Tank passive/aggro changes

[Primantis]

 

Brutes with IOs and such can reach 90% S/L resistance, as well as defense softcap to everything (sans psi) with only one person near them with invincibility. Additionally, with dull pain, brutes can hit their HP hardcap which is about 300 hit points lower than the tank health hardcap.

 

 

 

That's the ultimate issue. It is possible for Brutes to reach tank-levels of tankiness. Even if it takes a buff from an outside source.

 

However, no amount of IOs or buffs will let a Tank reach Brute-levels of damage. They just don't have the damage cap for that. Granted a fully built tank absorbing a FS is still going to be dishing out extreme amounts of damage!

 

 

[jack_nomind]

/signed for Bruising reducing critter mez protection

 

Control is the job of support characters.

 

That's a non-statement, even less well-founded than reverting the Tanker damage changes all the way to i0 because "damage is the job of DPS characters."  Tankers do the same job as mezzers (manage aggro), and as a "blue" (team-at-the-cost-of-solo) archetype should have a positive interaction with complementary roles.

 

/signed for tanker Taunts having a mez or damage component

 

This is pretty much why i suggested raising the -range to 100%. It'd be a rather strong positioning tool and increase the tanks utility by a ton.

 

Without changing mob AI, this probably wouldn't work how you are imagining; the mobs would most likely scatter, not group up.  -90% or -95% might work as you think, but it's a "the same but more" fix to a much deeper problem of identity.

 

/signed for more Tanker AoEs in secondaries, especially AoE DoTs

 

Reworking sets is likely out of the question ATM, they also don't need to be brought up in damage as the Tanker is not a brute.

 

Given the number of sets i25 reworked, I think the question is rather open.  In any case, it's not "brute" damage I'm after, but "controller."

 

 

Brutes with IOs and such can reach 90% S/L resistance, as well as defense softcap to everything (sans psi) with only one person near them with invincibility. Additionally, with dull pain, brutes can hit their HP hardcap which is about 300 hit points lower than the tank health hardcap.

 

That's the ultimate issue. It is possible for Brutes to reach tank-levels of tankiness. ... no amount of IOs or buffs will let a Tank reach Brute-levels of damage.

 

Making Tankers more like Brutes is absolutely neither the issue nor the solution.

[Super Atom]

I think I have a fundamental misunderstanding of what you're trying to say here. Could you perhaps expand on why you're comparing tanker against controllers?

[jack_nomind]

One way of breaking group combat in CoX down is into four aspects that I will unartfully term initiation, funnel, multiplication, and execution.  Every AT does one or more of these things in a group setting.

 

• Since most enemy mobs spawn in large groups and begin with all powers 'readied' just like players, initiation is the process of opening combat and managing/surviving the initial alpha strike as every mob uses its first power(s).  This is traditionally handled by melee, preferably tanky melee (or psuedo-melee, like MMs) when practical.  This role can be (inefficiently) skipped with effective funneling.
  
• Many powersets do better single-target damage than AoE damage, and the powersets that do AoE damage still need enemies grouped together.  Funneling is the control aspect of CoX, where mobs are "managed" in a way that keeps them physically near each other and not attacking the squishies.  For two examples, Tankers do this by pulling groups around a corner, keeping them nearby with their taunts and auras, and absorbing incoming damage; while Controllers do this by incapacitating and immobilizing mobs entirely.
  
• Multiplication is the "support" role, although nearly every AT has at least some kind of force multiplier.  In simplest possible terms, it's applying effects that divide enemy mitigation by as much as possible with e.g. damage buffs or -res, and multiply your team's by as much as possible with e.g. +def or healing.  Take Manuevers on any build you can afford to, folks!
  
• Execution is applying damage to enemy HP until it is gone.  No matter how great your multipliers are, if your base numbers aren't there, you are at best inefficiently grinding down incapacitated enemies for long periods of time and at worst going to run out of your HP before they run out of theirs.

 

Tankers right now are masters of only one of those jobs, initiation -- and not only is it a job plenty of other ATs can do more than well enough, but it's one that often isn't necessary.  At one point in time Tankers were masters of the funnel as well (I'd link one of the old Striga or dumpster farm videos but I can't find any), but the aggro cap changes pushed that over into the Controller AT and controllery builds of other ATs, since they can mez an indefinite number of enemies with enough varied powers and/or recharge.  The changes were largely necessary but in compensation Tankers were mostly given a sorely needed buff to damage... and continuing along that line just invites the comparison to brutes.  The two ATs tankers lost their "old" job to are Controllers and Masterminds, and integrating the AT back into that role would be far more fruitful.

[Super Atom]

Your idea on how City of Heroes is suppose to function is...odd?

 

I'll try and offer you a different view here so you can see where I'm coming from. For the sake of clarity we're going to refer to "Tanking" as Absorbing and keep the term Tank tied to the class.

 

The "Alpha Strike" Is usually absorbed by an absorbing class, Brute/Tank, However with IO's this can easily be done by any class if you've built well enough for the most part and isn't really a deciding factor as much in late game play. In earlier game it certainly is handled by the absorb of the team but early play is a different animal to late-game play and trying to balance for the early can often have adverse effects on late game. In early play, empathy can be useful enough as healing is still pretty important while in end game healing isn't as needed as debuff/buffing.

 

"funnel" is an optimal way to down a mob as quickly as possible often used in herding. Not everyone herds, though it certainly can speed things up. If you look at the base way the game was intended to be played, the mob itself isn't really meant to be dragged as much as its meant to be handled where its at. The re-positioning of a mob is usually reserved for speeding through content and not as much done in normal play even in incarnate trials, the most dragging you see is done in BAF where you reposition Seige/Nightstar. The reason for this is simple mobs usually just don't live long enough for this to matter. It's actually why i suggested giving tanks the -range increase to try and group them better where they stand.

 

"Multiplication" Is the strangest way I've seen this grouped to date. What you're referring to is a wide range of support. Buff/Debuff/Healing/ and where my confusion for your tanker ideas comes from. I'll try and break it down in specifics. Also for the sake of time i'm going to leave out kheldians/VEATs.

 

Control - Ability to immob/hold/stun/sleep the mobs.

 

De/buff - Ability to -regen -def -res -maxhp -tohit or give positive of theses

 

Healing - Give the big HP.

 

The ability to control a mob is usually left in the hands of Dominators/Controllers, with controllers have the extra benefit of de/buff/healing at the cost of damage while dominators have the added benefit of damage ontop of de/buff. They do all of these well and have clear defined roles similar to blaster/scrapper/stalker being damage when it comes identity, while Defenders/Corrupters primarily have stronger de/buff/healing with the stronger damage/buff/healing trade off. Then you come back around to Brutes/Tanks. Brutes have a very clear identity, they deal strong damage while maintaining aggro of the mob. Their more bruiser focus makes them come out on top of the tanker as not only can they absorb everything the tanker can they can fill a damage roll.

 

Tankers are not meant to fill the control roll of the game. They were specifically intended to fill the absorb portion of the game as brutes did not exists. What you were referring to in the old Ninja/Wolf/Striga farms was usually done with the support of another class and was also not ever intended to be how the game was played. Pulling the entire map was a terrible design flaw (While still being incredibly fun) and lead to the devs changing how the game functioned entirely to prevent. I'm not entirely sure where you were given the idea that tankers should ever fill the control roll but that is not their intended game play style. The tanker was meant to be the guy who jumps into trash mobs and maintains aggro while his team handled the rest and when time came, handled positioning and absorbing of AVs/Monsters. With the addition of villains we saw this role handled by a more brutish ( ;) ) type of character and eventually IO's made them on par absorb wise with the tank class. The only thing that sets them apart is 300 HP and a lot of damage. Sure the tanker has a slight advantage over the brute in terms of passive AOE taunt on attack but it isn't much in the way of a difference in actual play.

 

Changing the role of a tanker to fill the control aspect is a poor way to improve the class. Tankers are decent as is and many people enjoy them thoroughly, adding more AoE to the power set seems like a play to change their role. I'm going to try and break down your list as to why this would fundamentally change the tanker too much. While it would certainly make the class a hybrid and probably pretty fun for different reason, it would violate the design method behind the class.

 

/signed for tankers getting Bruising on all attacks

/signed for Bruising reducing critter mez protection

 

While the idea of introducing a new effect on hit is interesting enough and could probably be repurposed into aggro/range doing so to give them a control effect is unnecessary. Mobs already get absolutely destroyed by a well adjusted team not to mention an IO'd/incarnated team.

 

/signed for tanker Taunts having a mez or damage component

 

The only mez taunt needs to give is what it already does...taunted. It directly forces enemies to change target away from whatever they were attacking, this is incredibly strong as a pseudo mez effect. This is also where my idea to improve this effect specifically for tankers comes from and it would give them a stronger "Tanker" identity. Also you can add damage with a proc ;)

 

/signed for more Tanker AoEs in secondaries, especially AoE DoTs

 

Tankers were designed with the needed AoE/single target attacks in mind to keep aggro of wide-spread mob and single target with relative ease. Removing single target attacks in favor of additional Aoe would just increase their damage overall to wide-spread mobs which already get obliterated in team-play. You could make the case for indivdual sets needed their Aoes improved like Ice Melee or Energy manipulation but thats not whats being discussed here specifically and also doesn't apply to every set.

 

/signed for tanker T9 armor powers having offensive (or damage buff) components or being entirely offensive powers

 

Just including this again to say i agree with you and meltdown is again a good example of it.

 

/signed for tanker EPPs to be aoes (including aoe heal), nukes, team damage/offense buffs, and effective controls rather than garbage salads.

 

The tanker EPPs do actually have the option for additonal AoE including AoE immobs, AoE damage abilities like fireball/icestorm. Giving them team-wide buffs seems a tad unnecessary considering a team should/would usually have someone who already does that and often times multiple people. I'm not sure why you keep trying to push the idea the tanker needs to be able to buff/mez/nuke as that is against the tankers identity and wildly makes them stronger when they don't really need to be a jack of all trades.

 

 

My entire idea was centered around the idea of the tanker identity. Tanking. Their primary role in this video game is to jump in, grab aggro, reposition mobs/avs, and do some damage. The best way i can see to improve this identity past that of a brute would be to increase the utility of their tanking ability. Larger aggro cap, stronger -range. Their damage does not need to be that of a brute/scrapper to help them in viability. This game isn't really setup for them to need to mez/do more damage outside of niche examples like soloing team oriented content or AVs. Which to be honest with you is just ego-stroking and should not be considered while making balance passes. This game is balanced at the SO level for a reason. You seem to have a misunderstanding of the class and its role in the game. I hope any of what i said helps bring you up to date on where tankers are and need to be.

 

You do really need to take other classes into account for a lot of things as most of them were designed around the others. CoH is a very team centered game and trying to make any one class good at too many things is counter to that as you start a chain of "Why bring this when you could have this" which is why we're here talking about how to improve tanks in the first place.

 

 

[Charistoph]

The cap is fine, it is how the Brute gets to it, that needs to be addressed.

 

This isn't the problem at all. Brutes being a tank alternative isn't the problem and never has been. The problem is with tanks not having true tanking utility over brutes. They don't need any help getting aggro and they don't need to do more damage either. They aren't bruisers and weren't design to be. This is why i believe the best course of action is to increase their aggro limit and give them more -range. Like i said in the OP, the ability to aggro more than anyone else and position mobs without needing to LoS would set them far above anyone else in tanking ability.

 

It isn't a problem to you, and survivability is one of the aspects of tanking.  And I don't see how making Brutes have a Defender, or at least a Corruptor, handy to reach a Tanker's survivability has anything to do with Tanker'a damage.

 

/signed for Bruising reducing critter mez protection

 

Control is the job of support characters.

 

There are two aspects to control.  One is the obvious one provided by Controllers and Dominators for the most part, and Blasters to a much lesser degree.  This type of "Control" is about taking mobs out of the fight, one way or the other. 

 

The other type of "Control" is directing mobs attention and position.  This is the one handled by Tankers, primarily, and Brutes and Scrappers to a lesser degree.

 

/signed for more Tanker AoEs in secondaries, especially AoE DoTs

 

Reworking sets is likely out of the question ATM, they also don't need to be brought up in damage as the Tanker is not a brute.

 

And yet, the AoEs is also about creating a level of control.  More mobs hit, means that Gauntlet gets to do more work.

 

And allowing damage to affect in an area is a way to add Damage without increasing the base level.  And let's face it, outside of Fire, Tanker Secondaries don't have a lot of AoE in them to begin with.  Honestly, it doesn't have to be much, either, say a 50% splash damage for the non-Cone/PBAOEs, at a 2 yd radius, to make it interesting.

 

I play tanks in World of Warcraft, and my favorites are the ones that can do a consistent level of AoE attacks.  Admittedly, the taunt mechanics are a bit different in that game, yet the standard is there, the more I actually hit, the less Gauntlet actually has to do independently.

 

/signed for tanker Taunts having a mez or damage component

 

The only mez taunt needs to give is what it already does...taunted. It directly forces enemies to change target away from whatever they were attacking, this is incredibly strong as a pseudo mez effect. This is also where my idea to improve this effect specifically for tankers comes from and it would give them a stronger "Tanker" identity. Also you can add damage with a proc ;)

 

"Mez" can mean many things, but if I understand what you're saying, I can agree with it.  "Mez" (short for mesmerize) usually means taking a mob out of the fight after a powerful spell/power by the same long name, but in purely basic terminology, forcing the AI to focus on you is a form of mesmorization.  You're hypnotizing them to focus on you!  :P

 

/signed for more Tanker AoEs in secondaries, especially AoE DoTs

 

Tankers were designed with the needed AoE/single target attacks in mind to keep aggro of wide-spread mob and single target with relative ease. Removing single target attacks in favor of additional Aoe would just increase their damage overall to wide-spread mobs which already get obliterated in team-play. You could make the case for indivdual sets needed their Aoes improved like Ice Melee or Energy manipulation but thats not whats being discussed here specifically and also doesn't apply to every set.

 

If they were, then Gauntlet wouldn't have been added to them.

[Super Atom]

It isn't a problem to you, and survivability is one of the aspects of tanking.  And I don't see how making Brutes have a Defender, or at least a Corruptor, handy to reach a Tanker's survivability has anything to do with Tanker'a damage.

 

It isn't a problem because they were designed to be tanks. People seem to forget villains didn't have access to the tank AT for a very long time, nerfing them now just because they do would raise the same problem but against scrapper/stalkers/brutes. Also the damage was more of a side comment ;)

 

 

The other type of "Control" is directing mobs attention and position.  This is the one handled by Tankers, primarily, and Brutes and Scrappers to a lesser degree.

 

This is exactly why the form of control I'm looking to improve is their mob attention and positioning :P

 

And yet, the AoEs is also about creating a level of control.  More mobs hit, means that Gauntlet gets to do more work.

 

And allowing damage to affect in an area is a way to add Damage without increasing the base level.  And let's face it, outside of Fire, Tanker Secondaries don't have a lot of AoE in them to begin with.  Honestly, it doesn't have to be much, either, say a 50% splash damage for the non-Cone/PBAOEs, at a 2 yd radius, to make it interesting.

 

I play tanks in World of Warcraft, and my favorites are the ones that can do a consistent level of AoE attacks.  Admittedly, the taunt mechanics are a bit different in that game, yet the standard is there, the more I actually hit, the less Gauntlet actually has to do independently.

 

I don't have much issue/thoughts about the damage they do or the radius to be honest. Also, my comment about "changing sets" was made in error as they clearly can. WoW and City of Heroes are night and day, comparing them or considering anything WoW does as a standard is silly.

 

If they were, then Gauntlet wouldn't have been added to them.

 

It was added to help them :P however as the game continued to grow, it probably needs some additional help which is why i made this thread in the first place. Ways to improve gauntlet and general tanking utility. They might of always had gauntlet, just wasn't visible/named. I forget TBH.

 

 

 

[jack_nomind]

If you look at the base way the game was intended to be played

 

source please.

 

So I may've been unclear when I said that controllers handled funeling by incapacitating groups of mobs.  I did mean "where they stand."  Funneling isn't about re-positioning; that's just one way of accomplishing it.  Funneling is purely about directing the "flow" of damage to keep as much of it pointed on as many mobs as possible, and away from as many allies as possible.

 

"Multiplication" Is the strangest way I've seen this grouped to date. What you're referring to is a wide range of support.

 

I'm referring to anything that divides or multiplies a team or enemy life-expectancy.  They're "a range" in that there are different stats that play into this and which and how much are being specifically altered are important for planning strategy; but they all do the same thing in terms of time.  Control is only relevant to this aspect of combat insofar as it reduces the number of enemy attacks being made.

 

As Arcanaville pointed out again and again, time gating is the sole form of gating CoX truly employs.  She considered this a design flaw; I don't, but I absolutely agree that it's the only ultimate metric.

 

Tankers are not meant to fill the control roll of the game. They were specifically intended to fill the absorb portion of the game

 

I don't know when you started playing.  I'd direct you to look at comments from other Tankers in original-era CoX sources.  Here's a good one, from the old Tanker Strategy page from Paragonwiki.  It almost seems like you understand that aggro management is in fact just a form of "control," but are drawing some kind of hard conceptual line between "something that absorbs all the enemy hits and stops them from moving" and "something that prevents all the enemy hits and stops them from moving."

 

Here's another excellent synopsis.

 

old Ninja/Wolf/Striga farms was usually done with the support of another class

 

for speed, sometimes.  But the videos that prompted the entire aggro cap change were from solo /FA tankers.

 

it would violate the design method behind the class.

 

My new band name is "violating the design method."

 

Tankers were designed with the needed AoE/single target attacks in mind to keep aggro of wide-spread mob

 

No -- they weren't.  Tankers didn't get AoE taunts or proto-Gauntlet until a year after the game came out.  The AT was continually redesigned to get it away from the terrible, terrible original implementation.

 

You seem to have a misunderstanding of the class and its role in the game. I hope any of what i said helps bring you up to date on where tankers are and need to be.  ... You do really need to take other classes into account for a lot of things as most of them were designed around the others. CoH is a very team centered game and trying to make any one class good at too many things is counter to that as you start a chain of "Why bring this when you could have this" which is why we're here talking about how to improve tanks in the first place.

 

I'm blocking this quote in because I want you to re-evaluate it.  But I do have another question for you: In your vision, what's the job of the second Tanker on the team?

[Super Atom]

For the record, i started at the very start but that's completely irrelevant to how the game plays now.

 

 

 

 

So lets take a step back from what you're driving at here. The two descriptions given for the tanker class upon selection. Since you need a source of how it's intended to be played.

 

- Good mitigation

- Meant to soak up the majority of incoming attacks

- Works well with soloing or in teams

 

These are the base descriptions for selecting either a brute or tank. Literally in the descriptions, Meant to soak up the majority of incoming attacks. It is not a misunderstanding of the class or an RP element of the class It's the description. Furthering when you get specific in the selection, it mentions

 

- Lack of range

- Absorbing mass amounts of damage

- Hold own in a fight

 

From these three , you can assume the role of the tank specifically wouldn't be damage or range capabilities but instead a focus on absorbing damage while also helping in the fight. The "How to tank" doesn't tell me anything i didn't already know, what it doesn't say is any nonsense like "Flow of damage". You're trying to over complicate a rather simple game and It's unnecessary just like many of the changes you purposed.

 

The tanker EPP's already offer a variety of range/AOE/Debuff/CC abilities to enhance the class. Furthering, with incarnate abilities you gain another strong AOE/Cone/PBAOE. It's nearly impossible in a within-aggro limit fight to pull aggro from the tank, how to tank or the purpose of a tank was never in discussion and I'm not sure why you've hijacked the discussion to make it this with again over-complex descriptions of a rather simplistic system. City of Heroes, regardless of its past is now at the point in which any class can softcap def to certain things and effectively tank a mob by themselves. The topic here was/should be about how to improve tanker utility. Telling you repeatedly the very basic systems of this game is getting old, if you want to start your own thread to push your own ideas i suggest you do so.

 

for speed, sometimes.  But the videos that prompted the entire aggro cap change were from solo /FA tankers.

 

It wasn't ever any 1 video but ok.

 

No -- they weren't.  Tankers didn't get AoE taunts or proto-Gauntlet until a year after the game came out.  The AT was continually redesigned to get it away from the terrible, terrible original implementation.

 

Irrelevant, we're discussing current build.

 

In your vision, what's the job of the second Tanker on the team?

 

A good 8 man team wouldn't have 2 tanks. You don't even need 1 tank at the moment and if you did have another tank, it'd only be there to grab additional aggro.

 

My new band name is "violating the design method."

 

My new band name is snarky comments that don't contribute anything to the conversation and make people uninterested in discussing things with you.

 

It almost seems like you understand that aggro management is in fact just a form of "control," but are drawing some kind of hard conceptual line between "something that absorbs all the enemy hits and stops them from moving" and "something that prevents all the enemy hits and stops them from moving."

 

I'm not drawing some kind of hard conceptual line I'm pointing you to the literal line. You're arguing the semantics of terminology instead of furthering any kind of discussion. It doesn't matter what you want to call jumping into a mob and taking aggro. A tankers entire job is to absorb hit and keep aggro. Stop trying to over-complicate it.

[Charistoph]

No -- they weren't.  Tankers didn't get AoE taunts or proto-Gauntlet until a year after the game came out.  The AT was continually redesigned to get it away from the terrible, terrible original implementation.

 

Irrelevant, we're discussing current build.

 

Relevant because you said, "Tankers were designed with the needed AoE/single target attacks in mind to keep aggro of wide-spread mob and single target with relative ease."  The original Tanker Secondaries haven't had their ST/AoE ratio touched since launch.  Follow-up powers have largely followed that trend, save when they were imported from Scrappers (Hi Spines!).

 

It isn't a problem to you, and survivability is one of the aspects of tanking.  And I don't see how making Brutes have a Defender, or at least a Corruptor, handy to reach a Tanker's survivability has anything to do with Tanker'a damage.

 

It isn't a problem because they were designed to be tanks. People seem to forget villains didn't have access to the tank AT for a very long time, nerfing them now just because they do would raise the same problem but against scrapper/stalkers/brutes. Also the damage was more of a side comment ;)

 

Paragraphs help indicate changes in subject.  You incorporated both damage and survivability in to the same paragraph, so the same thought and subject.  Speaking of which.

 

Brutes were designed to be tanks, but not Tankers.  How they go about doing it should be different than how Tankers do it.  And after all, weren't you the one who just said, "Irrelevant, we're discussing current build," which is a game where Brutes and Tankers have been fighting side by side for years.

 

And yet, the AoEs is also about creating a level of control.  More mobs hit, means that Gauntlet gets to do more work.

 

And allowing damage to affect in an area is a way to add Damage without increasing the base level.  And let's face it, outside of Fire, Tanker Secondaries don't have a lot of AoE in them to begin with.  Honestly, it doesn't have to be much, either, say a 50% splash damage for the non-Cone/PBAOEs, at a 2 yd radius, to make it interesting.

 

I play tanks in World of Warcraft, and my favorites are the ones that can do a consistent level of AoE attacks.  Admittedly, the taunt mechanics are a bit different in that game, yet the standard is there, the more I actually hit, the less Gauntlet actually has to do independently.

 

I don't have much issue/thoughts about the damage they do or the radius to be honest. Also, my comment about "changing sets" was made in error as they clearly can. WoW and City of Heroes are night and day, comparing them or considering anything WoW does as a standard is silly.

 

Way to miss several points, including what was being quoted. 

 

You quoted a reply in adding damage on an aoe level, but now you have much issue and thoughts about it?

 

WoW and City of Heroes have many differences, but they also have many similarities.  One of those similarities is the role of the Tank.  Now, each tanking class does each one a little bit differently, both in mitigation and keeping the aggro, but I could feel the difference when I couldn't employ AoEs to help maintain that control.  It would be easier if WoW Tanks did have Gauntlet to help them out and have pulsing Taunt auras, but instead they employ AoE abilities which are punch-vokes in the code.  I went from running Stone/Energy to Shield/Stone, and their techniques are going to be very different, especially when Stone Melee is primarily a ST build, in timers of damage, till later in the development.

[Super Atom]

You quoted a reply in adding damage on an aoe level, but now you have much issue and thoughts about it?

 

I was replying to you about their damage/radius by letting you know I don't have much input on that matter since...you were quoting me? The only other thing i said was my reply was made in error. so...?

 

Paragraphs help indicate changes in subject.

 

cool

 

Brutes were designed to be tanks, but not Tankers.  How they go about doing it should be different than how Tankers do it.  And after all, weren't you the one who just said, "Irrelevant, we're discussing current build," which is a game where Brutes and Tankers have been fighting side by side for years.

 

They were designed to be tanks. Until the day coh died. You misquote me as implying "Designed" means specifically conceptualized so neat job there i guess. You're right, they weren't designed to be tankers. It's super weird when i select "Tank" it has brute listed but ok.

 

WoW and CoH couldn't be further apart. Your pretend fantasy they are similar because they have the class roles of "tank" is strange.

[TotalThunder]

WoW and City of Heroes have many differences, but they also have many similarities.  One of those similarities is the role of the Tank.  Now, each tanking class does each one a little bit differently, both in mitigation and keeping the aggro, but I could feel the difference when I couldn't employ AoEs to help maintain that control.  It would be easier if WoW Tanks did have Gauntlet to help them out and have pulsing Taunt auras, but instead they employ AoE abilities which are punch-vokes in the code.  I went from running Stone/Energy to Shield/Stone, and their techniques are going to be very different, especially when Stone Melee is primarily a ST build, in timers of damage, till later in the development.

 

They're not similar at all.

 

In WoW, (in dungeons, etc,) you have to have a tank. You literally can't avoid it. It's mechanically integral to the game design.

In CoH, in 95% of content, you don't even really need a tank on the team. Unless the everyone on the team just sucks at the game.

 

-

 

Unless you're doing Hami, Brutes are better tanks. (And that's only because Tankers have a slightly higher health cap.)

Because of IOs, Brutes are better tanks.

Because of Incarnates, Brutes are better tanks.

Brutes do not have a problem holding aggro. They have the same mag of taunt as Tankers.

 

Also the classes don't exist in a vacuum. Controllers and Dominators exist. Hell, with a good Controller on the team, you don't need a Tank even in "difficult" content. Calling aggro a form of "crowd control" is trying to make it sound more impressive than it actually is. Most mobs die almost INSTANTLY. Even more so if they're actually mezzed.

 

I can 'tank' mobs on my Blaster. Because he has soft-capped defense, and good resistances. Because of IOs and Incarnates.

 

And that's the problem. This thread isn't about "TANK > BRUTE. MY OPINION IS UNDENIABLE FACT." It's not about that other classes invalidate Tankers.

 

This thread was originally about giving Tankers an extra edge by changing their inherent, so they can more specifically fill the niche they are intended to fill.

Giving Tankers a higher aggro cap than other classes would give them an entirely unique utility that would make them a preferable choice for actually TANKING. Because holding the most aggro would truly make them "the tank."

[Super Atom]

Difference in opinions aside, I would appreciate it if we could stop the circle arguing and go back to the point of the post as Total said.

 

Increase tank aggro cap to roughly an extra mob in size.

 

Increase their - range to 95% or if possible cause enemy AI to move into melee range when taunted. (I think someone mentioned would be better to do the 95% over 100% for how the game AI works)

[jack_nomind]

Don't be ridiculous, the argument is what keeps this thread alive.  Ten pages and top 10 threads are better than two, even if (in both cases) only the first two pages actually get read.

 

Also, you're wrong!

 

- Lack of range

 

You talk about EPPs in the same paragraph as this comment.  So we've got two major problems here: first, the is-ought distinction you aren't making; and second, the description in the pictures you posted is obviously rhetorical rather than literal.  In other words, even if Tankers currently were one thing and one thing only, and had always been that way, that wouldn't be a very good reason for arguing they continued to be that way absent other gameplay mechanics; and they weren't and aren't anyway.

 

A good 8 man team wouldn't have 2 tanks. You don't even need 1 tank at the moment and if you did have another tank, it'd only be there to grab additional aggro.

 

Would a good 8-man team have two Brutes?  Two Defenders?  Two Peacebringers?  Two Dominators?

 

Why deliberately single Tankers out as "the only AT that we currently and will always want one or fewer of"?

[Super Atom]

Hi, this is my last reply about this and you're welcome to reply and continue if you'd like but I'd rather not keep talking in circles.

 

Would a good 8-man team have two Brutes?  Two Defenders?  Two Peacebringers?  Two Dominators?

 

Why deliberately single Tankers out as "the only AT that we currently and will always want one or fewer of"?

 

 

Because in an 8 man team, ideally you would only want 1 person handling the tanking. If you want to do another job, play a different AT. This doesn't mean you -have- to follow this because you don't. I've done TF's filled with nothing but brutes/tanks and it went just fine. Changing the tank to be something other than a tank is just silly.

 

We're here to discuss improving tanker utility. If the admins don't have the time to read the post then It's whatever. Tankers as a whole are mostly fine, they just in my opinion need something to set them apart from other ATs capable of tanking. My suggestion for doing so has been stated a couple of times. If you'd like to discuss how those specific changes could help, I'll be more than glad to expand my position on the change otherwise I have little interest in arguing semantics or opinion on other classes.

[TotalThunder]

Would a good 8-man team have two Brutes?  Two Defenders?  Two Peacebringers?  Two Dominators?

 

Why deliberately single Tankers out as "the only AT that we currently and will always want one or fewer of"?

 

I was an an Ernesto Hess TF a week ago. It was 4 Brutes, 2 Scrappers and 2 Stalkers. We giggled our way through it on +4.

 

It's not about wanting one or fewer of a class, it's about giving the Tank a special utility that separates them and makes them more preferable on a team. Because at this point, there's no reason to pick a Tank over a Brute if you're trying to make a specific team comp.

[jack_nomind]

It's not about wanting one or fewer of a class, it's about giving the Tank a special utility that separates them and makes them more preferable on a team.

 

Here, that's the same thing.  I think nearly everyone interested agrees that Tankers are doing a job that usually doesn't need to be done at all, and never needs a Tanker to do it; and are not doing any other job at any meaningful level.  Improving their utility means addressing that.

 

Because in an 8 man team, ideally you would only want 1 person handling the tanking. If you want to do another job, play a different AT.

 

I can do the same job on a different AT, and that different AT will also do other jobs as well.  "Silly" or not, limiting tankers to doing only one style of only one job stratifies them in a way no other AT is.

[Super Atom]

Here, that's the same thing.  I think nearly everyone interested agrees that Tankers are doing a job that usually doesn't need to be done at all, and never needs a Tanker to do it; and are not doing any other job at any meaningful level.  Improving their utility means addressing that.

 

They serve a purpose in more content than they don't. The example given, ernesto, is a lower level TF you can usually just blindly do. It's true for a lot of things but not everything. A lot of content does need a tank and while it needs a tank it usually don't need a tanker purely based on overall performance. My proposal would look to change that by adding in how many enemies they can aggro and the ability to group them without needing LoS tactics. It won't fix all of the problems but it will help.

 

I'll give you an example. The number six arc constantly puts the team at above aggro cap. It doesn't matter how tanky a brute is you can't outdo aggro cap. It would give tankers a advantage in large-mob situations like Incarnate content, Trials, and some end-game TFs. Pair it with their ability to then also cause those mobs to move into melee and thus be grouped better for AoE damage and it brings some serious weight to the idea of the Tankers superior tanking ability.

[jack_nomind]

I'll give you an example. The number six arc constantly puts the team at above aggro cap. It doesn't matter how tanky a brute is you can't outdo aggro cap.

 

You can evade aggro cap, though; either with pets (who each have separate aggro caps) or with control powers (which are limited in targets per activation but can be applied to an indefinite number in total).  That's why not only are Tankers not needed for this type of content, but no melee class is.

[Super Atom]

Well if you don't want practical answers then how about fighting tyrant in the trial?

 

Also do remember, we're also talking about changes that would help non min/maxed situations.

[Solarverse]

After reading this thread, I have come to one conclusion. City of Heroes players can't agree on diddly poop!  :D

 

Immovable objects meet unstoppable forces. No matter what type of suggestion, you always are going to have the No guys and the Yes guys and they will battle it out till a locked thread.  :D  Hahaha!  I fricken love you guys~

[Super Atom]

Thats pretty much why i wanted to end it right there and go back to the topic :P not looking to argue or fight with people i just want/hope someone in the dev team will see my suggestion and either say why it wouldn't work or take it into consideration.

[Charistoph]

Brutes were designed to be tanks, but not Tankers.  How they go about doing it should be different than how Tankers do it.  And after all, weren't you the one who just said, "Irrelevant, we're discussing current build," which is a game where Brutes and Tankers have been fighting side by side for years.

 

They were designed to be tanks. Until the day coh died. You misquote me as implying "Designed" means specifically conceptualized so neat job there i guess. You're right, they weren't designed to be tankers. It's super weird when i select "Tank" it has brute listed but ok.

 

First off, do not confuse "Tank" with "Tanker".  The first is a role, the second is an Archetype.

 

Second, the Homecoming Team hasn't done much to alter how any class was played as of Issue 24.  At most, they've added some Powersets and removed the no knockdown from Control Immobilizes.  So, taking it form there, design hasn't really changed at all for either of them from when Paragon worked on them.  This was not misquoting, this was going from the direction you gave.

 

WoW and CoH couldn't be further apart. Your pretend fantasy they are similar because they have the class roles of "tank" is strange.

 

Again, missing the point.  Don't shut it out because you don't want to hear about something else.  It was about Tanking styles, and I acknowledged the difference between the two systems.

 

A Monk doesn't tank the same way that a Druid tanks.  For one, the cooldown for the only aoe attack the Monk has is on a much longer cooldown, and they have this thing where they don't have as much health, but the damage they take is parceled out over time.  Druids have 2 aoes, with one on the global cooldown that can be spammed, meanwhile they don't have a lot of defensive tools other than a heavy health pool.  Paladins, meanwhile, have to use a Talent in order to be able to have a ST ability on the global cooldown (i.e. spammable) or to make it an AoE with 3 charges instead of 2.

 

Out of those I have tanked with (and I have tanked with all of them, mind), I prefer the ones where aoe attacks I could actively use on a quick and regular basis.  I hated the ones where it was single target only and all on long cool downs.

 

Now, City of Heroes comes with some advantages in that the Tank ATs come with an aura to help in that regard.  This leads to design decisions in which ST attacks can be more prevelant and they can all be on cooldowns, as opposed to being able to use the auto-attacks WoW tanks can work with.  Not to mention, City of Heroes does not rely specifically on gear, but directly improving the abilities themselves.  Need I even mention the ability for every Tank has to just ignore most of the controls directed at them?  I can't tell you how often I'd've killed for that ability on WoW or The Secret World.

 

All that being said, the role of the Tank is the same in Everquest, WoW, City of Heroes, the Secret World, or any other MMORPG in which a player on a team can be set up to be the focus of attention.  I've learned a lot from tanking on WoW, because I've done it for years, and I've learned from people who have done it longer and better.  Those rules don't really change, except on the tools you have to do it with.

 

WoW and City of Heroes have many differences, but they also have many similarities.  One of those similarities is the role of the Tank.  Now, each tanking class does each one a little bit differently, both in mitigation and keeping the aggro, but I could feel the difference when I couldn't employ AoEs to help maintain that control.  It would be easier if WoW Tanks did have Gauntlet to help them out and have pulsing Taunt auras, but instead they employ AoE abilities which are punch-vokes in the code.  I went from running Stone/Energy to Shield/Stone, and their techniques are going to be very different, especially when Stone Melee is primarily a ST build, in timers of damage, till later in the development.

 

They're not similar at all.

 

In WoW, (in dungeons, etc,) you have to have a tank. You literally can't avoid it. It's mechanically integral to the game design.

In CoH, in 95% of content, you don't even really need a tank on the team. Unless the everyone on the team just sucks at the game.

 

No, you don't need a tank in much of WoW's content.  You can avoid it.  It helps, don't get me wrong, but you don't need it until you start getting in to the truly difficult content such as Raids (even questionable there, depending on what you're hitting).

 

In much of the content, I've healed dungeons where our "tank" was an Arms Warrior or a Retribution Paladin.  That's not a Tank.  It's a class that can tank, but the spec isn't designed for it any more than expecting a Level 2 Stalker to be tanking the Positron TF.

 

How did we get in to a dungeon without a Tank?  Easy-peasy, and it can be done in one of two ways.  1) A class that can Tank can register to be the Tank, but doesn't change specs to their tanking spec when doing LFD or LFR (heck, I accidently queued for LFR as a Tank, but expected to be Ranged DPS and didn't notice it till I was booted).  2) If going in without using LFD/LFR, you can go in with any single team makeup you want, including completely solitary.

 

Now, for certain content, you want to have a Tank, as a good Tank makes the going easier, or even possible when you get in to more difficult content.  Even from there, much of the Raid content has been seen as requiring to have a SPECIFIC tank class for specific encounters, or at least, that certain tank class made tanking that encounter a heck of a lot easier.  I know some people have only looked at using Stone Armor Tankers for some time, as they were the toughest, while Fire Armor Tankers were only used for farming. 

 

How much of addressing such tanking concerns in WoW is truly different than what we are discussing here, but trying to get a specific AT to be good at its primary job?

 

This thread was originally about giving Tankers an extra edge by changing their inherent, so they can more specifically fill the niche they are intended to fill.

Giving Tankers a higher aggro cap than other classes would give them an entirely unique utility that would make them a preferable choice for actually TANKING. Because holding the most aggro would truly make them "the tank."

 

I don't know if it require changing their Inherent to do so, but I wouldn't be against changing Gauntlet to have that modification, either.  Either way, they're both intertwined, so I don't think it really matters.

 

I do think that having more inherent abilities which are more group-oriented or group-friendly would be good to have.  We've even discussed some of them.  Tanker's Taunt reducing the range of mobs more to get them in to aura range, would be very useful.  Tanker's armor also reducing the aoe radii of enemy attacks would also be useful, but could possibly be a pain to program in.  I think adding a bit of "splash" damage to all Tanker's damage attacks would allow them to be useful both in team, and when they're not on a team.

 

As for helping it so that a full Tanker team finds uses for everyone, that's a tall order without totally messing with the core design of the Tanker themselves.  Unless all the Powersets gain Shield-like powers where they are able to help their buddies around them in non-redundant ways, I don't have an answer without making Tankers beasts in solo.

[Super Atom]

Hi, I'm also giving you a final reply in regards to our circle arguing before no longer doing so.

 

First off, do not confuse "Tank" with "Tanker".  The first is a role, the second is an Archetype.

 

You're misunderstanding (again) the relation. You've basically implied that Tanker = the tank and because of that brutes shouldn't do it as opposed to how you should be using it where Tanker = A tank. This is how I've taken what you're saying and if its not your intention than it's only a misunderstanding.

 

Second, the Homecoming Team hasn't done much to alter how any class was played as of Issue 24.  At most, they've added some Powersets and removed the no knockdown from Control Immobilizes.  So, taking it form there, design hasn't really changed at all for either of them from when Paragon worked on them.  This was not misquoting, this was going from the direction you gave.

 

Not really sure what you're on about here. Nobody said they did, only that they've changed how powers function (see snipe, web nade etc).

 

wow blah blah

 

World of Warcraft content starts and stops at the max level. Leveling is a joke, old raids are a joke, old dungeons only relevant during time-walking. WoW is "Balanced" around max level in raid gear. All of their high end content is designed in DPS/Healer/Tank in mind. Sure, you can get around that in open world no problem. You can also get around basic dungeons once you're fully geared up. Thats about where it stops. Raids/Mythic + dungeons (which is like, 50% of the content btw) absolutely require a healer and a tank. To say otherwise would be 100% incorrect.

 

WoW tanking is a lot different than CoH tanking. It requires a bit more effort than just jumping into the mob and using an aoe taunt. Theres also usually gimmicks attached to boss fights while in coh thats probably the rarest thing in the game. Tanking as a core might be the same idea but the differences are staggering. Nobody is shutting it out because its WoW, only because it's irrelevant as a comparison due to the differences in the games. The core idea of tanking is the same across the board, but how you do it and how the abilities make it possible are just too different. Thats my final thoughts on WoW, i don't have anything else for you.

 

I think adding a bit of "splash" damage to all Tanker's damage attacks would allow them to be useful both in team, and when they're not on a team.

 

My only problem is this is effectively increasing their damage and i don't think the damage is the problem. The tanker as it is now isn't really shunned just not preferred until its time to tussle with hamidon. I feel my change would just make them more interesting to play/play with than it would make them any stronger. They're plenty strong and depending on what EPP you pick you could have more AoE or even debuffs. A good example of this would be a Fire/Fire tank with the Fire EPP. Combustion, FSC, Burn, Breath of fire and then having their epp of fireball and a debuff in melt armor. Not every set would be this aoe thick but enough would be. They don't need that much help in the way of AoE/cones in my opinion. (Whirling hands needs some love, poor EM)

 

 

 

[Charistoph]

Hi, I'm also giving you a final reply in regards to our circle arguing before no longer doing so.

 

First off, do not confuse "Tank" with "Tanker".  The first is a role, the second is an Archetype.

 

You're misunderstanding (again) the relation. You've basically implied that Tanker = the tank and because of that brutes shouldn't do it as opposed to how you should be using it where Tanker = A tank. This is how I've taken what you're saying and if its not your intention than it's only a misunderstanding.

 

Then you haven't really bothered to read ANYTHING I've said.  I didn't ever once say Brutes shouldn't Tank, I just said that they should get to certain aspects of Tanking DIFFERENTLY.  For example, Brutes keeping their overall caps, just not being able to reach those caps on their own (even with IOs).

 

Second, the Homecoming Team hasn't done much to alter how any class was played as of Issue 24.  At most, they've added some Powersets and removed the no knockdown from Control Immobilizes.  So, taking it form there, design hasn't really changed at all for either of them from when Paragon worked on them.  This was not misquoting, this was going from the direction you gave.

 

Not really sure what you're on about here. Nobody said they did, only that they've changed how powers function (see snipe, web nade etc).

 

The point I'm getting at, if you bothered to read what I wrote along with what I quoted, is that the design of the ATs has not changed from when City of Villains launched.  A few numbers in a powerset here, maybe a change in a Melee Power there that was reflected in both, yes, but the basic designs of the Tanker and the Brute have not had any significant changes since before they could Go Rogue.  You implied that they have completely changed since Homecoming launched, because we are dealing with a current build.

 

wow blah blah

 

World of Warcraft content starts and stops at the max level. Leveling is a joke, old raids are a joke, old dungeons only relevant during time-walking. WoW is "Balanced" around max level in raid gear. All of their high end content is designed in DPS/Healer/Tank in mind. Sure, you can get around that in open world no problem. You can also get around basic dungeons once you're fully geared up. Thats about where it stops. Raids/Mythic + dungeons (which is like, 50% of the content btw) absolutely require a healer and a tank. To say otherwise would be 100% incorrect.

 

That's a bull's load.  Might as well claim that Hamidon and Oroboros is the only real content in City of Heroes.  Trust me in that I've leveled up every single class in WoW.  All that "leveling is a joke" is about training you how to do your job when you reach the latest content, if anyone bothered to pay attention.  To be fair, though, to get to the latest content, you're talking about 2x the levels to progress through than City of Heroes has had, and three times expansion's worth of content.  But I guess, you're one of the ones that only ever focuses on Hamidon or Miss Liberty's TF in City of Heroes, right?

 

And part of the problem with the last few of WoW's expansions have been that there is been so little content in the released content, especially when compared to years past.  Each equivalent of an issue comes out with barely a dungeon and a Raid or two, and new areas, which have the actual majority of content, are sparse in release.  While the latest dungeon's Mythic+ and Raid are 50% of the content the population focuses on, it's not actually 50% of the content being played.  Most of the players don't even touch Mythic dungeons, much less Mythic+, and as for Raids, most are content with LFR.  The noisiest and the streamers do focus on the Mythic+dungeons and Mythic Raids, but those are the vocal minority, not the significant majority of players.

 

WoW tanking is a lot different than CoH tanking. It requires a bit more effort than just jumping into the mob and using an aoe taunt. Theres also usually gimmicks attached to boss fights while in coh thats probably the rarest thing in the game. Tanking as a core might be the same idea but the differences are staggering. Nobody is shutting it out because its WoW, only because it's irrelevant as a comparison due to the differences in the games. The core idea of tanking is the same across the board, but how you do it and how the abilities make it possible are just too different. Thats my final thoughts on WoW, i don't have anything else for you.

 

And it was that core idea of tanking, and the different approaches to tanking, I was talking about if you even bothered to read any of the paragraphs I wrote in context.

 

I think adding a bit of "splash" damage to all Tanker's damage attacks would allow them to be useful both in team, and when they're not on a team.

 

My only problem is this is effectively increasing their damage and i don't think the damage is the problem. The tanker as it is now isn't really shunned just not preferred until its time to tussle with hamidon. I feel my change would just make them more interesting to play/play with than it would make them any stronger. They're plenty strong and depending on what EPP you pick you could have more AoE or even debuffs. A good example of this would be a Fire/Fire tank with the Fire EPP. Combustion, FSC, Burn, Breath of fire and then having their epp of fireball and a debuff in melt armor. Not every set would be this aoe thick but enough would be. They don't need that much help in the way of AoE/cones in my opinion. (Whirling hands needs some love, poor EM)

 

Then you are blind, but then you've already demonstrated that, repeatedly.  No one has discounted or dismissed the idea of increasing the aggro-gathering ability of the Tanker.  In fact, I think that aside from the coding difficulties, everyone who posted in this thread was on board with doing so.  Your problem is only focusing on that one aspect, which is blinding you to other possibilities which could be added on in addition to it.

 

Damage is a Tanker problem.  It's been part of discussion the entire time, partly because it is an aspect in which the Brute excels past the Tanker, while the survivability is only mildly different between them.  Keep in mind, that when I said, "splash damage", I'm not talking about having the attack's full power being used, but a reduced affect as it "splashes" on to nearby targets.  We're talking about a roughly 50% of the current power's ability spread across a 2-3 yd radius.  It brings more damage to the Tanker AT, but only if the Tanker is gathering together the mobs and properly funnelling them up for the DPS's AoEs.  Beyond that and tying it back in to increasing aggro caps, the more targets an Attack hits, the more range Gauntlet has to affect other mobs in addition to being able to affect MORE of them at the same time.  You know, the AoE taunting affect Tankers have and we're talking about increasing the aggro ability of the Tanker, along with making them valuable for groups beyond grabbing the surprise group of mobs the TF hands out.