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

IllusionTokomi

Seems semantic...

How are you going to unword "Tank" that has been in use for decades?
I mean to say, even if you can't really force people to use the terms you want. Change the label, sure, but what's the point in the effort if it just gets called the original term anyway?

daxiongmao87

IllusionTokomi wrote: »

Seems semantic...
How are you going to unword "Tank" that has been in use for decades?
I mean to say, even if you can't really force people to use the terms you want. Change the label, sure, but what's the point in the effort if it just gets called the original term anyway?

Very semantic sure... But you didn't address any of the counterpoints already made about your argument.

IllusionTokomi

daxiongmao87 wrote: »

Very semantic sure... But you didn't address any of the counterpoints already made about your argument.

That is a true statement and accurate observation. But I just don't care heheh I'm going to call it Tank no matter what (more than likely). I wish you all, all the best.

Shoximity

@IllusionTokomi

It’s not that we shouldn’t use the word tank at all when referring to mmorpgs. It’s that they are literally calling an archetype “tank” rather than the role it will fill as a tank. They are borderline breaking the fourth wall in a fantasy world setting. A lot of people in this thread are missing the point. Of course the term tank is fine and should be used, just not as a primary class/archetype.

daxiongmao87

Hold on... Until you select your second class, are you referred by your double-class name? (E.g. tank/tank being guardian)? If this is the case, there really is no argument.

PlagueMonk wrote: »

Samson wrote: »

Out of the 64 available classes... none are called "Tank".

You know, this is an excellent point. While yes, "Tank" is the only real descriptor, they are all just categories and not actual class names.

And looking at the actual class names, I'm surprised people take issue with "Tank" but don't have a problem with Dreadnought? That is literally the exact same thing (Dreadnought being a classification of battleship and frequently used in SPACE games to refer to ship sizes)

/throws fuel on the fire

oh yes, let the arguing re-commence!

Good point. Now I hate the cool name dreadnought. Thanks 😄

IllusionTokomi

Cripsus wrote: »

@IllusionTokomi

It’s not that we shouldn’t use the word tank at all when referring to mmorpgs. It’s that they are literally calling an archetype “tank” rather than the role it will fill as a tank. They are borderline breaking the fourth wall in a fantasy world setting. A lot of people in this thread are missing the point. Of course the term tank is fine and should be used, just not as a primary class/archetype.

That's fair.

delghinn

Samson wrote: »

Out of the 64 available classes... none are called "Tank".

however all the tank/* whatever will be referred to as tank when looking for group etc or having any conversation regarding the class/archetype.

if they're going with the class roles it'd be more logical to have a base archetype named 'healer' instead of cleric and cleric would be a fighter/healer hybrid.

also have a sense the majority of players are going to be disappointed with the "64" mostly nebulous classes and would have rather had a smaller pool of more focused and accurate archetypes.

suprvilln

I agree the class name "tank" lacks creativity but it certainly conveys an image that is easily identified by most MMO players. I wouldn't knock it just because it is a gaming/fantasy trope. there are lots of fantasy tropes out there in both table top and video games, doesn't necessarily mean they are bad?

giftedfox

I am not a fan of tank only characters to be honest.

Yuyukoyay

delghinn wrote: »

Samson wrote: »

Out of the 64 available classes... none are called "Tank".

however all the tank/* whatever will be referred to as tank when looking for group etc or having any conversation regarding the class/archetype.

They were going to be referred to as a tank anyway though. No matter what name they give the archetype people are going to be saying looking for a tank. So they just made the term correct while they were at it.

SnakeyMan

How about "meat shield"?

Honestly ; this is a bit odd but... I don't know. What would be more fitting ? Defenders?

Damokles

Yuyukoyay wrote: »

delghinn wrote: »

Samson wrote: »

Out of the 64 available classes... none are called "Tank".

however all the tank/* whatever will be referred to as tank when looking for group etc or having any conversation regarding the class/archetype.

They were going to be referred to as a tank anyway though. No matter what name they give the archetype people are going to be saying looking for a tank. So they just made the term correct while they were at it.

We dont know if they are the only tank though. Fighter could also be a tank tbh.

Sent

Fantastic AoC developers, please consider changing the Tank archetype name.

Possible replacements may include: defender, protector or even champion.

In the MMO jargon, the word tank indicates one the roles of the trinity Damager-Healer-Tank, no need to use it for an archetype too.

Since you are MMO experts, I'm lead to think this is intentional. It seems that the Tank archetype will be the most apt, if not the only, at covering the tanking role. Was this name choice meant to avoid any possible confusion?

See also:
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/249442/#Comment_249442

Noaani

Sent wrote: »

Since you are MMO experts

That is saying a little bit too much.

Edit; though I agree, the archetype name should be changed.

CaptnChuck

Sadly everyone, including me, has been asking for class/archetype name changes for a long time now. But Intrepid hasn't changed them. So it is what it is.

Rhadek

why though

Hystorix

I agree ... the name tank is silly as heck ... why not have one called healer ... and another called DPS ... I had just been thinking it’s a placeholder name and surely it is ... right?

Sylvanar

I agree, though I would like to nominate two more classes:
- Ranger
- Fighter

Class name should imply the role of the class and not be the role itself.
I mean all the classes will have fighting capability and I doubt mage & other healers will have melee option.

maouw

I like "Vanguard" <--- such a pretty word.
but I dunno if people will miss the meaning.

Yokai Theater

Tank is not a placeholder name and this is something thing people have been arguing about since the class list was put out on 12/15/2017

Child Item