McBoo

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT *Ahem*
On who comic Tankers fight:

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g5...avyhitters.jpg


.

[/ QUOTE ]

For the record, Statesman is an Incarnate and therefore overpowered by player standards.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Here's another question. What is the scrapper supposed to be doing while the tanker is still handling all the aggro management, soaking up the damage AND going after the boss?

[/ QUOTE ]

Likely in his own mission soloing an AV.

Seriously, he should be clearing the crowds with his faster attacks like a little blender set to 'Mince'. You wanna give someone better AoE? Give it to Scrappers. They're apparently hard up for a team role. Larger crowds are found on teams, which is an area I don't think Tankers have a problem.

Better AoE really wont help Tankers when solo, unless you want to make them better at grinding in hazard zones, which is a goal I don't share.

Wolverine, Daredevil, they fight a bazillion ninjas. Colossus or the Thing take on the giant ninja robot.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, Scrappers don't need a team role. They already have one, melee damage and they do it quite well. No need for yet another melee damage archetype, the job has been filled.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Heavy hitting does not have to mean more damage. When a Brute or Scrapper hit, they do damage but when a Tanker hits he hits so hard that the blow plows through his intended target and hits others in range.


[/ QUOTE ]

And when they hit one guy, it's like a sissy slap. How is that being a heavy hitter?


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Define sissy slap. How many points of damage represent a sissy slap?

Let me paint you a picture. Brute and Tanker square off against 3 opponents.

The Brute draws back for a roundhouse punch, connects with the side of an opponent's head and said opponent is knocked to the ground, down but not out. Brute then must repeat this action over and over for each opponent he faces.

The Tanker draws back for a roundhouse punch, connects with the side of an opponent's head and said opponent is hit so hard he is knocked sideways into the two other mobs standing next to him and all three drop.

Who hit harder?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If i was given somehow the ability to modify tankers, though, I would somehow modify them to be AoE specialists. They would not be the best at ST damage but they would be the most effective AoE fighter, both endurance and damage wise.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I would object to that. Specializing in fighting lots of weaker little guys who can't even really harm you doesn't sound very heroic to me. In fact that sounds very Brute-like. A bully almost.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you keep making the assumption that the group is going to be made up of weaker opponents? Most of my tankers live for the times that they are standing amidst a sea of red or purple saying "That all ya got?"

Now add in some more AoE attacks so I can also say "See I can take on 4 or 5 of you at once without even breaking a sweat!" and I am one happy tanker player!

Here's another question. What is the scrapper supposed to be doing while the tanker is still handling all the aggro management, soaking up the damage AND going after the boss? Which, I might add, I do right now anyway with my tankers.

[ QUOTE ]
I did not even looked at JBs suggestion but it sounds like his old mega-buildup suggestion, honestly I don't like it if it is that.

If i was given somehow the ability to modify tankers, though, I would somehow modify them to be AoE specialists. They would not be the best at ST damage but they would be the most effective AoE fighter, both endurance and damage wise.

I have brainstormed a bit of a way to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's hear it! I'm a huge proponent of tankers taking on more of a melee controller role. That, in my opinion, would fit all of the criteria that Johnny listed.

[ QUOTE ]
-Allow them to be heavy hitting like Brutes and Scrappers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heavy hitting does not have to mean more damage. When a Brute or Scrapper hit, they do damage but when a Tanker hits he hits so hard that the blow plows through his intended target and hits others in range.

[ QUOTE ]
-Make Tanker offense more interesting and distict. Of the melee ATs, Tankers' offensive distinction is that they don't have anything dinstinct. They are Scrappers without the puntuation of Criticals, Stalkers without Assassin's Strike. Brutes without Fury. In a sea of many flavours, they are plain vanilla. At least give them sprinkles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tanker offense becomes more interesting because they will be able to actively manage aggro rather than relying on Taunt, an aura or an invisible game mechanic. Tanker offense becomes more distinct because they will be able to do something no other melee archetype can do.

[ QUOTE ]
-Have minimal impact on players who like Tankers as is.

[/ QUOTE ]

This one is borderline because I think that making tankers more AoE-centric melee controllers will have a huge positive impact for all players.

[ QUOTE ]
-Be conceptually suitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

The canon supports the idea of the heavy hitters taking on large groups of foes single-handedly so melee controller easily fits the concept.

[ QUOTE ]
And I just explained to Blue_Mourning how Tankers could occasionally appoach Brute damage and not make anyone obsolete.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your assumption is not taking into account the fact that players will always take the path of least resistance. In my first example Tankers would trump Brutes and Scrappers because they would offer superior defenses with comparable offense. In my second example Scrappers would eclipse Tankers and Brutes because their damage output is fairly constant with no need for Fury management or waiting for a Tank-whatsit bar to fill up.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I can do this now with my tankers. Hold back and use my lower level attacks to manage my endurance until I feel like letting loose. Then I fire off Build Up and hit with my big attacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the doesn't make you a heavy hitter like comic Tankers. You're not doing anything close to Brute or Scrapper damage for the same sets even when you're not "holding back". You're the same mediocre-hitting meatshield with bland offense.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

And tankers never will do "anything close to Brute or Scrapper damage for the same sets". Brute and Scrapper damage will always be far superior to Tanker damage. Trying to make them more comparable will only wind up making two of the three sets mentioned obsolete.

If Tankers get a damage buff with no defense reduction than why play a Brute or Scrapper?

If Tankers have their damage increased and defenses lowered so that they are more in line with Brutes and Scrappers than Tankers and Brutes become obsolete.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Please find a new name for your proposal. Smackdown, Overpower, Bulldoze. Anything but Tank-omination, it isn't very descriptive as it could be misconstrued as some form of ESP for tankers and it's far too silly to say.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the point is you remembered it because of the silly nickname. The actual proposal I dubbed Gauntlet 2.0, IIRC.



.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I didn't remember it. You mentioned it in the post to which I replied.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So I can assume that shield tankers are roughly what you would want out of baseline tankers in terms of long term performance?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not about long term. It's about being able to cut loose the deal some serious damage occasionally.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can do this now with my tankers. Hold back and use my lower level attacks to manage my endurance until I feel like letting loose. Then I fire off Build Up and hit with my big attacks.

[ QUOTE ]
Power customization is a big deal because the system wasn't designed to support it. If the could start fresh, it wouldn't be a big deal at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ask and you shall receive. Now I realize that this is only part of power customization but there is nothing saying that they haven't also taken the time to change the fetters and animations for powers so that people could be firing energy blasts from their eyes or spitting fireballs.

[ QUOTE ]
And I want to point out that Tank-omination really wouldn't help Tankers solo AVs.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please find a new name for your proposal. Smackdown, Overpower, Bulldoze. Anything but Tank-omination, it isn't very descriptive as it could be misconstrued as some form of ESP for tankers and it's far too silly to say.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't exist.

Just acknowledge that what you're saying is always subjective and try to back it up with provable facts. That's what people aren't doing in this debate, pretty much on either side.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately it does exist. You saying it doesn't, shouldn't make people think their posts are less objective. You don't control opinion. And your being pretentious in believing you do. What I post is fact. I want change in any field, not just tanker offense. Though it would be nice.

Objective ;expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations. By this definition, anyone asking for more overall tanker dmg is purely objective by what kind of dmg the devs give to tanks. Besides the "Medium" dmg branded on them and the overall lack of high dps should be enough.

[ QUOTE ]
The mechanics aren't perfect; but I don't know how you would change it, and I don't think that the ones proposed here, in this thread and in others, are the way to go if a direction is at all necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ideas friend, Ideas. As radical as it seems, the radical in many an industry has been the reason things have changed, and usually for the better. Shutting down ideas just because they don't fit into your reasoning doesn't mean they should be halted. You may not see it as a change thats needed, but others do.

Lastly, Ideas need to be stated, be it objective or subjective. If any idea exists it should be something that expresses an option for all to decide. It's just not about having it "my way" but merely a way that is beyond the now. I just don't see why so many hate the idea. After all history has been one radical idea change to another. Change HAS to happen. It is after all a super hero game based off Marvel and DC that much is obvious. So why not continue and develope some new powers, more additions, and more "comic like" tanks. I suppose thats what Champions Online is for, but time will have to prove us all wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Change does have to happen, lest things stagnate and die but those changes can't be made in a vacuum. In the medium where any proposed changes are going to be made there is a balance that has to be maintained or else changing becomes as dangerous as not changing.

A change to tanker offense would be nice. I don't personally believe that simply increasing damage will do anything to help tankers as a whole because, in the interest of game balance, they will always be bringing up the rear in melee damage. The best change would be something that makes tankers unique, not just another damage mechanic. Preferably something that could easily be tied to Gauntlet to make it more visible or palpable.

[ QUOTE ]
And Kruunch, I don't have anything in front of me, but FS quicker cast and slightly higher damage along w/ rage are better then tremor, add k/d to h/c and ss would make a run at Ice for tanker control set.

[/ QUOTE ]

I honestly don't see that as a bad thing. IMHO, melee control should be the one overarching goal of all of the tanker offensive sets. It should be balanced against the offensive damage offered by the set to offer a spectrum of control:damage ratio.

[ QUOTE ]
Ace: How would that make SS any different from Stone then, which currently does have two AOE KD powers? You think Stone is overpowered?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Stone does have it's relatively slow recharge and doesn't have a self buff like Rage.

Still I don't really think that changing from KB to KD on a power that most folks don't take anyway will really overpower the set. If anything it will just make the power more useful. Especially for the Anti-Taunt crowd.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that the KB magnitude of all melee sets should be lowered to the point that you will always do knockdown to even level mobs and above and then if you want to do knockback you can slot for it. For the folks that are very slot conscious I could even see them adding a knockback inspiration that way you can effectively ramp up the power at will.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And:

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Translation:

"I should have known a blanket damage increase wouldn't fly. Perhaps if I had pushed for some kind of special mechanic."

A measured response in this case isn't blindly calling for a massive increase in damage. Nor is it ignoring the problem and pretending no one is complaining or that their complaints have no weight, as the present devs have.

A measured response would be looking for a solution to the problem that doesn't include blowing balance out of the water. Ignoring the issue isn't a response. It's the lack of a response.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be your translation. From another perspective, a good, measured response could be something other than a damage increase. Also bear in mind that Fury was originally the mechanic planned for tankers but internal play testing proved that it was unbalancing.

A measured response is also not changing tankers into part time brutes when the data mining doesn't show it to be necessary just because some people believe it will work.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, McBoo, I think I responded to someone posting above you in quick reply, and it tacked your name on it. Sorry for the confusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

No worries... responding actually helped me blow off some steam from work related..... stuff.

[ QUOTE ]
And:

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Corrected...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That same developer also admitted that increasing tanker damage to compensate was a mistake as well.


[/ QUOTE ]

Did he now?

And what quote would that be?

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember, for instance, when players were complaining bitterly that Tankers just didn't do enough damage. Heck, they've got "Super Strength"! Shouldn't they be able to destroy things with one punch!". I pounded my fist up and down that Geko should change their damage...this only led to more issues down the lane. I don't think I came up with a good, measured response back then. I'm far more likely to be analytical now.


[ QUOTE ]
I'm remembering the interview where he sought a modifier increase for Tankers but was told that couldn't happen. We don't know if any thought was put into special mechanics or temporary damage increases. Circiumstances are different now anyways, and what was unacceptable before might be possible now.

Once upon a time, infinite respecs, cross factional teaming and flashbacks weren't possible or were things that were argued shouldn't be done. Things change. I don't think it's out of the question to re-examine Tankers.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough, and folks here in the tanker forums have come up with some interesting and varied ways of re-examining Tankers that don’t include a damage increase.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please, show me where the mistake is and why. Don't use comics to justify it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The lead designer of the game used comics to justify it.

To paraphrase:

"Our Tankers don't play like comics Tankers. This is a valid problem".

"Players rolled them(Tankers) expecting characters like the Hulk, but they weren't. This was a mistake."

The mistake being Tankers not playing as the heavy hitters they are in other media.

Despite the changes to made to them, a number of people in this thread and other can have made a decent case they still don't play like their comic counterparts. If it was justified by that reason then, it's good enough to be justified now.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

That same developer also admitted that increasing tanker damage to compensate was a mistake as well.

Just to add some perspective...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Based on their strength levels alone, The Thing and Superman would be Blue Side SS/INV brutes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Superman and the Thing are not Brutes. They are not ruled by their emotions. The Hulk is a Brute.

Superman and the Thing fit as Tankers for their teams conceptually because they do rush forward to take the brunt of an attack.

But Supes and the Thing also have the hitting power when the time comes for it and when they don't have to worry about their teammates.

When pushed, Supes will unload a pile of hurt.
He is the meatshield, but when he cuts loose, watch out.

Which is what Tankers lack conceptually. They protect teammates, and that's fine. The problem is they aren't allowed to cut loose from their medium damage.

Comic Brutes get carried away on their anger. Comic Tankers make a tactical decision to kick it up a notch and stop pulling their punches.

Which is something I've been trying to get for CoH Tankers.


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, concept is up to the player. I was speaking from a game mechanics point of view. If you want to replicate the punching power of someone like Superman or the Thing you go blue side brute. It's a much better option than trying to re-engineer one existing archetype to duplicate the abilities of another existing archetype.

[ QUOTE ]
See, now you're trying to make an argument where there isn't one. There's a name for that, but I'm not allowed to mention it here.

I actually wasn’t even replying to you. I was replying to Kruunch and offering my opinion.

In terms of scale, sure. Superman doesn't qualify as a Tanker, he does way to much damage. You know as well as I that conceptually, that's exactly what he is.

Invulnerability, Super Strength, Flight, Laser Vision, heck, you could even tack Super Leap and Super Speed in there. Those are all Superman powers. Pretty close to all of them, in fact. Superman, is plainly a Tanker.

Now that you've sidestepped my comment rather than addressing it, let me return to it.

Conceptually and mechanically, I always thought Tankers should have been AOE melee specialists, and Scrappers ST melee specialists.

[/ QUOTE ]

In order…..

I wasn’t even replying to any of your posts, I was merely offering up an opinion inspired by Kruunch’s question. RIF

Based on their strength levels alone, The Thing and Superman would be Blue Side SS/INV brutes. Wonder Woman has superhuman strength but not on the level with Supes and Ben and she is not impervious to injury, thus she is a WP/SS tanker. Again this is my opinion based on what I know of the canon and what I know will be possible in the game. YMMV

I couldn’t have possibly sidestepped your comment because I didn’t read it. I often post from work which means I don’t have time to wade through 25 pages of posts. Normally I will hit the last page, scan the last few posts and reply to one of them specifically if I feel so inclined.

I have always supported the idea of tankers being AoE melee specialists and scrappers being more ST specific. Thus I don't understand why you would assume that we are arguing.

Okay, someone bring me up to speed. What are we debating here? The OP was asking which aspect of that taunt was enhanced, correct?

[ QUOTE ]
I love my tanker(s) because there's nothing like taking an AV's alpha, letting a slow grin creep across your face, and saying, "if that's your best shot, you're about to have a very bad day."

[/ QUOTE ]

And all the minions look at the AV nervously and say "You're gonna need a bigger boat!"

[ QUOTE ]
Stone/Ice, my fave, nothing ever kills me in any situation.

Granite is only a panic button.

[/ QUOTE ]

For pure tankability I agree. For SMASH I would say my Invy/Stone is the business!