The naming of tank as tank was touched on in that video too. it's relatively early if you wanted to look for it. Steven said that apparently there's pushback about that in-house as well, but made the point that it doesn't matter what they call the tank archetype, people will still say in group chat looking for a tank. Plus after 25 and you actually get a class you're probably going to say paladin sentinel or guardian etc...
I don't want to get into a huge debate over a side subject here, but if they called Tanks a Tank because that's what they are, then why didn't they call Cleric a Healer, because that's what they are. When you say "looking for healer", you are looking for Cleric. It's a lousy excuse for being lazy. Don't @ me.
What happens if another group comes in to contend the encounter?
Smokebombs and Invisibility might come in handy.
Sounds like a situation where you may want other primary classes capable of tanking/off-tanking for those situations <.<
What?
This discussion thread asked why would the Rogue ever take Smokebombs and Invisibility if the Tank is doing their job. My answer is that they might come in handy if another group comes in to the dungeon content...
And your answer is that the Tank should be able to Tank all of the dungeon mobs and rival PvP group so weel that a Rogue will not want use Invisibility?
That's pretty absurd.
Rogue's tend to like to use Invisibility in any case.
The reason a Rogue uses Smokebombs and Invisibility is because that's the way they like to fight.
But, we can expect that in Ashes, by Rank 2 or Rank 3, Smokebombs will be adding damage - possibly burst damage. And dealing damage while Invisible might also add a damage modifier - especially coming out of Invisibility Rank 2 or Rank 3.
All of the other members of the group will be fighting opponents the way they like to fight.
Tank won't be the only person in the group using CCs.
Also, if it's a group that thematically likes to stack Shadow damage, and there are several x/Rogues in the group, Smokebombs, especially, could be helping to stack Shadow damage by Rank 2 or Rank 3. Tanks don't make it so that Rogues don't want to use Invisibility or other Evasion skills.
Instance dungeon with a 4-person group is not the primary scenario the devs are designing encounters for.
In Ashes, you should not be expecting that the Tank will typically be able to hold off all attackers such that no other person in the group will be attacked. Other people in the group who rely on Evasion will still want rely on Evasion because that's how they like to play their characters. But, the Rogue may not always be close enough to the Tank to rely on the Tank's abilities.
You can't just think, "Well, this is the way tanking worked in other games so it's going to work exactly the same way in Ashes.
You hae to think about the overall Ashes gameplay design and gameplay philosphy.
And to do that, you should be very well versed in everything the devs say about their game design and their game design philosophy.
The way we're approaching it philosophically is not 1v1 combat. That would be an impossible thing for us to do and it's not really a direction we want to go with the game. We're really focused on mass PvP, not one 1v1 encounters; not really even party v party encounters, but these big, big fights around Nodes...these fights around Castles, these big fights around Caravans...
So, a lot of it is trying to figure out balancing ways for classes to work together synergistically. So that, your focus as a team is building out the comp that synergizes best for what you've got. And we balance it that way.
So, we balance party on party, group on group and different configurations of those things. We look at it more as a macro scale balance problem rather than a micro scale balance problem.
----Jeffrey
I just wanted to say that when I read your posts I hear a calm and reasonable voice. An arm chair, crackling fire, goblet of mulled wine.
Thought I would pipe up with that.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Bards will also be able to heal.
Of course, Bards can also use magic and we have Mage as a primary Archetype.
Rogues can also fight and we have Fighter as a Primary Archetype.
Mages also fight from range, but we have Ranger as a Primary Archetype.
Clerics can summon whips, hammers and spears, but we have Summoner as a Primary Archetype.
I see zero reason for anyone to say that augments couldn't be used to turn other archetypes into tanks if they wanted to.
I agree.
If Intrepid wanted to, they could do that.
Thing is, they don't want to. That is the thing that needs to change in order for */tank classes to be able to actually tank.
But that's the title of this thread SHOULD tank/X be the only tank.
I 100% feel that they shouldn't be, and if augments can be used to this scale then there is no reason to not make it that way.
Oh well, either way I guess we will find out eventually...
I really hope X/Tank can be viable tank too depending of the build and gameplay chosen by the player. Like i enjoy tanking from time to time in games when i dont feel like healing. But I really dont like the classic warrior style tank that they offer.
I'd like another main archetype buy with a tank build
TBH, I don't mind if a non-tank class could feasibly tank some things.
Something like a summoner's summon, being able to tank some things in some situations. That said, I think a "real" tank should always be better.
I hate when there are tank specs that get outplayed by non-tanks due to poor class design.
i agree with this statement, a summoner should be the only well rounded class, being able to summon a familiar that compensates for the lack of verity, but not strong enough to replace that variable entirely.
to the question at hand if the tank specs tank for the archetype then they should be a brick wall that can pull/maintain aggro fairly well. but if say you chose tank/summoner it should allow you to apply a bind to an ally that buffs defense and replenishes their health by sacrificing your own, or as a tank/bard the more aggro you acquire or successful blocks you do, you boost your teammates offensive capabilities. tank/rouge can, in a sense, blink between the aggroed player and the monster and intercept any damage.
but admittedly i didnt play alpha and im not familiar enough with the abilities and how drastic their changes will be when the archetype is applied to their existing skills.
I think that Tank is a fluid concept, and depends on what content your doing. Depending on your primary and secondary archtypes, you should end up with roughly 8 viable main tanks and 8 viable off tanks or roughly 1/4th of the classes beeing able to tank. There isn't any game where one tank is the best tank in every situation, and most games have encounters where you can't tank something, or where the tank is not a standard tank class. I don't think ashes will be different in that regard.
I can repost in a different light and answer the thread question. I think there should be some secondaries that can primary tank. Like it doesn't make a lot of sense why a Fighter/Tank couldn't primary tank because they should both be relatively tanky classes by default. Tank is obviously going to be much tankier, but the tank augments should be able to fill in a lot of the weaknesses of fighter to primary tank.
So smart combinations should be able to primary tank. I wouldn't know what to expect if you picked mage/tank or bard/tank really. However those are probably never going to be able to primary tank because they are not smart decisions when it comes to tanking. They may still be good classes for other reasons.
If they use smart reasoning then I don't really mind a few of the tank secondaries to primary tank. Just not all of them. Since some of them don't make any sense when it comes to tanking.
I can repost in a different light and answer the thread question. I think there should be some secondaries that can primary tank. Like it doesn't make a lot of sense why a Fighter/Tank couldn't primary tank because they should both be relatively tanky classes by default. Tank is obviously going to be much tankier, but the tank augments should be able to fill in a lot of the weaknesses of fighter to primary tank.
So smart combinations should be able to primary tank. I wouldn't know what to expect if you picked mage/tank or bard/tank really. However those are probably never going to be able to primary tank because they are not smart decisions when it comes to tanking. They may still be good classes for other reasons.
If they use smart reasoning then I don't really mind a few of the tank secondaries to primary tank. Just not all of them. Since some of them don't make any sense when it comes to tanking.
If they want to (the real IF associated with all this) you could easily make a mage/tank.
Read through this whole thread, there are lots of examples and possible variations... I liked the thoughts that every archtype with the proper gear and selection of augments should be able to do more than 1 role in the trinity.
I'm not saying that every combination of x/tank should tank, but it would be cool to have options.
It would also be cool to not make every combination of tank/x be a tank, like as I said earlier a tank/bard to be closer to a support role akin to a battlefield commander.
My 20 year mmo experience says MORE TANKS on a server is better, So the more diversity in playable tanks skills and (classes) the better
While this has been true in most games, this is in part because of the group size of most games.
Look at WoW. A group there would consist of 1 tank, 1 healer and three DPS. This is fairly standard among MMO's, with some going up to 6 person groups, but the bulk sitting at 5.
Ashes will have 8 person groups, meaning that one tank and healer can take along 6 other players on group content.
This means that in WoW, if you have 300 DPS wanting groups, you need 100 tanks and 100 healers. Where as in Ashes, that 300 DPS only need 50 tanks and healers to all get taken along on groups.
If Ashes has the same mix of tanks, healers and DPS as other MMO's have, groups are going to have trouble finding DPS, not finding tanks or healers.
My 20 year mmo experience says MORE TANKS on a server is better, So the more diversity in playable tanks skills and (classes) the better
While this has been true in most games, this is in part because of the group size of most games.
Look at WoW. A group there would consist of 1 tank, 1 healer and three DPS. This is fairly standard among MMO's, with some going up to 6 person groups, but the bulk sitting at 5.
Ashes will have 8 person groups, meaning that one tank and healer can take along 6 other players on group content.
This means that in WoW, if you have 300 DPS wanting groups, you need 100 tanks and 100 healers. Where as in Ashes, that 300 DPS only need 50 tanks and healers to all get taken along on groups.
If Ashes has the same mix of tanks, healers and DPS as other MMO's have, groups are going to have trouble finding DPS, not finding tanks or healers.
While I agree with your math in concept. You need to look at the distribution for LFR in wow, that's 2 tanks for a group of 25... Tanks are still the hardest slot to fill most of the time. People generally just want to play the DPS type classes because they're cooler and or don't want the pressure of tank or heal.
My 20 year mmo experience says MORE TANKS on a server is better, So the more diversity in playable tanks skills and (classes) the better
While this has been true in most games, this is in part because of the group size of most games.
Look at WoW. A group there would consist of 1 tank, 1 healer and three DPS. This is fairly standard among MMO's, with some going up to 6 person groups, but the bulk sitting at 5.
Ashes will have 8 person groups, meaning that one tank and healer can take along 6 other players on group content.
This means that in WoW, if you have 300 DPS wanting groups, you need 100 tanks and 100 healers. Where as in Ashes, that 300 DPS only need 50 tanks and healers to all get taken along on groups.
If Ashes has the same mix of tanks, healers and DPS as other MMO's have, groups are going to have trouble finding DPS, not finding tanks or healers.
While I agree with your math in concept. You need to look at the distribution for LFR in wow, that's 2 tanks for a group of 25... Tanks are still the hardest slot to fill most of the time. People generally just want to play the DPS type classes because they're cooler and or don't want the pressure of tank or heal.
I have no doubts that your observations are true. None at all.
All I can say is that the pool of players that group is not the same as the pool of players that raid.
That same math (or the general idea of it) holds true for raiding in Ashes as well.
My 20 year mmo experience says MORE TANKS on a server is better, So the more diversity in playable tanks skills and (classes) the better
While this has been true in most games, this is in part because of the group size of most games.
Look at WoW. A group there would consist of 1 tank, 1 healer and three DPS. This is fairly standard among MMO's, with some going up to 6 person groups, but the bulk sitting at 5.
Ashes will have 8 person groups, meaning that one tank and healer can take along 6 other players on group content.
This means that in WoW, if you have 300 DPS wanting groups, you need 100 tanks and 100 healers. Where as in Ashes, that 300 DPS only need 50 tanks and healers to all get taken along on groups.
If Ashes has the same mix of tanks, healers and DPS as other MMO's have, groups are going to have trouble finding DPS, not finding tanks or healers.
While I agree with your math in concept. You need to look at the distribution for LFR in wow, that's 2 tanks for a group of 25... Tanks are still the hardest slot to fill most of the time. People generally just want to play the DPS type classes because they're cooler and or don't want the pressure of tank or heal.
And yet many still ask for the tanking role to be exclusive to the tank/x classes. Making the rarest played role the linchpin of every grouping scenarios is a recipe for frustration, and no, it does not make more people start playing that role. In my personal case, it made me stop looking for groups and group content to solo almost all the time.
If the game has some (or many) group encounters in which tanking is not as essential, where a second rate tank is enough to do the job, then x/tanks with appropriate gear could be a viable option. They wouldn't steal the show for dungeon boss or raids, but they would provide the necessary, even if imperfect, role to get people into groups.
Comments
@McShave
Because Cleric aren't the only class with heals.
I just wanted to say that when I read your posts I hear a calm and reasonable voice. An arm chair, crackling fire, goblet of mulled wine.
Thought I would pipe up with that.
Of course, Bards can also use magic and we have Mage as a primary Archetype.
Rogues can also fight and we have Fighter as a Primary Archetype.
Mages also fight from range, but we have Ranger as a Primary Archetype.
Clerics can summon whips, hammers and spears, but we have Summoner as a Primary Archetype.
I really hope X/Tank can be viable tank too depending of the build and gameplay chosen by the player. Like i enjoy tanking from time to time in games when i dont feel like healing. But I really dont like the classic warrior style tank that they offer.
I'd like another main archetype buy with a tank build
i agree with this statement, a summoner should be the only well rounded class, being able to summon a familiar that compensates for the lack of verity, but not strong enough to replace that variable entirely.
to the question at hand if the tank specs tank for the archetype then they should be a brick wall that can pull/maintain aggro fairly well. but if say you chose tank/summoner it should allow you to apply a bind to an ally that buffs defense and replenishes their health by sacrificing your own, or as a tank/bard the more aggro you acquire or successful blocks you do, you boost your teammates offensive capabilities. tank/rouge can, in a sense, blink between the aggroed player and the monster and intercept any damage.
but admittedly i didnt play alpha and im not familiar enough with the abilities and how drastic their changes will be when the archetype is applied to their existing skills.
So smart combinations should be able to primary tank. I wouldn't know what to expect if you picked mage/tank or bard/tank really. However those are probably never going to be able to primary tank because they are not smart decisions when it comes to tanking. They may still be good classes for other reasons.
If they use smart reasoning then I don't really mind a few of the tank secondaries to primary tank. Just not all of them. Since some of them don't make any sense when it comes to tanking.
U.S. East
If they want to (the real IF associated with all this) you could easily make a mage/tank.
Read through this whole thread, there are lots of examples and possible variations... I liked the thoughts that every archtype with the proper gear and selection of augments should be able to do more than 1 role in the trinity.
I'm not saying that every combination of x/tank should tank, but it would be cool to have options.
It would also be cool to not make every combination of tank/x be a tank, like as I said earlier a tank/bard to be closer to a support role akin to a battlefield commander.
While this has been true in most games, this is in part because of the group size of most games.
Look at WoW. A group there would consist of 1 tank, 1 healer and three DPS. This is fairly standard among MMO's, with some going up to 6 person groups, but the bulk sitting at 5.
Ashes will have 8 person groups, meaning that one tank and healer can take along 6 other players on group content.
This means that in WoW, if you have 300 DPS wanting groups, you need 100 tanks and 100 healers. Where as in Ashes, that 300 DPS only need 50 tanks and healers to all get taken along on groups.
If Ashes has the same mix of tanks, healers and DPS as other MMO's have, groups are going to have trouble finding DPS, not finding tanks or healers.
While I agree with your math in concept. You need to look at the distribution for LFR in wow, that's 2 tanks for a group of 25... Tanks are still the hardest slot to fill most of the time. People generally just want to play the DPS type classes because they're cooler and or don't want the pressure of tank or heal.
I have no doubts that your observations are true. None at all.
All I can say is that the pool of players that group is not the same as the pool of players that raid.
That same math (or the general idea of it) holds true for raiding in Ashes as well.
And yet many still ask for the tanking role to be exclusive to the tank/x classes. Making the rarest played role the linchpin of every grouping scenarios is a recipe for frustration, and no, it does not make more people start playing that role. In my personal case, it made me stop looking for groups and group content to solo almost all the time.
If the game has some (or many) group encounters in which tanking is not as essential, where a second rate tank is enough to do the job, then x/tanks with appropriate gear could be a viable option. They wouldn't steal the show for dungeon boss or raids, but they would provide the necessary, even if imperfect, role to get people into groups.