Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

The problem with having “Tank” as a class name

145791043

Comments

  • DamoklesDamokles Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Someone should merge all of these threads into a megathread.

    Too 3 mega threads:
    DPS meters
    Corruption and why I don't understand it
    Rename the Tank archetype

    Dont forget the dual shields mega thread! XD
    a6XEiIf.gif
  • Damokles wrote: »
    Someone should merge all of these threads into a megathread.

    Too 3 mega threads:
    DPS meters
    Corruption and why I don't understand it
    Rename the Tank archetype

    Dont forget the dual shields mega thread! XD

    Definitely honorable mention/runner up for sure.
  • SentSent Member
    edited September 2020
    I did some digging and found this. Relevant question at 58:54
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L30qJOqZUAg&feature=youtu.be&t=3534
    They want the base archetype name to clearly reflect the role.

    I'm dubious about Bard to be perceived as a party buffer for those who never played D&D.

  • I personally like Champion.
  • maouwmaouw Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Sent wrote: »
    I did some digging and found this. Relevant question at 58:54
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L30qJOqZUAg&feature=youtu.be&t=3534
    They want the base archetype name to clearly reflect the role.

    I'm dubious about Bard to be perceived as a party buffer for those who never played D&D.

    "so... why is a bard coming to the battlefield with his lute?"
    :D:D:D
    I wish I were deep and tragic
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited September 2020
    Tank is an anachronistic name with no place in a fantasy game that doesn’t have any idea what a “tank” is. Prior to WW1 the term didn’t have anything to do with warfare or armor.

    Fun fact: the term “tank” was a code word meant to keep the military secret about what was being developed. In 1915, when tanks were being built they tried to hide what was being made so they called these huge metal structures “tanks” so that people thought they were meant to hold liquids, not protect soldiers as war vehicles. The name stuck and so the vehicles kept the name.

    We might as well be calling them “barrels” or “casks” for as much sense as this idiotic name means. :angry:

    Next up: let’s call mages “Pew-Pews” and fighters are now “Hackenslashers”.
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • I was just talking about this with others, especially as it affects the future abbreviations that will inevitably happen.

    Lord of the rings online managed to come with interesting names for their trinity based system.

    That being said, why couldn't fighter be mercenary (sword for hire), tank could be soldier or guard, ranger could be Woodsman or something, heck even mage could be wizard (because isnt summoner just a mage who specialized?) and I don't know about the others.

    But in regards to this
    CaptnChuck wrote: »
    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.

    I feel like if this really matters, and we keep talking like it does, then eventually some kind of change will occur.
  • MarcetMarcet Member
    edited September 2020
    Change the name to vanguard, protector, guardian or whatever. Tank is a made up word for a role in a game not a class.... It seems very bad calling it "tank". It doesnt seem like fantasy world.
  • KhronusKhronus Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Damokles wrote: »
    Just call him Champion/Defender/etc and be done with it.

    Defender is where it's at IMO. It's very clearly defining what the role is but it isn't as silly as the word "tank". I keep seeing this pop up as a concern and it will eventually be changed I'm assuming.
  • maouwmaouw Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Petition to rename:
    • Rogue --> DPS Melee
    • Ranger --> DPS Ranged
    • Mage --> DPS Magic
    • Cleric --> Healer

    Then all will be right in the world.
    I wish I were deep and tragic
  • KhronusKhronus Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited September 2020
    What if as a community we just changed the name ourselves. From now on we call it Defender. When mentioning it in posts or questions for the team, just use Defender until it sticks and they change it haha. Might work!
  • AmmaAmma Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    maouw wrote: »
    Petition to rename:
    • Rogue --> DPS Melee
    • Ranger --> DPS Ranged
    • Mage --> DPS Magic
    • Cleric --> Healer

    Then all will be right in the world.

    I support that. If IS uses the reason that the archetype has to tell us what the character is all about, then we need to change the names, at least here in the chat, until IS understands that choosing a trinity-role as a Name is..."not so well done".
    Lets make a full list:
    - Tank is already there :-)
    - Cleric -> Healer
    - Bard -> Support
    - Warrior -> Sword-DD
    - Rogue -> Dagger-DD
    - Mage -> Range-Magic-DD
    - Ranger -> Range-Physical-DD
    - Summoner -> Pet-DD

    And if someone gets the idea to tell me, that warriors can use more than swords, well.....Tanks can do more than tanking, so......have fun. :-)
  • maouw wrote: »
    Petition to rename:
    • Rogue --> DPS Melee
    • Ranger --> DPS Ranged
    • Mage --> DPS Magic
    • Cleric --> Healer

    Then all will be right in the world.

    Exactly...
  • IzilIzil Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Champion would be good name
    Izil.png
  • Adding my small voice to a topic that will likely resurface a hundred times before launch.

    The main argument against the "Tank" name seems to be that it's immersion breaking as hell. This is both valid and extremely important for a game that continues to tout immersion as one of its main selling points.

    The only argument for "Tank" that holds any water is that people might choose the wrong class and feel stuck in a role they didn't want. That's fair, I suppose. But it can also be easily mitigated by having accurate descriptions of the archetypes available to players at the character creation screen. Heck, just put a banner across the top saying, in bold, red letters: THIS IS THE TANK ARCHETYPE

    That being said, I wouldn't be totally surprised if this all turned out to be an elaborate prank/inside joke by the devs. "Tank" will persist all the way up through the betas, then BOOM! Name change at launch.

    (On a personal note, I'm partial to Vanguard as a more appropriate name :smile: )
  • Love this post.

    Tank is so boring and overused hopefully they can change it in the future!
    Snarkotics_V1.png
  • AtiqaAtiqa Member
    edited September 2020
    Like has been mentioned, "Tank" wouldn't really mean anything in the world of Verra. At least not in a way that makes sense.

    I'm perfectly fine with all the other ones, because they make sense, but unless there are tanks (the war kind) hidden somewhere in Verra, nobody would call someone a "tank".

    Pretty easy fix too. I don't mind really what they would change it to. Guardian would still keep it clear that it's a tank archetype (ofc changing tank + tank name), but anything that makes sense really.
  • Hurf DerfmanHurf Derfman Member
    edited September 2020
    Atama wrote: »
    Next up: let’s call mages “Pew-Pews” and fighters are now “Hackenslashers”.

    I hear by petition to have Mages formerly addressed as Pewpews.

    While we're at it let's just rename everybody to better match their play style.

    Fighter: Tankwabnabe
    Cleric: Bae
    Rogue: Coward
    Ranger: Bow Coward
    Summoner: BadPewpew
    Bard: FknNoob
    Tank: Chad

    And then whatever dumb name Tank/tank has should be changed to:
    TOTALCHAD
  • DamoklesDamokles Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Atama wrote: »
    Next up: let’s call mages “Pew-Pews” and fighters are now “Hackenslashers”.

    I hear by petition to have Mages formerly addressed as Pewpews.

    While we're at it let's just rename everybody to better match their play style.

    Fighter: Tankwabnabe
    Cleric: Bae
    Rogue: Coward
    Ranger: Bow Coward
    Summoner: BadPewpew
    Bard: FknNoob
    Tank: Chad

    And then whatever dumb name Tank/tank has should be changed to:
    TOTALCHAD

    Fighter: MeChargeNow?
    Rogue: Stabby McStabsomemore
    Ranger: PewPew
    Tank: Masochist-Inc.
    Bard: Seduction101
    a6XEiIf.gif
  • VolgaireVolgaire Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    We asked 2 years ago and still no change, I don't mind it too much but tank really feels off considering what a tank really is and all. I also had a problem with how mage + mage gives archwizard not archmage but thats far less of an issue.
  • Steven has already answered why 'Tank' is named the way it is. The name of your class will be chosen from the 64 classes that are available... your class name will not be 'Tank'. It's time to move on.
    sig-Samson-Final.gif
  • VolgaireVolgaire Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Samson wrote: »
    Steven has already answered why 'Tank' is named the way it is. The name of your class will be chosen from the 64 classes that are available... your class name will not be 'Tank'. It's time to move on.

    It will be until you get your second archetype and all the other ones have well proper names, tank just sticks out really badly.
  • Samson wrote: »
    your class name will not be 'Tank'

    No. It will just be the name of the class/archetype/role/etc you use for half of your leveling experience.

    So I suppose we should instead just spend the first two weeks of gameplay saying "im a future knight" or other such nonsense?
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Samson wrote: »
    Steven has already answered why 'Tank' is named the way it is. The name of your class will be chosen from the 64 classes that are available... your class name will not be 'Tank'. It's time to move on.
    No it won’t, you don’t pick from 64 classes when you play the game. You pick from 8, one of which is Tank. You can’t get a subclass until later in the game.

    It doesn’t make it any less ridiculous, lazy, and wrong. Intrepid has done a lot of really good things, it’s silly that they’ve done something this blatantly stupid.
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • Atama wrote: »
    Samson wrote: »
    Steven has already answered why 'Tank' is named the way it is. The name of your class will be chosen from the 64 classes that are available... your class name will not be 'Tank'. It's time to move on.
    No it won’t, you don’t pick from 64 classes when you play the game. You pick from 8, one of which is Tank. You can’t get a subclass until later in the game.

    It doesn’t make it any less ridiculous, lazy, and wrong. Intrepid has done a lot of really good things, it’s silly that they’ve done something this blatantly stupid.

    Technically old chap, you pick an archetype and are playing as an archetype until level 25 at which point you choose a second archetype and form your class.

    It wouldn't do to be inadvertently spreading disinformation. Now, would it?
  • Is it really that big of an issue though? I don't think many people would get that confused of the Archetype naming, regardless of it being the name of the role as well. I mean, I just can't see the problem here, other than people finding the naming choice dull, uninspired, or lazy. Sorry, I guess I just fail to see the big picture; compared to other things.
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Atama wrote: »
    Samson wrote: »
    Steven has already answered why 'Tank' is named the way it is. The name of your class will be chosen from the 64 classes that are available... your class name will not be 'Tank'. It's time to move on.
    No it won’t, you don’t pick from 64 classes when you play the game. You pick from 8, one of which is Tank. You can’t get a subclass until later in the game.

    It doesn’t make it any less ridiculous, lazy, and wrong. Intrepid has done a lot of really good things, it’s silly that they’ve done something this blatantly stupid.

    Technically old chap, you pick an archetype and are playing as an archetype until level 25 at which point you choose a second archetype and form your class.

    It wouldn't do to be inadvertently spreading disinformation. Now, would it?
    Now that is semantics. What they call an archetype is really a class. Intrepid can make up terms but gamers know what things are. In no way is a class as Intrepid calls it, a class. Your weasel speech is unimpressive, and sorry but there is no “gotcha” here pal. :)

    In reality, no you’re stuck with a stupid class name for 25 levels if you want to be any of the 8 sub-types of the class Intrepid is calling a “Tank”. Hopefully they get around to fixing this sometime in the next year or so.
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • Don't you guys feel like some of the class names are repetitive as well?

    There are 6 classes with Shadow in their name. You can easily replace them with like Void/Night/Twilight or something.

    Also, wtf is a NightSpell? Or an Argent? Or a Scion?

    Some of these class names are super generic while others are pretty cool. I wish they were more open to changing these generic class names.
  • Its in pre-alpha still

    I think the devs should just do a sort of community poll. Give us a blank class template and ask people to rename all the base 8 and then the 64 advanced classes.

    Then they can see if there are sugestions that the community wants which might be better.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited September 2020
    Atama wrote: »
    Atama wrote: »
    Samson wrote: »
    Steven has already answered why 'Tank' is named the way it is. The name of your class will be chosen from the 64 classes that are available... your class name will not be 'Tank'. It's time to move on.
    No it won’t, you don’t pick from 64 classes when you play the game. You pick from 8, one of which is Tank. You can’t get a subclass until later in the game.

    It doesn’t make it any less ridiculous, lazy, and wrong. Intrepid has done a lot of really good things, it’s silly that they’ve done something this blatantly stupid.

    Technically old chap, you pick an archetype and are playing as an archetype until level 25 at which point you choose a second archetype and form your class.

    It wouldn't do to be inadvertently spreading disinformation. Now, would it?
    Now that is semantics. What they call an archetype is really a class. Intrepid can make up terms but gamers know what things are. In no way is a class as Intrepid calls it, a class. Your weasel speech is unimpressive, and sorry but there is no “gotcha” here pal. :)

    In reality, no you’re stuck with a stupid class name for 25 levels if you want to be any of the 8 sub-types of the class Intrepid is calling a “Tank”. Hopefully they get around to fixing this sometime in the next year or so.

    This is completely and totally the truth.

    The bulk of players are not going to restrict themselves to one "class" as Intrepid are currently defining them. Rather, they are going to look at their archetype as being their class, and all choices of secondary archetype as being potential builds for that class.

    A Scryer, Preditor or Knight will be a to Ashes what a fire mage or fury warrior is to WoW - whereas the 8 basic archetypes are to Ashes what the 12(?) basic classes are to WoW.
Sign In or Register to comment.