I like it..and I really don't want this to be shot down 
Join the Advocates of Fate on Infinity today!
@Inconclusive
It looks like it won't. It must be such a perfect idea that no one can add to it. Otherwise, if it was overpowered, posters would go out of their way to let me know 
I don't like it. This is a strict, non-dynamic power increase. If they change the tanker inherent, I'd like to see something that results in a more active thought about using the inherent in your tactics.
NPCs: A Single Method to Greatly Expand Bases
It's more an 'addition' than it is a 'change'. You still have the AoE taunt of Gauntlet on ST attacks, but now it affects your AoE attacks as well by adding more area.
But really, I doubt there's anything else you can add to Tankers that does what you're talking about without making them overpowered. It'd be like asking to add a more active inherent to Scrappers. They're already offensive powerhouses, you can't go adding something like a domination button, scaling fury-like buff bars and what not on top of it without nerfing something.
As is, there's nothing really 'wrong' with Tankers (my Shield/DM is a blast and I've pretty much mastered getting max foes in Shadow Maul's cone because of him). They can take down foes with little danger and contribute differently to teams that other melees can't. They're simply overshadowed with melee attacks (which they should be).
So what do you think they could add to help Tanker's image, CapnG?
The three main issues of the Tanker inherent are...
-It does nothing solo. Not "it's diminished solo" but "it does 100% nothing solo except when you're in specific missions that give you allies, because Tanks can't get pets."
-The more tankers on a team, the less useful it becomes.
-It's entirely mechanical and relies on AI being controlled by numbers and not anything resembling intelligence.
What the tanker inherent needs is something to show WHY it's a bad idea to not attack a tanker. As Umbral suggested in another thread, give the tankers something resembling a "flanking" attack in which they get bonus damage vs targets that aren't targeting them. This will give a slight increase to damage solo as, if you're fast enough or using a ranged attack, you can get the bonus on the first hit in combat, will encourage tankers to jump around and gain MORE aggro by attacking each enemy once then running, makes tankers stronger when in the presence of other tankers who are stealing the aggro, and it explains why not to avoid a tank from a flavor standpoint rather: If you're not focused on him, he's going to punch you for extra damage so pay attention to him.
NPCs: A Single Method to Greatly Expand Bases
That still doesn't do anything about the 1st issue you bring up (and probably the biggest reason fewer players make tankers). It does nothing solo unless you pick up stealth powers and turn off taunt auras.
Quote:
Actually, it does a bit (certainly more than it does now), but does depend a lot on player skill. Basically, if you can get the first hit in, you can get the damage boost, and this does not depend on stealth-like abilities.
|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
That still doesn't do anything about the 1st issue you bring up (and probably the biggest reason fewer players make tankers). It does nothing solo unless you pick up stealth powers and turn off taunt auras.
|
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
Whoo, then it'd have to be a mighty damage bonus for a one time (probably 1 target) thing with only a chance of occuring. Otherwise, the addition will be marginal if not unnoticeable.
Quote:
The problem with Tankers soloing is more an issue of the inability to properly leverage the higher survivability they get for losing out on damage. On a team, this is leveraged by a lone Tanker by being the primary target and allowing others to blast away with abandon. On a team with multiple Tankers, you don't really get any benefit because you can't really use more than one person to be the only target of every enemy's attacks.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
Whoo, then it'd have to be a mighty damage bonus for a one time (probably 1 target) thing with only a chance of occuring. Otherwise, the addition will be marginal if not unnoticeable.
|
Now, as you said, my solution addresses the two of the issues (redundancy, sensibility) without really solving the third (solo capability). I have a solution for that.
While solo, you can leverage higher survivability by simply increasing the spawn size of an enemy group: you can survive more damage so you can enter riskier situations that grant greater rewards. It's a classic trade off of safety versus speed. However, Tanks have to spend more endurance than Scrappers to deal the same amount of damage so that, even though they're capable of surviving for a longer period of time, they're not capable of defeating enemies as efficiently. The problem isn't the amount of damage the tank is dealing because they have sacrificed speed (i.e. damage) for safety (i.e. survivability). The problem is that a Tanker is going to take longer to kill those enemies and that will require more endurance so that the Tanker is more likely to run out of endurance mid-fight, especially within the riskier situations that the Tanker is capable of entering thanks to greater safety.
The solution I have is to provide Tankers with diminishing passive endurance reduction. If the Tanker is alone, he would get ~33% global end reduction. This would mean that a solo Tanker would be spending the exact same amount of endurance that a Scrapper would be spending to deal the same amount of damage (factoring in scalars). This would allow a Tanker to properly leverage the survivability time provided by greater survivability. For each ally on the Tanker's team, this end redux would be reduced by 11% until the bonus equals 0% with 3 allies.
Now, the logical base behind this additional functionality is that the Tanker is not having to be distracted by having to protect his allies. While he won't be dealing any more damage with his attacks, he's capable of using those attacks in a more efficient manner. The more allies he has, the more of his attention is spent trying to make sure that his enemies aren't attacking those friends that he loses this focus. Of course, because he's now got friends to protect, he regains this efficiency when he's failing to do his job, which makes him angry, which allows him to hit harder.
Quote:
Gotta agree with the leveraging survivability issue. When I solo, I'm set to +1x3 simply because I'm SD/DM and don't have many AoEs. But I still heard 2, possibly 3, spawns together for the fun and challenge.| The problem with Tankers soloing is more an issue of the inability to properly leverage the higher survivability they get for losing out on damage. On a team, this is leveraged by a lone Tanker by being the primary target and allowing others to blast away with abandon. On a team with multiple Tankers, you don't really get any benefit because you can't really use more than one person to be the only target of every enemy's attacks. |
It's one reason I sorta thought the range improvement on AoEs would be leverageable as a solo buff. The Tanker can simply sustain itself against more foes so have a better opportunity to use said range increase...but it was just a thought I had while soloing.
That 'extra dmg on foes not attacking you' would be 'kinda nice' but ultimately not used as I may try to pull a group around a corner so my AoEs will hit more enemies.
Quote:
| The solution I have is to provide Tankers with diminishing passive endurance reduction. If the Tanker is alone, he would get ~33% global end reduction. This would mean that a solo Tanker would be spending the exact same amount of endurance that a Scrapper would be spending to deal the same amount of damage (factoring in scalars). This would allow a Tanker to properly leverage the survivability time provided by greater survivability. For each ally on the Tanker's team, this end redux would be reduced by 11% until the bonus equals 0% with 3 allies. |
I know on normal spawns, my SD/DM doesn't run out of endurance despite needing to punch *a LOT* to take down things. Only with endurance drain present does he even have to look at Dark Consumption and blue pills. Now if I made a /SS I'm pretty sure I'd notice it a bit more.
Anyway, I think, if they ever did add stuff to Gauntlet, it won't just be one thing. Just like when they added to Assassination, they added multiple aspects to it. Hopefully the devs will add 2 or more of the ideas people suggest on the forums as they'd all really help. No need for a straight dmg or mitigation buff but little perks depending on team make-up or situation would probably be more likely.
Quote:
The problem with giving Tankers the ability to hit more targets with AoEs is pretty much that it would be too strong and it wouldn't really be definable. Keep in mind, as well, that it doesn't buff every Tank set the same. Dark Melee isn't really going to get much more out of it than it already does because it just doesn't do much with AoEs. The only thing that might make it viable would be increasing the number of targets for Soul Drain, but that's probably going to be pushing the envelop for a self buff power like that a bit too far. Energy Melee would get even less because all EM has that would benefit from your change is Whirling Hands. Conversely, War Mace is going to get a massive benefit because it's a set that lives off of cones, which would get the greatest benefit overall.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
It's one reason I sorta thought the range improvement on AoEs would be leverageable as a solo buff. The Tanker can simply sustain itself against more foes so have a better opportunity to use said range increase...but it was just a thought I had while soloing.
|
What you have to remember when coming up with an inherent is that it has to be able to be applied to most powers in an consistent manner. Look at Containment, Critical Hit, etc. A range or target increase would, by the very nature of it, be remarkably inconsistent.
Quote:
| That 'extra dmg on foes not attacking you' would be 'kinda nice' but ultimately not used as I may try to pull a group around a corner so my AoEs will hit more enemies. |
Quote:
| This almost correlates to the increase range idea directly. Simply hitting more foes more easily basically gives an endurance discount. Except that, rather than scaling by team size, it scales by how many enemies are around you. |
The point of the end redux is to give Tankers the same DPE while solo as the more damage oriented classes. They die slower, they kill slower, but they're spending the same amount of endurance to accomplish it as the faster ATs, which allows them to actually capitalize on that "dying slower" thing.
Quote:
| The endurance discount is novel and I'd enjoy that but, as Talen_Lee so eloquently put it, "Perception issues are only fixed through things that are outrageously hard to miss" and the endurance discount is barely noticeable as a change. |
Quote:
| I know on normal spawns, my SD/DM doesn't run out of endurance despite needing to punch *a LOT* to take down things. Only with endurance drain present does he even have to look at Dark Consumption and blue pills. Now if I made a /SS I'm pretty sure I'd notice it a bit more. |
Quote:
I'd actually say 'look at containment'. As an inherent, does it actually provide the consistency you're talking about? If I remember correctly, there are some damage powers available to Controllers that only partially benefit from the containment bonus. And there are other damage powers that get no benefit from it (Repulsion Bomb, IIRC).| What you have to remember when coming up with an inherent is that it has to be able to be applied to most powers in an consistent manner. Look at Containment, Critical Hit, etc. A range or target increase would, by the very nature of it, be remarkably inconsistent. |
As for the range buff being inconsistent with sets, I'd say it's possible but I'd have to see the numbers. You point to Whirling Hands but WH sucks not because EM sucks. It sucks because it's inferior in every way to every like power. It has shorter range, it hits fewer enemies and does less damage than the Dominator version and ultimately does less overall than other Tanker PBAoEs. But that can change. Sort of like how SS can manage to call itself an AoE set with only 1 AoE...but beyond that, EM simply has problems. Problems that aren't being fixed by an addition to the Tanker inherent.
For AoE intensive sets, again, we'd need numbers. Just because we're widening the area on *some* AoEs, doesn't mean we have to increase the number of foes affected or vise-versa. Just like Axe and Broadsword and Mace have different ranges on their cones, it preserves flavor. So improving the AoEs could be done while keeping flavor and balance in mind.
Quote:
| Your Tanker already has a power that gives him a drastic increase to DPE: AAO. AAO already provides the functional equivalent of the end reduction I'm talking about because it can provide 50-65% +dam with relative ease (7-10 targets). 50% +dam equates to a 25% increase in DPE assuming 95% +dam slotting so you're already benefiting from what I'm recommending be applied to pretty much anyone. Your lack of endurance problems isn't so much due to having Dark Melee. It's substantially more likely that it is due to having a primary that makes your attacks more efficient. |
Personally, I think it's that I use Shadow Maul more often when there are a decent amount of foes. By hitting 3 or more foes with it, it is probably the most damaging attack in the set for its cost.
I'd certainly take an END discount as part of the improved inherent, especially if I ever look into making a DA/Mace that I had been planning on. The only part I don't like is that, for some sets like Elec Armor and soon Energy Aura, discounting endurance cost devalues the bonuses those sets provide. Both have similar discounts as well as +END powers which would also do little for them. But, if anything, rather than adding such a discount to the inherent, it'd probably be justified to simply adjust the powers similar to how the devs adjusted Claws when proliferating it to Brutes.
look, changes have to be thought out and must fit with all the powers of an AT. if they do not, it is not the right idea.
here is what it says for containment:
Containment
Controllers are the masters at locking down and controlling their opponents. Few can escape their will. Controllers do extra damage to any target that is already Held, Immobilized, Slept, or Disoriented.
this is basically what the overpowered is that you see pop up over enemies heads if i'm not mistaken. and all controller sets, except for the secondaries i think, benefit from that.
what you are proposing would only fit into a select few tanker sets and would not benefit the others.
Quote:
Okay.|
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
look
|
Quote:
| changes have to be thought out and must fit with all the powers of an AT. if they do not, it is not the right idea. |
Quote:
|
here is what it says for containment: Containment Controllers are the masters at locking down and controlling their opponents. Few can escape their will. Controllers do extra damage to any target that is already Held, Immobilized, Slept, or Disoriented. this is basically what the overpowered is that you see pop up over enemies heads if i'm not mistaken. and all controller sets, except for the secondaries i think, benefit from that. |
Overpower is a 20% chance for an additional 1mag of mez added to their mez powers. So a Fossilize will cast a mag 3 hold on a target with a 20% chance of an additional mag of 1.
Quote:
| what you are proposing would only fit into a select few tanker sets and would not benefit the others. |
while i wasn't getting hostile, i just wasn't sugar coating that the ideas must be thought out before changes can be made. and i wasn't sure about how containment actually worked as i don't play alot of controllers. i just did what you did and threw out what i knew about it. tankers are not the only ones who suffer from a lack of inherent while solo. defenders suffer also, but imo, those 2 AT's are more team oriented then any other.
as someone who has taken many a tank to 50, both solo and on teams, i really didn't find the inherent to make any difference either way. until a really good idea can be had, i don't see why ideas can't be discussed to move it forward, just try not to get hung up on your idea to much as it seems that alot of people, especially the ones who play tanks, don't agree that your idea is the best but are more then happy to try to work with you to find something that is presentable.
Quote:
What I was referring to was that every power that benefits from Containment has the exact same effect applied to it in the exact same magnitude adjusted from the base: as long as the target is mezzed, the attack deals double damage. The only attacks that I know of that don't benefit from Containment are the few attacks in secondary effects. Other than those, the effect is absolutely consistent and doesn't require any special hand adjustment in order to be made effective.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
I'd actually say 'look at containment'. As an inherent, does it actually provide the consistency you're talking about? If I remember correctly, there are some damage powers available to Controllers that only partially benefit from the containment bonus. And there are other damage powers that get no benefit from it (Repulsion Bomb, IIRC).
|
Quote:
| As for the range buff being inconsistent with sets, I'd say it's possible but I'd have to see the numbers. You point to Whirling Hands but WH sucks not because EM sucks. It sucks because it's inferior in every way to every like power. It has shorter range, it hits fewer enemies and does less damage than the Dominator version and ultimately does less overall than other Tanker PBAoEs. But that can change. Sort of like how SS can manage to call itself an AoE set with only 1 AoE...but beyond that, EM simply has problems. Problems that aren't being fixed by an addition to the Tanker inherent. |
If you look at inherent powers for every single AT out there, the inherent powers are all designed to operate in a formulaic manner. The closest you get to "hand adjustment" is the higher chances for a few Critical Hit attacks. Most of those already had preexisting "critical" mechanisms before Critical Hit was even introduced so the addition of Critical Hit as an inherent would logically require some manipulation (which pretty much equated to giving a 5% higher crit rate to the existing rate). The only attack that got the treatment without any preexisting mechanism was Storm Kick and that was added more as an upward balance of the set as a whole than as necessary modification of the inherent itself.
Quote:
| For AoE intensive sets, again, we'd need numbers. Just because we're widening the area on *some* AoEs, doesn't mean we have to increase the number of foes affected or vise-versa. Just like Axe and Broadsword and Mace have different ranges on their cones, it preserves flavor. So improving the AoEs could be done while keeping flavor and balance in mind. |
Quote:
| I'd certainly take an END discount as part of the improved inherent, especially if I ever look into making a DA/Mace that I had been planning on. The only part I don't like is that, for some sets like Elec Armor and soon Energy Aura, discounting endurance cost devalues the bonuses those sets provide. Both have similar discounts as well as +END powers which would also do little for them. But, if anything, rather than adding such a discount to the inherent, it'd probably be justified to simply adjust the powers similar to how the devs adjusted Claws when proliferating it to Brutes. |
In the same sense as applies here, you have to realize that those Tanker sets that already have the ability to regain endurance are still advantaged because they still have those abilities while on larger teams. While solo, they'll still be more endurance sustainable because the endurance reduction I proposed is not intended to completely negate endurance problems while solo. I chose that much end redux specifically because it would provide a noticeable increase in efficiency without allowing Tankers to completely ignore endurance while solo. It wouldn't be a case of "omg! solo! my blue bar is always full!" It's a case of "now I don't have to slot end redux in all of my attacks just to solo without having to rest after every group".
Quote:
There's also Fireball in the controller ancillary power pool that doesn't do double damage. There's non-critting Energy Transfer, I'm betting their are non-scourging damage powers like time bomb or oil slick (but I don't play Corrs so not sure), Domination having no effect on Arctic Air.|
Originally Posted by Umbral
The only attacks that I know of that don't benefit from Containment are the few attacks in secondary effects. Other than those, the effect is absolutely consistent and doesn't require any special hand adjustment in order to be made effective.
... If you look at inherent powers for every single AT out there, the inherent powers are all designed to operate in a formulaic manner. The closest you get to "hand adjustment" is the higher chances for a few Critical Hit attacks. ... Inherents are formulaic mechanisms. They aren't tweaked on a set for set basis. Try looking for any inherent that doesn't apply a formulaic benefit in a predictable fashion to all applicable powers. You won't find one. |
The point I'm trying to make is not that inherents are *not* consistent but that, if need be, powers can be adjusted. Powers deemed too strong get a mild (or no) bonus from the inherent and powers deemed not so strong get the full benefit.
Quote:
|
If every set is going to be treated in a different manner, you might as well just ask for every Tanker to get whatever tweak you're asking for rather than attempting to dress it up as an inherent overhaul. Inherents either modify all powers in a specific listed fashion or they provide specific global benefits in a predictable(ish) manner. The entire point of the endurance reduction was that it only applied to situations in which the Tanker was on small teams or solo. If the base values were reduced then the entire point of that modification is kind of rendered null. At that point, you're simply stating that Tankers should have the same DPE as Scrappers in all situations rather than those in which they can't properly leverage higher survivability for faster experience gain. |
Quote:
| In the same sense as applies here, you have to realize that those Tanker sets that already have the ability to regain endurance are still advantaged because they still have those abilities while on larger teams. While solo, they'll still be more endurance sustainable because the endurance reduction I proposed is not intended to completely negate endurance problems while solo. I chose that much end redux specifically because it would provide a noticeable increase in efficiency without allowing Tankers to completely ignore endurance while solo. It wouldn't be a case of "omg! solo! my blue bar is always full!" It's a case of "now I don't have to slot end redux in all of my attacks just to solo without having to rest after every group". |
Tanks need a buff to their inherent (whatever that buff is I dunno). When Going Rogue comes out there will be no need to make tanks whatsoever because brutes do just fine and do a lot more damage with fury (except in PVP cause good luck getting fury up to a reasonable level in PVP). A Brute with taunt and their taunt aura is good enough to keep your team alive. And most people I know say that even taunt is optional.
They should make the tank inherent a 2-parter like some of the other inherents. It should give some taunt and something else too. In City of Heroes where damage is king and everything else is just nice tankers don't shine very well.
Quote:
Except that it does. Go in game and check it.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
There's also Fireball in the controller ancillary power pool that doesn't do double damage.
|
Quote:
| There's non-critting Energy Transfer, |
Quote:
| I'm betting their are non-scourging damage powers like time bomb or oil slick (but I don't play Corrs so not sure), |
Quote:
| Domination having no effect on Arctic Air. |
Quote:
| The point I'm trying to make is not that inherents are *not* consistent but that, if need be, powers can be adjusted. Powers deemed too strong get a mild (or no) bonus from the inherent and powers deemed not so strong get the full benefit. |
I don't think you understand what I mean by "formulaic" and "consistent" either. Find me a Scrapper attack except for those that had critical mechanisms from the very beginning that crit for less than 100% of their base damage. Find me a Blaster attack that contributes a different amount of +dam from the amount that it should based on its animation time. Find me a Controller power that deals less than 100% extra damage with Containment. All of those powers are both formulaic and consistent. They apply a specific effect and that effect does a specific thing. If the power doesn't benefit from the effect (i.e. Energy Transfer), then the effect isn't present at all. If the inherent is present, it acts in an exact manner.
Formulaic and consistent doesn't mean that it applies to everything. It simply means that it is applied in a specific way on all powers within a specific subset. Your idea isn't formulaic or consistent because you're attempting to apply different things to every single set. It's doing different things to different powers. You're not applying a 50% increase in range and a 50% increase in max number of targets to every power. You're cherry picking different powers to apply different aspects in different quantities for each set individually. That's not an inherent. That's attempting to rebalance a set.
Quote:
| With the advent of adjusting mission difficulty, I'd say such a change only mildly helpful to some builds and in the same vein of alteration as I'm asking for (basically something that could be just altered as the base of the powers rather than an addition to the inherent). That a Tanker could leverage their survivability so no bonus, really makes no sense to me. On a team, you'd be using attacks less per foes anyway. So you're already receiving a diminished bonus on the attacks (because you're simply not taking advantage of it). |
Quote:
| Teams already potentially devalue +END powers. That the recovery bonus and +END powers are usually very potent practically makes those advantages redundant. |
Personal end recovery powers are still useful solo with the end redux I suggested because if you want to take on larger groups, you still need more endurance. The presence of endurance recovery tools that you have natively allows you to take on larger and larger groups while taking less and less time to recover it. Try running an SO grade Tanker through a solo mission now. You're going to run out of endurance plenty. Now imagine if all of your powers had a free end redux SO (or 1 end redux SO in the power was turned into something like recharge or damage). That's not an intangible difference.
Quote:
| Not saying that the inherent discount would make those sets redundant but it wouldn't have much of an impact in normal play. |
If you can actually show something like numbers or play that demonstrate that it would be true, then go right ahead. I've already given my reasoning: it makes Tanker attacks as endurance efficient as Scrapper attacks. Can you legitimately claim with evidence that this wouldn't impact normal play or are you going to just doubting it arbitrarily?
Quote:
| The only time I could see it coming into play is on EBs and AVs that you're soloing. |
Please tell me that that's not noticeable.
PS: Someone said that with an improvement to the area of AoE attacks, Tankers would overshadow other melees. I think it was Umbral but I'm lazy and don't fee like rereading >_>
Well, currently, Tankers are the most lackluster of the close ranged ATs especially when it comes to meleeing. They aren't bad, but they do nothing special.
I've always dreamed that, for each melee AT with a similar powerset concepts, powersets would be custom tailored to the flavor of the AT. For example, Fire Melee. Brutes would get a 'brutish' FM, Scrappers would get a 'scrappy' FM, etc. etc. with one or more key powers added or replaced for that AT. Basically, it would give you a big reason to play Fire Melee 4 times because each AT had a couple of attacks the others didn't have.
Well, now that proliferation shows that will never happen, giving each AT a sort of 'tactic' that flavors them apart would be somewhat close.
-The Stalker currently smack guys really really hard so long as they pinpoint the weak area and brings everything down in a cool calculating manner.
-Brutes attacks are like an avalanche starting out slow and then barreling out in an overwhelming but controlled torrent of pain.
-Scrappers are like a gun that's always loaded and ready to fire at the flip of a switch and can shoot of a strong spread or a devastating piercing round depending what scrap/gun you're using.
-If Tankers got an improvement to the area of their attacks, they'd be like a cannon; similarly dangerous as a gun but without the pinpoint accuracy that a Stalker or Scrapper has that can easily bring down a Goliath. But, if the enemy's formation is right, that cannon can blow a hole in the enemy to make short work of their large numbers.
Anyway, I'd actually more like a change to the way Tankers *actually* fight. Anyone care to elaborate on that 'extra dmg on foes not attacking you' inherent? Would it be like double damage crit or something? How do you feel it ties in with the theme that Tankers are meant to play as?
Quote:
Actually, I haven't particularly specified anything with regards to altering the powers in a formulaic manner or otherwise. I simply put forth a suggestion.| Your idea isn't formulaic or consistent because you're attempting to apply different things to every single set. It's doing different things to different powers. You're not applying a 50% increase in range and a 50% increase in max number of targets to every power. You're cherry picking different powers to apply different aspects in different quantities for each set individually. That's not an inherent. That's attempting to rebalance a set. |
If you want, I can *try*. Such as, Cones get a 25% +range increase and +1 to number of foes affected. PBAoEs get no +range but get +5 foes affected.
And don't bring up Energy Melee! I'm not the only person that thinks the set needs work and even adding a 33% endurance discount while solo won't really do anything to fix it
Sets with only a PBAoE: Stone Melee, Super Strength, Energy Melee
Sets with only a cone: ?
Sets with a cone(s) and PBAoE(s): Dual Blades, Battle Axe, Dark Melee, Fire Melee, Ice Melee, War Mace
Exceptions:
-Buff Whirling Hands! Why? Well Why does Dom version have 10ft? And why does Dom version of Thorn Burst have 15ft?
-Dark Consumption and Soul Drain. Because they're buff PBAoEs, instead of increasing the number of foes, just increase its range some.
-Clobber. Because it's a mez attack so no +foes.
Quote:
| The issue isn't that Tankers need help in all situations. Tankers only need help in 2 situations: when solo and when on a team with another Tanker present. Your "solution" attempts to make Tankers better in all situations just to address the problems of these 2 situations. |
Quote:
| By this same logic, Granite Armor's penalty is pointless because 30% -dam and 65% -rech are incredibly easy to circumvent on a team. |
Quote:
| If you can actually show something like numbers or play that demonstrate that it would be true, then go right ahead. I've already given my reasoning: it makes Tanker attacks as endurance efficient as Scrapper attacks. Can you legitimately claim with evidence that this wouldn't impact normal play or are you going to just doubting it arbitrarily? |
I'm not saying wouldn't impact normal play. I'm just saying it would only do so in a minimal, perhaps even non-perceivable, way. As often as people say Vigilance sux, it actually makes a *huge* impact that is easily noticeable when it occurs.
Quote:
|
I can see this coming in to play all the friggin' time. When you're soloing, you're not just using AoEs. You're also using single target attacks. You're also using your toggles. I would gauge consumption at about 4.6 end sec (4 end/sec for attacks with no end redux, .6 end/sec for toggles/survivability powers with 1 end redux). Assuming Stamina and SOs, you'll have 2.48 end/sec recovery for 2.12 end/sec of loss. You'd be able to manage roughly 45 seconds of attacking before running out of endurance. With the end redux added to the inherent, you'd be able to manage roughly 155 seconds before running out of endurance. Please tell me that that's not noticeable. |
A Tanker can extend that time he spends fighting by staggering his attacks. Using damage auras (because you can get them and Stalkers can't!) improves your endurance economy as well.
i would just like to add in that my fire/ss tank disagrees with your look at tanks leo. i have no problem killing almost as fast as anyone else solo or on a team. i also have no real end issues. like i said earlier, tanks and defenders are more geared towards team play. hence why their inherents really only kick in on a team.
if a tanker were to get any kind of damage boost through gauntlet, the base damage would be changed. and not the good way. if it were implemented as umbral suggests, by giving an end discount, the endurance costs would be slightly raised i think, but his idea doesn't promote teaming which is a bad thing.
i just don't think there really is much they can do to the inherent to make it both solo friendly and team friendly at the same time without something else suffering.
Quote:
That's what I fear. I may end up staying with my 1 Tanker as the reason I enjoy him is he solos decently and I've fallen in love with his costume and concept.|
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
i just don't think there really is much they can do to the inherent to make it both solo friendly and team friendly at the same time without something else suffering.
|
It's rare for me that this will happen but I did want to try a DA/Mace but I may just toss that out...and I don't want to make a Brute. I don't care for Brutes at all >_> but I still have 3 of them between lvl 28 and 42.
If I do try another Tanker, I fear that only a Shield/ will even come close to satisfactory and yet I play sets once and only once (unless I delete).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
If you want, I can *try*. Such as, Cones get a 25% +range increase and +1 to number of foes affected. PBAoEs get no +range but get +5 foes affected.
And don't bring up Energy Melee! I'm not the only person that thinks the set needs work and even adding a 33% endurance discount while solo won't really do anything to fix it Sets with only a PBAoE: Stone Melee, Super Strength, Energy Melee Sets with only a cone: ? Sets with a cone(s) and PBAoE(s): Dual Blades, Battle Axe, Dark Melee, Fire Melee, Ice Melee, War Mace Exceptions: -Buff Whirling Hands! Why? Well Why does Dom version have 10ft? And why does Dom version of Thorn Burst have 15ft? -Dark Consumption and Soul Drain. Because they're buff PBAoEs, instead of increasing the number of foes, just increase its range some. -Clobber. Because it's a mez attack so no +foes. |
Quote:
| Well, that's if you're dismissing the opinion that maybe Tankers need something to appeal more to teams, |
Quote:
| multi-tank teams |
Quote:
| and teams where survivability is not an issue. |
Arguing that something needs to be done and then having your only viable condition be under arbitrary chosen situations when the primary function of that ATs is ignored is stupid beyond belief. You're attempting to salvage some scrap of intelligence but making yourself look like an even bigger idiot because the only decent situation you could come up with is a situation in which the primary strength of the AT is ignored.
Quote:
| A penalty and a buff are not the same. That a set doesn't have endurance recovery is not a penalty. That a set has +endurance is a buff. There is a point where more endurance does nothing. |
Quote:
| When do melees run out of endurance? Either in the face of debuffs (so you *should* be hurting on the blue bar) or on hard targets you wale on for a long time. For the most part, the second doesn't come up unless the target is meant to be fought with a team in tow. |
Quote:
| I'm not saying wouldn't impact normal play. I'm just saying it would only do so in a minimal, perhaps even non-perceivable, way. As often as people say Vigilance sux, it actually makes a *huge* impact that is easily noticeable when it occurs. |
The other problem with Vigilance is that it does nothing solo. Sure, you can capitalize on it while on teams, but it does nothing unless there is someone else to feed it. That's the specific reason why I was separating the two portions of the inherent fix that I would apply. Tankers need different things at different times.
Quote:
| The time it takes to defeat foes is rarely relevant as a Tanker can usually survive nearly indefinitely. For me, it's not about how long you can fight but how many foes you can take out in the time you do fight. That's why gathering 2 spawns together, IMO, is better because your AoEs will more often hit more foes and do more damage and defeat more enemies therefore costing you less endurance. |
Quote:
| A Tanker can extend that time he spends fighting by staggering his attacks. Using damage auras (because you can get them and Stalkers can't!) improves your endurance economy as well. |
Damage auras improve endurance economy because they provide AoE damage at the cost of ST endurance. However, they are not par for the course for Tanker sets. The same argument applies to them as it does to AAO: they are an artificial increase to endurance efficiency that cannot be relied upon for balance reasons because they are not a universal functionality.
I really have to wonder when you'll stop pulling arbitrary reasons out of your *** and realize that you have no clue what you're talking about. You don't even get half of your information correct, and you artificially apply your own playstyle or specific experience within specific sets without accounting for the capabilities of those specific sets in a global manner.
Increasing range or target caps in the manner you described is not the solution. It assumes that Tankers will never run up against single hard targets or that Tankers should be the AoE gods of the game no matter what conditions their under. It is inelegant, inefficient, and largely ineffective. Just stop. Please.
I don't have much experience with Tankers (I only have 1 that's lvl 34 and he's Shield/DM) but having recently started playing him more and having read some of the threads to improve them, I thought of a buff for Tankers. Throughout those threads, I don't recall hearing an improvement like the one I'm thinking of.
Anywho, my improvement goes along the concept of 'Gauntlet' and what being a 'Tanker' usually entails. When I think of Tanker, I think 'Big'. That doesn't necessarily mean you need to be a huge model to be a tanker, but in order to do what a tanker does best, you need to be noticed.
Taunt/Range
Although many may try, few can withstand the irresistible force of the Tanker. Each time a Tanker attacks, he enrages the target, and those around him, enticing them to attack the Tanker. Each punch is exaggerated in size and scope to attract more of the attention of the enemy, resulting in attack size increase and foes affected.
For example: Dark Melee; Soul Drain would have its range increased from 10 ft to 15 ft and Dark Consumption would have its range increased from 8ft to 15 ft. Shadow Maul would have its range increased from 7ft to 10ft, its arc improved from 45 degrees to 90 degrees and the number of foes affected from 5 to 8.
For Super Strength; for Footstomp basically just increase the number of foes affected from 10 to 15.
For Energy Melee; improve Whirling Hands from 8ft to 15ft and the number of foes effected from 10 to 15.
It could even extend to aggro auras, improving their range a few feet.
So it's not directly improving the dmg of the sets or even raising the aggro cap, but you'd still be able to stay on more enemies 'list' as their numbers steadily decrease.
PS: suggested numbers were pulled out of my bum and are subject to change with regard to balance.