Addressing the Tanker Brute Connundrum.

[Galaxy Brain]

Im not sure you can balance them at the IO level without drastic changes. What do you think of my last suggestion @Profit? Its similar to your OP with some tweaks.

[Zepp]

I'm still not convinced there is an actual conundrum (there have been many informed voices to the contrary).

 

I have not heard a strong argument for any specific changes.

I have heard a reasonable argument for a damage cap increase, or increased -res related to either an expansion or buff to bruising.

I have heard moderate arguments for the buffing of MT attack scopes (increasing area or cone width).

I have made a problematic, but supportable argument for differentiation via resistance cap adjustments (However, a 5% nerf to Brutes would negatively affect a small number of Brutes, but it would create a general outrage. In addition, a 5% buff to Tanker resistant caps may make Tankers OP. As such, I do not think it is a good idea, even though it is supportable in rational theory.).

 

Again, I am still not sold on the belief that there is a conundrum, and assertion of a universally agreed upon conundrum is not a tenable place to begin arguments. If you believe there is a conundrum, please actually make your argument rather than an assertion.

[Profit]

47 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Im not sure you can balance them at the IO level without drastic changes. What do you think of my last suggestion @Profit? Its similar to your OP with some tweaks.

I'm not sure which post you are referencing, are you talking about the grant cover like powers post?

[Galaxy Brain]

8 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

The rp behind bruising is going sideways here. And if it's taunting, why not add bruising to all their taunt effects like I suggested?

 

If I had to boil down all the suggestions so far, I think that changing certain powers in Tanker sets would be the best bet, Blaster-Style.

 

Blasters uniformly had Sustain Powers added to their secondaries in a generally uniform manner. They generally come at lvl 20, are generally a toggle, but all grant some form of Regen or Absorb, and a hefty Recovery boost (or end discount for /nrg). So no matter the blaster, they all have the ability to pick up a sustain power that more or less helps them all equally.

 

Tankers already have Bruising on their T1 attacks that is not skip-able.  This applies a 20% res debuff on targets hit, and for all sets except TW this is also a ST application. This seems like an oversight, but maybe Bruising could be applied as a small AoE like with TW on all T1's? That would certainly help out in big-team scenarios. Alternatively, all T1 attacks could maybe have a small AoE damage component like Contamination / Baby Thunderstrike to help spread Bruises?

 

Speaking of wide spread, Tankers also all get an AoE Taunt in their secondaries. Being tanks, you could argue this is also a must-have for their game play. Why not add Bruising to this power as well? Tankers already will bruise small batches of targets with their T1 power, and with Taunt they could apply a much wider net for -Res on targets. This would stack with the T1 power of course, which by proxy will raise Tanker damage but also provide a very useful debuff for teams.

 

Currently, Bruising does not stack from multiple tankers. Earlier in the thread it was proposed to have some portion of bruising be stack-able while another portion is not. This could work well here if both were about the same in power:

Bruising: your T1 power and Taunt power apply -20% Res on targets. 10% is unresistible and unstack-able from any source (the same or other Tankers), while the other 10% is resistible and stack-able. 

 

Example:

A Tanker taunts a group (-20% res on them, unless they have resistance than 1/2 of that value is resisted), then starts pummeling individuals with their T1 power to apply further -Res. On punched targets, they would go from 20% -> 30% -Res on one hit, and the next will be -40%, and so on. 

 

With multiple Tankers in a group, this would constantly be stacked up as they fight and taunt, applying portions of -Res on top of one another to effectively increase not only their own damage, but the team's damage while also corralling enemies together.

 

 

 

On top of this, I think that alterations to actual powers in the secondaries could always be nice to stand out from other melees, especially Brutes who share all the same powers. Fire Melee already has an example where it has a PBAoE instead of a powerful ST attack that Brutes have, but tweaks here and there could always be welcome. One that I would like to see is that Primary sets get more examples like Grant Cover from shield, where tanker powers buff the team in a small way here or there. 

 

In any case, Tankers should be the melee AT that is the center of attention for both enemies and the team to focus on. They're the force of personality that should batter down the opposition and bolster their team's morale. Changes like these are already present in Tanks as of now, but are not really uniform or they could be exaggerated further.

 

Thoughts?

@Profit

[Profit]

37 minutes ago, Zepp said:

I'm still not convinced there is an actual conundrum (there have been many informed voices to the contrary).

 

I have not heard a strong argument for any specific changes.

I have heard a reasonable argument for a damage cap increase, or increased -res related to either an expansion or buff to bruising.

I have heard moderate arguments for the buffing of MT attack scopes (increasing area or cone width).

I have made a problematic, but supportable argument for differentiation via resistance cap adjustments (However, a 5% nerf to Brutes would negatively affect a small number of Brutes, but it would create a general outrage. In addition, a 5% buff to Tanker resistant caps may make Tankers OP. As such, I do not think it is a good idea, even though it is supportable in rational theory.).

 

Again, I am still not sold on the belief that there is a conundrum, and assertion of a universally agreed upon conundrum is not a tenable place to begin arguments. If you believe there is a conundrum, please actually make your argument rather than an assertion.

If you're not convinced that at IO/Incarnate Levels a brute is more desirable to have on a team than a tank, then you will never be convinced. As for strong arguments, I made strong arguments in the OP for very specific scalpel changes that would not drastically change the AT. As for informed voices, I made my first tank on 2004-09-17. He is my main, even now and the first character I log in everyday. I would say my voice is as informed as any.

[Profit]

8 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

@Profit

Your suggestions aren't bad, but do have some holes.

T1 attacks are almost never used in io/incarnate levels due to having a very solid attack chain. That means almost no one is actively using Bruising. Also, with the way io/incarnate mobs melt from the dps aoes, there is almost no time to throw a bruising on anything significant.

The AOE Taunt you speak of is gauntlet. Currently Brutes and Tanks enjoy an auto hit single target taunt attached to every attack roll made at 400% taunt mag. Gauntlet (The AOE Taunt) attached to tank attacks only fires if the tank lands the attack, and even then gauntlet makes it's on to-hit roll and can miss. Gauntlet is in addition to the 400% auto hit taunt mag both brutes and tanks enjoy.

Allowing stacking gauntlet is good for me, but it has to be decoupled from the T1 and rolled into gauntlet while at the same time removing the to-hit check from gauntlet.

[Galaxy Brain]

They also have the actual power "Taunt" in their secondaries:

 

 

 

 

Gauntlet is secondary to this, and IIRC applies on ALL attacks not just the T1:  https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Gauntlet 

 

Though I may have misread and you're referring only to Bruising... anywho, if the T1 had a stacking or irresistible portion of -Res it would be more used IMO.

 

 

Edited August 30, 2019 by Galaxy Brain

[Profit]

6 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

They also have the actual power "Taunt" in their secondaries:

 

 

 

 

Gauntlet is secondary to this, and IIRC applies on ALL attacks not just the T1:  https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Gauntlet 

 

Though I may have misread and you're referring only to Bruising... anywho, if the T1 had a stacking or irresistible portion of -Res it would be more used IMO.

 

 

I can't actually see your picture, it's just a white box for me. But I did not reference the actual auto hit Taunt click power that is also enjoyed by brutes. I was referencing a specific taunt application that both brutes and tanks apply on their attacks. That reference was not to Gauntlet, which is a separate taunt mechanic that is also applied to tanker attacks.

 

edit:Well that's annoying, your picture finally showed up when I went to edit a spelling error.

Edited August 30, 2019 by Profit

[Galaxy Brain]

Right, Tankers have both the Splash Taunt from Gauntlet on all ST attacks, and the AoE Taunt. The AoE taunt is a spot we could tweak however if we expanded bruising to that as well, as I imagine it would be easier to apply an effect to an existing power that has no other secondary effects already than to tweak every application of Gauntlet across sets.

[Zepp]

Gauntlet affects all powers.

[Profit]

Brain, Tankers also have an additional taunt attached to their attacks besides Gauntlet. This additional taunt is auto-hit, single target, and is at a 400% taunt mag.

[Jeuraud]

1 hour ago, Profit said:

I would appreciate you not putting words in my mouth. I am not trying to turn COH into a classic Trinity MMO.

I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm saying to get the Tank your nostalgia created (Wherever that came from.), you need CoH to be a Trinity, because with CC and Support in CoH the Tank is not needed.

Many of us keep saying it and it keeps getting ignored, but the conundrum of the CoH Tank did not start with Brutes and IOs. Hells, I would be surprised if the Tank did not have issues in CoH beta, and should not have been released. I do know that Fury was talked about in the Forums as something to add to Tanks, and was instead added to the villian side tank.

 

1 hour ago, Profit said:

I am simply trying to make the decision between brute and tanks at IO levels a hard one instead of a no brainer.

You know what the no-brainer for me is.... that Tanks are fricken boring to play, and Gauntlet and Bruising did not change that, and your change will not change that either.  Your tweaks might change the minds of the Min/Maxers, and that's about it. I'm playing a fricken game for fun, and if I'm not having fun then I'm not going to waste my time.

 

2 hours ago, Profit said:

So no, you do not have a dog in this fight.

I have two dogs in this fight.

1. I'm an Altaholic, making Tank interesting/fun would add to my options.

2. Everything a CoHH Dev works on means there is something else they are not working on.

 

You need to get over this "you do not have a dog in this fight" attitude.

 

 

 

 

[Galaxy Brain]

1 minute ago, Profit said:

Brain, Tankers also have an additional taunt attached to their attacks besides Gauntlet. This additional taunt is auto-hit, single target, and is at a 400% taunt mag.

Yes I know but I am specifically referring to the click power, "Taunt", that all tanker secondary sets have that is an AoE taunt power. Gauntlet on ST attacks is like a splash-taunt on top of the normal punch-voke.

 

The power "Taunt" can be a space we can play with  for Tankers as it is something they almost always want to use often and hits a wide array of enemies. 

[Profit]

There are three separate taunt effects that tankers can enjoy.

 

1. There is a single target auto hit taunt effect applied everytime a tank attacks and hits. This is at 400% taunt magnitude.

2. There is Gauntlet, which is an AOE taunt effect that requires a to-hit roll. This to-hit roll happens once a tank attacks and hits something.

3. There is the Taunt click power in the Tanker secondary, which is an auto-hit power effecting up to 5 targets.

 

Brutes enjoy the effects of 1 and 3, but they do not get 2.

[Galaxy Brain]

1 minute ago, Profit said:

There are three separate taunt effects that tankers can enjoy.

 

1. There is a single target auto hit taunt effect applied every time a tank attacks and hits. This is at 400% taunt magnitude.

2. There is Gauntlet, which is an AOE taunt effect that requires a to-hit roll. This to-hit roll happens once a tank attacks and hits something.

3. There is the Taunt click power in the Tanker secondary, which is an auto-hit power effecting up to 5 targets.

 

Brutes enjoy the effects of 1 and 3, but they do not get 2.

I'm not sure why we are going over this, but the Taunt power for Tankers could be altered separate from the Brute version in their primaries to provide a space for uniform changes.

[Profit]

20 minutes ago, Jeuraud said:

I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm saying to get the Tank your nostalgia created (Wherever that came from.), you need CoH to be a Trinity, because with CC and Support in CoH the Tank is not needed.

Many of us keep saying it and it keeps getting ignored, but the conundrum of the CoH Tank did not start with Brutes and IOs. Hells, I would be surprised if the Tank did not have issues in CoH beta, and should not have been released. I do know that Fury was talked about in the Forums as something to add to Tanks, and was instead added to the villian side tank.

 

You know what the no-brainer for me is.... that Tanks are fricken boring to play, and Gauntlet and Bruising did not change that, and your change will not change that either.  Your tweaks might change the minds of the Min/Maxers, and that's about it. I'm playing a fricken game for fun, and if I'm not having fun then I'm not going to waste my time.

 

I have two dogs in this fight.

1. I'm an Altaholic, making Tank interesting/fun would add to my options.

2. Everything a CoHH Dev works on means there is something else they are not working on.

 

You need to get over this "you do not have a dog in this fight" attitude.

 

 

 

 

Just because tanks are boring to you do not mean they are boring to others. I hate that the strategy and idea of tanks as they are currently are boring to you. But they aren't to me and many others, so no making them interesting to just you and you alone is at the bottom of my priorities.

 

Just so you know, the only problem tanks had in beta was a single target taunt click power (which scrappers also shared) that forced many tanks into taking provoke, the Devs then decided to change it to an autohit power in the tanker powerset.

 

And no, I don't need to get over it. You don't have a dog in this, I'm advocating for thought out changes that will make tanks more desirable to people that want to actually play tankers instead of trying to shoehorn tankers into what ever they want.

[Profit]

3 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

I'm not sure why we are going over this, but the Taunt power for Tankers could be altered separate from the Brute version in their primaries to provide a space for uniform changes.

Just making sure everyone understands what taunts are what for tanks. Most people think the only taunt effect tanks get on attacks is just gauntlet. The reason it's important that everyone understands, is that Brutes enjoy 2/3s of those taunt effects with no changes what so ever.

[Myrmidon]

2 hours ago, Profit said:

As for informed voices, I made my first tank on 2004-09-17

Newb...

 

😁

[Myrmidon]

2 hours ago, Jeuraud said:

You know what the no-brainer for me is.... that Tanks are fricken boring to play, and Gauntlet and Bruising did not change that, and your change will not change that either. 

 

Did you ever have a chance to try out the time that all Tanker attacks were AoEs on test? Until they reverted it, I spent hours on that because it was so much fun.😁

Edited August 30, 2019 by Myrmidon

[Profit]

32 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

Newb...

 

😁

Inorite! I had a scrapper in beta and all the way up to day I made my tanker, and I just couldn't get into the scrapper. But oh boy I clicked with that tanker. Never looked back.

[Myrmidon]

Just now, Profit said:

Inorite! I had a scrapper in beta and all the way up to day I made my tanker, and I just couldn't get into the scrapper. But oh boy I clicked with that tanker. Never looked back.

Funny. My first character was a Dark/Dark Scrapper. I saw an SG-mate roll into a mission with a Tanker and after that single instance, I asked that Tanker to show me. 12 levels later, I had it down and the rest is history.

[Jeuraud]

3 hours ago, Profit said:

And no, I don't need to get over it. You don't have a dog in this,

Dude, everything a CoHH Dev works on takes time, they just don't happen by Fucking Magic. The time spent on your want is time not spent on my want, that is fucking real world. This means I have the right to voice my opinion on every suggestion made... if I fucking choose to.

 

My opinion is that Tanks and Brutes are working as intended by the CoHV Devs, which includes IOs, because IO's did not just appear in CoH by FM. 

My opinion is that Brutes who IO themselves to Tank levels are just as much a tank as Tanks are.

My opinion is that a Tank has no more right to tank than a Brute does.

 

My opinion is that your suggestion does nothing more than turn those Brutes who IO themselves up to Tank level into the second class Tanks, that in my opinion, you think they are.

12 hours ago, Profit said:

one being a team tank (tankers) and one being a selfish tank (brutes).

 

Now it's up to the CoHH Devs to decide whether your opinion or my opinion is more valid for Tanks and Brutes.

 

[Haijinx]

Regarding the IO levels balance.  The Tanker ATO really didn't help much.

 

Making tanks more survivable was pretty meh. 

[Leogunner]

11 hours ago, Profit said:

Just because tanks are boring to you do not mean they are boring to others. 

Are you staying that on principle or objectively?

 

On principle, I suppose. I had fun and enjoyed stalkers before they got their latest upgrade and it was assumed the way to play was to hit and run in PvE (that's always been wrong, btw). I even had fun with them when their only in combat crit chance was from mezzed targets. So if course someone might find regular Tanker fun. 

 

Objectively, maybe not? If you measure it by how many play them. Considering they even had their own weekly event (don't think there was ever a Stalker Sunday or something) I don't think they are as often played as something like Scrapper or even their team oriented cousin, the Defender. I could be wrong though, I'm going by pure anecdotal observation there. Every time I play my Defenders, it's like the time everyone decides it's Defenders week and that's all I see for PuGs. When I play scrappers, I always check other scrappers for their concept and power set combo and performance so much so that I'm talking about it now. Most tankers that I see are already max level... 

11 hours ago, Profit said:

I hate that the strategy and idea of tanks as they are currently are boring to you. But they aren't to me and many others, so no making them interesting to just you and you alone is at the bottom of my priorities.

And this is what I hate when having discussions with people online. They will complain when you put words in their mouths but be completely oblivious when they do it themselves. 

 

Why do you believe, doing something for tankers to make them more fun for a general audience is somehow isolated or antithetical to your idealized view of tankers? They can be made more fun AND retain their strategic feel and role. You seem to be under the impression that a change to add something interesting and different would require taking something AWAY from the AT but your suggestions will somehow be tarrif free. 

 

And I find it interesting you belive you speak for all tankers and their interest when at least a certain ratio of them don't think there is an issue to fix at all. 

 

But I guess since your dog is bigger than my dog, we should just accept your views at face value and not criticize your premise (that tanker needs to look more attractive to teams!). I believe many people have blown that argument out of the water with "no one cares about what the 'team' wants! It's what the players want to play". 

Edited August 30, 2019 by Leogunner

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

On the subject of how many choose to and enjoy the tanking role, that is abit unfair, its well known in the wider MMO world that in any given mmo only a small percentage of players regularly play tanks or support roles. WoW I believe revealed a few years back that in their total  pop on any given day only about 5% of players were on tank or support roles. Most people play these games to be killers basically.  High DPS classes are always played much much more then any other.

 

In CoH we have quite a few AT for that need, And no matter what some say here, a few have pointed out that even on day one in a team with enough buffs and debuffs a designated point man was more a quality of life feature then a need. That with such buffs even the squishiest became tanky as hell.

 

People imo need to recognize that if they dont enjoy playing a tank, that is not some crime, nor does it mean the tank is made or played wrong. Its just a class few will honestly ever choose and even if it was identical to a brute or better then a scrapper in every way many would likely just based on the name tank ignore the AT. In part because of the perception that such are responsible for keeping aggro off of others. Many dont want to feel responsible for anyone in any way even themselves in MMO, hence the trinity, as many who want to do DPS want to not have to pay any attention to their own survival.

 

These are broader MMO truths, and asking the HC team to overcome something no other MMO dev team has really ever managed to tackle in a way that increases the player pops desire to play a tank is really silly imo.

 

This is why some of the more modern MMO like Guild Wars 2 basically threw out the trinity and made every one a self contained trinity. This was also true of DDO with multi classing for its peak era of popularity. Players build to be all in one and not need anything from each other so when they did team up they basically could not be stopped by any content designed for the classic trinity.