From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

I think we should re-direct "tanks" to "warriors" and add a section in "warriors" talking about their nickname.Soulwar 01:32, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

As the main description in the article says, tanks can be of other professions than warriors so, I think there shouldn't be that redirection.Will Alvein 18:10, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
I have began rewroting the article so it will become not only a glossary definition, but rather a guide to tanking based on the format of the MM guide in GWiki. Some of the first things have been written, but I would ask anyone who has more experience on tanking than myself to help on it : ) Erasculio 18:47, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Should we make note about "Tanking" and how the AI responds to characters trying to tank? I recall characters with high armor and HP become low priority targets. I also recall that a knock down makes the AI enemy choose a target again. Edit: Forgot to sign. Miss Innocent 01:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Just a possibility[edit]

Assassins are now very capable of tanking if they use critical defenses, critical agility, and maybe a stance or another enchantment. From my experiences, this seems to be catching on...even though sins (as we all know from the early days of Factions) are shunned if they claim to be able to tank. What do you think? Silver40596

Furthermore...why not add that many warriors think they can "tank" but actually don't know what they're doing and try to be attackers instead of defenders? Redirect to "wammo." Silver40596

I agree with you. I was kicked out of a party for being a defensive Warrior, which is exactly what a tank is. They expected me to take out this tough boss and couldn't figure out why I had an elite defensive skill, 6 normal defensive skills, and a res sigint. A surprising bunch of people don't really know what a tank is. I suggest adding both of our statements to the normal article to drive home the point of what a real tank is, and how difficult it might be for a tank to find a party, simply because of the large volume of people who really don't know the basic principles of what a tank is. -- 19:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)Kaysan Smithee

I added that Knockdowns seeem to cause foes to repick their targets. Very useful information, thanks for bringing it up. Once great king 19:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


Would it be possible to have a few sample builds on this page which illustrate the principles, and would serve as a starting point for people to make their own builds?--Son of Batman 16:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Tanking in AB?[edit]

tanking in pvp isnt always useless. In ab, if you have a good tank build you can stop mobs of mindless noobs in their tracks. One time i stopped some idiots for over a minute and then they lost by about 200 deep in their own territory because of it. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) at 17:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC).

you're party right, but you cannot bank on that always. :P Against "normal" players, pure tanks are rather useless in pvp. —ZerphatalkThe Improver 17:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The mention of pvp on this page seems extremely out of place. The first line of the article states that tanking is a "pve tactic". I recommend removing this mention of pvp not just because it is out of place, but also because it is inaccurate. In HA body blocking enemy players is used extensively in relic runs, and in GvG, effective body blocking can prevent a team from reaching their guild lord and cost them the game. (particularly effective on Nomad's Isle) Kumlekar 21:11, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Defy pain in fort aspenwood and jq is far from useless, it is used, it is useful, FA/JQ are pvp so i say no remove, maybe its not in HA and the types of pvp you play but that dont mean it doesnt have a place in other types. Shogun 22:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Tanking isn't often used as a term in pvp but it doesn't mean it's not everpresent. Usually frontliners take the first knock as the team engage, sometimes pulling spikes as back in the day of rainbow spikes or ele spikes where teams didnt always have an enchantment removal queued (for it giving away target or simply inexperience). Backliners and midliners are those who usually take the brunt, and it's more present in gvg where matches are longer due to higher balanced teams with thought of spike negation and split teams. Monks often have one defensive skill in their bar such a warrior stance or an assassin skill in gvg.
When it comes to more causal pvp (AB, JQ and FA) it's more present as the shrines needs to be tanked while killing them or turtles & juggernauts needs to be killed. But holding (read; tanking) teams were killed off for AB when there was team limitation put on skills like heal party and aegis - which changed and made the gameplay more hack and slash than cooperation between 2 capping teams and one holding. Still holding (tanking) was used when you are ahead on shrines - if you can hold the opponents best team or 2 teams a while, while having more shrines you would gain from it as your other teams would supposedly keep capping thus retaining mroe points during the time you were able to hold/stall/tank the other team.

Defy Pain[edit]

why is Defy Pain not mentioned once on this page? its so obvious... Shogun 14:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Probably because it was a pretty useless elite until it got buffed. Eitherway, Defy pain can help tanking, but OF and FS builds are far superior. --Lhoj 15:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Depends what your doing, if your doing speedclears or stuff with really specialised builds then ok but if your just doing general high level stuff defy pain is pretty handy, more foolproof than SF or OF too, if im running with an ad hoc team through some vanqs or whatnot i'd always take defy pain over the other choices. Shogun 15:36, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. While a SF tank is still useful, certain areas like in the Aspect of Shadows in The Deep will certainly kill a tank. --talk Large 16:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness[edit]

this page needs to mention SY, which negates a need to bring a tank to begin with. -Auron 01:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

no it really doesnt, ive still wiped plenty of times with an imbagon in my group. tanking is much more effect if you know how to do it. H/h dungeons are easy if you use tanking techniques
Ways in which you don't need a tank are unnecessary to bring up in this article as it is about tanking. There are many ways in which one can go through without needing a tank, SY is one of them. -- Konig/talk 17:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Well i think he's right about the inclusion in the article because it makes a partial tank out of everyone minus the caster, but i agree with you too in that it's still not hard to get wiped even with a SY in your team. SY is really handy dont get me wrong but its way overated with the whole "you dont need a tank" thing. Shogun 18:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
You... don't. I've cleared everything in the game without a tank, and the first groups to clear hardmode DoA didn't use them either. SY isn't just a sort-of-viable alternative, it is a superior option that warrants mention. When Aatxe hit casters for 30 damage instead of hundreds, the skill is powerful enough to be mentioned on a page about "tanking." -Auron 00:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
If nothing else, consider it an important development in the history of tanking. Surely background information is a legitimate addition to any encyclopedic article? Vili 点 User talk:Vili 00:32, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I disagree with its inclusion in this article as it is about how to be a tank or coordinate with a tank, not how to avoid bringing one.--The Emmisary 00:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The article is named "Tank." Why on earth would you not mention a skill that makes every single party member a tank? Your logic here is baffling. -Auron 00:55, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Well I'm mistaken then. I thought the definition of a tank meant that it could lure and/or stay alive for long periods of time on its own, not that 6 seconds of +100 armor qualifies to be a tank.--The Emmisary 01:55, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
One can argue what is needed to be considered a tank, or whether only warriors are real (classical) tanks. However, "Save Yourselves!" can be kept up almost permanently by a skilled player with Imbagon build, and I think that +100 armour for all other party members over a longer time period qualifies as "tank" more or less. It wouldn't hurt mentioning that skill; it's not like we are telling everyone to switch to SY instead of using warrior tanks. Just show the possibilities and let the reader decide which kind of "tank" (whatever that means in that special case) is the best for his/her party and situation. --Amakiir 02:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
All ^ this random tanking unrelated information aside, SY should be on the page for the reason that it can be used as a tanking tool. People lose sight of secondary benefits to giving everyone *but* yourself, +100 AL. While a warrior set up to active-tank* (the only kind that really works on warriors in GW, as there are no tools to garuantee/hold aggro on one)can make use of it for two reasons: 1. as a last ditch effort, once he loses complete control of a balled group, to give himself time to either lock some mobs back down, or have the damage take then out, or 2. to trick the AI's aggro prioritization code (hit low AL targets yee-haw) into staying/getting back on himself. Ofcourse this is all predominantly moot, much like the entire article, as the very concept of tanking is ineffective in GW compared to alternative strategies.. but still. *also surprised there's no subsection about active tanking. (using snares and/or chained knockdowns to keep a group in place, rather than rely on a bad mechanic.) 07:39, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Well maybe you dont but for the rest of us...Shogun 19:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Retaining aggro with "SY" originally came from stancetanking in UW where you would use "Watch Yourself!" (and Hammer Bash to retain aggro). I then tried to push it over into the dwg meta having the imba take aggro when i did teachruns in the earlier days of dwg to the latter of them as it died off shortly after i moved to trench etc (not implying causation only because of correlation). Most runs started veil and having imba slightly below and st above made it easy for people to recognise lines.