Lodrig wrote: » But I do not see any reason why the PvP style Tank abilities would not make for good active Tank gameplay, if anything it should be better because it's more positional and dynamic rather than just pushing yourself up a 1-dimensional threat ranking
Lodrig wrote: » As for differential hate generation from actions is still one dimensional because there is only one hate ranking list, don't confuse having many different +/- inputs to something with dimensionality.
Lodrig wrote: » why is a taunted player about to die? Taunts aren't damage and under the proposed forced-tabing the taunted player is still free to retreat, receive heals and presumably use self-targeting abilities or items. If taunting a healer means they can't heal any allies then that's going to make taunts effectively a silence on them and would probably be OP.
Lodrig wrote: » Noaani your statement 'that anyone else has come up with' would imply that you have compared my suggestion to the Aggro paradigm and found it inferior. But I don't think that's what you actually mean, rather you're trying to say that 'amongst published MMORPG's there exists no better method' and you're not interested in untested alternatives for AoC. Do I have that correct?
Lodrig wrote: » I'm not surprised it's come up before, it's such an obvious incongruity between PvE and PvP, as for Aggro being 'best' in PvE I'm inclined to think your preference is for the Dynamics of active Tanking and your comparing Aggro mechanics to the even more primitive AI's that preceded it or the uncontrollability of battle when a threat generating tank is absent from a mob which is designed to be handled with exactly that tool. I don't think anyone would question that Tanking needs to be control who is being attacked. But I do not see any reason why the PvP style Tank abilities would not make for good active Tank gameplay, if anything it should be better because it's more positional and dynamic rather than just pushing yourself up a 1-dimensional threat ranking. I'm a bit skeptical of trying to make the threat generation of a Tank effect a Player, first off, it's going to remove agency from the opponent is a very severe and frustrating way, even the most aggressive control mechanic I'm imagining give the opponent some counter-play options. Second an amount of threat from one target is only relevant with respect to another targets, aka to create a threat ranking to determine who to attack so all damage is going to need to be tabulated and managed and in a large battle that's going to be nigh unmanageable. Lastly a mob is going to attack someone every chance it gets and generally has unlimited attack potential, but a player, even if there forcibly tabbed over to the Tank can choose to not attack and reserve their mana for when they regain control, that could lead to both sides trying to wait each other out and make for excessively slow combat.
Noaani wrote: » We've talked about this on the forum in years past. My opinion has always been that threat/hate/aggro is still the best method anyone has come up with for PvE, and so should remain for that reason alone. However, since it doesnt work in PvP, my thoughts are to turn that threat mechanic in PvP to a forced target instead. Perhaps make it as simple as taunts working as a forced target status effect on the target, with the strength of the taunt acting as a countdown timer to determine the duration. This is a much better solution that just dropping threat from PvE, imo. Since Intrepid seem fairly set on the idea of giving tanks a lot of CC (battlefield control is what they say), this seems to me like it would fit in just fine.
akabear wrote: » I`m not sure of the argument of why aggro does not work in pvp. I recall many intense fights in L2 where the enemy tank continually pulled my focus from the players I had targetted on to them.. I remember a 20min pvp fight with a tank with my hawkeye.. I could not kill him kiting, he could not catch me. Seemed to work fine..
Garrtok wrote: » You dont say... There are plenty of pvp MMOs that gave tanks anyways a purpose like warhammer online or daoc. Nothing new, no need to look at lol or overwatch or such nonsense Most prominent mechanics are a "guard" function where you can absorb damage from your guarded teammate, and pvp taunts were your enemy is doing less damage against targets that are not you.
Iskiab wrote: » Garrtok wrote: » You dont say... There are plenty of pvp MMOs that gave tanks anyways a purpose like warhammer online or daoc. Nothing new, no need to look at lol or overwatch or such nonsense Most prominent mechanics are a "guard" function where you can absorb damage from your guarded teammate, and pvp taunts were your enemy is doing less damage against targets that are not you. Warhammer guarding led to some unintended consequences. Usually a tank would guard a bright wizard who would spam aoe, then an engineer would aoe pull people into the bright wizard. It worked amazing, but guarding a glass canon build was a little overpowered. Better to give a reason for people to not ignore tanks in PvP and leave PvE threat alone. People generally still ignored the tanks and it made bright wizards OP.