Gauntlet and Taunt Auras don't work on AVs anymore
By
Aett_Thorn,
Posted on: 2006-10-15 21:38 in Tankers
It could be worse, you could be a blaster.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their purpose is to not have one apparently.
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess the "purpose" is to make Taunt worth something so that tankers will take it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think having 0 endurance cost, being auto-hit, ranged, a long duration, and being AoE makes it worth taking. I hate the very concept of the power, but I took it because it's just too good for me to turn down, especially when facing dangerous, unhittable foes like MoGed Paragon Protectors.
Please try my custom mission arcs!
Legacy of a Rogue (ID 459586, Entry for Dr. Aeon's Third Challenge)
Death for Dollars! (ID 1050)
Dr. Duplicate's Dastardly Dare (ID 1218)
Win the Past, Own the Future (ID 1429)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their purpose is to not have one apparently.
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess the "purpose" is to make Taunt worth something so that tankers will take it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think having 0 endurance cost, being auto-hit, ranged, a long duration, and being AoE makes it worth taking. I hate the very concept of the power, but I took it because it's just too good for me to turn down, especially when facing dangerous, unhittable foes like MoGed Paragon Protectors.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then why are we constantly being assaulted by Tankers constantly screaming about how they don't need it?
I think it's a great power, I have it on my tank. I find it invaluable. My job is to take aggro, that power allows me to do that much more effectively than swinging my fists about, especially if I'm fighting something that +3 to me.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
[ QUOTE ]
Tanker: Not one bit. Designed that way, apparently. But no where in the power descriptions does it state this. So if I never read the tanker boards, I'd never know. I'd just think something was wrong with my taunt aura, and try to add more taunts to it, but then that wouldn't help, and I'd give up in disgust.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's the killer part right there. Even if a tanker has Taunt, there's normally no reason to throw it out against a single powerful foe, such as an AV. Going by the information the game gives us, a taunt aura and Gauntlet should be more than adequate to hold an AV's attention. In fact, first-hand experience says that I can hold a giant monster's attention with just punchvoke.
That's the biggest problem. Tankers don't know about this nerf. The existence of the nerf is plenty to get mad about, but stealth nerfing it is just going to get teams killed left and right. When the power description says that all you have to do is keep punching the AV, and then you secretly make that not true, blasters and controllers are going to die.
Considering how AoE-happy AVs and giant monsters are anyway, I fail to see how this was necessary in the first place. I've sure never seen giant monsters be unable to attack because of rapid taunting. Lusca's tentacles were beating on us just fine, in spite of having four tankers dividing their attention back and forth.
Arc #41077 - The Men of State
Arc #48845 - Operation: Dirty Snowball
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their purpose is to not have one apparently.
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess the "purpose" is to make Taunt worth something so that tankers will take it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think having 0 endurance cost, being auto-hit, ranged, a long duration, and being AoE makes it worth taking. I hate the very concept of the power, but I took it because it's just too good for me to turn down, especially when facing dangerous, unhittable foes like MoGed Paragon Protectors.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then why are we constantly being assaulted by Tankers constantly screaming about how they don't need it?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because they didn't. Taunt should be a tool, like Power Burst. How would you feel if you thought Power Burst didn't fit your idea of a Blaster because it's got such a short range, and you had a bunch of people demanding that you take it, despite being capable of doing your job without it?
Anyway, that's pretty irrelevant now, isn't it? Taunt is now mandatory for AV fights. Tell your constantly screaming Tankers that.
Please try my custom mission arcs!
Legacy of a Rogue (ID 459586, Entry for Dr. Aeon's Third Challenge)
Death for Dollars! (ID 1050)
Dr. Duplicate's Dastardly Dare (ID 1218)
Win the Past, Own the Future (ID 1429)
[ QUOTE ]
Because they didn't. Taunt should be a tool, like Power Burst. How would you feel if you thought Power Burst didn't fit your idea of a Blaster because it's got such a short range, and you had a bunch of people demanding that you take it, despite being capable of doing your job without it?
[/ QUOTE ]
no, of course not. But many tankers treat the idea of Taunt with a level of snobbery that goes well beyond that concept. It's almost like they're offended at the very idea which is just as silly as the example that you gave.
This is probably sounding aggressive, I didn't mean to come in and pick a fight, I've just always been baffled by the Taunt issue with tankers. It's like Defenders constanlty screaming that they're not "Healers" all the time at the drop of a hat.
I'm not saying I like this change or that it's a good one. I'm a squishy, I'm a blaster and a controller, I want my tanks to be able to draw aggro from the AV and I want them to be able to do it however they please, as long as they [censored] well do it. From the Dev point of view, though, it may seem as though this is the kind of thing (and typical of this dev team, by the way) that they would pull to make us take a power that they think is "fun". This stinks of Jack Emmert.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
You know, if Taunt _is_ going to be needed for AV/GM tanking - can't we at least see an improvement to the power itself? Perhaps speed it up some? It's like 2 or more second long and it roots you. That's what gives us a lot of grief. Standing there, doing nothing.
Furthermore, how long does Taunt's effect really last on an AV? I can understand weaving it in on an attack chain, but how often would that have to be?
Let's be honest, the Devs probably aren't going to change this. So what can we do to adapt to this?
A lot of people don't like Taunt because they take it very literally- your hero throws out insults to get an enemy to attack him. But that's just one way of looking at it, everyone is free to make up their own concept.
When I was fighting the Lusca with a team one time, I stood behind the head, throwing out Taunt and taking the hits, making life easy for my teammates. Was I actually insulting a giant octopus? Nah, more like I was wrestling it to hold its attention. Sometimes when I use Taunt at range to peel an enemy off a Blaster I might imagine an insult, the "Why don't you pick on someone you're own size?" variety.
Just like my Tank doesn't actually shine like a disco ball (despite what the game's effects may say), not every Taunt represents hurling insults.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their purpose is to not have one apparently.
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess the "purpose" is to make Taunt worth something so that tankers will take it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think having 0 endurance cost, being auto-hit, ranged, a long duration, and being AoE makes it worth taking. I hate the very concept of the power, but I took it because it's just too good for me to turn down, especially when facing dangerous, unhittable foes like MoGed Paragon Protectors.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then why are we constantly being assaulted by Tankers constantly screaming about how they don't need it?
I think it's a great power, I have it on my tank. I find it invaluable. My job is to take aggro, that power allows me to do that much more effectively than swinging my fists about, especially if I'm fighting something that +3 to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
We *didn't* need it. I've never had trouble with holding AV aggro in the past without it, even tho I did heve it. And my ice/ice tank has a taunt enh in both Chilling Embrace and Icicles, so that took care of my taunting for me. Now I find that that isn't going to be good enough against AV's? If true, it totally sucks because I'll be forced to take a specific power. No hero/villain of any set should be forced to take any power in the set. Sure, some powers are better than others...that's a given...but no power should be necessary. Now, it appears, that one is going to be for any higher level tanks.
[ QUOTE ]
Then why are we constantly being assaulted by Tankers constantly screaming about how they don't need it?
[/ QUOTE ]
Let's be fair here. "Need" is a very flexible word. But before this patch you could build a "scranker" who's decent at holding localized aggro through AoE gauntlet and that character could AV aggro with the same concept. Jump in AVs face with an aura power, lay into him a few times and your teammates are good to go.
No one sane is going to claim that such a character is the best meatshield he can be. Taunt works at range and is autohit. My scranker is, largely, SOL if he needs to taunt a flier off of someone in the back of a party. But you could do a pretty good job and cover a lot of bases even without Taunt.
For typical CoH missions teams don't have to have a Tanker. Some fairly extreme posters hereabouts will claim it's never worth bringing a Tanker on a normal mission. But AV missions are something that lots and lots of people think a Tanker brings something noticably useful to the table. What better place for a single, tough, aggro-grabbing character than in the face of a single high-damage foe who spends most of the time shrugging off controllers.
So back to "need". We've got an AT-defining scenario, and only one tool that allows the AT to actually fulfill the defintion with any reasonable degree of success. To me, if they don't want to look like a chump in the face of an AV they need to have Taunt. When no one told them the needed it. When every other scenario in the game tells them "yeah, you're definitley better with it, but you don't need taunt to be a passable team meatshield."
Saying that this most role-defining scenario now needs taunt for the Tankers to actually succeed at their job is a serious slap in the face. The secretive nature of the change makes the slap come with a barbed palm. "Here, you can do your thing decently (if not greatly) in the rest of the game, but we're just going to confuse the crap out of you by making it not work in this key situation. Enjoy!"
I'm sorry, but that this was done and done this way says to me that someone really does have their head in a dark moist place.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brute attacks are subject to the same restrictions as Tanker attacks. They make a check to see if the target is an AV/GM/Hami/Mito/player, and if it isn't, the inherent Taunt effect is applied. If the target is one of those, the Taunt effect is not even applied to the target; t's not a matter of resistance or protection.
[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't correct. My brutes can hold aggro of 8 +4 AVs 100% of the time, using their aura and nothing else.
My tanker couldn't hold aggro of one +2 AV more than 3/4 of the time, using aura and every attack power I had.
This is my experience since 3 months ago. I always thought tankers were bugged. If they're WAI and brutes are bugged, well... I'm glad my brute is SHOE'd out. 
[/ QUOTE ]
I just rechecked this. It looks like Brute taunt auras (invincibility, mud pots) are exempt from this restriction. The inherent taunt of those powers apparently is set to work on all NPCs, but the Tanker equivalents do not. The inherent taunt of melee attack powers for both ATs does not work on AVs/GMs.
[ QUOTE ]
I just rechecked this. It looks like Brute taunt auras (invincibility, mud pots) are exempt from this restriction. The inherent taunt of those powers apparently is set to work on all NPCs, but the Tanker equivalents do not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I hope your "source" works both ways and gets that problem to a Dev. 
His source *is* a dev.
Please try my custom mission arcs!
Legacy of a Rogue (ID 459586, Entry for Dr. Aeon's Third Challenge)
Death for Dollars! (ID 1050)
Dr. Duplicate's Dastardly Dare (ID 1218)
Win the Past, Own the Future (ID 1429)
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I don't know what people think you need -regen for.
[/ QUOTE ]
because for a few weeks after i7 launched, GM and AV regen rates were about an order of magnitude too high to be defeatable by most teams that didn't have -regen
The responses to my PMs. The lack of any text by Positron and Castle means that there was none. Just see what was said and continue ignoring it because it is Tanker related.
10/16/06 05:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Read Receipt
.
From: _Castle_
.
Your private message at http://boards.cityofvillains.com/login.php to _Castle_ about 'A post that could use clarification' has been read.
[/ QUOTE ]
10/16/06 06:48 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Read Receipt
.
From: Positron
.
Your private message at http://boards.cityofheroes.com/login.php to Positron about 'A post that could use clarification' has been read.
[/ QUOTE ]
(Virtue/Champion) Neil Fracas: Inv/SS
(Virtue) Gideon Fontaine: MA/SR (Sc), Generic Hero 114: Ice/Cold, Marcus Tyler AR/En, Project F: Spines/DA (S)
(Champion) Jenna Sidal BS/SD, Generic Hero 114: En/En (Bl), Loganne Claws/WP (Sc)
[ QUOTE ]
The responses to my PMs. The lack of any text by Positron and Castle means that there was none. Just see what was said and continue ignoring it because it is Tanker related.
10/16/06 05:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Read Receipt
.
From: _Castle_
.
Your private message at http://boards.cityofvillains.com/login.php to _Castle_ about 'A post that could use clarification' has been read.
[/ QUOTE ]
10/16/06 06:48 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Read Receipt
.
From: Positron
.
Your private message at http://boards.cityofheroes.com/login.php to Positron about 'A post that could use clarification' has been read.
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]
No, you asked for a read reciept and got one. That they haven't responded to you specifically in a manner you'd accept as timely is irrelevant.
Dude, sorry, you screwed up.
If you want the dev's to read the tanker board, you need a post like:
1. I beat 4 minions, me uber
2. Tanks are fun
3. States is right, coh is just like my gameboy!
4. I can herd entire maps
5. I can solo +7 mobs
6. I'm having fun in this game!
See, if you say something they dont like, they will read it and nerf it.
We need to start a new topic, like 'gauntlet and aggro auras not working on AVs is fun!'
Then everyone lie and say how fun it is. They will read it and nerf it.
I'm thinking of making a 'burn's fear effect is fun!', then there is a chance they will read it, and nerf the fear, since its fun.
btw, I'd LOVE to understand why scrappers get damage is at 1.125, while tanks are stuck at .8, yet for defenses, they are .8 to our 1.
50 Tanks: Invul/ss, Fire/ice/fire, Ice/em, Stone/fire
WP/Stone, dark/dark, shld/mace
50 Other: WS, SS/dark/sc brute, BS/Regen/WM scrpr, fire/fire/force blaster, rad/kin corr, mind/rad ctrl, ill/storm cntrl
First off, based on conversations with him, I know that Castle very rarely opens a link sent in a PM. Direct him to the thread, and maybe he'll look at it. But he might not click on the link.
Also, Posi's mailbox has been full a lot recently, he might have more important PMs to deal with.
I'd like a Dev or Redname response on this, but with Halloween and I8 right around the corner, who knows when we'll get one.
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus
[ QUOTE ]
btw, I'd LOVE to understand why scrappers get damage is at 1.125, while tanks are stuck at .8, yet for defenses, they are .8 to our 1.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is OT, but it's at least partially because Tanker damage delivered relative to Scrappers is more than just the ratio of their base damage scales. Many tanker attack sets have damage scale (BI) that allows them to do rather well on a Scrapper comparison. A 6.333 BI attack (Swoop, Incinerate, Heavy Mallet, Shatter) compares to a Scrapper attack with a 4.50 BI (Soaring Dragon, Crippling Axe Kick, Focus all are around this). Scrapper sets except Broasdword cap out at 6.333 BI, where Tanker sets cap out at a Scrapper equivalent of 7.03. Except EM, which caps out at the equivalent of 9.0. Broadsword caps out at 7.333.
Now, I don't mean to say that Tankers get some sort of free lunch here, because those big hitter powers are expensive, and have long recharges. Of course most of them come with devastating status effects (in PvE at least). But Scrappers get Criticals, muddying direct comparisons even further.
My point is that someone correctly took a look at more than the base damge scale. Tankers have access to much bigger attacks relative to their base damage than Scrappers do. Base damage isn't the whole picture.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Cicle, could you repeat what you're trying to post?
I imagine it's about the difference between when scrappers didn't do anything well on a team and when they were overpowered and everyone wanted to nerf them, but without seeing your actual post, I can't have a decent conversation with you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I have no idea how that happened.
I just said blasters still are
In regards to scrapper blood.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is axiomatic.
But blasters really need something. Seriously, if I were primarily a blaster player, rather than brute/scrapper/tanker, I would've been so gone forever last year.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Cicle, could you repeat what you're trying to post?
I imagine it's about the difference between when scrappers didn't do anything well on a team and when they were overpowered and everyone wanted to nerf them, but without seeing your actual post, I can't have a decent conversation with you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I have no idea how that happened.
I just said blasters still are
In regards to scrapper blood.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is axiomatic.
But blasters really need something. Seriously, if I were primarily a blaster player, rather than brute/scrapper/tanker, I would've been so gone forever last year.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hi.
I'm a blaster.
Most of us are still here 'cause we're used to getting rammed in the pooper anyway, so what difference does it make.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, while this "Stealth Nerf" is a decidedly underhanded move on the part of the Devs (or even worse, another Bug), I think everyone needs to stop and take a breath.
To say that requiring one particular Power to take down a GM/AV is somehow unfair or borked fails to look at the bigger picture.
Can you take down a GM/AV without some form of -Regen?
No (some would argue that it is possible to accomplish this, but I don't consider a 30-60 minute whittle-fest an acceptable way to do it).
[/ QUOTE ]
It shouldn't be required either. Many of us posting in this thread said that AVs should not require that specific debuff to defeat.
[ QUOTE ]
And can you Tank (as in acquiring and holding aggro) a GM/AV without the Taunt power from any Tanker secondary?
No (at least according to recent personal experience & current Forum reports).
Are either of these situations fair & balanced?
I would say no to both.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed.
[ QUOTE ]
Are either Game-Breaking?
I would say no to both.
[/ QUOTE ]
They are, however, AT-breaking, which isn't excusable either.
[ QUOTE ]
All we can gather from the current state of GM/AV encounters is that the Devs want them to be only achievable (or at least resonably achievable) with what they consider a 'Balanced' team (one with at least one -Regen Defender or Controller & at least one Tanker with Taunt to keep everyone else from getting pulped).
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think the devs have a clear idea of what they want from GM/AV fights, beyond having them be tough.
[ QUOTE ]
Although I must admit that I'm mostly playing Devil's Advocate here....all my Tankers have taken Taunt as early as possible, and use it regularly, and therefore are unaffected by this "change."
[/ QUOTE ]
Tankers had inherent taunt in their attacks prior to issue 3, and had punchvoke added to their attacks in issue 3, to reduce the need for all tankers to take taunt to manage aggro. Many people chose to skip taunt because they could accomplish aggro management with auras and attacks. The only fights where you really have use for a heal/buff/damage sponge are GM/AV fights, and now you are required to take taunt in order to hold aggro in those fights.
My tanker had taunt for 39 levels, and can get it again with a respec I already have banked. It doesn't really affect me all that much, either. However, that doesn't mean I can't argue against this shift in the game environment.
Meanwhile, in WoW: Burning Crusade, warriors are being given more non-taunt tools to generate and sustain hate.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Cicle, could you repeat what you're trying to post?
I imagine it's about the difference between when scrappers didn't do anything well on a team and when they were overpowered and everyone wanted to nerf them, but without seeing your actual post, I can't have a decent conversation with you.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I have no idea how that happened.
I just said blasters still are
In regards to scrapper blood.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is axiomatic.
But blasters really need something. Seriously, if I were primarily a blaster player, rather than brute/scrapper/tanker, I would've been so gone forever last year.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm an Ice/Ice/Cold blaster. *shhhhh don't tell anyone* My powerset has largely been left alone except for ED. Well there was Hibernate but that was largely bleed off from a nerf to tanks. Does it suck for my blaster? Eh kinda, it is nice for a quick invincible rest. If I was less caring about concept on Cicle I'd swap it for probably electric. Can you imagine Emp pulse -> Blizzard? Can't run too far falling on your rear and disoriented. Yeah the recharge sucks (slower than a nuke), but I don't pop Blizzard too often anyway.
To be fair, Castle doesn't respond immediately to PMs that deal with mechanical stuff like this. He doesn't always respond, but when he reads them you can bet he considers them.
That doesn't mean that you'll get anything through, though. I don't know if Castle is the last word on power changes.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Thats just......very very depressing.