Focused Feedback: Tanker - Archetype Inherent Changes

[Maelwys]

2 minutes ago, Warboss said:

I don't think it's a "you problem" it's a game balance/game mechanics issue (maybe power sets as well...). One that needs to be addressed by resolving procs and other AT shortcomings PRIOR to nerfing Tanks, or any other AT.

It's definitely a game balance/mechanics issue.

However I don't think it necessarily needs addressed PRIOR to readjusting individual ATs or Powers.
It just needs addressed SEPERATELY.

Honestly, the Devs have been talking about redoing proc mechanics for years. If other changes had to wait until they were done then we'd barely be out of issue 25.

[Maelwys]

4 minutes ago, aethereal said:

This is a fundamentally bad lens for analysis.  Yes, Tanker caps are the same for resistance/defense as Brutes -- but Tankers have a much, much easier time reaching those caps.  This gives them vastly more build versatility than Brutes.  It can make Tankers higher damage mitigation than Brutes (the Tanker can reach one cap and then build towards a second one in a way that Brutes simply can't achieve), or they can build overcap in various ways (Tankers certainly have a much easier time hitting incarnate softcap than Brutes do), or they can build for offense.

 

Tanker's durability advantages can't be "free."  They're a massive advantage that can be (imperfectly) traded off for other build goals.

To be fair, Brutes get some versatility too via the way Fury works- they benefit much less proportionally from slotting their attacks with damage aspect; meaning that they can opt instead for more accuracy/endred/recharge whilst levelling; and when min-maxed at 50 they can go all-in on damage procs.

Also since a sizable proportion of the powergamer playerbase here take the stance that "building for survivability isn't needed" - most of the time building for offense will trump everything else; and the fact that Tankers can hit those survivability caps easier becomes a moot point. Sure; there are edge cases (801 AE mission series for example. And "AFK" AE Farming) but you just have to glance at an average min-maxed 4-star build to see that a lot of melee ATs aren't even bothering to ED-cap their armors half of the time even for the "hardest" content in the game (yes that's due to Barrier spam, but IMO that just reinforces my point!)... 🤷‍♂️

[aethereal]

6 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

To be fair, Brutes get some versatility too via the way Fury works- they benefit much less proportionally from slotting their attacks with damage aspect; meaning that they can opt instead for more accuracy/endred/recharge whilst levelling; and when min-maxed at 50 they can go all-in on damage procs.

 

We see that in practice, this does not nearly make up for the Tanker advantage.

 

6 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

Also since a sizable proportion of the powergamer playerbase here take the stance that "building for survivability isn't needed" - most of the time building for offense will trump everything else; and the fact that Tankers can hit those survivability caps easier becomes a moot point. Sure; there are edge cases (801 AE mission series for example. And "AFK" AE Farming) but you just have to glance at an average min-maxed 4-star build to see that a lot of melee ATs aren't even bothering to ED-cap their armors half of the time even for the "hardest" content in the game (yes that's due to Barrier spam, but IMO that just reinforces my point!)... 🤷‍♂️

 

Those people don't actually care about melee classes, to the extent that they believe this they can play Blasters and Corruptors.

 

It's also broadly sophistry.  People are like, "Four star content is the hardest in the game."  Sure, by some measure, but it's hard in a very specific way (and a way that was specifically designed to undervalue mitigation in general and defense in particular).  It's not representative of the rest of the game.  This is kinda like saying, "The hardest thing in baseball is to do a super-fastball pitch (arguably true), so we don't need to care about whether someone can hit or catch a ball."  Perhaps true if you only care about pitchers, but ignores 90% of the game.

[tidge]

16 hours ago, Gobbledigook said:

If they ever get around to giving the Brutes a decent ATO which they need, this could change even more. Brute ATO probably should have been done before Tanker nerf.

 

I'm unconvinced that Brutes have the worst ATOs. Certainly they aren't as good as Scrappers' or Stalkers' ATO (procs), and the Tanker ATO (procs) that lean into more survivability will make Brutes jealous.

[Maelwys]

33 minutes ago, tidge said:

I'm unconvinced that Brutes have the worst ATOs. Certainly they aren't as good as Scrappers' or Stalkers' ATO (procs), and the Tanker ATO (procs) that lean into more survivability will make Brutes jealous.

IMO the Sentinel and Brute ATOs are probably tied for "worst performing"; but at least Superior Opportunity Strikes means Sents get to trigger Vulnerability a bit more often.

The only time I've ever experienced any noteworthy beneficial effect from either of the Brute ATOs is in AFK Farming runs.
An additional ~5 HP/Sec per stack from the Superior Unrelenting Fury Proc can slightly reduce the likelihood that I'll come back to a dead toon. Meh.

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

Perhaps true if you only care about pitchers, but ignores 90% of the game.

That's the thing.

What constitutes "90% of the game" (as opposed to "90% of CoX's total playable content") will differ wildly from person to person.

I think it's fair to say that many players spend most of their time steamrolling through Lv50 content fully min-maxed; so they won't benefit as much from building for mitigation.
Others will spend more time playing at low-levels or exemplaring; so benefit from more mitigation to counter the loss of Incarnates/Enhancement Aspect/Set bonuses/etc.

I probably fall more into the first camp; but I tend towards a more balanced build approach instead of always going all-in on maximum damage output. Plus my OCD really appreciates it whenever I can reach arbitrary targets like the MaxHP cap, Resistance hardcap and/or Defence softcap(s) even if I know they're not strictly speaking necessary... I get the heebie-jeebies if I mouseover a Scrapper's HP bar and see XXXX/2399 instead of XXXX/2409... 🙈
 

Edited yesterday at 04:01 PM by Maelwys

[ExeErdna]

1 hour ago, Warboss said:

 

I don't think it's a "you problem" it's a game balance/game mechanics issue (maybe power sets as well...). One that needs to be addressed by resolving procs and other AT shortcomings PRIOR to nerfing Tanks, or any other AT.

 

The funny thing is procs aren't a problem either, the problem isn't the ATs or Procs it's AE and how people farm. Yet are they really the problem? No, it's more so an excuse. Not everybody is running papers/strike forces or trails. Most people miss out a a massive chunk of stories because how fast you level even without the boosters. Procs are nice on support classes like Defender, Corruptors, Controller, Dominators and Masterminds just to toss out a bit of extra dmg on something that normally doesn't do damage. Yet what the nerfs to Tankers seems to be return them to how they were before the buffs when they used to "bruise" without giving them that back... Or when they had to fix it so Irradated Ground took melee sets. Which personally more consistent on Brutes than it is on Tankers since the absorb is so small you really wouldn't notice it like that. The thing for Tankers they need a solid offensive state so they aren't just taking damage

[ExeErdna]

1 hour ago, aethereal said:

 

We see that in practice, this does not nearly make up for the Tanker advantage.

 

 

Those people don't actually care about melee classes, to the extent that they believe this they can play Blasters and Corruptors.

 

It's also broadly sophistry.  People are like, "Four star content is the hardest in the game."  Sure, by some measure, but it's hard in a very specific way (and a way that was specifically designed to undervalue mitigation in general and defense in particular).  It's not representative of the rest of the game.  This is kinda like saying, "The hardest thing in baseball is to do a super-fastball pitch (arguably true), so we don't need to care about whether someone can hit or catch a ball."  Perhaps true if you only care about pitchers, but ignores 90% of the game.

 

That's because Brutes shine with double offensive auras where Tankers shine with there as well. Yet often times their ATO pulls them over the cap armor dependent. Yet then you have Energy Aura and Regen now that people wanted because it played differently compared to what's expected from a Tanker. Since both lack an offensive aura they need to have a decent overall attack power or else they're just a ticking time bomb before their defenses get overwhelmed. That's one of the worse things to happen is when you realize how your build is crashing. Most other AT's are basically like "don't pull that aggro" Yet the MAIN ONE that's supposed to do that should never be struggling to do that job. 

The issue with 4 Star runs there is a reason why most runners of it say "EVERYBODY NEEDS BARRIER CORE" Since even with everybody most like min-maxxed it still ain't enough. 

[Erratic1]

1 hour ago, Maelwys said:

To be fair, Brutes get some versatility too via the way Fury works- they benefit much less proportionally from slotting their attacks with damage aspect; meaning that they can opt instead for more accuracy/endred/recharge whilst levelling; and when min-maxed at 50 they can go all-in on damage procs.

 

A Brute, on his own or even buffed by a single Defender/Corruptor, will not reach the Brute damage cap, even with maxed Fury. All a Brute gets from underslotting attacks for less damage is less damage. To be parallel with Tankers, in terms of build flexibility, a Brute would need to be capping their damage...ovecapping even.

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, Erratic1 said:

A Brute, on his own or even buffed by a single Defender/Corruptor, will not reach the Brute damage cap, even with maxed Fury. All a Brute gets from underslotting attacks for less damage is less damage.

 

But long before hitting the damage cap, even a 3.5ppm Damage Proc still adds more damage per activation to the vast majority of Brute attacks than a Lv50+5 Damage IO does. Their final attack damage is proportionally much more heavily reliant on Fury than on slotting damage aspect into their powers. Tankers on the other hand rely on that damage aspect (unless you're a SS with constant double stacked Rage, I guess!)

 

(Also as an aside, a Single Kinetics Corruptor or Defender can indeed cap out a Brute. Even my Kinetics Mastermind is capable of granting a good +360% purely by double stacking Fulcrum Shift, let alone Siphon Power and Support Hybrid etc. A traditionally slotted Brute is typically sitting 100% plus ~125% from slotting and Alpha plus ~160%+ from Fury = ~385%+. That's a good 35% over their 700% cap even before Set Bonuses and Hybrid!)

[Erratic1]

13 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

But long before hitting the damage cap, even a 3.5ppm Damage Proc still adds more damage per activation to the vast majority of Brute attacks than a Lv50+5 Damage IO does.

 

Perhaps it does, but most Brutes are chasing survivability and unlike Tankers that means scouring every IO set for things which boost their defenses--including their choice of damage sets. When Mako or Touch of Death is consuming 5 or 6 slots in an offensive power to get you to caps Tankers trivially achieve there are not many slots left to proc bomb with. And that before the extra shots invested in Tough and Weakness (you're likely to 5- or 6-slot both). All sorts of oddball Frankenslotting occurs in area attack powers to drive defenses.

 

Of course you can choose to not be at cap; but that means something too as dead Brutes do no damage.

[FupDup]

Brutes really do need higher armor modifiers regardless of any Tanker nerfs. Sharing the same 0.75 value as Stalkers and Scrappers is dumb design for an AT that is meant to be an offtank, and this makes it pretty hard to actually leverage their high caps. Tankers are a full 1.0, so I’d suggest between 0.80-0.85 for Brutes. 

[tidge]

3 hours ago, Maelwys said:

IMO the Sentinel and Brute ATOs are probably tied for "worst performing"; but at least Superior Opportunity Strikes means Sents get to trigger Vulnerability a bit more often.

 

Personally, I'd rate the %Orb/%Font procs at the bottom, and the "%minor PBAoE" ones fighting for last place. MMV. "always on" ones are usually the best IMO, and the Tanker ones are 

good... but they aren't exactly needed for most Tankers, such that they are practically passive.

 

More often than not: aside from the Stalker and Scrapper ATO %procs, for me the choice to include those sets in a final build (I'll always use them while leveling, because level 10) almost always comes down the set bonuses over trying to make the most of the specific ATO %proc. My choice to (not) leverage ATOs is HIGHLY complicated by the powers available that can hold the ATO sets. Blasters are golden (since primaries and secondaries are full of powers that can hold them), other ATs often have far fewer places to slot such sets.

 

I used to be bothered that Tankers (and Brutes) didn't have one (of the two) ATOs be slot-able in a the Primary (Secondary for Brutes) until I realized that most Armor sets would probably end up being way past the ED limits after 3 or 4 pieces... and for some powers in some sets the sorts of things that would be in combination (Endurance, Recharge) wouldn't matter. Of course there ARE some armor powers that could stand to also take Accuracy, but its kind of uneven across sets.

 

 

[SeraphimKensai]

I might have a bit of dissenting opinion on that I don't necessarily mind the offensive needs as tankers were overtuned offensively.

 

That said I don't like the change to resistance modifiers to match other melee ATs. Tankers are supposed to be meat shields and have had a higher resistance modifier since launch.

[SeraphimKensai]

13 minutes ago, FupDup said:

Brutes really do need higher armor modifiers regardless of any Tanker nerfs. Sharing the same 0.75 value as Stalkers and Scrappers is dumb design for an AT that is meant to be an offtank, and this makes it pretty hard to actually leverage their high caps. Tankers are a full 1.0, so I’d suggest between 0.80-0.85 for Brutes. 

I can honestly get behind a boost for brutes. But I'd rather them having something closer to fury 1.0 with the old damage cap and letting them loose like a wrecking ball.

[Maelwys]

35 minutes ago, Erratic1 said:

 most Brutes are chasing survivability

 

Perhaps, although I suspect more of the min-maxed ones are chasing maximum damage output instead via Global Accuracy and Global Recharge set bonuses plus Damage Procs. And even for the not-quite-optimised Brutes there's definitely something to be said for picking a Nerve Alpha plus 6x damage procs in most of if not all of their important attacks.

 

I fully accept that Tanker higher base numbers means they can meet specific survivability thresholds with less effort and build compromise than Brutes... which can in turn give them more leeway in slotting. However that only holds true if attaining those survivability thresholds is necessary for survival in the first place for whatever content you're running. And a very common view is that the majority of this game's content is so easy that building for additional mitigation simply isn't required (even for diehard soloers, in these days of Incarnate clickies and being able to type /AH before each mission!)

 

Edited yesterday at 07:30 PM by Maelwys

[aethereal]

13 minutes ago, SeraphimKensai said:

That said I don't like the change to resistance modifiers to match other melee ATs. Tankers are supposed to be meat shields and have had a higher resistance modifier since launch.

I think you're misreading that.  It's a change to "-Res" modifiers, to powers that debuff resistance, not to armors that increase your own resistance.  So for example Temporary Invulnerability gives a base +30% resistance to Smash/Lethal on both live and beta (while Brutes/Scrappers/Stalkers get +22.5% from the same power).

[Maelwys]

21 minutes ago, SeraphimKensai said:

II don't like the change to resistance modifiers to match other melee ATs. Tankers are supposed to be meat shields and have had a higher resistance modifier since launch.

 

Resistance modifiers were not changed.

Resistance DEBUFF modifiers were changed.

 

That means powers that inflict damage resistance debuffs on enemies (like Melt Armor) will strip off very slightly less resistance than before.

 

Tanker Armor sets still have the same damage resistance totals as on live.

 

Edited yesterday at 07:34 PM by Maelwys

[arcane]

4 hours ago, aethereal said:

Those people don't actually care about melee classes, to the extent that they believe this they can play Blasters and Corruptors.

What are you talking about?

[tidge]

15 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

 However that only holds true if attaining those survivability thresholds is necessary for survival in the first place for whatever content you're running. And a very common view is that the majority of this game's content is so easy that building for additional mitigation simply isn't required (even for diehard soloers, in these days of Incarnate clickies and being able to type /AH before each mission!)

 

 

I've bolded the part that I think is fundamental... Tankers (and Brutes) are both pretty close to the "Imma always gonna live" limit for 99%+ of the games contents, no matter the Primary/Secondary choice. Scrappers and Stalkers (and VEATs!) are also pretty close. When we factor in Defenses only... the field has more room for variability, but in comparison Tankers and Brutes have essentially run out of headroom. From my PoV the differences between Brutes and Tankers mostly comes down to the level at which certain powers can be chosen, and the slightly different base scales. I'm not at all bothered by the possibility of nearly identical performance (survive/defeat) at level 50 and beyond... especially if the final equivalence comes only from specific slotting choices.

 

The rumblings about the motivations for the deep pull-backs on Tanker damage don't strike me as entirely well-considered... because (1) Tankers don't really get more AoE 'out-of-the-box' than other ATs and (2) I can't imagine scaling back OTHER ATs to make those easier to be hit (or given fewer HP, or made easier to get mezzed, or whatever) because 'Surviving is the role for Tankers and Brutes'; there would be a riot.

[Maelwys]

Head's up: The Radius Nerfs have been revoked on Brainstorm! 🎉
  

On 6/12/2025 at 5:37 PM, The Curator said:

• Tanker Sphere radius buffs no longer lower their damage, this applies to the following powers:
  • Broad Sword > Whirling Sword
  • Claws > Spin
  • Dual Blades > Typhons Edge
  • Energy Melee > Whirling Hands
  • Fiery Melee > Fire Sword Circle
  • Ice Melee > Frozen Aura
  • Katana > The Lotus Drops
  • Kinetic Attack > Burst
  • Martial Arts > Dragon's Tail
  • Psionic Melee > Mass Levitate
  • Radiation Melee > Atom Smasher
  • Savage Melee > Rending Flurry
  • Spines > Quills
  • Staff Fighting > Eye of the Storm
  • Street Justice > Spinning Strike
  • Titan Weapons > Whirling Smash
  • War Mace > Whirling Mace

That should just leave the Overcap damage reductions, so the fallout should be drastically lessened and individual powersets won't be getting hurt more then others.

Thank you for listening Devs! 👍
 

[arcane]

10 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

Head's up: The Radius Nerfs have been revoked on Brainstorm! 🎉
  

That should just leave the Overcap damage reductions, so the fallout should be drastically lessened and individual powersets won't be getting hurt more then others.

Thank you for listening Devs! 👍
 

Well… Overcap and Proc Rate Reductions, to be clear, right?

[Uun]

Here are updates to several of the Trapdoor runs I did last week based on today's patch.

 

	Live	Beta Build 6	Beta RC2
Fire/Fire tank	11:15	10:07	9:11
SR/Staff tank	13:14	14:20	12:14

[Maelwys]

1 hour ago, arcane said:

Well… Overcap and Proc Rate Reductions, to be clear, right?

*Checks the listed base radiuses*



Yeah... they've not actually reverted the entire radius changes from the looks of it; just increased the base damage of each attack to compensate for it.
So you're quite right, proc rate will be reduced a bit on those attacks compared to Live due to the higher base radius.

However I can definitely live with that one.

(also: average of 62.44 on Brainstorm compared to 62.43 on Live - technically MA got buffed!) 🤣
 

Edited 20 hours ago by Maelwys

[DarknessEternal]

Combustion in Fire Melee was missed on on having it's damage greatly reduced because of the radius increase.