Oh, I'll also suggest another test.
Defender + <AT here> vs. AV
Back in I4, we could take down almost any AV with a Defender and my Inv/EM Tank, barring ones with big heals, or bubbles they use at low HP, like Nemesis.
So, I figure we do a test to see if a Defender + Tank/Blaster/Controller/Scrapper can take down an AV.
If that's untenable, then add a second standard teammate and see what happens.
Jagged:
[ QUOTE ]
Ah! See a lot of us thought we were front line troops as well, but Statesman came along and put us right on that one. We are a Support AT (apparently)
[/ QUOTE ]
Tanks have always been a support AT because damage is everything in CoH. Aside from a few missions, you must do damage to advance and succeed, there is no other way. The job of the support ATs is to keep the damage dealers alive and doing as much damage as fast as possible. A tank is not a damage dealing AT, it is a support AT which just happens to operate up close and personal in melee range.
TomTrumpinski:
[ QUOTE ]
I am not trying to prove anything, specifically. If I was, I would be worried about biasing the test.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why? The devs dont worry about it when they test. 
Heh, just couldnt resist.
As for enemies, I know youve pretty much ruled out Freaks, but you might want to reconsider. Maybe we should have them in there because they tend to be fairly easy for all types of tanks. They would make a good baseline I think. As for the others, Id say if one of the things we might show is that any AT can be made into a tank with buffs, it might be interesting to see how well that premise holds up against strong debuffers.
I didnt have time to check my alts last night, but I think I dont have any that are in that narrow level range youre looking for. I have some alts below 32 and some above 34. So that raises another question, are the tests going to be without any sks or exemps?
If I get IceNine to 32, will that help?
I applaud the Test. It will be interesting to see whether anything can be CLEARLY determined out of all the variables, from playstyles to hit 'rolls'.
If anything, I think it will help us all be more aware of how tough it is for the Devs to test and balance changes. Especially through the filters of their own biases, such as a presumed understanding of how things are 'supposed to be done' based on 'this is how they were designed'.
One thing not to overlook, though.
Even if we manage to 'prove' that the role of the Tanker is easily supplanted by other ATs...even if we manage to 'prove' that the Meat Shield role is not valuable in the current environment...
...what do we suggest they do about it?
In either case, "give us higher defenses" or "give us more damage" may not be a viable answer.
I just don't want the total result of all the testing effort to boil down to "Told ya!"
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
[ QUOTE ]
In either case, "give us higher defenses" or "give us more damage" may not be a viable answer.
I just don't want the total result of all the testing effort to boil down to "Told ya!"
[/ QUOTE ]
Well the funny part is we must do this as impartially as possible. So we can't be going in looking to prove anything. We are going in to test, if that test suggests a problem, ie removing the tank actually improves the groups performance, then we need to look to the tests and try and explain why followed by testing that hypothesis. Then after and if we find why we can work on how to fix it. We really should do our best not to go in expecting anything, I know it's not easy but it is best that way.
So I strongly suggest we not jump the gun and start coming up with fixes for a problem that at this point is only speculated at.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In either case, "give us higher defenses" or "give us more damage" may not be a viable answer.
I just don't want the total result of all the testing effort to boil down to "Told ya!"
[/ QUOTE ]
Well the funny part is we must do this as impartially as possible. So we can't be going in looking to prove anything. We are going in to test, if that test suggests a problem, ie removing the tank actually improves the groups performance, then we need to look to the tests and try and explain why followed by testing that hypothesis. Then after and if we find why we can work on how to fix it. We really should do our best not to go in expecting anything, I know it's not easy but it is best that way.
So I strongly suggest we not jump the gun and start coming up with fixes for a problem that at this point is only speculated at.
[/ QUOTE ]
One very interesting test I was thinking of is to drop the fifth wheel entirely from the run and see what happens.
I really like Foo's AV concept. It might be an enjoyable experiment with our 50s. I might raise a note of caution on that one, however. If we find that a duo combination massively outperforms all others either the DEVs or other players may be tempted to call for nerfs.
I have no preconceived notions on what we'll see right now. I do propose that before we run the tests, we PM the DEVs and ask them if anything we have in the test will bias it in their opinion. After all, if we're trying to show them what the situation is, we don't want them to diss it because of something stupid we overlooked.
Mr. Lithuania
Jessica to Nathan in bed: "I'm not really bad, Isaac just drew me that way."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In either case, "give us higher defenses" or "give us more damage" may not be a viable answer.
I just don't want the total result of all the testing effort to boil down to "Told ya!"
[/ QUOTE ]
Well the funny part is we must do this as impartially as possible. So we can't be going in looking to prove anything. We are going in to test, if that test suggests a problem, ie removing the tank actually improves the groups performance, then we need to look to the tests and try and explain why followed by testing that hypothesis. Then after and if we find why we can work on how to fix it. We really should do our best not to go in expecting anything, I know it's not easy but it is best that way.
So I strongly suggest we not jump the gun and start coming up with fixes for a problem that at this point is only speculated at.
[/ QUOTE ]
One very interesting test I was thinking of is to drop the fifth wheel entirely from the run and see what happens.
I really like Foo's AV concept. It might be an enjoyable experiment with our 50s. I might raise a note of caution on that one, however. If we find that a duo combination massively outperforms all others either the DEVs or other players may be tempted to call for nerfs.
I have no preconceived notions on what we'll see right now. I do propose that before we run the tests, we PM the DEVs and ask them if anything we have in the test will bias it in their opinion. After all, if we're trying to show them what the situation is, we don't want them to diss it because of something stupid we overlooked.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. I'm not looking for nerfs here. It may make sense for us to try and base the experiment around something we "know" the Devs to be happy with overall, which is why I figured the Defender+1 test might be interesting.
'course, this week's "happy with" is next week's "on the chopping block". 
Good Answer.
Just a thought though, just to play Dev's Advocate for a moment.
Tanker checklist
Best Self-defense Caps? check
Best Aggro Tools? check
Most Hit Points? check
'Moderate' Damage? check
Okay, done, moving on...
Heh, just throwing that out there. I'm not saying Tankers don't need improvement. They DO. Just trying to throw some alternate perspective out there.
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
[ QUOTE ]
I thought Tankers were the "supported" AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, the line for your truss is forming now, don't miss it!!!
[ QUOTE ]
Best Self-defense Caps? check
[/ QUOTE ]
Not flaming, just saying is all...
If everyone is tissue paper, scrappers can be regular a4, tankers can be cardboard. Bullets still suck.
@bpphantom
The Defenders of Paragon
KGB Special Section 8
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought Tankers were the "supported" AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, the line for your truss is forming now, don't miss it!!!
[/ QUOTE ]
bah I am going for a motorized wheelchair
[ QUOTE ]
I really like Foo's AV concept. It might be an enjoyable experiment with our 50s. I might raise a note of caution on that one, however. If we find that a duo combination massively outperforms all others either the DEVs or other players may be tempted to call for nerfs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Back in the pre-I5 days the most efficient AV killers I every witnessed was a Defender/Blaster Duo. They were lethal. I didn't think they needed nerfing then and I wouldn't think they need nerfing now. I think Tanks need a boost, plain & simple.
On a different note I think you should come up with some scenarios that give tanks the utmost advantage. If you run some tests that are obviously biased in the tanks favour and the performance is still lack luster then you will have powerful amunition. If.
This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really like Foo's AV concept. It might be an enjoyable experiment with our 50s. I might raise a note of caution on that one, however. If we find that a duo combination massively outperforms all others either the DEVs or other players may be tempted to call for nerfs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Back in the pre-I5 days the most efficient AV killers I every witnessed was a Defender/Blaster Duo. They were lethal. I didn't think they needed nerfing then and I wouldn't think they need nerfing now. I think Tanks need a boost, plain & simple.
On a different note I think you should come up with some scenarios that give tanks the utmost advantage. If you run some tests that are obviously biased in the tanks favour and the performance is still lack luster then you will have powerful amunition. If.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's an interesting thought. What would be tests that would be biased in the tank's favor? Pocket defenders?
Mr. Lithuania
Jessica to Nathan in bed: "I'm not really bad, Isaac just drew me that way."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really like Foo's AV concept. It might be an enjoyable experiment with our 50s. I might raise a note of caution on that one, however. If we find that a duo combination massively outperforms all others either the DEVs or other players may be tempted to call for nerfs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Back in the pre-I5 days the most efficient AV killers I every witnessed was a Defender/Blaster Duo. They were lethal. I didn't think they needed nerfing then and I wouldn't think they need nerfing now. I think Tanks need a boost, plain & simple.
On a different note I think you should come up with some scenarios that give tanks the utmost advantage. If you run some tests that are obviously biased in the tanks favour and the performance is still lack luster then you will have powerful amunition. If.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's an interesting thought. What would be tests that would be biased in the tank's favor? Pocket defenders?
[/ QUOTE ]
Any s/l AV.
Pocket Defenders/Controllers
for two options
Shell game: Arc_ID:417344: It can't be good for humanity if the Circle of Thorns, Banished Pantheon and The Vahzilok are making deals.
A Final Solution: Arc_ID:402587: Earth is under stress. Every being she has spawned and some she hasn't want to possess her. Some of her children believe they have a way to put a stop to this and bring a peace.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Feel free to add Controller + Scrapper + Blaster + Blaster
PS: I tend to focus on Defenders because since I stopped playing my Tank my Defender has become my Main and he out performs by Tank by a significant margin IMO.
[/ QUOTE ]
This thread is depressing.
Just do the all defender team and see the power.
I'm about ready to give up on all of my tankers. As a casual player I have none that are 50 yet and will never get there it seems. I agree with Jagged in that my Defender is my best option and most fun to play. Tankers are all forced into the scranker roll with out the tools to do the job.
Once the devs are done castrating the AT perhaps thay can review the "fun factor" again.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow my feelings mirror yours. My defenders are a lot more fun than my tankers and actually solo Prior to I6 far faster as well. Given simialr Resists/Def my brutes are also more fun gee i wonder why?
Pinnacle
Arch light L50 INV/SS
Psiberia L50 Kin/Psi
Screaming Mentallica L50 Sonic/MM
Infinity
Arc Voltinator L50 SS/Elec
Mind Fire Kinesis L50 Fire/Kin
Flaming Screamer L50 Fire/Sonic
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Feel free to add Controller + Scrapper + Blaster + Blaster
PS: I tend to focus on Defenders because since I stopped playing my Tank my Defender has become my Main and he out performs by Tank by a significant margin IMO.
[/ QUOTE ]
This thread is depressing.
Just do the all defender team and see the power.
I'm about ready to give up on all of my tankers. As a casual player I have none that are 50 yet and will never get there it seems. I agree with Jagged in that my Defender is my best option and most fun to play. Tankers are all forced into the scranker roll with out the tools to do the job.
Once the devs are done castrating the AT perhaps thay can review the "fun factor" again.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow my feelings mirror yours. My defenders are a lot more fun than my tankers and actually solo Prior to I6 far faster as well. Given simialr Resists/Def my brutes are also more fun gee i wonder why?
[/ QUOTE ]
See D_O I'm being good. It's hard but I'm gonna be good. 
Shell game: Arc_ID:417344: It can't be good for humanity if the Circle of Thorns, Banished Pantheon and The Vahzilok are making deals.
A Final Solution: Arc_ID:402587: Earth is under stress. Every being she has spawned and some she hasn't want to possess her. Some of her children believe they have a way to put a stop to this and bring a peace.
When do we plan to this? Tonight? Who should I bring?
[ QUOTE ]
Just a thought though, just to play Dev's Advocate for a moment.
Tanker checklist
Best Self-defense Caps? check
Best Aggro Tools? check
Most Hit Points? check
'Moderate' Damage? check
Okay, done, moving on...
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think this checklist has even been met.
Best Caps? Yes. Best self buffing? How does Dark compare? How do Kheldians compare?
Best Aggro Tools? Taunt and Gauntlet. I actually question if that is better at drawing aggro than blaster AOE attacks. It does remain true that Blasters wish to avoid aggro, and taunt of course is AOE auto-hit, so a powerful tool, has anyone REALLY tested this?
Moderate Damage? I don't think we currently out-damage controllers, but again I might be wrong on that.
Once upon a time, Statesman said that the Tank's role was to take damage. Given the state of defenses now, it might be time to increase a Tanker's hp.
Just as an aside, does anyone else get bothered when they see Freakshow Tanks? They just seem to be so much more aptly named, especially now.
I'd really love it if you could have two builds with your heroes, a PvE build and a PvP build. Would make things so much easier on deciding a build, really would.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's an interesting thought. What would be tests that would be biased in the tank's favor? Pocket defenders?
[/ QUOTE ]
Any s/l AV.
Pocket Defenders/Controllers
for two options
[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure about the def/trollers. Why would a test with a pocket def for a tank be biased vs a pocket def for a scrapper for instance?
[ QUOTE ]
When do we plan to this? Tonight? Who should I bring?
[/ QUOTE ]
Do which? The test that DO and I are going to organize is planned for Thanksgiving weekend. The other tests, I'm not sure.
Mr. Lithuania
Jessica to Nathan in bed: "I'm not really bad, Isaac just drew me that way."
My guess is that a scrapper with a defender would most likely do much better than a defender with a tank. I am still testing in the test server, but I am starting to realize that a Tank has no place in PvP (atleast not my Inv/SS, not to sure how a EM tank would fare off, but probably better), and that my focus should be in PvE (can't focus on both, gonna end up messing something up :P).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would much rather hear Cryptics explanation of our intended role and how they see us accomplishing it. Since we have obviously been wrong by their direction, I would really like for States and company to tell us what we are supposed to contribute to a team, and how that contribution stands out beyond all other AT's.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tankers manage aggro better than any other Archetype. They also have the highest combination of hit points and defenses in the game. Their role is to take the brunt of a spawn's aggro just long enough in order for the rest of the team to be able to eliminate the mobs.
Should a skilled Tanker be able to corral EVERY mob? With a lot of skill, it should be possible - but it's certainly not required to be a good Tank. As long as the Tanker can hold onto aggro so that his teammates are facing less than they'd normally face (i.e. 3 minions), then the team has an advantage. Namely, each teammate can quickly eliminate his opposition...and then come to the Tanker's aid at the end.
I just played a Tanker with the following group (actually, at the request of a PM)...
Inv/Fire tanker (32, SKed to 49)
Level 50 Elec/Elec Blaster (it was his mission, set on Rugged)
Level 32 Peacebringer (SKed to 48 or so).
Level 48 MA/Inv scrapper
Level 50 Fire/Kin controller
Level 35 Earth/empathy controller (SKed up to 48)
Level 49 Energy/energy blaster
We faced the Carnival of Shadows. Typically, I'd start combat by Taunting any Strongmen in the spawn. I knew that I could handle their damage best. I'd usually catch some other minions and lts. I'd end up with a good 1/3 of the spawn focused on me, while the rest of my group disposed of the others. Whenever I saw a teammate enter the red, I'd either Taunt the mobs off them or hit the mobs to get their aggro.
End result? Well, no one was that familiar with their builds. The Controller was defeated by getting too close to another spawn. The Peacebringer carelessly tossed off attacks and ended up aggroing too much. After those two defeats, we settled down and functioned fine.
Admittedly, my own health dropped down to a 1/3 several times. I'd get a little concerned, but usually I had Dull Pain ready.
[/ QUOTE ]
You honestly think they didn't know thier builds and they were that high in level? Or maybe defeats are more common because of ED?
Who do I have to *&^% around here to get more Targeted AoE recipes added?
Arc Name: Tsoo In Love
Arc ID: 413575
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's an interesting thought. What would be tests that would be biased in the tank's favor? Pocket defenders?
[/ QUOTE ]
Any s/l AV.
Pocket Defenders/Controllers
for two options
[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure about the def/trollers. Why would a test with a pocket def for a tank be biased vs a pocket def for a scrapper for instance?
[/ QUOTE ]
You have a point but I was thinking along the lines of the Tanks survivability due to hit points from a lucky alpha. However your point stands.
Shell game: Arc_ID:417344: It can't be good for humanity if the Circle of Thorns, Banished Pantheon and The Vahzilok are making deals.
A Final Solution: Arc_ID:402587: Earth is under stress. Every being she has spawned and some she hasn't want to possess her. Some of her children believe they have a way to put a stop to this and bring a peace.
[ QUOTE ]
I really like Foo's AV concept.
[/ QUOTE ]
I got the entire Praetorian arc to do with my tanker yet. If you want we can line 'em up one right after the other.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See, and when I read: Tanker = Frontline Fighter in the manual, I don't think of them as "support ATs." But then again, my only other MMO experiance was about 9 months of SWG, so I don't have Tank=Meatshield ingrained into my brain.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah! See a lot of us thought we were front line troops as well, but Statesman came along and put us right on that one. We are a Support AT (apparently)
[/ QUOTE ]
I thought Tankers were the "supported" AT.