Tanks and their common ability... Taunt.

Vanshoodie

Since CU is not going to have any pve and MJ said that they are still going to work on roles for tank classes. In the majority of games with pvp, a tanks taunt does very little in pvp. How about letting a tank fill their role by tanking pvp? Let taunts effect players in pvp, for a short amount of time of course. It can be used to save a fellow commrade, esp healers who get beat on pretty hard. EQ2 used this mechanic and I thought it was pretty awesome. Maybe that technique can be a glimmer of hope for those who enjoy to tank and can continue to do so in a pvp based game.

 

So continue to discuss that idea..... GO!

Odaman

This was how war worked. Taunt increased your dmg on a target, and reduced their dmg to targets other than you. I'd rather see them go back to peelers and slightly tougher melee dps than them be broken debuff bots. You're going to give me nightmares of chosen guardian doks while spamming ravage with crippling strikes.

Vanshoodie

Yeah, in some games taunts work as an interrupt in pvp instead of hate grabber. I'd prefer to see them taunt and pull target's attention.

Loktofeit

Originally posted by Vanshoodie

Since CU is not going to have any pve and MJ said that they are still going to work on roles for tank classes. In the majority of games with pvp, a tanks taunt does very little in pvp. How about letting a tank fill their role by tanking pvp? Let taunts effect players in pvp, for a short amount of time of course. It can be used to save a fellow commrade, esp healers who get beat on pretty hard. EQ2 used this mechanic and I thought it was pretty awesome. Maybe that technique can be a glimmer of hope for those who enjoy to tank and can continue to do so in a pvp based game.

So continue to discuss that idea..... GO!

If a PvE tank is of any use in PvP, it's a crappy PvP system.

Bearprobe

I'd rather have a clever use of bodyguard, intercept and guard than a taunt mechanic. 

Niix_Ozek

Instead of trying to figure out how to implement a PVE ABILITY in a PVP GAME, why not just NOT HAVE THIS SAID PVE ABILITY in THIS SAID PVP GAME?

 

Ugh, If you don't have PVE you don't need to design Tanks like they are designed in other games ( ie WAR ).

Just make tanks wear heavy armor and have utility of shield / swapping to 2hand.

gah why would you fight for a pve tank in a pvp game

Vanshoodie

I'm sorry, how does it have to be labled as a pve only ability? If you were on the ground about to die and someone had an ability to grab the foes attention for a moment so you could get a heal, you would not be ok with someone helping you out? I'm not saying make it so they have massive hate bombs to grab everyones attention. Just let it be part of the randomness and chaos that Mark has already mentioned. They can accompany that with shields, intercepts and what not.

Niix_Ozek

Are you trying to tell me it wasn't designed as a PVE ability?

Taking someones target away isn't tactical skill, people will just make macros to spam to reaquire targets, it will end up being a pointless ability.

The definition of tank people are describing in this thread was designed and required for a PVE game and PVE components of games. The only reason some games made alterations to make viable in RVR was because people complained about being required to spec a certain way for PVE and respec for PVP.

This game won't have that complication so don't over complicate things.

Speely

Agreed, Van. Taunting can serve a purpose if designed for RvR from the ground up. A way for tanks to protect people can exist outside of shield bashing.

Example: if you have an ability (taunt) activated, every time that you strike an enemy, they target you despite what their current target is. Perhaps Taunt mode could reduce your damage dealt by these strike to reflect that you aren't going for killing blows, but trying to save your ally.

They could keep manually targetting after each hit, but tgeir attacks would A) be slowed and be likely to hit you oftentimes instead.

Kinda cool.

Speely

Well, Niix... If people making macros is going to be a problem for that, then it will be a problem for almost anything, tbh.

Niix_Ozek

You guys are just talking about other abilities a "peeler / melee support class" might have... Labelling it taunt is inaccurate and don't know why you have to have an ability called "taunt"

Stop calling it taunt and throw around ideas, DAOC's taunt system is still unmatched imo, having an ability to force someone to attack you is forcing them to not control their character ( in a different way than stun/mezz ) and not in a good way.

Please don't make this game just a mash of pushing people back, pulling them around, forcing them to do things... There is only so much CC that is needed.... I don't think you guys understand because it seems all the games you played didn't have mezz / stun / root system. WIth these there are plenty of tactical choices to stop someone to get heals off, etc.

 

But continue idea mashing, just stop calling it taunt lol

meddyck

It's not literally true that CU will have no PvE. There will be guards, keep lords, and probably other enemy realm NPCs. Mark has hinted at dragons and the possibility of a dungeon like DF. It seems likely that the maps will have some wild animals, bandits, etc. You won't kill these NPCs for xp and loot drops like in a standard PvE or PvE/PvP MMO but they'll still be there and you will need to and possibly want to kill them at times. That being the case, some form of threat control could still be useful. You don't want an uber purple relic temple lord systematically running around destroying your healers with no way to turn his focus onto a sturdier character.

Niix_Ozek

Originally posted by PerfArt
Well, Niix... If people making macros is going to be a problem for that, then it will be a problem for almost anything, tbh.

Just think outside the box when thinking of abilities ... not just cool neat abilities, you HAVE to look on the other side of the coin.

How is it really going to affect people? With other things in game can people make a way to render it pointless?

Is it really a good idea to have 100 forms of CC? There is only so much you need, and not everything needs/should have a counter other than a players ability to be smart and avoid it. Keep things simple, you will end up having more fun.

 

Lawtoween

Am I incorrectly recalling that DAoC had skills like Guard/Intercept/Block that could be used in PvP?  If I remember correctly, and I could be way off, for those to work the tank had to be in close proximity (melee range) to the character they were protecting.  In WAR the 50 feet range of guard eliminates the need for formation and makes the tank more like a sacrificial healer. 

 

I think if you can get a few tanks to work in formation, they should be rewarded for it.  Put five tanks in a row each boosting the block of the one on either side of them and you have a small phalanx.  Give them a visual to know it is working like a chain connecting their shields.  Make it so that a support character close behind that phalanx can not be hit by direct fire attacks from the other side of the shields (and the tanks all must have shields) unless that ranged attacker has some form of elevation to achieve LoS, or an attack that is indirect fire, and now you make combat much more interesting. 

Taunt could still be included as a debuff to make the tank more versatile, just make sure that it is single target.  It could debuff the target's damage against everyone other than the tank, but also increase the damage the target could produce on the tank using the taunt.  It should provide some sort of unmistakable visual clue as to who is taunting them (the tank appears glowing red with a large flashing bullseye floating above their head to the target of the taunt).  The debuff might stack if done by the same tank multiple times (make the DPSer worthless against anyone else, but at some point making the tank like paper), but only the first tank that taunts a character would be able to taunt any one target, i.e. no stacking from multiple tanks.  Finally, if the taunting tank screws up and gets himself killed by over using it, the target of the taunt gets a short term buff to damage any enemy.  The buff would multiply by the number of times the debuff was stacked when the tank died.  This kind of risk-reward should be appealing even to those who think taunts are PvE garbage. 

killion81

Originally posted by PerfArt
Agreed, Van. Taunting can serve a purpose if designed for RvR from the ground up. A way for tanks to protect people can exist outside of shield bashing.

Example: if you have an ability (taunt) activated, every time that you strike an enemy, they target you despite what their current target is. Perhaps Taunt mode could reduce your damage dealt by these strike to reflect that you aren't going for killing blows, but trying to save your ally.

They could keep manually targetting after each hit, but tgeir attacks would A) be slowed and be likely to hit you oftentimes instead.

Kinda cool.
 

 

Clever way to implement taunt.  Another simple way would be to force the person being taunted to target the taunter for a specified period of time, maybe 2 seconds (give or take depending on the speed of the combat).  This pulls them off someone long enough that a well coordinated heal could turn the tide of the battle.  Could even use AoE taunts that last 1 second, once again used to provide a comrade with a slight break in damage received, used for escape or survival.  Probably have to put diminishing returns on this to prevent tanks from chain taunting a single target.

There are definitely ways that a taunt mechanic could work in PvP.

Speely

Agreed, killion81. A nice variant on the theme.

Niix_Ozek

Yes DAOC has those abilities, intercept was on a 30sec cooldown. Before ToA ( and before the game got worse and they added cheese body guard - worst ability ever put in ), you had to protect your healers with intercept and guard with high shield/dex

You had to spec for it and sacrifice damage, but that made you the class you are ( consequences like Mark talks about ), i hope they have a similar system. Protect just guarded against aggro from npcs.

I like the idea of an ability if you specced into a defensive peel tank role that works like you've said " Lower damage done to others by XX for 30 seconds, however increases that targets damage done to you by YY"

Abilities with consequences for using them, so the player could reacq and swap to the tank. Adds dynamic to a battle.

Niix_Ozek

Originally posted by killion81

Originally posted by PerfArt
Agreed, Van. Taunting can serve a purpose if designed for RvR from the ground up. A way for tanks to protect people can exist outside of shield bashing.

Example: if you have an ability (taunt) activated, every time that you strike an enemy, they target you despite what their current target is. Perhaps Taunt mode could reduce your damage dealt by these strike to reflect that you aren't going for killing blows, but trying to save your ally.

They could keep manually targetting after each hit, but tgeir attacks would A) be slowed and be likely to hit you oftentimes instead.

Kinda cool.
 

 

Clever way to implement taunt.  Another simple way would be to force the person being taunted to target the taunter for a specified period of time, maybe 2 seconds (give or take depending on the speed of the combat).  This pulls them off someone long enough that a well coordinated heal could turn the tide of the battle.  Could even use AoE taunts that last 1 second, once again used to provide a comrade with a slight break in damage received, used for escape or survival.  Probably have to put diminishing returns on this to prevent tanks from chain taunting a single target.

There are definitely ways that a taunt mechanic could work in PvP.

That's a terrible idea ugh, Changing someones target is taking the pure control out of the players hand. Not just Stalling them ( like mezz / stun ), but you're forcing their characters hand and it just doesn't make sense in my mind. There are other ways of dealing with saving someone that inputting 100 abilities like these.

Speely

Plus One, Niix

Plastic-Metal

Originally posted by killion81

Originally posted by PerfArt
Agreed, Van. Taunting can serve a purpose if designed for RvR from the ground up. A way for tanks to protect people can exist outside of shield bashing.

Example: if you have an ability (taunt) activated, every time that you strike an enemy, they target you despite what their current target is. Perhaps Taunt mode could reduce your damage dealt by these strike to reflect that you aren't going for killing blows, but trying to save your ally.

They could keep manually targetting after each hit, but tgeir attacks would A) be slowed and be likely to hit you oftentimes instead.

Kinda cool.
 

 

Clever way to implement taunt.  Another simple way would be to force the person being taunted to target the taunter for a specified period of time, maybe 2 seconds (give or take depending on the speed of the combat).  This pulls them off someone long enough that a well coordinated heal could turn the tide of the battle.  Could even use AoE taunts that last 1 second, once again used to provide a comrade with a slight break in damage received, used for escape or survival.  Probably have to put diminishing returns on this to prevent tanks from chain taunting a single target.

There are definitely ways that a taunt mechanic could work in PvP.

 

+1 to PerfArt and killion81

 

I was going to write up a detailed summary, but you guys beat me to it.  I don't think that forcing a player to target another target is the correct direction, but lowering the overall damage output of the specific target or something?  Game developers and players have labeled taunts as, "XYZ ability FORCES TARGET to redirect aggression to PLAYER".  When I think of taunting, I think of people literally taunting and enraging someone else until they snap; as in not being able to think clear headedly.

Speely

For your former post, not the most recent lol. Though I respect your opinion and your passion for CU, many daoc mechanics took control from players. That's part of the pvp dynamic.

Vanshoodie

Originally posted by killion81

Originally posted by PerfArt
Agreed, Van. Taunting can serve a purpose if designed for RvR from the ground up. A way for tanks to protect people can exist outside of shield bashing.

Example: if you have an ability (taunt) activated, every time that you strike an enemy, they target you despite what their current target is. Perhaps Taunt mode could reduce your damage dealt by these strike to reflect that you aren't going for killing blows, but trying to save your ally.

They could keep manually targetting after each hit, but tgeir attacks would A) be slowed and be likely to hit you oftentimes instead.

Kinda cool.
 

 

Clever way to implement taunt.  Another simple way would be to force the person being taunted to target the taunter for a specified period of time, maybe 2 seconds (give or take depending on the speed of the combat).  This pulls them off someone long enough that a well coordinated heal could turn the tide of the battle.  Could even use AoE taunts that last 1 second, once again used to provide a comrade with a slight break in damage received, used for escape or survival.  Probably have to put diminishing returns on this to prevent tanks from chain taunting a single target.

There are definitely ways that a taunt mechanic could work in PvP.

That is how it worked in EQ2. A tank used a hate modifying ability (don't want to use "taunt" anymore) and the target of the ability was forced to target the tank for 3 seconds. If overly used the tank could end up with too many people hitting them and would die. I just think it is a good idea that can be built upon with other damage reduction/shield support type abilites.

Niix_Ozek

Well exactly and i've stated them, "root, mezz, stun, snare" But like I said they take away in a different way than inabling someones ability to target someone they want... ( i guess this is also dependant on them not doing a stupid FPS style targetting system LOL ).

 

There are abilities you can give a tank that can help protect his healers without guarenteeing immunity and taking control away from the player like forcing their target would do. I just see this mechanic as cheesy.

I would compare it to BodyGuard from ToA that was added that when a tank bodyguarded someone you would just stand there not being able to attack, it made no visual sense and there was always work arounds, it was a crutch that people used when they screwed up... Instead of being punished for playing bad. This is different, but I feel it would garner the same cheese factor as it. Unless you're stalled out ( stunned / mezzed ) you shouldn't be able to not attack the target you want... ( lower hte damage, give your healer a shield that has to be broken before you can be interupted etc. do something else ) don't force someone that they're chasing to not be able to attack them...

Just picture chasing someone and someone casts it on you, your target changes so you're following someone trying to attack and out of your control you're forced to target someone behind you. It is just silly. Think outside the box more please.

tlear

In large fights WAR taunt is absolutely broken, target swapping mechnanic is worse can you imagine what will happen in 50 vs 50 fight with couple dozen tanks on each side.. /quit

 

Distinction between melee dps and tanks is just not needed if you have no pve in game. Just have couple different melee classes per realm with a bit different flavor. For example Polearmsman with single target and aoe specs and ?? with shield and sword and Zweihander spec lines

Niix_Ozek

Originally posted by tlear

In large fights WAR taunt is absolutely broken, target swapping mechnanic is worse can you imagine what will happen in 50 vs 50 fight with couple dozen tanks on each side.. /quit

 

Distinction between melee dps and tanks is just not needed if you have no pve in game. Just have couple different melee classes per realm with a bit different flavor. For example Polearmsman with single target and aoe specs and ?? with shield and sword and Zweihander spec lines

Thank you! +1

WIth the limited classes MJ has stated he is going to look at ( might not have a choice with minimum developers / money ).

There may just be 1 melee class with two option specs, melee dps ( dual wield ), melee dps ( 2hand ), defense / peeler ( shield / snares / guards  ).

I miss the arms / hero / warrior classes in daoc, they were so versitile.

Vanshoodie

Originally posted by Niix_Ozek

Well exactly and i've stated them, "root, mezz, stun, snare" But like I said they take away in a different way than inabling someones ability to target someone they want... ( i guess this is also dependant on them not doing a stupid FPS style targetting system LOL ).

 

There are abilities you can give a tank that can help protect his healers without guarenteeing immunity and taking control away from the player like forcing their target would do. I just see this mechanic as cheesy.

I would compare it to BodyGuard from ToA that was added that when a tank bodyguarded someone you would just stand there not being able to attack, it made no visual sense and there was always work arounds, it was a crutch that people used when they screwed up... Instead of being punished for playing bad. This is different, but I feel it would garner the same cheese factor as it. Unless you're stalled out ( stunned / mezzed ) you shouldn't be able to not attack the target you want... ( lower hte damage, give your healer a shield that has to be broken before you can be interupted etc. do something else ) don't force someone that they're chasing to not be able to attack them...

Just picture chasing someone and someone casts it on you, your target changes so you're following someone trying to attack and out of your control you're forced to target someone behind you. It is just silly. Think outside the box more please.

I have played like this. I do not have to picture it being done to me. As far as a complete game changer, it is not. You may instead land your larger damage ability on the tank instead of your weakened foe. So you missed.. swap back targets and continue.