A detailed Reaction to Warrior in SB

I wonder what the threshold on making a new complaint thread is. They did say to make new threads and not complain in megathreads, after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Umbeliel

I wonder what the threshold on making a new complaint thread is. They did say to make new threads and not complain in megathreads, after all.

---

I say complain away with as many threads as you like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adachi_Ame

Yes, but a Bloodbath like effect would fit WAR core nature more accurately, imo. And really a single change to a single skill, is actually not that hard of thing to do. I'm suggesting a simple change that would give more of the self sustaining portion of it back. Because more health just means more health to heal. I mean compare it to the other two tank stances, what do they do? They mitigate the damage. While health increase mitigates it to a weaker degree while a heal on a fraction of the damage you deal along with it would add more mitigation while keeping to the aggressive playstyle of WAR.

---

I see what you're saying, but I still disagree for the simple reason that Bloodbath (25% lifesteal) was not that strong in Defiance that it negated the necessity of the healing increase. And >unchained in 2017. Bloodbath was fairly strong in Deliverance though. In terms of identity I would agree with adding it as a buff (rather than removing the healing increase).

I think you already got this, but I'll say it again. The way Shield Oath and Grit work is you take less damage so you take less hits. The way Defiance works is you have more HP so you can take more hits, but since you have more HP that HP has to be healed back. Without the healing bonus Defiance is not equivalent to Shield Oath and Grit, which is why Scholars don't like healing Warriors in Defiance.

In the past, healing bonus depended on wrath stacks. There's a reason they moved it onto the stance itself.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comme...g_with_20_war/

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

The question that's long been on my mind is whether that initial fixed 200 ms delay was necessary and merely designed around, or part of the intended design itself. Moreover, a "global" shared cooldown itself is not necessary for hiding internal server lag. An "internal" cooldown (also known as "animation lock", when not muddled in term with consequent "movement lock") can do the same. The longer the animation, while still allowing for sequential ability queues, the more ping the game can hide. I would figure that the animation lock or internal cooldown need be no more than one's turn-around ping + whatever calculation time the servers need to create, essentially a "condition received / sequential action ready" check to avoid difference in output over ping. But, I am entirely a layman in this subject, and other MMOs with considerably shorter animations still suffer from output variance even over relatively small ping counts.

---

Just as a follow-up, I found this comment on Reddit as there some discussion in the Balance about the thread itself.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comme...yable/dk7r1wg/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YitharV2

I definitely think it's worth getting to level cap just to see how endgame tanking is, although I'd say the major difference is at level cap you have your full kit. I really do think there's a lot FFXIV can learn from TERA about how to make tanking more engaging and fun.

---

If only TERA's CPU downspikes and returns didn't consistently trigger my ASUS Anti-Surge protection the moment it loads the character selection screen, making the game utterly unplayable without risking frying my computer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

If only TERA's CPU downspikes and returns didn't consistently trigger my ASUS Anti-Surge protection the moment it loads the character selection screen, making the game utterly unplayable without risking frying my computer.

---

The one thing I like about FFXIV is that it's designed to run on the PS3 (well not anymore) and the PS4. TERA's optimization is really bad. I feel like they changed the loading screen to be flashy but imo the loading screen is really resource heavy. My only suggestion would be to try making it Windowed and a lower resolution by following instructions here. If that doesn't help, then yeah, you probably can't play it.

I think it's also possible you might be able to change graphics settings at the server select screen? I don't remember to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YitharV2

The one thing I like about FFXIV is that it's designed to run on the PS3 (well not anymore) and the PS4. TERA's optimization is really bad. I feel like they changed the loading screen to be flashy but imo the loading screen is really resource heavy. My only suggestion would be to try making it Windowed and a lower resolution by following instructions here. If that doesn't help, then yeah, you probably can't play it.

I think it's also possible you might be able to change graphics settings at the server select screen? I don't remember to be honest.

---

I can play Black Desert Online at 4k at max settings. I just can't play games that cause the same sudden reductions in power usage (and then subsequent dangerously quick returns to usage) as Tera. If I could run the game at all, I could run it at some 140 FPS. But the character screen bluescreens me due to its spikes—not the power requirements in themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YitharV2

The one thing I like about FFXIV is that it's designed to run on the PS3 (well not anymore) and the PS4. TERA's optimization is really bad.

---

Speaking of, TERA's coming to the PS4/XBone so that might be an option if your PC's CPU is having trouble with PC TERA.

http://gematsu.com/2017/03/tera-comi...-xbox-one-2017
http://tera.enmasse.com/consolebeta

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

I can play Black Desert Online at 4k at max settings. I just can't play games that cause the same sudden reductions in power usage (and then subsequent dangerously quick returns to usage) as Tera. If I could run the game at all, I could run it at some 140 FPS. But the character screen bluescreens me due to its spikes—not the power requirements in themselves.

---

Hmm, I wish there was some way around the new character selection screen but I doesn't seem like there is. :| My friend posted this on October 15, 2015, so seems like it happened a while back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YitharV2

-snip-

---

Another idea, would be to slightly decrease the healing potency while also adding the BB effect. Say 10-15% healing received, but also heals for 10-15% of the damage dealt. Can't make it Too powerful after all, and remember they buffed Darkside to 20%. So changing how the stance functions isn't too much of a stretch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adachi_Ame

Another idea, would be to slightly decrease the healing potency while also adding the BB effect. Say 10-15% healing received, but also heals for 10-15% of the damage dealt. Can't make it Too powerful after all, and remember they buffed Darkside to 20%. So changing how the stance functions isn't too much of a stretch

---

Perhaps. The main problem I see is that Defiance still has the damage penalty so I'm not sure if it would be enough to make up for it.