Forums » Pantheon Classes

Tanking Class Question

    • 185 posts
    April 9, 2016 10:38 AM PDT
    This is another thing I've been thinking about. My other main class is EQ was pally, and as such I was locked out of being MT at raids, which I'm hoping won't be the case in Pantheon.

    Something from EQ: during a guild raid (I only tested this briefly during one raid so as not to ruin things for anyone). I used the stun as well as the level 9 blind spell, timing taunt to spell impact and sword impact. After doing this for just a few times, the MT couldn't take aggro back from me. This was interesting, yet useless in the greater scheme of things, because of the much lower HP of the EQ pally. It was very sad. Boo.

    I'm hoping that in this game, all tanks are of equal worth as tanks. Not as in the same flavour ice creams with different toppings, but different actual flavours. And/or then each different tank class being the best against different kinds of mobs.

    I don't mind min/max, but I'd prefer to see a more balanced outcome.

    • 136 posts
    April 10, 2016 3:33 PM PDT

    Vanguard had the right idea on tanking just poorly balanced for the majority of the time. I believe Ceythos got it much better toward the end. If any tank is above the other defensively or when it comes to aggro, the other two classes won't get played. Remember how hard it became to find warriors in Vg? Pally's tanked everything. I would imagine tanks are the most difficult classes to balance.

    • 16 posts
    April 11, 2016 1:23 AM PDT

    I agree with Filzin.  VG got it right in the end.  All tanks were able to MT any boss, but each tank class had abilities that helped make certain bosses easier. 

    I think my favorite fight in VG was the turtle.  It seemed to go best with Pally/DK both building aggro, and the Warrior worked on grabbing all the adds.  I loved that the DK ability was beneficial when the MT was punted, and the Pally was strong at holding the aggro of the turtle for such a long period of time.  I especially enjoyed the warrior being able to hold aggro on so many adds at once.  My Warrior was just fine in any other spot, as it was the same for the other tanks, but this combo played to each tanks' strength.

    • 185 posts
    April 11, 2016 5:43 PM PDT

    Yep, I can see how balancing is, well, a balancing act :P . 

     

    Seriously though, I followed the creation of VG closely, but I was unable to play it when it came out, because life happened.

     

    Intresting stuff for me to read here. I really like how the VG tanks were good at different things during raids. Really happy about that. Thanks for writing about your takes on it, guys.


    This post was edited by Zenya at April 11, 2016 5:54 PM PDT
    • 296 posts
    April 21, 2016 9:09 PM PDT

    Bit late to the conversation like normal but IMO I hope they carry through with the idea of Warriors being able to Dual Wield Shields.  Make that a "perk/benefit" of playing a warrior class.. Want a tank that can stand toe to toe with a dragon?  I am thinking Ogre warrior dual wielding two tower shields.  For those that don't know what I am talking about by tower shields, a tower shield is a LARGe shield that is about 6 feet tall by 4 feet wide.  Normally saw these in movies at the front of formations with pole arms coming over them as the unit advanced. 

     

    I know that everyone has preferred tank class but each of the tanks should have some kind of benefit and hindrance to them.  Crusaders/Pallys can cast heals and the like but their damage output and mitigation is hampered because they have to CAST to maintain aggro and are limited on weapon/shield choice.  Dire Lords/Sks can lifetap and do debuffs but because these are spells as well their damage output is lower and they do not have access to all weapons.  Warriors have access to all weapons/shields/armor and know how to use them but they would also know the weaknesses of said weapons/armors/shields and know how to maximize the hindrances and weaknesses of their opponents.

    • 708 posts
    June 15, 2016 5:31 PM PDT

    I'd look at how VG handled tanks and then expound from there. :D

    They distinguished their tanks by the way they used gear and weapons. How they handled threat/aggro. The amount of mobs they handled comfortably. etc etc

    First, the warrior was geared for dual wielding. The DK was 2handers. And the Pally was sword and board or mace and board, hammer whatever. You get my point. So possibly Pantheon will handle tanks similiar with weapons.

    Then the way they handled threat. A warrior was great with AoE taunts. The DK was great with snap aggro which made him great for single targets. And the pally was good for intercepts and sustained fights, they had to build aggro but once they got it they were hard to break. But to make up for their lack of aoe taunts and instant aggro they had great intercepts for when the mob wandered and had great survivability.

    Though there is much speculation over the tanks of Pantheon what I can garauntee is this. Each and every tank will be able to MT quite well. Don't expect to play a crusader and not have the ability to main tank. But do expect there to be role players. The warrior will most likely be the most well rounded but the hybrids will most likely be better role players. Expect the tanks to make use of certain items better than the others. And expect the raid encounters to cause you to mix up your raid force every so often. Don't expect to keep your warrior as your sole MT because there will be times the situation calls for your Dire Lord or your most favored Crusader to step in and step up to the plate.

    • 204 posts
    June 20, 2016 1:30 AM PDT

    Not having played Vanguard, it's hard for me to comment about the tanks from that game, but a few comments above sounds well balanced and sensible.

    All three tanks classes need to be able to tank just as well as one another, just in different ways. Each should shine in their own specific manner, but be able to tank just as well as each other. If, for example, Warriors have the best defense and better DPS, DLs have debuffs/lifetap and Crusaders buffs/healing, it should only be very specific fights where one of the tanks is a must as opposed to any of the three.

    • 193 posts
    June 20, 2016 10:56 PM PDT

    In addition to wanting to see all tanks able to tank equally well. I'd like to see a role for a second tank in a group.  Perhaps offensive stances and skills would make having an extra tank in the group desirable.

    • 204 posts
    June 21, 2016 12:12 AM PDT

    Thanakos said:

    In addition to wanting to see all tanks able to tank equally well. I'd like to see a role for a second tank in a group.  Perhaps offensive stances and skills would make having an extra tank in the group desirable.



    Agreed. While not as offensive as a pure DPS class, the risk adverse or wary should be able to slot in a second tank to help pick up adds and act as an OT. This would be where a DL or Crusader could shine in that they can lifetap/heal themselves while OTing and having the DPS blast down the adds - then all fall back to attacking the boss.

    • 113 posts
    June 21, 2016 5:56 PM PDT

    from my experience in vanguard, while dps was high for some tank classes, it is not really an important stat for tanks in groups. It seems tanks are about 1) hate 2) mitigation (in all it's various forms including self heals/lifetaps.)

    so it would seem one way to differentiate tanks is to have one better aoe hate builder, one a single target hate builder, one a damage mitigator. they certainly should all be able to do all 3. that is any tank should be a viable tank for any content, but a 5% change in hate/mitigation while likely not a gamebreaker would be noticeable and give each a different feel hate builder would increase dps ability to nuke, mitigation tank would be able to hold a boss while adds were burned to keep them from killing the healer, aoe hate tank would hold the adds to allow the group to nuke adds without them peeling.

    thus the tanks class actually changes how the group should play encounters.

     

    p.s. not saying dps should be low for tanks, just if one tank has 5% more hate and mitigation while another tank has 10% more dps, the second tank not as useful in groups and is most likely an off tank in raids.


    This post was edited by alephen at June 21, 2016 6:00 PM PDT
    • 204 posts
    June 22, 2016 7:01 AM PDT

    Agreed, alephen. I'm hoping there is some marked mechanical (as well as thematic) difference amongst the classes from each of the archetypes. Your ideas for the tanks sounds pretty good. I'm hoping that with this difference, coupled with the party size of six, people decide to run with two tanks in their group.

    • 193 posts
    June 23, 2016 5:31 AM PDT

    Umbra said:

    Thanakos said:

    In addition to wanting to see all tanks able to tank equally well. I'd like to see a role for a second tank in a group.  Perhaps offensive stances and skills would make having an extra tank in the group desirable.



    Agreed. While not as offensive as a pure DPS class, the risk adverse or wary should be able to slot in a second tank to help pick up adds and act as an OT. This would be where a DL or Crusader could shine in that they can lifetap/heal themselves while OTing and having the DPS blast down the adds - then all fall back to attacking the boss.

     

    My question is, if the quaternity is already filled. (tank , healer, DPS and CC) and there is room for 2 more classes will another tank be an unwanted class to fill those last spots? Typically those spots are filled with DPS or an additional healer.

    • 204 posts
    June 23, 2016 6:35 AM PDT

    Yeah, it's a great question. In other games, a single tank is all you need with the extra DPS to burn down adds and the boss. I'm hoping that Pantheon switches that up a bit so that an OT is sometimes needed for a sustained amount of time. Similarly, I hope there are instances where the incoming damage is just so extreme that two healers are needed and other times were the mobs are so 'tough' they need to be snared or mezzed by a CC class for the party to survive and thus two of them are required.

    Things get boring if all you ever need is the holy quaternity and simply more DPS.

    • 113 posts
    June 23, 2016 11:07 PM PDT

    Umbra said:

    Yeah, it's a great question. In other games, a single tank is all you need with the extra DPS to burn down adds and the boss. I'm hoping that Pantheon switches that up a bit so that an OT is sometimes needed for a sustained amount of time. Similarly, I hope there are instances where the incoming damage is just so extreme that two healers are needed and other times were the mobs are so 'tough' they need to be snared or mezzed by a CC class for the party to survive and thus two of them are required.

    Things get boring if all you ever need is the holy quaternity and simply more DPS.

    one difficulty with that, however, is if they occur in the same area. in a dungeon for example. 'the last mob needed 2 healers, but this one needs 2 tanks, therefore we need to drop a healer and recruit a tank. sorry Healz McGurt.' (to not kick you would need 2 tanks, 2 healers, a cc leaving one slot for DPS.

    it might be better to have tank dps (and healer and support) close enough to pure DPS that they could be tolerated. but too close and dps might get frozen out, so...)

    another possibility would be with stances. maybe warrior has an off tank stance that buffs group members damage 10%. crusader gives group 10% greater mitigation. direlord gives groupmates a 1% lifetap.

    another idea: if mana out of combat regen is slower than health, (or perhaps out of combat spell casting costs less mana) it might be fastest in killing to have tank 1 pull mob then tank 2 take the mob from tank 1 at 50%. thus allowing the healer to leave tank 1 at low health and saving that mana.

    • 204 posts
    June 24, 2016 4:22 AM PDT

    So many permutations and combinations! As long as it is not always the well troden path of 'more DPS' then I'll be happy. 

    The stances for tanks interests me greatly, and I think I've read something like that from VG. Time will tell I guess!