09-01-2005, 09:16 PM
Is the AI really so bad though? I mean, if an encounter is going well then the monsters are usually behaving in a "stupid" way, beating on the tank. But lets look at what the aggro list basically means from the monster's point of view:
* If I see an enemy, I will attack it.
* Once in combat, my target will be either the enemy which is doing the most damage to me, or, if there is a healer keeping everyone alive to a great degree, I will attack them.
Now how does a player prioritize targets in a PvP skirmish? They target the "glass cannons" which do the most damage (rogues, mages, and warlocks), and if they see that a healer is doing a good job of keeping people alive, they'll attack them.
For all this talk of a stupid AI that acts very little like a player, those are both awfully similiar. The difference is embodied in the essence of one class: The Warrior. The Warrior is able to over-represent it's threat to monsters. Through the use of threat-generating attacks which are generally the domain of the warrior class (everybody else who has them generally has threat generation attached as a penalty), a warrior is able to keep himself ahead on the list and "fool" the enemy into beating up on him.
So, then it becomes a question of should the warrior be able to do this? I personally feel that it is a very sensible solution to the question of how "tanks" are supposed to defend other players from monsters. In an instance, a warrior is constantly working to force the enemy monsters to make him their target, rather then what their instincts would dictate. To remove this ability from warriors is to rob them of the ability to defend other players, since suddenly they can be ignored as if they weren't there.
Despite this, perfect tanking is anywhere from hard to impossible in the final, most difficult instances. I don't really think your criticisms are very valid, honestly.
You express the desire for unusual group compositions to be able to do instance content - they can. There are some instances which require certain components (Scholomance, for example, is significantly more difficult without a priest), but the instances below level 50 are very forgiving in group make-up.
Also, has others have pointed out, there ARE many unusual monsters within instances with a wide variety of abilities. The Scarlet Crusader foot troops in Stratholme for example, will change targets and shield charge casters before returning to their primary targets. Many, many monsters have a specifically anti-warrior de-aggro ability, the most common being a knockback which sends their primary target flying away and knocks him down the aggro list. I've heard in Blackwing Lair that every boss monster is immune to taunt and most have some sort of de-aggro ability. I've even seen a monster in Molten Core that seems to totally disregard it's aggro list and attack targets at random.
Speaking as a warrior, high level tanking requires a good amount of skill, and is a lot more complex then "find target, sunder, sunder, sunder". It's only your quick reaction time (or someone else's) that will save you from a wipe when you find yourself knocked back and stunned for 3 seconds while a monster that can kill your priest in 4 runs straight towards your rear ranks.*
I certainly would be interested in an MMORPG that tries to do something different, but I think World of Warcraft's combat model is fun, simple, and effective.
* If I see an enemy, I will attack it.
* Once in combat, my target will be either the enemy which is doing the most damage to me, or, if there is a healer keeping everyone alive to a great degree, I will attack them.
Now how does a player prioritize targets in a PvP skirmish? They target the "glass cannons" which do the most damage (rogues, mages, and warlocks), and if they see that a healer is doing a good job of keeping people alive, they'll attack them.
For all this talk of a stupid AI that acts very little like a player, those are both awfully similiar. The difference is embodied in the essence of one class: The Warrior. The Warrior is able to over-represent it's threat to monsters. Through the use of threat-generating attacks which are generally the domain of the warrior class (everybody else who has them generally has threat generation attached as a penalty), a warrior is able to keep himself ahead on the list and "fool" the enemy into beating up on him.
So, then it becomes a question of should the warrior be able to do this? I personally feel that it is a very sensible solution to the question of how "tanks" are supposed to defend other players from monsters. In an instance, a warrior is constantly working to force the enemy monsters to make him their target, rather then what their instincts would dictate. To remove this ability from warriors is to rob them of the ability to defend other players, since suddenly they can be ignored as if they weren't there.
Despite this, perfect tanking is anywhere from hard to impossible in the final, most difficult instances. I don't really think your criticisms are very valid, honestly.
You express the desire for unusual group compositions to be able to do instance content - they can. There are some instances which require certain components (Scholomance, for example, is significantly more difficult without a priest), but the instances below level 50 are very forgiving in group make-up.
Also, has others have pointed out, there ARE many unusual monsters within instances with a wide variety of abilities. The Scarlet Crusader foot troops in Stratholme for example, will change targets and shield charge casters before returning to their primary targets. Many, many monsters have a specifically anti-warrior de-aggro ability, the most common being a knockback which sends their primary target flying away and knocks him down the aggro list. I've heard in Blackwing Lair that every boss monster is immune to taunt and most have some sort of de-aggro ability. I've even seen a monster in Molten Core that seems to totally disregard it's aggro list and attack targets at random.
Speaking as a warrior, high level tanking requires a good amount of skill, and is a lot more complex then "find target, sunder, sunder, sunder". It's only your quick reaction time (or someone else's) that will save you from a wipe when you find yourself knocked back and stunned for 3 seconds while a monster that can kill your priest in 4 runs straight towards your rear ranks.*
I certainly would be interested in an MMORPG that tries to do something different, but I think World of Warcraft's combat model is fun, simple, and effective.