Curse

Jeydra · Oct 26, 2010, 11:06 AM // 11:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

You probably want to define "tank", because my first reaction when reading the title was "tanking freaking owns, you have no idea what you're talking about"

That.

12 chars.

Cuilan · Oct 26, 2010, 11:15 AM // 11:15

As if there weren't enough clues in the first post along with the quote that was added to it.

Jeydra · Oct 26, 2010, 11:18 AM // 11:18

That's why my post included the words "first reaction".

Cuilan · Oct 26, 2010, 11:32 AM // 11:32

And I pointed out what a build specifically did.

Rushin Roulette · Oct 26, 2010, 12:52 PM // 12:52

There seem to be 2 types of Tanking which are deffined in GW.

1. The Tank you described being a random teammate in an uncoordinated PUG who deals little damage and con not really hold much agro or even pulls it to the Squishies.

2. The Tank in a coordinated and coherent group (eg. Main tank of the month for FoWSC for example). These Tanks do actually deal no damage, but are important for the group to killed well balled and AoE susceptable foes (Anyone who has played MoP Necro here can see how much damage is dealt in less than a second)

The first tank is useless in my eyes as well, but the second one is actually usefull even though no damage is being dealt by that one player. The team is being helped by not having to run around for 5 minutes chasing single enemies in a big group and wasting the Monks precious energy while healing the randomly leeroying teammates and himself (also not wasting the Necros energy/Time casting Barbs on everything thats moving, just on the offchance that it will be hit by one of the randomly running Warriors at some point).

Milennin · Oct 26, 2010, 01:12 PM // 13:12

I hate it when people expect me to play as tank. Sometimes I do if a team wants me to, just to remind myself of how much tanking sucks. Last time a PUG wanted me to tank in the DoA Margonite city in HM... I just stood around doing pretty much nothing while the Margonites ran past me most of the times, it was pretty hilarious. And our team's DPS was so horrible, even henchmen could've done better.
The few places were I would consider tanking to work fairly well is when there's enough walls and corners to take advantage of, but even then a DPS build will tear groups apart anyway, no need to bring tanking anywhere.

JONO51 · Oct 26, 2010, 02:41 PM // 14:41

You seem to think tank=war with defy pain. That is incorrect.
War with defy pain = newbie/plain ignorant
Tank = melee (usually) with soa & prot spirit via the monk.

Tanking is the most efficient way to kill foes. Fact. You mention things like splinter weapon in your post, then go on to say tanking sucks. Wtf bro. If you have sloppy agro, your splinter damage isn't being maximized. If you have an ES warrior with ps and soa go in and group foes and kd them, it means when your souped up sins/paras/warrs et al attack, they are each gonna deal 47dmg to 3 foes which = shitload. Add in MoP and Barbs and that group has been floored while your sloppy agro group is chasing down the pesky lvl28 warriors who have been linebacking your monks the whole time.

Bodyblocking sucks? Even as a para, I bodyblock whenever I can. It works, your doing it wrong. Get them against a wall, your aoe armor ignoring damage is being maximized, and you skill shit fast. Hell, I hope you start bodyblocking so your monk can get out when they are being wailed for 80 dmg each auto attack in your sloppy agro groups.

When I play as warrior vs para, the difference in kill speed is noticeable. I micro a ps and soa, run in and hit es just as the minions envelop the group, keep it tight and blow up dealing 100dmg to everything, on top of splinter etc. On the para, where I can't do this nearly as effectively while performing ebsoh to buff casters, sure the minions blow up the casters quick, but the melee/rangers are left kiting around and pissing me off.

P_A_A · Oct 26, 2010, 03:18 PM // 15:18

As it's been said, you have to distinguish between a pure tank and a melee using tanking techniques.
Tanking techniques are basically bodyblocking, grabbing all aggro into you, etc. You don't need a fully dedicated bar to do this.
That a pure tank sucks in most of the cases is something everyone in here knows...

PS. Your video of the deep is irrelevant. It only shows 12 guys with a gimmick PvE build that survive because they can't get hit for more than 5% damage. Drop the bonds and try to do it again, same way. I'd like to see what happens.

maxxfury · Oct 26, 2010, 03:37 PM // 15:37

And i thought this was a guildwars forum, not a semantics wars forum

And Agro control =/= 'tanking', just to keep my post OT

Life Bringing · Oct 26, 2010, 04:42 PM // 16:42

Video of the deep is pointless but not for that reason. 90% of the deep doesn't hit over 25 damage, and the outcasts with multiple copies of chilblains make up the other 10%. Bringing an ER doesn't even make sense. The funniest part is that their 12man team was beat by a hero team and a 2 man team.

Regardless of the OPs original intent, the post came off vague, ignorant and misinformed.

Master Fuhon · Oct 26, 2010, 05:37 PM // 17:37

Looking back on the "Why nuking sucks" debate, I see that what was most controversial about the hypothesis was that it was often interpreted as stating that DPS was the best metric of effectiveness (mainly because it was written as stream of thought instead of essay, thesis is hidden in addendum section and forum readers TLDR everything). But the basic point of the article was about capability and sustainability of damage special attacks, and the effectiveness of classes while not using special attacks.

But the whole idea of this thread is so bad because of the imposed assumption that part of what the word means is the whole definition. Tanking includes both parts that people are arguing about. It's almost like you've written a "Why nuking sucks" article and said "Nuking sucks because there are no spells that kill everything at once in the game". If a guy with self defense balls aggro in a speed clear, is he only not a tank because his defenses are magical instead of metal? Or is he not a tank, because "Shadow Form and consumables are so overpowered that I deem everything done with them non-strategic"?

'Tanking' BOTH prevents teammates from getting attacked, AND mitigates the damage incoming to the party through self-defense. The only real semantics argument I see about tanking is about when a teammate uses mitigation skills to defend the person holding all the aggro. The main issue with this is that typical MMO design does not give teammates strong mitigation skills to use on teammates, and only the character's self defense allows him to be the 'tank'. Guild Wars breaks this paradigm, and so I would say that the character with aggro is 'made into a tank' (not 'is a tank', but it's almost the same thing anyway).

The basic point of using a complete tanking definition is this: taking a ton of self-survival skills does not make you a tank, it makes you a low priority target with low damage. Holding aggro on every enemy in the group doesn't make you a tank, it just means you have aggro. And both of these concepts, taken individually while excluding the other, are horrible in just about every MMO. Holding aggro on a character with flimsy defense is going to result in a fast death and then lost aggro. Taking too much self defense on a character that isn't being attacked enough to warrant it is bringing down the killing power of the group.

And besides that point, the whole idea of taking a tank is to reduce the defense that needs to be taken on other group members. A self-defense warrior and dps warrior woud not be interchangeable, but the builds would change around them. Obviously, I would not take the typical pug (caster nuke heavy + panic/mm/spirts, heal only builds), plop in a damage dealing melee with frenzy, and talk about how my build proves melee damage sucks. I'll will admit that the nuking article did not specifically talk about builds designed to enhance nuke damage (knockdowns and snares), but there was a basic understanding at the time that teams could split.

Warrior Babes · Oct 26, 2010, 06:49 PM // 18:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zodiac Meteor

Deep without any tank-n-spank slow tactics. Without any speed clear mob control tactics, we gone in, killed everything and moved on.

I can post Urgoz but I'm missing the end because Fraps lags up Guild Wars.

all this video shows is.. that u nearly wiped in Depletion, that u
didnt kill the Leviathan
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w...es/gw013-2.jpg, and that u are slow. although, i now know what the sound of a dieing oni is.

OT:
they are 2 different playstyles, they both work, so whats the problem? some find tank-n-spank boring, some find C-spacing (macro? ;o) trough an area boring.
yes, for those WiK or Wanted: quests u would be stupid to take a tank, but a melee using ''tanking techniques'' will be better then a melee chasing foes (maybe this doesnt increase your damage, but it surely does increase the damage of your party).

Zodiac Meteor · Oct 26, 2010, 09:22 PM // 21:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warrior Babes

all this video shows is.. that u nearly wiped in Depletion, that u didn't kill the Leviathan
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w...es/gw013-2.jpg, and that u are slow. although, i now know what the sound of a dieing oni is.

OT:
they are 2 different playstyles, they both work, so whats the problem? some find tank-n-spank boring, some find C-spacing (macro? ;o) trough an area boring.
yes, for those WiK or Wanted: quests u would be stupid to take a tank, but a melee using ''tanking techniques'' will be better then a melee chasing foes (maybe this doesn't increase your damage, but it surely does increase the damage of your party).

1. It was the teams decision to kill the Leviathan that boss is laughably easy and really has no point as killing it is not rewarding.

2. Yeah, it wasn't record time, we weren't going for record time and hey, we didn't get record time it was just our fastest. Beating our previous guilds record of 35 minutes.

3. You just contradicted yourself. That picture of 3 people and 9 heroes HAD no tanking skills for mob control. We been outdone and you basically just agreed what I'm saying, tanking sucks and DPS is better. Look at his necros, it even has Strength and Honor + Splinter Weapon for the melee.

Quote:

Originally Posted by P_A_A

PS. Your video of the deep is irrelevant. It only shows 12 guys with a gimmick PvE build that survive because they can't get hit for more than 5% damage. Drop the bonds and try to do it again, same way. I'd like to see what happens.

This will happen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Life Bringing

Video of the deep is pointless but not for that reason. 90% of the deep doesn't hit over 25 damage, and the outcasts with multiple copies of chilblains make up the other 10%. Bringing an ER doesn't even make sense. The funniest part is that their 12man team was beat by a hero team and a 2 man team.

90% of the deep can't hit above 25 damage, but other other 10% will give you some trouble or any team with no monks can beat it with flying colors. The point of the video was to show it is beatable without tank-n-spanking manlyway. Because I was argued that "elite area's can't be beat without a tank" which is wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Life Bringing

Regardless of the OPs original intent, the post came off vague, ignorant and misinformed.

How is, Tanking Sucks vague or misinformed? Seems straight forward to me.

P_A_A · Oct 26, 2010, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Zodiac, either it's you who cant understand the things people in here is saying or the rest of the world is dumb. We've all agreed a WHOLE TANKING BASED BAR sucks (see Defy Pain, etc etc), but you seem to evade the fact that TANKING TECHNIQUES are awesome. It's that or that you can't express yourself.

Zodiac Meteor · Oct 26, 2010, 09:38 PM // 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by P_A_A

Zodiac, either it's you who cant understand the things people in here is saying or the rest of the world is dumb. We've all agreed a WHOLE TANKING BASED BAR sucks (see Defy Pain, etc etc), but you seem to evade the fact that TANKING TECHNIQUES are awesome. It's that or that you can't express yourself.

... Tanking Techniques, where did that come from? This thread is about absorb damage vs. dealing damage. AKA Tanking vs. DPS.

Of course tanking techniques, AKA mob control is awesome. It's every monks dream to keep the team well alive, while killing fast.

Tanking techniques doesn't need a tank build to pull off. Yet some people absolutely insist on a tanking build for that purpose and shun melee classes that doesn't have some sort survivability skill.

P_A_A · Oct 26, 2010, 09:42 PM // 21:42

So you are saying you've opened all this post just to say something we all knew?

PS. In case you are referring to builds such as the Shadow Meld warriors used in the deep, you might want to know they're used to make the run faster, not because they're supossed to absorb damage.

Zodiac Meteor · Oct 26, 2010, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by P_A_A

So you are saying you've opened all this post just to say something we all knew?

PS. In case you are referring to builds such as the Shadow Meld warriors used in the deep, you might want to know they're used to make the run faster, not because they're suposed to absorb damage.

Kind of, a person hold a mob in an area while the team runs through and uses Shadow Meld or Return to go back to the rest of the team.

We all don't know, that's the point of this thread. People scratch their heads when this Ele refuses to play nuker in HM or requests this assassin to have Flashing Blades or Shadowform.
You posted that if our gimmicky Deep Build didn't have protective bond on everyone then we would lose. Which isn't true, we could be faster if we had monks and more melee damage, look at that record run of 3 people 9 heroes. It was faster and Life Bringer knows Deep well enough to know that nothing can hit hard.

How could you know that if everyone is 100 feet back, waiting for the tank to bring the huge mob for nuking?

Instead of using that warrior to kill fast, people rather have it grab aggro and tank the mob while everyone else nukes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tanking Techniques in GW2

Tank: This is where Guild Wars 2 makes the biggest break from the traditional MMO setup. Tanking is the most rudimentary form of the most important combat fundamental, CONTROL. Every game has it, yet it always seems to get a bad name. In Guild Wars there was Knockdown, Interrupt, Weakness, Blind, and Cripple, to name a few. We wanted to build upon what we think makes control such an important part of dynamic combat.
Control is the only thing versatile enough to get away from the rock-paper-scissors gameplay of other MMOs. It's healing when you need it, its damage when you need it. It is the glue that holds together our system. From controlling movement to controlling damage, there are tons of exciting dynamic scenarios that control can set up. You can use a stun to save an ally or to finish off a fleeing enemy. Immobilize that warrior to get away from them, or use it on an elementalist to close in on them. In order to use it well, we had to understand the drawbacks of control too. How often can you do it? How excessive is the duration? How does it affect the difficulty of challenges you face?
There are a lot of different levels of control, from a simple cripple, to an immobilize, to a knockdown. Each one has its place. The more devastating control effects are, the more infrequently they need to occur, and their duration needs to be shorter. Knockdown is one of the strongest forms of control in Guild Wars 2, but you won't see a character that can just keep knocking someone down indefinitely, and you won't see a knockdown that puts an enemy out for so long that they won't be able to react. It's simply a tool that players have at their disposal to use at the right times to turn the tide of a battle.

This is the same for GW1 just not implemented exactly. Ironically it's better to do the trinity setup in GW1 aswell in GW2 because it's better to have control than to tank. It's hardly tanking techniques, it's just control.

JONO51 · Oct 26, 2010, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zodiac Meteor

Tanking techniques doesn't need a tank build to pull off. Yet some people absolutely insist on a tanking build for that purpose and shun melee classes that doesn't have some sort survivability skill.

Thats based off of idiot pugs who run simple builds that still get the job done because the game is easy.

Mouse at Large · Oct 26, 2010, 10:30 PM // 22:30

Remember - while damage is being absorbed by one team member, it's not being dealt to other team members

IMHO, the real equation is how fast can you reduce the damage to a party by killing things quickly -v- damage saved by having it directed at a dedicated damage absorber over the course of a fight rather than at the midline/backline.

I've no real idea how this actually pans out in practice though.......

Jeydra · Oct 27, 2010, 12:08 AM // 00:08

@Zodiac - your post comes across as grossly misinformed because your 12-man time was beaten by a 2-man team. When something like this happens you know there is a problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zodiac Meteor

3. You just contradicted yourself. That picture of 3 people and 9 heroes HAD no tanking skills for mob control. We been outdone and you basically just agreed what I'm saying, tanking sucks and DPS is better. Look at his necros, it even has Strength and Honor + Splinter Weapon for the melee.

That just further shows your ignorance. Death's Charge is a tanking skill, if by "tanking skill" you mean "mob control". Splinter Weapon works better when mobs are properly aggro'ed. I wager they were faster because they properly used these force multipliers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zodiac Meteor

Instead of using that warrior to kill fast, people rather have it grab aggro and tank the mob while everyone else nukes.

That's an illusion as well. Proper aggro need not involve only one melee. See the Deep screen with 12 players.