Focused Feedback: Tank Updates

[tinytim1183]

I would really like to apologize if someone has already said something along this lines, but this is a really long post.

I was curious if we couldn't solve two problems at once.

 

I really like the idea @Captain Powerhouse has that tanks just keep going. I would dub this "I can do this all day". I have no idea how this would play out with the other changes, or even the exact numbers. That isn't my wheelhouse, so please follow along in theory and not in specifics.

 

Almost everyone would agree that the 1tier attack is full of boo. My suggestion is to make it endurance neutral. If it costs 5, then it returns 5. Then we turn to a new passive. I vision it as a bar that fills up based on how much aggro you have. Here is the fun part. The bar, or number of aggro'd targets, increases the amount of endurance returned by the tier 1 ability. Full aggro, it now returns 10. The kicker is that this return is shared with the team, basically turning tanks into endurance batteries. 

 

The tank isn't the guy that out damages everyone. The tank is the guy that keeps fighting and doesn't give up. Brutes want to fight more and harder to rip everything up. Tanks want to fight to protect people around them, to stand up against the forces that oppose them, and not give up until the job is done. Kins already exist, so reducing the endurance burden wouldn't be unique.

 

You are all smarter than me with numbers and how everything gets balanced, but it seems like it would give a defining characteristic that would draw a strong line between brutes and tanks. It wouldn't change anyone rotation as far as pure dps numbers, it would just make an active choice, do i want to hurt something, or do i want to help out the team. Every tank has to take the ability anyway, so it wouldn't require respecs to let every tank have the option to use it and then the button still matter at endgame.

 

Just a thought. Thanks for taking the time for reading and any feedback.

[Leogunner]

51 minutes ago, tinytim1183 said:

The kicker is that this return is shared with the team, basically turning tanks into endurance batteries. 

Not a bad idea.  More thematic than just a straight +END bonus and requires active use to benefit.  The team endurance battery might be pushing things beyond the cottage rule but I feel it's better than Bruising.  People say it's their team force multiplier but it's literally on a single target.  That's not multiplying anything, just reducing the lifespan of the target.

 

I'd recommend putting it in the Suggestions Forum tho.

 

Edited September 16, 2019 by Leogunner

[Auroxis]

22 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

The team endurance battery might be pushing things beyond the cottage rule but I feel it's better than Bruising.  People say it's their team force multiplier but it's literally on a single target.  That's not multiplying anything, just reducing the lifespan of the target.

 

What? Resistance debuffs multiply damage taken by the target from all sources, how is that not a force multiplier?

[Leogunner]

14 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

What? Resistance debuffs multiply damage taken by the target from all sources, how is that not a force multiplier?

You know what also increases damage to the target? More damage.  If we're talking about debuffs, you'd think there would be qualifiers such as reliability, propagation and magnitude that would categorize something as a force multiplier or else anything that increases team performance would be force multiplication, even a -res proc...we even have people saying aggro management is force multiplication...

 

No, Bruising is a bonus.  But this is neither here nor there.  The comment is meant for another thread, not here. 

[Auroxis]

Just now, Leogunner said:

You know what also increases damage to the target? More damage.  If we're talking about debuffs, you'd think there would be qualifiers such as reliability, propagation and magnitude that would categorize something as a force multiplier or else anything that increases team performance would be force multiplication, even a -res proc...we even have people saying aggro management is force multiplication...

 

No, Bruising is a bonus.  But this is neither here nor there.  The comment is meant for another thread, not here. 

Sure I don't mind not having this discussion ITT, but multiplying damage taken isn't just "more damage" in my book, you can agree to disagree. Let's just end it here.

[Mr. Igneous]

5 hours ago, tinytim1183 said:

I would really like to apologize if someone has already said something along this lines, but this is a really long post.

I was curious if we couldn't solve two problems at once.

 

I really like the idea @Captain Powerhouse has that tanks just keep going. I would dub this "I can do this all day". I have no idea how this would play out with the other changes, or even the exact numbers. That isn't my wheelhouse, so please follow along in theory and not in specifics.

 

Almost everyone would agree that the 1tier attack is full of boo. My suggestion is to make it endurance neutral. If it costs 5, then it returns 5. Then we turn to a new passive. I vision it as a bar that fills up based on how much aggro you have. Here is the fun part. The bar, or number of aggro'd targets, increases the amount of endurance returned by the tier 1 ability. Full aggro, it now returns 10. The kicker is that this return is shared with the team, basically turning tanks into endurance batteries. 

 

The tank isn't the guy that out damages everyone. The tank is the guy that keeps fighting and doesn't give up. Brutes want to fight more and harder to rip everything up. Tanks want to fight to protect people around them, to stand up against the forces that oppose them, and not give up until the job is done. Kins already exist, so reducing the endurance burden wouldn't be unique.

 

You are all smarter than me with numbers and how everything gets balanced, but it seems like it would give a defining characteristic that would draw a strong line between brutes and tanks. It wouldn't change anyone rotation as far as pure dps numbers, it would just make an active choice, do i want to hurt something, or do i want to help out the team. Every tank has to take the ability anyway, so it wouldn't require respecs to let every tank have the option to use it and then the button still matter at endgame.

 

Just a thought. Thanks for taking the time for reading and any feedback.

TinyTim I love this idea. 

 

Might even solve some issues with the massive endurance use of Dark Armor. 

 

I also see no one being offended by this type of change. I think it would make a whole team happy.

 

With a change like this, it would alter how we fight.  Don't kill minions and Lt., they become the batteries, concentrate single target attacks on the Boss or AV, leave the little ones alive to fuel our endurance.  If you kill the little ones first, then you kill your endurance gain....lol.  

 

Later,

 

Mr. Igneous

Edited September 16, 2019 by Mr. Igneous

[Noyjitat]

On 9/15/2019 at 7:26 AM, Myrmidon said:

 

The times they are a changin. Adapt or cry.

I adapted on day one by not asking for something to be buffed and not changing the game to what i prefer it to be. I accepted hey this is a tank and it isnt going to do damage like a dps at. The only people here crying are those that want to

change the game.

[Myrmidon]

31 minutes ago, Noyjitat said:

I adapted on day one by not asking for something to be buffed and not changing the game to what i prefer it to be. I accepted hey this is a tank and it isnt going to do damage like a dps at. The only people here crying are those that want to

change the game.

 

I didn’t ask for these changes either, however, here they are. And quite welcome, they are.

 

 

Even with these changes, a Tanker will still have the lowest melee DPS, so you can lay your fears to rest.

[DarZindel]

Interesting changes, and I'll admit upfront I haven't tested these as of yet.  Much of them seem purposed around making soloing and working in small teams a bit easier and/or faster. 

 

My initial reaction is that the AoE and taunt changes are a plus, as are some of the early power swapping.  I do feel that some of the lines between Brute and Tanker are blurring here due to the focus on offense.  I always felt that tanks deserve some kind of scaling res/def/health based upon the number of team members.  When I'm tanking for 8 team members say a boost in health of 30%, res & def of 10% or something of that nature would likely help me take those alphas, and shore us some of the issues we see with lesser played tank primaries (SR, Ice, etc.) having difficulty (or at least a perception they do) taking the alpha in larger groups.  This is just an example of course, those percentages would need to be played with, etc.

 

-DarZ

[kenlon]

22 minutes ago, DarZindel said:

I always felt that tanks deserve some kind of scaling res/def/health based upon the number of team members.  When I'm tanking for 8 team members say a boost in health of 30%, res & def of 10% or something of that nature would likely help me take those alphas, and shore us some of the issues we see with lesser played tank primaries (SR, Ice, etc.) having difficulty (or at least a perception they do) taking the alpha in larger groups.

 

The reason that doesn't work is that once you're tough enough to stay alive through anything, then it doesn't matter how much tougher you get. And just about any tanker primary can be utterly invincible to God himself once slotted with IOs. (And since the inevitable comparisons between brutes and tankers come in when the brutes are IOed, this is relevant here.) 

 

Also SR is utterly amazeballs/holy-shit-this-would-be-nerfed-on-live on tankers. Seriously, plan out a build in Mid's and your eyes will fall out of your goddamn head.

 

[Widower]

Again; this is a thread for feedback. Please cease and desist with the personal attacks and unrelated flame bait.

[ParagonKid]

"Melee damage modifier increased from 0.8 to 0.95 Bruise has been removed in favour of a flat damage scale increase."

This is a straight nerf though (according to the in game numbers)?
To both the Tanker and everyone grouped with them.

Edited September 16, 2019 by ParagonKid

[DarZindel]

5 minutes ago, kenlon said:

 

The reason that doesn't work is that once you're tough enough to stay alive through anything, then it doesn't matter how much tougher you get. And just about any tanker primary can be utterly invincible to God himself once slotted with IOs. (And since the inevitable comparisons between brutes and tankers come in when the brutes are IOed, this is relevant here.) 

 

Also SR is utterly amazeballs/holy-shit-this-would-be-nerfed-on-live on tankers. Seriously, plan out a build in Mid's and your eyes will fall out of your goddamn head.

 

Agreed, that SR can be amazing, it is more of a perception.  However I have been kicked from teams for playing an Ice/ or Stone/, etc. which do have serious issues (beyond perception) which need addressing. 

 

The thing is, how does more damage and a higher damage floor help either?  I've never seen tanks as needing high DPS in a team, and while I appreciate that using 100's of millions of inf and perfect slotting a tank can become godly, not everyone has the time to afford something like that.  I'd be curious to see the actual numbers of characters who have invested 100 million+ into IOs compared to the character/toon population as a whole.  Speaking personally, I'll likely never get to that point in the game again as I have other responsibilities in my life, etc.  Basically, I think content should be balanced around a tank at 20, 30 or 40 using generic IO's.  Building or setting power at levels 20, 30, 40, etc. based upon perfect slotted IO sets and bonuses will lead to nothing changing ever.  That's what level 50+ content is for and should be balanced accordingly.

[Noyjitat]

55 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

 

I didn’t ask for these changes either, however, here they are. And quite welcome, they are.

 

 

Even with these changes, a Tanker will still have the lowest melee DPS, so you can lay your fears to rest.

Still too high for the highest defense at and were still changing the at and game to something it was never meant to be.

[Auroxis]

5 minutes ago, ParagonKid said:

"Melee damage modifier increased from 0.8 to 0.95 Bruise has been removed in favour of a flat damage scale increase."

This is a straight nerf though?
To both the Tanker and everyone grouped with them.

It's a nerf in AV fights and a buff for clearing. I do think the AoE buffs are sufficient for clearing and would rather have a bruising buff over the damage buff, but I'm just reiterating my previous words at this point.

[Haijinx]

10 minutes ago, DarZindel said:

Agreed, that SR can be amazing, it is more of a perception.  However I have been kicked from teams for playing an Ice/ or Stone/, etc. which do have serious issues (beyond perception) which need addressing. 

 

The thing is, how does more damage and a higher damage floor help either?  I've never seen tanks as needing high DPS in a team, and while I appreciate that using 100's of millions of inf and perfect slotting a tank can become godly, not everyone has the time to afford something like that.  I'd be curious to see the actual numbers of characters who have invested 100 million+ into IOs compared to the character/toon population as a whole.  Speaking personally, I'll likely never get to that point in the game again as I have other responsibilities in my life, etc.  Basically, I think content should be balanced around a tank at 20, 30 or 40 using generic IO's.  Building or setting power at levels 20, 30, 40, etc. based upon perfect slotted IO sets and bonuses will lead to nothing changing ever.  That's what level 50+ content is for and should be balanced accordingly.

You've been kicked from teams on Homecoming for set choice?  

 

Or back in NCSoft live?  

 

 

 

[ParagonKid]

We'll, we're in agreement on that. Not a fan of this aspect of the proposed changes. Higher damage cap: sure! Endurance: I'm indifferent.

At no point would I ever expect anyone to look at Tankers and say they do too much single target damage.
Nor is more AoE something I'd ever ask for in exchange for anything.

It's not something I'd ever get behind thematically, for that matter. Let Brutes be little AoE monsters while making Tankers better at unloading on the hard targets.

[Bossk_Hogg]

32 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

It's a nerf in AV fights and a buff for clearing. I do think the AoE buffs are sufficient for clearing and would rather have a bruising buff over the damage buff, but I'm just reiterating my previous words at this point.

Bruising is a 20% resistable amount, single target, non-stacking. Against a +1 AV, it amounted to a 7% increase. While it is a force multiplier, it's actual worth seems to be significantly overstated in this thread, assuming my math is right based on purple patch numbers.

 

AV's generally die pretty fast, so I'll happily trade the 10 seconds it might shave off an AV fight for 20% all-round damage (and more targets in AE attacks) in the non-AV fights which are roughly 99% of the game.

[Myrmidon]

Tested: Willpower/Kinetic Melee

 

Overall, I think the changes give this set some depth and I love the Ageo control implications, however, it doesn’t play differently enough to switch my main over from a KM/WP Brute. If these changes were live at Homecoming release, I would have definitely started as a Tanker and perhaps one of the 1,000 character slots may get there in the future.

[Auroxis]

22 minutes ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

Bruising is a 20% resistable amount, single target, non-stacking. Against a +1 AV, it amounted to a 7% increase. While it is a force multiplier, it's actual worth seems to be significantly overstated in this thread, assuming my math is right based on purple patch numbers.

 

AV's generally die pretty fast, so I'll happily trade the 10 seconds it might shave off an AV fight for 20% all-round damage (and more targets in AE attacks) in the non-AV fights which are roughly 99% of the game.

Against a +4 AV with the rare alpha slot (making it +3) it's a 13% resistance debuff before resistances.

[Kumate]

Please make this happen.  I honestly have been very unhappy playing other AT's because I LOVED tanker for so long in City of Heroes.  When they made CoV..I tried brute but it didnt stick to me.  Just love being a TANK.  And in most MMO's DPS rules because everyone wants speed speed speed...and it killed the game for me.  But these changes would bring me back for a LONG time.  I don't even care if the dps was increased but if you make it so I can jump into a group of mobs and hold ALL the aggro and feel like I am doing something for the team with controls/aggro I will be beyond happy.  Can't wait for these, please dont change your mind...the hope is real.

[Megajoule]

7 hours ago, Noyjitat said:

I adapted on day one by not asking for something to be buffed and not changing the game to what i prefer it to be. I accepted hey this is a tank and it isnt going to do damage like a dps at. The only people here crying are those that want to

change the game.

And there's the pure Trinity, "a tank should only ever be able to take (an infinite amount of) damage, not actually do any" PoV heard from.

Walls of armor and HP with stubby little legs and arms are so early 2000s, if not 1990s (yes, I played dikus back in college, long before any of this newfangled eye candy came along).

[Leogunner]

5 hours ago, Myrmidon said:

Tested: Willpower/Kinetic Melee

 

Overall, I think the changes give this set some depth and I love the Ageo control implications, however, it doesn’t play differently enough to switch my main over from a KM/WP Brute. If these changes were live at Homecoming release, I would have definitely started as a Tanker and perhaps one of the 1,000 character slots may get there in the future.

Curious how you play your Kinetic Brute.

 

It might not be that the differences aren't enough but that you're already privy enough on optimizing Kinetics.  I actually had an Inv/Kinetic Tanker on live, I think that's another I need to test.

[DreadShinobi]

I've held back on commenting on this, because of my personal bias as well as the shown bias of those making the changes. Overall I think there are some solid improvements to the tanker class that will make them more effective and competitive with other ATs by means of a higher melee damage modifier and more unique among melee classes by means of wider aoes and a higher target cap on taunt. I think the higher endurance is a little left field but can fit well. Powerset changeups whether t1, t2, or otherwise seem fine. 

 

The one aspect of this change that I disagree with is the not small, but enormous increase to the damage cap, which I will raise several points about. For one the damage cap seems to have been chosen in a vacuum of brute v tanker comparison. I will also mention that brute damage cap is as high as it is because they have a much lower base damage and fury which eats into alot of it. Per percentage point of damage buffing, brutes gain less than other ATs with higher modifiers, including tankers. It also seems to be heavily based on gaining the most benefit possible from red spam or fulcrum shift which are poor arguments for AT balance. It disregards other ATs that suffer from low damage caps including defenders and controllers (which actually have significant damage buffs within powersets available to them), and all four epic archetypes. One of the counter arguments on keeping the enormous damage cap has been that tankers aren't going to be hitting it normally or even with significant buffing, so why set it so high in the first place? The reasoning is lacking unless every archetype set at the same damage cap was buffed similarly.

 

I also have a strong opinion that the best changes regarding balance are not large sweeping changes but can be small and significant. If it were me making these changes I would roll out the other changes first, the increased melee modifier (which is huge by itself) along with the other utility changes that will make aggro control, area damage effectiveness, endurance, and leveling progression all stronger. I would be in support of _at most_ increasing the tanker damage cap by an additional 100%, but beyond that the reasoning is lacking and hurts balance more than helps it. If it is shown later that for some reason tankers are in need of a higher damage cap aside from other possible changes that would be more aligned with the flavor of the tanker class, then I would support it then I suppose, but I don't believe it is the right direction for the archetype as a whole or in comparison with other archetypes.

Edited September 17, 2019 by DreadShinobi

[Leogunner]

Just got off of playing a Dark/Spines Tanker, lvl 39 (so I can use all primary/secondary skills), unoptimized, only basic IOs, some procs and uniques.

 

Not sure how anyone plays Dark Armor and Spines that isn't a Stalker.  Even with extra END, I likely couldn't manage without the END return from the panacea proc in Dark Regen.  Overall though, it was pretty interesting and I could still manage +1x4 comfortably.  Throw Spines and Spine Burst did feel rather anemic while Ripper felt like the set Workhorse as it hits a good amount of foes, does amazing damage and can knock down foes.  If I were optimizing power picks, I might skip Spine Burst and just maximize Ripper.  I actually skipped Impale as I needed more slots...went with Barb Swipe for a low cost, quick recharge but it also felt very lack luster.

 

All in all, I'd need to actually play the character and level them up fresh to get a better handle on which powers would work best for him.  It's the jankiest of Tankers I've played with on beta so far.