Tanking

I love the overall archetype class design that they're going for, and I know they have said that a tank archetype will be able to tank no matter what secondary class he chooses.
But does anyone know if any other classes if they choose a tank secondary will be able to tank?
For example a rogue/tank being able to do a Dodge evasion type build for tanking. Or a summoner focusing on tanky summons?

Or will the tank primary be the only tanking option?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Biccus

Dygz wrote: »

And it's 8 classes of Tank with the same abilities - not the exact same abilities because those same abilities will be augmented differently. But combat role is balanced around the abilities; not the augments.

This is the bit I’m talking about. The x augments from tank/x need to really change the abilities a lot or it won’t feel like 8 tanks, it’ll just feel like 1 and that’s what I worry about.

So for example take resounding smash from tank.
Tank/rogue removes the secondary hit and creates a smoke cloud that increases dodge chance.
Tank/ranger makes it a ranged ability
Tank/cleric again removes the second hit but puts down a healing patch on their location
Tank/mage makes it a larger radius and adds an elemental debuff .
Tank/fighter removes the initial hit but gives it a gap closer.

I mean augments that feels like actually change in the abilities.

Dygz

ThexBlackxKnight wrote: »

You don't know what combat will end looking like at launch , none of us do, as it is going through a lot changes already. Just because Steven has a design idea doesn't mean it won't change and he already shown that he willing to change things.

But, we do know what the design is. And that's all we can meaningfully discuss.
With your logic, we may as well discuss Ashes combat as if it will be exactly like WoW combat.
Again, willing to change fundamentals at this point really means Steven is willing for the game to vaporware.

ThexBlackxKnight

Dygz wrote: »

But, we do know what the design is. And that's all we can meaningfully discuss.
With your logic, we may as well discuss Ashes combat as if it will be exactly like WoW combat.
Again, willing to change fundamentals at this point really means Steven is willing for the game to vaporware.

If they get combat to be as polished as wow combat , it will be a very successful game. I would wouldn't mind having wow's combat in a game that has the features of Ashes. I don't mind tab target. Players might want more options for tanking , its open for change.

Dygz

Biccus wrote: »

This is the bit I’m talking about. The x augments from tank/x need to really change the abilities a lot or it won’t feel like 8 tanks, it’ll just feel like 1 and that’s what I worry about.

So for example take resounding smash from tank.
Tank/rogue removes the secondary hit and creates a smoke cloud that increases dodge chance.
Tank/ranger makes it a ranged ability
Tank/cleric again removes the second hit but puts down a healing patch on their location
Tank/mage makes it a larger radius and adds an elemental debuff .
Tank/fighter removes the initial hit but gives it a gap closer.

I mean augments that feels like actually change in the abilities.

"Really change" and "feels like actually change" are subjective.
The devs are are balancing the 8 versions of Primary Tank to make sure they can all main tank because the role of a Primary Archetype Tank is to primarily tank.
They are not going to balance the game such that a Primary Archetype Cleric can primarily tank because the primary role of a Primary Archetype Cleric is not tank. A Cleric/Tank does Celric stuff primarily, with a bit of tanking.
I understand that you wish it would be different, but just because you wish something does not mean that's the way it will be. Your wish is not what the game design actually is.

Biccus

Literally. If there is only 1 tank play style because no matter which augment you pick, the ability stays fundamentally unchanged. Then this company is a failure at class design.

I didn’t say anything about x/tank filling the tanking role so don’t quote me and pretend that’s what I said, if you don’t mind.

Songcaller

we aren't even sure whether you must pick one secondary augment school for all skills, or, whether you choose one of 4 augments per skill. I think the freedom of choice would be better if you get 4 choices per skill rather than 1 choice per class. I would hope there is distinct differences between the tanks, but, not at the cost of tanking ability.

Dygz

I need to reparse this.
I think you can choose any of the augments you have in your arsenal and you won't just be stuck with using only augments from one school.

@Biccus
There is not only one Tank playstyle but you can only use Tank abilities; you can't use abilities from other Archetypes.
There are 8 different versions of Primary Tank. So, at least 8 different versions of Primary Archetype Tank playstyles. Probably more with the 4 augment schools of each Secondary archetype. And all the other augments you get: social, naval, religious, racial, etc.
I covered several things in one post. If the shoe doesn't fit don't wear it...if you don't mind.

Biccus

Dygz wrote: »

I covered several things in one post. If the shoe doesn't fit don't wear it...if you don't mind.

You really didn’t. You misquoted me and you just won’t admit to it. Unless it was intentional..

Dygz wrote: »

you can't use abilities from other Archetypes.

I don’t know if you just can’t comprehend other people arguments but again.. I didn’t say anything about being given other archetype abilities, this is you trying to twist my words AGAIN.

What I want to see is the abilities being changed to incorporate the augmenting classes identity so it feels like almost like a hybrid of the 2 classes.

How can you argue that there will be 8 different play styles and then say the abilities of the 8 play styles are all identical.

Yuyukoyay

Summoner is excluded from the augment only penalty as their secondary archetype influences the class of their summons to some extent. So how they turn out is completely unknown, but if any class can be a main tank as a secondary archtype. It will be them.

Biccus

Yuyukoyay wrote: »

Summoner is excluded from the augment only penalty as their secondary archetype influences the class of their summons to some extent. So how they turn out is completely unknown, but if any class can be a main tank as a secondary archtype. It will be them.

It'll take a lot of micro management to main tank with a pet. looking at the recent boss vids, I'm not sure how they'd do main tanking when I'm seeing mechanics that need active avoidance. (like that jumping mechanic)

maouw

Biccus wrote: »

Yuyukoyay wrote: »

Summoner is excluded from the augment only penalty as their secondary archetype influences the class of their summons to some extent. So how they turn out is completely unknown, but if any class can be a main tank as a secondary archtype. It will be them.

It'll take a lot of micro management to main tank with a pet. looking at the recent boss vids, I'm not sure how they'd do main tanking when I'm seeing mechanics that need active avoidance. (like that jumping mechanic)

Maybe 3 things they could consider for this:

summoner has a spell to cast on summons that protects them for a brief moment (like an active block but for your summons)
"to heel!" or some other synchronized skill that you perform with your pet(s) at your side so they can be quickly pulled to your side out of danger
summons with inherent properties - like resistance to frost damage - or as an augment/equipment effect that applies to the summons.

Dygz

Biccus wrote: »

You really didn’t. You misquoted me and you just won’t admit to it. Unless it was intentional.

I did not misquote you.
You wrote: "This is the bit I’m talking about. The x augments from tank/x need to really change the abilities a lot or it won’t feel like 8 tanks, it’ll just feel like 1 and that’s what I worry about."
"I mean augments that feels like actually change in the abilities."
The parts I quoted are: "really change" and "feels like actually changed".
So. I did not misquote you.

Biccus wrote: »

I don’t know if you just can’t comprehend other people arguments but again.. I didn’t say anything about being given other archetype abilities, this is you trying to twist my words AGAIN.

What I want to see is the abilities being changed to incorporate the augmenting classes identity so it feels like almost like a hybrid of the 2 classes.

How can you argue that there will be 8 different play styles and then say the abilities of the 8 play styles are all identical.

You are the one who cannot understand what I wrote.
Nowhere did I write that there are 8 identical playstyles. That twists what I said.
What I said is that all 8 versions of an archetype have the same abilities. That is how the devs are balancing the 8 Primary archetypes so that they are all viable.
That is what I meant by, "The devs are balancing the 8 versions of Primary Tank to make sure they can all main tank because the role of a Primary Archetype Tank is to primarily tank."
That is not the same thing as, "All 8 versions of a Primary Archetype are identical."
I didn't say that you said anything about being given other archetype abilities - which is why that is not in quotes in my response.
What you did write is: "Literally. If there is only 1 tank play style because no matter which augment you pick, the ability stays fundamentally unchanged. Then this company is a failure at class design."
I responded: "There is not only one Tank playstyle but you can only use Tank abilities."
After that I marked the difference between abilities and augments. Augments are not as powerful as abilities.
I don't know what you mean by hybrid. I also don't know what you mean by "really change" or "feels like actually changed".

What I'm trying to get across here is that all 8 versions of a Primary Archetype have the same abilities.
Not the exact same abilities because those abilities can be augmented with effects from 4 Schools for each of the 8 Secondary Archetypes.
A Tank/Cleric will have augments they can choose from the Cleric's Life School that will allow the Tank/Cleric to self-heal. That is significantly different from a Tank/Tank who will not have augments from the Cleric's Life School that will allow them to self-heal. So, there should be no fear that there will only be 1 playstyle for Tank.
A Tank/Mage will be able to add an augment from the Mage's Escape School that would allow them to teleport.
The Tank/Cleric could add their self-heal augment to their Lasso ability. Also, the Tank/Mage could add their teleport to their Lasso ability. Both would be using the same ability but it would not be exactly the same because their would be significantly different results in addition to the Lasso effect. Lasso/teleport would also have a significantly different result than Lasso/aggro.
But...don't expect the self-heal augment to be as powerful as the self-heal ability. Don't expect the teleport augment to be as powerful as the teleport ability. Don't expect the aggro augment to be as powerful as the aggro ability.

Previously, I also used the Cleric/Tank example to imply - don't expect the aggro augment to be as powerful as the aggro ability. Which is why a Cleric/Tank will not be able to be a main tank. Because augments are not as powerful as abilities. The part that pertains to what I quoted is:
All Clerics will have Castigate. Whether you think adding an aggro augment to Castigate counts as "real change" or "actually changed" I don't know, but, the devs are balancing the Primary Archetypes by having all 8 versions have the Castigate ability.
Then because you wrote: "The x augments from tank/x need to really change the abilities a lot or it won’t feel like 8 tanks" I also added that the devs are not balancing such that an aggro augment will be as powerful as an aggro ability.
The Cleric/Tank does primarily Clericy stuff with a bit of tanking; not a lot of tanking.
If you think that last sentence is a response to something you didn't mean, that's OK. If the shoe doesn't fit don't wear it. Some other people in this thread still need that shoe.

For every Primary Archetype Tank, a Lasso will still Lasso - for every Primary Archetype Cleric, a Castigate will still Castigate.
But a Spellshield's Lasso can Lasso with significantly different results than a Guardian's Lasso.
If you're saying, "That's all I was asking for", great!
But, you have repeatedly indicated that you think that is not "a lot" of change and that Lasso/teleport is "identical" to Lasso/aggro.
And I am clarifying. It's fine for you to clarify, "that is not what I intended to indicate."
That is how communication works.

Popeh

I think, that summoner(support archetype), could prob help x/tank classes to perform better as tanks..I guess..

Dygz

Yuyukoyay wrote: »

Summoner is excluded from the augment only penalty as their secondary archetype influences the class of their summons to some extent.

That is something you are making up in your own head.

So how they turn out is completely unknown, but if any class can be a main tank as a secondary archetype. It will be them.

How they will turn out is not completely unknown.
Summoner/Tank might be the very best off-tank. But the devs are not balancing Summoners to be main tanks.

Biccus

Dygz wrote: »

Biccus wrote: »

This is the bit I’m talking about. The x augments from tank/x need to really change the abilities a lot or it won’t feel like 8 tanks, it’ll just feel like 1 and that’s what I worry about.

So for example take resounding smash from tank.
Tank/rogue removes the secondary hit and creates a smoke cloud that increases dodge chance.
Tank/ranger makes it a ranged ability
Tank/cleric again removes the second hit but puts down a healing patch on their location
Tank/mage makes it a larger radius and adds an elemental debuff .
Tank/fighter removes the initial hit but gives it a gap closer.

I mean augments that feels like actually change in the abilities.

"Really change" and "feels like actually change" are subjective.
The devs are are balancing the 8 versions of Primary Tank to make sure they can all main tank because the role of a Primary Archetype Tank is to primarily tank.
[They are not going to balance the game such that a Primary Archetype Cleric can primarily tank because the primary role of a Primary Archetype Cleric is not tank. A Cleric/Tank does Celric stuff primarily, with a bit of tanking.
I understand that you wish it would be different, but just because you wish something does not mean that's the way it will be. Your wish is not what the game design actually is.

If that isn't misquoting me or twisting my words.. Then you're just arguing against a point I didn't actually make.
If you only want to quote certain parts of my argument, you need to specify. Nothing I wrote said anything about Clerics being primary tanks, which is where I take issue with the response.

By your own words, giving a teleport to the lasso ability is changing the ability. Actually, I know how much you love to argue semantics so I should clarify and say it changes how the ability works. Even if it doesn't change the name of the ability.
Which is actually what I was talking about. Maybe it just wasn't obvious to you.

Dygz

It wasn't obvious to me because you didn't just say change.
You said "really change" and "actually changed" and "need to change the abilities a lot".
And I was using Cleric/Tank to help contrast the difference between a Tank ability and a Tank augment.
Tank augments are designed to change Cleric abilities significantly.
You seemed to indicate that's not "real change" or the abilities being "actually changed" or that a Tank augment would not change Cleric abilities "a lot".
So... I did specify. Which is why I placed quotes around specific words.
If I misunderstood what you meant, I misunderstood what you meant. That is not the same thing as misquoting you - because I did not put quotes around "Cleric/Tank".

Biccus

Clearly I was right.. It's all semantics with you as usual. I'm sure many people could read the examples I put in and understood what sort of changes I was implying I would like to see.. Not get hung up on the words real and actual.

I'm sure adding a healing AoE to a ground slam (to most people) is a "real" and "actual" change to the ability.

ThexBlackxKnight

Biccus wrote: »

Clearly I was right.. It's all semantics with you as usual. I'm sure many people could read the examples I put in and understood what sort of changes I was implying I would like to see.. Not get hung up on the words real and actual.

I'm sure adding a healing AoE to a ground slam (to most people) is a "real" and "actual" change to the ability.

He really likes to beat people over the head with notebook a of dev design plans like its a bible in multiple posts when people talk about changes in the game they would like to see , then play semantics when people counter his arguments. Truth is if a lot of players are not happy with the tanking options , the devs will make changes.

Dygz

Biccus wrote: »

Clearly I was right.. It's all semantics with you as usual. I'm sure many people could read the examples I put in and understood what sort of changes I was implying I would like to see.. Not get hung up on the words real and actual.

I'm sure adding a healing AoE to a ground slam (to most people) is a "real" and "actual" change to the ability.

Well, but we already know that's what's going to happen, but you stated that you worry that's not going to be a "real change" or an "actual change" or that "needs to change the abilities a lot".
If that's what most people already understood, what's the point of that post and why would you be worried?

Dygz

ThexBlackxKnight wrote: »

Truth is if a lot of players are not happy with the tanking options , the devs will make changes.

Changes may be made, but the devs are not going to be balancing the secondaries to be on par with the primaries.

Child Item