Tanks vs Brutes
By
Aett_Thorn,
Posted on: 2012-07-30 23:26 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
I always thought their roles was pretty well defined overall. In the past it was pretty concrete when COH/COV had thier respective exclusive ATs. Now that they are all mixed u more commonly, the roles have becoming closer to each other but still defined not to mention the style of play seems to be different enough. Scrappers, high burst damage attacks can take down enemies swiftly but may get overwhelmed in too much aggro. Most scraps I come across rather kill as many as they can while the brute and or tank asborb the aggro. The roles between the tank and brute seems a little blurred when IOs come into play but then again I thought the game was balanced around SOs with IOs being extra toppings on the cake. As far as roles, the brute seems to fall somewhere between the scapper and tank on the spectrum. Not quite a scrapper, but good damage and higher hp, but not quite tank level on hp and armor traits but tank have overall lower damage (at least once the fury bar gets going.)
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Ironically, the same zeal I see being applied to Blaster changes implies that any changes to the melee archetypes would not likely be conservative ones. That's of some concern because Blasters were so far out of whack it was practically impossible to overbuff them, or cottage rule slam them. But that's not remotely the case for the melee archetypes, for which making a dramatic change to one could easily start a holy war across all of them.
The stalker changes were pretty deft not just because of their numerical benefits, but also because complaints about them across the melee archetypes was minimal - at least as minimal as such things ever get on the forums. But changes that homogenize brutes and scrappers, or radically shift the roles of brutes, scrappers, and tankers, are inherently dangerous in that regard. |
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard.  Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
And in truth I've seen some Scrappers who quite happily would drink in the attention. In particular a certain Shield Scrapper I paired with a few months ago for a few weeks. She was godly in her ability to disassemble +4/8 spawns in her 30s. |
Originally Posted by Werner
It wasn't an evasion. It was an example. I would LOVE to have simply had a taunt aura on my Scrapper. If they gave it to me, I'd switch back. Believe me, my Scrapper can survive the attention, and I'm hardly the only one. I rerolled as a Brute primarily out of frustration with runners.
|
So consider the question withdrawn.
Quote:
| What I do NOT hear on the Scrapper forum are complaints about getting too much attention on the secondaries that DO have a taunt aura. Oh, I'm sure people have complained before, but I just don't see it. Perhaps it's a more common complaint outside of the forum. I don't talk to people in game, so I don't know. |
Quote:
| Of course not. On the other hand, who could argue against raising their cap if they can't hit it? Either caps matter or they don't. If they don't matter, who cares if we raise or lower them? If they DO matter, then it's a legitimate point for a balance discussion. |
Quote:
| All that said, I'm far from convinced that Scrappers, Brutes or Tankers are out of balance. My personal hatred of runners is not an argument that Brutes are better in some objective sense that calls for rebalancing. I don't mind balance discussions; I just don't have a strong feeling on this one, and if anything is done, I think the devs should tread lightly. |
Under construction
Quote:
I've actually not played or Mids'ed or number crunched any Stalkers, so I personally have no point of comparison. A Stalker might be next on the list once I finish leveling my two current Brutes, as a couple friends tell me they're great now, and that I'd like them.
|
Originally Posted by Erratic
Truthfully I am somewhat surprised that Scrapper's aren't giving the hairy eyeball to Stalkers. . .something which at first glance seems to me to be better grounded than Tankers continually and without end doing the same to Brutes.
|
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Quote:
I put the emphasis in there for you...you've said some intelligent things...but I believe the position you hold on this issue is likely right up there with the smartest things you've said so long as I have read your posts.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Ironically, the same zeal I see being applied to Blaster changes implies that any changes to the melee archetypes would not likely be conservative ones. That's of some concern because Blasters were so far out of whack it was practically impossible to overbuff them, or cottage rule slam them. But that's not remotely the case for the melee archetypes, for which making a dramatic change to one could easily start a holy war across all of them.
The stalker changes were pretty deft not just because of their numerical benefits, but also because complaints about them across the melee archetypes was minimal - at least as minimal as such things ever get on the forums. But changes that homogenize brutes and scrappers, or radically shift the roles of brutes, scrappers, and tankers, are inherently dangerous in that regard. |
Quote:
|
Erratic Truthfully I am somewhat surprised that Scrapper's aren't giving the hairy eyeball to Stalkers. . .something which at first glance seems to me to be better grounded than Tankers continually and without end doing the same to Brutes. |
[facetious]
Recently, I have simply come to the conclusion that tanker forum regulars, en masse, (with some notable exceptions) want all tanks to be like Juggernaut or Colossus or the Hulk from comic books, because there is no other logic for this tomfoolery that some of them think is a legitimate complaint. Tanks are FINE, and there is nothing wrong with them. I think most of them believe there should be one melee class, a tank that does scrapper damage and has ranged attacks and self buffs to the resist/defense/damage caps and has debuffs on every attack...oops...guess they don't need blasters/defenders/corruptors/doms/controllers either...we'll just have one class and call it TANKMAGE...but alot of them would likely want the caps for that one buffed too because AVs don't melt quick enough when they hit the "SMASH ALL" button. [/facetious]
Currently Playing:
Rage King - SS/Regen Brute (50+3)
Soulfire Darkness - Dark/Fire Tank (50+2)
Deaths Final Embrace - Kat/Dark Brute (50+3)
ULTIMATE REGEN GUIDE I22
I've posted this several times in the past but here's my fix:
Increase Brute max hp to Tanker level
Increase Kheldian max hp to tanker level, increase resistances to 90%
No changes to Brutes besides the HP buff
Tankers now have different "stances" and forms that give buffs and debuffs to their attacks. Things like Mez/Holds, Stuns, -Regen, -Resistance (Like Bruising), etc. The idea behind Tankers is that they are a debuff melee -- Being a "good" AT they hold back their brute power (To not cause a ton of damage) but they focus it with such control that they smash an opponent's defenses. (Defenses being resistance, defense, toggles, regen, etc)
Tankers also bring battlecries. These are the buff sides of things. These are AOE cries that do things like, +4 MEZ protection all, 1 min duration, 1 min CD, only one shout can be up at a time. +25% more damage, +10% to hit buff, +20% Recharge, etc. -- This is a new tanker inherent when one is clicked they all go on cooldown.
So basically Tankers can bring a lot of debuffs and buffs to the team.
*******
Kheldians I am still working on the revamp but I would want to give them a more interesting flexibility.
Quote:
stances hmmm interesting idea. Battlecries looks good too but which one would be the inherent?
|
Originally Posted by Ultimus
I've posted this several times in the past but here's my fix:
Increase Brute max hp to Tanker level Increase Kheldian max hp to tanker level, increase resistances to 90% No changes to Brutes besides the HP buff Tankers now have different "stances" and forms that give buffs and debuffs to their attacks. Things like Mez/Holds, Stuns, -Regen, -Resistance (Like Bruising), etc. The idea behind Tankers is that they are a debuff melee -- Being a "good" AT they hold back their brute power (To not cause a ton of damage) but they focus it with such control that they smash an opponent's defenses. (Defenses being resistance, defense, toggles, regen, etc) Tankers also bring battlecries. These are the buff sides of things. These are AOE cries that do things like, +4 MEZ protection all, 1 min duration, 1 min CD, only one shout can be up at a time. +25% more damage, +10% to hit buff, +20% Recharge, etc. -- This is a new tanker inherent when one is clicked they all go on cooldown. So basically Tankers can bring a lot of debuffs and buffs to the team. ******* Kheldians I am still working on the revamp but I would want to give them a more interesting flexibility. |
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Which is a terrible argument. A cap is a BAD thing. Never hitting it is a GOOD thing.
|
Originally Posted by Psiphon
especially when it's claimed that it's OK to have it this high because it's never/rarely used.
|
Quote:
Both would be the inherent, the idea is that the tanker becomes not only a power house tank, but brings good debuffs and buffs to the team. Basically they can choose a stance (Which dictates what their attacks do from controls, to -res, to -regen, -whatever) and then they can do the battleshouts which buff themselves and teammates.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
stances hmmm interesting idea. Battlecries looks good too but which one would be the inherent?
|
I was thinking something like a rule of 5 meaning that you could only stack something 5 times. IE, if you had 6 tankers on a team every single one could not use Battleshout damage only the first 5 would apply after that the new tanker would have to use a different shout.
The point of the controls in the attacks gives a nifty secondary effect and better allows the tanker to "control" combat to what their team needs.
I plan to do a full write up and really flesh out the details, especially for the Kheldians which I have ideas for.
*******
The ultimate goal is to create 3 unique tanking classes all with the same defensive caps but with different playstyles and ways of obtaining the caps.
Quote:
ok
|
Originally Posted by Ultimus
Both would be the inherent, the idea is that the tanker becomes not only a power house tank, but brings good debuffs and buffs to the team. Basically they can choose a stance (Which dictates what their attacks do from controls, to -res, to -regen, -whatever) and then they can do the battleshouts which buff themselves and teammates.
I was thinking something like a rule of 5 meaning that you could only stack something 5 times. IE, if you had 6 tankers on a team every single one could not use Battleshout damage only the first 5 would apply after that the new tanker would have to use a different shout. The point of the controls in the attacks gives a nifty secondary effect and better allows the tanker to "control" combat to what their team needs. I plan to do a full write up and really flesh out the details, especially for the Kheldians which I have ideas for. ******* The ultimate goal is to create 3 unique tanking classes all with the same defensive caps but with different playstyles and ways of obtaining the caps. |
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
I should also add the Tanker stances will be "twitchy" meaning:
1) The stances will be a toggle, with the toggle turned on you get that benefit.
2) Still debating if it will be a small debuff that stacks up to 5 times for duration X, X being at least 20 seconds maybe 15.
3) The toggle will have 0 cast time (Think like combat jumping)
This allows them to be twitching meaning you can be fast and keep shifting toggles and stack different debuffs on enemies.
Quote:
sounds like pretty powerful stuff for an inherent.
|
Originally Posted by Ultimus
I should also add the Tanker stances will be "twitchy" meaning:
1) The stances will be a toggle, with the toggle turned on you get that benefit. 2) Still debating if it will be a small debuff that stacks up to 5 times for duration X, X being at least 20 seconds maybe 15. 3) The toggle will have 0 cast time (Think like combat jumping) This allows them to be twitching meaning you can be past and keep shifting toggles and stack different debuffs on enemies. |
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Well it all depends on the values -- IE maybe the -Res would stack 5 times at 2% each or something. I haven't decided.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
sounds like pretty powerful stuff for an inherent.
|
They aren't going to be matching Defender or Corruptor debuffs.
Quote:
ah gotcha.
|
Originally Posted by Ultimus
Well it all depends on the values -- IE maybe the -Res would stack 5 times at 2% each or something. I haven't decided.
They aren't going to be matching Defender or Corruptor debuffs. |
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
I even tossed around another idea that when Tankers are attacked or attacking they build a fury bar (well a bar like domination) and when its filled their next attack hits the target for 5 stacks of the current stance they are in. (Ie if they were in -Res, or -Regen, -Def, Hold, etc)|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
ah gotcha.
|
After that it depletes.
Ultimately not trying to derail this thread, I just believe that rather then nerfing Brutes to make Tankers look better, we should be defining each Tanking class uniquely and bringing a different flavor. I think it could also cover the hole of the "melee debuffing/buffing AT" that so many want.
I also think in the process too (And still working on my Kheldian ideas) that Kheldians could be buffed a little.
Quote:
You missed a lot of the threads back when the first pass of Stalker changes happened to change their initial 20% chance to critical only on held or sleeping mobs to the 10% scaling critical that they have now, then. There were lots of "they took our inherent!" posts back then. The more recent changes actually drift a little away from that in the attack mechanics but more towards Scrapper survivability levels with the higher hp cap.|
Originally Posted by Erratic
Truthfully I am somewhat surprised that Scrapper's aren't giving the hairy eyeball to Stalkers. . .something which at first glance seems to me to be better grounded than Tankers continually and without end doing the same to Brutes.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimus
Ultimately not trying to derail this thread, I just believe that rather then nerfing Brutes to make Tankers look better, we should be defining each Tanking class uniquely and bringing a different flavor. I think it could also cover the hole of the "melee debuffing/buffing AT" that so many want.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PleaseRecycle
it has gone from unconscionable to downright appalling that we have no way of measuring our characters' wetness.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brillig
It's hard to beat the entertainment value of Whackjob Wednesdays.
|
The key to fixing tanks is their secondaries. They're the only AT with the melee sets as a secondary, so they should be given a look over/revamp in the same vein as the blaster sets are getting with the sustain powers.
Don't -take- anything from the powers, but add something that makes it different from the other 3 damage focused melee ats.
Taunt: Needs to change to, well, anything, that still taunts.
Attacks: Visit each set and give it a themed secondary effect, or boost its existing effect. But only for tankers.
IE: Energy melee gets "stronger" stuns, setting it up as a controllerish tank.
Dark Melee gets stronger -tohit values, setting it up as defensive debuffer.
Fire gets -regen added to it's attacks, setting it up as an offensive debuffer.
By the time you're done, you've given tankers something unique that can aid them, but doesn't leap foolishly into the arms race between brutes, scrappers, and stalkers.
Quote:
A lot of people think their roles are clearly defined, but most of them don't agree what they are. Most of them have to be mistaken about how clear the roles are.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
I always thought their roles was pretty well defined overall.
|
Quote:
| As far as roles, the brute seems to fall somewhere between the scapper and tank on the spectrum. Not quite a scrapper, but good damage and higher hp, but not quite tank level on hp and armor traits but tank have overall lower damage (at least once the fury bar gets going.) |
Inventions and side-switching created a scenario where the dynamic range of the brute archetype significantly overlapped both scrappers and tankers, while scrappers and tankers also edged closer to each other. That created the archetype tension that exists today.
[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:
NERF IOS!!!|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Inventions and side-switching created a scenario where the dynamic range of the brute archetype significantly overlapped both scrappers and tankers, while scrappers and tankers also edged closer to each other. That created the archetype tension that exists today.
|
....
*reads overview of I24 again*
Quote:
Nothing wrong with using a mechanic twice especially if its a good one. You could say the new Radiation Armor coming out stole Vigilance's mechanics as some of the passives scale based on your Hitpoints. (low hp = more regen, high hp = high endurance, etc)
|
Originally Posted by Siolfir
You missed a lot of the threads back when the first pass of Stalker changes happened to change their initial 20% chance to critical only on held or sleeping mobs to the 10% scaling critical that they have now, then. There were lots of "they took our inherent!" posts back then. The more recent changes actually drift a little away from that in the attack mechanics but more towards Scrapper survivability levels with the higher hp cap.
I'm completely agree with the highlighted point, but your proposal earlier in the thread about stances is basically Bio Armor's Adaptation toggles. For that reason alone I think it's unlikely to end up as an inherent: a powerset already stole the mechanic. |
Quote:
nope. nothing wrong with that at all.
|
Originally Posted by Ultimus
Nothing wrong with using a mechanic twice especially if its a good one. You could say the new Radiation Armor coming out stole Vigilance's mechanics as some of the passives scale based on your Hitpoints. (low hp = more regen, high hp = high endurance, etc)
|
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
What is this "Groundhog Day", read the previous posts; but a quick summary.|
Originally Posted by planet_J
You're dodging the question...why should tanks do any more damage...they perform their role as they were designed by the game designers to do. The fact that you don't like the role they were intended to play speaks more to the fact that you are not a tank player, than it says anything about tanks being broken or needing a buff...or something else needing a buff/nerf for that matter.
|
Brute Caps are too wide compared to other AT's and in regard to buffs.
Either caps are there to keep ATs within certain parameters or they are not!
You include inspirations and buffs or you don't!
If you include them then Brutes have an advantage and the caps need to be looked at!!
If you don't include them then bring other AT's in line and again look at the caps!!
Either way they need to be adjusted!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planet_J
Brutes can theoretically run around capped to all resists, and theoretical physics can prove an elephant can hang off a cliff from a blade of grass...but that doesn't make it any more likely to happen. Nobody would bother trying, brutes are tough "enough", tanks are even tougher, you could argue superfluously so...but it doesn't change the role tanks were built specifically to serve and they serve it well. If you reduce brute resists caps, then an out of the box warshade with eclipse is now permanently tougher than any brute...period...at 85% resist cap, a warshade caps ALL RESISTS.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planet_J
Brutes can theoretically do slightly more damage then scrappers...I've personally never had a brute that hit 100% Fury sustained and hit the damage cap...ever.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planet_J
Brutes have taunt auras because they have to chase Fury. They're designed differently...it is what it is. Scrappers need not be any tougher, they do just fine.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planet_J
If you think brutes are so insane, then quit complaining and play them, if you don't like the playstyle...then stop complaining and leave it be. The devs have stated they are WAI, they are sitting where they are because the balance is in order. Trying to put a square peg in a round hole doesn't make you intelligent, or thinking outside of the box, or a balance wizard. Instead it makes you ignorant of the truths that this game was designed around by the people who designed it.
Talking about toons running around hard capped out is a fools errand, and that argument will get you no more traction than any other fool who's tried to chase it over the last few years. Brutes are off the table, they are not up for a look, and this conversation is moot...beating a dead horse is getting old. |
Secondly I'm not trying to force any pegs anywhere, I'm after parity regarding caps.
I hadn't intended anymore posts on the subject as I felt the point had been made. Your posts required a reply though. You have got to be one of the rudest and condescending persons on this forum.
Playing all alts I wanted nothing more than to raise the cap discrepancy as a balance point!
You are nothing more than a Brute Fanboy trying to maintain the Brute's status as the Premier melee AT - capable of outputting far too much damage for the survivability that it has!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planet_J
Those are:
(1) Tanks are most survivable and do the least damage (2) Brutes are slightly less survivable and do more damage (3) Scrappers do the most damage and survive well (with criticals and ATO procs it isn't a contest anymore) (4) Stalkers are least survivable and have the most burst damage |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planet_J
You are a fool if you really believe that...look at scrappers with ATO critical procs and it stops being a contest, plus the ATO2 proc that's coming for them will make a GAP...that's right GAP between them and brutes, and a significant one at that.
Look at pylon times, the best barometer we have to compare...Stalkers and scrappers ROUTINELY have lower times than brutes...so do Night Widows and quite a few Doms... |
If Brutes have near Tank level survivability then they shouldn't be appearing just above Tanks in a pylon run.
That's called balance!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planet_J
Should we nerf all those ATs so brutes can be equal?? Of course not, the game wasn't designed for all ATs to be created equal. It was designed for all ATs to fill a role, and currently, all of them do that...you may not like the role some of them fill, but it makes it no less true.
|
All melee AT's have defence and attack primaries and secondaries and as such can be compared and balanced.
Brutes are currently out of whack with the other AT's in regards to caps and these need to be adjusted for reason of balance.
L50s: Tanks: Cryofission - Ice/EM - Dr Celsius - Fire/Ice - Saint George - SD/SS | Controllers: Psichosis - Ill/Kin - Major Chaos - Ill/Stm | Scrappers - Neutron Crusader - DM/SR
Currently Levelling: Angelic Blade - BS/WP Scrapper | Seeds of Destruction - Plant/Kin Controller
When im testing powers i go with brute if its primary and its mor of a tank type power like titan but if i put on my tryhard panties then tank
Why do people making these threads always seem to ignore that in the current game Scrappers and Stalkers are better than both ATs?
Why all the rage over jockeying for last place?
If you're measuring damage output vs survival capacity, the scrapper and stalker forums are filled with DPS that will make your head spin with enough survival packed into most of these super DPS builds to weather not just a pylon but often solo at x8 or crush crates in Lambda. If you can solo x8 you can tank for x8.
Both tanks and brutes are obsolete. Brute less so, sure, because it's a newer AT - all the newer ATs are better designed than their pre-I6 companions. But still obsolete.
Change Confront to Taunt (nobody takes it anyways unless they want to tank) and let this end. Scrapper caps are more than sufficient to tank for a team since any situation where a brute is buffed past scrappers 75% by outside sources* means the team is buffed to near unkillable levels anyways.
* Fire damage, energy damage, smash lethal damage can be exceeded interally, of course, in three armor sets. It only matters on farm maps. In general play I've never really noticed a difference when battling with my /elec brute vs my /elec scrapper, even against Mu. I know the difference is there, but with the speed said Mu die to either I've never seen it be a factor.
Weight training: Because you'll never hear someone lament "If only I were weaker, I could have saved them."
The stalker changes were pretty deft not just because of their numerical benefits, but also because complaints about them across the melee archetypes was minimal - at least as minimal as such things ever get on the forums. But changes that homogenize brutes and scrappers, or radically shift the roles of brutes, scrappers, and tankers, are inherently dangerous in that regard.
[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.)