Ferryman wrote: » Tank is a really poor name for a class and does not make much sense. Like pointed out several times, tank is a role like healer, support or damage dealer. Naming a class as a tank just shows lack of imagination. I cannot believe that the name is not changed yet. It was an okayish place holder at the beginning but nothing more tbh. However, naming classes have not been their strength anyway. Some are fine but some are just weird word combos.
Myosotys wrote: » Ferryman wrote: » Tank is a really poor name for a class and does not make much sense. Like pointed out several times, tank is a role like healer, support or damage dealer. Naming a class as a tank just shows lack of imagination. I cannot believe that the name is not changed yet. It was an okayish place holder at the beginning but nothing more tbh. However, naming classes have not been their strength anyway. Some are fine but some are just weird word combos. Agree with that ! 0 fantasy... I hope the devs will have more fantasy for the rest of the game. I already imagine my "tank" making FedEx quests... That's sad.
Noaani wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Ferryman wrote: » Tank is a really poor name for a class and does not make much sense. Like pointed out several times, tank is a role like healer, support or damage dealer. Naming a class as a tank just shows lack of imagination. I cannot believe that the name is not changed yet. It was an okayish place holder at the beginning but nothing more tbh. However, naming classes have not been their strength anyway. Some are fine but some are just weird word combos. Agree with that ! 0 fantasy... I hope the devs will have more fantasy for the rest of the game. I already imagine my "tank" making FedEx quests... That's sad. The problem there is that you are imagining your character identifying with the game mechanic description of an archetype. Complaints like this are on par with people complaining about how stats on gear is unrealistic, because you can't imagine your character equipping an item and feeling stronger or smarter.
NishUK wrote: » It's like you don't want to even want to be a part of this game's/Steven's vision and keep rattling on about how everything Tank is immersion-breaking."
Dygz wrote: » There. I fixed it for you.
Myosotys wrote: » Is someone here asking for a realistic game ? I think no one here is waiting from AOC to be realistic... as the game is more a kind of fantasy D&D inspired MMORPG. A tank has nothing to see with the fantasy background of AOC. And what the problem with attributes on gear ? I haven't play yet any MMORPG without attributes on gear...
Noaani wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Is someone here asking for a realistic game ? I think no one here is waiting from AOC to be realistic... as the game is more a kind of fantasy D&D inspired MMORPG. A tank has nothing to see with the fantasy background of AOC. And what the problem with attributes on gear ? I haven't play yet any MMORPG without attributes on gear... The use of the word "tank" in our case literally only exists as a means for Intrepid to communicate with players as to what the point of the abilities bound within the archetype kit that the name describes are intended to do. It isn't an aspect of storytelling, nor is it intended to be a term your character associates with in game. Other than a piece of communication between Intrepid and players (and between players and other players, I guess), archetype names need not exist at all. The moment you are taking that word and applying it to anything in game (as you yourself said you imagine seeing your tank doing FedEx quests), then you have taken a piece of communication between Intrepid and players and applied that to your character. There is no problem with stats on gear. However, some misguided people have mistaken game mechanics (and the effective communication of those game mechanics) with game lore and storytelling. I assume you can see the connection between what these people have done and what a few people here are doing.
Myosotys wrote: » Second time I see you claiming that "Tank is used for "communication" purposes... And I have already answered you that it makes no sense because "Tank" is totally part of the storytelling as you choose your archetype when creating you character.
If, as you say, the term was used for communication purposes, it would not even belong in the game. The term would be used in a separate guide (or only the Wiki for example).
Noaani wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Second time I see you claiming that "Tank is used for "communication" purposes... And I have already answered you that it makes no sense because "Tank" is totally part of the storytelling as you choose your archetype when creating you character. This doesn't make it part of storytelling. It becomes a part of storytelling if a character in game refers to your primary archetype by name. Anything short of this, and it isn't a part of the story being presented to you. If, as you say, the term was used for communication purposes, it would not even belong in the game. The term would be used in a separate guide (or only the Wiki for example). Except it needs to, because that is where players select that archetype kit. The developers can't exactly have a website with the abilities of each class kit, put the identifying labels on them on the website, but then leave those identifying labels off of them in game where players have to select one.
Myosotys wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Second time I see you claiming that "Tank is used for "communication" purposes... And I have already answered you that it makes no sense because "Tank" is totally part of the storytelling as you choose your archetype when creating you character. This doesn't make it part of storytelling. It becomes a part of storytelling if a character in game refers to your primary archetype by name. Anything short of this, and it isn't a part of the story being presented to you. If, as you say, the term was used for communication purposes, it would not even belong in the game. The term would be used in a separate guide (or only the Wiki for example). Except it needs to, because that is where players select that archetype kit. The developers can't exactly have a website with the abilities of each class kit, put the identifying labels on them on the website, but then leave those identifying labels off of them in game where players have to select one. Impossible is possible ! Dozens of MMORPG did it before AOC. With a one hour brainstorming, they can find a much better solution
Myosotys wrote: » Impossible is possible ! Dozens of MMORPG did it before AOC. With a one hour brainstorming, they can find a much better solution
Azherae wrote: » More seriously, Noaani, they MIGHT actually have thought that was okay... and therefore actually DO intend to use 'Tank' as a term in game. It's probably as you expect
SirChancelot wrote: » I've just read that 'tank' has actually had a videogame definition added to it's list of meanings... So now this is more viable right? I mean is definition 8... But it's therehttps://www.dictionary.com/browse/tank
NiKr wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » I've just read that 'tank' has actually had a videogame definition added to it's list of meanings... So now this is more viable right? I mean is definition 8... But it's therehttps://www.dictionary.com/browse/tank Yeah, it's as if language is constantly evolving. Except people don't seem to care about that in this case.
