434 replies to this topic

[Bryant Again]

Rickter, on 01 January 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

and this is all im really asking for.  

and you know what ive noticed, people get almost offended when you bring up tanks in GW2 yet. . . healers are welcomed and praised.

let's analyze that fora second, why the staunch rejection of a third of the trinity but not the others?

You're not just asking for the allowance of 'tanky builds', you're asking for more tanking mechanics. Hence the rejection.

Rickter, on 01 January 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

and idk why such support for nothing but dps.  because thats what no trinity means, nothing but dps.

and dont say its more than that, situational awareness, healing one's self etc etc

you do those things in trinity games as dps, stay out of red circles, anyone drank a high level potion before to stay above 50% health?  i have as dps in trinity games. . .

I will say this. I'd rather be in a group with five DPS who all have to pay attention rather than the three who don't.

[rentauri]

Rickter, on 01 January 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

and you know what ive noticed, people get almost offended when you bring up tanks in GW2 yet. . . healers are welcomed and praised.

If a tank does his job well everyone just facerolls the keyboard to victory and its kinda boring.

Rickter, on 01 January 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

yet the devs are acknowledging tanks in game. . .

Are you talking about PvP Bunker Builds? I'm pretty sure capping points with a Bunker build was always a valid tactic that the Devs wanted.

Rickter, on 01 January 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

and idk why such support for nothing but dps.  because thats what no trinity means, nothing but dps.

Because it means playing without the safety net of someone dragging aggro off you and someone healing you because you pressed the pretty red button when you shouldn't have. Don't get me wrong I think the the game could use more active support in it but nothing like the Trinity.

Edited by rentauri, 01 January 2013 - 08:02 PM.

[jthamind]

Rickter, i really don't understand what you're going for. you say you want the option to tank and heal in Guild Wars 2. then you go on to say that you and your wife ran a dungeon while you tanked it and she healed. you just gave an example of having the option to do exactly what you want. lol.

that's what this is about....options. if i want, i can roll a Guardian, synergize my build around massive damage mitigation with some power/tough/vit armor, and run headfirst into enemies before the rest of my party so i can try to handle the damage they dish out while protecting nearby allies. that's an option i have. i can also build an elementalist like your wife runs (which is also what i run) and heal the party better than any other class, plus give out constant boons. that is an option i have.

or i can run a glass cannon build with any class.

or a gimmicky build with any class

or a balanced build

the options are there to do all these things and more. but what happens if Anet adds a bit more trinity focus to the game? well, it's been said time and time again in this thread.....people will exclude anyone who doesn't want to run a trinity. why, you ask? it's not because people really want it, trust me. it's because it's easy. it's because they can get their daily dungeon run done in 10 minutes instead of 15.

let me quote a post from you from the "elitist" thread:

Quote

this is my favorite:

"LF2M AC Exp all paths speed runs skipping kohler MUST BE 80"

bunch of wannabe elitist.  "must be 80"?  what a joke, just because you are 80 doesnt make you a better player.  you can have all 80s with all traits spent, but their build has no synergy, or they dont know the dungeon, or they cant think on their feet, so what good is the level?

now, we both know these type of players exist. no denying that. but what that type of LFG would go to is now "LF Healer CoF exp" or "LF Warrior to tank AC exp" etc etc. we both know that's what would happen for the most part. sure, not every single player will do that, but i guarantee most will.

now, as far as people wanting the trinity, i disagree, and i already addressed that. i really doubt people want the trinity in this game. even the people who like healers. again, i'm a heal/support elem, so i've dealt with the type of situation you explained (people liking my heals) countless times. i'd venture to say what they like or are impressed by isn't the fact that i can heal for large amounts, but that i can do it in a game that wasn't designed to have designated healers. again, go to any other MMO that has a trinity and see how excited people get if you throw out some heals. they'll just say you're doing your job, nothing more. but since it's not mandatory in this game, when somebody sees you doing it well, it's like, "wow, somebody actually took the role of being a healer and they're doing it well, that's awesome! and it makes my job easier!"

and that's another point. if they were instituting a trinity, or leaning towards it with certain additions, it does make dungeons overall easier. i was a full tank in Cataclysm with full epics, so i know what it's like to tank a dungeon well. assuming you get halfway decent heals, it's a walk in the park, everybody else can pretty much faceroll and not stand in the fire. that would take some of the essence of GW2's combat away, which i don't think most people want.

so to summarize, the option to pseudo-tank or -heal is in this game, it's just not a dedicated role. the OPTION is there, though, and that's all we need. we don't need anything that makes the community lean in one direction or the other. if you want to run a tanky build, then by all means, and let your wife heal you. that's great that you're doing that. but don't make it so that everybody else should do that build too.

Edited by jthamind, 01 January 2013 - 09:13 PM.

[Dasryn]

jthamind, on 01 January 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

you made a lot of sense in your post and it really put things in perspective.  you are right about how if this were atrinity based game, ppl wouldnt get so excited when they see a character holding aggro or someone healing.  

what makes my build special is that i did get it to work in a game that wasnt supposed to have it work, so to accommodate that type of build actually detracts from its worth.

and i never advocated to make trinity mandatory, ive said it all along, find a middle ground.  but you are right, im doing it right now.  i wanted to tank in GW2, and im tanking.  some people appreciate that, others do not.  its w/e, at least i have the option to play the way i want to play.

[chrisbdrake]

Rickter, on 01 January 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

... ive said it all along, find a middle ground.  but you are right, im doing it right now.  i wanted to tank in GW2, and im tanking.  some people appreciate that, others do not.  its w/e, at least i have the option to play the way i want to play.

This is what game designers call success.

[Craywulf]

Let me reiterate my thoughts.  Currently the biggest benefit of teamwork in GW2 is the focus of condition stacking, getting everyone on their team to maximize conditions. While this isn't a bad thing, it's very much a individual strategy. You improve your build and min/max it to point where you you know you're doing best DPS your profession can offer. It certainly can make the strategy feel one-dimensional, despite the complexity of some builds.

What if ArenaNet were to make a greater importance of using CPCs (cross profession combos)? Many players simply don't feel compelled to utilize them when planning their builds. CPCs can be a huge factor in creating teamwork if ArenaNet actually made them worth doing. The way to do that is to provide much longer duration of the boons and conditions. This would also require ArenaNet to lower the overall DPS for every single profession, so that the best can only be achieved via CPCs. Of course this means the mobs would be tougher to take down in solo action, but as a team, triggering CPCs would be a higher priority, hence greater teamwork.

[Arquenya]

Rickter, on 01 January 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

what makes my build special is that i did get it to work in a game that wasnt supposed to have it work, so to accommodate that type of build actually detracts from its worth.

Well the question still remains if it's indeed "not as intended" as ANet put both the skills as the aggro mechanics in place that allow for that.

[Trei]

Arquenya, on 02 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Well the question still remains if it's indeed "not as intended" as ANet put both the skills as the aggro mechanics in place that allow for that.

What is not intended is for every group to NEED to rely on a tank.

It can be done if one specifically build his group for it.

Its just not the way to play, but only one of many strategies a player can use in the game, and it may not work universally for all encounters.

ie: go ahead and try to "tank" frac 50.

But if this "option" is further defined and improved to the point where players perceive it to be the most viable way to play, then its the end of "options".

Giving more obvious and reliable ways to control and hold aggro is one such improvements that cannot be allowed.

[Arquenya]

Trei, on 02 January 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

But if this "option" is further defined and improved to the point where players perceive it to be the most viable way to play, then its the end of "options".
Giving more obvious and reliable ways to control and hold aggro is one such improvements that cannot be allowed.

It depends.

Is a lvl 80 more viable than a lvl 60?
Is exotic gear more viable then using greens?
Is ascended gear more viable than exotics?

It still doesn't stop people from running dungeons and fractals in any possible group composition. One may argue that a team of guardians and warriors is more viable than a random team (I see it being asked for on a regular basis and a lot of people are levelling guardians atm).
I think as long as any group is viable and some "better" tactics, builds or class combinations don't stop groups from completing content, it's not such a big deal.

Edited by Arquenya, 02 January 2013 - 10:26 AM.

[Trei]

Arquenya, on 02 January 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

It depends.

Is a lvl 80 more viable than a lvl 60?
Is exotic gear more viable then using greens?
Is ascended gear more viable than exotics?

It still doesn't stop people from running dungeons and fractals in any possible group composition. One may argue that a team of guardians and warriors is more viable than a random team (I see it being asked for on a regular basis and a lot of people are levelling guardians atm).
I think as long as any group is viable and some "better" tactics, builds or class combinations don't stop groups from completing content, it's not such a big deal.

As you have just said so yourself, already there are sentiments favoring the two heavy armored professions. Do we really want to exacerbate the situation?

The comparison you made may be over simplistic as well.

Any profession, any player of any playstyle can attain lvl 80. The same goes for gear.

But would every profession be given aggro control and taunt abilities, with enough defense skills to back it up?
Should they?

If not, would it be fair to the other professions? Or should something be taken from warriors and guardians instead?
Why should they be the only professions to be able to handle every kind of role in the game?

If yes, how would the professions be balanced, yet at the same time retain their individual flavors and identities/themes? Mesmers tanking with illusions?

Edited by Trei, 02 January 2013 - 04:54 PM.

[Chuckles22]

I like how people are saying how easy tank and spank is, and act like this games combat is so much more involving. The fact is its really not. Let me give you an example;

Mage in wow dungeon starts casting frost bolt, fire is set down a quarter way through cast, should mage move and break cast time or finish and risk getting hit by fire, or should mage finish cast and blink out (dodge roll).

Elementalist runs around presses numlock and runs in circles not worrying about any damage because by the time the AoE is cast Elementalist has already run out of AoE.

Now this is a example MOST of the fights in either game I know the dredge boss makes you dodroll sometimes and sometimes you may have to roll 1-2 times to get out of an AoE (just means you dont have swiftness), but really the combat in this game has become bland to me. Which is becoming an issue. Im not saying that Tank and spank is more involving because its not, but the mechanics in this game means you only have to be just as aware as any tank and spank.

Edited by Chuckles22, 02 January 2013 - 03:40 PM.

[Trei]

Chuckles22, on 02 January 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

I like how people are saying how easy tank and spank is, and act like this games combat is so much more involving. The fact is its really not. Let me give you an example;

Mage in wow dungeon starts casting frost bolt, fire is set down a quarter way through cast, should mage move and break cast time or finish and risk getting hit by fire, or should mage finish cast and blink out (dodge roll).

Elementalist runs around presses numlock and runs in circles not worrying about any damage because by the time the AoE is cast Elementalist has already run out of AoE.

Now this is a example MOST of the fights in either game I know the dredge boss makes you dodroll sometimes and sometimes you may have to roll 1-2 times to get out of an AoE (just means you dont have swiftness), but really the combat in this game has become bland to me. Which is becoming an issue. Im not saying that Tank and spank is more involving because its not, but the mechanics in this game means you only have to be just as aware as any tank and spank.

Sure, if every fight goes according to plan.
But if not?

If your trinity healer or tank dies, what would you do? What can you do?
At most in very specific cases, try to evade tank or kite the boss around while attempting to burn down the last bit of its HP, if its low enough.

Usually players opt to stop wasting time and just wipe it. Why?
Because the way they build their characters are purely to capitalize on the expectation that the tank would handle everything other than Damage, and the healer would take care of the tank.
Because the encounter itself is necessarily designed in a way to allow the group to have little chance if one corner of the trinity fails, in order for there to be interdependence between the three archtypes.

There is only one real way each to spec - Max DPS, Max healing, Max threat/mitigation. Anything else is unacceptable, unjustified.
Why should a Damage class (I'm trying my utmost to never use the moronic acronym DPS ever again when describing the role) have to dabble in a bit of specialized CC or support heals... when they might as well just get a better healer?

-------------

Now, if your guardian dies...?
I'm not sure if anyone realises, or it may be different for other players, but I have yet to hear the phrase "just wipe it" in GW2.
I don't have the luxury and luck of always getting super groups that breeze through content either.

What I often see instead is players continuing the fight, because there is actual realistic chance for the group to pull through with a couple of those MVP clutch plays.
Even if more than one group member goes down, anyone.

Every profession has various different ways they can help with emergency recovery, if the player is cognizant of them.

Battles can change pace on a dime.  
Different group make up can lead to different strategies on the same boss.

It is actually worthwhile to be using a versatile build instead of a specialized one.


So... which is easier to handle?
Always getting the same group make up of a tank a healer and 3 dd?
Or potentially having all sorts of different mash ups every time like 4 control 1 support, or 2 damage 2 support 1 control, or 3 control 1 damage 1 support or...

Edited by Trei, 02 January 2013 - 05:25 PM.

[Ghostwing]

Trei, on 02 January 2013 - 04:33 PM, said:

Sure, if every fight goes according to plan.
But if not?

If your trinity healer or tank dies, what would you do? What can you do?
At most in very specific cases, try to evade tank or kite the boss around while attempting to burn down the last bit of its HP, if its low enough.

Usually players opt to stop wasting time and just wipe it. Why?
Because the way they build their characters are purely to capitalize on the expectation that the tank would handle everything other than Damage, and the healer would take care of the tank.
Because the encounter itself is necessarily designed in a way to allow the group to have little chance if one corner of the trinity fails, in order for there to be interdependence between the three archtypes.

There is only one real way each to spec - Max DPS, Max healing, Max threat/mitigation. Anything else is unacceptable, unjustified.
Why should a Damage class (I'm trying my utmost to never use the moronic acronym DPS ever again when describing the role) have to dabble in a bit of specialized CC or support heals... when they might as well just get a better healer?

-------------

Now, if your guardian dies...?
I'm not sure if anyone realises, or it may be different for other players, but I have yet to hear the phrase "just wipe it" in GW2.
I don't have the luxury and luck of always getting super groups that breeze through content either.

What I often see instead is players continuing the fight, because there is actual realistic chance for the group to pull through with a couple of those MVP clutch plays.

Battles can change pace on a dime.  
Different group make up can lead to different strategies on the same boss.

It is actually worthwhile to be using a versatile build instead of a specialized one.


So... which is easier to handle?
Always getting the same group make up of a tank a healer and 3 dd?
Or potentially having all sorts of different mash ups every time like 4 control 1 support, or 2 damage 2 support 1 control, or 3 control 1 damage 1 support or...

More importantly, who the hell even cares? Not every MMO has to have the trinity, and if you do find the trinity more engaging, play a trinity-based game. This game was made from the ground up not to rely on tanks and healers. I wonder if there are GW2 players going onto Blizzard or Bioware forums railing against their combat systems.

At some point, it becomes apples and oranges. Do you like watching football more than basketball? Are you going to argue with NBA fans how the NFL is funner to watch and they should make basketball more like football?

Edited by Ghostwing, 02 January 2013 - 05:18 PM.

[Juanele]

They just need better encounter design, smarter mobs, and more emphasis on the combos (combo fields and finishers). No need to put in a traditional trinity.

[Vorian]

No by the gods no, do not bring in the trinity back. I know of what I speak. I used to love dungeons in games like WoW and Rift. My favourite roles where healer and dps. I was never much for tanking. But the times are moving on, and you can sit here and think about the good old days, but what works even better to cure you is to actually go back to them.

..which is what I did. I still had a 10 day trial for the panda expansion left, and i had a 3 day trial for rift for changing my password. I went back and did some dungeons. While we remember these dungeons with sweet nostalgia, actually doing them makes you realise that right now after playing Guild Wars 2, these dungeons feel archaic. There is little movement except for bosses. As a healer, your looking at health bars instead of players and your literally playing wack a mole. As a DPS, your clicking buttons in the right order, over and over again. Yes there is some variation with some bosses you have to kite or kite adds or whatever, but most fights are really standard affairs that are a lot more simplistic and boring then you might remember them.

Then I went back to playing guild wars 2, and I amazed at how my concept of dungeons had been changed. I started playing on my Mesmer and did Shadows Embrace storyline first. It was at the asura boss with the three droids that it hit me. We where losing the battle and whiping, so we had to focus our teamplay. I started switching skills to a more supportive build. And there I was, running around, avoiding the explosions, using phantasmal defender to soften the blow, throwing my null field on my team mates to remove the burning conditions and most importantly timing my feedback to set it of exactly at the moment that the rocket shooting droid shoots its rockets.
I was doing support on my mesmer and i felt it was the difference between barely making it and easily making it. My nullfield where life saving, my feedback bubbles where disabling the most powerfull attack of the most dangerous droid and we finished that fight easily. I felt fulfilled. I felt like a healer except i didn't have to focus all my attention on healing and mana bars during the entire fight. And I wasn't a healer, because while i was supporting my group in a meaningfull way i was at that same time also summoning phantasms, dps'ing the boss, avoiding explosions, dodging and repositioning and occasionally ressing downed characters. It is a level of action that no classical trinity can match, and it makes you feel so much more flexible and powerful. It makes you feel like a powerfull dps and at the same time feel as usefull to the team effort that my disc priest was in WoW.

That is not to say that Guild War 2's soft trinity is perfect. Certainly not. I agree that the advantage of the classical trinity is that its less chaotic, people know what to do. For a large part its a learning process and for a large part its worst with pugs. I do think that will improve.

Furthermore, not every fight is as intense and as deep as some of the fights are. Yes there are tons of fights where you just get a bit of don't stand in the fire combined with bosses that have lots of hitpoints. Arenanet can do a lot of improvements on their dungeons and their bosses.  The problems aren't with the concept of the soft trinity in my opinion, they are with the encounters that Arenanet made.

But these encounters are already improving as we see from the fractals of the mist. And remember, WoW started with only tank and spank, in a similar way we can see this games dungeons get a new depth with more exciting battles as time moves on. Arenanet promised improvements in dungeons, new fractals and just the januari and februari updates should match "an expansion worth of content" so I'm certainly hopeful and excited.

But going back to the trinity? No way. The way to succes is not backward, its forward. There are tons of games that have the classic trinity and you can play them right now if you want and keep GW2 for the PvP or whatever. It will be much easier for Arenanet to offer more challenging and interesting encounters to spice up gameplay and team work, then it will be for Arenanets competitors to implement a combat system that feels as flexible and fresh.

But let this game move forward and build on its daring soft trinity concept.It is at this moment certainly not perfect, has its issues, feels chaotic and many bosses and encounters feel half baked. But when it works, it works beautiful, more flexible and entertaining than anything i've seen, like a diamond in the rough, Arenanet just has to polish it. I'm convinced they will.

Edited by Vorian, 02 January 2013 - 07:23 PM.

[Arquenya]

Trei, on 02 January 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

But would every profession be given aggro control and taunt abilities, with enough defense skills to back it up?
Should they?

If not, would it be fair to the other professions? Or should something be taken from warriors and guardians instead?
Why should they be the only professions to be able to handle every kind of role in the game?

If yes, how would the professions be balanced, yet at the same time retain their individual flavors and identities/themes? Mesmers tanking with illusions?

It's all rather situational. Some classes can stealth so you can easily skip loads of trash mobs, where guardians and warriors have to plough through them. Some bosses do so much damage that they just can't be tanked at all and only be fought at range. And I doubt it that tanking is 100% guaranteed mechanic.

And given the facts that 1) ANet should know about this by now and hasn´t changed it 2) put the underlying mechanics in the game in the first place, 3) there´s currently no `tanking revolution` in game at all while the build and tactics were already posted 2 months ago - I still see no reason to be overly upset or worried by it.

Edited by Arquenya, 02 January 2013 - 11:42 PM.

[Trei]

Arquenya, on 02 January 2013 - 11:40 PM, said:

It's all rather situational. Some classes can stealth so you can easily skip loads of trash mobs, where guardians and warriors have to plough through them. Some bosses do so much damage that they just can't be tanked at all and only be fought at range. And I doubt it that tanking is 100% guaranteed mechanic.

And given the facts that 1) ANet should know about this by now and hasn´t changed it 2) put the underlying mechanics in the game in the first place, 3) there´s currently no `tanking revolution` in game at all while the build and tactics were already posted 2 months ago - I still see no reason to be overly upset or worried by it.

Stealth isn't something a core idea of an entire combat model we know as the trinity revolves around.

1) Change what? It is fine right now. There IS no reliable way to gain and hold threat at the moment, only educated guesses that so far seem to work.

I don't see why Anet needs to go out of their way to make sure trinity style tanking cannot be possible at all.
But in the same vein, there is no good reason to make it any more viable than it is.

2) The underlying mechanics does not promote trinity style tanking at the moment. No one can be 100% certain exactly how threat works in the game, only speculations.

3) Yet we have claims that trinity style combat is what most people really want?

Edited by Trei, 03 January 2013 - 01:58 AM.

[Millimidget]

I'd actually like to see it go the other way, and have pure DPS or heavy DPS classes phased out of the trinity.

At the same time, there are tanking and healing mechanics that don't benefit a game, but that doesn't necessitate removing tanking/healing as roles entirely.

Vorian, on 02 January 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

As a healer, your looking at health bars instead of players and your literally playing wack a mole. As a DPS, your clicking buttons in the right order, over and over again.

Ironically, when I brought the former complaint up to a friend of mine who favors healers, his response was basically, "at least it's not [the latter]."

I know from personal experience that tanking is the most involved role, but because non-tanks expect you to maintain perfect agro to facilitate their endlessly repetitive healing/DPS rotations, developers usually introduce at least one class which offers ezmode tanking, and then the playerbase just flocks to that kind of tank.

That's what drove me to my initial statement, that I would rather see them move in the opposite direction and phase out pure or heavy DPS classes. This also seems consistent with a general desire for combat to be more drawn out, an issue I've seem many players raise (casuals especially).

Edited by Millimidget, 03 January 2013 - 01:56 AM.

[phineas]

If I have it right, Rickter is not referring to static tanking, just the ability to maintain aggro.

The whole group still remains mobile with his caring wife only concerned with healing whilst I presume the remainder are using ranged damage to take down the mob(s). This fits the brief set out by ANet that any player can fulfil any role, with the benefit of team members being certain of their responsibilties.

The team can then optimally spec their toon and forget issues such as wondering if it's his or her turn to heal/buff/debuff/etc. Still got to do the dodge/roll dance, but then back to the given role between-times. The outcome really is no different to what everyone else is doing already except the 'Tank' runs a merry dance, and thus has the busiest time of it, but overall the repairs costs are reduced.

The damage gained from the high-DPS members is offset (perhaps moreso) by gimping the Tank and Healer's damage output in return for surviveability and job satisfaction. Satisfaction perhaps being the real driver here.

Current game mechanics don't allow for the face-rolling tank-and-spank of yore. I doubt even 4 dedicated healers could keep 1 static tank alive in GW2.

I think the game is neither broken, nor in need of fixing, with regard to 'roles'.

Edited by phineas, 03 January 2013 - 04:30 AM.

[Trei]

What I would be curious to know is if other professions can similarly take on this aggro magnet role.

Has anyone even tried using say a necromancer to "tank" condition heavy encounters?

Edited by Trei, 03 January 2013 - 04:50 AM.

[Dasryn]

the thing is, the way my build is currently constructed is that im holding aggro by doing dmg.  in any other game my character would be rather OP, ive got a 45% crit rate and i hit very hard, but my toughness is 1994 which allows 3266 armor.

so im a tough hard hitting mofo.  in any other game, thats OP.

but in gw2 its not, because regular trash mobs can kill you in 3 hits.

[Age]

There was no such thing as the holy trinty in the Original GW as every profession was needed.You needed to think of the whole team not just say Warriors,Eles and Monks can do any mission which is false.You needed Rangers for interrupts and traps,Mesmers for interrupts and shutdown,Necros for degen or minions.

It was these 3 that got through missions as you needed to build a team around the mission.It is a lot like team sports with a defensive line or offense (football for eg or hockey with it 5 lines and baseball those up to bat or on the field)The removal of the Monk is like rmoving the goal tender from hockey of soccer and putting an extra attacker on which in hockey doesn't always work most of the time.

I miss having the Monk in this game and playing it the Guardian doesn't offer much and is bad at smitting compared to the Monk as that is castor classes role more so than a melee type.Warriors in GW were never tanks a little tanks and spak yes but not just tanks.warriors in GW2 are far better at doing damage than Guardians are but they have weak self heals.

To me there is no Trinty in GW if you all think there is it isn't the Monk that makes it up.This game would be more fun with smitng Monk scholar class and I much prefer the use of wands of staffs and sceptors.

@Juanele

Quote

What they really need to is emphasize the use of combos. It should be used to create teamwork so that it is important to use whether with a group or outside of one.I played a game were we got to make up are own combos called macoes.There is no skill to this game what so ever.

Don't put back the trinity. If they ever did that it would put the nail in the coffin of the game as far as I'm concerned.

Combos are lazey person way of making thier own skills up and wouldn't make difference.

It would never kill the game as if the trinty existed at all in GW.I think GW2 is doing fine jop of killing it self as there is no team plays like UW/DoA SC or GvG.

[Dasryn]

at this point in the discussion, im agreeing with both sides.

on one end, i notice that when myself and my wife are playing, the dungeons seem to run more smoothly.

but when we are not running the dungeon together its like, people are dying all the time and im constantly having to stop what im doing to revive someone because i never leave a man behind.

so this side of the argument is that it is forcing people to play smarter when they have to worry about everything.

but then there is the third party side of the argument that forcing people to have to be aware of so much is almost erasing that "casual player" line- because they have to get hardcore.

idk folks, i think i'll just have to say that GW2 is beautiful because it allows everyone to play the game the way they want to play and very few games allow that.

[Gilles VI]

Age, on 10 January 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

It would never kill the game as if the trinty existed at all in GW.I think GW2 is doing fine jop of killing it self as there is no team plays like UW/DoA SC or GvG.

What?
So dungeons/fractals aren't team based?
Or tPvP on the PvP side?

Age, on 10 January 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

There was no such thing as the holy trinty in the Original GW as every profession was needed.

Obby ele, obby war, perma assa, bundle rit = tank.
Ele, Rit, Mesmer, Necro = spiker
Monk, rit = healer

Ofcourse there were some adaptations like 100b warrior spiking or VoS derv spiking, or a 55 monk tanking, but saying there was no trinity in GW1 is very naive..

[Feathermoore]

Gilles VI, on 10 January 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

Obby ele, obby war, perma assa, bundle rit = tank.
Ele, Rit, Mesmer, Necro = spiker
Monk, rit = healer

Ofcourse there were some adaptations like 100b warrior spiking or VoS derv spiking, or a 55 monk tanking, but saying there was no trinity in GW1 is very naive..

There is no tank in GW. The warrior, while being the tankiest by default, also had one of the highest DPS out of all the classes. The AI worked in that monsters would attack the squishiest target they could get to (heck they would prioritize a character holding a caster weapon over a sword or axe). The only way to truly tank was to glitch the AI by bodyblocking them. This was only doable in specific places and was only truly a good tactic in even fewer locations.

Tanky classes do not a tank make. GW had DPS and prot/heal effectively making everyone a tank. If you were playing correctly, the entire group was tanking using peeling skills and kiting while the prot monk would allow anyone to tank until they could get a peel.

GW did have a trinity per se. But it wasn't the traditional "holy trinity" as it was made up of Damage, Protection, and Healing. You could force the holy trinity into the game (you can do it in GW2 as well) but it isn't the most efficient way to play the game in most areas. GW's PvE resembeled PvP as much as any game I have ever played. Tanking (as the term is used in PvE) doesn't work in PvP.

Edited by Feathermoore, 10 January 2013 - 04:22 PM.

[MisterB]

There was a brief period where tanking was possible in GW by exploiting the AI's priority to attack players holding a bundle. Players used it in FoW and Sorrow's Furnace, and it was referred to as the book or gear trick. It was excruciatingly boring to play, but maybe there are players that enjoy playing a rolling stone with no offense.

[Gilles VI]

Feathermoore, on 10 January 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

There is no tank in GW. The warrior, while being the tankiest by default, also had one of the highest DPS out of all the classes. The AI worked in that monsters would attack the squishiest target they could get to (heck they would prioritize a character holding a caster weapon over a sword or axe). The only way to truly tank was to glitch the AI by bodyblocking them. This was only doable in specific places and was only truly a good tactic in even fewer locations.

Tanky classes do not a tank make. GW had DPS and prot/heal effectively making everyone a tank. If you were playing correctly, the entire group was tanking using peeling skills and kiting while the prot monk would allow anyone to tank until they could get a peel.

GW did have a trinity per se. But it wasn't the traditional "holy trinity" as it was made up of Damage, Protection, and Healing. You could force the holy trinity into the game (you can do it in GW2 as well) but it isn't the most efficient way to play the game in most areas. GW's PvE resembeled PvP as much as any game I have ever played. Tanking (as the term is used in PvE) doesn't work in PvP.

And yet for the hardest content: UW/FoW at start, elite missions at factions, DoA at nightfall, some dungeons in EotN. everyone used "tanks".
I agree there wasn't a "tank" class like there is in traditional MMO's with a aggro mechanic, and tanks having 10 times as much hp as other classes, but there were tanks.

• I remember the first tank I played was a full strength/tactics warrior with dolyak signet, gladiator stance,...
  Also the 55 monk.
  
• Perma assas being a vital part of some dungeons and FoW for speedclears.
  
• Mid Factions Ritualists with bundles (AI had bug which made them target bundle holding players) were the tanks, factions was also the rise of W/E with obsidian flesh.
  
• Nightfall, W/E obsidian flesh warrior still going strong.
  
• EotN, Perma sins take over GW1, perma sins tank everything, obsidian flesh earth elementalist becomes strong.

The warrior maybe had high DPS in PvP (axe/hammer), it was severely lacking in PvE (except enduring stance scythe, which I used for 5+ years, but still limited AoE).
And going in first also made mobs target you, agreed they broke aggro easy, but still.

If you say there was no trinity in GW1, and even worse, that it wasn't the most efficient way, I can only conclude you never did:

• FoW/UW
  
• Dungeons in EotN
  
• DoA
  
• Xanai, Urgoz

Because I remember, till the last minute before GW2 came out, I was MT tanking in FoW with my sin, or was doing LT tanking in UW, or MT in DoA frostway, or general perma sin tanking in daily zaishen dungeons.
With my monk I was basically just keeping the red bars up with the UA/HB duo monking.
With my E/Mo I was just maintaining bonds on the whole team in FoW/DoA.
While my VoS derv/100b warrior was spiking in FoW.
My EoE rit was spiking in FoW/UW/DoA.
My mesmer was also stuck spiking in UW/DoA.

Was there any viable way of doing those areas without specific designed builds like those?

Edited by Gilles VI, 10 January 2013 - 04:48 PM.

[Feathermoore]

Gilles VI, on 10 January 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

Was there any viable way of doing those areas without specific designed builds like those?

DoA was the only area that pretty much required specific group set ups (ignoring the specific skills needed for the Deep and Urgoz) and then only in Hard Mode and only in certain maps (foundry and for the stupid cave quest/the Darkness). The existence of the builds you refer to were because they were the easiest/most reliable for PUGs. A guild group or organized group in voice chat would be better served going with a group that did not focus on the tank and spank methodology (excluding the mentioned DoA areas).

FoW and UW never required a tank and spank group, the Deep was ran with the "steel wall" warriors bodyblocking for the Eles originally and was the first time I ever encountered the idea of tanking in GW, and I never once ran a tank in the dungeons from EotN and don't think I did for Urgoz (ran Urgoz the least of all the content). Heck a guild group of mine went through almost every single dungeon with a group of beastmasters (not BP, but variants of bunny thumpers).

In hard mode Warriors had some of the highest DPS. Warriors, Mesmers, and Necros with Ritualists and Rangers right behind them.

The point being, unorganized groups excel when using a tank method but it was far from required or even the most effective method to play. The tanking strategy is just the easiest method to play when you cannot guarantee the skill level of those you are playing with.

[Gilles VI]

Feathermoore, on 10 January 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

DoA was the only area that pretty much required specific group set ups (ignoring the specific skills needed for the Deep and Urgoz) and then only in Hard Mode and only in certain maps (foundry and for the stupid cave quest/the Darkness). The existence of the builds you refer to were because they were the easiest/most reliable for PUGs. A guild group or organized group in voice chat would be better served going with a group that did not focus on the tank and spank methodology (excluding the mentioned DoA areas).

FoW and UW never required a tank and spank group, the Deep was ran with the "steel wall" warriors bodyblocking for the Eles originally and was the first time I ever encountered the idea of tanking in GW, and I never once ran a tank in the dungeons from EotN and don't think I did for Urgoz (ran Urgoz the least of all the content). Heck a guild group of mine went through almost every single dungeon with a group of beastmasters (not BP, but variants of bunny thumpers).

In hard mode Warriors had some of the highest DPS. Warriors, Mesmers, and Necros with Ritualists and Rangers right behind them.

The point being, unorganized groups excel when using a tank method but it was far from required or even the most effective method to play. The tanking strategy is just the easiest method to play when you cannot guarantee the skill level of those you are playing with.

How was using a perma sin in FoW (MT and even the T1 and T2 to solo) or in UW (LT and all the terras to solo the other stuff) not using tanking?

And I would like to see a video of clearing UW/FoW in a reasonable amount of time with other builds.
Note: I know they were not necessary, I cleared both of UW & FoW with 7 heroes (note that replacing my 7 heroes with humans made almost no difference, kills went faster but there were much more deaths and near-wipes), but it took 2h+ for FoW and 3-4h for UW, you cannot call that viable..
DoA just the same, ofcourse you could do it with a normal team, but the safest & fastest (muuuch faster) was by using those setups.

The steel wall method was only used aslong as perma sins weren't there, after EotN the ~4 warrior steel wall got replaced with a single (sometimes 2) permas that could tank anything, and even better than warriors because they didn't need healing.

Saying that other team setups were more efficient is rather unbelievable in DoA/FoW/UW.
What could be faster than balling mobs and killing them in 2sec with spikes + having 2 terras who solo all the northern/eastern and southern part of FoW in less than 30 minutes?
Same in UW, what can be faster than 4 "teams" all doing quests at the same time?
Same in DoA, what can be faster than balling everything in sight and then killing them within seconds, and with almost no risk of dying because of bonds and seed of life?

And I don't agree with your note about using those team builds when you weren't sure of the skill level of the pugs, if someone failed in UW/FoW/DoA half of the time this ruined the entire run, or it made sure it was much slower.

Edited by Gilles VI, 10 January 2013 - 05:22 PM.

[Fenice_86]

GW2, the game where Kiting all day/night beated any role/rule to survive