Too strong

[Troo]

Tankers too strong or just about right?

 

 

 

 

Just never feel at risk..

 

The Tanker shown in the tiny gif (it was dancing in front of mobs in RWZ) is just a Fiery Aura and groups of 54s don't tickle enough to use it's heal.

(no Incarnates, with S/L def at 21, Melee at 28)

Any resist that is over 75% goes to ~90% by 1/2 health.

 

Edited August 11, 2022 by Troo

[Spaghetti Betty]

Yeah, kinda. I dunno. Maybe?

 

I can't say I've had weak Tanks before. Maybe ones I just didn't like playing as much. Some of them feel like they do a ridiculous amount of damage for how tough they are. It probably says enough that I almost never make Scrappers anymore. But I never really wanted damage from a Tanker. They are already gods of crowd control. And pillars of immortality.

 

But I couldn't tell you what one specific thing makes them feel a little too strong. It could've been the AoE buff. Maybe it's the fact that they can utilize and benefit more from damage procs than the other melee ATs. Being able to stand upright reliably plays a big factor in DPS too.

 

I can tell you I enjoy the shit out of them though. I don't know what other AT can turn this game into "Dynasty Warriors, but a dungeon crawler" quite as fast as a Tanker can.

Edited July 12, 2022 by Spaghetti Betty

[Sovera]

Tankers are meant to survive. So they do. Then they whittle enemies down and I can't stand that anymore.

 

On the other hand I've yet to make a Brute that feels durable enough. Stone Armor felt nice but its DDR might as well not be there.

[Gulbasaur]

1 hour ago, Sovera said:

On the other hand I've yet to make a Brute that feels durable enough. Stone Armor felt nice but its DDR might as well not be there.

I've found strong, fast heals really benefit brutes. Radiation and dark, for example, do nicely on a brute.

 

Dark/dark (on a tanker) is ridiculously good - they have two mez auras, an AoE buff that's like having Build Up going off continually, a heal and an endurance refill power. Even when I do get overwhelmed, the healing is so strong that I'm not overwhelmed for long.

[Troo]

4 hours ago, Spaghetti Betty said:

It could've been the AoE buff.

 

I think I agree.

The AoE buff, plus the ATO procs & some IO uniques.. so strong.

• Gauntleted Fist: Recharge/Chance for +Absorb
• Might of the Tanker: Recharge/Chance for +Res(All)
• Reactive Defenses: Scaling Damage Resistance
•   Shield Wall: Teleportation Protection, +Res(All)

[Bill Z Bubba]

Being able to easily get 20.1% resist to EVERYthing from the AtO proc has always made me question the sanity of whoever set that value.

 

For one, it greatly benefits defense based tanks more than their resist based cousins since so much of it gets wasted on resist builds. (It's similar to how I view Shadow Meld for scraps/stalks where that greatly benefits resist and does fark all for defense and there's no resist based A-EPP power to balance that equation.)

 

Two, it's a huge amount of resists coming off of a single freakin enhancement.

 

And then you compare it to the AtOs that brutes get and you're left again wondering, WTF?

[ZemX]

I think if they made MotT's +res(all) non-stacking that would be enough.  +6.7% res(all) is still nothing to sneeze at and even many resistance builds probably already assume one stack will be present as Mid's does this by default if the proc is turned on in the power.

[Omega-202]

Honestly, I think the offense buffs may have been a bit much, but I'm not complaining.  Combining the damage scalar buff with the AoE radius/cone widening and the fact that enemies hug Tanks so tight has led to certain builds turning into absolute AoE mulchers.  

 

Being so inherently bulky without requiring a lot of investment means you can really focus on damage dealing and proc based frankenslotting while still functioning as a Tank for a team.  My Rad/Dark/Soul is essentially unkillable and can nuke lvl 54 spawns down to bosses in 3 attacks (and can hit 30 enemies with procced out Ground Zero if you can drag two spawns together!).

[Erratic1]

6 hours ago, Sovera said:

On the other hand I've yet to make a Brute that feels durable enough. Stone Armor felt nice but its DDR might as well not be there.

 

What qualifies as durable enough?

[Hyperstrike]

31 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

What qualifies as durable enough?

When you can essentially fight (not necessarily BEAT) an enemy indefinitely.

Because REAL Tanks have no problem taking 3 WEEKS to sand off an opponent's hit points.

And flat out "can't kill one another" scenarios can be seen as a "moral victory" for the Tanker.


🤣😂 🤣😂  🤣😂 

[Erratic1]

5 minutes ago, Hyperstrike said:

When you can essentially fight (not necessarily BEAT) an enemy indefinitely.

 

I am pretty sure for most (not necessarily all) opponents there are brute builds which can do that. 

[Gobbledigook]

I think @Bill Z Bubba is correct about the Tanker MotT proc it probably should be split 50/50 defence/resist really at least then see how that goes and adjust the numbers later.

 

Tanker damage is fine as it is. Scrapper/Stalker>Brute>Tanker they seem quite equal. The difference is the Tanker can take a tremendous beating and slowly take the target down whilst a Scrapper can certainly get the job done much faster, it is the durability which can be in question at times. The extra AoE radius on Tankers may have been a little OTT but i do like it now lol.

 

But balancing the game around SO's, when set IO's are so prevalent may be a big problem also. It also takes procs to bring Tanker damage up which they usually can afford to slot with their increased survival numbers.

[Erratic1]

1 minute ago, Gobbledegook said:

Tanker damage is fine as it is. Scrapper/Stalker>Brute>Tanker they seem quite equal. The difference is the Tanker can take a tremendous beating and slowly take the target down whilst a Scrapper can certainly get the job done much faster, it is the durability which can be in question at times. The extra AoE radius on Tankers may have been a little OTT but i do like it now lol.

 

Tankers get increased area sizes now, which while it will not help take down a single target any faster does a decent job on groups. I was quite happily abusing that and Tanker survivability last night while pushing my latest Tanker to 50 having set the number of foes appearing in missions up.

[Yomo Kimyata]

I rarely play tankers for a couple of reasons, but the main one is that I never feel I'm at risk unless I made a particularly crappy build.  And if I'm not at risk, I might as well be playing solitaire (and cheating at it!).

[Omega-202]

35 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 

Tankers get increased area sizes now, which while it will not help take down a single target any faster does a decent job on groups. I was quite happily abusing that and Tanker survivability last night while pushing my latest Tanker to 50 having set the number of foes appearing in missions up.

The area size is one part of it.  The other half is the absolute lack of runners and the easy clumping.  

 

I ran back to back S/L AE farms and PI Council and CoT radios last night just to see if I was losing my mind.  I ran my fully tricked out AoE focused Elec Stalker vs my new AoE focused Tank.  The assumption was that the Stalker would clear faster due to the higher damage, but in all three tests, the Tanker was clearing faster, which I had a feeling it would.  The biggest difference was AoE efficiency.  Stalker hit harder but the enemies wouldn't clump and my AoEs weren't capping out and bosses bolted halfway through a fight.  

 

I think this might merit further review.  There's the weird intangible factor from the enemy AI that doesn't really show up when you look at Tanks vs other ATs that I think contributes to the weird balance situation.  

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 hour ago, Gobbledegook said:

I think @Bill Z Bubba is correct about the Tanker MotT proc it probably should be split 50/50 defence/resist really at least then see how that goes and adjust the numbers later.

 

Agreed as long as we keep the 2 to 1 ratio. 6.7 res becomes 3.35 resist and 1.675 def, stacking for 10.05 res and 5.025 def max.

[Hyperstrike]

36 minutes ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

I rarely play tankers for a couple of reasons, but the main one is that I never feel I'm at risk unless I made a particularly crappy build.  And if I'm not at risk, I might as well be playing solitaire (and cheating at it!).

Personally, I love walking into a fight and spending most of my time shaking hands with the villain's FACE.

The cherry on the top is having someone who isn't acquainted with EXACTLY how insane Tanker builds can be, looking at you afterwards going "How the *PANCAKE!* did you do THAT?"

Hence, my signature...

[InvaderStych]

So, here's the thing about Gauntlet's AoE buffs to Radius/Arc and Target Cap.

 

Let me re-phrase.

 

Here is a hypothesis about those buffs.  Have discussed with a handful of folks who know the game better than I, and the notion is not mine - merely acting as messenger here.

 

PPM firing rates for procs in an AoE attack are impacted by something called Area Factor.  Short Version: Bigger the affected area, less chance of a proc firing.

 

AoE Size buffs from Gauntlet are not accounted for in this process.  Meaning that a Tank using a 10' AoE gets 10' AoE PPM rates in a 15' effective area with an increased cap on potential targets.  How much of an advantage this might be when comparing like powers across ATs is not something I am qualified to estimate, but I am confident that if this is truly happening that there is some amount of advantage granted.

 

I would love to see this theory either confirmed or refuted categorically.

[Omega-202]

@InvaderStych, yes that is definitely a huge factor.  I cannot overstate how disgusting a damage capped, 4 proc @ 90% fire rate Ground Zero with a 22.5ft radius, 30 target cap and 23 second recharge is. Or a 30 ft, 5 proc @ 90% fire rate Radiation Therapy.  And those are Tank PRIMARY powers that make my poor Sentinel cry in a corner with his sad nuke.  

 

AoEs that large probably shouldn't be capable of having 90% proc rates while also having such low recharges.  

[Bill Z Bubba]

19 minutes ago, InvaderStych said:

I would love to see this theory either confirmed or refuted categorically.

 

I thought that had already been confirmed by a dev or dev-adjacent. @Boppermight know.

[Omega-202]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

I thought that had already been confirmed by a dev or dev-adjacent. @Boppermight know.

Not Bopper, but can confirm that I have tested and Tank procs operate on the pre-Gauntlet area factor.  It's like how procs calculate based on the enhanced recharge rate, but don't factor in set bonuses or outside recharge buffs.  

[ZemX]

Interesting point.

 

And it's a disadvantage for both SS's Foot Stomp and all of TW's cones because none of them are allowed to benefit from Gauntlet's arc/radius buff.

 

Foot Stomp and Frozen Aura are similar in that they have the same radius, with Foot Stomp being 15ft to start with and Frozen Aura being 10ft that expands to 15ft with Gauntlet.  Same cast time and base recharge.

 

With no recharge enhancement and assuming 3.5ppm procs:

 

1. Foot Stomp  = 48% proc chance.

2. Frozen Aura = 60.6% proc change.

 

Not a huge difference, but nice.   Ground Zero, because it has such a long recharge time, is proc chance capped either way.  i.e. Even if it was calculated for 22.5ft radius, it's still capped, again assuming you don't add recharge.  If you do, that changes a little, but not by much.  Rad Therapy is like 81% if it were calculated on the expanded radius and capped if you don't. 

[Omega-202]

2 minutes ago, ZemX said:

 Rad Therapy is like 81% if it were calculated on the expanded radius and capped if you don't. 

Touch of the Nictus lvl 34 Heal/Rech + 5 Procs is what I go with.  Exactly at the 90% threshold while maxing recharge and getting some extra HP.  

[Gobbledigook]

3 hours ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

I rarely play tankers for a couple of reasons, but the main one is that I never feel I'm at risk unless I made a particularly crappy build.  And if I'm not at risk, I might as well be playing solitaire (and cheating at it!).

That is why i chose Rad or Bio for my primary rather than Shield/invuln because it was a little more exciting trying to do tougher content. Shield is just too easy lol.

I favor Bio now as it brings the damage and some content can be rough on it, making you react better. Tough as hell on on anything dishing out S/L damage though. If the MotT proc was changed it could hit Bio quite a bit but then you would have to adapt.

[Infinitum]

Here is how i break down Tanker/Brute dynamic.

 

Both can handle all the content this game can throw at it fairly easily.

 

What a tanker can do more efficiently than a brute:

* Take out hoards of henchmen with ease and shrug off the damage without much issue.

 

What a brute can do more efficiently than a tanker:

* Take out hardened targets like AVs without delay or drudgery - with a little more risk if overcome with aggro.

 

Now, can both cross over - certainly if you build for it.  Tankers are set up to take more damage and obliterate the trash.  Brutes are set up to put the hurt on solid targets faster and more efficiently - but both can do either job well enough that unless you are running a glaringly obvious test that will not be found in any of the 99% common gameplay that tankers will survive better than the brute. 

 

It just doesn't come into play.

 

The only gripe is the brutes advantage is literally negated by every thing nowadays because even petless masterminds do damage - and not a much emphasis is placed on defensive buffs as damage buffs and enemy debuffs.

 

That is not a tanker issue - that isa decades old game issue that you either live with and wait for more content - or you let the insignificance of it gripe you to death.

 

Personally i have had no issues teaming, soloing or any general mayhem creating on any of my Brutes.

 

Both are the strong centerpiece in different ways and that's how i leave it.

Edited July 12, 2022 by Infinitum