That's why you overcome the DPS with healing quantity. Also, the guardian doesn't take damage if he is constantly blocking, blinding, or shielding. Causing constant snaring with minor kiting does the same thing. The aggro simply moves. AoE non-melee is the main concern. But from what I've seen, that is a simple dodge out.
I don't buy this argument of quantity making up for diminished quality. If methods aren't in place to prevent that kind of approach (layered AOEs not stacking, for instance.), I'd be surprised. As I said earlier, I can't see ANet taking such a hardline stance on eliminating the Healing role and then allowing players to break that design philosophy so easily.
Even
with 4 healers, I don't think they'll have enough healing throughput to keep a tank up, and certainly not enough needed to keep a whole party up (which, from the comment I quoted earlier, is likely; the AI won't just focus on one guy all the time and everyone will need to take part in the control aspect).
We just can't say for sure now whether such a thing will be possible. Maybe later in the month when the Press Beta begins, but probably not then either.
Tanking is not only standing around. I never said standing around is viable. But a plinking/kiting backline with moving aggro is just moving the mobs. There is little difference and there is no accentuation on player skill.
I was referring to traditional MMO gameplay where the tank would just have all of the incoming damage healed; since GW2 has no direct healing, in order for that to actually work the tank would have to stand in the AOE.
That's counter-intuitive or everybody would die in the game.
In any other MMO, I would agree. GW2's skill-based gameplay only
seems counter-intuitive because players are so used to the standard diku-clone MMO handbook. From what we've seen, no profession will have the tools or capacity needed to keep their group alive, and trying to do so will severely limit the number of options the player has to react to changing situations (which, from what we've seen, will be often).
Players avoid death by physically evading attacks, the strong self-healing skills, using the environment, and controlling where enemies are and what they can do. All of those things are designed to replace the need for a healer in the first place, allowing ANet to drop all healing spells down to weak little piddly spells that are helpful but not reliable.
On top of that, GW2's approach to the death penalty means that "Everybody dies in the game" isn't an automatic failure. Because everyone can resurrect mid-battle and there are lots of support options that feed into this, "Everybody dies" isn't as stiff a penalty as other MMOs and therefore doesn't need so much reactive healing to counteract it.
People expect rainbow builds to be standard. No more "LF guardian tank, fire ele for ..." I don't buy it. And isn't that the goal? PvP/PvE elite players will find ways to break the system. Every break in the armor will be one build at a time. So you will see a lot of "Ranger LFG" with ZERO replies if it isn't the meta. But they promised pure diversity, right?
All of the things that people keep mentioning whenever this "They're not really changing the Trinity" argument comes up (movement, evasion, no direct targeting, environment, emphasis on control) are all there to make combat less analog and more diverse. Instead of fighting a boss and memorizing the dance steps (tank goes here, dps moves here, etc.), shit happens all the time because there's a lot going on. The best players are the ones who are able to assess and react to situations, and the sheer diversity of things that can happen means that a singular build for all situations is impossible (or underperforms overall, Jack-of-all-trades and so forth)
There will always be players who find what they think is the best build or the best approach. But there's so much going on in GW2 that the difference between the theorycrafted 'best' and something with more utility probably won't be noticeable. There will be players who say "Mist form is an awesome skill", and despite not being a 'best' skill, they will likely find plenty of situations in which to use it
just because there are so many different factors occurring at once. Situations where they save the entire group because they know how to use it. So instead of spending 2 hours doing an elite quest because of a wipe, they spend 45 minutes because somebody is a better player rather than theorycrafter.
From what we've seen in GW2, there are no 'bad' builds, just different builds for different situations. The malleability of the skill system means the best players will be the ones who know what skill to use and when.
You can't take out aggro. It is either bubble, damage, or stat.
I didn't say they were taking out aggro, I said aggro
as we know it is being changed.
This is awfully idealistic. I made no mention of spamming heals or any of that sort.
If healing spells are 'significantly weaker' than the self-heal skill, then I would venture to guess that they are too weak to do more than 'top off' players or give them lots of little heals that add up over time. Healers will not be able to keep a player under fire alive for very long, and
that's the entire point. The player who is taking all of this damage that needs to be healed should be dodging, mitigating and controlling the fight rather than taking damage. From the GW2 page: "
Healing is the least dynamic kind of support there is. It is reactive instead of proactive. Healing is for when you are already losing. In Guild Wars 2 we prefer that you support your allies before they take a beating." One player alone cannot make up for another player taking a beating; is up to every player to make sure they don't take the damage in the first place.
To that point, I also don't buy that your Guardian build has the level of survivability that you advertise. Your argument is "a tanking style build based solely on theory. If such a build works, then the backline can just spam spells constantly without worrying much about aggro." Based more on the attitude and tone that we've seen (versus the numbers and theory you use, which we have not), I would suggest that such a build would not work, or would be too focused on mitigating damage to have the proper tools needed for a variety of situations.
What new paradigm? Running away when you are hurt to self heal? Hitting the dodge button? And there is no old paradigm being mentioned. It's simple logic. Less running around, less 1v1, less spacing, etc... is just more efficient.
Games are not about efficiency. In fact, they're the exact opposite. If the objective of a boxing match is to knock your opponent out, surely letting you use something other than padded gloves would be more efficient. If the objective of soccer is to get the ball into the goal, why doesn't anyone use a rapid-fire ball launcher? Because all games are effectively a system of rules that intentionally make the activity less efficient in the name of fun and difficulty. Shooting soccer balls across a field gets old and predictable; having players physically move the ball using only their feet makes it a challenge and a sport.
The 'new paradigm' of Guild Wars 2 is that there is no magic button that says "Pay attention to me"; you have to physically get in the enemy's face, cast a spell to keep them from moving, summon a wall to direct them, etc. Instead of a button that says "Heal this person", players have to watch their own health and pick the right time to heal themselves, avoid damage in the first place via movement, control, dodging, etc. Instead of "Tank died, wipe", players have to make the choice between resurrecting a downed comrade, taking over whatever role they were filling, burning down the target, or trying to tip conditions to their favor (for example, switching to a weaker target to trigger a Rally or to use a skill like the Warrior's "I will Avenge you!"), etc. The new paradigm is that combat is no longer black or white; you no longer need to have the gear / stats / build/ tactics perfect (which leads to a boring, predictable fight) or you automatically fail (which is hardly fun). The new approach GW2 is attempting has much more wiggle room for interesting choices, situations and yes, builds.
I also want to state that tanking "makes sense." You want the armor up close taking damage. You want casters kiting and dropping bombs. You want mid-line getting a bit close to disrupt their mid/backlines. So I have a problem with removing such logical ideas. Removing the monks? Fine. Run-around independent FPS style with squishes up close? Umm...dumb.
The act of 'tanking' makes as much sense in MMOs as it does in military combat; nobody puts their archers up front or sends infantry against heavy cavalry. You put your heavy hitters up front where they can take the brunt of the damage and the squishies in the back. Nobody is suggesting that Guild Wars 2 will remove that. What
is being removed is the mechanics of tanking as they apply to MMOs to date; a tank 'taunts' the enemy and then maintains aggro through the fight, or in PVP, the tank gets between the attacker and the squishies.
In its place is the concept of "Control";
GW2 "Healing and Death" article said:
Tanking is the most rudimentary form of the most important combat fundamental, CONTROL. Every game has it, yet it always seems to get a bad name. In Guild Wars there was Knockdown, Interrupt, Weakness, Blind, and Cripple, to name a few. We wanted to build upon what we think makes control such an important part of dynamic combat. (
source)
In other words, there will still be 'tanking' to some degree, but getting between the mob and the squishies is only part of the game; there's also conditions and outright manipulation of the enemy (wall spells, knock backs, snares, roots, etc.) One player being solely responsible for keeping the enemy at bay will be impossible because the incoming damage will be too great (and there's not enough healing to nullify it), avoiding damage requires lots of movement, and (in theory) no single profession ha all the tools they need to perform that role. That doesn't mean everyone is going to be running around like a shooter, but it does mean that nobody gets to stand around like a statue. And yeah, you might be a squishy who wants to run into close range; to resurrect a fallen ally, to utilize short-range spells, etc.
