Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
- a tank has an "aggro stance"
- it's an aura with a somewhat small aoe
- as long as there's an enemy (mob or flagged person) within that aoe - the aura works
- aura has 4 stages (indicated by a colored (blue, green, yellow, red) circle around the tank)
- if the tank has not received a threshold of dmg (say, 1k after all reductions) within the last 5 secs - the aura moves to stage 2
- tank's allies have a "reduce incoming dmg" buff. if the tank hasn't received enough dmg (say, 2k now) - stage 3
- tank is now redirecting dmg from allies to himself, with an additional reduction on the incoming dmg. if the tank hasn't received direct incoming dmg (say, 4k) - stage 4
- tank gets timer of 3 seconds. This timer can be removed if the tank gets hit with 3 different debuffs. After those 3 seconds the tank will "explode", dealing x2 of the dmg he absorbed in the previous stage in the aura's aoe. Aura's stage gets reset.
- each stage's duration can be balanced however Intrepid wants
- if the tank receives enough dmg the stage go down one step
This would prevent the tank from just running away from attackers, while also encouraging dodge builds or high skill dodging/kiting gameplay. And this would make enemies pay attention to the tank, which will help his allies do their own stuff easier.While I am all for complex mechanics, when it comes to solving an issue, the simplest solution is always the best (imo).
To me, the simplest solution to the issue of allowing a tank to perform the same role in PvP as they do in PvE is to make it so that taunts have as similar a function as possible between what they have in PvP and what they have in PvE.
Anything other than this is not really solving the issue.
However, if the above were in place, I would assume that AoE damage would keep the tank at stage 1. Essentially, all it would do is slightly increase the amount of AoE damage we bring - we would likely still just ignore the tanks.
Edit to add; a MASSIVE advantage to giving taunts a similar function in PvE and PvP is that it means the abilities with hate components to them will still be of value.
As an example, in a game where attacks are dealing 1k damage, an ability with a 100 damage attack and a 1k taunt may be of value in PvE, but in PvP it is worthless. Make it so that taunt component has a function in PvP and all of a sudden that whole ability - taunt and damage components - is useful.
Same with a detaunt that a DPS class may have (should have). If an ability lowers your hate to a target by 1k, that is a worthless ability in PvP. Make it so taunts (and thus detaunts) have the same function in PvE and PvP, and that ability becomes useful.
Same with a hate transfer. If a class has the ability to transfer some or all of it's generated hate to a target ally for a period of time, that is again a worthless ability in PvP. However, make it so taunts have the same function in PvP as in PvE, and that ability has a great function in both.
if you look at threat as a forced target, what we have in the above is a tank that can deal an amount of damage, and also force you to target them for a period of time it could even be that the strength of the taunt is the amount of damage you need to deal to the tank before you break the force target).
However, you also have a DPS that has the ability to detaunt and gain the ability to target freely again, and you have a DPS class that has an ability where the rival tank may attempt to taunt them, but then instead find that they themselves have had their target locked on the player the DPS had that hate transfer on.
With this, the complexity of the situation is baked in to the existing abilities that can be spread out over all of the classes.
To me, this is a MUCH more interesting, engaging, exciting and unpredictable system than anything else - due simply to the fact that it is turning the hate/taunt/aggro mechanic that is spread over all ((or almost all) classes in to something that functions in PvP, rather than just trying to shove in some viability to tanks so they are worth using in PvP.
But otherwise I definitely agree. I'm used to "the tank forces you to target him" and deeper gameplay based on that would be great. I'm not sure how that would work with the action side of combat, but I do like the "amount of threat = the amount of dmg to remove the forced targeting" idea.
With player collision being a thing, if AoE's aren't hitting the tank, I would assume the tank is out of range of enemies, disabling the aura.
As for action combat, rather than being a forced target, it could simply be a forced direction to face.
Tanks also did things like hamstring which simply slowed the mob but he could ten be out maneuvered. So in my personal opinion if you want things to work in PvE and PvP as a tank, he should be the character that just annoys the crap out of others. Slows, chain pulls. Interruptions, knocking targets over etc. but the one thing he should do above all else as a leader are shouts/commands. Abilities that get the players in group to focus harder, regen mana faster, to dodge better and take less dmg. His shouts or. Commands, even call em banners he uses to “signal” should have high agro, wipe so agro and even make the player heal better, DPS better or CC longer.
Because he’s the commander of the group so give him commander functions. TBC’s agro table was handled way better than WoTLK and I hope that AoC’s is handled better than that. The tank shouldn’t out agro everyone just because he’s a tank. And their damage shouldn’t be negligible, nor should a healers or supporters. Just shouldn’t be as high as a pure DPS character.
If Tanks want to cry to be OP & douches, let them suffer for it, it is only fair. No heals, def or armor when they use trollable skills. Same for ninja type classes.
This all comes across as trying to buff taunts and give them weird functionality in place of them having none in pvp. Tanks don't need a taunt you can look at other types of games like overwatch or mobas how they approach tanks.
Rather than trying to add new ability effects exclusive for pvp with taunts just make the current set more effective. Ie if a player under effective of a taunt is hit by your ability, those abilities or more effective against that player. ie longer cc, slow, more dps, etc. Allowing the core of your tank kit to b more effective with what you can do rather than trying to add weird functions or clunky feels of a taunt.
ie i can only imagine in a war with tanks doing some aoe taunts and just physically not having control of your character. Losing control is not fun in any game.
You're on a roll today huh...
Overwatch and MOBAs actually have very precisely tuned Tank mechanics that depend on so many other things that it's hardly comparable.
In case anyone didn't know...
I'll write up some entire essays if people/Intrepid want, but suffice it to say that we should not be expecting anything approaching the Tank type play from those games in Ashes.
Forced Targeting is the easy fix for a Fantasy MMO. If you try anything else you are going to build something really interesting but not what players probably came to their Fantasy MMO for.
(you don't need to respond to this, Mag, I'm just 'on duty' today).
You physically aren't even trying to understand my view point, why quote me? If you are open to understanding what i mean and talking im down. else i don't see the point of talking about mobas with me that i've also been playing before you knew about them.
And again forced targeting is not a easy fix, it is a clunky mechanics. No one wants to play a game having their camera spun around every second from aoes taunts everywhere. If you are one of the few that are fine having someone affect you camera direction every second do not assume that is the majority
If you're gonna be this childish about it why did you even bump the post, dude?
Seriously...
To help you learn and understand a conversation where you don't even attempt to understand where someone is saying will lead no where. You are not caring + working off heavy assumptions there is nothing positive about that.
Imagine the difference if you were asking what someone meant and tried to understand their angle and view point and built upon that. Instead you are going right to "hardly comparable." without knowing exactly what level I am comparing or what I mean to begin with assuming what you want to think in your mind.
You outlined your entire concept though.
"Do a taunt, and instead of having that Taunt make the player focus on the Tank, make it a buff for other effects that disable the player."
Isn't this what you said?
MOBAs could also work as source of inspiration for what kind of skills would make a character a threat in a team fight situation.
That doesn't have any relation to my comment about mobas.
Comment on mobas is about people trying to force taunts to do the same thing in pve showing you can design things without relying on adding clunky gameplay.
Now below does not relate to mobas but simply an idea I'm throwing out may the core kit stronger during taunt effects rather than adding more complexity. A lot of work goes into the kits just make it feel better during the taunt to offset the loss of a skill if its only function pulls mobs and had no other effect.
My claim in this thread is that the 'just' is extremely hard to do in a Fantasy MMO, particularly one that involves 'cannot CC NonCombatant players + body blocking + Diminishing returns on CC'. This is just mechanical and balance related, not even touching on whether or not it would be fun.
And that for very complicated reasons, MOBAs are a poor source of inspiration for the skill types that fit into that type of Fantasy MMO, which as far as I understand is the type we're discussing.
If Intrepid desires to build a 'Tank' class that works even remotely similar to most MOBA/Battle Arena Tanks, I'd actually be 100% happy about it, but I definitely would think it would lose a lot of the 'historically accepted' principles of a Fantasy MMO.
(Mostly I've avoided this topic because I'm working on my 'not writing fullscreen posts').
This is, in fact, my current 'topic of study' since Predecessor went into Early Access, revisiting Paladins/Overwatch/League as well.
The problem with all the suggested things is that these are normally abilities given directly (and in more powerful forms) to other archetypes, except maybe the interrupt/disable which is where the mechanical issues happen.
Basically I'm asking, does anyone have anything other than 'CC or stuff other classes do' that fits in at all with the 'standard' Tanking flow of a Tab-Target-acceptable MMO? Because the MOBA options, while fun, would have the opposite issue. Most MOBA tanking 'skills' are 'PvP only' and don't work properly in PvE (or create horribly unbalanced situations when they do).
Exactly my point bringing it up was about inspiration, if we look at warcraft / cough dota2 for example there are a lot ways tanks work without relying on using a taunt. There is so much more creative ways we can approach things besides having tanks be as boring just throwing taunts in pvp. Make them fun at its core and not a taunt bot.
Fine, please name one...
I'll call in my Warcraft experts in case you get outside my zone.
Tusk is a great example has a lot of pressure and can create ice blocks to trap people in forcing them back towards him naturally if they want to move around the ice and get away. Omni is a great support with a lot of snares if he is near the opponent.
Both you could take the concept and just it for example the slow is stronger or last longer unless you bit the tank with an ability which would remove the debuff on you. Making it more of a natural choice and build aggro mentality on the player. Not taking control away from the player but making it more of a natural thing.
But there are tons of skills i could reference i find interesting mass teleport ( of course you don't need to have infinite range teleport), zone control CC that lingers in a area if people move into it, Ashes already had the tank shield skill which pretty much works the same as abaddon, creating clones of allies which you can confuse people on the battlefield (can also add taunt effects to them for people near their clones).
I could go on, and mobas were originally not that advanced, they originally were just a mod, they just have had time over many years to grow and add more complexity to it.
I don't see any particular reason to think that abilities that make tanks more viable would be more fun draining than having a rogue cut up a mage to be honest. If a rogue gets hit by a tanks "break ankle" (im making the name up) ability and is slowed by 20% and cannot use mobility abilities for 5 seconds that's just what it is. Same with when he finally gets out of it, jumps away and a harpoon pulls him back. Yes, that is VERY frustrating, but that doesn't seem much different from a mage casting thunderball and simply having a ranger jump over their head and push a spear into their back. At least through the lense of Rock-paper-scissor I think there are plenty of abilities a tank can have to make him a target to deal with.
Some more examples:
- Have the cone make allies standing in it gain greater resistance to interrupts
- give the smaller damage abilities of the tank a bleed effect, low healthpool and low armored targets like assassins will hate that
- shout ability slows and disables mobility skills (not magic) for a few seconds
- Shield assault reduces resistances of a target hit for a few seconds
If a tank decides to use their talents and stats to reduce the cooldowns of abilities rather than pump up the efficacy and duration on every cast, those guys could become relentless CC machines that make nearby allies a pain to deal with while making their targets very vulnerable. In my opinion that alone would make them a menace on the battlefield... at least to assassin type characters.
But the distinction between a Tank and a 'Fighter' is specifically that the Tank is built to take hits and damage. That's what I am talking about in general.
You can absolutely always build a Tank to be a 'CC and debuff menace'. The problem is that you then don't need to make a Tank, you could make a Fighter that does this, and honestly most players would be happier. Nor will the person who tanks in PvE by drawing the attention of the mob and taking hits, actually do any of that.
You don't need to hit the Tank because they're a menace, unless they are the biggest menace. If they are the biggest menace then what you need is more Tanks.
If you have some reason/method to counter the menace of 'Many tanks' we'll be back in the loop. This is precisely the problem that MOBAs have been working on for years. There's nothing 'ineffective' about what you're suggesting, it's that the gameplay doesn't actually work out this way.
Honestly I feel this is half the reason we got all that homogenization in games and discarding the Trinity in class design to begin with. MOBA Tank design is almost nothing like this, it goes right back to the 'Let's make CC Bruisers and call them Tanks', and it's only recently that most games built any true Tanks (again, from the Perspective that you actually need to kill them instead of just treating them as another source of CC that you really need to avoid).
Again, if you're saying 'well that's fine just make them CC Bruisers that's close enough' then I have no problems with this at all, but to me, until the Tank has a reason in PvP to use their personal damage reduction skill and expect it to actually not get ignored, they're not a Tank.
Ok I can handle Tusk and Omni 'by myself'.
I'll repeat the same 'answer' from what I said to Killon.
"Until the Tank has a reason in PvP to use their personal damage reduction skill and expect it to actually not get ignored, they're not a Tank."
Within the context of a Fantasy MMO, that is. And if you check most DOTA resources, they don't even have a concept of 'Tank', which is part of the reason Omni is even counted as Support.
If your response to 'Tank using their heavy mitigation skill' is 'do something else and attempt to move around them' and the Tank's job at that point is to CC you, then I'm just saying you'd have been better off with a Bruiser that had a CC skill. We did start to move a little toward the idea of 'Tanks being so much harder to kill than Bruisers that we got to call them that' in around 2015 and then Overwatch kinda took up the rest with their various game modes that enforce Tanking as an option...
But if we felt the Overwatch style mode was a Tanking Option no one would care about this conversation.
People who want Taunts to redirect aggro are asking for a way to make it so that their personal defenses matter in combat which is the easy answer to 'making it equal to PvE'.
We have proper Tanks in MOBAs/Arenas now, even if only a few of them, but the way they work is a pain to get into an MMORPG.
This is exactly why I'm saying under taunt you make people attack you organically while still giving them the choice. It isn't to use all dota things 1 for 1 but as inspiration as a base.
1 . Like i said they technically already have one skill in which if dmg is done to your allies it transfers towards you (meaning there is a reason for damage reduction)
2. My mention on when players have a taunt on them it increases the effective of their abilities on those players. Players to reduce that must dmg the take ( meaning their is a reason for damage reduction)
There is no issue having more special types of cc in related to tanks, it allows them to disrupt players while not easily be able to focus and be killed do to how tanky they are. It is a pretty important role that will be mixed in with bruisers (tanks having skills that will most likely high benefit them).
As i mentioned with the tusk ability you can give tanks more zone control that have an influence on the area making them effective and fun to play, Think of it like a tower that is tanky yet giving good benefits to the team.
Though just because you are spec'd into damage reduction, gameplay should not be designed around you need to kill the tank first and can't hit other players. Things should be done organically else it will be stale.
Sure but the nitty gritty of that is still not 'MMO Trinity Tanking', it's just debuffing. If you're okay with that, and Intrepid is okay with that, fine. People will just build Tanks with 'PvP set' focused on CCs and 'PvE set' focused on personal mitigation.
Tanking is:
1. I, by existing, am blocking you from achieving an objective.
2. I, by using defensive abilities or build, am soaking up the damage you want to do
3. Your best option for whatever reason is to keep actually doing the damage to me even though I'm definitely mitigating it.
Most MOBA characters achieve #1 without even being tanks, the Objective is usually behind them.
Most MMO Tanks are given skills to achieve #2.
Nearly nothing actually achieves #3. Technically not even 'Taunt Retarget' actually does this, that's why it is sort of the 'easy solution', I'm not saying it was the good one.
Again, my only point here is 'MOBAs do this really differently than MMORPGs and if you use the MOBA methods you either won't get a Fantasy MMO or you won't get 'Tanking''.
If we redefine Tanking as not needing #3, then you can do whatever you want, but if other classes have enough CC, people will still try to not bother building Tanks (that mitigate damage) for PvP (that isn't almost entirely focused around a positional objective).
The entire idea of the MMO Tank in the Trinity is that they are 'shrugging off your hits' or 'untouchably skilled with all their parries and whatever' but your best option is to keep attacking them, even using up your energy to do so. Otherwise we'll get a shoehorned 'CC Heavy' class that has wildly fluctuating effectiveness based on opposing CC resistance and low damage for no specific reason other than 'don't give them CC and big damage too'.
I think that's the origin of what I don't like about the concept of tanks in MMOs. Instead of working to make mobs behave more like players, games have expected players to behave like mobs vs other players.
Make PvE closer to what PvP is, not the other way around.
And ditch the current playstyle/mechanic of tanks at the same time.
I will agree of the thing in mobas having an objective and being stupid tank has a huge advantage pushing forward. Had a 15k hp centaur game (with insane regen) where i had the whole team attacking on my with a terrible team i was working with besides my friend. 0 Taunts but I had a lot of people attacking me getting my ass beat so we could stall until we won.
It is something that honestly I hope to see in ashes where they have more objective based gameplay. Rather than throwing numbers in zerg balls until you win and only king of the hill as the objective.
I would also advocate for fixing both problems at once, but I come from a game with only one Taunt as my primary game and it doesn't even guarantee the mob will turn.
So for me, PvE is already closer to PvP there.
A Fantasy MMO trying to resolve this 'problem' is taking on a huge challenge, though. How do you get the Big Fire Dragon to not just incinerate the Mage immediately upon recognizing they are the Mage, and wouldn't players just immediately spec their Mages for defense?
I am absolutely in the market for solutions to this problem for my own design space, but by the nature of that position, I gotta argue against all the things that don't really solve it. My current method shows promise but it has too many abuse points for an MMO still.
As to how that would play - it would play like you are being tanked. That is how it should feel when you are, well, being tanked.
I'm sorry but there is not a world where that will be fun in this type of game with this many players. That is one of those bad ideas you don't know how bad it is until you start playing it. And a lot of players start complaining asking why anyone thought it be a good idea.
Not to mention the level of griefing you can do with it on top of it. Allowing another person to control your character and add clunky elements will always be bad. It is only serviceable in small instances like smite (where it is limited to a few characters and not potentially 20 people around you.) and even than it is going to still be disorienting.
Once again, bad takes all around.
CC is a bad thing if it is done in excess - as opposed to always being bad as you suggest here.
Second, if you want to assume you can get yourself in to a situation in PvP in which you are being taunted by 20 tanks at a time, then you have to apply that same paradigm to any single ability that any single class may have. At the point of 20 tanks all taunting you, you are already at the point of absurdity.
Third, you seem to just be assuming a developer would put something like this in the game without any thought. Obviously they would add in a mechanism where you can't be taunted if you are already under the influence of a taunt, and they would obnviously also have what ever CC mechanics (diminishing returns or what ever) apply here.
Fourth, your insistance that this just wouldn't work seems to be ignoring games that use this.
You need to stop thinking like an NPC my dude.
20 cc around you is a reality if not more based on large scale wars so yes.?
20 cc vrs 20 taunt skills changing your camera skills and making the game feel clunky. Clearly the taunt skills are far worse. You are making assumption I'm not aware of the mechanic every mmo has where you have cc protection. Im very well aware of that and it doesn't change anything in what I'm saying, you will be taunted off protection.
Yes devs will add things in the game with thoughts, what I'm hearing is not devs but consumers throwing ideas out there that are not good. I highly doubt they are going to add mechanics in that are going to take control from players and make the came clunky which is this taunt affecting players you are talking about.
Are you talking about old tab target mmorpgs that don't use hybrid or have action camera from 20 years ago? Very slow paced gameplay and old tab target mmorpgs I'd expect to play differently than a modern mmorpg. People are already complaining about throne and liberty which is based off older style combat, with things being modern it is expect things change and different modern formulas are used.
There is no reason to use archaic methods do better with ideas, have some creativity in them. Regardless of me thinking this is clunky there is plenty of reasons why this idea doesn't make sense. Taunt is a basic and clunky cc that ruins another players experience.
You aren't testing out your damage reduction having some person attack you for a few seconds. Taunt will not work the same as pve where the mob is attacking you the entire time. Think about it seriously it doesn't work with pvp it just makes clunky gameplay.