Dev Discussion #47 - Tanking: Threat Mitigation

Entire duration of combat and ideally some new mechanics outside of just standing there pressing one button and yelling "yo mama" jokes at the mobs.

Iirc we already have that cone formation thing, so I think a mechanic of random agro by the mob that tank can "feel" beforehand and has a second or two to get in position and set up a defensive stance in front of the target would be great.

In other words, please try out something new with this archetype.

When I tank, it is almost always using a class/style where I need to constantly take actions, or DPS will take it off me. By some standards it isn't quite tanking in certain games, because other people are allowed to be attacked, just 'at the moment I decide'. Then they are healed, usually by me, and I reclaim the hate based on that.

I view threat management as a group coordination thing, therefore, and it requires at least some effort from everyone. Anything less is completely uninteresting to me. For clarity, I'm 100% an Evasion Tank. Every game. I have never chosen to play a 'straight mitigation' style tank, that I can remember, even my MOBA choices are more about 'force opponent to chase' and 'root them while I move away'.

My main game historically didn't even have the Tank be the one to engage, as they lacked the skills to drop or avoid unwanted aggro, so ranged classes with such skills or Bards would pull, therefore the initial Threat/Hate would be important. Other games, I am fine with pulling and 'getting into position for initial Aggro' because again, I'm Evasion Tank, it doesn't often matter.

To me, threat management is about riding the line of 'how much mitigation do I need, and how much can I remove for accuracy or other paths toward damage/control?'

This, however, depends a LOT on the TTK of a group vs a strongish enemy in the game. Using the one I am used to, which is also what I observed in Alpha-1, it would have to be similar, where the hate generation is a consistent, sometimes complex system, and knowing 'when to put energy into mitigation' vs 'when to put energy into spiking hate after an ally does something powerful' is one of the primary skills of an experienced Tank.

I don't remotely enjoy the flow of 'Do an ability at start to get hate and now, how good a Tank you are comes down to if you can CC the Mob's big stuff and how much damage mitigation you have'. I do not enjoy games where the 'effective way of fighting a mob' is to 'prevent the mob from actually doing all of its dangerous things', as it reduces the variety. It doesn't matter what the mob actually does if the main gameplan is always just 'stop it from doing that'. However, if mobs are allowed to realize and use their abilities, some of them will probably cause reductions in hate values, requiring the 'constant management'.

I'm also pretty uninterested in a combat system where threat/hate mechanics are determined primarily by who engages first.

In all the MMOs I've previously enjoyed, management of threat was an active process which everyone in the party needed to be aware of. Stuff like "the DPS needing to decide whether to commit to burst damage, based on how confident they are that the tank has control of the situation", or "quickly cycling aggro away from the healer when they need to save someone" for instance, is important to me feeling engaged, and feeling like my party has the potential for effective teamwork.

I also agree with the point Azherae made about CCs - while it's fun if tanks have some ability to disrupt enemy attacks, if it's either too easy to do consistently, or if CCs have low cooldowns, combat can quickly get monotonous.

I play mitigation tank. The entire thrill of the fight to me is being able to control the flow of hate precisely such that my allies can spike DPS, or heal me in some way that rises threat from the opponent monster as a response to something they did. I think that this push and pull effect makes group coordination more important, because both allies and the person currently with aggro need to manage each other such that they don't perform actions that raise/drop threat too much.

Plus, by having this available you also enable the capacity to drop hate onto others without requiring an explicit ability that does so. Emergent game play!

Having threat determined by the pull seems like a really terrible idea to me and decreases diversity of pull situations. Especially if we see abilities like in alpha 1 where the tank can pull targets or charge at them, it would be a shame if you couldn't combine that with a Mage or Ranger pull because they take so much initial threat.

Also, tying threat generation to mitigation abilities is a mechanic I like a lot. Whenever I use something like a Damage Reduction Stance, it should understandably upset the target a whole lot.

Threat management should be an active consideration from before the engagement even begins:
Who pulls might depend on party statuses, other enemies in the area, what buffs or prep is underway by others, requiring their time or focus.

It should be a continuous consideration for the entirety of the fight: Tanks have the greatest focus, but the arrangement of buffs from your Bard, who and in what order the Cleric heals, how the DPS manage their abilities, and what the Rogue does to move threat around in order to allow additional tactical choices on behalf of other teammates should all be a part of the dance of threat management.

Threat management can provide additional layers of depth to healing as well. Not just "keep the tank alive", but managing the types and levels of healing used on each teammate in order to keep hate off yourself, while anticipating upcoming events.

Threat management should be a consideration for buffers: Do I give the Ranger more attack or will it make him pull aggro off the Tank? If he does, how long can he last, and is that useful to us? (Which brings up coordination with the healer's CD/MP/focus)

The worst thing you could possibly do is make Threat management a simple one-time thing, or the focus of only one or two players. Done right, it allows a complex party interplay, creating and capitalizing on opportunities, adapting to unexpected shifts in situations, or ways that your responses to situations change the focus of the opponents and the shape of the battlefield.

Threat management should start at the beginning of the planning phase, and end only when all enemies have fallen. It should be everyone's responsibility. It's a huge, crucial layer of depth and complexity to create strong team dynamics and sustain lasting interest in gameplay.

We were unable to determine the author of the quoted post.

If there is no threat mechanic, then tanking is a lot more abstract in my opinion. I prefer threat mechanics. Not just as an occasional tank, but as any role. Particularly dynamic threat mechanics like tp that let the enemy react differently depending on how much damage is done to them at once that lets them do special abilities through out the fight like in FFXI. If hate isn't dynamic the game is too simple for my taste and tanking becomes very bland. You don't need fancy ai, just dynamic threat. We have a really old game that worked very well to prove it.

I feel like I have a unique perspective, as I enjoy tanking in some games but not others. I don't like games where they make it impossible for me to tank in the scenarios that interest me in tanking as I tend to play classes that can easily spec into tanking. When I do tank I tend to prefer to either off tank (ie hold focus on a secondary add for part of the duration of the fight OR swap tank with with my primary tank for part of the duration) OR tank for specific types of enemies that are more about positioning, quickly adapting to an enemy, and mitigating certain types of adds. Usually these fights tend to be against spell casters, dragons, or really anything that does magic as main damage and requires a lot of spacing from the party.

When I tank, I do not prefer to hold threat personally, I rather do it from a separate entity ie a summon. The reason I like tanking as a summoner is when the enemy is mainly magical in nature and requires a lot of mobility from the rest of the party. I prefer tanking such targets over my paladin because it frees them up to off tank more physical based adds, and frees up the party to focus on spacing. Usually I'm primary tank for these types of battles but need a secondary or off tank to help me mitigate adds or help me swap summons to switch to the right elemental resistance.

Additionally summoners in another game I play are good at having their loyal summon tank. So when an enemy uses Charm I can continue tanking because my summon does not get charmed, even though my team can get charmed, and I am able to run away from the range of the charm in time. I usually am main tank for these types of battles.

I love mitigation style abilities where I can swap threat between me and my summon. I love mitigation in terms of damage reduction, summoning temp hp buffering shields, and other forms of damage reduction. I love supporting my team with these as they lead to far more interesting and dynamic fights.

To answer your key questions:

Yes it should be part of combat initiation. Yes it should be throughout the entire duration of combat. Yes you can make threat pulling moves for tanks and hopefully as an augment. To make it work in PvP just make it force the targets reticle to focus on the activating player.