So, after the patch, how goes it with Paladin?

it is a 20% dmg increase ... don't know where that 20% str increase comes from.

Dunno where Maim and Darkside alleviate the tank stance penalty either, considering that you have them up while not in tanking stance too. The tanking stance is still a 30% damage loss compared to DPS stance for a WAR (Defiance + Deliverance loss), and a 20% damage loss as a DRK. PLD suffers more because of 20% damage loss + ~12% damage loss from the auto attack bonus in SwO. Maim and Darkside have nothing to do with all of this. It's not like unchained.

They alleviate the stance penalty compared to PLD I guess. Would be a different thing if we could have Swordoath active with shieldoath.

it would be too strong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brannigan

Bulwark gets you at most 2 procs every 3 minutes

---

That plus the normal blocks, counting that the skill still has a CD.. for me it was enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonanja

They alleviate the stance penalty compared to PLD I guess. Would be a different thing if we could have Swordoath active with shieldoath.

---

They don't alleviate anything, because you have them without the stance too. So your stance still reduces your damage by the same % compared to when you don't have it.

Got to play with it a little bit last night, and the changes...well, they don't really feel meaningful. The biggest thing I dislike is that now, Pacify is not in my control anymore. It's even more of an afterthought than it was before (and even before, it could be used to effectively "stun-lock" very specific mobs). And tanking bosses doesn't really feel any different. We're still mostly locked in our combos, and most of our mitigation still comes from Stoneskin and cooldown abilities.

It may help matters slightly where we'd had issues before (MT DPS on A3S and A4S), but I don't think this is a game-changer.

The change wasn't too big, but I do agree with some others that it is more fun now. Gives you more of a reason to time Sheltron a few before using it so you can get that shield swipe proc. Also it does help with enmity when the dps is really good, I don't need to RoH as much as before. All in all it was a positive change for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonanja

They alleviate the stance penalty compared to PLD I guess. Would be a different thing if we could have Swordoath active with shieldoath.

---

They don't alleviate the penalty - paladin just takes a double penalty by losing sword oath damage. Dark loses Blood Weapon and WAR loses Fell Cleave/5% bonus, but neither are nearly as strong as Sword Oath.

The paladin changes are minor. I still run out of TP.

One downside is that the new shield swipe has less synergy with Bulwark and Sheltron. Bulwark should temporarily remove the CD for Shield Swipe and Sheltron should remove the current CD for Shield Swipe.

I liked being able to use combos that generated Shield Swipes and I feel like SE didn't really think through this change.

I'm pretty underwhelmed by the changes. And depending or raid design to address the deficiencies would only trade one imbalance for another (everyone bitching that WAR and DRK don't have enough mitigation to be viable).

Personally, I really like the PLD aesthetic, but I feel that mechanically, the class needs an overhaul from the ground up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagledorf

First of all, no it's not. Swapping is a loss of at least 500 potency (in and out, average RA potency with slashing debuff). In those 3 GCD, you get .2*250*3+55*(3 or 4)+30 or 40 so you get about 350-400 potency.

Second of all, that's actually all the more reason Halone should be at least 300 potency. They should be encouraging us to use it for the STR debuff if we're OT or when we're MTing and have already established aggro. Making it so low discourages its use except for hate when absolutely necessary.

---

My calculations
Assume only RA combo spam
Not taking into account any debuffs
213 avg potency per GCD

213 * 5 = 1065
auto atks 6 - 600
1665*.8 = 1332

213 * 3 = 639
auto atks 5 with sword 1 with shield - 850
850+639 = 1489

If you stance dance at a time where you have CoS or SW or debuffs/buffs up, the difference will only be greater.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xyphon

Weird, the tool tip clearly says "Combo Bonus: Increases damage dealt by 20% Duration: 24s"

@Rawker - That's interesting that its applied that way. Any idea why the dev's did the math like that? As for the flight or flight argument, I was just straight out comparing non cooldown buffs.

If you want to compare cooldown buffs, wouldn't it be more appropriate to compare berserk vs FoF? Or you just trying to compare the dps increase duration of 24 vs 30 seconds?

Since you seem to like math, let me give you a very simple example:

Lets say every 10 seconds you deal 10k dmg. For the sake of buffs, lets take a look at 3 cycles of that.

So that's 30k dmg, in 30 seconds.

Paladin:

30k + FoF = 39k dmg

Warrior:

20k + berserk (only 20 seconds) + 10k unbuffed dmg = 40k dmg.

Looks to me in that simple math, that warrior with just berserk pulls ahead by 1k dmg. That's not even bringing in the potency differences between combos.

---

Wheres the 5s pacification. Are you assuming healers esunaing 100%? What about healer dps loss then?

@Alimdia - Add in maim and that's 46k dmg. The gap only increases every time these cool downs are up again.

In terms of healers, it depends on "which" healer you are referring to. Selene on obey doing Fey's Caress for instance, would not slow a sch's dps. It also depends on their dps rotations, because if done properly there should be barely any DPS loss at all. I was leaving out the 5 seconds of pacification to just simply show a proper comparison of the skills. If you want to compare the pacification, you'd also have to compare the potency differences between warrior and paladin combos. This is also not taking into count any other buffs or crit hits.

If you want to spend the time including all of the variables, be my guest lol.

Actually, I must admit that you're correct about SwO being a DPS gain in 3 GCD if you don't cancel combo, but your calculation is actually off. First of all RA is an average of 230 potency with no debuffs (150+200+340)/3=230, second a weapon with a 2.16 second delay will only get 4 hits in 4 GCD and 5 in 5, and third the potency of an auto attack isn't 100 unless your weapon delay is 3 seconds (it's 100/3*delay) so it's 72 for the Gordian Blade.

So for the Gordian Blade staying in ShO is (5*72+230*5)*.8=1208 potency and swapping to SwO is 230*3+4*122+72*.8=1236 so it is a potency gain of 28.

For Thordan, I see a lot of DRKs and WARs refuse to MT. Glad I didn't give up on my PLD because after a few learning parties, while I haven't cleared, I get asked if I want to come as PLD lol... Makes me feel good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim_Berry

For Thordan, I see a lot of DRKs and WARs refuse to MT. Glad I didn't give up on my PLD because after a few learning parties, while I haven't cleared, I get asked if I want to come as PLD lol... Makes me feel good.

---

WARs perform as good as PLD in this fight in terms of mitigation. Dunno why suddenly people ask PLD to come. If they want a tankier physical MT, just make the WAR MT and DRK OT.

DRK is not very good as OT on this fight though. They provide essentially zero utility since they can't reprisal and the party-wide damage is largely not possible to mitigate with Delirium and not appreciably better DPS than a PLD since you shouldn't take much damage OTing (the charges and comets I suppose). On top of that, the DPS checks are soft and can be survived even if you lack the DPS to meet them fully with Divine Veil and Stoneskin (unless DPS is really terrible, like level 50 terrible, in which case you're doomed anyway).

This is actually another major part of the problem with the tanks. WAR really is designed to OT so it's a poor choice to have any other tank do it even if it's preferable for the WAR to MT. In this case, it's probably most intelligent to have a SwO PLD MT and a WAR OT or use a second WAR to OT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagledorf

[...] and not appreciably better DPS than a PLD since you shouldn't take much damage OTing (the charges and comets I suppose).

---

DRK still does way more OT DPS than PLD and lasts longer without TP-starving thanks to Blood Weapon. I believe that WAR MT - DRK OT is more total tank DPS than PLD MT - WAR OT even with the Shield Swipe change. So if people want a MT with more physical mitigation, they don't have to switch jobs in their party, just make the WAR MT and DRK OT. But it's not even necessary. This fight is physical-heavy but DRK still mitigates good enough to survive everything while still doing more MT DPS. So DRK MT - WAR OT is still the way to go for clearing faster. Overkill mitigation is wasted DPS. DPS, on the contrary, is never overkill. Tho WAR - WAR is very efficient too, I agree.

In pure OT role DRK and PLD are very close in DPS. The best evidence is in A4S where the best PLD does 90% the best DRK's DPS even with the DRK getting hit for MP because of the loss of Reprisal and Lower Blows for part of the fight (much better than mystery people making videos).

In this fight, mitigation is actually superior to that small of a DPS difference because you can literally ignore things. Like you can ignore two meteor circles completely and burn the middle one with just Divine Veil since it's only about 17k damage from letting those go off.

If you want to try for a speed clear you might prefer a DRK, but it's in no way optimal for this fight, especially for a PF group.

Didn't expect mitigation to be able to do such things even for this fight. Gotta try it as PLD then. But if they plan on doing more encounters like that for the next set of raid it will not fix the imbalance anyway. It will just make DRK the next "undesired" tank. I would be disappointed to see SE come up with something like this instead of fixing the jobs.

It's really unlikely that you'll end up needing it unless your DPS are literally letting their cat walk all over the keyboard since one failed meteor sphere is survivable even with no mitigation at all and you'd have to let the limit break build really far for the Scholar to need extra mitigation, but it is an option other than making more DPS. Even with competent DPS, ignoring one comet could let you use cooldowns elsewhere and it's probably a totally good strategy to do with or without a Paladin and/or Scholar.

It's not only undesirable for DRK, it's also undesirable in my opinion since at least one and probably two of these particular mechanics can't be mitigated by the majority of utility skills as far as I can tell (Virus, Dragon Kick/Delirium, Storm's Path, Disable). It's fine to have a few mechanics like this in a fight (they've always had them when primals jump and stuff), but it's no way to "fix" a job.

Yes. We're in agreement. Tanks need to be fixed, not only the encounter design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rawker

Says the guy who leveled GLA only to get Provoke. Go play PLD and then we'll talk.

---

OK....paladin aoe threat sucks MT dps sucks and our defensive "bonous" only matters if fighting 3+ physical mobs otherwise black hardly matters.......a 4% dps increase is 10% away from being enough.....

Why in the bloody hell is it that everyone only thinks tank DPS is what matters?

The crappy meta is what makes you folks think that. I'll be glad if they gut that meta and we can get past this "tank DPS is the only important thing" bullcrap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nadirah

Why in the bloody hell is it that everyone only thinks tank DPS is what matters?

---

Even if the meta didn't cater specifically to tank dps, tank dps would still matter. So, hush.

I've yet to see any MMORPG where tank DPS doesn't matter at all in high end content. Even if it's not as much as it currently is in FFXIV, tank DPS has always been a thing to take care of in MMOs end game content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver_Blade

OK....paladin aoe threat sucks MT dps sucks and our defensive "bonous" only matters if fighting 3+ physical mobs otherwise black hardly matters.......a 4% dps increase is 10% away from being enough.....

---

Wait. I'm confused. Are you replying to my response or the one i responsed to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ralvenom

Even if the meta didn't cater specifically to tank dps, tank dps would still matter. So, hush.

---

Before you tell other to hush, perhaps you could quantify exactly how much tank DPS matters? Let's say it's a PLD MT exactly how much DPS relative to everyone else in the party is that tank putting out?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Before you tell other to hush, perhaps you could quantify exactly how much tank DPS matters? Let's say it's a PLD MT exactly how much DPS relative to everyone else in the party is that tank putting out?

---

Word problem on the SAT:

If DRK PLD & WAR can all survive General Tank Buster in Generic Boss Fight and we observe it to be true that the weighted ranking contribution of tanks is as follows; PLD weighted at 650, DRK weighted at 950, and WAR weighted at 1000.

Given the following variable sets;
WAR supports PLD & DRK damage & mitigation. +50
DRK supports neither PLD or WAR damage, supports MDT mitigation. +25
PLD supports WAR & DRK PDT mitigation, at cost to own damage. +25 -25 = net 0

DRK +150 if they are the primary target.
PLD +100 if they are the primary target.
WAR +0 if they are the primary target.


Which combination of tanks yields the highest weighted rank composition to clear Generic Boss Fight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Before you tell other to hush, perhaps you could quantify exactly how much tank DPS matters? Let's say it's a PLD MT exactly how much DPS relative to everyone else in the party is that tank putting out?

---

Tank damage is important because...
A. You push through phases faster in some fights.
B. Is the best type of mitigation due to things being dead.
C. Is the main method of keeping hate.

In conclusion, in any encounter where killing something is the main objective maxing out DPS always matters, no matter what it's on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seku

Tank damage is important because...
A. You push through phases faster in some fights.
B. Is the best type of mitigation due to things being dead.
C. Is the main method of keeping hate.

In conclusion, in any encounter where killing something is the main objective maxing out DPS always matters, no matter what it's on.

---

That's not the actual conclusion because you are stopping one step short of the real reason why any of what you said matters.

If a fight is shorter, the tank and the entire raid will take less damage. Why does this matter? With less damage taken, you lower the risk of something going wrong.

It's the same reasoning with pushing phases. Faster phasing usually means that you have a lower chance of messing something up and wiping (though there have been some examples of where phasing faster is bad).

The conclusion is more DPS in the current meta leads to more consistent raid performance. That is the actual point. It's about margins of success / failure.

I've said this in the past but just look at A3S. If someone accidentally hits the wrong had for too long during Equal Concentration, enough raid DPS means you can still recover. If one of your DPS accidentally gets damage down Digi for some reason, enough raid DPS means you can cover for his DPS loss. If someone dies from tether AoE or your DPS get linked with ferrofluid and lose a lot of up-time, you can still clear add phase with enough DPS. If you constantly miss your slows from ACC RNG or mistime a stun, you can still kill the add before they reach the edge with enough DPS. If your DPS messes up a ferrofluid pairing, you can still recover from the DPS loss of atrophy. If for some reason your LB build is slow in the fight, if you have enough DPS, you can still kill Liquid Limb in time to free your healer and kill the boss before hard-enrage.

In comparison, being tankier doesn't really help your raid as much.

This is the direct result of raid design making mechanics based on DPS benchmarks.

That's not to say eHP and tankiness can't be more valuable than DPS in the proper context. It's just that we don't live in that meta. If for some reason, sacrificing eHP led to tanks randomly dying 50% of the time to a mechanic and the added raid stability of DPS didn't outweigh that, then obviously you would not favor DPS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian_

Snip.

---

I'm not going into detail over every single fight and the context of it. Maxing out your DPS, after you've hit the threshold to live through every mechanic and the consistent out going damage, is a priority when it pertains to killing something (which is a majority of the content). I didn't know I really had to spell out the fact you needed to get to that threshold first and assume people would have enough common sense to figure that out on their own. Guess I was wrong. As for the rest of your argument I put in the A B C, mainly B which covers everything you said, just not the "why". Which if a person doesn't know why they exist they can go do the research themselves. Not like there are entire forums of it.

So after tanking a lot of the new stuff over the last few days, in regards to the changes I'll definitely say they aren't bad at all. Swipe is very small dps gain while MTing, one I'm glad to have, if only because I like the animation, I think the little upwards jump stab thing is nifty. I'd still like another oGCD attack to hit when not MTing though. I also notice my TP lasting longer in some of the longer fights to so that's a plus, overall I think we could use one more oGCD attack or extend the DoT on Circle to last until it goes off CD.

It has to do with people parroting the idea of DPS mattering without understanding why it matters or why it's more valuable than eHP or how that threshold is determined for each group.

The real statement is that tank damage matters because it contributes more to raid stability than "extra" eHP does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freyyy

I've yet to see any MMORPG where tank DPS doesn't matter at all in high end content. Even if it's not as much as it currently is in FFXIV, tank DPS has always been a thing to take care of in MMOs end game content.

---

My problem is that it's the *sole* thing this community grades tanks on.

They could be squishy as hell and require 100% healer attention yet do 1500 dps blindfolded and facerolling, and everyone would bitch "why can't we bring two?"

It's disgusting.

There's more to tanks than their damage.

The current meta forces us into this mindset. It's not the community. And your statement is wrong, only bad players trying-hard-to-be-good are thinking only about tank DPS. Good tanks think about HP thresholds and optimal CD usage (which is for............ MITIGATION !) for each fight before thinking about optimizing his DPS. The problem with PLD is that it lacks everything. It lacks a LOT in the DPS department, but also in the mitigation department where they're supposed to be the king when in fact WAR is the current king of mitigation. It also lacks in the raid utility department except for ONE SINGLE FIGHT in the game which is the brand new Thordan EX. But his lack of DPS is currently the most important problem because of the meta we live in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nadirah

My problem is that it's the *sole* thing this community grades tanks on.

---

This isn't really true because we're not dealing with hypothetical tanks. Dark Knight has more than enough mitigation to survive anything the game throws at it without extra healer attention and warrior's mitigation easily rivals paladin and in some cases exceeds it. The reality is that because their mitigation is pretty equal, damage is how you distinguish which one is better than the others. Of course here I'm talking about classes and not individuals - an individual can easily require more healer attention because they're tunnel visioning or wasting cooldowns on abandon stacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagledorf

First of all, no it's not. Swapping is a loss of at least 500 potency (in and out, average RA potency with slashing debuff). In those 3 GCD, you get .2*250*3+55*(3 or 4)+30 or 40 so you get about 350-400 potency.

Second of all, that's actually all the more reason Halone should be at least 300 potency. They should be encouraging us to use it for the STR debuff if we're OT or when we're MTing and have already established aggro. Making it so low discourages its use except for hate when absolutely necessary.

---

But the only time when someone would swap (well, half-swap) at 2 steps into a combo for dps reasons is in dropping Shield Oath before GB/RA for their full potency (followed by popping Sword Oath, before having lost more than one AA bonus)... Though it makes no sense to drop Sword Oath early, moving from Shield Oath to Sword Oath isn't necessarily done all at once. Normally you'd need 3 GCDs in Sword to make up for a swap if both oGCDs are up and doing so won't delay GB, 4 otherwise, but it's not because you're dropping a combo. You drop combos only in case of emergencies, which aren't really the situations we make broad rules upon...

As for Rage of Halone, consider the weight of its mitigation vs. your own damage. 10% vs. a Thordan his is a very large difference, much more than 20-40 of your potency, especially in Shield Oath. The problem is mostly that there are no flat-value suppressors/enfeebles in this game to attempt to equalize those ranges in value. Also, keep in mind that the enmity mod for both SB and RoH are both .5x less than equivalent abilities (SS/SS and PS/BB) in the other two jobs. We can always mess with those, or even Shield Oath's enmity multiplier, in order to make to give it a more reasonable value relative to other options (RA) or tanks (relative to DRK or WAR's average enmity during high-potency combos with their minimum mitigation). By the time you place RoH within 40 potency of RA, however, the real choice becomes simple -- Shield Oath MT PLD will use RA no more than once every third combo, period, Sword Oath MT PLDs will drop RA for ROH outright, and OTs PLDs will be sure to include RoH exactly every third. At 270/280, their still a choice to be made in most situations, especially with if SB enmity were increased by .5 to 1x (100-200 ePot) and RoH modifers left the same or reduced by .125-.25 (still an increase of up to 30 ePoT).

Right now, nobody uses Halone. Take a look at fflogs and see what fraction of the DPS is in Halone even for MTs. They use NIN and STR accessories to get around the hate issues so they can avoid Haloning. The total number of Halone used is <10 for all of them and as low as 1 for some of them.

Halone is just too much of a potency loss for what it provides. It's 80 potency lost for a debuff that only provides mitigation for the tank. Considering WAR will avoid SP while OTing even though the potency difference is only 40, it's totally logical for RoH to be buffed to at least 300. If they don't improve the debuff to provide mitigation for all types of damage, I honestly think the potency difference should even less (why should a less powerful debuff have the same or higher potency cost?)

As for what you're saying about potency lost, you lose about that much potency assuming you never cancel a combo. Even if you don't cancel your combo, turning on an Oath is a lost GCD so it's a loss of potency. If you actually cancel your combo 1 step in, you lose 594 potency with the slashing debuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagledorf

Halone is just too much of a potency loss for what it provides. It's 80 potency lost for a debuff that only provides mitigation for the tank.

---

How is it only mitigation for the tank? If an attack on another party member is physical damage it should also reduce that, no?