Curse

Kusandaa · Sep 16, 2008, 03:10 PM // 15:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

[Bull's Strike]?

[Bull's Charge]?

["None Shall Pass!"]?

Oh that's a form of aggro management indeed. Snares too. However, unlike other MMOs, you can't force a target to attack you with skills.

That's because you don't need it in GW. A single foe on GW probably won't kill you if you play it smart.. well depending of the circumstances. A single boss, yeah, after all it's overpowered compared to you (take some of the rit bosses.... 400+dmg). Unless you go with a solo build, well GL.

But how many SINGLE enemies are there in GW? Actually not a whole lot, and most are, AFAIK, in lower-level areas. Most are in mobs (as in groups of enemies).

In other MMOs, chances that everything - or almost - IS a "mob" on its own (as in mobile unit). It's generally not linked to 2, 3, 5 other enemies like in GW.

Judging from that, you'd think that GW needs aggro management and other MMOs don't. After all, you're faced with multiple enemies while in other MMOs, you have one. Which would be, IMO, a flaw... because the mobs in typical MMOs are more or less OP'ed, but when you come down to bosses... oh yeah, you need tanks and you need aggro management 'cause it's not as easy to manage the whole party. If that one boss takes down your main damagers or your tank, GG. The boss is gonna kill the whole party and you're gonna have to restart your instance or walk all the way to the freaking boss again, unless you've got res available.

Outside of farming and such, AFAIK, the chances you're currently facing 8+ enemies at the same time in a typical MMO are pretty low. In GW, it's normal.

So do you need aggro management in GW? No. IMO stuff like snares and KD are doing just fine. I don't need to focus a certain enemy's attacks on a certain target in 99% of the cases. Kiting is your friend.

Anyways that's what I gather... I could be wrong with a couple things...

(Oh and I like the GW aggro system more than other MMOs...)

Athrun Feya · Sep 16, 2008, 03:20 PM // 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

The difference between GW and all other MMOs that prevents tanking from being needed is...

Protection prayers.

The ability to (or lack of) keep things alive is not the only incentive to having a decent tank. As long as strong AoE damage exists aggro control and grouping foes together will always be an important part of the game.

This doesn't seem like a dead or dying team role to me.

BoondockSaint · Sep 16, 2008, 03:56 PM // 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

If we're going to add "tank" role, I'd much rather see it done right.

Rather, they have abilities that punish foes for attacking someone other than themselves. A fighter can "mark" a single foe so they get a penalty to attack anyone other than themself, and they also get extra attacks against foes trying to run away from them. So opponents have to make a choice of chasing the squisher target, or putting pressure on the harrassing fighter.

If you think about if, GW kind of has something like this only with a GW theme. "Save yourselves" esentually reduces the whole partys damage to nill while the one who used it still does not have the armor buff. Still what you said is intreasting, the only thing is, unless they do some major changes in GW2 what you are suggesting would most likly be a hex of some sort. And warriors in GW have none of those.

TurinPT · Sep 16, 2008, 06:02 PM // 18:02

"Taunt" - 8 adrenalin
Shout. For 4...6 seconds, nearby opponents focus their attacks on you.

Pointless in pvp, great crowd control in pve. Make it happen.

tmakinen · Sep 16, 2008, 06:13 PM // 18:13

"Bad Boy!" - 8 adrenaline
Shout. For 4...6 seconds, nearby opponents roll over and play dead.

Pointless in pvp, great crowd control in pve. Make it happen.

Katari · Sep 16, 2008, 06:38 PM // 18:38

Proactive "agro managment" like weakness, curses, and protection prayers, are a large part of what makes GW interesting.

Tank/Nuke/Heal is borring.

FoxBat · Sep 16, 2008, 07:37 PM // 19:37

In fairness, AoE weakness/hex spam is pretty boring too. Might be less so if mobs had removal.

Limu Tolkki · Sep 16, 2008, 07:38 PM // 19:38

So unrealistic, so boring and so on. Please no tanks in gw2.

Rhamia Darigaz · Sep 16, 2008, 08:27 PM // 20:27

tanking happens because of bad ai. i would like to see better ai, not worse. if ai played more like players (ups you can't tank players can you?) pve would be more fun.

ajc2123 · Sep 16, 2008, 09:12 PM // 21:12

1) Never meant for this to be about pvp. The class that could be the tank would have a more damage oriented role in PvP of course.

2) I don't mean pure skills like "Target foe now targets you forever" But skills that affect a threat bar of sorts. For example if there was a spellcaster spamming powerful spells, then the threat for them would increase and to a point where the tank's aggro gaining skills have no effect. This would require teamwork and not just spammy spammy spammy. Rangers could have threat decreasing skills since they are kinda all about evasion in my mind. And of course, every time a monk heals or prots, their threat level would increase making it ahrder for the tank to keep aggro.

I suggest things from other games because I like the aspect of it and would like to see the next generation improved upon it. We all understand GW is unique, but it doesn't mean it can't learn a few things from other games

Granted there ARE games like Fiesta, that their tanks just spam sweeping kick and low and behold, they are the ones taking damage nto the rest of the party. And this one skill that makes you the only target no matter what DOES make tanking seem easy, brainless, boring, but I did not mean for my suggestion to be just a simple aggro gaining skill that 100% works all the time no matter what.

Clobimon · Sep 16, 2008, 09:33 PM // 21:33

I admit I quickly skimmed posts in the thread...

After playing thousands of hours as a Warrior in GW and then over the last few months playing a melee class several hours in another game my viewpoint right now is that I pray for GW2 to be extremely similar to GW in combat. (to include the style of healing/protection classes and absence of potions and foods. That's a different topic though)

At times in HM I wished for a taunt skill, but I see now that proper positioning and group coordination can be as effective. Games without body blocking bug me, seriously. It's like fighting a ghost every battle - not very realistic. With the months of experience in proper positioning of myself, cheerios and/or party members I took some pride in that. Then I try another game only to watch as the foes run through me and I'm stuck trying to use taunt skills that sometimes work and sometimes don't. If the trade-off for taunts and other aggro-gaining skills is the elimination of body blocking, then no thanks. I'd have no issue with the availability of a couple of those skills if everything else were the same.

pamelf · Sep 16, 2008, 11:14 PM // 23:14

I usually HATE tanking in other games, but I actually enjoy the warrior class in Guild Wars. I didn't play the class for about 2 years because my experience with the warrior class has always been the definition of 'tank' and I just found that so desperately boring.

As the game stands at the moment there is something in each class that can appeal to almost every kind of player, therefor I'd really like to see the ideas behind the characters stay the same.

No tanks please. If I want to tank I'll play Barbarian when D3 comes out.

Trub · Sep 16, 2008, 11:20 PM // 23:20

Tank..tank?...Do you mean those obsi farming fellahs?
I likes warriors to kill things...not this tank stuff everyone is talking about.

draxynnic · Sep 17, 2008, 12:57 AM // 00:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajc2123

2) I don't mean pure skills like "Target foe now targets you forever" But skills that affect a threat bar of sorts. For example if there was a spellcaster spamming powerful spells, then the threat for them would increase and to a point where the tank's aggro gaining skills have no effect. This would require teamwork and not just spammy spammy spammy. Rangers could have threat decreasing skills since they are kinda all about evasion in my mind. And of course, every time a monk heals or prots, their threat level would increase making it ahrder for the tank to keep aggro.

You can have that without skills that directly affect the aggro metre. An offensive skill or a heal should have a chance of attracting a mob's attention. On the other hand, if the mob finds that you're hard to damage - through having a high block chance, kiting faster than it can chase, or just plain high armour, for instance - or if it hurts itself or its friends on trying to attack you, there should be a chance of it deciding to go and find something squishier. This would also cover your Rangers, as popping up Whirling Defense is a fairly strong incentive to stop attacking the Ranger until it wears off.

In short, though, anything that causes a mob to increase or decrease they're likelihood of attacking you... should be something that would also cause a player whose character has the same abilities as the mob to change their target priority. Managing aggro may be one thing, but it should be in the background - skills that do nothing but attract or divert aggro are a no-no.

The Meth · Sep 17, 2008, 01:06 AM // 01:06

I LOVE standing around doing nothing while the rest of the team kills everyone. Best idea evar!

wetsparks · Sep 17, 2008, 02:10 AM // 02:10

There should be no tanks. I have played my warrior a lot for a long time (over two years) and I about gave up on him because for the longest time the "hard" missions that is what people wanted of me, go in there and tank while I bond you and everyone else kills everything. When I found a pug and the leader asked me what my build was and I said the usual tank build and he asked me to get rid of that crap and bring skills to kill things I about cried tears of joy.

Though I do think they need to take the power of the monks down a few notches. The teams dependence on them is out of whack and because they are so good at protecting and healing enemies and enemy bosses have to hit for a lot of damage, almost to the point of insta kill if you are not ready and that is not fun. That is why I am so stoked for Diablo 3 where they are limiting potions because with potions they had to set up bosses that could hit for super high damage because you had almost infinite life.

Shadow · Sep 17, 2008, 02:13 AM // 02:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

But you CAN! You can bodyblock. You can snare. Assassins and Dervishes can apply conditions. Heck, just attacking the enemy melee rather than passing them on the way to their backline can get them to turn and attack you back.

I prefer the exchange of front line members. It makes for a more diverse and challenging game! Isn't that what everyone wants? More challenge?

Yichi · Sep 17, 2008, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lykan

You have weapons for a reason.

This...

12 chars.

HawkofStorms · Sep 17, 2008, 03:11 AM // 03:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow

I prefer the exchange of front line members. It makes for a more diverse and challenging game! Isn't that what everyone wants? More challenge?

Nah, clearly with all the Ursan supporters, people want the game as dumb down as possible.

Luckly, A.net (eventually) ignored those people. Sotra.

Reverend Dr · Sep 17, 2008, 03:36 AM // 03:36

GW needs tanks just as much as it needs sub machine guns, jedi, and battlecruisers.