Gauntlet and Taunt Auras don't work on AVs anymore
By
Aett_Thorn,
Posted on: 2006-10-15 21:38 in Tankers
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
No its getting it without the *other part* (other part is in reference to something that very well is against forum rules and not everyone will want to know, have kids know, about it).
I don't think the blasters issue is nerf after nerf like regen delt with (hows that for throwing yet another fire onto the inferno ?). Tanks and scrappers were a kick in the jimmy issue after issue while blasters were poked and prodded incessantly without ever really being addressed. It kinda went Dev: "Hey guys let us hear you issues" two days later "wait what were we doing?"
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: Cicle
.
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
In all fairness I might have been misquoted in some way. I NEVER asked that I personally be responded to. I said the post needed clarification. That was the title of my PM as I posted earlier. I never expected the thread to be addressed.
[ QUOTE ]
A post that could use clarification
[/ QUOTE ]
No one ever "asks" for a read reciept. You check that off and if it is read you get a notification. As for responding to me specifically or timely. I never expected any response because it involved Tankers which I have previously said was in the "When hell freezes over" schedule.
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: Aett_Thorn
.
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with these comments. I can understand not wanting to click a link but it was clearly a thread here as can be told from a casual glance at the URL and the title of "a post that needs clarification". My fault for not listing the name of the thread and where it is located.
As for Posi's PM box being full he read the PM or at least clicked it so that isn't a factor.
Regarding the I8 and Halloween events likely they will back burner anything but the most important bugs. However history shows that Tanker concerns aren't back burnered. They are put in a fridge to collect mold then eventually discarded.
(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 ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, see... I just know I hit my limit with DA being unstackable at I3's launch...and it was only the fact that getting it two weeks later that kept me going.
I really need to take my blaster to 50...
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 ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whenever my blaster gets to 41, she's going to be Ice/Energy/Elec.
Not because I thought of EMP + Blizzard. Thanks, man! I actually had a concept for it and all. Plus, I love the look. 
I believe all the blaster holds were hit after the defender holds were, but that may be it.
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 ]
No its getting it without the *other part* (other part is in reference to something that very well is against forum rules and not everyone will want to know, have kids know, about it).
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, regen's become a joke, but something that most people don't realize is that /Dev has been nerfed almost every single issue as well. It started out as one of the secondaries that was really quite good and now it's terrible.
And Tankers have gotten attention. Sure, you've been nerfed, but so have blasters, and we've gotten nothing for it in return. We were told in OCtober of 04 that Secondaries were needed to be looked at and that it would get done and we're still waiting.
You want to talk about red-headed step-children?
I'm not saying you guys don't have your issues, and I'm not trying to compete with you over who's got it worse, but you better believe that it's a hell of a lot worse than what you're talking about. We're the only AT in the game that's been pretty much ignored with a borked concept (range as a defense? Are you kidding me?), sub-par damage (Scrappers out damage blasters in melee. I have a dev quote to back that up) and the need to be babysat by our team mates.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
[ 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 ]
scrapper base hitpoints are 71.4% of tanker base hitpoints. for purposes survivability, ignoring outside healing, that difference can apply directly to the survivability difference between the 2 in addition to the differences in the raw defensive numbers.
An invuln scrapper, for example, not only suffers with 75% of the raw numbers of a tanker, but total health and the dull pain health boost are only 70ish % of a tankers too.
Barring unique differences between powersets, I'd have to say tankers make out better in the tradeoff.
[ 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 ]
How about this: things that become requirements to fulfil any sort of remote purpose become the inherent. Let Gauntlet be the effect we can take.
[ QUOTE ]
How about this: things that become requirements to fulfil any sort of remote purpose become the inherent. Let Gauntlet be the effect we can take.
[/ QUOTE ]
make taunt a clickable innate, and move gauntlet to a powerchoice in secondaries?
I'm curious if that's what you're suggesting.
Gideon_F
Your post was stating you got a response and what you posted was all you got. You asked for a read receipt by checking that box, I'm glad you understand that.
I see now your original post was made in sarcasm though.
The lack of dev response is not a tanker specific issue; in fact its been longer for other archtypes to have heard from a dev than tanks. Actually I think tanks have gotten more attention, good or bad, than any other archtype. The devs have not really responded on board to archtype specific gripes in a long time. Unless it was a major bug. I can understand why though.
[ QUOTE ]
make taunt a clickable innate, and move gauntlet to a powerchoice in secondaries?
I'm curious if that's what you're suggesting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, why not? I mean Brutes don't have Gauntlet, can hold as much agro as a Tanker does as easily. And according to iakona their auras still work vs the AV/Hero class of mobs.
That means Gauntlet is far less needed that Taunt. Which means it should be the inherent.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
make taunt a clickable innate, and move gauntlet to a powerchoice in secondaries?
I'm curious if that's what you're suggesting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, why not?
[/ QUOTE ]
Imagining the 120page thread in response to such a change makes me giggle.
Not saying such a change would be good to bad.. but boy, if the taunt threads are thick now...
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whenever my blaster gets to 41, she's going to be Ice/Energy/Elec.
Not because I thought of EMP + Blizzard. Thanks, man! I actually had a concept for it and all. Plus, I love the look.
I believe all the blaster holds were hit after the defender holds were, but that may be it.
[/ QUOTE ]
LOL np. I actually didn't think about it till the other day when I was hypothesizing a change. I always saw Ice storm -> Blizzard as awkward (two rains in a row), I much prefer Shiver -> Blizzard.
If that hold thing effected me I never noticed it. I still hold bosses without issue.
Sometimes I wish I could be a powerbuild guy without needing a concept. Heck even my fire/stone tank (now stone/elec brute) had a back story.
These threads happen because the AT is fundamentally broken at its core, we see several threads start every single day that demonstrate this, and not just here on the Tanker forum either.
However the devs think this AT is all hunky dory.
Like I said, they're busy messing up other ATs right now, so I expect Tankers will be fixed this side of never.
[ QUOTE ]
I want to say that this seems really odd, but after other tanker changes over the past year or so, it's pretty much par for the course.
What do the devs want tankers to do? Not supposed to take aggro from a full spawn, not supposed to hold aggro on GMs and AVs. What is a tanker's purpose?
[/ QUOTE ]
hopefully to be replaced by doms....at least the devs are trying to buff them up to a purpose.....
At this point, I am thinking that AV's need some form of cosmic balance, geared specifically towards countering the AT's in a mission against it, rather than hacked together blankets that get short-circuted by one effect in 2 or 3 powersets, or break what an AT is there for if they dont have one power from their set.
...try being 3 lvls' above Nosferatu(conning orange) and not being able to dent him.
There's more wrong here than just gauntlet.
36 level 50's in various servers...haven't been here in a while. It's now over 50
[ QUOTE ]
Some people will simply take anything the devs dish up without complaint. This is really sad.
[/ QUOTE ]
Probably cuz there isn't a Helluva lot we can do about it... 
The Devs, in all seriousness, sorta pick and choose what things they'll do for us...if they like the way something is, I don't think they'll change it, no matter how badly we want them to...especially if they think it "is working as intended".
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yep, that's the event I'm talking about. I can understand them changing it so that GMs are unaffected by inherent taunt, since there are potentially dozens of different targets applying the effect. However, it doesn't make sense for AVs that appear on mission maps, since there are normally only one or two players with an inherent taunt effect on any given team.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why bother changing it for giant monsters? They already bypass aggro control by having multiple huge AoEs. Heck, I don't recall ever seeing a single-target attack from a giant monster.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a key point in addressing the comment I've heard a few times now that "it's cool, we'll be like the Controllers with the purple triangles of doom". Even if we have the AV/GM Taunted on us, there are still stray cones and AoE's that can eat a squishy up. Ever stood in the wrong spot while a Tanker held aggro on Infernal? Ever gotten baked in two seconds by Fire Breath? Yeah, I thought so.
If controllers could just stack a couple holds and permalock down an AV, it would be much less risky to the team. I don't agree with the current triangle system because it goes too far, but I understand why it is in place. They just need to phase out more often.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
make taunt a clickable innate, and move gauntlet to a powerchoice in secondaries?
I'm curious if that's what you're suggesting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, why not? I mean Brutes don't have Gauntlet, can hold as much agro as a Tanker does as easily. And according to iakona their auras still work vs the AV/Hero class of mobs.
That means Gauntlet is far less needed that Taunt. Which means it should be the inherent.
[/ QUOTE ]
This sounds vaguely familiar.
-regen is not needed to take down an AV. Taunt is not needed. Tanks in general aren't needed. Want an easy time as a tanker on an AV team? Take taunt.
....And have a Coke and a smile, and shut the f--- up!! 
[ QUOTE ]
-regen is not needed to take down an AV. Taunt is not needed. Tanks in general aren't needed. Want an easy time as a tanker on an AV team? Take taunt.
....And have a Coke and a smile, and shut the f--- up!!
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually one could look upon this as a mercy overall. Given the casualty rate for many tankers fighting AVs these days, having them lose the attention of the baddie is a blessing in disguise. With the tanker's piddling damage, the AV's will regularly lose interest in them and the tanker will be spared the pain. Woo Hoo! It's a tanker survivability buff!! Really!! Dead squishies for the win!
Too many alts to list.
[ QUOTE ]
-regen is not needed to take down an AV. Taunt is not needed. Tanks in general aren't needed. Want an easy time as a tanker on an AV team? Take taunt.
[/ QUOTE ]
What team would take a tauntless tank to an AV fight now?
[ QUOTE ]
These threads happen because the AT is fundamentally broken at its core, we see several threads start every single day that demonstrate this, and not just here on the Tanker forum either.
However the devs think this AT is all hunky dory.
Like I said, they're busy messing up other ATs right now, so I expect Tankers will be fixed this side of never.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think that the devs believe that Tanks are hunky dory.
I do think that they've said that they're not sure what the problem is, but that there is a problem with the concept.
Sounds to me as if they're not happy somewhere, but they can't figure out either what the problem is, or what the solution is.
Heck, even the players who've played Tankers for 2+ years, and posted here all this time, can't agree on what "the problem" is.
Are we Taunt-bots (active aggro controllers)?
Are we Gauntlet-machines (passive aggro controllers)?
Are we damage sponges (absorb alpha)?
Are we melee controllers (control mobs and manage aggro through controls)?
Are we Scrankers?
Are we a mixture?
Which of those should be emphasized? Which should be de-emphasized? Should any be completely taken out? Should something be added?
I don't think that Brutes were that much better designed than Tankers. What I think is the case, is that the concept of Brutes is much more obvious, thus players are less confused about how they work. With Tankers, it's not just Devs that are confused. We all are.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
-regen is not needed to take down an AV. Taunt is not needed. Tanks in general aren't needed. Want an easy time as a tanker on an AV team? Take taunt.
[/ QUOTE ]
What team would take a tauntless tank to an AV fight now?
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh, some Tanks outdamage some Scrappers in single-target.
Fire puts out great sustained DPS due to having the best DPE efficiency.
EM is also okay... better in burst damage than sustained, but still good DPS.
Super Strength is also very good, especially on larger teams where you have a good chance of getting multiple +Recharge boosts so you can double-stack Rage for a long time.
Tank sustained DPS, on a team where they get +Recovery boosts so that they can afford to use their heavy hitters whenever they recharge, is not as bad as people make it out to be, by saying "Tanks have no use vs AVs except to Taunt". Frankly... probably any Tanker powerset built for it can outdamage my AR Blaster vs a single target. Well, except for Ice Melee.
Tanks have a purpose vs AVs... they can Taunt to hold aggro, they can do damage, and they can also hold aggro when the team is getting hit hard if the rest of the team cooperates by holding back fire until the situation is stabilized. It's true that our main purpose of aggro control is not manageable using what was once a very good concept of gaining aggro by attacking. But look at Controllers... their main purpose of controlling is 3/4 useless, yet they're still fine on AV fights by using other powers. Tanks are not defined solely by aggro management, even if it is their main or one of their main purposes.
The funny thing is, I got almost immediate read receipts from my pm's earlier today. But no responses, and I'm sure the last thing they want to deal with right now is a big bug right before their halloween event hits live.
Give them some time, one of us who've sent pm's will get a reply.
B