Focused Feedback: Tank Updates

[Leogunner]

1 hour ago, Mr.Sinister said:

I think the .95 modifier and damage cap are fine.  The max targets is probably good too.  The end increase is great.

 

The increased range and arc is the offender.  Personally I don’t think +damage is the right direction for tanks. Also the fault swap is not good. 

No! I want to hit stuff with shadow maul. 

 

I'd prefer they reduce the max targets but keep the cone range then do the reverse (reduce the PbAoE range but keep the max target buff) for radius. 

Edited September 11, 2019 by Leogunner

[tellania]

2 minutes ago, Vanden said:

Hurl uses the melee damage modifier, its damage did go up.

True story: on a RWZ raid, I used hurl at a rikti boss ... he was dead before I finished my animation.   Hurl is hurt by its DPA, but I like the theme.

 

At least I looked awesome, assuming anyone was watching ...

 

[csr]

54 minutes ago, Seph said:

And why should tankers do brute damage? They have higher hp caps, higher base defenses and better agro abilities. How about proposing something that makes tankers more unique instead of invalidating another AT to steal their spot.

I was actually agreeing with you.  The final comment was meant to be more general - it made no reference to damage at all, just high end performance.  I should have made that more clear.

 

What I meant is that the buffs to Tankers are seemingly targeted at a Brute's overall level of high end performance.  And, IMO, the high end performance of Brutes is OP.  Logically, if you accept the latter assertion, then you need to nerf Brutes high end somewhat (85% Res Cap, 700% Damage Cap, for example).  And then target the overall high end performance of Tankers off that.  Which would require a lower high end damage output, since they'll have significant survival advantages (at the high end now the HP difference and higher base Res/Def isn't particularly significant, even my moderate cost /Regen Brute build can tank anything at the high end).

 

Personally, I agree with you in general that differences should be accentuated rather than buffed out; to give the maximum value to having choices.  The problem Captain P has here is that there really isn't any head room to buff Tankers' ability to survive much, and the ability to generate aggro is only of so much value as long as there is a aggro cap of 17, so buffing damage seems necessary - if only for solo play.  And balancing the SO level performance to the IO/Incarnate level is tricky.  Brutes have it wrong.  Specifically because their caps are too high.  Tankers shouldn't get it wrong too by doing the same.

Edited September 11, 2019 by csr

[Sura]

2 minutes ago, csr said:

Personally, I agree with you in general that differences should be accentuated rather than buffed out; to give the maximum value to having choices.  

That's what I was hoping for.  Something perhaps like attaching bruising to gauntlet so Tankers had an automatic AoE -res buff that benefited everyone, and maybe stacked with other Tankers.  I just think these changes are too much.

 

One thing that I've seen mentioned that I think might be important to bring up here: right now there's no reason to have multiple Tankers on a team (the only AT where that's the case).  Are these changes going to work toward changing that?  I don't know, but I think it's worth asking.

[tellania]

27 minutes ago, Sura said:

That's what I was hoping for.  Something perhaps like attaching bruising to gauntlet so Tankers had an automatic AoE -res buff that benefited everyone, and maybe stacked with other Tankers.  I just think these changes are too much.

 

One thing that I've seen mentioned that I think might be important to bring up here: right now there's no reason to have multiple Tankers on a team (the only AT where that's the case).  Are these changes going to work toward changing that?  I don't know, but I think it's worth asking.

 

The -res from the tier 1 attacks do NOT stack.    Though some people have made suggestions for having multiple tanks, including myself:

 

[Seph]

42 minutes ago, csr said:

I was actually agreeing with you.  The final comment was meant to be more general - it made no reference to damage at all, just high end performance.  I should have made that more clear.

 

What I meant is that the buffs to Tankers are seemingly targeted at a Brute's overall level of high end performance.  And, IMO, the high end performance of Brutes is OP.  Logically, if you accept the latter assertion, then you need to nerf Brutes high end somewhat (85% Res Cap, 700% Damage Cap, for example).  And then target the overall high end performance of Tankers off that.  Which would require a lower high end damage output, since they'll have significant survival advantages (at the high end now the HP difference and higher base Res/Def isn't particularly significant, even my moderate cost /Regen Brute build can tank anything at the high end).

 

Personally, I agree with you in general that differences should be accentuated rather than buffed out; to give the maximum value to having choices.  The problem Captain P has here is that there really isn't any head room to buff Tankers' ability to survive much, and the ability to generate aggro is only of so much value as long as there is a aggro cap of 17, so buffing damage seems necessary - if only for solo play.  And balancing the SO level performance to the IO/Incarnate level is tricky.  Brutes have it wrong.  Specifically because their caps are too high.  Tankers shouldn't get it wrong too by doing the same.

So lets say tanks get brute levels of damage, what do brutes get? The painful reality is that tankers either must do less damage than brutes or brutes tank better than tankers otherwise you get a "useless" AT. Increasing agro control and team focus is the way to go, not damage.

[JPax]

22 hours ago, ShogunGunshow said:

Can't say I'm a fan of the 'fix' for Tankers being just to make them more Brute-like. 

To be honest they're not. They have even parity just about to a brute AT THE DAMAGE CAP. Big ask though, because unless you have a pocket kinetics and are always pulling full mobs it's not going to happen, meaning brutes are still, on average, going to have better clearing potential while tankers will now have better aggro potential. I mean jesus, a 15ft radius aoe taunt on ST attacks? That's amazing.

[tellania]

2 minutes ago, Seph said:

So lets say tanks get brute levels of damage, what do brutes get? The painful reality is that tankers either must do less damage than brutes or brutes tank better than tankers otherwise you get a "useless" AT. Increasing agro control and team focus is the way to go, not damage.

 

or say 'screw it' and merge them.  Tanks with fury.   In fact, brute fury came from the original tanker forum.

brutes get tank base protections, tanks get brute fury.   Like peanut butter and chocolate.

Then remove.   We already can have brutes start blue side, and tanks start red side.

 

[JPax]

22 hours ago, Leandro said:

Tank Updates [Experimental Changes]

Damage Scale

• Tanker: Ranged damage modifier increased from 0.5 to 0.8, Melee damage modifier increased from 0.8 to 0.95
  • Bruise has been removed in favour of a flat damage scale increase
• Brute : Ranged and Melee damage modifiers are now equal.
• Epic Pools: All Brute and Tanker Epic pools now use ranged damage modifiers
  • Due to the above changes, Epic Pools should see no damage change at all.

Gauntlet

• Is now applied via a global proc. Any single target power that takes accuracy enhancements will trigger an AoE taunt. Every AoE power that takes accuracy enhancements will taunt the enemies it hit.

Is this damage scale basically a 18.75% damage increase for tanker melee in general or does the math work differently?

 

With Gauntlet, is that a PBAoE or a TAoE Taunt? Because the latter makes any ranged ST attack an AoE Taunt.

[JPax]

22 hours ago, Keleko said:

Katana at least may be a poor choice for swapping T1 and T2 attacks.  Current T1 Katana is higher damage than the T2.

Higher damage sure, lower damage per activation time though - which is what counts if you're *numbers* minded. This change means Tankers maintain ST efficiency.

[Profit]

27 minutes ago, tellania said:

 

or say 'screw it' and merge them.  Tanks with fury.   In fact, brute fury came from the original tanker forum.

brutes get tank base protections, tanks get brute fury.   Like peanut butter and chocolate.

Then remove.   We already can have brutes start blue side, and tanks start red side.

 

I will literally walk away from this game if that happens.

[ZeeHero]

23 hours ago, Crimsanotic said:

I 100% agree.

Buffing tanks offensively is not the move.

Its the only move which will make tankers acceptable to play. it absolutely is the right move and I applaud the HC team for realizing it. Damage is the most important game mechanic. No one asked for them to do the SAME damage as brutes and they still will not.

 

The minute someone DARES ask for tankers to do a bit more damage people jump on it and whine "BUT THEN THEY'LL BE THE SAME AS BRUTES!" that makes as much sense as saying that if I choose to mow my lawn with a manual lawnmower, I am the same as a robot.

Edited September 11, 2019 by ZeeHero

[Replacement]

Bland, uninspiring subjective feedback:

 

I've rebuilt my invuln/staff tanker on Pineapple (on pizza) and I've been playing at assorted level ranges: 10, 16, and 30 so far.  My goal is just to gather subjective feedback on how the set feels.  It's silly to talk about how it performs at 50 when alting is the end game.

 

10 - nothing to write home about.

16, no enhancements at all - endurance didn't constantly tank.  It should be noted this level was chosen because it's about when I start to hate this game (starting at around 16 and carrying through until I pony up and get some IOs).  The fact that I wasn't constantly detoggling before groups went down says a lot.  In fact, It may say too much.  Even brutes at this level hate their blue bars and complete lack of accuracy.

30, basic IOs - Not fully kitted out.  I didn't even bother slotting Endurance, and I was still doing ok on blue.  It's just enough that you notice it if you're watching for it, like I was.  

 

It's really hard to disentangle how much is end recovery being based on a higher base, and how much was enemies dying faster (and thus with less stamina expended) due to damage increases.

 

Cone:

I tried to get a feel for the increased cone size, but I really didn't notice a change on Guarded Spin.  It's always been a super forgiving cone (probably just because of its awesome range), so it's hard to say.  Sadly, I didn't even think about the fact that Eye of the Storm probably hits everyone in sight now, so I didn't think to test it.

 

Thoughts on what I didn't test:

- I really should have tested at 20-22, no enhancements.  crazy how many of my characters stall out there.

- Pretty sure most IO +max stamina set bonuses are % increases.  It's meager, but I think this means Tankers will get more out of those than other ATs?

[Vanden]

6 minutes ago, Replacement said:

Pretty sure most IO +max stamina set bonuses are % increases.  It's meager, but I think this means Tankers will get more out of those than other ATs?

The extra end appears to be another function of the changed inherent, meaning it's a permanent +20 max end buff and not an actual increase to the base endurance of the AT.

[nihilii]

After giving several tankers a go on Pineapple, I hope we keep the AoE radius changes no matter what (and keeping target caps would be nice too). Couldn't care less about damage scale, damage cap or maximum endurance... It'd be cool to have these buffs, but if broots start having panic attacks over the idea of not being the supreme farming choice, we wouldn't want to cause such anguish. 😛 Hitting a lot of stuff from far away is the fun part, and it does make you better at tanking by virtue of having to spend less effort to grab targets and applying more CC/damage to them.

Edited September 11, 2019 by nihilii

[csr]

The Inherent Status Icon for Gauntlet blinks constantly.  I assume this is a bug.

[ThunderCAP]

23 hours ago, vonBoomslang said:

I'm not a fan of the enforced T1/T2 swap. That's a big enough change that I might have to call for cottages. I had a /stone on Live whose concept build was not to take any hammers - what if I made him /fire or /ice with no sword? This would be easy enough to fix by letting tankers pick either attack, though.

 

One other change I don't like is /stone losing Fault for a whole 15 levels. It's an extremely important power to the feel of the set, offering a shitton of CC and giving it  identity and I'd rather not lose it like that.  I don't, however, see many better swaps.

Same, I don't want to be forced to take the Psionic Melee "sword" as 1st power (I often create the punching-only version + last sword attack), plus it doesn't make sense to start from the 2nd best damage, than return to the weaker, than go to the 3rd, than all good from than (4th 5th 6th etc.). It breaks the natural "damage scale" order… and for nothing, since it doesn't solve anything but creates new issues.

I suggest to simply permit the tank to choose which attack wants as first   or   remain things as they are which were developed in a specific order that's better than the contrary imho.

I like the other changes, the tank would start off with even better damage but the brute still as much more potential when the rage goes up.

[vonBoomslang]

7 hours ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

The set has the exact same powers. By your logic, nothing should ever change because of your misunderstanding of the cottage "guideline".  Moreover, no one is FORCED to take it on an existing character. The swap would only apply to new ones. 

So, you are not allowed to respec your character. Ever. Even if you were planning to already, it's no longer an option for you.

 

Do you HONESTLY not see how this is a problem?

[Cendwar]

I don't think upping the damage scale is too big problem. I think the real problem is doubling the radius of pbaoes and cones. I'm sure others can relate to this but AoE is the reason I love to play melee. I play a spines/elec brute with double damage auras and the more crunch and ripping and echoing sounds I hear the more fun it is. If I'm going to be short-changed out of that experience by only having half the radius and lower target caps, well, it might be worth re-rolling. I wouldn't really care about what damage loss I take, I'd be too amazed at how far my spine burst, quills, etc are reaching. The more enemies I can take on and hit at once, the better. And as many others have mentioned already, hitting more targets = more dps. When a tank can hit 16 targets with his pbaoe and I can only hit 10, he's contributing more to getting everything dead than I am.

 

I get wanting to increase the radius and target caps of pbaoes and cones to be able to reach more targets and keep the attention easier, but scrappers, brutes and stalkers and other melee are definitely going to feel short-changed for sure. It feels like the problem you're trying to fix here is already being taken care of by the new changes to gauntlet. A 15ft AoE taunt with every attack sounds like a great way to keep the attention on the battlefield and make the tanker feel more in control, imo. In fact I would consider raising the cap on it to 10 instead of 5?

 

Also, this might be a dumb suggestion but have we ever considered just bumping the threat level of tanks to 5.0 (maybe even higher) and keeping brutes at 4.0? Sometimes when I'm on my brute I find myself peeling bosses/AVs off a tank just by trying to dps. I don't even use the taunt power (but I do have debuff procs which I believe contribute).

 

 

[Allekto]

The increased AoE and target caps sounds great for making tankers better at tanking.  I don't like the increased damage at all though.  Not even a little.  I'd rather see something more support oriented, like a passive +resistance aura that affects others in the same team.  Stackable if there are multiple tanks, so teams benefit from having multiple tanks.

[Warlawk]

29 minutes ago, nihilii said:

but if broots start having panic attacks over the idea of not being the supreme farming choice, we wouldn't want to cause such anguish. 😛

As the proprietor of the Farm Fresh builds thread in guides and an active farmer and brute player in general... no panic attacks, this is the first time I've ever been excited about potentially rolling a tanker. Shaking up the meta without changing the core gameplay or fantasy of the AT is amazing and very welcome.

 

I think the biggest issue in this thread is that there is very little focus on the changes that are being tested. This thread is not asking for suggestions of alternate changes. The AT is not going to be drastically changed or reworked. Give feedback on the proposed changes and take the suggestions for reworks and completely different concepts to the suggestion forum. The little bit of constructive on topic feedback is buried in waves of salt. If the current tanker doesn't match your class fantasy of what a tanker should be, then make some suggestions, but this thread is not the place for that.

 

CoH has never been balanced, it doesn't need to be balanced. It's a super hero game and people should be heroic. Most of the people who object to the damage seem to do so on the basis that it doesn't fit the role of what a tanker should do. That's bias from gaming and MMOs more specifically. Look at the source material, look at the comic books and movies. Tanker types are usually the ones punching people into orbit, not flailing ineffectively while they make everyone mad at them.

 

Please, let's not turn CoH into just another MMO by adhering to roles and concepts made mainstream there. CoH is different, and that's good.

[Myrmidon]

On 9/10/2019 at 6:30 PM, Leandro said:

Tank Updates [Experimental Changes]

Damage Scale

• Tanker: Ranged damage modifier increased from 0.5 to 0.8, Melee damage modifier increased from 0.8 to 0.95
  • Bruise has been removed in favour of a flat damage scale increase
• Brute : Ranged and Melee damage modifiers are now equal.
• Epic Pools: All Brute and Tanker Epic pools now use ranged damage modifiers
  • Due to the above changes, Epic Pools should see no damage change at all.

Stats

• Tanker base endurance has been increased to 120, to reflect the fact that they kill slower, but last longer in combat.
• Tanker damage cap to 600%, this would increase the max Tanker damage potential when grouped.

AoEs

• Most Tanker Melee AoE powers have had their target caps increased. Most cones are now 10 target cap. Most PBAoE are now 16 target cap.
• Tanker Taunts now have a 10 target cap.
• Most Tanker AoE powers now extend to inflict damage and other effects beyond their radius or arcs.

  • As part of their inherent power, tankers get a buff that works similar to Boost Range, but it boosts Radius and Arc of powers.

  • The arc of Cones gets boosted by +100% and the radius of PBAoEs are boosted by +100%.

  • This means a 90 degree cone will actually cover a 180 area, while a 10ft PBAoE will cover 20ft.

  • Almost all cones with over 90 degree arc, or AoE with over a 10ft radius, ignores this buff.

 

Gauntlet

• Is now applied via a global proc. Any single target power that takes accuracy enhancements will trigger an AoE taunt. Every AoE power that takes accuracy enhancements will taunt the enemies it hit.
• Radius is now the same for all attacks (15ft, 5 targets max)
• Taunt scale is now 10% higher than Brute's
• Brute PunchVoke is now also applied via a global proc. Any power that either inflicts damage or takes accuracy enhancements will be able to punch-voke.)

 

Power Levels

• In an attempt to help tanker progression, Tanker T1 and T2 powers have been exchanged for the following sets:
  • Battle Axe
  • Claws
  • Dark Melee
  • Energy Melee
  • Fiery Melee
  • Ice Melee
  • Katana
  • Kinetic Attack
  • Martial Arts
  • Psionic Melee
  • Radiation Melee
  • Savage Melee
  • Staff Fighting
  • Street Justice
  • Super Strength
  • War Mace
• To improve Tanker AoE capability during level up progression, the following powers had their acquisition levels changed:
  • Battle Axe > Whirling Axe = 20, Swoop = 28
  • Martial Arts > Dragon Tail = 20, Focus Chi = 28, Crippling Axe Kick = 34
  • Stone Melee > Tremor = 20, Fault = 35
  • War Mace > Whirling Mace = 20, Clobber = 28

 

1. Get rid of the additional Endurance.

2. Get rid of the attack swapping changes.

3. Push what’s left to live as soon as the Rage complaints are resolved.

[Myrmidon]

51 minutes ago, nihilii said:

After giving several tankers a go on Pineapple, I hope we keep the AoE radius changes no matter what (and keeping target caps would be nice too). Couldn't care less about damage scale, damage cap or maximum endurance... It'd be cool to have these buffs, but if broots start having panic attacks over the idea of not being the supreme farming choice, we wouldn't want to cause such anguish. 😛 Hitting a lot of stuff from far away is the fun part, and it does make you better at tanking by virtue of having to spend less effort to grab targets and applying more CC/damage to them.

Agreed, apart from the Brute panic attacks. Let the farmers either adapt or cry.

[tellania]

Went to dark astoria, fought multple mobs of level 51-53.   Groups of 3-4, I could finish off 3 groups, before running out of all endurance (with +20 endurance, and all attacks have 1 end red SO).

 

For an SO build, the extra endurance is a godsend, not overpowered (via IO's and incarnates, I'm sure its a very different story).

Largest group I found was ... 6, so the extra range of footstomp (my only aoe), nor the extra mob capacity made a difference.

 

Devs:  Are aura's affected by the increase range, e.g. invincibility?

 

Changes are much more mild on street sweeping  in DA.    Later, I'll go RWZ, much larger groups there, easier to test foot stomp new range and higher cap.

 

[Myrmidon]

On 9/10/2019 at 6:52 PM, Zodai said:

I'm a fan of the tanker endurance changes!  Definitely something that gives Tankers a leg up while still making them distinct from brutes.

 

While I will definitely make use of this advantage if it goes live, I think that an Endurance buff should be an “All AT or No AT” change.