Tank Balance - Berserker

Discussion in 'Berserker' started by ARCHIVED-Berendor, Sep 26, 2011.

  1. ARCHIVED-Berendor Guest

    Hello All,

    It's a bad time for some tanks, i hear every time .. OH yeah the tanks are now balanced...

    But in realy there isn't no tank balanced.

    Maybe SOE will try it again with the next gu/add on ...

    are some other players there who think the same as me?

  2. ARCHIVED-LygerT Guest

    the tanks who claim the game is balanced are the ones who are doing well for that expansion, the next when they aren't as flavorful the complaints switch again.
    not that most are doing horrible this expansion but the fact that they improvised strikethrough to help push some above the rest is just an example of how there will never be any balance when mechanics lean one way all of the time.
  3. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Lyger@Permafrost wrote:
    I dont think anyone thinks tanks are balance to current content.
  4. ARCHIVED-LygerT Guest

    i'm quite sure there are more than a handful who you don't see spewing it daily.
  5. ARCHIVED-Wasuna Guest

    If you think your class needs something then investgate the problem, post a solution and defend it.
    Don't just sit there and cry for yourself.
    All I ever see if people want critical heals back, AoE attack to be uncapped and asking for the moon so they can be the Gods of tanking again while doing close to T1 DPS. We went through that for 2-3 years with Crusaders and Berserkers to a lesser extent and I hope to God that NEVER happens again.
    If you come up with some realistic solutions then I'm sure people will listen. I personally do not play a Berserker and therefore have no clue if your balanced or not and I'm certinally not going to spend time researching your class for you.
  6. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Wasuna wrote:
    I would like to see strikethrough changed. a % chance to automatically hit regardless is badly designed. i rather seem them make accuracy a contested roll against uncontested avoidance. So for instance ay you have 70% block and the npc has 20% accuracy you have 50% block vs that npc. If they want to keep strikethrough. Keep it at 20% or so as well but allow enough debuffs in game to reduce strikethrough to 0. I am sure rogues(probably swashy the offensive debuffer) wouldnt mind another useful debuff. Doing avoidance this way effectively uncaps avoidance.
    I would like to see ALL death saves made into short term buffs. Raids shouldnt require killing a tank multiple times in order to survive. Until canceled or long duration (45+ secs), death saves (recast should be 5 min) is also bad design and forces devs to create content challenging enough to kill your tank multiple times.
    I see tanks as two types the singletarget defensive side and the multiarget offensive side. All tanks should had just enough tools to handle heroic tanking. In raids the multi target offensive tank should have a slight dps advanatgae and utility advantage as well as more aoe agro and several aoe snaps to handle waves of mem wiping adds. Single target tanks should have better single target agro via agro transfers, multiple single target snaps and longer range on thier single target snaps as well as better abilities to deal with spike damage. In current gameplay this means monks guardians and paladins shouldnt have aoe snaps except in conjunction with an ability like reinfrocements. All 3 should have transfers guard 25%, paladin 40% and monk 10%. All 3 should have multiple stoneskin type abilities paladins need another. Shadowknights, bruiser, zerkers should each have multiple aoe snaps one at least on a 60 sec recast another at 90 sec recast. They should have abit more damage and slightly better utility for groups. Shadowknights (mage group), and bruiser/zerker melee. They should have less stoneskins type of ability then single target tanks but have at least 1 decent stoneskin type ability, they should also have at least one type of non direct aoe avoid ability and each have an short duration avoid type buff that allows them not to take significant melee damage when tanking multiple adds.
    First suggestion is a mechanics change
    Second is a pretty big nerf to tanks
    Third suggestion is a few class tweaks to each fighter.
  7. ARCHIVED-Silzin Guest

    Gungo@Crushbone wrote:
    First to the Original Topic, as a monk that started around the beginning on the game and played to around the beginning on faydark, and came back mid TSO. I didn’t raid till mid SF. I don’t remember that much about how monks here before I came back and that not my point, monks that where not over gearing content in TSO and most of SF just couldn’t tank. As a monk I no longer feel like a 2nd wrath stepchild tank. I understand with T2 or T3 raid gear brawlers in SF were able to tank very well… but that’s not most brawlers. I don’t want to see any tank in this situation. Also I don’t think any tank is in this situation pre-high-end raid content, if I am wrong here then sorry.

    First Suggestion – not a bad approach but I think it deserves its own thread that could get into a long discussion… also we need input from the dives on this I think during the discussion.
    Second Suggestion – I can agree that tanks have gotten to reliant on DS’s and a matching nurf in the reliance and the need for then should be looking into. The encounters that rely on the tank to die every 30-45 sec’s need to be completely rethought.
    Third Suggestion – for the single target tank and defensive, I don’t think making guard’s more reliant on transfers would be healthy. I would actually like a complete rethinking on of hate transfer. With this ALL taunts and the aggression skill would need to be rethought. On my monk if I spec for all the threat I can I can get the TPS to be around 10-15% on my DPS, and I think there is something wrong with that. As for the AoE/ offensive tanks … I would have to think more about it in order to care. If monks Hate transfer is increased to 10% PLEASE detach it from our Avoid buff. The Avoid buff is one of our biggest rolls in a non-MT position, and is useless in a MT position.
    1 way I think would be a good approach for the management on AoE V ST and DPS V TPS would be throw stances. This would require severing offensive and defensive from the stances and all tank get 3 stances that are a balance of AoE V ST and DPS V TPS. The tanks that are designed to be more AoE based should get more AoE and DPS on one stance and ST and TPS on one stance. The 3rd stance should be…. I am not sure… something that is not a specific tanking stance but helps with not tanking (all tanks need to be able to not tank). This could be a stance that sets all Blue and Green AoEs to ST/Red with a 30% bones in dps and sets AO auto to 0…. Yes I am looking at the Warlock myth here.
  8. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Silzin@Crushbone wrote:
    My suggestion pretty much has gaurdians already in the perfect position. Guards already have a 25% transfer. They already have enough tools to deal with heroic content aoe agro control. Monks already have enough tools to deal with those agro controls as well. Paladins are the only tank that need a change to fit in that profile. They need a stoneskin and possibly a long range single target snap and likely remove the hate position on holy ground. I suggested raising monks to 10% from 5% but you can tie that hate trasnfer to the AA and you can put as little or as much trasnfer as you like.
    The largest changes would be on the aoe tanks, all three aoe tanks already have a stoneskin ability as suggested. Bruisers and zerkers have two snap abilities as suggested Shadowknights would need another aoe snap. Zerkers need an avoid temp on top of dragoon which is shared. They shoudl fidn a way to uncap aoe auto atk so that zerkers could spec for dragoon which is not only an avoid buff but a NON DIRECT aoe avoid. All three offtanks should get an additional nondirect aoe avoid/stone skin ability.
  9. ARCHIVED-Bremer Guest

    So you want to split the tanks into AOE trash tanks and raid mob tanks. Every single raid encounter in the game is one big mob, some have many small adds, some one or two bigger, some no at all. It would be stupid design to have 2 types of tank and 100 % of the fights require one type of tank while the other is only needed for say 25 % of the fights. So to make that concept work every single raid encounter had to be designed to have one big mob and tons of (memwiping) trash. Why do you think that such a limited encounter design will be an improvement?
  10. ARCHIVED-Bruener Guest

    Bremer wrote:
    Not to mention the huge problem with ST tanks having the tools to compete in "heroic" content which basically means they have more than enough AE control/survivability to handle any type of fodder like that. In fact ST type abilities like Reinforcement and Mantis Leap work better than any AE tank for climbing multiple hate positions fast.
    I am not against the ST v AE argument but in order for that to work in todays game ST tanks need a serious stripping of abilities to make them ST focused (which would stink for Heroic tanking) while AE tanks would need a serious advantage in AE survivability too (abilities like Tsunami/360 avoidance/etc need to be the realm of AE tanks only). Again this would probably cause disparity at the Heroic level of game play. How about the fact that a built in "hate-transfer" on an AE DPS class means more sustainable AE agro than what an actual AE tank can generate themselves?
    Than of course there is the problem of them adding tons of add fodder like in TSO that is way too easy to kill/tank that any DPS class can basically live through tanking them the few seconds they are up.
    The way the ST v AE tank role works is that it is ST/Defensive v AE/Offensive. Than the difference between Offensive and Defensive in the amount of DPS they do has to be quite a difference. The Offensive Fighter since not tanking 90% of the time in the game due to how they design content for tanking means that they should be pushing out significant DPS. Not this less than 1/2 the DPS of a T1 DPS that DoV has pushed Fighters into. This would also mean that that Offensive Fighter would have much superior self hate generation and could be put into more flexible groups that they could hold agro like beasts from, but better than the ST tank. Hey, you know....its starting to sound a lot like SF....actually a great xpac for Fighter balance and for Fighter mechanics in general.
  11. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Bremer wrote:
    Becuase its not limited to swarm adds. The single target adds also can be tanekd but an offtank which doesnt have as many of the large spike damage abilites. And nearly every encounter (not 25%) has some type of dual tank role Either swarm adds or another single add. Hence why all adds have coop strike, pretty much encouraging you to bring offtanks. Furthermore the idea behind non direct aoe avoids/stoneskins mean the offtanks are more survivable when not directly tanking. There is not a single encounter in dov designed for 1 tank.
    Its an improvement since if you read the suggestion the tanks are almost there with mostly just improvements needed for paladins and improvements needed for aoe tanks to support those roles. I am not saying you should agree with my opinion but its better then bruener idea of asking for a rogue dps with better survivability on par with the single target tanks.
  12. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Bruener wrote:
    Having the tools for heroic doesnt mean they have the tools for offtanking in raids. For instance a monk does fine in heroic but would be the least ideal tank to deal with offtanking. Try having a monk deal solo with valdemars mem wiping staggered spawn adds and it will much worse agro control if you had any of the aoe tanks deal with it.
    Massive dps difference did NOT makes more fighters needed in tso. There NEVER was a point in bringing more then 3 fighters in tso. Its the same as in DOV. All massive dps did was make fighters overpowered compared to most dps classes. Of course the aoe tanks should have MORE dps then the single target tanks but they shouldnt put up rogue levels of dps.
  13. ARCHIVED-Bruener Guest

    Gungo@Crushbone wrote:
    This is a misconception. A Monk spec'd right is just as good on those adds, even better with Mantis Leap since they can continually proc hate positions onto themselves.
    Furthermore despite your complete ignorance to it, reliance on others so much for Hate generation means that who is feeding the tank is more important than the type of tank. And I said SF not TSO. How exactly did DPS of Fighters make them OP'd compared to other DPS classes. People still used all those other classes regularly. Raids still brought 4 chanters and 4 bards. Instead of 3 Fighters though 4 was real nice, 1 for each group. Also set ups were a lot better and a Fighter could rely on their own hate from a not perfect hate set up to tank. T1 DPS classes were still T1. Oh wait, raids actually wanted to use 1 of each rogue too because the DPS difference was so massive. Yes, an Offensive fighter going all out with great group buffs working their tail off could out DPS a slacking T1 DPS'er, or undergeared DPSer. Thats how it should be.
    Yeah....Fighters were so OP'd in SF that Guilds actually wanted 4 of them!!!!!
  14. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Bruener wrote:
    Honestly you simply lie and make stuff up as you go. Most raids didnt roll with 4 fighters in raids. On like 1 fight they brought 4 fighters instead of 3. The same thing happens in DOV. Having massive fighter dps in raids didnt make fighters anymore needed in raids. It only made YOU feel better about yourself.
    Despite my misconception it is the truth. An aoe fighter class will simply handle them better. Regardless of 90 sec recast 10 sec duration ability they have that is no way competes with the MULTIPLE aoe snaps and higher aoe damage of all 3 aoe tanks.
  15. ARCHIVED-Boli32 Guest

    Gungo@Crushbone wrote:
    Because having crap all for DPS and only rotating snaps and saves is soooo much fun.
    Fighters should be T2 DPS, the same as chanters and bards - there is no reason why a supporting class should have their DPS gimped when others do not.
  16. ARCHIVED-LygerT Guest

    Wasuna wrote:
    go back to your own forum then if you can't add anything realistic to the discussion on the BERSERKER forum.

    i'd like to see you quote anyone from this community who has asked for anything unrealistic aside from tuor.

    one word:

    will eliminate ther majority of this BS and make it easier to define the classes again. and make the choice for what tank type to use more difficult because it would be much simpler to balance the tanks.

    but SOE's hands are full anyways, fixing the 10's of thousands of items/quests broken from the result of GU61... so you're all wasting breath.
  17. ARCHIVED-Bremer Guest

    Gungo@Crushbone wrote:
    So you have single target adds, that can be tanked just as well by a single target tank and even better, because he takes less damage and generates more hate on single target. And with their tools for lots of mobs in heroic zones they can certainly tank a number of them just as well on raids. So you end up that you lock out the AE tanks from raid mob tanking while the single target tanks can still do the AE tank job 75 % of the time. Great improvement.
  18. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Bremer wrote:
    Your twisting what i am sayign to fit your argument. Multiple LARGE spike damage abilites such as stone skins does NOT mean take less damage, unless that damage comes in large insta kill chunks. The main named usually has those types of abilites that one shot your tank very few if any adds do. I cant recall any at the moment actually. An offtank with short duration avoid temps, small amounts of damage reduction, and non direct aoe avoids would take LESS damage then the single target tank while offtanking and have better tools to deal with multple spawning adds. Additionally you can even give the offtanks more target locks which ALSO work on adds in the majority of content but not on the main named.
    There are many ways to seperate the two types of tanks in game into an offtank and named tank you just fail to look past your own misguided opinion of high dps fighters that can tank any content a defensive tanks can. Which is not balanced and only causes offensive fighters to be better then defensive fighters in the long run.
  19. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    Boli@Splitpaw wrote:
    It is fun for those players who rolled a fighter with the intention of being a fighter and holding agro and tanking, positioning mobs correctly and not pretending to be a scout and outparse everyone on ACT.
    I personally dont think it would be unbalanced with the offensive fighters in offensive stance, 2handers/whatever your high parsing weapons are and being able to push troubadors/illusionists on the parse to do well, but they shouldnt be anywhere near t1/t2 dps classes.
  20. ARCHIVED-Bruener Guest

    Gungo@Crushbone wrote:
    Yeah. Because having actually good DPS in a raid is so so OP'd for Fighters.
    The fact that you keep contradicting yourself claiming that Fighters have "never" soaked up more than 3 spots, and than claim that SF type DPS for Fighters was OP'd for some reason tells a lot.
    I ask you again....how exactly does Fighters pushing T2 DPS (and for that matter bringing T1 DPS back to the level it should be and pushing them when they slack) so OP'd? It didn't gain them much more on raids. Its not like groups all of a sudden wanted more than 1 Fighter to take into heroic zones. Is it the solo game you are worried about? Solo...the part of the game that is easy for everybody and being an MMO put at the bottom of the list of importance since its all about player interaction.
    All Fighters should do T2 DPS. The gap between T2 and T1 DPS needs to shrink. It creates a much healthier game.
    Than we can talk about the great players able to push out great numbers while still being able to do the required tanking mechanics. Some people are just better and it should show.

Share This Page