Quote:
As much as this would cause a huge amount of complaints, that does seem like it would be the more logical choice.
|
Originally Posted by PrincessDarkstar
Every post I read just makes me think Brutes need a good nerfing.
|
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
Quote:
Something like this came up during the coffee talk. I think, I'm not sure, it was regarding /Mental for Blasters and how Drain Psyche was already 'a little too good' and that's why Mental didn't get anything for the upcoming Blaster changes.|
Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
As much as this would cause a huge amount of complaints, that does seem like it would be the more logical choice.
|
The sentiment that seemed to be expressed for things like that was they understand exactly that we know something's OP, but that their current stance is that since it's been that way for so long, it's not worth nerfing and causing a disruption and complaints. In other words, they're not above bumping other things up a little, but they're not currently out to cut down any tall poppies.
.
I think they are just saying that to make a small segment of people feel better.
At the time they made /MM they nerfed PSW and were very clear they had "ZERO" problems nerfing "any" power they felt was out of line. I don't then buy the theory being bantered about, that they were somehow afraid to nerf DP because it would make people mad when they made more mad when they nerfed PSW and they did not seem to care who was mad about that at all.
Until I see a dev say "Yes I feel DP is OP'ed" I just cannot buy into the larger theory.
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
Quote:
You say 'they' as if it has always been the same people. People come, people go. A similar call that was made by someone once may not be made by whoever is in charge years later. Different philosophies, different POVs.|
Originally Posted by Darth_Khasei
I think they are just saying that to make a small segment of people feel better.
At the time they made /MM they nerfed PSW and were very clear they had "ZERO" problems nerfing "any" power they felt was out of line. I don't then buy the theory being bantered about, that they were somehow afraid to nerf DP because it would make people mad when they made more mad when they nerfed PSW and they did not seem to care who was mad about that at all. Until I see a dev say "Yes I feel DP is OP'ed" I just cannot buy into the larger theory. |
As was said even during that coffee talk: the devs currently don't want a DPS meter in game, but they know some people in the office would dig it. Years from now, one of those people could be in charge and overturn that decision. Energy Melee is a perfect example. Last time it was looked at, it was nerfed hard. Now the current guard is excitedly talking about improving it.
In other words, things change.
.
Well lets see Tanks res max is 90%, then bump that up to 95%, then bump up the dam like was mentioned before, there problem solved, leave the brute the way it is
Okay, just speculating and trying to think this through properly, lets assume for a moment implementing a Vigilance-style trade-off plus a damage cap hike as described earlier; call it Gauntlet 2.0 for now. I would assume/hope it would have some of the following features:
-1. As with Vigilance, we're talking a damage boost while solo, with the boost decreasing with team size, this inherent however being offset with increasing hit-points
- 2. A simple trade-off between damage modifier and hit-points only: messing with Resistance or Defence values would over-complicate things, both in terms of coding and balancing
- 3. The trade-off at solo would have to be similar to Brutes in terms of average damage output and durability; if res/def values are still at Tanker levels, then HP might need to be slightly lower than Brutes
- 4. The trade-off should probably be front-loaded: the first person added to the team should increase HP/decrease damage by the greatest amount
Back of the envelope suggestion:
- Damage cap raised (I'll go with JB's 445% for now unless someone wants to dispute it)
- While solo: damage modifier equivalent to Brutes at 50% fury; HP at 85% of Brutes; Res and Def unchanged
- 2 team members: damage modifier equivalent to Brutes at 20% fury; HP at 100% of Brutes; Res/Def unchanged
- A small increase in HP and decrease in damage for each team member after that until the team is at 8 members, where the Tanker is at current levels.
Alternatively, just the damage cap raise alongside a more conservative damage boost/HP debuff when solo, perhaps.
-Captain_Aegis aka @Captain Valiant EU
Quote:
And things say the same ie. DP after two look overs, one old one new.
|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
In other words, things change.
|
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
Quote:
If anything.
|
Originally Posted by LSK
Well lets see Tanks res max is 90%, then bump that up to 95%, then bump up the dam like was mentioned before, there problem solved, leave the brute the way it is
|
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
Quote:
The day before the coffee talk, Arbiter Hawk told me exactly the same thing he said about DP during the coffee talk: Drain Psyche is a power far too powerful that they would never let people have today, but for that specific power it would also be too much trouble to nerf for too little benefit.|
Originally Posted by Darth_Khasei
I think they are just saying that to make a small segment of people feel better.
|
Arbiter Hawk had no particular reason to lie to me in that context.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
The fact that Brutes have lower *actual* defensive numbers for Tankers separate from their maximum caps is something you seem to think is irrelevant, but I can assure you the devs do not. The moment you start talking about the point at which tankers and brutes are living consistently at their defensive caps, you've just cut your own legs out from under you, because the devs interpret that situation as outside the normal range of game balance.|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
No, it doesn't because Brutes.
It's as simple as that. Brutes have the same resistance caps as Tankers and just 10% shy the same Max HP caps. Fury doesn't suddenly shut off and their damage buff cap suddenly shrink when a Brute gets his survivability above a certain point. Brutes don't have to sacrifice or trade off so why should Tankers? |
I would strongly advise you to come up with arguments that don't involve that position, while the devs are responsive to actually hearing them. Kicking Tankers down the road to address Blasters first is actually one of the best things that could have happened to Tankers, because it implies the devs want to do things that required more time and/or more tought than they had available and decided to spend more time on it. As I was telling blasters for months that would be the best time to sharpen your arguments and tune them for the devs, who are the only people that matter when it comes to scoring points with arguments.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
What are your thoughts on Tanker balancing, if you don't mind my asking, Arcana? At this point we've heard from people saying that they need more defensive or offensive capability, better threat/aggro control etc. I'm just curious as to where you stand. |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The fact that Brutes have lower *actual* defensive numbers for Tankers separate from their maximum caps is something you seem to think is irrelevant, but I can assure you the devs do not. The moment you start talking about the point at which tankers and brutes are living consistently at their defensive caps, you've just cut your own legs out from under you, because the devs interpret that situation as outside the normal range of game balance.
I would strongly advise you to come up with arguments that don't involve that position, while the devs are responsive to actually hearing them. Kicking Tankers down the road to address Blasters first is actually one of the best things that could have happened to Tankers, because it implies the devs want to do things that required more time and/or more tought than they had available and decided to spend more time on it. As I was telling blasters for months that would be the best time to sharpen your arguments and tune them for the devs, who are the only people that matter when it comes to scoring points with arguments. |
-Captain_Aegis aka @Captain Valiant EU
A lot of people forget that the whole game doesn't revovle around incarnate content.
Even still, Tankers need to be looked at. Right now Brutes, Scrappers and even Crab Spiders reach Tanker level efficiency. A committed 'tank' isn't really what this game needs anymore. Even at lower levels where incarnates cannot foul up balance, I have trouble justifying bringing my tanker to Positron 1/2 when my Brute can do essentially the same thing and then some assuming a quasi-intelligent team.
Tankers really only need 1 or 2 changes. Perhaps turn the tanker into a meatshielding support class as the Brute has taken the role of 'take damage, deal damage' away essentially. Tankers already have their tier 1 attack reducing resistance. Maybe it's time to consider similar effects on their other attacks?
TL
R Shift tanker from pure meatshield (which is obsolete now-a-days) into melee-support role.
Whining about everything since 2006.
Ammo switching for Dual Pistols was my idea:
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=135484
While I'm not Arcanaville by any means, I'd like to take a "shot" at it Aegis.
I'd like to see a change to Tanks that would make them less "redundant" in the general population's eye. Even if it's in a small way, I'd like for Tanks to be force multipliers. In the past I've advocated that a small percentage of bruising stacked between Tanks. I could also see some other de-buff that Tanks could stack between themselves.
Throwing darts at the board to see if something sticks.....
Come show your resolve and fight my brute!
Tanks: Gauntlet, the streak breaker and you!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PapaSlade
Rangle's right....this is fun.
|
Quote:
I don't think there's a "balancing" problem with Tankers. Brutes themselves are an outlier in many ways, but comparing to other peer archetypes in general I don't see very many archetype-wide numerical problems.|
Originally Posted by Captain_Aegis
What are your thoughts on Tanker balancing, if you don't mind my asking, Arcana? At this point we've heard from people saying that they need more defensive or offensive capability, better threat/aggro control etc. I'm just curious as to where you stand.
|
I think the larger problem with Tankers is that there are too many melee archetypes all crowded into a small functional box, particularly Scrappers, Brutes, and Tankers. In the long run, while no solution will be a perfect one, the best thing I think that could happen would be for the devs to think about modifying Scrappers and Tankers to put some distance between them and Brutes. And given both what I think would best benefit the archetypes in general and what the current dev team seems to think in terms of how they approach balancing, I would try to carve out a unique playstyle option for tankers that neither Brutes nor Scrappers can really leverage, even if performance-wise they are similar (with the same powersets and the same melee archetype structure, they are always going to be).
So the question for me is really: what should Tankers do uniquely different than other archetypes, including melee archetypes, and how should they be constructed to deliver that.
The way I see it, Tankers advantages should start on their defenses, and the fact they should be able to get the best defenses at the lowest cost. I think their defensive strength itself is more or less fine in general, but there's lots of room to improve them in terms of their cost.
Defenses cost endurance. Even with inherent Stamina, they can cost a lot. If a tanker can't run his toggles, or runs his toggles and that eats into his ability to do anything else, those toggles have a burden I don't think they should have to that degree. That's exacerbated by the fact that the tanker damage mod in effect means every tanker kill costs more endurance than a similar scrapper or brute kill. Their lower damage modifier penalizes them once in terms of lower DPS: I don't think it should do so twice in terms of also significantly lower DPE. I'd do something so that in effect Tankers could run their defenses mostly without significant endurance cost, whether that be through an endurance discount inherent or bonus recovery or lowered power costs or whatever. I'd also add a little more so their effective DPE was higher: comparable to scrapper and brute DPE in absolute terms.
I also think that in the same way I see Blasters as offensive specialists not just damage specialists, and "offense" has a lot more meaning than just points of damage, I see Tankers as aggro and defensive specialists but that doesn't necessarily mean taunt and higher resistances. Squishies can be protected by defender bubbles, or controller controls. Why would they want to be protected by Tankers? And I come back to a strange problem with tankers that goes back years to a conversation I had with The_Foo and Tankers: the most dangerous place to be in a team is standing next to the tanker. While drawing maximum aggro, he's probably bringing down a ton of attacks on himself, and those attacks include AoEs. You could be vaporized standing "behind" the tank. The best place to be is very far away from the tank. That doesn't fit with the concept of the tanker protecting anyone.
At the time, I suggested a reverse bodyguard-like effect for tankers where anyone standing within a certain radius of the tank got a certain amount of protection, sort of like how mastermind bodyguard works but in reverse (the suggestion also predates masterminds and CoV, so it wasn't called "reverse bodyguard" initially).
Today, I might consider a different idea that combines new mechanics with a way to play off of Brutes. Brutes generate fury as they are hit or attack, and fury buffs offense. The opposite effect for tankers would be as tankers are hit or attack, they buff their own defense. But their own defenses are already designed to be strong enough to tank, so that doesn't make as much sense or is as useful as Fury. But an alternative is this: for each attack the tanker uses he buffs his surrounding team mates with absorb shields. What's more, the strength of the shield rises the closer to the tanker you are.
In this case, the tanker is defending team mates by attacking, and its safer to be closer to the tanker than farther away, to a point. Its a different way to protect teammates than defender buffs or controller controls, and its an active mechanism: it rewards attacking, and the reward is something that doesn't just overbuff the tanker.
I don't mention that to say that's exactly what I think Tankers need. Rather, what I think they need is something unique, and something that provides players with a unique playstyle reason to play them, and that provides a unique contribution to teams. That might work, that might not be palatable to other players. But the core concept is to add unique gameplay, not necessarily higher numbers, although of course in some cases certain numbers can be higher to implement the unique gameplay.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Pointing out endurance gave me an idea for a relatively quick suggestion. (On top of the other end-game fixes.) and that would be to have something similiar to Beginner's Luck to tanker's endurance costs.
Leveling a tanker is quite a slow process, especially solo, mostly because taking all the toggles without SOs or enough end redux makes putting out solid damage chains difficult. If tankers had a decreasing end redux as they leveled up (perhaps dissappearing at 20, just before SOs become widely available.). Then it would help reduce the overall "lackluster" feel of low level tankers.
Quote:
They could do something similar to SoA's Conditioning, not that I'm suggesting they do it.
|
Originally Posted by Flints
Pointing out endurance gave me an idea for a relatively quick suggestion. (On top of the other end-game fixes.) and that would be to have something similiar to Beginner's Luck to tanker's endurance costs.
Leveling a tanker is quite a slow process, especially solo, mostly because taking all the toggles without SOs or enough end redux makes putting out solid damage chains difficult. If tankers had a decreasing end redux as they leveled up (perhaps dissappearing at 20, just before SOs become widely available.). Then it would help reduce the overall "lackluster" feel of low level tankers. |
Throwing darts at the board to see if something sticks.....
Come show your resolve and fight my brute!
Tanks: Gauntlet, the streak breaker and you!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PapaSlade
Rangle's right....this is fun.
|
Quote:
Problem with that is that a tank is not the only one with end issues, all of the ATs I play have that same going on.
|
Originally Posted by Flints
Pointing out endurance gave me an idea for a relatively quick suggestion. (On top of the other end-game fixes.) and that would be to have something similiar to Beginner's Luck to tanker's endurance costs.
Leveling a tanker is quite a slow process, especially solo, mostly because taking all the toggles without SOs or enough end redux makes putting out solid damage chains difficult. If tankers had a decreasing end redux as they leveled up (perhaps dissappearing at 20, just before SOs become widely available.). Then it would help reduce the overall "lackluster" feel of low level tankers. |
[QUOTE=Arcanaville;4285397]The moment you start talking about the point at which tankers and brutes are living consistently at their defensive caps, you've just cut your own legs out from under you, because the devs interpret that situation as outside the normal range of game balance.
So +0x1 Radios are now outside the normal range of game balance?
.
[QUOTE=Johnny_Butane;4285766]
Quote:
Brutes can now run at perma soft-cap and perma-hard cap resistance by themselves now? This is what we're talking about, Johnny. You constantly change your position depending on how the argument is going.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The moment you start talking about the point at which tankers and brutes are living consistently at their defensive caps, you've just cut your own legs out from under you, because the devs interpret that situation as outside the normal range of game balance.
So +0x1 Radios are now outside the normal range of game balance? |
Brutes CANNOT be as tough as Tankers by themselves. They can be tough enough, but the Tanker will always be tougher given the same slotting. But if you start talking about always having a certain buff set with you, or several buff sets with you, then you're starting to add in variables that the Devs don't expect to be normal. Having A buffer with you isn't abnormal. ALWAYS having that buffer with you is. And on Leagues or other large-team scenarios, where there are a lot of buffs going on, most people will admit that there is a problem with anything BUT the buffing classes. So those are out, too.
So talk about normal scenarios that aren't ridiculous, and we can make some progress, here. At 0/+1, the Brute isn't as tough as a Tanker. Both will steamroll that content, though.
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
wow ya know i actually posted something on this subject in a couple other threads especially the synapse corner. Anyway with scraps,stalkers and brutes now able to take alpha like tanks ,the tank now becomes absolete around lvl 35 and 40. this much is pretty much fact. Incarnate trials Brutes outnumber tanks usually 3 to 1 on average. and well i like to run alot of Mo "insert name what tf you like" tf runs its become harder now to blend a team..i can do a ton a damage solo mentality can screw up a master real easy.
Tanks have no Damage, tanks were made to hold aggro with moderate damage output only. The trade was,and always has been resist and def bonus. Brutes could out damage tanks before incarnates but they loose resist, def whatever. So in essence brutes got more damage(quicker Fury) bonus stalkers and scraps more damage bonus...tanks what did we get more resist bonus,,,,yeah like that helps...we needed more resist for ummm what? But a tanks luck a being next,naw we prolly be the last on the list
Quote:
This I don't disagree with.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I think the larger problem with Tankers is that there are too many melee archetypes all crowded into a small functional box, particularly Scrappers, Brutes, and Tankers.
|
Quote:
| And given both what I think would best benefit the archetypes in general and what the current dev team seems to think in terms of how they approach balancing, I would try to carve out a unique playstyle option for tankers that neither Brutes nor Scrappers can really leverage, even if performance-wise they are similar (with the same powersets and the same melee archetype structure, they are always going to be). |
The former, I assure you many players would disagree with, myself vehemently, and the latter I don't think will happen with the suggestions you make further down.
Quote:
| I'd do something so that in effect Tankers could run their defenses mostly without significant endurance cost, whether that be through an endurance discount inherent or bonus recovery or lowered power costs or whatever. I'd also add a little more so their effective DPE was higher: comparable to scrapper and brute DPE in absolute terms. |
If ALL Scrappers, Brutes and Tankers were currently facing dire endurance woes that seriously hindered their ability to fight, then I could maybe get behind a suggestion like this. But that's not the situation. The situation is that they're not, that blue inspirations exist and that there are already powers like Consume, Conserve Power and Energize and you're doing me no great service by making them more 'skippable' and less meaningful by handing out end discounts to everyone that I don't think are even needed.
It also comes back to what the devs said in the coffee talk about "fun". I have a hard time seeing anyone playing a Tank and going "Oh man! I'm discounting so much end right now! Woot!" If people wont play Tankers because the perception is that they're slow, boring, and low damage now, then slow, boring, low damage with a full blue bar isn't going to sell them on the AT.
Quote:
| for each attack the tanker uses he buffs his surrounding team mates with absorb shields. What's more, the strength of the shield rises the closer to the tanker you are. |
Ultimately, as long as the damage cap gets fixed, I don't really mind what Tankers get, but, I would think it needs to be flashy and add some pizzazz to the AT. Something that makes people think Tankers are badass (and I'd be hard pressed to call ineffectual decoys/turtles, even ones with boundless endurance, badass). I'd also have to insist that whatever Tankers get is a boon to Tankers, as opposed to a boon to everyone else; ie, everyone BUT the Tanker are the ones really benefiting. Otherwise it's like the d-bag who gives you a "present" of donating a dollar to a charity in your name for your birthday gift.
.
Quote:
I agree that all the AT's should bring something unique to the table in terms of game mechanics. However, I consider this a different argument: saying that there should be a fair and enjoyable tradeoff in offense versus defence for ATs is not the same as saying that they should simply be tweaked versions of one another. |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I don't mention that to say that's exactly what I think Tankers need. Rather, what I think they need is something unique, and something that provides players with a unique playstyle reason to play them, and that provides a unique contribution to teams. That might work, that might not be palatable to other players. But the core concept is to add unique gameplay, not necessarily higher numbers, although of course in some cases certain numbers can be higher to implement the unique gameplay.
|
Much of the rhetoric over the Tanker vs Brute question comes simply from the fact that they are thematically similar ATs(identical, really - they are two sides to the comic book "Brick"), but one is noticeably more useful, well regarded and popular, not just in high-level play. The rather arbitrarily high level of defensive buffing available at that level plus high damage caps, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, makes a mockery of Tankers by comparison. This is a separate, but not mutually exclusive, issue to how "unique" they are.
I'm also just not convinced that there is any sort of gameplay "gimmick" (forgive the term) that would narrow the gap in estimation between the two in the (admittedly narrow) parameters of iTrial and high level play. There's no shortage of survivability buffs already offered by the other AT's - having Tankers provide them in some form would have little effect, I believe, in making Tankers more popular or the game in general in any way more enjoyable to play (and that is, ultimately what we should be concerned over).
It -might- have an effect on lower level or generic team content, but I'm far from convinced this is the case; this isn't a game where defensive buffs are usually in short supply, even on a standard PuG. This is also where Tanker's actually need the least help - there's little wrong with Tankers in standard play, other than the fact you'll be hard pressed to get an invite to a team if there's one already there, as players usually favour more damage or offensive buffs.
Other gimmicks, such as AI-manipulation mechanics for Tankers would probably be impractical (you doubtless have a better idea on this than I do). Endurance buffs would be completely unnoticeable post level 25. Also, the fact that the solo experience for Tankers is slower and for many players, tedious, would be unaffected.
-Captain_Aegis aka @Captain Valiant EU
The way things are going I think perhaps Brutes although they should aggro cap 17 might be better to only cap 10 with taunt maximum, same with Scrappers. They can all still aggro cap 17 just not all with taunt factored. They're pretty much less survivable than Tankers who I expect to cap 17 with taunt.
Also and I am probably already sounding harsh on the Brute AT (of which I do have at 50, incarnated and all that jazz on a second account even) but when it comes to high ranks like AVs their gauntlet duration could be better resisted by AVs. Allowing Tanks who think like Tanks better control over Brutes that think like Scrappers (blanket thinking).
He will honor his words; he will definitely carry out his actions. What he promises he will fulfill. He does not care about his bodily self, putting his life and death aside to come forward for another's troubled besiegement. He does not boast about his ability, or shamelessly extol his own virtues. - Sima Qian.
Quote:
What do you mean in your first paragraph?|
Originally Posted by New Dawn
The way things are going I think perhaps Brutes although they should aggro cap 17 might be better to only cap 10 with taunt maximum, same with Scrappers. They can all still aggro cap 17 just not all with taunt factored. They're pretty much less survivable than Tankers who I expect to cap 17 with taunt.
Also and I am probably already sounding harsh on the Brute AT (of which I do have at 50, incarnated and all that jazz on a second account even) but when it comes to high ranks like AVs their gauntlet duration could be better resisted by AVs. Allowing Tanks who think like Tanks better control over Brutes that think like Scrappers (blanket thinking). |
As for your second paragraph...if said Brute is just "blanket thinking"...which I'm assuming it means just mindlessly attacking...than the Tanker/tank who thinks like a tank should have better control through their use of Taunt. No need to lower Brutes inherent taunt duration.
The only way for a Tanker (assuming they have and use Taunt) to lose agro to a Brute...is if that Brute is built for tanking as well (meaning the have Taunt and use it).
I don't see why Tankers have a problem with this. You picked the Tanker AT to have the best inherent survivability and assumingly to have the ability to protect your team. If some Brute that is also built for tanking takes some of your agro, why do you care? If they can survive the agro (assuming they can or they shouldn't have taken Taunt) then why does it bother you?
The only thing I can think of is because said Tanker didn't choose the Tanker AT to protect his team when needed...they choose it to be the center of attention.
I don't believe Brutes need to be nerfed for the Tanker AT to stick out...I think the Tanker AT needs "buffed" in a way that (as someone previously mentioned) makes them more unique.
Every post I read just makes me think Brutes need a good nerfing.
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune!