Forums » Pantheon Classes

Tanking Class Question

    • 1016 posts
    March 18, 2016 10:54 AM PDT

    Hi Everyone,

    A curiosity on the tank class.  Is the Warrior goign to be the primary tank in Pantheon?  I play both caster and tank.   I am poking around on the Crusader threads but that is a specialized class imho.

    Just a general question.

     

    Ox

    • 326 posts
    March 18, 2016 12:19 PM PDT

    I sure hope so.

    • 118 posts
    March 21, 2016 10:02 AM PDT

    I sure hope not. Crusaders & Dire Lord should be equally capable tanks imo.

    • 749 posts
    March 21, 2016 6:34 PM PDT

    Oxillion said:

     

    Is the Warrior goign to be the primary tank in Pantheon?  I play both caster and tank.   I am poking around on the Crusader threads but that is a specialized class imho.

     

     

    I really don't think these kinds of distinctions are going to be made.  The implication that the Warrior class will be "THE" tank seems incredibly limiting to me.  I also see a lot of comments on these forums referring to the classes as if they're going to be picked up with a crane from Everquest and dropped in Pantheon.  I think we would be doing ourselves, and this game, a great injustice to think this way.  We would all do well to drop the preconceived notions about how Pantheon will mimic Everquest and start judging it on its own merits.

    In my opinion, if a class resides within an archetype, it should be able to fill that role unquestionably.  The only distinction should be the way in which they go about it.  If you want to Tank, you should be able to feel confident, all things being equal, that any of the three classes can do the job.  Your decision should be based on playstyle and how the spells and abilities of the individual classes suit you.  The decision should never be based around some notion that any one class is somehow inherently better by design.

     


    This post was edited by Nikademis at March 21, 2016 6:35 PM PDT
    • 326 posts
    March 21, 2016 7:05 PM PDT

    If Dire lord, Crusader and Warrior are all equal tanks what does the Warrior get? Both other classes have heals and buffs, utility and debuffs, what will the Warrior have?

    • 749 posts
    March 21, 2016 7:26 PM PDT

    Jamie said:

    If Dire lord, Crusader and Warrior are all equal tanks what does the Warrior get? Both other classes have heals and buffs, utility and debuffs, what will the Warrior have?

     

    I guess we will just have to wait and see when we get some more definitive class descriptions from the team.  

    As it stands, the only information that we have published for any class is the Cleric.  Anything we "know" about any other class is based on either a) the short class description on the "Classes" section of the website, b) the original early class descriptions from the Kickstarter campaign, or c) the recent pre-alpha stream, where we got to see a few of the classes in action (but still only through the eyes of the Wizard).  Outside of that, anything that gets said about classes at this point (except from the devs directly) is pure speculation.

    • 118 posts
    March 21, 2016 7:35 PM PDT

    Jamie said:

    If Dire lord, Crusader and Warrior are all equal tanks what does the Warrior get? Both other classes have heals and buffs, utility and debuffs, what will the Warrior have?

    (All speculations...) Possibilities include dual wielding, offensive stance, buff from shouts or banners, debuffs from special attacks. Warrior don't have to be the skill deprived meat shield they were back in EQ, and thus forcing every other tank to give up tankiness to make up for additions they recieve.

    • 749 posts
    March 21, 2016 7:42 PM PDT

    Mekada said:

    Jamie said:

    If Dire lord, Crusader and Warrior are all equal tanks what does the Warrior get? Both other classes have heals and buffs, utility and debuffs, what will the Warrior have?

    (All speculations...) Possibilities include dual wielding, offensive stance, buff from shouts or banners, debuffs from special attacks. Warrior don't have to be the skill deprived meat shield they were back in EQ, and thus forcing every other tank to give up tankiness to make up for additions they recieve.

    Agreed.  I think it would be cool if they explored a Warrior with the ability to gain certain bonuses with individual weapon types.  If the Pantheon Warrior were a master of weaponry, a major mechanic could allow higher weapon proficiencies, damage, abilities, etc. with weapons that other melee fighters would not have the ability to get out of the same weapon.  In other words, due to the Warriors superior understanding of weaponry he is able to use them in ways that other classes can't.

    • 326 posts
    March 22, 2016 2:48 AM PDT

    It seems like most of the ideas here revolve around warriors having more dps and less defensive ability. Obviously this is my opinion but I do not think this is the direction people are looking for in Pantheon. All tanks being equal and all healers being equal was something EQ2 tried and failed. I was under the impression that the idea here was strong class distinctions not equality but perhaps I misunderstood. I posted somewhere else on here about my speculations, if I can find it I will quote myself.

    • 326 posts
    March 22, 2016 3:38 AM PDT

    Again this is just my opinion but it is definitely close to what I am looking for. Warrior = Defensive Mitigation Tank.

    Jamie said:

    Normally warriors are great at mitigating big hits but have no heals or major buffs or debuffs to help the raid. They have few range attacks and are short on area of effect attacks which makes them less than ideal for picking up adds. Sk (Dire Lord) on the other hand normally is great at this type of thing with the ability to replace their own hp decent self buffs and debuffs but they do not really have the hp and ac to shine as the raids MT. Pally (Crusader) is great for hanging out with the healers and casters during raid, they have spells to attack from a distance enough heals to take care of themselves and their teammates without having the healers change targets from the tanks. They are tough enough to hold on to some adds indefinitely plus they have great buffs.

    In my experience the minor difference in tanking ability really only matters on the hardest content and in raids. In most other scenarios the difference is negligible and in most other cases the average hybrid tank brings just a little more to the group than even a really good warrior. A warrior can be competitive by knowing what his bread and butter is and sticking to it. Build groups that play on your strengths with lots of utility to fill in for your weaknesses. Help control the battlefield, positioning is the tanks job. Maintain agro and soak up the big hits to keep your group alive and doing what they do best. This is the least solo able class and it requires great group leader skill to be successful. When you are a warrior the key to being consistent is having great people in your group and keeping things organized and people alive so they want to group with you again.

    This is how I see things but they may go a different way with Pantheon.


    This post was edited by Jamie at March 22, 2016 3:40 AM PDT
    • 118 posts
    March 22, 2016 7:47 AM PDT

    This is how it was in EQ, not how it has to be in pantheon.

    If you look at it from a raid perspective, a paladin having buffs (which would be superseeded by cleric's) and heals (barely any time to cast them while tanking) means the paladin in just a weak warrior with less damage on top of it (unless the target is undead). SK had it a bit better imo but similar issues.

    I'm hoping pantheon will have limited abilities and something emulating specs. In that case, the 3 tank classes could be oriented as such:

    Warrior: 75% tank / 25% melee dmg

    Dire Lord: 75% tank / 25% magic caster

    Crusader: 75% tank / 25% healer

    Obviously, proportions are made up and there could be more tiers in there (DL and crusader will have some melee dmg capabilities, Warriors could get some utility) but when either of the 3 classes picks up a shield and choose abilities accordingly, Warrior shouldn't have an edge in most situations.

    • 749 posts
    March 22, 2016 9:16 AM PDT

    Jamie said:

    All tanks being equal and all healers being equal was something EQ2 tried and failed. I was under the impression that the idea here was strong class distinctions not equality but perhaps I misunderstood.

    I don't feel like these two ideas have to be mutually exclusive.  Surely we can have classes that are unique in ability and playstyle that can be relied on to do a specific role when compared to another within the same archetype.  And let me be clear, I'm not calling for total balance among classes, far from it.  What I am implying is that if I want to tank, I should be choosing the class that I feel a connection to, who’s abilities makes sense to me.  Not because the community has deemed one the ONLY TANK, and if you’re not a Warrior than kick rocks.  Honestly, at that point why are the Dire Lord and Crusader even in game then?  Just make the Warrior the only "Tank" and move on.  That would make the most sense in the scenario you describe.


    This post was edited by Nikademis at March 22, 2016 9:21 AM PDT
    • 326 posts
    March 22, 2016 10:07 AM PDT

    Nikademis said:

    Jamie said:

    All tanks being equal and all healers being equal was something EQ2 tried and failed. I was under the impression that the idea here was strong class distinctions not equality but perhaps I misunderstood.

    I don't feel like these two ideas have to be mutually exclusive.  Surely we can have classes that are unique in ability and playstyle that can be relied on to do a specific role when compared to another within the same archetype.  And let me be clear, I'm not calling for total balance among classes, far from it.  What I am implying is that if I want to tank, I should be choosing the class that I feel a connection to, who’s abilities makes sense to me.  Not because the community has deemed one the ONLY TANK, and if you’re not a Warrior than kick rocks.  Honestly, at that point why are the Dire Lord and Crusader even in game then?  Just make the Warrior the only "Tank" and move on.  That would make the most sense in the scenario you describe.

     

    I am not sure I said only tank. Nowhere did I say that Warriors would be the best tank in all situations. To sum it up I actually said the best tank for MT raiding the end game of content. I went on to say one of the worste at group content. 

    Jamie said:

    In my experience the minor difference in tanking ability really only matters on the hardest content and in raids. In most other scenarios the difference is negligible and in most other cases the average hybrid tank brings just a little more to the group than even a really good warrior.

    Choose the tank for the play style you like and the content you will be experienceing. I plan to be on the edge of the end game where the only thing that matters is my ability to stay up long enough to let my guild kill some mob we have never killed before. I except that I will have to try much harder than my hybrid tank friends in most group content but I am okay with that becuase I know how to maximize my class by group setup. 

    One tank will be best for my scenario and playstyle. I may be wrong and it may not be Warrior but there is no way one of these classes will not excell in this situation. This was the the same for EQ and EQ2 (Gaurdian) even though they tried it otherwise. 

     

    • 326 posts
    March 22, 2016 10:10 AM PDT

    My other question would be does anyone who has any input here actually play a tank class? Has anyone actually played a tank class in end game groups or raids?

    Or is this all just back seat driving?

    • 749 posts
    March 22, 2016 2:11 PM PDT

    Jamie said:

    My other question would be does anyone who has any input here actually play a tank class? Has anyone actually played a tank class in end game groups or raids?

    Or is this all just back seat driving?

    Yes.  And I'm really not sure I appreciate the implication one way or another.  Again, I feel that your preconceived notions are getting in the way.  Should anyone on these forums have less of a right to participate in discussion based on their playstyle/experience?  I don't think so.  The title of this thread is not "End Game Tanking Philosophy - credentials required.”

    Your comment implies that because you have end game experience that you are somehow an authority.  I hate to say it, but you’ve stumbled into a community that was there from the start, MMO veterans of 17+ years, just like you.  That sort of elitist attitude just won’t fly here.

    It's clear that we don't agree on how things should be and that's fine; discussion is the hallmark of a healthy community.  But don't think for a minute that your underhanded comments are flying over our heads.

    • 326 posts
    March 22, 2016 5:52 PM PDT

    Nikademis said:

    Yes.  And I'm really not sure I appreciate the implication one way or another.  

     

    That actually made me laugh =)

    I have to say you are definitely taking this way too seriously.

    I hope you find the experience in Pantheon that you are looking for. 


    This post was edited by Jamie at March 23, 2016 4:21 AM PDT
    • 273 posts
    March 22, 2016 6:30 PM PDT

    As far as warriors go, I think adding game mechanic mitigations to the warriors ability chains could be a possibility to distinguish it.  Crit resistance/immunity, Stun or CC resistance/immunity, In combat Aggro modifiers more than attacking fast and hard (like a feign maneuver), Dual wield tank is by far the most recognized weapon form, so that's a given. What about fighting styles.  Warriors historically had many different fighting styles they could employ based on their enemy.  Berserker style for large groups, fencing style for 1v1, Wall of steel style for agile, on the run fights, etc.  There should be "ability groups" that are good for each situation individually and how you employ them makes you skilled or novice. 

     

    As far as tanking goes, warriors should be the most flexible when it comes to spur of the moment changes in combat.  Mitigation-wise they should be a close second to crusaders(only because historic MMO's have paladin classes as the most defensive tanks), but they should be the only ones with crit immunity.  DPS wise they should be tops as far as tanks go, followed by dire lords, then crusaders.

     

    All tanks should be fully capable of tanking any endgame dungeon, with warriors being main raid tanks.  Each tank should be compliment its group differently tho in a way that supports his own playstyle.

     

    edit:spellling =)   


    This post was edited by Larr at March 22, 2016 6:32 PM PDT
    • 193 posts
    March 28, 2016 6:36 AM PDT

    I think hybrid tanks might be the hardest classes to balance in these games. What you want to avoid is having the less specialised classes becoming increasingly less desirable at higher levels.  Giving more unique-ness to the classes would go a long way to help.

    • 16 posts
    March 28, 2016 4:12 PM PDT

    This is my dream combo with all tanks having pretty much the same HPs:

    Warrior - Best/most AOE attacks with strong group battle buffs and slightly higher DPS and evasive skills but not as many taunt abilities (rage in motion tank)

    Crusader - Best/most single target aggro abilities with minor single target healing with high melee mitigation (turtleshell tank)

    Dire Lord - Best ability to hold aggro from a distance with an ability to absorb small percentage of health from damage and strongest spell mitigation (caster's nightmare tank)

     

    Overall I think each tank class can tank anything, but with the above specializations to make it an advantage in special situations.

    • 820 posts
    March 31, 2016 11:44 AM PDT

    I'm not sure I see why there needs to be a distinction between tanks when it comes to what they're best at tanking - group vs raid vs solo play - as much as a disctinction between how they go about filling those roles, or even how much skill is required to fill those roles. Frankly, I don't believe the developers of MMO's specifically make tanks good or bad at any role. That's just how they end up. And it's not even that some are "bad", as it is some just take a higher degree of skill in a particular tanking role.

    I actually prefer this. I would always rather play the tank that is least played due to restraints keeping it from being the best-in-role by your average mmo'er. Why? Because when I'm in a group, I know I'm grouped with good players when they play a class well that takes a higher degree of skill vs someone that plays a class well that takes a lower degree of skill.

    So go on. You play your warrior because he's the easiest to main tank in a raid. I'll play whatever tank is hardest, and still out tank you.

    For example:

    Warrior: Great at MT'ing raid encounters with a high learning curve // Great at tanking group content with a moderate learning curve // Great at soloing with a low learning curve

    Crusader: Great at MT'ing raid encounters with a low learning curve // Great at tanking group content with a high learning curve // great at soloing with a moderate learning curve

    Dire Lord: Great at MT'ing raid encounterss with a moderate learning curve // Great at tanking group content with a low learning curve // Great at soloing with a high learning curve

    The important thing to note here is that all classes are GREAT at all roles - the difference is how much experience and skill it requires from the player to achieve the same level of tanking ability in any given role compared to other tanks. The difference is HOW they achieve role fulfllment. How they collect aggro. How mitigation is determined. How they achieve maximum survivability.

    Or, hell, just make it even across the board. All three tanks are capable of tanking all situations and all three tanks require a lot of skill for all situations. It should be like that with any class. Any class is able to fulfill their role, and any class should require a lot of skill. I'm not sure why that's a difficult concept.

    -Tralyan

     

    • 582 posts
    April 1, 2016 10:53 AM PDT

    Personally I feel that each tank class should bring something different. While warriors may have slightly more defences they should also suffer in other areas. Same going for the other tanks. 

    My preferences for the tanking classes would be:

    warrior - strong defenses, moderate utility, weak with aoe, high movement

    Crusader - moderate defenses, high utility, low movement, high AoE

    Dire lord - Moderate defenses, low utility, moderate AoE, able to ranged tank via spells for threat

    This would mean that warrior would be stronger for things like MT on bosses but Crusader and DL would be better for all aoe. DK being able to ranged tank would have benefits on some fights as well. Crusaders having heals/buffs etc would fill the role of off tank more commonly but can serve as a MT when the need arises. They would be the best all around for any type of aoe encounters. 

    The differences need to be there between them but there also needs to be a need for each of them otherwise it will become take the best class. All in how they develop the game


    This post was edited by Enitzu at April 1, 2016 10:55 AM PDT
    • 582 posts
    April 1, 2016 10:59 AM PDT

    Tralyan said:

    The important thing to note here is that all classes are GREAT at all roles - the difference is how much experience and skill it requires from the player to achieve the same level of tanking ability in any given role compared to other tanks. The difference is HOW they achieve role fulfllment. How they collect aggro. How mitigation is determined. How they achieve maximum survivability.

    While I agree that skill should trump class choice that isn't always the case. If the game is out of balance and one class just has an easier time tanking things then that's just the way it is. There have been times in multiple games where I've had to sit a class simply because they were considerbly worse than another class for a fight. And I'm not speaking from a casual point of view, more from a top 10 world one. It's the reason you see most top end wow guilds who's tanks have every class and all of them are geared asap. It's why at the start of an expansion most guilds roll with high numbers of bear tanks yet at the end of one bears barely exist. It's just the way it works out.

    • 1823 posts
    April 1, 2016 5:40 PM PDT

    Jamie said:

    If Dire lord, Crusader and Warrior are all equal tanks what does the Warrior get? Both other classes have heals and buffs, utility and debuffs, what will the Warrior have?

    Historically, gamewise that is, the difference really came down to how the incoming damage profile was shaped by the class.  Warriors smoothed out the incoming damage making it predictable, linear, very few spikes as the defensive skills kept the really high hits low.  The hybrid tanks could not smooth out that incoming damage very well so it was less predictable, random spikes were common. 

    This great unpredictability in their damage mitigation made them less useful for main tanks..good for off-tanks, rampage tanks, etc.

    I would suspect that we might see similar tradeoffs.

    • 273 posts
    April 1, 2016 6:16 PM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    Historically, gamewise that is, the difference really came down to how the incoming damage profile was shaped by the class.  Warriors smoothed out the incoming damage making it predictable, linear, very few spikes as the defensive skills kept the really high hits low.  The hybrid tanks could not smooth out that incoming damage very well so it was less predictable, random spikes were common. 

    This great unpredictability in their damage mitigation made them less useful for main tanks..good for off-tanks, rampage tanks, etc.

    I would suspect that we might see similar tradeoffs.

     

    This really is an underappreciated benefit of wariors. predictable incoming damage is such huge asset.  +1


    This post was edited by Larr at April 1, 2016 6:16 PM PDT
    • 14 posts
    April 3, 2016 6:15 PM PDT

    i for one have no idea about EQ tanks never play the game but i did play VG from the start till the very end, and all 3 tanks in VG could hold aggro ay all levels of the game ie small grp aggro or raid aggro. I belong to a guild call CORE and we had all 3 tanks class in it and we use all 3 tanks as main raid tank. I feel all tanks can be a MT in raid i would love to see tanks played because you love that style of tank class. IN VG i played a paladine and i was very good at my class and could hold aggro against any other tank in the game, i did not get there in one night it took lots of time learning my class and what i needed to do so i was able to be a MT. This can be said for all classes in mmo if you only want 1 MT 1 DD and 1 healer then we can all play warrior's wizards and clerics, god that is not the game i want to play. If they will have 3 tank class in the game i want the choice to play the tank i like the most not be limited to 1.