Brawler tanking Justified and Rejustified.

[Neofa]

By request: this is being reposted from the Bruiser forums.

---

Warning! The following post may be hazardous to your health, for it is VERY long, and redundant.  Proceed with caution

---

 

 

 

 

---

 

   ::If this message is hard for your to read I have provided an alternative version without any formatting:: http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=24267

 

---

          

             As I read through these threads, and play the actual game, I have decided to advocate specifically for my class, the Bruiser, using a means of basic explanation of where "tanks", in everquest II, came from. As such, I will attempt to unfold what, I think, our class (Bruiser) should be capable of through the use of SOE's provided information and design origins.  I will use repetition of the sound facts of design stated by sony for the benefit of Tanking classes.  Through which It should be shown, without a doubt, the Class: Bruiser is not only classified as a "Tank", but was designed as one; therefore shedding light on the question: ((Are bruiser's tanks?)).  Furthermore, given the ironclad evidence below, Sony and players who either approve or dissaprove of the Bruiser's current and future status will have to accept the justification that Bruisers are Tanks and, as such, Bruisers should be granted adequate ablities to protect theirselves and their party members from in-game opposition.

 

Provided that a pre-requisite of living is required in order to "keep party members alive from in-game opposition", the current condition of the Bruiser Class abilities is sub-par.  As of the February 1st, 2005 patch bruisers lost a large majority of their "tanking" ability.  As a result, this class, derived from the Fighter Archetype, is no longer even meeting the standards required to protect a group of people from normal in-game encounters. 

 

The fact stands alone that a class should possess the fundamental traits inherited from it's Archetype.

 

In this case, Bruisers should inherit the traits, thereby producing functional tank abilities, of the Archetype Fighter.

 

Just for continuity, all tanks should posess the fundamental traits found present in the Fighter Archetype.

 

  

 

 

First, lets go to the basics:

 

Sony designed the Class system from Archetypes.

 

The design was (and is)  -- Pick your Archetype,   Level to 10 then pick your Class,    Level to 20 and pick your final profession (Sub)Class.

 

Going by design, this game was created so that you had 4 Archetypes. (Fighter) (Priest) (Mage) (Scout)

 

Before we go any further, lets take a look at just exactly what an "Archetype" is::

 

 

 

---

ar·che·type  (ärk-tp)

n.

1. An original model or type after which other similar things are patterned; a prototype: "'Frankenstein' . . . 'Dracula' . . . 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' . . . the archetypes that have influenced all subsequent horror stories"New York Times.

2. An ideal example of a type; quintessence: an archetype of the successful entrepreneur.

3. In Jungian psychology, an inherited pattern of thought or symbolic imagery derived from the past collective experience and present in the individual unconscious.

 

[Latin archetypum, from Greek arkhetupon, from neuter of arkhetupos, original : arkhe-, arkhi-, archi- + tupos, model, stamp.]

 

And..

 

"An Achetype can be thought of as a model after which other things can be patterned, a prototype or a permanent underlying structure."

---

Given the factual information here, we can deduce that each Archetype - Fighter, Priest, Mage, or Scout is the original model or type in which other similar things are modeled.

Also, along the same thinking in different wording, our Archetypes are the models after which each Class and Subclass is patterned, or More accurately a permanent underlying structure!

Now lets apply this with Everquest II Terminology.

The Fighter Archetype is the underlying structure of each of the final classes:  Berserker - Guardian - Bruiser - Monk - Paladin - Shadowknight. 

Ok, we're still left with a simple statement that provokes many questions, some of which are:

• What is a fighter?    

 

• What is this "Archetype" in which the 6 aforementioned classes are made of?    

 

• What is their underlying structure? 

 

• What pattern(s), according to our games creators', is intended to be expected in each of these Six Classes of the Fighter Archetype?

 

Keep these questions, and your own, in mind as hopefully the answer will reveal itself as you continue..

 

Using factual information, verbatim from the Everquest II Manual:

"Fighters enjoy the thick of the fray, often absorbing the brunt of the attacks while taking the battle to the enemy directly.  Fighters can wear a variety of armor, and employ a host of weapons and combat arts to defeat enemies."

"Fighters use brute strength and sturdy weapons to deal physical damage to their enemies.  Always at the forefront of combat, Fighters stand toe-to-toe with opponents while keeping their allies from harm."

End of verbatim quotation from the SOE, Everquest II, manual.

 

 

Now, without using anything that is Nonfactual, and with explanation, we can see the very basic fabric of what each of these Six Classes, derived from the Fighter Archetype, is supposed to consist of.  (I use suppose because this is not being written as a dictionary for Sony's Fighter classes, but moreso because there are conflictions and contraindictions between what was created, said, and written verse what now exists, is UN-said, and NOT-written.) 

So what do we have so far?  The Fighter Archetype is the DNA, (if you will), of Guardians, Monks, Bruisers, Berserkers, Paladins, and Shadowknights.

---

(From here on out I will refer to these Six Classes: Guardian, Bruiser, Paladin, Monk, Shadowknight, Berserkers as Tanks.)

---

If each Tank class is composed of the Structure of the Fighter, then EACH and EVERY one of these classes will possess the same basic abilities.

These abilities are drawn from the Fighter Archetype, once again, which would produce things such as:

 

1) Enjoying the thick of the fray

This indicates a schematic in which tanks flourish in the heat of battle, in other words tanks live up to their Archetypically given potential in battle, (Or the "Fray").

2) Absorbing the brunt of attacks

Clearly this shows that tanks were designed to take the damage from enemies.  That they were NOT designed to receive a little bit of an enemies attack, but instead patterned to take on the brunt of attacks.

3) Battling the Enemy Directly

Simple,.. Tanks were designed and aren't doing their job if they are anywhere else but fighting the mobs full frontal!

4) Use brute strength and sturdy weapons to deal physical damage to their enemies.

Every tank was given strength, and through use of this strength and various weaponry they are, by design, expected to contribute to the demolition of any and all enemies.

5) Always at the forefront of combat, stand toe-to-toe with opponents while keeping their allies from harm.

This ties back into number 3, but doesn't hurt to be said again.. Tanks are their best "at the forefront of combat".  You simply can't be any plainer than that.  However, more importantly related to the current issue at hand is the unarguable point that tanks  DO,  in fact, keep their allies from harm. ------| Keep this statement in mind for the remainder of this explanation.  Tanks, ALL tanks, according to their model of design, are to, without question, have the ability to keep their party (ie: group members) alive!  This trait is one of a fairly short list of basic fundamentals that prooves ALL tanks should be capable of satisfactorily keeping their party alive.

---

 

Now we understand what an Archtype is, and more specifically the basic traits that spawn the Archtype: Fighter.

Provided that we know the Archetype of a class, we could begin to describe the classes very basic nature without even knowing the class's "Name".  Basically, what I am trying to point out, is that upon Going from an Archetype to a Class then finally to your (Sub)Class does not equate to your (Sub)Class being absent or denied any of the abilities that your FORMER position, in the heirarchy of Character Classification , instrinsically held native to function.

---

 The, now,  conspicuously defined nature of the Classification system in everquest II at it's most root level leads way to the question:  Why was it designed this way?

The end result does not always, especially given the current state of affairs the Bruiser class resides, manifest or reveal the true intentions of the design.  Nor do they provide any exact reason why things are the way they are, but nonetheless ultimate justification of the design and it's end result is how well they best match.

It is my belief that this class system was designed in an effort to simplify the ever elusive efforts at "class balance".  This is a game we play, and no one wants their chosen class to be at a disadvantage when compared to class's of a similar role.  These classes and roles go hand in hand.

Each encounter needs a group of some consistency and balanced to produce power in order to be defeated.  Each group needs a certain diversity in class's to provide this power.  Each class, in order to balance the scales in the favor of success, or victory, needs to fill a certain role and/or roles.

For Example:

A group can consist of a maximum of 6 persons, and minimum of 2 persons.  If you are presented with an encounter of 4 grouped mobs that are classified (intended for a group of people as opposed to one person) then you will want to build a group that is capable of statistically emerging victorious  in this encounter.  Now, this is obvious, but in order to build something successful you need adequate parts.  Consider each class in the game a part.  For this particular encounter you need a group of at least 3 Player Character's (or parts), of adequate, functional condition of the following diversity. 

Member 1) --Class: Tank

With this class, you have the following classes that come from the Tank, or Fighter family tree:

Monk, Guardian, Bruiser, Paladin, Berserker, Paladin

 

Member 2) --Class Healer

With this class, you have the following classes that come from the Healer, or Priest family tree:

Templar, Inquisitor, Warden, Fury, Defiler, Mystic

 

Member 3)--Class DPS (or high damage producer)

With this class, you have the following class that come from the DPS role, or Scout and Mage family tree:

Brigand, Swashbuckler, Dirge, Troubadour, Assassin, Ranger, Warlock, Wizard, Illusionist, Coercer, Necromancer, Conjurer.

 

Now this layout is overly simplified, but does take into account the basic design principles of this [Everquest II] class system.

You, in very general terms, only have to pick what Roles you need to be filled and then have the luxury of choosing them from only (FOUR) categories.

You needed the role of a tank, or someone who, as mentioned in great detail above, can function as a "group shield" and take on the majority of the damage dished out by the encounter. (Even if this is accomplished through a combo of Avoidance + Mitigation)

Now with the need of this role, automatically generates the need of another role.  The role to heal this tank.  The tank must be healed, because that is a basic principle in Everquest gameplay.  In the encounter, the tank takes on all of the hits that he can, and the healer(s) keep this tank alive so they, themselves, will not die.  If one role, or part, of this system is taken away the entire system fails.  (Not always the case, but the system is much less efficient to put it nicely).

With this encounter you have someone to take the damage, and you have someone to sustain the person taking the damage, now you need someone capable of competently and in an acceptable haste produce damage towards the NPC's in the encounter,... in order to kill them,.. ultimately emerging victorious.

Group makeups can become much more complicated, and often do, but that is the very basic principle.

---

Out of this design I am going to take the role of tank:

We see above that the role of "Tank" can only be, by design, fulfilled competently by a Class derived from the ArcheType "Fighter".

We are given not one, not two, but Six! Choices.

Guardian, Berserker, Paladin, Monk, Bruiser, Shadowknight.

Out of these choices that are, by design, capable of fulfilling the tank role I will specifically choose the Class, or technically the (Sub)Class:  Bruiser.

Ok, we have a Tank, and it is of the class Bruiser.

Here inlies the basic problem,... out of these Six classes only 4 of them can function as a tank currently.

Before you start with the opposition to that statement, when I say function, I mean ALL of these things.::::

A) Perform the role adequately

B) Perform the role as originally designed

C) Are in demand to some degree by parties.  (If A and B are true, then C will be as well since the tank role is essential.)

D) Relating to C specifically, If class performs said role at the bottom of the (6) available -- The class has innate advantages that outweigh by a great measure the fact that they are, indeed, the poorest at the said role. 

---

The Paladin, and Shadowknight are two VERY similar yet different Tank classes,.. However, it is my belief and experience that they do fulfill the tanking role to a degree that is acceptable to others in need of them.  (I am on all classes side here, I am not saying that these particular classes are perfected by any measure).

The Guardian class is, in my opinion and I believe in SOE's, the best class at fulfilling this role of "Tank".  In my experience they have always been the most capable tanks, and the most desired.  However, the one thing I can say about Guardians is that there is still the Human element factor involved.  Thus, a party can still have the best in design, yet fair better with a lesser designed for the role due to this element.  (The game doesn't play itself )

The Beserker class fulfills the role of tank very well, .. while they offer a bit more variety to the party, as do differing (sub)classes of the same Archetype yet different "Class"'s often do, they still have their share of their own problems, but none are as severe in this regard.

The Monk is as close to my Sub(Class) as you can get without actually being a Bruiser.  I *think* monks are experiencing the exact same problems as the Bruiser class is, but I speak only for the Bruiser class here.

---

Finally -- The Bruiser Class,..  [Subclass of the (Brawler) Class]

This, *my*, class before the patch on 2/1/05 Fulfilled the role of tank satisfactorily in my opinion, and from the actions of others to the public as well.  However, I did notice that this class required a different healing strategy, different "parts" of the system, --- Different and specific Sub(Classes) of the Priest Archetype to be effective.

For example.. If I tried to tank with a single Healer of the Priest Archetype and of the Cleric Class --Either a Templar or Inquisitor I would fail miserably.  But, if I had either a healer of the Priest Archetype and of the Druid or Shaman Class -- Either a Warden, Fury, Defiler, or Mystic.  I was able to tank quite, quite well.  This was due in large part to the way the bruiser,and more broadly the Brawler (Encompassing Monks and Bruiser) Class handled incoming damage.

There are fundamently 3 ways one can handle incoming "Physical" damage.

1) Get hit for the full amount. 

2) Not get hit, or in other words the NPC Missed.

3) Git hit for a partial (Mitigated amount)

The Brawler class derived it's tanking properties from it's ability to use fundamental number #2.

Brawlers, have to use their agility to avoid the incommnig melee damage.  This agility is manifested in many ways,.. a brawler can dodge the attack, parry the attack, riposte the attack, and so on.  Basically we , as brawlers, depended on not getting hit to survive.  However, we do get hit some.  Inevitable of course.

Going back to the reasoning the specific healers worked for Brawlers, where the Cleric based healers did and do not...

Shamans have "Wards" which summed up are damage shields that when cast on a player absorb X amount of damage for Yseconds.  If you put two and two together you will come to the relevant conclusion that since brawlers avoid the incomming damage to a much higher degree, than do the other 4 subclasses of tanks, the "Ward" style of healing the Shaman class's provide allows our class to fulfill it's designed and intended role.

Druids, I am not as familiar with, but I do know they perform an acceptable healing role for a Brawler Tank.  I believe the druidic heals are regenerative in nature, rather than the clerics "Instant or reactice heals".  Given that regeneration takes time, it suits a brawler that fulfills his role to tank proportionatly to the degree in which he can avoid incoming hits, This is obviously predictable because if, for example, a brawler has 1000 hit points and a mob hits him for 100 hitpoints every 5 seconds then he would need a regenerative rate from this druid equal to 20 hitpoints per second or higher in order to stay alive.

The brawler is thus able to perform his role and duty because he can AVOID incomming hits to a degree that allows these Druidic and Shamanic healers spells the time to do their job.

How is this balanced? 

It is very balanced, and by design and even real life, a martial artist (Brawler in game) uses avoidance to lower incoming damage to a great degree verses a Knight in olden times, or a soldier in body armor (Plate Tanks in game -- The others basically) uses some avoidance but rely more on the mitigation of the incomming damage via his or her equipment.

This provides an ingenius way to tie Brawlers to Druids and Shaman healers, and Plate class tanks to Clerical Healers.

(Pre-patch) Brawlers = Lower mitigation, much higher avoidance, .. Seemingly needs a Shaman or Druid present to efficiently do the job ( Pre-patch status)

(Post-patch) Brawlers = Identical mitigation pre-patch, Avoidance is almost non existent,... No combination of healers will allow a Bruiser to tank in the capacity they once did, or a capacity in which is "O.K" with a party.  Bruisers: Have been turned into a burden on parties and are only seen with the ability to fill the "dps" role and no other.  While this role is wanted, due to the nature of Brawlers not being ranked as the TOP DPS producers in the game they are often overlooked for someone who can do a better job.  Where before, they could tank sufficiently, perhaps not as well as a plate-tank, but they provided a DPS boost that a plate clast didn't.  Thus, it was justified to allow a Brawler to Tank.   Now, there isn't justification for a brawler to tank, and I can't blame them.  Who would want a "broken part"? [Refer to my explanation further up].(Post Patch)

(Pre-Patch) Plate Tanks, (Guardians,Shadowknights, Paladins etc) = High Mitigation, and some avoidance due to the general nature of combat.    These tanks seem to do an adequate job with any of the 3 Classes of healers, but do a more efficient job with a Clerical healer. (Pre-Patch)

(Post-Patch) Plate Tanks = I don't play one, only witness what they do for groups and can guess.  However, it seems as if even their tanking was lowered a bit, the exact cause I couldn't accurately and confindently tell you.  Although it might statistically be lowered, in relavence to the Brawler class they are THE only tanks.  Basically the tank pool lowered from 6 to 4 to choose from.  With the Monks and Bruisers declassified as tanks.  I don't want to get into the status of these classes because quite frankly I don't have enough personal experience with them to make accurate judgement calls on in-game mechanics related to their ability.  This is observation only.  But, that is 95% of what anyone will take to heart, is what they see in their experiences in Everquest II Online. (Post-Patch)

 

Recommended remedies for the Brawler class:

• Please Re-establish the degree of avoidance to allow Brawlers to once again be a viable option to tank, (In an experience group, one group named settings)

 

• Think in terms of pre-patch status and healer specific techniques, and how that benefits more than just one class!

 

• Please Remember what we are, Fighters first, Then Brawlers, then either a Monk or a Bruiser.  But FIRST we are a fighter, therefore we are justified in our reasoning for a "remedy" to place us back in our rightful position to fulfill the tanking role.

 

• Please Do this without nerfing other abilities, or other classes!

 

• On the same note, please  remember that (In a non sarcastic tone), it isn't necessary nor required to take something away to give something.  Especially when it is rightfully the owners (The brawlers in this case), and they had it up until just recently.

 

• Other matters that are on the TOP of the list for Bruisers ---

 

• A) Armor Design --Too plain and no variety   B) Fun Spells (Fluff spells) -- Ours are a joke to be honest.  Not to be spiteful, but if our nemesis, yet archtypically the same, opposite only in Morals, Monks get "Tiger Form" and we get "Look like your dirty", Or "Poo is on my cloths", or "Instant plague ability (self only)" something is wrong.  A simple solution that would fit our class would be Black Panther Form, or simply "Panther Form".  This is more of an embarassing issue.

---

If you've managed to read this in entirity, I thank you,

Take care,

 

Neofate  [42] (Bruiser)

 

[Alaile]

/cheer

well written post!  I agree with all of your points.  Lets hope the devs get ahold of this and read it.  5 stars!

[Coter]

Definitely well written and nicely put to add justification to us brawler types needing to be able to fill our primary purpose of tanking.

[Nemi]

I agree with everything you've written, but its a shame that SOE don't see the game through common sense or logic, but only as UBER_MAX. SOE don't balance a game or class based on what they should do by design, or what is fun for the players, they balance based on what the UBER MAX character of that class can do, and then impose a system wide change to the class, balancing the UBER_MAX but leaving everyone else scratching their heads.

[xrippe]

I agree with this post.  The only thing I can see happening though is Sony says.. Oh you monks want to tank as well as plate tanks?  SO be it.  At this point they cut our damage output by half and give us our tanking ablity back.  Right now we are still damage dealers and may need to just accept this "tweak" or the Sony gods may get out the nerf bat and [Removed for Content] our good leg.

[Se]

Or they will go in and rip Mitigation to shreads and bring plate tanks down to our current level. But that's only a nightmare scenario...

 

Seiv

[Neofa]

---

Seiv wrote:

Or they will go in and rip Mitigation to shreads and bring plate tanks down to our current level. But that's only a nightmare scenario...

 

Seiv

---

Well.. this is what is proposed it seems:

---

 Tanks now tank better with increased mitigation!

 The damage bonus given by extremely high amounts of strength has been reduced. For example, having a strength of 400 previously gave a 200% damage bonus; after this change, the damage bonus is 155%. There is no change to the damage bonus at a STR of 100, and only a slight reduction at 200 STR.
- Heavy armor now mitigates 11% more damage. Light armor now mitigates 35% more damage.
- Having stamina greater than 200 will now increase the character's maximum health pool.

---

Basically they adjusted Plate tanks armor to mitigate 11% more, and Brawler armor to 35% more.  How this equates in the overall scheme of things, we can only wait and see.  (Or go play on test )

It would seem that 24% improvement in mitigation alone wouldn't cut it, but hey I'm not complaining before I witness it.

We shall see..

 

[Phank]

Wow.  The best post I have read in 6+ yrs of gaming.  Excellent writing skills!

[Aetheris]

Wonderful Post.

 

-Aetheris

50th Seasoned Monk

Crushbone Server

[Whett]

A little out of the loop, but light-armor wearers will once again be able to tank next week, as per Live Update #3.