Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes

[Excraft]

5 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Finally, I'm actually quite shocked that no one's flipped out about the nerf to Rage. So good job there!

 

What would be the point?  It's not like it would make any difference.  

[PeregrineFalcon]

3 minutes ago, Excraft said:

What would be the point?  It's not like it would make any difference.  

While that's quite obviously true (Energy Melee, Rune of Protection, etc.) it's never stopped anyone from flipping out in the past.

 

I wonder though, is it because people now realize that it won't matter or because they no longer care. I really hope it's not the second option.

[Jaxman100]

One side effect that I haven't testing much, Claws and Spines have single target ranged attacks that have shorter ranges than Throw Spines and Shockwave.  That really does make those sets feel very odd when impale won't fire off but Shockwave will. 

 

There's a lot of muscle memory that just seems to make this change feel wrong. 

[Excraft]

52 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I wonder though, is it because people now realize that it won't matter or because they no longer care. I really hope it's not the second option.

 

For me, both.  No point in shouting at the wind. 

[BrandX]

I was just curious on it, so did a pylon run test on beta and live and had a 7 second difference in time.  Though, I was worried more about ST than my AOE, as I'm sure I (personally) can handle the changes there.

[Heatstroke]

16 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I Finally, I'm actually quite shocked that no one's flipped out about the nerf to Rage. So good job there!

 

Im highly upset about it considering I have Three SS tanks.. but also realize that they simply are not going to do anything about it.  

Edited Thursday at 10:44 AM by Heatstroke

[Maelwys]

FWIW; this is what the effect of the Tanker AoE/Cone radius changes combined with the Tanker AoE/Cone "overcap" damage reductions currently looks like:



That's attack in-game listed base damage per activation at level 50 - no damage enhancement; let alone incarnates or procs.
_{[EDIT: although note that the game does include normalised values for Fiery Embrace in its display figures; so what's shown above will be a bit higher across the board than what you'd actually see in the combat log!]
[EDIT #2: Have removed the Fiery Embrace contribution since it was confusing matters. And also tweaked Fire Sword Circle's figure to use the correct average DoT damage values whilst I was at it!]}

So as things stand, 15ft base AoEs like Footstomp are going to be the least affected (and you can see that the values in its bar stay green for longer) but they'll still suffer a bit.
The most affected will be Cone attacks (such as Guarded Spin which can hit 10 foes on Brainstorm and still not reach the same overall damage as hitting 5 foes on Live!)
Single Target Attacks (and a few specific "Ranged" Cones like Shockwave and Throw Spines AFAIK) are the only Secondary Powerset attacks not impacted at all.

(Also I purposely omitted Eye of the Storm; as the damage for it currently has a display discrepancy on Brainstorm)

And FWIW, this shows why if I had to pick then I'm more in favour of keeping the "Overcap" damage reduction changes than the Gauntlet radius changes. Currently Tanker secondaries that rely heavily on cones (like Staff!) to fill out their attack chain are actually having their Single Target damage drastically cut... 😭
 

Edited Thursday at 06:49 PM by Maelwys

[Uun]

34 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

That's attack in-game listed base damage per activation at level 50 - no damage enhancement; let alone incarnates or procs.

There's a display bug in the Staff powers that includes the extra damage from Fiery Embrace in the displayed total damage. This occurs on both Live and Brainstorm. You can see this if you compare the damage figure at the top of the screen to the damage details at the bottom. For example, Guarded Spin (live) shows 106.5, but when you look at the details it shows 6 ticks of 12.24 (73.44) plus 6 ticks of 5.51 (33.06) when using Fiery Embrace. (Note, the details for all the Fire attacks incorrectly label everything with Fiery Embrace, but the totals at the top appear to be correct.)

[Maelwys]

50 minutes ago, Uun said:

There's a display bug in the Staff powers that includes the extra damage from Fiery Embrace in the displayed total damage. This occurs on both Live and Brainstorm.

Yeah; I actually edited the original shortly after posting to include a note that FE damage was included in the display figures.
The proposed damage reductions apply to damage from FE in exactly the same as they do to "real" base damage though; so it's still showing the correct proportional effect.
If it's overly bothering anyone then when I get home I'll redo the figures without any FE contribution as they'd be shown in the combat log instead of in the powers display.

[Edit: Done. The original post should now have the "correct" combat-log matching values for the Staff Cones. I've also included average regular (non FE) DoT damage for FSC]
 

Edited Thursday at 03:16 PM by Maelwys

[drbuzzard]

22 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Finally, I'm actually quite shocked that no one's flipped out about the nerf to Rage. So good job there!

 

Considering it's the double stacked rage which got us this adjustment, perhaps they're just penitent. 

 

Nah. 

[ZemX]

3 hours ago, Maelwys said:

(Also I purposely omitted Eye of the Storm; as the damage for it currently has a display discrepancy on Brainstorm)

 

The damage you're showing for Frozen Aura is also incorrect for a similar reason.  It's actually half of what's showing both on Live and on Brainstorm.  In other words, on Live it matches Foot Stomp's damage.  On Brainstorm, currently, it is doing less damage than Foot Stomp.

 

Basically there are some weird conditionals around some of the effects in the powers data and in-game window doesn't understand them so, in the case of FA, it's double-counting damage, essentially.  It's a similar story, but worse, for Staff Powers which have even more conditional stuff for effects based on current level of "perfection" stacks.

Live data here: https://cod.uberguy.net/html/power.html?power=tanker_melee.ice_melee.frozen_aura&at=tanker

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, ZemX said:

The damage you're showing for Frozen Aura is also incorrect for a similar reason.  It's actually half of what's showing both on Live and on Brainstorm. 

Good grief that's some convoluted coding. Looks like double-damage in PVE but only to to "RAID"-flagged mobs?
Amended.

_{I really should've caught that one earlier - I was playing my /Ice Blaster again recently until all these Tanker changes smacked me upside the head...}

[ZemX]

17 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

Good grief that's some convoluted coding. Looks like double-damage in PVE but only to to "RAID"-flagged mobs?

 

Heh.. not actually but it's very difficult to follow, to be sure.  There's another weird tag on the first effect that says "fallback - only used if no other affects apply".  In other words, the two effects really are mutually exclusive.  One applies to "raid" mobs (which I think it like AVs and maybe incarnate stuff?) and the other is everything else and the whole point of all that acrobatics was to make it so the piddly mag 2 sleep side-effect was auto-hit on some enemies but not on others.  Wild.  It's sort of funny though that it's possible to get so complicated with the powers coding that the game literally can't decipher it back into human-readable form. 

 

And like I said, Staff powers are even more complicated looking than that.  Maybe look at it sometime you have a stiff drink at the ready.

 

[Borgold]

23 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I wonder though, is it because people now realize that it won't matter or because they no longer care. I really hope it's not the second option.

Also both for me - Not being a masochist i have no intention of playing a Z dps taunt bot that needs pity invites so when this car crash goes live my tank will be stripped

Edited Thursday at 11:17 PM by Borgold

[Maelwys]

Looks like another change on Build #5:
  

20 hours ago, The Curator said:

---

 Tankers

• Self damage buff lowered from 1.0x to 0.875x.
• -Res modifiers lowered to match other melee ATs.
• Diminishing returns:
  • All powers Melee set powers that go over their standard caps will inflict work at 1/3rd efficiency on those targets
  • In powers that had their target cap increased from 10 to 16, each target above 10 will take 25% less damage than the previous target
  • In powers that had their target cap increased from 5 to 10, each target above 5 will take 44% less damage than the previous target
  • Gauntlet is immune to these diminishing returns
• Removed passive global Arc/Radius buff
• Increased the radius and range of all tanker Primary and Secondary Cones by 50%
  • Cones no longer have their arc boosted
• Increased the radius of all tanker Primary and Secondary Sphere AoEs by 50%
  • The increase wont push radius above 15ft
• Reverted the radius increase on the following powers:
  • Powers that are balanced as single target attacks:
    • Broad Sword > Head Splitter
    • Katana > Golden Dragonfly

  • Powers that accept range enhancements:

    • Claws > Shockwave

    • Fiery Melee > Breath of Fire

    • Ice Melee > Frost

    • Kinetic Melee > Repulsing Torrent

    • Spines > Throw Spines

 

Initial opinion is: they've made things even worse.

For AoEs (1-10 base targets, 11-16 "overcap" targets) a 67% flat damage reduction means always inflicting less damage than the last build's diminishing returns curve.
For Cones (1-5 base targets, 6-10 "overcap" targets) a 67% flat damage reduction means inflicting less damage than before until you start hitting targets 9 and 10.

🤮

[Uun]

On 6/3/2025 at 4:17 PM, Uun said:

 There are two things going on. First is the transfer of the Gauntlet radius/range/target cap buffs to the powers themselves. Second is the damage penalty applied to over cap targets. Before you even get to the target cap penalty, damage is being reduced significantly due to the increased radius/range. The over cap penalty is then applied to this already reduced base value. Restating what others have said, I consider this penalty to be overly harsh. Using Staff Fighting as an example (assuming target saturation):

 

 

Note that for Guarded Spin and Eye of the Storm, the aggregate damage applied to the base + over cap targets on beta is less than the aggregate damage applied to just the base targets on live (for Innocuous Strikes it's slightly more). It would be more efficient to revert the radius/range/target caps to those used by other ATs and attack fewer targets at a time. Assuming there's been no change to Gauntlet's AoE taunt, there should be no appreciable change in aggro control.

 

Updated the table for the Build 5 changes. Made things worse for the 10/16 target AoEs and only marginally better for the 5/10 target cones. Tanks would be better off not having the expanded radius/range AT ALL and keeping their previous base damage levels. If that was done, I wouldn't care if target caps were rolled back as well.

 

 

[dukedukes]

Updated graph for b5 https://www.desmos.com/calculator/vmtwg7joem

Compared to test b4 cones received 34% more overcap effectiveness at max targets and AOE's got a 17.5% reduction at max targets. For the impact on overall damage calc aoe received a further 2% reduction at max targets and cones have a 4% increase at max targets.

The average damage reduction (vs random amount of targets) is around a 30% loss for aoe attacks:

Edited yesterday at 02:48 PM by dukedukes
added average loss

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, Uun said:

Tanks would be better off not having the expanded radius/range AT ALL and keeping their previous base damage levels. If that was done, I wouldn't care if target caps were rolled back as well.

This.

At this point I'm getting extremely disillusioned by the direction they're apparently taking.
Surely an AT's Inherent should be granting them some kind of a benefit; rather than inflicting a measurable penalty?!?

I'd honestly be happier if they removed all Tanker power Radius and Target Cap boosts; and dropped every effect from Gauntlet other than the AoE Punchvoke.

[PeregrineFalcon]

20 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

I'd honestly be happier if they removed all Tanker power Radius and Target Cap boosts; and dropped every effect from Gauntlet other than the AoE Punchvoke.

What? Why?

 

The new numbers suck, but it's still more damage that zero. And more damage helps to hold aggro.

 

20 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

At this point I'm getting extremely disillusioned by the direction they're apparently taking.
Surely an AT's Inherent should be granting them some kind of a benefit; rather than inflicting a measurable penalty?!?

They are altering the deal. Pray they don't alter it any further.

.

Edited yesterday at 03:59 PM by PeregrineFalcon
Added another thought.

[dukedukes]

6 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

What? Why?

 

The new numbers suck, but it's still more damage that zero. And more damage helps to hold aggro.

I think he mostly refers to the radius increase as it lowers all our aoe damage by 12%-23% regardless of enemy count. The target cap increase existing gives aoe's 20% more damage and cones get 33% more damage assuming you hit max targets on b5 test.

Edited yesterday at 04:00 PM by dukedukes
phrasing

[Super Atom]

21 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Pray they don't alter it any further.

 

if they could alter kinetic melee before these changes drop, that would be cool.

[arcane]

Don’t want to make this harder for those fighting the good fight, but, to those saying they would take radius reductions for their base damage back, I am not personally convinced I want to make that trade.

[Maelwys]

46 minutes ago, dukedukes said:

I think he mostly refers to the radius increase as it lowers all our aoe damage by 12%-23% regardless of enemy count. 

This.

Tanker's inherent schtick is now apparently that their AoEs are bigger and can hit more targets.
OK. But that's only beneficial if (i) it lets you inflict more overall damage and (ii) it lets you keep the attention of more targets.

What we have currently on Brainstorm is that whilst Tanker AoEs still have a larger radius and target cap; they also inflict 20-30% less base damage. So you HAVE to hit 2-3 additional targets with your AoEs just to break-even with the overall damage that you would have inflicted with them if they'd had exactly the same 'unbuffed' radius and target caps as a Brute or Scrapper. However because of "overcap" damage reductions applying on top of this; hitting 2-3 targets is not enough to break even; and under the current build you can't even reach that break-even point after hitting all 16 foes.

So for damage output; the increased AoE radius and target caps is a trap - the radius buff is actually actively hurting your performance.
The increased range on Cones is almost as bad - they'll now sometimes reach a break-even point vs "unbuffed with 5 enemies" if you can hit 9+ enemies with them. (Meh!)

And for aggro control? Tankers already have an AoE splash punchvoke effect and the aggro cap is 17 foes. So again, an increased target cap on AoEs is practically pointless.

So yes, IMO if this is what the Tanker Inherent now gets us; we'd honestly be better off without it (aside from bog-standard AoE Punchvoke)
 

Edited yesterday at 04:46 PM by Maelwys

[Uun]

16 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

What? Why?

 

The new numbers suck, but it's still more damage that zero. And more damage helps to hold aggro.

Because the radius increase results in a decrease in base damage to targets under the default target cap, with the penalty for those over the default target cap applied to an already reduced value. Take Eye of the Storm for example. Before the radius increase, it had a 10 ft radius and did 65 damage per target (650 aggregate if you hit 10 targets). It now has a 15 ft radius and does 50 damage per target for the first 10 targets and 16.7 damage per target for targets 11-16 (500 aggregate if you hit 10 targets and 600 aggregate if you hit 16 targets). You're doing less aggregate damage to 16 targets than you were previously doing to 10. 

[Sovera]

I'm fairly sure it wasn't a purposeful change because surely they ran the math and tested before putting it in the game. It must be a misplaced decimal.