Leveling/PvP ideas for Tanks and Healers

We've all experienced the arduous task of leveling a tank or a healer for your guild, friends or maybe to experience something challenging. Some of us may have had help and some may have put in the time and patience to solo those levels. I hope there is going to be a way to help Tank/X and Cleric/X level effectively enough that players don't fall far behind compared to other DPS classes.

Since tanks generally don't have the damage output as a dps class, allow tanks to have less downtime in between pulls with better sustain options spent by whatever our resource is going to be (i. e. Rage). When it comes to PvP, tank damage output will be low but give us the tools to cause area denial, CC, damage mitigation cooldowns for a small area effect or nearby ally. Not to steal anything from WoW but their stances are a simple way to help Tanks pick the perfect stance for the situation. I want to be a menace on the field, not a shadow of a thought.

Healers will obviously do more healing than dps so I hope they'll have a nice dynamic between healing and dps'ing. Downtime is also usually something that holds a healer back doing subpar damage but easily staying alive through their healing. The templar in ESO had an ability to sap resources from dead mobs or players which would be a nice feature to reduce their downtime. In PvP, healers are typically saving their resource to keep their allies alive but never really having a chance to contribute or kill other players. Also, having to have a quickslot bar for all healing and buffing doesn't allow much room for offensive skills. I hope healers will receive the option of casting healing and buffing spells on allies while using the same spell and buffs on their enemies but it is the antithesis of the ability. Buffs are debuffs, direct healing causing damage and healing over time (HoT) are damage over time (DoT).

I think it is important that the primary class has these sustain and damage abilities instead of relying on the secondary class to provide them because then you'll pigeonhole players into certain Tank/X or Cleric/X combination.

What are your ideas?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Noaani

Atama wrote: »

Simple. Because players do not like losing control over their characters. Stunlocking is not fun, nor is being “mind controlled”, and something that forces you to focus on a target leads to bad feelings. You can’t apply the same crowd control consequences to players that you apply to NPCs. It pisses people off and drives them away. There’s a reason why developers won’t touch this with a ten foot pole. You don’t want to ask people to give their money to have fun then punch them in the groin, which is how players usually react to that sort of thing.

I just want to check something here.

We are both talking about the same game... right?

Ashes of Creation? The game where players can (and will) literally kill you and take your stuff? The game where a max level character can kill a low level harvester and take a percentage of the materials that player has harvested? The game that asks you to put time and resources in to building up a city, to set up industry in that city, only to then invite other players to tear all of that down?

And you think a 1.2 second force target ability will lead to bad feelings?

Ishka

Regarding the taunt in pvp, my position is to make it target changing in the 1st place. Not necessarily forcing to attack the tank who uses taunt. You will asks yourselves with such little effect what is the point ?

Well, we all know that tanks in many MMOs do not have a single taunting ability, at least they got damaging abilities that generate "threat" in PvE. Why wouldn't they make some sort of mechanic around taunt & threat in pvp ? The threat could build up to a certain point then target switch and finally forcing the opponent to attack for a short duration. If we look at how the game will be, the regular taunt that switch target wouldn't have any uses against a player that builded his character with a lot of action combat abilities. That is why attack forcing a target becomes necessary.

What I find also interesting in this "threat accumulation mechanics" is that it forces the tank to make a choice regarding a focus, since it's not always possible to focus the same target for a long duration in pvp, it would make him take risks and make sort of a gamble.

Adding a bonus-penalty damage with the taunt seems interesting, but subjectively I kinda dislike it. While it seems to give a real reason to focus the tank instead of squishies target. If I played a dps and would get my damages reduced every time because some apes in huge armor shouted at me, it would make me a lot worse than being chain CC.

The execution to a taunt is a lot more simple and there would be a lot less possibilities to counter such effects compared to CC. If we look at how a dps will build its character, it's obvious that he will have a larger attack. It would simply reduce too much of its damages compared to other non-based dmg classes, at least in a % reduction, a flat -X could do the trick. A group of 2 or 3 tank taunts focusing on someone to “permanently” reduce its damages is too cancerous.

So the idea of target changing is more flexible and useful for the tank in its use and is less painful for the opponent (at least in case of tab-targeting), if they give us tools to mark a target with a number and a shortcut the select the marked target, here you you have a "counterplay", and the tank can still make some decent plays forcing the uses of a huge CD on himself.

Wandering Mist

@Ishka having threat generation in PvP is an interesting idea that I don't think has really been done before. Of course it couldn't work exactly how it does in PvE but you could instead have a special threat meter that builds as a tank attacks an enemy (each enemy would have a separate bar). Once the bar is full the tank can use his taunt to temporarily force the enemy player to attack the tank.

The other way you could do it is similar to how taunts appear in the anime "Log Horizon". A player affected by the spell "Anchor Howl" isn't directly forced to attack the tank but if they attack anyone other than the tank they take extra damage:

https://log-horizon.fandom.com/wiki/Anchor_Howl

Ishka

I like your variation of the "threat mechanic" but paired with the Anchor Howl from log horizon, it could be the regular use for taunt. And the threat stacking up empower the taunt, forcing the attack for... let's say for 1s or 1.2s as noaani suggested. The "Anchor Howl debuff" would lasts for 3s or 5s dunno how it could impact the pvp.
As long as both of your ideas are in, I would gladely play with such mechanics, as long as the damage is not OP ofc.

Atama

noaani wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

Simple. Because players do not like losing control over their characters. Stunlocking is not fun, nor is being “mind controlled”, and something that forces you to focus on a target leads to bad feelings. You can’t apply the same crowd control consequences to players that you apply to NPCs. It pisses people off and drives them away. There’s a reason why developers won’t touch this with a ten foot pole. You don’t want to ask people to give their money to have fun then punch them in the groin, which is how players usually react to that sort of thing.

I just want to check something here.

We are both talking about the same game... right?

Ashes of Creation? The game where players can (and will) literally kill you and take your stuff? The game where a max level character can kill a low level harvester and take a percentage of the materials that player has harvested? The game that asks you to put time and resources in to building up a city, to set up industry in that city, only to then invite other players to tear all of that down?

And you think a 1.2 second force target ability will lead to bad feelings?

If taunt only lasts 1.2 seconds it’s useless and no tank would waste space on their bar.

For something to be worth using, it has to be good enough that if used on a player would piss them off.

I don’t think you have a lot of exposure to PvP across multiple games. Successful MMOs don’t have hard CC against players. People will not play that game. Someone stronger than you attacks you and you die? Okay, then get stronger so next time you win. Someone plays a class that has a ability to prevent you from fighting back (even temporarily)? That’s when people rage quit.

Again, games don’t do this for a reason. You don’t know the mind of gamers. Your ideas don’t work.

Wandering Mist

Atama wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

Simple. Because players do not like losing control over their characters. Stunlocking is not fun, nor is being “mind controlled”, and something that forces you to focus on a target leads to bad feelings. You can’t apply the same crowd control consequences to players that you apply to NPCs. It pisses people off and drives them away. There’s a reason why developers won’t touch this with a ten foot pole. You don’t want to ask people to give their money to have fun then punch them in the groin, which is how players usually react to that sort of thing.

I just want to check something here.

We are both talking about the same game... right?

Ashes of Creation? The game where players can (and will) literally kill you and take your stuff? The game where a max level character can kill a low level harvester and take a percentage of the materials that player has harvested? The game that asks you to put time and resources in to building up a city, to set up industry in that city, only to then invite other players to tear all of that down?

And you think a 1.2 second force target ability will lead to bad feelings?

If taunt only lasts 1.2 seconds it’s useless and no tank would waste space on their bar.

For something to be worth using, it has to be good enough that if used on a player would piss them off.

I don’t think you have a lot of exposure to PvP across multiple games. Successful MMOs don’t have hard CC against players. People will not play that game. Someone stronger than you attacks you and you die? Okay, then get stronger so next time you win. Someone plays a class that has a ability to prevent you from fighting back (even temporarily)? That’s when people rage quit.

Again, games don’t do this for a reason. You don’t know the mind of gamers. Your ideas don’t work.

I disagree with this. If you have no cc then you have no way of melee classes fighting ranged classes.

Atama

Wandering Mist wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

Simple. Because players do not like losing control over their characters. Stunlocking is not fun, nor is being “mind controlled”, and something that forces you to focus on a target leads to bad feelings. You can’t apply the same crowd control consequences to players that you apply to NPCs. It pisses people off and drives them away. There’s a reason why developers won’t touch this with a ten foot pole. You don’t want to ask people to give their money to have fun then punch them in the groin, which is how players usually react to that sort of thing.

I just want to check something here.

We are both talking about the same game... right?

Ashes of Creation? The game where players can (and will) literally kill you and take your stuff? The game where a max level character can kill a low level harvester and take a percentage of the materials that player has harvested? The game that asks you to put time and resources in to building up a city, to set up industry in that city, only to then invite other players to tear all of that down?

And you think a 1.2 second force target ability will lead to bad feelings?

If taunt only lasts 1.2 seconds it’s useless and no tank would waste space on their bar.

For something to be worth using, it has to be good enough that if used on a player would piss them off.

I don’t think you have a lot of exposure to PvP across multiple games. Successful MMOs don’t have hard CC against players. People will not play that game. Someone stronger than you attacks you and you die? Okay, then get stronger so next time you win. Someone plays a class that has a ability to prevent you from fighting back (even temporarily)? That’s when people rage quit.

Again, games don’t do this for a reason. You don’t know the mind of gamers. Your ideas don’t work.

I disagree with this. If you have no cc then you have no way of melee classes fighting ranged classes.

I never said there is no CC. No lasting, hard CC. But there are snares, short term stuns, all kinds of CC. You just can’t have the same options against PCs that you have against NPCs.

Remember, I’m not expressing my opinion of how things should be. I’m expressing what they are. I’m describing what you will find in MMOs. Are you suggesting that right now, melee classes can’t PvP against ranged classes? (I’m sure in some games there’s an imbalance.)

Wandering Mist

Atama wrote: »

Wandering Mist wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

Simple. Because players do not like losing control over their characters. Stunlocking is not fun, nor is being “mind controlled”, and something that forces you to focus on a target leads to bad feelings. You can’t apply the same crowd control consequences to players that you apply to NPCs. It pisses people off and drives them away. There’s a reason why developers won’t touch this with a ten foot pole. You don’t want to ask people to give their money to have fun then punch them in the groin, which is how players usually react to that sort of thing.

I just want to check something here.

We are both talking about the same game... right?

Ashes of Creation? The game where players can (and will) literally kill you and take your stuff? The game where a max level character can kill a low level harvester and take a percentage of the materials that player has harvested? The game that asks you to put time and resources in to building up a city, to set up industry in that city, only to then invite other players to tear all of that down?

And you think a 1.2 second force target ability will lead to bad feelings?

If taunt only lasts 1.2 seconds it’s useless and no tank would waste space on their bar.

For something to be worth using, it has to be good enough that if used on a player would piss them off.

I don’t think you have a lot of exposure to PvP across multiple games. Successful MMOs don’t have hard CC against players. People will not play that game. Someone stronger than you attacks you and you die? Okay, then get stronger so next time you win. Someone plays a class that has a ability to prevent you from fighting back (even temporarily)? That’s when people rage quit.

Again, games don’t do this for a reason. You don’t know the mind of gamers. Your ideas don’t work.

I disagree with this. If you have no cc then you have no way of melee classes fighting ranged classes.

I never said there is no CC. No lasting, hard CC. But there are snares, short term stuns, all kinds of CC. You just can’t have the same options against PCs that you have against NPCs.

Remember, I’m not expressing my opinion of how things should be. I’m expressing what they are. I’m describing what you will find in MMOs. Are you suggesting that right now, melee classes can’t PvP against ranged classes? (I’m sure in some games there’s an imbalance.)

Right, before you said "MMOs don't have hard cc against players" which you are now changing to "no long lasting hard cc". Nobody is expecting to be able to stun-lock another player to death as that would indeed be poor game design. But there still needs to be some forms of hard cc in limited amounts otherwise melee fighters will just get kited to death by ranged players with no chance of fighting back.

Most online games use diminishing returns to combat this, as well as giving players ways of breaking cc on themselves.

Gimlog

What about a taunt effect in a X meter radius where any enemy attacking a ally see his damages redirect to the tank for 5 sec with each sec 20% less damages starting with 120%

It make it interesting to cast but you have to think went to us it , if to much enemy you may die ,ect

Atama

Gimlog wrote: »

Most online games use diminishing returns to combat this, as well as giving players ways of breaking cc on themselves.

Yes, you’re repeating what I said previously. As a matter of fact, I referenced WoW doing the former and ESO doing the latter. The point is that you have to treat CC different in PvE than in PvP; or at the very least MMO designers live by that philosophy.

Virtek

A lot of good ideas and references since I posted last, lol. Can't even quote or reference them all.

But yeah, SWTOR and Wildstar both had systems where tanks would reduce opponent damage when taunted, unless that tank was attacked. It felt great to be a tank in those situations!
I'm a huge fan of that.

As for the original post intent:
One thing to keep in mind is that Intrepid has stated that they want to make groups much more attractive. Solo play while trying to level may not be anything to worry about unless you are actually trying to solo.

If you're trying to solo, you probably don't care about group content as much. If you don't care about group content as much, you probably don't care as much about hitting max level as quickly as possible, so leveling speed shouldn't matter as much. Slow leveling may even be preferable for the stability of fewer deaths.

That's a lot of "probably" in there, but just a random thought process I went through...

Noaani

Atama wrote: »

If taunt only lasts 1.2 seconds it’s useless and no tank would waste space on their bar.

Any tank that knows how DPS classes work would.

The only assumption to make is that the mechanics are designed around the notion of the current spell being cast landing on the tank that taunts you. I agree it would be pointless without this - but this is kind of the point of the whole thing, and so is how it should be designed.

From there, if you are playing a game with a fair amount of cooldowns rather than stupid mechanics like resource building (aka, 1, 1, 1, 2 mechanics), then it should be really obvious how a tank can essentially keep a healer alive in the face of a three or four DPS classes, making those DPS classes specifically want to take that tank out, even though that tank would then have an unmolested healer healing them.

Atama wrote: »

Successful MMOs don’t have hard CC against players.

A force target is not a hard CC.

You are able to move at will, you are able to cast at will, all you are not able to do is change your target. Hell, if you are a class with a good amount of AoE, it is arguable as to whether a forced target would have any effect on you at all in large scale PvP.

A snare, root or stun is far more invasive on your options in play than a force target ability is. If Ashes has these abilities, there is literally no argument at all against a force target ability of similar duration.

Atama wrote: »

Someone plays a class that has a ability to prevent you from fighting back (even temporarily)? That’s when people rage quit.

Again, this ability is quite literally exactly NOT this.

It isn't preventing you from fighting at all. Not even a little bit. It is, however, forcing you to fight a specific enemy for a specific amount of time. It wouldn't take long before people realize that this is actually how PvP in this game works - you want to kill the tank first. In a game where the meta of PvP is to kill the tank because of taunts, there is no need for the tank to actually use that taunt - the simple idea that the tank "could" taunt you to take your big nuke off of that healer is enough for you to want to take out that tank first.

This turns mass PvP from "kill the weak first", to an actual fight between groups where killing the tanks (with healers healing them) is the key to over all victory.

Any player that would quit a game over this kind of PvP would quit a game like Ashes regardless.

Sarevok

With this game being a hybrid action/tab-targetting, I wonder how taunts would work then. Maybe AoE taunt?

They had hard CC's back in Dark Age of Camelot which helped control zergs and prevented you from AoEing everything in sight. That game is still around. It may not be the most popular game out now but it definitely set the stage for future MMOs. The mesmerize ability was great but if that target suffered any damage it would break and further mez abilities would suffer diminishing returns on the duration. They later added CC breaks through realm rank abilities iirc. It's been two decades for me lol

Atama

noaani wrote: »

A force target is not a hard CC.

Look, I didn’t design the MMOs that have determined these things. You keep arguing with me like I’m proposing this stuff as my own idea. I’m not. I wouldn’t mind if taunts worked the same in PvE and PvP. (I usually play tanks so I think it would be cool.) I’m explaining what games have done and why, and coming at this from that perspective. Everything you’re arguing is “old man shouting at the clouds” stuff. You don’t even understand what I’m saying.

Noaani

Atama wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

A force target is not a hard CC.

Look, I didn’t design the MMOs that have determined these things. You keep arguing with me like I’m proposing this stuff as my own idea. I’m not. I wouldn’t mind if taunts worked the same in PvE and PvP. (I usually play tanks so I think it would be cool.) I’m explaining what games have done and why, and coming at this from that perspective. Everything you’re arguing is “old man shouting at the clouds” stuff. You don’t even understand what I’m saying.

Thing is, my suggestion is also straight from an MMORPG.

Not one well known for its PvP, but still PvP in an MMO that is done this way.

I don't think I ever saw a complaint about the mechanics of it even once, in many, many years - which is why I find your line of querry with it odd.

I mean, I totally agree that being CC'd is not fun. It is not fun because you have significatly less control over your character, and the more control a particular type of CC takes from you, the more hated it is.

Since my suggestion ONLY takes targeting away from you, and leaves everything else as it, it barely even classifies as CC at all.

I am not arguing with you on how other games have dealt with CC in PvP at all. I am arguing with you in classifying a target lock as CC at all.

Edit: while you may fancy yourself as a more experienced PvP player, and I'd only somewhat disagree with you (as opposed to all out disagreeing), you should maybe take into considerarion that I have played a game with the mechanic in question for years, and you seem unaware that a game even has this mechanic.

Ishka

@Gimlog I think the aoe taunt is not necessary, you could do it the way Aion does it, as a templar you cast a spell onto an ally, and all damages inflicted to that ally is redirected to the templar within 25 meters.

I like the reduced damages every 1s, but the spell in itself is too short, I think 10s ~ + and damages reduced by 10% each sec is better, capped at 50% damage reduction (still starting at 120% damages).

Gimlog

@Ishka what I prefer about a AoE is the risk you take by using it , us it on to much enemy and you maybe in trouble but choose the right time and you change the battle.

I do agree for 10sec 10% reduction per sec.
It's even better because it create a window of 3sec where the enemy would want to us powerful abilities, by baiting them you take of the risk they us it on your teammates. I love it !

Ishka

If I understood correctly, the way it works is that more than protecting one target, the taunt redirects all the damages done by the oponnent no matter their targets ?

Or does it works like some sort of durable aoe where all the damages done to an ally in this zone is redirected to the tank ?

Gimlog

Yeah the first is the correct one.

Thought what the better way to have the effect of a taunt without CC players

Sarevok

The hope of this forum post is to give our developers our voiced opinions on tanks and healers. I don't expect tanks and healers to be able to solo at the same speed as a pure dps class but to also not be forgotten in the same instance. The benefit of Intrepid Studios being actual gamers is that they understand what our concerns are and hopefully know how to address them in the most fair way possible. It was just my fear with previous games that tanks and healers were going to be designed for a specific purpose and not be viable in all aspects of the game. This type of problem in design always leads to these class types being in demand, constantly. I am sure most of you that mainly play dps have experienced long wait times in dungeon queues due to the low supply of tanks and healers out there.

Here's to hoping tanks and healers will get the same attention to detail and dynamic design that dps classes will receive!

Cheers

Child Item