Addressing the Tanker Brute Connundrum.

[ryuplaneswalker]

7 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

I agree mostly that brutes can be ok as is, but tankers themselves need help becuase brutes are UNDENIABLY OP compared to tankers. compared to say, scrappers with damage for instance they are clearly not.

The only reason Scrappers aren't OP compared to both is because Scrappers don't have punchvoke like Tanks/Brutes do.

 

7 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

Tankers and brutes have been in the same category since they were both a thing. they do the same job in endgame and brutes do it better when a single AV is concerned.

 

This is only true Post IOs, Previous to that people wanted the tank AT on Redside because Stone Armor and Invulnerability brutes were the only ones who could tank the Heroes without FF/Sonic/Cold/Thermal buffs.

[ZeeHero]

1 minute ago, ryuplaneswalker said:

The only reason Scrappers aren't OP compared to both is because Scrappers don't have punchvoke like Tanks/Brutes do.

 

 

This is only true Post IOs, Previous to that people wanted the tank AT on Redside because Stone Armor and Invulnerability brutes were the only ones who could tank the Heroes without FF/Sonic/Cold/Thermal buffs.

 

Regardless it is the reality right now and were never going back to pre IO.

[ryuplaneswalker]

1 minute ago, ZeeHero said:

 

Regardless it is the reality right now and were never going back to pre IO.

Yes, but understanding the cause of the problem is core to solving it, and quite frankly balancing around IOs is a really bad idea.

[ZeeHero]

1 minute ago, ryuplaneswalker said:

Yes, but understanding the cause of the problem is core to solving it, and quite frankly balancing around IOs is a really bad idea.

It is but nerfing IOs is too. changing the AT mechanics is the key.

[Zepp]

Basically, what I am getting from this thread is that Tankers are not as good on a team when dealing with high-end end-game team content. The biggest reason for this disparity is the low damage cap for Tankers compared to Brutes.

 

It seems the easiest and best (they are the same in this instance) way to deal with this would be to double the Tanker damage cap.

[Galaxy Brain]

Throwing this at the dart board,  but what if tankers got a damage bonus per team mate?

[ryuplaneswalker]

3 minutes ago, ZeeHero said:

It is but nerfing IOs is too. changing the AT mechanics is the key.

I never advocated nerfing IOs, but there is a fundamental problem in IOs in that things like +HP, +Regen, and +Damage are completely blown out of the water by Recharge and Defenses.

Resistances and Typed Defenses were like that too until I-24.

 

Making Tanks "better" involves one of two things, adding some sort of buff/debuff mechanic to their inherent or giving them a benefit from IOs that Brutes don't have.

1 hour ago, Zepp said:

The biggest reason for this disparity is the low damage cap for Tankers compared to Brutes

That isn't really the reason at all, the only time you spend fully damage capped is with Fulcrum Shift, even if you boost Tanker cap they aren't going to have many ways to use it.

 

12 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Throwing this at the dart board,  but what if tankers got a damage bonus per team mate?

Extra damage won't help tankers need something that sets them apart from brutes.

[ZeeHero]

18 minutes ago, ryuplaneswalker said:

Extra damage won't help tankers need something that sets them apart from brutes.

But it WILL help tankers period. something else can also be added to set them apart but as it stands tanker damage with many sets is beyond bad.

[ryuplaneswalker]

53 minutes ago, ZeeHero said:

But it WILL help tankers period. something else can also be added to set them apart but as it stands tanker damage with many sets is beyond bad.

But it won't, it will just make the gap less but an IO'd Brute will still be miles better than an IO'd tank.

[Leogunner]

Just now, ryuplaneswalker said:

But it won't, it will just make the gap less but an IO'd Brute will still be miles better than an IO'd tank.

I think the both of you are over-exaggerating the damage difference.

 

But I will agree that you can certainly add something to tanker damage to make them stand out 😉

[ryuplaneswalker]

5 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

I think the both of you are over-exaggerating the damage difference.

 

But I will agree that you can certainly add something to tanker damage to make them stand out 😉

if we are over-exaggerating the difference then why is there a conundrum at all?

[Zepp]

There is a conundrum less because of actual differences, and more because of perceived differences. There is a significant difference at the high end for damage because of the damage cap for Tanker being fairly low. There is not a sufficiently significant difference in survivability at the high end because of the resistance caps being identical. There is a significant difference in aggro generation that is not perceived.

 

In other words, doubling the damage cap for Tankers and creating a 5-10% difference in resistance caps between Tankers and Brutes could go a long way in improving the perceived differentiation.

[Leogunner]

Just now, ryuplaneswalker said:

if we are over-exaggerating the difference then why is there a conundrum at all?

Considering there being a conundrum in the first place is partially based on opinion in the first place, you're going to get different answers depending on who you ask.

 

Some will say Brutes overperform and do both Scrapper and Tanker jobs at the same time, others will say the niche Tankers fill is infringed on by Brute while Brute reaps the rewards of a high caliber DPS AT and yet again others will cite team contributions being more beneficial when you exchange a Tanker for a Brute.

 

To me, I think the kind of min/max performance a Brute requires to output what people complain about isn't as lofty or widely desired (not everybody like chasing that fury bar) as people think.  There's a reason people still play Scrappers (and further still, why people play Stalkers).  And I severely doubt teams are going to be mincing details like if they should exchange their Tankers for Brutes (because nobody cares that Brutes hit harder! You've got Blasters and Doms and Stalkers etc blowing crap up!).  Again, to me, it doesn't matter about how big the difference is to a team (people have posted how Tankers can put up good numbers).  What matters is, why you want to make your character a Tanker rather than those other melee ATs.  I cite the difference between Scrappers and Stalkers and advocate for a similar type division between Tanker and Brute.  The melee-play between the two (Scrapper and Stalker) differs because of how they utilize their melee sets and Tankers are the only ones that don't really do anything different with their melee set (besides AoE taunting and the befuddling addition of a non-stacking -res on their 1st melee power...basically encourages spamming the tier1 which isn't very engaging at all lol).

 

tl;dr: No matter how hard Tanker players try to deny, they are a melee AT and their job is to hit things in the face like every other melee AT. So, to me, if you want to give the player creating the character a reason to make their melee a Tanker, you have to give their melee attack style a more fun/engaging feel.  

[Zepp]

I was actually thinking about recent changes to Smite (another online game). The most winning god is basically a tank with a global buff. However, because people didn't feel like they were contributing when playing her, she was one of the least popular gods to play. They "buffed" her by reducing her global buff and general tankiness, and buffing her damage-dealing abilities. She feels stronger, but is now much less likely to be on the winning team than before...

In other words. Tankers may not feel like they are doing well, or filling their niche, but they are.

If you want to double the Tanker damage cap and drop Brute's Res cap by 5%, that could make Tankers feel more unique, but they already are filling an important role, and shouldn't be tampered with too much.

[Infinitum]

5 hours ago, Zepp said:

I was actually thinking about recent changes to Smite (another online game). The most winning god is basically a tank with a global buff. However, because people didn't feel like they were contributing when playing her, she was one of the least popular gods to play. They "buffed" her by reducing her global buff and general tankiness, and buffing her damage-dealing abilities. She feels stronger, but is now much less likely to be on the winning team than before...

In other words. Tankers may not feel like they are doing well, or filling their niche, but they are.

If you want to double the Tanker damage cap and drop Brute's Res cap by 5%, that could make Tankers feel more unique, but they already are filling an important role, and shouldn't be tampered with too much.

No that's ludicrous, nerf one at and buff another will just lead to the same discussion just reversed 3 months from now.

 

There in reality is no tanker in game issue outside of all the spines/fire brutes farming AE giving the perception tanker damage is bad when it's not.  In reality my group often times plays lots of end game content with multiple tanks and brutes with no issues.

 

You can play this game many ways and choose to team with many different types.

 

Nerfing brute resistance caps is no solution, because how would you then address super reflexes across all ATs.  Those caps are all the same regardless.  That's why nerfing the resistance wouldn't address anything, only ruin a well built synergy that exists for a lot of brute players utilizing them as tanks that only happens once you slog through 50 levels of hell just to get there.

 

You want to see obscene numbers watch my SR/psi stalker take on +4/8 groups with the buildup and hide procs.  Ask yourself the question, what would you you pick, a SR brute, tank, scrapper, or stalker?  No answer makes that choice OP.  Just chosen, then played, then built, then played more.

 

Again you can slot, play, team lots of different ways in this game.  Tankers have good damage if you just unlock it.  Maybe certain tank sets need work but most are fine, I have a TW, SS, Fire tank that outdamage any brute I have aside from my psi melee when insight and buildup click together on full fury.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Infinitum

[Galaxy Brain]

Have you tried a tw, ss, or fire brute for comparison?

 

Anyway, Leogunner has a point that Tankers bigger issue is that they dont provide a hook as a melee AT that significantly stands out. Scrappers, Stalkers, and Brutes all have hooks to their playstyle.  Stalkers are obviously stealth oriented and can do awesome stuff with that and Assassination mechanics. Brutes are tougher and have a minigame of chasing fury, and have access to some sets that stalkers and scrappers dont have + generally benefit more from damage aura sets due to both fury and the taunt effect that feeds fury. Scrappers are a sort of baseline where they have some sets/combos that may work better over brutes/stalkers and offer a balanced experience with no extra frills. 

 

Blasters, Defenders, and Corruptors all have ranged damage sets. Blaster hook is of course raw damage + manipulation set perks. Corruptors are balanced between damage and support with a hook via Scourge, and Defenders are more geared toward support with much better numbers on all support stats. Controllers and Masterminds also have support but play way, way different. 

 

Dominators and Controllers are only similar in that they crowd control, the support vs assault secondaries are super different. Blasters could be compared to dominators but again the powerset differences make them stand out. 

 

Sentinels, and EaTs all have variety to them and offer a bit of X Y and Z that make it hard to compare to other ATs directly. 

 

The Tanker hook is that they are bulky and have taunt effects to keep attention on them easier. As we have talked about for many pages, this is the same general hook as a Brute but without the minigame of Fury, but lacking the bonuses of a Scrapper with crits to spice up gameplay. 

 

Aside from being... a tank I suppose, what really grabs people onto tankers that they cant get elsewhere? Brutes and even Scrappers have fine survival in many situations while leveling + have the kill speed to survive encounters with less potential hits taken due to time in combat. In a team setting, more damage is always welcome as you can buff survival through the variety of support or control ATs available. Tankers, IMO, don't have something to hook many people to them.

[Auroxis]

Just now, Galaxy Brain said:

Have you tried a tw, ss, or fire brute for comparison?

 

Anyway, Leogunner has a point that Tankers bigger issue is that they dont provide a hook as a melee AT that significantly stands out. Scrappers, Stalkers, and Brutes all have hooks to their playstyle.  Stalkers are obviously stealth oriented and can do awesome stuff with that and Assassination mechanics. Brutes are tougher and have a minigame of chasing fury, and have access to some sets that stalkers and scrappers dont have + generally benefit more from damage aura sets due to both fury and the taunt effect that feeds fury. Scrappers are a sort of baseline where they have some sets/combos that may work better over brutes/stalkers and offer a balanced experience with no extra frills. 

Bruising is definitely a hook, it changes how the class plays in terms of target prioritization and rotations.

[Galaxy Brain]

1 minute ago, Auroxis said:

Bruising is definitely a hook, it changes how the class plays in terms of target prioritization and rotations.

Yes, but compared to other types of damage boosts + how it plays out in a team setting its.... eh?

[Auroxis]

8 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Yes, but compared to other types of damage boosts + how it plays out in a team setting its.... eh?

Then buffs should be centered around that aspect of the tanker instead of trying to make it resemble its main competition.

[Infinitum]

25 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Have you tried a tw, ss, or fire brute for comparison?

 

Aside from being... a tank I suppose, what really grabs people onto tankers that they cant get elsewhere? Brutes and even Scrappers have fine survival in many situations while leveling + have the kill speed to survive encounters with less potential hits taken due to time in combat. In a team setting, more damage is always welcome as you can buff survival through the variety of support or control ATs available. Tankers, IMO, don't have something to hook many people to them.

Yes I rolled them all on beta in all forms avail-scrapper, brute, stalker, tanker, before I picked the winning build.  I always build for survivability first then damage, and I test in the Rikti War zone how long it takes me to dispatch a lvl54 group spawn in the back of the war zone, and then one of the elite bosses that spawns there.

 

Basically on fire and invul I stayed with the tank because the damage was just as good as the brute but it was a lot more survivable in the fight.

 

With electric armor I always go brute because you can cap resistance but with a lot of work and grind and expensive set bonuses, but thats personal preference-you could go either way, the tank is cheaper actually so you could go that way just with a tad less damage on the tank.

 

Titan weapons is superb on anything, you wont notice much difference here.

 

SR I eithet go stalker or scrapper because you soft cap positional defense no matter what AT you are playing and the scrapper or stalker with set bonuses are just as survivable than the tank or brute but with a whole lot more damage.

 

This is All stuff I compared in similar mobs, not based on scientific numbers but on feelings - what the average gaming experience feels like - watching my health bar and ease of dispatching the mobs.

 

Raw numbers most of the time do not translate to what actual gameplay feels like.

[Galaxy Brain]

6 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

Then buffs should be centered around that aspect of the tanker instead of trying to make it resemble its main competition.

Exactly! Making a Tanker more like a Brute still ends up being a conundrum. Tankers should stand out in a different way, and there have been plenty of suggestions in here so far:

• Make their AoEs bigger / hit more targets (not taunt more targets, but the actual AoE powers. This would make them feel different than Brutes in practice in direct set comparisons)
• Increase their damage cap (sorta going toward Brute territory, but without Fury this is only relevant in team situations)
• Increase their damage per team mate  (would make it fury-esque, but could be a nice perk and make multiple tankers on a team be able to smash more effectively)
• Add team-buffs to their primary powers in some way (again more geared towards solving the problem of multiple tanks on a team)
• Expand on Bruising in some way (Stacking, attach it to Gauntlet, something...)

 

Any / All of these could be looked at to help out, but the more geared towards "playstyle" the suggestion the better IMO.

 

[Leogunner]

41 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

Then buffs should be centered around that aspect of the tanker instead of trying to make it resemble its main competition.

OR.. don't do either of those things and do something that makes thematic sense. 

[Auroxis]

12 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

OR.. don't do either of those things and do something that makes thematic sense. 

You do not have a monopoly over what makes thematic sense.

 

For me, a tanker is more about being a team player and helping your allies rather than having wider AoE's or a higher damage cap. And the fact that the original devs chose Bruising as a way to buff tankers shows that they at least somewhat shared the same sentiment.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Auroxis

[Leogunner]

1 hour ago, Auroxis said:

You do not have a monopoly over what makes thematic sense.

 

For me, a tanker is more about being a team player and helping your allies rather than having wider AoE's or a higher damage cap. And the fact that the original devs chose Bruising as a way to buff tankers shows that they at least somewhat shared the same sentiment.

Well I don't like to assume. For all I know, the Bruising effect is the only solution they could come up with. Granted I did suggest bigger cones and target caps during live by it was after side switching was introduced thus far after Bruising was implemented. 

 

But I still like to hear how players explain Bruising as a concept for the AT. Apparently you hit them soft enough that you don't break bones or maim but instead leave a nasty bruise? Not sure how that equates to a moderate amount of - res that all other melee are incapable of duplicating. But sure 😂 

[Galaxy Brain]

17 hours ago, Leogunner said:

Well I don't like to assume. For all I know, the Bruising effect is the only solution they could come up with. Granted I did suggest bigger cones and target caps during live by it was after side switching was introduced thus far after Bruising was implemented. 

 

But I still like to hear how players explain Bruising as a concept for the AT. Apparently you hit them soft enough that you don't break bones or maim but instead leave a nasty bruise? Not sure how that equates to a moderate amount of - res that all other melee are incapable of duplicating. But sure 😂 

I always saw bruising as like, "combat advantage". The Tanker's might is able to give them an edge once they start engaging in a fight (via landing attacks), similar to how Sentinels roll.