Guild Wars 2

Kitsune.1902:

Seera.5916:

As long as five players who are friends and want to play together and all want to do the same role have the chance to complete the content without changing to a different role, then I don’t care how they change it up. Be it they all want to play DPS or they all want to play Support or Control or whatever.

I don’t want to have to wait for someone in a particular build to show up in order to be able to do content.

Some people really enjoy soloing content. Add hard roles to the game and you destroy their fun. Because they can no longer do it alone. They have to bring others.

There is a limit to this. Five dedicated healer builds for example, that sacrifice essentially all of their DPS and defense to be as efficient at healing as possible.

Five characters with build like that should not be able to deal with all content. If you make all the content such that any and all builds – and combinations of builds – can drudge through it, you will sacrifice far too much.

If you take it to extreme, you’d have to give up all time based combat challenges, all ‘hold the line’ type challenges, and a lot of other mechanics. Taken to the wider scale, most – if not all – of the current world boss fights that are even a little challenging, would be impossible.

You can’t compare dungeon mechanics to world boss mechanics. 5 players in a group are not able to take a world boss down because a world boss is a World Event and they need more than 5 players. World bosses would be doable no matter what because enough people will be in a variety of builds that it wouldn’t matter. And unless you want to chase away a LOT of casual players, you can’t make open world have hard roles. That leaves dungeons as the only real place hard roles would cause a problem.

Hard roles:

Neutral out on inclusive/exclusive. You can claim they are more inclusive of more builds, but if the group already has the max number of DPS players and is needing a healer and a tank, then any DPS player that wants to join is excluded. Players should not be forced to carry around multiple sets of armor and have multiple builds in order to always be included in a dungeon run. And if there are 5 groups of players needing healers and only 3 healers are on that are wanting to do dungeons, that’s a lot of waiting time for 2 groups of players. And this game was ADVERTISED as not having to wait for someone to fill a specific role.

Yes, current set up does have people waiting for people that fit what they want to join the group, but they are choosing to wait for a specific person. They aren’t forced to do so by the game.

And yes, I say the five healers should be able to complete the same content that five DPS players should. Slower as they’ve sacrificed DPS for healing. But still able to do so. And the game currently allows for any group of players with any combination of builds to complete content. So I would not be sacrificing anything to keep it that way.

thomdane.3670:

I’m sorry, but no, I never want any hard trinity put in place. I like the fact that I can insta fill a dungeon party, not having to wait around for a certain specialty class that I have to have, even to the extent of “hiring” one for coin just to get going..

^^ This is exactly why GW2 is the way it is and it was pain in GW1 for Halls and few other boss fights like Shiro.

DiogoSilva.7089:

Seera.5916:

I just don’t want the method chosen to be adding hard roles to the game.

Hard roles is a wonderful thing, if done right. They are usually thematically tight and easy to grasp, unlike soft roles, which, at first glance, all look “same-y”. There’s a reason for why a game like GW2 is criticized for being “all dps” or having “no build diversity”: because soft roles contribute to that perception.

The Soft roles aren’t the problem… its the fact that the dungeons, and most PvE content for that matter, only exists in 2 categories.

1. The Year 2 “Fractals approach” to event design…. of which none of the early dungeons benefit from without a design. In these ones we don’t fight unless we have to…. and we breeze through that pretty quick.

2. “Kill all the things” because “Reasons”. Reasons vary from “if NPC dies, you fail”, to “You don’t clear the room, you can’t move on”, and sometimes “You guys camp this spot against mobs while one of you performs some complicated (or even not complicated) task to unlock the door” reason.

The vast majority of content is designed around you killing in order to progress. So naturally the meta is going to revolve around “builds that are good at killing things fast”.

Zerkers…. Zerkers everywere… actually thats my only complain this game is a DPS pool of nothingness… players and armor now are divided in this orted: Normal Zerker, Ascended Zerker… and anithing with a Zerker frase… i feel the op that kind of gameplay is indeed boring

A definite “no” to the Trinity. Also, even before GW2 was released it was set up as a MMO without the Trinity, wherein each class could perform every role needed (damage, healing, support), though some are better than others. The point is, OP could have known that this is not a Trinity game from the start, 3 years ago. Last but not least, it would require a massive skill overhaul and basically change the classes as we know them.

NoTrigger.8396:

Paprikaspice.8462:

the game needs to expect an excellent comp to balance accordingly.

i agree that instanced PvE content needs to be balanced around an excellent comp (meta builds), because if you balance for 20 different stat combinations and include stuff like nomads, the instanced PvE content will always be a joke for the above average player. but i dont agree that the excellent comp is a trinity comp.

you dont need a trinity to design complex encounters and everything you do in a trinity game can be done in gw2 without a trinity, because each player in the party contributes to everything, instead of having dedicated roles.

you dont really have to be a genius to understand how gw2 works, why its great that way and why a trinity or hard roles or w/e you call it will not make it more interesting at all. if anything, it will make things less complex, easier and take away depth.

agreed on the instanced part, thats what i meant to specify.

but you are wrong that hard roles arent in gw2 they are. you can find them in wvw and spvp. its not always 3 roles, but they are there and distinct. those roles make these game modes more complex. no specific team comp is required but a certain outline is encouraged. the developers even mention that this specialization could work great as a bunker or dps or roamer.. clearly defined roles are on their minds. they just havent been able to make it work in dungeons.

Paprikaspice.8462:

NoTrigger.8396:

Paprikaspice.8462:

the game needs to expect an excellent comp to balance accordingly.

i agree that instanced PvE content needs to be balanced around an excellent comp (meta builds), because if you balance for 20 different stat combinations and include stuff like nomads, the instanced PvE content will always be a joke for the above average player. but i dont agree that the excellent comp is a trinity comp.

you dont need a trinity to design complex encounters and everything you do in a trinity game can be done in gw2 without a trinity, because each player in the party contributes to everything, instead of having dedicated roles.

you dont really have to be a genius to understand how gw2 works, why its great that way and why a trinity or hard roles or w/e you call it will not make it more interesting at all. if anything, it will make things less complex, easier and take away depth.

agreed on the instanced part, thats what i meant to specify.

but you are wrong that hard roles arent in gw2 they are. you can find them in wvw and spvp. its not always 3 roles, but they are there and distinct. those roles make these game modes more complex. no specific team comp is required but a certain outline is encouraged. the developers even mention that this specialization could work great as a bunker or dps or roamer.. clearly defined roles are on their minds. they just havent been able to make it work in dungeons.

Then that’s not a hard role. A hard role is one that is required by the game, not by players.

And defined roles also do not equal hard roles either.

The content just needs more variety, make conditions, debuffing, and support not required, but more valuable for some encounters.

zapv.8051:

The content just needs more variety, make conditions, debuffing, and support not required, but more valuable for some encounters.

While this may seem to be an easy fix, it does not take into account prevailing factors.

1. ANet has abandoned any dungeon except for FotM.
2. Respeccing for conditions requires an investment of gold and space for different gear, and must deal with the fact that, in GW2, changing gear is a pain in the butt.
3. Debuffing is not available to all professions. There is already one profession (maybe 2, depending on group) that is excluded based on just being that profession.

Seera.5916:

Paprikaspice.8462:

NoTrigger.8396:

Paprikaspice.8462:

the game needs to expect an excellent comp to balance accordingly.

i agree that instanced PvE content needs to be balanced around an excellent comp (meta builds), because if you balance for 20 different stat combinations and include stuff like nomads, the instanced PvE content will always be a joke for the above average player. but i dont agree that the excellent comp is a trinity comp.

you dont need a trinity to design complex encounters and everything you do in a trinity game can be done in gw2 without a trinity, because each player in the party contributes to everything, instead of having dedicated roles.

you dont really have to be a genius to understand how gw2 works, why its great that way and why a trinity or hard roles or w/e you call it will not make it more interesting at all. if anything, it will make things less complex, easier and take away depth.

agreed on the instanced part, thats what i meant to specify.

but you are wrong that hard roles arent in gw2 they are. you can find them in wvw and spvp. its not always 3 roles, but they are there and distinct. those roles make these game modes more complex. no specific team comp is required but a certain outline is encouraged. the developers even mention that this specialization could work great as a bunker or dps or roamer.. clearly defined roles are on their minds. they just havent been able to make it work in dungeons.

Then that’s not a hard role. A hard role is one that is required by the game, not by players.

And defined roles also do not equal hard roles either.

Thats just semantics…yeah you can get a couple of wins in low lvl spvp if you dont get matched with a real team with 5 glassy roamers but you will lose 97% of the time against a composed premade.

that equivalent should exist in pve. the easier content like cof can be done with 5 zerkers and sure you can walk into the toughest content with 5 zerkers. the game wont stop you, but you will fail most of the time.

Too much work. Easier to create braindead bosses with infinite defiant stacks, huge health pool and unblockable attacks. This also prevents any type of exploiting like using strategies which involve using skills that reflect projectiles or interrupting a instantly killing attack with cool looking animation.

It’s simple imo. Full zerk party’s have to go.
Now hold your horses. I don’t mean you should be able to play the way you want. BUT if 5 full dps specced people can clear the content, then clearly that is the only build that is gonna be required, and you have the same problem as we have now. Being there is no hardcore content, wich is why people are excited they are bringing some in HoT.

Group content should be at a difficulty level that if you want to go full zerker, fine, but do not expect to be able to survive without someone supporting you. If you don’t wanna wait on someone supporting you, weave some support into your own build, sacrificing damage but being able to survive.

There is no such thing as play as you want. It’s a marketing gimmick that get you to open up your wallets.
The design of the game encounters mostly do not require full support as into healing or tanking or cc. Only dps with minimum support equipped+active defense like dodging.
The price GW2 pay for getting rid of trinity. Deal with it. There are no clear benefit on going deep into tanking or healing, you either go full ham on dps or let rng, lag, cds and exhaustion get the better of you by trying to be jack of all trades.

Current dps speed run meta exists as it is for several reasons:
First, just because you can.
Second, all the rewards worth anything are in the final box, and because you can full out dps it, it means the final box is all that matters, and speed is all that matters and therefore dps is all that matters.
Third, lack of need for other mechanics, condition application/removal/manipulation, boon strip, hard CC (aka incoming break bars… so some hope there)
Lastly, dumb mobs. (AI being worked on, but we shall see)

I feel the fixes will have to be from the ground up, starting first with the rather stupid mob AI. It needs to understand what it’s got, if it has range, it needs to pie that corner and stay at range, and kite like crazy when you do come at it. This alone will push the skill requirement for stack and smack quite high. GW1 had some of this behavior, if too many mobs were stacked, the AI would simply hold a few back, melee or ranged, and if you charged the healer, the thing would happily kite you across what felt like the whole map through every other mob group if you couldn’t catch it. Fighting this as full glass actually requires skill. And mob AI when the game was launched (or at least during the BWEs) behaved a lot like this, but most players were unable to cope and (I hope more importantly) it caused a lot of extra server lag.

Lack of mechanics that don’t pertain to dealing damage. Well that’s an outright lie right there. Boon strips, slows (in HoT), poison (healing debuff), hard CCs to prevent certain skills (HoT break bars), chill, immobilize, cripple… all the stuff that effects movement speeds will become important the moment the AI is fixed, in GW1 the only thing that would stop a kiting mob was to snare it (with simple immobilize and knockdowns it would start running again the moment the CC wore off). Break bars and slow will come with HoT so there is a chance some of this has been looked at. And then boon rip/conversions, condition cleanse/convert… this exists in a very limited way in a few areas already. However, you don’t need to make it a 100% requirement for a fight, you only need make it so the fight is that much longer and/or harder for ignoring the mechanic. Poison and it’s healing debuff falls under this category. And since so many boons and conditions are dichotomous, having them play major parts of an encounter only makes classes that deal in conversion that much more desirable. Super simple example: heavy application of weakness (this could become a stacking condition with its current base effect, but then also start to impact your power), as part of fighting, it gets inflicted upon the party, converting this to might would be great, similarly a boss that buffs up the might like crazy having that turned to weakness would make good use of an underused aspect of play, and this could be further impacted by mechanics that make the simple boon/condi interplay far more pronounced, boss deals 300% more damage to foes with weakness or when boon’d with might and maybe even takes 200% extra damage if converted, etc…

5001 character limit post split -.-

Con’t after 20 second flood conkittenol

So now mobs aren’t completely stupid, there will be fights that can make good use of all available mechanics, so what about that final box? Easy, boost rewards for doing the other stuff. Literally add more rewards given at the end for simple things like clearing trash, doing those odd events that sometimes are off to the side, add a couple challenge options for even more rewards… Challenge motes? Gambits? And for those who really take the time and go all out, their rewards should scale to Saturn’s rings to reflect this, guaranteed extra loot, guaranteed rarity boosts (doesn’t speak to value ofc, but it excludes a lot more of the available junk for RNG to vomit at you), more tokens, more raw cash. Throw out all concept of trying to “keep the economy” on this one, as a full clear with challenges could potentially take several hours, and without serious reward, people won’t bother with them.

Wooden Potatoes had a video talking about his thoughts on a “gambit-like” system for making dungeons more difficult, I’m only on board with maybe 50% of them, but it’s great food for thought: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ld-geUCvebE

So fights harder to face roll, more mechanics involved, but not absolutely required (they just make it a lot quicker), and you will now see boat loads of rewards for spending time doing those extra things. Maybe have a “do over” limit or “1 shot, win or lose” on the challenge motes idea, to require that you move on if it doesn’t work out. Now just ask yourself, just because I can, is it a good idea to risk potentially a lot of extra loot?

It’s a boatload of extra work, but I honestly I think it can be done with our current “soft roles,” again the issue is that it most focus on player skill, the hardest mechanics do not need to be the “end of all, bring counter or die” and in fact they shouldn’t ever be anything more than “you must deal with this one way or another.” And then they absolutely must reward you like crazy for doing the extra things, succeeding at the harder challenges, and of course, finishing the dungeon after all that.

And finally, a real hard NO to trinity. I think Anet didn’t know what to expect groups to do when they built our dungeons 3 years ago, and now they do know. I feel the strengths of my suggestions above can be applied to our existing ones, or worked into any new ones they have planned, and I hope to see some of it eventually enter the game.

Most people don’t want a hard trinity in GW2. What makes people unhappy is that the soft role system is poorly executed and they never iterate on it. DPS is way over-emphasized while there are too few options to build a viable healing/support character.

Einlanzer.1627:

Most people don’t want a hard trinity in GW2. What makes people unhappy is that the soft role system is poorly executed and they never iterate on it. DPS is way over-emphasized while there are too few options to build a viable healing/support character.

I agree.

A part of the problem here is that they really need to keep healing down to a mostly self-sustaining role that shouldn’t rely heavily on anybody else. Full on healers are the crutch on which the whole trinity rests.

The other part with “support” is that traditional support-y things don’t have many mechanics designed for them currently, and where they do exist they are rather narrow, or not dangerous enough to force even a slight change in how you go at it. Then the combat dps support is too easy, too widely available.

Then they have other concepts presented in skills and abilities that already exist, but are either currently too weak, or could be expanded on to make better “healing support.” Example, the new vampiric aura on necromancers. There is no reason it’s heal and damage have to be identical, it could damage more without affecting the heal component, since “necros dont bring the dps” is currently their biggest hang up in small group play. Another interesting one was the new healing skill guardians received, where doing damage heals you for a short while after casting it, necros gained a similar ability (I think) with their signet heal’s active effect. Ways could be made to expand more skills like these to effect the group, and they don’t even need to be healing effects, any other boon that fits the style could work.

People need to really get a good grasp of the difference between viable and optimal.

Currently everything is pretty much viable. You can clear a dungeon with 5x Zerkers, and you can clear that same dungeon with 5x Clerics. That’s viable.

It’s faster with 5x Zerkers than it is with 5x Clerics. That’s optimal.

Enforcing roles or forcing certain itemsets other than zerkers (or other equally squishy sets i.e. Rampager) will diminish the pool of builds that are viable. But we will still be stuck with only 1 setup that is optimal.
And considering profession imbalance, this could very easily push certain professions out of being viable, or into very specific roles.

Even if say a zerker Guardian was viable, but Clerics Guardians were much needed, people would force Guardians to go healers because that is what’s needed and refuse Zerker Guardians on principle. Something i’ve seen all to well and all to often in another big, popular, trinity game.

Just be glad that currently you can play the style you like and still get through that dungeon just fine. That being said boss fights can certainly be a lot more interesting. Any fight that is essentially “solved” by stacking in a cornor and wailing on the AI for 12seconds is poorly designed. Currently that would include most bossfights.

Terrahero.9358:

People need to really get a good grasp of the difference between viable and optimal.

Currently everything is pretty much viable. You can clear a dungeon with 5x Zerkers, and you can clear that same dungeon with 5x Clerics. That’s viable.

It’s faster with 5x Zerkers than it is with 5x Clerics. That’s optimal.

Enforcing roles or forcing certain itemsets other than zerkers (or other equally squishy sets i.e. Rampager) will diminish the pool of builds that are viable. But we will still be stuck with only 1 setup that is optimal.
And considering profession imbalance, this could very easily push certain professions out of being viable, or into very specific roles.

Even if say a zerker Guardian was viable, but Clerics Guardians were much needed, people would force Guardians to go healers because that is what’s needed and refuse Zerker Guardians on principle. Something i’ve seen all to well and all to often in another big, popular, trinity game.

Just be glad that currently you can play the style you like and still get through that dungeon just fine. That being said boss fights can certainly be a lot more interesting. Any fight that is essentially “solved” by stacking in a corner and wailing on the AI for 12seconds is poorly designed. Currently that would include most bossfights.

Cogent analysis and good points. That said, ANet is putting a tank and healer into the game in Rev. Whether they’re going to be able to be effective enough to be dedicated roles and whether they will be needed is another matter. Based on the feedback and what I’ve seen so far, the likely outcome for Rev in Pug meta will be Shiro (?) /Malyx in Sinister and Jalis/Ventari need not apply. Who knows about the Elite Spec.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Based on the feedback and what I’ve seen so far, the likely outcome for Rev in Pug meta will be Shiro (?) /Malyx in Sinister and Jalis/Ventari need not apply. Who knows about the Elite Spec.

It will be same old same old. It’s not like going full heal or tank not available for other heavy classes like Guardians and Warriors.

GW2 is impossible to balance when it comes to role.
Anet needs to change every encounter in the game, how credit to events being counted (try healing on event without in party, you’ll probably won’t get credit since your damage output too low), then there are tons lots of chaos amount of synergy inter weapons, traits and professions to balance.
It’s highly impossible without upsetting the majority of player base who deems dps as a standard measurement for a long time.

Reality is this, by getting rid of trinity, GW2 ended up being a very 1 dimensional game where dps dominates. So don’t expect Rev will change anything, because Rev won’t and it will be just another profession in game.

Paprikaspice.8462:

Time to not let people play anyway they want

Terrahero.9358:

People need to really get a good grasp of the difference between viable and optimal.

Currently everything is pretty much viable. You can clear a dungeon with 5x Zerkers, and you can clear that same dungeon with 5x Clerics. That’s viable.

It’s faster with 5x Zerkers than it is with 5x Clerics. That’s optimal.

Enforcing roles or forcing certain itemsets other than zerkers (or other equally squishy sets i.e. Rampager) will diminish the pool of builds that are viable. But we will still be stuck with only 1 setup that is optimal.
And considering profession imbalance, this could very easily push certain professions out of being viable, or into very specific roles.

Even if say a zerker Guardian was viable, but Clerics Guardians were much needed, people would force Guardians to go healers because that is what’s needed and refuse Zerker Guardians on principle. Something i’ve seen all to well and all to often in another big, popular, trinity game.

Just be glad that currently you can play the style you like and still get through that dungeon just fine. That being said boss fights can certainly be a lot more interesting. Any fight that is essentially “solved” by stacking in a cornor and wailing on the AI for 12seconds is poorly designed. Currently that would include most bossfights.

You still aren’t getting it. If the optimal way would be let’s say 5 moderately tanky/supp/dps people for a pug, then it gives coordinated groups still the room to do it with let’s say 3 zerkers a tanky member boosting offensive stats on others and a support, and still pull of simular times, or maybe even better, because they are on ts and actively calling for things.

The point is that 5 zerkers works and destroys all combo’s possible.
The optimal way for hard group content should always be on teamspeak with people you know, having some sort of team build that works. If that isn’t the case something in your game is broken.

Fox.3469:

Terrahero.9358:

People need to really get a good grasp of the difference between viable and optimal.

Currently everything is pretty much viable. You can clear a dungeon with 5x Zerkers, and you can clear that same dungeon with 5x Clerics. That’s viable.

It’s faster with 5x Zerkers than it is with 5x Clerics. That’s optimal.

Enforcing roles or forcing certain itemsets other than zerkers (or other equally squishy sets i.e. Rampager) will diminish the pool of builds that are viable. But we will still be stuck with only 1 setup that is optimal.
And considering profession imbalance, this could very easily push certain professions out of being viable, or into very specific roles.

Even if say a zerker Guardian was viable, but Clerics Guardians were much needed, people would force Guardians to go healers because that is what’s needed and refuse Zerker Guardians on principle. Something i’ve seen all to well and all to often in another big, popular, trinity game.

Just be glad that currently you can play the style you like and still get through that dungeon just fine. That being said boss fights can certainly be a lot more interesting. Any fight that is essentially “solved” by stacking in a cornor and wailing on the AI for 12seconds is poorly designed. Currently that would include most bossfights.

You still aren’t getting it. If the optimal way would be let’s say 5 moderately tanky/supp/dps people for a pug, then it gives coordinated groups still the room to do it with let’s say 3 zerkers a tanky member boosting offensive stats on others and a support, and still pull of simular times, or maybe even better, because they are on ts and actively calling for things.

The point is that 5 zerkers works and destroys all combo’s possible.
The optimal way for hard group content should always be on teamspeak with people you know, having some sort of team build that works. If that isn’t the case something in your game is broken.

As long as the content doesn’t require specific roles in order for it to be done (aka, every group combination is viable), the meta can change until pigs fly.

You want the meta to change. I don’t think anyone has an issue with the meta changing as long as all group combinations still remain viable. Especially now that you can change the stats on ascended gear. You still have to rebuy/buy a sigil/rune, but it’s still cheaper and quicker than a whole new set of gear.

However, some people in this thread and the title of this thread, have been worded to make it appear that at least some in this thread want hard roles. They want some group combinations to not be viable. That’s who Terrahero was talking to. Not to you who seems to get that everyone should be able to play what they want, but just wants the meta to change.

Unfortunately to allow for more variety in the meta, it does flirt on a fine line of hard roles most likely.

Silhouette.5631:

I want to not get kicked out of parties if Im in clerics gear.

Instead of having to play one of three classes (tank healer dps). you have to play 1 (dps).

D: I wouldn’t kick you!!

Find a good group of people who want to just do the dungeons instead of rush. Sadly there are more Rushers than enjoyers. But more than likely it’s those rush folks who are bored all the time. :P

I think having no trinity has lead to exactly the opposite if you consider that each player gets to play all 3 roles simultaneously regardless of gear if they choose too. Every class has healing, support, and dps abilities. Any combination works in any dungeons.

The only way to ensure tanks and healers have a place is to make encounters impossible to complete without x defense on one character and y healing on the other. Making passive stats more important than positioning and active defenses reduces the number of viable builds for content completion.

Nothing stops you from playing support or tanky in game currently, unless you try and join groups that don’t want a tank/healer and they kick you. Easily remedied by making your own group.

There are already tons of games where you have the holy trinity, go play one of them. This games system is fine. If you want to be tanky or a healer you can do that. You won’t be welcome in most parties but thats a personal problem.

Fox.3469:

You still aren’t getting it.

I get it just fine, you’re the one that doesn’t seem to understand what your asking for.

Fox.3469:

If the optimal way would be let’s say 5 moderately tanky/supp/dps people for a pug,

Why? You are going to punish less tanky professions if you do this. Why can you not see this?
A Warrior is natively far more durable then an Engineer, so the Warrior doesn’t have to sacrifice as much dmg by taking tanky stats as an Engineer to be durable enough for the content. As a result, everyone only wants Warriors.

Fox.3469:

The point is that 5 zerkers works and destroys all combo’s possible.

That’s an exegeration. If i do dungeons i go with friends and we all play kind of whatever, never a problem with clearing dungeons quickly.

Fox.3469:

The optimal way for hard group content should always be on teamspeak with people you know, having some sort of team build that works. If that isn’t the case something in your game is broken.

And it is. What on earth makes you think that a well coordinated group of people on Ts that have experience playing with eachother are not more efficient at clearing content than a rag-tag team of randoms?
The builds that work is all of them. That isn’t broken that is by design.

I’m in support of the trinity, but not class based. Which I think was the original goal of Anet…

Example party of 5 guardians could fulfil healer, dps, tank, cc.
Four necros and a ranger? No problem.

5 people pressing 1 for 15 minutes with no armor on?
Nah… “Play the way you want”shouldn’t be “wanna smash your face on the keyboard?! You can!”

Even if it’s one dungeon that requires trinity, I don’t understand what anyone would lose? Oh no, you can’t get… Tokens?.. For Exotics..?

You don’t want to wait for content? Then go ahead with facerolling AC. I’m used to waiting a minute or two just queuing PvP matches, waiting for a dungeon should be easy enough.

Anet isnt stopping you playing as you like, They will never stop you going back to playing WoW but when you have been cleansed of your need for the trinity you’ll start to enjoy the future in mmo’s.

Pino.5209:

Reality is this, by getting rid of trinity, GW2 ended up being a very 1 dimensional game where dps dominates. So don’t expect Rev will change anything, because Rev won’t and it will be just another profession in game.

The failure wasn’t in the lack of Trinity. You need look no further then WvW and PvP to see that build diversity both does and doesn’t work due to the nature of the objectives, yet PvE is one dimensional because Mobs are one dimensional.

Case in point….. the Mordrem are proof that Control based mobs are not only powerful, but opens a lot of counter play by employing Controls against them. Their failure was the adherence of the lazy standard of “Hit like a Truck, HP oceans”, and simply stacked boss mob levels of CCs into their basic attack tables. Couple this with the long cooldowns and one off nature of Player CCs, and you can clearly see why the entire attempt was a mess of overwhelming AOE. Any deliberate counter-play action by the player is quickly lost by the speed of recovery of the Mordrem. Since CCs are only effective for about 3-5 seconds in this situation, it pushes huge emphasis on DPS to capitalize on that small window.

I’m hoping for, but not expecting HOT mob designs to correctly address these problems. The way the Devs have been talking; that unless the entire counterplay system is fluid, and not effect specific, then “challenging content” is going to equate to needing specific effects in your build to deal with a specific mob. And like SW mordrem, if the diversity is too high in Mob groups, they will overwhelm any class’s ability to field enough control effects to deal with them. If that fails, all we’ll do is focus on optimals, which will probably revolve around DPS… after all, killing a mob is the best way to eliminate their threat level.

Paprikaspice.8462:

I think designing instances by allowing content to be clearable by any group comp has lead to less build variety as one piece of the holy trinity far outclasses the others.

I think its time to divide the roles once again in instances. I would be interested in fights that require both heavy condi and heavy physical dmg along with support and control. maybe a boss that has loads of toughness and physical dmg is not very effective. this boss is immune to all damaging conditions and requires 3 ccs to land in a short window. the boss reacts to the first cc by ccing the person who threw it, or hunkering down and blocking attacks for a bit or leaping away. After the ccs land the boss will be stunned and a significant amnt of physical dmg in a short window will then remove his immunity from condis which do a crapton of dmg to him.

I really think its time to provide roles for individuals rather than simple positioning mechanics and dps whenever. this increases accountability and in turn rewards. for instance if your job was to burst hard in a specific moment and you failed, you would be the one that let your team down. conversely if you succeede in a really hard fight, you get the credit. you feel like the team actually couldnt have done it without you.

I really hope theres a future with new and much more difficult/rewarding instanced content. I also think its time to return to well defined roles and required team comps to complete content. I totally support the omission of a healer though. thoughts?

No. One of the main selling points in this game is no waiting around on required class or build “x” for 30 minutes-1 hour before evening getting to content.

starlinvf.1358:

Pino.5209:

Reality is this, by getting rid of trinity, GW2 ended up being a very 1 dimensional game where dps dominates. So don’t expect Rev will change anything, because Rev won’t and it will be just another profession in game.

The failure wasn’t in the lack of Trinity. You need look no further then WvW and PvP to see that build diversity both does and doesn’t work due to the nature of the objectives, yet PvE is one dimensional because Mobs are one dimensional.

Case in point….. the Mordrem are proof that Control based mobs are not only powerful, but opens a lot of counter play by employing Controls against them. Their failure was the adherence of the lazy standard of “Hit like a Truck, HP oceans”, and simply stacked boss mob levels of CCs into their basic attack tables. Couple this with the long cooldowns and one off nature of Player CCs, and you can clearly see why the entire attempt was a mess of overwhelming AOE. Any deliberate counter-play action by the player is quickly lost by the speed of recovery of the Mordrem. Since CCs are only effective for about 3-5 seconds in this situation, it pushes huge emphasis on DPS to capitalize on that small window.

I’m hoping for, but not expecting HOT mob designs to correctly address these problems. The way the Devs have been talking; that unless the entire counterplay system is fluid, and not effect specific, then “challenging content” is going to equate to needing specific effects in your build to deal with a specific mob. And like SW mordrem, if the diversity is too high in Mob groups, they will overwhelm any class’s ability to field enough control effects to deal with them. If that fails, all we’ll do is focus on optimals, which will probably revolve around DPS… after all, killing a mob is the best way to eliminate their threat level.

This is indeed the entire problem with GW2. All control skills are balanced around the low health, highly active style of PvP whenever all of PvE is the opposite. You just simply gain way more from emphasizing DPS over everything else in virtually all situations. This actually causes problems in other areas too. But, it’s not simply because “no trinity lol”, it’s just because PvE encounters are designed in a very one-dimensional way. Consistently.

The simple solution is to increase the potency of control effects in PvE. The more complex (but better) solution is to try to make PvE combat work more like PvP combat, which highly active monsters that have less health and deal less damage but attack and evade more often.