Off Tanking

In all this talk of augments and secondary archetypes, the tank archetype is brought up quite often. Can xxx/tank classes main tank or only off tank? And similar questions, which leads me to this:

What is the role of an Off Tank in Ashes, and what do you expect them to be capable of?

I am basically curious to see if most people agree on what Off Tanking is and how it ties into the class system in Ashes. A tank in MMOs in general have two things they must be able to do, which is 1. keep the enemies away from the other people in the group as much as possible, and 2. be able to survive long enough for the enemies to die first. That's it. Everything else is fluff.

An Off Tank, to me, is someone who can offload some of the pressure from the main tank. They typically have less damage mitigation than a main tank, but also have either higher DPS or higher self-healing than the main tank, and they have some sort of mechanic to hold the attention of enemies. They are often used to handle adds in boss fights.

In some games I have seen the term "Off Tanking" being used in raid situations, where one main tank takes the aggro from another main tank in order to survive a certain boss mechanic. To me that's just tank swapping, not off tanking.

For Ashes, I expect one of the four schools of augmentation from the secondary tank archetype to add threat generation to a skill. And another school of augmentation will add some damage mitigation to a skill, perhaps through temporarily lowering the damage output of the enemy.

In other words, I think xxx/tank classes can off tank with the right gear and spec.

Can off tanks or xxx/tanks function as main tanks in group content (8 people)? Yes and no. If the group is near the minimum level for the content and don't have really good gear, then no. I think a tank/xxx is needed. If the content is on farm and the group is well geared, then absolutely yes; I think the off tank can handle the group bosses and adds in most cases.

I don't expect them to be able to main tank in raid content (40 people). Nor do I want them to. I can see a well geared off tank handle some raid boss adds perhaps, but not easily. I want the choice to go tank/xxx to be meaningful. I want them to be better tanks than any other class in pretty much all situations.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

SirChancelot

CROW3 wrote: »

Hm… my hope would be that ‘ease of play’ and ‘most effective in a role’ are two very different things. If I MT with a tank/tank, I want to have the highest ceiling v. all other class combos to tank a given encounter effectively. AND I don’t necessarily want that to be the easiest to play. I think it should be challenging to play and master a lead tank.

Just my two coppers.

Keep in mind I'm not saying the content is easy, or makes the raid easy to tank for. I'm saying the easiest build to pick up, and learn to use... I totally see it being the easiest to use.
Because onslaught, resounding smash myrmidon's fury, and then lacerate to death, with ultimate defense where applicable, doesn't look like that difficult of a rotation to master.

Azherae

SirChancelot wrote: »

CROW3 wrote: »

Hm… my hope would be that ‘ease of play’ and ‘most effective in a role’ are two very different things. If I MT with a tank/tank, I want to have the highest ceiling v. all other class combos to tank a given encounter effectively. AND I don’t necessarily want that to be the easiest to play. I think it should be challenging to play and master a lead tank.

Just my two coppers.

Keep in mind I'm not saying the content is easy, or makes the raid easy to tank for. I'm saying the easiest build to pick up, and learn to use... I totally see it being the easiest to use.
Because onslaught, resounding smash myrmidon's fury, and then lacerate to death, with ultimate defense where applicable, doesn't look like that difficult of a rotation to master.

Maybe so, but remember that no matter what, what is true is what people have been saying all this time about relying on Primary abilities. In other words, all Tanks will do all of those things. The main benefit a Guardian gets over anyone else is PROBABLY that they generate more hate and mitigate more damage when they do those things.

Maybe this might let them spend Skill Points in another different ability, so I actually see it in the opposite way. I expect Tank/X to need to take more different abilities in order to maintain the same level of Threat and get more use out of their augments, whereas Tank/Tank could focus more strongly in other ways, perhaps improving DPS, or similar.

I wouldn't call that 'easier', at all, actually, except in the 'number of actions or decisions you have to make within the battle'. It might just shift your strain to 'decisions in kit'.

SirChancelot

Azherae wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

CROW3 wrote: »

Hm… my hope would be that ‘ease of play’ and ‘most effective in a role’ are two very different things. If I MT with a tank/tank, I want to have the highest ceiling v. all other class combos to tank a given encounter effectively. AND I don’t necessarily want that to be the easiest to play. I think it should be challenging to play and master a lead tank.

Just my two coppers.

Keep in mind I'm not saying the content is easy, or makes the raid easy to tank for. I'm saying the easiest build to pick up, and learn to use... I totally see it being the easiest to use.
Because onslaught, resounding smash myrmidon's fury, and then lacerate to death, with ultimate defense where applicable, doesn't look like that difficult of a rotation to master.

Maybe so, but remember that no matter what, what is true is what people have been saying all this time about relying on Primary abilities. In other words, all Tanks will do all of those things. The main benefit a Guardian gets over anyone else is PROBABLY that they generate more hate and mitigate more damage when they do those things.

Maybe this might let them spend Skill Points in another different ability, so I actually see it in the opposite way. I expect Tank/X to need to take more different abilities in order to maintain the same level of Threat and get more use out of their augments, whereas Tank/Tank could focus more strongly in other ways, perhaps improving DPS, or similar.

I wouldn't call that 'easier', at all, actually, except in the 'number of actions or decisions you have to make within the battle'. It might just shift your strain to 'decisions in kit'.

Oh
My example there I meant as in using tank augments on those tank primary abilities. Potentially adding threat to abilities that don't already have it, or mitigation on to his damage abilities. I meant literally a double down on those 'tanky' characteristics. If they do that, then yes it should be the tankiest thing in the game. As in best and holding aggro, and hardest thing to kill. And, in my opinion, that would make him easier to use for a beginner. But if a player does that then he wouldn't have access to certain toys and effects that a tank/rogue does for example. Maybe he would have an augment that says when he charges he drops a smoke bomb, and no one outside of the smoke bomb area of effect can Target the tank so they all have to come to him and get close. That would be more tactical play than the tank/tank could do.

Azherae

SirChancelot wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

CROW3 wrote: »

Hm… my hope would be that ‘ease of play’ and ‘most effective in a role’ are two very different things. If I MT with a tank/tank, I want to have the highest ceiling v. all other class combos to tank a given encounter effectively. AND I don’t necessarily want that to be the easiest to play. I think it should be challenging to play and master a lead tank.

Just my two coppers.

Keep in mind I'm not saying the content is easy, or makes the raid easy to tank for. I'm saying the easiest build to pick up, and learn to use... I totally see it being the easiest to use.
Because onslaught, resounding smash myrmidon's fury, and then lacerate to death, with ultimate defense where applicable, doesn't look like that difficult of a rotation to master.

Maybe so, but remember that no matter what, what is true is what people have been saying all this time about relying on Primary abilities. In other words, all Tanks will do all of those things. The main benefit a Guardian gets over anyone else is PROBABLY that they generate more hate and mitigate more damage when they do those things.

Maybe this might let them spend Skill Points in another different ability, so I actually see it in the opposite way. I expect Tank/X to need to take more different abilities in order to maintain the same level of Threat and get more use out of their augments, whereas Tank/Tank could focus more strongly in other ways, perhaps improving DPS, or similar.

I wouldn't call that 'easier', at all, actually, except in the 'number of actions or decisions you have to make within the battle'. It might just shift your strain to 'decisions in kit'.

Oh
My example there I meant as in using tank augments on those tank primary abilities. Potentially adding threat to abilities that don't already have it, or mitigation on to his damage abilities. I meant literally a double down on those 'tanky' characteristics. If they do that, then yes it should be the tankiest thing in the game. As in best and holding aggro, and hardest thing to kill. And, in my opinion, that would make him easier to use for a beginner. But if a player does that then he wouldn't have access to certain toys and effects that a tank/rogue does for example. Maybe he would have an augment that says when he charges he drops a smoke bomb, and no one outside of the smoke bomb area of effect can Target the tank so they all have to come to him and get close. That would be more tactical play than the tank/tank could do.

I'm moreso theorycrafting that while it would be easy to pick up and get used to tanking this way, the 'top level of skill' might be those Tank/Tank that know exactly how much threat and mitigation they need, and therefore skip certain ability upgrades entirely in favor of additional passives or Weapon Skill options. Basically, using the fact that their Secondary allows them to strengthen their Tankiness, to then 'not upgrade all of the abilities as much', or not unlock any abilities that don't suit their Node's enemies.

SirChancelot

Azherae wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

CROW3 wrote: »

Hm… my hope would be that ‘ease of play’ and ‘most effective in a role’ are two very different things. If I MT with a tank/tank, I want to have the highest ceiling v. all other class combos to tank a given encounter effectively. AND I don’t necessarily want that to be the easiest to play. I think it should be challenging to play and master a lead tank.

Just my two coppers.

Keep in mind I'm not saying the content is easy, or makes the raid easy to tank for. I'm saying the easiest build to pick up, and learn to use... I totally see it being the easiest to use.
Because onslaught, resounding smash myrmidon's fury, and then lacerate to death, with ultimate defense where applicable, doesn't look like that difficult of a rotation to master.

Maybe so, but remember that no matter what, what is true is what people have been saying all this time about relying on Primary abilities. In other words, all Tanks will do all of those things. The main benefit a Guardian gets over anyone else is PROBABLY that they generate more hate and mitigate more damage when they do those things.

Maybe this might let them spend Skill Points in another different ability, so I actually see it in the opposite way. I expect Tank/X to need to take more different abilities in order to maintain the same level of Threat and get more use out of their augments, whereas Tank/Tank could focus more strongly in other ways, perhaps improving DPS, or similar.

I wouldn't call that 'easier', at all, actually, except in the 'number of actions or decisions you have to make within the battle'. It might just shift your strain to 'decisions in kit'.

Oh
My example there I meant as in using tank augments on those tank primary abilities. Potentially adding threat to abilities that don't already have it, or mitigation on to his damage abilities. I meant literally a double down on those 'tanky' characteristics. If they do that, then yes it should be the tankiest thing in the game. As in best and holding aggro, and hardest thing to kill. And, in my opinion, that would make him easier to use for a beginner. But if a player does that then he wouldn't have access to certain toys and effects that a tank/rogue does for example. Maybe he would have an augment that says when he charges he drops a smoke bomb, and no one outside of the smoke bomb area of effect can Target the tank so they all have to come to him and get close. That would be more tactical play than the tank/tank could do.

I'm moreso theorycrafting that while it would be easy to pick up and get used to tanking this way, the 'top level of skill' might be those Tank/Tank that know exactly how much threat and mitigation they need, and therefore skip certain ability upgrades entirely in favor of additional passives or Weapon Skill options. Basically, using the fact that their Secondary allows them to strengthen their Tankiness, to then 'not upgrade all of the abilities as much', or not unlock any abilities that don't suit their Node's enemies.

That just sounds like player skill and experience to me. All of that optimizing could apply to every class.

Azherae

SirChancelot wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

CROW3 wrote: »

Hm… my hope would be that ‘ease of play’ and ‘most effective in a role’ are two very different things. If I MT with a tank/tank, I want to have the highest ceiling v. all other class combos to tank a given encounter effectively. AND I don’t necessarily want that to be the easiest to play. I think it should be challenging to play and master a lead tank.

Just my two coppers.

Keep in mind I'm not saying the content is easy, or makes the raid easy to tank for. I'm saying the easiest build to pick up, and learn to use... I totally see it being the easiest to use.
Because onslaught, resounding smash myrmidon's fury, and then lacerate to death, with ultimate defense where applicable, doesn't look like that difficult of a rotation to master.

Maybe so, but remember that no matter what, what is true is what people have been saying all this time about relying on Primary abilities. In other words, all Tanks will do all of those things. The main benefit a Guardian gets over anyone else is PROBABLY that they generate more hate and mitigate more damage when they do those things.

Maybe this might let them spend Skill Points in another different ability, so I actually see it in the opposite way. I expect Tank/X to need to take more different abilities in order to maintain the same level of Threat and get more use out of their augments, whereas Tank/Tank could focus more strongly in other ways, perhaps improving DPS, or similar.

I wouldn't call that 'easier', at all, actually, except in the 'number of actions or decisions you have to make within the battle'. It might just shift your strain to 'decisions in kit'.

Oh
My example there I meant as in using tank augments on those tank primary abilities. Potentially adding threat to abilities that don't already have it, or mitigation on to his damage abilities. I meant literally a double down on those 'tanky' characteristics. If they do that, then yes it should be the tankiest thing in the game. As in best and holding aggro, and hardest thing to kill. And, in my opinion, that would make him easier to use for a beginner. But if a player does that then he wouldn't have access to certain toys and effects that a tank/rogue does for example. Maybe he would have an augment that says when he charges he drops a smoke bomb, and no one outside of the smoke bomb area of effect can Target the tank so they all have to come to him and get close. That would be more tactical play than the tank/tank could do.

I'm moreso theorycrafting that while it would be easy to pick up and get used to tanking this way, the 'top level of skill' might be those Tank/Tank that know exactly how much threat and mitigation they need, and therefore skip certain ability upgrades entirely in favor of additional passives or Weapon Skill options. Basically, using the fact that their Secondary allows them to strengthen their Tankiness, to then 'not upgrade all of the abilities as much', or not unlock any abilities that don't suit their Node's enemies.

That just sounds like player skill and experience to me. All of that optimizing could apply to every class.

That's the point I'm making actually. That the skill required to play Tank/Bard might involve all that optimization from the beginning because without it, one might fail at Tanking, but Tank/Tank would not fail at Tanking as most people understand it, either way. They would actually 'Tank way harder than they need to' if they just took all abilities to max rank the way a Tank/Bard MIGHT need to do.

And then as they gained experience with Tanking, would be able to learn where they could cut back to get other things.

That would give the 'Guardian is easy to Tank with, but to be most effective at doing other things beyond a basic rotation, you have to learn something and improve' that I would expect most people would hope for, while still not making them suboptimal compared to Tank/X, once the player did improve.

Dygz

SirChancelot wrote: »

I have said a tank/tank should probably be the easiest tank to play. Having the lowest barrier to entry to learn and use, because he is the tankiest tank to tank with. But that should also have the lowest skill cap ceiling, the lowest damage output, and lowest raid support functions. If you're going to all in on being a tank, then that's all you should have.
I have said I'm all for some tanks being more difficult to use, having that barrier to entry (not for new to tanking players), but allowing for a higher skill cap ceiling (able to pull off more creative plays), more utility to offer the group, better DPS.

Doesn't have to be Tank/Tank. Just needs to be Tank/x. Even in top-end raids.
They are balancing for the Primary Archetypes to be viable; not the Secondary Archetypes.
It's the Active Skills that count most.

Noaani

Nerror wrote: »

They pretty much say that tank/xxx are for the most difficult content like raids, where xxx/tanks can handle easier content. Well, there is more nuance to what they say, so watch the clip. Might be of interest to you SirChancelot

They said that tank/* wouldn't be the only tank, they didn't say anything about all */tank classes being able to tank.

The take I had on this is that summoner/tank is able to tank, to a degree. This is something we had been talking about around this time, so was on their mind at least a little.

What this statement did indeed confirm at the time is that for any hard content, tank/* is required.

Now, if people want to go on about */tank being viable as tanks because they are able to tank trash mobs in a dungeon, have at it. I don't consider that to be how you define a class or character as being a viable tank or not.

To me, your class is viable in a role if it is capable of taking on all content in the game in that role. If it is not, then your class is not viable in that role.

Boanergese

Dygz wrote: »

In that clip Nerror just posted:
Steven: To be clear, it's not just the Tank Archetype that can tank. It's just likely that they will be the most effective at tanking.

Which is why I keep saying... x/Tanks can tank.
Just don't expect them to be main tank in an 8-person group with a Tank/x.
Again, I don't understand why that gets any push-back.

What I got from watching the clip is it depends on your gear and the type of content. So, I think that a X/tank might be able to do a dungeon or even off tank, but it depends on the difficulty level of the tank. To go back to World of Warcraft, with a normal raid you might be able to use X/Tank if the tank is well geared and knows how to tank. I saw that even in Heroics raids where a well geared tank was able to live long enough to solo tank a raid when the second tank died early in the fight. However, with a mythic raid you are going to need Tank/X or maybe two Tank/X to get by the hardest stuff. The same would be that X/tank can do a dungeon run but wouldn't be able to do a +27 mythic key. I think @Noaani is right in that groups will bring archetypes to raid, sieges, and dungeons based on how they are designed. I would like to see some raids where you need four tanks like the four horsemen fight.

Dygz

X/Tank can definitely off-tank.
Mentioning gear in no way stated that an x/Tank , with proper gear, could main tank better than the Tank/x in an 8-person encounter.
He straight up states: "To be clear, it's not just the Tank Archetype that can tank. It's just likely that they will be the most effective at tanking."

What Steven says about gear is, "Gear can bridge the gap between most efficient as well sometimes."
And, that "sometimes" leaves us with a qualifier of rare, rather than an unqualified generalization.

Steven did not make a definitive statement like, "If you use the proper gear, an x/Tank will be able to main tank in an 8-person group."

You can always try to make that kind of build and see how far you get.
You might be able to succeed - just don't go in with the expectation that it's designed for you to succeed at that. Because the devs aren't balancing to ensure that can happen.

I fully expect that groups will bring Primary Archetypes based on how they're designed. I expect it to be very rare that they choose an x/Tank as main tank for 8-person group encounters... especially not over a Tank/x.

Expect that to be similar to Steven's reply:
Q: " If i use secondary cleric can i heal others?"
A: "indirectly there are some augments when applied to certain skills that can do this. But it would not replace a cleric archetype"

Boanergese

Nerror wrote: »

Hah! In my chronological watch-through of their youtube, I just came across a part in a video where they talk about this. Watch from 57:38 - 59:20.
https://youtu.be/6CwaEg-b20k?t=3460
They pretty much say that tank/xxx are for the most difficult content like raids, where xxx/tanks can handle easier content. Well, there is more nuance to what they say, so watch the clip. Might be of interest to you @SirChancelot

Look at minute 19:00 of the video with the destructible world objects. We won't need rogues to pick locks because we can just bash the door with our axe. New revelation. Let the controversy begin.

Noaani

Boanergese wrote: »

Look at minute 19:00 of the video with the destructible world objects. We won't need rogues to pick locks because we can just bash the door with our axe. New revelation. Let the controversy begin.

Parts of the world will be destructible, but not all of it.

If they make it so that a door that needs a rogue to unlock isn't destructible, then problem solved.

McShave

The need for off-tanking really depends on how Intrepid design their fights.

For me, off tanking is when there is something that needs to be tanked but the main tank cannot do it. Usually this additional target has less damage and health than a main boss, is supposed to be kited, or is a group of mobs that spawn around the encounter room.

This is really for dungeon fights, as if you are in a raid you will have enough room for as many main tanks as you need.

Off-tanking does not mean bring 2 main tanks, as the off-tank will provide more damage, or other things, that a main tank cannot provide.

In a 8 character party, there might be many ways to "off-tank". Maybe you can have a mage or cleric cc the target, or a hunter pet kite it, or the good old high defence or high evade character keep aggro (these are just examples).

For example: let's say the boss is 3 bosses. The main tank will take 2 of them, and the off-tank will grab the other one.

OR

There is a big raptor boss that the main tank is tanking, and throughout the fight groups of small raptors spawn that the off tank will grab so they can be aoe'd down.

Dygz

In a sense, it won't really matter whether there is a need for an off-tank.
Just as it won't really matter whether there is a need for an x/Cleric or x/Bard.

If x/Tanks are in the group, they will be tanking to some degree.
They just won't be main tank.

Just as a Tank/Mage might be able to create a Shield Wall that also deals Elemental damage, a Mage/Tank may be able to deal Elemental damage that also creates a Shield Wall.
Just don't expect the Elemental damage from the Tank/Mage to be as powerful as the Elemental damage from a Mage/x. And don't expect a Shield Wall from the Mage/Tank to have the durability or duration of a Shield Wall created by a Tank/x.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

If x/Tanks are in the group, they will be tanking to some degree.
They just won't be main tank.

If you are in my group, and you are not the tank, don't try and tank.

The tank is there to hold mobs steady for DPS to deal with efficiently (important for any positional DPS), and to focus as much damage on one player as possible to make things more manageable for the healer. Don't interrupt that, I don't care what you think your role is.

Interrupting that in any way is going to go badly for the group. If you can tank some adds that we accidently pull without the healer focusing on you, then the tank would have been able to tank them, position them, and allowed the DPS to better kill them.

Being able to throw up a shield wall doesn't make you a tank.

Dygz

Who you allow in your groups is irrelevant.
x/Tanks are tanks. They will be tanking to some degree. Just don't expect them to be main tank in an 8-person group.

Sathrago

Dygz wrote: »

Who you allow in your groups is irrelevant.
x/Tanks are tanks. They will be tanking to some degree. Just don't expect them to be main tank in an 8-person group.

You're missing the whole point of what Noaani is saying. The reason why you designate one person to be tank is to reduce the chaos and control where enemies are standing, facing, and the damage they deal. Off-Tanks are only needed for very specific types of fights designed with an off-tank in mind. All other encounters are best run with a singular tank, otherwise you are just making things harder for everyone in the party.

Dygz

I am not missing any point.
In Ashes, main tank will still be designated.
Regardless of whether off-tanks are "needed", x/Tanks will also be tanking.
Just as X/Clerics will also be healing and just as x/Bards will also be buffing.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

I am not missing any point.

You are missing one somewhere.

A main tank (tank/*) will be needed for all content that is not solo.

If content requires two tanks, two tank/* will be present.

This leaves no content left for a */tank to tank.

So what will they be tanking? Like, give an example of where you think they will tank.

McShave

Noaani wrote: »

If content requires two tanks, two tank/* will be present.

This leaves no content left for a */tank to tank.

I disagree with this. What gives you the authority to say this, at least phrase it as a suggestion since we don't actually know how this will play out.

Child Item