what AT's are in need of any help?

Presumably, if you wish to "help" an AT, making it more attractive so people want to play it goes in hand with that. While it may not have been the main goal of the devs for Stalkers (I'm betting it probably was *a* goal), for example, it was an outcome that was favorable.

If you don't care about what people think of the AT, then there's no real point in making any changes. If Blasters are under-performing and need a buff, but you don't care that people are playing them or not, there's no real point doing anything for them.

Obviously, the devs want all ATs to hold some appeal to everyone. Is it possible to make them all appeal equally to everyone? Probably not. But if you can improve their standing with the masses without doing any damage to balance between them, then by all means.


.

I must not have been clear. I have yet to see evidence that either of the following are true:

1. Tanks are out of balance and need help.
2. Tanks are not popular.

Taunting, attacking and two aggro auras going on my Ice/Ice Tanker who got the first hit in.

FM/SH Scrapper ripped that aggro away like my tank didn't have gauntlet!

Since you'd have something that does as much damage as a brute but is more survivable than either brutes or scrappers, people would pretty much only roll tanks if you did that.

If their damage modifier was raised to that of a brute, they would still have nowhere near brute damage due to lacking Fury, which makes up more than half their damage a good deal of the time.

That's what I was thinking as well...but for me it would change nothing...even if Tankers were the highest Damaging AT in the game. I personally hate most melee toons and I hate Tanking...that's why I like playing a Brute, Scrapper or Stalker...yes it's still melee but less responsibility/accountability if the *Ahem* hits the fan.

I think the up in damage would appeal to a lot of others though.

Yea, personally I've never been a big fan of tanking myself. I've never gotten a tanker or defender past level 30, which can be explained by me just not caring about other players enough. There is probably nothing that could make me like either of those ATs.

That said, I know there are plenty of people who don't feel that way, and for them increased damage would be a godsend.

The Tanker damage modifier is already higher than a Brute.

Ah, good to know. Are these things listed anywhere?

I agree...I only have two Defenders lol. I normally play Corrs or Controllers when to comes to me dabbling with support. I like the extra dmg during Team play.

Really now! I guess the biggest issue is how can the Tanker get there? So Brutes still manage to pull ahead due to Fury?

It does take a certain amount of leadership qualities in a person to really get to grips with a Tanker but if the *Ahem* hits the fan, players might still see who is directly responsible, they could be a Brute bringing more mobs too early to the team with an already aggro capped Tanker leaving the team with not a lot that is game mechanically possible. I am sure the Brute made himself feel Pro for a moment before needing to be saved and losing aggro to others. I bet such a Brute player would agree that Tankers need a higher aggro cap. I would prefer to see the Tankers do any herding whilst the Brute constantly does the damage. It seems daft to me when its the other way around.

A Tanker often sets up the game dynamics from which everyone else in the team should be able to build upon. Therefore it's only right that Tankers should know and understand how to bring out the best in all ATs and Powersets. Work with what you've got. Being able to tank something with a Kin but not a TA would be a failure, not on the Devs part but on the players part because as sure as eggs are eggs somebody somewhere is going to do their job better.

People do let themselves down when it comes to building and playing their characters offering very little due to apathy, lack of acquireable knowledge, lack of foresight and proactiveness.

A natural born leader deals with accountability and responsibility.

And there is an equal if not greater number of people who resent Tankers 'taking control', especially when the Tanker doesn't have the star and it's completely unsolicited. The Bossy Tank stereotype exists for a reason.


So, Tankers should be a crutch so bad players don't have to take responsibility for their own actions?

Sorry, no.

ONE Tanker should not be an aggro catch all. The situation above is why you take a second Tanker, or you kick the player being an idiot.


Those are qualities that come from a player, not a class, regardless of the AT they are playing.

The Tanker AT is NOT the defacto leader. Whoever forms the team is the leader, and they call the shots until you're told otherwise. You set your ego aside and work with the team. This isn't your show. It isn't all about the Tanker with the spotlight on you. Don't act like a control freak who needs to be the center of attention.


Furthermore, if you really want the Tanker to be the "Leader AT", then that's even more justification for their damage to not be crap. Superman, Optimus Prime, Cyclops, they're more powerful than their subordinates. They have the devastating power and it comes with the burden to use it wisely that teaches them responsibility, thus the mantle of leadership falls to them. CoH Tankers have the burden, but not the power. If you think they're intended to carry the team, they need to start being treated better than aggro monkeys. If they're going to be leaders, they need to be someone to follow, not low damage decoys.



.

Completely agree with this post. If we were to take a Vote; I LOVE Tankers, they are not out of balance in the game, in fact, if anything (dare I say it), Tanks are a bit overpowered.... uhm, nope they are just fine. Thanks

For JB, if you really want to see a low damage AT, try soloing a defender who has not +dmg or -res buffs/debuffs. Now that is slow.

I'm not sure popularity proves much regardless. In terms of general mmo's I don't really think the statement that "less people play tanks" or "less people play healers" to be all that much of a concern as it's pretty much universally true and in all cases does not actually reflect poor balancing.

The problem is more a matter that tanks/blasters/defenders fit into the traditional mmo holy trinity fairly firmly. And coh isn't a trinity game. You can succeed on most levels without a tank and/or without support. So the tank isn't as needed. So the tradeoff isn't as needed. Ie most games if I were to pick up a tank toon I'd expect to have to lead a bit and that my damage wouldn't be great but I'd be fulfilling a vital support role for my group. It appeals to some people.

In coh the second half isn't as much there, tanking doesn't feel as useful to your group in coh compared to the dozen or so mmo's I've played. If tanks need a fix though making them brutes isn't it. Erasing further the boundaries between the melee's solve nothing.

Either adjust the content so a tank is more useful.

or Make the tank more tanky. More able to hold aggro, more able to take damage, less weak to debuffs, better able to control mob movement. Those sorts of things.

Or you could of course apply the nerf stick as well. Kneecap brutes and scrappers ability to taunt. Remove taunt auras, remove taunt in brute attacks, etc. Then attack survivability, seperate and lower defense caps, resist caps. Limit buff stacking etc. Or you could buff a tank and start designing content that would lay waste to brutes.

TLDR: Low popularity proves nothing about balance. Tanks and support are traditionally less played in any rpg or mmo you can think of.

Making a tank into a brute is imbalanced on the low end and just homogeneity in general.

The best thing they could do for tanks is make them more tankish and desirable/useful for terms in comparison to their brothers which means more like a tank not more like a brute. It's probably easier to vigorously beat the entire system with the nerf stick to do this though, so I wouldn't expect drastic changes.

http://wiki.cohtitan.com/wiki/Damage

Under "Damage Scale by Archetype," somewhere in the middle.

Right, because Mercenaries are as amazing as bots/thugs/demons.

No, you are twisting things. They altered Stalkers to be closer to the original design goal; that is, the single-target damage kings and is still the lowest-armored melee class.

So, the question is what to do to Tankers to make them closer to the design goal, NOT what YOU are saying they should do. The only way I would agree about getting more damage for certain secondaries is by taking it apart. Let's start with Ice Melee and go from there.

Tankers will hopefully never be the freaking superman/juggernaut clones with plenty of damage and godlike survivability just so you can live your comic character dreams while saying 'to hell with balance.'

If that was the case the changes wouldn't have increased the Stalker HP cap and they would have made them more dependent on Assassin Strike and less able at scrapping after the AS.

But doing that would have been stupid, like giving more survivability to Tankers. They're already the most survivable AT in the game and survivability is the last thing giving them problems. Their problem is being one trick ponies that sacrifice far too much for aggro control when we don't really need a supreme aggro control AT because we've got two other ATs, three if you count Masterminds, intended to share aggro and tanking duties. Pushing Tankers further into that niche wont help them.


.

That still doesn't mean that MMs as a whole need help. You'll be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks mercs and ninjas are doing well compared to their cousins.

That wouldnt be an AT issue though. That would be a powerset issue.

This inspired me, what if Tanks were given a solo damage buff like Defenders, then as they team the damage buff is replaced by a Leadership-esque team buff?

Call it Mantle of Leadership like you said. The buff could be a combined Assault-Tactics that extended to the whole team/league and stacked as other Tankers are added.

Even better, what if the buff adjusted based on the team makeup like Kheldian's cosmic balance works? On a high DPS team Mantle of Leadership swaps to +Def/+Res & Tactics, on a low DPS team, Mantle of Leadership swaps to +Dam & Tactics. It could even extend a tiny bit of mez protection for the squishies.

I'm not sure if that's possible, but that would definitely make teams appreciate the Tank (and especially multiple tanks) more and when solo would give the Tank a bit more damage.

They increased the Stalker HP cap because there were sets with +HP bonuses that werent being used, due to hitting the HP cap with Accolades and Set Bonuses (or you could look at it as not using Set Bonuses).

It was basically the change that helped Regen, IA, and WP. The increased HP cap didn't really do much for the other Stalker secondaries. I believe my NIN Stalker got a whole additional 10 HP

And yes, there is the Cold Domination users who can increase everyone's HPs, but that's one class out of many support classes that can do that.

And I've agreed with some of the things you've said.

Increase that Damage Cap on Tankers. Lower the resists on Brutes.

The one change helps the outlier cases of reaching the damage cap on their own (being teamed with a KIN should not be a factor) without actually upping a Tankers damage (except now people can go "I'll build for +DMG") and it puts Tankers at the level of more survival (higher HP and higher Resist values).

the problem with that, would be that JB is hitting the Tanker Damage Cap solo already. Giving additional +DMG solo wouldn't help him.