Why some of us OG's Get upset

[papakami]

Single most important way to be a "good tank"? Use guard EFFECTIVELY. See how I differ the inherent use of the ability from the actual skill involved in using it in the most effective way possible? Guard requires more than simply activating it; it requires you to be mindful of your guard range, your positioning to not get punted out of that, and to swap guard to the correct target when pressure shifts. A good tank does not only use guard, he knows how guard works for and against him in every situation. Their main objective is thus to be a proper tank, NOT activate one ability and do /follow on the MA while jerking off. If you consider me to have completed my main objective by selecting a party member and clicking guard, while I spend most of the time nowhere near my guarded target/nor switch to a party target that is, how am I benefiting ANYONE?

One more thing; what the **** are we using the term redirect for? It seems more logical to use the Guard tooltip's definition of SPLITTING damage. It's an inherently flawed phrase too, since a tank is able to soak up more damage with block + parry than the person whose damage he's splitting off to himself, but redirect is a term used for URLs.

I'm happy for you Ryan. You tried to weasel out, but finally - you've agreed. The main objective is to redirect damage. You do that by using guard... effectively. whatever. Point is - the main objective of a tank is to redirect damage. When you split someone's damage, you take their damage. If the damage was intended for them, but you take some of it, it has been re-directed.

Now, i'm not here to give you a tutorial on english. At the end of the day - despite everyone's best efforts to the contrary, the OP was baited into a straw man argument with the question - Why stop attacking tanks.

In his response, he gave a correct statement when noting the main objective of a tank. From there, a straw man argument was levied against him regarding all of the other abilities a tank can do and why his answer was such a disappointment because it demonstrated a lack of knowledge.

Yet - many posts later, we can now recognize his response was in-fact correct. The main objective is to redirect damage. Further, the straw man argument levied against him was non-sensical blabbering about abilities that were never in question and were never being debated. And finally - we see that someone discrediting the main objective as incorrect is in-fact ignorant and silly. Literally - the dumbest of response.

whew - we can now all go back to our day.

[RyanMakara]

Single most important way to be a "good tank"? Use guard EFFECTIVELY. See how I differ the inherent use of the ability from the actual skill involved in using it in the most effective way possible? Guard requires more than simply activating it; it requires you to be mindful of your guard range, your positioning to not get punted out of that, and to swap guard to the correct target when pressure shifts. A good tank does not only use guard, he knows how guard works for and against him in every situation. Their main objective is thus to be a proper tank, NOT activate one ability and do /follow on the MA while jerking off. If you consider me to have completed my main objective by selecting a party member and clicking guard, while I spend most of the time nowhere near my guarded target/nor switch to a party target that is, how am I benefiting ANYONE?

One more thing; what the **** are we using the term redirect for? It seems more logical to use the Guard tooltip's definition of SPLITTING damage. It's an inherently flawed phrase too, since a tank is able to soak up more damage with block + parry than the person whose damage he's splitting off to himself, but redirect is a term used for URLs.

I'm happy for you Ryan. You tried to weasel out, but finally - you've agreed. The main objective is to redirect damage. You do that by using guard... effectively. whatever. Point is - the main objective of a tank is to redirect damage. When you split someone's damage, you take their damage. If the damage was intended for them, but you take some of it, it has been re-directed.

Now, i'm not here to give you a tutorial on english. At the end of the day - despite everyone's best efforts to the contrary, the OP was baited into a straw man argument with the question - Why stop attacking tanks.

In his response, he gave a correct statement when noting the main objective of a tank. From there, a straw man argument was levied against him regarding all of the other abilities a tank can do and why his answer was such a disappointment because it demonstrated a lack of knowledge.

Yet - many posts later, we can now recognize his response was in-fact correct. The main objective is to redirect damage. Further, the straw man argument levied against him was non-sensical blabbering about abilities that were never in question and were never being debated. And finally - we see that someone discrediting the main objective as incorrect is in-fact ignorant and silly. Literally - the dumbest of response.

whew - we can now all go back to our day.

As I see it, whether or not a tank is guarding somebody, you still do the same damage to said tank if they're not being guarded. Bretin gave exact reason as to why the claim of "don't attack the tank" holds no ground. You wish to call an entirety of responses 'the dumbest' when you nitpick only one exact sentence: "the main objectiv of a tank is not to redirect damage", I feel that's unfair. It's probably why the majority of people initially disagreed with you despite being right on that one.

I do appreciate the English lesson, but in response to that I have to point out that your use of a hyphen in 'in-fact' is incorrect within the given context. 'Re-directed' requires no hyphen at all.

[warhammer69]

either me or you tanking gachi :p

[th3gatekeeper]

Read the first page, feels like just a bunch of e-peen measuring going on in here.... Think you guys should try and find common ground and get direction of this thread going again instead of an argument about semantics. I could be WAY off base, but I did actually care about this topic until the end of the first page, now I could ALMOST not care any less (I cared enough to post amirite?).

[RyanMakara]

Read the first page, feels like just a bunch of e-peen measuring going on in here.... Think you guys should try and find common ground and get direction of this thread going again instead of an argument about semantics. I could be WAY off base, but I did actually care about this topic until the end of the first page, now I could ALMOST not care any less (I cared enough to post amirite?).

I think you're simply demonstrating a failure to read. - papakami

[papakami]

Well let's take a look at his statements, line by line, and examine where the "unfair" characterization of his statements as dumb are at?

Bretin wrote:
1. i basically asked that one question just to check your knowledge and yet you disappointed me. the main objectiv of a tank is not to redirect damage.

We've concluded this was dumb. The main objective of a tank is to redirect damage


2. they have multiple jobs and yet the tank archetype has the biggest impact on the battlefield.

No one argued they didn't have multiple jobs. Rather, it was discussed what the main job was. Further, noting they have multiple jobs implies they do a lot of things. So using "yet" as a followup to their multiple jobs is dumb. Of course they have a big impact on the battlefield due to their multiple jobs. Saying they have multiple jobs and yet have the biggest impact is nonsensical. It's dumb.

3. they are responsible for most of the CC, to negate damage & to deal damage. a good tank can control a battlefield on his own. due to the fact that they have by far the largest impact on the outcome of an fight, it is quite often important to shut them down before anything else.

How many videos have you witnessed this author targeting the tank before anything else? It is extremely rare. Only when the tank is terribly played (i.e. a 2hander tank or a terribly geared/played comp). DPS and Healers are always the primary targets in a matchup of equal strength players. So discussing the shut down of a tank before anything else - well that's just dumb.


4. ofc that doesn't always makes sense, especially not when the enemy group has 2 tanks who are both capable of swapping guard (take care of each other). but one thing is for sure: if the enemy tank dies, the fight is basically won. losing a tank is worse than losing a healer because the amount of pressure it generates on your group is insane. so whenever you have the chance to drop a tank, do it.

no one is debating this - just a straw man argument by the author. The comment is perfectly valid. But dumb to be introduced since no one is arguing otherwise.

5. note: that doesn't mean to always go for the tank first, the situation matters a lot but saying "ignore tanks" or "don't hit tanks" is just a proof of little to no knowledge about target calls.

again - no one is debating this. just part of the straw man argument. dumb.


6. aha.. i want to see how that works ingame. if you want your group to work they have to assist. splitting your offtank from the rest of the train which is supposed to chase the healer in your scenerio will end in an full wipe after 30seconds. though for your team ofc. a offtank can't pressure a guarded dps all alone and if you let him stick to deal fluff damage it will make you end up losing one guard on your dps e.g. providing a free kill for the enemy team.

Look at this - a non-guarded dps is a free kill for the enemy team. Sounds like redirecting that damage is of primary importance. contradicting his original statement that it wasn't of primary importance. When you contradict your own writing, just sentences later, that is truly dumb.


7. i really appreciate your theorycrafting and that you want to share informations which are supposed to let people improve their gameplay. in general this would be a good thing but yet this advice is really really bad and you should rethink everything of your post.

Here the author is condescending to another forum user. Sadly - his own advice should be heeded here. Really dumb to talk down to another user when you've started your own conversation with one of the dumbest responses ever.


in conclusion - dumb.

[Theseus]

Ok, I didnt want to write more in this case after bretins answer, as it is quit rude, ( Yes he apologized for it, but I just am quite sensitive about such a tone, even if i dont feel insulted in particular. And even if it is not really a thing, I played War on live for years and thousands of battles in any scale.), but this is really getting out of hand here.

First of all, Bretin made one good point. I was quite unprecise when I talked about redirecting damage. Of course a tank can do so much more... as an Melee DD I know and appreciate that. But at the end of the day, everything he does, from CC over Buff, Knockback, taunting and even to just standing in the way, you direct the damage of the opponent in a way you want it to flow. Thats what I meant. Can you so conduct the flow of the Battle? Of course, but to say thats the role of the tank gives the DD way to less credit I think. A good DD just sets the course of a battle as a good tank. So yes a Tank has a lot of Abillities which are important, with guard as a main abilitiy. But not the only one, and yes he has to know how to use it, how switch guard and so on, but isnt that the point with any ability?Oo

But that was not the point I was making: The point I was making was, that it is, in my point of view, to first take out DD and Heal before you take out the tanks, just because you would need to long otherwise, if they and their healers can play. So you take out Healers and DD first, in most cases. Not in all, and not with all tanks, your right here, but no rule is 100% applyable, I thought that would be trivial.^^


So all in all, no one should rage here about that thing here, we just have two different points of view, and bretin a bit of a rough tone.^^

[papakami]

Ok, I didnt want to write more in this case after bretins answer, as it is quit rude,

and bretin a bit of a rough tone.^^

No worries Theseus. Bretin was rude.

This is why it was very important to point out just how completely stupid his comment was, given that it was made whilst being ridiculously rude.

He actually had no good points to make. So you already are being kinder than the situation necessitates.

He merely straw-manned arguments that no one was debating. Oh, but before he did that, he made sure to make one of the stupidest comments ever:

"The main objectiv of a tank is not to redirect damage"

[reactor24]

Ok, I didnt want to write more in this case after bretins answer, as it is quit rude,

and bretin a bit of a rough tone.^^

No worries Theseus. Bretin was rude.

This is why it was very important to point out just how completely stupid his comment was, given that it was made whilst being ridiculously rude.

He actually had no good points to make. So you already are being kinder than the situation necessitates.

He merely straw-manned arguments that no one was debating. Oh, but before he did that, he made sure to make one of the stupidest comments ever:

"The main objectiv of a tank is not to redirect damage"

I don't know Bretin but I don't think he was rude at all. You are the one sir that has been very rude throughout the thread. Is something going on in your real life that is causing you to be a jerk on these forums? Work your **** out bruh.

[reactor24]

Ok, I didnt want to write more in this case after bretins answer, as it is quit rude,

and bretin a bit of a rough tone.^^

No worries Theseus. Bretin was rude.

This is why it was very important to point out just how completely stupid his comment was, given that it was made whilst being ridiculously rude.

He actually had no good points to make. So you already are being kinder than the situation necessitates.

He merely straw-manned arguments that no one was debating. Oh, but before he did that, he made sure to make one of the stupidest comments ever:

"The main objectiv of a tank is not to redirect damage"

I don't know Bretin but I don't think he was rude at all. You are the one sir that has been very rude throughout the thread. Is something going on in your real life that is causing you to be a jerk on these forums? Work your **** out bruh.