2H Tanks: 9001th thread edition

[Idrinth]

Is it me or people just love to play their 2h DPS tanks? There are like 2-3 threads with heated discussions of them going all the time on these forums.

Actually this is not the thread for the dps-tanks if you look around the main adjustments desired are increased support abilities to equal out the shield's benefits a bit.

Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with them, but I always thought of 2h DPS tanks as the ultimate choice for a player, that wants to play as a melee-fighter and most likely go solo.
They have the traits of both tank and dps worlds, bringing enough CC, while being still fairly tanky, able to stick to the target and deal substantial damage if needed and even some unique 2h only moves.

You describe a melee dps here, not a tank. Tanks need to put pretty much everything into offence to be a dps tank and usually that means reduced cc.
Defensive, or medium twohanded tanks are another matter, but both mostly outlast their opponents, so they are also not dps-like.

Why not just let them have the 2h tanks have their fun, where now there is plenty of it even if you take them now in your 6man comp, and leave an option to go SnB if they really to push your group potential further and shine in a group-vs-zerg encounters?

To add more options? A game thrives on having valid options to tackle a problem, currently twohanded tanks are not really up for their job - they are lower damage and defence than some mdps while at the same time usually reducing their group utility a lot. The point here was making the choice viable, so that it's not just desperate tanks, that need to kill something themselves in pugs or people who just go for the style.

[Scrilian]

My point that there is no problem to begin with.
The option they have now is working fair and square with all its upsides and downsides I've described(even though you somehow think that it was a melee dps). Not saying the classes themselves are perfect.
Their gameplay is solid enough as it is, the choice is very viable in its own merit, where they still have a ton of utility and damage to back it up even if you take them in your comp, without overshadowing SnB-tanks or pure DPS.

Spoiler:

So much wrong with your post that I can't even... the disjointed quotation, seeing my post somehow unrelated, tank CC, utility equality, geez

[Idrinth]

The option they have now is working fair and square with all its upsides and downsides I've described(even though you somehow think that it was a melee dps). Not saying the classes themselves are perfect.

I thought it was a melee dps, because the described character seemed to fit one. maybe you can add some details to clear up the confusion?

Their gameplay is solid enough as it is, the choice is very viable in its own merit, where they still have a ton of utility and damage to back it up even if you take them in your comp, without overshadowing SnB-tanks or pure DPS.

ok, so why are twohanded tanks relatively rare in premade groups, while shield ones are common? Maybe you just pick a tank and show, that it is worth as much with a shield as well as a twohanded weapon. I'd love to see that for pretty much any tank.

So much wrong with your post that I can't even...

Answer and show where I'm wrong? Please do, otherwise the comment is not useful.

[Nekkma]

ok, so why are twohanded tanks relatively rare in premade groups, while shield ones are common? Maybe you just pick a tank and show, that it is worth as much with a shield as well as a twohanded weapon. I'd love to see that for pretty much any tank.
[

It is T3, with quite high damage and lower mitigation and avoidance. On live in T4, twohanded tanks was common and perfectly viable.

Tanks, just as any other archetype, does not exist in a vacum. Depending on your setup, what you fight, the quality of your healers, a twohanded tank can cvertainly be as valuable as a sword and board. We often ran with a twohanded BO on live and the extra burst provided should not be dismissed. In general I think twohanded tanks are fine. It is more of tweaks that is needed and not big buffs.

[Idrinth]

ok, so why are twohanded tanks relatively rare in premade groups, while shield ones are common? Maybe you just pick a tank and show, that it is worth as much with a shield as well as a twohanded weapon. I'd love to see that for pretty much any tank.

It is T3, with quite high damage and lower mitigation and avoidance. On live in T4, twohanded tanks was common and perfectly viable.

I was under the impression, we were mostly talking about the T4 anyway.

Tanks, just as any other archetype, does not exist in a vacum. Depending on your setup, what you fight, the quality of your healers, a twohanded tank can cvertainly be as valuable as a sword and board.

You can farm pugs with 1 healer and 5 tanks or something similar, that doesn't make a the choice viable. A tank is by it's very core design never viable without a group, most of the abilities need a group to be useful.

We often ran with a twohanded BO on live and the extra burst provided should not be dismissed. In general I think twohanded tanks are fine.

Actually the burst a shield-BO can get is not that much lower, while the shield makes him a way better guarder How was that "we" build, Nekkma, if I may ask? Was the BO guarded or not, what actuall support did he provide, etc.?
I would love to hear about a proper twohanded tank, that worked fine

It is more of tweaks that is needed and not big buffs.

I think we all agree on that ifyou have a look at the proposed changes - they wouldn't suddenly make 2-handed tanks the best of the best, but would add a bit to their power, the same as wearing a shield is adding a bit.

[Scrilian]

Sorry, but I wouldn't bother to, just the way you seem barely have read my initial post about 2h dps tanks and why I see it it "fair" for them to be less good than SnB but still viable in group play, which is debatable if it's actually less good.

To add I agree with Jaycub that I personally would like to see more 2h tanks in group play now in t3, but they are already strong as they are with 2h BOs high crits or KotbS huge stat gains, being able to decimate couple of opponents in a small scale combat, stay alive and still have superpunts, stuns, challenges and staggers, and high avoidance with parry to mitigate solid amount of guard damage.

My best guess would be why ppl run two SnB tanks now in t3 is that ranged are very strong with stats close to r40 while hp pools/mitigation is no near t4 levels. Back in the day I myself ran a Slayer-based premade with one tanks being SnB kotbs and the other was 2h IB, we decimated almost everybody

[Idrinth]

Sorry, but I wouldn't bother to, just the way you seem barely have read my initial post about 2h dps tanks and why I see it it "fair" for them to be less good than SnB but still viable in group play, which is debatable if it's actually less good.

don't worry, I even read posts I don't agree with, I jus don't quote the whole thing to be able to reply to the most obvious issues or least understandable statements.

To add I agree with Jaycub that I personally would like to see more 2h tanks in group play now in t3, but they are already strong as they are with 2h BOs high crits or KotbS huge stat gains, being able to decimate couple of opponents in a small scale combat, stay alive and still have superpunts, stuns, challenges and staggers, and high avoidance with parry to mitigate solid amount of guard damage.

I think you're mixing different tanks now, but well:
- KotbS always have huge stat boosts, no matter the weapon chosen. With a shield the actually supply more to the group
- BOs have huge crits if they remove all their defence, yes, adding a shield will lessen that only a tiny bit and increase survivability by a lot
- A tank can not obliterate multiple opponents that know what they are doing, there is no twohanded tank that ends up with a defence and offence that good.
- Challenge is an ability both tank types have, so is the cc usually
- Getting parry up to parry+block takes a bit investment renown wise

Back in the day I myself ran a Slayer-based premade with one tanks being SnB kotbs and the other was 2h IB, we decimated almost everybody

"back in the day" is when? The twohanded IB had a long knockdown for a while, making him an option, but tell me, why didn't you run a 2H-KotbS and a S+B-IB? You said that the weapon choices are close enough
The easy answer would be, that the knight lost too much support-potential for the extra damage potential he would have gained, while the IB would lose a one-trick-pony for a slightly weaker one(there is a shield-knockdown afair)

[Nekkma]

The twohanded BO was naturally guarding a mdps as he filled the role of a offensive tank, not that of a mdps. Just because something is not optimal does not make it not viable. If a 6vs6 is the benchmark to be viable less than half of the classes are viable.

[Idrinth]

Just because something is not optimal does not make it not viable.

To be viable it needs to be reasonably close the the optimum. A twohanded BO is not, he produces to much health issues for the return - adding a shield would solve most of that at little cost to his damage.

If a 6vs6 is the benchmark to be viable less than half of the classes are viable.

So we'll need to adjust most classes by a small bit, sounds fine to me. Especially if we start with basics, that will fix or at least reduce issues in a whole archetype.
I would also love small, incremental adjustments to classes, but that needs some basics set properly first

[Nekkma]

You miss the point. 6vs6 is about St damage. Warbands is about aoe. All classes does not need to be equally viable in all aspects of the game. Also, the offensive, but still tank, BOs I have seen packs quite the punch. I have never seen any SnB tanks provide that kind of burst, not even close.