Dev Discussion #47 - Tanking: Threat Mitigation

Songcaller

NishUK wrote: »

Gandalfthegrape wrote: »

Aoe threat using single target abilities makes pulling the boss faster, or having a faster acceleration for tanks than dps will let dps start attacking faster. No one wants to wait for the tank to get threat.

You might as well say you want PvE super easy.

Little thought here really...

Aoe taunts can be a death sentence for a tank. Better to have the control a singular ability gives with the threat generation from active abilities to assist.

ForlornFjord

Threat is a great mechanic, but I don't like when DPS have to restrict their damage because of that. Main DPS job is to do as much damage as possible. Main job as a Tank is to make sure the threat is on you while DPS are doing their main job.
I like the idea when it's easier to keep threat at the beginning, but gets harder as a fight goes on. The longer DPS deal damage the more obvious it is to a boss.

Zeric

Vaknar wrote: »

Dev Discussion - Tanking: Threat Mitigation
For people who prefer to play the tanking role, do you enjoy holding threat as a prevalent part of combat? Would you prefer threat mechanics to be a part of combat initiation, or throughout the entire duration of combat?

Edit: Here is a follow-up question for you non-tanking players
For non-tanking players, are you fond of having to play your role with threat in mind?

As a tank player I prefer it being throughout the fight.
As a rouge/ninja/assassin player I do enjoy having to keep aggro in mind.

I was, especially, enjoying my Thief's role in Final Fantasy 11 where I would assist the tank is hate management.

1Miracle

Put aside the "tanks are also supports" or "I need a spell for pvp and pve" or "tanks should have cc only" etc. comments. Tanks are tanks and that's what we are talking about.

Yes and throughout the entire duration of combat.

Do you want a tank that can't tank ? NO
Everything depends on what kind of mob you are fighting(maybe you need more than 1 tank or more than 2 tanks, etc.) and, sometimes, on how many people take part in that pve fight.

Songcaller

I'm used to ranged weapon pulls and body pulls. I requested the additions due to perceived difficulty of single digit success rates in certain pve conditions. Tank should be awesome whether solo tank or in a team of tanks.

NishUK

Vaknar wrote: »

Edit: Here is a follow-up question for you non-tanking players
For non-tanking players, are you fond of having to play your role with threat in mind?

Any decent PvE should involve the attack and defence of everyone.

If you are planning on having Tanks make gameplay simple, where threat is absolute and where everyone else just purely focuses on damage and maintaining their niche buffs/tricks I will already regard this project as a gameplay bore.

Songcaller

I hope there will be a tanking school available at the military node or some other location. It would mean that more classes can spec into being tanks. Though I think that the tank should also be the most optimal tank if the tank class is designed to be the tank. After all, how would the dps feel if their dps was nerfed to only allow synergy damage? Tank gets a ton of hate, either from the name or the functions and its not warranted. On the note of taunts, I dislike timed taunts and prefer a threat bomb taunt rather than a windowed taunt.

gvpr

I am more of a PVP kind of guy so how does threat work in PVP?

Roshen

ardanza wrote: »

I don't post often as I feel my words will never see the light of day.

As I go through this thread to pull together notes for the studio, I just wanted to take a moment to say YES, your words do see the light of day.

Thanks!

Lana

I think the answer to this relies heavily on how important threat is overall in gameplay. How important is it? How hard is it to get it, how hard is it to lose it? Can the DPS or the heals 'pull off' the tank?

I imagine in a scenario where threat isn't complicated or a priority, it isn't something anyone else is worried about than I wouldn't want to be tied down by it either. I smack it first then everyone else smacks it and it dies we win.

Now in a world where the DPS must be conscious of who they have targeted and how hard their hitting, the healer is weary of when and where they're throwing out heals, and the tank is now focused not only on positioning but also what everyone else in the party is doing and how it affects his job; well, in this world threat is a living breathing thing and I want the tools conquer it.

Now that I've said all this, it has me wondering if having both isn't such a bad idea. Hear me out: in world content, early content, or just the simpler versions of lets say dungeons threat is a hit and don't worry about it thing, however, the more difficult the content becomes the more important the threat mechanic becomes. This allows more casual players or new players to the roles to start out with a simpler more toned down version. Players who revel in a challenge and choose to do more difficult content later will have to understand how their roles are affected by threat and what they personally need to do to ensure their group is able to take down those more difficult targets.

For example: Easy difficulty - I'm DPS and I pew pew and its dead woot. Medium difficulty - I'm DPS and I pew pew...woah did it look like that guy turned and looked at me for a second...huh oh well its dead. Hard difficulty - I'm DPS and I pew, Oh crap did I just pull that off the tank!? now I'm dead.

Selo

Anything but GW2 horrible threat mechanics

Ashgan

For threat generation, instead of just attacks and hitting you can utilize the party shield, each time an ally is hit it both reduces damage to the ally and generates threat, just a thought.

Leukael

I like threat playing a role in play because it adds depth. I also like positioning mattering (if I know we're going to pull another pack I should position myself as a healer so that the new patrol will walk over the tank to get to me, for example.) I think proximity to the target impacting how much threat you generate could be really a really interesting idea to explore.

I do really want threat to matter and be something everyone has to be aware of at all levels of play. Alongside thoughtful AI (and varied ones based on the type of enemies) you encounter will make a more engaging combat. Then add in augments, ability combos (both individual and party synergies,) and the tension these together create in combat will keep everyone glued to their seat and heart racing - from pull to loot!

Tilts

Q: Would you prefer threat mechanics to be a part of combat initiation, or throughout the entire duration of combat?

I'd like to see a combination of both. What I mean by this is:

-On the start of the encounter you have an aggro shout that forces the aggro onto you for 5 seconds regardless of how much threat you have built up, though that shout has an 15+ second cooldown; within those 5 seconds you have the time to use your threat generation skills and also position the enemy/boss.

-Throughout the fight you have several skills and mechanics (such as perfecting blocking into counterattacking) that continuously generate threat. In the video perfect blocking was mentioned, and I think that would be an essential mechanic to have for tanks, it would be cool if you could tack on some sort of counterattack to reward players that optimize their perfect blocking.
Ex: The player achieves a perfect block, then they have 1-3 seconds to activate the counterattack skill, not just rewarding them additional damage but threat generation as well. The counterattack could have an 3~5 second cooldown so it's not too overpowering but also keeps tanks engaged on block timings.

-All classes should have threat generation, certain skills generating more threat than others, and the aggro shout I mentioned earlier could be used for DPS burst windows so tanks don't lose aggro during these windows and it would incentivize party coordination.

Songcaller

Threat potions would be great. If implemented well it means many tanks could be created other than tank.

Taerrik

If at all possible, please do not implement a direct taunt ability, that forces a mob to attack the user for some number of time.

Threat maintenance should ideally be balanced on a knife edge if good dps are pushing the limits of a class. Healers overhealing should be generating loads of threat, and the tank should be working to maintain threat, by being more threatening.

I dont mean to say a dps in tank clothes, I mean something like having a stat like 'hate' that exists on tank gear, that acts as a multiplier. One point of damage = One point of threat normally, but this can be modified by stats.

Certain tank abilities can further these modifiers drastically to function as "taunts" if the tank is not on top of the agro meter, so the tank can quickly grab threat if its lost.

And, threat management is a group duty. Classes like a rogue should have abilities that can send thier own threat generation to a target for a short time, or reduce a teammates threat generation for a short time.

This doesnt need to be useless in pvp either. A tank that works to generate threat on a target, can start putting on a short term debuff that as threat gets higher, that target will do less damage to other people. So a tank can actually defend teammates in pvp. This debuff should never last more than a few seconds if the tank disengages. The idea being that if I am going ham on a enemy healer, and that healers tank comes over to start hitting me, not only am I getting some pressure from being hit by the tank, but the longer I try to ignore the tank, the more I am discouraged from doing so until I leave, or deal with the tank. If the tank leaves to go somewhere else, then after a few seconds I should be able to go back to smacking the healer for full damage.


TLDR tho, please no taunts.

Orym

Tanking and holding aggro should imo not be difficult or much of a challenge at all. Exactly as a healer just have to press a heal button and he then heals (doing his job), same with dps, just do some dps and you are dong your job. The aggro manegement should just be the basic part of being a tank. Press 1 or 2 abilities and you get all aggro.

The fight should not come down to if the tank can hold aggro or not, it should come down to how much you can mitigate from abilities and armor, healing and just group synergy, tactic and overall knowledge and preperation.


Summary: Aggro management is a headache and an annoyance, focus on other things and we good.

Edit:
Now when i think about this a little bit more i actually can't understand how aggro management can be a thing. Like HOW can you be like " ye hold down your dps there Bobby you are doing your job way too good", or "be careful keeping everyone at 100% health there Bill so you dont get too much aggro from healing".
I have NEVER experienced a game where the tank lost aggro and everyone WASN'T pissed off or frustrated.
FOCUS on the other variables of combat and it will be SO MUCH MORE FUN.

A DPS DOES DPS, A HEALER HEALS AND A TANK CONTROLS THE MOBS!!! EVERYTHING ELSE COMES AFTER THAT!!

Omniceye

A new idea I'd love to see some thoughts on.

USING THREAT AS A RESOURCE

Using the stamina system hasn't ever felt right for me. However when you are a tank with a blocking system you are either spending all your time blocking or building threat. Essentially making tanking a repeat of taunt>block>taunt>block with the occasional cc or debuff in between.

Now what if you lose threat from blocking, nothing wants to attack a wall, but now you also have to balance your threat vs survival. Attacking full force to build up threat, taunts just being a perk of some skills you can put a skill point into to build up a significant amount of threat. Then when blocking you reduce damage by a % based on the type of shield your using, however it removes your threat based on the damage reduction.

This essentially changes up how tanking works and adds a new mechanic for the party to consider, if the healer pulls aggro they can choose to bring a shield instead of a focus to help with aggro reduction at the cost of less healing. This also would give purpose for an off tank to be in the party. The Tank can build up aggro and block during tank busters to survive, now the off tank pulls aggro until the MT can build up threat again while the party slows dps to help out.

Now based on a couple skills we saw in the showcase. You have the shield wall, it could reduce the threat of those behind you while building yours, using the shout with a perk added to make it a taunt builds massive threat, stacks of courage could also reduce the amount of threat lost when blocking. All of these building your threat allows you to block to reduce when needed without it feeling like that's your only option.

In PvP this is essentially how threat against other players would be. If you just hunker down behind your shield, other players will ignore you, but if you are attacking and throwing out cc you start drawing their attention.

I understand that this system isn't perfect and needs more thought to be fleshed out but I want to know what others think on this vs a stamina blocking system.

Krasty

Vaknar wrote: »

Dev Discussion - Tanking: Threat Mitigation
For people who prefer to play the tanking role, do you enjoy holding threat as a prevalent part of combat? Would you prefer threat mechanics to be a part of combat initiation, or throughout the entire duration of combat?

Edit: Here is a follow-up question for you non-tanking players
For non-tanking players, are you fond of having to play your role with threat in mind?

Keep an eye out for our next Dev Discussion topic regarding Training!

From a TANK perspective(tanking players):
I have played tank in games like: ESO, GW2(Guardian), AA, L2 [C4,H5], BDO(Valkyrie), BNS(Blade Master), All these games had pvp and games like AA,GW2,BDO had pvp/pve = 80%/20% most of these games had an agro skill directly intended to maintain agro, maybe only in gw2 I don't remember any. And at the same time the tank in all these games was Strong-up to-OP sometimes he could defeat more than one opponent at once. Even in L2 , and L2 was known to be situated on party pvp 9v9 and more(in lower chronicles).

by that I mean that for me as a pvp tank it's not how it behaves in pve that matters, but how it behaves in pvp... and if tanking is challanging/fun in pve, that's even better. but alpha and omega will be how the tank will behave in pvp

And from a DPS/Healer perspective(non-tanking players):
(because in many of these games I also played dps or healer, or the tank was so hybrid that it could heal itself or be directly dps.)

: of course it's better if the mobs don't aggro on you and the tank can keep aggro, of course full burst dps and uninhibited dmg is fun, but also in most of these games the tank couldn't keep aggro and the boss aggroed on dps or healer (for example: L2, ESO, and in any other game where pve meant something), and of course any dmg meters added to the trend of ripping agro, and one could recognize greedy dps from "reasonable" dps.

so as a non-tanking player, yes I have threat in my mind.

Symbiosome

I think that "Combat Formation" and "Active Shielding / Dmg Absorption" is the way to go.

Current state: players stand anywhere melee or range, particularly without too much of care of their relational positioning from each other. The tank either captures threat or not. Trying to take the fight away from the party makes it feel "unreal" (I know ...).

Proposed future state: make combat rely on "Formation" more like in "real life". Make the tank have instead of threat management, 100% active shielding management. Make it as similar for both PvE and PvP. Just a few ideas of how they can CC an enemy in PvP and PvE; root/fall, slow, place barriers, different sizes of protective domes around the tank, different shapes of dome such as backwards related to where the tank faces or around, different types of protections such such as absorbing damage, preventing damage, etc. Make the group really follow the leader adapting to the position of the tank for maximum effectiveness, in other words apply formations. Then apply the same to the other roles, and open the door for a true tactical game play, and even more so creativity of players on effective formations that can be trained and rely on high coordination.

Songcaller

The combat is already too static. I'm concerned formations will make the combat even more static. However, if we will only get static combat then formations are the logical next step.

Symbiosome

Neurath wrote: »

The combat is already too static. I'm concerned formations will make the combat even more static. However, if we will only get static combat then formations are the logical next step.

The tank will have to keep repositioning during the fight! The party will constantly adapt. That will mean very non-static gameplay in my opinion. And an experience that may be really fun.

Songcaller

I'm not convinced. In a formation where will the tanks be? The rear of any formation is a weak spot. If the formation gives high levels of mitigation to those in formation then everyone becomes a tank and its just a massive tank and spank.

I hope for difficult dungeons and bosses. I just don't see how the difficulty will be applied if everyone is in a mitigation bubble. Sometimes, tanks have to position the boss away from the dps. In such circumstances where is the threat to to tank group if the tank group is in formation and under high mitigation?

Symbiosome

Also adding to my original post, that will also break the current horrible "fact" that you have one tank. Two tanks will be great to "flank" and protect from multiple directions.

Songcaller

But you wouldn't need multiple tanks if everyone is in a formation/mitigation bubble.

Symbiosome

you would if the dome is e.g., "backwards" from where the tank faces, and you want to flank the enemy from multiple sides for additional damage from the back. It opens the door for so much tactics,

Songcaller

In my mind, formations should enhance the synergy skills. I don't believe a formation should give a high mitigation bubble. Aegis should be more effective in formation to give directional bonus to mitigation but I don't feel everyone in a mitigation bubble is the way to do formations.

I'm all for tactics but until I see formations in action I'm still rather opposed due to the static nature of the current combat.

Percimes

Formations may work well for range dps, but make me fell that melee classes will have a lot of out of weapon range moments during fights. They're not fighting with pikes, spears or any pole weapons.

Songcaller

Yeah. I liked your idea of switching between formational benefits. Perhaps a timed mitigation bubble would be good. However, I haven't seen any dungeons or raids for many months and I can't quite see the value with those old endeavours in mind.

Certainly, there should be benefits and reductions in capabilities inherent in each formation type. We don't want 40 players acting like GM toons.

Symbiosome

Percimes wrote: »

Formations may work well for range dps, but make me fell that melee classes will have a lot of out of weapon range moments during fights. They're not fighting with pikes, spears or any pole weapons.

DPS can just stand closely next to the tank. Still short melee range, but positional and tactical 100%.