It's about time Shield oath and Grit become Abilities instead of Spells. (off-GCD)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Izsha

So for warrior to be able to play the same "all damage all the time" style that covers the raid scene, you HAVE to dip into defiance and unchained to gain access to that mitigation gap to bridge that gap. The way that tanks are played now requires that.

---

You are balancing for a theoretical fight. Every fight can be done with 0 tank stance outside of the pull. And the pull isn't for mitigation.

Warrior doesn't have access to inner beast, and it doesn't need it because content isn't designed to need frequent access to an on demand cooldown, and thats because warrior doesn't have frequent access to on demand mitigation.

So once again, content is built around tank cooldown kits, which means warrior must be kept in mind, which means frequent mitigation isn't required. But then this is used as a balance point for warrior having boosted dps and more flexibility with less costs. This isn't an actual draw back. An actual drawback is dark knight needing to spend dark arts on dark mind because it does run out of cooldowns in some fights and TBN or dark mind on their own aren't enough or need to be used close together. Thats a drawback, you have to give up dps for mitigation in boosting dark mind, and its one which actually currently exists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Izsha

Except its the not irrelivant. If you play warrior just like Pld/drk and never enter tank stance for a fight, you are significantly more squishy than pld and yes, even drk. The ever lauded OP war CD suite is not as good as Drk+Pld suite if everyone stays out of tank stance. Deliverance warrior has less to fall back on than either pld or drk and it entirely centers around access to the 'always up' CDs of IB/TBN/Shell because IB isnt up.

---

We have had this conversation before. Maybe if you try solo-tanking you might have an issue, and even there I'm only giving a maybe. If you co-tank and split the fight appropriately then warrior does just fine if not better, and doesn't require any of the other tanks utilities. There isn't support for this statement, someone would need to release damage taken information and actually work this statement out, but at the time of writing I'm unaware of such data existing in a nicely compiled space for analysis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Izsha

snip

---

as Saeno say my point is WAR's mitigation is just as powerful as PLD/DRK without inner beast, looking at the data of logs you can see no WAR use inner beast ever and they mitigate as much as the other 2, then is the coment as WAR is more weaker that the other 2 on deliverance and my point is they are not bcs a proper WAR use holmgang like a sentinel/shadow wall due the short recast, with this means WAR take the full hit often but dont die and in the end the data show they take some more damage to the other 2 but is not about WAR mitigate less, is about WAR abuse more from holgang and holmgang only prevent you dead.

so i know this discussion is only about tank stances but being part of our defensive kit is hard to dont spread a bit, so sorry for that Saeno but was necesary to explain my point, with is leaving the fact that WAR's kit is stronger like the PLD/DRK kit and more versatile we end with the extras here our tank stances, with grit/shield being unfairly taxed and defiance being just a ToB+Conva+snap agro CD every 90 seconds, and on top of that we have inner beast with is never used even less that heavensward bcs they get rampart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I mean, you could make Clemency a 60-sec CD instead of being a spammable spell? Other than that it's hard to compare them. I feel like Clemency was only given to PLD to replace what they had with Stoneskin.

---

no please, this will lead us to a problem of powercreep and we are already overflowing that line, WAR kit despite how good feels (or not, depending of you preferences) WAR have a serious problem of lack of weakness making it excell on every field, my opinion is clemency is fine as it is and WAR have to get more limits in for of increse the recast or meaby gauge cost but thats other theme and my personal opinion.

The only problem I have with stances at all is how DRK's operates, the other 2 classes seem fine beyond PLD GCD. You are shunting a large portion of your resources through 1 transaction and you may not have enough when its needed because of this or it leaves you with nothing resources wise after using it in some cases. If they would turn Darkside into an actual DPS stance you could split the MP cost and get rid of the GCD allowing for more flexability and less situations of a DRK without MP for grit or any MP left to grab hate after using grit.

I can understand resource costs for pld and drk but both resources and gcd leaves me wondering why both?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shao32

no please, this will lead us to a problem of powercreep and we are already overflowing that line, WAR kit despite how good feels (or not, depending of you preferences) WAR have a serious problem of lack of weakness making it excell on every field, my opinion is clemency is fine as it is and WAR have to get more limits in for of increse the recast or meaby gauge cost but thats other theme and my personal opinion.

---

I think this is being made a bigger deal because of how it sounds on paper. In my experience, I've probably failed at least as many times as I've succeeded in saving myself with Defiance/Equilibrium. Grade A example last night: I'm sitting at 15-20k HP just taking autos from Kefka. With regen ticks here I float. AA down to 3k HP. ToB/Conv down for another 15 sec. Will I get a heal? I guess I'll have to go to Defiance and Eq. Alright here's Defi... Oh I'm dead

That's obviously on me for delaying (and my healers for making me wonder), but my point is that it's no guarantee Warrior's Super Awesome Tanking Kit™ is always gonna save your hide. Certainly if you can plan for it's usage at a given point it's easier to prepare for and very smooth to execute, but just on the fly like that more decisions have to made and it doesn't always work out. And that kind of situation has happened more times than I care to even keep track of, but maybe it's just me lol. It is nice when it works, no doubt about that

As it relates to PLD/DRK, if in the same situation it seems like all you'd really need to do is glance at your MP and decide if you have enough to execute a Clem/TBN on yourself. In a pinch you'd probably just start mashing the button and it either would or wouldn't activate. You don't need to equip a tank stance or try to figure how to weave swapping to tank stance during your GCD so you don't lose one. It's just a simple one push heal/shield button. Maybe that's simplifying it a bit, but really it's no more than Def/Eq is being simplified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono_Rising

Warrior doesn't have access to inner beast, and it doesn't need it because content isn't designed to need frequent access to an on demand cooldown, and thats because warrior doesn't have frequent access to on demand mitigation.

---

I'm not sure how you got to this conclusion. Does that mean you're going to stop using Sheltron/TBN? If content required more frequent on-demand mitigation, War is more than capable of providing it. But since it's locked behind tank stance it would likely just move to back to the OT role to optimize it's damage instead. And, since you're using Sheltron/TBN despite content not requiring it, do you not think War would use IB more if were unlocked from Defiance?

I hate to say this, but they probably should have unlocked IB from Defiance instead of giving War Rampart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

...

I'm not sure how you got to this conclusion. Does that mean you're going to stop using Sheltron/TBN? If content required more frequent on-demand mitigation, War is more than capable of providing it. But since it's locked behind tank stance it would likely just move to back to the OT role to optimize it's damage instead. And, since you're using Sheltron/TBN despite content not requiring it, do you not think War would use IB more if were unlocked from Defiance?

I hate to say this, but they probably should have unlocked IB from Defiance instead of giving War Rampart.

---

I reached this conclusion by mapping out the cooldowns of both myself and my co-tank since a5s. Limiting ourselves to just stormblood savage content, inner beast use isn't required of a warrior. The reason why? Warrior's short cooldowns are more than enough to handle mechanics without needing to use inner beast. It does take timing, but when you do have tank busters which are close together you can often fit them in to a single cooldown, in god kefka there is a series of 3 tank busters which can be fit into a single vengeance use, that doesn't happen on paladin or dark knight.

You asked if that means I would stop using TBN and Sheltron. The answer is no, because sometimes the only mitigation I have on those jobs is sheltron or tbn, and thats because because you do not have short cooldowns with large durations like warrior. Have I ever needed mitigation on a 15 second basis frequently throughout a fight? Also no, thats how I come to the conclusion that:
(1) warrior's cooldown kit is designed around not having IB to the point that IB is unnecessary
(2) The game does not require tanks to need access to mitigation every 15 to 24 seconds.

Together this is how I reach my final conclusions:

(3) Warrior's higher offensive capabilities are not justified by its defensive kit
(4) Warrior's defensive kit does not justify the flexibility it receives when it comes to its tank stance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono_Rising

Together this is how I reach my final conclusions:
(1) warrior's cooldown kit is designed around not having IB to the point that IB is unnecessary
(2) The game does not require tanks to need access to mitigation every 15 to 24 seconds.
(3) Warrior's higher offensive capabilities are not justified by its defensive kit
(4) Warrior's defensive kit does not justify the flexibility it receives when it comes to its tank stance

---

I kind of have to agree that it makes no sense for WAR to do as much damage as it does while having so much mitigation. You're also completely right in that WAR's dont even need Inner beast but the fact that they have it is silly.
You look at the caster DPS, BLM has no utility but the highest damage.
You look at Healers, WHM has the least utility but the strongest raw heals and aoe damage.
You look at the melee, SAM has the least utility but highest personal DPS
And then you look at tanks. WAR has the best of everything except party wide shields but still has one, PLD has better utility but less damage and more restrictions than WAR on stances, and DRK has the least damage (tied with PLD), least utility, least usable defensives, most restrictions and worst aggro.

As it stands, DRK by all rights should do the highest damage and PLD/WAR should be tied for DPS. We'll see what happens in 4.3 and 4.4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono_Rising

snip

---

I just don't believe content was designed around War being 100% Deliverance main tank, which is kinda what your comment suggests (At least from my interpretation of it). The fact that content can be done like this is a testament to the optimization that players go through more than anything. Look back at the 270 str accessory debacle. It's quite clear that they intended tanks to only wear fending accessories by locking them out of anything else, but players found away around and changes had to be made to fix the situation.

So I have a hard time believing the devs sat around saying "Since we are giving Rampart to Warrior they will no longer need to use Inner Beast for on-demand mitigation. Let's design the new content around Warrior's not having on-demand mitigation." No, I think they designed the fights like they always do with Tankbusters/Raidwides/mechanic things all taking place at the usual intervals, and it just so happened to work out for Warrior the way it has. It doesn't make sense to give all 3 tanks on-demand mitigation abilities but then scrap the need to design content around that because one of the abilities is locked behind a tank stance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I just don't believe content was designed around War being 100% Deliverance main tank, which is kinda what your comment suggests (At least from my interpretation of it). The fact that content can be done like this is a testament to the optimization that players go through more than anything. Look back at the 270 str accessory debacle. It's quite clear that they intended tanks to only wear fending accessories by locking them out of anything else, but players found away around and changes had to be made to fix the situation.

---

No one really liked it though even after optimzing. You went about tanking like if you were a wet noodle and abused your invuls (just like today).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

No, I think they designed the fights like they always do with Tankbusters/Raidwides/mechanic things all taking place at the usual intervals, and it just so happened to work out for Warrior the way it has. It doesn't make sense to give all 3 tanks on-demand mitigation abilities but then scrap the need to design content around that because one of the abilities is locked behind a tank stance.

---

Things work out for WAR because they have a huge amount of cooldowns and its near impossible for a job with that many defensive CD's to ever be bad at tanking. As for the on-demand tanking abilities, I don't think this was ever in SE's raid design since no fight in this game has ever needed you to have a CD up every 15-20 seconds or you die. Typically you take a tank buster every minute at the shortest. Also, the on-demand skills that PLD and DRK have are things that can be given to the others, so they double as utility and not just personal buffs so you cant really design a fight that requires you to only be able to use these skills on yourself and ignore the utility aspect of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I just don't believe content was designed around War being 100% Deliverance main tank, which is kinda what your comment suggests (At least from my interpretation of it). The fact that content can be done like this is a testament to the optimization that players go through more than anything. Look back at the 270 str accessory debacle. It's quite clear that they intended tanks to only wear fending accessories by locking them out of anything else, but players found away around and changes had to be made to fix the situation.

So I have a hard time believing the devs sat around saying "Since we are giving Rampart to Warrior they will no longer need to use Inner Beast for on-demand mitigation. Let's design the new content around Warrior's not having on-demand mitigation." No, I think they designed the fights like they always do with Tankbusters/Raidwides/mechanic things all taking place at the usual intervals, and it just so happened to work out for Warrior the way it has. It doesn't make sense to give all 3 tanks on-demand mitigation abilities but then scrap the need to design content around that because one of the abilities is locked behind a tank stance.

---

My interpretation of my statement is that you can be 100% deliverance tank, but that might require you to share responsibilities with the other tank in your party. If you want to 100% solo tank then you should probably consider tank stance every once in awhile and thats on all tanks, not just warrior.

In multiple raid tiers people have gotten by with never touching inner beast and never using tank stance, that tells me something about the frequency of these things. I cannot think of a time when you need cooldowns on a sub thirty second basis. Balancing warrior's cooldowns to be lower because it doesn't have access to IB in dps stance, and then not designing raids that actually require frequent cooldowns seems like a strange way to balance things.

Nothing that has been said really convinces me otherwise either. I think you brought up that we are making it seem overly easy to pull off tank stance equilibirum. Consider this, in the situation your described, you took a hit and dropped 15k hp to 3k and then died to the next auto, if you couldn't pull that off with two oGCD's waiting for your GCD wouldn't have saved you either. If you were sitting on your GCD and died to a 15k attack you would have had to have at least 12k hp for tank stance to have saved you, and thats if the animation had time to complete because the DR isn't active till then. Sheltron likewise wouldn't have saved you, nor would inner beast, TBN might have saved you if your max HP was above 60k, but I've also put TBN up and though it went up the auto attack had already been snapshot in so that I took the hit anyway. If you were a paladin in this example you would have had no recourse, if you were in this situation you wouldn't have time for a clemency cast, if you were a dark knight you might have had TBN to save you, or you might have just used it because you had to survive a tank buster. These last second examples only prove that it is hard to adapt at the last second, not that we should be balanced around it.

Taking stances off the GCD is good for the game. It is one less reason to have to have a warrior in your party, it brings the game one step closer to being balanced, because like it or not, warrior being the sole tank with the ability to not lose significant dps picking up adds, pulling bosses, and other such things is going to lock its position in for the raid scene.

Warrior advantages:
(1) pulling
(2) slashing (no ninja no sam comp is being run by some people drk/pld is looking less likely to be run for those groups)
(3) picking up adds
(4) short cooldowns with longer durations
(5) Flexibility to help itself when things go south

It is really very little to ask that tank stance not be tied to the GCD, and after really considering it I think I was wrong, I don't think paladin or dark knight needs an mp cost to balance the 80% damage down they suffer is probably enough since warrior can still get around that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I just don't believe content was designed around War being 100% Deliverance main tank

---

i dont belive that either, it will looks like the dev team are WAR famboys and keeping strong bcs is they favourite job, but looking at the love WAR gets this past patchs and how the comunity question about tanks keep pointing WAR is "weak"vs PLD make you think, but i dont belive it or i dont want to belive that.

WAR is a failure, they designe never works at the end, a tank how can swap betwen stances easily to take what it needs (at least looks like that for me) end being a "stay on deliverance you dont need anything more", in paper looks like sheltron and TBN is compared to inner beast but the reality show sheltron/TBN is actually compared to WAR low CD's and inner beast its just there bcs share the same button with fell cleave, upgrading foresight to rampath without rebalancing the rest of the kit was a mistake and thats in part why WAR is so strong, defiance innerbeast/fell cleave relation is something idk why is still a thing, heavensward show this dint work and ppl will always use fell cleave.