195 réponses à ce sujet

[Aradace]

Seems like Ninja has never played an MMO in his life. Otherwise he'd know that's ALL a "tank" does in a group. A tank's "typical" role in a group usually goes as follows: Taunt, get skull bashed while shielding allies from damage, taunt more if the mob is going after another party member, get healed by the healer, taunt some more, take more skull bashing, mob dies.....Lather, rinse, repeat as needed in future battles lol.

[Yrkoon]

Aradace wrote...

Seems like Ninja has never played an MMO in his life. Otherwise he'd know that's ALL a "tank" does in a group. A tank's "typical" role in a group usually goes as follows: Taunt, get skull bashed while shielding allies from damage, taunt more if the mob is going after another party member, get healed by the healer, taunt some more, take more skull bashing, mob dies.....Lather, rinse, repeat as needed in future battles lol.

Well, if that's true then the term "tank" is a huge misnomer.  They should be calling them meat-shields.  Or "decoys".  Because that's what you're describing.

A tank should be all of the above  and also have front line offensive capabilities.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 31 décembre 2010 - 07:15 .

[State_Of_Danile]

Yrkoon wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Seems like Ninja has never played an MMO in his life. Otherwise he'd know that's ALL a "tank" does in a group. A tank's "typical" role in a group usually goes as follows: Taunt, get skull bashed while shielding allies from damage, taunt more if the mob is going after another party member, get healed by the healer, taunt some more, take more skull bashing, mob dies.....Lather, rinse, repeat as needed in future battles lol.

Well, if that's true then the term "tank" is a huge misnomer.  They should be calling them meat-shields.  Or "decoys".  Because that's what you're describing.

A tank should be all of the above  and also have front line offensive capabilities.

yeah they should have the offensive abilities. I think the main issue was that they didnt. they did seem to fit the role of meat shield rather than a tank. But hey, i trust Bioware. this time around i think SnS will handle much better in the offense department (not to say that 2h warriors cant tank either)

[Ziggeh]

Yrkoon wrote...
A tank should be all of the above  and also have front line offensive capabilities.

They have said they'll be somewhat more potent in that regard this time around (if 40% of a rogue is more than last time), but I'm not sure why it should need to meet that definition. classes (generally) fall somewhere along an offense/defense scale for balance purposes, and the main role of the tank is party wide mitigation. One is engaged in the act of "tanking" even if stock still being punched repeatedly.

[soteria]

Aradace wrote...

Seems like Ninja has never played an MMO in his life. Otherwise he'd know that's ALL a "tank" does in a group. A tank's "typical" role in a group usually goes as follows: Taunt, get skull bashed while shielding allies from damage, taunt more if the mob is going after another party member, get healed by the healer, taunt some more, take more skull bashing, mob dies.....Lather, rinse, repeat as needed in future battles lol.

Not my experience.  Usually the tank is the leader of the group--the one who determines the pace, which enemies to kill first and which to crowd control, and which strategy to use on a fight.  In small groups, the tank probably also needs to be on the ball dishing out spell interrupts and watching the party's position, too.  It is true that the tank is not expected to put up big damage numbers, though.

[AlanC9]

Yrkoon wrote...

Well, if that's true then the term "tank" is a huge misnomer.  They should be calling them meat-shields.  Or "decoys".  Because that's what you're describing.

Yep. Feel free to go on a grammar crusade against MMO players everywhere.

[Yrkoon]

 Will do.   Thanks for the permission, master.

Hanz54321 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Seems like Ninja has never played an MMO in his life. Otherwise he'd know that's ALL a "tank" does in a group. A tank's "typical" role in a group usually goes as follows: Taunt, get skull bashed while shielding allies from damage, taunt more if the mob is going after another party member, get healed by the healer, taunt some more, take more skull bashing, mob dies.....Lather, rinse, repeat as needed in future battles lol.

This is why I ducked out of this thread.  A LOT of people posting have obviously never played an MMO.  A LOT don't get it - that in some games a tank is a required team member who is required to do one specific job.

You can't teach those people on an internet thread.  It's like the adage (sp) about tasting an apple.  You can describe it to them until you're blue, but they won't really understand what an apple tastes like until they've bitten in to one.

This is one case where I don't fault folks.  It's just that they lack an experience that defines the topic.

May everyone get what you need this New Year

I'm really not understanding why, for a single player RPG like Dragon Age, we're required to know (or care) how an MMO player defines a "tank".  Or why MMOs are now the official benchmark for such terms.  Is DA2 going to be an MMO?

Modifié par Yrkoon, 31 décembre 2010 - 09:02 .

[Ziggeh]

Yrkoon wrote...
I'm really not understanding why, for a single player RPG like Dragon Age, we're required to know (or care) how an MMO player defines a "tank".  Or why MMOs are now the official benchmark for such terms.  Is DA2 going to be an MMO?

You're playing as a party. It's very much the gaming "benchmark" for party based gameplay.

[tonnactus]

The arcane was more then a tank of course.Heal speals never required much many.Spells like fireball were also possible,with blood magic even big aoe spells like blizzard.

The guardian in awakening was also more then an ordinary warrior.
As far as offensive goes,the spirit warrior didnt need much dexterity with 50 percent dodge(and items like cailans arms,the spellward and the cinch of manouvering). The player could put 26 points in dexterity and the rest in strenght.

Easy harvester defeat with a spirit warrior with just enough dexterity to get all shield talents(you dont need any defense with 100 percent dodge so this is possible with any kind of warrior):




It works.

Modifié par tonnactus, 31 décembre 2010 - 09:24 .

[Yrkoon]

Ziggeh wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...
I'm really not understanding why, for a single player RPG like Dragon Age, we're required to know (or care) how an MMO player defines a "tank".  Or why MMOs are now the official benchmark for such terms.  Is DA2 going to be an MMO?

You're playing as a party. It's very much the gaming "benchmark" for party based gameplay.

Nonsense.  I've never played a party based RPG that even needed a tank, let alone needed a  meat shield to   sit there and  just  absorb damage.  In most Party Based RPGs,  you  can assign your mage to the task of doing nothing but Crowd control so that  everyone else in your party can clear out the battle field

Modifié par Yrkoon, 31 décembre 2010 - 09:24 .

[Yrkoon]

Hanz54321 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote..
I'm really not understanding why . . .

Nods.  That's the gist of my post.  Folks like you don't understand "why".

And, as I said in my post, unless you actually play a MMO through to the point that you are raiding, you never will understand why.

Why do you NEED to inderstand?  Because without the context of having played a real tank in a game that requires a real tank, you can't understand what a tank even is supposed to be.  Unless you like arguing your POV without actually knowing what you are talking about.

It's ironic your posing this debate to me because I already said I like having the option to use a tanking strategy in DA, but I like that it's not mandatory.  DA does not require a tank and I think it's great.  People can play how they want.

But if you are going to discuss tanking, you need to know what a tank is.  If you've never played an MMO, you don't really know what a tank is because you've never played a game that demands you have one.

I'll ask again.  Is DA2 going to be an MMO?

No?   Then  why do we need to know squat about how things operate in MMOs?

Modifié par Yrkoon, 31 décembre 2010 - 09:27 .

[Yrkoon]

Hanz54321 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote..
I'll ask again.  Is DA2 going to be an MMO?

No?   Then  why do we need to know squat about how things operate in MMOs?

Well, keep asking.  If my answer didn't satisfy then you really don't want to know, you just want to be obstinent.

You replied so fast I can tell you didn't even think about what you read - you just sped through it ready to continue your challenge.

Save  it.    you'll never be able to overcome the bottom line here and you know it:   Dragon Age is not an MMO.  period.    Therefore, coming on a Dragon Age thread and blasting people for not understanding what a Tank is in an MMO, is beyond silly.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 31 décembre 2010 - 09:38 .

[NvVanity]

Not that I would know only having played WoW for a few months before getting bored and Final Fantasy 11 for three days before the sheer boredom kicked in, but i'm pretty sure MMO "tanks" and a single player action game like Dragon Age "tanks" would differ in the combat roles. Seeing as in Dragon Age I don't have a giant group of people in combat with me and only a small group of 4.

[Ziggeh]

Yrkoon wrote...

Nonsense.  I've never played a party based RPG that even needed a tank, let alone needed a  meat shield to   sit there and  just  absorb damage.  In most Party Based RPGs,  you  can assign your mage to the task of doing nothing but Crowd control so that  everyone else in your party can clear out the battle field

You don't really "need" one here. But "threat" is a variable, it is useful to manage it in order to reduce incoming damage and "tanking" is an activity one may engage in. You seem to be arguing that we should use a vocabulary that fits systems other than the one in place.

[Yrkoon]

I guess we really DO need to walk someone through this.

Hanz54321 wrote...
 A LOT don't get it

They don't get it.  Translation:   We're the smart ones with the capacity to understand,   They're not.

Hanz54321 wrote...
You can't teach those people on an internet thread.

 Translation:  Those people are too dumb to  learn what we're trying to teach them  (too dumb to learn that MMOs = the way things really  are)
  

Hanz54321 wrote...

 It's just that they lack an experience that defines the topic.
 

Translation:  If you haven't wasted your life away playing MMOs, then you lack the experience to know what a tank is.


Yeah, real solid argument there.    You're discussing  a different system entirely.  There's a huge difference between the role of a tank in an MMO vs. the role of a tank in an RPG.   But I'm sure  you knew that already, right? 

Modifié par Yrkoon, 31 décembre 2010 - 10:18 .

[Yrkoon]

Hanz54321 wrote...

That's it. Lobby for help from others.

Yes, perhaps someone else  can answer the very simple question that you've been dodging  for a whole page now:


Since DA is not an MMO, why does anyone discussing Tanks in DA need to know anything about what a tank is in an MMO?

[AlanC9]

Yrkoon wrote...
  There's a huge difference between the role of a tank in an MMO vs. the role of a tank in an RPG.  

Why?

I figured I might as well play the MMO-ignorance card myself.

[Sylvius the Mad]

soteria wrote...

Not my experience.  Usually the tank is the leader of the group--the one who determines the pace, which enemies to kill first and which to crowd control, and which strategy to use on a fight.

You're describing a tank who is also acting as the puller, but that's not a necessary group design.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dhiro wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I wonder to what degree non-Warriors can serve as effective tanks.

I'm almost sure someone in this forum said that Leliana could be a good tank.

And she could.  But that was DAO.

Can a Rogue be an effective tank in DA2?