Addressing the Tanker Brute Connundrum.

[Leogunner]

1 minute ago, Foxfyre said:

ROFL.....

I've seen many try and fail to do exactly what you're saying is possible.

A good tanker does not lose aggro.  Period.  

Okay. Cookie.

 

@Profit how much are you paying this guy to ride your d***? Is this why he/she's trying to throw around his/her 50mil inf?  You're not paying them much...

[Foxfyre]

2 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Okay. Cookie.

 

@Profit how much are you paying this guy to ride your d***? Is this why he/she's trying to throw around his/her 50mil inf?  You're not paying them much...

I mean.....I could throw 500 million at you.  It really doesn't matter.  This is a bet i wouldn't lose anyway.
 

Also, it's sad that you don't understand friendship.

[Jeuraud]

16 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

As I mentioned before.....bring whatever you want and go try to pull aggro off Profit.

 

6 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

A good tanker does not lose aggro.  Period.

Then there is no need for the OPs Taunt change.... period.

 

If there is no need for the OPs Taunt change then what is the purpose of the Taunt change?

[Foxfyre]

1 minute ago, Jeuraud said:

 

Then there is no need for the OPs Taunt change.... period.

 

If there is no need for the OPs Taunt change then what is the purpose of the Taunt change?

Read the OP again.

Then go read the posts in the thread where people said they don't play Tanks because they can play a Brute instead.

[Profit]

15 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Okay. Cookie.

 

@Profit how much are you paying this guy to ride your d***? Is this why he/she's trying to throw around his/her 50mil inf?  You're not paying them much...

I'm not paying him anything. Foxy and I have played this game a long time. We've been friends a long time. A long time. Foxy has seen me tank things that you wouldn't believe. Foxy has seen me tank for teams you probably would have walked away from and keep them together and successful. Do I have friends? Yeah. Do they know what I'm capable of on my tank? Yeah. Do they not like to see people who apparently know nothing about tanking talk to me like I just picked up the game yesterday? No they do not. All the things you guys are describing, brutes tanking as well as tanks, blasters stripping aggro off tanks, tanks needing support, psi hole OMG, these are things my friends have seen me demonstrate to be untrue time and time again. And yet there is still a misconception in the game that brutes > tanks at tanking. They are not. You are not going to take my word for it, that's fine. My suggestions in the OP are meant to solidify tanks as the main tanking class, no ifs and or buts and still leave room for a brute/scrapper to step in and tank in a pinch. My suggestions are meant to address inadequacies created by easily obtainable res/def IO bonuses that causes another AT to be able to step on a tanks toes. And they do that perfectly while not hurting any existing Tanker character in the game. They don't change those characters to be different than the player who created envisioned and they add extra to the class in a subtle way.

 

Then again, you are the guy who told me to 'lrn2tank noob' because I've never tanked in other MMOs. If you want to discuss FFXII tanking, goto those forums. You need to realize one thing though, 90+% of my time playing COH is spent on an INV/SS tank, tanking in a dynamic COH environment, I know tanking in this game. I may not know it in other games, and I will be bow to your knowledge in WOW/CO/EverQuest/DACO/FFXII/Whatever, but here in this game? I am the tank, you are not.

[Jeuraud]

3 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

Read the OP again.

Then go read the posts in the thread where people said they don't play Tanks because they can play a Brute instead.

So what... I can play a Stalker instead of a Scrapper, or I can play a Dominator instead of a Controller, or I can play a Corrupter instead of a Defender, or... I could continue on with more examples but I don't think it's needed. Also I can choose to play the opposite of these... you know a Controller instead of a Dominator, etc..

Why should there be changes made just because someone can play a different AT that fills the same function?

 

Also I've read the OP a few times, and I have read every post in this thread, so being I'm a bit dense how about explaining why Tanks would need a Taunt increase, which is totally about keeping agro, if other ATs cannot pull agro from a good Tank.

or

Are you saying that the OPs Taunt changes are for the mediocre and bad Tanks, to give them an advantage over a IO'd 'for tanking' Brute?

 

 

 

[Leogunner]

1 minute ago, Profit said:

I'm not paying him anything. Foxy and I have played this game a long time. We've been friends a long time. A long time.

Good for you.  Can you explain why he randomly brings you up in unrelated conversations?  It's rather odd.

 

3 minutes ago, Profit said:

Foxy has seen me tank things that you wouldn't believe. Foxy has seen me tank for teams you probably would have walked away from and keep them together and successful.

That's fine and dandy, but it's like bragging "I can play the game on Medium difficulty without trying".  The reason tanking is a preferred tactic is because it's easier than the other methods.  Nothing against you or your skills in the game, more a jab at your buddy injecting you in other people's conversations that didn't evoke your name.

 

7 minutes ago, Profit said:

All the things you guys are describing, brutes tanking as well as tanks, blasters stripping aggro off tanks, tanks needing support, psi hole OMG, these are things my friends have seen me demonstrate to be untrue time and time again. And yet there is still a misconception in the game that brutes > tanks at tanking. They are not. You are not going to take my word for it, that's fine. My suggestions in the OP are meant to solidify tanks as the main tanking class, no ifs and or buts and still leave room for a brute/scrapper to step in and tank in a pinch. My suggestions are meant to address inadequacies created by easily obtainable res/def IO bonuses that causes another AT to be able to step on a tanks toes. And they do that perfectly while not hurting any existing Tanker character in the game. They don't change those characters to be different than the player who created envisioned and they add extra to the class in a subtle way.

I'm not one of those people saying Brutes replace Tankers or some such.  I'm in the camp that says tanking, the role, is niche.  If anything overshadows the Tanker's ability to tank, it's a perma-dom Dominator.  In that camp, I believe making Tanker better at such a niche as managing aggro won't do anything productive because they already do tanking better than any other taunting melee.

 

12 minutes ago, Profit said:

Then again, you are the guy who told me to 'lrn2tank noob' because I've never tanked in other MMOs. If you want to discuss FFXII tanking, goto those forums. You need to realize one thing though, 90+% of my time playing COH is spent on an INV/SS tank, tanking in a dynamic COH environment, I know tanking in this game. I may not know it in other games, and I will be bow to your knowledge in WOW/CO/EverQuest/DACO/FFXII/Whatever, but here in this game? I am the tank, you are not.

Did you read my clarification?  Or did you go off your buddy's misconceptions?  That wasn't me telling you "lrn2tank noob", I was describing other games' tanking and how, as a niche role, it has a lot of weight to work with in their respective games.  And it's FFXI.  FFXII was single-player on the PS2 (although FFXI was also available on PS2 but with that weird online service box thingy on it).  But in FFXI, tanking was important because you had no choice!  Every DPS was paper thin while every tank was relatively a rabbit in strength until you unlocked super high level gear and weapon skills that used non-offensive stats to calculate their damage and stuff like that.  It's similar in FFXIV but they dumbed down the stats system a lot.  Those are hard-trinity systems that live and die by the tank and support.

 

In Blade and Soul, tanking is just complex and reactionary but when done properly, you do as much as a DPS in damage while also staying alive and making sure others aren't in the line of fire.  It's a daunting job if you don't have the best upgraded weapons, so much so I gave up on my Kungfu master and stayed with my Warlock.  In that game, it's a more soft-trinity since a tank isn't necessary but the role can be filled and functions to the team's benefit (i.e. the tanks skills feed off of the foe being blocked or dodged and returns damage or activates other skills that keep attention and hinders the foe).

 

City of Heroes, by comparison to even a mainstream hard-trinity game, is like tanking pre-school.  There's not as much depth to it here.  I'm not criticizing CoH for having a basic combat system, I'm mentioning this because I'd rather not worry about boxing in Tankers into a shallow niche that can be replaced with some hard CC and enough buffs to mitigate what gets through.  Instead, make the AT more fun!

 

Also, get off your highhorse.  lol It's pathetic.

[Foxfyre]

20 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Good for you.  Can you explain why he randomly brings you up in unrelated conversations?  It's rather odd.

 

 

Bringing up Profit's tanking skills in a thread about tanking that he started is unrelated?

O_o

o_O

[Leogunner]

2 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

Bringing up Profit's tanking skills in a thread about tanking that he started is unrelated?

O_o

o_O

On a board not owned by Profit?

 

o_O

o_o

O_o

 

@Profit can you tell your friend what an A&B conversation is? I'm sure you don't enjoy replying to any of my posts and I doubt you want to be expected to respond to all replies here.

[Haijinx]

3 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

Bringing up Profit's tanking skills in a thread about tanking that he started is unrelated?

O_o

o_O

The entire concept of Tanking is apparently unrelated. 

 

 

[ZeeHero]

A good tanker will lose aggro to a equally good brute on a single target.

[Kimuji]

21 minutes ago, ZeeHero said:

A good tanker will lose aggro to a equally good brute on a single target.

If the Tanker is using taunt and attacking a Brute will need to taunt as well to pull the aggro from the Tanker (because a brute doesn't do 400% more damage than a Tanker) which means that the Brute is not doing its job as a Tank/DPS hybrid and is wasting its DPS potential by including taunts in its rotation when there's already a tank in the team. It is suboptimal play.

I've seen it myself on a few occasions against AVs, me on my Tanker and Brutes spaming taunt trying all they could to pull the aggro from me (and to what end? prove something to themselves?) instead of spaming their attacks and adequately contribute to the team's dps.

Conversely when I'm on my Brutes even if I build them to be able to be the main tank if needed I'll only play off-tank if there's a (competent) Tanker in the team. Because if the Tanker is doing its job my Brute is better used as a dps source than a competitor for the main tank spot.

Edited September 2, 2019 by Kimuji

[Foxfyre]

 

19 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

 

@Profit can you tell your friend what an A&B conversation is? I'm sure you don't enjoy replying to any of my posts and I doubt you want to be expected to respond to all replies here.

I think someone needs to tell you about PUBLIC FORUMS.

No such thing as an A&B conversation here.

[Leogunner]

16 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

 

I think someone needs to tell you about PUBLIC FORUMS.

No such thing as an A&B conversation here.

You can choose to believe either:

1. anyone can choose who to direct their message to because it's a PUBLIC FORUM
2. or the thread generator is 'A' and all replies in their thread must address 'A' or contain 'A' in their context.

You can either be wrong here or wrong in your previous post:

 

[ZeeHero]

21 minutes ago, Kimuji said:

If the Tanker is using taunt and attacking a Brute will need to taunt as well to pull the aggro from the Tanker (because a brute doesn't do 400% more damage than a Tanker) which means that the Brute is not doing its job as a Tank/DPS hybrid and is wasting its DPS potential by including taunts in its rotation when there's already a tank in the team. It is suboptimal play.

I've seen it myself on a few occasions against AVs, me on my Tanker and Brutes spaming taunt trying all they could to pull the aggro from me (and to what end? prove something to themselves?) instead of spaming their attacks and adequately contribute to the team's dps.

Conversely when I'm on my Brutes even if I build them to be able to be the main tank if needed I'll only play off-tank if there's a (competent) Tanker in the team. Because if the Tanker is doing its job my Brute is better used as a dps source than a competitor for the main tank spot.

Maybe so but since when does a team which cares about max efficiency take a tanker over a brute? (assuming both would be fully built) they don't. and when balancing a game you dont say "oh you dont NEED specific things to win therefore its balanced that energy melee damage is bad for no reason and tankers are not fun to play"

[Foxfyre]

21 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

You can choose to believe either:

1. anyone can choose who to direct their message to because it's a PUBLIC FORUM
2. or the thread generator is 'A' and all replies in their thread must address 'A' or contain 'A' in their context.

You can either be wrong here or wrong in your previous post:

 

Or I can believe that sub conversations are completely able to happen within a main conversation, and I can freely point out whether something is relevant to either.

Edited September 2, 2019 by Foxfyre

[Kimuji]

35 minutes ago, ZeeHero said:

Maybe so but since when does a team which cares about max efficiency take a tanker over a brute? (assuming both would be fully built) they don't. and when balancing a game you dont say "oh you dont NEED specific things to win therefore its balanced that energy melee damage is bad for no reason and tankers are not fun to play"

The vast majority of incarnate trials I've played involved Tankers chosen as the main tank for the whole trial. Same for Hamidon raids. I've yet to meet that team refusing to invite a Tanker because they can have a Brute instead. And I'm not saying that nothing can or should be done for Tankers, I've made several suggestions on this thread. I was just pointing out that when a Brute is trying to pull the aggro from a Tanker it is a suboptimal play from the Brute (and potentially a childish move as well).

Despite their short coming Tankers are fun too play (and again it doesn't mean that I think that nothing should be done for Tankers). And EM is broken because the devs broke it.

Edited September 2, 2019 by Kimuji

[Haijinx]

3 minutes ago, Kimuji said:

 And EM is broken because the devs broke it.

QFT

 

 

Its still good on Blasters though .. 

Edited September 2, 2019 by Haijinx

[Leogunner]

17 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

Or I can believe that sub conversations are completely able to happen within a main conversation, and I can freely point out whether something is relevant to either.

And when the person you're pointing out that relevancy tells you they aren't talking about that person, do you just go on pressing the issue?  It'd be like if Profit threw a party at a public venue to raise money for a charity and you randomly forcing yourself into conversations to talk about the size and texture of Profit's ****.  

 

1 hour ago, Haijinx said:

The entire concept of Tanking is apparently unrelated. 

I was still talking about tanking, but it was more about it's importance and weight as a team role.  Consider the "sub conversation" was sparked by someone saying, in favor of the Tanker, that Tanker and Brute were effectively the same because you can build an offensive Tanker and they serve the same role while an IO'ed Stalker/Scrapper can also tank and someone else replying that the Scrapper/Stalker have no means of managing aggro and can only take alpha strikes.

 

Within that context, do you disagree?  And were you aware of the context of my reply to it?  I know it can be confusing to follow multiple conversations at once and I'm guilty of confusing one person for another (especially when they don't have distinctive avatars).

[Haijinx]

6 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

 

I was still talking about tanking, but it was more about it's importance and weight as a team role.  Consider the "sub conversation" was sparked by someone saying, in favor of the Tanker, that Tanker and Brute were effectively the same because you can build an offensive Tanker and they serve the same role while an IO'ed Stalker/Scrapper can also tank and someone else replying that the Scrapper/Stalker have no means of managing aggro and can only take alpha strikes.

 

Within that context, do you disagree?  And were you aware of the context of my reply to it?  I know it can be confusing to follow multiple conversations at once and I'm guilty of confusing one person for another (especially when they don't have distinctive avatars).

If in this context you are advocating that what a Stalker can do is Tanking .. then we are not talking about Tanking.  

 

Scrappers can have *some* aggro-gain tools, so "Scrapper/Stalker" isn't actually a true category exactly.  

   

[Jeuraud]

10 minutes ago, Kimuji said:

I was just pointing out that when a Brute is trying to pull the aggro from a Tanker it is a suboptimal play from the Brute (and potentially a childish move as well).

Your another Tank proponent who thinks they are the only AT allowed to perform a specific role (Agro control through Taunt.), while every other role in CoH has multiple ATs that can fill those roles. Gods, the arrogance of some of you people.

 

[Leogunner]

5 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

If in this context you are advocating that what a Stalker can do is Tanking .. then we are not talking about Tanking.  

 

Scrappers can have *some* aggro-gain tools, so "Scrapper/Stalker" isn't actually a true category exactly.  

   

But that's the thing, I'm not saying it is tanking.  I'm saying the necessity really depends on your team composition.  We can probably make a list of all the circumstances where traditional tanking is diminished or completely unnecessary which comes back to my opinion of focusing on improving taunt, aggro management or even level of survivability in relation to Brute won't do anything.  Bruising is something else and a better option to improve Tanker...probably not as interesting but who knows?

[Haijinx]

2 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

But that's the thing, I'm not saying it is tanking.  I'm saying the necessity really depends on your team composition.  We can probably make a list of all the circumstances where traditional tanking is diminished or completely unnecessary which comes back to my opinion of focusing on improving taunt, aggro management or even level of survivability in relation to Brute won't do anything.  Bruising is something else and a better option to improve Tanker...probably not as interesting but who knows?

Okay sure.  

 

And its true that in a lot of teams/situations, especially once you get to high level, you don't need any Tanking, even for +4's. 

 

Of course there are also a lot of players who think they don't need any tanking, and end up smooshed and ruining the nice no defeat Task Force no-prize.  As long as they bring their own wakies though, its NBD.   

 

I don't think it would hurt to improve the Tanker's aggro control some.  But its true that its not really going to change much.   

 

I find it interesting though that since a Brute can eclipse the Tanker's role, that simply making it so a Tanker can eclipse the Brute's role is so unpopular. 

 

 

[Kimuji]

 

42 minutes ago, Jeuraud said:

Your another Tank proponent who thinks they are the only AT allowed to perform a specific role (Agro control through Taunt.), while every other role in CoH has multiple ATs that can fill those roles. Gods, the arrogance of some of you people.

 

I think you are misreading what I wrote. I play Brutes and I tank with them. I wrote it did you miss it? So no I don't think that Tanker should be the only AT "allowed" to tank. And I've been defending Brutes against suggestions aming to cripple their aggro management abilities on this very thread. So that accusation doesn't work here.

If you don't believe me go check these posts:

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/6271-addressing-the-tanker-brute-connundrum/?do=findComment&comment=71317

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/6271-addressing-the-tanker-brute-connundrum/?do=findComment&comment=71326

https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/6271-addressing-the-tanker-brute-connundrum/?do=findComment&comment=71455

 

And there are more I didn't link them all.

What I was talking about was strategy and optimization when you have a Tanker and a Brute on the same team. The Tanker assuming the main tank role and the Brute the off-tank's just makes sense. Brutes are better damage dealers than Tankers so if the Brute spends most of its time herding mobs while there is somebody else with a lower damage output able to fill that role then the Brute is lowering the team's dps for no practical reason. And it's the same against AVs, a Tanker spaming Taunt hurts the team's dps much less than a Brute spaming Taunt instead of using an optimized attack rotation. And yes making a point at pulling the aggro from the Tanker while it's its biggest contribution to the team is a bit dickish, especially if you are playing an AT that have the possiblity to contribute in a different manner. It's a good way to make them feel useless and then you can't be surprised if threads like this one appear on the forum.

Edited September 2, 2019 by Kimuji

[Haijinx]

Bruising doesn't stack does it?

 

Even from other players?