[ QUOTE ]
but he still holds back and just hits them hard enough to not break anything, sometimes he does it so softly he needs to do it again.
[/ QUOTE ]
False, Superman in the comics, uses brute force , enough to knockout an opponent or send him/her flying into an object, or in some cases a different zip code. Examples; His fight with Maxima, his fight with the hulk, his fight with Superboy prime, his fight with Lobo, his fight with Metallo, and of course his fight with doomsday. I know you havent done any research, but still any wiki page can you help you out tons.
I will agree that taunt should be an inherent as having taunt and gauntlet is highly redundant, especially when Gauntlet is this weak in the game. As for more dmg?, sure I would love actually feeling like a comic book "tank". The Fury Warriors of WoW easily achieve this feat with the exclusion of better tanking "tools". Regardless, I hope tanks in CoH will be given more dmg without the cost of taunting power.
"If you can make a girl laugh, you can make her do anything"
"You're like Giraffe's, the way you look down on me, with your vegetarian scorn."
Next time, please take the whole quote:
[ QUOTE ]
Superman can theoretically liquefy most foes with a single finger swipe, but he still holds back and just hits them hard enough to not break anything, sometimes he does it so softly he needs to do it again.
Technically, tankers work just like that right now. Only thing is, when Superman decides he is really going to let it all out against one foe, he really goes out at it. He will pick his target, usually a very tough foe, and just go wild, mostly because the foe can take it, off course.
[/ QUOTE ]
Starsman quite acurately already addressed what Superman can do in fights against tough foes. He was talking about, in the first line, about Supers going up against the normal street thug and the like. Against a tough foe, Starsman litterally says that Supers allows himself to go wild on them.
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
And yet you missed my point.... We as tanks, aren't even close to "theoretically" liquefying most foes". The power to even have the option isn't even grasped in the game. The parallels are NOT vivid , in this case.
"If you can make a girl laugh, you can make her do anything"
"You're like Giraffe's, the way you look down on me, with your vegetarian scorn."
[ QUOTE ]
And yet you missed my point.... We as tanks, aren't even close to "theoretically" liquefying most foes". The power to even have the option isn't even grasped in the game. The parallels are NOT vivid , in this case.
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, so then we can't use any comics to back up concepts then? You know, since the parallels aren't "vivid." You know that word means flamboyant, dramatic, or colorful, right, and makes no sense there?
Comic concepts are perfectly valid points of comparison, but they need to be tempered with game balance. Superman is a great character to try to emulate in a superhero game. But you've got to realize that having a character that is the toughest, the most damaging, with range, and with speed that few can match, all in one, is not going to be allowed.
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 ]
And yet you missed my point.... We as tanks, aren't even close to "theoretically" liquefying most foes".
[/ QUOTE ]
That was nowhere near your point on your last post, your only point was that I had not done any research about how Sups unleashes his full might against tough foes, even if i said it in the first post, that is, unless mind reading was expected from us.
And the point to begin was to justify the tanker "not being even close to liquefying most foes" with that same logic: those characters don't even attempt to do it by norm. My proposal was to give the tanker a tool to establish a warning challenge that would make you do much more damage against the challenged foe. Still not liquefying for sure, but at least without fear of breaking bones or kicking nuts.
[ QUOTE ]
False, Superman in the comics, uses brute force , enough to knockout an opponent or send him/her flying into an object, or in some cases a different zip code. Examples; His fight with Maxima, his fight with the hulk, his fight with Superboy prime, his fight with Lobo, his fight with Metallo, and of course his fight with doomsday.
[/ QUOTE ]
Correct.
But for the purposes of equating those fights to PvE in CoH, each one of those battles were against EB and AV ranked enemies.
Supes, Colossus, Ben Grimm or the Hulk aren't using their full strength on minions and LTs like typical Metropolis bank robbers.
Bosses, EBs, AVs and GMs are another matter though, and conceptually speaking, Tankers should be bringing them hell.
[ QUOTE ]
I will agree that taunt should be an inherent as having taunt and gauntlet is highly redundant, especially when Gauntlet is this weak in the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
My personal opinion is that Taunt + Gauntlet aren't as redundant and Gauntlet + taunt auras. Both grab eneies as a PBAoE. From what I can see, Gauntlet is intended to be the little bit extra that helps keep enemies on you should a Scrapper with a Taunt aura be thrown into the mix. I don't think Gauntlet would be necessary however, if they just made Tanker taunt auras better.
I can see reasons why they did it via Gauntlet, but that doesn't change the fact the two are a little redundant together in some cases.
[ QUOTE ]
As for more dmg?, sure I would love actually feeling like a comic book "tank".
[/ QUOTE ]
You're one of the few it seems. Castle doesn't seem to see a reason for it. Maybe you could explain it to him in a PM sometime. 
[ QUOTE ]
The Fury Warriors of WoW easily achieve this feat with the exclusion of better tanking "tools". Regardless, I hope tanks in CoH will be given more dmg without the cost of taunting power.
[/ QUOTE ]
CoH Tankers are the best tanks in any MMO I've seen. They hold aggro better and survive easier than similar classes in other games.
The problem is, the devs make them pay for helping teams, conceptually and with decreased soloability.
Soloability-wise, in other games the extra survivability of the tanking classes is an asset solo. In CoH, it's largely wasted and redundant. I'll bet if you trimmed 15%-20% of survivability off of Tankers, they'd likely solo just about as well. What holds back Tankers solo is damage. Scrappers and Brutes have less survivability than Tankers out of the box, yet they solo better. Their survivability is lower, but it doesn't slow their soloing the way Tanker damage slows theirs.
Conceptually speaking, comic Tankers are tougher and they deal a lot of damage, albiet usually slower and concentrating on one large foe, unlike characters like Wolverine and Daredevil who are often fighting 100 ninjas at once. CoH Tankers don't get to have the great damage. That's the forced trade off they make for doing their job on teams and being good at it. Scrappers and Brutes really don't pay a price conceptually for their team role. Speaking as someone who has multiple 50s of all three ATs in question, that never struck me as a fair deal and it never will. Not that some other ATs don't have concept issues, but I feel the ones with Tankers are the most easily fixable and I feel most AT should and could stand to be a little more super and closer to their comic counterparts.
.
[ QUOTE ]
Soloability-wise, in other games the extra survivability of the tanking classes is an asset solo. In CoH, it's largely wasted and redundant. I'll bet if you trimmed 15%-20% of survivability off of Tankers, they'd likely solo just about as well. What holds back Tankers solo is damage. Scrappers and Brutes have less survivability than Tankers out of the box, yet they solo better. Their survivability is lower, but it doesn't slow their soloing the way Tanker damage slows theirs.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow... you really are causing all this gigantic stink for years and years over soloabillity? You think Tankers are TOO good in teams (better than any other MMO at least) and pay for it in soloability and that is why you have been on this crusade? What a colossal waste of time for something that is as simple as looking at the fact that this game is not built or balanced around solo play.
End of discussion. You've wasted years of your life over the fact that you don't know that MMO's and online games in general are not built around solo play... hence why they are online. Go play some Freedom Force single player and you'll get exactly what you want and call it a day.
Wow.... just wow.
[ QUOTE ]
I think a point has been missed in all this math as well -
Taking longer to kill a target ALSO means that target has a lengthier opportunity to regenerate HP, thus adding another factor in the formula. This may not mean much to Minions and LTs, but it does have a noticable impact on Bosses and higher.
In other words, not only must you do more attacks to break down their original HP values, you must also add even MORE attacks to break through the HP they've regenerated in that additional time. I would hate to see the math on this one. 
I believe a proposal was mentioned at one point (and thereafter extensively reviewed) of adding a -Regen modifier to enemies affected by Gauntlet regarding this issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
You also need to consider that a tanker is much harder to kill, and would take longer for said mob to defeat. The only fair way to increase the damage of the tanker to a target should also leave the tanker more vulnerable to that same target.
[ QUOTE ]
After reading most of this thread I've come to the conclusion that Gauntlet as it is now should stay as it is. Not all comic book tanks are super INV/SS Tankers. (as his two examples is) but should be set as a power in either a secondary set or better an APP set. I personaly don't see tankers, especially in this game, as people that are "holding back"
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd have to agree. My main Tanker isn't based on any of the popular comic references found in this thread, and conceptually, wouldn't benefit at all from more damage.
As someone stated before, I think Rage properly represents the idea originally proposed in this thread, while any further changes along these lines, with respect to the AT as a whole, are unnecessary-- at least when justified by comic characters, who at an authors discretion, can do near anything. Also stated before, I think the line between concept and mechanics should stay put, here.
Aside from the original point of the thread (or rather, where it went), I do like some of the teaming ideas being tossed around for Tanks. The reverse BG mode one sounds interesting.
[ QUOTE ]
The only fair way to increase the damage of the tanker to a target should also leave the tanker more vulnerable to that same target.
[/ QUOTE ]
By that same logic, since Tankers are more vulnerable to Bosses, EB, AVs and GMs than they are to Mins and LTs, they could deal more damage against Bosses, EB, AVs and GMs.
Assuming the same melee and defensive powersets:
If a Scrapper is vulnerable to a LT by a factor of X, and he can defeat it in 5 seconds with 3 attacks.
And a Tanker is vulnerable to a Boss by the same factor, wouldn't it be ok by your quoted logic for him to defeat that Boss in 5 seconds with 3 attacks?
You can increase a Tanker's damage against Bosses indivually from the damage he inflicts on Minions and LTs via damage bonuses.
You could in theory manipulate the damage curve so that Tankers deal the same damage vs safety ratio as Scrappers do.
.
[ QUOTE ]
My main Tanker isn't based on any of the popular comic references found in this thread, and conceptually, wouldn't benefit at all from more damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Conceptually, would he suffer from more damage? I'd have to stop taking you seriously if you answer in the affirmative.
[ QUOTE ]
As someone stated before, I think Rage properly represents the idea originally proposed in this thread
[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree. Rage does not.
SS Brutes also get Rage. Brutes do not hold back for conscientious reasons. Until we see otherwise, we can assume when SS is ported to Scrappers, they will get Rage as well.
The concept outlined in the OP is distinct from Rage's concept, and is something unique to heroic, Tank-like characters in comics. It's one not really found in the bruteish and scrappy characters.
It's also a trait that's shared by more than just super strong characters. It goes beyond one power set.
I can cite characters who fit into that concept and as you said, characters change depening on who's writing them. That is true to an extent. One day Commander Action reads more like a Scrapper, the next he's a Tanker. But one thing that's more consistant, is that some characters are typically written as Tankers the majority of the time, and when most characters in general are written as Tankers, they have the "holding back and cutting loose" trait.
Also, functionally speaking, most SS Tankers are perma Raged, which means they're never really "holding back" or "unleashing" anything. The concept in the OP speaks to Tankers cutting loose on worthy opponents, and usually holding back on anyone else, not just cutting loose on whoever comes by while your click is up.
Rage doesn't function like the concept in question, people don't use Rage like they would the concept in question. That is because Rage is NOT really an adaptation of the concept in question.
.
[ QUOTE ]
Conceptually, would he suffer from more damage? I'd have to stop taking you seriously if you answer in the affirmative.
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course not. But since it is a matter of concept, and the basis for suggested changes are on anothers interpretation of a concept, then its a matter of perception.
I think Tanks are fine.
You think they aren't.
The extent to which anyone can be wrong or right won't be be realized, as based on this criteria.
[ QUOTE ]
I disagree. Rage does not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Case in point.
You know.... I'm not even sure I accept one of your main points... being that the survivability curve is easier to overcome.
I should preface this by saying I completely realize this is anecdotal and I'm not that big into data collection, and this test was just to see for myself, so I'm not particularly interested in continuing on, or collecting videos or spreadsheets or anything like that.
To see for myself, I took 2 of my 50's.
1. Completely and totally IO'd out 50 stone/fire/pyre tank. This char pretty much has everything I could want... maxed out LoTG's, Numina's, Miracles... the works. I've probably spent around 2 billion on this toon.
2. Completely and totally normal and boring 50 kitana/regen scrapper. Nothing special. Normal SO build.
I put both of these chars up against some lvl 52 custom bosses in the AE.
Come to find out. My IO'd tanker actually survived and did damage far better than my normal SO'd scrapper. My SO'd scrapper had a hard enough time just surviving with a large chunk of the custom types. My stone tanker (who is probably one of the least optimal primaries you could imagine for such a test) managed to kill off all the bosses no problem. Not only that but it was actually pretty fun, and none of them were slow kills at all. The scrapper was a chore and had all kinds of survivability problems. I didn't actually even finish the map most of the times since it was too much of a headache.
I don't have the AT's built to try the reverse, but I would be willing to bet that if the reverse were tested and I tried the survivability test, that my tank in SO's would survive just as well as my scrapper in IO's. Obviously an IO'd out scrapper would do more damage than I do, but thats not the point of the test. The point is that in IO's I could do more damage than an SO'd scrapper, and in SO's I could survive just as well as an IO'd scrapper.
Maybe I'm just not building the scrapper in SO's well (since I'm really not a big scrapper fan) but I can't imagine I'm that far off knowing generically how to build a char in this game (sorry I'm not a mids person). I tried a fairly wide variety of types and the tests pretty much came out the same way.
So basically J_B my experience and tests (compared to your providing no data or tests at all) show that you are wrong.
I think, as an exercise, readers should point out at least 1/2 a dozen reasons why this last test is incredibly invalid.
I realize Alabaster12 admitted it was anecdotal at best but... yeesh. This isn't even in apples and oranges territory, more like apples and banks or something. 
Once again I will point out the difference between concept concerns which are purely a matter of the individual player's perception. And game mechanics where there is this pesky thing called "balance".
Concept is dealt with in costume design, backstory, ingame RP chat, and soon power customization.
Mechanics needs to address the affect of a change vs the game content, across powersets, across ATs, and across the level spread.
It is foolish in the extreme to promote mechanical changes to solve perceived conceptual problems.
Mechanics affects every player. Concept is a fairly personal thing in this MMO. JB wants to run around as Supes, I want nothing to do with the bland creations of Marvel and DC.
I want an AV to be an epic struggle I have to recruit friends for.
I am sick to death of this "cut loose/hold back" BS. Thats RP you don't need to overhaul my favorite AT to RP.
Any push for a change to mechanics needs to have numbers backing it up. Not some stupid youtube link to a cartoon written by someone who never got within a leapin lightyear of a videogame design studio.
Taking It On the Chin I-16 Tanker Guide
Repeat Offenders
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think a point has been missed in all this math as well -
Taking longer to kill a target ALSO means that target has a lengthier opportunity to regenerate HP, thus adding another factor in the formula. This may not mean much to Minions and LTs, but it does have a noticable impact on Bosses and higher.
In other words, not only must you do more attacks to break down their original HP values, you must also add even MORE attacks to break through the HP they've regenerated in that additional time. I would hate to see the math on this one.
I believe a proposal was mentioned at one point (and thereafter extensively reviewed) of adding a -Regen modifier to enemies affected by Gauntlet regarding this issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
You also need to consider that a tanker is much harder to kill, and would take longer for said mob to defeat. The only fair way to increase the damage of the tanker to a target should also leave the tanker more vulnerable to that same target.
[/ QUOTE ]
I never mentioned boosting damage in that statement and don't intend to debate its relevance. What bothers me is the endurance burned over the additional time and attacks launched because of the enemy's regen. Just because a Tanker can survive longer and better than the Scrapper doesn't mean that he can attacking as many foes or as long. In other words, time is not the end-factor of the problem. Additional endurance burned during that period is.
The -regen idea would arguably take away some of that sting without giving them a means to boost their farming abilities (Since the effect would be meaningless against Minions and LTs), but I pretty much support any idea which would close the endurance burn gap - damage or otherwise.
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!
1% buff to damage for each 5th opponent taunted, potentially maxing out at 3% global bonus to damage with the 17 max aggro cap.
I haven't read any of the ideas in the thread, haven't given my idea any thought, but now I've contributed. ;]
I don't think any buff of any sort should be considered if at its best is below the current prime rate
[ QUOTE ]
I think, as an exercise, readers should point out at least 1/2 a dozen reasons why this last test is incredibly invalid.
I realize Alabaster12 admitted it was anecdotal at best but... yeesh. This isn't even in apples and oranges territory, more like apples and banks or something.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would say we should do the same with J_B's tests and proof but well... he's never actually provided any.
I understand there are a ton of holes in the test, which was why there were so many caveats. The bottom line for me is, that my IO'd out tank can out damage my SO'd scrapper which to me only says the following:
<ul type="square">[*] It is easier to increase survivability than damage.[/list]This statement which J_B makes frequently is both far too broad and in the only test I've performed completely and totally false.
[ QUOTE ][ QUOTE ]
How does it make them stand out from brutes and scrappers?
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes get very high ST damage and very high AoE damage, but it's all back loaded DPS.
Scrappers get high ST damage and AoE damage, it's evenly loaded DPS with punctuated bursts.
Stalkers get very high ST front loaded burst damage as well as high evenly loaded DPS punctuated with bursts.
Tankers would get high ST damage, medium AoE damage, evenly loaded.
.[/QUOTE]
So all melee archetypes are vanilla but they have different colored sprinkles? You failed to actually make tankers stand out in your example. Based on what you present they simply become another damage dealer. And, in your example above, tankers still wind up taking a back seat to scrappers and brutes. It's about time we started thinking outside the box. Sarrate has a rather interesting way of dealing with tanker issues.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=144567
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Castle
Noted.
I still don't believe anything like this is necessary. |
Could you pretend like you do?
.
Quote:
Its pointless to bring up a "matchup excuse" i to fight on the same levels as comic tanks, as even Lt's can take down the life of a CoH tank. Hell Bosses can bring down the life of CoH tanks. My point is that the OPTION of even having that much power isn't even given. Brutes are as close as we're gonna get.|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
Correct.
But for the purposes of equating those fights to PvE in CoH, each one of those battles were against EB and AV ranked enemies. Supes, Colossus, Ben Grimm or the Hulk aren't using their full strength on minions and LTs like typical Metropolis bank robbers. Bosses, EBs, AVs and GMs are another matter though, and conceptually speaking, Tankers should be bringing them hell. |
[QUOTE]My personal opinion is that Taunt + Gauntlet aren't as redundant and Gauntlet + taunt auras. Both grab eneies as a PBAoE. From what I can see, Gauntlet is intended to be the little bit extra that helps keep enemies on you should a Scrapper with a Taunt aura be thrown into the mix. I don't think Gauntlet would be necessary however, if they just made Tanker taunt auras better.
I can see reasons why they did it via Gauntlet, but that doesn't change the fact the two are a little redundant together in some cases.[/QUOTE ]
Agreed.
Quote:
|
You're one of the few it seems. Castle doesn't seem to see a reason for it. Maybe you could explain it to him in a PM sometime.
|
Quote:
|
CoH Tankers are the best tanks in any MMO I've seen. They hold aggro better and survive easier than similar classes in other games. The problem is, the devs make them pay for helping teams, conceptually and with decreased soloability. Soloability-wise, in other games the extra survivability of the tanking classes is an asset solo. In CoH, it's largely wasted and redundant. I'll bet if you trimmed 15%-20% of survivability off of Tankers, they'd likely solo just about as well. What holds back Tankers solo is damage. Scrappers and Brutes have less survivability than Tankers out of the box, yet they solo better. Their survivability is lower, but it doesn't slow their soloing the way Tanker damage slows theirs. Conceptually speaking, comic Tankers are tougher and they deal a lot of damage, albiet usually slower and concentrating on one large foe, unlike characters like Wolverine and Daredevil who are often fighting 100 ninjas at once. CoH Tankers don't get to have the great damage. That's the forced trade off they make for doing their job on teams and being good at it. Scrappers and Brutes really don't pay a price conceptually for their team role. Speaking as someone who has multiple 50s of all three ATs in question, that never struck me as a fair deal and it never will. Not that some other ATs don't have concept issues, but I feel the ones with Tankers are the most easily fixable and I feel most AT should and could stand to be a little more super and closer to their comic counterparts. |
It really doesn't matter anyway, since power scaling can go both way's. But then you have to realize what you're dealing with here. Maybe once the dev's see how powerful CO's tanks are , maybe then the Tanks in CoH will get a power upgrade.
"If you can make a girl laugh, you can make her do anything"
"You're like Giraffe's, the way you look down on me, with your vegetarian scorn."
And here we see why so many suggestions don't even get the courtesy response.
Quote:
I say one of the few because most of the time there's any talk of conceptual failings of the Tanker AT and discussion of addressing it, the same half dozen or so "Tanker community" members come out en masse to stymie any effors to grow the AT beyond being a rodeo clown.|
Originally Posted by Lacrymosa
One of the few?...not really. Many of my friends who play MMO's and have played CoH, don't feel very "Super". Especially with the whole "Take a train" aspect. If the only thing to super is a Granite tank, then theres a huge problem. Of course anyone can use the excuse of IO's, but if you need IO's to become "super" then why bother?. You're telling me you wouldn't like powerful tanks?....talk about self-degradation, it's sad that you think tanks in CoH are "fine" just the way they are.
|
I suggest PMing Castle because for him and the other devs, the issue has been all to easy to ignore and not do anything about. A few more PMs from people not content with Tankers as aggro monkeys might make it a little harder to ignore.
Quote:
| Maybe once the dev's see how powerful CO's tanks are , maybe then the Tanks in CoH will get a power upgrade. |
.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would hate to see the math on this one.
[/ QUOTE ]
Geek out.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Dramatically removes monocle* Dear god...
[/ QUOTE ]
O.O And people say that I don't have a life...
[/ QUOTE ]
I have a life (if you ask my wife she may say I do but I'm still one hell of a geek,) I just happen to do this kind of stuff for a living.
I rather do it with game related data than analyzing medical coding and AR statistics ANY day of the year. That being told, I didn't do that yesterday, I did that several months ago, after the last serious tanker endurance debate.