With the launch of Stormblood

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XoanGrahm

Snip

---

Have you forgotten that all three tanks will be getting new toys from level 61 to 70 and that, due to the change of cross-class skills to role based skill pools, Paladin and Warrior will be getting replacements for "must have" cross class skills such as Provoke?

What you post sounds like is a passive aggressive rant about not getting a new tank job.

I don't understand all this doom and gloom. If your a main tank player, you will main tank regardless if we get a "new toy" or not right? What happened to just tanking because you like to? A new tanking job will not all of a sudden create a influx of tanks forever, and having all tanks go on "strike" as it were isn't going to do a thing to SE and only hurt us as a community even more.. (not to mention put us tanks in a light we really don't want to be viewed in)

Tanks (and healers to an extent) are in a weird place right now. We have one tank that's pretty much requested in EVERY composition, one that has become a joking meme, and the last that is still trying to find its identity. Adding one more into such a fragmented state isn't going to do anything useful for the sake of having "something new".

We need to wait. Sit back and see how the changes to 4.0 will be recieved by the player base and balance what we have right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esp

I don't understand all this doom and gloom. If your a main tank player, you will main tank regardless if we get a "new toy" or not right?

---

Perhaps, but I would have liked to try out something new while still a tank. I'm not unsubbing over this, but I'm a little disappointed, is all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aleph_null

I was thinking that they'll probably try to balance tanks as "OT" type and "MT" type, in which case adding samurai as a second "OT" type to compete with war would make sense, so we'll see raid groups bringing pld/drk + war/sam, but it seems like they are trying to avoid having that subclassification among tanks. It'll be interesting to see how they'll balance the three tanks so that any combination of two tanks is viable for raid progression.

---

I do prefer that they avoid sub-classifications unless they plan on going whole-hog with the idea that no two jobs provide quite the same functionality or "niche", but that latter idea would require that gearing, and possibly even leveling, were revised heavily to allow for easier job swapping, and even then you'd want to try to keep a sense of bringing the player, not just the class. Moreover, classes would feel a bit... fettered at best, dismembered at worst, if there was still a clear niche victor for each fight, such that one job always ends where the next begins, regardless of the actual range of their toolkits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XoanGrahm

Maybe its time for all tank mains, to just.. not queue up for anything without a full pre-made of friends or FC members. Let the DPS wait in their two hour queue's and show SE that they've made a mistake.

---

That said, as a DPS I'll probably be doing my best to try to avoid the need for a tank anytime I and my friends don't have one in actual need for experience to rotate through (e.g. MSQing on tank/heals, and one of four friends each taking a healer or tank through 61-70 then swapping out while the two previous dps do the same). If SE hadn't gone out of their way to destroy their own toolkits and mechanics (removing most forms of CC), DPS could actually forgo tanks entirely for a time. So rather than pointing fingers at "entitled" DPS for having gained two jobs this coming expansion, let's first note that it took dungeon redesigns just to ensure tanks would remain in the loop even mitigation needs weren't so great as to actually require your presence...

Yeah, I'll openly admit I was running on practically 0 sleep when I wrote this, and it could have been worded much better.



So I found a a better way of putting it, for example: If 5.0 rolls around, and we only get two classes again, and they are only a tank and a healer. Wouldn't you be upset as a dps player? I'm not advocating the removal of the two DPS classes we're getting. I actually am happy we're getting them. But the reason given to us by SE sounds like a cop-out more than any actual rational reasoning.

To address another point, I know we wont get tanks and healers in each expac, thinking we would is unrealistic. But this is only the second expansion, and we do have gaps in the tank meta as it is. There is no competition for Warrior at the moment(my main) and that's actually really unfortunate. I would love another high damage tank so a warrior isnt required for every single raid scenario, or hell, just so I have another option to play as, because I enjoy the high damage tank approach.

One final though, to the person that said "Have you forgotten that all three tanks will be getting new toys from level 61 to 70 and that, due to the change of cross-class skills to role based skill pools, Paladin and Warrior will be getting replacements for "must have" cross class skills such as Provoke?" Thats kind of a worthless argument, because by the same token every DPS job is also getting those reworks and new skills from 61-70. Not really a valid point, sorry.

*Edit* character limit

I don't think any type of psudo tank strike will be necessary. DPS queues will skyrocket regardless of if tanks and healers avoid DF. There are already going to be many upset DPS.

My concern is more on how they are going to try and balance tanks and healers. Short of Homogonising the different Jobs or drastically changing the meta I am not sure how they can do it without tuning tanks to fit different subcatagories. With such small raid tiers its hard to balance around 'Physical Mitigation' 'Magic Mitigation' and 'Damage', particularly since damage is dominant at the moment. Depending on the boss mechanics one of the Mitigation style tanks will always lose out and be underpowered Job for a teir.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xau

you know what the dev team has limited resources?, they can't add every expansion 3-4 dps 1 tank and 1 healer

---

SB supposedly has triple the budget of HW. Despite that, we're getting no new race and only 2 new jobs.

At what point will people stop making excuses for SE? When the next expansion has quintuple the budget, only gives us 1 new job, and removes a race?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xau

this time they decided 2 dps because the str stat jobs and the int stat jobs had only 2, meanwhile the other jobs had what 3 of each?, in the next expansion they could add 1 tank and 1 healer, or 1 dps and 1 tank or 1 dps and 1 healer, or just add another 2 dps, what you do not like it, they will note it, but is theirs decision to chose what roles will get new jobs, not yours

also, do not expect they will give a new tank/healer job per expansion, is unrealistic

---

If we're going to arbitrarily split up jobs by mainstat, wouldn't it make more sense to split them up by their actual role? We currently have 1 OT vs. 3 melee DPS. What do you think makes more sense -- adding another OT so that OTs can finally play another job or adding another 1.5 melee DPS so that DPS players can now drown in even more options?

If there was no healer added, I could understand as someone who also plays healers. The situation with their design and balance is far worse than what tanks have to deal with and quite a bit more complicated to deal with (largely thanks to AST).

But 2 DPS in a single expansion and ONLY 2 DPS?

I'd blame SE but the decision is not SE's alone. SE listens to their paying subscribers and if there wasn't such vocal opposition to making DRK a tank, such persistent pressure to add a sword DPS or make SAM a DPS, and such widespread avoidance of tanking, SE would've surely felt differently about the matter.

As a tank main, I know I won't be touching DF for a very long time after SB releases. And, while you might assume it's out of support for this topic, I'm actually not that petty. I'm sure to be fully booked by friends, FC mates, and LS peeps for content once SB releases. Good luck to the DPS players who don't have that option.

You know, when HW released, I tried out MCH and it was nice having fast queues for it. I wanted to try out SAM and RDM but chances are I'll be too busy bailing my DPS friends out of DF queue purgatory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian_

SB supposedly has triple the budget of HW. Despite that, we're getting no new race and only 2 new jobs.

---

A new race is just pure cosmetic, it's like making new glamours options. Since we know absolutely nothing about the numbers of dungeons and trials we'll get throughout Stormblood, it's far too early to consider they've wasted their money. I'd rather have a whole new original concept with Eureka, challenging dungeons and beautifully designed raids than a 4th tank thrown in the already messy pool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian_

If we're going to arbitrarily split up jobs by mainstat, wouldn't it make more sense to split them up by their actual role? We currently have 1 OT vs. 3 melee DPS. What do you think makes more sense -- adding another OT so that OTs can finally play another job or adding another 1.5 melee DPS so that DPS players can now drown in even more options?

---

What makes more sense is to tweaks existing tanks so that all three can be fully used in either position.

Jobs are not the only type of content. Besides, some of the more strident members of this forum are endlessly trying to convince themselves that WAR is the only well-designed tank job in the game. Heaven help us all if SE introduced another "inferior" tank.

There is no OT "role". It's an arbitrary, player-created designation which depends entirely on how your group decides to split up the tanking responsibilities on a given fight.

I'm relieved that RDM and SAM turned out to be dps. Neither would have made for a unique tanking aesthetic over the existing tanks. Casters previously had the least variety in terms of jobs (BLM and SMN). Adding RDM into the mix not only helps with that, but its also a great way to get melee orientated players to try out casters, by bridging the gap between the two playstyles. I'd also be interested in seeing if this opens the doors to new caster synergies, allowing for a caster-heavy raid comp.

I'm happy with the introduction of SAM as melee. I like having the option of being able to jump into a sword-based dps for offspec purposes, and the charge attacks sound reminiscent of Cyan from FFVI. Also, with the addition of a fifth job with slashing, the game designers will have to think twice about letting WAR effectively be the sole provider of the slashing debuff. I'll be interested to see how it synergizes with the existing melee jobs, as well as the tanks.

SAM and RDM start at lvl 50, so I'm not entirely certain how useful existing tank mains at 60 will be to alleviating queue times, outside of the once-a-day roulette. It'll be an problem regardless of whether your secretaries have booked out your Stormblood schedules or not. Well, serves them right. T-they'll see! *shakes fist*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

I do prefer that they avoid sub-classifications unless they plan on going whole-hog with the idea that no two jobs provide quite the same functionality or "niche"

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

What makes more sense is to tweaks existing tanks so that all three can be fully used in either position.

---

Personally I don't really mind having subclassification into different kinds of tanks, just like how there are different kinds of dps (melees with resistance down debuffs, ranged with magic/physical dps boost and mp/tp regen, casters with high personal dps and some defensive utilities). I know that ideally any tank can be good at OT and MT, and that any combination of two tanks is good for progression, but that'll be a lot harder to balance when we get more and more new jobs. Right now we have 3 tanks and 3 combinations of tanks, if we have 4 tanks we'd have 6 combinations, if we have 5 tanks we'd have 10 combinations, and so on. I think it's reasonable to have certain combinations being "bad", just like certain combinations of dps are just flat out terrible for progression (2 melees 2 casters for example, will struggle with long fight).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

There is no OT "role". It's an arbitrary, player-created designation which depends entirely on how your group decides to split up the tanking responsibilities on a given fight.

---

"MT" and "OT" are just oversimplification of saying which tank benefits more from taking hits, due to skills that proc based on taking hits (block/parry/just taking damage) like shield swipe, reprisal and blood price. You want the tank that benefits more from taking hits to be, well, tanking the boss as much as they can, while their cds allow (with a few tank swaps to allow the other tank to use their cds as well).

Yes it's player created designation, but it's not arbitrary, it completely depends on the skillset of the jobs. It's not arbitrarily decided that war benefits less from taking damage compared to pld/drk. It's decided by their skillsets, which are at the hands of the devs.