Before the rumors start

Tankers were designed for a game that no longer exists.



.

Bingo, As much as i love my Ice/Fire/Soul Tank. It's now one of my slowest Chars in terms of doing anything form Solo'ing Mobs or living without Hib. My Masterminds Scrappers Brutes all do what my tank can do and do it faster.

My Bots/Dark Tanked Reichs in Cuda TF for a 4 man team (we won and beat the "ever lasting ambush") it was fun up to the point where it was just reichs, i put provoke on auto and eat at my desk to watch the show.

The funny thing about incarnate content is that while it definitely made the problems with tankers bigger, the incarnate powers themselves also made me more satisfied with my tankers thanks to the damage options.

I'd agree with this playing solo or on small teams; it's certainly nice not to crawl through solo content to the same extent on my Inv/SS. I think the issue is more on larger teams and Trials.

Trial content and the removal of the blue/red barrier has blurred the lines for the melee AT's; the introduction of iTrial content has also produced a game environment that the Tanker AT was never really designed for.

We're now in a situation where, on a large team with an arbitrary number of defensive and offensive buffs, you have two thematically similar AT's where one is obviously more desirable, one being capable of dealing far, far more damage with only a slight to moderate reduction in survivability due to differences in damage and hitpoint caps. That, I believe, is bad design.

We also have a situation, conversely, where in non-trial content, IO'd out Tankers can and do solo +3/x8 maps in comparative safety (in fairness, all melee toons can to some degree approach this now). Also factor in that we don't really want to mess a great deal with the SO-only and early-game crowd.

What I personally would like to see tested, at the least (ymmv):

1. Apologies for the Cognitive Dissonance, but I agree with Johnny Butane that the Tanker damage cap should be raised. That's all I agree with, if it makes you feel any better.

On a team with an arbitrary amount of defensive and offensive buffs, Tankers and Brutes should offer a fair tradeoff between survivability and damage: Brutes a little more damage, Tankers a little more survivability, instead of the frankly easy choice between them currently. I'd like to see some play-testing to see if this is doable without imbalancing Trial gameplay.

2. A Vigilance-style tradeoff between damage and hitpoints. Yes, you heard me (apologies again for the dissonance). It makes thematic sense and theoretically might address soloing and balance issues. I'd like to see the idea toyed with and experimented with, at the very least.

I'm agnostic on the whole issue of increased aggro caps and threat generation; again, test it and see what happens.

What I wouldn't like to see is some some of gameplay gimmick added as a crutch for the problem. Which immediately makes me think that's exactly what will happen.



-Captain Aegis aka @Captain Valiant EU

That was kind of the point of this thread. I didn't want to see a bunch of threads popping up saying things like, "The Devs are looking at Tankers next!"

Actually I see not only is there a problem with tanks but also for most melee ATs out there, BAF u get 3 rings your held, trying to stop the inmates from escaping while running back and forth. LAM crates/capsules trying to target them when a range AT has them scattered, Maurader doing his big attack where the melee has to break off to not to get killed, MoM the purple rings may I say more? Keys getting disintegrated as u fight anti, his big attack thats melee, TPN getting marked for death while fighting Maelstorm, UG getting close and then getting confused on the last AV, fighting the leach infested War walkers, and a few other spots, Mag getting to close to neo pendragon, chaseing after cim, the final fight where he dose his electric attack, I have yet done the DD but all the others it seems to me that the ranged AT has a bigger advantage then any of the melee toons out there.

That's one of the more discouraging, yet true posts I have read regarding melee ATs in general now.

so true...and thats why we need a new inherit that doesnt break every issue and to do whatthey did with blasters.make sure some of the "lesser" ones are more up to par with the "popular ones" like the blaster updates via the snipe and non snipe powersets.

but im willling to bet that wont happen.

then theyll make a buncha changes and have a bunch of non tank players play it in closed beta who are only there to see a dev online. then itll go to open beta where nothing got done so it can be changed all over again and then it still wont be right cause they wasted too much time in closed beta to meet their deadline.

Actually, out of all that, the only ones my toons ever had issues with were...(1)Maelstrom's Marked for Death...that's essentially a one shot death...(2) Anti's oblit beam on low HP toons.

Rest of it is a non issue...for my toons personally...just have to pay attention same as others...

That is what I mean where u have to break contact of them where a range toon can still attack. If your are melee with no range attacks and u are constantly running away from the big attacks unlike in reg content then u will be either 1 shotted or come close to dieing where 1 more small hit will take u out and u can not heal in time. I have been there on a tank with max res and still died with in 2 hits.

I used to consider this an issue. For about 5 minutes. Then I remembered that those ranged characters are all dying way more often than my melee toons do. I'd rather be inconvenienced with running out of melee every once in a while than dying more often because I just don't have the survival numbers.

Yes, those melee oriented attacks affect you more. But seriously, you'd just be spamming melee attacks and worrying about nothing the whole time if they weren't there. Is that challenging in the slightest? The only one that I've found to be over the top ridiculous is Tyrants AoE in the Mag trial. And only because it comes up way too often in my opinion. Everything else allows plenty of time to do some work before stepping out of harm's way.

If they make Tanker changes, whatever they do, I hope that it's actually for Tankers.

Because the "Blaster changes" announced yesterday are mostly not about Blasters, but all of the ranged damage sets.

So the "Tanker changes" better not amount to shuffling around stuff for all the melee ATs and every two-bit Assault/Manipulation set that gets some of the same melee attacks.


.

That's somewhat contestable. I don't think you'll see a large rush of Scrapper trying to squeeze in a sniper PPP. And I doubt that those changes would benefit Scrappers nearly as well as it would for Blasters.

Are Blasters the only ones benefiting? No. But it's going to greatly increase they're performance and purpose.

If Tankers get any attention and it makes a marked improvement in their function and playability, then I don't really care if other ATs are able to use some of those changes as well. I'm not so selfish.

Not really. There was nothing inherently "about blasters" in the changes.

The ranged attack changes benefit:

• Blasters
• Corrupters
• Defenders
• Dominators

The melee attack/control changes benefit:

• Blasters
• Dominators
• Masterminds

The big issue is that Incarnate content has basically removed the triumvirate of things that made tanks stand out amongst other ATs.

• Mez Protection: We now have completely unresistable mez.
• Damage resistance/defense: We now have completely unresistable autohit attacks
• High HP caps: Completely irrelevant in the face of monster attacks designed to "get around" one shot-code and "instakill" mechanics.

Other ATs have to deal with this too. Brutes and Scrappers have this to a lesser degree.


And yes, some of these affect other ATs besides. However, with the way Incarnate powers are constructed at the moment, they're arguably MORE durable now than they were previously, and aren't REALLY forced to change their play style (especially ranged ATs) the way melee toons are. They have the means to continue attacking from range in a continuous manner. Melee toons don't.


Melee toons, while marginally tougher against normal content, gain almost zero benefit (outside of added damage) from current Incarnate powers.


Going Melee Hybrid or Barrier Destiny on a tank doesn't toughen you up against unresistable crap patches or instakill.


Going Assault on a tank nets you very little damage increase (especially on Inv/SS which can nearly self-cap).


Going Clarion Destiny doesn't do a damn thing against unresistable mez in Sequestration. And since Tanks are, by definition, aggro magnets, it's several times more likely that any given Tank is going to get sequestered than it is for a ranged toon unless their damage output is absolutely outstanding in the group.

Basically, tanks in Incarnate trials are essentially reduced to third-rate scrappers with aggro management.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

Not even the survival power changes in their secondary?

First off, do keep in mind I said I don't mind if other AT's get *SOME* of those changes. Johnny's comment sounded like he felt he wanted changes that would ONLY affect Tankers. I'm just expressing that I don't see that as necessary.

I agree Tankers rolls have been reduced in the end-game, and it's something that needs to be addressed. I don't agree that they bring nothing, as I've seen Tanks surviving more than other ATs, but I don't think surviving more than other ATs is enough.

Mez protection in the end game has become meaningless for most Primaries when Fear and Confuse are being spammed in nearly every group. And yes, I think we could be made more durable in the end game WITH the added benefit of a higher aggro cap. We're being asked to Tank for bigger and bigger teams sometimes, so I think we should be able to control more aggro.

Higher Res caps, HP caps and Aggro Caps would be a good start IMO. I understand what you're saying about one-shot kills, but most of those are avoidable. You may not like the mechanic for avoiding them, but I don't think you're going to see a change in that mechanic.

Higher damage resistance caps are unlikely to happen. At the existing caps, a well build Tanker can already survive pretty much anything in the game that CAN be resisted. More survivability is simply the last thing Tankers need.

Aggro caps can't be changed depending on AT. They are a fixed value in the AI for everyone. Even if they could be, or with a workaround like invisible pseudopets, increasing aggro caps for Tankers actually makes additional Tankers less desirable for a team. The only reason to have more than one Tank now is to deal with adds and spill over. Having one Tanker that can do that themselves means there's less reason to have another.

The Tanker HP Cap, for the same reasons as the resistance caps, is also about as high as it ever should be. The best you could hope for is some Absorb given to Tankers inherently to help mitigate unresistable damage and such. But that is something they probably still don't need because the people who aren't playing Tankers aren't playing them because they lack survivability.

I have seen nobody, not one person, who seriously thinks that Tankers aren't tough enough. What I have seen, especially from people who don't play them, are numerous complaints and comments that Tankers are too slow, are boring and they lack damage. If one truly wants to make Tankers more popular, more fun for all players to play instead of just for the diehard niche fans of the AT, ignoring those complaints would be folly. Because everyone else isn't buying the 'extra-survivability-plus-aggro-control-at-the-cost-of-all-else' that the Tanker AT is currently selling.



.

Quite simply, no. Higher res and HP caps simply don't address the problem of unresistable damage and controls.

So the solution for ranged attackers is to simply change position and keep attacking.

The solution for melee attackers is to back off and COMPLETELY STOP CONTRIBUTING DAMAGE?

There's got to be some sort of middle ground in here.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

I don't get it, Johnny. If you're always saying Brutes are just as survivable as tanks but get more damage, how exactly is buffing tanker damage going to set them apart from Brutes? It seems to me it would only make them more similar to them. And if we're just making them more like Brutes, I don't see any rationale in how that will make people want to play them more.

Certainly buffing tanker mez protection in end-game content would do a lot for many Tankers. It's going to be something that makes a tank more unique. If other melee toons are more susceptible to Fear and Confuse than tankers, it does give an edge to the tanker AT.

I'll meet you in the middle and say a higher damage cap *may* be good. But that's about it, and I don't think it needs to be a huge raise either. 400% instead of 300% perhaps. But again, this isn't doing much to make a tanker stand out in end-game performance.

So, thinking about this a little bit, I'd suggest something more unique and more in tune with the team-support goal of the tanker and it's aggro control. And if you're correct that survival for tanks isn't needed, then perhaps this would be good.

Boadygaurd inherent:

Like the Mastermind mechanic, but in reverse. Make it a toggle free of endurance cost. Allow a percentage of damage being taken by up to 5 teamates in a certain range be diverted to you. The damage sent to you can be resisted or avoided according to your defense and resist numbers. Taking too much heat? Turn off the toggle.

The 5 teammate limit is only for your tank. So if a second tank is on the team, they too can mitigate damage for teammates, maybe even the same team members (stackable). A new unique mechanic is introduced that gives tankers something to bring to the team, and gives incentive for multiple tanks.

Oh, but Tanks do not receive the benefit of being guarded by other Tanks. I'd imagine that becoming overpowered.

As I said, a lot of that unresistable damage is avoidable. You may not like the mechanic that is used because you have to move out of melee, but I don't see those mechanics changing, and I doubt you'll get any devs attention about changing it.

The control issues, such as the ridiculous amount of Fear and Confuse in the end game are a problem, I'll agree. I think something could be done for tankers there. If anyone should be able to contribute to the team in a high-mez scenario, it should be tanks, IMO.

Many of these "Move out of melee range" attacks aren't that big of an issue. Either they don't happen that often that you're really having to move around that much, or they don't necessarily always hit you (Marked for Death does not appear over everyone in Melee). Personally, the only one I find to be over the top is in the Mag Trial.

That being said, even the inconvenience of having to move out of Melee isn't the worst thing in the world. Considering how many ranged toons I see face planting during trials, I don't personally feel they have that much of an advantage. YMMV, but I'd rather have to move every now and then than face plant more often from range. It's not like they're contributing a lot of damage from the ground.

How does making an AT that is already nigh unkillable even more nigh unkillable improve them in a meaningful way? Are people not playing Tankers because they die too much?

No. So why do they need to be tougher than they are when they're already the toughest?

And why do you think that if people aren't playing Tankers despite the fact that they're the toughest, that making them tougher will change their minds?


If by "more similar to Brutes" you mean popular and generally regarded as fun to play and not regarded as slow and boring, which is what seems to be the most common criticism about Tankers, then I don't think that's a bad thing.

Only if things like Fear and Confuse were huge problems for every other melee AT to begin with. They're not. They're rarely seen minor annoyances at worst, one not even shared uniformly by all power sets.

445% as opposed to the 300% it is currently.


Too griefable. No sensible person would ever turn on the toggle.

Counter suggestion: When a Tanker uses Taunt, he radiates a power to nearby teamates that grants them and the Tanker a small amount of Absorb. Does not stack, even from two different Tankers, but further taunting will refresh it.

Gives Tankers a reason to take Taunt for themselves, especially in the lower levels (because survival in the lower levels isn't as assured for a Tanker) and use it even when solo.



.

The main issue with this even on tanks, if there is no other tank or brute then the baddies will follow the tank when u try to move out of range. I have had that happen may times when i am tanking some times even when there was other ppl that could take the aggro for me. Especially in the BAF.