The problem with having “Tank” as a class name

Hello all, I believe this discussion may have come up before, but I really would like Steven and friends to reconsider the name “Tank”. Overall, they have done a good job at naming the other classes and subclasses, but they ruin the immersion of the game by using the class name “tank”. Tank was a code name given to military vehicles being created in 1915. It has been a slang term for classes and archetypes in many video games given to the role that is used to absorb/mitigate or “tank” damage. Having a class name feels very uncharacteristic compared to the other class names. It’s like naming your cat “Cat”. It’s cute and punny, but is that what they really want for their game? What class do you play? Oh, I play a tank! Yea, but like what class? TANK!! *insert meme of a tank with a face on it... drooling*

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Shoximity

@CaptnChuck

I think “Tank” is much worse in comparison to the other names. I’m willing to overlook the other names if they agreed to change “Tank” lol. A lot of their subclass names are pretty straight forward and plain, but at least It makes sense. I may have been exaggerating my statement saying they were named well a bit to try and get my point across xD.

daxiongmao87

It could have been worse. All combinations with Tank coulda been named Tank lol

Drek

Adlehyde wrote: »

Right. If I were to take the simplicty of the other 7, Bard, Cleric, Rogue, Ranger, Summoner, Fighter, Mage, and apply it to the tank class, I'd call it Defender probably. If I were to take the gamer jargon of the tank class and apply it to the other 7, I'd call them, Support, Healer, Stealth, Ranged, Pet, Melee, Magic.

Just looking for some consistency. haha.

No, because those are not archetypes.

Tank is not a class name, and it's not just gamer jargon, it's a archetype name that describe it's role.

So is a Bard, Cleric, Rogue, Ranger, Summoner, Fighter, Mage AND Tank, people immediately know what their role will consist of.

And don't forget, the gamer jargon of Tank is meat shield, while defender is definitely not a archetype and is a class.

In the end, i really don't see why people are trying to turn that into an issue when your class name will be one of the 8 other ones.

Songcaller

We were just having some fun man, can only take so many serious threads in one's stride.

Yuyukoyay

I will be an underpants gnome.

PlagueMonk

The truth is that while yes, it's original meaning was borrowed from a modern machine, it's been taken and turned into a word that is now ingrained into the gaming vernacular. There are also plenty of other transgressions that are equally immersion breaking so to focus on just one seems pointless unless they are ALL changed (which, lets face it, will never happen)

So unless there is going to be a strict RP server, you will have to put up with "Tank" along side things like "DPS class", poor character naming (which is 1000% WORSE imho), people talking about jumping on discord in open channel, etc.

Shoximity

@Drek if your class is going to change anyways, why bother naming it tank to begin with. It’s just describing a role that you fill not what you will actually be/are. The word “tank” is just a slang name. It would be like naming the Cleric, Healer, because that is a term used from other games to describe that role as well. I fill the role as a healer, but play a priest, druid, monk, paladin, etc in WoW. People also call me a healbot. Maybe they should name the Cleric Archetype to Healbot to match the “Tank” theme.

Adlehyde

Nagash wrote: »

Adlehyde wrote: »

Nagash wrote: »

Cripsus wrote: »

Nagash wrote: »

Adlehyde wrote: »

Nagash wrote: »

Cripsus wrote: »

@StevenSharif is this true good sir? You aren’t willing to adjust class names? I believe I bring some valid points, and I would like to know your reasoning behind the name choice.

So you want them to change a class based on one person?

Lets not pretend it's remotely one person though.

Let's not pretend it's not even 1% of the player base though

You can’t make up fake statistics and believe it as true. Just because you are fine with it or impartial doesn’t mean there isn’t a silent majority that would also prefer a different name. I made the post because I feel it’s not a good name. Others here have expressed they are indifferent or have agreed other names would be better within this very thread. This is Stevens baby, so I’m sure he has his reasons and logical explanation. He obviously put a lot of thought into the names, however doesn’t mean he can’t make mistakes or others don’t agree with his decisions.

Ok first that was a joke in passing and not real statistics. Second I just don't care about class names I just don't agree with people saying they speak for the whole group. There are many better names for tank than tank and I know that but why should they have to change it, because you and some other people said so?

See, but I didn't say I speak for the whole group. No one did. One person asked a question and you erroneously bashed that person for assuming steven would change their mind just because of them. Then you got like... weirdly argumentative, which is weird, because you usually aren't in other threads.

Sorry if I seemed argumentative as that was not my intent, I think I'm just tired of seeing these kinds of threads (devs change the game threads because ....) that they start to get to me. You spend so much time reading these types of threads and give the same points you start seeing everyone as the same.

Yeah, I getcha. I think you saw me go back and forth plenty of times in the corruption threads. People trying to get core mechanics of the game changed in contrast to the vision of the developers has become more pervasive and obnoxious for sure. I don't think this one name change request is really a qualifying exmaple imo though.

Songcaller

Cripsus wrote: »

if your class is going to change anyways, why bother naming it tank to begin with. It’s just describing a role that you fill not what you will actually be/are. The word “tank” is just a slang name. It would be like naming the Cleric, Healer, because that is a term used from other games to describe that role as well. I fill the role as a healer, but play a priest, druid, monk, paladin, etc in WoW. People also call me a healbot. Maybe they should name the Cleric Archetype to Healbot to match the “Tank” theme.

The issue with Healbot is that the Devs don't want Heal bots, or, Buff Bots. And Bard can also heal to a lesser degree than Cleric. Cleric is DPS/Heal and Bard is DPS/Buff.

Adlehyde

Drek wrote: »

Adlehyde wrote: »

Right. If I were to take the simplicty of the other 7, Bard, Cleric, Rogue, Ranger, Summoner, Fighter, Mage, and apply it to the tank class, I'd call it Defender probably. If I were to take the gamer jargon of the tank class and apply it to the other 7, I'd call them, Support, Healer, Stealth, Ranged, Pet, Melee, Magic.

Just looking for some consistency. haha.

No, because those are not archetypes.

Tank is not a class name, and it's not just gamer jargon, it's a archetype name that describe it's role.

So is a Bard, Cleric, Rogue, Ranger, Summoner, Fighter, Mage AND Tank, people immediately know what their role will consist of.

And don't forget, the gamer jargon of Tank is meat shield, while defender is definitely not a archetype and is a class.

In the end, i really don't see why people are trying to turn that into an issue when your class name will be one of the 8 other ones.

It's not really like it's that big of a deal no, but please tell me this part...

"Tank is not a class name, and it's not just gamer jargon, it's a archetype name that describe it's role.

So is a Bard, Cleric, Rogue, Ranger, Summoner, Fighter, Mage AND Tank, people immediately know what their role will consist of."

Is a joke right?

Bard, Cleric, rogue, ranger, summoner, fighter, and mage are not archetype names that describe a role. They are class names that have commonly been used in MMOs and RPGs in the past. Tank on the other hand is in fact a term gamers came up with (jargon) to describe the role of heavily defensive characters, who's job it was to hold aggro and literally "tank" the damage. The others are all classes, which have fallen into various roles in the past, those roles being support, healer, or various forms of DPS.

While true that anyone can look at these 8 names and pretty much expect to know what their role will be, only one of them is literally named after a role.

Drek

Cripsus wrote: »

@Drek if your class is going to change anyways, why bother naming it tank to begin with. It’s just describing a role that you fill not what you will actually be/are.......

Exactly, because that's the point !

They want that when people will launch the game to create their character that the archetype describes their role.

Tank is a perfect archetype name for the role , the issue doesn't lie with "we could name cleric healer instead" ( which i would be fine with ), the issue is there's no other name that fits the archetype role that describes it as good as simply "Tank"

But i'm all ears...what would you call the "meat shield / tank " archetype that describes it role WITHOUT making it sound like a class (so the others mentioned in this thread that i've seen is defender and warlord, which is a big no)

Jexz

How do you know modern Tanks weren't named after this archetype.

Damokles

Drek wrote: »

Cripsus wrote: »

@Drek if your class is going to change anyways, why bother naming it tank to begin with. It’s just describing a role that you fill not what you will actually be/are.......

Exactly, because that's the point !

They want that when people will launch the game to create their character that the archetype describes their role.

Tank is a perfect archetype name for the role , the issue doesn't lie with "we could name cleric healer instead" ( which i would be fine with ), the issue is there's no other name that fits the archetype role that describes it as good as simply "Tank"

But i'm all ears...what would you call the "meat shield / tank " archetype that describes it role WITHOUT making it sound like a class (so the others mentioned in this thread that i've seen is defender and warlord, which is a big no)

You cant say that things like Defender or Protector would have been better or easier to understand.

Drek

Damokles wrote: »

You cant say that things like Defender or Protector would have been better or easier to understand.

Wait am i misunderstanding something or are you ?

Because i didn't say those would had been better...?

Since i said " i've seen is defender and warlord, which is a big no"

Shoximity

Jexz wrote: »

How do you know modern Tanks weren't named after this archetype.

If Verra has a clear history and lore of modern day tanks driving around in their past before the Apocalypse or whatever the story is. Then yes, the word “Tank” would make more sense. But, if they ever retroactively added that into the game or made it part of the story it would be super lame and a poor excuse to fill in some lore gaps for their sorry excuse of a name “Tank” lol.

Yuyukoyay

They do have a negative connotation with them as well as the positive. I don't want to be a self righteous moron who is heavily religious by class name alone. It's kind of what I see the name guardian as.

Tank means i jump at them like a moron and piss everyone off. Feels better.

roguewolf552

Drek wrote: »

Cripsus wrote: »

@Drek if your class is going to change anyways, why bother naming it tank to begin with. It’s just describing a role that you fill not what you will actually be/are.......

Exactly, because that's the point !

They want that when people will launch the game to create their character that the archetype describes their role

If that was the case, there would be 4 options; Tank, DPS, Healer, and Mixyboi. I like 'Guard' personally!

Damokles

Drek wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

You cant say that things like Defender or Protector would have been better or easier to understand.

Wait am i misunderstanding something or are you ?

Because i didn't say those would had been better...?

Since i said " i've seen is defender and warlord, which is a big no"

Just examples from the top of my head^^ Did an error, meant to say "You cant tell me that x wouldnt have been better then Tank."

Jexz

In the first mmo's when you needed a meat shield people would shout looking for "Tank" not looking for Protector or Defender. I think that validates Tank as a solid archetype nomenclature

Protector and Defender can be substituted with Guardian

Damokles

Jexz wrote: »

In the first mmo's when you needed a meat shield people would shout looking for "Tank" not looking for Protector or Defender.

But people also want something that sounds a bit better then just "Tank".
Everyone has the typical nice mmorpg class names and then comes Tank...

They could have called the Fighter something like Hitter in the same way.
Because they hit things.

Child Item