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

Noaani

Maciej wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Maciej wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Tank as a class name is perfect fine, if we are given an in game reason as to where the name came from. This need be nothing more than someone thousands of years earlier looking at someone in full plate armor and commenting that they look like a metal water tank, and that name just sticking.

Are you still arguing that the German localization should use Behälter instead of Panzer?

I never argued that point either way. That is something a native German speaker should consider, not me.

Yes you did:

With this point, you are still making the assumption that the class is named after the vehicle, which is exactly what I am saying is not an assumption that should be made.

This point is only valid if the localized version of the tank class in this game uses the word from the associated language for the vehicle.

I somehow doubt they will do that though. It is far more likely they will either not translate it at all, or will use the language appropriate word for the liquid storage vessel.

No I didn't.

With this point, you are still making the assumption that the class is named after the vehicle, which is exactly what I am saying is not an assumption that should be made.

This point is only valid if the localized version of the tank class in this game uses the word from the associated language for the vehicle.

I somehow doubt they will do that though. It is far more likely they will either not translate it at all, or will use the language appropriate word for the liquid storage vessel.

What I am saying here is that this is what they could do, I am not arguing what I think they should do.

That is fairly basic English right there, the start of the paragraph set it up perfectly so that a reasonable reader would understand that I am talking about what they could do, and in total there are three things talked about in the post that could be done. I am not discounting any of them - I am simply saying I think one is less likely and two are more likely. There is no argument there for any option, which is what you think you were posting.

Either you lack reading comprehension to be able to understand full thoughs and are only interested/able to digest bite sized snippets, or you are being completely disingenuous.

I don't care which it is, but it is one of those two.

Mowaby

It has to stay Tank. Keep the meme alive.

Tyranthraxus

They'll toss this on the proverbial pile tomorrow - and good riddance! 'Tank' is fine.

This argument is beginning to feel a bad case of herpes. No matter how long you work to suppress it, it seemingly just flares up again, at some point....

/TopicalCream

Maciej

Noaani wrote: »

What I am saying here is that this is what they could do, I am not arguing what I think they should do.

Which of course makes no sense in any language other than English where Tank (vehicle) and Tank (liquid container) share a word.

Noaani

Maciej wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

What I am saying here is that this is what they could do, I am not arguing what I think they should do.

Which of course makes no sense in any language other than English where Tank (vehicle) and Tank (liquid container) share a word.

As I said (this is the third time now), there are several ways they could do it, I am not the person to ask, and I do not care.

They could call the class "tank" in every language for all I care. Most MMO players would understand it straight away, without needing translation.

There is literally no situation at all ever where the way a thing may translate in to a different language should have any impact on how that thing is developed in its native language.

Maciej

Noaani wrote: »

There is literally no situation at all ever where the way a thing may translate in to a different language should have any impact on how that thing is developed in its native language.

Sure, but you are the guy that keeps on suggesting that there might be / could be some lore explanation for Tank as the archetype name being named after the liquid container, and that the fact that the class is named after the vehicle is just an assumption I'm making. Tank (vehicle) functions as a descriptor for a person in heavy medieval-esque armor just fine, in any language. It's fine to disagree whether that word is fitting for the theme of the game or not, but this:

Tank as a class name is perfect fine, if we are given an in game reason as to where the name came from. This need be nothing more than someone thousands of years earlier looking at someone in full plate armor and commenting that they look like a metal water tank, and that name just sticking.

is just silly. I know where the name comes from, you know where the name comes from, everyone knows where the name comes from.

Noaani

Maciej wrote: »

I know where the name comes from, you know where the name comes from, everyone knows where the name comes from.

Indeed.

However, there are people that dislike it, and the only validnreasin for this is based on lore/immersion.

That point was the specific reason I said there ar many ways the name could be justified in game,being named after a water tank being but one that I suggested.

So,the whole thing was only mentioned in the first place as one potential example of how the name could be justified in game in order to put to rest the argument about lore/immersion,and some people (no names) decided to take that and run with it in actual absurd directions, like what about translations of the game, and we dont need justifocationbecause we all know where it came from.

Honestly, learn to follow the whole topic, not snippets of it.

Maciej

Noaani wrote: »

So,the whole thing was only mentioned in the first place as one potential example of how the name could be justified in game in order to put to rest the argument about lore/immersion,and some people (no names) decided to take that and run with it in actual absurd directions, like what about translations of the game, and we dont need justifocationbecause we all know where it came from.

I know why you mentioned it, your argument went into absurd directions because it was an absurd argument. You've claimed that you are here to convince people the name is fine, but I don't see it. Other people made much more sensible, good faith arguments for that case, one has convinced me that I was wrong (which I admit with no shame) in my assumption that etymological root needs to make literal sense in the setting, as there are other terms we use that fail that test and are perfectly fine. You on the other hand are so stubborn about appearing correct, that when presented with direct evidence that contradicts your points, like quotes from Steven publicly admitting about having done changes that were not planned solely on player feedback, you just double down. And then you do snarky shit like this:

Noaani wrote: »

Honestly, learn to follow the whole topic, not snippets of it.

SnowyPoupa

For me Tank is more of a Role Definition.
Like Warriors Can Be Tanks And Damage Dealers.
Paladins can be Tanks and healers and Damage Dealers.
Cant recall a game where the Class was named Tank(I don't talk for Mobile games).
Even in FFXIV Warriors and Paladins and Dark Knights are Tank roles but not named tanks.
I also do hope they will change it something else but its ok even if they leave it like that.

uao

Idk about u guys but its gonna be hillarious having the german localization team decide about having to name the tank either "Panzer" or "Behälter".

Mowaby

uao wrote: »

Idk about u guys but its gonna be hillarious having the german localization team decide about having to name the tank either "Panzer" or "Behälter".

I vote Panzer.

Noaani

Maciej wrote: »

Other people made much more sensible, good faith arguments for that case, one has convinced me that I was wrong

That is because other people addressed the issue you had - which I neither know nor care.

I was addressing a specific person that had a specific issue with the name. You decided that the point I put forward to address their issue didn't address your issue, and therefor is a b.ad faith argument (which is just odd from a number of perspectives).

It's basically like two people going to a car dealership and looking at the same car. One doesn't like the color, and the other doesn't like the range available with the fuel tank. The sales person that the color complaint has tells them they are able to get the car in any color they want, and the sales person the range complaint talks to tells them they can get it with a larger fuel tank.

All is well, and that should be the end of it, but then the person with the range complaint hears the sales person tell the other customer about the color options, and starts talking about how that is a bad faith argument because it doesn't address the range issue.

Honestly, that is what you have done here, because you didn't even attempt to follow the conversation, you just wanted to take snippets out of context.

Khronus

I would like to see how this discussion ends up with only people who will be playing the class. It's so funny seeing people who plan to play other classes but say "TaNk iS a FiNe NaMe CaUsE FaNtAsy BrUh!!"

Noaani

Khronus wrote: »

I would like to see how this discussion ends up with only people who will be playing the class. It's so funny seeing people who plan to play other classes but say "TaNk iS a FiNe NaMe CaUsE FaNtAsy BrUh!!"

I mean, everyone that doesn't play a tank will just call the class tank anyway.

daveywavey

Khronus wrote: »

I would like to see how this discussion ends up with only people who will be playing the class. It's so funny seeing people who plan to play other classes but say "TaNk iS a FiNe NaMe CaUsE FaNtAsy BrUh!!"

It'll end up the same as all the other threads on this same topic. With "Tank" being the archetype name.

Maciej

Noaani wrote: »

I was addressing a specific person that had a specific issue with the name. You decided that the point I put forward to address their issue didn't address your issue, and therefor is a b.ad faith argument (which is just odd from a number of perspectives).

You literally quote replied to me with that stuff on previous page mate, if you want to address someone else, maybe @ them instead next time?

Volgaire

Not a fan of the name but it's not a make or brake for me either since I won't play the archetype, if I did I might be more opposed to it. I'd say if a majority are against it Intrepid would be willing to change it in the future. They might be keeping it for the lols right now.

akabear

To call a spade a spade would be to call a tank a tank! Keep on tankin!

Marcet

Here we go again! Finally a good topic!

Marcet

Like always I vote to change the Cleric name to Healer, as everyone knows what a healer is, right?

Child Item