Guild Wars 2

I have a theory about combat roles in Guild Wars 2. Although this theory is based on subjective observation I would like to post it for peer review and see what this community has to say. Before I begin I would also like to thank my Guild mates for their input when I first broached this topic.

During the promotion of GW2 one of Area Net’s primary talking points was the removal of the “Holy Trinity” of combat roles indicative of MMO games. (On a side note, I find the overuse of the term “Holy Trinity” to be extremely annoying. Unfortunately it is currently the most succinct way to refer to the Healer/Tank/DPS paradigm.)

In at least one interview developers did name a different trinity that they wished to use in their game:
Damage/Control/Support.

If we examine the skills provided by different weapons given to each class there seems to be a large number of possible combat roles inherent in each character class. I made the following list by puzzling over the functionality of the weapon and utility skills, as well as traits, I have observed in the different classes.

Guild Wars 2 Combat Roles
-Physical DPS
-Condition Damage
-Condition De-buffs
-Ally Offensive Boons
-Ally Defensive Boons
-Enemy Control (damage mitigation through blocking, interrupts, blinds and evasion)
-Field Medic
-Balance (solo survival) [can be called selfish in a group]
-Multi-role (actively trying to combine two or more roles) [Although, some internal synergy between roles is natural]

When I created characters for World of Warcraft, TERA and Neverwinter I decided I wanted to play a tank. That determined what race and class to take: Paladin for WoW, Lancer for TERA and Shield Warrior for Neverwiner. I don’t think that is how GW2 is designed. ANet focuses more on the RP of an MMORPG. Your combat role comes second to your character’s personality.

Creating YOUR Character:
Hero Archetype==>
Combat Role===>
Weapons and Utility Selection <==> Trait Selection
(These two are interchangable and connected)

Any character can take on any role. You choose traits for your character to optimize the role you want to play. Of course, some classes are better at certain roles than others, but all have the potential of performing in any given role.

To make it so people are not waiting for a “healer” or a “tank” before they can do content, tasks that were concentrated in those two characters are now spread across more players. This will require a larger amount of player communication than is the norm in PUG groups. Coordinating combo fields (or trading off certain roles with other players while your skills are on cool down) requires explanations or even voice chat the first time you try that kind of strategy.

Most forums talk about maximizing your DPS. It seems player consensus is that the optimal dungeon group uses overwhelming damage to muscle through. But is that necessary? Is that really the best way?

An example of the wider potential for combat roles beyond DPS can be found in the recent Molten Forge dungeon. Defensive fighting really had a chance to shine. Projectile reflecting was devastatingly effective against the fire shamans and Charr riflemen.

Since there was a major skill and trait revision/rebalancing recently, this is a good time to reexamine how we make our character builds and group composition. Awkwardly, the fact that we need to discuss player roles within a group so long after the game’s launch could be a sign that No Trinity design has failed.

What do you think of the multiple roles I stated earlier? Do they really exist or are they a figment of an overactive imagination? Will composing a group from the expanded list of roles make dungeons easier for everybody?

You, sir, deserve a bravo for writing down all these things, which are absolutely correct. However, as I keep saying, there is only one thing you cannot fix in a game: community. The community is dumb. Even if you give them every tool and let them play all roles with every single one of a group of balanced classes, they will still go for raw power and start writing in the forums how “OP is the war, nerf war” and “zerk is the best way to go”.

I love everything you are saying and trying to get across but sadly to answer your last question. No.

Easier is subjective so what I think you mean is efficient. And because of the way the game is designed and played. With everyone having all the tools and responsibility of their own healthbar. And with boss mechanics designed around that fact, the bosses simply do not do enough (Un-dodgeable) damage to make a glass cannon build die.

because if they did then DPS roles simply would not be useful at all, Control cannot reliably hold aggro and support cannot reliably keep a team alive.

Because of this DPS was and still is king, once you know how to dodge and evade the all the damage you can. If you can survive just as well with 100% offense as you do with 80% defense 20% offense… why not just go offense?

As for your roles they pretty much all come down to the trinity.

-Physical DPS (Damage)
-Condition Damage (Damage)
-Condition De-buffs (Control)
-Ally Offensive Boons (Damage)
-Ally Defensive Boons (Support)
-Enemy Control (Cannot be used on bosses.)
-Field Medic (support)
-Balance (solo survival) [can be called selfish in a group] Everyone has this already.

In fact most groups would say that if you cannot keep yourself alive in a group you are simply lowering the group’s damage and survivability as they have to keep saving you.

I like the Idea of having defined roles but sadly with class skills and game mechanics Anet erased it in this game.
_________
Edit

To clarify. I have no problem with people in PVT or Clerics or any other set, and I have never denied someone a group for not being a full zerk. But I do understand that there is only 1 PvE reason to not be in full Zerk, and that is that you haven’t yet learned to properly manage your dodge/Vigor/self heals. As you do and swap to more and more zerker gear you just become not only more efficient but a better player as a whole.

So while the other sets are fine, in the current state of the game zerker is #1 and will continue to be as long as the devs keep the game as it is.

^
Get in Arah path 3 with 2 support guardians and then without them. Then come here and post the difference.

APunch.7581:

Most forums talk about maximizing your DPS. It seems player consensus is that the optimal dungeon group uses overwhelming damage to muscle through. But is that necessary?

No.

APunch.7581:

Is that really the best way?

Yes. DPS is king because of some fundamental design choices. Survival has almost nothing to do with character, and everything to do with the player. As a result characters are built for maximum damage while the player keeps their character alive through good play. There really is no reason to chose a “survival” build at all.

I got bored with GW2 combat mechanics early on. Only played a month or so after launch. Came back about a month ago and already moving on to something else again (Rift in this case). Not sure if I will be back again or not, but if something doesn’t change in GW2 there really won’t be a reason to come back.

Stefanos.1673:

^
Get in Arah path 3 with 2 support guardians and then without them. Then come here and post the difference.

The difference is (assuming 4zerk + optional) one run is a lot faster but also takes a lot more skill and perfection on the part of the entire party. Taking the multiple support characters + PVT dps and a defense stacked character will make for a lot slower run but requires less skill and has tons of room for errors.

I’ve done both and personally I prefer the latter in a Pug. When I pug a high frac or something tougher like Arah I like the more balanced approach because IMHO they succeed more often do to fewer wipes (high mistake tolerance). But that doesn’t change that when you have an experienced group with a high skill level full zerk, they will blow through everything more efficiently and effectively than any other setup.

Someone already answered it. The problem is every class is a hybrid of dps/control/support.

Just because a guardian is using reflect for support, dont’ mean he can’t use zerker gear for dps, and gs/hammer for blind and control.

What you listed is more specializations than roles. Direct damage builds and condition damage builds are both DPS builds, for example.

I also have the same impression about how characters are created. Unlike other MMOs where some classes can only ever do DPS, I always had the impression that in Guild Wars 2 every profession is versatile and able to take any role a player may want. You pick a profession for the hero archetype, the feel and the playstyle, and then you pick the role you want to assume. However that’s not what I’m seeing right now. I picked a warrior with the intension to go defense-heavy, and I think it’s pretty reasonable to expect a heavy armored “tough guy” character to be viable at defense, but as it is, the class has no viable bunker or tanking build and it probably has the worst sustain out of any class right now. I’m talking about warriors because I have one, but I’m sure there are a few other professions with only one viable build. I still believe that the ultimate intension of the developers is to have every profession viable in multiple roles, but it doesn’t feel very high on their list of priority.

As for roles, there will always be roles. As long as people have preferences, people will naturally pick a role. The reason that the tank/dps/healer model works so well is because it gives people who prefer defensive playstyles a chance to shine. As someone who prefers playing on defense (I have a level 90 of all 5 tank classes in World of Warcraft) I just can’t get engaged in this game’s PvE because it’s DPS, DPS, DPS, DPS. (Plus warriors are pretty crappy at defense and I don’t “feel” guardians, but that’s another issue.) On a side note, I don’t think that their DPS/control/support would work as well as tank/DPS/healer for defense people.

Bearhugger.4326:

On a side note, I don’t think that their DPS/control/support would work as well as tank/DPS/healer for defense people.

I think it could work just fine, actually it did work just fine in GW1.

In GW1 there were no “tanking” skills that increased threat or taunted the mobs, instead the “tank” had to control the targets, keeping them from being able to get to the DPS / healers. Snares, knock downs, stuns and interrupts were used often and the smart AI would realize it couldn’t make it to any other target and attempt to kill the tank.

In this way the controller archetype was the tank, (DPS and support are self explanatory)

I too was like you thinking that each class would have 3 ways to build and you could have a control of any class (who could swap builds on the fly like GW1), or a support of any class. Negating the need to have XYZ class because they are the healer, or ABC class because you need a tank. Get a group of 5 and you have all you need. Just decide who is doing what. but that isn’t how it is… Turns out we instead have all 3 at once. So while you can build for more of each you are ultimately responsible for all 3, and ultimately for yourself and only yourself.