Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
LastLast
  1. #61
    Pandaren Monk NuLogic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    1,862
    Ehh no tanks is to much of a clusterfuck for me. I didn't really enjoy scenarios but maybe next expansion they might improve.

  2. #62
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    376
    To me the current class role model is outdated but the system itself is not. What I dislike at the moment is that Tanks and healers are given the most importance in a group while DPS are just cannon fodder. Sure tanks and healer cant deal good damage like dps's but the fact that they can outlast them is my main issue; Survivability. Tanks and healers have excellent survivability through heals and defensive CD's or the combination of both while DPS's only have some medicore defensive CD's apart form Warrior's and Rogue's who have decent survivability in the form of high parry/Die by the sword and high dodge/vanish respectively.

    Such a defensive system is flawed and will only favour some classes/spec's while leaving the rest to rot. What I am trying to say is that the balance of survivability should be redistributed and overhauled toward Dps's to make the class and by extension make the class roles more balanced. the class role division is to great and therefore diversifies the class too much. the way I see survivability and damage are the main factor that define a class role. Melee Dps's such as non-tank warrior's, DK's and Paladin's should have a degree of tankiness while non-plate's such as Enhancement shamans and WW monks should have less but be more tougher then their Caster/healer counterparts. I think that the best way to make the class role more effective in regards to melee survivability and balancing tanks and healer survivability would to be for the overall survivability of the class roles/Spec's to be like this: Healer -> Caster -> Melee -> Tank . The Idea of still having melee's that could fill in for brief time as "sub tanks" would be the first step in giving melee DPS more survivability. Right now I Meless are all as fragile as cloth casters or rouges which is not right and should be allowed to stand as it is, Speaking of Rouge the current Raid set-up is more in favour of them, having to deal damage form behind and having the nearly the same level of durability as other melees while being able to vanish/stealth. the main goal of the class is to deal extreme amount of DPS in a short period of time but lack a lot of durability, check. the whole melee DPS role to more or less based on rouge but in a fundamentally lazy and flawed way.

    But tanks should not be removed from the game. but if they get all of the defensive power while all the other roles get scraps then I believe there is something wrong with the role balance. Having tanks being the last line of defence while protecting 8-23 healer's and DPS's who barely have even a quarter of they toughness is not right to me. The roles now are all about doing the best Tanking, healing or DPS, the best specs are the ones that can do their job the best while the worst are the ones that can't do alot of healing/DPS or tank well, Spec's are being forced to carry out the main task of the chosen role and nothing else. The roles of spec should be able to have a bit of hybridization, for example Enhancement shamans should able to do a bit of healing, range dps and tanking, While arms warrior's should able to tank better then and enhacement shaman due to plate and better close-combat abilities but should not be as good as and prot warrior. Being able to do more and having more freedom to do more damage, healing or tanking based on their class and spec.

    P.S Sorry for the messy typing. It was late when I posted this and I got tired.
    Last edited by Goradan; 2014-03-29 at 05:45 AM.
    Power never corrupts but it brings out ones true self. Think about that for a moment.

  3. #63
    There's a reason why every game that tries to get rid of the trinity ends up as a clusterfuck or a failure. Because it's a key aspect of the genre. There are elements to MMOs that will always be there: Quests, Raids, Dungeons, Tanks, Healers, DPS etc. They might take on different names but they've taken decades to develop over many different games and theres a reason why they work so well and why trying to avoid them doesn't. Because that is an MMO. Now if you were to argue that vertical progression is outdated versus horizontal progression, then yeah that's true. But class roles will always be an aspect of any successful MMO.

  4. #64
    You don't need the trinity in PVE. You just design your mobs and encounters around other teamwork concepts.

    The greatest barrier is getting people to be willing to learn a new system of organized PVE. A lot of people could not adjust to GW2 and just gave up quickly. I believe EQN is ditching the common trinity as well. The hardest job for each dev that tries this is to introduce new concepts and get people to observe, learn and value them.

    There's nothing particularly more tactical about the trinity. In fact, I feel WoW began reusing fight ideas years ago and the encounters started to get stale. You can do new things and new ideas without the trinity. It's really just a matter of encounter design and getting people to open up their minds.

  5. #65
    I don't think they're outdated but I do think that single role classes are in the current game in its current design.
    "If you have to believe it on faith, you have no reason to believe it at all.” Aron Ra

  6. #66
    The Lightbringer Kathranis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    3,103
    Honestly, I think a I'd like to see a new game gravitate more towards the original EQ model where there were like 7 different roles, instead of to no defined roles.

    EQ had yank, healer, damage dealer, puller, buffer, debuffer, crowd control.

    Obviously it makes it more difficult to organize, but I think that having some sort of defined role inherently encourages strategy and makes combat a more interesting and more managable experience.

  7. #67
    Mechagnome Zenora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In a van near you!
    Posts
    666
    I'm not sure we would get very far if we didn't have tanks or healers

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by z4x View Post
    Everyone is dealing with mechanics.

    The difference is that: Tank has responsibility, Healer has responsibility, DPS happy button mashing
    Sorry, but no. You might argue that DPS's responsibility is too tolerant, but doing a fight with crap DPS and dying to it over and over because the DPS cannot kill the boss fast enough for the healer to avoid going OOM demonstrates the DPS' responsibility.

    I was the healer in that case, which was frustrating because in my main DPS spec I'd have been doing literally five times what the group's DPS was.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by z4x View Post
    Everyone is dealing with mechanics.

    The difference is that: Tank has responsibility, Healer has responsibility, DPS happy button mashing
    DPS has responsibility to kill the boss..
    As someone who's played all three roles in a progression setting, DPS is the most competitive and it's the hardest to play optimally when progressing on a new fight. I wouldn't call that no responsibility.

  10. #70
    Moderator Gehco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FEEL THE WRATH OF MY SPANNER!!
    Posts
    6,594
    Not having any class roles, can't imagine that. It's not outdated, it's a low guideline as well. Though needed, I find.
    If you disapprove of moderation, seek an Admin or Global Moderator.
    Stuff can be fixed, just get enough glue or duct tape!
    Apparently, if you make a person jump off a cliff but you stop him from doing it successful in ArcheAge, you get the honor but you don't get the points - fun thought.

  11. #71
    There is a place for a tank-less genre of MMO gaming. I don't believe that WoW should spearhead that charge because they have a very defined system in place and they do it really well. Yes, there is the issue of a lack of tanks and how much groups have to rely on having good tanks. That is a challenge for Blizzard to overcome though.

    I personally love tanking (and healing, but mostly tanking) and I have been nothing but supportive of the move towards more active and less passive tanking. Removing stats such as Defense back in the day, following with Dodge and Parry (on gear, not as a concept) and focusing more on short, on-use abilities and spatial awareness has been a lot of fun. Tanking shouldn't be a subset of jst DPSing - I think the worst of it was around Wotlk/Cata.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Karnak View Post
    Sorry, but no. You might argue that DPS's responsibility is too tolerant, but doing a fight with crap DPS and dying to it over and over because the DPS cannot kill the boss fast enough for the healer to avoid going OOM demonstrates the DPS' responsibility.

    I was the healer in that case, which was frustrating because in my main DPS spec I'd have been doing literally five times what the group's DPS was.
    Yeah. Hard enrage timers aside, you have things like cleaning up adds in a timely manner (especially when they periodicalyl respawn like on Garrosh or have secondary effects like mcs or cc.) and also the better your dps the less time your healers have to keep the raid going through a soft enrage, and cases like destorying parts on the assembly line in blackfuse.

    Granted if an individual dps fucks up it's usually harder to tell and more forgiving than if a healer or tank messes up, but it's still there.
    "If you have to believe it on faith, you have no reason to believe it at all.” Aron Ra

  13. #73
    Stood in the Fire Cylom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    kuwait
    Posts
    393
    No it's not, having no class roles is boring.
    We need more tanks in ppv

    What can I say, I love Female Gnomes.
    Quote Originally Posted by ShimmerSwirl View Post
    People don't come back because the game is homogenized with no meaningful progression. Everyone is a winner, all your actions are irrelevant.

  14. #74
    Herald of the Titans crakerjack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Ptwn, Oregon
    Posts
    2,803
    I'm all down for convenience to have a significant role in RPG's, but at some point you have to realize how damaging it can be. LFR/LFD allowed people to que for dungeons/heroics w/o having to go out of their way to find a group, but it also significantly damaged realm communities. There's always going to be a pro/con to changes regarding convenience and it's up to blizzard to make sure they determine which ones are more beneficial than bad.

    Most likely the wisest Enhancement Shaman.

  15. #75
    I find class based games more interesting. When people are given the freedom to do whatever they want, things tend to muddy up and it becomes less interesting. There's no cooperation, because you're generally just nuking whatever you want to kill. You don't have to work with a healer or a tank, you just nuke. That's boring to me. Class roles force people to play a certain way.

    That being said, I'd like to see a game that allows people to mess around with how particular classes work. Say you want to play a warrior, but you want to be really fast and agile, you are allowed to wear light/leather armour and dual-wield which increases your movement speed. However, the same class could also wear plate armour which would give more protection at the cost of speed. Maybe a mage that uses a staff can do better AoE damage while a wand is more accurate and does better single-target damage. Allows players room to mess around within their role. I know some games do this, but I'm yet to see any do it in an interesting way.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by zed zebes View Post
    There's nothing particularly more tactical about the trinity.
    And I disagree. Tankless encounters encourage very little strategy beyond "use your abilities like you're suppose to and run if you're being chased or aimed at." Tanking implies someone is in charge of controlling whatever the threat happens to be and keeping it contained and unable to attack others. Healers, as well, are fairly important to avoid that "just attack it and keep yourself alive" issue. They undo the threat's effects that couldn't be restrained by the tank.

    In fact, I feel WoW began reusing fight ideas years ago and the encounters started to get stale.
    This one's demonstrably false. The raid encounters, and dungeons even, have gotten more and more complicated every expansion. There was even a list on this forum showing how they add up.

    It's really just a matter of encounter design and getting people to open up their minds.
    While that's true, it's also the way the game works. You're taking Baseball and saying "Why do we even have basemen?"
    Praise the Quest Writers for they give life to otherwise boring expansions.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by z4x View Post
    Everyone is dealing with mechanics.

    The difference is that: Tank has responsibility, Healer has responsibility, DPS happy button mashing
    Incorrect, if you just dps Horridon, you will wipe. If everyone just dps what ever boss on Council of Elders, you will wipe. I just gave two examples where dps has responsibility. Unless you want to prove that healers and tanks can carry those 2 bosses in normal raiding (note I said normal and not LFR) with the dps doing whatever they want, you're wrong.

  18. #78
    GW2 tried to go without the holy trinity.

    So we got dungeons boss fights that felt like playing Tag with one dude trying to kill you
    Quote Originally Posted by Count Zero View Post
    I think MMO-C should be renamed "HJTC-C" - Hyperbolic Jumping To Conclusions Champion.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by zed zebes View Post
    You don't need the trinity in PVE. You just design your mobs and encounters around other teamwork concepts.

    The greatest barrier is getting people to be willing to learn a new system of organized PVE. A lot of people could not adjust to GW2 and just gave up quickly. I believe EQN is ditching the common trinity as well. The hardest job for each dev that tries this is to introduce new concepts and get people to observe, learn and value them.

    There's nothing particularly more tactical about the trinity. In fact, I feel WoW began reusing fight ideas years ago and the encounters started to get stale. You can do new things and new ideas without the trinity. It's really just a matter of encounter design and getting people to open up their minds.
    And while this line of thinking is to be applauded, the deal with the Trinity is what it evolved into in WoW.

    A check and balance system that force role-interdependency in the game.

    If you look at Vanilla, you can see there was a lot more diversity, especially with the hybrids at at the time.

    The problem becomes, you end up only bringing the classes you need and in cases where abilities could trivialize content, you picked those. We see that happen in top tier guilds all the time.

    So for control factors, a foundation to base most of the game design upon, the concept of the Trinity came out and then you had hard specs created for each part of the trinity. While they can change how the role is fulfilled with different underlying mechanics... Dodge vs Block vs Parry vs High Armor vs Stagger, they only have to get 5 specs in line for tanking and 5 for healing and the rest DPS.

    GW2 suffers the opposite problem, there is so much "freedom" on the class-side that their encounters are horribly boring and there are no real defining abilities in the game for fear that something might be released that would be a scale-tipper in the favor of a particular profression.

  20. #80
    Herald of the Titans Haidaes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    BUoE - Bureaucratic Union of Europe
    Posts
    2,968
    They can get rid of it for all I care, but only if the combat turns into one as in a spectacle fighter or at least action adventure. As long as my character just slashes the thin air in fron't of him to down a dragon there is no reason to change the system. It would only turn the gameplay in the already mentioned clusterfuck and would actually limit the mechanics more than they already are currently.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •