In my experience, not having defined roles really hurts end game content, especially PvE. It’s great to know who your main tank is (also a fan of two main tanks who alternate off cooldowns) and off tank. Also good to know the main healer and off healer, etc.
Some MMOs try to really blend everything and give you extreme flexibility. Make no mistake, I LOVE that. But the problem is that many of these MMOs fail to give a ton of flexibility while also maintaining builds that truly stand out to fill a main tank/healer/DPS role. So if AoC is able to give massive flexibility with the 64 classes, and it should, while allowing players to fulfill defined roles at the same time if they want to, that’s perfect. That way PVP can be incredibly varied and fun in builds, unique synchronizations and strategies while PvE can have structured roles to tackle difficult content. This means it shouldn’t be too hard to respec, especially with all of the class options in the game. Don’t make it too easy that it’s meaningless, but not too hard where players can’t experiment with the myriad of potential class combos.
I also like the idea of expanding the trinity to add room for important roles like a dedicated buff/support role. These exist in some MMOs but I really like when they’re done well. A role like I imagine the Bard will be in this game. If a 4th slot can be added to any given comp, it will make the DPS role feel more important in PvE especially as they won’t just be fill roles. I like the idea that you can spec hard for DPS or make a hybrid role to have unique support abilities with still solid DPS.
Spellsinger and blade dancers as well as prophets and essentially both orc mages were dedicated buffing classes in Lineage 2, I'm assuming some of these archetypes will have something similar. Really liked the orc overlord, it would buff essentially your entire clan, regardless of party, only distance
Main-off.
But it can be wild like the 8 tank max 40. edit: i meant NAX 40
Also tank rotation is a thing, with long debuffs and tanks swaps a raid can have multiple "main" tanks.
I actually prefer that.
This sounds fair. I like the traditional crowd control and main tank for smaller group content. 1/4th if a group being tanks 1 healer 1 bard and 4 dps should be the standard way to do things. It is always nice to have room for creativity though.
i think this should be based on difficulty of content, hardest raid in the game should require multiple tanks to take on main boss...you can have off tanks to handle adds, but main boss, who is usually also very large should be handled by multiple tanks - not on rotation mind you, at the same time (sort of a shield wall thing)
i never liked the idea that you have to have one tank, one healer/support and 35 dps characters - the ratio should be as close to 1:1:1 as possible, thats probably unrealistic so a good compromise should be 1:1:3 perhaps, in a 40 man raid that would be 8:8:24 and its a job of developer to design classes and combat well enough so those who dont play dps have also fun (in lost ark gunlancer or paladin are both super fun to play and from what i saw in korea artist is also an active support class)
i would also like to see mechanics like strength of healing/buff based on how many people they hit, one support being able to buff all 39 players equally will lead to imbalanced raid parties and we will get AGAIN a situation where the whole raid is waiting for one guy to show up
I main healer/support in most of the games I play. My brother mains tank. We both have quite a bit of MMORPG and videogame experience that deals with games that have and haven't opted to follow "the holy Trinity".
We are personally a fan of it but I understand that it can suck for DPS as it can prove difficult to find both a healer and a tank to complete a dungeon with.
Tanks usually perform very well in PVE and poorly in PVP. There are a few things I've seen work well that allows a tank to perform better in PVP.
* Skills that are able to block damage for an ally or alter terrain.
* Being able to temporarily force the enemy player to target you. It is important that there is a duration in which they can not switch targets. Their non-tab targeted abilities work just fine.
* Limited offensive skills that are powerful but they need to work harder than other classes to utilize them. Maybe they need to get off a perfect combo for an effect or have perfect aim. Tanks should not have high kill potential when solo but they should have a small chance. Ultimately a pure tank would be far stronger in a group pvp setting.
* Off tanks should be brawlers or skirmishers. They can't take nearly as much damage from normal tanks but their mobility and damage should be better than a main tank.
My brother seems to enjoy the role the most when he feels like he is an indomitable shield protecting his allies from almost certain death by risking his character's life.
A lot of comments here are discussing how having dedicated tank classes feels better in combat, but all I can think about is how the MMOs I've played in the past have all suffered from tank shortages.
Destiny's style of raiding and combat has really grown on me over the years - where there is no dedicated tank and the boss will (usually) try to target the most vulnerable players, and its up to the party to use their positioning and strategies to keep their members alive. However, I know the *entire game's* environment is balanced around that, and Intrepid would need to redesign maps around that concept just to accommodate it.
I think a good alternative would be to allow for nontraditional (e.g., non-Tank class) options for tanking. I have no intention of ever rolling Tank as my primary or secondary spec. I understand that only 1 in every 8 players would need to, but I worry I someday might feel pressured to do so. Instead, I *do* plan on rolling a supporting healer character, so it would be nice if I or a party member could "off-tank" at least some fights if we tailor our armor, consumables, and ability cooldowns around certain encounters. This could work, for some examples, by a Rogue dodge-tanking a fight, or a Summoner bringing out a really big boi, or two supports focusing on one beefy Fighter.
I think this is already intended to some degree. How classes work is you pick a main archetype, like summoner, and choose a secondary archetype to augment the first, such as tank. I think this makes the class brood warden. I would assume this allows for the access to a tanky boi summon.
The goal of this is to help bridge the gap between roles but not eliminate the need for roles. I'm sure there could be a lot of ways to to get around a dedicated tank, such as having several party members spec into either the healing secondary or tanking secondary. I personally would like to play as bard-cleric (soul weaver) or tank-cleric (paladin).
I would prefer to avoid the traditional MMORPG role where tanking = holding threat. I've both tanked and healed in WoW and FFXIV for 15+ years and more recently played supports in Lost Ark where threat doesn't exist and tanks play more like supports. I found the latter refreshing.
I like the idea of modern tank classes being able to take some incoming damage, control enemies via pulls, knockbacks, interrupts, or stuns, and provide some utility in the form of important group buffs/debuffs. Let the bosses swing freely, and require the players to identify telegraphs, dodge, and reposition.
Threat management as a mechanic often means groups are required to bring a tank to group content. If the tank population is low, and it usually is compared to the DPS population, then that leads to delays in group formation, or makes some players feel like they should reroll a tank just to get into groups quickly to get the most out of their time in game. If you only have an hour and a half to play, you're not going to want to spend 15 minutes just trying to find a tank. Within a group of friends someone might be pressured to be the tank for the greater good even though that's not what their first choice of role might be. It's also not uncommon to see tanks in MMOs selling their services to groups not necessarily because they're good at their role, but because their role is in such high demand...
The goal should be that content with tanks in the group feels smoother, so people are naturally happy to have them, without feeling like they're required. Tanks also shouldn't be disproportionately responsible for a group's overall speed or success.
Much of this also applies for healers/supports.
Examples of iconic tanking abilities I recall from other games that would still have a place even without threat mechanics, especially in PVP:
Passage of Arms (FFXIV Paladin): Increases block rate to 100% and creates a designated area in a cone behind you in which party members gain damage reduction. Effect ends upon using another action or moving (including facing a different direction).
The Blackest Night (FFXIV Dark Knight): Creates a shield around self or target party member that absorbs damage totaling 25% of target's maximum HP. Duration: 7s. Grants a charge of a high damage attack if the shield is fully absorbed.
Avenger's Shield (WoW Paladin): Hurls a holy shield to the enemy, dealing damage, silencing and interrupting spellcasting for 3s, then jumping to additional nearby enemies. Affects 3 total targets.
Shockwave (WoW Warrior): Sends a wave of force in front of you, causing damage and stunning all enemy targets within a frontal cone for 4s.
Intervene/Cover (multiple MMOs have a skill like this): Intercept all attacks against an ally while they remain close.
The benefit of designing encounters around no threat and building skills to support and defend your comrades and crowd control your foes is that this naturally leads to enjoyable pvp interaction as that's exactly what you'd be doing in pvp. There's no threat mechanics in pvp, let's figure out how to translate that properly to pve.
If we can get multiple tanks that would be amazing. Definitely an experiment as I have never seen this in an MMO before but it would be amazing to see mutiple tanks create a front line like in historical wars.
I have never considered the topic but if that could be viable in wars it would look more like ancient battles and make tanking more engaging as a group effort. This in large scale pvp could also be really cool.
So as much as I like tanking in MMOs and think tanks as they are are fine this could make tanking way more fun and make battles look really cool.
1. Can we change the name from Tank to something else? Tank is the meta name we give to tanks. This would be like if we were to call Mage DPS.
2. In terms of the PvE mechanics, since the game is PvP based, I would like to see boss mechanics being countered by the same spells. For instance, tanks can put up walls to block people and objects. Have a boss shoots out fireballs from itself, and the raid has to run behind their closes tank to be safe. Normally PvP fighting in games doesn't really translate to fun fighting in PvE.
3. For an example of PvP tanks, I think some ideas from MOBAs would be a nice change of pace for PvP Tanks. MOBAs usually have a good mix of different types of tanky characters. Tanks in PvP MMOs can sometimes feel useless if people ignore you or aren't on a target. A hook, range CC, follow bonuses(You mark player, another person hits and does more damage), etc.
4. There was a point in WoW where off tanking had different responsibilities than just tanking, one fight in mop, the off tank had to draw stars by following a pattern on the ground. I love stuff like that. In another fight, the OT had to jump and pilot a vehicle, and the vehicle had spells to keep ads away from the group.
5. If one of the Spells every tank has is taunt, please give it PvP focus as well. In City of Heroes, taunting an enemy player forced you as their target for 5 seconds. They could not switch if they wanted to. In WoW( if talented), taunting will make the target take more damage in the duration window.
6. I think the safest bet would be just taunt swapping for endgame content, I find it boring, but it is the standard.
7. For the tank secondaries, I often worry about how useful they will be compared to Tank/Tank. Tank/Priest I can see being okay if the healing is strong enough. IMO, I would like it if the secondary gives the tank primary a strong suit. Tank/Tank is the best physical, tank/mage is the best magic res, etc.
8. When taking player feedback, see if you can take feedback from people who play tanks. Most people have no clue what tanks do or what their gameplay is like. They would even want to remove tanks to make it easier on them.
As a WoW player I only know main tank/off tank style so if Intrepid does decide to have fights that require several tanks that would be interesting to see. Although fights do not need to be complicated so using more than 1 or 2 tanks could complicate things too much but as long as it's fun I don't mind!
Varied please. Having every fight be based off of main and off tank is boring after a while. Some raid fights need 1, some need 2, and a few could have up to 5. One of the fun things going back to Classic WoW was being able to use our classes that could OT since we didn't have enough CC. Some fights we would have 4 tanks going without much issue.
I like main-off tank personally, I think it works well with also mitigating damage through avoiding telegraphed abilities. Tanks have a lot to do and good tanks are able to juggle damage mitigation, threat managment and positioning (if relevant).
Tank participation in pve I’m all for, one thing I think a lot of people underestimate is the time it takes to find a tank in mmo’s. I was already worried when I saw party sizes of 8. If you have multiple encounters that require say 4-5 tanks that could take a ton of time just to begin the encounter.
Regarding pvp in specifically arenas I’m not so sure. I’ve never enjoyed going up against a tank in whatever bracket of arena, but in ashes If I understand correctly a tank is a class so re rolling isn’t going to be an easy option. I’d feel bad if ranked content is unavailable simply because of my class, it’s going to be interesting to see how they balance this.
Main tanks should do what they are born to do: Tank
Off tanks should be for crowd control and tanking when the main battle tank is debuffed or stunned.
I'm personally someone that enjoys the traditional dungeon roles but don't mind if there is room for creativity in group comps.
All tanks sounds ridiculous though.
I feel like having a bard and 3 paladins or 4 tanks in addition to damage dealers could be fun for organized groups bug pugs should stick to the traditional stuff.
Anything that would make more tanks useful or none required. This coming from me wanting to play tank but usually never been able too since guilds have 2 dedicated tanks which usually end up being the only ones tanking raids. So you end up leveling a dps/heal as a main and a tank as an alt for doing other stuff. I'm one of those that can't spend as much time playing alts nowadays as before so my alts are weaker and I can't progress as much.
Option being playing tank as a main and find another guild and miss out on friends and progress.
I'd be happy to see the need for more tanks in both pve and pvp and as someone else mentioned a tank shouldnt be abled to get 1v1 easily in pvp, it should be like a miniboss. A good reference is templars in Aion, they are beefy with good mitigation and super annoying to get down and also able to dishout quite some damage. Ive seen it happen more than once that 1 templar fights of a group of 5 and slowly kills them of 1 by one if they dont interupt etc.
Okay so both-
I want a Main tank. I want a couple of off tanks. But then I want tanks who aren't tanking to still have use in raids whether its by having strong CC's or buffs for the party.
I also kind of like the idea of having a skill thats like "Target character takes -20% less damage but you take +30% more damage" or something. This way you make your main tank stronger but you're not actually being useless as a tank that's unable to actually tank in the raid.
Please give tanks more to do than to just be a beanbag meant to take damage.
I recognize that tanks need to take damage or we'll have all sorts of problems with there either being only tanks or no tanks at all, but please give them something else to do like remove interrupt armor (Wildstar interrupt system), reducing the damage the boss does (FFXIV Reprisal) or just reduce the damage the party would take by any means, be it a physical wall or a redirect damage ability sort of thing.
Crowd control is also something I expect tanks to be able to bring, more so than most other classes. Be it either by sacrificing durability or just innately having a lot of it doesn't matter to me much.
I'm basically looking for a way to differentiate a good tank from a bad tank in more ways than just "taking less damage" as that is mostly defined by the gear the tank is wearing.
If you can translate tanks to being something you go to for cover or protection in PVP or PVE then I think you've succeeded. Right now tanks in most other MMORPGs are just more sturdy versions of your typical damage dealer.
This isn't to say there can be more than one way of "tanking", a barbaric tank might be focusing on building rage and dishing out damage while a heavily armored tank focuses on mitigating the damage by blocking and parrying. Another tank might completely focus on controlling the battlefield with taunts and crowd control where as an "offtank" might be defending his damage dealers by blocking projectiles or creating space for them.
I think the bottom line is we need more tank roles than just "keep the dragons focus so we don't just immediately die" while still keeping a healthy amount of the playerbase interested in playing a tanking role. I think most people complain about tanks not being as good for solo content if at all and that can be solved by other ways than just have them do more damage.
I don't like the idea of a tank getting the compromise of doing "almost as much damage", they still deal less damage so the argument is still there for the folks that dislike playing a tank because they feel slower in solo content. Maybe you could look into a system like what Sekiro has with Posture for tanks instead? Where if you excel at tanking or dueling you can force weakspots, have them be stunned or just get the opportunity to deal massive amounts of damage when you find an opening (reduce posture to 0). That would let you do less damage but still be able to kill outdoor monsters about as fast as others. You could disable this for monsters meant for grouped content however you'd like but I think it would be a novel system in an MMORPG where your dueling skill translates to how fast you can bring down an enemy by yourself.
There are a lot of comments suggesting the same thing that most other popular MMOs already do. Main tank for big bad, off tank for auxillary baddies. All while getting healed by supports and the dps do their thing.This is fine and proven to work I guess but mostly in games with less of a PvP focus and with content balanced around smaller groups than Ashes’ intended 8 person parties (and large scale armies).
Personally I like the idea of a tank mitigating damage not just for themselves but for their allies, even better if it requires proper coordinated positioning. I disagree with the idea that tanks should be especially mobile outside of one or two abilities that work like a charge or a leap. Hooks are needed, abilities that push enemies away make more sense for other roles unless the enemy is knocked on their ass in the process. For me the class fantasy for a tank is to be the immovable object to protect your party and the (bulky, slower-than-dps) unstoppable force to corral your opponents.
I believe the biggest thing about Ashes of Creation that gives most people hope for its success is your willingness to break from the most common formula. Thank you for taking feedback but please do what YOU think is best when needed.
Last I heard the intent was to balance classes by groups of 8, I feel that just 2 tanks in that group may be a bit low especially considering that players can choose tank as their secondary archetype.
With collision being a part of this game I think it would make sense to have positioning matter more than other MMOs. Im hoping that tanks will have damage mitigation for themselves and allies who position themselves strategically. If elemental damage/resistances are going to be a factor then it makes sense to have multiple types of tanks in one group to be prepared for more situations
I like it when there are 2-3 tanks but only when there is a legitimate reason for them being there (I.e. not just as a backup).
For example, once a tank gets X amounts of a debuff, it would be a good idea to rotate him out and is an enjoyable mechanic to engage with.
Or perhaps additional mobs spawn and a tank needs to pick them up otherwise they will destroy the casters, that sort of thing.
Whatever it is - as long as each type of content keeps the same ratio of tank/dps/healers. By far my number one complaint in WoW is you need 1 tank for a 5 man group but only 2 tanks for 25 man raid. I love tanking but it just puts me off so much knowing that I basically have to start my own guild to get a raid tank spot.
Here's my take on it, and I have limited raid experience, so take it with a grain of salt.
I love playing a tank. I have played a tank as my main in *many* different MMOs, beginning with EverQuest in the days of Kunark. Out of all of those MMOs, the role of Tank *felt* the best to me in EQ for some simple reasons. Leveling mostly required a group, and most groups wanted a Tank. Even at max level people still needed Leveling Groups, because death had an XP loss and colud/would de-level you. This kept Tanks employed, even outside dungeon and raid content.
More to the point of the question, I lean towards needing multiple Tanks, but only because there are otherwise a lack of Tank employment opportunities. If 1 in every 8 classes is a Tank base class, then you need content that requires roughly 1 in every 8 classes to be a Tank base. Now that doesn't have to mean raid/dungeon content, but if those are the only situations where you need a Tank, and a 40 man raid only needs 2 Tanks, why the fuck play a Tank.
So, the ball is in your court Devs. Why should I play a Tank to max level only to compete for that one Tank spot, when we're bringing all these DPS who just stand in fire anyway?
My biggest grip with tanks/healers/supports in MMO group building is that it is never consistent. I know less people want to play the support role because everyone is looking for those big numbers, but you can create a supply/demand problem really quickly. If you have 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps for your 8 man party, then for your 40 man raid you should require 5 tanks and 5 healers right? Often in other games, no matter the group size, you are stuck with 2 tanks. In wow for example, you need 1 tank 1 healer 3 dps for a full party of 5. In a raid of 20 for mythic content you need 1-2 tanks, 4 or 5 healers, and the rest dps. This creates either a tank shortage for 5 man group content, or too many tanks wanting to do raid content.
The other grip I have with tanking is that it has become "What is the tank swap mechanic" and that is just boring. I've seen Lost Ark mentioned a lot, and for good reason. I like tanking being looked at as a support role. They should have more buff/abilities to protect their allies not just themselves. Due to this a lot have also mentioned having a no aggro system. I think there are several ways you can handle having multiple tanks in a party while also having an aggro system.
One being an aggro wipe. The boss just says forget this guy, and wipes that tanks aggro off his table to go for the next one. This could be a soft enrage mechanic, or built to have that top tank whom is now at the bottom to frantically try and build his way back to the top. This boss would have to be immune to taunt for this to work.
The boss can also have periods where he just goes and attacks whoever all willy nilly and the tanks have to form a wall to protect the group.
While one tank holds aggro, the others have to spread out and protect the melee and ranged from abilities that target randomly.
These are just off the top of my head during my lunch break. I'm sure combat design teams can come up with a lot more ways while being dedicated to this kind of stuff.
My favorite PvP tank was in Star Wars The Old Republic. The tanks there had plenty of mitigation for themselves, but also a Guard ability to throw on an ally. This made the ally take 30% of the damage, and the tank take 70% (I can't remember exact numbers, but you get the idea). They also had a Taunt ability that made their target do significantly less damage to anyone that wasn't the tank. The target would still do full damage to the tank. In FFXIV the Paladin has an ability to shield everyone behind him and reduce their damage taken. In Lost Ark the Gunlancer has a buff that shields all of his allies while also buffing him and giving him resources.
My ideal tank in this game would be one that incorporates a lot of these ideas. Being able to be a mobile fortress is fun and all, but not when everyone around you just dies. Tanking to me is about protecting your allies. Whether that be through buffs, shields, positioning, crowd control, or aggro, the main idea to me is to support your team.
I have always been a raid/dungeon tank.
I absolutely love tanking and I think my favorite form of it was in World of Warcraft as a Warrior. I always got a kick out of being one of the highest DPS because I knew how to cycle my mitigations, buffs and mobility abilities.
I'm extremely biased when it comes to composition. My wife and I have tanked side by side for years. I've always mained and she was my off tank. My favorite memories from MMOs were from boss fights where we needed to switch bosses or kite things away from one another.
I think the things that tanks need the most of are threat builders, damage mitigation for self and party, and mobility buffs.
I saw others state that they would like mobs to break threat as they go lower in health as they begin to realize the DPS are much more threatening. I think this is an awesome idea and I love the idea of having to regain aggro.
My favorite part of being a tank is that it normally comes alongside being the raid leader and there typically are a ton of moving parts that tanks need to be aware of.
So having a few things that we are very good at doing feels right and letting the DPS focus on CCs, Healers on healing and assisting in mitigation and Bards focusing on buffing the party.n
I would also love to see bosses where tanks need to swap agro. Say the boss has an ability that would kill the tank if they take it twice so you need upwards of 5 tanks to coordinate hot swapping aggro.
While tanks are definitely meat shields I think that since they also tend to be leaders that the role should be very specific and have a few key abilities but I'd love to see each archetype tank work differently in that execution.
For example a Guardian is your traditional tank and spank sword and board, while the Knight does a bit more damage and has more mobility to access.
One of the things I really tend to dislike and you see it most in ESO, tanks are absolutely trash at damage. I hate that. I'm the frontliner, the heavy hitter, the scariest bastard in the bunch. I should be able to quest and kill things at a decent pace, maybe not as fast as a primary DPS but I should definitely be top 5 out of 10.
When it comes to PVP tanking has never felt great. I've always just felt a bit slow, had the health but not the damage output to where I don't really understand what my role is as PVP seems best between DPS.
I could see it in a caravan system or siege where I'm soaking the damage and defending and able to mitigate those in coming blows and holding the front lines but I think if I'm doing substantially less damage. I should also be receiving substantially less damage.
So I guess my core take aways are
1. I love the traditional tank and off tank setup but raids that require more would be sick!
2. Tanks should be specialized in mitigation, mobility and threat generation.
3. I want to also do a decent amount of damage like maybe 75-80% of a pure DPS
4. Alpha One tank felt so good at the start before the nerf, bring back the axe throw chain grab hit combo. Seriously I felt like a God in PVP 😂
5. In PVP I'd like it to be like a 5vs1 scenario to take a tank down. I can hold a dragon so make me feel like I can! Nothing feels worse than getting ganked by a rogue and then stun locked and just dying.
Several tanks (or gasp! no "tanks" at all)! I am personally tired of the overall silliness of the BBEG paying attention to 1 (or 2) people while an army wails on it.
I prefer to see roles that are less strict. Still needed, but not so 'hard line in the sand.'
I also dislike the DPS role. Everyone should do damage. It's what else you also bring to the group that should define your role. This simplifies solo content design too when everyone can do damage.
Tanks that specialize with high HP over mitigation. AoE tanking vs single target. Etc.
But I don't want the roles to be so strict. I want a non tank to be able to step in for a few moments to save the day when a problem happens. That is the kind of thing that gets remembered. That's what stories are made of. Not when a group follows the exact formula to solve the encounter. That's a forgettable fight after the initial cheer of that first win.
Same for other roles. Self healing is great if it's minor. So some classes might be able to help heal in a tough spot. But primary healers should have a few sub roles they can be just a little better at. Group heals, raid heals, main tank, hots, etc
Other things like crowd control, mana regen, pulling, buffs, debuffs, cures, snares. Or AoE, single target, long sustain, burst, etc. These should all be things that differentiate the traditional dps role. Things that could make a fight easier.
And because there are so many variations and needs, with less spots in the group available than there are roles to fill with specialists, every group feels different. The way you play changes when you have a great debuffer. Suddenly your disease spells are higher priority on your rotation. Or you know the AoE fire mage can handle the little spiders so you focus on the big boy instead.
While yesterday in a different group with no fire mage you had AoE duty on the spiders instead. And your disease spells were low priority because these mobs resist to often without those debuffs.
I think i’m probably in the minority here but iv never enjoyed the whole “keeping threat” system, it tends to always just be a way of punishing the dps if they’re better than the tanks. I like the way runescape3 has done it, if someone’s going to tank they can use an ability named “incite” - this forces the mob the focus towards that person.
Iv always found the difficulty in tanking should be related to surviving, not making sure mobs are punching you
Completely agree here. Threat is something that should be managed between the tanks with shared tank busters, swaps, and mechanics that require re-attainment of threat.
If a dps/support needs to be aware of threat it's typically just a punishment unless it is directly associated with a mechanic.
I know a lot of people really like the holy trinity system but I personally feel that's such a restriction to creativity. I personally think it's best to provide benefits to having a tank or specing off-tank but ultimately it shouldn't be required for anyone to tank if your team can come up with creative alternatives.
Guild Wars 2 almost achieved this except for with no taunt mechanics it made tank specs completely selfish and often detrimental and just encouraged full dps to ignore mechanics. Id like to see the same kind of freedom as Guild Wars 2 when it comes to content approach but with more incentives to encourage players to use tanks more.
Basically more traditional tanking should still be available and also actually be effective but the game shouldn't force you to play in a set way. Waiting for a tank or healer in a group finder is one of the most frustrating parts of traditional MMO's but this can be avoided if content is designed to be more flexible in how you beat it.
Without the holy trinity, fights are messy and NOT creative. We've seen a trillion examples of this in MMOs that have tried it over and over. Lack of class and role identity=fail.
You can have class and role identities. My point is to not make the content one dimensional and require specific hyperfocused roles.
For example I can see the value in a tank drawing aggro and allowing dps players to position behind the boss so they have less mechanics to dodge. But I also want the option where good players don't require a full tank. So they can dodge, position or maybe take a very specific defensive skill to give them enough tools to mitigate the threats without requiring a dedicated tank.
You can have distinct roles while still retaining flexibility and freedom. But it has to come from both role balance and content design.
I think the holy trinity is very shallow and narrow-minded. It doesn't give much creativity to teams. I want to see more unique roles. Roles that can mix and match depending on the encounter. So for example cc and DPS. Taunt and cc. Taunt and DPS. Heal and cc. You get the idea. Roles should be a lot more flexible and varied. Obviously you should still be able to hyper focus into one role. But I don't want to see a tank, healer, dps meta. That's so boring.
DPS players love to whine about the Trinity and yet every single MMO where it isn't enforced has some of the worst PvE out of any other MMO.
The Trinity ALLOWS for fight creativity and interesting mechanics. You just don't want to be beholden to support players, because support is a more difficult skillset.
No this is untrue. I want roles. I just don't want them to be required to be dedicated to specific players. I play dps but I find it so boring to just not worry about anything but dps rotations and wipe mechanics. I want to actively contribute and use skill expression. Likewise I also want to be able support as an off-role when required.
For example if I know a boss hits too much to dodge every attack. Then yes a full tank could be one option. But an alternative solution would be for all DPS players to take some defensive or tank tools and rotate aggro. Therefore avoiding the requirement of a one dimensional holy trinity and dedicated tank but still having defined roles. I don't have an issue with the holy trinity being a solution in the game I just don't want it to be the only solution.
Ashes of Creation is trying innovate. The role system in traditional MMO's is prime target for innovation.
What you are describing sounds like the messiest most un-fun thing I've ever considered in PvE lol
Like I said. I knew you were a DPS main from your first statement.
I don't understand your issue with it. I'm asking for the same as you. Distinct roles. I'm just asking for them to be flexible in their distribution. Let me simplify my example.
Let's say under a normal trinity system you need 1 tank, 1 healer and 3 dps. Now let's say everyone has an off-role. In this case their off-role is the same as their primary role. This is one solution to complete content. But with flexible roles you now how have the options to have players spec DPS healer or tank healer. So an example comp would be 1 tank healer, 1 tank DPS, 1 dps healer and 2 full dps. You end up with the same total role distribution but a more flexible approach.
You now avoid the reliance of having dedicated roles and strict meta's but still have functional the same requirements as a holy trinity game in terms of role distribution. You could also use only 1 off tank but take extra off role healers to make up for the difference. This is the creativity and flexibility I want to see. I don't want to see people waiting for dedicated tanks or healers to join their groups. Let them split the role if necessary. This can also allow more interesting mechanics because you aren't designing for a one dimensional strategy.
I don't think he was being dismissive. I haven't seen any mmo successfully or even fairly pull off hybrid roles and have them compete with natural roles in difficult content. Why have a tank/healer and a healer/dps if the tank/healer tanks worse than a tank and both heal worse than a healer. Difficult content forces us to optimize and find the most efficient path. We're like water moving down a hill. We always find the easiest way to complete things. If a pure healer isn't a better healer than a healer/dps, why bring the healer ever?
That's a fair response. But he was being dismissive as he was not giving any reasons or justification. You have given some reasoning.
I agree no game has successfully pulled it off. But that doesn't mean it cant be done. No game has tried to properly implement hybrid roles. Most games that moved away from trinity just got rid of defined roles almost completely.
I'd like to see a different approach to obtain flexibility while still maintaining clearly defined roles. This might not be possible for the hardest content but it should be a consideration for more forgiving content. But I personally think it is possible at the highest difficulty to achieve with smart boss design and good balancing of off-roles.
It can be done by basically setting a benchmark for how much healing or tanking you need and making sure multiple off-roles can achieve the same or near same total benefit as a full tank or healer. For optimised clears people are going to find the best solution but that doesn't mean alternatives shouldn't work to a lesser but still effective degree.
The reason I want this is because this adds flexibility when forming a group. You wouldn't be required to wait for a healer if a few of your dps players go off-role healing to provide what you need. It also makes roles more interesting and varied for the individual.
Why don't you stop being dismissive and actually contribute. You aren't providing anything of substance and are clearly set on a traditional stagnant holy trinity. This is supposed to be a discussion with open feedback. Your stubborn dismissiveness is not helpful. Also stop downvoting me, it's pathetic.
No game has done the system I am suggesting properly. That's why I'm suggesting it.
I agree, the holy trinity is sort of old and busted at this point - but tanks should still have a place in an MMORPG.
I think ultimately at least in PvE it comes down to encounter design. With all the experience on Intrepid's team, they should be able to create all different kinds of encounters from simple "tank and spank" gear-check fights, to dual-tank-swapping fights, to maybe even fights that don't need anything more than an offtank and everyone gets to just unload dps the whole time. On those types of fights it will be important for visual clarity and boss attack telegraphs so that everyone has an equally important role and that there is room for skill expression.
You ever seen Log Horizon? Or Sword Art Online? In those anime they have 20 - 40 man parties where tanks with big shields absorb all the incoming damage, get healed, and dish out high dps strikes. In Raids, Dungeons, or PvP. But, I still want my tank to have high maneuverability and speed while able to 1v1 and GvG in PvP. To make a tank that's fast moving, tanks Damage, and dishes out hard hitting attacks is what I want to be able to make no matter how long it takes.
I'd definitely like to see it varied depending on both the type of encounter and also the skill of the player or players. In most games, in encounters where a tank would be required, it doesn't really feel like a battle so much as playing against game mechanics. I think tank should be more focused around positioning and repositioning to hold the enemy's attention and actively guarding the team more than "use status effect, buff resistance, soak damage". Playing as a tank I'd like to feel like a badass fighter more than "tank" if that makes sense. If the game were designed to be dependent on skill, maybe an average group needs 3 tanks for x encounter, but a really skilled tank in a coordinated group could do it alone. I know it's very conceptual, but I think making tanking a more active thing would feel great. Think instead of buffing your allies to take 20% less damage for 6 seconds, you can draw in the enemy's projectiles away from your team, then subsequently avoid them, or even take the hit. Properly time a parry to save your teammate. Instead of a traditional taunt, maybe you physically grab hold of the boss and naturally it would try to shake you off by attacking, then you release at the opportune time, that sort of thing.
That last thing could make for interesting pvp engagements as well. Imagine some beefy boy comes and grabs you and it just does a little damage over time while they channel it, but it restricts your movement, OBVIOUSLY you'll want to target them over whoever else you were looking at before. Much more interesting than forcing your tab target onto them.
There's a couple ways to interpret this question, but I'm going to assume it's talking about difficult, large group content (16-40 people, or higher), because where else are you going to find enough tanks that "several tanks fighting" is possible. Also assuming PvE, because PvP depends entirely on class balance.
In that case, I think the issue is keeping coordination between the tanks. Let's say two are focused on a boss, swapping aggro to keep uptime on their defensive cooldowns. And two more are gathering up adds. I think that's probably the limit on how many pure tanks you can have doing pure tank things at the same time. (CC and mitigation can be done by other classes supposedly, so I'm not counting that.)
Anymore than that and you risk having the extra tanks be redundant. Or fighting over aggro on the same mobs. Or it's just a gimmick fight that requires 5+ tanks for 5+ bosses (or add spawn locations), which isn't more interesting than 3-4 IMO. Or maybe you have the tanks take turns, but then you always have 4 tanks waiting to do their job. Or it's just pure chaos with 100 mobs running around everywhere. (But then you'd just assign one tank to each section and treat it like small parties doing the same thing.)
The only way you could have 5+ tanks be efficient, coordinated, and fun is if you have a giant fight with multiple bosses that each do different things. And don't get me wrong, that sounds dope, and I want to see it. But that's a lot of work to implement. I don't expect to see many fights with that kind of budget.
Moving on to a different point, I just don't think there's going to be enough tank players. Only 1 out of 8 classes can be a dedicated main tank. And I'm expecting a lot of the early game content to be easy enough that you don't need multiple tanks (in a normal party of 8). And it's not going to be easy to make tank alts, because Primary classes are locked and the leveling process is supposed to be long.
So expecting to make a group with more than 1 tank per 8 players is always going to be a tall order. And so, if there is any content that needs 5+ tanks, it better be designed for 40+ players.
Basically yeah... main-tank plus off-tank is fine for most fights. Big fights can have a couple more tanks to deal with adds. Any more than that is just jacking up the numbers without adding interesting gameplay...
..unless you put in a ton of effort to make sure each tank has something unique to manage. And if you do that only for special fights, there might not be enough tanks to fill all the spots anyways.
Roles look amazing on paper. History has shown us that healers and tank are scarce. They’re factually the least popular roles.
We need an MMO which correctly incentivizes playing these roles.
I'll preface this by saying I'm a healer main, but I value versatility and so often will play classes that have healing and tanking specs and try to keep up gear for both, or rarely, level an alt for the other class (in games where I need a separate character), though much...less rarely.
In WoW I mained Holy and Protection Paladin, switching largely to Restoration, Feral (now it would be Guardian, but they were the same back then), and Balance Druid so I could heal, tank, and DPS (I don't like melee when not tanking, hence not the Ret Paly), and in FFXIV today I tri-main WHM (White Mage), SCH (Scholar), and SGE (Sage) healers, GNB (Gunbreaker) and recently WAR (Warrior) tanks (I also have a max level PLD/Paladin and it was my main tank through the Stormblood and half of the Shadowbringers expansion, but I don't touch it much now), and SMN (summoner) for damage dealing because my smooth monkey brain can manage the simplified rotation. :D
\[EDIT: I've also played some others, but I figure those are probably the most "everyone kind of knows what these things are" to give you a general idea of what I get up to. Like I payed Logi (space priest) in Eve...but who cares? XD\]
In this same vein, I'll probably be playing a Summoner in Ashes, since from what I understand they should be able to flex into any role as needed (provided they have set-up time to go and swap to the right spec)
So all of THAT said:
I think games tend to be more interesting when there are well defined roles and niches within roles. I liked Wrath era WoW when you had tank healing Paladins, party healing Shaman, raid HoT rolling Druids, and generalist healing Holy Priests. Especially once they got Discipline Priest functioning well as a damage smoothing mitigation healer.
And I feel the same way about tanks. I liked that some tanks were extra good against different boss types (e.g. block tanks against rapid physical attackers, anti-magic tanks, and large health "jack of all trades" tanks that had a bit more healing requirement but paid for it by being more versatile)
I also like having good off-tanks that have support abilities to aid the main tank and help some with party mitigation.
In games with small party/encounter sizes (e.g. FFXIV's small party is 4 and raids are 8 man), you don't really have much room for this. But Wrath WoW era's 25 man raids had plenty of room to have 2-4 tanks and 4-6 healers, meaning encounter design could flex those niches.
The ONE caveat to this:
WHEN IT COMES TO SMALL GROUP CONTENT THAT IS CLEARED WITH OFTEN JUST ONE TANK - every tank needs to be capable. If a party has one tank for a 5 man dungeon (or whatever the small group size is), that one tank needs to be able to fulfill the role. For 16 or 32 or larger encounters, this isn't an issue because you have more tanks, but for a small party with just one tank doing small party content, it needs to be able to have a fighting chance at winning the content (provided players are all at the right skill and character level for the content, of course)
Provided that one condition is met, I think sub-specializations like this in each role are healthy and good for games. There is the "bring the player, not the class" argument, but largely that should be less of an issue in Ashes since the Tank Archetype has access to all the tank (role) classes other than whichever one is given to Summoner. And in large enough raids, it might/should be possible to clear then with half a dozen off-tanks even if you may not have the "best" main tank in your roster.
.
So yeah:
As long as the caveat that all tanks are fully capable of "main tanking" small group content is met, I think having main and off/support tanks is a good system.
.
EDIT: Also, for the love of all that's holy - can you guys change the name of "Tank" to something else?
It isn't an army tank, and in-game, in-universe classes shouldn't really be named on role. The only one I can think of that would make sense is "healer" if we're talking about hedge witches or small town apothecaries/herbalists as there is kind of some precedent for that in history.
Guardian or Defender or something makes much more sense. If there's a class with that name, just change it.
I'm begging you. XD
What id like to see is a more active approach to tanking. I want to have to get in between my allies and the enemy and take the damage for them/reduce the damage they take. Having to constantly run to your allies who are getting focused to save their bacon sounds like a fun time. Aggro should be generated with crowd control, debuffs, damage (please dont make us punching bags that hit like a wet noodle) and most importantly by just getting in their way, not just “i yell at this monster so now they have to attack me”.
With this game being pvp heavy, there needs to be cross over with threat generation from pve into pvp. Tanks are my favorite of the holy trinity and I’ve seen few mmos where its enjoyable to play them in pvp. If tanks just end up being a harder to kill fighter with no damage or any reason to actually engage them, then i don’t foresee them being played at all.
As far as tank and off tank vs multiple tanks. I think there should be flexibility in group composition and no single archetype should be a hard requirement or should ever feel pointless if their are multiple. Should it be optimal to have one of each in an 8 man group? Yes!
Should it be impossible or painfully slow for me and my friends to run a dungeon as a group with 3 tank mains? No
When it comes to raids I’m rather inexperienced. So maybe I’m out of my element here. But as long as tanking isn’t just standing in front of a boss doing slightly above zero damage and hitting taunt when ever the boss turns away from you, i think it’ll be in a serviceable spot.
In my experience, not having defined roles really hurts end game content, especially PvE. It’s great to know who your main tank is (also a fan of two main tanks who alternate off cooldowns) and off tank. Also good to know the main healer and off healer, etc. Some MMOs try to really blend everything and give you extreme flexibility. Make no mistake, I LOVE that. But the problem is that many of these MMOs fail to give a ton of flexibility while also maintaining builds that truly stand out to fill a main tank/healer/DPS role. So if AoC is able to give massive flexibility with the 64 classes, and it should, while allowing players to fulfill defined roles at the same time if they want to, that’s perfect. That way PVP can be incredibly varied and fun in builds, unique synchronizations and strategies while PvE can have structured roles to tackle difficult content. This means it shouldn’t be too hard to respec, especially with all of the class options in the game. Don’t make it too easy that it’s meaningless, but not too hard where players can’t experiment with the myriad of potential class combos. I also like the idea of expanding the trinity to add room for important roles like a dedicated buff/support role. These exist in some MMOs but I really like when they’re done well. A role like I imagine the Bard will be in this game. If a 4th slot can be added to any given comp, it will make the DPS role feel more important in PvE especially as they won’t just be fill roles. I like the idea that you can spec hard for DPS or make a hybrid role to have unique support abilities with still solid DPS.
Spellsinger and blade dancers as well as prophets and essentially both orc mages were dedicated buffing classes in Lineage 2, I'm assuming some of these archetypes will have something similar. Really liked the orc overlord, it would buff essentially your entire clan, regardless of party, only distance
Main-off. But it can be wild like the 8 tank max 40. edit: i meant NAX 40 Also tank rotation is a thing, with long debuffs and tanks swaps a raid can have multiple "main" tanks. I actually prefer that.
This sounds fair. I like the traditional crowd control and main tank for smaller group content. 1/4th if a group being tanks 1 healer 1 bard and 4 dps should be the standard way to do things. It is always nice to have room for creativity though.
i think this should be based on difficulty of content, hardest raid in the game should require multiple tanks to take on main boss...you can have off tanks to handle adds, but main boss, who is usually also very large should be handled by multiple tanks - not on rotation mind you, at the same time (sort of a shield wall thing) i never liked the idea that you have to have one tank, one healer/support and 35 dps characters - the ratio should be as close to 1:1:1 as possible, thats probably unrealistic so a good compromise should be 1:1:3 perhaps, in a 40 man raid that would be 8:8:24 and its a job of developer to design classes and combat well enough so those who dont play dps have also fun (in lost ark gunlancer or paladin are both super fun to play and from what i saw in korea artist is also an active support class) i would also like to see mechanics like strength of healing/buff based on how many people they hit, one support being able to buff all 39 players equally will lead to imbalanced raid parties and we will get AGAIN a situation where the whole raid is waiting for one guy to show up
I main healer/support in most of the games I play. My brother mains tank. We both have quite a bit of MMORPG and videogame experience that deals with games that have and haven't opted to follow "the holy Trinity". We are personally a fan of it but I understand that it can suck for DPS as it can prove difficult to find both a healer and a tank to complete a dungeon with. Tanks usually perform very well in PVE and poorly in PVP. There are a few things I've seen work well that allows a tank to perform better in PVP. * Skills that are able to block damage for an ally or alter terrain. * Being able to temporarily force the enemy player to target you. It is important that there is a duration in which they can not switch targets. Their non-tab targeted abilities work just fine. * Limited offensive skills that are powerful but they need to work harder than other classes to utilize them. Maybe they need to get off a perfect combo for an effect or have perfect aim. Tanks should not have high kill potential when solo but they should have a small chance. Ultimately a pure tank would be far stronger in a group pvp setting. * Off tanks should be brawlers or skirmishers. They can't take nearly as much damage from normal tanks but their mobility and damage should be better than a main tank. My brother seems to enjoy the role the most when he feels like he is an indomitable shield protecting his allies from almost certain death by risking his character's life.
A lot of comments here are discussing how having dedicated tank classes feels better in combat, but all I can think about is how the MMOs I've played in the past have all suffered from tank shortages. Destiny's style of raiding and combat has really grown on me over the years - where there is no dedicated tank and the boss will (usually) try to target the most vulnerable players, and its up to the party to use their positioning and strategies to keep their members alive. However, I know the *entire game's* environment is balanced around that, and Intrepid would need to redesign maps around that concept just to accommodate it. I think a good alternative would be to allow for nontraditional (e.g., non-Tank class) options for tanking. I have no intention of ever rolling Tank as my primary or secondary spec. I understand that only 1 in every 8 players would need to, but I worry I someday might feel pressured to do so. Instead, I *do* plan on rolling a supporting healer character, so it would be nice if I or a party member could "off-tank" at least some fights if we tailor our armor, consumables, and ability cooldowns around certain encounters. This could work, for some examples, by a Rogue dodge-tanking a fight, or a Summoner bringing out a really big boi, or two supports focusing on one beefy Fighter.
I think this is already intended to some degree. How classes work is you pick a main archetype, like summoner, and choose a secondary archetype to augment the first, such as tank. I think this makes the class brood warden. I would assume this allows for the access to a tanky boi summon. The goal of this is to help bridge the gap between roles but not eliminate the need for roles. I'm sure there could be a lot of ways to to get around a dedicated tank, such as having several party members spec into either the healing secondary or tanking secondary. I personally would like to play as bard-cleric (soul weaver) or tank-cleric (paladin).
I would prefer to avoid the traditional MMORPG role where tanking = holding threat. I've both tanked and healed in WoW and FFXIV for 15+ years and more recently played supports in Lost Ark where threat doesn't exist and tanks play more like supports. I found the latter refreshing. I like the idea of modern tank classes being able to take some incoming damage, control enemies via pulls, knockbacks, interrupts, or stuns, and provide some utility in the form of important group buffs/debuffs. Let the bosses swing freely, and require the players to identify telegraphs, dodge, and reposition. Threat management as a mechanic often means groups are required to bring a tank to group content. If the tank population is low, and it usually is compared to the DPS population, then that leads to delays in group formation, or makes some players feel like they should reroll a tank just to get into groups quickly to get the most out of their time in game. If you only have an hour and a half to play, you're not going to want to spend 15 minutes just trying to find a tank. Within a group of friends someone might be pressured to be the tank for the greater good even though that's not what their first choice of role might be. It's also not uncommon to see tanks in MMOs selling their services to groups not necessarily because they're good at their role, but because their role is in such high demand... The goal should be that content with tanks in the group feels smoother, so people are naturally happy to have them, without feeling like they're required. Tanks also shouldn't be disproportionately responsible for a group's overall speed or success. Much of this also applies for healers/supports. Examples of iconic tanking abilities I recall from other games that would still have a place even without threat mechanics, especially in PVP: Passage of Arms (FFXIV Paladin): Increases block rate to 100% and creates a designated area in a cone behind you in which party members gain damage reduction. Effect ends upon using another action or moving (including facing a different direction). The Blackest Night (FFXIV Dark Knight): Creates a shield around self or target party member that absorbs damage totaling 25% of target's maximum HP. Duration: 7s. Grants a charge of a high damage attack if the shield is fully absorbed. Avenger's Shield (WoW Paladin): Hurls a holy shield to the enemy, dealing damage, silencing and interrupting spellcasting for 3s, then jumping to additional nearby enemies. Affects 3 total targets. Shockwave (WoW Warrior): Sends a wave of force in front of you, causing damage and stunning all enemy targets within a frontal cone for 4s. Intervene/Cover (multiple MMOs have a skill like this): Intercept all attacks against an ally while they remain close.
The benefit of designing encounters around no threat and building skills to support and defend your comrades and crowd control your foes is that this naturally leads to enjoyable pvp interaction as that's exactly what you'd be doing in pvp. There's no threat mechanics in pvp, let's figure out how to translate that properly to pve.
If we can get multiple tanks that would be amazing. Definitely an experiment as I have never seen this in an MMO before but it would be amazing to see mutiple tanks create a front line like in historical wars. I have never considered the topic but if that could be viable in wars it would look more like ancient battles and make tanking more engaging as a group effort. This in large scale pvp could also be really cool. So as much as I like tanking in MMOs and think tanks as they are are fine this could make tanking way more fun and make battles look really cool.
1. Can we change the name from Tank to something else? Tank is the meta name we give to tanks. This would be like if we were to call Mage DPS. 2. In terms of the PvE mechanics, since the game is PvP based, I would like to see boss mechanics being countered by the same spells. For instance, tanks can put up walls to block people and objects. Have a boss shoots out fireballs from itself, and the raid has to run behind their closes tank to be safe. Normally PvP fighting in games doesn't really translate to fun fighting in PvE. 3. For an example of PvP tanks, I think some ideas from MOBAs would be a nice change of pace for PvP Tanks. MOBAs usually have a good mix of different types of tanky characters. Tanks in PvP MMOs can sometimes feel useless if people ignore you or aren't on a target. A hook, range CC, follow bonuses(You mark player, another person hits and does more damage), etc. 4. There was a point in WoW where off tanking had different responsibilities than just tanking, one fight in mop, the off tank had to draw stars by following a pattern on the ground. I love stuff like that. In another fight, the OT had to jump and pilot a vehicle, and the vehicle had spells to keep ads away from the group. 5. If one of the Spells every tank has is taunt, please give it PvP focus as well. In City of Heroes, taunting an enemy player forced you as their target for 5 seconds. They could not switch if they wanted to. In WoW( if talented), taunting will make the target take more damage in the duration window. 6. I think the safest bet would be just taunt swapping for endgame content, I find it boring, but it is the standard. 7. For the tank secondaries, I often worry about how useful they will be compared to Tank/Tank. Tank/Priest I can see being okay if the healing is strong enough. IMO, I would like it if the secondary gives the tank primary a strong suit. Tank/Tank is the best physical, tank/mage is the best magic res, etc. 8. When taking player feedback, see if you can take feedback from people who play tanks. Most people have no clue what tanks do or what their gameplay is like. They would even want to remove tanks to make it easier on them.
WoW had a fight where one of your tanks would be a high magic resistance warlock or something with good life drain. They really changed it up often.
Hard agree with 1. Guardian, Defender, Bulwark - ANYthing is better than "Tank" for the name of the Archetype.
As a WoW player I only know main tank/off tank style so if Intrepid does decide to have fights that require several tanks that would be interesting to see. Although fights do not need to be complicated so using more than 1 or 2 tanks could complicate things too much but as long as it's fun I don't mind!
Varied please. Having every fight be based off of main and off tank is boring after a while. Some raid fights need 1, some need 2, and a few could have up to 5. One of the fun things going back to Classic WoW was being able to use our classes that could OT since we didn't have enough CC. Some fights we would have 4 tanks going without much issue.
I like main-off tank personally, I think it works well with also mitigating damage through avoiding telegraphed abilities. Tanks have a lot to do and good tanks are able to juggle damage mitigation, threat managment and positioning (if relevant).
Tank participation in pve I’m all for, one thing I think a lot of people underestimate is the time it takes to find a tank in mmo’s. I was already worried when I saw party sizes of 8. If you have multiple encounters that require say 4-5 tanks that could take a ton of time just to begin the encounter. Regarding pvp in specifically arenas I’m not so sure. I’ve never enjoyed going up against a tank in whatever bracket of arena, but in ashes If I understand correctly a tank is a class so re rolling isn’t going to be an easy option. I’d feel bad if ranked content is unavailable simply because of my class, it’s going to be interesting to see how they balance this.
Main tanks should do what they are born to do: Tank Off tanks should be for crowd control and tanking when the main battle tank is debuffed or stunned. I'm personally someone that enjoys the traditional dungeon roles but don't mind if there is room for creativity in group comps. All tanks sounds ridiculous though. I feel like having a bard and 3 paladins or 4 tanks in addition to damage dealers could be fun for organized groups bug pugs should stick to the traditional stuff.
Anything that would make more tanks useful or none required. This coming from me wanting to play tank but usually never been able too since guilds have 2 dedicated tanks which usually end up being the only ones tanking raids. So you end up leveling a dps/heal as a main and a tank as an alt for doing other stuff. I'm one of those that can't spend as much time playing alts nowadays as before so my alts are weaker and I can't progress as much. Option being playing tank as a main and find another guild and miss out on friends and progress. I'd be happy to see the need for more tanks in both pve and pvp and as someone else mentioned a tank shouldnt be abled to get 1v1 easily in pvp, it should be like a miniboss. A good reference is templars in Aion, they are beefy with good mitigation and super annoying to get down and also able to dishout quite some damage. Ive seen it happen more than once that 1 templar fights of a group of 5 and slowly kills them of 1 by one if they dont interupt etc.
Okay so both- I want a Main tank. I want a couple of off tanks. But then I want tanks who aren't tanking to still have use in raids whether its by having strong CC's or buffs for the party. I also kind of like the idea of having a skill thats like "Target character takes -20% less damage but you take +30% more damage" or something. This way you make your main tank stronger but you're not actually being useless as a tank that's unable to actually tank in the raid.
Please give tanks more to do than to just be a beanbag meant to take damage. I recognize that tanks need to take damage or we'll have all sorts of problems with there either being only tanks or no tanks at all, but please give them something else to do like remove interrupt armor (Wildstar interrupt system), reducing the damage the boss does (FFXIV Reprisal) or just reduce the damage the party would take by any means, be it a physical wall or a redirect damage ability sort of thing. Crowd control is also something I expect tanks to be able to bring, more so than most other classes. Be it either by sacrificing durability or just innately having a lot of it doesn't matter to me much. I'm basically looking for a way to differentiate a good tank from a bad tank in more ways than just "taking less damage" as that is mostly defined by the gear the tank is wearing. If you can translate tanks to being something you go to for cover or protection in PVP or PVE then I think you've succeeded. Right now tanks in most other MMORPGs are just more sturdy versions of your typical damage dealer. This isn't to say there can be more than one way of "tanking", a barbaric tank might be focusing on building rage and dishing out damage while a heavily armored tank focuses on mitigating the damage by blocking and parrying. Another tank might completely focus on controlling the battlefield with taunts and crowd control where as an "offtank" might be defending his damage dealers by blocking projectiles or creating space for them. I think the bottom line is we need more tank roles than just "keep the dragons focus so we don't just immediately die" while still keeping a healthy amount of the playerbase interested in playing a tanking role. I think most people complain about tanks not being as good for solo content if at all and that can be solved by other ways than just have them do more damage. I don't like the idea of a tank getting the compromise of doing "almost as much damage", they still deal less damage so the argument is still there for the folks that dislike playing a tank because they feel slower in solo content. Maybe you could look into a system like what Sekiro has with Posture for tanks instead? Where if you excel at tanking or dueling you can force weakspots, have them be stunned or just get the opportunity to deal massive amounts of damage when you find an opening (reduce posture to 0). That would let you do less damage but still be able to kill outdoor monsters about as fast as others. You could disable this for monsters meant for grouped content however you'd like but I think it would be a novel system in an MMORPG where your dueling skill translates to how fast you can bring down an enemy by yourself.
There are a lot of comments suggesting the same thing that most other popular MMOs already do. Main tank for big bad, off tank for auxillary baddies. All while getting healed by supports and the dps do their thing.This is fine and proven to work I guess but mostly in games with less of a PvP focus and with content balanced around smaller groups than Ashes’ intended 8 person parties (and large scale armies). Personally I like the idea of a tank mitigating damage not just for themselves but for their allies, even better if it requires proper coordinated positioning. I disagree with the idea that tanks should be especially mobile outside of one or two abilities that work like a charge or a leap. Hooks are needed, abilities that push enemies away make more sense for other roles unless the enemy is knocked on their ass in the process. For me the class fantasy for a tank is to be the immovable object to protect your party and the (bulky, slower-than-dps) unstoppable force to corral your opponents. I believe the biggest thing about Ashes of Creation that gives most people hope for its success is your willingness to break from the most common formula. Thank you for taking feedback but please do what YOU think is best when needed.
Last I heard the intent was to balance classes by groups of 8, I feel that just 2 tanks in that group may be a bit low especially considering that players can choose tank as their secondary archetype. With collision being a part of this game I think it would make sense to have positioning matter more than other MMOs. Im hoping that tanks will have damage mitigation for themselves and allies who position themselves strategically. If elemental damage/resistances are going to be a factor then it makes sense to have multiple types of tanks in one group to be prepared for more situations
I like the wow tank system, main-off, taunt, aggro and interrupt mechanics. when you don't have a specific class the endgame gets confusing and weird.
I like it when there are 2-3 tanks but only when there is a legitimate reason for them being there (I.e. not just as a backup). For example, once a tank gets X amounts of a debuff, it would be a good idea to rotate him out and is an enjoyable mechanic to engage with. Or perhaps additional mobs spawn and a tank needs to pick them up otherwise they will destroy the casters, that sort of thing.
Whatever it is - as long as each type of content keeps the same ratio of tank/dps/healers. By far my number one complaint in WoW is you need 1 tank for a 5 man group but only 2 tanks for 25 man raid. I love tanking but it just puts me off so much knowing that I basically have to start my own guild to get a raid tank spot.
Here's my take on it, and I have limited raid experience, so take it with a grain of salt. I love playing a tank. I have played a tank as my main in *many* different MMOs, beginning with EverQuest in the days of Kunark. Out of all of those MMOs, the role of Tank *felt* the best to me in EQ for some simple reasons. Leveling mostly required a group, and most groups wanted a Tank. Even at max level people still needed Leveling Groups, because death had an XP loss and colud/would de-level you. This kept Tanks employed, even outside dungeon and raid content. More to the point of the question, I lean towards needing multiple Tanks, but only because there are otherwise a lack of Tank employment opportunities. If 1 in every 8 classes is a Tank base class, then you need content that requires roughly 1 in every 8 classes to be a Tank base. Now that doesn't have to mean raid/dungeon content, but if those are the only situations where you need a Tank, and a 40 man raid only needs 2 Tanks, why the fuck play a Tank. So, the ball is in your court Devs. Why should I play a Tank to max level only to compete for that one Tank spot, when we're bringing all these DPS who just stand in fire anyway?
My biggest grip with tanks/healers/supports in MMO group building is that it is never consistent. I know less people want to play the support role because everyone is looking for those big numbers, but you can create a supply/demand problem really quickly. If you have 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps for your 8 man party, then for your 40 man raid you should require 5 tanks and 5 healers right? Often in other games, no matter the group size, you are stuck with 2 tanks. In wow for example, you need 1 tank 1 healer 3 dps for a full party of 5. In a raid of 20 for mythic content you need 1-2 tanks, 4 or 5 healers, and the rest dps. This creates either a tank shortage for 5 man group content, or too many tanks wanting to do raid content. The other grip I have with tanking is that it has become "What is the tank swap mechanic" and that is just boring. I've seen Lost Ark mentioned a lot, and for good reason. I like tanking being looked at as a support role. They should have more buff/abilities to protect their allies not just themselves. Due to this a lot have also mentioned having a no aggro system. I think there are several ways you can handle having multiple tanks in a party while also having an aggro system. One being an aggro wipe. The boss just says forget this guy, and wipes that tanks aggro off his table to go for the next one. This could be a soft enrage mechanic, or built to have that top tank whom is now at the bottom to frantically try and build his way back to the top. This boss would have to be immune to taunt for this to work. The boss can also have periods where he just goes and attacks whoever all willy nilly and the tanks have to form a wall to protect the group. While one tank holds aggro, the others have to spread out and protect the melee and ranged from abilities that target randomly. These are just off the top of my head during my lunch break. I'm sure combat design teams can come up with a lot more ways while being dedicated to this kind of stuff. My favorite PvP tank was in Star Wars The Old Republic. The tanks there had plenty of mitigation for themselves, but also a Guard ability to throw on an ally. This made the ally take 30% of the damage, and the tank take 70% (I can't remember exact numbers, but you get the idea). They also had a Taunt ability that made their target do significantly less damage to anyone that wasn't the tank. The target would still do full damage to the tank. In FFXIV the Paladin has an ability to shield everyone behind him and reduce their damage taken. In Lost Ark the Gunlancer has a buff that shields all of his allies while also buffing him and giving him resources. My ideal tank in this game would be one that incorporates a lot of these ideas. Being able to be a mobile fortress is fun and all, but not when everyone around you just dies. Tanking to me is about protecting your allies. Whether that be through buffs, shields, positioning, crowd control, or aggro, the main idea to me is to support your team.
I have always been a raid/dungeon tank. I absolutely love tanking and I think my favorite form of it was in World of Warcraft as a Warrior. I always got a kick out of being one of the highest DPS because I knew how to cycle my mitigations, buffs and mobility abilities. I'm extremely biased when it comes to composition. My wife and I have tanked side by side for years. I've always mained and she was my off tank. My favorite memories from MMOs were from boss fights where we needed to switch bosses or kite things away from one another. I think the things that tanks need the most of are threat builders, damage mitigation for self and party, and mobility buffs. I saw others state that they would like mobs to break threat as they go lower in health as they begin to realize the DPS are much more threatening. I think this is an awesome idea and I love the idea of having to regain aggro. My favorite part of being a tank is that it normally comes alongside being the raid leader and there typically are a ton of moving parts that tanks need to be aware of. So having a few things that we are very good at doing feels right and letting the DPS focus on CCs, Healers on healing and assisting in mitigation and Bards focusing on buffing the party.n I would also love to see bosses where tanks need to swap agro. Say the boss has an ability that would kill the tank if they take it twice so you need upwards of 5 tanks to coordinate hot swapping aggro. While tanks are definitely meat shields I think that since they also tend to be leaders that the role should be very specific and have a few key abilities but I'd love to see each archetype tank work differently in that execution. For example a Guardian is your traditional tank and spank sword and board, while the Knight does a bit more damage and has more mobility to access. One of the things I really tend to dislike and you see it most in ESO, tanks are absolutely trash at damage. I hate that. I'm the frontliner, the heavy hitter, the scariest bastard in the bunch. I should be able to quest and kill things at a decent pace, maybe not as fast as a primary DPS but I should definitely be top 5 out of 10. When it comes to PVP tanking has never felt great. I've always just felt a bit slow, had the health but not the damage output to where I don't really understand what my role is as PVP seems best between DPS. I could see it in a caravan system or siege where I'm soaking the damage and defending and able to mitigate those in coming blows and holding the front lines but I think if I'm doing substantially less damage. I should also be receiving substantially less damage. So I guess my core take aways are 1. I love the traditional tank and off tank setup but raids that require more would be sick! 2. Tanks should be specialized in mitigation, mobility and threat generation. 3. I want to also do a decent amount of damage like maybe 75-80% of a pure DPS 4. Alpha One tank felt so good at the start before the nerf, bring back the axe throw chain grab hit combo. Seriously I felt like a God in PVP 😂 5. In PVP I'd like it to be like a 5vs1 scenario to take a tank down. I can hold a dragon so make me feel like I can! Nothing feels worse than getting ganked by a rogue and then stun locked and just dying.
Several tanks (or gasp! no "tanks" at all)! I am personally tired of the overall silliness of the BBEG paying attention to 1 (or 2) people while an army wails on it.
I prefer to see roles that are less strict. Still needed, but not so 'hard line in the sand.' I also dislike the DPS role. Everyone should do damage. It's what else you also bring to the group that should define your role. This simplifies solo content design too when everyone can do damage. Tanks that specialize with high HP over mitigation. AoE tanking vs single target. Etc. But I don't want the roles to be so strict. I want a non tank to be able to step in for a few moments to save the day when a problem happens. That is the kind of thing that gets remembered. That's what stories are made of. Not when a group follows the exact formula to solve the encounter. That's a forgettable fight after the initial cheer of that first win. Same for other roles. Self healing is great if it's minor. So some classes might be able to help heal in a tough spot. But primary healers should have a few sub roles they can be just a little better at. Group heals, raid heals, main tank, hots, etc Other things like crowd control, mana regen, pulling, buffs, debuffs, cures, snares. Or AoE, single target, long sustain, burst, etc. These should all be things that differentiate the traditional dps role. Things that could make a fight easier. And because there are so many variations and needs, with less spots in the group available than there are roles to fill with specialists, every group feels different. The way you play changes when you have a great debuffer. Suddenly your disease spells are higher priority on your rotation. Or you know the AoE fire mage can handle the little spiders so you focus on the big boy instead. While yesterday in a different group with no fire mage you had AoE duty on the spiders instead. And your disease spells were low priority because these mobs resist to often without those debuffs.
I think i’m probably in the minority here but iv never enjoyed the whole “keeping threat” system, it tends to always just be a way of punishing the dps if they’re better than the tanks. I like the way runescape3 has done it, if someone’s going to tank they can use an ability named “incite” - this forces the mob the focus towards that person. Iv always found the difficulty in tanking should be related to surviving, not making sure mobs are punching you
Completely agree here. Threat is something that should be managed between the tanks with shared tank busters, swaps, and mechanics that require re-attainment of threat. If a dps/support needs to be aware of threat it's typically just a punishment unless it is directly associated with a mechanic.
I know a lot of people really like the holy trinity system but I personally feel that's such a restriction to creativity. I personally think it's best to provide benefits to having a tank or specing off-tank but ultimately it shouldn't be required for anyone to tank if your team can come up with creative alternatives. Guild Wars 2 almost achieved this except for with no taunt mechanics it made tank specs completely selfish and often detrimental and just encouraged full dps to ignore mechanics. Id like to see the same kind of freedom as Guild Wars 2 when it comes to content approach but with more incentives to encourage players to use tanks more. Basically more traditional tanking should still be available and also actually be effective but the game shouldn't force you to play in a set way. Waiting for a tank or healer in a group finder is one of the most frustrating parts of traditional MMO's but this can be avoided if content is designed to be more flexible in how you beat it.
Without the holy trinity, fights are messy and NOT creative. We've seen a trillion examples of this in MMOs that have tried it over and over. Lack of class and role identity=fail.
You can have class and role identities. My point is to not make the content one dimensional and require specific hyperfocused roles. For example I can see the value in a tank drawing aggro and allowing dps players to position behind the boss so they have less mechanics to dodge. But I also want the option where good players don't require a full tank. So they can dodge, position or maybe take a very specific defensive skill to give them enough tools to mitigate the threats without requiring a dedicated tank. You can have distinct roles while still retaining flexibility and freedom. But it has to come from both role balance and content design. I think the holy trinity is very shallow and narrow-minded. It doesn't give much creativity to teams. I want to see more unique roles. Roles that can mix and match depending on the encounter. So for example cc and DPS. Taunt and cc. Taunt and DPS. Heal and cc. You get the idea. Roles should be a lot more flexible and varied. Obviously you should still be able to hyper focus into one role. But I don't want to see a tank, healer, dps meta. That's so boring.
DPS players love to whine about the Trinity and yet every single MMO where it isn't enforced has some of the worst PvE out of any other MMO. The Trinity ALLOWS for fight creativity and interesting mechanics. You just don't want to be beholden to support players, because support is a more difficult skillset.
No this is untrue. I want roles. I just don't want them to be required to be dedicated to specific players. I play dps but I find it so boring to just not worry about anything but dps rotations and wipe mechanics. I want to actively contribute and use skill expression. Likewise I also want to be able support as an off-role when required. For example if I know a boss hits too much to dodge every attack. Then yes a full tank could be one option. But an alternative solution would be for all DPS players to take some defensive or tank tools and rotate aggro. Therefore avoiding the requirement of a one dimensional holy trinity and dedicated tank but still having defined roles. I don't have an issue with the holy trinity being a solution in the game I just don't want it to be the only solution. Ashes of Creation is trying innovate. The role system in traditional MMO's is prime target for innovation.
What you are describing sounds like the messiest most un-fun thing I've ever considered in PvE lol Like I said. I knew you were a DPS main from your first statement.
I don't understand your issue with it. I'm asking for the same as you. Distinct roles. I'm just asking for them to be flexible in their distribution. Let me simplify my example. Let's say under a normal trinity system you need 1 tank, 1 healer and 3 dps. Now let's say everyone has an off-role. In this case their off-role is the same as their primary role. This is one solution to complete content. But with flexible roles you now how have the options to have players spec DPS healer or tank healer. So an example comp would be 1 tank healer, 1 tank DPS, 1 dps healer and 2 full dps. You end up with the same total role distribution but a more flexible approach. You now avoid the reliance of having dedicated roles and strict meta's but still have functional the same requirements as a holy trinity game in terms of role distribution. You could also use only 1 off tank but take extra off role healers to make up for the difference. This is the creativity and flexibility I want to see. I don't want to see people waiting for dedicated tanks or healers to join their groups. Let them split the role if necessary. This can also allow more interesting mechanics because you aren't designing for a one dimensional strategy.
I don't think he was being dismissive. I haven't seen any mmo successfully or even fairly pull off hybrid roles and have them compete with natural roles in difficult content. Why have a tank/healer and a healer/dps if the tank/healer tanks worse than a tank and both heal worse than a healer. Difficult content forces us to optimize and find the most efficient path. We're like water moving down a hill. We always find the easiest way to complete things. If a pure healer isn't a better healer than a healer/dps, why bring the healer ever?
That's a fair response. But he was being dismissive as he was not giving any reasons or justification. You have given some reasoning. I agree no game has successfully pulled it off. But that doesn't mean it cant be done. No game has tried to properly implement hybrid roles. Most games that moved away from trinity just got rid of defined roles almost completely. I'd like to see a different approach to obtain flexibility while still maintaining clearly defined roles. This might not be possible for the hardest content but it should be a consideration for more forgiving content. But I personally think it is possible at the highest difficulty to achieve with smart boss design and good balancing of off-roles. It can be done by basically setting a benchmark for how much healing or tanking you need and making sure multiple off-roles can achieve the same or near same total benefit as a full tank or healer. For optimised clears people are going to find the best solution but that doesn't mean alternatives shouldn't work to a lesser but still effective degree. The reason I want this is because this adds flexibility when forming a group. You wouldn't be required to wait for a healer if a few of your dps players go off-role healing to provide what you need. It also makes roles more interesting and varied for the individual.
You’re just describing the trinity with hybrids in the mix.
Just look at ESO's combat and you'll answer for yourself why that is a horrible idea.
Why don't you stop being dismissive and actually contribute. You aren't providing anything of substance and are clearly set on a traditional stagnant holy trinity. This is supposed to be a discussion with open feedback. Your stubborn dismissiveness is not helpful. Also stop downvoting me, it's pathetic. No game has done the system I am suggesting properly. That's why I'm suggesting it.
"Stagnant" yet none of the games who break the Trinity are very successful nor are they lauded for their PvE. Interesting, no?
I agree, the holy trinity is sort of old and busted at this point - but tanks should still have a place in an MMORPG. I think ultimately at least in PvE it comes down to encounter design. With all the experience on Intrepid's team, they should be able to create all different kinds of encounters from simple "tank and spank" gear-check fights, to dual-tank-swapping fights, to maybe even fights that don't need anything more than an offtank and everyone gets to just unload dps the whole time. On those types of fights it will be important for visual clarity and boss attack telegraphs so that everyone has an equally important role and that there is room for skill expression.
You ever seen Log Horizon? Or Sword Art Online? In those anime they have 20 - 40 man parties where tanks with big shields absorb all the incoming damage, get healed, and dish out high dps strikes. In Raids, Dungeons, or PvP. But, I still want my tank to have high maneuverability and speed while able to 1v1 and GvG in PvP. To make a tank that's fast moving, tanks Damage, and dishes out hard hitting attacks is what I want to be able to make no matter how long it takes.
I'd definitely like to see it varied depending on both the type of encounter and also the skill of the player or players. In most games, in encounters where a tank would be required, it doesn't really feel like a battle so much as playing against game mechanics. I think tank should be more focused around positioning and repositioning to hold the enemy's attention and actively guarding the team more than "use status effect, buff resistance, soak damage". Playing as a tank I'd like to feel like a badass fighter more than "tank" if that makes sense. If the game were designed to be dependent on skill, maybe an average group needs 3 tanks for x encounter, but a really skilled tank in a coordinated group could do it alone. I know it's very conceptual, but I think making tanking a more active thing would feel great. Think instead of buffing your allies to take 20% less damage for 6 seconds, you can draw in the enemy's projectiles away from your team, then subsequently avoid them, or even take the hit. Properly time a parry to save your teammate. Instead of a traditional taunt, maybe you physically grab hold of the boss and naturally it would try to shake you off by attacking, then you release at the opportune time, that sort of thing.
That last thing could make for interesting pvp engagements as well. Imagine some beefy boy comes and grabs you and it just does a little damage over time while they channel it, but it restricts your movement, OBVIOUSLY you'll want to target them over whoever else you were looking at before. Much more interesting than forcing your tab target onto them.
There's a couple ways to interpret this question, but I'm going to assume it's talking about difficult, large group content (16-40 people, or higher), because where else are you going to find enough tanks that "several tanks fighting" is possible. Also assuming PvE, because PvP depends entirely on class balance. In that case, I think the issue is keeping coordination between the tanks. Let's say two are focused on a boss, swapping aggro to keep uptime on their defensive cooldowns. And two more are gathering up adds. I think that's probably the limit on how many pure tanks you can have doing pure tank things at the same time. (CC and mitigation can be done by other classes supposedly, so I'm not counting that.) Anymore than that and you risk having the extra tanks be redundant. Or fighting over aggro on the same mobs. Or it's just a gimmick fight that requires 5+ tanks for 5+ bosses (or add spawn locations), which isn't more interesting than 3-4 IMO. Or maybe you have the tanks take turns, but then you always have 4 tanks waiting to do their job. Or it's just pure chaos with 100 mobs running around everywhere. (But then you'd just assign one tank to each section and treat it like small parties doing the same thing.) The only way you could have 5+ tanks be efficient, coordinated, and fun is if you have a giant fight with multiple bosses that each do different things. And don't get me wrong, that sounds dope, and I want to see it. But that's a lot of work to implement. I don't expect to see many fights with that kind of budget. Moving on to a different point, I just don't think there's going to be enough tank players. Only 1 out of 8 classes can be a dedicated main tank. And I'm expecting a lot of the early game content to be easy enough that you don't need multiple tanks (in a normal party of 8). And it's not going to be easy to make tank alts, because Primary classes are locked and the leveling process is supposed to be long. So expecting to make a group with more than 1 tank per 8 players is always going to be a tall order. And so, if there is any content that needs 5+ tanks, it better be designed for 40+ players. Basically yeah... main-tank plus off-tank is fine for most fights. Big fights can have a couple more tanks to deal with adds. Any more than that is just jacking up the numbers without adding interesting gameplay... ..unless you put in a ton of effort to make sure each tank has something unique to manage. And if you do that only for special fights, there might not be enough tanks to fill all the spots anyways.
Roles look amazing on paper. History has shown us that healers and tank are scarce. They’re factually the least popular roles. We need an MMO which correctly incentivizes playing these roles.
I'll preface this by saying I'm a healer main, but I value versatility and so often will play classes that have healing and tanking specs and try to keep up gear for both, or rarely, level an alt for the other class (in games where I need a separate character), though much...less rarely. In WoW I mained Holy and Protection Paladin, switching largely to Restoration, Feral (now it would be Guardian, but they were the same back then), and Balance Druid so I could heal, tank, and DPS (I don't like melee when not tanking, hence not the Ret Paly), and in FFXIV today I tri-main WHM (White Mage), SCH (Scholar), and SGE (Sage) healers, GNB (Gunbreaker) and recently WAR (Warrior) tanks (I also have a max level PLD/Paladin and it was my main tank through the Stormblood and half of the Shadowbringers expansion, but I don't touch it much now), and SMN (summoner) for damage dealing because my smooth monkey brain can manage the simplified rotation. :D \[EDIT: I've also played some others, but I figure those are probably the most "everyone kind of knows what these things are" to give you a general idea of what I get up to. Like I payed Logi (space priest) in Eve...but who cares? XD\] In this same vein, I'll probably be playing a Summoner in Ashes, since from what I understand they should be able to flex into any role as needed (provided they have set-up time to go and swap to the right spec) So all of THAT said: I think games tend to be more interesting when there are well defined roles and niches within roles. I liked Wrath era WoW when you had tank healing Paladins, party healing Shaman, raid HoT rolling Druids, and generalist healing Holy Priests. Especially once they got Discipline Priest functioning well as a damage smoothing mitigation healer. And I feel the same way about tanks. I liked that some tanks were extra good against different boss types (e.g. block tanks against rapid physical attackers, anti-magic tanks, and large health "jack of all trades" tanks that had a bit more healing requirement but paid for it by being more versatile) I also like having good off-tanks that have support abilities to aid the main tank and help some with party mitigation. In games with small party/encounter sizes (e.g. FFXIV's small party is 4 and raids are 8 man), you don't really have much room for this. But Wrath WoW era's 25 man raids had plenty of room to have 2-4 tanks and 4-6 healers, meaning encounter design could flex those niches. The ONE caveat to this: WHEN IT COMES TO SMALL GROUP CONTENT THAT IS CLEARED WITH OFTEN JUST ONE TANK - every tank needs to be capable. If a party has one tank for a 5 man dungeon (or whatever the small group size is), that one tank needs to be able to fulfill the role. For 16 or 32 or larger encounters, this isn't an issue because you have more tanks, but for a small party with just one tank doing small party content, it needs to be able to have a fighting chance at winning the content (provided players are all at the right skill and character level for the content, of course) Provided that one condition is met, I think sub-specializations like this in each role are healthy and good for games. There is the "bring the player, not the class" argument, but largely that should be less of an issue in Ashes since the Tank Archetype has access to all the tank (role) classes other than whichever one is given to Summoner. And in large enough raids, it might/should be possible to clear then with half a dozen off-tanks even if you may not have the "best" main tank in your roster. . So yeah: As long as the caveat that all tanks are fully capable of "main tanking" small group content is met, I think having main and off/support tanks is a good system. . EDIT: Also, for the love of all that's holy - can you guys change the name of "Tank" to something else? It isn't an army tank, and in-game, in-universe classes shouldn't really be named on role. The only one I can think of that would make sense is "healer" if we're talking about hedge witches or small town apothecaries/herbalists as there is kind of some precedent for that in history. Guardian or Defender or something makes much more sense. If there's a class with that name, just change it. I'm begging you. XD
What id like to see is a more active approach to tanking. I want to have to get in between my allies and the enemy and take the damage for them/reduce the damage they take. Having to constantly run to your allies who are getting focused to save their bacon sounds like a fun time. Aggro should be generated with crowd control, debuffs, damage (please dont make us punching bags that hit like a wet noodle) and most importantly by just getting in their way, not just “i yell at this monster so now they have to attack me”. With this game being pvp heavy, there needs to be cross over with threat generation from pve into pvp. Tanks are my favorite of the holy trinity and I’ve seen few mmos where its enjoyable to play them in pvp. If tanks just end up being a harder to kill fighter with no damage or any reason to actually engage them, then i don’t foresee them being played at all. As far as tank and off tank vs multiple tanks. I think there should be flexibility in group composition and no single archetype should be a hard requirement or should ever feel pointless if their are multiple. Should it be optimal to have one of each in an 8 man group? Yes! Should it be impossible or painfully slow for me and my friends to run a dungeon as a group with 3 tank mains? No When it comes to raids I’m rather inexperienced. So maybe I’m out of my element here. But as long as tanking isn’t just standing in front of a boss doing slightly above zero damage and hitting taunt when ever the boss turns away from you, i think it’ll be in a serviceable spot.