Sathrago wrote: » Azherae wrote: » When I hear the word 'rotation' I immediately have a biased negative reaction, but in this case I don't know how else to think about it. Every instance I can find is actually of something that is fairly uninteractive (with your teammates) that I don't like the idea of. My feedback is therefore moreso not that I strictly care a lot about if threat management is very difficult, but that I don't like the idea that being a good DPS is something that involves 'rotations'. If there is a 'rotation' that is achieved between three people that can still fit the definition as I understand it, and that is required to cement threat on the tank, I think I would dislike this too. I feel like I need a better idea of how this works, since I do not generally play games with rotations, so obviously the mechanics of Tanking and Threat relative to it are not a common experience for me. Can someone give me an example of a 'good DPS rotation' that involves some dynamism and teamwork but is still definitely still the type of rotation where Player A can be better than Player B (and not just equal to Bot C). When I refer to "dps rotation" its in reference to one player. This would involve a set of skills in the optimal order to produce damage be it single target or multi-target. I am not sure how to answer the 3 person rotation question though.
Azherae wrote: » When I hear the word 'rotation' I immediately have a biased negative reaction, but in this case I don't know how else to think about it. Every instance I can find is actually of something that is fairly uninteractive (with your teammates) that I don't like the idea of. My feedback is therefore moreso not that I strictly care a lot about if threat management is very difficult, but that I don't like the idea that being a good DPS is something that involves 'rotations'. If there is a 'rotation' that is achieved between three people that can still fit the definition as I understand it, and that is required to cement threat on the tank, I think I would dislike this too. I feel like I need a better idea of how this works, since I do not generally play games with rotations, so obviously the mechanics of Tanking and Threat relative to it are not a common experience for me. Can someone give me an example of a 'good DPS rotation' that involves some dynamism and teamwork but is still definitely still the type of rotation where Player A can be better than Player B (and not just equal to Bot C).
pgt1027 wrote: » I disagree with this. Firstly, I don't think PvE in MMORPGs should be a DPS race. If there's no chance for the tank to lose aggro and all mobs stick to him like glue no matter what happens so long as he isn't asleep, then PvE becomes just that, a DPS race. I think threat serving as a soft cap for DPS and healing is a good thing because it discourages min-maxing.
Secondly, the chance for the tank to lose aggro provides an element of chaos into PvE encounters and its this element of chaos that keeps content fresher longer. I don't want all PvE encounters to be a sure thing that goes the same way every time. Threat should be more than just the mechanic that makes every enemy in a five mile radius stick to the tank like glue so the DPS is free to AoE the trash stacks, it should give depth to encounters and variation in experiences with the same encounters.
In addition, threat being an actual mechanic that has to be managed is an opportunity to use crowd controls, and crowd controls are something that, once again, can add variation and chaos to PvE encounters.
Lastly, I don't really think the game should center entirely around preset rotations that you memorize like a game of Simon Says. I think the mechanics should have more depth than just pressing 10 buttons that all do the same thing in the right order. PvE content with solid mechanics shouldn't need to revolve around doing "rotations." Modern MMOs only started having their games revolve around "rotation" gameplay because they stripped the actual mechanics out. Mechanics like threat.
Azherae wrote: » I have a negative bias because I am aware of games where 'the optimal order' is generally static. In the ones I play, it is not. Therefore, adapting one's order to have a result other than max deeps when your Tank is struggling, is an automatic assumption. In general, I also play games where the choice for DPS is not usually (at average skill) 'Do this for max damage or be bad', it is 'do this for max damage or do this for some other benefit to the team'. And in that case, the choice is made by the situation. I also seem to play games where the DPS wouldn't easily be able to grab so much hate off a Tank who is doing decently for them to die in the process. So please humor me, I genuinely don't understand if you're talking about the same sort of games at 'high level' where 'incredible DPS' can consistently win out over 'decent tanking' with no adaptation options, or if you're talking about something simplistic like certain eras of WoW, where your concern is totally valid but my bias reaction would at least be consistent.
Sathrago wrote: » Now some may say that threat management is fun, I need you to explain that to me. Is it fun when the dps pulls aggro and gets killed, halting progression? Is it fun when the healer gets aggro because too much damage was taken and they were forced to "heal too much"? Is it fun making the entire group wait 5-10 seconds so that the tank can desperately fight to hold the attention of the enemies? Personally, mechanics to dodge and engage with are the "fun" of an encounter. Dodge this, kill that add, interact with that mechanic. etc etc.
NiKr wrote: » Sathrago wrote: » Now some may say that threat management is fun, I need you to explain that to me. Is it fun when the dps pulls aggro and gets killed, halting progression? Is it fun when the healer gets aggro because too much damage was taken and they were forced to "heal too much"? Is it fun making the entire group wait 5-10 seconds so that the tank can desperately fight to hold the attention of the enemies? Personally, mechanics to dodge and engage with are the "fun" of an encounter. Dodge this, kill that add, interact with that mechanic. etc etc. And what if the tank itself has to move more and react to boss actions rather than just sit on its rotation and keep taunting? What if the tank needs to cast abilities on his mates to protect them when the boss reaggros? Would you find this boring too?
Sathrago wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Sathrago wrote: » Now some may say that threat management is fun, I need you to explain that to me. Is it fun when the dps pulls aggro and gets killed, halting progression? Is it fun when the healer gets aggro because too much damage was taken and they were forced to "heal too much"? Is it fun making the entire group wait 5-10 seconds so that the tank can desperately fight to hold the attention of the enemies? Personally, mechanics to dodge and engage with are the "fun" of an encounter. Dodge this, kill that add, interact with that mechanic. etc etc. And what if the tank itself has to move more and react to boss actions rather than just sit on its rotation and keep taunting? What if the tank needs to cast abilities on his mates to protect them when the boss reaggros? Would you find this boring too? Those are mechanics tied to how the boss operates and do not require loss of threat to create those situations if the fight is tailored to do so. The boss can just choose to cast a spell on the healers. The boss can just choose to charge a random member of the party forcing the tank to react. The thing is, if you play right, threat management removes all those scenarios of "fun". Or you could just have those mechanics be apart of the fight and engage with them properly instead of when they rear their head due to someone in your party playing poorly.
Sathrago wrote: » Those are mechanics tied to how the boss operates and do not require loss of threat to create those situations if the fight is tailored to do so. The boss can just choose to cast a spell on the healers. The boss can just choose to charge a random member of the party forcing the tank to react. The thing is, if you play right, threat management removes all those scenarios of "fun". Or you could just have those mechanics be apart of the fight and engage with them properly instead of when they rear their head due to someone in your party playing poorly.
NiKr wrote: » Sathrago wrote: » Those are mechanics tied to how the boss operates and do not require loss of threat to create those situations if the fight is tailored to do so. The boss can just choose to cast a spell on the healers. The boss can just choose to charge a random member of the party forcing the tank to react. The thing is, if you play right, threat management removes all those scenarios of "fun". Or you could just have those mechanics be apart of the fight and engage with them properly instead of when they rear their head due to someone in your party playing poorly. But why not combine the two? Make the gameplay more interesting by changing things up and making mobs/bosses attack other players as well, while making the whole process more skill-requiring from the tank. If the tank wants to keep the aggro on him, he should not only do a good rotation but also protect his mates, which in turn helps him to sustain aggro. This would be the threat management that still mostly holds it on the tank, but just requires more from the tank. And, obviously, all the mates can just unload on the boss and do their rotations and react to all the other mechanics as well.
Stalwart wrote: » I don't think a dps that doesn't have to worry about threat is lazy. It's just a matter of holding your dps or not (which imo is annoying). There are tons and tons of mechanics out there that keep the whole group engaged. If the raid design has a dps just stand there to parse and do nothing else that is a boring raid and no threat minigame will save it. I think a dps should be good at optimizing their dps while handling all the mechanics thrown at them (do damage, don't die). Threat counteracts optimizing your dps. For me, it's like being punished for being too good at doing damage. It's also annoying for the tank and everyone.
Sathrago wrote: » What I am suggesting still has threat generation on all party members, I just want tanks to have the massive, clear advantage. I dont want to jump in with a tank, hit three buttons, only for my dps to use a big spell or combo that rips aggro off me. I don't want to be tanking 7 mobs, taking a ton of damage and because my healer used one too many spells they pull aggro from the mobs I didn't have the chance to build threat on. In this case they are all doing their role, its just that the tank's "extra threat" is not able to keep up at all. I want it to keep up if the player on the tank is using their skills correctly and there is no major gear or level disparity. That is all.
Sathrago wrote: » Stalwart wrote: » I don't think a dps that doesn't have to worry about threat is lazy. It's just a matter of holding your dps or not (which imo is annoying). There are tons and tons of mechanics out there that keep the whole group engaged. If the raid design has a dps just stand there to parse and do nothing else that is a boring raid and no threat minigame will save it. I think a dps should be good at optimizing their dps while handling all the mechanics thrown at them (do damage, don't die). Threat counteracts optimizing your dps. For me, it's like being punished for being too good at doing damage. It's also annoying for the tank and everyone. There it is. in bold. That's my point exactly. I don't care for that and think it shouldn't be that way. If you want to slow down damage dealt to a creature on a fight give it damage reduction, a "dance" of skills to avoid, or countless other mechanics the dps need to respond to in order to deal damage and survive. Dealing properly with a mechanic by interaction is in my opinion more fun than standing there twiddling my thumbs at random intervals of the fight to avoid threat generation.
Sathrago wrote: » NishUK wrote: » You want to speed run mmorpg grind/bosses? Why doing boring people like this exist in a genre of fantasy and expression, it's crazy. Huh? No, I just don't think threat is an important aspect that should heavily influence how a fight is engaged with barring the exceptions of gear and level disparities. A tank should be able to hold aggro and position the boss while engaging with other mechanics that make up the fight. Final Fantasy 14 does a really good job of this. If the tank plays properly there is no threat management for anyone else. If they play poorly then the group wipes. Thats the short and long of what I want. It's a much better system imo than worrying about the dps attacking 1 second too soon or playing "too good" at their role. Sure you can argue that threat management can describe a "good" dps, but only in regards to a system that forces that on the player. Without it a good and bad dps are decided by what they bring to the fight and how well they preform the mechanics of the fight.
NishUK wrote: » You want to speed run mmorpg grind/bosses? Why doing boring people like this exist in a genre of fantasy and expression, it's crazy.
NiKr wrote: » Sathrago wrote: » What I am suggesting still has threat generation on all party members, I just want tanks to have the massive, clear advantage. I dont want to jump in with a tank, hit three buttons, only for my dps to use a big spell or combo that rips aggro off me. I don't want to be tanking 7 mobs, taking a ton of damage and because my healer used one too many spells they pull aggro from the mobs I didn't have the chance to build threat on. In this case they are all doing their role, its just that the tank's "extra threat" is not able to keep up at all. I want it to keep up if the player on the tank is using their skills correctly and there is no major gear or level disparity. That is all. If the tank has a massive advantage on threat gen, the game just becomes the classic "stand in one place and taunt everything that moves, while the others are just doing dmg/healing". Which is boring and the reason why some people want the system to be better.
Stalwart wrote: » The tanks have to move the boss in positions, survive heavy burst of damage, dodge key attacks, swap bosses at the right time, debuff to improve dps numbers, buff the group so they can survive mechanics, etc, etc. If your entire raid relys on a threat minigame to be interesting it's a bad raid.
Sathrago wrote: » Why do you guys keep ignoring that Im advocating for more mechanics in fights? Just because a dps doesnt have to worry about threat doesn't mean they suddenly stop moving, roll their face on the keyboard and forget everything else. That's ridiculous and not engaging with what I am saying.
NiKr wrote: » And I want even more mechanics Having the boss and adds stay on the tank at most (if not all) times seems boring to me. Obviously all the other mechanics would remain, but tank could still be doing more or at least doing different stuff than just keeping aggro with taunt skills.
NiKr wrote: » Stalwart wrote: » The tanks have to move the boss in positions, survive heavy burst of damage, dodge key attacks, swap bosses at the right time, debuff to improve dps numbers, buff the group so they can survive mechanics, etc, etc. If your entire raid relys on a threat minigame to be interesting it's a bad raid. And all of this would still be true with what I'm saying. Sathrago wrote: » Why do you guys keep ignoring that Im advocating for more mechanics in fights? Just because a dps doesnt have to worry about threat doesn't mean they suddenly stop moving, roll their face on the keyboard and forget everything else. That's ridiculous and not engaging with what I am saying. And I want even more mechanics Having the boss and adds stay on the tank at most (if not all) times seems boring to me. Obviously all the other mechanics would remain, but tank could still be doing more or at least doing different stuff than just keeping aggro with taunt skills.
