There will be some changes. I never said there wouldn't be.
The point is if majority of players think tank/x is not satisfying enough and want x/tank to have some viability , Steven is not going to say to the players well too bad this my vision for my game. Devs will make the changes to make the players happy . No plans survive contact with the enemy as they say in the military, and tanking is not even fully in the game yet to be tested to see players will even like the current plans for it.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Uh hunh. They say without even having tested it.
That is not going to change significantly and... if they try to...expect vaporware.
This is not something we need to discuss farther. We just wait to see which one of us is right after the game launches.
If the game launches.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Uh hunh. They say without even having tested it.
That is not going to change significantly and... if they try to...expect vaporware.
This is not something we need to discuss farther. We just wait to see which one of us is right after the game launches.
If the game launches.
It will be vaperware? So you know better then other players or the devs making the game? Ok then..
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited May 2021
I know better than Steven, yeah. Just as I knew he would not be able to launch the game before 2020.
Because I've been a game dev longer than he has.
But, hit me up when Steven drastically changes the way augments work.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I know better than Steven, yeah. Just as I knew he would not be able to launch the game before 2020.
Because I've been a game dev longer than he has.
But, hit me up when Steven drastically changes the way augments work.
in my pissed state it is important to remember the devs want a tank tank (Guardian) which might not be viable in PvP and 7 other Tank/Xs which could be viable in PvP. We do not know enough about Tank/X augments, we know Cleric Augments are either death or life augments, but these augments lack the other two styles of augment. It is not clear how drastically the augments will affect tank dispositions or which tank/x will be the main tank most groups will ask for.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
in my pissed state it is important to remember the devs want a tank tank (Guardian) which might not be viable in PvP and 7 other Tank/Xs which could be viable in PvP. We do not know enough about Tank/X augments, we know Cleric Augments are either death or life augments, but these augments lack the other two styles of augment. It is not clear how drastically the augments will affect tank dispositions or which tank/x will be the main tank most groups will ask for.
Steven says all Tank/x will be viable as main tank. We should expect that to be true because all Tank/x have the same Tank abilities - which is what allows them to Tank.
How they augment their Tank abilities will be different.
Which Tank/x most groups ask for is different than whether all Tank\x can actually main tank.
Could be that most groups believe Tank/Tank is what every group must have, even if it's not true.
Steven says all Tank/x will be viable as main tank. We should expect that to be true because all Tank/x have the same Tank abilities - which is what allows them to Tank.
How they augment their Tank abilities will be different.
Which Tank/x most groups ask for is different than whether all Tank\x can actually main tank.
Could be that most groups believe Tank/Tank is what every group must have, even if it's not true.
Yeah man, I hope the generic requests are more than Guardian Level (Tank/Tank). I've considered the options at the present disposition of information and I would agree that Guardian is the predisposition for Tank in the current knowledge base. The truth is we don't know the tank secondaries so we can't make an educated guess. I would argue the semantics between the different tanks but we don't know enough about the tank dispositions. Would it be advantageous for a tank to teleport charge when the standard charge knocks down all targets on route? who knows. I will love the time when we understand the augments enough to build a competent tank class
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited May 2021
Well...but, it's not like the teleport is the only option to put on the Charge ability. If you want to add damage to the Charge, you could choose an augment from the Elemental School rather than the Escape School.
What we do know is that all of the Tank/x will have the abilities that allow them to main tank. They have a wide variety of choices of augments - they might even choose to use social, racial, religious or other augments rather than Secondary Archetype augments, but...if they want to dabble in some different Archetype, they have options that allow them to do so.
It will be a fun experience on the tanking front, even without x/tank being viable. I would hope the social and religious augments will allow a plethora of play options which will make tanks unique in the diorama of conflict. I would hope we would not be pigeon holed into Tank/Tank (Guardian) but will have the opportunity to build a viable tank for all end game metrics with the secondary, societal and religious aspects in tow. It will broaden the scope of tank/x considerably if we can glean augments from other areas, and, if those augments add to our repertoire rather than subtract from our repertoire. It will be a pleasure working with intrepid to build the tank classes. It will be a pleasure tanking for my guild if the augments add viability rather than switch viability with the augments.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Well, I mean, yeah...off-tank should still be a lot of fun. If you really want to main tank choose Tank as your Primary Archetype. But, you should still have plenty of fun doing some tanky stuff with x/Tank augments.
I'm also very curious to see how racial augments will have Tank/x of different races tanking differently.
in my pissed state it is important to remember the devs want a tank tank (Guardian) which might not be viable in PvP and 7 other Tank/Xs which could be viable in PvP. We do not know enough about Tank/X augments, we know Cleric Augments are either death or life augments, but these augments lack the other two styles of augment. It is not clear how drastically the augments will affect tank dispositions or which tank/x will be the main tank most groups will ask for.
Steven says all Tank/x will be viable as main tank. We should expect that to be true because all Tank/x have the same Tank abilities - which is what allows them to Tank.
How they augment their Tank abilities will be different.
Which Tank/x most groups ask for is different than whether all Tank\x can actually main tank.
Could be that most groups believe Tank/Tank is what every group must have, even if it's not true.
Imagine though if say the mage augments boosted up the DPS of the tank at the cost of the survivability. Now the player who decided to roll the tank class has more meaningful choice over the long term of the character. Add in a few of these sorts of these augments (plus use a 2h weapon instead of a shield) and you could move the tank/mage to a DPS role instead of a tanking role. Since we know the that the sub-class can be changed, this would now give the player the option to do the tank or the DPS role and switch over time rather than being stuck only playing the tank game. This would be 100x better game design.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Well...but, it's not like the teleport is the only option to put on the Charge ability. If you want to add damage to the Charge, you could choose an augment from the Elemental School rather than the Escape School.
Ok I agree, and those are all going to be different flavor options... But that won't change how the tank plays... Adding ele DMG just makes the charge more effective against frost types, or add a burn effect... It's still just a tank charging in though... That's not going to change the play style, just help your character tailor his kit to run a specific dungeon or quest area.
I'm hoping for something that has a different playstyle than charge in
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
It will change how the Tank plays.
A Tank/Cleric who Javelin's the boss to where he's at and then self-heals will have a significantly different result than a Tank/Mage who Javelin's the boss to where he's at and teleports to a different location.
Adding any augment to the Charge makes the Charge more effective, but different augments will make the Charge more effective in significantly different ways.
If you are a Tank/Rogue or Tank/Ranger and put a Stealth augment on your Shockwave, you might choose to Stealth to your next target rather than Charge to your next target.
I'm not sure a maxed out augmented charge will knock down all in the charge path though. How would you knock down foes with a teleported charge? It would be good if you could still function the same but I'm not sure it will be possible.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Imagine though if say the mage augments boosted up the DPS of the tank at the cost of the survivability. Now the player who decided to roll the tank class has more meaningful choice over the long term of the character.
If a Tank/Mage adds an Elemental augment to Javelin, it will increase the DPS of Javelin.
I don't understand why there would be a cost to survivability for that.
Add in a few of these sorts of these augments (plus use a 2h weapon instead of a shield) and you could move the tank/mage to a DPS role instead of a tanking role. Since we know the that the sub-class can be changed, this would now give the player the option to do the tank or the DPS role and switch over time rather than being stuck only playing the tank game. This would be 100x better game design.
It's still going to be a tank role because the Tank uses Tank abilities. All you are saying is that the secondary role would be DPS. It doesn't give the player a chance to tank or DPS because all of the augments are attached to Tank abilities. What they would be doing is tank and DPS.
Steven says that an x/Cleric will not replace a Tank/x, so I doubt very much that a Tank/x is going to replace a Rogue/x or a Mage/x when it comes to DPS.
I'm not sure if you've tanked much before Dygz but it certainly feels like you aren't in tune with our concerns.
I (we?) are coming from games that have different classes that can tank, each class having completely different abilities, which in turns comes with completely different play styles. What I (we?) am worried about is that the way abilities are modified by the augmenting class will not be enough to allow for the different play styles we are used to.
The fear is simply that all the tanking "classes" will feel too similar to each other.
Now, It's very likely that through the passives, weapon skills and as you said racial abilities will be able to align with the augments to give differing play styles. However with such little information of those (and even augments), we are left with the fear we have.
If I ask 'why can't a Fighter/Tank be a tank', here's what prevents that overall.
1. Can they do more DPS than a tank?
Probably, or we may not see a lot of Fighters...
2. Can they find a way to take near or less damage than a tank?
Probably harder, but most of the tank abilities so far don't do damage reduction consistently, or other classes can help provide a lot of this.
3. Can they control adds (for some this might even be optional)?
Dunno, but this is pretty binary.
4. Can they match a Tank/X's bonus to Threat?
Not saying I know, here, but if the answer is yes via augments, then the equation's done.
This class has all the abilities of a Fighter, and outperforms the Tank at Tanking in at least some groups, where 'Ultimate Defense' isn't necessary for whatever reason.
Are we assuming that Bulwark and Ultimate Defense are such powerful damage mitigation tools that nothing can match them?
The benefit of Ultimate Defence is the area of effect mitigation it will give the raid group alongside the mitigation it gives the tank (When the ability is Rank 3). I'm not going to lie, Bulwark, Lacerate and Myrmidon will be a big part of my rotation unless the skills are changed (Which they definitely could be by launch). The only other options for threat generation will be any skills which give more threat per use than Bulwark, Lacerate and Myrmidon, and, the rest will be damage abilities (Weapon Skills most likely). So my theory crafting is updated when the information changes. I also don't know whether I will run Guardian, Paladin or Knight.
What I mean is this (I'm often the tank or the healer or sometimes both for my group in nearly any MMO).
Let's assume that I have one DPS player who is doing 200 damage every 30 seconds.
My tank character does 100 damage every 30 seconds, generates the equivalent threat of 200 damage through abilities, and takes only 75 damage, in that 30 seconds.
I hold the enemy.
If that DPS player does a big ability and takes attention for 10 seconds, and then take 50 damage, multiple things happen (you're a tank so you're obviously familiar with all of this but humor me).
1. I didn't take that 50 damage so I now have 50 additional 'hate'.
2. They lost 50 'hate'.
3. The healer got a little more (but probably not because they'll use Regen instead of a heal)
4. The enemy returns to me. This is a given. The gap between my DPS and their DPS is 100. They lost 50 'hate' and I got to 'keep' an extra 50.
There's only a certain amount of time before that disparity returns the enemy to me, because if it does not come back to me, then it means I wasn't generating much more than they were to begin with, and therefore I was failing at tanking.
So, right after that big burst, which we can say brought them to 'some amount of hate higher than mine', I 'lose control of the enemy'. But this is a whole strategy that is employed quite often. Let the DPS go a little wild, you get more damage and the healer often uses LESS mana relative to the fight length.
DPS characters have to be so squishy for this to be a bad idea, that it's a little weird to be concerned about it (because if they are, PvP will suck).
Point of all this is, Tank doesn't currently have any abilities other than Ultimate Defense that will definitely cause the damage mitigation to be so much higher than damage mitigation available to other classes, to go 'this is definitely the only tank for all content'.
What they have is all of the 'I can stand even when things are going bad and I have no support' damage mitigation. Other tanks are often better, when supported, than the 'standard tank class'. All you have to do is change the 'random DPS' in the above scenario to 'X/Tank'.
In most games, almost the only thing determining 'if a class is actually a Tank' is if they can manage DPS on the target and not take more resources than a 'standard tank' to keep alive. And what stops most from getting that designation is that the enemy, in some way, prevents them from doing the DPS, and the 'true tank' shines because they just use an ability to generate threat instead, that can't miss, or something.
Well, I have raised concerns about the threat tables, aggro swapping and the fact Tank has no taunt (up to level 10). If Tank gets a taunt, either from class abilities or through Shield Weapon Abilities, then you can pull the boss/mobs back from the DPS easier though most likely the healers will have higher threat generated than the DPS. Because there won't be DPS Meters to hand (most likely) we can't prevent someone taking the threat pole position, it could even be a secondary tank or someone who generates threat like a x/Tank. It is not a major problem if the aggro swap can be controlled but if the boss/mobs must be held in a specific location, then deviations from the initial tank can be catastrophic.
In most circumstances, Tanks who main Tanks are rare. Often times, a DPS will turn into a Tank Player once the dungeon mechanics are on farm. It can be difficult for Tank Players to expand their skills/reaction times/prestige once the dungeons/raids are on farm. It is a difficult life for a Tank Main irrespective of the base classes used to create the tank. The Tank Mains will suffer the first wipes, could cause the first wipes and could learn from the first wipes. It can be difficult for a Tank to recover the trust from group members if the Tank loses Aggro, causes a wipe or doesn't understand the dungeon mechanics.
At a functional level, it won't matter what you choose to tank on so long as you can mitigate damage, create threat and learn the dungeon/raid mechanics. It could be a rockier ride for an x/tank than it might be for a tank/x (Except Guardian Tank - Tank) but Tank Players have a penchant for mad juju. I hope I make sense and have answered the question.
Edit: From my theory crafting, you would make sure most mobs/bosses have their back to the DPS/Healers. Normally, you should have a tank group who will stand the same side of the tank. The reason for this is because the DPS get Critical Damage/Increased Damage when we strike the back of Players/Mobs. If the Clerics have the appropriate range on heals, then you wont need a tank group and you can stand on the boss alone from the front. Just make sure you dodge and move out of higher damage moves. You should also Taunt/Goad/Irritate/Generate Threat on adds too. You must learn which adds you should tank and which adds you can allow off-tanks to tank.
I think that the main thing here might be a philosophy thing, (from Intrepid's side/Steven's mind, rather than between the posters discussing things here).
I can tank in many groups as the healer because of community. My group knows what to do, they know how to rotate things, they know what to expect and when to hold off on their abilities because of my rotations.
In short, the social aspect of the game has opened new opportunities. Sometimes opportunities that other groups don't even have because 'this fight requires more healing than usual so the healer is in danger' so the tank choices are limited or need really incredible gear or skill.
I can't say if Tank will get a true taunt, or if they'll be expecting people to rely on Weapon Throw. And we don't know right now, if the ability can miss in a way that cause zero threat generation, do we?
I guess in the end, we're both (tentatively) reassuring people that X/Tank works in way more situations with even minor tweaks, and we've probably said enough. Those who are still really worried after this point, I really hope you don't get too discouraged.
Know that even if you don't have the time to give a ton of feedback on it yourself if it somehow doesn't get designed right, you've got some Alpha Tester 'tank mains' on your side.
You would use Weapon Throw to initiate/pull the mobs/bosses. I'm not sure if it can be dodged or evaded, but, at the very least you will have the first threat generated from the pull if not the ability. Otherwise, I believe we're on par for the current information we have access to.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If I ask 'why can't a Fighter/Tank be a tank', here's what prevents that overall.
1. Can they do more DPS than a tank?
Probably, or we may not see a lot of Fighters...
2. Can they find a way to take near or less damage than a tank?
Probably harder, but most of the tank abilities so far don't do damage reduction consistently, or other classes can help provide a lot of this.
3. Can they control adds (for some this might even be optional)?
Dunno, but this is pretty binary.
4. Can they match a Tank/X's bonus to Threat?
Not saying I know, here, but if the answer is yes via augments, then the equation's done.
This class has all the abilities of a Fighter, and outperforms the Tank at Tanking in at least some groups, where 'Ultimate Defense' isn't necessary for whatever reason.
Are we assuming that Bulwark and Ultimate Defense are such powerful damage mitigation tools that nothing can match them?
1: We have Steven's statement: "Some cleric augments applied to certain skills will indirectly provide the ability to heal others. These will not replace the need for a cleric archetype." We can assume this will also apply to Tank augments.
2: Steven always feels compelled to state that Secondary Archetypes do not provide new abilities; instead you get augments that reflect on of the Primary Archetypes. So...augments are not as powerful as abilities.
3: A Fighter/Tank can be a tank. They will certainly be a secondary tank. Tank will be their secondary role. But, the devs are not going to be balancing the tank augments to ensure that a Fighter/Tank can main tank. And, again, if Steven points out that x/Cleric will not replace the need for a Cleric (primary) archetype, we can assume the same will be true for Tanks.
4: That does not mean it will be impossible for an individual Fighter/Tank to find a way to main tank. There could be exceptions to the rule. The point is that the devs are not going to be listening to complaints from Fighter/Tanks that they can't main tank because the expectation is that x/Tanks are not main tanks. If you want to be a main tank, you should choose Tank/x.
5: It's highly unlikely that a Fighter/Tank will have Tank augments that can out tank Tank abilities because Tank abilities typically do multiple tank things and Tank augment will probably only do one tank thing. The devs are not designing augments to compete with abilities. Again, this is why Steven says that x/Cleric will not replace the need for a Cleric/x.
At a functional level, it won't matter what you choose to tank on so long as you can mitigate damage, create threat and learn the dungeon/raid mechanics. It could be a rockier ride for an x/tank than it might be for a tank/x (Except Guardian Tank - Tank) but Tank Players have a penchant for mad juju. I hope I make sense and have answered the question.
If you look at the abilities for Tank, almost all of them generate threat.
The real question with regard to Fighter/Tank would be whether the Fighter/Tank (with no Primary Tank in the group) would be able to generate enough threat to keep the boss off the Mage or Summoner, etc.
If you look at the abilities for Tank, almost all of them generate threat.
The real question with regard to Fighter/Tank would be whether the Fighter/Tank (with no Primary Tank in the group) would be able to generate enough threat to keep the boss off the Mage or Summoner, etc.
I'm very familiar with the tank skills. I know all the tank skills up to level 10 can generate threat except Ultimate Defence. I'm also aware there are social and religious augments which will provide threat generation. It is not impossible that at a functional level the Tank could lose aggro and thus would have to rely on the off tank or secondary tank if they have generated more threat. What you don't want is the healers or dps to take second place in the threat order. If the off tank is a fighter/tank then I would aim to relieve the off tank as soon as possible.
I still believe we need a goad/taunt for aggro swapping, otherwise the threat generation would mean the tank can never lose aggro unless the tank dies. From what I know of the planned boss encounters, less than 10% of people will be able to do all boss encounters so aggro swapping will have to be available. If a tank wants to use a class different than Tank then it is not our place to dissuade, we can only advise. I would believe Tank Augment will have these four schools: Threat, Mitigation, Damage or Damage Reflection. I could be wrong on the augments but I struggle to think of any others that would be relevant to a tank.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I'm very familiar with the tank skills. I know all the tank skills up to level 10 can generate threat except Ultimate Defence. I'm also aware there are social and religious augments which will provide threat generation. It is not impossible that at a functional level the Tank could lose aggro and thus would have to rely on the off tank or secondary tank if they have generated more threat. What you don't want is the healers or dps to take second place in the threat order. If the off tank is a fighter/tank then I would aim to relieve the off tank as soon as possible.
1: I don't know how you are aware that there will be social and religious augments that are designed to generate threat. We can expect a Threat School of Tank augments - which will very likely not generate as much threat as Tank abilities - but, I'm not aware of there being any indication that social or religious augments will have anything like a Threat School.
Do you have a dev quote for a Threat School of augments for social and religious augments?
2: This discussion is not about what's impossible. The only way for that to really be a thing is for the devs to actively design to make it impossible for anything except a Primary Tank to main tank. And, even then, a few people would probably be able to find exceptions.
3: The design is for x/Tank to be able to do some tanky things, but not replace the need for a Tank/x.
I still believe we need a goad/taunt for aggro swapping, otherwise the threat generation would mean the tank can never lose aggro unless the tank dies. From what I know of the planned boss encounters, less than 10% of people will be able to do all boss encounters so aggro swapping will have to be available. If a tank wants to use a class different than Tank then it is not our place to dissuade, we can only advise. I would believe Tank Augment will have these four schools: Threat, Mitigation, Damage or Damage Reflection. I could be wrong on the augments but I struggle to think of any others that would be relevant to a tank.
People can try anything they want. There's nothing being said in this discussion that can dissuade an x/Tank from trying to build a character that can out-tank a Tank/x or from trying to fill the role of an absent Tank/x.
The point is that it's unlikely they will have the tools to do so. It's not impossible that some individuals will be able to find a mix of augments and player skills that will allow them to do so, but...it's highly unlikely to be a general or even uncommon thing. It will likely be a rare thing. And, more importantly, the devs are not designing augments with the intent for them to allow an x/Tank to replace the need for a Tank/x.
And complaining that you (hypothetical you; not you-you) want them to design augments with the intent to allow an x/Tank to replace the need for a Tank/x is highly unlikely to change the dev philosophy because they are balancing 8 versions of Primary Tank to be viable as main tank - they are not going to want to have to balance 15 versions of x/Tank/x to be viable main tanks.
If you want you're character to be main tank - choose Tank as your Primary Archetype.
If you choose Tank as your Secondary Archetype - expect that you will be an off-tank, rather than primary tank.
While the above should not dissuade anyone from giving it a try, I have a feeling that Apostles who try to out tank a Tank/x will probably be reprimanded by their group and told to concentrate more on their Cleric role.
I'm happy with the 8 Main Tanks from the Tank Class, but, I can only play one because I don't want alts you see. Here is the quote I referenced:
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Tank
The game hosts a wide array of progression paths, and some of those paths will grant additional paths to augmenting your threat generation. This can be in the form of enchantments and stats ... and even in the form of augments granted from societies and religions. Gear and skills choice are also a big component.[5] – Steven Sharif.
It is completely down to the build and if someone wants to build from scratch then I think it would be feasible to expect X/Tank to cause problems in the threat tables if someone really wants to create a PvE Tank out of a Rogue/Tank or Fighter/Tank. I also am aware the Devs stated all Tank/X will be viable Main Tanks. I feel we don't need to debate the fundamentals I just wouldn't write off certain people who are adamant they want to tank a different way to Tank/X. If they find a way I say more power to them but I will be happy with Guardian, Paladin or Knight. I only offered my experience and some guidance. I don't want to argue over the fundamentals because Steven has given two different approaches once on livestream and once in the quote above.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited May 2021
I'm using hypothetical/general you, not you-you.
I know you know about the devs stating all Tank/x will be viable main tanks.
I'm using that to contrast that the devs are not balancing x/Tank to be viable main tanks.
And, Steven strongly implies that we should not expect x/Tank to be able to replace Tank/x.
I don't think anything I've said "writes off certain people" trying to main tank as an x/Tank.
I don't think anything I've said claims it's impossible for any person to find a way to get an x/Tank to main tank.
I agree, if someone can create an x/Tank that can consistently out-tank a Tank/x, that's great.
All I'm saying is don't expect that to be a common or even uncommon thing. Rather, expect that to be a rarity.
Yeah, we're in agreement. I mean I have a Guild and our tanks are definitely all going Tank/X. I do not think I will meet a X/Tank except Guardians because I won't do pick up groups and require a tank - I'll be the tank. I won't run PuG Raids in Ashes because of the nature of the game. I did used to run PuG Raids in other MMOs but we must adapt to the situation at hand. I'm still not sure how my Guild Clerics will spec though, it will determine whether I must go Paladin or whether I can be free to choose Knight. If the Tank Augments are too good to miss though I will roll a Guardian.
Comments
The point is if majority of players think tank/x is not satisfying enough and want x/tank to have some viability , Steven is not going to say to the players well too bad this my vision for my game. Devs will make the changes to make the players happy . No plans survive contact with the enemy as they say in the military, and tanking is not even fully in the game yet to be tested to see players will even like the current plans for it.
That is not going to change significantly and... if they try to...expect vaporware.
This is not something we need to discuss farther. We just wait to see which one of us is right after the game launches.
If the game launches.
It will be vaperware? So you know better then other players or the devs making the game? Ok then..
Because I've been a game dev longer than he has.
But, hit me up when Steven drastically changes the way augments work.
Careful your big ego is showing.
How they augment their Tank abilities will be different.
Which Tank/x most groups ask for is different than whether all Tank\x can actually main tank.
Could be that most groups believe Tank/Tank is what every group must have, even if it's not true.
Yeah man, I hope the generic requests are more than Guardian Level (Tank/Tank). I've considered the options at the present disposition of information and I would agree that Guardian is the predisposition for Tank in the current knowledge base. The truth is we don't know the tank secondaries so we can't make an educated guess. I would argue the semantics between the different tanks but we don't know enough about the tank dispositions. Would it be advantageous for a tank to teleport charge when the standard charge knocks down all targets on route? who knows. I will love the time when we understand the augments enough to build a competent tank class
What we do know is that all of the Tank/x will have the abilities that allow them to main tank. They have a wide variety of choices of augments - they might even choose to use social, racial, religious or other augments rather than Secondary Archetype augments, but...if they want to dabble in some different Archetype, they have options that allow them to do so.
I'm also very curious to see how racial augments will have Tank/x of different races tanking differently.
Imagine though if say the mage augments boosted up the DPS of the tank at the cost of the survivability. Now the player who decided to roll the tank class has more meaningful choice over the long term of the character. Add in a few of these sorts of these augments (plus use a 2h weapon instead of a shield) and you could move the tank/mage to a DPS role instead of a tanking role. Since we know the that the sub-class can be changed, this would now give the player the option to do the tank or the DPS role and switch over time rather than being stuck only playing the tank game. This would be 100x better game design.
I'm hoping for something that has a different playstyle than charge in
A Tank/Cleric who Javelin's the boss to where he's at and then self-heals will have a significantly different result than a Tank/Mage who Javelin's the boss to where he's at and teleports to a different location.
Adding any augment to the Charge makes the Charge more effective, but different augments will make the Charge more effective in significantly different ways.
If you are a Tank/Rogue or Tank/Ranger and put a Stealth augment on your Shockwave, you might choose to Stealth to your next target rather than Charge to your next target.
I don't understand why there would be a cost to survivability for that.
It's still going to be a tank role because the Tank uses Tank abilities. All you are saying is that the secondary role would be DPS. It doesn't give the player a chance to tank or DPS because all of the augments are attached to Tank abilities. What they would be doing is tank and DPS.
Steven says that an x/Cleric will not replace a Tank/x, so I doubt very much that a Tank/x is going to replace a Rogue/x or a Mage/x when it comes to DPS.
I (we?) are coming from games that have different classes that can tank, each class having completely different abilities, which in turns comes with completely different play styles. What I (we?) am worried about is that the way abilities are modified by the augmenting class will not be enough to allow for the different play styles we are used to.
The fear is simply that all the tanking "classes" will feel too similar to each other.
Now, It's very likely that through the passives, weapon skills and as you said racial abilities will be able to align with the augments to give differing play styles. However with such little information of those (and even augments), we are left with the fear we have.
If I ask 'why can't a Fighter/Tank be a tank', here's what prevents that overall.
1. Can they do more DPS than a tank?
Probably, or we may not see a lot of Fighters...
2. Can they find a way to take near or less damage than a tank?
Probably harder, but most of the tank abilities so far don't do damage reduction consistently, or other classes can help provide a lot of this.
3. Can they control adds (for some this might even be optional)?
Dunno, but this is pretty binary.
4. Can they match a Tank/X's bonus to Threat?
Not saying I know, here, but if the answer is yes via augments, then the equation's done.
This class has all the abilities of a Fighter, and outperforms the Tank at Tanking in at least some groups, where 'Ultimate Defense' isn't necessary for whatever reason.
Are we assuming that Bulwark and Ultimate Defense are such powerful damage mitigation tools that nothing can match them?
Let's assume that I have one DPS player who is doing 200 damage every 30 seconds.
My tank character does 100 damage every 30 seconds, generates the equivalent threat of 200 damage through abilities, and takes only 75 damage, in that 30 seconds.
I hold the enemy.
If that DPS player does a big ability and takes attention for 10 seconds, and then take 50 damage, multiple things happen (you're a tank so you're obviously familiar with all of this but humor me).
1. I didn't take that 50 damage so I now have 50 additional 'hate'.
2. They lost 50 'hate'.
3. The healer got a little more (but probably not because they'll use Regen instead of a heal)
4. The enemy returns to me. This is a given. The gap between my DPS and their DPS is 100. They lost 50 'hate' and I got to 'keep' an extra 50.
There's only a certain amount of time before that disparity returns the enemy to me, because if it does not come back to me, then it means I wasn't generating much more than they were to begin with, and therefore I was failing at tanking.
So, right after that big burst, which we can say brought them to 'some amount of hate higher than mine', I 'lose control of the enemy'. But this is a whole strategy that is employed quite often. Let the DPS go a little wild, you get more damage and the healer often uses LESS mana relative to the fight length.
DPS characters have to be so squishy for this to be a bad idea, that it's a little weird to be concerned about it (because if they are, PvP will suck).
Point of all this is, Tank doesn't currently have any abilities other than Ultimate Defense that will definitely cause the damage mitigation to be so much higher than damage mitigation available to other classes, to go 'this is definitely the only tank for all content'.
What they have is all of the 'I can stand even when things are going bad and I have no support' damage mitigation. Other tanks are often better, when supported, than the 'standard tank class'. All you have to do is change the 'random DPS' in the above scenario to 'X/Tank'.
In most games, almost the only thing determining 'if a class is actually a Tank' is if they can manage DPS on the target and not take more resources than a 'standard tank' to keep alive. And what stops most from getting that designation is that the enemy, in some way, prevents them from doing the DPS, and the 'true tank' shines because they just use an ability to generate threat instead, that can't miss, or something.
In most circumstances, Tanks who main Tanks are rare. Often times, a DPS will turn into a Tank Player once the dungeon mechanics are on farm. It can be difficult for Tank Players to expand their skills/reaction times/prestige once the dungeons/raids are on farm. It is a difficult life for a Tank Main irrespective of the base classes used to create the tank. The Tank Mains will suffer the first wipes, could cause the first wipes and could learn from the first wipes. It can be difficult for a Tank to recover the trust from group members if the Tank loses Aggro, causes a wipe or doesn't understand the dungeon mechanics.
At a functional level, it won't matter what you choose to tank on so long as you can mitigate damage, create threat and learn the dungeon/raid mechanics. It could be a rockier ride for an x/tank than it might be for a tank/x (Except Guardian Tank - Tank) but Tank Players have a penchant for mad juju. I hope I make sense and have answered the question.
Edit: From my theory crafting, you would make sure most mobs/bosses have their back to the DPS/Healers. Normally, you should have a tank group who will stand the same side of the tank. The reason for this is because the DPS get Critical Damage/Increased Damage when we strike the back of Players/Mobs. If the Clerics have the appropriate range on heals, then you wont need a tank group and you can stand on the boss alone from the front. Just make sure you dodge and move out of higher damage moves. You should also Taunt/Goad/Irritate/Generate Threat on adds too. You must learn which adds you should tank and which adds you can allow off-tanks to tank.
I can tank in many groups as the healer because of community. My group knows what to do, they know how to rotate things, they know what to expect and when to hold off on their abilities because of my rotations.
In short, the social aspect of the game has opened new opportunities. Sometimes opportunities that other groups don't even have because 'this fight requires more healing than usual so the healer is in danger' so the tank choices are limited or need really incredible gear or skill.
I can't say if Tank will get a true taunt, or if they'll be expecting people to rely on Weapon Throw. And we don't know right now, if the ability can miss in a way that cause zero threat generation, do we?
I guess in the end, we're both (tentatively) reassuring people that X/Tank works in way more situations with even minor tweaks, and we've probably said enough. Those who are still really worried after this point, I really hope you don't get too discouraged.
Know that even if you don't have the time to give a ton of feedback on it yourself if it somehow doesn't get designed right, you've got some Alpha Tester 'tank mains' on your side.
2: Steven always feels compelled to state that Secondary Archetypes do not provide new abilities; instead you get augments that reflect on of the Primary Archetypes. So...augments are not as powerful as abilities.
3: A Fighter/Tank can be a tank. They will certainly be a secondary tank. Tank will be their secondary role. But, the devs are not going to be balancing the tank augments to ensure that a Fighter/Tank can main tank. And, again, if Steven points out that x/Cleric will not replace the need for a Cleric (primary) archetype, we can assume the same will be true for Tanks.
4: That does not mean it will be impossible for an individual Fighter/Tank to find a way to main tank. There could be exceptions to the rule. The point is that the devs are not going to be listening to complaints from Fighter/Tanks that they can't main tank because the expectation is that x/Tanks are not main tanks. If you want to be a main tank, you should choose Tank/x.
5: It's highly unlikely that a Fighter/Tank will have Tank augments that can out tank Tank abilities because Tank abilities typically do multiple tank things and Tank augment will probably only do one tank thing. The devs are not designing augments to compete with abilities. Again, this is why Steven says that x/Cleric will not replace the need for a Cleric/x.
If you look at the abilities for Tank, almost all of them generate threat.
The real question with regard to Fighter/Tank would be whether the Fighter/Tank (with no Primary Tank in the group) would be able to generate enough threat to keep the boss off the Mage or Summoner, etc.
I'm very familiar with the tank skills. I know all the tank skills up to level 10 can generate threat except Ultimate Defence. I'm also aware there are social and religious augments which will provide threat generation. It is not impossible that at a functional level the Tank could lose aggro and thus would have to rely on the off tank or secondary tank if they have generated more threat. What you don't want is the healers or dps to take second place in the threat order. If the off tank is a fighter/tank then I would aim to relieve the off tank as soon as possible.
I still believe we need a goad/taunt for aggro swapping, otherwise the threat generation would mean the tank can never lose aggro unless the tank dies. From what I know of the planned boss encounters, less than 10% of people will be able to do all boss encounters so aggro swapping will have to be available. If a tank wants to use a class different than Tank then it is not our place to dissuade, we can only advise. I would believe Tank Augment will have these four schools: Threat, Mitigation, Damage or Damage Reflection. I could be wrong on the augments but I struggle to think of any others that would be relevant to a tank.
Do you have a dev quote for a Threat School of augments for social and religious augments?
2: This discussion is not about what's impossible. The only way for that to really be a thing is for the devs to actively design to make it impossible for anything except a Primary Tank to main tank. And, even then, a few people would probably be able to find exceptions.
3: The design is for x/Tank to be able to do some tanky things, but not replace the need for a Tank/x.
People can try anything they want. There's nothing being said in this discussion that can dissuade an x/Tank from trying to build a character that can out-tank a Tank/x or from trying to fill the role of an absent Tank/x.
The point is that it's unlikely they will have the tools to do so. It's not impossible that some individuals will be able to find a mix of augments and player skills that will allow them to do so, but...it's highly unlikely to be a general or even uncommon thing. It will likely be a rare thing. And, more importantly, the devs are not designing augments with the intent for them to allow an x/Tank to replace the need for a Tank/x.
And complaining that you (hypothetical you; not you-you) want them to design augments with the intent to allow an x/Tank to replace the need for a Tank/x is highly unlikely to change the dev philosophy because they are balancing 8 versions of Primary Tank to be viable as main tank - they are not going to want to have to balance 15 versions of x/Tank/x to be viable main tanks.
If you want you're character to be main tank - choose Tank as your Primary Archetype.
If you choose Tank as your Secondary Archetype - expect that you will be an off-tank, rather than primary tank.
While the above should not dissuade anyone from giving it a try, I have a feeling that Apostles who try to out tank a Tank/x will probably be reprimanded by their group and told to concentrate more on their Cleric role.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Tank
The game hosts a wide array of progression paths, and some of those paths will grant additional paths to augmenting your threat generation. This can be in the form of enchantments and stats ... and even in the form of augments granted from societies and religions. Gear and skills choice are also a big component.[5] – Steven Sharif.
It is completely down to the build and if someone wants to build from scratch then I think it would be feasible to expect X/Tank to cause problems in the threat tables if someone really wants to create a PvE Tank out of a Rogue/Tank or Fighter/Tank. I also am aware the Devs stated all Tank/X will be viable Main Tanks. I feel we don't need to debate the fundamentals I just wouldn't write off certain people who are adamant they want to tank a different way to Tank/X. If they find a way I say more power to them but I will be happy with Guardian, Paladin or Knight. I only offered my experience and some guidance. I don't want to argue over the fundamentals because Steven has given two different approaches once on livestream and once in the quote above.
I know you know about the devs stating all Tank/x will be viable main tanks.
I'm using that to contrast that the devs are not balancing x/Tank to be viable main tanks.
And, Steven strongly implies that we should not expect x/Tank to be able to replace Tank/x.
I don't think anything I've said "writes off certain people" trying to main tank as an x/Tank.
I don't think anything I've said claims it's impossible for any person to find a way to get an x/Tank to main tank.
I agree, if someone can create an x/Tank that can consistently out-tank a Tank/x, that's great.
All I'm saying is don't expect that to be a common or even uncommon thing. Rather, expect that to be a rarity.
(Thanks for finding and sharing the quote, btw.)