Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.

Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

The problem with having “Tank” as a class name

13468944

Comments

  • How about "meat shield"?

    Honestly ; this is a bit odd but... I don't know. What would be more fitting ? Defenders?
  • DamoklesDamokles Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited August 2020
    Yuyukoyay wrote: »
    delghinn wrote: »
    Samson wrote: »
    Out of the 64 available classes... none are called "Tank".

    however all the tank/* whatever will be referred to as tank when looking for group etc or having any conversation regarding the class/archetype.

    They were going to be referred to as a tank anyway though. No matter what name they give the archetype people are going to be saying looking for a tank. So they just made the term correct while they were at it.

    We dont know if they are the only tank though. Fighter could also be a tank tbh.
    a6XEiIf.gif
  • SentSent Member, Alpha Two
    edited January 2021
    Fantastic AoC developers, please consider changing the Tank archetype name.

    Possible replacements may include: defender, protector or even champion.

    In the MMO jargon, the word tank indicates one the roles of the trinity Damager-Healer-Tank, no need to use it for an archetype too.

    Since you are MMO experts, I'm lead to think this is intentional. It seems that the Tank archetype will be the most apt, if not the only, at covering the tanking role. Was this name choice meant to avoid any possible confusion?

    See also:
    https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/249442/#Comment_249442
    LA MANO NERA - Gilda Italiana - Sei pronto ad unirti all'Ordine della Mano Nera? Questa può essere la tua occasione
    CLICCA QUI PER UNIRTI ALL'ORDINE
    ya0bgx8sxy7p.jpg
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited September 2020
    Sent wrote: »
    Since you are MMO experts
    That is saying a little bit too much.

    Edit; though I agree, the archetype name should be changed.
  • Sadly everyone, including me, has been asking for class/archetype name changes for a long time now. But Intrepid hasn't changed them. So it is what it is.
  • why though
  • I agree ... the name tank is silly as heck ... why not have one called healer ... and another called DPS ... I had just been thinking it’s a placeholder name and surely it is ... right?
  • SylvanarSylvanar Member
    edited September 2020
    I agree, though I would like to nominate two more classes:
    - Ranger
    - Fighter

    Class name should imply the role of the class and not be the role itself.
    I mean all the classes will have fighting capability and I doubt mage & other healers will have melee option.
    "Suffer in silence"
  • maouwmaouw Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I like "Vanguard" <--- such a pretty word.
    but I dunno if people will miss the meaning.
    I wish I were deep and tragic
  • Yokai TheaterYokai Theater Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Tank is not a placeholder name and this is something thing people have been arguing about since the class list was put out on 12/15/2017
  • Sylvanar wrote: »
    I agree, though I would like to nominate two more classes:
    - Ranger
    - Fighter

    Class name should imply the role of the class and not be the role itself.
    I mean all the classes will have fighting capability and I doubt mage & other healers will have melee option.

    ranger is a d&d class, as is fighter
  • SentSent Member, Alpha Two
    edited September 2020
    Bard, cleric, fighter, mage, ranger, rogue and summoner are well established class names. Most of them date back to the oldest editions of D&D.

    To me, those names come with quite a lot of assumption about what the class will do and, more importantly, how will do it.

    I guess you cannot mistake what the tank archetype role will be.

    But that's kind of a problem, I don't like being pigeonholed into a role.
    We don't know enough about augments but, will a tank+fighter be taken seriously as a DPS in a raid?
    It still sounds like a (off)tank to me.
    LA MANO NERA - Gilda Italiana - Sei pronto ad unirti all'Ordine della Mano Nera? Questa può essere la tua occasione
    CLICCA QUI PER UNIRTI ALL'ORDINE
    ya0bgx8sxy7p.jpg
  • I have to agree that, from the moment I read the "Tank" label, I felt like it was out of place.

    In my mind, all the other class names fit well into the paradigm of what a class name should be... a categorical or professional title that you might find a character using in person. "I'm a Ranger" or "I'm a Sorcerer". Cultural knowledge of these titles will then provide the player with a hint of what that class can do... and from there you can meta-game-think about where they may fall in the Tank/Heal/DPS trinity.

    In my experience, that's basically the traditional separation of the thought processes. Class names on one hand, and trinity focus on the other. Why keep these two things separate? Simple... it helps immersion. Yes, it's a small detail... but immersion is a delicate thing. It doesn't take much to shatter the illusion... especially when it comes to traditional "gamer-culture" traditions, like class names.

    Also, I think the problem is made worse by the fact that the word in question is "Tank". I'm a long-time gamer and a history buff... so I admit that I'm probably biased... but a "Tank" is not a profession or a class, it's a multi-ton armored vehicle that gained prominence in World War 1 & 2. When I hear "Tank" in that in-character sense, it yanks me right out of High Fantasy and pulls me into Blitzkrieg. In a meta-game context, not a problem at all... because it conveys a concept. As a class name, though, it's a major break from the genre... at least to me.

    Emotionally, it's like if they re-named one of the other classes "DPS". Seriously... could you see a character saying "I'm Korvath... a DPS of the Dwarven Lands." LoL... obviously not.

    So ultimately, I think those are the two biggest sticking points in this issue. First, class name and trinity role are two separate things... using a trinity role AS a class name breaks the logical pattern and, indeed, may pigeon-hole people's thinking about the classes in general. Second, the word "Tank" just doesn't fit into High Fantasy... I think changing it would be a benefit to immersion.

    Just a thought... and my 2 cents' worth.

    Have a great day, everybody. :)
  • DamoklesDamokles Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Just call him Champion/Defender/etc and be done with it.
    a6XEiIf.gif
  • My main problem with the naming is that Tank is a combat role, not a class archetype, and thus doesn't fit in with the rest of the archetype names.
    Tank is part of the holy trinity, Tank/Healer/DPS. The class archetype that fills the combat role of "tank" would be guardian or defender or something along those lines, similar to how the class archetype that fills the combat role of "healer" is cleric.
    If Tank is to be called Tank, I do not see why Cleric is not called Healer. There is no archetype named "Healer". There is no archetype named "Ranged Physical DPS" or "Ranged Magical DPS".
    Either go for generic combat role descriptors like that or go for proper archetype names. Having everything be themed one way and then just throwing in "Tank" as an odd one out doesn't make all that much sense. Pick a theme and stick to it.
  • Its not just Tank either; so many of the class names are repetitive. Just look at how many times they've repeated the name "Shadow" for different classes. You could easily use other synonyms like night/void etc. to make it sound a little different. But they haven't.
  • KezzicKezzic Member, Alpha Two
    I would also really like it changed to something more fantasy related. Tank is a meta gamer term. I’d prefer Vanguard or Defender or Protector or Guardian or something. Defender probably is the most neutral and would make sense related to the other Primary Class words like “Fighter” or “Ranger”.
  • maouw wrote: »
    I like "Vanguard" <--- such a pretty word.
    but I dunno if people will miss the meaning.

    This.
  • I agree 100%.

    It should be changed to something like Protector, Vanguard, etc.

    I don't like a class named "tank".

    That's my opinion.
  • maouw wrote: »
    I like "Vanguard" <--- such a pretty word.
    but I dunno if people will miss the meaning.

    Actually that's a really good word AND descriptor for the role they are going to perform.

    There is also a dictionary and/or google for those that do not know it's meaning. Will help to expand their vocabulary a bit! :)

    I mentioned this in a previous, similar thread but if we are going to change things, Dreadnought should be changed as well.
    isFikWd2_o.jpg
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Tank is a fine name.
    TVMenSP.png
    This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
  • ChunksChunks Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I enjoy Tank more than some traditional alternatives that sound kinda cheesy, but I'm on board for that change
  • BaSkA_9x2BaSkA_9x2 Member, Alpha Two
    Has Steven ever talked about this specific matter? Is there any chance they would consider changing the class name? Would an official poll made by Intrepid Studios here, on Reddit, etc be enough to at least bring some attention to this?

    I don't think a bad class name is a big deal, but at the same time I don't see any reason to have bad class names.
    🎶Galo é Galo o resto é bosta🎶
  • nidriksnidriks Member, Warrior of Old, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited September 2020
    I agree with this. It's the one thing that I haven't liked since I heard it in AoC. I'd much rather see a class named warrior or protector.

    I guess the main reason they must have went with tank is not using up a name they wanted for the augmented class names.

    I do look at the primary class names and they all seem to be pretty standard to me though. What I think would be cool is to have your class name vary in some way before you reach the stage at which you augment. Depending on what abilities you favour you'll get a different pre-augmentation title. For example (and this is just quick off me head), a tank that tries to dps more will be known as a ruffian, but if they do tank more then they'll be a page (trying to think of a better one).

    A summoner that goes full on dps could be a magician and one that relies on their pet chiefly could be a master (or something less advanced sounding).

    Either that or I'd like to see augmentation come in stages. Maybe get some abilities at 10 or 15 then more at 25. I'd like to see some choices to branch your playstyle out before 25. 1 to 25 in an MMO can seem a long time.
  • Meh.

    You'll only be playing a "tank" until level 25. After that you'll have eight other names for your class to pick from.

    And everyone will still refer to you as a tank regardless of what the archetype is named.
  • Noaani wrote: »
    Sent wrote: »
    Since you are MMO experts
    That is saying a little bit too much.

    Edit; though I agree, the archetype name should be changed.

    I think they should remain "tank" with the tank/tank combo being called Supatank, and they would have an exclusive class skill called: DPS Meter.

    In addition to seeing the entire party/raid's DPS it would also allow the Supatank to delete the account of any player that has lower DPS than the Supatank.
  • CaptnChuckCaptnChuck Member
    edited September 2020
    BaSkA13 wrote: »
    Has Steven ever talked about this specific matter? Is there any chance they would consider changing the class name? Would an official poll made by Intrepid Studios here, on Reddit, etc be enough to at least bring some attention to this?

    I don't think a bad class name is a big deal, but at the same time I don't see any reason to have bad class names.

    Jahlon asked Steven. He asked him to change the tank name and a few other class names as well. But Steven was unwilling to do so.
  • GruntagGruntag Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    This is such a silly post. Nothing to see here.

    Keep tank as named and designed
  • FuryBladeborneFuryBladeborne Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Someone should merge all of these threads into a megathread.
  • Hurf DerfmanHurf Derfman Member
    edited September 2020
    Someone should merge all of these threads into a megathread.

    Top 3 mega threads:
    DPS meters
    Corruption and why I don't understand it
    Rename the Tank archetype
Sign In or Register to comment.