The other Tanks won't inherently take more damage. Paladins can heal themselves and Spellshield can avoid damage. I mean, shield is right there in the names Nightshield and Spellshield so, unlikely that they will be taking more damage than Guardian - just using other forms of shields besides a mundane shield.
What you personally choose to take is really irrelevant from how the game is objectively balanced.
The other Tanks won't inherently take more damage. Paladins can heal themselves and Spellshield can avoid damage. I mean, shield is right there in the names Nightshield and Spellshield so, unlikely that they will be taking more damage than Guardian - just using other forms of shields besides a mundane shield.
What you personally choose to take is really irrelevant from how the game is objectively balanced.
Indeed it is possible that the Nightshield or Spellshield could "avoid" damage (I assume you are using the term avoid to collectively refer to avoid, mitigate and block).
In fact, I even talked about that in my previous post where I said I am expecting Intrepid to balance the game reasonably well.
Obviously you don't have that same expectation of balance, otherwise you wouldn't refer to the super-tank as the tankiest tank, and then in the same thread say that the Spellshield may avoid damage just as well.
Indeed it is possible that the Nightshield or Spellshield could "avoid" damage (I assume you are using the term avoid to collectively refer to avoid, mitigate and block).
In fact, I even talked about that in my previous post where I said I am expecting Intrepid to balance the game reasonably well.
Obviously you don't have that same expectation of balance, otherwise you wouldn't refer to the super-tank as the tankiest tank, and then in the same thread say that the Spellshield may avoid damage just as well.
I meant that a Spellshield can evade damage.
By tankiest Tank, I mean that Guardian will be augmenting Tank abilities with Tank abilities while a Nightshield and Spellshield will be augmenting Tank abilities with Rogue and Mage abilities, respectively.
A Guardian will tank like a Tank, a Nightshield will tank like a Rogue and a Spellshield will tank like a Mage. But that is really a matter of flavor.
Shouldn't really matter much if a blow doesn't hit the Tank due to a mundane shield or due to a Shadow Puppet/Decoy or due to Blink.
Shouldn't really matter much if Hatred is augmented with Shield Bash or Poison or Fireball.
Clearly, we don't have the same expectation of balance because you expect (for no real reason) for Guardian to be balanced as a super-tank compared to the other 7 primary Tank archetypes.
Ok so here is what I'm trying to get people to understand. I think most of the people in this thread experienced tanks, and I feel we are all passionate about the tank role. What I'm trying to get across is to people who are thinking of trying it for the first time. They will look at the experienced tanks and listen to our advice. I want new tanks to understand there are a lot of different mechanics to tanking, I don't want people to read that x-tank is the best and if you want end game content you need to play said tank. Since we don't know how each tank works yet and don't know how balanced the classes will be. I feel we should be giving out only the information that is relevant to the making of this game not what we have seen form other games.
Clearly, we don't have the same expectation of balance because you expect (for no real reason) for Guardian to be balanced as a super-tank compared to the other 7 primary Tank archetypes.
My expectation of balance does not mean that you can pick any one of the 8 classes of a given archetype and expect to function as well in all situations as any other class of that archetype, no.
This is not WoW. Class choice matters. Raid composition matters. If Spellshields are better at soloing, Nightshields better in group content, Paladins better in PvP and Guardians better in raid content, then those four classes are balanced against each other. They don't need to all be able to do all three.
This game has 64 classes, not 8 classes each with 8 flavors.
Fortunately, if someone rolls up a Spellshield and then decides they want to tank group or raid content, the option is open to them to switch to a class that is better suited to that role.
I think what @cheap is trying to say is their is more than just penetration mitigation to tanking. 1. Resist damage. 2. Absorb damage. 3. Deflect damage 4. Refect damage 5. Fragment damage 6. Evade damage
Arguably those that return that damage or absorb energy from it would be far more OP than someone who simply resists it. Aka resists physical damage (note zero magical damage resistance too).
An intelligent post, thank you.
There are indeed many types of tanks. All tanks will hopefully have their place in all aspects of the game.
However, when setting up a raid, I want the tank that will require my healers to heal the least amount possible, but in the most consistent way possible (ie, eliminate spike damage).
In assuming Intrepid will make a balanced game, the tank that requires the least amount of healing will be the mitigation tank, as while the others all have other things they do, a mitigation tank is doing nothing but mitigating damage.
In extreme cases, this means I can even run a raid with fewer healers than I would need to with a different tank, meaning I can bring along more support or DPS.
I see no net gain in taking a tank that takes more damage itself, but reflects a portion back for a small amount of damage back to the target, a setup that requires me to bring another healer or two in order to keep the tank alive, meaning one or two less DPS that would have done more damage than the tank is doing via reflect.
Of course, we can make the assumption that Intrepid won't balance the game, but if we make that assumption then there is no point in these discussions (not that there is much of a point to 90% of t his thread anyway).
I think what everyone has been trying to point out is TTK makes the bestest tank from a pure mitigation point of view an irrelevant strawman.
Yes, they will suck up less damage (penetration mitigation), but because they dish out less damage (vs reflection tank), the TTK until completion takes longer. So in one scenario the healers have to pump out more healing yes.....but they are pumping out more healing for less time to complete the content. Alternatively, they can go your route soaking up more damage but with a greater TTK.
So its swings and roundabouts at the end of the day if the game is balanced properly. I have no doubt some players will prefer a slow fight with lesser healing. Others will prefer a more exciting and hectic pace to wipe the boss ASAP.
Thats what makes alternate playstyle options viable.
I think what everyone has been trying to point out is TTK makes the bestest tank from a pure mitigation point of view an irrelevant strawman.
Yes, they will suck up less damage (penetration mitigation), but because they dish out less damage (vs reflection tank), the TTK until completion takes longer. So in one scenario the healers have to pump out more healing yes.....but they are pumping out more healing for less time to complete the content. Alternatively, they can go your route soaking up more damage but with a greater TTK.
So its swings and roundabouts at the end of the day if the game is balanced properly. I have no doubt some players will prefer a slow fight with lesser healing. Others will prefer a more exciting and hectic pace to wipe the boss ASAP.
Thats what makes alternate playstyle options viable.
This is true outside of difficult raid content, and that is why I have been saying that all the other tank types may well be preferred over a Guardian for anything other than such content.
However, with around 32 DPS and utility classes on a raid, the extra damage a tank could do is insignificant in the overall picture. However, the extra healing that a tank more focused on damage than mitigation would require is not insignificant.
This is not WoW. Class choice matters. Raid composition matters. If Spellshields are better at soloing, Nightshields better in group content, Paladins better in PvP and Guardians better in raid content, then those four classes are balanced against each other. They don't need to all be able to do all three.
Sorry but I disagree with this. I don't think the devs will make it so tanks are separated by content. I think they will be separated by how they reduce damage, by dodging, strait damage reduction, absorbs, self healing, ect. The reason is if they did make it by content then players would be forced to only play that type of tank, I doubt they want to force anything on players.
The reason is if they did make it by content then players would be forced to only play that type of tank, I doubt they want to force anything on players.
While I kind of agree with you in terms of the differences in classes being designed around the method in which things are done, you can't have different methods for things with the exact same outcome via all methods.
Even if the outcome is the same in the end, the path to it isn't - as explained when I talked about an avoidance tank vs a mitigation tank - but I'll quickly go over it again to illustrate my point.
If two tanks have 10,000 HP each, one mitigates 50% of damage and one avoids 50% of hits. Now if the mob hits every 2 seconds for 5,000 unmitigated damage, that means the healers for the mitigation tank have a steady 2,500 damage every 2 seconds they need to heal - easy (5,000 damage mitigated by 50% down to 2,500 damage). The avoidance tank though, he may avoid a hit - meaning the healers can't do anything for 2 seconds, and then may get hit by 2 or 3 hits in a row. If the healers doesn't heal this tank within 2 seconds of taking that first hit, the tank dies. If the healers doesn't heal the tank again within the next 2 seconds, the tank dies.
It is blatantly obvious which of these tanks any sane raid would want, even though both are actually perfectly balanced to negating 50% of all incoming damage.
Now, to be absolutely clear, when I say top end, competitive raids will want Guardians as their main tank, I am talking a *total* of 4 to 8 *characters* per server - assuming 2 - 4 competitive raid guilds (or group of friends - what ever) per server which in my experience is generous, and each guild wanting their main tank and a back-up main tank (not off tanks, they will likely be other tank classes). The kind of players that are in the position of main tanking a competitive raid are going to be which ever of the 8 tanking classes their guild needs them to be, because that is the mindset of players in that position.
If a player is not aiming to be one of these 4 to 8 characters, then they don't have any need to worry about which tank the competitive raids are using.
Clearly, we don't have the same expectation of balance because you expect (for no real reason) for Guardian to be balanced as a super-tank compared to the other 7 primary Tank archetypes.
My expectation of balance does not mean that you can pick any one of the 8 classes of a given archetype and expect to function as well in all situations as any other class of that archetype, no.
This is not WoW. Class choice matters. Raid composition matters. If Spellshields are better at soloing, Nightshields better in group content, Paladins better in PvP and Guardians better in raid content, then those four classes are balanced against each other. They don't need to all be able to do all three.
This game has 64 classes, not 8 classes each with 8 flavors.
Fortunately, if someone rolls up a Spellshield and then decides they want to tank group or raid content, the option is open to them to switch to a class that is better suited to that role.
Balance should mean that you can pick any sub-class of a primary archetype and still be viable to play the primary role of the primary archetype.
Primary archetype choice matters. Secondary archetype choice is mostly flavor. Secondary archetype choice should not make you unable to perform the role of the primary archetype. Any Tank sub-class should be able to perform the role of main well enough to succeed in top end raid content, in general.
You can have whatever expectation you wish. But, your expectation is not supported by what the devs have shared about Ashes game design. Your expectation is from playing previous MMORPGs with static endgame raid content.
Since there is no indication that the sub-classes are being designed in such a way that a Spellshield will be better at soloing, Nightshields better at group content, Paladins are better at PvP and Guardians are better at raid content, that is not a valid argument. Even if the devs were balancing the sub-classes to each be better at a specific types of combat -which is highly unlikely- for all we know, Paladin would be balanced to be better at raid content while Guardian is better at PvP.
Regardless, "better" is irrelevant since what is important is that the content is not balanced such that having some sub-class of Tank other than Guardian acting as main tank in a top end raid is objectively laughable.
Ashes has 64 subclasses. 8 sub-classes per 8 primary archetypes. So. Yes. There are 8 flavors of Tank. Paladin is not a separate class as it is in WoW or EQ or D&D. In Ashes, Paladin is a flavor of Tank: Tank abilities augmented/flavored with Cleric abilities.
A Spellshield's primary archetype is Tank, so they should not have to respec their secondary archetype in order to be the primary Tank in a group or raid.
This is speculation on your part, and one I totally disagree with.
Even *if* all classes are able to tank top end raid content while it is still competitive, if one tank class is even 1% better than the others - which is what you would have to expect the tankiest tank to be at a minimum (I would expect more like 5 - 7%) - tanks of competitive raid guilds *will* be that class, not because their guild forces them to, but because they want to be the best raid tank they can at any cost. In most cases, it will be the main tank that knows the in's and out's of tanking, and it will be them that makes the decision as to what class they need to be to best do their job.
A player that isn't willing to do what ever it takes to be the best what ever the cost won't be a competitive raid guilds main tank, and as such the whole conversation doesn't even apply to them.
The reason is if they did make it by content then players would be forced to only play that type of tank, I doubt they want to force anything on players.
While I kind of agree with you in terms of the differences in classes being designed around the method in which things are done, you can't have different methods for things with the exact same outcome via all methods.
Even if the outcome is the same in the end, the path to it isn't - as explained when I talked about an avoidance tank vs a mitigation tank - but I'll quickly go over it again to illustrate my point.
If two tanks have 10,000 HP each, one mitigates 50% of damage and one avoids 50% of hits. Now if the mob hits every 2 seconds for 5,000 unmitigated damage, that means the healers for the mitigation tank have a steady 2,500 damage every 2 seconds they need to heal - easy (5,000 damage mitigated by 50% down to 2,500 damage). The avoidance tank though, he may avoid a hit - meaning the healers can't do anything for 2 seconds, and then may get hit by 2 or 3 hits in a row. If the healers doesn't heal this tank within 2 seconds of taking that first hit, the tank dies. If the healers doesn't heal the tank again within the next 2 seconds, the tank dies.
It is blatantly obvious which of these tanks any sane raid would want, even though both are actually perfectly balanced to negating 50% of all incoming damage.
Now, to be absolutely clear, when I say top end, competitive raids will want Guardians as their main tank, I am talking a *total* of 4 to 8 *characters* per server - assuming 2 - 4 competitive raid guilds (or group of friends - what ever) per server which in my experience is generous, and each guild wanting their main tank and a back-up main tank (not off tanks, they will likely be other tank classes). The kind of players that are in the position of main tanking a competitive raid are going to be which ever of the 8 tanking classes their guild needs them to be, because that is the mindset of players in that position.
If a player is not aiming to be one of these 4 to 8 characters, then they don't have any need to worry about which tank the competitive raids are using.
I don't understand why the focus is on healers as if the side tanks could not be using Cover to protect the main tank from damage in addition to the healers doing what they normally do. I's not enough to simply give an example of mitigation v evasion, you have to also factor in any damage or utility at the time. What's important is that the specific group/raid of players learn how to synchronize their abilities to best advantage for the specific group/raid. What is a viable config when your main tank is a Spellshield or Nightshield rather than a Guardian? That is what players will determine as they band together for sieges and to defend against caravans. And they will have to learn that since the game is not so static that they can just wait around for a Guardian to come online and be available to participate.
Elitist raid guilds will probably want Guardians as main tank. Or whichever subclass of is determined to be the min/max most efficient main tank of the month. You are the only person who really cares about that. It's unimportant.
What's important is that the content is designed such that, in general, it's possible for top end raid content to be completed by raids with a Spellshield or Nightshield acting as main tank.
Again, your concept of raisin is obsolete because in Ashes, people won't be participating in top end raids just to compete or because they love raiding. The content will be more meaningful than that. Rather, people will be participating in top end raids in order to end the negative effects this top end raid bosses are having on the regions near their metropolis. There are 8 flavors of Tank. In general, people are not going to wait around for 1 out of 7 flavors of Tank to become available to help defeat the raid boss. Elitists will wait. We know.
No one is worried about what elitist raid guilds will do. Except you. You are talking about raid guilds, while we are talking about raid content.
I don't understand why the focus is on healers as if the side tanks could not be using Cover to protect the main tank from damage in addition to the healers doing what they normally do.
One simple reason.
Good raids don't use a side tank.
Good raids have a tank. If - and only if - the encounter requires it, the raid has a number of off-tanks as dictated by the encounter. If not needed as off-tanks, those characters instead act as DPS.
Side tanks are a tool used by raids without full confidence in their main tank - often caused by the main tank being the wrong class.
Good raids instead fill that raid spot with more DPS.
Every time we have said you are talking about raid guilds while we are talking about raid content you have said that is just semantics.
That's the logic.
It is semantics if you are talking about the same level of content - that is the argument I have made many times.
For days now I have specifically been using the term competitive raid content to avoid the issue.
lmfao For days you have been using 3 words. "Top end raids". I told you that you mean top end raid guilds. While we are talking about raid content and and raids that are formed from players who don't belong to raid guilds. You have repeatedly stated that is semantics, which, clearly it is not.
Content is content. Guilds are guilds. Can only be semantics if content is guilds and guilds are content.
You are talking about how elitist guilds configure their raids. We are talking about how the devs balance the raid content (bosses, adds, utility and other challenges). That's not semantics.
It is semantics if you are talking about the same level of content - that is the argument I have made many times.
For days now I have specifically been using the term competitive raid content to avoid the issue.
lmfao For days you have been using 3 words. "Top end raids". I told you that you mean top end raid guilds. While we are talking about raid content and and raids that are formed from players who don't belong to raid guilds. You have repeatedly stated that is semantics, which, clearly it is not.
I am also of the opinion that if any one group of players of AoC are going to be actually fine with needing a specific class for a specific role, it will be competitive PvE raiders.
Even *if* all classes are able to tank top end raid content while it is still competitive
Have you not been paying attention?
I have been absolutely clear this whole thread that I am talking about guilds or raids that are on the edge of first kills with content. Different people take issue with different terms that can be used and so I have altered terminology slightly, but it has been clear as to what I have been talking about.
I really hope the game gives you all the scenarios your speaking of. Im going to hold all my theorycraft on tanking till after I see the game and classes. Referencing the old way or an old game may be a little presumptuous in regards to this game.
This thread reminds me of the holy Trinity of MMO/RPG games. Ye olde Tanks/Healers/DPS and how it seems to be a unbreakable model.
Divinity Original Sin 2 was interesting in that your so called 'tanks' had to really really earn any tanking round by round as the AI would (like a player) go for the weakest link instead of predictably going for the tank. Making for some crazy combat especially at the higher difficulties.
I wonder if this trinity will ever be changed. I think AOC has a great chance with its dual class system
This thread reminds me of the holy Trinity of MMO/RPG games. Ye olde Tanks/Healers/DPS and how it seems to be a unbreakable model.
Divinity Original Sin 2 was interesting in that your so called 'tanks' had to really really earn any tanking round by round as the AI would (like a player) go for the weakest link instead of predictably going for the tank. Making for some crazy combat especially at the higher difficulties.
I wonder if this trinity will ever be changed. I think AOC has a great chance with its dual class system
The developers have specifically said they like the trinity system, and that AoC is making use of it with the addition of utility.
This is speculation on your part, and one I totally disagree with.
Even *if* all classes are able to tank top end raid content while it is still competitive, if one tank class is even 1% better than the others - which is what you would have to expect the tankiest tank to be at a minimum (I would expect more like 5 - 7%) - tanks of competitive raid guilds *will* be that class, not because their guild forces them to, but because they want to be the best raid tank they can at any cost. In most cases, it will be the main tank that knows the in's and out's of tanking, and it will be them that makes the decision as to what class they need to be to best do their job.
A player that isn't willing to do what ever it takes to be the best what ever the cost won't be a competitive raid guilds main tank, and as such the whole conversation doesn't even apply to them.
I think this is an interesting comment to notice because of the assumption that statistics will be readily available to users of the game. In a different thread, there was a conversation around combat and how to make it interesting, and one of the biggest elements that people (including myself) seemed to be returning to was the mystery and risk of the unknown.
I think statistics threaten to undermine that, and I wonder what the devs' position is with regards to analysable information. Sometimes, quantified data can be really useful; I wonder if in a fantasy game is one of those contexts. If people can't quantify the differences between tanks, then it will be down to theorycrafting and guesswork. I quite enjoy that, because it likely opens up more opportunities for people to play the way they'd like to, and also to shield them from arguably game-crushing experiences of "you can't use that spell X because it does 7.23% less DPS than spell Y over a sustained 6 minute 33 second fight where approximately 47 seconds are spent moving, not casting."
When does data become a blocker for having fun?
I query the necessity of it all (and this comes from someone who is competitive and has played and varying levels of varying games with statistical data readily analysable). Perhaps it would be better if we didn't know which tank was 1% better at mitigating damage. Perhaps the experience of healing and fighting should enlighten that; albeit not confirm it.
I think this is an interesting comment to notice because of the assumption that statistics will be readily available to users of the game.
I don't think statistics like that will be readily available - but they will be available to those that put the time in to work them out.
A games code is all 1's and 0's. It's systems are all based on basic math. Once you have enough data, it is easy (though potentially time consuming) to figure out how it all works.
To many people, figuring this stuff out is half the fun of the game.
I think this is an interesting comment to notice because of the assumption that statistics will be readily available to users of the game.
I don't think statistics like that will be readily available - but they will be available to those that put the time in to work them out.
A games code is all 1's and 0's. It's systems are all based on basic math. Once you have enough data, it is easy (though potentially time consuming) to figure out how it all works.
To many people, figuring this stuff out is half the fun of the game.
Sure, but it also kills half the fun of the game when 32 out of 64 classes are considered sub-optimal. I'm intrigued, without information coming directly from the game, how would one go about calculating whether build A or build B was better at DPS/healing/tanking? You could theorycraft what you think might be best, but that's not the same thing and wouldn't hold nearly as much weight in shifting the game's dynamics.
I'm intrigued, without information coming directly from the game, how would one go about calculating whether build A or build B was better at DPS/healing/tanking?
Hit someone and see what happens.
Change the parameters, hit them again and see what happens.
Collect thousands of data points.
Calculate.
Also, no one is trying to shift the games dynamics with any information. I will figure out what I need to know to make decisions I need to make about my class choice, and about the composition of my raid.
As will many other guilds.
Fortunately, some things are easier than others to figure out.
and how many times in this thread have I specifically used the three words top end raid ?
In none of the quotes you provided do you use the term "competitive raid content."
Have I, in any way, made it unclear at all what I am talking about?
Edit; actually, don't answer that.
I have made what I am tanking about very clear. You arguing otherwise is simply because you have nothing left to argue with in regards to my actual point.
You could try and argue that what I am saying won't hold true in other content - but that wouldn't be much of a debate or discussion, because I'd totally agree with you.
You could try and argue that there would be ways around it even on the content I am talking about - things like "side tanks" - and I would still say it may be possible, but that is not the player type I am talking about as no self respecting serious raider would raid with a side tank.
Basically, all you have left to do is argue pointless semantics, or give up.
Yes. You have been all over the place, conflating raiders with top end raid guilds and top end raid content with top end raid guilds. And making up completely unsubstantiated claims about the game design. But, it's not like you will ever admit your own failings, so...
Quick off topic that leads to the same topic, wow thats a bit strange wording. So, I don't think this is a holy trinity game, I think it is a quad. There are references to tanks, DPS, healers, and support. The quad is nothing new there where a few games that imputed it into game play, but that really changes the way raiding was run. The effects of a buffer side changed what people where looking for in the tank. If they had a strong damage absorb support they insisted on a high DPS tank over a defensive one. While if they had a DPS buffer they wanted a more defensive or control tank. That's where min/max is subject, if a support class adds a stronger utility than what a tank is more popular for, the raid will swap the tank for what they feel will make the run time shorter. Sure, a super defensive tank will make it so you beat a boss, but if you have a tank that with the support will kill the same boss faster you choose the faster tank. At some point the hard core elite raiders won't be the only players finishing the end content, so their new challenge is to do it faster than anyone else. That in itself changes the makeup of the raid.
Comments
Paladins can heal themselves and Spellshield can avoid damage.
I mean, shield is right there in the names Nightshield and Spellshield so, unlikely that they will be taking more damage than Guardian - just using other forms of shields besides a mundane shield.
What you personally choose to take is really irrelevant from how the game is objectively balanced.
In fact, I even talked about that in my previous post where I said I am expecting Intrepid to balance the game reasonably well.
Obviously you don't have that same expectation of balance, otherwise you wouldn't refer to the super-tank as the tankiest tank, and then in the same thread say that the Spellshield may avoid damage just as well.
I meant that a Spellshield can evade damage.
By tankiest Tank, I mean that Guardian will be augmenting Tank abilities with Tank abilities while a Nightshield and Spellshield will be augmenting Tank abilities with Rogue and Mage abilities, respectively.
A Guardian will tank like a Tank, a Nightshield will tank like a Rogue and a Spellshield will tank like a Mage. But that is really a matter of flavor.
Shouldn't really matter much if a blow doesn't hit the Tank due to a mundane shield or due to a Shadow Puppet/Decoy or due to Blink.
Shouldn't really matter much if Hatred is augmented with Shield Bash or Poison or Fireball.
Clearly, we don't have the same expectation of balance because you expect (for no real reason) for Guardian to be balanced as a super-tank compared to the other 7 primary Tank archetypes.
This is not WoW. Class choice matters. Raid composition matters. If Spellshields are better at soloing, Nightshields better in group content, Paladins better in PvP and Guardians better in raid content, then those four classes are balanced against each other. They don't need to all be able to do all three.
This game has 64 classes, not 8 classes each with 8 flavors.
Fortunately, if someone rolls up a Spellshield and then decides they want to tank group or raid content, the option is open to them to switch to a class that is better suited to that role.
Yes, they will suck up less damage (penetration mitigation), but because they dish out less damage (vs reflection tank), the TTK until completion takes longer. So in one scenario the healers have to pump out more healing yes.....but they are pumping out more healing for less time to complete the content. Alternatively, they can go your route soaking up more damage but with a greater TTK.
So its swings and roundabouts at the end of the day if the game is balanced properly. I have no doubt some players will prefer a slow fight with lesser healing. Others will prefer a more exciting and hectic pace to wipe the boss ASAP.
Thats what makes alternate playstyle options viable.
However, with around 32 DPS and utility classes on a raid, the extra damage a tank could do is insignificant in the overall picture. However, the extra healing that a tank more focused on damage than mitigation would require is not insignificant.
Even if the outcome is the same in the end, the path to it isn't - as explained when I talked about an avoidance tank vs a mitigation tank - but I'll quickly go over it again to illustrate my point.
If two tanks have 10,000 HP each, one mitigates 50% of damage and one avoids 50% of hits. Now if the mob hits every 2 seconds for 5,000 unmitigated damage, that means the healers for the mitigation tank have a steady 2,500 damage every 2 seconds they need to heal - easy (5,000 damage mitigated by 50% down to 2,500 damage). The avoidance tank though, he may avoid a hit - meaning the healers can't do anything for 2 seconds, and then may get hit by 2 or 3 hits in a row. If the healers doesn't heal this tank within 2 seconds of taking that first hit, the tank dies. If the healers doesn't heal the tank again within the next 2 seconds, the tank dies.
It is blatantly obvious which of these tanks any sane raid would want, even though both are actually perfectly balanced to negating 50% of all incoming damage.
Now, to be absolutely clear, when I say top end, competitive raids will want Guardians as their main tank, I am talking a *total* of 4 to 8 *characters* per server - assuming 2 - 4 competitive raid guilds (or group of friends - what ever) per server which in my experience is generous, and each guild wanting their main tank and a back-up main tank (not off tanks, they will likely be other tank classes). The kind of players that are in the position of main tanking a competitive raid are going to be which ever of the 8 tanking classes their guild needs them to be, because that is the mindset of players in that position.
If a player is not aiming to be one of these 4 to 8 characters, then they don't have any need to worry about which tank the competitive raids are using.
Primary archetype choice matters.
Secondary archetype choice is mostly flavor.
Secondary archetype choice should not make you unable to perform the role of the primary archetype.
Any Tank sub-class should be able to perform the role of main well enough to succeed in top end raid content, in general.
You can have whatever expectation you wish.
But, your expectation is not supported by what the devs have shared about Ashes game design.
Your expectation is from playing previous MMORPGs with static endgame raid content.
Since there is no indication that the sub-classes are being designed in such a way that a Spellshield will be better at soloing, Nightshields better at group content, Paladins are better at PvP and Guardians are better at raid content, that is not a valid argument.
Even if the devs were balancing the sub-classes to each be better at a specific types of combat -which is highly unlikely- for all we know, Paladin would be balanced to be better at raid content while Guardian is better at PvP.
Regardless, "better" is irrelevant since what is important is that the content is not balanced such that having some sub-class of Tank other than Guardian acting as main tank in a top end raid is objectively laughable.
Ashes has 64 subclasses.
8 sub-classes per 8 primary archetypes.
So. Yes. There are 8 flavors of Tank.
Paladin is not a separate class as it is in WoW or EQ or D&D.
In Ashes, Paladin is a flavor of Tank: Tank abilities augmented/flavored with Cleric abilities.
A Spellshield's primary archetype is Tank, so they should not have to respec their secondary archetype in order to be the primary Tank in a group or raid.
Even *if* all classes are able to tank top end raid content while it is still competitive, if one tank class is even 1% better than the others - which is what you would have to expect the tankiest tank to be at a minimum (I would expect more like 5 - 7%) - tanks of competitive raid guilds *will* be that class, not because their guild forces them to, but because they want to be the best raid tank they can at any cost. In most cases, it will be the main tank that knows the in's and out's of tanking, and it will be them that makes the decision as to what class they need to be to best do their job.
A player that isn't willing to do what ever it takes to be the best what ever the cost won't be a competitive raid guilds main tank, and as such the whole conversation doesn't even apply to them.
I's not enough to simply give an example of mitigation v evasion, you have to also factor in any damage or utility at the time.
What's important is that the specific group/raid of players learn how to synchronize their abilities to best advantage for the specific group/raid.
What is a viable config when your main tank is a Spellshield or Nightshield rather than a Guardian?
That is what players will determine as they band together for sieges and to defend against caravans.
And they will have to learn that since the game is not so static that they can just wait around for a Guardian to come online and be available to participate.
Elitist raid guilds will probably want Guardians as main tank. Or whichever subclass of is determined to be the min/max most efficient main tank of the month.
You are the only person who really cares about that.
It's unimportant.
What's important is that the content is designed such that, in general, it's possible for top end raid content to be completed by raids with a Spellshield or Nightshield acting as main tank.
Again, your concept of raisin is obsolete because in Ashes, people won't be participating in top end raids just to compete or because they love raiding.
The content will be more meaningful than that.
Rather, people will be participating in top end raids in order to end the negative effects this top end raid bosses are having on the regions near their metropolis.
There are 8 flavors of Tank.
In general, people are not going to wait around for 1 out of 7 flavors of Tank to become available to help defeat the raid boss.
Elitists will wait. We know.
No one is worried about what elitist raid guilds will do. Except you.
You are talking about raid guilds, while we are talking about raid content.
Good raids don't use a side tank.
Good raids have a tank. If - and only if - the encounter requires it, the raid has a number of off-tanks as dictated by the encounter. If not needed as off-tanks, those characters instead act as DPS.
Side tanks are a tool used by raids without full confidence in their main tank - often caused by the main tank being the wrong class.
Good raids instead fill that raid spot with more DPS. That is what I've been saying all along, and what you and others have been attacking me for saying.
What has made you suddenly agree with me? Logic perhaps?
That's the logic.
For days now I have specifically been using the term competitive raid content to avoid the issue.
For days you have been using 3 words.
"Top end raids".
I told you that you mean top end raid guilds.
While we are talking about raid content and and raids that are formed from players who don't belong to raid guilds.
You have repeatedly stated that is semantics, which, clearly it is not.
Content is content.
Guilds are guilds.
Can only be semantics if content is guilds and guilds are content.
You are talking about how elitist guilds configure their raids.
We are talking about how the devs balance the raid content (bosses, adds, utility and other challenges).
That's not semantics.
I have been absolutely clear this whole thread that I am talking about guilds or raids that are on the edge of first kills with content. Different people take issue with different terms that can be used and so I have altered terminology slightly, but it has been clear as to what I have been talking about.
Ye olde Tanks/Healers/DPS and how it seems to be a unbreakable model.
Divinity Original Sin 2 was interesting in that your so called 'tanks' had to really really earn any tanking round by round as the AI would (like a player) go for the weakest link instead of predictably going for the tank. Making for some crazy combat especially at the higher difficulties.
I wonder if this trinity will ever be changed. I think AOC has a great chance with its dual class system
I think statistics threaten to undermine that, and I wonder what the devs' position is with regards to analysable information. Sometimes, quantified data can be really useful; I wonder if in a fantasy game is one of those contexts. If people can't quantify the differences between tanks, then it will be down to theorycrafting and guesswork. I quite enjoy that, because it likely opens up more opportunities for people to play the way they'd like to, and also to shield them from arguably game-crushing experiences of "you can't use that spell X because it does 7.23% less DPS than spell Y over a sustained 6 minute 33 second fight where approximately 47 seconds are spent moving, not casting."
When does data become a blocker for having fun?
I query the necessity of it all (and this comes from someone who is competitive and has played and varying levels of varying games with statistical data readily analysable). Perhaps it would be better if we didn't know which tank was 1% better at mitigating damage. Perhaps the experience of healing and fighting should enlighten that; albeit not confirm it.
A games code is all 1's and 0's. It's systems are all based on basic math. Once you have enough data, it is easy (though potentially time consuming) to figure out how it all works.
To many people, figuring this stuff out is half the fun of the game.
Change the parameters, hit them again and see what happens.
Collect thousands of data points.
Calculate.
Also, no one is trying to shift the games dynamics with any information. I will figure out what I need to know to make decisions I need to make about my class choice, and about the composition of my raid.
As will many other guilds.
Fortunately, some things are easier than others to figure out.
Edit; actually, don't answer that.
I have made what I am tanking about very clear. You arguing otherwise is simply because you have nothing left to argue with in regards to my actual point.
You could try and argue that what I am saying won't hold true in other content - but that wouldn't be much of a debate or discussion, because I'd totally agree with you.
You could try and argue that there would be ways around it even on the content I am talking about - things like "side tanks" - and I would still say it may be possible, but that is not the player type I am talking about as no self respecting serious raider would raid with a side tank.
Basically, all you have left to do is argue pointless semantics, or give up.
And making up completely unsubstantiated claims about the game design.
But, it's not like you will ever admit your own failings, so...
Back to discussing Tanks specifically.