Focused Feedback: Tank Updates for January 6, 2020

[Haijinx]

2 hours ago, siolfir said:

Rage changes have been rolled back; IIRC @Captain Powerhouse said that Super Strength is getting a separate pass later.

Yes.  But the difference between patches is Rage went back to +80% damage per stack.  

 

It had dropped to 60ish last time like build up, etc. 

 

 

 

 

[siolfir]

18 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Yes.  But the difference between patches is Rage went back to +80% damage per stack.  

 

It had dropped to 60ish last time like build up, etc. 

This is true, but I thought that the person you were quoting was comparing against live - in which case, Rage should be untouched - instead of comparing against the last patch.

[nicoliy]

I'm so ready for this to go live 🙂 , can't wait for a more powerful tanker build.

[r0y]

I understand the taunt / global taunt stuff; heck, I get the increase in AoE/cone/cap stuff... but seriously, the +Damage buff?  Tanks (and kind of Brutes) should sacrifice great damage for their greater survivability (health, defense/resist/regen).  I mean if one is not careful, one may unwittingly make Scrappers and Stalkers obsolete.

 

Why would I play a scrapper or stalker if I can, for a slightly-less (but maybe not?) damage reduction get much better defenses, regen, hp, etc.?  I think it is a similar issue with Sentinels (wrt blasters/corrupters).  If sentinels worked (e.g. did decent damage) then blasters/corrupters would start to be marginalized more.  It's a fine line to walk, I will admit.  (and yes, I know corrupters buff/debuff, but I'm speaking about ranged damage options, specifically).

 

Tanks should hit MORE, hit farther/wider, and taunt better - sure!  100%!  But hit HARDER?  No way.  Let's keep this City of Heroes, not World of Tanks (Brutes).

 

Just my 2¢

 

[dangeraaron10]

Any damage buff Tankers get here will never make Scrappers/Stalkers obsolete.

 

If these ATs are still in use in spite of Brute existing, Tanker sure isn't going to replace them.

[nicoliy]

32 minutes ago, dangeraaron10 said:

Any damage buff Tankers get here will never make Scrappers/Stalkers obsolete.

 

If these ATs are still in use in spite of Brute existing, Tanker sure isn't going to replace them.

Agreed. This change is not going to put a street justice tank anywhere close to AV/Pylon killing speed of a SJ stalker. In a team setting especially, where death is not likely, the tank is not going to output the damage of a pure damage AT.

[Myrmidon]

20 hours ago, AlienMafia said:

Because there is no hit check since they dont do damage. This is done to make it equal in taunting to the other sets

Also, a key fact is that Willpower has now been brought up from its old 2.5 second duration on Tankers (and Brutes).

[Azra]

5 hours ago, r0y said:

I understand the taunt / global taunt stuff; heck, I get the increase in AoE/cone/cap stuff... but seriously, the +Damage buff?  Tanks (and kind of Brutes) should sacrifice great damage for their greater survivability (health, defense/resist/regen).  I mean if one is not careful, one may unwittingly make Scrappers and Stalkers obsolete.

 

Why would I play a scrapper or stalker if I can, for a slightly-less (but maybe not?) damage reduction get much better defenses, regen, hp, etc.?  I think it is a similar issue with Sentinels (wrt blasters/corrupters).  If sentinels worked (e.g. did decent damage) then blasters/corrupters would start to be marginalized more.  It's a fine line to walk, I will admit.  (and yes, I know corrupters buff/debuff, but I'm speaking about ranged damage options, specifically).

 

Tanks should hit MORE, hit farther/wider, and taunt better - sure!  100%!  But hit HARDER?  No way.  Let's keep this City of Heroes, not World of Tanks (Brutes).

 

Just my 2¢

 

 

I think they should hit harder.  For sustained burst.

 

I'm quite open to all ATs being 'damaging' - for me, it's just a question of how they get there.  Controllers control.  Blasters blast.  Tanks/almost Tanks (Brutes) Scrappers melee.  etc.

 

I rolled a tank (Invul/DMelee) and 'tough' enough in early Brickstown.  L28.  But very end heavy and the attacks feel very 'tippy tappy.'  You can box yourself out to death or a stalemate.  Your attacking ability doesn't seem to be able to survive your defence.

 

Playing the brute in the same small mobs of 2-3 in Bricks/Founders.  Sure, I get hurt quicker but having a DoT toggle in my armoury and the fury bar AND the BU button is an embarrassment of riches.  Mobs don't last long.  You only have to get the fury bar to 30-50% and it has enough bite to have a satisfying crunch to your attacks.

 

Solution?  Role a brute and IO the resists and defences.  And you'll have the tank you dreamed of.

 

Solution to tanks?  Put a 'Might' bar in there.  Builds up like Domination.  Builds up via mob aggression and taunt....herding and punchvoke.  Then?  BOOM!  Might gives you a 1 minute damage buff.

 

Tanks?  Problem solved.  Sure, Brutes might spit their dummy out but I'd argue that....

 

Tanks defences (at peak) outweigh a brute.

Brutes attacks (at peak) outweigh a tank.

 

It's an inversion.  It's just a question of how much.  At the moment I'm not playing tanks.  I had to take  3 incarnate powers, make them level shifted, take musculature AND 'assault' to get my ice tank worthy of doing some actual respectable damage.  To get that 'feel' of a brute in an attacking sense.  That's a long way behind a brute to me.  Too far.  I don't think their damage out put should be the same.  But the disparity is too great and the play stats of ATs prob' reflect that.  Along with the enticing fury mechanism (which was originally intended for tanks.)  I don't think it would be outrageous to put that mechanism onto a tank.  Bet there'd be no one playing brutes. 😛  What's a brute?  A scrapper with a fury bar but no crits?

 

I like playing Blasters that are set built.  But in SO terms.  The Sentinel is great.  To have a blaster that hits as hard as a Defender but doesn't get mezzed because it can take a hit like a scrapper.  But I can't expect to hit as hard as blaster.  Ofc.  I understand that.  

 

Brutes can be damage monsters all the time if you get them 30-40% and higher.  Can the tank have a mechanism whereby their damage is 40-50% higher with a slightly different method to fury in that the tank's play style builds aggression for a sustained burst rather than a higher and lower ebb and flow mechanism which the Brute has.

 

Just helicopter air lift the Domination mechanism onto the tank.  Call it might.  Try it privately, Dev's and see how it works.  It would end this debate one and for all.  Tanks with Damage.  For a 1 minute.  

 

So, I have a domination bar and button fetish. 🙂

 

Another thing to consider.  Is time and space.  Certain ATs use the mind.  Some blast.  Some melee.  IT takes time to close to melee.  Mind is a direct hit.  Blasting has projectile time which is shorter than running to an enemy.

 

There's the possibility of making some ATs slower or faster than others.  If you're slower in your attack rate you hit hard.  (Generally, as an AT.)  Brutes may be quicker, tanks slower.  Or could be.

 

I'd like the idea of tanks hitting harder as they seem quite slow to me.  I think a sustained burst of damage mechanism would spice up the AT.

 

3 things transformed blasters from being completely borked.

 

Auto SNIPE!  HIT LIKE  A TRUCK OR HIT INSTANTLY.

Self Buff.

Rinse Repeart Novas.

 

You don't get nudged off snipe in battle and die or have a snipe you 'can't' use in combat situations in the mix of the melee.

You don't have to die.  There's enough self buff to keep you healed or rocking instead of depleted and defenceless.

And in case of emergency?  BOOM.

 

And you can mix and match those 3 things in attack situations.  Snipe and Nova.  Snipe and Torrent.  Snipe and Energy punch...snipe with chips, snipe with fries...snipe with steak...and with incarnates you can double nova and snipe an nova and snipe and energy punch and...

 

These 3 things were transformative.   *And yes, they can really tank if you IO set build and Incarnate them.  Further amplifying the changes.

 

Tanks.  3 things that would be transformative.

 

1.  Big end.  *nods.  120 end.  So you're no longer the 'big out of shape' boxer who punches him self out.

2. Double taunt from 5 to 10 to put clear day light between you and the upstart brute boy.

3. SUSTAINED DAMAGE MECHANSIM.  You taunt, you take a hit, you get in a fight and after several mobs of being kicked around?  You lose your hair for little while and BOOM, red cloud MIGHT button.  Press it and dish out that 'Punch in the face' to sort it out.  ie.  You're not just a glorified trash talker that stands like a giant door stop whilst the rest of the team roll teh mob for you whilst you land a few token hits.  Your big attacks are slow.  But they are excruciatingly damaging.  If you hit something, it gets rocked to its core.  Adding a mechanisms would add some moisture to the dryness of tanks.

 

Make him last the fight.  Make him king of taunt.  Make him able to be influential with a punch in the face.

 

Sure, he's not the fastest, he's not the most damaging in terms of peak overall volume of damage output.  Tanks are slower.  They don't nova nor do they have the battery of attacks a blaster does.  But if he lands a blow or two or three on you?  You're in deep, deep trouble or laying down or laying in a wall.

 

A z r a

Edited January 8, 2020 by Azra

[nicoliy]

Ran a pylon on my tank Elec/Tw...5 minutes. Felt good for a tank.

[siolfir]

45 minutes ago, Azra said:

1.  Big end.  *nods.  120 end.  So you're no longer the 'big out of shape' boxer who punches him self out.

The extra endurance was due to low damage and taking forever to kill mobs, causing Tankers to run out of endurance.

With these melee modifier and AoE buffs, Tankers are no longer low damage, and don't need it any more than any other AT.

 

I would suggest you build better if you want to button mash with impunity.

[Wavicle]

Personally, I think an added difficulty mode (similar to WoW's "Mythic" dungeons) for TFs would be a good idea.  Add some worthwhile rewards (probably just increased merit rewards would be ok) and BINGO we have content that actually calls for Tanks and CC.

Edited January 9, 2020 by sacredlunatic

[Sir Myshkin]

7 hours ago, nicoliy said:

Ran a pylon on my tank Elec/Tw...5 minutes. Felt good for a tank.

On Beta? Cause it can get faster. 😉

 

Editing in this just because I hate the idea of creating a double post even though it's not quite related:

Didn't post it in the Beta threads, but I did go back with Kinetic Melee and test out its performance with the Tanker changes since it was the last thing on my list. I managed to get the attempt done before the Dec 6th patch, which is interesting because it gives me two data points measuring how the same build functioned just like I did early on with some of the first tests in my series before the Beta stuff hit months back.

 

So pre rollback I could roll in and take down a Pylon with T1/2/3+Gloom under Power Siphon and Hybrid: Assault with a best time of 2:45, general swing from 2:45-3:00, post rollback (so what we're back to now) 2:34 with a swing up to 2:50. Then for T1/2/3+Gloom+Concentrated Strike under PS+HA: 2:27, with a swing up to 3:00 cause CS is terrible when it misses.

 

I didn't see much deviation with CS inclusive chain, but that one is so fickle on CS hitting consistently and never missing that getting under 2:30 is a bit rough, but it does show how a more consistent low-tier-usage chain can overshadow the T9 being included, and how little variance they have. Comparatively I saw about a 10/s offset from nerfed-buff to rollback (~35 DPS difference)

Edited January 9, 2020 by Sir Myshkin

[Saiyajinzoningen]

On 1/7/2020 at 2:07 PM, sacredlunatic said:

I can think of nothing in the game more brokenly OP than the Brute damage cap.

i dunno man the fact that the only 2 options i ever see in LFG are DFB and AE farm sounds kinda broken to me.

[Sovera]

18 minutes ago, Saiyajinzoningen said:

i dunno man the fact that the only 2 options i ever see in LFG are DFB and AE farm sounds kinda broken to me.

Hyperbole, meet Saiyajinzoningen. Saiyajinzoningen, this is hyperbole.

[Replacement]

46 minutes ago, Saiyajinzoningen said:

i dunno man the fact that the only 2 options i ever see in LFG are DFB and AE farm sounds kinda broken to me.

As much as I wish for a conversation on allowing missions to suck while AE is literally several entire magnitudes stronger, resulting in a desire to PL characters to 50 in a game where "alting is the end game" and then trying to slow-grind other characters, getting frustrated at how slow it is until PLing them...

 

That place really isn't here.  That's a content imbalance; not a gameplay one.

Edited January 9, 2020 by Replacement

[Saiyajinzoningen]

6 minutes ago, Replacement said:

As much as I wish for a conversation on allowing missions to suck while AE is literally several entire magnitudes stronger, resulting in a desire to PL characters to 50 in a game where "alting is the end game" and then trying to slow-grind other characters, getting frustrated at how slow it is until PLing them...

 

That place really isn't here.  That's a content imbalance; not a gameplay one.

i apologize for the digression

[Myrmidon]

9 hours ago, Saiyajinzoningen said:

i apologize for the digression

No apology needed. This thread has far less digression than the series have. Perhaps make a post on this idea in another forum and see where it goes?

Edited January 10, 2020 by Myrmidon

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, Myrmidon said:

No apology needed. This thread has far less digression that the series have. Perhaps make a post on this idea in another forum and see where it goes?

They will work on it.

 

Keep the faith.

 

[MIG]

Let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

 

No amount of testing will make this a perfect patch (everyone accepts it equally), but it is a good update and will make most people happy.

 

 

[ApesAmongUs]

I get the increase in AoE targets, but why not an increase in aggro cap to go with it.  I mean, if the goal is to pull more aggro, why not let them actually pull more aggro.  And, I'm not talking about oldschool full zone, but +50% would really differentiate them on a team.  Or maybe make them able to control aggro on 2 adjacent groups (double cap?). 

[Super Homer]

[Caulderone]

1 hour ago, ApesAmongUs said:

I get the increase in AoE targets, but why not an increase in aggro cap to go with it.

Per the gif above, this has been rehashed over and over.

 

The aggro cap is not per AT.  It cannot be modified like that.

[AlienMafia]

53 minutes ago, Caulderone said:

Per the gif above, this has been rehashed over and over.

 

The aggro cap is not per AT.  It cannot be modified like that.

I am curious about this because this beta patch has pets from MMs now attack an over agro'd enemy. The MM seems like a more simpler change but curious if there is a to do tanks. The tank agro cap increase is not a straight increase because I cant imagine it being changed just for tanks but have it more incorporated into a power that replaces bruising as a "unique" reason to roll a tank and not a brute

[Number Six]

My opinion is that code should never be used as an excuse. Not to pick on this instance in particular, but there are a lot of people who quote the standard code rant in various threads and it's a bit of a pet peeve. I see a lot of assertions about things being "impossible" that are clearly not, like fixing the Pet AI without having to use hacky workarounds. On the other hand, there are a lot of things that we technically can do, but it doesn't necessarily follow that we should do.

 

Per-AT aggro caps are technically possible with a small amount of work, but I'm not convinced that they're a good idea. The cap exists for a reason -- if you are fighting very large groups then everybody has to think about aggro management and survivability a little, and you can't completely ignore the mechanic by bringing a tanker.

 

IMO any discussion over such a thing should be focused solely on whether or not it makes for better gameplay and is likely to produce a better result than keeping the cap uniform, considering all aspects of what makes a good game.

[siolfir]

33 minutes ago, Number Six said:

My opinion is that code should never be used as an excuse. Not to pick on this instance in particular, but there are a lot of people who quote the standard code rant in various threads and it's a bit of a pet peeve. I see a lot of assertions about things being "impossible" that are clearly not, like fixing the Pet AI without having to use hacky workarounds. On the other hand, there are a lot of things that we technically can do, but it doesn't necessarily follow that we should do.

There isn't much that can't be coded within the game, but some things would require major refactoring while other things are essentially updating values. Given that we were led to believe that changing the aggro cap to an AT-specific value was closer to the former than the latter, after having the same argument to the same request so many times, people started just saying that things are "impossible" to get them to shut up about it so that other things could be worked on.

 

If it's a small project, can be done relatively quickly, and won't interfere with the code performance, then it can be done quietly behind the scenes without telling anyone because you can just set the values to the current cap across all ATs. Then the next time the request comes through, you can just quietly bump the number for Blasters and Brutes to 256 and see if anyone notices on their farming characters.