Guild Wars 2

Nerelith.7360:

Look Up " WTF?? No Trinity?" On youtube. It describes the " Trinity" in Gw2. BY Gw2.

Searched this and only found videos by Woodenpotatoes. Not saying they are bad, but in no way are they valid promises by a GW2 employee. Again, post a link and I’ll buy your basket of “ANET BREAKS WORD!!!!!”, goods….other than that, you are just spreading FUD as a disgruntled player.

Your claim that a fan made video constitutes a broken promise by Anet employees is laughable. Seriously, quit making wild claims about what players were “promised” (or more specifically, what you seem to think YOU were promised).

I think another problem many people cannot seem to deal with is the concept of marketing. Perhaps the type of people that GW2 attracts are people that have no experience with companies like Blizzard. Else they would understand that GW2’s manifesto (by Anet) was just a very good marketing idea aimed at getting more box sales. Anyone who watched that manifesto video and actually believed everything in it would actually be in the game in the same way the video showed it or believe that promotion trailers like that are an accurate description of certain ‘promises’ made by a company prolly lives on some kind of pink cloud. It’s called marketing, it’s how companies work. l2p life/capitalism/economy/companies and businesses is my response to people like that. Most of the complaints come from people who are primarily former console/single player gamers, former GW1 players or any other type of gamer not familiar with MMO type games. Arguably this is a large part of anet’s customers and playerbase. A playerbase they themselves created by picking certain target groups they maybe shouldn’t have picked. Gw2 is a really odd one between the MMO’s in terms of playerbase. WoW players complain too but you will never hear a wow player say: Hey! X character use Y skill and spec in this trailer video! It’s unviable in the current raid! Your game suck! Or: Blizzard! Your game is so bad because holy priests aren’t viable DPS specs!!!!

People these days.. sheesh.. Just play the kitten game.

Nerelith.7360:

Look Up " WTF?? No Trinity?" On youtube. It describes the " Trinity" in Gw2. BY Gw2.

I think you got the title wrong if you’re talking about an official video. I’m looking for it now, will edit in a link if I find something.

Closest I found so far – Link . . . Isiah talking about how they wanted the classes adaptable, and it proceeds into the same talk you might be thinking of. Just the word “trinity” does not come up at all.

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

ocirne.7915:

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

There are plenty of builds in GW2. Just look that the various build databases. GW1 was a trinity based game so the builds are stuck in specific roles. You cannot compare the 2 games. Both have depth of builds, it is just the players only see one type. That is not the games fault, but theirs.

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

There are plenty of builds in GW2. Just look that the various build databases. GW1 was a trinity based game so the builds are stuck in specific roles. You cannot compare the 2 games. Both have depth of builds, it is just the players only see one type. That is not the games fault, but theirs.

There are plenty of builds, but the builds often have nearly identical playstyles. Builds mostly dont change how you use your skills.

Basically, yes there are many variations for builds on all classes, but they are not nearly different enough gameplay wise.

edit:
And no, it’s never the player’s fault. The game promotes using certain things, simply because it works best. If people don’t use things, its because they don’t work as well. There is no depth if the choice is always clear.

the only way to break DPS depending groups is by making dungeons depend on conditions, places where regular damage simply doesn’t work and where conditions are the only dmg dealers.
or what about a dungeon where DPS simply has no use, you need to gear on defense and dmg avoidance, regen if needed.

DPS is bad because some professions lack the so called “meta DPS”, conditions and boons on the other hand is one thing every single profession has plenty of and is somewhat equal on power.
that, and i see allot of players focus on perfection rather then fun, i see them as players who simply don’t have any idea what a game is all about.

Well, other stuff works too, but honestly once “I” tasted the sweet speed of mob-annihilation – why would I go back? Especially in open PvE this is very noticeable. Mostly it’s just a question of the utility traits for me.

One of the funnest and most satisfying moments for me (again, open world PvE) is when I can pull at least 3, best case 5 mobs with a guardian’s GS binding blade and then mow them all down at once. A simple pleasure I admit.

the only way to break DPS depending groups is by making dungeons depend on conditions, places where regular damage simply doesn’t work and where conditions are the only dmg dealers.

But conditions do DPS. The problem is, it caps at around ~7,000.

or what about a dungeon where DPS simply has no use, you need to gear on defense and dmg avoidance, regen if needed.

That sounds absolutely atrocious – it would be full of running around in circles waiting for time gates.

DPS is bad because some professions lack the so called “meta DPS”, conditions and boons on the other hand is one thing every single profession has plenty of and is somewhat equal on power.

Mesmer lacks reliable condition application, thieves can only apply bleeds and poison, elementalists are weak on condition application, guardians can only apply burning. A warrior can cap bleeds, have full burning uptime and full uptime on 4 stacks of torment – no other profession besides engineer is close to this level of condition application.

ocirne.7915:

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

There are plenty of builds in GW2. Just look that the various build databases. GW1 was a trinity based game so the builds are stuck in specific roles. You cannot compare the 2 games. Both have depth of builds, it is just the players only see one type. That is not the games fault, but theirs.

There are plenty of builds, but the builds often have nearly identical playstyles. Builds mostly dont change how you use your skills.

Basically, yes there are many variations for builds on all classes, but they are not nearly different enough gameplay wise.

edit:
And no, it’s never the player’s fault. The game promotes using certain things, simply because it works best. If people don’t use things, its because they don’t work as well. There is no depth if the choice is always clear.

You are mistaken – it is the players fault – the players are the ones who look for speed runs and the simplest way to do things. It is obvious that people like to blame others for their own faults and flaws.

The game doesn’t promote ANYTHING. They did say that ‘Zerker’ was the best DPS is all – nothing more. It is the PLAYERS that decided that ONLY DPS is important. A.Net did not and if they did, then we would only have DPS armor not PTV, and all the other armors types in the game. If what you said is true, than A.Net wouldn’t have changed how some of the world bosses fight, etc.

Galen Grey.4709:

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Galen Grey.4709:

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Being the “last man standing” on your non-DPS spec is nothing to brag about, it means you made a spec to do something other than DPS (i.e. tank, heal, CC, etc.) and FAILED because your party is now dead.

“My healer build was so amazing my entire party wiped” is basically what I see people saying whenenver they say “last man standing”.

we’re talking pugs, some of whom might be new to the game and I wouldnt consider it a failure if it didnt wipe.

what processing logic are you using to translate this “last man standing” to this “My healer build was so amazing my entire party wiped”

last man standing doesnt imply healer and if they’re standing it implies there is no wipe!

1) Not DPS = you were healer or tank or some other similar support role.
2) Last man standing = everyone else is dead.
3) Everyone else is dead = healer/tank/support didn’t do his job properly.

in a trinity setup yes sure… but in gw2 everyone is dps, tank and healer at the same time (or damage, control , support to use the official terminology).

Perhaps the last man standing is the last man standing cause s/he didnt neglect their control, support part while the other did. Support and control help in Gw2 but they’re not going to keep everyone alive.

Your statement isn’t necessary true in a trinity setup either. A healers job is first and foremost to keep himself/herself alive before his/her teammates. A dead DPS is bad but survivable generally speaking a dead healer means game over.

The point of a dedicated support/healer/tank is to keep OTHER people alive while they do other things. If your dedicated support/healing/tanking didn’t keep them alive, it was utterly pointless. The fact that it kept YOU alive is totally irrelevant because you’re not DPSing anyway.

So basically what that boils down to is that whatever role you picked for yourself was pointless and useless, and you’re bragging about how pointless and useless it was for everything except keeping you alive long enough to continue being pointless and useless longer than the rest of your party.

You’re literally negative DPS because you not dying along with everyone else is just keeping them from ressing and retrying sooner.

Galen Grey.4709:

nexxe.7081:

Again, most of you missed the point.

I’ll keep it short this time and perhaps there is some hope, that some of you will understand.

-DPS-zerker is desired, but not required.
-One role is superior. The others are inferior.

When you have one role desired over everything else, then you must admit it’s a problem.

in every game there is one superior role and the other are inferior. perfect balance doesnt exist!

Wrong. There are multiple roles in other MMOs. The usual one is the infamous Trinity (tank, healer, support), but there are also hybrids, that don’t require a tank or healer.

This isn’t just about roles either. It’s mostly about encounters, and how they favor DPS over the others.

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

There are plenty of builds in GW2. Just look that the various build databases. GW1 was a trinity based game so the builds are stuck in specific roles. You cannot compare the 2 games. Both have depth of builds, it is just the players only see one type. That is not the games fault, but theirs.

There are plenty of builds, but the builds often have nearly identical playstyles. Builds mostly dont change how you use your skills.

Basically, yes there are many variations for builds on all classes, but they are not nearly different enough gameplay wise.

edit:
And no, it’s never the player’s fault. The game promotes using certain things, simply because it works best. If people don’t use things, its because they don’t work as well. There is no depth if the choice is always clear.

You are mistaken – it is the players fault – the players are the ones who look for speed runs and the simplest way to do things. It is obvious that people like to blame others for their own faults and flaws.

The game doesn’t promote ANYTHING. They did say that ‘Zerker’ was the best DPS is all – nothing more. It is the PLAYERS that decided that ONLY DPS is important. A.Net did not and if they did, then we would only have DPS armor not PTV, and all the other armors types in the game. If what you said is true, than A.Net wouldn’t have changed how some of the world bosses fight, etc.

DPS is most important because it works best, because of how the AI / encounters work right now. PLAYERS don’t decide things, they do what works best.

And obviously only DPS is not what anet wanted to do, simply because there is stuff aimed at other roles. The game just isn’t designed well enough to make those other roles comparable.

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

There are plenty of builds in GW2. Just look that the various build databases. GW1 was a trinity based game so the builds are stuck in specific roles. You cannot compare the 2 games. Both have depth of builds, it is just the players only see one type. That is not the games fault, but theirs.

There are plenty of builds, but the builds often have nearly identical playstyles. Builds mostly dont change how you use your skills.

Basically, yes there are many variations for builds on all classes, but they are not nearly different enough gameplay wise.

edit:
And no, it’s never the player’s fault. The game promotes using certain things, simply because it works best. If people don’t use things, its because they don’t work as well. There is no depth if the choice is always clear.

You are mistaken – it is the players fault – the players are the ones who look for speed runs and the simplest way to do things. It is obvious that people like to blame others for their own faults and flaws.

The game doesn’t promote ANYTHING. They did say that ‘Zerker’ was the best DPS is all – nothing more. It is the PLAYERS that decided that ONLY DPS is important. A.Net did not and if they did, then we would only have DPS armor not PTV, and all the other armors types in the game. If what you said is true, than A.Net wouldn’t have changed how some of the world bosses fight, etc.

How could you blame the players? That’s so ridiculous.

The game might not promote anything, but it’s up to the developers to adapt and change their A.I. encounters, to offer more diversity for other roles.

From what i read, they used to have 6 living story teams at one time, and dissolved their dungeon team for it. If true, that would explain why they don’t focus on developing for the existing dungeons and world.

So, no. It’s not the players fault. It’s the lack of direction from Anet.

ocirne.7915:

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

There are plenty of builds in GW2. Just look that the various build databases. GW1 was a trinity based game so the builds are stuck in specific roles. You cannot compare the 2 games. Both have depth of builds, it is just the players only see one type. That is not the games fault, but theirs.

There are plenty of builds, but the builds often have nearly identical playstyles. Builds mostly dont change how you use your skills.

Basically, yes there are many variations for builds on all classes, but they are not nearly different enough gameplay wise.

edit:
And no, it’s never the player’s fault. The game promotes using certain things, simply because it works best. If people don’t use things, its because they don’t work as well. There is no depth if the choice is always clear.

You are mistaken – it is the players fault – the players are the ones who look for speed runs and the simplest way to do things. It is obvious that people like to blame others for their own faults and flaws.

The game doesn’t promote ANYTHING. They did say that ‘Zerker’ was the best DPS is all – nothing more. It is the PLAYERS that decided that ONLY DPS is important. A.Net did not and if they did, then we would only have DPS armor not PTV, and all the other armors types in the game. If what you said is true, than A.Net wouldn’t have changed how some of the world bosses fight, etc.

DPS is most important because it works best, because of how the AI / encounters work right now. PLAYERS don’t decide things, they do what works best.

And obviously only DPS is not what anet wanted to do, simply because there is stuff aimed at other roles. The game just isn’t designed well enough to make those other roles comparable.

No – sorry – that is why Anet put a heal and other support skills on the bar. If they just wanted DPS, that is all they would have on the bar. I am not saying DPS is not important I am saying that other types of skills (such as CC, debuff, etc.) are just as important. Example if you use a GS with a Mesmer you get one skill that is a knockback. If DPS was so important, than why is that skill there? The same can be said for a Guardian using a scepter as in the middle of the 5 skill bar, there is a CC skill – why?

People like to blame others for the narrow way they think. This is what is happening now. Go into WvW and try not to use a Support Guardian – it won’t happen. Same with all the other professions.

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

Dusty Moon.4382:

ocirne.7915:

The whole point of this thread is that we want more diversity and choice.

Diversity is not diversity if there is only one clear answer. A game with proper diversity has a large selection of different playstyles and options available for builds without one being clearly better than the other.

Anet absolutely did a brilliant job at this in GW1, even after updates stopped to stop OP builds, there is still a massive amount of builds available each with a completely different playstyle.
pvp: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvP_builds
pve: http://gwpvx.gamepedia.com/Category:All_working_PvE_builds

Depth plays a huge role, and depth is not difficulty, difficulty is the easiest / laziest way to add depth. Depth and accessibility are also not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

Basically this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU

There are plenty of builds in GW2. Just look that the various build databases. GW1 was a trinity based game so the builds are stuck in specific roles. You cannot compare the 2 games. Both have depth of builds, it is just the players only see one type. That is not the games fault, but theirs.

There are plenty of builds, but the builds often have nearly identical playstyles. Builds mostly dont change how you use your skills.

Basically, yes there are many variations for builds on all classes, but they are not nearly different enough gameplay wise.

edit:
And no, it’s never the player’s fault. The game promotes using certain things, simply because it works best. If people don’t use things, its because they don’t work as well. There is no depth if the choice is always clear.

You are mistaken – it is the players fault – the players are the ones who look for speed runs and the simplest way to do things. It is obvious that people like to blame others for their own faults and flaws.

The game doesn’t promote ANYTHING. They did say that ‘Zerker’ was the best DPS is all – nothing more. It is the PLAYERS that decided that ONLY DPS is important. A.Net did not and if they did, then we would only have DPS armor not PTV, and all the other armors types in the game. If what you said is true, than A.Net wouldn’t have changed how some of the world bosses fight, etc.

DPS is most important because it works best, because of how the AI / encounters work right now. PLAYERS don’t decide things, they do what works best.

And obviously only DPS is not what anet wanted to do, simply because there is stuff aimed at other roles. The game just isn’t designed well enough to make those other roles comparable.

No – sorry – that is why Anet put a heal and other support skills on the bar. If they just wanted DPS, that is all they would have on the bar. I am not saying DPS is not important I am saying that other types of skills (such as CC, debuff, etc.) are just as important. Example if you use a GS with a Mesmer you get one skill that is a knockback. If DPS was so important, than why is that skill there? The same can be said for a Guardian using a scepter as in the middle of the 5 skill bar, there is a CC skill – why?

People like to blame others for the narrow way they think. This is what is happening now. Go into WvW and try not to use a Support Guardian – it won’t happen. Same with all the other professions.

Have you read any of the other posts?

nexxe.7081:

Wrong. There are multiple roles in other MMOs. The usual one is the infamous Trinity (tank, healer, support), but there are also hybrids, that don’t require a tank or healer.

You also forgot DPS, because you can tank all day long and if you’re not doing “the deeps” then you’re cutting down a pine tree with a hatchet. You’ll get it done, but you’re taking a lot longer than if you had the right tool. And, notably, that’s probably seen in groups and guilds I was in for other games . . . as the top requirement: “if we can burn down things much much faster, then we can do more kills, get more loot, get better XP”.

(And before you ask, yes, was a ranger in that game and switched to straight healer so I could get a group because . . . it’s a known thing that rangers in any game suck._

In other MMOs the trinity approach (I’ve always heard) is DPS/Heal/Tank, support being a non-essential role which can often be sacrificed while the other three usually cannot. And you don’t want too many healers in your party or too many tanks . . . usually two tanks (main and off tank), one healer (optimistically with one hybrid healer for backup or “patch” healing), and the rest DPS. You can slide a “support” or “hybrid” in if your off-tank is decent at DPS, but for the most part if you’re not confident you let those slide in favor of sticking with 2/2/X

But then, that’s how it was played last time I touched an MMO with the trinity, which has been a while. Strangely enough, it’s been applied to D&D since 3.5 also . . .

This isn’t just about roles either. It’s mostly about encounters, and how they favor DPS over the others.

They always have – if you can get a group which can burn down things fast enough, why bother with the rest of it? Also not restricted to GW2 or MMOs, seen it in CCGs too. That’s why “burn decks” exist in MTG after all . . .

Support and healing are only as useful as they are necessary. This is a basic truth; if a player is at full health and taking no damage, then giving them Aegis, Protection and healing them is not useful. The same thing can be said for damage. Using one-hundred blades on an invulnerable creature is useless. The difference is that there is usually something to attack and not usually something that needs healing and protecting.

If ArenaNet made an encounter where support and healing were required (and therefore mandatory) I personally wouldn’t mind it, but prepare yourself for the flood of forum posts that will be demanding its nerf. For you see, the difference between making healing and support useful and making damage useful is that failure will result in death for the former group and merely time lost for the latter.

It’s quite simple really.

If the only life threatening incoming damage can be avoided, you only need as much defense as mistakes you foresee yourself making.
As you improve as a player, you make less mistakes, correctly time your dodges/blocks, and do not need defensive stats. This means you can gear zerker.
It does not mean all zerkers are good players, many use zerker gear without the correct dodge/block timings. However there is little reason for a good player to gear for anything except more dps, since they will naturally avoid life threatening damage anyway.

If you increase the amount of unavoidable damage, thus forcing people to gear defensive/regenerative, this has two very negative impacts on the game:
Reduced reliance on player skill.
Reduced reliance on an active style of combat.

Personally I would like to see fights where not only are blocks/dodges required to keep a zerker alive, but there is also enough unavoidable damage to require a dedicated healer. Some changes need to be made to allow this though: currently heals, boons and support skills are mostly far too low radius to be useful which is actually one of the reasons why we see lots of stacking.

Interestingly, and I’ve said it for a while now (the fight may have changed since I last logged in) Mai Trin is easymode if you simple have a dedicated guardian healer. You can all literally just stack on the guardian and afk her to 0%.

No.

Stack and Smack and Zerging are the only flavors over the last two years.
It will never change unless meaningful mechanics are altered in the game.

Brother Grimm.5176:

Nerelith.7360:

Look Up " WTF?? No Trinity?" On youtube. It describes the " Trinity" in Gw2. BY Gw2.

Searched this and only found videos by Woodenpotatoes. Not saying they are bad, but in no way are they valid promises by a GW2 employee. Again, post a link and I’ll buy your basket of “ANET BREAKS WORD!!!!!”, goods….other than that, you are just spreading FUD as a disgruntled player.

My bad, I assumed he was an employee of anet, he spoke with such authority in the video Not " these are my speculations…. " but " This will be in the game, and that will be in bla bla bla" My mistake.

To be honest I am not disgruntled at all. Fact is, I have been playing my engineer again. Someone suggested playing her past level 20…to see what she can do then, before giving up on engineer.

You really should not assume because someone made a mistake that they are " disgruntled employee full of madz.." or whatever.

Sometimes it’s a simple mistake. :-)

Galen Grey.4709:

wouldnt that actually be unnatural?
When you go in a fight your main aim is to kill your opponent why would you want to be kitten in doing that?

Your main aim is not to necessarily to kill your opponent, even if such is the most effective way to achieve your true main objective.

Not every member of a military, even a military at war, is directly charged with inflicting casualties on an enemy force. Quite the contrary.

Galen Grey.4709:

Someone mentioned this before, a combat medic isn’t issued with a knife instead of a gun just cause he has the ability to heal and thats an important point. Like wise a soldier may not be an awesome medic but can still do first aid if needs be.

Medics are armed for defense of self or their charges. He is armed with a gun primarily because not everyone, including signatories, abides by the Geneva convention regarding the sanctity of medical personnel.

Galen Grey.4709:

Thing is Trinity works by putting limitations in place not by making roles more powerful. There is a reason you never see 3 tanks and 2 healers. or 3 healers a tank and a dps.

Never is an awfully long time. I have seen just what you describe in another game where the design allows for even more hybrid character building than we see here.

Galen Grey.4709:

DPS is always king cause well thats what a fight is always about primarily.

Don’t really agree. In GW2 yes. Other games ? Not as much. DPS are a dime a dozen in plenty of other games. Healers and tanks are kings there. Personally I prefer to play a blend of DPS and soft control (GW1 Interrupt ranger for the win) ankitten ot particularly bothered that in GW2 control or support as full on specializations are not needed. I do see how others might feel otherwise.

When Anet speaks of a new trinity, where trinity in MMOs has traditionally been a reference to role specialization, of DPS, control, and support, it gives the impression that their new trinity are three role specializations. Such is not the case.

Realistically Anet is not going to revisit current dungeons again and tweak their AI again. Their only chance to fix the imbalance is to change the way mobs behave in all future dungeon, fractal and open world content. As I said in my previous posts there seems to be evidence of better enemy AI and encounters in the new living story, but it’s unfortunately open world and easy personal story content.

Also I want to address this notion in PvE that dodging telegraphed attacks is somehow the only and true combat “skill” that’s worth rewarding. The thought process to be “skillful” in PvE goes something like this:

- Know optimal placement in boss room.
- DPS and wait for Boss Telegraph
- Boss telegraphs super duper attack
- Wait x seconds to dodge or move out of the way
- Dodge/Move out of the way
- DPS
- Stabilize your situation through heals or cc if need be before Boss super duper attack cooldown recharges
- Repeat

That’s very simplistic and basic compared to other telegraphs and thought processes that are existent in WvW and PvE that are required to be skillful. It’s even worse for trash mobs:

- Knowledge of trash location
- Skip or Stack/DPS down in seconds.
- It is a combination of noticing a telegraphed attack

Obviously Zerker gear is going to be best for the above because dodge keeps you from dying 90% of the time and the insane DPS shortens the encounter enough that the time you have to make a mistake is very limited. In some cases this goes against the argument that pro zerker players are better at seeing and avoiding telegraphed attacks. No, sometimes the fight doesn’t even last long enough for there to be 2-3 attacks while more balanced teams may encounter and have to deal with a lot more over time.

Anyways, the thought process vs a player(s) is different. To be skilled in PvP/WvW combat you need to know telegraphs of all profession skills. You need to be able to identify on the go what build(s) you’re going against quickly based off skills used. You need to know how your build can counter said skills. You need to be disciplined enough to use your skills wisely and not just burst at every opportunity. You need to know what your allies are capable of etc etc. This promotes build variety and diversity as players try to cope with the abundance of combat variables that simply do not exist in GW2 PvE.

GW1 AI and encounters in many cases were designed for enemy AI to use a variety of skills, group compositions and even builds akin to the players. If there had been gear sets in GW1 I think there would have been plenty of variety in higher level PvE.

Again the problem is not players or gear it’s PvE encounter design and AI. Not having a Holy Trinity shouldn’t be an excuse to not have challenging and diverse AI that constantly pressures players like players do in WvW/PvP.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

nexxe.7081:

Wrong. There are multiple roles in other MMOs. The usual one is the infamous Trinity (tank, healer, support), but there are also hybrids, that don’t require a tank or healer.

You also forgot DPS, because you can tank all day long and if you’re not doing “the deeps” then you’re cutting down a pine tree with a hatchet. You’ll get it done, but you’re taking a lot longer than if you had the right tool. And, notably, that’s probably seen in groups and guilds I was in for other games . . . as the top requirement: “if we can burn down things much much faster, then we can do more kills, get more loot, get better XP”.

(And before you ask, yes, was a ranger in that game and switched to straight healer so I could get a group because . . . it’s a known thing that rangers in any game suck._

In other MMOs the trinity approach (I’ve always heard) is DPS/Heal/Tank, support being a non-essential role which can often be sacrificed while the other three usually cannot. And you don’t want too many healers in your party or too many tanks . . . usually two tanks (main and off tank), one healer (optimistically with one hybrid healer for backup or “patch” healing), and the rest DPS. You can slide a “support” or “hybrid” in if your off-tank is decent at DPS, but for the most part if you’re not confident you let those slide in favor of sticking with 2/2/X

But then, that’s how it was played last time I touched an MMO with the trinity, which has been a while. Strangely enough, it’s been applied to D&D since 3.5 also . . .

This isn’t just about roles either. It’s mostly about encounters, and how they favor DPS over the others.

They always have – if you can get a group which can burn down things fast enough, why bother with the rest of it? Also not restricted to GW2 or MMOs, seen it in CCGs too. That’s why “burn decks” exist in MTG after all . . .

My bad. I meant DPS, and not support.

The problem with your argument though, is that all the roles are needed in traditional Trinity MMOs. A tank and healer are required. In GW2, it’s not required. Support-specific, or Healer-specific, roles are not required in GW2.

And you’re wrong. DPS roles aren’t favored in other MMOs. They are just required with needing 3 DPS, but that doesn’t mean they are necessarily favored. That just means they are essential to the group, otherwise the boss takes longer to kill.

The opposite is true in GW2. Damage roles are favored by the community, because other roles aren’t required, and are actually discouraged from playing.

It wouldn’t make sense to take an extra Tank or Healer in a 5-man group, in traditional MMOs. It would slow the group down, due to lack of DPS. The same is true for GW2. Bringing another role just hampers the group’s efficiency.

I can only explain it so many times, before people understand. If they want to remain ignorant though, then that’s their problem. It’s an easy concept to understand.

Damage roles = preferred.
Others are not.

In reality, GW2 is worse than Trinity MMOs, by excluding other roles, and only needing one. It’s the homogenization of the self-reliant class.

nexxe.7081:

It wouldn’t make sense to take an extra Tank or Healer in a 5-man group, in traditional MMOs. It would slow the group down, due to lack of DPS. The same is true for GW2. Bringing another role just hampers the group’s efficiency.

The last traditional MMO I played had six people in the group, not five, and there were a few camps where two tanks (the off-tank) really was a good idea. In raid content, a “primary” off-tank was really kind of expected . . . as well as “as much DPS as we can have healers for”.

. . . which is why my cleric was almost always accepted for raids when I was doing EverQuest. And after I built him up, my ranger actually wound up being useful though it took a very specific build to let him work. (Trueshot was so fun.)

In reality, GW2 is worse than Trinity MMOs, by excluding other roles, and only needing one. It’s the homogenization of the self-reliant class.

Problem is, I think people like it that way now. Or rather, they’ve invested enough into their damage role they’d rather not see it be less than “always needed”.

Nerelith.7360:

I think the problem is… some people would Like to be support and control specialists. Not saying they do not wish to do damage, They simply wish to be able to specialize in one of the other two roles of the Anet trinity.

Saying " you can do support, and you can control." doesn’t mean that you can specialize. Some people want to specialize. Now this is Not the game for that…. this is a game for generalists that mostly do damage, and do support or control only sporadically.

Control think EQ Enchanter. Support Think EQ Druid.

None of that is in Gw2. Now asking for it is an exercise in futility. The game is what the game is.

We need to either enjoy it for what it is…. or find something else to play.

Whats stopping you from specializing? If you funnel your points to healing power instead of power, boon duration, condition duration etc.. wouldnt that be specializing in support as opposed to damage?

Nerelith.7360:

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Galen Grey.4709:

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Being the “last man standing” on your non-DPS spec is nothing to brag about, it means you made a spec to do something other than DPS (i.e. tank, heal, CC, etc.) and FAILED because your party is now dead.

“My healer build was so amazing my entire party wiped” is basically what I see people saying whenenver they say “last man standing”.

we’re talking pugs, some of whom might be new to the game and I wouldnt consider it a failure if it didnt wipe.

what processing logic are you using to translate this “last man standing” to this “My healer build was so amazing my entire party wiped”

last man standing doesnt imply healer and if they’re standing it implies there is no wipe!

1) Not DPS = you were healer or tank or some other similar support role.
2) Last man standing = everyone else is dead.
3) Everyone else is dead = healer/tank/support didn’t do his job properly.

Have to agree here. As much as I don’t Like the " DPS trumps all" nature of the game, this is truth.

Saying " I am not DPS" = " I am either support or control"…" I am usually last man standing " = " I didn’t keep my group alive, as well as I did Not do my utmost to DPS"

This is NOT a reason to brag. This means that you suck at your chosen role. If you are not DPS, then your role is to keep the DPS characters alive. If everyone around you is dead, that means you suck. Now. This is Not meant for the person I am quoting, the reason I am quoting you personally is…I agree with you.

There are dozens of games where Healers are necessary. There are plenty of games where tanks are necessary. This is not one of those games.

We need to accept this, and Play the game for what it is…. or find another. But constantly wanting the game to be drastically altered to be what someone else envisions the game should be, is an exercise in futility.

dps thrumps all in every game. there is a reason a party of 5 is 1 tank, 1 healer and 3 dpses. Whats different here is the game isnt designed to create artificial limits to force a group into taking a tank and a healer if they dont want to. thats all.

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Galen Grey.4709:

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Galen Grey.4709:

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Being the “last man standing” on your non-DPS spec is nothing to brag about, it means you made a spec to do something other than DPS (i.e. tank, heal, CC, etc.) and FAILED because your party is now dead.

“My healer build was so amazing my entire party wiped” is basically what I see people saying whenenver they say “last man standing”.

we’re talking pugs, some of whom might be new to the game and I wouldnt consider it a failure if it didnt wipe.

what processing logic are you using to translate this “last man standing” to this “My healer build was so amazing my entire party wiped”

last man standing doesnt imply healer and if they’re standing it implies there is no wipe!

1) Not DPS = you were healer or tank or some other similar support role.
2) Last man standing = everyone else is dead.
3) Everyone else is dead = healer/tank/support didn’t do his job properly.

in a trinity setup yes sure… but in gw2 everyone is dps, tank and healer at the same time (or damage, control , support to use the official terminology).

Perhaps the last man standing is the last man standing cause s/he didnt neglect their control, support part while the other did. Support and control help in Gw2 but they’re not going to keep everyone alive.

Your statement isn’t necessary true in a trinity setup either. A healers job is first and foremost to keep himself/herself alive before his/her teammates. A dead DPS is bad but survivable generally speaking a dead healer means game over.

The point of a dedicated support/healer/tank is to keep OTHER people alive while they do other things. If your dedicated support/healing/tanking didn’t keep them alive, it was utterly pointless. The fact that it kept YOU alive is totally irrelevant because you’re not DPSing anyway.

So basically what that boils down to is that whatever role you picked for yourself was pointless and useless, and you’re bragging about how pointless and useless it was for everything except keeping you alive long enough to continue being pointless and useless longer than the rest of your party.

You’re literally negative DPS because you not dying along with everyone else is just keeping them from ressing and retrying sooner.

you’re mistaken, I am not anti DPS, DPS is totally fine with me. I am arguing that DPS is not the only choice nothing more nothing less.

once again you’re using trinity philosophy on a game that specifically walks away from it. There is no concept of dedicated healer and tank in Gw2. Healer in Gw2 isnt meant to keep everyone alive, its meant to help one or two teammates get out of a sticky situation.

nexxe.7081:

Galen Grey.4709:

nexxe.7081:

Again, most of you missed the point.

I’ll keep it short this time and perhaps there is some hope, that some of you will understand.

-DPS-zerker is desired, but not required.
-One role is superior. The others are inferior.

When you have one role desired over everything else, then you must admit it’s a problem.

in every game there is one superior role and the other are inferior. perfect balance doesnt exist!

Wrong. There are multiple roles in other MMOs. The usual one is the infamous Trinity (tank, healer, support), but there are also hybrids, that don’t require a tank or healer.

This isn’t just about roles either. It’s mostly about encounters, and how they favor DPS over the others.

Did I say other wise? I only said there is always the superior role and it also happens to be dps. There is a reason why party of 5 are split 3x dps 1x healer 1x tank
there is a reason why people are always stuck waiting for a healer and a tank and never (or very rarely) for a dps even though there is 3x as much need for dps in a team then the other roles.

What do u mean? Non-dps is very important during dialogues.

nexxe.7081:

How could you blame the players? That’s so ridiculous.

The game might not promote anything, but it’s up to the developers to adapt and change their A.I. encounters, to offer more diversity for other roles.

From what i read, they used to have 6 living story teams at one time, and dissolved their dungeon team for it. If true, that would explain why they don’t focus on developing for the existing dungeons and world.

So, no. It’s not the players fault. It’s the lack of direction from Anet.

Disagree… while Gw2 isnt a sandbox and I am not saying it is, it shares certain aspects. One of these aspect is the freedom to approach combat as you see fit. Arenanet provide the tools, its up to the players how to use them. That people seem to choose dps over everything else is their choice nothing more nothing less. why is it such a big deal to play what you enjoy without having to be forced into it?

What you’re calling lack of direction is in fact freedom. Arenanet didnt strip heal-ability from tanks and dps in order to force people to play healers. It didnt strip survivability off dps and healers to force people to play tanks. It didnt imbude NPCs with strategic idiocy so they remain attacking the last unit they really should be attacking.

as for the dungeon team dissolving that’s all rumors. All that is known is there was a dungeon team and the person heading it no longer works with Arenanet. The dungeon team was actually active along side the living story teams and the living story team is actually relatively small compared with all the other teams working on the game. Its like 20 people compared to some 370 employees.

Ashen.2907:

Your main aim is not to necessarily to kill your opponent, even if such is the most effective way to achieve your true main objective.

Not every member of a military, even a military at war, is directly charged with inflicting casualties on an enemy force. Quite the contrary.

In real life I would hope so but in a game it generally is. The vast majority of quests are about killing y of x, specifically killing x or indirectly killing y of x (defend an objective against waves of enemies for example). The number of quests in MMOs that can be completed without killing anything are generally quite low.

Ashen.2907:

Medics are armed for defense of self or their charges. He is armed with a gun primarily because not everyone, including signatories, abides by the Geneva convention regarding the sanctity of medical personnel.

sure you’re right but thats no the point of what the other person was saying. In your typical trinity game your medic does a lot less damage then your dps. Thats an artificial barrier in service to a game mechanic. Its unnatural, in that just cause you can heal it doesnt mean you cannot do anything else.

Ashen.2907:

Never is an awfully long time. I have seen just what you describe in another game where the design allows for even more hybrid character building than we see here.

thats interesting, can you expand more on that? (but yes you’re right… should have said very often.. there are always exceptions)

Ashen.2907:

Don’t really agree. In GW2 yes. Other games ? Not as much. DPS are a dime a dozen in plenty of other games. Healers and tanks are kings there. Personally I prefer to play a blend of DPS and soft control (GW1 Interrupt ranger for the win) ankitten ot particularly bothered that in GW2 control or support as full on specializations are not needed. I do see how others might feel otherwise.

Hehe but thats the thing, why are DPS a dime a dozen? and why are healers and tanks rare? because DPS in a general sense is more useful role to play especially to solo. Healers and tanks arent king in that their role is best suited for the game. They’re king because their role isnt best suited at the game at all but the game through barriers ensures they’re necessary. Thus the smaller population of players that actually play them are highly requested.

Ashen.2907:

When Anet speaks of a new trinity, where trinity in MMOs has traditionally been a reference to role specialization, of DPS, control, and support, it gives the impression that their new trinity are three role specializations. Such is not the case.

as far as I know arenanet never claimed the damage, support control was a new trinity and in fact it isnt. every profession can be all three at once if the player chooses too that doesnt conform to the trinity design.

I think people are getting a little hung up on the trinity thing imho. Damage, Support and control will always exist in any game(yes even COD) so in that respect the trinity will always be with us.

In GW2 there is, just as there was in GW1 the chance for any player to play one or more these core roles. GW1 did it with secondary professions, and GW2 tries to do it with every class getting a heal etc etc.

Where GW2 falls short IMHO is that, in the design there is little productive opportunity for a pve player to play support or control so people spec towards damage. This lack of requirement effectively cuts the abilities of a class by 2/3rds.

Which is why we see so little build variety also imho

Players will use the tools that are given to them, and the tools they find fun or usually most productive/efficient and developers should take that into account when designing encounters. The fact we are so DPS centric, and have a lack of build diversity is not down to the players, but to the designers who’s encounter design funnels the players down this route.

As I mentioned before, I very much doubt anything will happen to resolve this as the changes required to fix it are too expansive

Someone please do a high fractals run with 4 eles and a warrior and record it please. All DPS, no support, just like the entire game supposedly is.

Except 4 eles brings a lot of support.

Galen Grey.4709:

as far as I know arenanet never claimed the damage, support control was a new trinity and in fact it isnt. every profession can be all three at once if the player chooses too that doesnt conform to the trinity design.

5 minutes of ‘Googling’:

http://www.arena.net/blog/jon-peters-talks-combat (link now defunct)
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1078544-GW2-official-Blogpost-about-the-Holy-Trinity-must-read (copy & paste of the original blog post)

Jon Peters

Each profession can support, control, and do damage. We believe that this creates more dynamic combat and more distinct professions because there are more play styles than roles.

spoj.9672:

Except 4 eles brings a lot of support.

hahahaha .. so true!!!!

Galen Grey.4709:

Ashen.2907:

Your main aim is not to necessarily to kill your opponent, even if such is the most effective way to achieve your true main objective.

Not every member of a military, even a military at war, is directly charged with inflicting casualties on an enemy force. Quite the contrary.

In real life I would hope so but in a game it generally is.

Let’s not forget that GW2 group play (heck, MMO group play in general) is not very much like real world combat on the strategic level. At best, it’s like a squad or fire team. While such small groups do have specializations (e.g., one might have a SAW, another a grenade launcher, a third an anti-tank or anti-air weapon), they are all doing damage at various times.

When Anet speaks of a new trinity, where trinity in MMOs has traditionally been a reference to role specialization, of DPS, control, and support, it gives the impression that their new trinity are three role specializations. Such is not the case.

as far as I know arenanet never claimed the damage, support control was a new trinity and in fact it isnt. every profession can be all three at once if the player chooses too that doesnt conform to the trinity design.

The quote referred to was, iirc, in the blog “Healing and Death.” If you look under http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Control and http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Support in the official Wiki, that blog is quoted on both. Interestingly enough, the links now show that the blog is no longer available. On reading the two articles, it’s pretty clear to me that support is working as intended, while control has some issues due to mob immunity mechanics. Neither article suggests to me that either would be dedicated roles — which is what the OP is asking for.

Knighthonor.4061:

Will Anet ever make Non-DPS role important?

I want to be able to play the group PvE dungeons without the retaliation of the community for not specing for pure damage.

I would like the option to play more roles than just damage in this game.

No.

Sorry OP but A-Net is a fail of epic proportions on this point.

The original game was designed and marketed as different from other MMOs in that it does not require a “holy tirnity”. Tank, heals, DPS. It was also at same time marketed and designed and stated that while it does not require those elements and content is doable with any group make-up, an optimal group would be DPS, support, control.

DPS, Support and Control were supposed to be the trinity of this game for optimal, but not necessary grouping. However A-Net has completely failed.

They wrote bad scripts for bosses and failed at proper encounter design, thus having no choice but to completely dumb them all down, basically making the control completely useless as the bosses were just flat out immune or durations so significantly lowered that they might as well have been immune.

On top of that they failed providing proper infrastructure. Back in beta for example, some mobs / bosses would not just sit in place in AOEs while being hit, they would kite players, but the servers failed and kept stuttering on the scripts they ran locking them up or causing “mob” lag, etc. So A-Nets solution was to remove all those type of things from the game. They gave up on it entirely and gave bosses mass hit point pools, immunities to Control and next to zero defenses instead.

Very bad programming coupled with poor hardware infrastructure and zero drive to improve on this area of the game by the people in charge is what has led to this situation. I expect absolute zero improvement in this area. A-Net knows all this as a business, and all they do is keep putting in more fluff and milking a cow for all its worth while it will slowly die (open new markets etc.), and then if the people currently in charge stay and don’t leave and actually apply their experience, they will make a new, better product.

So my suggestion to you is, either start on organized WvW / PvP, or leave the game, there are other much better, also F2P ones, albeit they are not as casual as GW2. Sad, and has led a lot of us to stop playing GW2, but true.

Tongku.5326:

Knighthonor.4061:

Will Anet ever make Non-DPS role important?

I want to be able to play the group PvE dungeons without the retaliation of the community for not specing for pure damage.

I would like the option to play more roles than just damage in this game.

No.

Sorry OP but A-Net is a fail of epic proportions on this point.

The original game was designed and marketed as different from other MMOs in that it does not require a “holy tirnity”. Tank, heals, DPS. It was also at same time marketed and designed and stated that while it does not require those elements and content is doable with any group make-up, an optimal group would be DPS, support, control.

DPS, Support and Control were supposed to be the trinity of this game for optimal, but not necessary grouping. However A-Net has completely failed.

They wrote bad scripts for bosses and failed at proper encounter design, thus having no choice but to completely dumb them all down, basically making the control completely useless as the bosses were just flat out immune or durations so significantly lowered that they might as well have been immune.

On top of that they failed providing proper infrastructure. Back in beta for example, some mobs / bosses would not just sit in place in AOEs while being hit, they would kite players, but the servers failed and kept stuttering on the scripts they ran locking them up or causing “mob” lag, etc. So A-Nets solution was to remove all those type of things from the game. They gave up on it entirely and gave bosses mass hit point pools, immunities to Control and next to zero defenses instead.

Very bad programming coupled with poor hardware infrastructure and zero drive to improve on this area of the game by the people in charge is what has led to this situation. I expect absolute zero improvement in this area. A-Net knows all this as a business, and all they do is keep putting in more fluff and milking a cow for all its worth while it will slowly die (open new markets etc.), and then if the people currently in charge stay and don’t leave and actually apply their experience, they will make a new, better product.

So my suggestion to you is, either start on organized WvW / PvP, or leave the game, there are other much better, also F2P ones, albeit they are not as casual as GW2. Sad, and has led a lot of us to stop playing GW2, but true.

The PvP and WvW is even worse designed than the PvE lol. At least the PvE is decently well-paced, dungeons in most MMOs can take as long as an hour on average.

Rangersix.1754:

Galen Grey.4709:

as far as I know arenanet never claimed the damage, support control was a new trinity and in fact it isnt. every profession can be all three at once if the player chooses too that doesnt conform to the trinity design.

5 minutes of ‘Googling’:

http://www.arena.net/blog/jon-peters-talks-combat (link now defunct)
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1078544-GW2-official-Blogpost-about-the-Holy-Trinity-must-read (copy & paste of the original blog post)

Jon Peters

Each profession can support, control, and do damage. We believe that this creates more dynamic combat and more distinct professions because there are more play styles than roles.

Actually what you quoted says exactly the opposite.
“Each profession can support, control, and do damage”
for it to be a new trinity each profession should only be able to do one of them no all 3.

The whole point of the trinity is you have 3 roles and any character can only fit one of those roles. The game is designed in a way that you need all 3 roles to succeed and thus it forces players to diversify.

if you can have all 3 roles on 1 character it just is not a trinity game design.

Tongku.5326:

No.

Sorry OP but A-Net is a fail of epic proportions on this point.

The original game was designed and marketed as different from other MMOs in that it does not require a “holy tirnity”. Tank, heals, DPS. It was also at same time marketed and designed and stated that while it does not require those elements and content is doable with any group make-up, an optimal group would be DPS, support, control.

DPS, Support and Control were supposed to be the trinity of this game for optimal, but not necessary grouping. However A-Net has completely failed.

No they weren’t supposed to be a new trinity at all.

Tongku.5326:

They wrote bad scripts for bosses and failed at proper encounter design, thus having no choice but to completely dumb them all down, basically making the control completely useless as the bosses were just flat out immune or durations so significantly lowered that they might as well have been immune.

They’re not really immune just they need to be hit multiple times for it to take effect which in a twisted way makes sense though I do agree with you its far from ideal.

Thing is with each profession being able to crowd control bosses would stand no chance if they didnt have some sort of protection. On my necro I have builds that have 2 fears, 7 blinds meaning I could single handly negate 9 attacks in the span of 60 seconds. A coordinated group of 5 characters could easily shut down a boss making each and every attack miss. Doesnt take much co-ordination either just agreeing on a CC character rotation and notifying when all your cc is on cool down so the next person takes over. Defiant mechanic is a big bummer cause it requires insane co-ordination for CCing a boss but something needs to be done in a game where your whole party can easily pack some CC.

Tongku.5326:

On top of that they failed providing proper infrastructure. Back in beta for example, some mobs / bosses would not just sit in place in AOEs while being hit, they would kite players, but the servers failed and kept stuttering on the scripts they ran locking them up or causing “mob” lag, etc. So A-Nets solution was to remove all those type of things from the game. They gave up on it entirely and gave bosses mass hit point pools, immunities to Control and next to zero defenses instead.

Very bad programming coupled with poor hardware infrastructure and zero drive to improve on this area of the game by the people in charge is what has led to this situation. I expect absolute zero improvement in this area. A-Net knows all this as a business, and all they do is keep putting in more fluff and milking a cow for all its worth while it will slowly die (open new markets etc.), and then if the people currently in charge stay and don’t leave and actually apply their experience, they will make a new, better product.

So my suggestion to you is, either start on organized WvW / PvP, or leave the game, there are other much better, also F2P ones, albeit they are not as casual as GW2. Sad, and has led a lot of us to stop playing GW2, but true.

back in beta? Do you perhaps mean alpha? because I dont remember any of what you mention here in beta.

Galen Grey.4709:

Rangersix.1754:

Galen Grey.4709:

as far as I know arenanet never claimed the damage, support control was a new trinity and in fact it isnt. every profession can be all three at once if the player chooses too that doesnt conform to the trinity design.

5 minutes of ‘Googling’:

http://www.arena.net/blog/jon-peters-talks-combat (link now defunct)
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1078544-GW2-official-Blogpost-about-the-Holy-Trinity-must-read (copy & paste of the original blog post)

Jon Peters

Each profession can support, control, and do damage. We believe that this creates more dynamic combat and more distinct professions because there are more play styles than roles.

Actually what you quoted says exactly the opposite.
“Each profession can support, control, and do damage”
for it to be a new trinity each profession should only be able to do one of them no all 3.

The whole point of the trinity is you have 3 roles and any character can only fit one of those roles. The game is designed in a way that you need all 3 roles to succeed and thus it forces players to diversify.

if you can have all 3 roles on 1 character it just is not a trinity game design.

Its not a conventional trinity. But there is still a trinity of roles. Its irrelevant that you can cover all 3 of them on one character. Anyway i believe anet said something like this “we dont have the traditional trinity of tank, healer and dps. But we sort of have a new trinity of sub roles and they can be divided as dps, support and control”. Not a direct quote but i remember it going something like that. Key thing to take from this is that they never claimed that you should focus solely on one of these sub roles.

It’s not only about dungeons.
Back to my topic: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Why-helping-don-t-give-you-reward-WvW/first#post3867068

You get nothing from support because it’s all about brainless damage with dodge.
But this problem, in my opinion, can’t be solved because it requires deep changes in the game mechanics.

spoj.9672:

Galen Grey.4709:

Rangersix.1754:

Galen Grey.4709:

as far as I know arenanet never claimed the damage, support control was a new trinity and in fact it isnt. every profession can be all three at once if the player chooses too that doesnt conform to the trinity design.

5 minutes of ‘Googling’:

http://www.arena.net/blog/jon-peters-talks-combat (link now defunct)
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1078544-GW2-official-Blogpost-about-the-Holy-Trinity-must-read (copy & paste of the original blog post)

Jon Peters

Each profession can support, control, and do damage. We believe that this creates more dynamic combat and more distinct professions because there are more play styles than roles.

Actually what you quoted says exactly the opposite.
“Each profession can support, control, and do damage”
for it to be a new trinity each profession should only be able to do one of them no all 3.

The whole point of the trinity is you have 3 roles and any character can only fit one of those roles. The game is designed in a way that you need all 3 roles to succeed and thus it forces players to diversify.

if you can have all 3 roles on 1 character it just is not a trinity game design.

Its not a conventional trinity. But there is still a trinity of roles. Its irrelevant that you can cover all 3 of them on one character. Anyway i believe anet said something like this “we dont have the traditional trinity of tank, healer and dps. But we sort of have a new trinity of sub roles and they can be divided as dps, support and control”. Not a direct quote but i remember it going something like that. Key thing to take from this is that they never claimed that you should focus solely on one of these sub roles.

I wouldnt say its irrelevant you can cover all 3 of them with one character, I’d say its actually the core of the matter. The holy trinity is an issue not because of DPS, healing or tanking.. Its good that you can do damage, control and support. The issue stems from limiting characters to 1 of them. The issue is waiting for hours looking for a tank and a healer etc…

All of that is a byproduct of the trinity design where your warrior can only DPS, s/he cannot also tank / heal (if they could then you wouldnt need to wait for a tank or a healer but have 1 of your team focus on that etc…)

Gw2 didnt walk away from the trinity just for the sake of being different it was specifically to solve these issues inherit to the holy trinity design.

It was never about eliminating healing / support / Crowd control… it was all about not limiting any profession’s ability to support and crowd control and thus not requiring any specific group makeup for content.

kristof.7182:

It’s not only about dungeons.
Back to my topic: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Why-helping-don-t-give-you-reward-WvW/first#post3867068

You get nothing from support because it’s all about brainless damage with dodge.
But this problem, in my opinion, can’t be solved because it requires deep changes in the game mechanics.

dodge isnt the ultimate solution..

1. you’re limited about how many times you can dodge
2. dodge doesnt help you if you are afflicted with conditions.
3. dodge doesnt always help with AOE attacks.
4. A good opponent will factor in your ability to dodge in their attack pattern.
5. Some conditions prevent you from dodging all together.
6. too many opponents at the same time to dodge all the incoming damage

In all of these cases dodge can be totally useless and support can make all the difference.

In dungeons there may be a valid argument how support and control has limited value since a lot of it is predictable enough and bosses strong defence against control. In PvP however I dont think DPS is king at all. Support and Control are just as essential.

In team PvP it isn’t because you play for your team andyou get the same chest.
In PvE and WvW class with AoE wins. So it’s all about AoE damage for loot. And for stricte-support you get bronze medal and for AoE damage – gold medal.

I said “brainless damage with dodge” because I was afraid of players: “It’s not true! You need to dodge if you want to survive”.

For rifts (and other events/pvp) in Rift everyone gets fairly (in my opnion) rewards – damage taken (tanks), damage done (dps), healing done (support) and kills, assists. It’s all about the game mechanics and it won’t work in GW2 – DPS taunt mobs so damage taken and damage done is for DPS only and there’s no healing class so there’s no healing done.

If you dislike doing damage do not play action games.

I’m sorry for my post on the first page. You were right. PVE in GW2 is about zerker stats, nothing more. Anet wants us to use zerker as there is time counter on any major boss event.

Other stat combos are for PVP and partially for WvW where you need some more health to survive mass aoe fights.

//so much fun QQ//

Bread.7516:

If you dislike doing damage do not play action games.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_game

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game

compare and rewrite your thesis