March update and enmity

[PlumbGame]

I think you misunderstood my post.

That is what I was saying: that on most other games the tank simply spams some optimized rotation and keeps hate through-out the fight. It's rare for another party member to actually get hit - and when they do it's thought to be the tank's fault and not part of the expected gameplay.

Where we fundamentally disagree is you like this approach and I don't. I find this kind of combat shallow and prefer it when there are enmity caps or a similar mechanic in place that causes the enemies to mix it up between party members. It improves the gameplay and makes combat more interesting.

I think you are missing the point. IN THIS GAME tanks simply spams some optimized rotation, then hits a caps, that EVERY DD hits with simplicity also, preventing a tank from being............ a tank, and considering that PLD was not designed for damage, it should be able to................ tank. It does not make the combat more interesting, it does not make the combat more fun. Carrying damage taken gear to take up the already limited inventory space isn't "interesting" or "improving" on the gameplay, or not dpsing for extended periods of time to lose enmity just to get it back on a few round of auto-attacks of a WS is not interesting or improving, it's actually a lazy way for SE to ignore the tanking problem. What would be interesting is DDs being able to perform MAX damage and a tank being able to compete to hold threat.

It would also play a more strategic roll in hate control because without a capped threat people would have potential to do more max dmg making them more inclined to make sure the tank has the threat.

[Dale]

I think you are missing the point. IN THIS GAME tanks simply spams some optimized rotation, then hits a caps, that EVERY DD hits with simplicity also, preventing a tank from being............ a tank, and considering that PLD was not designed for damage, it should be able to................ tank. It does not make the combat more interesting, it does not make the combat more fun. Carrying damage taken gear to take up the already limited inventory space isn't "interesting" or "improving" on the gameplay, or not dpsing for extended periods of time to lose enmity just to get it back on a few round of auto-attacks of a WS is not interesting or improving, it's actually a lazy way for SE to ignore the tanking problem. What would be interesting is DDs being able to perform MAX damage and a tank being able to compete to hold threat.

It would also play a more strategic roll in hate control because without a capped threat people would have potential to do more max dmg making them more inclined to make sure the tank has the threat.

I just disagree with your description of how the enmity system works on this game.

When the party is balanced and well played - it is possible for the tank to control hate. The enmity system on this game does not prevent a tank from being utilized.

Paladins were designed to do damage. They have an A+ in sword, weapon skills etc. They just weren't intended to do as much damage as some of the other jobs.

Where we agree is I don't really think having to wear -damage gear brings anything of value to this game. I would prefer they just make Defense the new mitigation and stop forcing tanks to gimp their offense and enmity by having to put it on. This is especially the case since other jobs are so resistant to wearing it themselves. It also leads to a lot of problems - like the one this thread is talking about.

[Selindrile]

When the party is using rangers that are well played - it is possible for the rangers to control hate. The enmity system on this game does not prevent a tank from being utilized when all the dds are rangers.

I fixed this for you.

[PlumbGame]

I just disagree with your description of how the enmity system works on this game.

When the party is balanced and well played - it is possible for the tank to control hate. The enmity system on this game does not prevent a tank from being utilized.

Paladins were designed to do damage. They have an A+ in sword, weapon skills etc. They just weren't intended to do as much damage as some of the other jobs.

Where we agree is I don't really think having to wear -damage gear brings anything of value to this game. I would prefer they just make Defense the new mitigation and stop forcing tanks to gimp their offense and enmity by having to put it on. This is especially the case since other jobs are so resistant to wearing it themselves. It also leads to a lot of problems - like the one this thread is talking about.

Sadly it doesn't matter that you disagree with my description of how enmity works. It is how it works.

[Dale]

Sadly it doesn't matter that you disagree with my description of how enmity works. It is how it works.

Not for me it isn't.

So does the game then have two separate enmity systems? One for you and one for me? It must: because that is the only way I can explain it.

[Dale]

I fixed this for you.

Cute. But you didn't fix it

You do not need rangers to utilize tanks in this game.

[Alhanelem]

I think you misunderstood my post.

That is what I was saying: that on most other games the tank simply spams some optimized rotation and keeps hate through-out the fight. It's rare for another party member to actually get hit - and when they do it's thought to be the tank's fault and not part of the expected gameplay.

Where we fundamentally disagree is you like this approach and I don't. I find this kind of combat shallow and prefer it when there are enmity caps or a similar mechanic in place that causes the enemies to mix it up between party members. It improves the gameplay and makes combat more interesting.

In other words: I like that the boss will turn and attack the player who just busted off a huge skill chain.

The approach is good because it rewards people for doing their job to the best of their capability, and doesn't punish DDs for doing so. It does NOT mean that other party members never get hit, because these games generally have a lot more area attacks than XI which everyone has to deal with, not just the tank(s). You make it sound a lot simpler than it actually is. Often the mechanics can make it difficult for the tank to do their job right which does make it hard on hate control. There's also usually still hate resets and some games have mechanics where mobs have a special capability to ignore the hate list and go after a different target.

The only difference here is that each role is responsible for doing its own role and not anyone else's. It isn't fun as a DD to have to hold back, especially in this game where the reason is because of an arbitrary limitation (the hate cap), and especially an arbitrary limitation that wasn't a problem until a few years ago. The game was a lot better in terms of battle tactics back several years ago when the hate cap wasn't nearly as much of an issue and as long as you let the tank get some hate before engaging you were fine. Tanks can't really do their job very well without DPS constantly standing idle because of the hate cap. In the early years we didn't have to do that (much).

Right now, DDs may as well do as much damage as possible purely due to that flaw- they're going to make the mob spin even if they aren't doing max DPS because they simply WILL hit the hate cap unless they literally do nothing at all. That's not the tank's fault, because the tank's hate is at maximum possible.

[Dale]

The approach is good because it rewards people for doing their job to the best of their capability, and doesn't punish DDs for doing so. It does NOT mean that other party members never get hit, because these games generally have a lot more area attacks than XI which everyone has to deal with, not just the tank(s). You make it sound a lot simpler than it actually is. Often the mechanics can make it difficult for the tank to do their job right which does make it hard on hate control. There's also usually still hate resets and some games have mechanics where mobs have a special capability to ignore the hate list and go after a different target.

The only difference here is that each role is responsible for doing its own role and not anyone else's. It isn't fun as a DD to have to hold back, especially in this game where the reason is because of an arbitrary limitation (the hate cap), and especially an arbitrary limitation that wasn't a problem until a few years ago.

I don't because such a feature may as well not exist if doing so will usually kill you. If the optimal strategy is to generally avoid performing optimally, that just doesn't make sense to me. The game was a lot better in terms of battle tactics back several years ago when the hate cap wasn't nearly as much of an issue and as long as you let the tank get some hate before engaging you were fine.

As I said - we just have a fundamental disagreement here about what constitutes fun gameplay.

You seem to prefer the wow/FF 14 approach. I prefer the system on this game where hate is less predictable and damage dealers have to be on their guard and respect what they are attacking because it might turn around and attack them back.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about this.

[bazookatooth]

Just nerf all forms of damage back to 75 levels. Problem solved ;P

[PlumbGame]

Not for me it isn't.

So does the game then have two separate enmity systems? One for you and one for me? It must: because that is the only way I can explain it.

There has been much testing on enmity since..... forever. I'll take the results of the tests over random guy A who plays PLD and thinks PLD shouldn't tank and that his fun and interacting gameplay is revolved around DDs tanking.