The Fighter Changes: A New Look. [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

View Full Version : The Fighter Changes: A New Look.

steelbadger

02-22-2009, 07:18 PM

I have already outlined some problems with the fighter changes as currently presented by SOE in <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=443913" target="_blank">THIS THREAD</a>. This post hopes to look at alternatives to the method SOE is currently hoping to employ. I hope to remain true to the spirit of SOEs Fighter Changes .The problem highlighted in my previous thread is that on live taunts are largely ineffectual, but on test they are too effective and must be hit too often. There is an easy middle ground to find here. No taunt should have a 0.25 second cast and 4.5 second recast, certainly not one that on it's own can constitute half of the characters hate per second. Firstly; Taunts need to have longer casting times, 1 second is about right.Secondly; Taunts need to have longer recast times, 30 seconds to a minute is about right.Thirdly; Taunts have to be able to maintain a steady hate flow for the tank despite long cast/recast times.Fourthly; Careful and correct usage of Taunts must be notably more effective than simply mashing buttons.Fifthly; No single taunt should be overpowering in it's effectiveness, everything should be roughly equal in basic effectiveness, but each taunt should be more effective in certain circumstances.Sixthly(?); Auto-attack and it's maximisation should remain an important part of aggro control (ie timing CAs should be viable, but not required).So I've drawn up a collection of taunt models:Examples of Single Target Taunts: Option 1 Casting Time: 0.5 second Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 30 seconds Duration: 36 seconds Effects: Taunts for 3000 initially then taunts for 5000 every 6 seconds. When this expires it taunts for an additional 5000 (So the final tick is 10000) Info: 1055TPS Rationale: The longer cast time and dot nature of this taunt makes auto-attack timing a viable way of squeezing out a little extra TPS, the larger hit at the end is to discourage spamming. Option 2 Casting Time: 0.5 second Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 30 seconds Duration: 10 seconds, 5 procs Effect: Debuff applied to mob, procs a 6000 threat increase to caster on mob when mob is hit. Info: 1000TPS Rationale: a far spikier taunt method (works kinda like the assassin Mark line), more suited to secondary taunt role. Or possibly Bruisers/monks primary taunt (call it aching bruise or some such) Option 3 Casting Time: 0.5 second Recovery Time 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 40 seconds Duration: 30 seconds, 5 procs. Effects: Debuff applied to mob, when mob deals damage it increases hate to the Guardian by 8000. Info: 1000TPS Rationale: Again, longer cast/recast time for auto-attack timing. Though it becomes less effective at higher avoidance levels it should still taunt for the full amount against all epics. Against heroics it becomes marginally less useful (may only proc 3 times) but the tank will probably need less hate against heroics so it’s not a problem. More suited to the secondary taunt role. Option 4 Casting Time: 0.5 second Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 30 seconds Duration: 20 seconds Effect: (use on group friend) Applies Immunity (Lasts 80 seconds, cannot cast this on them again for that time), Reduces threat of target to target’s target by 8000 instantly and every 10 seconds. Info: 800TPS, slightly lower than the other taunts because it is stripping hate from a group member to you. Think Paladin secondary taunt. Immunity timer so that it isn’t a free-wheel ticket for the lucky dps class. (Example, Pally tanking mob, with brig in group. Pally switches target to brig, hits this ability and brig loses 10000 hate with their target (or implied target if they are assisting) over time). Rationale: Ok, maybe amends was a bit easy-mode, but the theory behind the pally threat sap was nice, this keeps the spirit while making the pally work for their hate. Could be a primary taunt. AoE Taunts: Option 1 Casting Time: 1.5 seconds Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 30 seconds Duration: 12 seconds Effects: Taunts up to 8 mobs for 2000 initially then for 3000 every 2 seconds. Info: 666TPS per target. Rationale: A rather ineffective AoE on longer fights but on short fights it achieves pretty high TPS per mob. For use with the non-aoe tank classes; AoE tank classes should get abilities closer to the single target taunt examples (though obviously AoE). Option 2 Casting Time: 1.5 seconds Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 10 seconds Duration: 12 seconds Effects: Taunts up to 8 mobs in the encounter for 1000, then for 2000 after 6 seconds then for 3000 after a further 6 seconds. Info: 500TPS Rationale: A more flexible group taunt, the price paid for the flexibility is a reduced TPS. Bump up for AoE tank group taunts.Option 3Casting Time: 1.5 secondsRecovery Time: 0.5 secondsRecast Time: 30 secondsDuration: 15 secondsEffects: Encounter debuff. Every time a mob in the encounter misses with an attack or spell their hate to the caster is increased by 3000.Info: About 1000TPS per mobRationale: to show that AoE taunts don't been to be simple whack-taunt affairs.Temp Buffs: Taunt Buff 1 Casting Time: 0.5 seconds Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 60 seconds Duration: 10 seconds Effects: Roots and dazes caster (no auto-attack), makes caster immune to stun, stifle, fear and mezz. Makes all taunts 10% more effective. Info: Basically a method to hold aggro through intermittent control effects, can also be used as a temp taunt buff but you must have ALL of your taunts available to use to make it worth losing your auto-attack threat. Rationale: With greater emphasis on “active” tanking (as opposed to passive tanking) tanks need a method to gain hate even while under control effects. Taunt Buff 2 Casting Time: 1.5 seconds Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 30 seconds Duration: 20 seconds Effects: Increases hate gained from caster’s CAs(or spells/auto-attack) by x2 (or x3, depending on how much damage comes from the CAs or spells/Auto-attack). Info: Effectively gives 1000TPS. Suited as a primary “taunt” for zerkers (or, in a modified form, for SKs)Rationale: Why do all the tanks have to hold aggro through taunts? Why not have the dps tanks hold aggro through dps, just have their dps count for more aggro than normal! Other Ideas: Idea 1 (aoe) Casting Time: 1.5 seconds Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 60 seconds Duration 12 seconds Effects: Taunts all targets in area of effect for 1500 initially and every 2 seconds. Taunts for additional 1500 upon expiration. Roots Caster. Slows all enemies in area of effect by 90%. Increases hate gain effect of all knockdown abilities by x10. Info: 200 TPS On each mob, but real use is gained by using in conjunction with Kick and Shield Bash.as they will generate 6000 hate if used while this ability is running (and both can be hit twice during the duration). Rationale: And now for something completely different! Note that the x10 hate effect effects ALL knock down abilities, not just the Guardian’s. This ability needs to be called to the group/raid to be effective or dps classes with knockdowns may pull aggro. Debuff 1 Casting Time: 1 second Recovery Time: 0.5 seconds Recast Time: 120 seconds Duration: 30 seconds Effects: All deaggros used on the mob while this debuff is active will be x2 (or x3) more effective. Taunts will be ineffective.Info: This causes a brief change of pace, suddenly the onus is on the dpsers to control aggro, not the tank.Rationale: Paying attention is good! The dps classes that pay attention and deaggro in this time get to live on and breed, the ones that don't pay attention get to die! Abilities like this would mix up the monotony a bit, keep things interesting. Also, why not give dirges the ability to pull hate off a group member and throw it to the tank? (not as a transfer but as a straight ability, reduces hate of target to targets target by xxxx and distributes the hate among fighters in the group, or even pull hate onto themselves with one ability and throw (half of) it to the tank with another, they'd have to tread a line between pulling aggro to themselves (and dying) and maximising tank aggro). Why not give troubs the ability to pull hate off a group member and then redistribute it evenly amongst the rest of the group? Get rid of all +taunt, +hate, -hate, and transfers, make it all active. As a tank I want as many ways to taunt as dps classes get to dps. Lets see some real coordination in a group/raid, why not make Dispatched make taunts completely ineffective for it’s duration? How about other buffs and debuffs that can be both a help and a hindrance, and only the awareness of the group can decide which it shall be (like idea 1, a dps class hitting a high damage knock down while that ability is up could cause aggro problems).We need more debuffs that effect both aggro and deaggro, we need temp buffs that can radically change the aggro situation and force people to readjust on the fly. The whole system needs to be more involved not less involved. Lets see some more ideas for alternative taunts and aggro control mechanics, I've had enough of "click, Boom, aggro" abilities.

Mulethree

02-22-2009, 08:09 PM

Loving your posts, don't be discouraged by the bickering that shows up in the threads, or the people who chime in without having bothered to read it all. People just have to chip in their 2 cents, though I wish they would stay on topic and not bother posting at all unless they have, say, 25 cents to contribute.I like #3 especially - nah nah you can't hit me! and then hate me more every time I avoid you. One problem with the DPS-tank model of hate is that most defensive tools reduce your dps and thus hate generation. Having one that increases hate when you hunker or such is great. Amplifying others detaunts is also great.But how many taunts? Yes on test theres the big fast taunt thats rediculous (on paper at least, the taunts on test are currently acting out of whack with the spell descriptions). But When you give them 30 second recasts I worry that you'd end up replacing 3 taunts with 6. or else have nothing casteable at some crucial time. It might be interesting to have taunts that work differently but share the same recast timer - you've got to choose the best situationally rather than just mashing, but how many spellbar slots are needed?You could also alter the behavior of taunts based on your current hate position? e.g. if you are in top position its generating hate to help keep you at the top, if you aren't top its doing hate-position gains to move you closer to the top.For DPS we have tools like decimate (reduce targets defenses a lot tho briefly) to be followed and timed with the most crucial attacks as they are more certain to land, acceleration strike - best leading off a string of CA's, Another that raises melee crit% alot briefly. None of them would seem to benefit taunts, but are good ideas that could be applied to taunts. Perhaps the same skills increase aggression, or taunt crits, or reduce taunt recasts - if used smartly, or the same ideas included in pure threat-skills. So Combinations, perhaps differently situationally, that significantly trump your one-button spam macro.

Aldelbert

02-22-2009, 09:08 PM

SoE needs to hire this guy pronto. His understanding of hate, taunts, and game mechanics for Fighters just embarasses the rest of the devs.

demonwr

02-22-2009, 09:30 PM

wouldnt change the cast or recovery time on the taunts but like the idea of a taunt over time with a longer recast alows for more of a rotation in general and less spamming of a few taunts

steelbadger

02-22-2009, 09:34 PM

<cite>Mulethree wrote:</cite><blockquote>But how many taunts? Yes on test theres the big fast taunt thats rediculous (on paper at least, the taunts on test are currently acting out of whack with the spell descriptions). But When you give them 30 second recasts I worry that you'd end up replacing 3 taunts with 6. or else have nothing casteable at some crucial time. It might be interesting to have taunts that work differently but share the same recast timer - you've got to choose the best situationally rather than just mashing, but how many spellbar slots are needed?</blockquote>My intention is that all tanks would essentially keep the same number of taunts. 1 primary taunt that does about 1kTPS with a long recast (30ish seconds), a secondary taunt that does less, say 600-800TPS but with a shorter recast (10 ish seconds), a couple of AoE taunts (again a primary, more powerful taunt and a secondary, more flexible taunt). Together I'd expect them to achieve about 3.5-4kTPS on a solo mob (dependant on class definitions). Add 500-1500 auto-attack dps and 500-1500 CA/spell DPS and we're talking comparable threat numbers to what are currently achievable on live and test. In addition to the taunt over time and delayed effect taunts I've suggested I think we should keep the various emergencies as big lump taunts with position modifiers, so that they can retain their position as emergencies, instant response abilities (though at the moment they are used more as extra taunts for when the tank can't quite be bothered to maintain full aggro).Really the basic change I have made in terms of hate generation is I have reduced the effectiveness of the primary taunt to 1kTPS (from 2.5k) and increase the effectiveness of secondary and AoE taunts (from 200-300TPS to 600-1000TPS). The reason for this is based on the findings of my first thread, if a single ability is too effective. I have designated "too effective" as more effective than CA's or Auto-attack, if they are more effective then these to any significant degree then it becomes efficient to ignore auto-attack timing, and while I don't want auto-attack timing to be required to hold aggro I do want it to be an option for the player that wants to eke out the last bits of aggro.One addition I want to see though is the almost complete removal of percentage based hate effects, passive hate reductions or transfers. I want to see Coercers, Illusionists, Dirges and Troubadors replacing these abilities with active methods of aggro control (Like I described in the second to last paragraph). I also want tank aggro from straight taunts to fall short of a full out dps class. I want to see raids using little utility abilities dotted around a few classes to pull up those really high numbers. What about a debuff applied to the mob which makes all damage into a detaunt for a few seconds while increasing taunt effectiveness, and for those few seconds a smart tank would have to turn off auto-attack and stop using CAs but make sure they hit their taunts. If we can get enough of that kind of conditional abilities in I think tanking and dpsing can be so much more fun than following the prescribed recipe we worked out 2 years ago (or found posted on a forum).Really, I want fights to be too complicated for me to work out using an excel spreadsheet. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" />

steelbadger

02-22-2009, 09:42 PM

<cite>demonwrym wrote:</cite><blockquote>wouldnt change the cast or recovery time on the taunts but like the idea of a taunt over time with a longer recast alows for more of a rotation in general and less spamming of a few taunts</blockquote>Yeah, I wasn't sure about the casting times (I left recovery times the same). I think you're right 1 second cast+recovery for the classes primary focus (ie 1 second aoes for aoe tanks and 1 second single targets for singe target tanks) and 2 seconds cast+recovery for non primary focus (visa versa) simply because a standard tank weapon is 3 seconds, which can go as low as 1.3 seconds (with 125% haste) allowing for auto-attack timing with them (if one is careful and fast) but not allowing for good auto-attack timing for the non-primary focus (a 2 second cast time will impast your auto-attack dps when you have just 50% haste). I also wanted a longer cast time to again weight it in favour of timing swings. I hadn't quite thought the numbers through (1 second cast + 0.5 second recovery = 1.5 seconds <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> and that makes auto-attack timing unviable at high hastes, and that would be a bad thing).Thanks for pointing that out. Will change my OP to display most of the taunts as 0.5 cast, 0.5 recovery.

UNTILitSLEEPS

02-22-2009, 09:49 PM

your trying to get skill involved, soe trys to make it so a 6 year old can hold aggro...see where the problem lies? you want totally different thingsalso long reuse of taunts could get [censored word^^] if you are pulling fast and have to build on them because rest of your skills got gimped

UNTILitSLEEPS

02-22-2009, 09:51 PM

<cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote>a standard tank weapon is 3 seconds, which can go as low as 1.3 seconds</blockquote>thats only for warriors, crusaders have 6sec, brawlers have 2.5sec base

Danelin

02-22-2009, 11:17 PM

I have to say in general I like what you are doing, especially the 'why not hold threat through DPS' portion of things. berserkers really ought to be holding more through damage than swearing.That being said, in order to help offset the group vs single target advantage of the more AOE focused tanks, one possible option is to make AE taunt effects have a reduced effect on the mob being targetted vs increased effect for AE tanks, and vice versa for single target tanks.That way we won't have the whole 'AE tanks ARE single target tanks argument quite so much. I am fine with having to fight harder for aggro on a single target with my berserker, I already do that on live. I would love to have more tools to hold aggro without relying on buffs and transfers. Making every threat trick active is a good idea.Hell, you could even make a threat transfer that is an active ability into a primary taunt. Make the Paladin's primary taunt a reactive taunt on group members. When target casts spell/inflicts damage the caster gains threat equal to some # on their current target. (Assuming we keep to the new single/group target thing)

demonwr

02-22-2009, 11:50 PM

another thought i had was add threat to more of the CAs so you do have to maxamize a casting order to get your full threat insdead of it being on 4-6 buttons in your rotation have say 10 or so tants CAs that have treat on them

Eugam

02-23-2009, 08:21 AM

<cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote>Really, I want fights to be too complicated for me to work out using an excel spreadsheet. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Which is your good right.Lets look at my shaman. Hmm.. group preward, singel preward, debuff, debuff, debuff, group ward, single ward. maybe a cure inbetween and then some dps to finsih the mob. Rinse and repeatLets look at my warden. Hmmm.. preHoT, going behind the mob with the scouts and auto-attack for heal procs. Skip that part if you are solo healing. Again the same HoT from preHot, the same Hot, and the same HoT again. Maybe, if an AE hit a group HoT. Rinse and repeat.Lets look at my Illusionist: Hmm.. Stun, debuff, debuff, enchanting tank, dps, dps, dps, dps, leeching power from mob, casting manaflow on the person with the lowest powerpool. Sometimes the encounter requires a mezz. Rinse and repeat.See, i loved my disciple in Vanguard. I had to care for crits to be able to use certain heals. I had to wait sometimes and use my crit for the right CA in chain. But this is EQ2. This isnt rocket science. This is about having a fun time for an hour or two. This is about being able to do content even with a random group as long as someone is able to take the hits and someone able to heal the hits. Thats all, there is no rocket scienece involved. Since a lot of palyers seem to need the illusion of challange the devs have put in scripted mobs. Thats all. Really, its a simple game ment for social game play, interaction and solving quests with a group or solo. Most of the flight simulators out there require more brain then EQ2. Its an mmorpg, not rocket science.

Danelin

02-23-2009, 08:32 AM

Playing the game passibly well isn't rocket science, but maximizing your toon's effectiveness can be a lot more complicated than it sounds, especially when it comes to responding to changes in battle. Even maximizing your DPS on a 'pure' dps class can be complicated because knowing your ideal CA rotation isn't that hard, but responding to stifles, stuns, the need to joust, etc, can require a lot more reaction on your part.This is especially true if you aren't purely focused on one thing.If I am healing easily on my inquisitor, I get in and mix it up a bit. If it is still too easy, I start swapping in DPS gear for healing gear. If my tank is solid and the content is easy I might just end up in offensive stance, wearing my dps gear, and still solo healing the instance while toggling devotion on and off. But hey, fighters in offensive won't be able to tank. That's good and balanced.

Noaani

02-23-2009, 09:09 AM

As ideas for taunts, those are actually quite good. It is probably too late to implement changes as big as would be needed for them, but they are ideas that could be added to fighters as the game progresses.

UNTILitSLEEPS

02-23-2009, 09:32 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>But hey, fighters in offensive won't be able to tank. That's good and balanced.</blockquote>no, thats stupidif i roll a new tank and hit 80 having mostly crafted gear at start i should have to roll def stance to tankif i play with my main, one of the better equipped tanks ww i should not be forced in defstance to tank anything but the really hard encountersno need to use an atomic bomb to smoke some ratsits just stupid to force tanks in defstance where its not needed to survive, why should a well equipped tank not be allowed to have fun and mess around hitting some decent numbers? its like if it was made impossible for a healer to fulfill his primary roll (healing!) when he starts to dps.hitrate on high lvl raidmobs already is as low as 30-40% in defstance with the new defstance it will be like 20?why use a weapon at all then? let me dual wield shields all i need to hold aggro are my 4 tauntbuttons anywaysnext thing that comes to mind is the reuse on stances. [Removed for Content] is that for? making it even more impossible for offtanks to do dmg and only switch when needed? as a raidofftank i see myself running around stanceless on 90% of encounters where offtanking is needed and probably 100% when tanking instances.great job soeid better stop here...

steelbadger

02-23-2009, 09:44 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have to say in general I like what you are doing, especially the 'why not hold threat through DPS' portion of things. berserkers really ought to be holding more through damage than swearing.That being said, in order to help offset the group vs single target advantage of the more AOE focused tanks, one possible option is to make AE taunt effects have a reduced effect on the mob being targetted vs increased effect for AE tanks, and vice versa for single target tanks.That way we won't have the whole 'AE tanks ARE single target tanks argument quite so much. I am fine with having to fight harder for aggro on a single target with my berserker, I already do that on live. I would love to have more tools to hold aggro without relying on buffs and transfers. Making every threat trick active is a good idea.Hell, you could even make a threat transfer that is an active ability into a primary taunt. Make the Paladin's primary taunt a reactive taunt on group members. When target casts spell/inflicts damage the caster gains threat equal to some # on their current target. (Assuming we keep to the new single/group target thing)</blockquote>Yeah, I know that the line between AoE tank and single target tanks is poorly defined in my examples but any change like this would have to be extensively tested to find out weakenesses and strengths of new aggro abilities, once the bahaviour of the new abilities is known it will be easier to come up with a creative way of defining the class roles through they way they gain hate and not just by fiddling with numbers. Why not have single target tanks AoE operate in such a way that they are watered down if they effect more mobs? (For example does 2000 threat every 2 seconds to a single mob, 1500 threat every two seconds to each mob if there are two and 1000 threat every second if there are 3 or more mobs). Why work on ways to reduce the effectiveness of the AoE classes against single targets, we can also work on the single target tanks to give them abilities specially tailored for single mobs.The debuffs are another good example of an ability a single target tank could use to get an edge up on an aoe tank in a signle target situation.<cite>demonwrym wrote:</cite><blockquote>another thought i had was add threat to more of the CAs so you do have to maxamize a casting order to get your full threat insdead of it being on 4-6 buttons in your rotation have say 10 or so tants CAs that have treat on them</blockquote>I'm against this idea. Firstly the tempatation is to simply put block taunts on CAs, boring gameplay and lazy design. Secondly while I do want CAs to have an important part in holding aggro I think they should be less effective usually, but with debuffs and buffs available that make them temporarily more effective (like the ability that makes knockdown abilities high hate taunt effects).I'm thinking the following; Tanking passably should be reasonably simple; hit taunts. Tanking well should require coordination of taunts, CAs and auto-attack while tanking very well requires all that and good use of temp buffs and debuffs. Simply sticking taunt effects on CAs makes being a "good" tank too easy as auto-attack hate proportions go down with respect to everything else.<cite>UNTILitSLEEPS wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>But hey, fighters in offensive won't be able to tank. That's good and balanced.</blockquote>no, thats stupidif i roll a new tank and hit 80 having mostly crafted gear at start i should have to roll def stance to tankif i play with my main, one of the better equipped tanks ww i should not be forced in defstance to tank anything but the really hard encountersno need to use an atomic bomb to smoke some ratsits just stupid to force tanks in defstance where its not needed to survive, why should a well equipped tank not be allowed to have fun and mess around hitting some decent numbers? its like if it was made impossible for a healer to fulfill his primary roll (healing!) when he starts to dps.hitrate on high lvl raidmobs already is as low as 30-40% in defstance with the new defstance it will be like 20?why use a weapon at all then? let me dual wield shields all i need to hold aggro are my 4 tauntbuttons anywaysnext thing that comes to mind is the reuse on stances. [Removed for Content] is that for? making it even more impossible for offtanks to do dmg and only switch when needed? as a raidofftank i see myself running around stanceless on 90% of encounters where offtanking is needed and probably 100% when tanking instances.great job soeid better stop here...</blockquote>Judging by the rest of his post I assume it was an ironic remark. Really I do think that offensive stance should be a viable possibility for tanking; it should grant a slight increase in threat generation by trading off a lot of survivability. If survivability is not an issue then a tank should not be forced to spec as such. Just as a healer with little healing to do can spec for dps; a tank with little tanking to do should be able to spec for dps.

Noaani

02-23-2009, 10:02 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have to say in general I like what you are doing, especially the 'why not hold threat through DPS' portion of things. berserkers really ought to be holding more through damage than swearing.</blockquote>The commonly accepted tradeoff for DPS is survivability.How much survivability are you willing to trade away from your base class (ie, not via achievements that can be spec'd too and from) in order to gain DPS, and how do you think bezerkers as a community would react to that?

Wytie

02-23-2009, 10:34 AM

I like the general idea the OP has here. Nicely thought out and not bad of a concept.

Zagats

02-23-2009, 11:18 AM

"Dispatched make taunts completely ineffective for it’s duration."LAWLZWow- I was kinda agreeing with some of your ideas, until I read this and the other item you posted about making a mob immune to taunts as debuff.Seriously- why would any person ever cast anything that would make a mob immune to taunts. Even f it has some uber debuff attatched to it. Most groups or raids would likely rather take a little longer killing a mob then have to spend the same ammount of extra time making up the extra mob health from consume soul because half of your raid was eaten because some brigand or dirge decided it would be funny to destroy the mobs hate list.

Bruener

02-23-2009, 11:35 AM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have to say in general I like what you are doing, especially the 'why not hold threat through DPS' portion of things. berserkers really ought to be holding more through damage than swearing.</blockquote>The commonly accepted tradeoff for DPS is survivability.How much survivability are you willing to trade away from your base class (ie, not via achievements that can be spec'd too and from) in order to gain DPS, and how do you think bezerkers as a community would react to that?</blockquote>And amazingly this "common" theme is being thrown out the window by the changes to the stances on test currently. SOE forces you to tank in defensive, period. Now on test it is suirvivability/agro v dps. It is impossible to tank in offensive and yet all the survivability penalties on offensive stance are still there. Either make it so tanks can tank in either stance and surivivability being the difference between stances (which on test there definitely is that difference) or if you are going to keep it the way it is now where tanks cannot use taunts and have negative hate mod on their offensive stance you might as well take off the hit to survivability that comes on the stance as well...its not like you can tank in the stance. To top it off with the recast on stances being changed and only being able to tank in defensive than in offensive fighters better be hitting real close to T1 numbers....i mean it is offensive or defensive right?Too many penalties associated with stances and not enough choices being kept in game.Please just keep it the way Live is now, add some bonuses to defensive stance that make it a viable stance, and give a little AE hate to the ST tanks. Take out all the nerfs you are doing to classes, all that dps from fighters and chanters on raids has to be there, things take way too long to kill as of right now. T1 classes still do amazing DPS. Fighters at best are T2 dps in offensive. Enchanters are T2 dps. I mean on Live things line up better than they ever have in the past and you want to throw it all down the tubes.

steelbadger

02-23-2009, 12:03 PM

<cite>Zomgxx@Kithicor wrote:</cite><blockquote>"Dispatched make taunts completely ineffective for it’s duration."LAWLZWow- I was kinda agreeing with some of your ideas, until I read this and the other item you posted about making a mob immune to taunts as debuff.Seriously- why would any person ever cast anything that would make a mob immune to taunts. Even f it has some uber debuff attatched to it. Most groups or raids would likely rather take a little longer killing a mob then have to spend the same ammount of extra time making up the extra mob health from consume soul because half of your raid was eaten because some brigand or dirge decided it would be funny to destroy the mobs hate list.</blockquote>The whole point I'm trying to make is that aggro control doesn't have to be about "I'll get as much hate as I can so you can do as much dps as you can". Why not have debuffs that temporarily reduce taunt effectiveness? Why should debuffs be a free lunch? It far from cripples the tank as it is only a 13 second duration debuff and the tank is gaining most of his aggro through hate-over-time or reactives (or through abilities that increase the hate gain of his CA's/spells).The tank would simply have to attempt to coordinate their taunt-over-times to fall in between Dispatch calls (any already applied taunts would be unaffected by taunt reductions of this type) and then they could use things like the temp buffs that increase hate from CAs and auto-attack during dispatch calls to further maximise hate. So it seems that you took that suggestion out of context from the rest of the post. Yes, such a disadvantage on Dispatch would be crippling under current mechanics, but less so if the mechanics I'm trying to propose where implemented, and would actually give the tank an advantage if they where on the ball. (Dispatched would greatly increase the effectiveness of their CAs so if it where combined with a temp buff that increases the hate gain of your CAs you would gain a considerable amount of hate and lose none because a well prepared tank would have their taunts already applied on the mob when Dispatched went in.

Motzi

02-23-2009, 12:35 PM

<cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote>The tank would simply have to attempt to coordinate their taunt-over-times to fall in between Dispatch calls (any already applied taunts would be unaffected by taunt reductions of this type) and then they could use things like the temp buffs that increase hate from CAs and auto-attack during dispatch calls to further maximise hate. So it seems that you took that suggestion out of context from the rest of the post. Yes, such a disadvantage on Dispatch would be crippling under current mechanics, but less so if the mechanics I'm trying to propose where implemented, and would actually give the tank an advantage if they where on the ball. (Dispatched would greatly increase the effectiveness of their CAs so if it where combined with a temp buff that increases the hate gain of your CAs you would gain a considerable amount of hate and lose none because a well prepared tank would have their taunts already applied on the mob when Dispatched went in.</blockquote>Considerably bad idea. We tend to raid with 2-3 brigs, dispatch making taunts ineffective isn't a great winner imo. Other than that, changing taunts to ToTs is something I had already suggested and continue to support as a needed change.The dispatch suggestion would be akin to a swash using a short term buff that makes your healers cure's not work. No class should be able to prevent the core competency of another to work.If they switch to ToTs, and fix the stances to be survivability vs dps, I think we might have a winner on the fighter revamp.However, I don't see them changing anything before it goes live.

Zagats

02-23-2009, 12:49 PM

steel-I understand the concept you are promoting. However, in real live application it would fail in a number of ways, one of which was pointed out in the post above me. If you are running2+ brigs, you would not have time to taunt unless your brigs suck and aren't coordinating thier debuffs. At any rate, some of the idea's you have are decent, but I have to agree that no class should be able to prevent another from doing it's job. Ever. There is a reason this type of effect is currently used in game as a severe detrimental, i.e. Avatar of Justice, Pentaclyps.I'm all about the threat over times, I think a good mix of threat over times, with a few big taunts and several smaller taunts strategically placed onto ca's could be enough to give fighters the ability to figure out the best casting order to maximize hate. Much in the same way it is done currently to maximize dps. I think the thing that would be good to do hre is, make the stances more reliant on dmg (incoming) as has been suggested. If you want to be in off stance, you will take a beating, defensive= more survivability as the name of the stance implies. But, each stance must have trade offs.I'm personally ok with changing from holding agro through dps, to holding it using taunts. But, it must be set up similarly in order for it to work. Additionally, with taunts being spells, how will this effect resistability. I know it is terrible on live right now as far as having mobs resist your taunts. If we are to be reliant on taunts for holding agro, maybe they need to be given thier own catagory. i.e. spells/ca's/taunts with different resist rates for each.

Motzi

02-23-2009, 01:04 PM

<cite>Zomgxx@Kithicor wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm personally ok with changing from holding agro through dps, to holding it using taunts. But, it must be set up similarly in order for it to work. Additionally, with taunts being spells, how will this effect resistability. I know it is terrible on live right now as far as having mobs resist your taunts. If we are to be reliant on taunts for holding agro, maybe they need to be given thier own catagory. i.e. spells/ca's/taunts with different resist rates for each.</blockquote>Resistability has been solved on test. With max aggression, your taunts are virtually unresistable. In fact, you don't even need to max it to reach unresistable taunts. They changed how the aggression check works, and if you have enough points over the con of the mob, your taunts are unresistable.

Ashek

02-23-2009, 01:04 PM

I personally believe for the stances, I have no reason in a right mind they shouldn't give say (example: defensive stance -15% damage recieved and -15% damage done) and (example: offensive stance +15% damage done and +15% damage recieved)..Maybe not particuarly those numbers exactly but something maybe like this? And for certain classes.. Say guardian is 20% less damage recieved compared to a SK/Pally/Zerker at 15% less recieved and brawlers 10% less recieved.. Making some noticeable difference between the classes but atleast making the stances viable to tank in either.And vice versa for the damage done 15% for guardians 20% for SK/pally/zerker and 25% for brawlers

Elanjar

02-23-2009, 01:42 PM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have to say in general I like what you are doing, especially the 'why not hold threat through DPS' portion of things. berserkers really ought to be holding more through damage than swearing.</blockquote>The commonly accepted tradeoff for DPS is survivability.How much survivability are you willing to trade away from your base class (ie, not via achievements that can be spec'd too and from) in order to gain DPS, and how do you think bezerkers as a community would react to that?</blockquote>We already pay survivability on live. The changes on test actually are the complete opposite from this...1- to hold agro we pretty much have to be in offensive2- we have less defensive/agro management buffs/temps than other tanks, but more dps buffs__________________________________________________To the OP:I like your new ideas for taunts, and I've always though taunts over time would be good. However I dont want all my taunts on a 30s timer. It doesnt allow for fast pulling of a zone especially if you are trying to chain pull. Also I think you made the AE hate taunts to weak. You stated for almost all of them that they would be good for short fights and I find that most AE fights take significantly longer than a ST fight unless you have a lock.I think if tanks had a taunt over time added to our current aresenal then it would be good.Overall I think a better answer to the primary issue (taunts are too important on test), would just be to increase the amount of hate generated through dps again. They overly nerfed that aspect of the fighter (a common SOE trend), and made us too taunt dependent. Just bring it back a little. In all honesty fighter agro would be fine if they just implemented increased taunt amounts, revamped defensive stances (w/ hate gain so they are useable), CA's with taunts (more ae tools for ST tanks), taunt crit etc..., and got rid of the transfers. They dont need the nerf to o-stance, or the recast time on stances, or the dps nerf in defensive.Personally I'd like to seeNew O-stance: only change from live is extra 5% damage receivedNew D-stance: -0.5 damage mult, +hate gain, taunt amount, NO -skills penalty since hate gain is dependent on hitting the mobgive every tank a new taunt over time

Ventisly

02-23-2009, 02:19 PM

Some good ideas but a few things that stuck out as possible problems:If we are going to try to remain true to the spirit of the fighter changes then the ST vs AOE tank concept must still be considered. With such long recast timers a single target tank won't be able to effectively lay down an even amount of hate by tabbing through an encounter as they can now with the shorter recast taunts on test.There's a few changes already on test that increase the challenges of ST tanks on encounters. The first being that hate does not bleed across the encounter whenever you hit a mob in the encounter (something that is always quoted as being a benefit to AOE dps such as warlocks but will actually hurt AOE aggro control for ST tanks more IMO). The second being AOE hate transfer from classes such as swashys is going away. I'm certainly willing to work harder to maintain AOE aggro control as a guard, but with taunts that are on a 30s recast my toolbox is a lot more limited to manage multiple adds.Another problem to consider is that with so many taunt over time (TOT) options, it's entirely possible for a tank in a low to moderate DPSy group to cast TOT1, TOT2, TOT3, /gsay AFK grabbing another beer and still maintain aggro. Certainly not a style I would use but it could be perceived as another "easy-mode amends".Lastly, one of the things I really enjoy about playing a tank is managing the chaos of the battlefield. My focus is on the positioning of the mob, who's got aggro, scanning around for adds, watching positioning of my group mates and many other things that are not numbers or icons on the screen. Too many long recast TOTs and too much focus on maintained spells seems more like a healer/caster playstyle and less like the traditional tank style.Oh, and making dispatch have a taunt immunity component, bad idea. With mem-wipes and all the other craziness going on during encounters, the last thing you want to do is take away options from the tank. Dispatch in the suggested form would be forbidden in my groups/raids except for the simplest of trash clearing.

Obadiah

02-23-2009, 02:24 PM

<cite>Gaktar@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>There's a few changes already on test that increase the challenges of ST tanks on encounters. The first being that hate does not bleed across the encounter whenever you hit a mob in the encounter (something that is always quoted as being a benefit to AOE dps such as warlocks but will actually hurt AOE aggro control for ST tanks more IMO). The second being AOE hate transfer from classes such as swashys is going away. I'm certainly willing to work harder to maintain AOE aggro control as a guard, but with taunts that are on a 30s recast my toolbox is a lot more limited to manage multiple adds.</blockquote>Since you now have roughly the same TPS from taunts and CAs w/ Taunts on Test as AE tanks, I'm guessing you should probably be OK.

Ventisly

02-23-2009, 02:32 PM

One idea I've had floating around in my head for the tank changes is that instead of focusing on taunts and how to get them balanced with our DPS for enough hate generation to maintain aggro why not just generate more hate with the DPS that we do. Here's the stances (of course the actual percentages could be adjusted):Def stance: +survivability, -DPS, all damage generates 300% hateOff stance: -survivability, +DPS, all damage generates 200% hateYou still give the tanks some proc based hate unique to the classes, give them some emergency aggro tools to handle unexpected chaos but otherwise they will be focused on maintaining aggro through DPS while not having to overshadow the DPSer's actual numbers.This could also automatically handles AOE vs ST tanks since AOE tanks should generate more AOE damage and ST tanks would generate more ST damage.

Ventisly

02-23-2009, 02:33 PM

<cite>Kurgan@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaktar@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>There's a few changes already on test that increase the challenges of ST tanks on encounters. The first being that hate does not bleed across the encounter whenever you hit a mob in the encounter (something that is always quoted as being a benefit to AOE dps such as warlocks but will actually hurt AOE aggro control for ST tanks more IMO). The second being AOE hate transfer from classes such as swashys is going away. I'm certainly willing to work harder to maintain AOE aggro control as a guard, but with taunts that are on a 30s recast my toolbox is a lot more limited to manage multiple adds.</blockquote>Since you now have roughly the same TPS from taunts and CAs w/ Taunts on Test as AE tanks, I'm guessing you should probably be OK.</blockquote>Yea, with the way things are on test now I'm not concerned. I'll need to scramble more for AOE aggro control but that's the way it should be. I was just trying to highlight that with longer recast timers on taunts I will lose this ability.

steelbadger

02-23-2009, 03:33 PM

<cite>Motzi@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote>The tank would simply have to attempt to coordinate their taunt-over-times to fall in between Dispatch calls (any already applied taunts would be unaffected by taunt reductions of this type) and then they could use things like the temp buffs that increase hate from CAs and auto-attack during dispatch calls to further maximise hate. So it seems that you took that suggestion out of context from the rest of the post. Yes, such a disadvantage on Dispatch would be crippling under current mechanics, but less so if the mechanics I'm trying to propose where implemented, and would actually give the tank an advantage if they where on the ball. (Dispatched would greatly increase the effectiveness of their CAs so if it where combined with a temp buff that increases the hate gain of your CAs you would gain a considerable amount of hate and lose none because a well prepared tank would have their taunts already applied on the mob when Dispatched went in.</blockquote>Considerably bad idea. We tend to raid with 2-3 brigs, dispatch making taunts ineffective isn't a great winner imo. Other than that, changing taunts to ToTs is something I had already suggested and continue to support as a needed change.The dispatch suggestion would be akin to a swash using a short term buff that makes your healers cure's not work. No class should be able to prevent the core competency of another to work.If they switch to ToTs, and fix the stances to be survivability vs dps, I think we might have a winner on the fighter revamp.However, I don't see them changing anything before it goes live.</blockquote>A good point well made, I hadn't fully considered the implications of multiple brigs in a raid, though I still would like to see temp buffs/debuffs of this type. Possibly only as Gravitas type spells though (applied to the tank alone, increases hate from dmg and decreases hate from taunts with an attached immunity timer).<cite>Gaktar@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>There's a few changes already on test that increase the challenges of ST tanks on encounters. The first being that hate does not bleed across the encounter whenever you hit a mob in the encounter (something that is always quoted as being a benefit to AOE dps such as warlocks but will actually hurt AOE aggro control for ST tanks more IMO). The second being AOE hate transfer from classes such as swashys is going away. I'm certainly willing to work harder to maintain AOE aggro control as a guard, but with taunts that are on a 30s recast my toolbox is a lot more limited to manage multiple adds.</blockquote>This is also a good point, I did notice this and tried to help the situation by making the secondary taunt faster recasting. A possibility is a very fast recast taunt that applies an immunity timer to the mob (so you can apply it to multiple mobs easyily, but cannot be used to hold massive single target aggro).I should perhaps also point out that most of the numbers where kind of built around the Guardian class (the tank class I know most about) so the taunts and aoe quantities are designed for a lower aggro single target tank. Obviously Shadowknights, Zerkers and Bruisers can have more imaginative AoE's the purpose of the post was more to be a demonstration of possibilities rather than a full description of a fully balanced set of patch notes <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Motzi

02-23-2009, 03:39 PM

<cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Motzi@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>The dispatch suggestion would be akin to a swash using a short term buff that makes your healers cure's not work. No class should be able to prevent the core competency of another to work.</blockquote>A good point well made, I hadn't fully considered the implications of multiple brigs in a raid, though I still would like to see temp buffs/debuffs of this type. Possibly only as Gravitas type spells though (applied to the tank alone, increases hate from dmg and decreases hate from taunts with an attached immunity timer).</blockquote>I do like the notion of this type of situational / reaction elements as it provides paths to player 'skill' other than timing auto attacks. If we can find ways to implement it without classes stepping on each other too negatively, I think it would be a winner.It goes back to a whole HO revamp post I've been waiting to make. I figure with everything else up in the air, its not a good time to start that discusion yet.

Thunderthyze

02-24-2009, 05:23 AM

LOL at the total inactivity of red names in this thread. Maybe you shouldn't have mentioned Excel speadsheets <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />

Eugam

02-24-2009, 06:07 AM

<cite>Holymoly@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>LOL at the total inactivity of red names in this thread. Maybe you shouldn't have mentioned Excel speadsheets <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>ROFL, as part of the EQ2 community i find the thread amusing/partly interessting. In privacy i think all those tanks have a testosterone problem <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />This is mmo, a game, part of the entertainment industry. If you wanna win a cup go and find any sport that fits you and play in any league you enjoy <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> There you can min-max all your live. You have real risc vs. reward conditions and you can, depending on sport, get hurt.Here all is pixels. No risc, no reward, no min and no max. Either its entertaining or not. Thats all devs should care about <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Noaani

02-24-2009, 06:08 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>And amazingly this "common" theme is being thrown out the window by the changes to the stances on test currently. SOE forces you to tank in defensive, period.</blockquote>Not sure if its ironic or intended, but I do recall bezerkers complaining about not being able to tank raid mobs as well as a guard due to them needing to be in off stance to hold aggro.Won't have that issue any more, will we?

Eugam

02-24-2009, 06:29 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Playing the game passibly well isn't rocket science, but maximizing your toon's effectiveness can be a lot more complicated than it sounds, especially when it comes to responding to changes in battle. Even maximizing your DPS on a 'pure' dps class can be complicated because knowing your ideal CA rotation isn't that hard, but responding to stifles, stuns, the need to joust, etc, can require a lot more reaction on your part.This is especially true if you aren't purely focused on one thing.If I am healing easily on my inquisitor, I get in and mix it up a bit. If it is still too easy, I start swapping in DPS gear for healing gear. If my tank is solid and the content is easy I might just end up in offensive stance, wearing my dps gear, and still solo healing the instance while toggling devotion on and off. But hey, fighters in offensive won't be able to tank. That's good and balanced.</blockquote>You know what ? I am able to tank the easy single target heroic trash as warden in melee gear <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Linked heroic trash with the mystic in shard armour triggering damage. I am quite sure your inquis can do the same. If the plate/shield mitigated tank in off stance cant handle that something is wrong with him <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />BUT, on harder stuff i can do only one thing and thats healing. I really have to care and buy me the time for any dps spells. But.. oh.. the heroes, the migthy tank wants to be able to do it all at once while slaving the dirges and healers to work for THEM. Nope Sir, you go def stance and taunt or you die because i ll forget how to push a heal button. Thats how we dealt with tanks in 2005 and 2006 who didnt bother about others and wanted to be the hero while others worked their a** of. LOL, just repeating history. Tanks nowadays arent different to all tanks in history <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Where do you think the "proverb" FFS HEAL ME comes from ? <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

steelbadger

02-24-2009, 06:42 AM

<cite>Eugam wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Holymoly@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>LOL at the total inactivity of red names in this thread. Maybe you shouldn't have mentioned Excel speadsheets <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>ROFL, as part of the EQ2 community i find the thread amusing/partly interessting. In privacy i think all those tanks have a testosterone problem <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" />This is mmo, a game, part of the entertainment industry. If you wanna win a cup go and find any sport that fits you and play in any league you enjoy <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> There you can min-max all your live. You have real risc vs. reward conditions and you can, depending on sport, get hurt.Here all is pixels. No risc, no reward, no min and no max. Either its entertaining or not. Thats all devs should care about <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I like maths. One night I couldn't get to sleep because I wanted to work out the speed a circular portion of space ship would have to spin to simulate earth gravity (Think 2001 a space odyssey). In terms of variables, not earth absolutes (so that it was usable by other alien races one assumes). I then fell asleep and completely forgot what I'd come up with <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />I rather if you didn't tell me how I should be amusing myself (well, possibly it would be acceptable if I was torturing kittens for fun, but doing maths because I feel like it is not really all that similar to torturing animals because I feel like it).

Noaani

02-24-2009, 06:53 AM

<cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote>I rather if you didn't tell me how I should be amusing myself (well, possibly it would be acceptable if I was torturing kittens for fun, but doing maths because I feel like it is not really all that similar to torturing animals because I feel like it).</blockquote>That depends, are you calculating your math out loud, and are kittens within earshot?If so, I think you are torturing kittens as a pass time <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" />

Eugam

02-24-2009, 06:57 AM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>And amazingly this "common" theme is being thrown out the window by the changes to the stances on test currently. SOE forces you to tank in defensive, period.</blockquote>Not sure if its ironic or intended, but I do recall bezerkers complaining about not being able to tank raid mobs as well as a guard due to them needing to be in off stance to hold aggro.Won't have that issue any more, will we?</blockquote>Any fighter class who cares for its duties is able to tank well. All classes have their strong and weak spots and every class has to work to overcome their weaknesses. Ofc. there are some encounters that are very hard for some fighters.The complainers want to jump in with a huge two-hander sword and dps. They dont care for their role, they dont care for the history of EQ2 tanks, they only care for themsleves. Summoners cant use tank pets to dps and i bet they would love it currently if they could. Scouts should be in off stance to dps, healers should be in heal stance to heal.Part of the problem are the persistent instances. Previously it was one of the tanks biggest duties to choose the right path through the instance and to pull the best way possible. They also had to care to tank in the right spot. All those duties are gone for the most part. This was their key role, taking hits and holding aggro was almost secondary. Without pull and save spot skill many tanks probably feel underchallanged. But giving them infinite freedom isnt the answer.

Danelin

02-24-2009, 07:24 AM

<cite>UNTILitSLEEPS wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>But hey, fighters in offensive won't be able to tank. That's good and balanced.</blockquote>no, thats stupid</blockquote>Sorry, I should have put the big flat sarcasm flag on there and I didn't

Danelin

02-24-2009, 07:28 AM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have to say in general I like what you are doing, especially the 'why not hold threat through DPS' portion of things. berserkers really ought to be holding more through damage than swearing.</blockquote>The commonly accepted tradeoff for DPS is survivability.How much survivability are you willing to trade away from your base class (ie, not via achievements that can be spec'd too and from) in order to gain DPS, and how do you think bezerkers as a community would react to that?</blockquote>1 - You ignored the majority of the interaction to pick on one line out of context and then try to turn it into a 'YOU'RE WRONG HAR HAR' This is quite regular for you, and idiotic. Knock it off.2 - Guardian isn't my base class. Warrior is. I already have a lot less survivability than Guardians do at core. Due to maximizing gear being in game as it is, this ceases to be an issue at some point in the gear curve far, far above me. Guardians have more avoidance, more health, and typically more mitigation in comperable gear. They get better defensive skills and AA. I already MADE the tradeoff for damage.3 - I said hold MORE through damage than screaming. Seeing as this was made in response to a comment that perhaps berserkers should get a taunt that results in an increase to the threat generated by our damage for a short period of time, that damage output could be pretty [Removed for Content] close to baseline and still be effective.Not that you will bother to read this, since it is more than 3 lines it is clearly a WALL OF TEXT. Stop shilling and go back to dual boxing your guardian/templar through moors.

Thunderthyze

02-24-2009, 07:45 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Playing the game passibly well isn't rocket science</blockquote>.....which is good as most players aren't rocket scientists, honestly.

Danelin

02-24-2009, 07:46 AM

<cite>Eugam wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>You know what ? I am able to tank the easy single target heroic trash as warden in melee gear <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> Linked heroic trash with the mystic in shard armour triggering damage. I am quite sure your inquis can do the same. If the plate/shield mitigated tank in off stance cant handle that something is wrong with him <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" />BUT, on harder stuff i can do only one thing and thats healing. I really have to care and buy me the time for any dps spells. But.. oh.. the heroes, the migthy tank wants to be able to do it all at once while slaving the dirges and healers to work for THEM. Nope Sir, you go def stance and taunt or you die because i ll forget how to push a heal button. Thats how we dealt with tanks in 2005 and 2006 who didnt bother about others and wanted to be the hero while others worked their a** of. LOL, just repeating history. Tanks nowadays arent different to all tanks in history <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> Where do you think the "proverb" FFS HEAL ME comes from ? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" /></blockquote></blockquote>You don't get it. I don't want to be standing in offensive stance for the gnarliest fights. I want defensive stance to be useful. I want defensive stance to have a purpose, and fulfill that purpose when it is needed. I want to be able to stand in offensive stance for all the same content YOU JUST MENTIONED, but due to the percentage hate reduction and deactivation of taunts in offensive on test, that will become impossible unless I am the only one in the group capable of putting on any kind of DPS numbers.My inquisitor will quite probably be better at offensive tanking than my berserker if these changes go in as is, she has better gear than my berserker and parses higher. Hell, I could probably even use some of the punishments tree to build my own aggro up further.I don't want to be tanking and t1 dpsing at the same time.I am a berserker, I trade survivability for dps vs other tanks so this is what I want -When I am fighting against easy content, I expect to be standing in offensive and holding aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing low T2 DPS when this is happening, below rogues and above bards and enchanters, and well above priests.When I am fighting against difficult content, I expect to be standing in defensive, and be able to hold aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing high T3 dps when this is happening, below bards and enchanters, and roughly on par with an offensive priest.I should be hitting for more than a guardian or Paladin, about equal with a SK depending on if the mob is more melee or magic resistant, and doing less damage than a brawler, if stances are the same.Once again my response was taken out of the context of the thread. I was merely stating that I liked his comment about 'why not get some aggro through dps' and making taunts that did stuff like increase your DPS multiplier to aggro temporarily.

Encantador

02-24-2009, 09:12 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>.....I don't want to be tanking and t1 dpsing at the same time.I am a berserker, I trade survivability for dps vs other tanks so this is what I want -When I am fighting against easy content, I expect to be standing in offensive and holding aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing low T2 DPS when this is happening, below rogues and above bards and enchanters, and well above priests.When I am fighting against difficult content, I expect to be standing in defensive, and be able to hold aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing high T3 dps when this is happening, below bards and enchanters, and roughly on par with an offensive priest.I should be hitting for more than a guardian or Paladin, about equal with a SK depending on if the mob is more melee or magic resistant, and doing less damage than a brawler, if stances are the same.</blockquote>Can I just point out the inconsistancy here ... Above enchanters doing low T2 DPS in offensive and below enchanters doing high T3 DPS in defensive. Eh? so what are enchanters doing ? T2 and a half DPS ? I doubt we will agree on the damage you should do relative to other classes but surely you can see you are not being realistic. On your way of looking at things the best you could hope for is low T3 or T4 DPS when in defensive.

Danelin

02-24-2009, 11:33 AM

<cite>Encantador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>.....I don't want to be tanking and t1 dpsing at the same time.I am a berserker, I trade survivability for dps vs other tanks so this is what I want -When I am fighting against easy content, I expect to be standing in offensive and holding aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing low T2 DPS when this is happening, below rogues and above bards and enchanters, and well above priests.When I am fighting against difficult content, I expect to be standing in defensive, and be able to hold aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing high T3 dps when this is happening, below bards and enchanters, and roughly on par with an offensive priest.I should be hitting for more than a guardian or Paladin, about equal with a SK depending on if the mob is more melee or magic resistant, and doing less damage than a brawler, if stances are the same.</blockquote>Can I just point out the inconsistancy here ... Above enchanters doing low T2 DPS in offensive and below enchanters doing high T3 DPS in defensive. Eh? so what are enchanters doing ? T2 and a half DPS ? I doubt we will agree on the damage you should do relative to other classes but surely you can see you are not being realistic. On your way of looking at things the best you could hope for is low T3 or T4 DPS when in defensive.</blockquote>Generally speaking I think of the utility classes as sitting right at the top of T3. Previously they were down around the bottom of T3, barely above priests, which was too low for their archetype apparently. You will note I said 'high tier 3' not 'The top of tier 3". Therefore being low T2 would be above them, and high t3 could still be below them.Not inconsistent, but I can see how it would be unclear.

Bruener

02-24-2009, 12:01 PM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Encantador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>.....I don't want to be tanking and t1 dpsing at the same time.I am a berserker, I trade survivability for dps vs other tanks so this is what I want -When I am fighting against easy content, I expect to be standing in offensive and holding aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing low T2 DPS when this is happening, below rogues and above bards and enchanters, and well above priests.When I am fighting against difficult content, I expect to be standing in defensive, and be able to hold aggro through my own taunts and DPS. I don't want to have to have a hate transfer or increaser to do this. I should be doing high T3 dps when this is happening, below bards and enchanters, and roughly on par with an offensive priest.I should be hitting for more than a guardian or Paladin, about equal with a SK depending on if the mob is more melee or magic resistant, and doing less damage than a brawler, if stances are the same.</blockquote>Can I just point out the inconsistancy here ... Above enchanters doing low T2 DPS in offensive and below enchanters doing high T3 DPS in defensive. Eh? so what are enchanters doing ? T2 and a half DPS ? I doubt we will agree on the damage you should do relative to other classes but surely you can see you are not being realistic. On your way of looking at things the best you could hope for is low T3 or T4 DPS when in defensive.</blockquote>Generally speaking I think of the utility classes as sitting right at the top of T3. Previously they were down around the bottom of T3, barely above priests, which was too low for their archetype apparently. You will note I said 'high tier 3' not 'The top of tier 3". Therefore being low T2 would be above them, and high t3 could still be below them.Not inconsistent, but I can see how it would be unclear.</blockquote>Lol at Utility classes being T3 dps. Yes, this is probably how it SHOULD be, but this is not how it is at all. Enchanters are closer to T1 dps more than anything else, and bards are mediocre T2 dps. Healers sit in T3.And now fighters in defensive will be low-mid T3 dps, and in offensive lucky to be low T2 dps. And unlike all those other classes that have more than 1 role, fighters will only be able to be either or. No such thing as tanking and dps'ing.

Danelin

02-24-2009, 12:05 PM

Well, I was listing where I thought things ought to be, I am well aware of how out of line with that definition current enchanter and Bard DPS are.

Eugam

02-25-2009, 06:36 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite> </cite>You don't get it. I don't want to be standing in offensive stance for the gnarliest fights. I want defensive stance to be useful. I want defensive stance to have a purpose, and fulfill that purpose when it is needed. I want to be able to stand in offensive stance for all the same content YOU JUST MENTIONED, but due to the percentage hate reduction and deactivation of taunts in offensive on test, that will become impossible unless I am the only one in the group capable of putting on any kind of DPS numbers.Once again my response was taken out of the context of the thread. I was merely stating that I liked his comment about 'why not get some aggro through dps' and making taunts that did stuff like increase your DPS multiplier to aggro temporarily.</blockquote>What hate reduction ? I ll have to log on test tonight and look at it. Last time i looked you got accounted for all damage you do in off.Noone said you wont need to use CA's. I do think you will need a full rotation to tank successful. But in def stance. On easy encounters you will probably rotate more through CA then taunts and on harder more through tanunts and on very hard ones on all to maximize hate.DPS in off stance is a different animal. if you think the zerker is underpowered in off then make a thread about it. I am probably willing to accept it/support it. I dont know where a dpsing zerker stands atm tbh.As healer i want my tank in def, always without any exception. I want him using def itemization. I never drop attention unless the encounter is dead. I change to full heal itemization and spec when grouping. I want him to be as serious as i am. Currently i am able to peel with heals on linked encounters <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> and i am not done with my itemization yet, there is still potential left. I want tanks to be solid enough and taunting enough so my heals cant peel. I am not talking about a peel on pull, i am talking about a peel mid-fight. Even though heals are only .5 hate it requires a lot more heals in off stance. Add an AE and a scout/mage peeling and i am close to tank with heal hate <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Motzi

02-25-2009, 12:22 PM

<cite>Eugam wrote:</cite><blockquote>As healer i want my tank in def, always without any exception. I want him using def itemization. I never drop attention unless the encounter is dead. I change to full heal itemization and spec when grouping. I want him to be as serious as i am. Currently i am able to peel with heals on linked encounters <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> and i am not done with my itemization yet, there is still potential left. I want tanks to be solid enough and taunting enough so my heals cant peel. I am not talking about a peel on pull, i am talking about a peel mid-fight. Even though heals are only .5 hate it requires a lot more heals in off stance. Add an AE and a scout/mage peeling and i am close to tank with heal hate <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Then you sir, i dont' much care to tank for. Cause with the exception of the harder instances, darn near every trash mob can be killed with no healer with a tank in defensive stance and 4 dps, and honestly some nameds as well.. The mobs just don't hit hard enough and often enough vs a well geared tank to require defensive stance unless in one of the harder instances.By example, did hollow tower last night in offensive stance, no shield using JoA being solo healed by a templar who also had to cover 2 dps using choker. Said templar brought his offensive spec as well and averaged 2.1k ZW and kept me and the group healed while able to dps.Had I chosen to go defensive, put a shield on and played alpha defensive tank role as you suggest, my dps would have dropped 2-2.5k and his might have gone up 500. If this was on test, my dps would have gone from 5.5k to 1.5k and taunt spam in order to hold aggro from the 4 dps in group and the healer could have forgotten about healing at all except for a preheal and a couple heals on the harder names.Playing on test turned a fun group into a borring chore for me (the tank). The expereince of the DPS classes would have been unchanged, and the healer would have gone from an easy zone to heal to a trivial zone.The real problem is, with the test model, I would have /ragequit my tank and the 6 of us would instead be crafting for the night while the group was looking for a tank.

Obadiah

03-18-2009, 11:46 AM

<div>The original post here had some great ideas. Hopefully some of these concepts can be considered now. I also hope that not everything in the revamp is totally scrapped. When it's redone, there were things that I thought were quite well done and it would be nice to see some of them return. For example:</div><div></div><div>Buff consolidation: Not necessarily the items going into the stances, but generic buffs like Rouse and the Group Zerk ... why not, I guess? Honestly I thought the Berserk proc being higher in Offensive stance and lower in Defensive made a lot of sense as well but other classes seemed to totally hate this entire concept. Oh well. The only thing I didn't like about being "forced" into Defensive stance to tank is that Berserk procs substantially less since you miss more and are missed more. IMO that's always been another reason Zerks in particular tank in Offensive. If you are more likely to be Berserk ... you are more likely to be taking 50% damage when Adrenaline is up. So it's better defensively to be in Offensive stance. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></div> <div> </div> <div>Aggression being made worthwhile. Although it hurts my class, having the lowest and all that. It's still good to make it worthwhile. Adding more Aggression on our set gear than on Guardians compensated for about half of the difference. I think though, that "unresistable if 10% over the mob" is too low a threshhold. That's 467-468 for level 85 mobs and as a Berserker I'm already 430 self-buffed with just 3 pieces of gear adding it. 20% maybe?</div> <div> </div> <div>Taunt crits. Large taunt amounts. Although, if you did nothing at all but change the taunt amounts to what they were for all Fighters on Test, they still wouldn't account for a high enough percentage of your hate. </div> <div> </div> <div>For Zerks, I think putting our biggest taunt on Bloodshower was a very clever way of making us "less efficient" on ST mobs yet giving us tools to use. It essentially forced us into using that ability even on singles. Reducing the high-end of the damage range on it by 70% though ... that was the lamest change anyone has ever made to anything in the history of MMOs. (Hyperbole)</div> <div> </div> <div>The one good thing about the -0.4/-0.5 melee multiplier was that it suddenly made more sense to use IA or Feral or other ST type damage abilities on someone other than the tank. Don't get me wrong, I love that stuff. It turns me on. But IMO in order to maximize output it should make more sense to buff the DPS of the, uh, DPS. I don't know how else you accomplish that in Defensive Stance. Anything else you nerf - DPS, Haste, Melee Skills - can be buffed away. </div> <div> </div> <div> <div>We were among the most balanced DPS vs Taunt on Test because our taunts were substantially lower than anyone else's. The balance we had seems like a good starting point to use when doing the math on whatever change is made now. An 11K taunt every 4.5 seconds like the ST tanks ... that's not balance.</div> <div> </div> <div>-Hate gain in Offensive Stance. Yeah, taunts should still taunt in some way shape or form. But if I DON'T want aggro ... well on Live I have nothing except my Gnomish racial ability to use asa a deaggro. Personally even with no transfers on me and no +Hate buffs I have to hold back when on my DPS when I'm the OT. Always have. Anything to allow me to "release the hounds" would be hot. I was actually drooling a bit when taunts were actually DEtaunts in Offensive at first, giving us the best deaggros in the game. Bit screwy, that.</div><div></div></div> <div>As far as new directions go, the largest complaint I saw from people was about choice. What they generally meant was the choice of popping into Offensive Stance as opposed to fighting EVERYthing in a defensive stance that had been severely gimped. But I think also being forced to choose before all or at least some button clicks or hotkey depression "Do I want to taunt or do I want to DPS" in some way would be a great thing. I can taunt for 10,000 or I can hit for 3,000 ... but if I do one or the other I'm not going to be able to do the other for several seconds. For example I could hit Trespass ... or I could hit Mock ... but they share a timer. Anyone being a "Taunt Monkey" or "Taunt Bot" then - despite being high on the aggrometer - may hold aggro like a champ, but would suck. </div> <div> </div> <div>Steelbadger had some great ideas in this thread as well, particularly anything making it more active rather than passive. </div>

Kordran

03-18-2009, 12:29 PM

<cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote>Really, I want fights to be too complicated for me to work out using an excel spreadsheet. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>That's a problem, however. First, it makes things more complicated for casual players and, secondly, it can make things a lot more annoying on raids. The MT and MA in a raid can have a lot of things going on already; adding yet more "stand on your head, while patting your stomach and recite the alphabet backwards" mechanics to tanking is not something that is going to make things more fun in the long-term. We already get more than enough of this from the encounter scripts themselves.There has to be a middle ground between being a taunt monkey and "fights to complicated to work out on a spreadsheet" that could address the core design goals without being a nuisance.

Elanjar

03-18-2009, 12:44 PM

I know this has nothing to do with the OP, but an idea I had for taunts would be something along the lines of a "double up" or "fatal followup".If you had enough taunts on CA's for example then you could cast this ability and then if you successfully landed a combination of those CA/taunts and regular taunts then it would follow up with another large taunt or taunt over time.Other things it could follow up with could be temporary buffs (~15sec) that add effects like a taunt on every successful attack, passive aoe taunt every Xsec, etc etc

Gungo

03-18-2009, 02:03 PM

I think you have a good starting point for threat over time. And i like the move away from spam taunting into more threat per second.But you also need to incorporate snap agro tools into the fighters aresenal. for single target tanks large single target positional increases rescue type taunts 5 positions 2min recastfor aoe tanks low positional faster recasting something like 1 hate position and a large direct taunt every 45-60 secs.

Bookbunny

03-18-2009, 02:09 PM

ST vs. AE tank idea - so glad it is dead. Tank diversity should not be based on WHAT they can tank, but on HOW they can tank.The model for this diversity is already in place with the healer archetypes, let's use this model and apply it to fighters. Every healer is able to heal in every fight. They all have direct healing spells, then the diversity comes in with druids/regens, shamans/wards and clerics/vitaes. Every fighter should be able to tank in every fight. They should all have basic taunt spells, then the diversity comes in with Warrior/Crusader/Brawler specific aggro management styles.Simply allow all fighters their basic taunts, then change how they each maintain aggro to make them different, FUN, and still useful in ALL content the game offers. An example: Warriors use massive threat increases to maintain aggro (taunting as we now know it); Crusaders use hate transfers and taunts over time to manipulate the hate ladder; Brawlers could get abilities that detaunt for their groupmates, or disperse the group's hate evenly among them and allow their taunts to push them ahead. (There is a healer spell that disperses all damage done to a target and spread it among the group, do the same with hate).Changing the style of the fighter's hate manipulation will make them diverse, fun and challenging without the current issue of limiting content and lowering group desireability.Best statement I have seen made so far on this issue: "Stances should determine how much damage someone takes, not how much hate they generate."Class specifically for paladin: Please recognize that Amends was not only being used to generate hate to the tank but to decrease the hate of your highest dpser. To me this fit the AA title of "Protector" perfectly. If the hate transfer is still being removed I would like to see Amends as a hate decrease buff for a groupmate or maybe a lower % hate decrease for the entire group.

Obadiah

03-18-2009, 02:17 PM

<cite>Bookbunny wrote:</cite><blockquote>ST vs. AE tank idea - so glad it is dead. Tank diversity should not be based on WHAT they can tank, but on HOW they can tank.</blockquote>Well, it's not really dead. It's existed since launch. It's just that [for now] AE tanks are still Berserkers, SKs and Paladins instead of being changed to Berserkers, SK's and Bruisers.

steelbadger

03-21-2009, 11:10 AM

<cite>Kordran wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>steelbadger wrote:</cite><blockquote>Really, I want fights to be too complicated for me to work out using an excel spreadsheet. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>That's a problem, however. First, it makes things more complicated for casual players and, secondly, it can make things a lot more annoying on raids. The MT and MA in a raid can have a lot of things going on already; adding yet more "stand on your head, while patting your stomach and recite the alphabet backwards" mechanics to tanking is not something that is going to make things more fun in the long-term. We already get more than enough of this from the encounter scripts themselves.There has to be a middle ground between being a taunt monkey and "fights to complicated to work out on a spreadsheet" that could address the core design goals without being a nuisance.</blockquote>Hmmm, I disagree. I don't believe that in depth mechanics need necessarily be unintuitive. A casual player plays largely by intuition, a kind of "well it makes sense to do this now" kind of play. It is quite possible to have very intuitive aggro mechanics whilest making the individual abilities situational enough that a by-the-numbers examination becomes extremely difficult.But I agree that unintuitive and needlessly overcomplicated mechaincs are not what the game needs.