Let's stop ruining other topics and discuss it here...
IMO, a tank can fall into any number of the following categories:
1. Initiator. A guy who starts fights by closing distance well and then offering up some hard CC on the opposing team forcing them to fight or abandon those who were caught. Best Examples: Malphite, Amumu, Rammus, Galio
2. Babysitter. A guy who keeps people off of your carry's nuts via support spells and CC. The line between a babysitting tank and a support is pretty vague, but generally I believe that a babysitting tank tries to help his carry by getting between the assailant and their carry while a support tends to stay behind to support the carry. Best Examples: Alistar, Shen, Taric, Nunu
3. Damage Tank. A guy who is both incredibly sturdy and dishes out good damage. These guys draw fire from the opponent by chasing down carries and putting it in their butt, but tend to have little or weak CC. Best Examples: Mordekaiser, Garen, Mundo, Nasus
Now, any and all of these characteristics can define a tank in LoL IMO, but we tend to use the term too generally. Frequently in champ select we'll hear shit like, "omg, we need a tank" when really the need is much more specialized than that. Have an Ashe? Ok, not as much need for an initiator. No hard AD carry? Probably don't need a babysitter. Already have 3 carries? Prolly shouldn't be picking a damage tank. etcetcetc. Really when you boil it down, saying Tank just means someone beefy, whereas the roles we really need to fill are much more nuanced than just Tank.
I strongly disagree with the idea of calling 3. 'tanks' at all because of how misleading it is. They can't CC, they can't peel. What they do is wtfheugdamage
I don't really think "babysitter" or "initiator" define a Tank. It just so happens that a good tank should also be able to do those things. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the OP, idk. "Tanking" in games like this almost always refer to being able to take damage, or having great survivability, or just generally being really tough and hard to kill in a straight up fight. There are plenty of initiators who aren't tanks, etc etc
A good tank should be able to babysit and/or initiate. But those roles aren't exclusive to tanks, and all tanks don't necessarily have one of those 2 roles.
i think its pretty important to make clear the difference between being a 'tank' and itemizing a char to be a tank. Ezreal with bveil + fon + omen + thornmail is technically a 'tank' in the sense that he can take shitloads of dmg, but hes completely useless (and so i would never classify it as a tank, just a waste of space). A tank has to be able to itemize the majority of his item slots to 'tanking' items and still provide something to the team.
It doesn't matter if you disagree with calling morde, garen, nasus tanks or not because everyone calls them tanks or "tanky". You can't just change the minds of the general public because your definition is different than theirs.
People that get pissed off about the word tank and its various uses are more annoying than the people that don't understand the difference between tank types.
Heck, maybe there should be a 4th kind of tank class... Rage Tank. These would be your normal annoying characters like teemo/morgana/urgot that instead of built for damage they are built to annoy the piss out of the other team and make them focus the rage tank just because they're angry.
What a shit topic. People need to get a clue asaply.
3 is a category on its own. "Tanky DPS". Not really a true tank in any sense.
1 is recommended for a tank but not a must. i.e. Alistar You will get a lot of complaints in solo q if you're the tank but you don't initiate fights. It's somewhat expected of you. Thus, why most Alistars run Flash.
2 is pretty much what is required from a tank. A lot of HP to soak up damage as well as MR/Armor to mitigate all that damage. But most importantly, they need to keep asshats off their carries.
Edit: In response to your examples, Smash: Galio, Taric, Nunu, Morde, Garen, Mundo would not be "tanks" in my textbook.
blitz possesses characteristics of all 3, though I'd say he's an initiator first, babysitter second and damage tank third. most tanks fall into multiple categories here.
On February 04 2011 02:10 NeoIllusions wrote: What a shit topic. People need to get a clue asaply.
3 is a category on its own. "Tanky DPS". Not really a true tank in any sense.
1 is recommended for a tank but not a must. i.e. Alistar You will get a lot of complaints in solo q if you're the tank but you don't initiate fights. It's somewhat expected of you. Thus, why most Alistars run Flash.
2 is pretty much what is required from a tank. A lot of HP to soak up damage as well as MR/Armor to mitigate all that damage. But most importantly, they need to keep asshats off their carries.
Edit: In response to your examples, Smash: Galio, Taric, Nunu, Morde, Garen, Mundo would not be "tanks" in my textbook.
tank means different things to different people. I had someone start telling me that Malphite isn't a tank just yesterday. Until the day he died, Utah insisted that post-nerf Shen wasn't a tank. I think stuff like this goes to show you how ambiguous the term tank is and how people should be more clear when talking about "tanks."
My biggest point of contention with this is Taric. He's pretty tough, certainly comparable to Mundo and Nasus in that department, but he just doesn't feel like a tank to me. The biggest reason, I think, is that his contribution in team fights is more focused towards supporting his teammates than it is towards hampering the enemy team.
Is he tough? If he builds tank, he's not super-tough, but he's tough enough that you probably don't want to focus him.
Does he protect his teammates? Yes; he has a stun, a heal and his armor aura.
Is there any reason an enemy glass cannon wouldn't want to stand next to Taric, nuking his allies? ... not that I can think of. Remember that old video from Shurelia on Zone Control? Most tanks have some form of that; moving up to the enemy tank can be dangerous. Singed will fling you into his team, Alistar will punt you into someplace you don 't want to be, Rammus will taunt you and hit you with Tremors, Garen would silence you, deal a lot of damage with Judgment and threaten to kill you with his ult, Nasus has a nasty damage aura in his ult plus a hard-hitting Q and a very powerful slow, Malphite has damage and MS and AS debuffs...
And Taric? He has a stun, but it's single target and if you're close to him it only lasts one second. He has shatter, but if he built tank then he has no AP and it isn't much of a deterrent. This lack of zone control- of being able to draw a line and make at least the enemy squishies think twice before crossing it- makes it hard for me to see Taric as a tank.
Ugh. I had already given up on this discussion. It's useless because the whole set of "classes" we commonly use for LoL champs is flawed and not suited for this game.
Imo we need:
melee ranged AoE phys magic DPS burst tough initiator (peeling) tank map control teleport support (heal, auras) pusher assassin (anti-squishy) disable
(not perfect, I might miss a few important roles)
These roles do not overlap (unlike your definitions of support and tank or dps and tank). Every champ can fill multiple of these roles depending on items etc, and usually 2-4 at once. But I know that it's hopeless to try to get people to accept a new system.
Anyways, regarding the "is Janna a tank" issue: Janna is a tank by 2). Janna, if built properly, is harder to kill than a ranged DPS during most stages of the game because the ranged DPS usually invests heavily into offense. Janna stays roughly at the same line as her carry, if not a bit in the front. It's better for Janna to take those skillshots than her carry, and she has Cleanse + Ult. W is best served before the enemy is on your DPS.
And where is the difference between protecting your carry by standing in front of him and doing the same by standing behind him? If the effect is the same then it doesn't matter. Or is it important what it looks like? Then I have to agree, Janna doesn't look like a tank at all.
(Malph is not a tank, he's: initiator, tough, melee, magic, AoE, burst, assassin, disable)
Well, I think your scenarios in the OP said it best. Pick the champion that provides your team the most synergy. That someone is dumb. Uta has a huge impatience streak and always needed an initiator. Shen works best if someone else starts the fight, giving him someone to ulti and taunt off of.
"Tanks" are just such an ambiguous category/name. It's like all champions not a caster and not a DPS is tossed into that group.
On February 04 2011 02:31 Zato-1 wrote: My biggest point of contention with this is Taric. He's pretty tough, certainly comparable to Mundo and Nasus in that department, but he just doesn't feel like a tank to me. The biggest reason, I think, is that his contribution in team fights is more focused towards supporting his teammates than it is towards hampering the enemy team.
Is he tough? If he builds tank, he's not super-tough, but he's tough enough that you probably don't want to focus him.
Does he protect his teammates? Yes; he has a stun, a heal, his armor aura and a heal.
Is there any reason an enemy glass cannon wouldn't want to stand next to Taric, nuking his allies? ... not that I can think of. Remember that old video from Shurelia on Zone Control? Most tanks have some form of that; moving up to the enemy tank can be dsngerous. Singed will fling you into his team, Alistar will punt you into someplace you don 't want to be, Rammus will taunt you and hit you with Tremors, Garen would silence you, deal a lot of damage with Judgment and threaten to kill you with his ult, Nasus has a nasty damage aura in his ult plus a hard-hitting Q and a very powerful slow, Malphite has damage and MS and AS debuffs...
And Taric? He has a stun, but it's single target and if you're close to him it only lasts one second. He has shatter, but if he built tank then he has no AP and it isn't much of a deterrent. This lack of zone control- of being able to draw a line and make at least the enemy squishies think twice before crossing it- makes it hard for me to see Taric as a tank.
hmmm, perhaps. Taric toes the line. 2 abilities to hamper the opponents, 2 abilities to support allies. I can see this both ways tbh, but you do raise a valid point with how other tanks seem to be considerably more focused on impacting the opponents than Taric is. He does provide more zone control than you give him credit for (2 second stun -> -30 armor drops a carry very quickly), but I can still see a pretty strong case for classifying Taric as a support rather than a tank. I've always just seen him as both, but that might just be me *shrug*.
I agree with everything you've said Neo except for:
"Tanks" are just such an ambiguous category/name. It's like all champions not a caster and not a DPS is tossed into that group.
I don't think that the term itself is ambiguous but that people who don't understand what role a tank SHOULD be doing make it ambiguous. In a game like LoL anyone that can take a lot of damage has been considered a tank by people but this is only because the opposing players are poor players imo. They hit the first god damn thing that comes in range of them.
The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
Hard tanks (What you would always like to have): Alistar, Shen, Rammus, Singed
Soft tanks(What is still very good with certain team comps): Galio, Malphite, Amumu, Nunu
Beefy DPS/support: Everyone else
*I'm a firm believer of always taking anything I read with a grain of salt so I would say that those reading my posts should do the same.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
On February 04 2011 02:52 Mogwai wrote: how in the fuck is singed a hard tank????
he is hardy as fuck,,,, he can fucking throw someone the fuck away from your team mates,,,, he can throw down a fucking 75% slow in front of your fucking team mates,,,, and he is fast as hell to to be able to get to where he needs to be!!!!!!
singed is an offtank/caster, closer to vlad than anything, not really a 'tank'
edit: also, i used to think that a char w/o cc didnt really qualify as a tank (0 ability to peel) but have since come to recognize the ability that champs who stick to carries like glue and dont die (olaf and garen come to mind) have a strong case for being considered 'tanks'.
I consider Singed an off-tank, anybody with a slow or snare (which is pretty much every champ) and is semi-competent can make Singed's job a nightmare. Paired with another tank he can do his job significantly easier and just be unkillable.
On February 04 2011 03:32 Darkchylde wrote: I consider Singed an off-tank, anybody with a slow or snare (which is pretty much every champ) and is semi-competent can make Singed's job a nightmare. Paired with another tank he can do his job significantly easier and just be unkillable.
I can see that argument but wouldn't that apply to everyone else as well? There isn't a tank that is immune to slow/snares so I'm not sure how this changes Singed's viability. I also always run ghost/cleanse on him personally so that isn't really a problem.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
The goal of a Tank is to protect your allies, you are right. That is what tanks WANT to do. But if they can't do that, that just means they suck at tanking, right? Just because someone is a tank, doesn't mean they are good at tanking. Not all heroes can accomplish their function. The ones who can't, suck. All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
Singed bad hard tank, need so much farm to be effective, not used to babysit squishes, he himself is the carry and you are suppose to support HIM while he does his antics.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
I disagree with you on this point. Take WoW as an example yet again. A disc priest will be beefy/tough/durable, but they are NOT a tank by any means. I'm not giving LoL a special definition but I am trying to apply it specifically to it.
On February 04 2011 03:42 Juicyfruit wrote: Singed bad hard tank, need so much farm to be effective, not used to babysit squishes, he himself is the carry and you are suppose to support HIM while he does his antics.
The fact that he needs the farm is a very good point but I don't think that should change the fact that he is a tank that can remove an enemy from your allies. If a person playing Singed is not throwing people away from your squishes then I would argue that he is doing it wrong because it isn't hard to do and it is very beneficial.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
I disagree with you on this point. Take WoW as an example yet again. A disc priest will be beefy/tough/durable, but they are NOT a tank by any means. I'm not giving LoL a special definition but I am trying to apply it specifically to it.
Well let me try to rephrase that.
The purpose of a "tank" in videogames are those who are designed to suck up damage and not die. IMO Tanks are defined by their purpose. I think this can be universally applied. Is this character meant to try and suck up damage, and then be able to take that damage and not die? If so, then they are a tank. Whether or not they are actually able to do that (for whatever) is an entirely different question, and just tells if said hero is bad at their job or not.
So, while I don't know anything about WoW, are "disc priest" designed to suck up damage/not die? If that isn't their purpose, then I agree they aren't a tank, and are rather just "tanky".
I feel like scorcher and sentenal agree on their definition. A tank is someone who mitigates incoming damage by taking it themselves and letting their durability keep them alive. In dota and LoL, being a good tank is more about initiation and positioning, taking skillshots and forcing the enemy to waste their cc's to protect their squishies instead of killing yours. Without a built-in aggro mechanic (unless you play a herpderp tank like rammus) it is up to the tank's in-fight tactics to direct damage towards him and not his team.
Also, a disc priest is a terrible example. They might last a while in duels and arenas, but in any sort of raid or party situation, they'll get 2-shotted just like everyone else who isn't a "tank."
edit: in prediction of "LoL is a 5v5 WoW arena" tanks in arena fights are rarely called tanks, you simply have dps that are tankier by virtue of their gear. All "tanks" in WoW arenas are just beefy dps, or have an abnormal amount of peels (but still generally dps pretty hard).
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
I disagree with you on this point. Take WoW as an example yet again. A disc priest will be beefy/tough/durable, but they are NOT a tank by any means. I'm not giving LoL a special definition but I am trying to apply it specifically to it.
Well let me try to rephrase that.
The purpose of a "tank" in videogames are those who are designed to suck up damage and not die. IMO Tanks are defined by their purpose. I think this can be universally applied. Is this character meant to try and suck up damage, and then be able to take that damage and not die? If so, then they are a tank. Whether or not they are actually able to do that (for whatever) is an entirely different question, and just tells if said hero is bad at their job or not.
So, while I don't know anything about WoW, are "disc priest" designed to suck up damage/not die? If that isn't their purpose, then I agree they aren't a tank, and are rather just "tanky".
I think I understand now what you're saying. I'm not quite sure how to word this... I agree that a tank is first defined by being something that soaks a lot of damage. However, I think that their ability to actually force that to happen is what makes them a tank. Not the quality of their ability to force the damage to go to them but simply being able to do it period. The reason why I do not think that characters such as Mundo should be considered tanks (and instead as a beefy dps) is because they can not force the damage to turn onto them through anything other than doing damage.
I honestly don't think either of us are wrong. This honestly just seems like a difference in opinion.
On February 04 2011 04:08 Flakes wrote: edit: in prediction of "LoL is a 5v5 WoW arena" tanks in arena fights are rarely called tanks, you simply have dps that are tankier by virtue of their gear. All "tanks" in WoW arenas are just beefy dps, or have an abnormal amount of peels (but still generally dps pretty hard).
Hmm, this is very true. This is also a great example as to why team composition is more important than simply who your tank is. I think you hit the nail on the head.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
The goal of a Tank is to protect your allies, you are right. That is what tanks WANT to do. But if they can't do that, that just means they suck at tanking, right? Just because someone is a tank, doesn't mean they are good at tanking. Not all heroes can accomplish their function. The ones who can't, suck. All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
You got that mixed up. A champ is not a tank and THEN you decide if he is a good or a bad one. A champ is a tank if he IS able to protect his allies and does so.
Afaik a tank in WoW has the means to direct all damage to himself and mitigates it that way. But that's only HOW he does it, not WHAT he does: he protects allies. And in the end it doesn't matter how you do it as long as you achieve what you need to.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
The goal of a Tank is to protect your allies, you are right. That is what tanks WANT to do. But if they can't do that, that just means they suck at tanking, right? Just because someone is a tank, doesn't mean they are good at tanking. Not all heroes can accomplish their function. The ones who can't, suck. All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
You got that mixed up. A champ is not a tank and THEN you decide if he is a good or a bad one. A champ is a tank if he IS able to protect his allies and does so.
Afaik a tank in WoW has the means to direct all damage to himself and mitigates it that way. But that's only HOW he does it, not WHAT he does: he protects allies. And in the end it doesn't matter how you do it as long as you achieve what you need to.
How you do it is 100% relevant. To continue the WoW example, a discipline priest also protects his allies, but he does so by applying shields, buffs, healing, and repositioning skills--and as such is classified as a healer/support and NOT a tank.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
On February 04 2011 02:52 Mogwai wrote: how in the fuck is singed a hard tank????
he is hardy as fuck,,,, he can fucking throw someone the fuck away from your team mates,,,, he can throw down a fucking 75% slow in front of your fucking team mates,,,, and he is fast as hell to to be able to get to where he needs to be!!!!!!
But really, how is he not?
*edit for more fuck
it's less about how he's not and more about how others are. you put him next to alistar, rammus and shen... what makes him a harder tank than say... amumu (2 hard CC, one of which is massive AoE), blitz (3 CC), Cho (2 CC), Malphite (2 CC, one of which is the #1 initiating skill). What makes shen more of hard tank than them too for that matter? Your classification just seems arbitrary and general consensus is that while the other 3 all conform to what we consider a tank very well, singed sticks out like a sore thumb since he lacks true initiation and reliable hard CC.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
I disagree with you on this point. Take WoW as an example yet again. A disc priest will be beefy/tough/durable, but they are NOT a tank by any means. I'm not giving LoL a special definition but I am trying to apply it specifically to it.
On February 04 2011 03:42 Juicyfruit wrote: Singed bad hard tank, need so much farm to be effective, not used to babysit squishes, he himself is the carry and you are suppose to support HIM while he does his antics.
The fact that he needs the farm is a very good point but I don't think that should change the fact that he is a tank that can remove an enemy from your allies. If a person playing Singed is not throwing people away from your squishes then I would argue that he is doing it wrong because it isn't hard to do and it is very beneficial.
all repositioning moves are situational. sometimes alistar headbutts the enemy trist into your team, sometimes he punts the enemy singed away. sometimes blitz pulls a squishy into your team, sometimes he pulls Garen away. it's just situational.
On February 04 2011 02:51 Scorcher2k wrote: The term "tank" in any game sense should mean that they should be the ones to soak damage so that their allies don't. Ok, that's easy to establish but how in the hell are you going to do that if they just run past you and hit your allies? Well that is where the CC comes in. Perhaps you might make the argument that the characters damage can't be ignored. I would then argue that you then fill the role of being an anti-carry and not a tank at all.
To answer your question about them running past you, that simply depends on how good a tank the character is. If you have a shitty tank, they can just completely ignore you. But that just means the character is a "shitty tank", rather than simply "not a tank".
I don't understand what you are implying here. How are you tanking if you aren't protecting your allies? Are you actually like throwing your body in front of them so that they can't run past you?
All tanking ever refers to, and should refer to IMO, is if a character is beefy/tough/durable. Thats what it generally means in video games, so I don't see why LoL should get a special definition for it.
I disagree with you on this point. Take WoW as an example yet again. A disc priest will be beefy/tough/durable, but they are NOT a tank by any means. I'm not giving LoL a special definition but I am trying to apply it specifically to it.
Well let me try to rephrase that.
The purpose of a "tank" in videogames are those who are designed to suck up damage and not die. IMO Tanks are defined by their purpose. I think this can be universally applied. Is this character meant to try and suck up damage, and then be able to take that damage and not die? If so, then they are a tank. Whether or not they are actually able to do that (for whatever) is an entirely different question, and just tells if said hero is bad at their job or not.
So, while I don't know anything about WoW, are "disc priest" designed to suck up damage/not die? If that isn't their purpose, then I agree they aren't a tank, and are rather just "tanky".
I think I understand now what you're saying. I'm not quite sure how to word this... I agree that a tank is first defined by being something that soaks a lot of damage. However, I think that their ability to actually force that to happen is what makes them a tank. Not the quality of their ability to force the damage to go to them but simply being able to do it period. The reason why I do not think that characters such as Mundo should be considered tanks (and instead as a beefy dps) is because they can not force the damage to turn onto them through anything other than doing damage.
I honestly don't think either of us are wrong. This honestly just seems like a difference in opinion.
everything in here is a difference of opinion. see, I think it's pretty silly to say that a tank needs to be able to force the opposing team to attack them, because honestly, the tanks that do that best are the ones that do damage. a team is more likely to be making the correct play when they try to focus down a Mundo or Garen than they are when they try to kill an Alistar or Rammus, yet it's unanimously accepted that Alistar and Rammus better fit the bill for "tank" than Mundo or Garen. And it has everything to do with CC, which is extremely useful but does nothing more to force the damage to come their way than a Garen on your carry's nuts forces the damage to come his way.
On February 04 2011 04:26 Caller wrote: this is wrong title, should be "Wut es a tank? huehuehuehuehue"
if I could change it, I would change it to: Wut es a tank? huehuehuehue (splr: Morde es #1)
I feel "tank" is a hugely misused term in LoL (and I hate using the word "tank"). When people ask for a "tank" in a game, they 99% of the time they mean a hero who has initiation abilities. Unfortunately for LoL, many of the inherently tough (ie: high hp/armor/mr) heros have initiation abilities which creates confusion because people now associate "tank" with "initiation".
Personally I think we should categorize heros in terms of what they do (hero role) for a team instead of what characteristics a hero posses (hero property). For example amumu's hero role should be "initiatior" and one of his properties is being "tanky" (same with Malphite). Taric's hero role would be babysitter/supporter (maybe even ganker) and one of his properties would be "tanky".
If you look at DotA/HoN this problem basically doesn't exist. Spectre/Sand Wraith's hero property is "tanky" but her hero role is "hard carry" while Puck/Bubble's hero role is "initiator/ganker" but he's super squishy. When choosing teams people shouldn't look for "tanks", they should look for "initiation".
Roles (each hero has a primary and secondary role):
Hard-Carry, Carry, Semi-Carry: Carries are typically rather weak in the early stages of the game and need to have a decent gold income through farming to reach their potential. When they do however, they are capable of winning a game almost by themselves. Hard Carries have more potential than Carries who have more potential than Semi- or Soft-Carries. Lower potential ususally means they become effective earlier in the game or they have other strengths and uses but just carrying. Their job is to farm and eventually lead their team to victory in the lategame.
Supporter: Supporters are typically heroes who can be effective with few items and gold. They give up last hits in favor of the Carries and focus on denying and harassing. Their item choices are based on what the team needs (supportive items). They are also responsible for warding and counter warding.
Ganker: A ganker should be looking for opportunities to team up and kill opponents during the late early and mid game once he reaches his critical level (Usually 6 or 7).
Initiator: Initiation is the art of starting the combat with a big advantage for your team. Initiation typically involves one hero instantly appearing next to the enemy team (by means of Portal Key, Flash, Invisibility, ...) and starting the fight with a very powerful ability that is capable of turning the tide in his team's favor (e.g. Whirlpool, Shockwave, Eruption,...). Generally every team needs some kind of initiation to be able win the game. Know how to use your initiation abilities correctly when playing an Initiator!
Properties (each hero can have multiple properties):
Disabler: A hero with one or more immobilizing abilities.
(Dedicated) Roamer: A hero with no fixed lane. Typically a Roamer stays in his opponents' forest and waits for opportunities to gank their short or mid lane from level 1 on. His aim is to keep the enemies undergeared and underleveled and not allowing them to farm. The Roamer however will be outgeared and outleveled himself pretty quickly. Roamers are rarely seen in pubs but they do appear in competitive play.
Babysitter: Always a Supporter. Usually a ranged hero with abilities that allow him to protect and/or support a carry hero in the early laning phase. A babysitter will harass the enemies and deny his own creeps while he leaves the last hits and killing blows to his babysat carry whenever possible. He ensures the carry will start to become effective as soon as possible by giving him "free farm".
Jungler: A hero who can level up by killing neutral creeps in the forest from level 1 on. This will give the team two solo lanes and usually more overall experience.
Tank: A Tank's aim is to draw as much enemy fire on him as possible to allow the rest of the team to move and fight freely. Tanks shine through their high physical and magical damage reduction, high Health pool and tanking related abilities. It is a common misconception to assume that every team needs a tank. You can win games without a tank easily (unlike initiators).
Nuker: A hero with one or more directly damaging abilities. These abilities are strongest in the early game and tend to lose power as the game progresses.
Pusher: A hero with one or more Spells to destroy creep waves and/or buildings very effectively in the early- and midgame.
TLDR: don't even use the word "tank", it only causes confusion.
No one asked for my 2 cents, but here it is anyway. I essentially define 2 types of tanks.
The first are "pure" tanks. Their job consists of 2 functions: Primarily disrupt the other teams attack plans using utility, and secondarily be really fucking hard to kill. Think amumu or shen or alistar or rammus. They dont necessarily have to initiate, but they could. Where they really shine is their ability to interrupt the opposing teams attack pattern. Gallio is gonna force everyone to attack him. Rammus is going to blow up your carry, ect. As a secondary purpose, they are going to be able to bounce around from target to target, assisting the individual teamfight matchups and have enough health to survive the entire thing or at least long enough to get to each battle "zone." By this I mean shen taunting the enemy carry off your melee dps, then going over and finishing off a caster, then going back and killing the melee dps from the other team.
The second group are what I think of as Tanky DPS. This group again has 2 goals. 1st, pick off the enemy squishy, and secondly, disrupt the enemy attack plans by FORCING them to attack you because of your sheer damage output. This group has nasus, singed, mundo, blitz. Note they all have a way to either slow or somehow capture the enemy carry. They force a teamfight not by running in and initiating, but by forcing the enemy team to react to their actions. For example a blitz pull forcing the enemy to engage, nassus or mundo hitting a slow on a out of position champion to where the rest of your team can dive in and the other has to help, or singed running in and flipping someone. After that though, their job in the teamfight is different. They do damage, singling out targets and killing them, forcing the enemy to attack them instead of other targets. Nasus siphoning the enemey carry and casters till they have to leave, singed sticking to a target and keeping them from entering the battle. They have less utility from an assistance to teammate standpoint, but are capable of selecting and shutting down enemy players, or if they can do enough damage, forcing the enemy team to try to focus them down at the expense of your carry.
NOTE: the second group are different from "heavy" dps. Irelia, morde, olaf, ect. These champs have no way to force an engagement. Sure, they could catch an out of position champ, but they have no way to do it reliably. In battle, their job is the same as tanky dps, but outside of it they are walking paperweights.
Olaf slows and runs through CC. Irelia has 99.99% CC reduction and has a dash and a slow/stun. Your distinction between heavy and tanky DPSs is completely nonsensical to me.
Its their goal before battle where I draw the line: Tanky dps can force a fight by creating an uneven situation in positioning all by themselves. In order for heavy dps to start a fight, they would have to run in, not get blown up, then start wailing away.
I find this thread fascinating because everyone thinks everyone else looks like a complete retard because no one knows wtf makes someone a good tank or a tank at all.
On February 04 2011 05:53 spinesheath wrote: We should just all agree that a tank can only be a champ that can switch between tank mode and siege mode and all that stuff.
"Tank" is like some other terms ("metagame" for instance, or "mindgames" in the Smash community) in that its (mis)usage has broadened to the point where using the word in any sort of intelligent discussion is pretty dumb. You're just bound to be misunderstood on at least some level.
That said I don't think it's terribly hard to see which champs have innately good survivability (Taric, Malphite, Udyr), which have good initiation (Malph, Rammus), which can keep anti-carries off your carry (Udyr, Cho) and so on. I feel like arguing over the definition of a word that is used so broadly ("tank") is silly when there are other, perfectly good words that accurately express what you're trying to say.
On February 04 2011 05:46 Mogwai wrote: I find this thread fascinating because everyone thinks everyone else looks like a complete retard because no one knows wtf makes someone a good tank or a tank at all.
On February 04 2011 05:57 Mogwai wrote: the thread title has huehuehuehuehuehuehue in it, I'm not sure anyone is even slightly surprised that I'm at least 50% trolling here.
On February 04 2011 05:57 Mogwai wrote: the thread title has huehuehuehuehuehuehue in it, I'm not sure anyone is even slightly surprised that I'm at least 50% trolling here.
I thought trolling your own thread was illegal and that you would be shot.
I'm not full blown trolling, just being an ass to try to prove how stupid nailing down what a tank is is. Tanks come in many shapes and sizes and do many different things. besides, I'm not terribly interested in this discussion. I merely created this thread to stop the patch notes thread from getting completely derailed.
On February 04 2011 06:11 Mogwai wrote: Tanks come in many shapes and sizes and do many different things. besides, I'm not terribly interested in this discussion. I merely created this thread to stop the patch notes thread from getting completely derailed.
So do weebles and they never fall down. I think you really, secretly, unbeknown to yourself, craved an opportunity to talk about the classification of pen.. I mean tank sizes.
He has build in damage mitigation with his passive, and his ultimate puts him right in the midst of the other team, who will usually toss a round of nukes his way, meaning he has just succeeded in both initiating a fight and absorbing a significant portion of the enemy team's punishment.
As far as disruption goes, how much more disrupting than a giant rock man in the middle of your team's squishies can you get?
right and all tanks are beefy. that's their unifying characteristic. to imply anything more is to lose sight of why we call them tanks and exposes a severe lack of vocabulary. you want an initiator, ask for an initiator.
This spreadsheet's really cool, and gives a nice baseline for talking about how durable a champion is (or isn't).
---
I think the main difference between a 'Tank' and a 'Bruiser' (thx Riot for the terms) is that a bruiser can be looked at to provide physical or magical damage as their primary reason for being on a team, whereas a tank provides meatwalling or group EH as their reason for being on a team.
Look at the champs Riot has tagged as 'tanks'. None of them are champions you'd pick to fill an AD or AP carry role on your team, and they're not the fragile buffbots that 'Support' has come to mean in LoL either. The idea of a 'tank' to me is a 'non-carry, non-caster, character takes an active role in battle' character.
- Shen and Rammus do this by having skillsets with taunts and abilities to prevent damage to themselves. - Amumu and Galio do this by bringing in an AoE disable that forces fights for their teams. - Alistar does this by having a skillset that lets him wreak havoc in combat along with an ult that lets him do it. -Taric does this by having a hard requirement to be in melee to be at his full effect and having a skillset that's entirely focused on support and survival. He's a 'Durable Support' as much as he is a 'Tank', but the terms aren't that different for the LoL terms.
Other popular 'tanky' champions clearly have ways in which they're either AD or AP, but for the above champs, it's not even what they're doing, but how they're doing it.
On February 04 2011 07:02 Mogwai wrote: right and all tanks are beefy. that's their unifying characteristic. to imply anything more is to lose sight of why we call them tanks and exposes a severe lack of vocabulary. you want an initiator, ask for an initiator.
This is the crux of it and very well said.
Which is an interesting issue, because now we see that the usage of the word 'tank' encourages further confusion and obfuscates the REAL question, what the discussion is really about, "who is an/the best initiator?" Taric and Janna have better initiates than Malph and Morde. Malph and Morde are sure more durable than Taric and Janna.
We all know who the tanky champs are already. Rather, we should be discussing who all the initiators are, and how to min/max the relationship and balance between being able to initiate effectively and surviving after you've initiated.
Champs like Rammus and Shen are natural in this role. Sometimes unorthodox champs with amazing initiates like Annie build tank and attempt to also fill the same role. Other times the responsibility for the role is shared amongst a team like Ashe Fiddle Morg Trynd Mundo with plenty of initiates and beef, just not both on a single champ.
This is where the breakdown occurs I think because in most cases people expect a single person on the team to shoulder this responsibility. "WTF NO TANK?" means '4x of us are not gunna start the fight, you should pick someone durable cuz we want you to run in first, also u better be good at running in first and then getting out too or we call u a nub.'
This sums it up very nicely:
On February 04 2011 04:54 ArC_man wrote: I feel "tank" is a hugely misused term in LoL (and I hate using the word "tank"). When people ask for a "tank" in a game, they 99% of the time they mean a hero who has initiation abilities. Unfortunately for LoL, many of the inherently tough (ie: high hp/armor/mr) heros have initiation abilities which creates confusion because people now associate "tank" with "initiation".
It is a common misconception to assume that every team needs a tank. You can win games without a tank easily (unlike initiators).
TLDR: don't even use the word "tank", it only causes confusion.
Ultimately we should still use the word tank, but to mean beefy/durable and that will eventually trickle down. Meanwhile in solo que instead of complaining no one picked a tank I'll instead be saying 'WTF NO INIT?'
honorable mentions to all the pussies who need flash to make it happen Alistar, Annie, Galio
ya ok but...
so like, why?
I mean, I don't think you're wrong, but I'm curious for example why mummy is #3 but i don't see Janna or Shen on the list. And Ashe arrow is amazing but that's all she has, so if u consider bandage toss in a vaccuum without his ult is it still #3 over rocket grab #5? And when is it a good idea to build Annie pure tank and be my teams stun initiator instead of say picking Sion and building tanky?
These are the type of questions that I think need further discussion and why this is a good thread!
This is only from an initiation standpoint. The purpose of an initiator is to take quick, decisive advantage of a mistake on the enemy team. Ashe is #1 for a long duration global stun. Malphite has his ulti and large burst/slow/aspd redux. Mumu similarly. Rammus powerballs into your carry and you lose the teamfight. Blitz pulls someone not tank and it's gg. Etc.
On February 04 2011 11:15 Logrus wrote: I mean, I don't think you're wrong, but I'm curious for example why mummy is #3 but i don't see Janna or Shen on the list. And Ashe arrow is amazing but that's all she has, so if u consider bandage toss in a vaccuum without his ult is it still #3 over rocket grab #5? And when is it a good idea to build Annie pure tank and be my teams stun initiator instead of say picking Sion and building tanky?
Shen is a poor initiator. You port in once the fight has started, but at actually starting fights, Shadow Dash really doesn't do it for you, especially against a team that has enough on-demand cc to keep themselves out of its woefully weak range. The best way Shen gets a fight started is to apply pressure on the other side of the map and wait for someone else to start the fight--which isn't really initiating in a useful sense.
With regard to Amumu/Ashe--while it's true that they can't do their initiation very often, in the context of a teamfight, that's not really a necessary trait. What IS necessary is reliability. If Amumu lands bandage/ulti or Ashe lands an Arrow, the fight is going to happen because you've got some significant portion of their team locked down. From there, once the fight is over, initiating a teamfight isn't going to be something you need to do in the next 20 seconds--because a significant portion of one team or the other is going to be dead. By the time both teams are in position to teamfight again, those skills will be ready again. Note that given the cooldown of Flash compared to initiation ultimates, this is NOT true of flash-based initiatiors like Galio, Alistar, and Annie.
One of the reasons I personally label Amumu as a better initiator than Blitzcrank is his ability to force his initiation through spell blocks (Black Shield and Banshee's Veil). You land a toss on someone, it pops the veil, pulls you through to them, and catches them in the ulti with all of their teammates. Later-game, Blitz needs to push through spell blocks in order to perform his initiation reliably.
On February 04 2011 07:02 Mogwai wrote: right and all tanks are beefy. that's their unifying characteristic. to imply anything more is to lose sight of why we call them tanks and exposes a severe lack of vocabulary. you want an initiator, ask for an initiator.
This is idea is why I've actually found the thread useful. From reading the opinions here it's clear that people have different views on tanks.
From now on I'm going to try to be more aware of the varying definitions and ask for what I think the team specifically needs "We need someone to initiate", "We need someone to be able to protect X" etc.
honorable mentions to all the pussies who need flash to make it happen Alistar, Annie, Galio
ya ok but...
so like, why?
I mean, I don't think you're wrong, but I'm curious for example why mummy is #3 but i don't see Janna or Shen on the list. And Ashe arrow is amazing but that's all she has, so if u consider bandage toss in a vaccuum without his ult is it still #3 over rocket grab #5? And when is it a good idea to build Annie pure tank and be my teams stun initiator instead of say picking Sion and building tanky?
These are the type of questions that I think need further discussion and why this is a good thread!
ashe is #1 because it's idiot-proof. it's on short CD, is completely safe (if you fuck up, it's not game over), and frenquently just accidentally wins the game by snagging a carry kill out of thin air.
Malphite is #2 over the rest because it's not impeded by having a clear line shot (which is to say that he can ult through a tank blocking your shot on a carry). He also just immediately blows a giant load on everyone and dumps on their ability to stand and fight with ground slam.
Amumu has a distance closing spell (toss) + the largest AoE immobilize in the game, nuff said.
Rammus is under amumu because while he outputs more damage and single target disables for longer... he doesn't root everyone meaning that while you can disable the carry, you don't stop their tanks from stopping your damage dealers from raping the taunted carry.
Blitz hooks are tricky, but a good blitz hook will instantly win the game, like a good ashe arrow, and they tend to be safe (though sometimes you snag a singed/alistar and get raped for it). They're just way harder to hit. He also gets bonus points for having an on command knockup and AoE silence to follow up or counter initiate vs. opposing teams.
And no, my rating there is talking about the full package for every character, without his ult, mummy would be like last place among characters with ranged disables, lol. I'm also not saying they're all tanks, I'm just saying they're all extremely capable initiators. Ashe and Annie should never be build tank, but they're still incredible initiators and eliminate the need for you to have a tank that can initiate really well.
Janna sucks at initiation (wtf, flash ult or something? idk, tornado and her slow are both lackluster initiators and all her skills are best used defensively). Shen is an OK initiator but again, is better used defensively. He'll do in a pinch, but he's a much better peeler/chaser than hard initiator.
Initiating with panth is actually a bad idea since you'll get instagibbed 90% of the time. Best time to ult in with panth is after the initiation has started. Example: morgana went in there and ult'ed, panth ults in while everyone is slowed & trying to run away. Panth gets pentakill
On February 04 2011 22:20 Abenson wrote: Initiating with panth is actually a bad idea since you'll get instagibbed 90% of the time. Best time to ult in with panth is after the initiation has started. Example: morgana went in there and ult'ed, panth ults in while everyone is slowed & trying to run away. Panth gets pentakill
There is no better feeling in the world than knowing your enemies are like O_O when you're about to jump in onto all 5 of them. You know all they're thinking is "oh, fuck, it's panth, I've gotta run."
On February 04 2011 21:31 Zato-1 wrote: What about Taric/Sion stuns and Karthus wall? I know their range is hardly ideal, but I've seen them start teamfights often enough.
Well, and then there's Grand Skyfall, but I'm a bit of a noob when it comes to Panth compared to a lot of people here.
they're all adequate initiations, but can you seriously say that they're even worth talking about next to Ashe, Malph, Amumu, Rammus, Blitz, Alistar, Annie, or Galio?
EPT
