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

Cypher

It’s completely unreal that this (still) is one of the most popular threads. People are going to argue until a statement is made one way or another so let’s hope one is made during the next livestream. Then we could finally put this thread to rest.

WhitneyHagasMatsumoto

I am not a native English speaker, so I don't think I really understand this discussion in depth.

However, no matter how much we argue about the sun, the sun is the sun and will continue to float in the sky.

I'm not saying it's wrong to argue about the sun, but if you think it's an extension of the debate to do something sterile like which charity the sun will donate to, please change your mind.

The debate has been parallel for the past few days.
Then the Sun will have to answer for itself.

If you want to give a constructive opinion to the Sun, don't argue with anyone, just write "for or against the name change" and "objective reasons for it" in bullet points.

I think everyone here thinks it's sterile to argue endlessly with each other on this topic.

bigepeen

pyreal wrote: »

maouw wrote: »

Let's leave decision making to the team.

We don't make decisions, so that statement is like saying the "Sun is hot.".

Good example, this thread is like arguing whether or not the Sun should actually be called Sol. The correct answer is who cares. It's not a big deal. There are way more important aspects of the game to focus on than an archetype name based on extremely common mmorpg lingo.

maouw

@pyreal
Is that how you read it? I'm only trying to curb the outrage building up in this thread.
The poll is done. Let's not rub salt in wounds.

Noaani

pyreal wrote: »

The real problem with a class being named 'Tank' is that it is outside of accepted Fantasy lore.

It describes the player's perspective, rather than Verra's.

If this is your issue, there is a really easy way to make the situation more palatable to you.

Accept that it is within accepted fantasy lore.

I mean, what you accept or not is 100% your choice. If you are not accepting it, that is your decision. However, you can't use your decision as an argument in saying it is fine or not.

Asgerr

Honestly if anyone stops themselves from playing this game (assuming nothing else is wrong with it) just on account of the name Tank for one of 8 archetypes.....

Well you know what I mean.

daveywavey

Asgerr wrote: »

Honestly if anyone stops themselves from playing this game (assuming nothing else is wrong with it) just on account of the name Tank for one of 8 archetypes.....

Well you know what I mean.

Gizban

Noaani wrote: »

pyreal wrote: »

The real problem with a class being named 'Tank' is that it is outside of accepted Fantasy lore.

It describes the player's perspective, rather than Verra's.

If this is your issue, there is a really easy way to make the situation more palatable to you.

Accept that it is within accepted fantasy lore.

I mean, what you accept or not is 100% your choice. If you are not accepting it, that is your decision. However, you can't use your decision as an argument in saying it is fine or not.

Do you read novels?

With novels, and some games, there is a willing suspension of disbelief. When silly things are said or done that do not belong within the fictional world, that suspension can be broken.
It's extremely annoying and shows a lack of skill on the part of the writer.

Should some of the tavern drinks be called Cola, and HillDew?

WoW was infested with pop references. They offered a quick and cheap chuckle, and nothing more.

WhitneyHagasMatsumoto

I've had enough of this.

I'm telling you to wait for Intrepid Studios' decision.

And if the name doesn't change, and you don't like it, use some tool to display the name of your choice every time you see the word "Tank" in the screen.

I don't speak English, so I have to translate every sentence in the game as I play.

If you can't even be bothered to do that, then shut up.

akabear

How about leave it as is and allow titles to be modded so those that want different nomenclature on their own screen can adjust as they see fit.

And if that is not a go`er, then perhaps some AoC branded post stick notes to hand write the name of choice and stick on your own monitors where the objected titles predominantly show.

Problem solved, next topic!

Noaani

pyreal wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

pyreal wrote: »

The real problem with a class being named 'Tank' is that it is outside of accepted Fantasy lore.

It describes the player's perspective, rather than Verra's.

If this is your issue, there is a really easy way to make the situation more palatable to you.

Accept that it is within accepted fantasy lore.

I mean, what you accept or not is 100% your choice. If you are not accepting it, that is your decision. However, you can't use your decision as an argument in saying it is fine or not.

Do you read novels?

With novels, and some games, there is a willing suspension of disbelief. When silly things are said or done that do not belong within the fictional world, that suspension can be broken.
It's extremely annoying and shows a lack of skill on the part of the writer.

Should some of the tavern drinks be called Cola, and HillDew?

WoW was infested with pop references. They offered a quick and cheap chuckle, and nothing more.

The thing with this is - no matter what Intrepid do, if you roll a tank, other players will call you a tank.

I can't see how you can say a term doesn't belong in a game when that is the only term 99% of players will refer to your class as.

So, from a suspension of disbelief perspective, you could easily "decide" that since that is what others in the world will call you, it is perfectly acceptable for the game to call you that as well.

Maciej

Asgerr wrote: »

Honestly if anyone stops themselves from playing this game (assuming nothing else is wrong with it) just on account of the name Tank for one of 8 archetypes.....

Well you know what I mean.

I haven't seen anyone state here they aren't going to play the game if the name doesn't change.

That said, there is a myriad of reasons someone might get interested in AoC, then look at the wiki or watch some videos for 10 minutes and find something they don't like: world PvP, there is too much action combat, there isn't enough action combat, the game looks too hardcore, the game doesn't look hardcore enough, the animations are off, their favorite class isn't covered, their favorite class is covered but has a dumb name, etc.

All of those are perfectly valid reasons to decide how to spend your valuable free time, and Intrepid doesn't and shouldn't try to please everyone.

WhitneyHagasMatsumoto

So I'll dedicate this video to make everyone's precious time a little more enjoyable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VsgkIE-RHg&ab_channel=SEATBELTS

Gannito

Tank forever.

Shoximity

OP, here. Just popping back in to say thank you everyone who participated in this discussion! I haven't checked out the forum since September, so I am glad to see my original post is living on strong. Ultimately, I think everyone wants this game to be great. We all would like things to be a certain way based on our experiences, opinions, preferences, etc. The archetype "Tank" really is small potatoes in the scheme of things. It may put a damper on my immersion, but I respect the opinions of others that it doesn't bother. Regardless, there are much more important things in regards to the games' success than just the naming of a archetype/class. I think we are all here on the forums because we ALL want this game to be good. I think things like perfecting gameplay, design, lore, content, music, etc. will all be more important than just perfecting every single archetype name. However, I do think that it could be such a simple fix that if this game does turn out to be successful, they may end up looking back on it in 3+ years regretting their decision or get tired of getting memed on by the ppl that really do care about them breaking the 4th wall. In the end, it likely won't get changed, but at least we can say "we tried".

WhitneyHagasMatsumoto

@Cripsus -san
I apologize for my aggressive and cynical attitude towards the twists and turns in the thread you created.
And I have a lot of respect for your tolerance and positive attitude!
Let's continue to have free and lively discussions together, so that we can make Ashes great together.

Warth

bump

maouw

Warth wrote: »

bump

you. cheeky. muffin.

Saedu

"Tank", "Healer", and "DPS" are the roles in a group. It is confusing if any of these roles are also class names.

Ostaff

Saedu wrote: »

"Tank", "Healer", and "DPS" are the roles in a group. It is confusing if any of these roles are also class names.

(pout) There goes my idea of having two more classes named Healer and DPS.

Child Item