Johnny_Butane

It would, if Tankers still weren't keeping them for feeling much aggro in the first place, but it would go over with Scrapper and Brute players like an airship made of some kind of dense metal.

I suggested, semi facetiously, that Brutes and Scrappers should get Gauntlet that trumps Tanker Gauntlet and that Tankers would have to use Taunt to peel aggro of them.

Maybe it's time enemies got an IQ upgrade and went after the melee ATs that are the most actual threat to them, rather than one that can shrug off their attacks but hits like a foam bat.




.

I know the scene.

In that context, a tank is someone who is tough and packs a big punch and is anything but subtle. Like a military tank.

The three of them, likely view Superman and themselves in terms of filling leadership positions first, before whatever role in combat they may take.


Regardless, consider this: From the game's launch until a year and a half later, Tankers were the only Archetype (and until just last year the only blue side AT) that had super strength and invulnerability. In light of that, I don't know how can anyone can say they weren't intended to represent the popular comic characters who posses those abilities. Scrappers meanwhile, were given sets like Claws and Regeneration; no one disputes who they were intended to evoke:






.

That doesn't matter. Shutting it down cancels the mitigation you get from the guys that are in range.

And if you didn't notice, enemies who are aggro'ed tend to bring their friends along for the ride. So, if for example the aggro cap raised to allow for three full spawns of enemies, all it takes is a Lt. from each of those spawns to be one of the 10 enemies the aura hits to aggro the spawn onto you. Plus, who says it'll hit the same 10 guys each pulse?

And since you can't control what your aura hits, or what that Scrapper who chased an enemy into another spawn (despite the fact the team is dealing with two already) brings back with them, my point stands.


I can see training enemies onto Tankers do be the next big thing in griefing. Since their defensive sets have been balanced for the last long while with the 17 cap in mind, I'm in no hurry to see how the typical player fares. I'm confident the devs are too smart to touch the aggro cap, just like they're smart enough not to boost Tanker base damage 3X.


.

Except, you know, your taunt aura. Like...Invincibility or RttC. So better shut that off too.
Just what you want to do when surrounded by a bunch of enemies.

Oh, wait... no, that would be an incredibly stupid thing to do.


I'm still 100% against them upping the aggro cap. It affecting Tanker survivability is just another reason it shouldn't happen.

And before anyone suggests I (or anyone) could use the increased danger the tanker would be in to justify a damage increase, I just have to say again I don't want a blanket Tanker damage increase.



.

Oh, anyone who complains will just be told to L2P and drop some of their attacks to build more sturdily.

But you raise a point. Tankers, with a higher aggro cap, would be facing more potential damage than Brutes or Scrappers. All they could ever get is 17 guys attacking them, while Tankers could and would be attracting more.

When you think about it, upping the aggro cap is more or less akin to asking for a nerf to Tanker survivability.


.

The developers said different.

Frankly, I don't care about your take on Tankers' role or what you think was the developers' intent. You're not changing my mind so you may as well take your spreadsheet and go home.



.

So, CoH PvP then?


.

That would at least be a refreshing change of pace.

When you do get to the cap, hit the wall and he goes past it doing more damage and you're both nigh-unkillable, you may feel differently.



.

You're right, I hate the very concept of aggro and how it's used to feed the Trinity concept.

One character standing in the middle of the fight, insulting everyone into attacking them while your teammates stand back and pick them off. And brother, do they ever line up to get picked off.

That's not how a fight works.

Not in comics. Not in a movie. Not in reality.

It's a stupid mechanic that centers around AI being non-existent and from what I can tell, was championed 40 years ago by someone who made a PnP game who likely never threw a punch in their life.

It's artificial, phoney and we can and have done better in modeling combat, superhero or otherwise, in realtime games.

Does it hold no similarities to anything found in something approaching a comic book, cinematic or 'realistic' battle? Of course not. There are plenty of moments of someone taking the heat for a teammate, and I only have to look at the Justice League Unlimited episode 'Question Authority' to find an instance of Superman 'tanking' for Huntress and the Question.

But as a core mechanic, the overused backbone of 99% of the combat in this game and the sole focus of Tankers? It's grossly simplified, idiotic and fake in my opinion.

[insert tongue into cheek]
Specifically, in Keyes, how ****ing stupid must Anti-Matter be to chase me for going "Unhh!" at him while people are messing with his reactors? Or follow anyone to the console when he knows that is exactly what we need to do to stop him?
And why WOULD Siege or Nightstar run to the tennis courts when they can stay under the protection of the guard towers and run out the clock to victory by refusing to move?

Do I hate helping my teammates by being a distraction? No. I hate that Tankers get screwed for doing that well, at the expense of better reflecting the Tankers in comics. And I hate that some ATs get more than they give back, take pride in running off on their own and being a-hats, solo better and don't hit a low ceiling when becoming an Incarnate.



.

I just have to mention, I think I'm the only one who actually answered the questions the OP posed, in a succinct manner free of cruft too.



.

You mean the glory of being a tauntbot on Keyes?
Yeah, I feel like a real demigod superhero there. /sarcasm

When they send the Tanker to pull Nightstar (that is if a Brute doesn't just run in instead) somewhere Joe Esposito starts playing You're the Best, every time.


.

In all fairness, Arguing with Johnny has been the de facto Tanker forum mini game for almost five years now. I don't expect that to change.



.

I see what you're implying, but that has no bearing. My point stands. The caps are the same regardless of the power set. The more damage and defensive buffs that are added to the game, via the Incarnate system, temp powers or whatever, the easier it will be for *all* Tankers and Brutes to hit their caps. You don't think they're going to suddenly stop adding both kinds, do you?

Of course the outlier sets for Tankers will get there first, but even they shouldn't be hitting the damage cap when comparable Brutes retain more head room before they get no benefit from improving offensively AND get nearly the same defensive potential, minus 10% max HP.

The second any Tanker hit the damage cap my point is justified.
They have no more room to grow offensively from straight damage. Brute damage will keep going way past that point, like 80% further IIRC. Meanwhile, both Tanker and have very similar maximum defensive potentials they can ever reach, only differing with 10% max HP.

So, tell me, what quality Tankers do you have that don't routinely hit the damage cap on Leagues or for that matter, when teamed? And, just to be clear, you do know that even if you monitor damage buffs with Combat Attributes, you're hitting the cap well before the numbers turn blue; it doesn't take Enhancements into consideration.

As it stands, Fulcrum Shift may as well not even exist for most of my Tanker stable. Meanwhile, my Brute on the same League does get the full benefit from two Kins. And he's NOT dieing, same as my Tanker, but is hitting much harder.

If I didn't care about Tankers, I'd just play the Brute. He wins. End of story.
But I do care about Tankers and I am capable of seeing there's a disparity and something inherently unfair about the situation with their potential compared to Brutes and Scrappers, so I'm trying to remedy it.


.

I was using that as an example that even by the first Incarnate slot in, those tanks are already against the wall.

Ageless gives you recharge, and even before it, endurance isn't an issue. I don't care much about getting more survivability because that's easy. Barrier, Rebirth. I don't even bother with Tough and Weave. Never had to since issue 12 or so.

Endurance is not an issue, already impressive recharge, no survivability needs that can't be met as the situation demands. There are no more branches worth pursuing.

And I'm against or getting near the damage cap and I didn't even build specifically for damage

This is two, nearing three of my Tankers I'm talking about.


So, riddle me this: if I'm such an idiot who knows nothing about how this game and its systems work, as many seem to act like I am, and I'm able to hit this point only half way through the Incarnate system, what are average, and even competent players going to do with their Tankers as we get deeper into it and they start running to these issues?

Oh, wait, maybe I answered my own question. Competent players aren't going to take their Tankers this far. They're going to work on their Brutes who have nearly the same defensive potential at caps (minus 10% max HP) but have way more damage potential than Tankers.

Silly, stupid me for taking a Tanker and not trying to build for more superfluous survivability and thinking they deserve to have the same potential to grow offensively and defensively as Brutes do.


.

Forgive me if I am curt. I'm not trying to be rude but I'm trying to get this out before I go to sleep.

Counter point one
I know all about Bruising. Read my posts on the subject, especially #173 in this thread.


Counter point two
The Incarnate system may have done OK by Tankers so far, but I have two, soon to be three, Tankers that are up against the damage cap or are so close to it they don't receive full benefit from their Musculature Alpha boost or any future damage boosting slots or abilities they may add. That doesn't give me a lot of room to grow.

Lore: I rolled a Tanker, not a Mastermind, so Lore pets don't get me off, effective as they are.

Judgement: is somewhere between a party favor and chore to me at this point. They made darn sure it wasn't as effective in the content it's intended for as it is for level 50 trash mobs. And to me, using it for that purpose is the equivalent of using a level 50 Foot Stomp on gray Hellions in Atlas park.

Interface: I can't complain.


Counter point 3
I don't want Tanker AoE anything improved. I've stated my reasons.


Counter point 4
See counter point 3


Counter point 5
I think Tankers already pull more than their weight on teams.
I don't agree that increasing the aggro cap holds any improvement to legitimate players or will improve redundancy issues and under no circumstances will I agree to it so no use in trying to convince me.


Counter point 6
Tankers get the shaft for being a 'team archetype' while Scrappers and Brutes can get on leagues and start their own teams just as easily and still solo better.

The holy trinity is a ridiculously outdated ideal and has no place being shoved into the comic book genre at the expense of that genre's own ideals, conventions and tropes.


My musing on your musings
A 36% damage buff will do little to improve the damage of a character already hitting the damage cap. Either all Tankers get a buff or none of them do.

Even if they raised the cap to make room for this, even I think 36% is excessive. 15% is pushing it. 0% is fine.

I stated on the first page and numerous times in the thread: I don't think Tankers need, (and I don't even want) a blanket damage increase for all Tankers. I want the damage cap raised and a few more options for better damage in the Tanker Ancillary/Epic pools and Incarnate boosts. Maybe one that temporarily trades off some mitigation for increased damage.


.

I'm not suggesting anything now. I just want the damage cap to get looked at and some better options for Tankers to improve their damage by way of Epic/Ancillary pool powers and Incarnates if they choose to.

But once upon a time I suggested a long-ish recharging bust of damage for Tankers similar to the old Domination inherent for Dominators. Times are different now.

If there was more room to change things without upsetting people, I'd suggest taking the hard hitting attack in each set, increasing the recharge and base damage for Tankers. That's how I'd run with the military tank analogy.

If I was given the power to go back in time and change things, there would be only two melee ATs:

One with great survivability and good aggro control, great ST damage but AoE revolving around low damage/soft crowd control.

The other with good survivability, good AoE damage, good ST damage, attacks that lower enemy damage resistance and low aggro control.

Solo, one is tougher, but has worse AoE damage. They end up breaking even for ST damage.
Teamed, the first improves the survivability of the second by tanking and the second improves the damage of the first by weakening enemy resistances.


.

Yeah. A military tank gets a main cannon that isn't too fast to reload but obliterates what it's aimed at.



.

I was wondering if someone was going to correct me on this or not. I've never been 100% sure about calculating damage output and constructing attack chains.



.

I love your directness and your animated sig graphic.


.

Yes. Isn't that what a good Tanker does? Hang on for the long haul and keep going?

I haven't had much reward in doing so, also like a Tanker.

You mean Brutes and Scrappers fighting alongside me got a damage increase.

Then Incarnates came out and Scrappers and Brutes gained Barrier and Rebirth while my Tanker hits the brick wall of the damage cap without even needing Assault and now has little potential to improve or grow the way I want.

That's 'winning', Charlie Sheen style.

Tankers can only hit so many targets with AoE attacks regardless of how many are mad at them or not. There's two different caps in play there.

Furthermore, that gets into farming territory IMO, and I have an extremely negative view of that. Especially since, again IMO, Tankers are in the situation/balance point they are currently because over the years, some people have pushed them into a niche as a farming tool: Safe, reliable, slowly moving back and forth across a farm. No longer Tankers, but 'Tractors'. All at the expense of Tankers better reflecting their comic counterparts instead. I have have seen too many 'looking to make a farm tank' threads to be persuaded otherwise, so let's not bother debating it.

Not so. I believe that one Tanker being enough for a team's typical aggro needs is half of the reason they have redundancy issues. The other half is overspecialization in aggro control in the first place.

That is not typical operating procedure for the vast majority of teams. It works for you, obviously, but doing so without everyone on board is just going to cause group friction and it's not a play style you can hope people to adopt widespread.

'With proper tactics' is the key phrase. You can't balance an AT around said tactics when most people really haven't been using them since the game began.

It's quite relevant if a proposed change to Tankers has the side effect of buffing two other ATs that I don't think should be buffed. Why should I sign to that if I feel that way?



.

Wouldn't be be just as easy to eat a number of purple/orange inspirations in anticipation of the crash?

Surely you can get/combine some in a shorter period of time than Burnout recharges?

This I tested.
IIRC, Unstoppable remains grayed out as long as an Unstoppable is in effect, regardless of recharge on it.

Or something like that. The point is, it didn't work if I remember right.


.

Works to justify my stance. Go for it.



.