Gottbeard said:I don't remember them touting a quaternity, I could be wrong. I am old and my memory isn't what it used to be. I thought they said they were moving away from a trinity to allow for other roles like off-tank, fisher (puller), control, buffer, debuffer, utility to come back to the forefront. They also said expanding back to a large party size would alleviate the need for stringent performance requirements on each role. I think it is disingenuous to insinuate they are somehow doubling back on a core design ethos.
They aren't bleeding control away from anything. From the beginning, the class design has had role overlap. You can go back to gameplay streams from 2017 where the devs and guests form party comps without a traditional control and then have to blend the party abilities together to cover the deficit through monk off tanking and rogue CC. And in those streams you can hear them talk about how a control enchanter would perform better for the group. They talk about how much dps the rogue and monk are losing by stretching into these other roles.
The classes in this game are very well balanced. Do not make the mistake of confusing capable with overpowered. Do not make the mistake of confusing versatility with overpowered. The classes in this game are all designed to reward good choices and gameplay with success. Great Design
P.S. Leave Summoner alone.
-Gottbeard
Yeah, you're wrong, respectfully. The quaternity concept was one of the MAJOR game tenets. It's largely what has the EQ1 folks excited because the Control role has been ignored in the genre, and that's a style of play that many people enjoy. If they have decided to abandon the quaternity in their recent reboot, that is an EXTREME change in philosophy which will have huge repercussions. That would be a game most of us did not donate to create.
I am fine with them bleeding some core archetype abilities into other archetypes for extra flavor and temporary role cover, but you'd think they would need to get the primary archetypes in the game first and get that full blown role defined and fleshed out before they start bleeding core role concepts into other archetypes. The Rogue with a long cooldown stun, sure. The Rogue with unlimited mezzing ability, nope. Common sense. And again, the Rogue doesn't lose much DPS at all mezzing mobs. The DPS abilities generate the resource to Mez, and the Mez is instant cast with a long duration. (i.e. Mez, go back to fighting for 10+ seconds, re-mez, go back to fighting).
There is no fleshed out game yet. They don't have the pet system even determined. Some classes aren't even created or designed. Nothing is well-balanced. Your final sentence is pure hopium, which I'll gladly agree with, but you can't say that yet. Not for another year probably at best.
And yeah, I'd like to see the Summoner in the game at launch. Along with the two other Control classes. No reason they can't get all the classes in. Seems like that would be even more important than Whitethaw itself.
Way too much complaining for a PRE-ALPHA. The one thing that you should be taking away from the streams is the devopment and proof of concept that is taking place. There is a very high probability that almost nothing you see right now will be in launch. Let's relax and post about what we DO like about the Rogues concepts. Did you like the Shadow Walk ability? Like how it looks etc.? I thought it was pretty cool. What you SAW was someone that could walk about without issue. But let's be realistic. These guys are going to put in counters for every spell/ability there is. This is how MMORPGs work. They havent fleshed out the mobs out. How long before we see a ton of mobs that can detect stealth/invis? How long before we see mobs that CAN NOT be controlled? There is always something that will throw a wrench into your plans. Let's not really call anyone OP untill we see a launch ready product. What we were looking at was the current build for mastery level spells/sbilities for lvl 15ish mobs. Max Leveled mastery points etc. Against lvl 15 mobs. Of course it's going to be somewhat easy when fighting lvl 15 mobs with max-leveled spells/abilities/mastery points. YOU will never experience this in-game in any other way than in a test. When YOU are ate lvl 15, your spells/abilities etc. will not be maxed. You will not have max mastery points. Your posts should be along the lines of "I like how this looks" or "I like where this is going". It is OK to say negative things like "Oh, if Rogues are CC kings by using all their MPs on a build, then maybe we should restrict re-builds in a big way". If a Rogue wants to be a CC king - let him. But the penalty is going to be way decreased DPS. This is not wrong! This is just going a different way. I applaud the concept. What I took from the video was the continued development. The game is already much cleaner and crisper than most products I have tested (and that's a LOT of titles). I tested Vanguard with most of these guys a *while* ago. This product is already better than their Beta. It is VERY clear to me that my invested dollars are being used wisely.
Mathir: Common sense. They tout a Quaternity system as a pillar of the game focused on four main roles (Tank, Healer, Control, DPS). There are 3 Tank classes. There are 3 Healer classes. There are currently 5 DPS classes. There is 1 Control class.
Yeah, but there is a CC class, that makes Tank, Healer, DPS AND CC! We are in PRE-ALPHA! It is for getting the basic functionality right. As I said, if (and I mean IF) we are doing the quaternity, then that testing is covered. Yes there is only one CC and there should be more but I do believe that if this is the direction that ProtF is taking, that more will be brought on line in time for alpha, beta and live.
Mathir: How about I tell you you can only be the Wizard.
If I was in pre-alpha testing and I was told that only a wizard class was availble, then thats fine. I believe that others would be brought in as and when appropriate. Common sense (as you put it) dictates that you use the system before you say whether it is broken or not. The current combinations of roles may be more than enough for CC. We just dont know at this point. Yes, CC does seems lite, whether it is or not, without playing the game, you just cannot tell.
Nothing should be benched. We should comment on what we see yes, but we cannot extrapolate that something is broken from from a limited set of inputs.
Nephretiti said:Way too much complaining for a PRE-ALPHA. The one thing that you should be taking away from the streams is the devopment and proof of concept that is taking place. There is a very high probability that almost nothing you see right now will be in launch. Let's relax and post about what we DO like about the Rogues concepts. Did you like the Shadow Walk ability? Like how it looks etc.? I thought it was pretty cool. What you SAW was someone that could walk about without issue. But let's be realistic. These guys are going to put in counters for every spell/ability there is. This is how MMORPGs work. They havent fleshed out the mobs out. How long before we see a ton of mobs that can detect stealth/invis? How long before we see mobs that CAN NOT be controlled? There is always something that will throw a wrench into your plans. Let's not really call anyone OP untill we see a launch ready product. What we were looking at was the current build for mastery level spells/sbilities for lvl 15ish mobs. Max Leveled mastery points etc. Against lvl 15 mobs. Of course it's going to be somewhat easy when fighting lvl 15 mobs with max-leveled spells/abilities/mastery points. YOU will never experience this in-game in any other way than in a test. When YOU are ate lvl 15, your spells/abilities etc. will not be maxed. You will not have max mastery points. Your posts should be along the lines of "I like how this looks" or "I like where this is going". It is OK to say negative things like "Oh, if Rogues are CC kings by using all their MPs on a build, then maybe we should restrict re-builds in a big way". If a Rogue wants to be a CC king - let him. But the penalty is going to be way decreased DPS. This is not wrong! This is just going a different way. I applaud the concept. What I took from the video was the continued development. The game is already much cleaner and crisper than most products I have tested (and that's a LOT of titles). I tested Vanguard with most of these guys a *while* ago. This product is already better than their Beta. It is VERY clear to me that my invested dollars are being used wisely.
Huh? I led THE beta testing guild for Vanguard (Voodoo). I was the defacto class lead for the Blood Mage. I had raid items named after me in game due to being one of a handful of raid mob testers when the mobs were just giant vapor clouds with abilities. Cohh? was a member of my guild. These guys (VR)? I don't remember any of them from early beta testing. I knew all the main testers though. And with all the awfulness that was Vanguard's launch product, this game in greybox demo form is nowhere near VG's beta quality yet. There's no reason not to just be honest about the state of this product, the white knighting is insane.
As for complaining, it's pointing out a concern and then going into detail about why you believe it's a concern. Yes, things will change. Why do they change? Because people point out concerns.
Alpha level testing is when the guts and core systems of the game are implemented. By the time something is in beta, not much is going to change, it's pot-committed at that point. Something like the game being based on a quaternity concept is core to the underlying development of the game. You can't wait until beta to voice concerns or to see if design goals have been drastically changed. It's too late at that point. Now is the time to figure this stuff all out. Beta is for polishing.
When you say it's ok for a Rogue to be a CC king and that's ok. No it's not. Not when there is an entire archetype centered around being the best in that particular field. Many recent MMOs have allowed for any class to be great at any particular role they choose to be, and that always fails because class and role identity is eroded. Joppa is aware of this and has talked on this point. He agrees, or at least he did. Group and role desireability is a key concept in a group based game, especially one that is slow leveling and potentially a multi-year game. When you choose an archetype, you want the security knowing that role will always be there for you, desired in every group. It's not ok for another archetype to infringe on that. The only CC kings should be Enchanters, Bards, and Necromancers. Rogues can have a long cooldown stun to help out in a pinch. They get to be kings at DPS and Utility.
chenzeme said:Mathir: Common sense. They tout a Quaternity system as a pillar of the game focused on four main roles (Tank, Healer, Control, DPS). There are 3 Tank classes. There are 3 Healer classes. There are currently 5 DPS classes. There is 1 Control class.
Yeah, but there is a CC class, that makes Tank, Healer, DPS AND CC! We are in PRE-ALPHA! It is for getting the basic functionality right. As I said, if (and I mean IF) we are doing the quaternity, then that testing is covered. Yes there is only one CC and there should be more but I do believe that if this is the direction that ProtF is taking, that more will be brought on line in time for alpha, beta and live.
Mathir: How about I tell you you can only be the Wizard.
If I was in pre-alpha testing and I was told that only a wizard class was availble, then thats fine. I believe that others would be brought in as and when appropriate. Common sense (as you put it) dictates that you use the system before you say whether it is broken or not. The current combinations of roles may be more than enough for CC. We just dont know at this point. Yes, CC does seems lite, whether it is or not, without playing the game, you just cannot tell.
Nothing should be benched. We should comment on what we see yes, but we cannot extrapolate that something is broken from from a limited set of inputs.
Agree with everything you just said for the most part. The larger concern is that the other Control classes are likely NOT to be brought online until some point after launch. The Bard was looking good pre-launch, but that was before the Project Faerthale reboot, and the game being delayed further while they audited and fixed their coding issues. From recent statements, it looks more likely than not that the plan is to launch with less than three Control Archetypes, specifically just the lone Enchanter. So, while I agree with your statement, I don't think it's the current plan, and that's very concerning. Chris can always clear this up though with a simple statement.
And yes, I too, am fine testing the classes they need in testing. I'm not talking about testing. I'm talking about Launch. If you want to play a DPS role, but all they offer at launch is the Wizard, can we agree that's a problem? DPS have different playstyles and flavors. Control classes should as well.
Mathir: And yes, I too, am fine testing the classes they need in testing. I'm not talking about testing. I'm talking about Launch. If you want to play a DPS role, but all they offer at launch is the Wizard, can we agree that's a problem? DPS have different playstyles and flavors. Control classes should as well.
If at launch, there was only one class that could CC in a reliable manner, then yes, that is a concern, unless CC was covered by other classes that were not CC specific, but together became as good as the single class, (i.e. their CC-ness complimented and enhanced others) then this is a new way of playing and I would be happy with that.
It is not the lack of dedicated CC (or dps, etc.) that concerns me, it is whether the game comes together in a way that allows that concept of CC to be implemented successfully, intelligently and in a fun way.
To answer your question directly, if other classes provided the DPS in a manner that enhanced groups rather than relying on a single architype, then I would be willing to give it a go before judging the system. I.e. tanks and healers could DPS as well as tank and heal and enhance the others roles dps via actions, spells, buffs and procs and the like, then this doesnt sound implausable to me, just different. Whether it was more fun is another matter entirely and it is something that we cannot conclude until such a system was tested. I would agree that a lack of CC types does appear to be limiting. However, until we know the full extent of skills and the like of the classes in the game, we cannot be sure. It is a concern, but it is not broken at this point.
chenzeme said:If at launch, there was only one class that could CC in a reliable manner, then yes, that is a concern, unless CC was covered by other classes that were not CC specific, but together became as good as the single class, (i.e. their CC-ness complimented and enhanced others) then this is a new way of playing and I would be happy with that.
It is not the lack of dedicated CC (or dps, etc.) that concerns me, it is whether the game comes together in a way that allows that concept of CC to be implemented successfully, intelligently and in a fun way.
To answer your question directly, if other classes provided the DPS in a manner that enhanced groups rather than relying on a single architype, then I would be willing to give it a go before judging the system. I.e. tanks and healers could DPS as well as tank and hehhal and enhance the others roles dps via actions, spells, buffs and procs and the like, then this doesnt sound implausable to me, just different. Whether it was more fun is another matter entirely and it is something that we cannot conclude until such a system was tested. I would agree that a lack of CC types does appear to be limiting. However, until we know the full extent of skills and the like of the classes in the game, we cannot be sure. It is a concern, but it is not broken at this point.
This is a little bit of a different debate, one where we might be on different sides. I understand your point, and it's the WoW route, where the CC is sprinkled amongst all the classes so that collectively, CC is covered in a group. The game is functional, there is a place for CC abilities. The major selling point for this game though, or at least one of them, was that they are "Bringing back the quaternity", so that instead of sprinkling CC amongst a collection of classes, there will be an entire archetype for people who enjoy the non-dps focused, control role playstyle to gravitate to. There are plenty of folks out there, especially the Bards and Enchanters from EQ1, that yearn for that type of play experience again. For that to happen, there needs to be multiple options of Control classes to choose from, AND the other archtypes can't have CC sprinkled all amongst them.
Also, to expand on your point a little bit more, we saw this other archetypes infringe on main playstyles thing in other games, WoW being the best example with Warriors and Rogues. Once it was determined that Fury Warriors could outdps Rogues, Rogues became obsolete because the Warriors could off tank and had survivability advantages. Healers and Tanks should NEVER be able to compete with DPS archetypes with overall DPS. We saw this in WoW again with the Holy Paladin being able to outheal Priests. Once that was possible, Paladins were no longer "allowed" to be tanks or dps. And the primary healing class was no longer the best healier, and the tank alternative to the warrior was no longer allowed to function as such. I think we have more than enough evidence from other games that class archetype roles should not be spread around. So, I'm firmly in the "if you need DPS, you have to find a DPS class" camp (and tank, heals, control can be sub'd in for DPS in that example).
So, I see the spreading around of control abilities, at least in a massively effective form like we saw with the Rogue, to be two things: 1) Against the promise of the quaternity archetype game pillar, and 2) Extremely unhealthy for any person that wants to main a control archetype.
Mathir said:Gottbeard said:I don't remember them touting a quaternity, I could be wrong. I am old and my memory isn't what it used to be. I thought they said they were moving away from a trinity to allow for other roles like off-tank, fisher (puller), control, buffer, debuffer, utility to come back to the forefront. They also said expanding back to a large party size would alleviate the need for stringent performance requirements on each role. I think it is disingenuous to insinuate they are somehow doubling back on a core design ethos.
They aren't bleeding control away from anything. From the beginning, the class design has had role overlap. You can go back to gameplay streams from 2017 where the devs and guests form party comps without a traditional control and then have to blend the party abilities together to cover the deficit through monk off tanking and rogue CC. And in those streams you can hear them talk about how a control enchanter would perform better for the group. They talk about how much dps the rogue and monk are losing by stretching into these other roles.
The classes in this game are very well balanced. Do not make the mistake of confusing capable with overpowered. Do not make the mistake of confusing versatility with overpowered. The classes in this game are all designed to reward good choices and gameplay with success. Great Design
P.S. Leave Summoner alone.
-Gottbeard
Yeah, you're wrong, respectfully. The quaternity concept was one of the MAJOR game tenets. It's largely what has the EQ1 folks excited because the Control role has been ignored in the genre, and that's a style of play that many people enjoy. If they have decided to abandon the quaternity in their recent reboot, that is an EXTREME change in philosophy which will have huge repercussions. That would be a game most of us did not donate to create.
I am fine with them bleeding some core archetype abilities into other archetypes for extra flavor and temporary role cover, but you'd think they would need to get the primary archetypes in the game first and get that full blown role defined and fleshed out before they start bleeding core role concepts into other archetypes. The Rogue with a long cooldown stun, sure. The Rogue with unlimited mezzing ability, nope. Common sense. And again, the Rogue doesn't lose much DPS at all mezzing mobs. The DPS abilities generate the resource to Mez, and the Mez is instant cast with a long duration. (i.e. Mez, go back to fighting for 10+ seconds, re-mez, go back to fighting).
There is no fleshed out game yet. They don't have the pet system even determined. Some classes aren't even created or designed. Nothing is well-balanced. Your final sentence is pure hopium, which I'll gladly agree with, but you can't say that yet. Not for another year probably at best.
And yeah, I'd like to see the Summoner in the game at launch. Along with the two other Control classes. No reason they can't get all the classes in. Seems like that would be even more important than Whitethaw itself.
I don't think they have abandoned anything.
You believe the control archetype is under represented on launch. I think what we have seen of enchanter shows it to be a snugly nostalgic fit to the role of control. Sure, more choices in the archetype would be nice, but its a far cry from abandonment. The archetype is strongly represented.
You believe that rogue's kit is overpowered and the CC element is so powerful it diminishes the control archetype. But, in all the videos we have seen of rogue gameplay, there has always been a hard hit to DPS in order to fill the role of control for their group. Opportunity costs (literally) and stamina costs force a CC rogue to drop a significant amount of DPS and this has been commented on by several players playtesting the role. On top of that, all the enchanter play we have seen has shown enchanter to be a class that easily controls multiple mobs while simultaneously providing buff power, resource sustain to their group while also performing the role of debuffer and sometimes even fisher. I think a balanced party is still going to prefer having the enchanter.
Even if I 100% agreed with you on each point, A true pet class is also something we haven't seen for a very long time in the MMO scene. Many people are excitied for that specific nostalgia. I don't even need 3 pet classes, just 1 pet class is good for me. Don't throw Summoner under the bus. If it is trully a problem just put more emphasis on finishing bard.
Regardless, these topics are large enough for their own thread. If you trully feel the development team is making a mistake, create your own thread about your concerns for the control archetype at this stage of development. It would get more visibility and it would be a good topic.
-Gottbeard
Do we know that we will ever have enough mastery points to max out every ability? It seems to me that making the choice to build out your mastery to stand in as a CC class, you are probably going to have to give up on some of your DPS mastery. I would think that it would be rare for a rogue to prioritize CC over DPS and if one does choose to do that, then there should be a significant trade-off.
vjek said:Ruinar said: Do we know that we will ever have enough mastery points to max out every ability? ...Yes. They've confimed this exactly when the system was revealed, and at least one more time again, since the initial reveal.
If I recall, it was also said that it is unlikely that most people will max out all of their Masteries by the time they reach max level.
vjek said:If it's possible, people will do it. (max them all out as soon as possible/always/whenever)
I mean.. they drop as items.. If they're trade-able, it's pretty easy to see how that's going to turn out.
I think that's pretty obviously true, but the greater point is that, in the launch version of the game, a level 10 Rogue have maxed Mastery in any skill, let alone all of the skills they have access to at level 10, is extremely unlikely.
Eventually you will be able to get every mastery point but it is going to take a long time (some longer than others). If you chose on your rogue to invest your masteries into a CC engine build as a priority while you leveled up, you would definitely be outclassed in dps by another rogue who put their masteries towards dps priority. There are also 3 tiers of pips in mastery that get exponentially expensive, so builds that require many tier 3 max masteries to pull of a combo will be particularly painful to pull of while leveling up.
Gottbeard said:I don't think they have abandoned anything.
You believe the control archetype is under represented on launch. I think what we have seen of enchanter shows it to be a snugly nostalgic fit to the role of control. Sure, more choices in the archetype would be nice, but its a far cry from abandonment. The archetype is strongly represented.
You believe that rogue's kit is overpowered and the CC element is so powerful it diminishes the control archetype. But, in all the videos we have seen of rogue gameplay, there has always been a hard hit to DPS in order to fill the role of control for their group. Opportunity costs (literally) and stamina costs force a CC rogue to drop a significant amount of DPS and this has been commented on by several players playtesting the role. On top of that, all the enchanter play we have seen has shown enchanter to be a class that easily controls multiple mobs while simultaneously providing buff power, resource sustain to their group while also performing the role of debuffer and sometimes even fisher. I think a balanced party is still going to prefer having the enchanter.
Even if I 100% agreed with you on each point, A true pet class is also something we haven't seen for a very long time in the MMO scene. Many people are excitied for that specific nostalgia. I don't even need 3 pet classes, just 1 pet class is good for me. Don't throw Summoner under the bus. If it is trully a problem just put more emphasis on finishing bard.
Regardless, these topics are large enough for their own thread. If you trully feel the development team is making a mistake, create your own thread about your concerns for the control archetype at this stage of development. It would get more visibility and it would be a good topic.
-Gottbeard
Fair response, I appreciate your thoughts on this, and you articulate them well. To be very, very clear, I am in no way burying the Summoner, that is a class I am interested in as well. It's just if they have to bench a class or two due to time constraints to get the Control Archetypes fleshed out on par with the other roles, it clearly has to be DPS. Out of the DPS classes, the Rogue and Wizard are in, and the Monk has already been said to be close to finished. That just leaves the Ranger and Summoner. And the Summoner, specifically the pet system, is giving them a lot of problems. That's where the Summoner and Ranger came from in my initial post. My preference, and I see ZERO reason why they can't do it, is to get all the classes in at launch, Necro and Bard included.
I don't disagree with anything you said other than the Rogue having to stop DPS'ing to CC. He doesn't. He just has to target, hit his instant cast Mez, and get right back to DPS'ing. Minus actually does that several times while fighting trash in his video. On the boss, he stayed in stealth to keep him mez'd, but he did not have to do that at all. Currently, Rogue can DPS building up Opportunity, stop for a second to target and insta-cast his Mez, then go right back to DPS'ing. No tradeoff in current state of the game UNLESS he's trying to Mez a large pack of mobs, than yeah, he needs Shadow Walk to generate the endless Opportunity points every second. And I am definitely saying Rogues should not be able to Mez 5+ mobs at a time.
Joppa knows where I stand on this. He's answered me directly in the past, but I'm encouraged each time we discuss it. Originally, I argued we needed more Control and the Necro should be included in that, this was several years ago. Now, Necro is confirmed Control. We've also gone back and forth on the idea that each archetype should have at least three classes to choose from. Chris said it didn't start out as the goal to have at least three of each role, but maybe that's the direction we head. That also was several years ago. Brad was always a lot more bullish, even stating they would get all the classes in even if they had to prioritize that over the third continent. Chris disagreed with that answer though. I'm going to keep on beating this drum because it's common sense. Many people LOVE the Control archetype and playstyle, but not everyone wants to be a squishy ranged wizard type (Enchanter), some enjoy the plate wearing tanky type (Bard), and I'm very curious to see what they do with the Necro, but I assume it's going to be pet oriented. Three different flavors for those that love the Control archetype. Again, not everyone wants to be an Enchanter, just like not every healer wants to be a Cleric, not every tank wants to be a Dire Lord, and not every DPS wants to be forced to be a Wizard. Right now Control players are scheduled to be forced to be an Enchanter. That's bad every which way you slice it.
eunichron said:I think that's pretty obviously true, but the greater point is that, in the launch version of the game, a level 10 Rogue have maxed Mastery in any skill, let alone all of the skills they have access to at level 10, is extremely unlikely.
Absolutely true, but not what I am arguing at all. A Rogue at max level shouldn't be able to Mez packs of mobs, which as it stands, he could do rather easily by staying in stealth. Or even lock down just a single named mob in perpetuity. The Control archetypes have to be more powerful at Control than the other archetypes that get some Control abilities sprinkled in. That's common sense, and we can all agree on that concept as well. The concern here is that in order to make the Enchanter (for example) considerably more powerful than the Rogue, the Enchanter gets an AoE Mez "I win" style ability. That just breaks the game and makes the Control archetype too easy. By limiting the Control abilities of other archetypes, it also avoids an "arms race" concept with the actual Control archetypes where their abilities are too strong (and too easy/boring).
And what is scary here, to me at least, is that they haven't mapped out the Bard or Necro in terms of abilities and how they will Control the battlefield. Tacking that on post-launch seems like a balancing nightmare that would be far better handled and addressed prior to launch.
I'm also curious what they have planned for all the Control classes. Control is so much more than Mesmerize and Stuns, though those are some of the most powerful tools in the kit along with Charm.
The video showed what I expect a pre-Alpha to look like: grey-boxing and a sprinkling of mechanics (environment/climbing/combat).
As to the other debate that has popped up... I agree with Mathir. The dev team should focus on getting more than 1 control class out before launch. I do not mind other class types having some type of control; however, without a working understanding of how all the control classes are going to work balancing will become an issue.
Nobody wants to be the 1 class type that only has 1 choice. Otherwise, why not release the game with 1 tank, 1 healer, 1 damage, and 1 control?
vjek said:Ruinar said: Do we know that we will ever have enough mastery points to max out every ability? ...Yes. They've confimed this exactly when the system was revealed, and at least one more time again, since the initial reveal.
Thanks for the info. I watch/listen to all of the streams but still miss details.
Watching the fact that a team can wipe on trash mobs made me happy. I'm sick of playing games where there is little or no risk. Seeing a team of 5 with 2 tanks and 2 healers still need to use tactics is also a win IMO. Also love seeing the Rogue calling out when he CC things made me grin. So much of this video made me happy.
