1390 réponses à ce sujet

[Lebanese Dude]

It's become a modern convention like a tank, but I prefer rulesets where there are no tanks or healers. 

 

I disagree about the tank part.

Proper battlefield combat should always have a front-line. It's essential to organized warfare and is what allows covert and support operations to take place.

DA provides two approaches to it. You can be a shield-bearing impenetrable bulwark or a constantly threatening zweihander-wielding juggernaut.

 

It's much easier to cut off healing as it is only one way to support, but cutting off a front line is essentially turning combat into a zerg. it completely changes game strategy and not always to the better. 

 

[Gtdef]

Tank and meatshield are different things. Like support and healing are different things. I'm pretty sure that's what he means.

[lolwut]

For playing a healer class, duh... Some people like me love being a healer. What's so shocking about that?

 

There's nothing shocking about it. But if including "thing" is making the rest of the game worse in order to balance "thing", get rid of "thing".

[Lebanese Dude]

Tank and meatshield are different things. Like support and healing are different things. I'm pretty sure that's what he means.

 

This is incorrect.

 

Tank and meatshield are the same thing. A tank can still do damage and a meatshield can tank. They are equivalent. Their purpose is to absorb damage and pose a constant threat on the battlefield that the enemy cannot ignore.

 

A support does not have to heal. In fact, good non-heal-based support (prevention) is seen to be better than cure (healing). Its why discipline priests in WoW were valued so highly pre-nerfs. Just refresh shields and blitzkrieg everything.

[Gtdef]

This is incorrect.

 

Tank and meatshield are the same thing. A tank can still do damage and a meatshield can tank. They are equivalent.

 

A support does not have to heal. In fact, good non-heal-based support (prevention) is seen to be better than cure (healing). Its why discipline priests in WoW were valued so highly pre-nerfs.

 

The are not. Meatshield is anything that can use their skills to soak damage. Warlock in earlier WoW expansions was a meatshield. Someone with high resistances but not high overall mitigation is a specialized meatshield (like the Huhuran fight). 

 

Tank is a specialized role that only exists to hold aggro and mitigate damage. In most games where the role is used, the damage output of a tank is based on the damage he takes/mitigates or how many enemies attack him.

[Lebanese Dude]

There's nothing shocking about it. But if including "thing" is making the rest of the game worse in order to balance "thing", get rid of "thing".

 

To be fair, a good middle-ground would have been to remove dedicated healing specializations and the creation tree while retaining a long-cooldown healing spell.

 

As it were, DAI has the Resurgence focus Healing ability, so they have delivered. 

[Lebanese Dude]

The are not. Meatshield is anything that can use their skills to soak damage. Warlock in earlier WoW expansions was a meatshield. Someone with high resistances but not high overall mitigation is a specialized meatshield (like the Huhuran fight). 

 

Tank is a specialized role that only exists to hold aggro and mitigate damage. In most games where the role is used, the damage output of a tank is based on the damage he takes/mitigates or how many enemies attack him.

 

So the warlock by that definition was a tank. Perhaps not a conventional tank such as a shield-bearing warrior, but he was a tank. He held aggro and soaked damage, albeit inefficiently.
 

Mitigation is a non-factor. This has to do with tanking efficiency, which is irrelevant to the distinction. 

 

Also, tanking does not necessitate low damage. In DAO my shield warrior did more effective damage than my other characters. In DA2 my tank 2-H warrior hurt a lot. You are generalizing.

[Siven80]

I'm interested to try it out.

 

It really wont alter my playstyle all that much anyway as i tend to use heal spells as last resort. 

 

I use CC i have available to minimize incoming dmg. 

 

I dont typically use a "tank" in my DA games. The tank, heal, dps of MMOs doesnt fit my DA playstyle. My warriors are there to deal dmg along with everyone else, they just have heavy armour to reduce dmg more. My mages CC, do dmg and as a last resort throw a heal.

 

So the increased focus on preventing dmg vs heal spam in theory sounds good to me.

 

As long as theres a last resort heal spell to use. I also hope 2 handed warriors get enough Guard to use as the shield wearers do.

[In Exile]

I disagree about the tank part.

Proper battlefield combat should always have a front-line. It's essential to organized warfare and is what allows covert and support operations to take place.

DA provides two approaches to it. You can be a shield-bearing impenetrable bulwark or a constantly threatening zweihander-wielding juggernaut.

 

It's much easier to cut off healing as it is only one way to support, but cutting off a front line is essentially turning combat into a zerg. it completely changes game strategy and not always to the better. 

 

 

Front line combatants and tanks are different things. Tanks use what are basically magic powers to (1) reduce damage in unrealistic ways and (2) force targets to attack them. I dislike that playstyle. I prefer that damage mitigation abilities be left with mages, and that taunt-like abilities absolutely do not exist. 

 

Edit: Basically what Gtdef said. 

[Mirrman70]

does barriers and guard stack?

[jtav]

does barriers and guard stack?

Yep.

[Gtdef]

So the warlock by that definition was a tank. Perhaps not a conventional tank such as a shield-bearing warrior, but he was a tank. He held aggro and soaked damage. 
 

Mitigation is a non-factor. This has to do with tanking efficiency, which is irrelevant to the distinction.

 

Also, tanking does not necessitate low damage. In DAO my tank did more effective damage than my other characters. You are generalizing.

 

No I'm not. The word is used interchangeably but the role has a very precise meaning. We call bulkier classes "tanky". Because they are not tanks but have higher defenses like a tank does. 

 

If the game isn't designed around the trinity, the role "tank" has absolutely no point. In DnD we use meatshield, in Moba we use "bruiser" or "initiator" or "durable", usually to describe the top laners. Only in mmos we use the word "tank". 

[dutch_gamer]

does barriers and guard stack?

Yes.

 

See first post.
 

• Yes, guard and barriers stack—enemies have to break Cassandra's barrier AND guard before they damage her health

[Dunbartacus]

No I'm not. The word is used interchangeably but the role has a very precise meaning. We call bulkier classes "tanky". Because they are not tanks but have higher defenses like a tank does. 

 

If the game isn't designed around the trinity, the role "tank" has absolutely no point. In DnD we use meatshield, in Moba we use "bruiser" or "initiator" or "durable", usually to describe the top laners. Only in mmos we use the word "tank". 

actually lol uses the classification tank for those with high defensive stats, synergy and cc.

[Lebanese Dude]

No I'm not. The word is used interchangeably but the role has a very precise meaning. We call bulkier classes "tanky". Because they are not tanks but have higher defenses like a tank does. 

 

If the game isn't designed around the trinity, the role "tank" has absolutely no point. In DnD we use meatshield, in Moba we use "bruiser" or "initiator" or "durable", usually to describe the top laners. Only in mmos we use the word "tank". 

 

Semantics.

 

A "meatshield" in DnD is a tank. The meatshield absorbs damage while holding aggro. That is a tank. They didn't use the word "tank" perhaps, but the meaning is the same.

 

A bruiser is a multiclass unit that has different ITEM builds for the same ability set, so they cannot be used in this discussion. They are tanks when built tanky and dps when built for dps. They can be "both", but something that can tank  is a tank, albeit inefficently if not enough tank items are bought.

LoL (and other MOBAs) also has dedicated tanks that are only efficient at tanking.

So basically MOBA tanks are different in that their items make them tanks, rather than their abilities, with the units with abilities specialized for tanking being better at it. A support can build tanky and be a hell of a tank, but a dedicated tank will always be better.
It's different than RPGs.

[Lebanese Dude]

Front line combatants and tanks are different things. Tanks use what are basically magic powers to (1) reduce damage in unrealistic ways and (2) force targets to attack them. I dislike that playstyle. I prefer that damage mitigation abilities be left with mages, and that taunt-like abilities absolutely do not exist. 

 

Edit: Basically what Gtdef said. 

 

While I agree that "taunt" is a pure gameplay mechanic, you can do what I do and envision tanks as the assertive, high-pressure, constant threat that the enemy must deal with while the support and covert operations take place. 

 

Support units in DA (archers, mages) and Covert units (rogues) are either too inconvenient to attack or too slippery.
You can't just run past the cohesive front-line in real life without taking serious damage. The same should apply to games, not only for the realism aspect but also for keeping combat organized and fun.

[Vaseldwa]

 @ Patrick Weekes

 

Thank you so much for a great explanation and for your view on how to "stay alive" I feel so much better! 

[Gtdef]

There is no such thing as "aggro" in DnD. The targets of the enemies is left up to the DM. There isn't such thing as aggro in LoL as well. That's the main reason people started saying "bruiser" instead of tank. You can just ignore the tank. This is true for every pvp environment.

 

It's not the item build that makes a bruiser. It's the skill set. You can't make Ashe into a "bruiser" no matter how hard you try. Even bots will destroy you. Like you can't build Yorik into AD carry. His skillset doesn't allow him to connect or to survive.

LoL uses the word tank only because people are familiar with it. It also uses the word "off-tank". What does this mean in the context of the game?

[TheEternalStudent]

There is no such thing as "aggro" in DnD. The targets of the enemies is left up to the DM.

 

It's not the item build that makes a bruiser. It's the skill set. You can't make Ashe into a "bruiser" no matter how hard you try. Even bots will destroy you. Like you can't build Yorik into AD carry. His skillset doesn't allow him to connect or to survive.

LoL uses the word tank only because people are familiar with it. It also uses the word "off-tank". What does this mean in the context of the game?

DnD totally lets you challenge enemies making them ineffectual against other allies, and sometimes take damage if they don't attack you. It doesn't force them, but it still encourages focusing their attacks on you.

[Dunbartacus]

Semantics.

 

A "meatshield" in DnD is a tank. The meatshield absorbs damage while holding aggro. That is a tank. They didn't use the word "tank" perhaps, but the meaning is the same.

 

A bruiser is a multiclass unit that has different ITEM builds for the same ability set, so they cannot be used in this discussion. They are tanks when built tanky and dps when built for dps. They can be "both", but something that can tank  is a tank, albeit inefficently if not enough tank items are bought.

LoL (and other MOBAs) also has dedicated tanks that are only efficient at tanking.

Bruisers can build tank or dps but their effectiveness drops they are best suited to building a bit of offense and defense, I would probably consider two handed warrior and maybe knight enchanters natural bruisers. Tanks are effective in LoL(cant really speak for other Moba's) because they have great presence within a fight through great lockdown and initiation and are also make an amazingly durable front line due to abilities that actively increase toughness, S&S warriors are your natural tanks im also hoping to build a viable Knight enchanter tank.

[Lebanese Dude]

 im also hoping to build a viable Knight enchanter tank.

 

I'm afraid they have already stated that Knight Enchanters aren't very durable. I hope we can increase the durability through gear.

[Gtdef]

DnD totally lets you challenge enemies making them ineffectual against other allies, and sometimes take damage if they don't attack you. It doesn't force them, but it still encourages focusing their attacks on you.

 

Indeed but is like a common debuff with a twist. Aggro is part of the AI mechanics.

[Dunbartacus]

I'm afraid they have already stated that Knight Enchanters aren't very durable. I hope we can increase the durability through gear.

Ive already got a build which sounds pretty tanky but a lot will depend on the contents of the Knight enchanter tree and whether i can hold aggro.

[sylvanaerie]

There is no such thing as "aggro" in DnD. The targets of the enemies is left up to the DM. There isn't such thing as aggro in LoL as well. That's the main reason people started saying "bruiser" instead of tank. You can just ignore the tank. This is true for every pvp environment.

 

It's not the item build that makes a bruiser. It's the skill set. You can't make Ashe into a "bruiser" no matter how hard you try. Even bots will destroy you. Like you can't build Yorik into AD carry. His skillset doesn't allow him to connect or to survive.

LoL uses the word tank only because people are familiar with it. It also uses the word "off-tank". What does this mean in the context of the game?

 

It's been a long time since I played D&D but the similar game system "Pathfinder" has plate classes with specific taunts that increase aggro or force aggro onto themselves.  Samurai and Paladins specifically.

[Lebanese Dude]

Ive already got a build which sounds pretty tanky but a lot will depend on the contents of the Knight enchanter tree and whether i can hold aggro.

 

I hope we can. I'd love to try a non-efficient shits and giggles 4 mage playthrough some day since we can.