Actually, Ultra, with the Damage mitigation of Scrappers, i.e. "Making things Dead really quick" it's not an unfair comparison. If a scrapper can dispense with a foe, that's 100% mitigation against attacks, and they do it much more quickly, to the team's benefit.
[ QUOTE ]
hasten cannot be permaed anymore but you only get minimal downtime if you keep it about 40 seconds or so. I don't get why stone tanks would respect out of it all of the sudden just because you can't perma it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't reply to this before because I wanted to make sure I had my facts straight. This is the kind of misconception that many of us Stone Tankers think that non-Stone Tankers have when they talk about how the drawbacks to Granite (and Rooted) don't offset the benefits. So, for the record:
With Granite on, the Hasten downtime is now 2:25 (that assumes 6 Recharge SOs in Hasten).
With Granite on and Hasten recharging, our big attack power has a recharge of 1:00 (assumes no recharge SOs)
With Granite on and Hasten recharging, our littlest attack power has a recharge of :15 (assumes no recharge SOs).
With Granite on and Hasten recharging, Taunt has a recharge of :30.
I agree that the benefits still far outweigh the costs and I personally think any Stone Tanker that uses Granite is crazy to not have Hasten, so at least you get 2 minutes with powers that recharge semi-normally. But wanted to clear the air and point out that until you play in Granite, it is really tough for people to understand the drawbacks. Keeping aggro when you can't taunt or punchvoke more often than above can be challenging.
I now return you to the interesting discussion already in progress. 
Scorus
Is the bug in Invic applicable to both the tank and the scrapper version? I don't know, but if so, then it is still a vaild test.
And yes, making an offensive build and a defensive build does put them back in the skranker/meatshield roles, and that's exactly the point. As far as I know, no redname has come out and explicitly said that a tanks role is no longer to be a meatshield. It seems to me the first thing to do is to demonstrate that a tank (other than a Stoner in Granite) can no longer fulfill that role on a continuous basis. Just because the consensus on the boards is that tanks arent meatshields doesnt mean the devs agree.
If you leave out Invul because of the Invic bug, how are you going to demonstrate where tanks stand? What I mean is, I think you need to be careful that the testing doesnt reduce to demonstrating limitations of a specific set.
[ QUOTE ]
Since other than Regen and Dark they are using the same numbers but lower than Tanks no Scrapper is going to be able to deal with damage better.
[/ QUOTE ]
You also conveniently forget to add in the value of the defensive strikes that add to def for scrappers in their primaries. Tanks do not get such attacks in their secondaries.
Having said that, if Tanks are meant to be defensive oriented scranks, they could add to the secondaries extra res or def, or more debuffs to make a tanker more powerful defensively through attacking.
Of course, they could make it a bar, like the Rage bar, call it the "Berserker Bar" or some such, so the more tank fights, the tougher they get.
[ QUOTE ]
I think this is a good idea, DO as far as it goes, but I think the pentad team is a bit too small to get the most out of it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't kid yourself there. The pentad, and in fact any 5 character team is exactly the sort of testing the devs want to see. Especially Statesman.
Why would you want a Tanker in a 5-man team if you have a Controller, a Scrapper, and a Defender to buff the Scrapper's defenses? At least the Blaster is contributing damage. What should the Tanker's contribution be?
I think that's the question that will truly define the Tanker's role.
Would INVINC be less bugged with no def and to hit buff enhancements in it?
Prof
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't want to go there.
The thing is, that seems to be what States' expects to be the role of the. If you are doing more, then the AT may need to be taken down some more.
How much is enough, and what should you expect. Apparently the contribution that Statesman's Tank made was sufficient to meet expectations.
If that is the case, then the question becomes, is it worth playing a character that contributes that much (little)?
[/ QUOTE ]
He "tanked" 1/3 of a spawn for 7. He took up a little more than twice his share. On a team with any sort of non-melee AT i'd expect any scrapper to at LEAST do this much. I think it's pretty clear that states' grand vision for tanks is nothing more than scrankers who draw a little more aggro than the vastly more offensively effective scrappers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly how does a Scrapper with less defense than a tank do do at LEAST as much defensively? That makes no sense. Since other than Regen and Dark they are using the same numbers but lower than Tanks no Scrapper is going to be able to deal with damage better.
Statements like this are why nothing comes of these threads. There is no basis for them. They are little better than the obvious flames.
The Devs respond to facts not opinions.
[/ QUOTE ]
Look at his team composition with an emp and a kin supporting him, my scrapper does it all the time. With just an emp my controller can handle all the aggro he gets from his holds. With just an emp my regen scrapper becomes ultra regen/SR tanker/capped damage with unlimited endurance and healing there's very little that can stop me I have tanked avs and herded with my scrapper with just an emp buffing and healing me.
[/ QUOTE ]
My BS/Invul does the same thing with that kind team support. She becomes a wrecking machine of destruction that not even AVs can wishstand, even in duo situations post-ED. Dealing high damage is one of the best types of overall defense in the game. (as Casshan so eloquently put it 
) If they are dead, they don't deal damage to you (or your team) anymore. The main problem with this situation is that, if Tankers need the same support that a Scrapper does to deal with aggro, then WHY BOTHER WITH THE TANKER WHEN YOU CAN BRING ANOTHER ARCHTYPE INSTEAD? (highlighted for those that just don't seem to get it.)
The question here is a Tanker's role in a post ED environment. Do we have a distinct function or can we just be replaced by another AT and forgotten? If Statesman's "example" is the future of Tanking, then I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but we are sadly moving toward the latter. 
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
[ QUOTE ]
Is the bug in Invic applicable to both the tank and the scrapper version? I don't know, but if so, then it is still a vaild test.
[/ QUOTE ]
Affects Tanker, Scrapper, and Brute.
[ QUOTE ]
Just because the consensus on the boards is that tanks arent meatshields doesnt mean the devs agree.
[/ QUOTE ]
The "consensus" isn't so much that Tanks aren't meatshields, its more that, if that's the role the devs want Tanks to play in the game, they've not provided the proper tools for doing so with a reasonable modicum of success. At least not one that makes a Tanks participation in a team environment more palatable that any other AT.
[ QUOTE ]
If you leave out Invul because of the Invic bug, how are you going to demonstrate where tanks stand? What I mean is, I think you need to be careful that the testing doesnt reduce to demonstrating limitations of a specific set.
[/ QUOTE ]
When the bug is fixed, Invuln not using Unstoppable will look/function a lot like an Ice Tanker. Only Invuln will be better at Smash/Lethal/Fire, and Ice will be better at Energy/Negative/Cold. Ice will be better at Solo play, and larger mob groupings and higher level mobs is where Invuln will outperform.
Overall, testing with a bugged core power in a powerset invalidates the test. Wait until they get the bug fixed, then either include Invuln in the test, and if you've already run it, go back and test Invuln.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't want to go there.
The thing is, that seems to be what States' expects to be the role of the AT. If you are doing more, then the AT may need to be taken down some more.
How much is enough, and what should you expect. Apparently the contribution that Statesman's Tank made was sufficient to meet expectations.
If that is the case, then the question becomes, is it worth playing a character that contributes that much (little)?
[/ QUOTE ]
He "tanked" 1/3 of a spawn for 7. He took up a little more than twice his share. On a team with any sort of non-melee AT i'd expect any scrapper to at LEAST do this much. I think it's pretty clear that states' grand vision for tanks is nothing more than scrankers who draw a little more aggro than the vastly more offensively effective scrappers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly how does a Scrapper with less defense than a tank do do at LEAST as much defensively? That makes no sense. Since other than Regen and Dark they are using the same numbers but lower than Tanks no Scrapper is going to be able to deal with damage better.
Statements like this are why nothing comes of these threads. There is no basis for them. They are little better than the obvious flames.
The Devs respond to facts not opinions.
[/ QUOTE ]
Look at his team composition with an emp and a kin supporting him, my scrapper does it all the time. With just an emp my controller can handle all the aggro he gets from his holds. With just an emp my regen scrapper becomes ultra regen/SR tanker/capped damage with unlimited endurance and healing there's very little that can stop me I have tanked avs and herded with my scrapper with just an emp buffing and healing me.
[/ QUOTE ]
When you dont have "pocket defenders" and all that there's no chance your scrapper can do what a tank does defense-wise. Wanna bet? Bring your scrapper and I'll bring my tanker to the test server and we'll see who takes damage better.
[ QUOTE ]
Would INVINC be less bugged with no def and to hit buff enhancements in it?
[/ QUOTE ]
unfortunately, no ... Invinc wit zero enhancements today will still be decently more powerful than it will be when they drop it to 1.5 and you three-slot it with DefBuf.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He "tanked" 1/3 of a spawn for 7. He took up a little more than twice his share. On a team with any sort of non-melee AT i'd expect any scrapper to at LEAST do this much. I think it's pretty clear that states' grand vision for tanks is nothing more than scrankers who draw a little more aggro than the vastly more offensively effective scrappers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly how does a Scrapper with less defense than a tank do do at LEAST as much defensively? That makes no sense. Since other than Regen and Dark they are using the same numbers but lower than Tanks no Scrapper is going to be able to deal with damage better.
Statements like this are why nothing comes of these threads. There is no basis for them. They are little better than the obvious flames.
The Devs respond to facts not opinions.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are not a troll.
1) I said that i'd expect a scrapper to do at LEAST as much as STATESMAN DID. Not as least as much defensively as a tank.
2) The difference between what a scrapper can do vs what a tanker can do defensively is marginal with the amount of support necessary for a team to be able to use a meatshield. This is far outweighed by the scrappers impressive offensive superiority.
3) Statements like mine are opinion yes. Opinion backed up by a lot of objective analysis playtesting and thought. I'd like to be wrong, but all my own post-I5 experience and analysis indicates I am not. Read my position again (sans the mouth frothing this time), I've said nothing unreasonable or unjustified.
[ QUOTE ]
When you dont have "pocket defenders" and all that there's no chance your scrapper can do what a tank does defense-wise. Wanna bet? Bring your scrapper and I'll bring my tanker to the test server and we'll see who takes damage better.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're right, but still missing the point. If your non-Granite tank doesn't have 'pocket defenders', you can't stand up to large-group spawns. So since you need a 'pocket defender' in a team, why not just get a scrapper, who also needs the 'pocket defender' but also does more damage?
Skip
My Char. List and Market Transactions
HeroStats Developer
Legion of Valor
Iron Eagles
[ QUOTE ]
When you dont have "pocket defenders" and all that there's no chance your scrapper can do what a tank does defense-wise. Wanna bet? Bring your scrapper and I'll bring my tanker to the test server and we'll see who takes damage better.
[/ QUOTE ]
I realize the thread is long asqshy, but at least try to keep up.
This is a strawman that we've knocked down a few times already. Nobody is claiming that a tanker is less tough than a scrapper. Unsuported OBVIOUSLY tankers will last longer (a whole 5 seconds say, intead of 2). The point is that the meagre unsupported defense we bring is too marginal to do anything except "tank" in a useless fashion a la statesman. (Though he was working on a team WITH support! 
) A team would be FAR better off bringing a defender instead of the tanker to provide the entire team with more damage mitigation than a tanker's primary could.
[ QUOTE ]
The main problem with this situation is that, if Tankers need the same support that a Scrapper does to deal with aggro,
[/ QUOTE ]
Here's a big misunderstanding. Tankers need support but not the same kind of support as scrappers (scrapps need more).
Like I said, we can meet on the test server and fight without support to see who can out-tank who defense wise.
Having said that, I won't complain if you people get the devs to listen and the RE/RE powers get revamped....because the benefits these powers give is too low.
[ QUOTE ]
The question here is a Tanker's role in a post ED environment. Do we have a distinct function or can we just be replaced by another AT and forgotten?
[/ QUOTE ]
I think this game almost achieves balance in as any AT can be replaced (and forgotten 
) and be efficient.
Before the changes, we were basically THE team.
[ QUOTE ]
If Statesman's "example" is the future of Tanking, then I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but we are sadly moving toward the latter.
[/ QUOTE ]
Certainly not the best example of "heroic" tanking I mean, any tanker worth its salt would jump and whack the ring mistresses and the master illusionists, then "taunt" (or whatever) the rest of the weaklings. It wasn't the image I was expecting from Statesman, that's for sure!
[ QUOTE ]
Here's a big misunderstanding. Tankers need support but not the same kind of support as scrappers (scrapps need more).
[/ QUOTE ]
You miss an important subtlety here. To put it in an obtuse abstract way :Support doesn't occur in a continuous scale or gradient. It occurs in discrete steps. The difference between scrapper and tanker survival is smaller than the difference between one of these steps.
[ QUOTE ]
Certainly not the best example of "heroic" tanking I mean, any tanker worth its salt would jump and whack the ring mistresses and the master illusionists, then "taunt" (or whatever) the rest of the weaklings. It wasn't the image I was expecting from Statesman, that's for sure!
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I first read it myself!
[ QUOTE ]
Luminara, from measuring spawns on teams like this, the total number of enemies in the spawn was more like 16, with 10 of them being minions, 4 or so lieutenants and a couple bosses. They would not have been yellow to States, but red and purple under normal circumstances since the mission belonged to a level 50, with a team of 7, the difficulty would have been kicked up by +1 and it was run on rugged for another +1. The minions would have been orange for the mission holder, with them being +3 to States's tank.
You have to remember that a team of 7 would normally spawn 21 enemies, but that bosses and lieutenants count for more than one when they calculate it.
Nowhere near 30 and at a much higher level than you're thinking, in other words.
[/ QUOTE ]
Still, the results from his tests were more than a little underwhelming.
Aggroing only 5-6? If that's really the case, then it indicates that he either wasn't running Invincibility or wasn't using Taunt AND only used Brawl and his default secondary set attack. I mean, come on, if he'd been using his tools, he should've had ALL the aggro. Invincibility alone would generate enough aggro to get the entire spawn, briefly, and from that point on, he'd only have to keep up steady attacks to keep most of them on him. If he wasn't running Invincibility, then his only means of gathering aggro would've been Taunt and attacks, but even then, he should've ended up with many more.
What I finally realized was that the only way Statesman could've ended up with 5-6 foes on him, and ONLY those 5-6, was if he Taunted them away from the main spawn and left the rest for the team to deal with. Taunt is an AoE, so if he did use it, he would've always drawn extra aggro. Punchvoke is an AoE, so what he was attacking with also would've held his aggro. He should've gradually built up the entire spawn around him, but that's not what happened.
And the argument that there was plenty of room to let a battle rage with the entire team spread out... no, because the controller ate it when she aggroed another spawn, so that indicates that there wasn't enough room to move around. He should've had the entire spawn slavering on him, trying to rip him to pieces, but he somehow managed to get away with just a third?
That's just plain pootastic.
And then there's the build speculations, and the suggestions that he wouldn't've been able to tank like a true 48-50 tank would. That's not actually the case, though, since he was trying to prove that ED wasn't hurting tanks. At 32, he had 30 slots to work with, EASILY enough to 3-slot all of his passives, and 4-6 slot Unyielding and Temp Invuln, and still have plently of slots left for DP, his attacks, and any pool powers he took. The fact that he was capable of surviving with nothing but DP for the entire length of the fight (see below on why this is important) gives a pretty good indication that he was at or near his max potential S/L res (not capped, but the max he could reach with 3 slots or res enhs/power), and maybe using Lucks and some def-bonus powers (such as Combat Jumping) as well. So level differences really don't mean anything.
Finally, the Dull Pain thing really sank in today and connected the last dots. I was thinking about it today, and I realized that even if he threw 3 recharge SOs in DP, he was looking at nearly 3 minutes between each use, and since he stated that he had to use it several times (several being more than two), that means that fight went on for ~9 minutes or longer.
Even if he had Adrenaline Boost on him, that's still a loooooooooong time between DPs, and the fight still had to have gone on for almost 7 minutes.
That's just plain insane. 7-9+ minutes to take out 5-6 enemies, even if they were orange-red? Even if he were only using the first couple of attacks in his secondary, AND they were only slotted with a single accuracy SO (if they weren't slotted with at least that, he wouldn't've even held the aggro on those 5-6), AND he didn't have Fortitude on him, he should've cleaned them out in less than 5 minutes. Anything better than unslotted Brawl would've been enough to deal with them faster than that. Heck, my kin/elec defender can handle an orange-red minion in under a minute, without ANY damage enhancements OR using Siphon Power, and she's only level 7.
And what were his teammates doing while he played pattycake with those enemies? Even post-ED, there's NO way it was taking the blasters/scrappers 7-9 minutes to handle 2-3 enemies apiece. I could see them taking 2 minutes, at most, and then spending another 2 minutes helping the other teammates clear out their "shares".
Nothing about this "test" feels right. The build level was high enough to be capable, but the sheer length of the described combat was WAY out of the ballpark and the incredibly poor aggro management suggests serious flaws in how the test was conducted.
[ QUOTE ]
I realize the thread is long asqshy, but at least try to keep up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry man, this post is reaching biblical proportions
[ QUOTE ]
This is a strawman that we've knocked down a few times already. Nobody is claiming that a tanker is less tough than a scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry if I misunderstood their point then 
[ QUOTE ]
Unsuported OBVIOUSLY tankers will last longer (a whole 5 seconds say, intead of 2).
[/ QUOTE ]
Roflol....well you guys have a point. Yesterday we faced the envoy of shadows. I was using my scrapper so I went down like an insect but well, regen isn't THE POWA anymore so....a friend of mine brought his Invul tank and he lasted less than me! (he hadn't respec'd to ED, but I couldn't believe I6 could bork an entire ok I5 build like that).
Something needs to be done about the RE/RE thing.
[ QUOTE ]
The point is that the meagre unsupported defense we bring is too marginal to do anything except "tank" in a useless fashion a la statesman. (Though he was working on a team WITH support! ) A team would be FAR better off bringing a defender instead of the tanker to provide the entire team with more damage mitigation than a tanker's primary could.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, like I said in another post, his example of tanking was rather.....disappointing......You go into a carnies mob and taunt strong steelman?!?!?, What the hell is wrong with statesman?!?!
Anyway, lets hope something useful comes out of this.
It's because it wasn't really a test, it was propoganda.
okay, kidding aside, we don't actually know what states was being asked to look into. He just told us his experience where he happened to play a tank. Maybe he was trying to focus on something else? Either way I agree that coming on with that as an example of succesful tanking is ludicrous.
Well, my tank, right now is about as defensive as I can get him. Should the test require an INV just give a yell. I'll mention this to a friend of mine with a lvl 40 fire/fire and see if he can help if you guys want.
Prof
[ QUOTE ]
Support doesn't occur in a continuous scale or gradient. It occurs in discrete steps. The difference between scrapper and tanker survival is smaller than the difference between one of these steps.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry if I am not stating it clearly enough for you, Aqshy. Da5id's example is really the best way to look at it. I know that a Tanker can take more damage than a Scrapper, however, the difference in how much doesn't matter when you add in support.
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
[ QUOTE ]
When the bug is fixed, Invuln not using Unstoppable will look/function a lot like an Ice Tanker. Only Invuln will be better at Smash/Lethal/Fire, and Ice will be better at Energy/Negative/Cold. Ice will be better at Solo play, and larger mob groupings and higher level mobs is where Invuln will outperform.
[/ QUOTE ]
And all this time we have felt Ice needed help. Instead of fixing Ice they gutted Invuln and Fire and pre-GA Stoners. GA is going to be the best stable tank (with some drawbacks, but GA gives exactly what we need to tank, making the drawbacks easily palatable for team tanking). Unstop is great for some situations, but some it will just not work.
And this poses the question about Fire's performance now. If Invuln and Ice are both going to be poor now. What about Fire? My conversations with da5id have put Fire below Inv and Ice barring fire damage. This is truely sad when Fire lost so much offense to Burn getting hit so hard.
Caveat: Smash/Lethal is slightly better on Fire (with tough) than Ice (with tough) is I believe, but I am going off my no-sleep memory, rather than my actual TTL calculations. But the it really depends on the number and con you are facing.
What if neither had Tough? That puts Fire at roughly 48.1% S/L res, and Ice at 0 S/L res.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't want to go there.
The thing is, that seems to be what States' expects to be the role of the AT. If you are doing more, then the AT may need to be taken down some more.
How much is enough, and what should you expect. Apparently the contribution that Statesman's Tank made was sufficient to meet expectations.
If that is the case, then the question becomes, is it worth playing a character that contributes that much (little)?
[/ QUOTE ]
He "tanked" 1/3 of a spawn for 7. He took up a little more than twice his share. On a team with any sort of non-melee AT i'd expect any scrapper to at LEAST do this much. I think it's pretty clear that states' grand vision for tanks is nothing more than scrankers who draw a little more aggro than the vastly more offensively effective scrappers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly how does a Scrapper with less defense than a tank do do at LEAST as much defensively? That makes no sense. Since other than Regen and Dark they are using the same numbers but lower than Tanks no Scrapper is going to be able to deal with damage better.
Statements like this are why nothing comes of these threads. There is no basis for them. They are little better than the obvious flames.
The Devs respond to facts not opinions.
[/ QUOTE ]
Look at his team composition with an emp and a kin supporting him, my scrapper does it all the time. With just an emp my controller can handle all the aggro he gets from his holds. With just an emp my regen scrapper becomes ultra regen/SR tanker/capped damage with unlimited endurance and healing there's very little that can stop me I have tanked avs and herded with my scrapper with just an emp buffing and healing me.