Saying that most Tankers would not want to play with a damage boost against Boss, EB, AV, and GM class enemies is likely not true and borderline insanity, however, everyone is entitled to their opinion. 
Johnny, even though I think there are times you have the personality of a wet mop when trying to get your ideas across, I have and still do agree with several of them. Maybe you should get a PR agent or something to try and give ideas to Castle on this type of thing. It may have taken forever to get Invul, Warmace, Dark Melee, and several other sets buffed, but they did get buffed after enough civil discussion was had about the issues.
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thematically, I can accept Tankers holding back on the lesser foes; minions, LTs...IF they were able to open up on the Bosses, EBs AVs and GMs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now this idea has merit, actually. That's pretty much how all of the "Comic-Book Tanks" operate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh hai.
I agree 100%.
That's pretty much the original idea behind Fury; that Tankers hold back at the begining of a fight and cut loose as it wears on.
And it was the idea behind my Tanker Domination proposal, executed differently of course. You'd save your big hits for the last encounter on a mission.
And I've also suggested Tankers could get a flat damage increase against just Bosses and up. That's quite possible, technically speaking.
I was inspired by Supe's little speech here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoJ2Bd41zsw
Which, as you said, is something that could speak to the Tanker's concept.
Many people here shot down the concept(Tankers holding back against everyone but the big guy), and any execution of it suggested by me. And the devs, of course, ignored me and the idea.
I still think is a viable hook for Tankers being able to be heavy hitters, some of the time.
So yeah, it's nothing new.
Glad you like it, though.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
My question regarding the idea was why did tankers deserve two inherents and the other nine primary ATs did not? IIRC, it was never answered.
[ QUOTE ]
My question regarding the idea was why did tankers deserve two inherents and the other nine primary ATs did not? IIRC, it was never answered.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes?
Who said two? This would wrap into Gauntlet.
Just like Defiance now does a couple of different things (pseudo mez protection and damage buffs) as does the Stalker's new Assassination(regular crits, hidden crits, demoralizing effect), there's no reason Gauntlet can't do something else on top of being a radial AoE taunt.
.
It's not a question of whether people want another damage boost for tankers. If the latest MA brouhaha is any indication, players will take every advantage afforded them and capitalize on it to the Nth degree.
It's a question of whether a second damage boost is truly needed for tankers and what price will have to be paid to get it? If tankers are truly in danger of extinction because of blue side brutes than a token damage boost will do nothing to save them because by their very nature brutes and scrappers will always deliver more damage more consistently than tankers.
If the point of the exercise is to "save tankers" than they need something that brutes and scrappers do not currently have and can never duplicate.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
Saying that most Tankers would not want to play with a damage boost against Boss, EB, AV, and GM class enemies is likely not true and borderline insanity, however, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is no one wants to know how much downward their defenses would need to go in order for them to get such a thing and still be balanced.
Because I have a hard time seeing Tanks getting more damage and still being pretty much unkillable... but, what do I know, the only tank I ever had I quit playing at 38.
Virtue:
Miserya - 50 EM/ELA Brute (Perma-shelved)
Adriana Rayne - 42 Katana/Dark Scrapper
Cyberpulse - 26 Super Strength/Willpower Brute
Steel Heart - 24 Invuln/Super Strength Tanker
[ QUOTE ]
Johnny, even though I think there are times you have the personality of a wet mop when trying to get your ideas across, I have and still do agree with several of them. Maybe you should get a PR agent or something to try and give ideas to Castle on this type of thing. It may have taken forever to get Invul, Warmace, Dark Melee, and several other sets buffed, but they did get buffed after enough civil discussion was had about the issues.
[/ QUOTE ]
My humble request to you then is when you hear me touting ideas and concepts that you agree with, speak up.
I suspect Castle is well aware of the things I propose, be they reasonable or unreasonable. But he's not even going to stop and consider them either way when there is little to no support for them.
We both know there's more people out there who'd support Tanker tweaks/changes than who actually speak up to say so. I've had a number of people encourage me to keep pushing away at this because they support many of the ideas. But these same people don't always turn out to vocalize that support. I can understand people not wanting to step into the crapstorm that's regularly directed at me, but if they really do support the effort, and they want any progress made, when push comes, they should make an effort to shove.
If you wanna roll with an analogy, I'm tanking this stuff for you guys. Support's always welcome.
.
Honestly, both of the ATs work pretty well. I doubt many oother players are gonna freak out about getting one over the other. If you can hold aggro, people will group with you.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question regarding the idea was why did tankers deserve two inherents and the other nine primary ATs did not? IIRC, it was never answered.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes?
Who said two? This would wrap into Gauntlet.
Just like Defiance now does a couple of different things (pseudo mez protection and damage buffs) as does the Stalker's new Assassination(regular crits, hidden crits, demoralizing effect), there's no reason Gauntlet can't do something else on top of being a radial AoE taunt.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is true, but (correct me if I'm wrong) didn't Tankers also get -Range to their Taunt exclusively as well.
I don't mean to bash an arguement that might lend more power to my character, but it does well to bring up further issue with a possible debate of this nature. Beyond the -Range in Taunt, I do have to say that Johnny is right in so far as some other Archetypes getting double benefits and thus the idea is not entirely far-fetched.
Raid Leader of Task Force Vendetta "Steel 70", who defeated the first nine Drop Ships in the Second Rikti War.
70 Heroes, 9 Drop Ships, 7 Minutes. The Aliens never knew what hit them.
Now soloing: GM-Class enemy Adamaster, with a Tanker!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Saying that most Tankers would not want to play with a damage boost against Boss, EB, AV, and GM class enemies is likely not true and borderline insanity, however, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is no one wants to know how much downward their defenses would need to go in order for them to get such a thing and still be balanced.
Because I have a hard time seeing Tanks getting more damage and still being pretty much unkillable... but, what do I know, the only tank I ever had I quit playing at 38.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd say level 38 gives you the right to "talk tanker". By 38 you have the majority of your core powers in place and slotted and you're tactically savvy. Beyond that it's all icing on the cake.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Saying that most Tankers would not want to play with a damage boost against Boss, EB, AV, and GM class enemies is likely not true and borderline insanity, however, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is no one wants to know how much downward their defenses would need to go in order for them to get such a thing and still be balanced.
Because I have a hard time seeing Tanks getting more damage and still being pretty much unkillable... but, what do I know, the only tank I ever had I quit playing at 38.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd say level 38 gives you the right to "talk tanker". By 38 you have the majority of your core powers in place and slotted and you're tactically savvy. Beyond that it's all icing on the cake.
[/ QUOTE ]
If I may interject; said icing is pretty much what alleviates the Tanker Damage debates in that it is common to have some of your most cushy damage powers (or opportunities for more) beyond the level 38 threshold. Not to say his opinion doesn't count, but the level 38 discussion does signify a major turning point in character development, one which we often overlook - the advent of the Ancillary Pools lies beyond that threshold.
Raid Leader of Task Force Vendetta "Steel 70", who defeated the first nine Drop Ships in the Second Rikti War.
70 Heroes, 9 Drop Ships, 7 Minutes. The Aliens never knew what hit them.
Now soloing: GM-Class enemy Adamaster, with a Tanker!
[ QUOTE ]
This is true, but (correct me if I'm wrong) didn't Tankers also get -Range to their Taunt exclusively as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. It wasn't exclusive to Tankers. It was applied to Scrapper Challenge and Brute Taunts as well.
.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Saying that most Tankers would not want to play with a damage boost against Boss, EB, AV, and GM class enemies is likely not true and borderline insanity, however, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is no one wants to know how much downward their defenses would need to go in order for them to get such a thing and still be balanced.
Because I have a hard time seeing Tanks getting more damage and still being pretty much unkillable... but, what do I know, the only tank I ever had I quit playing at 38.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd say level 38 gives you the right to "talk tanker". By 38 you have the majority of your core powers in place and slotted and you're tactically savvy. Beyond that it's all icing on the cake.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but I played a Willpower/Super Strength. 
Virtue:
Miserya - 50 EM/ELA Brute (Perma-shelved)
Adriana Rayne - 42 Katana/Dark Scrapper
Cyberpulse - 26 Super Strength/Willpower Brute
Steel Heart - 24 Invuln/Super Strength Tanker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is true, but (correct me if I'm wrong) didn't Tankers also get -Range to their Taunt exclusively as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. It wasn't exclusive to Tankers. It was applied to Scrapper Challenge and Brute Taunts as well.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
Excellent.
Makes the arguement much more viable.
Raid Leader of Task Force Vendetta "Steel 70", who defeated the first nine Drop Ships in the Second Rikti War.
70 Heroes, 9 Drop Ships, 7 Minutes. The Aliens never knew what hit them.
Now soloing: GM-Class enemy Adamaster, with a Tanker!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question regarding the idea was why did tankers deserve two inherents and the other nine primary ATs did not? IIRC, it was never answered.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes?
Who said two? This would wrap into Gauntlet.
Just like Defiance now does a couple of different things (pseudo mez protection and damage buffs) as does the Stalker's new Assassination(regular crits, hidden crits, demoralizing effect), there's no reason Gauntlet can't do something else on top of being a radial AoE taunt.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is true, but (correct me if I'm wrong) didn't Tankers also get -Range to their Taunt exclusively as well.
I don't mean to bash an arguement that might lend more power to my character, but it does well to bring up further issue with a possible debate of this nature. Beyond the -Range in Taunt, I do have to say that Johnny is right in so far as some other Archetypes getting double benefits and thus the idea is not entirely far-fetched.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely not! The idea of rolling something into Gauntlet to make tankers more unique is a very good one. Unfortunately increased damage is neither unique among the archetypes' inherents nor is it a new idea for tankers. While I respect Johnny's tenacity I believe it's slightly self serving, narrow of vision and I don't believe that it will really help tankers in the long run. Honestly I believe it will do more harm than good.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
While I respect Johnny's tenacity I believe it's slightly self serving
[/ QUOTE ]
We are arguing changes to a game people play for pleasure.
Everything here is self serving.
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately increased damage is neither unique among the archetypes' inherents nor is it a new idea for tankers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stalkers, Scrappers and Brutes. Three melee ATs. Their role is dealing damage, in different ways. Three very different playstyles because of the mechanics involved.
They're going to soon co-exist. There's no reason Tankers can't be as unique as they are from each other and also be able to be heavy hitters. It all comes down to mechanics, not roles.
If you accept that Tankers should conceptually be heavy hitters for the reasons I've stated before, then you can logically conclude Tankers can be both heavy hitters and unique among the melee ATs.
.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Saying that most Tankers would not want to play with a damage boost against Boss, EB, AV, and GM class enemies is likely not true and borderline insanity, however, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is no one wants to know how much downward their defenses would need to go in order for them to get such a thing and still be balanced.
Because I have a hard time seeing Tanks getting more damage and still being pretty much unkillable... but, what do I know, the only tank I ever had I quit playing at 38.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd say level 38 gives you the right to "talk tanker". By 38 you have the majority of your core powers in place and slotted and you're tactically savvy. Beyond that it's all icing on the cake.
[/ QUOTE ]
If I may interject; said icing is pretty much what alleviates the Tanker Damage debates in that it is common to have some of your most cushy damage powers (or opportunities for more) beyond the level 38 threshold. Not to say his opinion doesn't count, but the level 38 discussion does signify a major turning point in character development, one which we often overlook - the advent of the Ancillary Pools lies beyond that threshold.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough, I will admit that the icing is very good icing. 
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
While I respect Johnny's tenacity I believe it's slightly self serving
[/ QUOTE ]
We are arguing changes to a game people play for pleasure.
Everything here is self serving.
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately increased damage is neither unique among the archetypes' inherents nor is it a new idea for tankers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stalkers, Scrappers and Brutes. Three melee ATs. Their role is dealing damage, in different ways. Three very different playstyles because of the mechanics involved.
They're going to soon co-exist. There's no reason Tankers can't be as unique as they are from each other and also be able to be heavy hitters. It all comes down to mechanics, not roles.
If you accept that Tankers should conceptually be heavy hitters for the reasons I've stated before, then you can logically conclude Tankers can be both heavy hitters and unique among the melee ATs.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
I established quite some time ago that I do not agree with your proposal for a tanker damage mechanic because it is not necessary, it has been tried before and did not work and it will ultimately do more harm than good for tankers. As for your reasoning, other than waving a comic book in everyone's face, you mostly just insult, condescend and argue to turn a defensive oriented archetype into an offensive oriented archetype without regard to game design or game balance.
The three primarily offensive archetypes need different mechanics in order to make the selection of one over the others mean something. Tankers are not primarily offensive so they have no need for an offensive mechanic to make them stand out. If coexistence with blue side brutes means tankers need a bit of a spit shine than let's give them something that allows their primarily defensive role to stand out.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question regarding the idea was why did tankers deserve two inherents and the other nine primary ATs did not? IIRC, it was never answered.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes?
Who said two? This would wrap into Gauntlet.
Just like Defiance now does a couple of different things (pseudo mez protection and damage buffs) as does the Stalker's new Assassination(regular crits, hidden crits, demoralizing effect), there's no reason Gauntlet can't do something else on top of being a radial AoE taunt.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would disagree when said 'something else' is as potentially powerful as your proposal is, though I am on board with the idea of Tankers providing Defender-level buffs from Leadership Pool powers. To continue your original example, Brutes get a weak, single-target Gauntlet effect coupled with Fury -- an inherent-and-a-half, at best. Assassination for Stalkers combines several situational effects (being hidden, having teammates for higher crit chances, PvP opponents being slept or Held) into a variation of Scrappers' inherent.
By contrast, Gauntlet is an always-on effect that is very useful for the tanker's primary role in this game, which is not to deal lots of damage. Granted, it has no useful effect when solo, but Tankers don't need help to solo content unless they're going up against things not intended to be soloed.
[ QUOTE ]
It's not a question of whether people want another damage boost for tankers. If the latest MA brouhaha is any indication, players will take every advantage afforded them and capitalize on it to the Nth degree.
It's a question of whether a second damage boost is truly needed for tankers and what price will have to be paid to get it? If tankers are truly in danger of extinction because of blue side brutes than a token damage boost will do nothing to save them because by their very nature brutes and scrappers will always deliver more damage more consistently than tankers.
If the point of the exercise is to "save tankers" than they need something that brutes and scrappers do not currently have and can never duplicate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I can completely understand not wanting to "Rob Peter to pay Paul" with any changes that could be used to compensate for something like what Johnny suggests. I am not a fan of extreme changes myself, however, I am not opposed to something that would make Tankers more unique than just Gauntlet. Maybe some kind of Guard ability or even the Defender level of bonuses in Leadership, as has been suggested. For the record, I don't feel Tankers need much of anything (apart from some more proliferation) and the Devs have stated several times that they think that Tankers perform well enough, however, talking about ideas certainly doesn't hurt.
Honestly, if we're talking about inherent tweaks, Defenders could use a couple that might effect them as well as their teammates (yes, I am aware that there is another forum for this ).
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes get a weak, single-target Gauntlet effect coupled with Fury -- an inherent-and-a-half, at best.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is false.
Brutes have the exact same Threat Magnitude and Taunt Duration in their version of Gauntlet. The only difference is the AoE vs. Single Target nature of Gauntlet for each AT. That is not a "weak" Gauntlet--That is a full-strength Gauntlet without a splash effect (which is practically impossible to be seen in the first place).
[ QUOTE ]
By contrast, Gauntlet is an always-on effect that is very useful for the tanker's primary role in this game, which is not to deal lots of damage. Granted, it has no useful effect when solo, but Tankers don't need help to solo content unless they're going up against things not intended to be soloed.
[/ QUOTE ]
You say that like Gauntlet for Brutes isn't always on. or like their Fury isn't always on.
Given our recent discussions, I'd say the viability of anything else benefiting Tankers would come from the following criteria:
A) It must be linked to Gauntlet.
B) It must not be damage-related.
C) It should probably run in the same vein as the Taunt / -Range idea in its core functionality. In other words, it should be a beneficical effect that improves an existing function without emulating the effects of another existing archetype.
The problem is we're still working with ideas that have already been introduced in some way. Thinking outside the box is always difficult, and so was designing the now-simplistic concept of the wheel I imagine. Heck, even I'm stumped on this one, but I'll speak my mind if I think of something.
Raid Leader of Task Force Vendetta "Steel 70", who defeated the first nine Drop Ships in the Second Rikti War.
70 Heroes, 9 Drop Ships, 7 Minutes. The Aliens never knew what hit them.
Now soloing: GM-Class enemy Adamaster, with a Tanker!
[ QUOTE ]
It must not be damage-related.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then I am immediately off on another rant.
For the simple reason that any change that doesn't affect Tanker damage, isn't going to help their concept deficiency, which is where I say they are lacking the most. Other areas where they're lacking (endurance use, the early-mid levels stretch, being called "boring" by many) can all be tied to damage and offense issues.
The recent revisions to the AT's inherents can be see as an attempt to make them more rounded.
Blasters, an AT primarily about damage, got a form of mez protection to make them more survivable in addition to increasing their damage output.
Stalkers, another damage AT, got the demoralizing effect which also helps their survivability, not to mention staying hidden from missed Assassination.
These changes improved the survivability for these primarily offensive ATs, making them more rounded and less frustrating to play.
Why then, should it be off the table for a primarily survivable AT to get improved offense to make them more rounded and fun to play?
It should very much be on the table.
And since Tankers currently do two things: they tank with their primary and attack with their offensive secondary, making them more rounded would involve improving on their secondary's offense.
Not to mention now there's a precident for improving a melee damage secondary:
Dominators.
.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes get a weak, single-target Gauntlet effect coupled with Fury -- an inherent-and-a-half, at best.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is false.
Brutes have the exact same Threat Magnitude and Taunt Duration in their version of Gauntlet. The only difference is the AoE vs. Single Target nature of Gauntlet for each AT. That is not a "weak" Gauntlet--That is a full-strength Gauntlet without a splash effect (which is practically impossible to be seen in the first place).
[/ QUOTE ]
You are misinterpreting the way in which I am using the word 'weak.' It's the single-target nature of Brute Gauntlet that makes it weak when compared to that which is given to Tankers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By contrast, Gauntlet is an always-on effect that is very useful for the tanker's primary role in this game, which is not to deal lots of damage. Granted, it has no useful effect when solo, but Tankers don't need help to solo content unless they're going up against things not intended to be soloed.
[/ QUOTE ]
You say that like Gauntlet for Brutes isn't always on. or like their Fury isn't always on.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cherry-picking. Read and respond to the entire sentence, if you please. Brute Gauntlet isn't 'very useful' for the primary role of a Brute.
[ QUOTE ]
endurance use
[/ QUOTE ]
Decreased End Usage would be nice, I have to agree there.
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then a tank should spec into Pyre mastery if they want to do more damage?
[/ QUOTE ]
Boo specifically asked for protective shields for Blasters. That's a very narrow concept.
[/ QUOTE ]
And so is increased damage for tankers. The tools to do so also exist in the game in several places. All of the tanker APP sets increase tanker damage. Against All Odds increases tanker damage. Rage increases tanker damage. Fiery Embrace increases tanker damage. Mud Pots and Icicles increase tanker damage.
As has already been pointed, making the right selection of power sets and powers even allows tankers to hit the damage cap. I don't think that anyone would disagree that hitting the damage cap allows tankers to be heavy hitters.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat