Tank Balance

Discussion in 'Fighters' started by Priority, Jul 14, 2021.

  1. Standard Member

    It's truly depressing that there has been no official response to this. I don't know what else to say.
    Priority likes this.
  2. Priority Well-Known Member

    just keep it going and sooner or later it'll get enough traffic to warrant a response i guess
  3. AvenElonis Well-Known Member

    E-mails have been sent to Kander and Gninja - I am hoping something is done to fix bulwark for the next GU.

    It fails in Heroics (a group can usually survive that) but it fails in raid - it can get ugly.
  4. Agarth Member

    Tank balance should start with :

    - fix the shields / give them a real use
    - taunts/threat abilities should be affected by fervor. ( would help returning / undergear tanks a lot ! )
    - improve bulwark duration to ~12-14 sec, no mana cost.
    AvenElonis and Benj like this.
  5. AvenElonis Well-Known Member

    and add making Mitigation matter again...
  6. Standard Member

    zzmax929 likes this.
  7. Errrorr An Actual EQ2 Player

    My view would be the following;
    • Boost Tank hp significantly vs other classes.
    • Make mobs hit for significant amounts (Such that non-fighters would have to go really defensive to tank).
    • Make mitigation/block actually matter to lowering that damage.
    • Fix shields.
    • Balance utility a bit around classes (Zerk CB buff anyone?).
    • Have raid scripts that require multiple fighters.
    I think if you do the above well enough, you could actually remove Bulwalk. The reason to bring a fighter to a fight should be a) You need a meatshield who can take the damage/control the adds. b) It's required by a script.
    Blazen and Priority like this.
  8. Baldzilla New Member

    Eagle spin turns the mob so you can sucker punch which, pisses off the group. Fun Facts?
  9. Bhayar Well-Known Member

    Although I have tanks, I generally don't play them except for amusement. The creation of Bulwark was probably one of the dumbest things I've seen to overcome an overall problem with tanks abilities. When it fails--either because the person playing it misses casting it or it simply doesn't work, it screws up the whole group. You want more tanks? Make the tank fun to play and needed. Adding Bulwark just doesn't work as a mechanic. Fix tanks to make them effective, although I see a bulwark patch went in this morning. Really, just make tanks great again. Find some current tanks in game that are acknowledged to be excellent, get their ideas and make them happen for each of the tank classes.
  10. Clintsat Well-Known Member

    It doesn't do that anymore.
  11. Rhita Member

    I had suggested the way to fix shields is to give them a 10%-20% of absorb damage that way they will have a purpose and will forever be useful. As for bulwark, while still an annoying mechanic to make tanks useful, it was much better after the changes with today's patch.
  12. Arclite Well-Known Member

    Definite improvement from before. The power drain on the first mob in beyond the veil challenge raid led to some close instances where bulwark would've failed before the power fix. The reduction in cast time is good but overall still think and feel it to be a cheap tacked-on inclusion that they could do away with if they balance tanking mechanics properly.
  13. Arclite Well-Known Member

    @Accendo -- could you please provide us an update if "tank balance" is something the developers are addressing at the moment? Without sounding pretentious, I think most of here would be delighted to offer direct feedback if it helps them.
    Priority likes this.
  14. Aull New Member

    Copied from Obano

    To fairly balance the game the tank classes should be inversely proportional in terms of offense and defense. The strongest tanks defensively are supposed to be weakest in terms of offensive.

    It terms of defense the best tanks were supposed to be.

    Guardian > Paladin > Zerker > Monk > SK > Bruiser

    Offensively in terms of DPS it went in the opposite order:

    (T1 dps) > Bruiser > SK > Monk > Zerker > (T2 dps) Paladin > Guardian

    This is very accurate as how it was when the game was young.
    I believe Moorguard was in charge of the fighters and he listed as in terms of damage output as

    Bruiser,monk,berserker, sk, with guard and paladin.
    Defensive. Guard, paladin, and monk. Better defensive stance and defensive temp rotations.
    Offensive. Bruiser, zerker, and sk. Better offensive stance and better offensive temp rotations.
    Utility. Paladin, monk, guard, sk, zerker, then bruiser.

    Basically bruisers were the last in group utility and last in defense because they had at the time no “oh $#|?” defensive capability.
    So they did have the greatest dps potential.

    Monks in Desert of Flames did get tsunami and at that time was a class defining ability defensively.
    They had decent utility coupled with good offense. Great class and to bad that tsunami spin-offs were given to the other fighters.

    Zerkers like bruisers didn’t have the defensive temps until adrenaline in ROK but did have offensive temps with ok group buffs.

    Guards could not buff their offensive but sure had the defensive ability to take on the most difficult tasks. Had decent group protection.

    The crusaders were decent all around. Group utility was very good with paladins and more defensive than the sk.

    Anyway from my perspective the game drifted from its core design trying to reach “balance” when “differentiation” is what made this so special.
    For me balance is what watered down the individuality that these fighters once had.
    Maybe they should revisit this idea.
    Obano likes this.
  15. Priority Well-Known Member

    Great in theory, but until they make content that actually requires these super defensive tanks, you'll continue to see people pushing the best DPS/buffing tanks for progression raiding.

    Would require a complete overhaul of end game mechanics/design
  16. Aull New Member

    Yes you are correct. When content favors a specific class with abilities catered for that content then they will be the first choice. Over the years it has been the content that needed adjusting more than the classes or sub-classes.

    I know this is off topic but years ago crowd control was useful and as time progressed it ceased to exist. No need for it when aoe centric classes could just burn em down.
  17. Priority Well-Known Member

    I think certain classes were given abilities that make it impossible to balance against without locking others from content.

    As for the crowd control, it's definitely being utilized in some of the challenge zones as it's, agreed, a lost art that a lot of older players took for granted as part of dungeoning. New players only know the "round up and burn" method.
  18. Priority Well-Known Member

    2 more weeks later and still waiting for any kind of response here from a red name
  19. Sykle I use too many words sometimes.

    Just need to buff the defense of every tank but monk and berserker, and increase the utility of every tank but berserker, and decrease monk dps. Currently, with Stoneskin Reaction broken, Guardians are worthless. Paladins can't live through meaningful content, and offer very little meaningful group utility. Bruisers offer very little utility, and can't live through meaningful content. Shadowknights are in a overall okay spot, but still need some defensive love, and a bit more utility. Just not as much. Monks and berserkers are just overpowered, whether it comes to selfdps, or massive utility. I don't play a tank other than some Shadowknight, so not going to input much more here, but I do agree something needs to be done.
    Red name response, even acknowledging its being looked at, would be great.
    Priority likes this.
  20. Revanu Well-Known Member

    Carnelian gem op
    Priority likes this.