[ QUOTE ]
However, the real question is, does Tank B hold aggro well enough?
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you've done a fine job of explaining that you can tank well enough without it.
It would seem to me the issue being discussed comes down to people's perception of what a tank is. I'm of the agro management crowd; a tank's first job is to hold agro and one of the keystone tools in doing that job is taunt.
Therefor if a tank *doesn't* take taunt the automatic assumption that they've not made agro management their primary concern and hence the scorn for being a scranker.
(\_/)
(O.O) Bunny: Our time is coming
(> <)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, the real question is, does Tank B hold aggro well enough?
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you've done a fine job of explaining that you can tank well enough without it.
It would seem to me the issue being discussed comes down to people's perception of what a tank is. I'm of the agro management crowd; a tank's first job is to hold agro and one of the keystone tools in doing that job is taunt.
Therefor if a tank *doesn't* take taunt the automatic assumption that they've not made agro management their primary concern and hence the scorn for being a scranker.
[/ QUOTE ]Agreed.
This is kind of my concern, as above; irrespective of taunts undoubted value to a tank... NOT taking taunt... whats the psychology behind it?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As i have said you can not constantly keep 17 foes taunted with an aura. You would need to slot 3 taunt durations to effect 10 on one tick for as long as possible, while jump to the others and effect the other 7, then jump back and reaffect the first 10. Now how long does 3 taunt durations last? Its hard to measure, but on all my tanks i have tried.
[/ QUOTE ]That depends on the aura. CE either applies instantly, or ticks at a VERY fast rate, so it's perfectly possible to keep 17 with it. I don't have that much experience on the other auras.
[/ QUOTE ]
The tick for the actual taunt component is nothing special, i have other tanks to compare it to, the debuff itself is a good aggro getter but that also can only effect 10 at a time.
You dont necessarily need taunt to tank but with the bonuses that secondary taunt gives id much rather a tanker with, than without from any perspective and some powerset combinations require it more really than others.
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 love this thread. 17 pages and still no conclusion in sight [img]/uk/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
So, with that in mind. Here's a hypothetical situation;
Player X rolls two tanks. He builds them identically, same powersets, same slots, everything EXCEPT one has taunt (Tank A), and one doesn't (Tank B).
So, we've eliminated player skill from the equation, along with powerset differences. The question is simply this; which out of the two tanks would be better at holding agro?
[/ QUOTE ]
The one with taunt... however originally this wasn't the topic of discussion. It was whether the one without taunt is a tank... and he is [img]/uk/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
My real concern with this thread is the discussion seems to be: A tank without taunt is a selfish idiot skranker. Discuss.
Which doesn't sit very well with me...
Idiot? No
Selfish? Possibly
Scranker? Probably
It depends. For concept reasons, I have no problem at all. In fact, I find people taking powers out of concept a bit distasteful (not overtly, just rankles a bit).
BUt outside of concept, whats the motivation for NOT taking taunt?
Is it idiotic? certainly not. I have met enough idiots with taunt, and some very good tauntless tanks who are clearly not idiots. .
Is it selfish? possibly. Finding selfish builds in CoX is like trying to spot fat Americans, tho. Its a bit like seeing an empath who has taken a second single target blast and not dull pain, or a rad defender who has taken stealth instead of enervating field I guess.
Is it being a skranker? well here you probably have to say yes, unless its for concept reasons. If you take something like boxing/tough/weave instead of taunt, I can sort of understand. If you take another attack instead of taunt, well inevitibly its going to push you towards the skranker camp isnt it?
[ QUOTE ]
Idiot? No
Selfish? Possibly
Scranker? Probably
[/ QUOTE ]
My concern is that for the most part these three things don't seem to get discussed in isolation on this thread. If you are one you are all three.
[ QUOTE ]
Is it selfish? possibly. Finding selfish builds in CoX is like trying to spot fat Americans, tho. Its a bit like seeing an empath who has taken a second single target blast and not dull pain, or a rad defender who has taken stealth instead of enervating field I guess.
[/ QUOTE ]
hmm, well aside from the fact that empaths can't get Dull Pain :P How about the idea that neither one of the above mentioned builds is selfish... how about the idea that the rad defender took stealth because he didn't understand the merits of enervating field?
When I built my empath (she was my second ever character) I took a blast and then I took a second blast, before I took a heal. Why? Well, aside from the fact that I didn't have a clue what I was doing, at lvl 1-6 I didnt really see anyone that needed a huge amount of healing. Heck, when I was playing my empath I didnt take Fortitude till quite late. Why? I didnt realise it was as good as it was. Am I ashamed that I made a mistake in my build? Nope, not at all. I was learning how to play.
Motivation for not taking taunt? Playing the game differently, making the game more of a challenge? Already having played a taunting tank and trying to see what it's like without? Not realising the merits of taunt? Making it more exciting? Making a build mistake? All of these can still leave you a fantastic team playing tank who attempts to manage the aggro in the best way they can.
You are still a tank.
Making a mistake is totally valid... and doesnt make you a nOOb (i hate that word), idiot, selfish, or anything. Similarly for not realising the merits of taunt.
Making the game more of a challenge?. Certainly. Personally, Psygon, I DONT think thats a common motivation for not taking taunt. In fact, I think thats a damm rare one. How about not taking your smash/lethal armour if you want more of a challeng?, or not taking dull pain? (The invun one not the empath this time [img]/uk/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]). Funny, I dont see many tanks skipping them for "more of a challenge". I dont buy that motivation at all. Even in the highly unlikely (IMO) chance that it was to make the "game more challenging", its interesting that this challenge gives the tanks team mates the risk of debt, and not the tank, isnt it? [img]/uk/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
its a challenge to be tauntless and still be good.
for me i'd already done 74 levels of taunt tanking before i decided to stop and drop taunt on Max Thunder, why? taunting was dull and slow (thus not a challenge) and i couldnt face going thru another 18 levels taunting.
in fact its taken another two characters to 50 and another 6 characters into the 30s to make me go back to taunt tanking it was so mind numbingly boring the first times round.
You can be tank without taunt, it does require a side shift in gear to do it, its just unfortunate that tehre is such a negative stigma attached to tauntless tanking that it makes the build less viable due to player prejudice.
That said, i think I7 and changes to taunt, AV's and threat level has shafted tauntless tanking thru the high levels. This is unfortunate as it decreases diversity and increases the mind numbing sameyness of the 40-50 as all tanks are peer pressured and game pressured into conforming to what didnt used to be a requirement.
this fact i see as being more depressing than anything else in the tanking world.
@ExtraGonk
[ QUOTE ]
Is it being a skranker? well here you probably have to say yes, unless its for concept reasons. If you take something like boxing/tough/weave instead of taunt, I can sort of understand. If you take another attack instead of taunt, well inevitibly its going to push you towards the skranker camp isnt it?
[/ QUOTE ]Maybe. However, IMO a tank who can both keep the aggro, AND contribute offensively is FAR better for the team that one with zero offensive value.
[ QUOTE ]
its interesting that this challenge gives the tanks team mates the risk of debt, and not the tank, isnt it? [img]/uk/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
not necessarily...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unless the taunting one never uses taunt.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fogging the issue?
Assume he does.
[/ QUOTE ]
The reason I said that is that many tankers I team with who have taunt do not use it. But the very act of having taunt seems on average to mean they are better tanks from my squishy experiences on pick up teams. I put this down to something like the mindset thing mentioned early in the thread.
Taunt used at range helps aggro control. Taunt used on the enemy you are attacking ( which is how I used it in I3/I4 ) only makes a small difference unless that enemy is an AV as you hit the taunt AoE cap very quickly so end up taunting those who are already punckvoked and auraed.
In most PUGs my squishies are in, a tank with taunt normally doesn't seem to use it at range, but throws it the person in melee. If I see taunt used on enemies outside the group I am pleasantly suprised. I rarely see a tanker who is situationally aware. Most don't seem to look at the team's health bars.
Some tankers are under the impression that taunt is enough. I'm sure I've met a granite tank who acted that way. You need an aura, but taunt is there to easily regain aggro, taunt pull spawns, ensure AVs stay on you and allow you to kite dangerous enemies. I've only seen AVs kited about 5-10 times in the year and a bit I've played this game. Most of those times were against Infernal.
@Unthing ... Mostly on Union.
Have to agree with you there, actually... Anything that shafts diversity is pretty poor.
But, taking a step back... what about the "requirement" for you to take your smash/lethal armour?. How about skipping that if you really want a challenge.
There are LOTS of powers that are almost requirements for a character. A controllers single target hold, or his pets (for non mind trollers) for instance.
Or a tanks smash/lethal armour, or a tanks taunt aura.
Taunt actually gets off pretty easy. At least you only need one slot to make it pretty good. One taunt duration and it works out of the box.
So I do agree with you that tauntlessness should be possible to play. But please dont single out taunt.
And personally, I have had always seen taunt as a near requirement for solid tanking, but thats just me.
Not quite the same I admit but there are several stone tanks that have built their tanks without the I-Win button of granite. So some people do try and tank without some of their armours.
[ QUOTE ]
Not quite the same I admit but there are several stone tanks that have built their tanks without the I-Win button of granite. So some people do try and tank without some of their armours.
[/ QUOTE ]
And you see, if I say a stone tank without Granite, it would be /em praise.
I think the psychology of that is FAR different from the psychology of not taking taunt.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it being a skranker? well here you probably have to say yes, unless its for concept reasons. If you take something like boxing/tough/weave instead of taunt, I can sort of understand. If you take another attack instead of taunt, well inevitibly its going to push you towards the skranker camp isnt it?
[/ QUOTE ]Maybe. However, IMO a tank who can both keep the aggro, AND contribute offensively is FAR better for the team that one with zero offensive value.
[/ QUOTE ]
But a tank with taunt also contributes offensively, so thats a bit misleading.
A tauntless tank will skip one attack. Also consider that an attack need at least 4 slots. Taunt needs one. So that even replacing an attack with taunt (skipping one) means you have three more slots to soup up your attacks.
So thats a bit misleading. A tank with taunt has far from ZERO offensive capability. It is simply slightly less than the tank with taunt.
i don't think attackes need at least 4 slots. 2 accuracy and 1 x end red would probably do for some/most attacks, it's not like you need to do any damage...
I also don't think taunt needs just one slot. Yes you can slot it that way and it will be effective. But stick some slots on taunt and it will be even better.
I think what MaX may be getting at, and I've seen it myself, is that some taunting tanks seem to just taunt.
Stand in the middle of the mob and hit taunt over and over again, sometimes not even bothering to use their attacks.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it being a skranker? well here you probably have to say yes, unless its for concept reasons. If you take something like boxing/tough/weave instead of taunt, I can sort of understand. If you take another attack instead of taunt, well inevitibly its going to push you towards the skranker camp isnt it?
[/ QUOTE ]Maybe. However, IMO a tank who can both keep the aggro, AND contribute offensively is FAR better for the team that one with zero offensive value.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think that depends on the team. If you have a team with a empathy defender ( they never seem to ever have attacks ) a few controllers and a single target blaster ( so common these days ) I agree with you. If you have a few scrappers and some AoE heavy toons the tank having the extra attack rather than taunt will not be advantage.
However taking taunt doesn't mean than I can't attack. Not taking taunt only gives me one more attack. Which given that the recharges and damages are balanced so all attacks are roughly equivalent it means that say my Ice Tank ( who probably needs taunt less than the others due to mobility, fast attacks and chilling embrace ) would do about 25% more single target damage. I doubt that would make much difference in most teams.
At lower levels ( say level 25 ) it would probably make more difference as by then it would allow me to get some of my 20-35 powers earlier. However at most it would mean I would have my 3rd single target attack earlier for an extra 33% single target damage.
@Unthing ... Mostly on Union.
I do that, sometimes.
For instance, if fighting the cabal or skyraiders... or sometimes the tsoo... Those enemies just wont sit still... in that case, taunting becomes no1 priority. Its not that I wont attack, its that im scanning around all the time for the loose ends...
Also, once you get up to 6-8 man teams, your damage becomes proportionally less significant. Again, in those teams, I will attack, it just becomes more important to keep all enemies tightly clustered to let the real damage dealers do their work.
It also depends on build. Playing my ice/ice, my damage is feeble. Playing my fire/fire attacking becomes much more important.
However, I think you can actually contribute far more to TEAM damage by keeping every mob packed closed to you, so the blaster can spam those AoE without fear of death.
Ive noticed that "loose ends" distract other ATs.. they become concerned with their own safety, and the whole team looses efficiency in that way.
So, it sometimes behoves one to taunt first, attack second. I think this is a valid tactic (by all means attack but just do it carefully not spamming it) on occassion.
And there is nothing like playing an ice/ice tank, facing a spawn of 15 or so, and doing the newspaper emote whilst they all flail away at you and slip on the ice slick... [img]/uk/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]. you want me to break that emote to attack with frozen fists! you crzay dude you!
[ QUOTE ]
And there is nothing like playing an ice/ice tank, facing a spawn of 15 or so, and doing the newspaper emote whilst they all flail away at you and slip on the ice slick... [img]/uk/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]. you want me to break that emote to attack with frozen fists! you crzay dude you!
[/ QUOTE ]
I used to do that with my first inv tank. My Ice tank had the dance emote in his attack chain in his teens.
@Unthing ... Mostly on Union.
I actually have done that with my rad defender a couple of times, to teams of new players who screamed heal and killed the anchor...
"Stay back folks" (Rest of the team all huddle out of range)
Lingering Radation, Ennervating field, Radation Infection...
Jump next to anchor, put on Choking cloud...
All enemies in debuffed goodness, then start choking away and flailing limply at me... Rad defender starts reading newspaper...
Suffice to say, no one killed the anchor anymore... [img]/uk/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ]
The reason I said that is that many tankers I team with who have taunt do not use it. But the very act of having taunt seems on average to mean they are better tanks from my squishy experiences on pick up teams. I put this down to something like the mindset thing mentioned early in the thread.
[/ QUOTE ]
I picked the example specifically to eliminate player skill from the equation which is BY FAR the biggest factor. If said player didn't use taunt, despite picking and despite its usefulness the odd are he'd be a 2nd rate player and his tauntless tank could only be worse.
I'd be a fool not to acknowledge that a tauntless tank can be better than a tank with taunt, based solely on relative skill of the two players.
[ QUOTE ]
Taunt used at range helps aggro control. Taunt used on the enemy you are attacking ( which is how I used it in I3/I4 ) only makes a small difference unless that enemy is an AV as you hit the taunt AoE cap very quickly so end up taunting those who are already punckvoked and auraed.
[/ QUOTE ]
In general this is true unless fighting foes with accuracy debuffs. I'd have an awful time tanking CoT without taunt. Afterall, punchvoke only works if you can actually hit your target.
[ QUOTE ]
In most PUGs my squishies are in, a tank with taunt normally doesn't seem to use it at range, but throws it the person in melee. If I see taunt used on enemies outside the group I am pleasantly suprised. I rarely see a tanker who is situationally aware. Most don't seem to look at the team's health bars.
[/ QUOTE ]
Must admit, I don't look at the team health either. Ultimately, another player staying alive isn't my responsibility. No, that's not true, I'm aware once someone runs into trouble, but 95 times out of 100 that's because they've agroed another spawn. Even in an 8 man team I'm controlling over 80% of the agro and that will include the boss if there is one, even if it's 2 spawns. The stragglers are really down to the scrappers to take care of.
I will use taunt at range and do quite frequently but ultimately I'm of the mindset that staying alive is your own responsibility.
How many times have I seen a squishy fire on a straggler. What are they thinking. When I was playing my blaster I almost always targetted through the tank and almost always never pulled any agro because I was hitting mobs standing in the tank's taunt aura.
If a mob did lock on to me I didn't run away I positioned myself so the tank was between me and the mob and got hit by the taunt aura. Not very difficult to work out.
So, in my mind, they'll either learn or collect debt badges.
(\_/)
(O.O) Bunny: Our time is coming
(> <)
[ QUOTE ]
So thats a bit misleading. A tank with taunt has far from ZERO offensive capability. It is simply slightly less than the tank with taunt.
[/ QUOTE ]
And even then it all comes out in the wash. I have taunt and ALL the attacks in the set. I seriously doubt there's a tank out there who's noticeably more offensively able than me simply because they didn't take taunt.
(\_/)
(O.O) Bunny: Our time is coming
(> <)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Taunt used at range helps aggro control. Taunt used on the enemy you are attacking ( which is how I used it in I3/I4 ) only makes a small difference unless that enemy is an AV as you hit the taunt AoE cap very quickly so end up taunting those who are already punckvoked and auraed.
[/ QUOTE ]
In general this is true unless fighting foes with accuracy debuffs. I'd have an awful time tanking CoT without taunt. Afterall, punchvoke only works if you can actually hit your target.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ice and Inv have auto hit taunt auras, so I haven't had this problem.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In most PUGs my squishies are in, a tank with taunt normally doesn't seem to use it at range, but throws it the person in melee. If I see taunt used on enemies outside the group I am pleasantly suprised. I rarely see a tanker who is situationally aware. Most don't seem to look at the team's health bars.
[/ QUOTE ]
Must admit, I don't look at the team health either. Ultimately, another player staying alive isn't my responsibility. No, that's not true, I'm aware once someone runs into trouble, but 95 times out of 100 that's because they've agroed another spawn. Even in an 8 man team I'm controlling over 80% of the agro and that will include the boss if there is one, even if it's 2 spawns. The stragglers are really down to the scrappers to take care of.
I will use taunt at range and do quite frequently but ultimately I'm of the mindset that staying alive is your own responsibility.
[/ QUOTE ]
I find there always stragglers and sometime these are a big threat to the group. The team health bar is the best place to look for a teammate in trouble. I do this on most of my characters, as almost all of them can do something to help a teammate in trouble, whether it is taunt, attack, hold or heal.
Do the scrappers know you think it is their responsiblity to take out the stragglers? I go straight for the centre of the spawn with my Spines, concetrating on AoEs, I tend to go for stragglers with my Dark. Most people end up playing to their powerset's strengths which means the niches occupied by certain ATs often change.
IMO staying alive is a shared responsibility within the team, whether you are if tanker, defender, scrapper, controller or blaster. If someone aggros another spawn you have a choice, sometimes it is best to jump into the new spawn and leave the old one to the team, sometimes it is best to taunt the new spawn, sometimes it is best to ignore it. That is a decision that is made based on experience and situation. However I will try my best not to risk the whole team's safety for one individual.
[ QUOTE ]
How many times have I seen a squishy fire on a straggler. What are they thinking. When I was playing my blaster I almost always targetted through the tank and almost always never pulled any agro because I was hitting mobs standing in the tank's taunt aura.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can think of many reasons for a squishy to fire on straggler. Normally it is because they think they can deal with it or because the stragglers look like the biggest threat to them or another teammate at the current time.
[ QUOTE ]
If a mob did lock on to me I didn't run away I positioned myself so the tank was between me and the mob and got hit by the taunt aura. Not very difficult to work out.
[/ QUOTE ]
But not always feasible to do. Especially if this involves running into a more dangerous place in the fight.
[ QUOTE ]
So, in my mind, they'll either learn or collect debt badges.
[/ QUOTE ]
No comment.
@Unthing ... Mostly on Union.
[ QUOTE ]
As i have said you can not constantly keep 17 foes taunted with an aura. You would need to slot 3 taunt durations to effect 10 on one tick for as long as possible, while jump to the others and effect the other 7, then jump back and reaffect the first 10. Now how long does 3 taunt durations last? Its hard to measure, but on all my tanks i have tried.
[/ QUOTE ]That depends on the aura. CE either applies instantly, or ticks at a VERY fast rate, so it's perfectly possible to keep 17 with it. I don't have that much experience on the other auras.