Shaman Tank - makes the most sense ever but is not in the game

It’s not that they will be “similar”, but from what i’ve seen is that there is no clearly define design for tanks.

Keep in mind that all tanks in some way had a unique identity in their playstyle:

  • Warrior is the traditional sword and board tank vs physical damage

  • Paladin is/was the aoe tank and closest to share a design space with war (my opinion is that he suffers from being a really old tank along with warrior).

  • Druid is the heavy armor/dodge/hp stacking bear

  • DK is the self healing one from damage taken

  • Monk is the one that staggers dmg

  • DH is the one that heals from damage dealt

As you see, apart from the original 2 (or maybe 3), each one has a clear design along with theme.

The problem with shaman is not that there is no theme, it is quite thematic, but the problem is that there is no clear idea for a design goal.

Asking for a shaman tank is going to a car manufacturer and asking for a red car. Sure, it is what you want, but it is not something he can deliver on that alone, since he must come up with all other specifications.

This is why I believe we got shaman tanks in SoD but not in retail. In SoD where specs are not really well designed, they can add 2-3 abilities and call it a day because it is thematic.
In retail they must build a well designed spec with its abilities and how they interact with everything in the game (and that they are unique enough and not share the design of another tank). That’s what I believe holds them back from delivering, not the lack of wanting it.

1 Like

We can go this like forever, i think it will be fun to have another tank and shaman can fit that role easy.

When it happens or not, is another story.

1 Like

Nah dude your posts aren’t worth reading based on these comments. Pls make your own post if you enjoy derailing and complaining so much.
Also I will not care for your reply.

I agree that it would be good. I also see that just asking for it will not make it more likely.

Giving examples or feedback on design spaces that are not filled by other tanks and what you would like to see on the other hand, might help start a discussion/give some ideas for that.

Not on general forums though :stuck_out_tongue:

Exactly.

And I can give you guys a clear example of a spec that has this exact problem right now.

What happens if you dont think through with “new specs”.

PEvoker is in a really tricky situation. Because its “niche” was supposed to be the new “charge up” skills (the breath) and Blizz tried to make its range a niche (mid range).

They said: Well PHoly and MW are “melee”. All other healers are “ranged”. So lets do something in between (“mid range”). Which is what they did.

They forgot that even IF MW and HPala are “melee”… their spells STILL have a 40 yard range. So while they might sit at melee range, they can still target a caster in Narnia and heal him.

So by confusing where the healer actually sits with “range of spells” they made PEvoker.

So now. To solve this issue, they need to increase the range of PEvoker to 40 yards like every other healer.

HOWEVER… what do you do now? You got a healer that practically speaking does THE SAME THING as a RShaman… and has crazy mobility. How do you balance that out? You cant. Your stuck.

And that ladies and gentlemen is WHY PEvoker does not have 40 yard range. And wont have for the foreseeable future. Because by doing so, you kill off another healer spec.

So they will leave it as it is and hope that none of you guys figure out the truth.

Thought this was a solid place to share these ideas with blizz. Where else would you communicate stuff like this?

It is a solid place to share ideas. And I will be here to point out when those ideas are bad.

Another example : People asked for Group Loot in raids. Because Personal Loot was “bad” somehow.

I was called out back in the day. And now, 1 out of every 5 post is about people complaining GL sucks. :slight_smile:

Not everything that is posted here is a good idea.

Oh, shaman class forum for sure, this is exactly the reason those exist :stuck_out_tongue: .

On general it is not the best place, because a small minority is interested on those posts and they quickly “die out” to other posts. Also it might be removed (because it belongs to another forum).

Oh got you. I was thinking general is better because it does reach more people, people that wouldn’t hang out in the shaman forum. Like other tank mains for example. It does get more attention here for sure

2 Likes

Have it your way. Enjoy SoD.

I think there are many similarities between specs across the game.

Your deconstruction above, is mostly correct, though utility plays a huge role in play style.

The reasoning still feels flawed to me, and let me recontextualise it in the realm of DPS:

“We already have a builder-spender, can’t have another one”… When basically all dps specs are based around the concept of building and spending.

They can find a way to make a shaman tank spec feel more individual.

Maybe it will rely on self heal a lot like BDK, but have a completely different set of utility and defensive abilities.

And again, adding another tank isn’t going to destabilize the game. It might even get more people interested in tanking, which is never a bad thing.

3 Likes

ALL tank specs are builders and spenders too. So if my deconstruction is correct, how would that fit in your description?

DPS are actually categorized in : Melee and Ranged. And each category has primarily sustain or burst. Or caped and un-caped AoE. You categorize DD like that.

And because DPS are a less specialized roll (unlike healers and tanks) you have more than 1 deconstruction, or “range”. Allowing for more variety. And that explains why there fewer tank/healer specs vs. DPS specs.

Defensive abilities of a DK are mostly self heal. If you make a shaman work like a DK, then most of the defensive abilities have the same effect (self heal) but with a different name. Hence a shaman would be a DK in blue.

If you give a bit of mitigation and mostly self-heal. Its a DH in blue. If you give DK levels of self heal, and some mitigation then its OP and will get nerfed. :slight_smile:

Utility in tanks falls under the same category as DPS and Healers. Because many share the same aspects.

Except DH tank this season with double sigil. And we all know that is OP, and that is why its “Exodia Level” of representation this season. And because of that, its not a good example of “utility” balance.

Either way. The “utility” dilemma is something that goes beyond tanks. Its a discussion on its own, and should not form the basis of ANY spec. Even less tanks and healers (examples: GDruid in S2, or DH this season).

It seems to make sense that the classes that can use a shield should have a tank spec. Shaman is only shield bearer that can’t tank. I would enjoy this addition to have a shaman tank.
Plus if 3 leather wearers can have tank spec , why not a mail wearing class :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Surely that only adds to the point? As you can have micro variations and make something feel quite different still. For example, arcane mage, destro lock, devoker.

You’re oversimplifying. Giving a shaman tank an “Earth Strike” which operates exactly the same way as BDK “Death Strike” would make the hypothetical ShamyTank “BDK in blue”.

The resource system is going to work differently.

The healing abilities will work differently.

The damage profile (both offensive and defensive) will work differently.

Mobility will be different.

I get very much that we have specific axis to balance all these on, but surely there’s room for micro variation within those? I do believe that you’re right in the sense that there’s only so much room for variation, but I don’t think we’ve quite reached that room yet.

1 Like

Maybe I am not explaining myself properly. I am not “over-simplifying” classes. All I am saying is that mechanically speaking (emphasis on that) all classes need a “niche” or a “foundation” in order to make them distinct from one another. And then you build the “micro-utility” on top of that foundation.

And if you don’t respect that foundation you will end up with specs competing with each-other, AND simultaneously with other specs. Which is a tough spot to be in. “Micro-Utility” just wont cut it to make them distinct enough to prevent competition with themselves.

And I will clarify my position with an example: Evoker (all 2, then 3 specs) in the DF PTR were announced as a “mid-range”. I said it would not work.

Well turns out that a mid-range niche does not exist. Because most of the PvE mechanics are either run to melee range. Or stack up with ranged in Narnia. Or spread out all over the room. There is no such a thing as “ranged stack with ranged. Melee stack with melee. And the Evoker, stand in between”.

PEvoker got the shortest end of the stick. Because while theoretically there are “melee-range healers”, both PHoly and MW monk have 40 yard spells. Because while they do sit at melee range, they also need to heal the ranged DDs sitting in Narnia. And vice-versa for the caster healers.

To technically speaking, ALL healers are “ranged” healers. There is no “melee/caster” range where you can place healers in. So a “mid-ranged” healer makes no sense.

PEvoker had to move around all day not being able to heal anyone. If he sits in melee, he cant heal ranged. If he sits in ranged, cant heal melee.

And that is why if you go to the Evoker forums right now… they are BEGGING for 40 yard spells.

But you know why they did not get that yet? Because if they did get 40 yard range spells… they would be an RShaman with wings. And better mobility.

So now. Instead of comparing RShaman to the rest of the healers. Now, you FIRST see who is better: RShaman or PEvoker. Whoever wins, THEN compares to the other healers. The looser gets squat. This is an over-simplification of what would happen. But you get my point right?

And that is what happens if you dont respect the overall niches (or foundations) of specs.

1 Like

I mean this is a pretty comprehensive breakdown of a specific problem, credit where credit is due.

Is this problem transferable in the case of tanks? That’s where I’m differentiating. Let’s ignore the shaman aspect of it, and keep to the common denominators.

Obviously, just as you’ve eloquently put it, there’s not going to be some sort of caster tank, or ranged tank or something that simply fits nowhere in the game.

A new tank would still be bound by how tanks are currently operating in game.

This happens a lot with dps specs already, and is of course also dependant of the seasonal tuning. There’s all sorts of functional overlap between class/specs and the majority of raiders and dungeoneers are affected by the current meta one way or another. Loads of people choose to ignore that and carry on with whatever aesthetic they prefer playing.

If tanks get a bit of that as well (that being the functional overlap), will it really be a problem? Will it break the game? At worse? Some class/spec combo never gets picked (ie nothing new here) at best there’s one new tank in the roster which might increase interest in the role, both in organised communities and the solo players.

People vibe with aesthetics, fantasies and things like that. Let’s say ShamanTank plays a bit like bdk. There might still be people who’d rather play the shaman tank for all sorts of reasons. They don’t like DK vibe, or they don’t enjoy melee dps. They like being a caster or tanking. They just love elements themes that all shaman specs have, but also like tanking.

I think it’s important to account for all those factors, together with all the more technical elements that you’ve been mentioning of course.

1 Like

I would LOVE Shaman’s to get a tank spec, I wouldn’t even be bothered if it had to replace one of the DPS specs and not fussed which one would stay or go. It would be my main if it ever happened. Unless DH got a healing spec first but that is for another thread.

You point out an important element. But my personal opinion is still that technical elements (foundation) >> than the rest of the factors.

However, I wont pretend like my opinion is better than anyone else’s. So a nice balance has to be struck. Lets see. :slight_smile:

And this is the core of my opinion. A bit of overlap is OK and healthy. But how much overlap is too much overlap?

I claim that in the case of tanks, its pretty saturated as it is. Any more, and you would bump into the “too much” zone.

For sure! :nerd_face:

Oh that’s debate for the ages and one that I’m sure blizzard devs are having very often between them too, considering how often Ion among others mentions the fear of class homogenization in design.

But does this saturation have a negative effect in the game? We still seem to have a lack of players interested in tanking, and a disproportionate amount of DPS. Mind you that’s likely to do with many other factors outside of the pool of currently available tanks. (thinking route prepping for m+, the weight of responsibility in raids with one shot mechanics etc).

Making a new tanking spec has never resulted in more tanks. As you already pointed out, the reason people tank or don’t tank is because of other factors.

And as you also pointed out there will always be a meta. But you also have to agree that the “meta” of S1 is not comparable to the “meta” of S2 (Exodia).

I claim the following : the negative effects of having too similar classes means that one of the two very similar specs will always be left behind. Because the “weight” or importance of the micro-utility will be much higher.

So you will create a “mini-exodia” every season by default for those 2 tanks. And the only way to “fix” this situation is by homogenizing the specs in question. Which is something we dont want. We want to keep each spec unique.

1 Like