Focused Feedback: Tank Updates

[Blastit]

How sensible would it be to open up the two first secondary powers for everyone? It feels more elegant than swapping the order of powers around for tankers. Is it doable?

 

Personally I'm happy for anything that make tankers feel nicer to play. I like the suggestion of giving tankers better scaling for support abilities. Have brutes deal more damage overall but tankers have bigger AoEs and better support. Brutes have a big advantage in having one of the best defined playstyles of all the ATs. You've got mechanical and emotional incentives to keep pressing ahead so that your sweet fury bar doesn't decay which is something the state of tankers can't take away.

 

Better support can open up for adding some buffs and debuffs into epic pools, because tankers epic pools are pretty boring honestly. I'd rather have idk Ice Shield than Chillblain. That'd just be neat. Imagine putting Warmth in Pyre Mastery.

[Sniktch]

Blastit:  There are quite a few nasty, nasty codebombs preventing secondary first-power choice; Cap posted some of them earlier in the thread.  There's a verify check in the character database that would explode, for one.  Technically possible, but you're looking at man-YEARS of work, not man-hours.

[yoshidon]

I'm not opposed at all to the changes proposed as I think tanks could use some sort of buff to help their value. But thinking of this in a totally different direction I had an idea. The issue seems to be giving the tank more offensive capabilities and making taunt better.

 

Not having a firm grasp on all the number crunching would it be possible / useful to have a system where opponents take damage for attacking the tank. Something like taunted enemies that attack the tank (hit or miss to balance def/res tanks) take 10% of the base damage of their attack to themselves - no secondary effects. So an enemy would normally hit the player for a base of 300 points (before any resists would be calculated) would do 30 points to themselves when they attack the tank while taunted. This ups the damage of tanks solo or in groups and adds value to the taunt mechanic. There would need to be some limits in place so a purple enemy can't kill itself on a lower level tank that can aggro it and maybe escape getting squashed with lots of def.

You think about in comics and movies where a villain will hurt themselves while trying to punch a super tough hero, bullets ricocheting off into someone else or hitting the wrong target while swinging at a speedy target that dodges.

[Sura]

6 hours ago, Mr. Igneous said:

I Love this idea.  Tanks need to be tanks.  We need to be able to hold large groups with Taunt, and adding a -Resist (All) Debuff on actively Taunted Mobs would be fantastic.  This idea fits with what a tank should be much better than added damage.  Tanks need to be more resilient and differentiated in play style from Brutes.  Make the Tank version of Taunt at least 25 please!!  Brutes Taunt should not be as strong, say 10 or so.  Tanks are damage absorbers, not damage dealers.  We need the capability to hold large amounts of aggro, right now we can only hold a very small percentage of an 8 man teams aggro.  This makes tanking difficult on large teams.  However with IO's teams can also steam roll content, not really needing a tank most of the time.  This makes Tanks feel useless at times.  This is why many old Tanks rolled Brutes to feel useful.  Tanks need extra control and debuff capability not extra damage.  A team would much rather have a Tank on an AV with automatic debuffs from the Tank then have a little bit of extra damage from the Tank.  Don't turn us into Brutes.  Make us unique.  Could also make Tank Debuffs scale with team size, that would be awesome!  Encourage groups to want a tank.

I agree.  I like the bruise/gauntlet idea.  You're still punching things in the face more effectively whether solo or in a team, but without the straight up damage increase.  And as long as the effect stacks from different casters, multiple tanks on a team would be fine.

 

Edited September 13, 2019 by Sura

[Sovera]

38 minutes ago, Sniktch said:

Blastit:  There are quite a few nasty, nasty codebombs preventing secondary first-power choice; Cap posted some of them earlier in the thread.  There's a verify check in the character database that would explode, for one.  Technically possible, but you're looking at man-YEARS of work, not man-hours.

You're assuming to be man-YEARS! Lets not forget once upon a time we were given a hard NO about coloring powers because colors were hard coded into the spaghetti code. So there was nothing that could be done, sorry guys.

 

One or two issues later we could color our powers.

[Noyjitat]

Tanks shouldn’t be seeing damage increases this radically high. 600% cap that’s just.... i mean why????? Whats the point in playing a brute now. Yeah even if it’s bonus damage that number shouldnt be reverted.

[golstat2003]

3 minutes ago, Noyjitat said:

Tanks shouldn’t be seeing damage increases this radically high. 600% cap that’s just.... i mean why????? Whats the point in playing a brute now. Yeah even if it’s bonus damage that number shouldnt be reverted.

The point of playing a brute is because I don't want to take Taunt and hold aggro, which tanks are expected to. If I want to tank I'll play a Tank and take Taunt. If I just want to be difficult enough to kill but still do damage and not be expected to hold aggro for the entire team, I'll play a Brute.

[Sniktch]

1 minute ago, Sovera said:

You're assuming to be man-YEARS! Lets not forget once upon a time we were given a hard NO about coloring powers because colors were hard coded into the spaghetti code. So there was nothing that could be done, sorry guys.

 

One or two issues later we could color our powers.

 

Power customization was an ask at launch and not available till issue 16 - 5 years.  People were asking for 'reverse knockback' for most of the game's life, and it's still not a thing - though dark-years tinkering may have made it possible.  I don't think I'm out-of-line in my estimate.

[Warlawk]

I'm not going to deep dive into the numbers on the damage increases because frankly I haven't tested them enough to speak with authority. I will say that tanks need the scalar increase, damage cap could be tweaked perhaps but being able to solo well is an important part of functionality for myself and many others.

 

People seem very eager to give tanks a unique and niche appropriate ability within groups which is very understandable, but we need to be mindful of the fact that at the moment the AT will not be getting a redesign from the ground up. Suggestions which incorporate existing mechanics in new and interesting ways for Tankers are far more likely to see implementation. On that note, I do have an idea to propose for consideration.

 

@Captain Powerhouse How viable would it be to give tankers a team affecting proc built into Gauntlet? The one I would love to see is a 15' radius 0.5 second duration Break Free on attack with a cooldown of maybe 10 seconds. In this way sticking close to your tank means that he can break you free from being locked down (Damn you Malta! *shakes fist angrily*!). No lingering effect so it's not going to offer any sort of blanket immunity but rather offer a reactive solution for allies who have put themselves in danger next to the tanker. A less attractive but perhaps slightly more balanced option would be a small absorb shield (does not affect caster?) tied to gauntlet triggers. Again a 15' radius, non stacking with perhaps a 10 second duration. This is not intended to provide a massive damage shield to the team on a long term basis but rather immediate protection to those brave enough to dive into the fray alongside their fearless leader!

 

I do not know the viability of adding something like this, but it very much plays to the class fantasy of a tanker without stepping on too many toes and uses already existing effects that can (hopefully) be tied directly to the Gauntlet trigger so that a change wouldn't have to be added to each individual attack power.

Edited September 13, 2019 by Warlawk

[siolfir]

12 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

The point of playing a brute is because I don't want to take Taunt and hold aggro, which tanks are expected to. If I want to tank I'll play a Tank and take Taunt. If I just want to be difficult enough to kill but still do damage and not be expected to hold aggro for the entire team, I'll play a Brute.

So you just hate Scrappers? Because that's their niche - difficult to kill, not expected to hold aggro. Stalkers are even easier to kill with lower hit points, but they're not only not expected to hold aggro, they have powers to actively shed it.

 

Brutes are supposed to hold aggro, that's why they get punchvoke. They were a mix of the Tanker and Scrapper ATs when City of Villains was a separate game, and you couldn't have those ATs.

[Bossk_Hogg]

45 minutes ago, Noyjitat said:

Tanks shouldn’t be seeing damage increases this radically high. 600% cap that’s just.... i mean why????? Whats the point in playing a brute now. Yeah even if it’s bonus damage that number shouldnt be reverted.

Tankers have a pretty small durability advantage. Brutes will have a small damage advantage.

 

How much difference do you honestly expect from AT's that share the exact same powers? Defenders and Corrupters are essentially within 5% of each other as well. The time to differentiate brutes and tanks has basically passed. Scrappers and tankers were already too close when brutes came out. They could have made them unique in which armors they could take, with brutes getting more offensive options like fire, and tankers getting stone/invuln, but powerset proliferation and Going Rogue killed basically any chance of keeping them really different in a big way. We simply have too many "tough guys who hit stuff" AT's to really give them niche protection without bolting something onto the AT that it never had before. I don't think many people rolled tankers because they wanted to debuff/heal.  That isnt to say that they CAN'T, but that shoudlnt be their selling point over brutes. 

Edited September 13, 2019 by Bossk_Hogg

[Blastit]

1 hour ago, Sniktch said:

Blastit:  There are quite a few nasty, nasty codebombs preventing secondary first-power choice; Cap posted some of them earlier in the thread.  There's a verify check in the character database that would explode, for one.  Technically possible, but you're looking at man-YEARS of work, not man-hours.

Ah, I hadn't seen that. Quite unfortunate. Controllers, corruptors and defenders would certainly appreciate some more flexibility.

[Sgt. Terminus]

I love these changes, haven't played a tank much since coming back as once you get to higher levels I felt under powered compared to everyone else and it wasn't fun.  When I play, I want to take the "alpha" and smile when doing it and then dish out as much AOE/taunt so scumbags keep trying to wipe that smile off my face.   Which I think is what these changes will help do.  Call it a form of "control" but I have no interest in playing a melee hybrid controller/debuffer like some have suggested.  Would not miss bruising in the slightest with these changes.  No AT is really required in the game (which is one of the many reasons I love it) so why not make it more fun and to me more AOE and damage is definitely fun!  If the damage is to close to Brute levels then tweak it down but tanks would have niche in the melee world as masters of taunting and the most AOE targets.

[Replacement]

2 hours ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

There are many reasons I dont want to expand the bruise to every power, from personal to actual balance.

 

From a personal point, going all the way to launch, I didn't roll a tank just to debuff things so others can kill them better. I rolled a tank to punch things in the face, while i get punched in the face and my team mates are mostly safe.

 

From a balance perspective, it still means a second tank is the least optimal party member you can bring aboard. Allowing it to stack is also problematic in it's own ways. A thing I am considering to do, though, is to increase some of the modifiers used by power pools like Leadership, allowing for some tanks to opt into more support-oriented builds on an individual basis, instead of the AT as a whole being shoe-horned into a new support role via global mechanics. Between Leadership and epic pool powers like Darkest Night or Melt Armor, a tanker could build for more support.

This is still honestly the biggest thing I'd like to see (along with at least a small damage bump.  I wouldn't mind something between Live and current Pineapple if it got us more power budget for stuff like this).

 

It has always bothered me that there are four Archetypes comprised of melee and armor pools, and all 4 of them are tied at the bottom of the heap for leadership benefits.  If this happens to buff Grant Cover and some other secondary effects?  I'm super OK with that.  If Tanker Epics with debuffs are actually better than the Brute versions, I would feel justified in those choices instead of feeling like "I'm only grabbing this because I know my Brute counterparts won't."

[Cutter]

Can some of these changes be rolled into an inherent (Gauntlet 2.0), and be built to apply scaling buffs, akin to Defenders' Vigilance? Something like:

 

Team Size	Damage Buff %	Cone Size %	AOE Size %	Taunt Mag %
1 (solo)	20	+0	+0	+0
2	17.5	+14	+9	+2.5
3	15	+28	+18	+5
4	12.5	+42	+27	+7.5
5	10	+56	+36	+10
6	7.5	+70	+45	+12.5
7	5	+84	+54	+15
8	2.5	+98	+63	+17.5

 

This way, solo tankers get a damage buff to kill things faster, while in teams they get increased range and aggro generation to more effectively pull things off their teammates and onto themselves?

[Vanden]

On 9/10/2019 at 8:22 PM, MechaMarshmallow said:

I'm confused by this - Katana's current T2, gambler's cut, is stronger than the T1 - and recharges faster to boot. 

I think there's something weird going on with the Real Numbers on the beta client. On the Live client, you can see that Sting of the Wasp is indeed stronger than Gambler's Cut.

[siolfir]

2 minutes ago, Warlawk said:

I'm not going to deep dive into the numbers on the damage increases because frankly I haven't tested them enough to speak with authority. I will say that tanks need the scalar increase, damage cap could be tweaked perhaps but being able to solo well is an important part of functionality for myself and many others.

 

People seem very eager to give tanks a unique and appropriate niche ability within groups which is very understandable, but we need to be mindful of the fact that at the moment the AT will not be getting a redesign from the ground up. Suggestions which incorporate existing mechanics in new and interesting ways for Tankers are far more likely to see implementation. On that note, I do have an idea to propose for consideration.

 

@Captain Powerhouse How viable would it be to give tankers a team affecting proc build into Gauntlet? The one I would love to see is a 15' radius 0.5 second duration Break Free on attack with a cooldown of maybe 10 seconds. In this way sticking close to your tank means that he can break you free from being locked down (Damn you Malta! *shakes fist angrily*!). No lingering effect so it's not going to offer any sort of blanket immunity but rather offer a reactive solution for allies who have put themselves in danger next to the tanker. A less attractive but perhaps slightly more balanced option would be a small absorb shield (does not affect caster?) tied to gauntlet triggers. Again a 15' radius, non stacking with perhaps a 10 second duration. This is not intended to provide a massive damage shield to the team on a long term basis but rather immediate protection to those brave enough to dive into the fray alongside their fearless leader!

 

I do not know the viability of adding something like this, but it very much plays to the class fantasy of a tanker without stepping on too many toes and uses already existing effects that can (hopefully) be tied directly to the Gauntlet trigger so that a change wouldn't have to be added to each individual attack power.

I thought about suggesting a small mez protection aura around Tankers earlier as well, since the killer of squishies is typically the inability to act rather than anything else. If it affects the Tanker as well, this could be another differentiator between them and Brutes, because you can lower the magnitude of protection in their primary to make up for them having it in an inherent by the magnitude of the protection provided, but the inherent wouldn't have the holes that the armor set would on a Brute/Scrapper/Stalker, it would just be easier to overload the magnitude on.

 

As for the damage increase... meh. For me the problem with levelling a Tanker wasn't the damage modifier (I solo levelled a Dark/Cold Corruptor - the existing Tanker modifier is higher than the Corruptor modifier, and Cold has no damage increasing debuffs until level 35... the same level that Dominators get Sleet). It was the the long delays in getting powers to fill an attack chain because melee was the secondary powerset instead of the primary, so you had the same two relatively weak attacks to cycle through and wait for them to recharge. Yes, that means that my problem was still damage... but it was "damage per second" for the character, not "damage per attack".

[William Valence]

3 hours ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

From a personal point, going all the way to launch, I didn't roll a tank just to debuff things so others can kill them better. I rolled a tank to punch things in the face, while i get punched in the face and my team mates are mostly safe.

That's kinda the crux of it isn't it.

 

Your perspective is damage output should be primary, and now you're in a position to make it so the primary focus of Tankers is Damage, regardless of what they were. And in a way that is just so grossly strong, and that just can't be matched.

[Replacement]

2 minutes ago, William Valence said:

That's kinda the crux of it isn't it.

 

Your perspective is damage output should be primary, and now you're in a position to make it so the primary focus of Tankers is Damage, regardless of what they were. And in a way that is just so grossly strong, and that just can't be matched.

That's unfair.  His opinion was tempered, moderate. 

 

You're being hyperbolic.  He didn't say damage should be primary.  You put those words in his mouth.

Edited September 13, 2019 by Replacement

[William Valence]

3 minutes ago, Replacement said:

 

You're being hyperbolic.  He didn't say damage should be primary.  You put those words in his mouth.

 

Sneaky edit, have to edit too.

 

With the new target caps, he doesn't have to say damage is primary, it is demonstrably. Tankers aren't primarily noticeably stronger in mitigation, if we are to believe the criticisms of brutes vs tankers but they are in offense with the ability to apply 60% to 100% more effect with the same button click.

 

With the change the strength of tankers isn't it's mitigation, it's the ability to output damage. I think that shows a damage primary outlook.

Edited September 13, 2019 by William Valence

[Vanden]

2 minutes ago, William Valence said:

That's kinda the crux of it isn't it.

 

Your perspective is damage output should be primary, and now you're in a position to make it so the primary focus of Tankers is Damage, regardless of what they were. And in a way that is just so grossly strong, and that just can't be matched.

Now come on, this is just hyperbole. That’s not helpful when it comes to feedback.

[Megajoule]

3 minutes ago, William Valence said:

Which part is hyperbole?

 

6 minutes ago, William Valence said:

And in a way that is just so grossly strong, and that just can't be matched.

This part.

[Replacement]

I was probably editing while you asked that, but to be clear, the statement that CP wants damage to be primary.  That's hyperbole.  

 

I want to also note: I've seen your posts around here.  You're smart and I like what you have to say, so this is entirely me trying to keep this fair, not attack you.

[William Valence]

2 minutes ago, Megajoule said:

This part.

How does a brute or scrapper with a 10 target cap match the output of a tanker with a 16 target cap on the same power?

[Megajoule]

Okay.  How would you like to see Tanks improved, within your perception of their intended role and the technical constraints (which are significant) of the engine, if not by improving their damage dealing (in some way)?

Edited September 13, 2019 by Megajoule