Why Avoid Parry?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dante_V

If you would like to see some hard scientific data on the issue I would check out the FFXIV reddit forums and do a search on parry stats or stat weights for tanks. There is some pretty comprehensive research on the issue that has been done by the raiding community if you are interested in that type of thing.

---

Another good place to check for data like this can be the bluegartr forums. Just be aware they're not the most welcoming/patient of folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dante_V

If you want to get upset and foot stamp off because parry isn't a good stat Good luck.

---

Hmmmm?

Actually, what I said was that if superior DPS == tanking, then I'm gone. There's no need to repeat your arguments, I read them, and I'm not disagreeing with them, or arguing the apparent facts about the current meta. I signed up to play a tank, not DPS. Tanks in my view are protectors, not damage dealers. You can feel 'right' all you want in your argument, but do not belittle people who want to actually play tank, and not dps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Hmmmm?

Actually, what I said was that if superior DPS == tanking, then I'm gone. There's no need to repeat your arguments, I read them, and I'm not disagreeing with them, or arguing the apparent facts about the current meta. I signed up to play a tank, not DPS. Tanks in my view are protectors, not damage dealers. You can feel 'right' all you want in your argument, but do not belittle people who want to actually play tank, and not dps.

---

Well, honestly as a protector its your job to also remove the threat.

In a real fight you can't just stand around and take hits, that will protect nobody. You have to get rid of the problem so it doesn't hurt the people your protecting. So in actuality the current way "is" the proper way to be a tank.

A real protector has to learn to defend himself, his target and disable and remove the threat.

The other thing people don't mention is, what is a Tanks job in real life?

A tank rolls in, protecting allied infantry to soak and take care of high priority threats on the battlefield with its main cannons and suppressive fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velox

It doesn't have to be that complicated.

I didn't say remove tank damage, I said remove "stances." Make it so you can't stance-dance while in combat. In exchange, you lower the HP pools of future raid bosses to compensate. Hell, add more mechanics and team-function tasks OTHER than "durr hurr DPS more." T12 in Coil did this beautifully.

The point is that building content around DPS is just plain stupid. The balance of the game should not be based on damage. The balance of the game should be based on tanks tanking, healers healing, and DPS hitting things. You can still put non-damage mechanics in for all 3 roles to deal with. The current raid community is obviously not happy with the damage-formula SE moved into for 3.0. It's time for a massive overhaul of raid design.

---

Oh, I agree. It is stupid, no fight should be based on Enrage and how fast you can DPS. However, removing playstyles and options from the game when there is already very few: is also stupid.

However, they need to focus the fights more on mechanics that are not just: "Kill this fast or raid wipes."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

snip

---

It doesn't have to be that complicated.

I didn't say remove tank damage, I said remove "stances." Make it so you can't stance-dance while in combat. In exchange, you lower the HP pools of future raid bosses to compensate. Hell, add more mechanics and team-function tasks OTHER than "durr hurr DPS more." T12 in Coil did this beautifully.

The point is that building content around DPS is just plain stupid. The balance of the game should not be based on damage. The balance of the game should be based on tanks tanking, healers healing, and DPS hitting things. You can still put non-damage mechanics in for all 3 roles to deal with. The current raid community is obviously not happy with the damage-formula SE moved into for 3.0. It's time for a massive overhaul of raid design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Actually, what I said was that if superior DPS == tanking, then I'm gone.

---

Which is, unfortunately, a large part of why PLD is so behind in the current meta. I don't end up touching mine too much, unless the healer queues are completely unbearable (which some have been lately).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Well, why should you get parry?

Having 700 parry is literally the same as having a 4.69% chance to parry, and that is a lot of a stat to stack. When you add in RNG that is about... 0.938% physical damage reduction. Meaning it is pretty much worthless, it also does not work on magic attacks, only physical.

...

So, as others said.

Scales Poorly:
100=about 0.67% parry.

---

Source. Now.

Oh, wait. You're wrong. As usual.

Because many people went into 3.0 fully intending to ignore Parry, no "super official maximum accuracy" statistics have been gathered for the stat for 3.0 scaling. However, this thread appears to be the closest thing we have. People did things correctly in this thread, albeit without data sets large enough to ensure maximum accuracy. Nevertheless, it's close enough to be able to presume with enough accuracy that an increase of 1% Parry Rate requires 35-40 points of the stat, not over 100. A larger data set will not suddenly reveal all of the previous testing to be off by a factor of over 200%. That's not how statistics work.

We can even use other logic to strengthen the assumption.

1. This scaling is slightly higher than the scaling of Critical Hit Rate. Parry scaled slightly faster than Crit in 2.X as well.
2. Gearing for max parry would result in a total parry rate of between 28 and 31%, according to these stats. If we go back to 2.X and gear for max parry in i90(to compare the item level at both "first raid tiers"), the total rate also comes between 28 and 31%.

I don't get why people are trying to hard to spread such awfully exaggerated accounts of Parry's faults. Using more correct numbers won't change the arguments of why it isn't the best idea to stack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jpec07

Even so, isn't it still more valuable for a tank to stack anything that will reduce incoming damage? Even if only by a little bit? Sure, encounters right now don't really make mitigation valuable (because of how little damage is going out), but as a general rule, isn't anything you can do to even have a chance of slightly reducing incoming damage worthwhile?

---

Not really. Heals come in big distinct chunks. Cures, Regen ticks, etc. If you're taking 1% less damage, this isn't going to make much difference to the healer. If this was "free" in that you didn't have to give up DPS stats to get it, that would be one thing. But since you have to give up DPS stats for it, and it's not even good against all attack types (useless vs. magic) it's hard to justify stacking it.

Of course the easiest way to test the Parry scaling will be to strip your character down, then add pieces with varying amounts of Parry back in one at a time to get as many value-to-percentage data points as possible, from job to job.

If no one has by tonight, I'll give it a shot and do maths to figure out the rate/curve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donjo

snip

---

Gasp, accurate information on parry? Not in my forums! 354 parry or gtfo!

Love you tahz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donjo

Source. Now.

---

Firstly though you need to find out if there is a "base parry" trying to parry 10,000 hits with 0 parry. Then add 100, then 200, then 300.
You also need to test every class, because stat values weigh differently per class.

I only guesstimated. That is why I used the word "about".

I do know it changed a lot from 2.X to 3.X.

However, saying: "Source" to me, does not matter. You need a "Source" to prove me wrong if that is the case. Which I wouldn't mind, since I said "about" it means I was not setting it as a fact, my only fact is that it doesn't happen very often and is based on RNG.

So, where is the source showing all three tanks testing at 0, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800+ parry?

You also have to factor that this is only physical damage we are preventing, not magical. Which lowers its total damage reduction value.

It is completely unreliable and that is is. Which is why I used the term: about. Meaning It wasn't an exact rate, even with your increased rate it is still very poor and unreliable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

So, where is the source showing all three tanks testing at 0, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800+ parry?

---

If you were paying attention: bluegartr forums (no I am not going to google for you). It's impossible to test at 0, however. Or any value below the base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

If you were paying attention: bluegartr forums (no I am not going to google for you). It's impossible to test at 0, however. Or any value below the base.

---

Not really impossible. Take off all of your gear and put on a parryless low level weapon and let a monster beat on you with a program running. You will die a lot yes, however you will get data.

Because if you can survive whatever it is you're fighting, why would you need to stack even more parry to "survive" it more (not possible) when you can just stack more damage and damage it more (completely possible) thus killing it quicker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Hmmmm?

Actually, what I said was that if superior DPS == tanking, then I'm gone. There's no need to repeat your arguments, I read them, and I'm not disagreeing with them, or arguing the apparent facts about the current meta. I signed up to play a tank, not DPS. Tanks in my view are protectors, not damage dealers. You can feel 'right' all you want in your argument, but do not belittle people who want to actually play tank, and not dps.

---

You signed up to be a tank? Is tanking even your main class?
Most real full time tanks know there's only so much tanking you can do, once you can tank said content without dying anyone with a brain knows you then use your remaining time/effort dpsing

You can roleplay all you want as that noble holy paladin who swore an oath to the sword and board and will lay his life on the line to protect his comrades and save the princess and that's fine it doesn't change the reality that you have a job that needs to be executed efficiently which is eliminating a threat quickly which I will get done by maximizing my DPS and making everyone in my group's lives a little easier. You can choose to be lazy and RP getting by doing minimal DPS, that's fine, but personally I'm going to stick with the guy who understands his job is not only surviving/holding the boss in place but also killing the fucker asap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Not really impossible. Take off all of your gear and put on a parryless low level weapon and let a monster beat on you with a program running. You will die a lot yes, however you will get data.

---

This will still leave you with around 354 parry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Not really impossible. Take off all of your gear and put on a parryless low level weapon and let a monster beat on you with a program running. You will die a lot yes, however you will get data.

---

Parry cannot go below 354. That's the base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

This will still leave you with around 354 parry.

---

I meant parry from gear, not base.

Your trying to find the value of getting "parry from gear". Meaning to test you have to add 100 after the base, then 200 after the base.

The entire argument is trying to find out how much parry from gear gets you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dank1

**a great example of why people don't like tanks in this game**

---

Did it ever cross your mind that people play for many different reasons and do not treat this game as an exercise in math and efficiency?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Did it ever cross your mind that people play for many different reasons and do not treat this game as an exercise in math and efficiency?

---

Going pure defensive and just holding threat really isn't that hard to do. I can do that watching a movie at the same time. I would have no reason to play a tank class because that just sounds extremely lazy and boring. I had to group with several tanks like that already. If a Warrior or Dark Knight plays like that, they usually are less survivable then ones who focus on DPS because they have overall less sustain, and most don't even actively use their defensive moves often.

However, trying to deal as much damage as possible while tanking is both fun, active, rewarding, challenging.

Most full defensive tanks I meet, pretty much do their threat combo and stack high vit and never use defensive moves. Some don't even avoid AOEs. Its almost like they are watching Netflix more then playing the game.

I mean, sure that probably sounds fun to you but its really not that hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Going pure defensive and just holding threat really isn't that hard to do. I can do that watching a movie at the same time. I would have no reason to play a tank class because that just sounds extremely lazy and boring. I had to group with several tanks like that already. If a Warrior or Dark Knight plays like that, they usually are less survivable then ones who focus on DPS because they have overall less sustain, and most don't even actively use their defensive moves often.

However, trying to deal as much damage as possible while tanking is both fun, active, rewarding, challenging.

Most full defensive tanks I meet, pretty much do their threat combo and stack high vit and never use defensive moves. Some don't even avoid AOEs. Its almost like they are watching Netflix more then playing the game.

I mean, sure that probably sounds fun to you but its really not that hard.

---

Thank you for this, most str based tanks play better overall than those who stack vit spam their 123 aggro rotation because they have to.
Being full str means you have to increase your survivability to full levels by using cooldowns.
Being full str also means you more than likely care about your dps which means you will put in effort into your combos to pump out damage and not play lazily, all this will amount to better aggro management and survivability because we all know a dead tank cant dps, why would we risk dying and wiping the party?

The people who are against tanks dpsing usually have a one track mind and believe there's only 2 diff types of tanks, those who want to tank or want to dps so they to fit into a certain mold. They fail to realize that this is a game where a party all has the same common goal, you need to be versatile to complete and said goals and put the party's interest before your own wants and conceptions of what a class should or shouldnt do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Syzygian

This is a straw man argument. Literally zero people expect a tank to sit there and do no damage. It is in fact impossible to do so and keep hate. The arguments being posited are whether or not a tank's dps secondaries actually contribute -significant- increases to raid dps over a tank favoring parry, assuming they both have the same str and weapon damage.

---

Doing just enough damage to keep hate is failure. You're a DRK. You know this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dank1

Thank you for this, most str based tanks play better overall than those who stack vit spam their 123 aggro rotation because they have to.
Being full str means you have to increase your survivability to full levels by using cooldowns.
Being full str also means you more than likely care about your dps which means you will put in effort into your combos to pump out damage and not play lazily, all this will amount to better aggro management and survivability because we all know a dead tank cant dps, why would we risk dying and wiping the party?

---

Huge fallacy with this logic when compared to the prevailing argument in this thread (it's kind of ironic, actually).

This thread suggests that people in full Fending gear don't really have that much of an advantage over people in Pentamelds or full Slaying gear. If Parry is utter crap (and I don't think anyone will contend that Vit isn't really that helpful for tanks), then how can you possibly argue that the Slaying tank will tend to play better than the Fending tank? If the prevailing argument in this thread holds true, then the two will be taking just about the same amount of damage, and the only difference will be that the Fending tank has to work harder for enmity. So by this logic, the natural conclusion of Slaying > Fending is that Fending gear actually makes enmity gameplay harder for the tank, while they'd have to cycle their cooldowns just as effectively as the tank in Slaying gear. So if they are able to hold threat and survive in Fending gear, and if the mitigation gains by Fending gear are marginal at best, then it stands to reason that the tank in Fending gear is better at the mechanics of their job than the tank in full Slaying, because they have to be.

As it's already been mentioned, Parry has one of the worst scale rates out of every stat in the game. Getting a notable increase with it is like pulling teeth. It was actually mapped by someone back during the Zeta grinds (when tanks were debating which stats to put on their original Novus weapons) and it was proven not to be worth it. I was gonna post the numbers here, but I can't seem t find the original post, and I'm too lazy to search for it. The only tank who can create a noticeable increase in their parry rate are Dark Knights using Dark Dance, but that's because the CD scales based off of a Percentage, not a stat increase. The stat itself is terrible, which means that the Parry defense is, basically, pure RNG. If it happens, it's great, but it's definitely not something to count on or build as the baseline of your defense.

Instead, it's much better to look for DET as a secondary stat. The reason here is not just for Dps output (killing quickly is great, but we have Dps for that), though that plays a part of it. The way in which Det scales and effects your Str stat, as well as the increase in recovery magic, provides far more mitigation to a Tank that parry. For one, it's not random. The results are immediately noticeable. stack any tank (including pld) with Str accessories instead of Vit accessories and you'll notice a difference in output. Increased output = increased enmity, increased hp recovery from moves such as Bloodbath or Inner Beast, and increased healing magic potency (such as clemency, in the case of Pld's). These are all things you can bank on by planning your CD's appropriately, unlike Parry which is almost completely random (Drk's aside).

TL;DR The bottom line is that a Tank's defense isn't truly based on secondary stat allocation so much as it is based on knowing your defensive cooldowns, which CD's work together and have synergy (ie: Pld's popping Fight or Flight with Bloodbath is a MUST. Popping Sword Oath as well grants even better returns) , and how you can best exploit them. When you know these things, you plan your secondary stats accordingly so that you can greater maximize the effects of your CD's. Parry NEVER acts as an optimization for any Tanks CD's (including DRK). DET and Crit, however, can greatly increase the effects of a tank's CD's when they are used correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jpec07

then how can you possibly argue that the Slaying tank will tend to play better than the Fending tank?

---

It's simple. The full slaying tank knows his choices are 1) don't use CDs as often and die OR 2) use CDs often, live, & do damage. When you have less room for error (because you don't have a larger HP pool to fall back on), you're forced to play tighter.

Also, most full Fending tanks tend to require more healing.

Btw, it's worth noting that both myself & dank1 used the word "tends", as in "to be disposed or inclined in action, operation, or effect to do something". So, before you (or anyone else) decides to jump in & go, "But I'm a full Fending tank who uses all his CDs, so I basically take no damage"...remember exceptions to the rules don't make the rules invalid.

Also, think about that concept a bit: a full fending tank who uses all of his/her CDs. As much as you (and others) may dislike it, if you used your CDs all the time AND were in full (or mostly) Slaying gear, how much more damage would you be contributing to the party. I feel it's VERY selfish in this game to NOT contribute as much damage as possible to the party, which means gearing in a manner that ups your damage is key, especially when we have enough CDs to make it such that Fending gear is NOT required in the current meta. I honestly hope this changes slightly in 3.2, because it would be cool to have a few fights where I have to a beefy tank. But, this is still 3.1, so suck it up & contribute as much as possible to the party already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

Increased output = increased enmity, increased hp recovery from moves such as Bloodbath

---

It's worth noting that increased HP recovery from Bloodbath = increased emnity (~10%+ emnity), so you might as well use this as often as it's up on pulls.

Unfortunately, PLD only has Circle of Scorn to act as an AoE damage dealing emnity generator. (Flash doesn't deal damage, so...using Bloodbath & Flash together is generally not great.) So, it's still kind of weak for PLD, but it's better than nothing. WAR & DRK have enough AoE emnity generation to get significant gains from Bloodbath.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Going pure defensive and just holding threat really isn't that hard to do. I can do that watching a movie at the same time. I would have no reason to play a tank class because that just sounds extremely lazy and boring.

---

Then don't play that way, I'm not telling you that you should.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

I had to group with several tanks like that already.

---

As have I, it's extremely irritating, especially when I normally play PLD, and do not play that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

If a Warrior or Dark Knight plays like that, they usually are less survivable then ones who focus on DPS because they have overall less sustain, and most don't even actively use their defensive moves often.

---

I play Paladin, all my comments start from that perspective. Of course WAR would be less survivable if they did not do as much DPS sa they can because of their skill set with damage related self heals (among other things). No argument there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

However, trying to deal as much damage as possible while tanking is both fun, active, rewarding, challenging.

---

Damage above and beyond tanking well and doing your best in the tank role to keep aggro and protect the party is gravy, everyone likes gravy. So far you're not saying anything I have an argument with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Most full defensive tanks I meet, pretty much do their threat combo and stack high vit and never use defensive moves.

---

Then they are quite simply bad tanks. defensive moves are as important as keeping hate, otherwise you put undue pressure on the healer, which helps no one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Some don't even avoid AOEs.

---

Now that's just plain stupidity on their part. I mean there are times when you have to choose which AoE you will have to eat because either the healers are fully occupied or dodging one put's you in line for the other, so you pop a cool down and choose the lesser of two evils.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

Its almost like they are watching Netflix more then playing the game.

---

I used to have someone in my FC who played tank and healer in lazy mode all the time, I'm painfully aware of the watching Netflix thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

I mean, sure that probably sounds fun to you but its really not that hard.

---

I think you're not understanding where I am coming from here. I agree that where possible, and if the player is comfortably able to do it without affecting their core role, players should try to put out additional damage. I agree that tanks (including PLD) are supposed to use their cool downs, buffs, oGCD skills and stay engaged enough to dodge AoEs without spinning the boss like a top and pissing off everyone with positional requirements. I agree that tanks can contribute more damage besides their basic damage done by their hate combo. There's no arguing with any of that that, and I'm not. I am saying that any damage above and beyond what is generates by all of the above is gravy, it's an optional extra, and always appreciated when it happens.

However, when we have Paladins being told to use Sword Oath not Shield Oath when MT, and to stack STR, and focus their rotations on maximizing dps, which in one thread or another I've seen over and over in this forum, more so in the last few months; that's when I'll start arguing. Changing tanks in general into DPS focused clones of each other is not an attractive prospect to me. PLD in particular is simply not that kind of role, and nothing you or anyone else can say will alter that. So if the game changes and follows the current meta and basically makes the things that set Paladin apart irrelevant, I won't continue playing PLD because it's not the role or job that I signed up for. It would be like taking Warrior and nerfing it's DPS and self heal capabilities and then making encounters that depend heavily on physical defense and mitigation.

What bothers me more than anything though is that throughout the numerous topics, players who lean towards the high DPS end of things tend to be dismissive or insulting when it comes to players who are not DPS focused. There are 3 tanks in the game 2 of them (WAR in particular) make a virtue out of higher DPS. Is that not enough? Do we have to railroad Paladin down that line too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jpec07

Huge fallacy with this logic when compared to the prevailing argument in this thr

This thread suggests that people in full Fending gear don't really have that much of an advantage over people in Pentamelds or full Slaying gear. If Parry is utter crap (and I don't think anyone will contend that Vit isn't really that helpful for tanks), then how can you possibly argue that the Slaying tank will tend to play better than the Fending tank? If the prevailing argument in this thread holds true, then the two will be taking just about the same amount of damage, and the only difference will be that the Fending tank has to work harder for enmity. So by this logic, the natural conclusion of Slaying > Fending is that Fending gear actually makes enmity gameplay harder for the tank, while they'd have to cycle their cooldowns just as effectively as the tank in Slaying gear. So if they are able to hold threat and survive in Fending gear, and if the mitigation gains by Fending gear are marginal at best, then it stands to reason that the tank in Fending gear is better at the mechanics of their job than the tank in full Slaying, because they have to be.

---

By playing better I meant more effectively contributing to the party. A tank who provides a higher damage output than the other while maintaining the same survivability by default is the better tank just by helping the boss die that much faster and in some cases being the only reason the boss even died in a decent amount of time(i.e in DF when the dps is doing only around 400dps)

I also mentioned "plays better" due to the fact that a lot of the times full vit players don't use any cooldowns due to thinking they don't need to because of their higher hp pools, while a str tank being aware that they don't have as much of a cushion is more likely to pop cooldowns which in turn is actually better most times, and provides more survivability, than the full vit guy who doesnt think he needs to pop any cooldowns.
Obviously these scenarios arent always the case, there is some cases where full str tanks dont ever pop CDs and cases where even full vit tanks still use CDs effectively, but if we were talking about equally skilled players then the one who deals more damage is better by default because why wouldn't they be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Is that not enough? Do we have to railroad Paladin down that line too?

---

That's kind of the point, isn't it? We do, because PLD can't perform as well in raids. If the other tanks can defend just as well (remember, block only affects physical attacks) in the current meta, but also do more dps; why bring a PLD? The solution is 2-fold:

1. make the next meta such that there's 1-2 fights where it's not only required for tanks to "turtle" BUT is also fun;
   This would force tanks to bring a Fending set for those fights.
2. bring MT PLD dps up slightly, as the changes in 3.1 were a good step but not enough.
   Every tank should feel like they can perform at the same level as every other tank, which is still not the current case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

*snip* What bothers me more than anything though is that throughout the numerous topics, players who lean towards the high DPS end of things tend to be dismissive or insulting when it comes to players who are not DPS focused. There are 3 tanks in the game 2 of them (WAR in particular) make a virtue out of higher DPS. Is that not enough? Do we have to railroad Paladin down that line too?

---

Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jpec07

But in general, don't tanks want to do whatever they can to take less damage?

---

I hope you see now what you've done by asking this question. This post was made less than 5 hours ago and it already has 67 replies! YOU'VE AWOKEN THE MOB!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ralvenom

Unfortunately, PLD only has Circle of Scorn to act as an AoE damage dealing emnity generator. (Flash doesn't deal damage, so...using Bloodbath & Flash together is generally not great.) So, it's still kind of weak for PLD, but it's better than nothing. WAR & DRK have enough AoE emnity generation to get significant gains from Bloodbath.

---

Yet another reason why the changes from 3.1 to shield swipe are awful for Pld's mob enmity. They already had piss poor mob aggro, so, by all means, lets take away the crutch we gave them in 3.0 that was actually working for holding aggro on a mob without spamming flash.

I should point out though, that Blood bath does not provide healing with magic attacks. Unleash is the same as Flash. It provides no healing when used with bloodbath because the dmg dealt in non-aspected magic dmg. That being said, their primary enmity combo hits harder than RoH, so they get a better return off of that than Pld do, and their Siphon Blade combo already self heals, so they can compound the effect using that combo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

Actually no, Foresight is better. Foresight offers a 20% boost to p.defense, which translates to about 8% p.damage mitigated for its duration. This is not really useful for tankbusters and yeah it's a weak CD, but it helps smooth incoming damage just a bit.

Parry (the stat)... it's difficult to even get to a 1% difference for the encounter and it's active full time.

Now obviously the CDs that give very high boosts to parry/block are good, but the stat... well, see my post above.

---

Oh of course...I came late to the party when SE decided to nerf/cap parry(I'm bit of a fan of the concept in combat). I'm never thrilled when I get a piece of gear with parry on it. And wow this thread exploded since page 1 @_@.

player skill and player gear are not the same think, im laugh how many have a tunnel vision of no str= noob.

basic thinks, you know emity is based in agro combos and a more potency more agro, so a full vit tank have to work much more to built agro, si if you see a vit tank with zero issues is a excelent tank in terms of skill, because you need use all your skills to dealt the job.

im use str because the meta demands use this stad in tanks not because i like it, bad tank is a bad tank no matter the gear you have, and most of the bad tanks use str gear for 2 reasons are new tanks and see all people using str.

and for first and last time, STOP saying str tanks are more fun, that's not true at all, some people have more fun when dealt more dps, and other people have more fun and is more enjoyable a turtle tank.

YES, the current meta prove the str tanks are more useful in raid, don't use that to say you metod is more "fun" because you can't talk for all people, i'm use str gears for the meta not because i love it, in 3.2 this stupid fight go to end give a favor to all and stop acting like kids really.

back to the threat, parry now is a terrible secondary now in 3.0, maybe we see a revamp in 3.2 or not, only time say what happen, but yeah i like to see parry like a stad you need to survive in the future.

I would be pretty happy if stacking block and/or parry actually made a big difference. And if VIT actually decreased damage taken instead of simply adding a bit more health buffer...

Unfortunately... this game's defensive stats suck.

Why did this parry discussion even have to start? Parry has been deemed as a terrible stat a very long time ago. It was bad in 2.x, and worst in 3.x. It no longer scales with strength. So parry will always be 20% dmg mitigation on physical attacks when it goes off, all you are doing by stacking parry stat is getting a very slight increase for parry to proc. Also critical hits ignore parry, and aswell as block, and parry is even a worst stat on Pld, since how the game calculates incoming damage. It first sees if a incoming hit is block first, then calculates if parry procs, if block procs it never gets to the parry proc chance stage. Parry has larger diminishing returns on Pld versus the other 2 tanks.

Parries rng nature, and 3.0 nerf makes it unreliable, and a weak stat. Where it really would not be noticed if SE just took Parry stat out of the game completely, and just gave everyone flat parry rates.

But let's say Parry was actually good, and is useful. Well as tanks you now need to have two seperate sets of armor. One heavily stated with parry for mting/tanking, and the other stack with dps stats for oting/dpsing. Parry would still remain only useful while tanking, but also wasted stats to a ot, but dps stats will always be useful. So parry would still lose out even if it was good, it would only change if it actually becomes a mandated requirement for a tank.

And if parry was good it would only further divide the tank community more, forcing tanks to either to get parry gear, or dps tank gear. Because we all know it takes ages in this game to get a set of max ilvl gear in current content.

*Lastly for people saying tank dps is not important, it is very important in progression groups, and statics. I really do not care what your tank dps is like in dungeon runs, or old content in general, because in that content it doesn't matter at all. But if somehow you got into a group with me in current endgame content like Alex Savage or Thordan for example, and you try to agrue with me you are there to only tank, and not dps. I will ask you kindly to leave, before I forcibly remove you from the group myself. You are expected by 7 others to use everything your job has to offer, so all 8 of us can complete it. So stop being so self-consciousness about yourself, and think more in lines what more you can bring to a group, and stop acting like a carry, and expect 7 others to make up for your shortcomings in difficult, current, endgame content. Kay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Isius

and parry is even a worst stat on Pld, since how the game calculates incoming damage. It first sees if a incoming hit is block first, then calculates if parry procs, if block procs it never gets to the parry proc chance stage. Parry has larger diminishing returns on Pld versus the other 2 tanks.

---

PLD is in fact the only one who gets this "double check" when taking physical damage. When taking damage, the game checks twice (block, if not, parry, if not, full damage) if you passively mitigate the hit instead of just once (parry, if not, full damage). It increases their overall passive physical mitigation. But parry is still garbage tho. I'm not saying that it's good on PLD or whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jpec07

Huge fallacy with this logic when compared to the prevailing argument in this thread (it's kind of ironic, actually).

This thread suggests that people in full Fending gear don't really have that much of an advantage over people in Pentamelds or full Slaying gear. If Parry is utter crap (and I don't think anyone will contend that Vit isn't really that helpful for tanks), then how can you possibly argue that the Slaying tank will tend to play better than the Fending tank? If the prevailing argument in this thread holds true, then the two will be taking just about the same amount of damage, and the only difference will be that the Fending tank has to work harder for enmity. So by this logic, the natural conclusion of Slaying > Fending is that Fending gear actually makes enmity gameplay harder for the tank, while they'd have to cycle their cooldowns just as effectively as the tank in Slaying gear. So if they are able to hold threat and survive in Fending gear, and if the mitigation gains by Fending gear are marginal at best, then it stands to reason that the tank in Fending gear is better at the mechanics of their job than the tank in full Slaying, because they have to be.

---

He's talking about the general behavior and attitude of players that choose to push their limits by running with lower HP pools, and stance swapping aggressively. His claim is that they tend to be more mindful of the encounter because they are playing in a precarious fashion by taking more damage and having a lower HP pool which decreases the margin of error. As opposed to those who stack VIT and sit in tank stance all day because their job is not DPS.

Although my experiences have been somewhat different. I see a pretty even split between good STR tanks that can use cooldowns and stance dancing effectively vs. bad STR tanks that sit in DPS stance all day, don't use their cool downs and expect the healer to pick up the slack.

Either way, this has little to nothing to do with the parry stat.

Oh and I forgot to answer this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ralvenom

It's worth noting that increased HP recovery from Bloodbath = increased emnity (~10%+ emnity), so you might as well use this as often as it's up on pulls.

---

This is completely false. Lifestealing doesn't generate enmity. Bloodbath only generates the basic buff enmity when you activate it, like any other buff, and that's it (which is 70 I believe). This has been tested back in 2013.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freyyy

PLD is in fact the only one who gets this "double check" when taking physical damage. When taking damage, the game checks twice (block, if not, parry, if not, full damage) if you passively mitigate the hit instead of just once (parry, if not, full damage). It increases their overall passive physical mitigation. But parry is still garbage tho. I'm not saying that it's good on PLD or whatever.

---

Yes, it's true Pld is the only class atm that gets this double check system, but it really doesn't change the fact you get diminishing returns with parry on Pld versus the other two tanks. If your block always gets activated first there is no point in stacking extra parry on a Pld, skills like Sheltron/Bulwark also decrease the value of parry on Pld. Block is just a better Parry anyways, and with both Block/Parry Pld does get more passive physical mitigation versus the other tanks, but doesn't change the fact a activated block will always override parry giving parry less chances to activated on a Pld.

So parry does have diminishing returns on Pld, and stacking parry is even less useful on Pld versus the other tanks, especially when new patches come out with better gear/shields, just based on how the game calculates incoming damage.

On a successful parry, instead of reducing damage of that hit you should gain a buff called: "Short Reprieve". It also reduces damage from the hit as well.

Short Reprieve:
Reduces all damage taken by 20% for 2.5 seconds.



Of course, proccing parry again would refresh the buff.

A buff like this would make parry infinitely more useful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

A buff like this would make parry infinitely more useful.

---

And (potentially) hilariously over-powered.

You'd essentially be given the defense of a Pld's Rampart (arguably one of the best single use CD's in the game) for every successful parry, and that could, possibly, be the entire encounter. The reason for this is because despite the RNG nature of Parry, you can never make the odds of a successful parry worse. You can, however, make the odds better simply by pulling more dmg. In high dmg pulls (Pulls of 5 or more mobs, for example) the odds of you gaining Parry would go up for each and every auto attack which came towards you. That means that the more enemies that you are fighting, the higher odds you have for getting a 20% increase in defense. Given that mob pulls often end in seconds, not minutes, you could potentially be covered by the effect of Rampart for an entire fight. That's absurd.