How do you fix a role shortage in MMOs and other online games?

[Val the Moofia Boss]

/title

I propose that if a queue lasts for 5 minutes or longer for the servers to begin drafting people at random as tanks. Doesn't matter what your spec is. Are you a Warlock? You get a 500% HP and DEF buff and aggro stance slapped on you and a temporary taunt button. You will tank or you will get banned for 10 days. Now start pulling!

[Oyster Sauce]

"WE NEED TO FORCE PEOPLE TO PLAY TANKS" - guy who isn't tanking

[Stack of Turtles]

/title

I propose that if a queue lasts for 5 minutes or longer for the servers to begin drafting people at random as tanks. Doesn't matter what your spec is. Are you a Warlock? You get a 500% HP and DEF buff and aggro stance slapped on you and a temporary taunt button. You will tank or you will get banned for 10 days. Now start pulling!

Have you considered playing games that don't break down irreparably when people play what they want?

[J1M]

I think the existence of the queue leads to content that is not fun.

When I played Vanilla we did not repeat the same dungeon over and over. The dungeons were more complex and contained events. Crowd control was used.

► Show Spoiler

To answer the question you are actually asking: give more classes the option to tank so people don't have to switch characters to balance social dynamics. For example, survival hunter tank or rogue ranged damage dealer, or time mage healer.

[DrSneed]

"WE NEED TO FORCE PEOPLE TO PLAY TANKS" - guy who isn't tanking

Tank is the most fun role to play in MMOs. You get to sit there and blame your healers when things go wrong.

[rusty_shackleford]

allow true hybrids

[NotAI]

Even better than hybrids: modes.

As in, PC can transform from A mode into B mode. Then from B mode into A mode.

More things to lvl up anyway, and plenty of people like progress, do they not?

[WaterMage]

If no one wants to tank is maybe, because "tanking" in your game sucks.

About the case of warlock, allowing daemonic apotheosis ie - the warlock assuming the form of a demon and tanking as a powerful baddass demon could be interesting. Since everything in wow revolves around gear farming, giving loot bonus for underused roles could also be good.

[Rienen]

In my exp, people not wanting to tank usually happens because of a few main factors. Tanking typically is seen as the head of the party, and people don't want to be responsible for leading, as that also comes with the blame when things go wrong. Additionally, they don't want to do any research beforehand. Some people also don't want to have to be "on" the entire time. Finally, DPS'ing is usually more fun and varied in its gameplay (although this is subjective).

Most of those issues are personal/mental issues and have nothing to do with a/the game itself. I think, ultimately, it's just not a role that most personality types gravitate towards.

[Valter]

How does ESO handle that? Is it like in the singleplayer games where there's no classes? So if there's a shortage of tanks, you can get some tanky stats yourself?

[TKVNC]

Tanking is the only enjoyable role in MMO's.

If you're not tanking, honestly, why even play?

[Xenich]

Get rid of the "Holy Trinity" concept and stop designing around pushing that narrow concept of "roles" in terms of this concept.

Treat classes as having many tools that can be used in conjunction with each other to find solutions depending on content, approach, party makeup, and player ingenuity.

[rusty_shackleford]

Get rid of the "Holy Trinity" concept and stop designing around pushing that narrow concept of "roles" in terms of this concept.

Treat classes as having many tools that can be used in conjunction with each other to find solutions depending on content, approach, party makeup, and player ingenuity.

every game that has done this has been shit. Oh wow, everyone gets to do EVERYTHIN… zzzz… zzzzzz
the "holy trinity" itself is garbage because it's a distillation of a larger design

[Manny V]

If you're not tanking, honestly, why even play?

me loike killing fingz

[Xenich]

Get rid of the "Holy Trinity" concept and stop designing around pushing that narrow concept of "roles" in terms of this concept.

Treat classes as having many tools that can be used in conjunction with each other to find solutions depending on content, approach, party makeup, and player ingenuity.

every game that has done this has been shit. Oh wow, everyone gets to do EVERYTHIN… zzzz… zzzzzz
the "holy trinity" itself is garbage because it's a distillation of a larger design

That isn't what I mean. EQ didn't have the Holy Trinity, that was created by players (look at the original manuals descriptions, they were generally focused but not focused to that narrow view). Each class had strengths and weaknesses, could apply their tools in various ways. The concept of the holy trinity was a narrow way to look at class interaction and it resulted in simplistic concepts that constrained classes to "roles" limited to that view and any that did not function according to that narrow perception were proclaimed "imbalanced" with nerfs or buffs by players.

[TKVNC]

Get rid of the "Holy Trinity" concept and stop designing around pushing that narrow concept of "roles" in terms of this concept.

Treat classes as having many tools that can be used in conjunction with each other to find solutions depending on content, approach, party makeup, and player ingenuity.

every game that has done this has been shit. Oh wow, everyone gets to do EVERYTHIN… zzzz… zzzzzz
the "holy trinity" itself is garbage because it's a distillation of a larger design

That isn't what I mean. EQ didn't have the Holy Trinity, that was created by players (look at the original manuals descriptions, they were generally focused but not focused to that narrow view). Each class had strengths and weaknesses, could apply their tools in various ways. The concept of the holy trinity was a narrow way to look at class interaction and it resulted in simplistic concepts that constrained classes to "roles" limited to that view and any that did not function according to that narrow perception were proclaimed "imbalanced" with nerfs or buffs by players.

It's fundamentally impossible, because humans are problem solving creatures.

Group tasks will ALWAYS have a solution that is optimal, and people will look for it. It is unlikely that anyone will have a possibly far higher damage output class focus on distraction / control versus something with a lower damage output, but higher health / mitigation class

Simply because it's illogical.

You can offer diversity in solutions in single player games, and to a lesser extent in online games, but people will always maximise efficiency; and in online games the social reinforcement and expectation will punish people who do not act in this way.

[rusty_shackleford]

make dynamic problems
one of the best 5man encounters in WoW was in that late TBC sunwell era dungeon that had the match against a team of bosses pulled from a pool of them

[TKVNC]

make dynamic problems
one of the best 5man encounters in WoW was in that late TBC sunwell era dungeon that had the match against a team of bosses pulled from a pool of them

It just ended up being a PVP encounter, so a mage just interrupts the caster while the tank holds aggro.

Sadly, until you have AI that has more than 1 IQ, we're unlikely to see the 'holy trinity' leave any time soon.

[asf]

autism play

[Val the Moofia Boss]

How does ESO handle that? Is it like in the singleplayer games where there's no classes? So if there's a shortage of tanks, you can get some tanky stats yourself?

I only got to level 15 or 20 when we were checking out the game with Vergil. IIRC there were no tanks during the dungeon runs we did as we just eviscerated everything, and then for the boss fights anyone can run out of of the telegraphed AoE attacks and heal. Maybe tanks are needed at the endgame.

[Xenich]

every game that has done this has been shit. Oh wow, everyone gets to do EVERYTHIN… zzzz… zzzzzz
the "holy trinity" itself is garbage because it's a distillation of a larger design

That isn't what I mean. EQ didn't have the Holy Trinity, that was created by players (look at the original manuals descriptions, they were generally focused but not focused to that narrow view). Each class had strengths and weaknesses, could apply their tools in various ways. The concept of the holy trinity was a narrow way to look at class interaction and it resulted in simplistic concepts that constrained classes to "roles" limited to that view and any that did not function according to that narrow perception were proclaimed "imbalanced" with nerfs or buffs by players.

It's fundamentally impossible, because humans are problem solving creatures.

Group tasks will ALWAYS have a solution that is optimal, and people will look for it. It is unlikely that anyone will have a possibly far higher damage output class focus on distraction / control versus something with a lower damage output, but higher health / mitigation class

Simply because it's illogical.

You can offer diversity in solutions in single player games, and to a lesser extent in online games, but people will always maximise efficiency; and in online games the social reinforcement and expectation will punish people who do not act in this way.

Nothing wrong with that, but people demand a role to be attached to that "optimal solution".

Monks in EQ were far better at rampage tanking than mitigation tanks, but this angered the self proclaimed "tank roles" because they believed all damage taking was supposed to be a tanks job. The idea of a class who could do good damage, but also tank well in specific situations caused envy even though it was limited and situational. A tank was a tank, a DPS was DPS, a healer was healer and none shall cross the line!

People weren't interested in optimal solutions, they were interested in forcing game play to their perception of what it should be. While some class balancing is justified (ie overpowering content, contrary to developer intent, etc...) a lot of it has been at the behest of the mob demanding classes fit into neat little containers.

[Statesman]

I only got to level 15 or 20 when we were checking out the game with Vergil. IIRC there were no tanks during the dungeon runs we did as we just eviscerated everything, and then for the boss fights anyone can run out of of the telegraphed AoE attacks and heal. Maybe tanks are needed at the endgame.

ESO content is extremely easy. Only Veteran Trials are challenging. You might die on Vet DLC Dungeons if its your first time/don't know the mechanics but otherwise you should breeze through pretty much all PvE content.

[Norfleet]

I propose that if a queue lasts for 5 minutes or longer for the servers to begin drafting people at random as tanks. Doesn't matter what your spec is. Are you a Warlock? You get a 500% HP and DEF buff and aggro stance slapped on you and a temporary taunt button. You will tank or you will get banned for 10 days. Now start pulling!

The problem with "enforced roles" is that they rarely match what players actually would choose to do. A typical 5-man group might, in THEORY, be 3 DPS, a tank, and a healer. But in PRACTICE, players ultimately just play it as 5 DPS, because as player skill and power creep pile on, eventually none of these things matter and you just burn it down by DPS alone.

The solution is just to eliminate it and let players sort this shit out on their own.

Sadly, until you have AI that has more than 1 IQ, we're unlikely to see the 'holy trinity' leave any time soon.

That's the thing: AI that responds to "tanking" is actually deliberately made more stupid than an AI that simply lashes out randomly, at the nearest thing, or at whatever hits it. You have to go out of your way to make an AI stupid in this way, it doesn't happen naturally. It took WORK to do this.

[rusty_shackleford]

That isn't what I mean. EQ didn't have the Holy Trinity, that was created by players (look at the original manuals descriptions, they were generally focused but not focused to that narrow view). Each class had strengths and weaknesses, could apply their tools in various ways. The concept of the holy trinity was a narrow way to look at class interaction and it resulted in simplistic concepts that constrained classes to "roles" limited to that view and any that did not function according to that narrow perception were proclaimed "imbalanced" with nerfs or buffs by players.

It's fundamentally impossible, because humans are problem solving creatures.

Group tasks will ALWAYS have a solution that is optimal, and people will look for it. It is unlikely that anyone will have a possibly far higher damage output class focus on distraction / control versus something with a lower damage output, but higher health / mitigation class

Simply because it's illogical.

You can offer diversity in solutions in single player games, and to a lesser extent in online games, but people will always maximise efficiency; and in online games the social reinforcement and expectation will punish people who do not act in this way.

Nothing wrong with that, but people demand a role to be attached to that "optimal solution".

Monks in EQ were far better at rampage tanking than mitigation tanks, but this angered the self proclaimed "tank roles" because they believed all damage taking was supposed to be a tanks job. The idea of a class who could do good damage, but also tank well in specific situations caused envy even though it was limited and situational. A tank was a tank, a DPS was DPS, a healer was healer and none shall cross the line!

People weren't interested in optimal solutions, they were interested in forcing game play to their perception of what it should be. While some class balancing is justified (ie overpowering content, contrary to developer intent, etc...) a lot of it has been at the behest of the mob demanding classes fit into neat little containers.

Warriors crying about hybrids in EQ is why hybrids were near useless for anything in WoW at launch beyond healing.
The issue in EQ was warriors weren't good at doing damage, not hybrids.

[J1M]

I think the solution is more required roles, not less.

[Norfleet]

To answer the question you are actually asking: give more classes the option to tank so people don't have to switch characters to balance social dynamics. For example, survival hunter tank or rogue ranged damage dealer, or time mage healer.

This isn't necessarily the magic bullet you think it is, either. Even if every class has a mode switch that allows them to flip between roles, if building your character to play those roles requires personal skill training or build investment, players may not necessarily be equipped to actually DO that. If I have to entirely relearn how to play the character and/or completely reequip myself to do so, it may simply be a nontrivial exercise and most players are unlikely to be qualified to actually switch roles, and thus won't. If converting from backstabber DPS rogue to ranged DPS rogue requires me to actually have a ranged weapon, and I don't, I can't actually do this. If converting from ranged DPS rogue to dodge tank rogue requires me to equip an entirely different suit to switch from "doing damage by shooting my enemies from across the room" to "have enough evasion stats to survive sustained close contact", this becomes nontrivial. Even if my class is capable of the role switch, I don't necessarily have the equipment or experience to comfortably make this switch.

[J1M]

To answer the question you are actually asking: give more classes the option to tank so people don't have to switch characters to balance social dynamics. For example, survival hunter tank or rogue ranged damage dealer, or time mage healer.

This isn't necessarily the magic bullet you think it is, either. Even if every class has a mode switch that allows them to flip between roles, if building your character to play those roles requires personal skill training or build investment, players may not necessarily be equipped to actually DO that. If I have to entirely relearn how to play the character and/or completely reequip myself to do so, it may simply be a nontrivial exercise and most players are unlikely to be qualified to actually switch roles, and thus won't. If converting from backstabber DPS rogue to ranged DPS rogue requires me to actually have a ranged weapon, and I don't, I can't actually do this. If converting from ranged DPS rogue to dodge tank rogue requires me to equip an entirely different suit to switch from "doing damage by shooting my enemies from across the room" to "have enough evasion stats to survive sustained close contact", this becomes nontrivial. Even if my class is capable of the role switch, I don't necessarily have the equipment or experience to comfortably make this switch.

Yes, there are many ways stubborn developers can trip themselves while pretending to implement a viable solution.

The point is to reduce the lost time investment by switching roles. If you make a required investment that is the same cost as making a new character then you should be fired. A new weapon is probably a reasonable expectation. Gearing up from baseline is obviously not.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

To answer the question you are actually asking: give more classes the option to tank so people don't have to switch characters to balance social dynamics. For example, survival hunter tank or rogue ranged damage dealer, or time mage healer.

This isn't necessarily the magic bullet you think it is, either. Even if every class has a mode switch that allows them to flip between roles, if building your character to play those roles requires personal skill training or build investment, players may not necessarily be equipped to actually DO that. If I have to entirely relearn how to play the character and/or completely reequip myself to do so, it may simply be a nontrivial exercise and most players are unlikely to be qualified to actually switch roles, and thus won't. If converting from backstabber DPS rogue to ranged DPS rogue requires me to actually have a ranged weapon, and I don't, I can't actually do this. If converting from ranged DPS rogue to dodge tank rogue requires me to equip an entirely different suit to switch from "doing damage by shooting my enemies from across the room" to "have enough evasion stats to survive sustained close contact", this becomes nontrivial. Even if my class is capable of the role switch, I don't necessarily have the equipment or experience to comfortably make this switch.

I think it depends on how much investment is required to play the game. In Retail WoW, it is trivial for me to switch from DPS to tank space. I don't need any different equipment for my Death Knight, and it would just take about 30 minutes of me relearning blood and checking out the talent tree and then I would be ready to go. And then I was tanking as a prot paladin during Dragonflight anyway so I wouldn't have to relearn anything there, and you can very quickly and easily acquire a good 1H sword, a shield, and a 2H weapon, so I can swap between prot and ret no problem.

But in FF11, I would not be able to switch roles from being a heavy melee DPS at level cap. I only took Dark Knight to level 75, and my other jobs of warrior, samurai, and dragoon are in the level 30s, and Ninja in the level 20s. It would tank 100 to 200+ hours to grind Ninja up to the 75s if I wanted to "tank". I did sometimes pull threat as a Dark Knight/Samurai and would have to hold off on using my cooldowns and weaponskills, so I suppose I could theoretically "tank" but I would really need to invest a significant amount of time and money in acquiring better gear to give me more leeway. But most players seem to expect that tanks are warriors/paladins/ninjas, and wouldn't be so keen on the idea of a non-meta "tank", so it wouldn't work well outside of a pre-established friend group.

[Norfleet]

The point is to reduce the lost time investment by switching roles. If you make a required investment that is the same cost as making a new character then you should be fired. A new weapon is probably a reasonable expectation. Gearing up from baseline is obviously not.

It's not about the cost. It's about whether or not a given individual has actually DONE this. If a player has played a certain way for his entire progression and hasn't really touched the other branch because it was not previously required to, he's unlikely to be qualified to suddenly switch. At minimum, he would need to learn how to DO this entirely new side of things, and an environment where he has suddenly become mission critical because no one else was available to even try, is not the best learning environment for this.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

The point is to reduce the lost time investment by switching roles. If you make a required investment that is the same cost as making a new character then you should be fired. A new weapon is probably a reasonable expectation. Gearing up from baseline is obviously not.

It's not about the cost. It's about whether or not a given individual has actually DONE this. If a player has played a certain way for his entire progression and hasn't really touched the other branch because it was not previously required to, he's unlikely to be qualified to suddenly switch. At minimum, he would need to learn how to DO this entirely new side of things, and an environment where he has suddenly become mission critical because no one else was available to even try, is not the best learning environment for this.

So would a solution be to force the player to be brushing up on how to play all roles throughout the game? Ie, to raise your level cap from 50 to 60, you have to have passed tests for tank/healer/dps/however many roles there are?