Addressing the Tanker Brute Connundrum.

[Leogunner]

4 hours ago, Kimuji said:

Why does half of the suggestions include increased damage? It's like people are begging for the follow up Thread once they realize why it was a bad idea: "Addressing the Brute Tanker Cunnundrum, make Brutes relevant again". And then there will be another thread to 'fix' this "Addressing the Tanker Brute Cunnundrum V3, make Tankers relevant again". Etc...
 

To be brutally honest, I'm not a big tanker fan. I only have a couple. But one thing I am a fan of: Shadow Maul. I love using it despite it being less than optimal. 

 

I'd love for a means of making it better without needing to make it OP. It just so happens, when I first thought of the idea back on live, it fit with Tanker AT. As is, they are a predominantly melee AT without a melee identity. Stalkers are the crit kings, Scrappers are the top melee, Brutes are the Hulk hitters. What are tankers? The "apply - res with their weakest attack and taunt"? The last one is also accomplished by brute so minus that. 

 

I want to be able to reliably hit 3 guys with shadow maul, not hit 3 guys if you carefully line them up. And if I had to go to tanker for that, I think it's a worthwhile means to a melee identity. 

 

[Kimuji]

Tankers have an identity: the highest def and res bonuses for every defense sets, the highest base HP and HP cap, a -20% res on their T1 attack and a built-in aoe taunt on their single target attacks.
Now if you want to find a really bad inherent power look at Defenders. They're meant for team play and yet the only meaningful part of their inherent is for solo play.

I'm a Tanker player and most of my frustrations don't come from Brutes: careless Sentinels/Scrappers (or whatever AT with incarnate powers) that pull mobs because they're sturdy but end up getting half the team killed because they can't control the aggro they generate, easy farms where no one cares about buffs, debuffs or waiting for the tank because we're just steam rolling everything etc.
The only annoying Brutes are those making a point at stealing the aggro from the Tanker just to prove than they can do it too instead of punching stuff when the team needs more DPS (I teamed with one like that recently, he kept taunting the AV not even bothering with dealing actual damage while we were clearly short on DPS).

Edited August 6, 2019 by Kimuji

[Leogunner]

 

1 hour ago, Kimuji said:

Tankers have an identity: the highest def and res bonuses for every defense sets, the highest base HP and HP cap, a -20% res on their T1 attack and a built-in aoe taunt on their single target attacks.
Now if you want to find a really bad inherent power look at Defenders. They're meant for team play and yet the only meaningful part of their inherent is for solo play.
 

That's more listing the things they have, not the identity they are known for. For example, Stalkers are crit kings because they apply lots of crits and they have a strong hidden crit in Assassin's Strike. Their identity isn't stack Assassin's focus, use placate and AoE fear and  unresistable - 5% ToHit.

 

I want Tanker *melee* (not talking about their armor) to have an identity. It should be they have the biggest, showiest, most attention grabbing attacks. They got the attention grabbing part but now I'm focusing on why they grab attention. 

 

Why does a stalker's attacks crit more? Because they are opportunistic, accurate and calculating. It's why they can control when they crit. 

 

So why does a scrapper crit? Because they are just that good. They are strong and skilled at what they do which is reflected in their melee mods. 

 

Why does a Brute hit harder? It's implied being in combat feeds into some kind of reserve or unlocks some potential. Basically they get angry or let loose. 

 

So why does tanker taunt? Or more specifically, why do their attacks draw so much attention? 

 

*crickets*

 

My vision is a Tanker's strength comes in the volume, I. E. Potential size, of their strikes. That they permeate and penatrate and thus the boom draws attention. Just like the lightning does more damage but the thunder makes you jump and cause everything to rumble. 

[Kimuji]

The Tanker's identity lies in its defenses and aggro management, not his melee prowess. Hence my support to suggestions related to threat generation and aggro management.
Talking damage is just asking for Tankers and Brutes to become even more redundant.

[Leogunner]

32 minutes ago, Kimuji said:

The Tanker's identity lies in its defenses and aggro management, not his melee prowess. Hence my support to suggestions related to threat generation and aggro management.
Talking damage is just asking for Tankers and Brutes to become even more redundant.

But there's nothing you can do with threat management in PvE unless you're talking removing aggro from other players. And by end game, how much use is that going to be? 

 

And i'd challenge you to question player's Tanker concepts and find out if they are adept or powerful in melee. I doubt many make a Tanker with the intent to be inept at melee. So if they are to be adept, why not feed into it except to argue its power creep. 

 

[Kimuji]

But Tankers are not inept at dealing damage, they're just not as good as Brutes or Scrappers. Which is by design. And you can make them better at managing aggro, there are several suggestions going in that direction on this thread.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Kimuji

[William Valence]

44 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

So why does tanker taunt? Or more specifically, why do their attacks draw so much attention? 

 

*crickets*

 

My vision is a Tanker's strength comes in the volume, I. E. Potential size, of their strikes. That they permeate and penatrate and thus the boom draws attention. Just like the lightning does more damage but the thunder makes you jump and cause everything to rumble.

Actually I think this one is pretty well described as force of personality. Enraging enemies as the tanker attacks, whether that take the form of a silver-tonged trash-talker, an imposing or defiant demeanor, or even just a really punchable face. Scrappers are said to be the fiercest combatants, and Brutes are literally just a fury "Madder hulk gets" type.

 

Saying one at is the more skilled and the other is the heavy hitter is really hard in a situation where both ATs have access to most of the same powersets. It seems like they were very deliberate, and with good reason, in choosing language that didn't inherently attribute skill or power leaving that to the player. Why would we say that a SR/MA tanker is more thunderous and booming than a TW/Invuln Scrapper?

 

My idea was to give tanks the ability to mitigate damage that was intended to bypass league levels of survivabilty without changing their normal resistance values. Another idea is to solidify their threat generation mechanic either through additional taunt effects, or tossing this one off the top of my head simply reducing the threat generation of non-tanker or MM teamates.

 

Why would it be better, to twist the tanker AT around AoE attacks, instead of improving one of the areas it was designed to be strongest? Considering all the work that would be needed to layer the multiple AoE effects with proper tags to fire at the appropriate team size with modified target caps. It seems like a lot of work just to make shadow maul better.

[Leogunner]

24 minutes ago, William Valence said:

Actually I think this one is pretty well described as force of personality. Enraging enemies as the tanker attacks, whether that take the form of a silver-tonged trash-talker, an imposing or defiant demeanor, or even just a really punchable face. Scrappers are said to be the fiercest combatants, and Brutes are literally just a fury "Madder hulk gets" type.

 

Saying one at is the more skilled and the other is the heavy hitter is really hard in a situation where both ATs have access to most of the same powersets. It seems like they were very deliberate, and with good reason, in choosing language that didn't inherently attribute skill or power leaving that to the player. Why would we say that a SR/MA tanker is more thunderous and booming than a TW/Invuln Scrapper?

Right back atcha: Why wouldn't a Scrapper have a really punchable face or defiant/imposing demeanor or even be a guy tossing out quips in battle.  In fact, I'd probably put the likes of Spiderman or Wolverine as a Scrapper sooner than a Tanker and they fit the whole silver-tongued or imposing demeanor category that they end up drawing attention to themselves.

 

Thinking back on some forum RP I did on the old boards, there was a character that actually did this quite well, being an Invul/EM Tanker and he had the whole "razzle dazzle" style of having bright flashy powers that drew attention and the "come over here and hit me!" tactics...but he was also very potent.  I guess what I'm saying is, there is a time and place for RP and this isn't it.  Those things you outline are more RP centric denominators of the AT while I'm talking about mechanics.

24 minutes ago, William Valence said:

 

Why would it be better, to twist the tanker AT around AoE attacks, instead of improving one of the areas it was designed to be strongest? Considering all the work that would be needed to layer the multiple AoE effects with proper tags to fire at the appropriate team size with modified target caps. It seems like a lot of work just to make shadow maul better.

Target caps and ranges of powers are merely numbers to be tweaked, not layers of multiple AoE effects or tags.

 

And why would it be better?  Because it's fun.  I already described why it'd be fun for me: I like using Shadow Maul despite it not being effective.  If it and the plethora of cones and PBAoEs could land easier, that could be the hook to play Tanker.  FYI, a lot of people skip these power or merely use them as ST attacks.  Now imagine if they were the trademark of the AT instead.

[Leogunner]

1 hour ago, Kimuji said:

But Tankers are not inept at dealing damage, they're just not as good as Brutes or Scrappers. Which is by design. And you can make them better at managing aggro, there are several suggestions going in that direction on this thread.

So Tankers are adept at melee.  So why can they not have their own niche with melee?  Brutes are adept and feed their strength with fury, Scrappers occasionally overwhelm the target and deal double damage...and tell me how you can make them better at managing aggro.  Also, tell me why anyone would care.  The story of the Scrapper getting half your team killed sounds more of a failing of your Tanker and unless you're advocating for hard control so you can deal with mobs past the aggro cap, aggro has a hard limit and a finite source of utility.  You'll have to start thinking outside of that niche if you're going to get anywhere.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Leogunner

[William Valence]

2 hours ago, Leogunner said:

So why does tanker taunt? Or more specifically, why do their attacks draw so much attention?

 

5 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

I guess what I'm saying is, there is a time and place for RP and this isn't it.  Those things you outline are more RP centric denominators of the AT while I'm talking about mechanics.

Are we talking about the flavor of the mechanics or not? I guess it doesn't really matter, but I was thinking Spider-man as a tanker when I made the SR/MA tanker example.

 

As to why can't scrappers have those things, they could, and do, just not to the same level as Tanks. Same as Tankers can hit, just not as well as Scrappers. Hell we only figured out how Taunt worked because WP scrappers once had the most punchable face in the game since Empathy when healing counted as DPS for threat.

 

9 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Target caps and ranges of powers are merely numbers to be tweaked, not layers of multiple AoE effects or tags.

So using the example from earlier in the thread: Dark Melee: Shadow Maul [Current - 7 ft, 45 degrees, 5 foes] ; (Gauntlet - 9 ft, 135 degrees, 7 foes| 4+ Team - 10 foes)

 

In order to make that work, it would need two overlapping AoE damage effects with the modified ranges and target cap values. One effect can't have multiple ranges or areas, for example Thunder Strike. Each of those would need a variable trigger to have one apply rather than the other depending on gauntlets teammate count.

 

In a nutshell effects can be conditional, but their numbers can't. If you want a power to behave like one of three powers depending on circumstance, it has to *be* three different powers and call the proper effect conditionally. Effectively tripling the work to do a power. At least that's how synapse described it, and how it showed in every real number dive or the tomax site.

 

Again, a lot of work to ignore the things the class is supposed to do in favor of making it something else.

[Leogunner]

33 minutes ago, William Valence said:

 

Are we talking about the flavor of the mechanics or not? I guess it doesn't really matter, but I was thinking Spider-man as a tanker when I made the SR/MA tanker example.

Even if we're saying Spiderman is a Tanker, I feel the way his attacks would draw attention isn't because of his quips but because of his irritating ability to control you with webbing.  Similar to how the RP example I mention where his Energy Melee attacks were literally physically beacons of brightness guiding attention to himself.

 

What I'm aiming at is mechanical.  Not the flavor of mechanic because flavor can change.  I suppose one could say it takes a certain kind of personality to choose to be a Tanker but I'm not about that jazz.  If you want more people to flavor the mechanic to their liking, then give the mechanic a better prop to flavor for more players.  That's my perspective because I'm not aiming to make Tankers better tanks, I'm aiming to make Tankers more fun.

48 minutes ago, William Valence said:

So using the example from earlier in the thread: Dark Melee: Shadow Maul [Current - 7 ft, 45 degrees, 5 foes] ; (Gauntlet - 9 ft, 135 degrees, 7 foes| 4+ Team - 10 foes)

 

In order to make that work, it would need two overlapping AoE damage effects with the modified ranges and target cap values. One effect can't have multiple ranges or areas, for example Thunder Strike. Each of those would need a variable trigger to have one apply rather than the other depending on gauntlets teammate count.

That was a prospecting suggestion.  If the mechanic of variable target caps isn't feasible, then just a base improvement.

 

Someone already mentioned how changing target caps depending on team size is complicated or impossible.  So the solution is put the attacks somewhere in the middle.

 

52 minutes ago, William Valence said:

 

Again, a lot of work to ignore the things the class is supposed to do in favor of making it something else.

I already made my statement on that but I'll state it again, and feel free to counter it: Aiming to do something you already do the best better will only matter if its noticable.  If Tankers are already unkillable and you want to make them 5% more unkillable, who will notice or care?

 

As for aggro management, if it's not hard control, you're stuck at 16.  And what does it matter if the Brute or Scrap steals aggro from you, if they don't die, that merely means they don't need a tank.

 

From what I can tell, you've got Vet Tanker players that are salty about "they terk ker jurbs" and are desperately pushing to get that job back...but nobody NEEDS that job.  Sure, it's nice to have but not necessary...but this whole issue is predicated on these players wanting to MAKE that role necessary.  I'm merely popping in as a novice Tanker and avid Stalker player trying to throw out some ideas for you to make your AT fun because THAT is what's necessary lol.  But if the AT is fun to you then please, leave Tanker as is.  I'm merely propositioning on some aspect of the game that I'd definitely dig into and have no idea why anyone would be opposed to such a prospect but would rather a much more bland idea like "longer taunt duration" or "more HP".

 

*shrugs*

[William Valence]

1 hour ago, Leogunner said:

I already made my statement on that but I'll state it again, and feel free to counter it: Aiming to do something you already do the best better will only matter if its noticable.  If Tankers are already unkillable and you want to make them 5% more unkillable, who will notice or care? 

I'll give it a shot:

 

I don't care if people can perceive it, because I don't trust people's perceptions. Think about how many times people said that accuracy was nerfed, and would argue with Arcanaville about it. It wasn't, but **** me try telling them that. Or the "Defense myth" and how many times it was necessary to explain why going from 40%-45% defense was more important than going from 0-5%. People's perception is the last thing I'm worried about.

 

Arguing with people on the CO forums was a pain enough. When their perception says that a character that has a 14k bubble on top of 5k health is losing compared to a character with effectively 60% resistance because the bubble doesn't have resistance. I become less inclined to worry about what people notice.

 

So basically my concern is balance not whether or not people notice, because to be honest I don't trust people to be able to notice, just going by precedent.

 

As for aggro changes. I got bored and started wondering. What attributes can a pet inherit from the summoner? What if Gauntlet summoned an invisible pet that occupied the same space as the tanker's hitbox. It inherits the Defense, Resists, and threat output of the tanker. It has a power that functions like BG mode transferring 100% of the damage it takes to the tanker. The hard part would be making it immune to AoE attacks and autohit AoE attacks, so the Tanker doesn't take damage twice. I wonder if you could piggyback the method used to do autohit to make and automiss mechanic.

[ryuplaneswalker]

12 hours ago, Kimuji said:

Now if you want to find a really bad inherent power look at Defenders.

Defenders also bring the most potent support capabilities in a game where Support effects alone are enough to bring a character.

9 hours ago, Kimuji said:

And you can make them better at managing aggro, there are several suggestions going in that direction on this thread.

And that won't solve the problem.

19 hours ago, Jeuraud said:

Again... the Tank pretty much lost its roll right out of the CoH box, and they have never been "important" in CoH, because CoH broke the Trinity.  With the breaking of the Trinity there are no "important" ATs in CoH and there never has been. I think that is why so many Tank players in CoH are butt-hurt. They are coming from other MMOs where the Tank is a Primary AT/Class in the Trinity, and there is no primary or important AT in CoH.

 

I'm all for making the Tank a different/fun AT to play, but quit trying to make them "important" to the group. To do that you would have to turn CoH into a Trinity MMO, and I'm definitely against that... not that I really see that happening in CoHH.

 

This, isn't remotely true, Pre-Side Switching Tanks were the only real aggro aura class that could take AV level hits without having an Empath/FF/Sonic buddy running around with them, and even if you have a scrapper to tank they won't have the aggro control that a tank has for trash and against some of the End Game AVs a scrapper with a pocket empathy user will still get completely destroyed. 

17 hours ago, Kimuji said:

Why does half of the suggestions include increased damage?

Because This is the thing that Tanks don't have. Once again. The Reason Tanks have fallen behind is because you can get massive survival benefits from IOs. The reason that Brutes have replaced Tanks as the primary Tank class in the game is that they get Aggro Tools and Damage, and IOs cover the fact that in exchange for the extra damage Brutes have lower baseline defenses. Tanks need either some level of debuffs/buffs to bring something that brutes do, or some manner of extra damage benefits from Sets.

[Auroxis]

From reading this thread, there are in general several different types of suggestions:

 

1. Aggro sustain buff

 

I think a dev has specifically stated that aggro cap is a global thing, and making it AT-specific would be difficult to do. Increasing the magnitude of Tanker taunt effects and buffing some under-performing sets like Willpower would be a welcome change though.

2. Self offensive buff

 

This to me treads too much into Brute territory, whether it be by increasing the damage cap or giving extra damage buffs/recharge mechanics.

3. Self defensive buff

 

I don't think Tankers need this at all, their numbers are far ahead of Brutes already (especially once you factor stacked ATO procs). And with IO'd out builds in incarnate trials the extra mitigation is rarely noticed over Brutes.

4. Defensive team support

 

This is an interesting approach, but in my eyes aggro management is what tankers should be about when it comes to supporting their team defensively.

5. Offensive team support

 

My preferred approach. Bruising could be buffed so it stacks from multiple tankers (unless that's already the case in i25), and the debuff numbers could be increased. Though to me a tanker is a "team leader" in the classical sense (Captain America, Superman), and should be given some team offensive buffs rather than just debuffing an enemy. However when implementing this you need to be careful not to make the offensive buffs affect the Tanker itself too much (if at all) so as to not encroach onto Brute territory (as stated above regarding self offensive buffs).

 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Auroxis

[Infinitum]

2 hours ago, ryuplaneswalker said:

This, isn't remotely true, Pre-Side Switching Tanks were the only real aggro aura class that could take AV level hits without having an Empath/FF/Sonic buddy running around with them, and even if you have a scrapper to tank they won't have the aggro control that a tank has for trash and against some of the End Game AVs a scrapper with a pocket empathy user will still get completely destroyed. 

Yet you had all scrapper, controller, tank, defender, blaster STF.  The problem with this line of thinking is you have to have xyz to do and and it's never been the case with this game.  You aren't required to "tank" anything.  I once ran an all kinetic defender team just for the heck of it, the enemy couldn't move and rarely could attack.  It was awesome.

2 hours ago, ryuplaneswalker said:

Because This is the thing that Tanks don't have. Once again. The Reason Tanks have fallen behind is because you can get massive survival benefits from IOs. The reason that Brutes have replaced Tanks as the primary Tank class in the game is that they get Aggro Tools and Damage, and IOs cover the fact that in exchange for the extra damage Brutes have lower baseline defenses. Tanks need either some level of debuffs/buffs to bring something that brutes do, or some manner of extra damage benefits from Sets.

That's not even remotely true.  Maybe on farming AE missions brutes are more prevalent, but in the normal game/missions/tf, I'm not seeing any discrimination against tanks, or any increased number of brutes replacing them.

 

If anything I've had a more than few teams still look for a tank while my brute was on team.

[ryuplaneswalker]

1 minute ago, Infinitum said:

Yet you had all scrapper, controller, tank, defender, blaster STF. 

Two of those classes are support classes, saying "I did an All Defender/Controller STF." is sort of like saying you played a game on the easiest setting, and I am willing to bet in Pre IO land. Scrapper and Blaster STFs were not very smooth. In content where it matters Tanks were 100% wanted, like Master of Pre Incarnate, Even in the Post IO World Tanks were desired in the situations where pure survival mattered.

 

6 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

That's not even remotely true.  Maybe on farming AE missions brutes are more prevalent, but in the normal game/missions/tf, I'm not seeing any discrimination against tanks, or any increased number of brutes replacing them.

That is because the game is super easy and there are no DPS checks.

 

7 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

If anything I've had a more than few teams still look for a tank while my brute was on team.

I would attribute that to..not all brutes taking taunt and not being effective at aggro management. Of course given that in the time of Inherent stamina..I have no idea how someone can avoid taking taunt if only because it requires no slots to do it's job.

[Leogunner]

6 hours ago, William Valence said:

I'll give it a shot:

 

I don't care if people can perceive it, because I don't trust people's perceptions.

 

So then the change would be unnecessary.  At best, it would be an appeal to the perception that Brutes are superior tanks compared to Tankers and it'd just be throwing those particular players a pity bone but it wouldn't change that people see Brute as superior because damage is king.

 

6 hours ago, William Valence said:

 

So basically my concern is balance not whether or not people notice, because to be honest I don't trust people to be able to notice, just going by precedent.

There are a lot more concerns of balance beyond Brute.  Are you telling me that Brute is just OP?  Then we should nerf them, right?  Or that Tankers are UP?  Well do they die too easily?

 

From my perspective, I don't see a balance concern between the two.  They are different playstyles (mainly talking about Brute), it just so happens that said playstyle falls in line with the meta and farming.

7 hours ago, William Valence said:

 

As for aggro changes. I got bored and started wondering. What attributes can a pet inherit from the summoner? What if Gauntlet summoned an invisible pet that occupied the same space as the tanker's hitbox. It inherits the Defense, Resists, and threat output of the tanker. It has a power that functions like BG mode transferring 100% of the damage it takes to the tanker. The hard part would be making it immune to AoE attacks and autohit AoE attacks, so the Tanker doesn't take damage twice. I wonder if you could piggyback the method used to do autohit to make and automiss mechanic.

Well now you are getting into complicated implementations.

 

I've seen such suggested before but why not post a full write up?

[Kimuji]

4 hours ago, ryuplaneswalker said:

Because This is the thing that Tanks don't have. Once again. The Reason Tanks have fallen behind is because you can get massive survival benefits from IOs. The reason that Brutes have replaced Tanks as the primary Tank class in the game is that they get Aggro Tools and Damage, and IOs cover the fact that in exchange for the extra damage Brutes have lower baseline defenses. Tanks need either some level of debuffs/buffs to bring something that brutes do, or some manner of extra damage benefits from Sets.

You're making it worse than it is, Tankers damage isn't horrible at all. It's adequate with their role and it still allows them to solo content.

I still maintain that going on the more damage route will lead to a heavy redundancy between Tankers and Brutes or worse making one AT obsolete. Tankers mustn't compete with Brutes for damage or you will see a Topic just like this one pop on the forum begging for a Brute buff.

 

But I fully agree that the debuff/team buff option is worth exploring. Mentioning the Defenders inherent gave me some ideas. The end discount on Defenders when the team is low on health is pretty useless but the main concept isn't so bad. I can imagine a similar mechanic for Tankers: when the team's health is decreasing the Tanker gets something like a recharge bonus on taunt or/and a progressive teamwide +res or +def bonus.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Kimuji

[Leogunner]

5 minutes ago, Kimuji said:

You're making it worse than it is, Tankers damage isn't horrible at all. It's adequate with their role and it still allows them to solo content.

I still maintain that going on the more damage route will lead to a heavy redundancy between Tankers and Brutes or worse making one AT obsolete. Tankers mustn't compete with Brutes for damage or you will see a Topic just like this one pop on the forum begging for a Brute buff.

 

But I fully agree that the debuff/team buff option is worth exploring.

Just to caveat off that, my suggestion isn't technically more damage but rather reliable damage.  The Brute can still do more damage, he just might have to spend more endurance to hit those outside his range or spend more effort lining up mobs to knock down (or likely, just not bother lining them up and use ST attacks or AoEs as ST attacks).

 

I think you need to get out of the mentality of "We shouldn't compete with Brutes!"  Wrong.  Yes, you need to compete with Brutes because they are your DIRECT COMPETITION!  You never hear Stalkers or Blasters say "Aw, guys. We don't need to compete with Dominators or Scrappers.  We just have to do our own thing" NO! It's just natural to pit these ATs against each other when they are trying to accomplish the same thing lol.  Now they don't have to do the exact same thing to compete but don't just quit the game because you feel it's not your place when it very much is.

[Auroxis]

3 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

It's just natural to pit these ATs against each other when they are trying to accomplish the same thing lol

 

What is "the same thing" here exactly?

[Kimuji]

17 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Just to caveat off that, my suggestion isn't technically more damage but rather reliable damage.  The Brute can still do more damage, he just might have to spend more endurance to hit those outside his range or spend more effort lining up mobs to knock down (or likely, just not bother lining them up and use ST attacks or AoEs as ST attacks).

 

I think you need to get out of the mentality of "We shouldn't compete with Brutes!"  Wrong.  Yes, you need to compete with Brutes because they are your DIRECT COMPETITION!  You never hear Stalkers or Blasters say "Aw, guys. We don't need to compete with Dominators or Scrappers.  We just have to do our own thing" NO! It's just natural to pit these ATs against each other when they are trying to accomplish the same thing lol.  Now they don't have to do the exact same thing to compete but don't just quit the game because you feel it's not your place when it very much is.

Tankers should do better than Brutes at keeping a team alive, not being competitive with them damage wise. Tankers ARE NOT and WERE NEVER MEANT to be a major source of DPS in a team. But it's still very possible for them to deal decent damage and contribute to the team's overall DPS. Again you're exaggerating, Tankers overall damage output isn't bad at all.

Let's say we bump the Tankers damage then what happens? What will be the difference with Brutes? We'll have two ATs with similar damage, similar defenses, similar aggro management. We don't need two ATs doing the exact same thing with a similar level of performance, that's awful game design. And like I said you'll start to see people complaining about Brutes being underpowered because Tankers have better defenses for the same amount of damage. No, the "give Tankers more damage" option is a dead end.

 

To your own admission you're not even a Tanker player... Which I get, some people prefer to support, other to hit things like a truck. There are ATs for these roles and if big damage is your thing Tanker is not for you. It's like saying that you don't like Blasters and ask for them to be modified to become sturdy melee fighters because you like to fight in melee. The fact that you are dismissing the aggro/team buff suggestions and focus only on damage is telling because I am totally pitting Brutes and Tankers against each other. I am all in favor of giving Tankers a clearer advantage regarding aggro management/team play.

I have many more Tankers than Brutes and I'm not bothered by the damage gap. What bothers me is the fact that I'm not providing much more safety to the team than a Brute would.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Kimuji

[Leogunner]

1 hour ago, Auroxis said:

 

What is "the same thing" here exactly?

Get mob attention and hit them in the face. 

 

1 hour ago, Kimuji said:

Tankers should do better than Brutes at keeping a team alive, not being competitive with them damage wise. Tankers ARE NOT and WERE NEVER MEANT to be a major source of DPS in a team. But it's still very possible for them to deal decent damage and contribute to the team's overall DPS. Again you're exaggerating, Tankers overall damage output isn't bad at all.
 

"keeping a team alive" is broad and outside of the purview of your skill repertoire. At best, you indirectly keep attention away from the teammates that keep the team alive. Same could be said for my stalkers who take down annoying targets that could hinder the efforts of the tank or support. Or a blaster who thins down opposition so that there is less for the tank to have to deal with. 

 

I think there is a misunderstanding in what you accomplish as a Tanker. It's no more "keeping the team alive" than a Brute... They just do it differently. 

 

And if I'm over exaggerating the damage disparity (I never implied Tanker damage was under par, just not as fun because there is nothing to their melee... They just press the buttons... At least with brute, there's a bar to maintain and manage) you're exaggerating your tank role. Lol as if my dominator doesn't practically invalidate aggro the majority of the time. 

1 hour ago, Kimuji said:

Let's say we bump the Tankers damage then what happens? What will be the difference with Brutes? 

If we were going with my idea, Brutes would just hit harder and likely faster while Tankers might focus on using their AoEs and cones (that Brutes/Scrappers wouldn't use or might only bother using as ST attacks) to spread as much damage as possible, making up for their weaker damage with improved efficiency. 

 

1 hour ago, Kimuji said:

We don't need two ATs doing the exact same thing with a similar level of performance, that's awful game design. 

Perhaps you need to admit to yourself that those ATs (Tankers and Brutes) do the same thing: get mob attention and hit them in the face. I'm trying to generalize this so that the vets who don't take in others perspectives, that they are aggrandizing their role in an attempt to make the AT unique... They are putting the role before the concept and thus dooming it to its fate of obsolescence. 

 

1 hour ago, Kimuji said:

To your own admission you're not even a Tanker player... Which I get, some people prefer to support, other to hit things like a truck. There are ATs for these roles and if big damage is your thing Tanker is not for you. 

I said I'm not a Vet Tanker. I didn't say I don't play them. I'd consider a Vet Tanker to be one that played a lot of tankers, live and current, and maybe have a preference toward Tanker. 

 

And if Tanker is not for me, then is it for you? If it is, then the AT doesn't need anything. Do you want more people to enjoy or create concepts for Tanker when they'd otherwise would make Brutes? Then stop trying to gatekeep who Tanker should and shouldn't be for. 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Leogunner
Autocorrect

[Auroxis]

11 minutes ago, Leogunner said:

Get mob attention and hit them in the face. 

What about Bruising then? What about staying alive? What about Gauntlet?

 

You shouldn't ignore the design space of a class when performing balance changes. Tankers are clearly more oriented towards support than Brutes, judging by their inherent bonuses. If even someone as experienced as you only sees them as a "getting mob attention and hitting stuff in the face" class, clearly the changes should be about accentuating the class's support aspect rather than trying to make it more like a Brute?

Edited August 7, 2019 by Auroxis

[Steampunkette]

I still like the idea of doing irresistible bruising. It wouldn't quote-unquote replace defenders or support characters because they can do buffing debuffing and healing, and typically do so to large numbers of enemies. 

 

But it would make tankers more valuable against Archvillain enemies who normally have ridiculous quantities of resistance to debuff. 

 

It wouldn't have much effect while leveling characters up since the task force AVs aren't as overtuned as high-end ones. They would just die marginally faster. Meanwhile all other content would essentially be unchanged because bosses don't resist debuffs nearly as much as elite bosses or archvillains.

 

And it's really only in the high-end that brutes and tankers really start to have this problem where a brute is better for a team than a tanker.

[Leogunner]

31 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

What about Bruising then? What about staying alive? What about Gauntlet?

Those are what the AT has, not what it's trying to accomplish. It's not accomplishing Bruising or Gauntlet, it's trying to grab attention and hit the mob in the face. 

 

31 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

You shouldn't ignore the design space of a class when performing balance changes. Tankers are clearly more oriented towards support than Brutes, judging by their inherent bonuses. If even someone as experienced as you only sees them as a "getting mob attention and hitting stuff in the face" class, clearly the changes should be about accentuating the class's support aspect rather than trying to make it more like a Brute?

How is applying the effects of your secondary (for example, - dmg from Kinetic melee Burst or - ToHit from Shadow Maul) or applying taunt via these skills not support? And how is hitting your AoEs reliably being "more like a Brute"? 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Leogunner