A good change in gauntlet would be to increase its area effect on the lower end cost powers.
He will honor his words; he will definitely carry out his actions. What he promises he will fulfill. He does not care about his bodily self, putting his life and death aside to come forward for another's troubled besiegement. He does not boast about his ability, or shamelessly extol his own virtues. - Sima Qian.
Quote:
I disagree that Tankers should have their aggro control abilities increased beyond what they already are. The task of actually tanking is already trivial, shallow and easy. That is simply not a direction the AT needs to go any further.|
Originally Posted by Shannon_EU
A good change in gauntlet would be to increase its area effect on the lower end cost powers.
|
Besides soloing and team stackability concerns, the area they do need attention in is concept.
A good number of people agree on the basic concept in the OP:
Quote:
|
"Tanks" in comics Now, many state that tankers, if based of this comic counterpart, should do high damage. But every time we see these guys, they dont go out ripping heads off. 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. |
Such an addition would, in my opinion, address the soloing, team stackability and conceptual issues at once.
.
I like this idea, I think it fits the theme and it seems fairly balanced. It could be possible that the "gauntlet flag" could improve the secondary effects of attacks too. Like, Ice Melee would do even more -rchg and -spd, Total Focus could do extra mag1 stun, Cleave would make a huge gaping hole in the target (-def, -res), making them take even more damage!
Tanker is credit to team!
Again I have to point out that the single target nature of this suggestion will invariably pull tankers away from their main role in the game. Forcing tankers to think in terms of single target damage will lead to "tanker-lock" and even more unflattering comparisons with brutes and scrappers. I am not against the idea of tweaking tankers to address any issues they may have but I believe that they can be better addressed by going more of an AoE/melee controller route.
Personally I like Sarrate's suggestion (http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=144567) because it offers something for everyone.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
Quote:
Have you seriously consider why that might be?|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
That's the most he's said on the subject in 3 years that I've seen.
And that's considering Starsman is fairly well respected. |
Hmmm... what as been the constant throughout all of this subject in 3 years that might drive someone like a dev away. Some kind of troll maybe?
Quote:
... Me? It must be me... |
Originally Posted by Alabaster12
Have you seriously consider why that might be?
Hmmm... what as been the constant throughout all of this subject in 3 years that might drive someone like a dev away. Some kind of troll maybe? |
Quote:
Castle has talked about Tankers in the past, although passingly. |
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
That's the most he's said on the subject in 3 years that I've seen.
And that's considering Starsman is fairly well respected. . |
I would have to dig a lot, and with the forum changes not sure how much more may have been lost than normal, but he has expressed in the past that tankers can use something, he just made it also clear he does not think damage or more survivability to be the way to go and recall him noting that a reverse-bodyguard system would be a nightmare to code (and was already hard to do for Masterminds that redirect their pain to pets instead of sharing the team's pain)
I can see the potential of recursive nightmares with multiple reverse-bodyguard tankers may cause.
Based on that previous feedback I TEND to avoid suggesting damage as a tanker improvement proposal unless I have some solid convictions about it having a good selling point, but I think Castle is very decided in his "damage is not the answer" mindset and I don't blame him.
His response here simply reaffirmed his stance about damage and tanks.
This is my first time posting in any kind of forum.
I don't really remember where I read it, but i liked the idea of a Domination type click.
The bar would fill as you take more damage and unleash it when it was full.
Now what kind of effects it would produce, i don't really know.
The problem most people have with this issue is the dev's refuse to actually come out and acknowlege that their is a problem.
I would like to think that if Castle himself started a thread on the subject and said somethin to the effect that "I believe tankers need something so suggest away but I will ignore ideas suggesting more damaget" we might get some new ideas and the community would feel that the problem is being acknowleged.
The problem is in stead we get the answer above where he states that he does not belive that anything like this needs to be done.
Acknowlage the problem and give us a direction you want to go then maybe we can make some progress.
If you dismiss the problem then all you will get is the same suggestions that have been given because we have no idea as a group what you might like.
*readies fire extinguisher*
The first statement of the OP is that playing a tanker should make you feel like Superman, trying not to use his strength too much.
Maybe that's not how Catsle see it.
Maybe we should try to find what kind of Tanker from comicbooks or movies Castle has in mind to understand what could be done. Because I agree that Gauntlet is lame compared to fury, defiance or domination (even if defenders have the worst inherent power in CoX)
My idea is that if we cannot get more damage or more survivability let's try to get something else ^^
I liked the idea in the shield set that Tankers have a small support role, maybe a supportive inherent that fits with the tanker spirit could be found ...
Just throwing a new way of thinking this issue, I don't have any particular idea about it 
The problem is too much vague ness from Castle. Also from those that cry "You just want more damage." It's a huge oversimplification.
More damage is not what I want, in terms of DPS. Nor should tanks be AoE masters. What I do want to see is massive damage per hit.
Before that can happen, you have to solve the problem of targets dying before you blow lands, and you see no effect (damage or gauntlet). I have in the past proposed a change that would basically show damage numbers, and produce any effects (Gauntlet), if the target is valid at the time of power activation. No matter what happens to the target between power activation, and the end of the animation, if it's a valid target, and the RNG shows a hit, then the player sees the damage, and the effect. Currently, the bigger hitters in our secondaries (as well as many other powers in the game from other ATs), have slow enough animations that you can activate a power, and before the end of the animation, the target is defeated, you see no damage, and see a waste of endurance, and a power that can't be used for a while.
If the above is corrected in some way (my method or some other) then you could allow for much longer animation/recharge/casting time powers in our secondary, that would in turn hit the bejesus out of our foes, and still not step on the toes of Scrappers or Blasters.
Also, as I said above, AoEs are a problem. Basically the tough guys/gals should not have good damage in AoEs. Effects, taunting yes, damage no. As a fire tank player (my main) I know full well how easy it is to rack up XP/Inf/Prestige by simply gathering spawns, being tough, and melting them away. Much more efficient than any single target attacks we have. These need to go away if we are to be "Heavy Hitters." Effects are great, with minimal damage. I like the idea of Hand clap, however the KB is horrid with the game mechanics. I like the effect of Footstomp and Shield Charge, but the damage (if we are to be heavy hitters) is too high.
All of the above is pretty much moot. This is now an old game, with entrenched players and devs. The changes above will never happen, and I have no hope of them happening in this game. Maybe in CoH 2.0. A less likely hope is if Incarnates were playable.
Help make America #1 in Broadband: www.broadband.gov
Take the survey/test (like a Census for Broadband): http://broadband.gov/qualitytest/about/
This implication that comic "big guys" are heavy hitters is wrong. More often than not what they are is environment smashers/users. They can take a beating beyond anyone else, and usually end up smashing through buildings, lifting giant heavy objects to prevent the people in them from dying, etc.
This is not possible in an MMO first.
Second, this isn't how CoH works. Tankers in CoH are not all SS contrary to what everyone who wants a "heroic heavy hitter" believes. Please explain to me how a dark melee tank needs to have giant big hits for everything it does, or how those would necessarily be any "heavier" than anyone else with dark melee. The same can be said for virtually any other tanker secondary outside of SS. Swinging a police baton doesn't necessarily imply "heavy hitter" to me, and neither does fire/ice melee. Because the toon can absorb more damage that somehow means the damage should be bigger and more powerful?
This is the underlying problem. Everyone who wants a heavy hitter, seems to want SS to be it's own AT and who cares about the rest of them. You want SS to feel more iconic, petition to have SS actually do more damage, or have longer animation times with bigger damage numbers, or whatever else it is you seem to want, and leave everyone else who plays tankers that are not obsessed with SS being Superman.
Quote:
I mean specifically about the issues of Tanker concept, damage, mechanics and most importantly, about doing something about those issues.|
Originally Posted by Starsman_NA
Castle has talked about Tankers in the past, although passingly.
|
The only thing I can recall seeing in three years was a brief comment when I suggested battle stances about how he had already designed a system of battle stances, but they were never going to happen.
Quote:
| but he has expressed in the past that tankers can use something |
.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mecha_Titan
This is my first time posting in any kind of forum.
I don't really remember where I read it, but i liked the idea of a Domination type click. The bar would fill as you take more damage and unleash it when it was full. Now what kind of effects it would produce, i don't really know. |
I suggested that.
As far as I know, it wasn't even 'noted' by anyone of import.
.
Quote:
I'm not all that interested in the concept Castle has in mind. For one, he's demonstrated in the past he lacks an understanding and respect for the super hero genre's conventions and tropes.|
Originally Posted by _Starbird_
The first statement of the OP is that playing a tanker should make you feel like Superman, trying not to use his strength too much.
Maybe that's not how Catsle see it. Maybe we should try to find what kind of Tanker from comicbooks or movies Castle has in mind to understand what could be done. Because I agree that Gauntlet is lame compared to fury, defiance or domination (even if defenders have the worst inherent power in CoX) |
I simply do not trust his judgement on concept issues. Not after that Juggernaut discussion from a little while back.
His ability to adapt a concept to a working and semi balanced game mechanic? I'm fine with that. But I don't want him making the call as to if a concept is "right" or not for an AT or powerset.
I have similar opinions of Positron. Judging on how much he seems to enjoy DnD, decisions made in the past, it seems to me he'd rather be working on a fantasy MMO. If you say the word "rogue" to the lead designer of a super hero game, his first thought should be about a red-headed mutant with a southern accent and not about stealthy elves with daggers. If that is the case, is it any wonder CoH's Tankers reflect the ideal of the fantasy MMO tank and not the ideal of the super hero tank, and any wonder he doesn't seem to see any problem with that?
Secondly, if the players have a problem with the concept of Tankers, but Castle thinks it's fine, that doesn't mean he shouldn't do anything. Ultimately the game and AT should be made of us to express our concepts, not the devs'.
That being said, many Tanker players are happy with Tanker concept and execution as is. That doesn't change the fact that many think they could use something. The important consideration to make is anything the devs do to Tankers, can't take anything away from the players who enjoy them as is. That's always been my mantra. I don't agree with how Tankers are currently, but I understand that people like them as is and respect their right not to have that yanked out from under them at this point. It just wouldn't be fair.
It's also not fair for the devs to ignore the people pointing out Tankers don't reasonably live up to their comic cousins.
.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
Secondly, if the players have a problem with the concept of Super Strength, but Castle thinks it's fine, that doesn't mean he shouldn't do anything. Ultimately the game and AT should be made of us to express our concepts, not the devs'.
That being said, many Super Strength players are happy with the Super Strength concept and execution as is. That doesn't change the fact that many think they could use something. The important consideration to make is anything the devs do to Super Strength, can't take anything away from the players who enjoy them as is. That's always been my mantra. I don't agree with how Super Strength is currently, but I understand that people like them as is and respect their right not to have that yanked out from under them at this point. It just wouldn't be fair. It's also not fair for the devs to ignore the people pointing out Super Strength doesn't reasonably live up to their comic cousins. |
Fixed that for you.
I could almost see your point if this was what you had actually said. Well... I certainly wouldn't care as much. Making an entire AT a "heavy hitter" based on a concept that is really only applied to a single powerset is what I disagree with so vehemently. I don't even agree with that concept, but at least I can see the comparison. How you are finding my DA/DM tanker in comics and thinking that they can only be a heavy hitter is where you lose me completely. The same applies for everything that isn't */SS
Quote:
Please don't do that. It's both childish and confusing for anyone who's trying to follow the conversation. It's easy for anyone to be misrepresented when you alter their opinion and don't include the original text. In a gag thread, its one thing. In a discussion thread, it's another. If you can't at least respect my opinions, respect Starsman. It's his thread.|
Originally Posted by Alabaster12
Fixed that for you.
|
Quote:
| I could almost see your point if this was what you had actually said. Well... I certainly wouldn't care as much. Making an entire AT a "heavy hitter" based on a concept that is really only applied to a single powerset is what I disagree with so vehemently. I don't even agree with that concept, but at least I can see the comparison. How you are finding my DA/DM tanker in comics and thinking that they can only be a heavy hitter is where you lose me completely. The same applies for everything that isn't */SS |
-Damage from DC could be interpreted as an Inv/EM/NRG Tanker. He's always careful about unleashing his power.
-Classically, Luke Cage has had "enhanced strength" as opposed to full blown super strength. A more accurate description would be street fighting. He doesn't go caving in thugs' chests even though he could.
-The Molten Man. Fire/Fire. Once he became a hero, he kept his powers in check for fear of hurting those around him. An example is when Harry Osborn snapped and held his sister and nephew hostage. MM didn't fully power up for fear of them getting hurt in the crossfire or by himself by accident. He even 'tanked' a pumpkin bomb for Spidey.
-Giant Man technically isn't super strong. His power is growth. He has to be very careful about throwing his weight around.
-Thor is super strong, but I would make him a Mace Tanker for sure. Part of the point of his adventures on Earth was to learn respect for human life. After being chewed out by Odin he learned to watch it around the squishy mortals.
I think a large number of the tank-like characters in comics are super strength. No doubt. That doesn't change the fact the OP's concept applies to them AND other tank-like characters. The concept in question doesn't have to only apply to SS. It's part of a mindset, the same mindset that leads these characters to use their powers protectively and tank to begin with. Tanker comic characters protect too. They also cut loose when possible.
It actually has more to do with being very tough AND offensively powerful AND a hero who thinks things through, as opposed to being a brute.
Being a game that needs to be balanced, one character can't be both very powerful offensively and defensively all the time. However, with the right mechanic, he could be heavy hitter a portion of the time, or perhaps be one with restrictions on who he can hit hard against and when, as the OP suggests.
Such a mechanic is supported by the concept in the OP and in turn, the concept explains conceptually why Tankers tank/protect and deal lower damage most of the time in the first place. Said concept is agreed upon by many as being something that speaks to the core of Tankers, and was even acknowledged as such by the devs at one point.
.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
Please don't do that. It's both childish and confusing for anyone who's trying to follow the conversation. It's easy for anyone to be misrepresented when you alter their opinion and don't include the original text. In a gag thread, its one thing. In a discussion thread, it's another. If you can't at least respect my opinions, respect Starsman. It's his thread.
|
...
Quote:
It's like having my tail pulled. Considering I don't have a tail, it's very confusing.
|
Originally Posted by Starsman_NA
... |
Quote:
I don't really mind what he could say about his vision of tankers but at least we could start discussing with him what could be done
|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
I'm not all that interested in the concept Castle has in mind. For one, he's demonstrated in the past he lacks an understanding and respect for the super hero genre's conventions and tropes.
I simply do not trust his judgement on concept issues. Not after that Juggernaut discussion from a little while back. His ability to adapt a concept to a working and semi balanced game mechanic? I'm fine with that. But I don't want him making the call as to if a concept is "right" or not for an AT or powerset. ... |
How about this
As the tanker takes damage, the bar fills up. Unlike the Brute that deals greater and greater damage the more the fury bar fills up, the tanker would instead have a click power that will essentially dump that damage bonus into the next attack the tanker makes. This damage bonus would only be good for one ST attack. This would basically be the tanker putting his entire weight behind his next attack.
It would give the tanker that bursty high damage feel but also wouldn't step on the scrapper's toes too much
Would this work?
Is it even possible to program?
Now I freely admit that i don't know the ins and outs of the game. I'm not the best at conveying my thoughts on a keyboard either so if anybody needs me to explain better then I will try my best.
Well this is exactly how domination works, you build a bar then click somewhere ^^
that be nice for resistance oriented tankers but for defense it's lame 
if you're not getting damage, how are you gonna fill this bar ?
Ah...very true
but don't Brutes still have the bar increase if their defense makes the attack miss or deflected?
Quote:
You derailed this thread to the point where no one is actually talking about Starsmans actual point anymore and now you have the audacity to get mad when I was simply making a point by saying what I WOULD agree with if you HAD said it. I very much respect Starsman's opinion which was why I responded the way I did to him originally, and I think we actually had a decent conversation about it. As far as what I did... it's kind of like pulling a single sentence out of context and responding only to that in a reply isn't it? I seem to know someone who does that frequently so that he can ignore other points that people make.|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
Please don't do that. It's both childish and confusing for anyone who's trying to follow the conversation. It's easy for anyone to be misrepresented when you alter their opinion and don't include the original text. In a gag thread, its one thing. In a discussion thread, it's another. If you can't at least respect my opinions, respect Starsman. It's his thread.
|
You still haven't addressed conceptually why you believe that my DA/DM tanker is required to be a heavy hitter to bosses. What if conceptually the character is great at taking down minions. Which is where the problem lies. You want to take a single idea and put it across the entire AT for concept reasons when your concept reasons really only lie with SS and a few minor examples that you were able to find, and the majority of those examples are not even able to be built in CoH, and are still SS characters. They might have additional powers like fire, but in the end they are all super strong.
You seem to be implying that just because a character is careful with their powers in order not to hurt those around them that this means they are a tanker? Well how about havoc? I certainly wouldn't make him a tanker, but if that's your only justification I guess he is. There are hundreds of super heroes that have powers that are difficult if not impossible to control and they hold back all the time in order to prevent them hurting others. That is an particularly weak argument, even from you.
And that's considering Starsman is fairly well respected.
.