Addressing the Tanker Brute Connundrum.

[Xaeon]

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.

 

Defender Damage Scaling: Damage Scale Melee: 0.550 Ranged: 0.650 

 

Tanker Damage Scaling: Melee: 0.800 Ranged: 0.500

 

 

 

And of course, melee attacks usually get better better stats than ranged attacks as compensation for their lack of ability to attack from a safe distance.

[Leogunner]

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.

 

Who's the troll trying to compare comic book feats to MMO RPG numbers?

 

Also, see the above post with the damage scalars.  The only saving grace for Defender damage is their force multiplication abilities (if they picked the right primary)...which also multiplies everyone else's damage...including that "garbage damage output" of Tankers lol

 

 

[Xaeon]

A Titan Weapons, Rad Melee, or War Mace Tanker is going to out damage any defender you care to name lol.

[Jeuraud]

 

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

 

The Tanker would not have been if the CoH Devs had followed the standard Trinity model, but they didn't.

They gave Support, Buffs and Debuffs that where more powerful then the norm, and the ability to stack them. They gave CCrs the ability to lock down more then one MOB at a time, for more than a few seconds. I don't think the Devs intentionally broke the Trinity, but in making all of the ATs... Super, they did, and I feel CoH is a better game for it.

 

But your right in a way, the Tank did not fit in CoH right out of the box.

This Tanker/Brute argument is no different than the Tank/Scrapper arguments of old (I'm getting deja vu from this thread.), because as long as you have Buffs, Debuffs, and CCs that work more then 'kind-of' you don't need a Tanker/Brute in the group. The only way to fix that is to tweak back the Buffs, Debuffs, and CCs to the 'kind-of' work level, and I do not believe you Tanks want to go there. I have vague memories of that being suggested and the shit storms it created.

[kelly Rocket]

 

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

 

The Tanker would not have been if the CoH Devs had followed the standard Trinity model, but they didn't.

They gave Support, Buffs and Debuffs that where more powerful then the norm, and the ability to stack them. They gave CCrs the ability to lock down more then one MOB at a time, for more than a few seconds. I don't think the Devs intentionally broke the Trinity, but in making all of the ATs... Super, they did, and I feel CoH is a better game for it.

 

But your right in a way, the Tank did not fit in CoH right out of the box.

This Tanker/Brute argument is no different than the Tank/Scrapper arguments of old (I'm getting deja vu from this thread.), because as long as you have Buffs, Debuffs, and CCs that work more then 'kind-of' you don't need a Tanker/Brute in the group. The only way to fix that is to tweak back the Buffs, Debuffs, and CCs to the 'kind-of' work level, and I do not believe you Tanks want to go there. I have vague memories of that being suggested and the shit storms it created.

 

Yeah, this is sort of my point. And why I say I'd just remove Tankers if it were up to me. I don't believe there's any way to buff them that will ever make them more valuable than a Brute. If the Brute can do the same job well enough to succeed at it, AND do several times as much damage while doing so, there really isn't any reason to go Tanker instead (Except for the fact that they get their defenses earlier and can tank better at very low levels).

 

Ultimately, there's no point in buffing Tanker defenses as they can already reach the caps trivially. There's no point in buffing their taunt abilities, as even a Brute (Who doesn't have AoE Gauntlet) can easily taunt well enough to hold all the aggro on a big 8 man team.

 

So unless you nerf Brute survivability, there just won't ever be a need for Tankers, which means people will always prefer to have a Brute who can do the same job and also provide more damage and faster clear times.

[Xaeon]

Expanding bruising so the Tanker passes out debuffs to enemies like candy would be a cool and unique way to give them their own independent niche on teams. People swore stalkers were unfixable for years until they ended up being fixed.

 

Also any suggestion that involves deleting people's characters is a complete non-starter that would likely lead to people leaving the game at best. To even entertain the idea of deleting people's tanker toons or forcibly converting them into Brutes is foolishness.

 

I would absolutely quit the game if I logged in and saw that my tankers were deleted or turned into brutes. I don't care what I got as compensation.

[Charistoph]

Honestly, I think expansion of Bruising to other powers, an extension of the AOE size of the auras (fixing Willpower's ticking while we're there), and providing debuffs to control powers would probably be the abilities I'd look in to first.

 

Aside from that, a little minor splash damage would be nice as a side benefit.  We're hitting effectively enough so that their friends feel it.

 

There are two roles to the Tank.  One is to be a shield of the group.  The other is tied to that by being a control element and controlling where groups of goes and directs their attention.

 

I think improving the control aspects of the Tanker versions of the powers would also be one way to help address what the Tankers are doing there.

[Galaxy Brain]

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.

 

Nobody has responded to this yet, but I want to quote this since it seems to be a fantastic idea. Tankers differ from Brutes thematically as their role is supposed to be the focal point of a team. Making their defensive powers also come with team-wide, or at least team mates in range, benefits would not only make multiple tankers neat, but be a big difference over brutes without making them play any differently.

 

 

[Jeuraud]

 

Tankers differ from Brutes thematically as their role is supposed to be the focal point of a team.

 

This is not true; the CoH Devs designed the Brute to fill the Tank/Scrapper rolls on Redside.

 

Also before CoV came out; hells, pretty much right after CoH came out, the players found that they did not need a Tank. The CoH Devs had broken the Trinity, and most of us players were happy with that. This is CoH not some other MMO, and you Tank proponents need to quit arguing for the Trinity role that a Tank fills within a Trinity, because the Trinity is not going to happen in CoH.

 

What I'm gathering from this thread is you all are trying to make the Tank into some type of Support/Melee. The problem I see is that you are trying to keep your heavy armor at the same time getting Support abilities through your inherent. I don't see that happening, but I could support the Tank being turned into a true Support/Melee. and then having a true roll in the group... Buffs/Debuffs & Heals on the front line.

 

Otherwise the Tank is going to have the same issue it had when it stepped out of the CoH box.

[SwitchFade]

 

Tankers differ from Brutes thematically as their role is supposed to be the focal point of a team.

 

This is not true; the CoH Devs designed the Brute to fill the Tank/Scrapper rolls on Redside.

 

Also before CoV came out; hells, pretty much right after CoH came out, the players found that they did not need a Tank. The CoH Devs had broken the Trinity, and most of us players were happy with that. This is CoH not some other MMO, and you Tank proponents need to quit arguing for the Trinity role that a Tank fills within a Trinity, because the Trinity is not going to happen in CoH.

 

What I'm gathering from this thread is you all are trying to make the Tank into some type of Support/Melee. The problem I see is that you are trying to keep your heavy armor at the same time getting Support abilities through your inherent. I don't see that happening, but I could support the Tank being turned into a true Support/Melee. and then having a true roll in the group... Buffs/Debuffs & Heals on the front line.

 

Otherwise the Tank is going to have the same issue it had when it stepped out of the CoH box.

 

Brutes were not meant to be villain tanks. They shaped red to be more solo, and they did not want to mirror blue. If anything, the mm was the meatshield.

 

The closest analogue a brute MIGHT have is a scrap. And before incarnates, scraps out damage brutes on a consistent basis.

[speczero]

What about dropping the Brutes max resistance down to 75% the same as a scrapper and just acknowledge them as a DPS. I mean they already compete against scrapper more than anything.

[Xaeon]

What about dropping the Brutes max resistance down to 75% the same as a scrapper and just acknowledge them as a DPS. I mean they already compete against scrapper more than anything.

 

Tankers differ from Brutes thematically as their role is supposed to be the focal point of a team.

 

This is not true; the CoH Devs designed the Brute to fill the Tank/Scrapper rolls on Redside.

 

Also before CoV came out; hells, pretty much right after CoH came out, the players found that they did not need a Tank. The CoH Devs had broken the Trinity, and most of us players were happy with that. This is CoH not some other MMO, and you Tank proponents need to quit arguing for the Trinity role that a Tank fills within a Trinity, because the Trinity is not going to happen in CoH.

 

What I'm gathering from this thread is you all are trying to make the Tank into some type of Support/Melee. The problem I see is that you are trying to keep your heavy armor at the same time getting Support abilities through your inherent. I don't see that happening, but I could support the Tank being turned into a true Support/Melee. and then having a true roll in the group... Buffs/Debuffs & Heals on the front line.

 

Otherwise the Tank is going to have the same issue it had when it stepped out of the CoH box.

 

Brutes were not meant to be villain tanks. They shaped red to be more solo, and they did not want to mirror blue. If anything, the mm was the meatshield.

 

The closest analogue a brute MIGHT have is a scrap. And before incarnates, scraps out damage brutes on a consistent basis.

Jack Emmeret may have wanted MMs to be the Redside tanks but Jack Emmeret is a gibbering idiot who was wrong about literally everything in CoX. Forget his intentions for the game; he thought that three minions should be a hard challenge for a fully built level 50 player; who cares what he thought 14 years ago?

 

By I18 the devs clearly thought that Brutes and Tankers were equivalent enough to have them share ancillary/patron power pools while Scrappers were thought to be closer to Stalkers and thus shared pools with them. 

 

Like can we finally retire this asinine meme of MMs being tanks? Because most MMs do not even try to tank or aggro manage for their teams while Brutes were given multiple tools to do just that. The initial concept of Masterminds was as tanks, but the initial concept did not pan out, nor did any of Jack's attempts to try and force it to pan out.

[Vanden]

Jack Emmeret may have wanted MMs to be the Redside tanks but Jack Emmeret is a gibbering idiot who was wrong about literally everything in CoX. Forget his intentions for the game; he thought that three minions should be a hard challenge for a fully built level 50 player; who cares what he thought 14 years ago?

 

By I18 the devs clearly thought that Brutes and Tankers were equivalent enough to have them share ancillary/patron power pools while Scrappers were thought to be closer to Stalkers and thus shared pools with them. 

 

Like can we finally retire this asinine meme of MMs being tanks? Because most MMs do not even try to tank or aggro manage for their teams while Brutes were given multiple tools to do just that. The initial concept of Masterminds was as tanks, but the initial concept did not pan out, nor did any of Jack's attempts to try and force it to pan out.

 

You need to let go of your hateboner for Jack Emmert. No one even brought him up, there's no reason for you to start bashing him in this thread, too.

[Xaeon]

Jack Emmeret may have wanted MMs to be the Redside tanks but Jack Emmeret is a gibbering idiot who was wrong about literally everything in CoX. Forget his intentions for the game; he thought that three minions should be a hard challenge for a fully built level 50 player; who cares what he thought 14 years ago?

 

By I18 the devs clearly thought that Brutes and Tankers were equivalent enough to have them share ancillary/patron power pools while Scrappers were thought to be closer to Stalkers and thus shared pools with them. 

 

Like can we finally retire this asinine meme of MMs being tanks? Because most MMs do not even try to tank or aggro manage for their teams while Brutes were given multiple tools to do just that. The initial concept of Masterminds was as tanks, but the initial concept did not pan out, nor did any of Jack's attempts to try and force it to pan out.

 

You need to let go of your hateboner for Jack Emmert. No one even brought him up, there's no reason for you to start bashing him in this thread, too.

His original concept of Mastermind Tanks (which was never even implemented into the game) was brought up and I'm pretty sick of the meme of MMs being primary tankers when they have precisely zero methods of in built aggro management so I just let loose.

[Jeuraud]

 

Brutes were not meant to be villain tanks. They shaped red to be more solo, and they did not want to mirror blue. If anything, the mm was the meatshield.

 

The closest analogue a brute MIGHT have is a scrap. And before incarnates, scraps out damage brutes on a consistent basis.

 

Again with this BS about the MM being the Redside meatshield/Tank.

You know what I find when I log in and go to create a new character and press Tank Playstyle and then go to Archetype, I find Brute, not MM. When I look at the Brutes numbers for survival and melee they are in between the Scrapper and the Tank, because it was made to go either way, depending on power choices and slotting.

 

This is the fricken official description of the Brute.

Official Description: "Brutes love to fight, and as a Brute you revel in hand to hand combat. With strong offensive power sets to inflict pain and strong defensive power sets to take it, you're the best there is in a straight fight. Protracted battles only make you mad, and the madder you get, the more damaging your attacks become.

[Legree]

Again with this BS about the MM being the Redside meatshield/Tank.

 

It's not entirely untrue.  A mid-level Brute with SOs or basic IOs is going to be squishier than a similarly equipped Tanker, and there were times on live when my MM was more able to take point on teams than a Brute thanks to bodyguard mode.

 

The reason this idea is so discredited now is, I think, twofold.  Firstly, most of these discussions revolve around highly optimised 50+ builds with a ton of IO set bonuses and probably also Incarnate powers - and that's a whole different game from comparing the relative merits of ATs during levelling.

 

Secondly, we have Brutes on blueside now, and the trinity - which places so much importance on someone being a designated tank - has always been more prevalent as a playstyle on blueside than it ever was on redside.

 

You know what I find when I log in and go to create a new character and press Tank Playstyle and then go to Archetype, I find Brute, not MM.

 

The playstyle menu casts its net rather wide, I think.  If it didn't MMs would be the only real choice under Pets.

 

[SwitchFade]

Jack Emmeret may have wanted MMs to be the Redside tanks but Jack Emmeret is a gibbering idiot who was wrong about literally everything in CoX. Forget his intentions for the game; he thought that three minions should be a hard challenge for a fully built level 50 player; who cares what he thought 14 years ago?

 

By I18 the devs clearly thought that Brutes and Tankers were equivalent enough to have them share ancillary/patron power pools while Scrappers were thought to be closer to Stalkers and thus shared pools with them. 

 

Like can we finally retire this asinine meme of MMs being tanks? Because most MMs do not even try to tank or aggro manage for their teams while Brutes were given multiple tools to do just that. The initial concept of Masterminds was as tanks, but the initial concept did not pan out, nor did any of Jack's attempts to try and force it to pan out.

 

You need to let go of your hateboner for Jack Emmert. No one even brought him up, there's no reason for you to start bashing him in this thread, too.

 

Is it weird that I +1'd your hateboner?

 

=O

 

This thread has officially been Perma-Hatened.

[Infinitum]

What about dropping the Brutes max resistance down to 75% the same as a scrapper and just acknowledge them as a DPS. I mean they already compete against scrapper more than anything.

 

Well this idea sucks because it would literally kill 3 of my best characters.

 

Secondly not all brute sets can do what the same respective tank set can do, and even then can only do so with massive effort getting through the early game with what feels like nearly half the survivability of the same tank type.  And then you have to fully and expensively IO the sucker out just to get it near tank levels with just SOs.  That's a lot of effort of a lot of people that would just get pooped on.

 

Now tank sets I think work better than their brute counterpart in both attack and damage are fire/fire and invul and SR.  You just reach nothing can kill me levels easier and higher than the same brute and honestly the tanks I have output pretty good damage.

 

The secondary sets that I prefer to roll a brute into a tank late game with are Elec and rad.  That's only because I can reach tank levels of can't kill me with a heavy investment of time and strategy and sometimes frustration.

 

But as a whole if brutes were made weaker baseline than they already are there is literally no reason to play them then.  Being overpowered comes with a price.

 

My tanks all play well skin survivability and damage and haven't really had any issues teaming, so I wouldn't know where to start telling you how to fix them because they don't really feel broken to me.

 

In fact I view tanks and brutes the same way with tanks honestly being more fun early game and brutes being more fun late game but the gap on the late game isn't as vast as the tank > brute gap earlygame.

 

Ultimately I view being a tank as a job not an AT and either of these can do it.

[Galaxy Brain]

 

Tankers differ from Brutes thematically as their role is supposed to be the focal point of a team.

 

This is not true; the CoH Devs designed the Brute to fill the Tank/Scrapper rolls on Redside.

 

Also before CoV came out; hells, pretty much right after CoH came out, the players found that they did not need a Tank. The CoH Devs had broken the Trinity, and most of us players were happy with that. This is CoH not some other MMO, and you Tank proponents need to quit arguing for the Trinity role that a Tank fills within a Trinity, because the Trinity is not going to happen in CoH.

 

What I'm gathering from this thread is you all are trying to make the Tank into some type of Support/Melee. The problem I see is that you are trying to keep your heavy armor at the same time getting Support abilities through your inherent. I don't see that happening, but I could support the Tank being turned into a true Support/Melee. and then having a true roll in the group... Buffs/Debuffs & Heals on the front line.

 

Otherwise the Tank is going to have the same issue it had when it stepped out of the CoH box.

 

While there is no true trinity in CoH, the way Tankers are currently built gives them the base playstyle of "the tank". They can soak up damage for a team and have enemies aggroed to them and focus on them as a singular point. The rest of the team then uses the tank as that focal point for their abilities.

 

Other ATs can do this too! Most notably brutes, but Tankers have the built in aggro tools to more easily get this job done. They have AoE taunt in both their actual taunt power and via gauntlet to make grabbing and holding aggro more efficient. The issue is that a Brute can also grab aggro efficiently and survive that aggro well enough to fill this role on a team, and so can Scrappers or even reportedley Stalkers if they invest into it hard enough,  while also providing substantially more damage to the team.

 

So the issue here is that Brutes, and to a lesser extent Scrappers, can potentially provide a similar role and playstyle of a Tanker in the current game environment when it comes to grabbing aggro from the team while also layering on much more damage comparative to how much tougher a tank is, if that makes sense. Melee characters are expected to be relatively self sufficient already, and on a team survival is boosted from buffs / heals to help with that which closes the gap between tanks and brutes/scrappers on top of how the latter can still at least decently hold aggro... but the damage gap is still there and it cant be closed by the tanker in the same way that survival and even aggro can.

 

Increasing the tanker damage cap would help a little, but at the end of the day it doesnt make them stand out gameplay wise. They'd just be a tougher but slower brute, but only when they get boosted by the team for damage.

 

They should instead stand out from being a 4th melee dps class and instead focus more on being a melee support class. Support is a broad term here in that they already support by taking hits for the team and providing a focal point... so I guess more "melee controll". Something tossed around often is the idea of a hybrid melee support where they have armors with PBAoE buffs for the team, why not lean into that for Tankers to make them really stand out?

 

A brute could do more damage, but can they hold aggro while debuffing enemy resistance with bruising + boost the team's recharge rate and accuracy? Or their regen? Etc, etc. In essence, if a brute is a warrior the tanker could be shifted more towards a paladin kind of role while still having the same playstyle as before. :)

 

 

 

 

[Replacement]

Yeah, this is sort of my point. And why I say I'd just remove Tankers if it were up to me. I don't believe there's any way to buff them that will ever make them more valuable than a Brute.

 

Why are you even posting in this thread?

 

I suppose you make a good argument for nerfing Brute but I don't think that's what you've been trying to convey.

 

I don't think a defeatist attitude helps anything, and I don't think this thread has anything to offer you.

[Leogunner]

So the issue here is that Brutes, and to a lesser extent Scrappers, can potentially provide a similar role and playstyle of a Tanker in the current game environment when it comes to grabbing aggro from the team while also layering on much more damage comparative to how much tougher a tank is, if that makes sense. Melee characters are expected to be relatively self sufficient already, and on a team survival is boosted from buffs / heals to help with that which closes the gap between tanks and brutes/scrappers on top of how the latter can still at least decently hold aggro... but the damage gap is still there and it cant be closed by the tanker in the same way that survival and even aggro can.

 

Increasing the tanker damage cap would help a little, but at the end of the day it doesnt make them stand out gameplay wise. They'd just be a tougher but slower brute, but only when they get boosted by the team for damage.

 

They should instead stand out from being a 4th melee dps class and instead focus more on being a melee support class. Support is a broad term here in that they already support by taking hits for the team and providing a focal point... so I guess more "melee controll". Something tossed around often is the idea of a hybrid melee support where they have armors with PBAoE buffs for the team, why not lean into that for Tankers to make them really stand out?

 

A brute could do more damage, but can they hold aggro while debuffing enemy resistance with bruising + boost the team's recharge rate and accuracy? Or their regen? Etc, etc. In essence, if a brute is a warrior the tanker could be shifted more towards a paladin kind of role while still having the same playstyle as before. :)

 

And I'm still confused why no one has commented on the prospect I suggested that would do just this (increase its damage cap, help make it better at control/support, stand out gameplay-wise): Increase Tanker melee AoEs!  It's even a simple numbers tweak.  I'll even make an example for you.

 

Gauntlet (Inherent) - Same as now but add "The Tanker's strength comes not only in the size of their presence but also the size of their attacks.  A Tanker's melee AoEs have a wider range of coverage and slightly increased number of affected foes that increases with team size.  Having 4 or more teammates increases affected foes even more."

 

Dark Melee: Single Target Attacks - Range and number of targets affected by taunt increased

Dark Melee: Shadow Maul [Current - 7 ft, 45 degrees, 5 foes] ; (Gauntlet - 9 ft, 135 degrees, 7 foes| 4+ Team - 10 foes)

Dark Melee: Soul Drain [Current - 10 ft sphere, 10 foes] ; (Gauntlet - 18 ft, 10 foes| 4+ Team - 10 buffs cap, 15 foes)

Dark Melee: Dark Consumption [Current - 8 ft sphere, 10 foes] ; (Gauntlet - 20 ft, 10 foes| 4+ Team - 15 foes)

 

Same thing with damage/taunt/debuff auras.

 

Electric Armor: Lightning Field [Current - 8 ft sphere, 10 foes] ; (Gauntlet - 15 ft, 12 foes| 4+ Team - 15 foes)

 

You're not only hitting and taunting more targets, you're applying effects like -ToHit, Knockdown, END Drain, etc to more targets more reliably.  It's also technically raising their damage cap.  It's also somewhat a dynamic you can sell that AT on (Everybody craps on Shadow Maul, but if you like to fist groups of foes faces, Tanker is your choice here!).

 

[Ozryk]

Just drop Brute's resist cap to 85%, comparable to Epic Archetypes (VEAT's, PB's, etc.). They'll still be perfectly viable, tougher than Scrappers, yet not as tough as Tankers. Let's not pretend this is an unsolvable conundrum. It's extremely simple, both to identify and to solve.

[Galaxy Brain]

@Leogunner

 

That would be cool too! We have precedent with Sentinels that target caps can be messed with per AT / power, I'm not sure if it can be adjusted on the fly tho so maybe just a flat range/cap boost would be good.

 

I also think like, maybe 1-2 Grant Cover style powers (that also have big range) would be really fun.

[Cutter]

That would be cool too! We have precedent with Sentinels that target caps can be messed with per AT / power, I'm not sure if it can be adjusted on the fly tho so maybe just a flat range/cap boost would be good.

 

In a similar vein of adding to range and target caps, what about adding secondary effects to Gauntlet based on powerset?

 

E.g., Ice Melee hands out slow/-rech effects, Dark Melee gives out acc debuffs, blade sets drop a def debuff, etc.?

 

Or, if you don't want to tweak things set by set, give Gauntlet a pseudo-Confuse effect that causes a percentage of the target's damage to affect itself and its friends. Thematically, the target is so intent on hitting the tank that it will damage itself and its team to get to the tank.

 

I also think like, maybe 1-2 Grant Cover style powers (that also have big range) would be really fun.

 

In the old "fix tanks" thread, a few of us discussed a bodyguard-like inherent. Having a tank on the team would reduce damage taken by (non-tank) teammates and redirect it to the tank. More tanks = more damage redirected = better survival for the squishies.

[Xaeon]

Just drop Brute's resist cap to 85%, comparable to Epic Archetypes (VEAT's, PB's, etc.). They'll still be perfectly viable, tougher than Scrappers, yet not as tough as Tankers. Let's not pretend this is an unsolvable conundrum. It's extremely simple, both to identify and to solve.

The problem is not at all with Brutes or Kheldians being too good, it's with Tankers not bringing enough to the table. Tankers have the harshest diminishing returns of any AT if you have more than one on a team and nerfing Kheldians and Brutes won't fix that. Two or more tankers does not really do anything for the team or league. But you are right in the fix being easy without distorting the flavour of the existing AT or nerfing other ATs. The stalker used to be in a very similar boat to the Tanker; people felt they were redundant, they struggled to find a meaningful place for them in most teams and some people suggested nerfing scrappers or deleting the stalkers entirely as a redundant and pointless AT. But the OG Paragon Studios devs instead knuckled down on the Stalker and made it more versatile until the Stalker was easily the equal of the scrapper, trading some trash mob clearing effectiveness to be its superior in AV slaying (ST scrappers can only keep up with a properly built stalker now if they use titan weapons which was never made with scrappers in mind).

 

Tankers can get Stalkerized too without harming Brutes and Scrappers in any way.