taunt All Scrappers must have Taunt Auras

[Alchemystic]

Just now, chi1701 said:

Then would you support dwarf form (and nova) buff to make them compariable to tank? Access to defensive buffs, more damage, access to abilities outside their respective form, larger aoes, higher hit cap, more threat?

That's not the argument I'm trying to make, it's not even the argument this thread is trying to make.

 

So on that basis, no.

[chi1701]

3 minutes ago, Player2 said:

Tanking is a combination of both being more resilient/survivable and aggro mangement.

 

Kheldians' dwarf form being more survivable and possessing an AoE taunt qualifies it as a tank.  They aren't "true" tanks as they can focus their build in a non-tank way that excludes them from being tanks... but as pointed out, they are the jack of all trades and master of none.  They are definitely more qualified to be on the tanks list than scrappers.

Scrappers are resilient/survivable and can have aggro management. They also have access to AoE taunt both active and passive. Does this qualify them as a "Tank"?

[chi1701]

1 minute ago, Tyrannical said:

That's not the argument I'm trying to make, it's not even the argument this thread is trying to make.

 

So on that basis, no.

Point is, they arent "tanks", simply keldians with forms that can taunt

[Alchemystic]

7 minutes ago, chi1701 said:

Scrappers are resilient/survivable and can have aggro management. They also have access to AoE taunt both active and passive. Does this qualify them as a "Tank"?

5 minutes ago, chi1701 said:

Point is, they arent "tanks", simply keldians with forms that can taunt

 

Wait so if a Scrapper has an AoE taunt, they're a tank, but if a Kheldian has an AoE taunt, they're not?

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by Tyrannical

[Monos King]

1 minute ago, chi1701 said:

Point is, they arent "tanks", simply keldians with forms that can taunt

No, they're definitely tanks, and you're arguing a point the game itself rejects. Kheldians receive the second highest res caps in the game (behind tanks/brutes tied with VEATS) of 85%, and are given access to the dwarf form which allows them to make use of that potential. This includes a taunt, and comes with a heal as well. This is different from VEATs who, while sharing the 85% res, are not given in set ways to optimize that potential and are thus not tanks. Similar to scrappers. Your powers define your role.

 

Kheldian dwarfs are tanks, just inferior tanks to brutes similar to how brutes are slightly inferior tanks to tankers.

[chi1701]

Just now, Tyrannical said:

They don't have access to any kind of AoE taunt besides an outlier armor set. So no, they don't qualify as tank.

Like I said before, they have a form designed to tank, therefore they qualify.

Confront and provoke.

 

1 minute ago, Monos King said:

No, they're definitely tanks, and you're arguing a point the game itself rejects. Kheldians receive the second highest res caps in the game (behind tanks/brutes tied with VEATS) of 85%, and are given access to the dwarf form which allows them to make use of that potential. This includes a taunt, and comes with a heal as well. This is different from VEATs who, while sharing the 85% res, are not given in set ways to optimize that potential and are thus not tanks. Similar to scrappers. Your powers define your role.

 

Kheldian dwarfs are tanks, just inferior tanks to brutes similar to how brutes are slightly inferior tanks to tankers.

Im surprised because I argued this when they came out with the buffs for tanks and brutes and why are peace bringers (keldians) being left out and was slapped down by rest of forum goers on how Keldians arent tanks.

[Alchemystic]

Just now, chi1701 said:

Confront and provoke.

 

Confront AND provoke?

 

Scrappers only get access to Confront, which is a single target taunt.

Provoke is a pool power which ANY archetype can get, so by your logic, ALL archetypes are tanks.

[Player2]

4 minutes ago, chi1701 said:

Scrappers are resilient/survivable and can have aggro management. They also have access to AoE taunt both active and passive. Does this qualify them as a "Tank"?

You are correct in that they are resilient and survivable.  I was once on a Statesman Task Force with a group and they were trying to pull the patron AVs one at a time... and failed.  Our second rate tank held aggro Ghost Widow and Scorpion while we laid into Ghost Widow first then Scorpion, and the healer did as well as possible keeping the tanker healed (died once, but rezzed immediately).  The spines/invul scrapper on the team held aggro on Mako and Scirroco alone until we finished with the other two... and did not die.

 

Does this mean scrappers are tanks?  No... inherently, they are not tanks.  Their aggro management is limited by design.  They are melee damage dealers that CAN tank, especially if one's build is geared toward that function.  I've also seen an illusion/storm controller tank... but that doesn't make controllers tanks.

 

Scrappers are melee damage dealers.  If you want to play them as tanks, that's no different than a dominator trying to qualify as a ranged damage dealer (aka blaster/corruptor).   Just because a thing can be done does not mean that the AT should be modified to make it more like the role it has been molded into.

[chi1701]

2 minutes ago, Player2 said:

You are correct in that they are resilient and survivable.  I was once on a Statesman Task Force with a group and they were trying to pull the patron AVs one at a time... and failed.  Our second rate tank held aggro Ghost Widow and Scorpion while we laid into Ghost Widow first then Scorpion, and the healer did as well as possible keeping the tanker healed (died once, but rezzed immediately).  The spines/invul scrapper on the team held aggro on Mako and Scirroco alone until we finished with the other two... and did not die.

 

Does this mean scrappers are tanks?  No... inherently, they are not tanks.  Their aggro management is limited by design.  They are melee damage dealers that CAN tank, especially if one's build is geared toward that function.  I've also seen an illusion/storm controller tank... but that doesn't make controllers tanks.

 

Scrappers are melee damage dealers.  If you want to play them as tanks, that's no different than a dominator trying to qualify as a ranged damage dealer (aka blaster/corruptor).   Just because a thing can be done does not mean that the AT should be modified to make it more like the role it has been molded into.

Exactly, just because dwarf form fits their narrative of what they think a tank is, doesnt make it one, as much as Nova form doesnt make it a blaster.

Edited December 30, 2020 by chi1701

[Starforge]

Just now, chi1701 said:

Exactly, just because dwarf form fits their narrative of what they think a tank is, doesnt make it one.

Fits the narrative the original devs thought a tank was?

[Alchemystic]

Just now, chi1701 said:

Exactly, just because dwarf form fits their narrative of what they think a tank is, doesnt make it one.

No the higher resist/defense caps, increased HP limit and access to AoE taunt does.

[chi1701]

2 minutes ago, Starforge said:

Fits the narrative the original devs thought a tank was?

Il bite and ask for proof, because when I played one when they came out they werent used as tanks.

 

2 minutes ago, Tyrannical said:

No the higher resist/defense caps, increased HP limit and access to AoE taunt does.

Thats your opinion, and thats something I dont agree with.

[Player2]

1 minute ago, chi1701 said:

Exactly, just because dwarf form fits their narrative of what they think a tank is, doesnt make it one, as much as Nova form doesnt make it a blaster.

Kheldians are, by design, able to fill multiple roles.  They are not dedicated tanks because different powers can be taken.  But if dwarf form is taken, then the kheldian in question is --by design-- able to fill the tank role.  Kheldians are both tanks and not tanks... depending on how they are played.  They are not ideal tanks, but that's the point of how they are designed to be able to fill multiple roles.

 

But what's the point of this line of calling them into question as tanks or not?  Are you trying to reason that scrappers belong on the list of tanks as much as kheldians do or something else?  Because if it's the former, that's an incorrect assumption.  Scrappers CAN be capable of tanking, depending on how you build, and if you want an AoE taunt you have to dip into a power pool to do it.  Kheldians have this by design without the pool power workaround.  Kheldians are more tank than scrappers are by design... but they are not as much tank as tankers and brutes are... by design.

[Alchemystic]

5 minutes ago, Tyrannical said:

No the higher resist/defense caps, increased HP limit and access to AoE taunt does.

2 minutes ago, chi1701 said:

Thats your opinion, and thats something I dont agree with.

It's a fact, with mathematical evidence.

 

[Starforge]

1 minute ago, chi1701 said:

Thats your opinion, and thats something I dont agree with.

Wait, it's an opinion that the literal numbers are higher than on another AT?

[Player2]

Scrappers are potentially the tankiest non-tanks in the game.  How's that?  Does that work for everyone?

[Monos King]

17 minutes ago, chi1701 said:

Im surprised because I argued this when they came out with the buffs for tanks and brutes and why are peace bringers (keldians) being left out and was slapped down by rest of forum goers on how Keldians arent tanks.

I have nothing to comment on what other people might have stated, but the point is if kheldian dwarfs aren't tanks, then Scrappers certainly are not.

[Davy]

You could go for gold with these mental gymnastics.

[Apparition]

3 minutes ago, Player2 said:

Scrappers are potentially the tankiest non-tanks in the game.  How's that?  Does that work for everyone?

Except then we have Blasters with Provoke and the Melee Hybrid. :;

[Player2]

2 minutes ago, Apparition said:

Except then we have Blasters with Provoke and the Melee Hybrid. :;

Nah, scrappers still have higher Def/Resist values, as well as higher HP.  They also have a dedicated secondary power set of damage mitigation, as opposed to certain blasters having a power that gives them more survivability than other blasters.

 

 

[Parabola]

Tanking is a player behaviour not an archetype or group of archetypes. It involves handling aggro but that's far from the whole of it. A tanker can run their aggro aura and not be tanking if they are not jumping in and taking the alpha or positioning mobs etc. The other day I 'tanked' a posi 2 on my latest blapper. I simply threw myself at the enemy relying on my ice manipulation powers and some good support from the rest of the team to keep me mostly alive. All we needed was somone to be the focus of healing and we sailed through.

 

Anyway none of this has anything much to do with scrappers having aggro auras or not. It wouldn't make tankers or brutes obsolete or that would already have happened with the scrapper sets that do have aggro auras. It would just be a quality of life improvement to how the other scrapper secondarys play. 

[Alchemystic]

5 minutes ago, parabola said:

Tanking is a player behaviour not an archetype or group of archetypes. It involves handling aggro but that's far from the whole of it. A tanker can run their aggro aura and not be tanking if they are not jumping in and taking the alpha or positioning mobs etc. The other day I 'tanked' a posi 2 on my latest blapper. I simply threw myself at the enemy relying on my ice manipulation powers and some good support from the rest of the team to keep me mostly alive. All we needed was somone to be the focus of healing and we sailed through.

 

I get where you're coming from, but in the case of Coh and many other MMOs, tanking has defined classes/archetypes designed to encourage and reward that behaviour.

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by Tyrannical

[Monos King]

3 minutes ago, parabola said:

Tanking is a player behaviour not an archetype or group of archetypes. It involves handling aggro but that's far from the whole of it.

This discussion became to center on the nature of archetypes that are focused on tanking, the abilities that facilitate that process, and why if they are not devoted inherently to that task they may not deserve said abilities. Not the playstyle of "tanking". Various powers allow for crowd control through use of status effects, but you would not call a blaster with entangling aura a controller. That's similar to the misconception I believe you're having here.

[Parabola]

2 minutes ago, Monos King said:

This discussion became to center on the nature of archetypes that are focused on tanking, the abilities that facilitate that process, and why if they are not devoted inherently to that task they may not deserve said abilities. Not the playstyle of "tanking". Various powers allow for crowd control through use of status effects, but you would not call a blaster with entangling aura a controller. That's similar to the misconception I believe you're having here.

I don't beleive I'm having any misconceptions at all. The idea of adding aggro auras to all the scrapper secondarys prompted comments that it shouldn't happen 'because they aren't tanks'. I am saying that I think it's got nothing to do with tanking whatsoever, it's just a quality of life improvement to an archetype that I feel could do with a little boost. To be fair the op did mention which archetypes are listed in which categories but I don't think that is something that we should base anything much on.

[Monos King]

6 minutes ago, parabola said:

I am saying that I think it's got nothing to do with tanking whatsoever, it's just a quality of life improvement to an archetype that I feel could do with a little boost.

Why is it a qol improvement?