Addressing the Tanker Brute Connundrum.

[Brutal Justice]

I don’t see increasing taunt magnitude or duration for tanks helping their issues with brutes. A brute can hold 100% aggro.  A tank being able to hold aggro off of the brute is not helpful at the higher levels. 

 

With bruising being self casting and not stacking with other sources of bruising it’s still an issues of not wanting more then one tank on a team.  No other archetype is diminished from having another of their kind on the same team quite like a tank. There are cases where having more than one tank could be beneficial but, in the majority of play, the team would be better served with any other archetype replacing that second tank. Tanks are my favorite archetype because I spend a lot of time in the lowers levels where they see their most impact on teams.  I also don’t have a “one tank rule”.  I love all tank teams.  Tanker Tuesday’s!  It’s just facts that more than one is less efficient than replacing that second tank with anything else.

 

I think the easiest way to add more value to tanks is to increase their leadership values.  That would be a “super easy” adjustment the devs could do. Tanks improving their teams makes sense.  Brutes smashing faces makes sense.  Somebody mentioned wanting an actual tanker for a tank as opposed to a brute because the person playing the tank has that tanker mentality, you have confidence in what the tank player is going to do, you can never trust a brute.  The brute would just as soon smash you if your hit box turned red.  The tank is there to protect. 

 

Ideally, tanks should have more powers like grant cover from shields or ground zero from rad armor.  Ground zero for the tanks should be just like it is.  As a tank with a tank mentality it feels good to be able to physically help another teammate.  The other archetype ground zeros should have the heal removed to distinguish the tanks version and mentality.  Grant cover should have a pve or self affecting aspect  added to it and the +def to teammates unique to the tanks version.  Pick a power from every armor set and give the tank version a team only affect. 

 

Each armor could have its unique affect as well.  Electric armor’s energize gives the team a small recharge boost when used.  Invincibility gives the whole team +to-hit.  Examples like that unique to the tank versions of the power. With this the only person who had something taken away was rad armor and shield armor. Brutes with these powers more than likely only take them to slot a LotG or have a pbaoe damage power anyways. Same with scrappers and stalkers.  This also helps with multiple tank teams.

[Leogunner]

 

With bruising being self casting and not stacking with other sources of bruising it’s still an issues of not wanting more then one tank on a team.  No other archetype is diminished from having another of their kind on the same team quite like a tank.

 

I'd argue: Who cares?

 

I've been on teams as a Blaster where things fall at such a clip that, I paused and just watched a few spawns and surprise, the mobs still fell at relatively the same speed.  I've been on a Stalker where I just relaxed and AS'ed mobs while the try-hard Scrapper was the Tank, DPS and coordinator. At the end of the day, practically any role can be minimalized to a point that the only difference is mincing percentages in an excel spreadsheet. But players do it to themselves.  They minimalize roles and then wonder why roles are minimalized lol

[Jeuraud]

This is how to fix the tanker/brute issue.

 

Problem 1 - Tanks are invalidated by brutes at IO power levels making the decision a player or team leader has on which they would prefer to have in a team a 'no-brainer'. This invalidation occurs on all fronts - aggro control, damage, and survivability.

Problem 2 - The game is balanced around SO power levels, and at these power levels brutes and tanks are balanced as with SOs brutes can not achieve the level of survivability tanks have.

 

How is this any different than the Tank/Scrapper issue before IOs and Brutes were a thing?

In-group, Scrappers were good enough for 99.9% of the game. Hells, once people started learning CoH's group dynamics, 'no Melees at all', performed way better than 'good enough'. CoH was unique in that it needed no Trinity.

Has this changed with the addition of IOs and Incarnates?

 

The team leader who would bypass a Tank, to wait on a Brute, is an ignorant, who thinks they are playing (Name any other MMO). The team leader who would kick a Tank for a Brute, is a team leader I would 'note', and then I would drop from their group.

 

The thing is, I'm not sure what your issue is.

My issue with the Tank is that it was fricken boring to play.

 

Brutes were the Devs answer to how boring a Tank was to play. Because unless you drastically change the Tanks game-play there is no answer to the Tank's issue, as I see it... that there are other ATs that can fill their roll 'good enough', and are way more fun to play.

 

Note, I do not see the OPs fixes, fixing the fun factor

[Foxfyre]

The thing is, I'm not sure what your issue is.

My issue with the Tank is that it was fricken boring to play.

 

Brutes were the Devs answer to how boring a Tank was to play. Because unless you drastically change the Tanks game-play there is no answer to the Tank's issue, as I see it...

 

You just walked yourself in circles.

 

Profit: Here's a fix for tanks because they aren't fun to play and there's no real reason to play them over Brutes.  Here's some changes I'm suggesting.

You: My issue with tanks is that they aren't fun to play.  And that they need changes.

 

At this point, I'm wondering if you even read what you're replying to.

[Replacement]

Btw, Profit, in glad you posted this. I hope we're showing some capacity to get over our emotions and see your perspective.

 

Not fond of expanding brusing?

 

I'm honestly not sure. It feels like a rabbit hole of sorts. I'm quite opposed to retooling it to be smaller numbers that stack. That would distort play, including relative usefulness of other ATs (e.g. Sonic blasters).  It would probably be ok on all attacks, but it would need watched and would represent a lot of work (adding the bruising line to every single tanker secondary attack, one by one).

 

It's weird.

[marcussmythe]

I coule get hehind expanded brusing (more team offense value, more output solo against hard targets - where tank solo misery lies) and handing out debuff reist generously with bith hands to the AT. 

 

This would allow them to function with less pain alone, and give them the ability to tank the Vanguard/Imperial/Banished/etc. mobs that late game devalue any untility beyond ‘kill them NOW’

 

 

[Leogunner]

This is how to fix the tanker/brute issue.

 

Problem 1 - Tanks are invalidated by brutes at IO power levels making the decision a player or team leader has on which they would prefer to have in a team a 'no-brainer'. This invalidation occurs on all fronts - aggro control, damage, and survivability.

Problem 2 - The game is balanced around SO power levels, and at these power levels brutes and tanks are balanced as with SOs brutes can not achieve the level of survivability tanks have.

 

How is this any different than the Tank/Scrapper issue before IOs and Brutes were a thing?

In-group, Scrappers were good enough for 99.9% of the game. Hells, once people started learning CoH's group dynamics, 'no Melees at all', performed way better than 'good enough'. CoH was unique in that it needed no Trinity.

Has this changed with the addition of IOs and Incarnates?

 

The team leader who would bypass a Tank, to wait on a Brute, is an ignorant, who thinks they are playing (Name any other MMO). The team leader who would kick a Tank for a Brute, is a team leader I would 'note', and then I would drop from their group.

 

The thing is, I'm not sure what your issue is.

My issue with the Tank is that it was fricken boring to play.

 

Brutes were the Devs answer to how boring a Tank was to play. Because unless you drastically change the Tanks game-play there is no answer to the Tank's issue, as I see it... that there are other ATs that can fill their roll 'good enough', and are way more fun to play.

 

Note, I do not see the OPs fixes, fixing the fun factor

 

Agreed wholeheartedly.

 

The thing is, I'm not sure what your issue is.

My issue with the Tank is that it was fricken boring to play.

 

Brutes were the Devs answer to how boring a Tank was to play. Because unless you drastically change the Tanks game-play there is no answer to the Tank's issue, as I see it...

 

You just walked yourself in circles.

 

Profit: Here's a fix for tanks because they aren't fun to play and there's no real reason to play them over Brutes.  Here's some changes I'm suggesting.

You: My issue with tanks is that they aren't fun to play.  And that they need changes.

 

At this point, I'm wondering if you even read what you're replying to.

 

How is "taunt has higher mag" and "there is a small amount of -res added" fun?  That's merely placebo considering how many effects get thrown around that are vaporous concepts.  Like, why not add -def to gauntlet? Because players can already reliably hit targets?  Well players can already reliably defeat targets too so how is -res fun?

[Replacement]

The thing is, I'm not sure what your issue is.

My issue with the Tank is that it was fricken boring to play.

 

In my estimation, there are two (2) things players mean when they say something is fun/boring:

 

a) They are speaking about the sense of being proficient; powerful.  This is what leads people to FotM builds and the reason the highest performing classes in MMOs always tend to have the highest popularity -- the correlation is real.

 

b) The gameplay loop.  This is a really neat little term to sum "all the things about the play experience for this class/character/build."  This can be broad, like "keep hitting things to keep fury up, duh" to very specific nuances like "Street Justice combo points vs Dual blades combo system."

 

I believe you and @Leogunner are looking at a category B -- you are unsatisfied with the loop and its expectations. 

 

Profit is very happy with it, and a lot of us simply don't want to shake the boat.  So keep this in mind.  If I am correct on my read, keep in mind there is a fundamental incompatibility between how you want to treat Tanker and how others do.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong.. I still like my "spend a fury" idea (gain a stack of gauntlet every time you're attacked, spend all of them every time you attack for bonus damage, so you sit there and build strength), but the more radical ideas just aren't safe.

[Leogunner]

The thing is, I'm not sure what your issue is.

My issue with the Tank is that it was fricken boring to play.

 

In my estimation, there are two (2) things players mean when they say something is fun/boring:

 

a) They are speaking about the sense of being proficient; powerful.  This is what leads people to FotM builds and the reason the highest performing classes in MMOs always tend to have the highest popularity -- the correlation is real.

 

b) The gameplay loop.  This is a really neat little term to sum "all the things about the play experience for this class/character/build."  This can be broad, like "keep hitting things to keep fury up, duh" to very specific nuances like "Street Justice combo points vs Dual blades combo system."

 

I believe you and @Leogunner are looking at a category B -- you are unsatisfied with the loop and its expectations. 

 

Profit is very happy with it, and a lot of us simply don't want to shake the boat.  So keep this in mind.  If I am correct on my read, keep in mind there is a fundamental incompatibility between how you want to treat Tanker and how others do.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong.. I still like my "spend a fury" idea (gain a stack of gauntlet every time you're attacked, spend all of them every time you attack for bonus damage, so you sit there and build strength), but the more radical ideas just aren't safe.

 

You're not far off.

 

Personally speaking, I just see it's pointless to pick and choose melees besides Stalker vs everything else because they all tend to narrow down on the same goal which is hit stuff in the face.  Basically, it doesn't really matter if you pick a Brute or a Tanker or a Scrapper or multiples as it's the dynamic change of the team that is important, i.e. how you pick and start combats.

 

The only thing I would advocate is giving purpose to why a player would want to pick a certain melee over another.  Besides character concept, I don't feel tweeking numbers to create the illusion of role diversity would help.  And if you're going to throw Tanker a bone, why not my idea lol.  If the dynamic was play Scrapper for min/max optimal DPS, Brute for easy solo damage/survival and Tanker for different AoEs, that at least gives you a reason to make multiples of a melee setup.

[Jeuraud]

The thing is, I'm not sure what your issue is.

My issue with the Tank is that it was fricken boring to play.

 

Brutes were the Devs answer to how boring a Tank was to play. Because unless you drastically change the Tanks game-play there is no answer to the Tank's issue, as I see it...

 

You just walked yourself in circles.

 

Profit: Here's a fix for tanks because they aren't fun to play and there's no real reason to play them over Brutes.  Here's some changes I'm suggesting.

You: My issue with tanks is that they aren't fun to play.  And that they need changes.

 

At this point, I'm wondering if you even read what you're replying to.

 

I read it, then read it again before I made my reply, and I'm pretty sure I read it again before I posted my reply, and I just read it again. You know whats not in the OPs statement... the word 'Fun' or anything about fun.

 

It's all about numbers, and I'm going to go with Leo and say BFD, and I'm going to stick with my first statement about not accepting or kicking; it's Un-CoH, and something someone from another MMO would do, and is totally unnecessary in CoH.

 

I don't play a Tank because it's numbers can be matched by a Brute or a Scrapper using IOs and the proper build, again BFD. Or because somebody might not want me in their group; there is no way in hells that I would play in this persons group. I don't play a Tank because it's fricken boring, and the OPs suggestions do not answer the boring game-play aspect of the Tank.

 

If there is something in the OPs post about 'Fun' then post it, maybe I missed it in my multiple readings. It's sure as hells not impossible.

 

In my estimation, there are two (2) things players mean when they say something is fun/boring:

 

a) They are speaking about the sense of being proficient; powerful.  This is what leads people to FotM builds and the reason the highest performing classes in MMOs always tend to have the highest popularity -- the correlation is real.

 

b) The gameplay loop.  This is a really neat little term to sum "all the things about the play experience for this class/character/build."  This can be broad, like "keep hitting things to keep fury up, duh" to very specific nuances like "Street Justice combo points vs Dual blades combo system."

 

I believe you and @Leogunner are looking at a category B -- you are unsatisfied with the loop and its expectations.

 

Yep, I would say your correct for me.

I am not a numbers cruncher or a Min/Maxer; 'a', above does not sound like fun to me, and I'm having a hard time viewing it as fun.

I happen to like Fury... in solo, it's its own mini game. In-group the Brute needs to ignore it or drive the group crazy.

 

The question is; What is the OP trying to fix with their proposal!

Are they trying to tweak the numbers?

Or are they trying to make the Tank more appealing to more gamers? 

[Redlynne]

Not fond of expanding brusing?

 

I'm honestly not sure. It feels like a rabbit hole of sorts. I'm quite opposed to retooling it to be smaller numbers that stack. That would distort play, including relative usefulness of other ATs (e.g. Sonic blasters).  It would probably be ok on all attacks, but it would need watched and would represent a lot of work (adding the bruising line to every single tanker secondary attack, one by one).

 

It's weird.

 

Hence why I tailored my proposal for this kind of thing to be noticeable when stacked, but hardly game breaking.

 

Consider ... that if you're soloing and using your Tier 1 secondary power once per 10 seconds (to sustain Bruising, since only the T1 secondary power includes the Grant Power: Bruising attribute) the amount of -Resist debuffing is ... -20%.

Note that the precedent, where nothing is changed from Issue 23, is that under the exact same circumstances of using your Tier 1 secondary power once per 10 seconds (to sustain Bruising) while solo the amount of -Resist debuffing is ... -20%.

 

So far so good.

The performance profile before and after the change in the solo scenario is effectively equal.

 

Now consider what happens when you have an all Tanker Team-8 situation with the exact same condition of every Tanker on the team using their Tier 1 secondary power once every 10 seconds ...

 

Under my proposal ... -15% has the Effect does not stack from same caster modifier on it, so that doesn't stack ... but an additional -5% DOES STACK from each of the (8) Tankers on the team.

Net result = -(15 + (8*5)) = -55% Resist debuffing (in a mix of that is half and half resistable and unresistable)

 

Compare that to the default baseline performance of an Issue 23 Tanker ... where the -Resist debuffing is ... -20% ... no matter how many Tankers are on the team or how much Grant Power: Bruising is going on.

 

Now suppose that all of those (8) Tankers are using their Tier 1 secondary attack TWICE per 10 seconds, rather than just ONCE ...

-(15 + (8*5*2)) = -95% Resist debuffing (in a mix of that is half and half resistable and unresistable)

 

 

 

Do I Have Your Attention Yet?

 

 

 

I mean, I know Barbie™ says that "Math is Hard!" ... but really ... we're gamers, and this is just basic arithmetic.

 

Your turn.

[Replacement]

The question is; What is the OP trying to fix with their proposal!

Are they trying to tweak the numbers?

Or are they trying to make the Tank more appealing to more gamers?

 

So a more encompassing title for my "Category A" above would probably be optimization appeal.

 

Let me pause and be clear here: this is a spot where people want to respond with a high-horse answer about doing what's fun. But when "fun" feels miserable because you feel like the weak link, that's far more damaging to your "fun."

 

The intent is simple: keep tanker the same, on a gameplay loop level, but bring them in line with other melee on the optimization level.

 

@Redlynne - I'm not particularly opposed to it, but I think that sounds like it could make distortions on how other class/combinations are perceived. It's subtle and little. I'm just saying... There's good reason to tread lightly, and that means you're asking a volunteer developer to make changes to about 165 powers that they may need to come back through and adjust again, or back out entirely.

[Jeuraud]

 

Now suppose that all of those (8) Tankers are using their Tier 1 secondary attack TWICE per 10 seconds, rather than just ONCE ...

-(15 + (8*5*2)) = -95% Resist debuffing (in a mix of that is half and half resistable and unresistable)

 

Do I Have Your Attention Yet?

 

I mean, I know Barbie™ says that "Math is Hard!" ... but really ... we're gamers, and this is just basic arithmetic.

 

Your turn.

 

Are you saying that with this change multiple Tanks with their -Res T1 attacks would add value to a group, because of their -Res?

 

 

There are 11 Support sets with -Res in them and 4 ATs that can use them. Within these sets are 3 Toggles and 6 AoEs, and the 3 Toggles have Single Target -Res as well.

 

If you were to take all 8 team members from this group, in the opening seconds they can put down 278.75% -Res (Non Defender numbers.), for a minimum of 30 sec, 188.75% not requiring To-Hit.

 

Three of the ATs have attack sets that can do -Res as well. Lets say we have a Demon MM who uses one attack, 9.35% -Res, and 5 Sonic attackers with 2 attacks at 15% -Res each, that can be easily done in 10 sec, and 2 Controllers with no -Res Attacks. After the opening you can add another 84.35% -Res that requires To-Hit (1 MM -Res + 5 -Res Attacks), which equals 353.75% -Res, and a few seconds later another 75% -Res that requires To-Hit (5 Stackable -Res Attacks), for a total of 438.1% -Res.

 

438.1% -Res within the first ten seconds easy. I generated more than four times the -Res, and non of these needed to use their T1 Attack to generate the -Res from the attack. We weren't plinking at the MOB this first ten seconds, we were locking it down and tearing it a new asshole.

 

I'm unclear how replacing a couple of members of the above group with a couple of Tanks doing their T1 attack would add value to the group.

[kelly Rocket]

IMO, just remove Tankers from the game. There's no real need for them to exist anymore, and frankly they never had a basis in the comics in the first place. I can think of maybe two or three characters in all of comics that fit the Tanker power profile (Indestructible and weak as a kitten), but they're certainly not a major archetype in the comics. Generally all Tanks in the comics are also incredibly strong.

[Herotu]

IMO, just remove Tankers from the game. There's no real need for them to exist anymore, and frankly they never had a basis in the comics in the first place. I can think of maybe two or three characters in all of comics that fit the Tanker power profile (Indestructible and weak as a kitten), but they're certainly not a major archetype in the comics. Generally all Tanks in the comics are also incredibly strong.

 

How about they just make all the archetypes the same, call them something generic like... "Superbeing", and let us pick powers that determine all of our differences - I'm looking forward to my Superstrength/Kinetics Manipulation Supercharacter.

 

[edit] I read this back and it seems like a reasonable idea until you realise that it just means players will all pick the "best" pair of powers. Thematics aren't enough encouragement to be varied - as a dev you have to force it... somehow.

[Infinitum]

IMO, just remove Tankers from the game. There's no real need for them to exist anymore, and frankly they never had a basis in the comics in the first place. I can think of maybe two or three characters in all of comics that fit the Tanker power profile (Indestructible and weak as a kitten), but they're certainly not a major archetype in the comics. Generally all Tanks in the comics are also incredibly strong.

tanks have always been my main, since I1. I've had at least 6 lvl 50s through the years.  Never once have I felt weak. 

 

Maybe I'm just stupid though.

[Zolgar]

I don’t see increasing taunt magnitude or duration for tanks helping their issues with brutes. A brute can hold 100% aggro.  A tank being able to hold aggro off of the brute is not helpful at the higher levels. 

 

Infact, quite the opposite. End game, a tank pulling the agro off a brute constantly is often going to hinder the brute and possible prove a detriment to the teams overall efficiency.

 

Let's say I'm running a rad/bio Brute. I am an AoE death and debuff machine. I am agro-capped and surrounded by foes, not only are they improving my survival, but I am I am debuffing their damage, damage resist, defense, etc. just by them being next to me, to say nothing of my damage output..

 

Tank pulls them all off of me. Enemies are now stronger, taking less damage, and my survival capabilities have been lowered.

[Foxfyre]

 

How is "taunt has higher mag" and "there is a small amount of -res added" fun?  That's merely placebo considering how many effects get thrown around that are vaporous concepts.  Like, why not add -def to gauntlet? Because players can already reliably hit targets?  Well players can already reliably defeat targets too so how is -res fun?

 

1.  Because it makes them more "tankier", and provides a difference between the tank and the brute that fits their thematics.  The tank is supposed to be able to hold aggro.  That is the tanks job.  The brute is supposed to do damage while holding aggro.  Increasing tank magnitude, or increasing the tanks aggro cap fits the theme of the AT, and provides a clear difference between the two.

 

2. -Res is better than -def.  A defense debuff just means your more likely to hit.  A resistance debuff means you're going to do MORE damage when you hit.  And once you get past being a lowbie and have decent accuracy most toons don't have to worry that much about IF their going to hit something.  Especially once you get to IO sets with accuracy and to-hit bonuses.

[Foxfyre]

I read it, then read it again before I made my reply, and I'm pretty sure I read it again before I posted my reply, and I just read it again. You know whats not in the OPs statement... the word 'Fun' or anything about fun.

 

It's all about numbers, and I'm going to go with Leo and say BFD, and I'm going to stick with my first statement about not accepting or kicking; it's Un-CoH, and something someone from another MMO would do, and is totally unnecessary in CoH.

 

I don't play a Tank because it's numbers can be matched by a Brute or a Scrapper using IOs and the proper build, again BFD. Or because somebody might not want me in their group; there is no way in hells that I would play in this persons group. I don't play a Tank because it's fricken boring, and the OPs suggestions do not answer the boring game-play aspect of the Tank.

 

If there is something in the OPs post about 'Fun' then post it, maybe I missed it in my multiple readings. It's sure as hells not impossible.

 

I'll leave this up to interpretation, although I will say that me and Profit had many discussions about this issue before he made this post, so I have the benefit of understanding his mindset a little better.

 

However, while the word fun may not have been used, he does pretty much start off his spiel with "Tanks are invalidated by brutes at IO power levels".  If one AT is completely negated by another, and can out perform the other, then it's pretty easy to then say that makes the AT not fun to play as well.

 

[Leogunner]

I read it, then read it again before I made my reply, and I'm pretty sure I read it again before I posted my reply, and I just read it again. You know whats not in the OPs statement... the word 'Fun' or anything about fun.

 

It's all about numbers, and I'm going to go with Leo and say BFD, and I'm going to stick with my first statement about not accepting or kicking; it's Un-CoH, and something someone from another MMO would do, and is totally unnecessary in CoH.

 

I don't play a Tank because it's numbers can be matched by a Brute or a Scrapper using IOs and the proper build, again BFD. Or because somebody might not want me in their group; there is no way in hells that I would play in this persons group. I don't play a Tank because it's fricken boring, and the OPs suggestions do not answer the boring game-play aspect of the Tank.

 

If there is something in the OPs post about 'Fun' then post it, maybe I missed it in my multiple readings. It's sure as hells not impossible.

 

I'll leave this up to interpretation, although I will say that me and Profit had many discussions about this issue before he made this post, so I have the benefit of understanding his mindset a little better.

 

However, while the word fun may not have been used, he does pretty much start off his spiel with "Tanks are invalidated by brutes at IO power levels".  If one AT is completely negated by another, and can out perform the other, then it's pretty easy to then say that makes the AT not fun to play as well.

 

So it's perception.  It's not that the game sets your Tanker as invalid, or even that other players drop you from teams (I've never heard people doing this or it being a problem) but rather how you feel in the presence of others' contributions.  So your solution is to pad that perception so that, even after being inevitably "invalidated", you can have that consideration in the back of your head "Well, at least I added 20% -res" or "I kept their attention for 2 sec longer before they all got wiped by someone who doesn't care where the aggro is because it was going to be dead in the same amount of time with or without the taunt".

 

I'm not buying it lol

 

I know it's just a suggestion so this is all just my 2 cents.  Are there any more ideas that could make Tanker fun while not pushing past the performance cap that is Brute?  Just make it different.

[Foxfyre]

So it's perception.

 

As stated in Profit's original post, the game was balanced around SO's.  Brutes could not come close to Tanks at SO power levels.

 

To give an example: A fire/fire tank vs a fire/fire brute.  For a fire/fire tank to cap S/L resists, it only needs about an additional 18% in S/L resist over what the powers from it's own set give it.  (This may include the Tough power....I forget as I'm going off a remembered conversation I previously had.)

 

For a brute, that number was a bit over 40%.

 

Thanks to incarnates and IO's, A fire/fire brute can still achieve capped resist.

 

So no, it's not perception. It's actual numbers. 

 

Brutes were supposed to have extra damage at the price of being squishier.  Tanks were supposed to be sturdy at the price of lower damage.

 

Now that both AT's can easily achieve capped resists, something should be done to make Tanks stand out as actually being the Tank, and not just a weaker Brute.

[Leogunner]

So it's perception.

 

As stated in Profit's original post, the game was balanced around SO's.  Brutes could not come close to Tanks at SO power levels.

 

To give an example: A fire/fire tank vs a fire/fire brute.  For a fire/fire tank to cap S/L resists, it only needs about an additional 18% in S/L resist over what the powers from it's own set give it.  (This may include the Tough power....I forget as I'm going off a remembered conversation I previously had.)

 

For a brute, that number was a bit over 40%.

 

Thanks to incarnates and IO's, A fire/fire brute can still achieve capped resist.

 

So no, it's not perception. It's actual numbers. 

 

Brutes were supposed to have extra damage at the price of being squishier.  Tanks were supposed to be sturdy at the price of lower damage.

 

Now that both AT's can easily achieve capped resists, something should be done to make Tanks stand out as actually being the Tank, and not just a weaker Brute.

 

But in a team, where capped resistance matters and is the basis for your invalidation perceptions, both can be capped with a couple of team buffs.

 

That a Brute can solo cap their resistance does nothing to invalidate your Tanker doing the same.  Your perception dictates that, if a Brute can accomplish the same thing as a Tanker you might as well make a Brute.

 

Those changes in the OP doesn't fix that.  It doesn't change that.  At best, it pads perception of invalidation.

 

Also, this whole thing is mired in perceptions of min/maxing, the circumstance that invalidates much of the game's mechanics and AT differences.  I could use the same argument that people use to defend Incarnates here to dismiss your point but I won't.  I'm just putting it out there.

[kelly Rocket]

IMO, just remove Tankers from the game. There's no real need for them to exist anymore, and frankly they never had a basis in the comics in the first place. I can think of maybe two or three characters in all of comics that fit the Tanker power profile (Indestructible and weak as a kitten), but they're certainly not a major archetype in the comics. Generally all Tanks in the comics are also incredibly strong.

tanks have always been my main, since I1. I've had at least 6 lvl 50s through the years.  Never once have I felt weak. 

 

Maybe I'm just stupid though.

I mean... Tankers have terrible, garbage damage output. This is not really up for debate. Defenders hit harder than Tankers do. So I dunno how you could not feel weak unless you don't care about damage at all.

 

The only comic book character I can think of off the top of my head who fits the Tanker AT mechanics is Diamond Lil, from Alpha Flight back in like the '80s. She was completely invulnerable, but had only normal human strength. Any other "brick" or "tank" I can think of in the comics is also super strong.

 

So I think the Tanker design was misguided from the start.

[Leogunner]

IMO, just remove Tankers from the game. There's no real need for them to exist anymore, and frankly they never had a basis in the comics in the first place. I can think of maybe two or three characters in all of comics that fit the Tanker power profile (Indestructible and weak as a kitten), but they're certainly not a major archetype in the comics. Generally all Tanks in the comics are also incredibly strong.

tanks have always been my main, since I1. I've had at least 6 lvl 50s through the years.  Never once have I felt weak. 

 

Maybe I'm just stupid though.

I mean... Tankers have terrible, garbage damage output. This is not really up for debate. Defenders hit harder than Tankers do. So I dunno how you could not feel weak unless you don't care about damage at all.

 

The only comic book character I can think of off the top of my head who fits the Tanker AT mechanics is Diamond Lil, from Alpha Flight back in like the '80s. She was completely invulnerable, but had only normal human strength. Any other "brick" or "tank" I can think of in the comics is also super strong.

 

So I think the Tanker design was misguided from the start.

 

Well, Knockback is a sign of strength in comics so where does your comparison line up with CoH?

[Foxfyre]

Well, Knockback is a sign of strength in comics so where does your comparison line up with CoH?

 

Ok, now I know for sure you're just a troll.