Tanker Discussion
Im glad so many people post here. Well I have never been a Dark Armor type of person but it is a fantastic set with great stats so I may give it another shot. I want a tanker with a little more single target abilities so I will probably make a DA/Energy tanker. Anyways, what impact do you guys think i19 will have on Tankers? Will the new systems and changes boost tankers up, keep them the same, or make them less required on average teams? Share your opinions. Auto fitness will give us the ability to boost our defense with more defense based powers or allow us to take on more offensive abilities to have greater damage output. I have read about the Incarnate system but I guess not enough because it is still fuzzy to me, so I don't know exactly how that will change tankers.
I think I19 unsettles the "standards" that have developed over the years of travel power/fitness/fighting/ 2nd travel power or whatever and makes things that much more interesting. Maybe more tankers end up taking taunt? Maybe the new standard tanker builds take a more offensive stance at earlier levels than they do right now as the need to grab stamina by 20 goes away. It will make the next year or so fun to be a part of anyway.
My mains are blasters but I'm becoming more attached to tankers as I play them more. I've mostly played Fire and Invuln tanks up into the mid levels and Fire just fits how I like to play - lots of offense, decent defense, a heal, and End recover - maybe it's easier to grasp than some but it's a lot of fun to play, especially with Burn turned back into a nice power from the fear patch that it was before. I'm slowly working some stone, shield, and electric tanks up with the kids but I already know Fire clicks with me.
I don't think any AT is useless on any team. Sure, at 50 a maxed out scrapper may be almost as tough as some tankers but on the way up there's not much comparison. It may be time to learn some new strategies if you're on a really sharp higher-up team as the traditional "gather aggro and take a beating" approach may not be needed but that doesn't mean there's not a job for you to do. At that point maybe you become "melee character built for defense" so get out front and go beat on something.
With the Incarnate system kicking off in a week or so I suspect the standards for high-level play are going to be in a state of flux comparable to that of low level play as inherent fitness becomes a factor. Time to unlearn some of what we have learned.
Aluminum Man's Journal: http://diaryofanaluminumman.blogspot.com/
Well as a person that plays many tanks I find that I do play different styles on different tanks.
|
I think I19 unsettles the "standards" that have developed over the years of travel power/fitness/fighting/ 2nd travel power or whatever and makes things that much more interesting.
|
Agreed.
If we are to die, let us die like men. -- Patrick Cleburne
----------------------------------------------------------
The rule is that they must be loved. --Jayne Fynes-Clinton, Death of an Abandoned Dog
In my opinion the Devs really screwed up when they made the tank AT. Or, more properly, they have modified the game so much from the beginning that now it just looks stupid, like a guy in tights and poofy pants from the French 17th century court in downtown NY today.
When a tank could taunt an entire map, and pull a parade through Perez Park, that was when not doing much damage was a reasonable trade off. With every change they have made in the game, from taunt caps, to ED, to you name it, they have consistently bent Tanks over the Dev fun time table.
In every other video game, seriously, every other game. The biggest guy does the most damage. Period. He may have an attack rate that would make a turtle yawn. He may miss more than most. He may lack cool stuff that other characters get. But, big guy = big damage in the videogame world. Heck, in one particular X-man game you cannot unlock Colossus until halfway through the game because he is so awesome compared to the rest. Tanks always do the most damage. Think of the freaking name even. Armored, slow, big punch. They should have named these guys Armored Police deterrent wagons with no guns. Guess that would be too long though.
Seriously, the only hope for the Devs with this AT is to bring the damage to the exact same level as Brutes, no Fury though. Otherwise, the class is only rolled by newbs. Take a Brute blueside, and you got a Tank that does damage. Or just take the Scrapper, as has been posted above, and really kill stuff (and still survive)
the only thing Tanks are good for IMO is for tourists to the city who want a toon that they can walk around the most dangerous places to check out whats going on without fighting/dieing. Its a tourist bot. The way it is written it cannot compete with any other AT at any level (except perhaps level 1, and even then, probably not) Take equal cash, equal level, on any other AT, and given equal level of play, any other AT is a better teammate/soloer/PvPer/you name it-er.
Hmm, interesting. It does seem like most tanks accept what they can do and settle for that. I have always been more of a survive now, kill later kind of person. Two blasters will have more risk in a team than two tankers. I have seen it happen in many video games where the 'tank' role is generally underpowered with the exception that they have a sliver more defense and health then the big guy who does the real damage. I have not played blasters, scrappers, and brutes enough to state fact about this but based on what I hear, a brute or scrapper can, in many cases, drop a blaster very quickly. It is usually like this in other games as well which should not be the case, the guy with the most melee damage output generally has better defense/resistance or better armor capabilities making them not only lethal in combat but incredibly tough. I also notice how many tanker abilities are usually self-affecting, has no effect on team behavior. Shield Defense brought some team-oriented abilities into play but I think tankers need more abilities that help his/her team. Widows/Soldiers get leadership abilities even though they appear more as assassins than team players.
Your point about the blasters is good, but if the two blasters are smart and hae the right sets, they would do better (and much faster0 as well. devices and ice would both have enough mitigation to have 2 blasters going nuts on spawns.
In my opinion the Devs really screwed up when they made the tank AT.
|
Seriously, the only hope for the Devs with this AT is to bring the damage to the exact same level as Brutes, no Fury though. |
Specifically, I'd say raise the Tanker damage cap to 600 percent. Thus, Brutes, Scrappers, and Tankers can all do roughly equal max damage, but the Tanker needs a LOT more external buffage to get there.
Team friendly, you see.
A more interesting speculation is what do you do about Stalker damage/capabilities?
LOL! Wow, hyperbole much?
To be honest, I would like to see Tanker damage caps increased by quite a lot. Not base damage, at all, and no self-buffing either beyond the extant. But tankers are, by nature, team-friendly. Make them even more-so: Make them highly effective buff amplifiers. Specifically, I'd say raise the Tanker damage cap to 600 percent. Thus, Brutes, Scrappers, and Tankers can all do roughly equal max damage, but the Tanker needs a LOT more external buffage to get there. Team friendly, you see. A more interesting speculation is what do you do about Stalker damage/capabilities? |
If you're talking about comics and movies, to some degree you're right - the big guy usually hits hard too, he doesn't just suck it up. To go further, this type (Colossus, Thing, Hulk for example) is usually resistance based in COH terms - you can hit them fairly easily it just doesn't do anything.
The scrapper type (Nightcrawler, Captain America, various Kung-Fu types) tends to be damaging plus hard-to-hit, or defense based in COH terms.
Maybe the designers for COH2 can use those guidelines rather than reducing the offensive power of the "tank" versus other melee types. I think it would be an interesting way to go about it. Then you could throw a regen option in there as a 3rd path to survival and keep it interesting.
Aluminum Man's Journal: http://diaryofanaluminumman.blogspot.com/
In every other video game, seriously, every other game. The biggest guy does the most damage. Period. He may have an attack rate that would make a turtle yawn. He may miss more than most. He may lack cool stuff that other characters get. But, big guy = big damage in the videogame world.
|
Honestly, back in the day, Tanker sets were mostly designed like that. Stone Melee, Fire Melee, Axe and Mace, they all have powerful attacks with long recharges. Scrappers got the faster attack sets, Claws, Spines, they were intended to hit more often, but do less damage. But, Broadsword was an exception, and eventually Martial Arts (it started out really low damage but had its animation times decreased) and with Proliferation Tankers have been getting faster sets and Scrappers the slower ones.
The thing is, even if you gave Tankers a +100% boost to damage and a 100% increase in recharge, it still wouldn't do the job because recharge is not important in this game, animation time is. What the devs SHOULD have done is given Tankers attacks that do a lot of damage, but take twice as long to animate. Then the Tankers would not be standing around doing nothing, they would be attacking, but their attacks would be slower and more ponderous than a Scrapper. It's too late for that now, and with Proliferation you couldn't design a set that way anyway, just for a single AT.
Lowering To Hit or raising End cost wouldn't be a viable solution either. Both of those limitations can be overcome with the right build. You would just end up with Tankers doing twice as much damage as Scrappers, while being just as resiliant as they are now.
Seriously, the only hope for the Devs with this AT is to bring the damage to the exact same level as Brutes, no Fury though. |
In my opinion the Devs really screwed up when they made the tank AT.
In every other video game, seriously, every other game. The biggest guy does the most damage. Period. He may have an attack rate that would make a turtle yawn. He may miss more than most. He may lack cool stuff that other characters get. But, big guy = big damage in the videogame world. Heck, in one particular X-man game you cannot unlock Colossus until halfway through the game because he is so awesome compared to the rest. Tanks always do the most damage. Think of the freaking name even. Armored, slow, big punch. They should have named these guys Armored Police deterrent wagons with no guns. Guess that would be too long though. Seriously, the only hope for the Devs with this AT is to bring the damage to the exact same level as Brutes, no Fury though. Otherwise, the class is only rolled by newbs. Take a Brute blueside, and you got a Tank that does damage. Or just take the Scrapper, as has been posted above, and really kill stuff (and still survive) the only thing Tanks are good for IMO is for tourists to the city who want a toon that they can walk around the most dangerous places to check out whats going on without fighting/dieing. Its a tourist bot. The way it is written it cannot compete with any other AT at any level (except perhaps level 1, and even then, probably not) Take equal cash, equal level, on any other AT, and given equal level of play, any other AT is a better teammate/soloer/PvPer/you name it-er. |
I learned to love tanks as a defender, where I learned the surprising lesson that the safest place in the world is not in the back with a misguided fire blaster, as I had been taught, but as close to sitting in the tanks' lap as s/he'd let you. (Nemmies and Council notwithstanding). What I dislike are BAD tanks... guys with huge bodies and those itty bitty heads, who feel their only function is to impotently punch the same guy over and over (and over and over), because "I have GAUNTLET!" (pause for applause) "I get most of the aggro this way!" Yeah, we are thrilled by your studliness, but geez, big guy, could ya think to get the other 10% who are killing the rest of us??"
I'm not sure I get why would anyone make a huge, no-necked tank, who looks indistinguishable from hundreds of other huge, no-necked toons. Blue, you have cleared it up for me by saying that this stereotype is from other games, where big no-neck guys are all that and a bag of chips. (Which makes me really glad I don't play those other games. YUK!)
I guess bad tanks are like bad empaths. They cause a pretty vocal segment of the players to say they're not needed on a well balanced team of people who know what they're doing. (You know, I think I played on a team like that, back in '07?).
So, to answer the question on this thread, I do love to play my tank, but find I dislike tanking. My favorite is to play the scrapper-on-steroids, on my SD/EM tank, and taunt myself a huge group of bad guys (solo), then go Lightning Rod and Shield Charge into the lot of them. The few Lt's who survive this are easily dispatched, and on to the next group. It goes fast, and never bores me - and I get bored easily. I don't much care to solo, but on this toon I had so much fun, I ended up soloing all the lvl 50 arcs (set at +0/x8). It continues to bring out my inner 6 year old, and a trip to Monkey Island still makes me giggle myself silly.
My scrapper - even my brute - can't survive the same way I play the tank. The EM/SD scrapper (also capped) is good, but can't survive the same abuse. Once on an ITF on the tank, we were taking down the computer and got ambushed at the same time all the robots woke up. My teammates (and they were all very good players) all died almost immediately, and I stood there and beat down and beat down, till every last robot was dead. The team was cheering me on, saying I was a beast (!), etc., and yeah, it felt good. AND it felt bad. Because I didn't save a single one of them. Not one! I taunted all I could, but saved no one. And that's the tank's job. I looked cool, but... epic fail.
I have a SD/DM tank who is very good at tanking. She hovers, taunts, does ranged attacks, and in no way feels that killing anything is her job (even though she does pretty good damage). She's a tiny fairy in strapless dresses and a bad attitude named Punkerbell*. Much as I love her, I find playing this way more than a hour and I want to scream. My back hurts, and my eyes are crossed. I love my tanks (noun), but I find it incredibly stressful to tank (verb). I know I'm responsible for the team's safety, and feel badly when I can't save everyone.
*She also has a neck
I'm not sure I get why would anyone make a huge, no-necked tank, who looks indistinguishable from hundreds of other huge, no-necked toons. [...]
I have a SD/DM tank who is very good at tanking. She hovers, taunts, does ranged attacks, and in no way feels that killing anything is her job (even though she does pretty good damage). She's a tiny fairy in strapless dresses and a bad attitude named Punkerbell*. Much as I love her, I find playing this way more than a hour and I want to scream. |
He was never more than an off-tank, though. Because I built him for offense he wasn't really able to tank for a team the way a more dedicated Tanker could. But taunting was inherent to his concept, so he could HOLD the aggro, he just couldn't always take it. (Actually, he would so often come within an instant of death and then not die that I had a teammate comment on it. That was back when Invincibility was far stronger than it is now, though)
I've got two more Tankers now, though, which were offshoots of the same concept. One is Dark/Dual Blades, and is something more like a thief or a druid than the no-neck type. He has a couple of ferrets (who do all the "taunting" for him by running up his foes' legs) and sneaks around under cloak before popping out to grab aggro.
My other Tanker is a Stone/Axe, who was originally the nature druid concept. But now he's a more traditional stoner, doing the tanking for the team thing. He's not built that way, though, he's tall and kind of gangly (not as much as the druid used to be) and more a cunning type of fighter than just brute force.
I honestly don't see the issue, I haven't had trouble with damage since, say around Issue 3, and I solo constantly. It's just a matter of picking attacks and slotting them reasonably. And honestly, knowing that you can wade into ANYTHING and end up being the last thing standing is pretty nice. I wouldn't say my Stone can do as much damage as my Inv/SS, and I wouldn't say that he's got as much control and utility as my Dark, but that's just the difference between sets.
Heh. I like unusual tanks. Amusingly enough, for the longest time I had only ONE Tanker, a no-neck type named Blue Diamond. However, for all his muscle and compact build, he's only about 5 feet tall. He's a foul-tempered, grouchy, obstinate jerk, who insists that no one is ever going to beat him. Probably has an inferiority complex. But he's all about being loud and obnoxious and the center of attention to the point where he pretty much exemplified the Tanker for me.
. |
When a tank could taunt an entire map, and pull a parade through Perez Park, that was when not doing much damage was a reasonable trade off.
|
And "not doing much damage" isn't a tradeoff Tankers have to make. Tankers are the most damaging Heroside archetype*.
It's true.
*Except, of course, for the specialist damage-dealers, who admittedly do more damage for a significant or even extreme tradeoff in durability.
If we are to die, let us die like men. -- Patrick Cleburne
----------------------------------------------------------
The rule is that they must be loved. --Jayne Fynes-Clinton, Death of an Abandoned Dog
I also notice how many tanker abilities are usually self-affecting, has no effect on team behavior. Shield Defense brought some team-oriented abilities into play but I think tankers need more abilities that help his/her team. Widows/Soldiers get leadership abilities even though they appear more as assassins than team players.
|
hmm, interesting opinions. I have been on and off with CoH for many years, haven't been around since i2 like many people but I been around for awhile. Always missing some gap though when I return.
I love my WP/Fire tanker but (maybe its just me) I feel he isn't doing what I want him to do in ST situations like against AVs. I am tweaking with my char's build but Im thinking of making an alt to change the pace since i19 is when I can make the major difference. I am thinking SD/Energy or or maybe Ice/Energy for a strong ST yet have a few AoE powers to balance out. Paired with a solid defensive.
/Fire's strengths are AoE and DoT. When it comes to AVs, focus more on your DoT (damage over time) attacks. You won't see any BIG numbers, but your actual total damage will be fairly significant. DoTs have the added benefit of "sticking" on phased targets (provided they're applied before the target phases).
If your team needs tanking, you set the pace, and you set a cautious pace. You con mobs and look for hidden mobs. You pull and you corner pull. You expect buffs. You are ready to die.
If your team does not need tanking, you hang back with the low hit point people and make sure nothing annoys them, and then go DPS as you are able. This too is a worthwhile job, even if you aren't leading the charge. |
I wish more people playing tankers were able to do the second bit.
What I hate about my tank: On a top end team (read: heavy on defenders/masterminds/corruptors/controllers), my tank is absolutely worthless. I feel like I'm not contributing at all. The best teams share aggro and turn AVs into trivial minions with a lot of hit points. In this scenario, my aggro control is not needed, and my damage output pales in comparison to the rest of the team. Simply put, I offer nothing to this kind of team.
|
While no SD tanker will give you the same level of survivability as a Dark Armor tanker (this is my opinion), you might try SD/SS/Soul with Gloom.
In my opinion, outside of select FA Tanker builds, it comes as close to the Brute AT as it gets in terms of damage dealing - but you're still a Tanker, with better overall survivability.
That being said, I think all but the most optimal teams would probably want a tanker. Even then, Brutes are rarely going to be so focused on controlling as much aggro as possible when compared to a Tanker.
Seriously, the only hope for the Devs with this AT is to bring the damage to the exact same level as Brutes, no Fury though. Otherwise, the class is only rolled by newbs. Take a Brute blueside, and you got a Tank that does damage. Or just take the Scrapper, as has been posted above, and really kill stuff (and still survive)
|
Please, anyone reading this thread - totally disregard this person.
I think that in so far as team play style goes, it all boils down to one question. How much tanking do these guys need?
This is something that teams will differ on. Is this a master run of some kind? Do I mind if one of the scrappers gets in over their head? We have three controllers / three defenders / three blasters: this makes a difference. Are we fighting stuff that my defensive set does not work well on? Malta? Devouring Earth? Rogue Vanguards? If your team needs tanking, you set the pace, and you set a cautious pace. You con mobs and look for hidden mobs. You pull and you corner pull. You expect buffs. You are ready to die. If your team does not need tanking, you hang back with the low hit point people and make sure nothing annoys them, and then go DPS as you are able. This too is a worthwhile job, even if you aren't leading the charge. |
I know it's my personal preference, but I do think that works better, rather than hanging back ever (and if things go south, they're going to go south more by the mob). My Controllers or Scrappers can do pretty well taking the alpha, reducing damage, etc., but they're not going to say no to a tank taking the damage (alpha or otherwise) or clumping up mobs for them, either. Same thing for my Brute, to be honest, even though he's not all IO'd out yet.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
I know you've forayed into Brutes a bit, and not come out happy.
While no SD tanker will give you the same level of survivability as a Dark Armor tanker (this is my opinion), you might try SD/SS/Soul with Gloom. In my opinion, outside of select FA Tanker builds, it comes as close to the Brute AT as it gets in terms of damage dealing - but you're still a Tanker, with better overall survivability. |
Scrappers comfortably exceed even full-Fury Brute damage (especially now that full Fury is 75%) with any set other than Super Strength, given equivalent investment. Super Strength works great on a Brute, but Tankers are better suited to take advantage of double-stacking Rage -- which puts them very close to single-Rage, Fury-enhanced Brutes:
Brute: 0.75 AT damage mod * (1.95 enhancements + 1.5 Fury + 0.8 Rage) = 3.185 damage.
Tanker: 0.8 AT damage mod * (1.95 + 1.6 double Rage) = 2.84 damage
3.185 / 2.84 = ~1.12, or a 12% advantage. Granted, the Tanker gets more crashes, but even if we average crashes out over time, we end up with the Brute sitting at 3.185 * (120 / 130) = 2.94, and the Tanker sitting at 2.84 * (55/65) = 2.40, which is a 22.5% advantage for the Brute ...
Which is almost exactly what Bruising gives Tankers.
So you're left with a significant but certainly not insurmountable disadvantage with respect to AoE damage and in teams where there's more than one Tanker -- but your single-target damage is essentially equivalent in all other scenarios, and your survivability ranges from marginally higher with heavy buff support, to several times higher with no buff support.
We're also assuming the Brute is at full fury full-time, which isn't necessarily a fair assumption. What's somewhat amusing to me is that in any realistic situation that would invite a side-by-side comparison of Brute versus Tanker -- the Tanker will diminish the Brute's ability to maintain Fury simply by his very presence. (Because he cuts into the Brute's aggro.)
Some may say that I'm being unfair here, that I've glossed over several details -- like the Tanker's need to use a generally sub-par attack to set up Bruising whereas the Brute doesn't even need to take his first-tier attack. Yes, clearly, damage comparisons are much more complex in practice than the back-of-the-napkin calcs I've used here. A Tanker does have a slight DPS disadvantage from having to work Jab in, all else being equal, and a Tanker isn't handed extra recharge to double-stack Rage on a silver platter.
But a Tanker does have more opportunities to fit recharge bonuses into his build if we assume that both builds are going for some arbitrary and equivalent standard of IO-boosted survivability -- say soft-capped S/L DEF on a Willpower or INV character. That makes double-stacking Rage easier for the Tanker, who also has more incentive to stack it because the second Rage represents a higher proportional gain for him (the Brute only nets something like 10% extra DPS out of the second Rage if you account for the extra crashes).
By the same token, the Tanker has more recharge to fuel his attack chain. So if he loses by having to fit Jab into the equation, he also gains by having attacks like KO Blow up more often. YMMV, but I'm willing to call that a wash. In fact, even if we assume that the Tanker only goes for single Rage (which is reasonable, given that the crashes are annoying), the Tanker can make up some of his offensive shortfall through extra (relative to the Brute) recharge and damage procs in his attack chain.
The bottom line is that Brutes are generalists. They're desirable because of their flexibility. Notice I'm not going so far as to say that Brutes are useless. But for standalone capability in the age of IOs, the extreme choices (in this case, Tanker and Scrapper) tend to be better from a pure min/max perspective because IOs allow you to shore up weaknesses and build on strengths. A by-design middle-of-the-road Archetype can be similarly improved, but at the end of the day it's still middle of the road.
Any accusation that can be leveraged at an over-specialized AT with respect to team attractiveness can also be leveraged at an over-generalized AT. For my money, the latter has more to worry about -- to the extent that any AT really needs to worry about type-A team leaders passing them over in what is generally a very easy game.
I will have to agree with Obitus. After having leveled almost every tanker powerset to 50 the hard way (KM is currently 22 all other sets finished) I have found complaints regarding tanker damage exaggerated.
As with every other archetype there is a range of performance. At on end there is extreme survivability at the other extreme damage output. Adding IOs and player skill allows us to push the build further...in either direction.
There are a few perks for tankers that we cannot build into the other melee ATs.
We cannot grant to the brute, scrapper, stalker, a tanks hp caps.
We cannot give the average meleer a tank's aggro control capacities.
When this question comes up I frequently see folks say "I can IO my scrapper/brute to be plenty tough enough for *insert supposedly difficult content here* why would I roll a tank?" My response is "I can IO my tank to do more than enough damage for any content I want to play, why would I settle for any other AT?"
Taking It On the Chin I-16 Tanker Guide
Repeat Offenders
I frequently see folks say "I can IO my scrapper/brute to be plenty tough enough for *insert supposedly difficult content here* why would I roll a tank?" My response is "I can IO my tank to do more than enough damage for any content I want to play, why would I settle for any other AT?"
|
When this question comes up I frequently see folks say "I can IO my scrapper/brute to be plenty tough enough for *insert supposedly difficult content here* why would I roll a tank?" My response is "I can IO my tank to do more than enough damage for any content I want to play, why would I settle for any other AT?"
|
By the way Severe, you have a Fire/Fire tanker correct? I just made one and speeded through sewers and the hollows and am close to getting Burn which will only make leveling quicker. If you do have a Fire/Fire I was hoping you could post your build to see what you went for (S/L defense, all around, global recharge, a mix, etc) so I have a sort of guide to help me (I'm no pro at builds).
QR
Dark/Fire here. I play the same way regardless of the skill level of the team I am on: lead the fray (first one to engage a spawn). In tightly grouped spawns I will aggro a second, or even 3rd spawn. Until we start dying . Essentially I just look for what amount of aggro the team can handle. On strong teams, where people are more likely/capable of soloing spawns, I keep an eye on the squishies - so I know who to expect to be near me, or off by themselves. I push the pace (often beating superspeeders), even at the risk of running out of endurance . When there is a teammate with some kind of taunt as well (aura or power), I will try to "pile on" spawns as well. Enemy types, and levels, matter, but it's pretty rare that we can't handle 2 spawns at a time.
In terms of actual combat tactics, it goes something like: AoE, taunt south, AoE, taunt north, AoE, taunt west, single target attack on strong enemy (boss, etc), taunt east, AoE, single target, etc etc etc. moving around to keep as many enemies in my aura as possible. Nothing "fancy", but pretty effective. Never had any complaints anyway, even when I didn't join as the primary tank . Fire's got a good mix of PBAoE, and ranged AoE (Pyre epic pool too), so it's not uncommon for me to pull aggro off of other tankers/brutes. Psi damage proc in taunt helps too.