warriors have it more easy to tank outside of tank stance, with shorts colddowns and a self heal combo cant really compared on how DRK suffers outside of grit on this fight.
-
10-17-2017, 05:55 AMshao32
-
10-17-2017, 05:56 AMMycow8meYeah, skip soar or disband. Sorry man, you make good points its not that I disagree its just there's no reason to argue over semantics at this point cause we have fundamentally different thought processes or have not had the same experiences with raid groups.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hruodig
-
10-17-2017, 06:00 AMwhiskeybravo
Buffing tenacity does nothing to encourage more tank stance. The only way you're going to accomplish that is a design change, be it either the content or the jobs themselves. I used to be on the tank stance bandwagon too (for different reasons), but a eventually jumped off because it really just doesn't matter. Put the stance on if you need it, or use dps stance if you don't. It's really that simple. Since SB launch I've literally had 1 person - 1 person (it was another tank no less) - tell me "You're too cool for tank stance?" which happened in a v4n run where I tanked in deliverance the whole time w/ no swaps. That's it, 2 tanks @ 70, literally the only time anyone has said something negative. Most people aren't even paying attention to call you out on it one way or the other.
Oh here's another, I was on SAM so I didn't think much about it, but since it's fresh - was running the new dungeon the other night, war tank pulled the last couple of packs wall-to-wall, ended up dying because he switched to deliverance halfway through. The healer asks "Why did you switch to deliverance with that large of a pull?" tank says "because aoe damage". And that was it. We re-did the pull and he stayed in defiance and we proceeded to clear the dungeon. Nothing else was said, no hard feelings, I even gave him the commendation cuz why not.
I get there are occasionally hardcore types who call people out for using a "crutch" tank stance, but outside of those rare situations most people aren't even paying attention to what stance you're in to begin with unless it leads to a wipe. -
10-17-2017, 06:24 AMBluexBird
The only complaint I currently have with Tenacity is the fact that Direct Hit is still vastly superior to Tenacity. People say that the overall different between DH vs. Tenacity builds isn't that big, but that's only a statistical average. It doesn't change the fact that if you end up being lucky, you are potentially able to deal A LOT more damage by melding Direct Hit and use crafted accessories, than if you meld Tenacity. Not to mention there is a buff that increases Direct Hit chance. Given the fact that the base DH chance without any melds for tanks is ZERO (which is DUMB), this makes DH the clear winner when it comes to melds. Whether this will change as we get access to more Tenacity in the future, remains to be seen.
And it's not just the fact that Direct Hit is better than Tenacity that I'm mad at - it's the fact that Direct Hit is SO GOOD as a stat, yet they screw us over by not only not giving us gear with no DH, but barely any STR on our accessories. Meaning there's no reason not to use the higher-level accessories dropped from raids. -
10-17-2017, 06:37 AMAana
The way the OP is worded just sounds like a convoluted way to increase damage in tank stance by gearing the 'tank stat'. If you want more damage in tank stance, there are much simpler ways to do that. Reduce tank stance penalty. Give access to offensive actions while in tank stance. Bake in tank stance to the job itself and make the 'stance' just multiply enmity or 100 other things simpler than having a single sub stat get a minor boost while in defensive stance.
But that point aside, unless tank stance is equal to offense stance, it will be intentionally avoided. But if you make them the 'same' power, then you remove a large amount of nuance from tanking. Tank stance is just a conscious choice. Do I want to trade safety for damage. Why remove the choice or push for a 'right' choice.
Why does 'Good tanking' need to mean "I know how to stance dance". Why cant it just be "I'm good and coordinate with my healers to NOT need tank stance to raise the raids overall DPS." (like its been this entire game) I really don't understand the constant requests to make tanking in tank stance more appealing. If you can keep enmity and survive, then youre tanking. What in the world does it matter what stance your in at all if youre doing that.
On Tenacity. Its already great. Parry was crap. This stat is good. It adds reasonable, measurable amounts of tankiness and damage. Great. Does it add as much damage as a 'damage' stat? nope. It does more than damage theres no need for it to add as much damage as DH otherwise it would be even less interesting. "Stack this 1 stat foever!". That's no fun. That's boring. Tank stats are the most balanced as they have ever been. Theres not really a terribly 'wrong' way to gear, but there are preferences. Real choices for the 1st time in this game. -
10-17-2017, 06:53 AMMauvaisOeilWell, that's pretty strange to call for "boring choices" while yourself calling DPS stances and DH "best choices".Quote:
Originally Posted by Aana
Why keepin illusions of choices ? Possibilities that aren't, optimization non existant ?
There's no such difference as stacking tenacity because it's the best-to-go, or stacking DH because it's the best-to-go. In both cases you only get the choice to make a bad decision. -
10-17-2017, 07:20 AMAanaon stats, there is choice now. -1.5% damage for ~7% mitigation. That's a choice. A tradeoff. The old 'tank stat' was more like -7% damage for 1%mitigation. Theres a clear cut winner in the old scenario. And the only 'no choice' now is DH which has no bearing on our gear. Its only melds. The gear you choose to meld DH too is the choice and leads to the above. As I said, we have the MOST choices weve ever had as tanks. Not perfection (DH is such an obvious winner for melds its not really a choice, but the gear itself is pretty open right now).Quote:
Originally Posted by MauvaisOeil
And what I mean by 'boring' choices on watering down/removing tank stance is that it forces 1. If we did the same damage in tank stance as out, theres no tradeoff. Its just a toughness button as complex as deciding to use a CD on a tank buster. Hmm should I reduce damage or not to for zero cost....hard choice. Not only does watering down stance variance become less interesting, it will either lower the skill floor, or lower the skill ceiling. If (extreme example) you delete all tank stances, tanking just gets harder for newbies and has little effect on the 'best'. Newby tanks will get run over by damage and enmity issues. If you do the opposite (delete offensive stances), newbies see no change, but the 'best' players get their wings clipped as their damage goes down and their survivability (which was already high) is just unnecessarily high and EZ mode now. The skill ceiling drops down. Right now stances are an expression of skill/group coordination. Buffing up tank stances to 'encourage more tank stance' just because only hurts this dynamic. Who is it really helping? Right now stances are training wheels to keep the tank population healthy (tanks are underplayed as it is) and offer skill expression later down the road when you become good enough. Why mess with either of those aspects just for the thematic 'feel' of being tankier?
Buffing up tank stances with the goal of 'making people use tank stance more' is kinda a silly goal. Why do tanks need to use more tank stance? Why is that even a goal? What good does it provide to the players/community? People tank with and without stance now. Why is that broken in need of fixing? -
10-17-2017, 07:32 AMMauvaisOeil
Sure, tenacity is "quite" a choice, but since the encounter design is not focused on the ability to reduce damage taken, but the sole ability to avoid dying in one spectacular damage burst, it's outshined and cannot truly compete with additionnal dps.
The same way tank stances offering 20% dmg reduction for 30% damage done cannot compete. However the cause are quite different but both remain options, and poor options, due to the way the game was designed.
Tanking in DPS stance is not a "risk" at all, because you can survive with solely cooldowns, and because you gain much more DPS than you loose survavibility. You're never quite on an edge to play turtleneck completely, even if you had to dance, TB are what, 60s ahead ? far enough to drop into DPS for most of your GCD.
A tank stance reducing damage taken by 20% and damage done by a SOLE 10% (meaning, the bias of your dps in dps stance and tank stance would only be 10%) WOULD be a meaningfull choice. Not a win-win situation like it is nowadays. Not to say with more and more abilities tied outside of tanking (BW, fel cleave, decimate, IR), the gameplay in tanking stance turns out more and more boring. In fact it's more and more... lvl 50 gameplay :x. -
10-17-2017, 08:52 AMFalgernWhich fight are you talking about? Shinryu EX? The only difference between tanking on warrior and dark knight in shinryu is that picking up the adds is not feeling good as it takes MP so you end up losing damage on the actual bossQuote:
Originally Posted by shao32
A -50% enmity modifier would be enough to make tanks use tank stance if they so wanted. But it seems to be the current goal to just keep tanking the way it is with how many abilities tanks get for their DPS stancesQuote:
Originally Posted by Shinkyo
-
10-17-2017, 10:16 AMAcidblood
Personally, and at this point, I think SE needs to just flat out drop the idea of 'tank stance'... it works OK on WAR because they have skills built around being in a certain stance (and they can switch oGCD), but on PLD especially the stances are next to pointless in terms of gameplay.
For example; would it really make any difference to PLD gameplay (apart from making it less clunky) if they removed the stances (and gauge), adjusted the enmity of the standard combo (which is now otherwise useless), and made blocking more active as their primary means of mitigation while tanking? Similarly, for DRK, they could remove Grit and make DRK more of a counter tank, able to parry more actively, counter to lower incoming damage (to themselves or the party), and use Dark Arts in far more interesting (read: less spam, more impact) ways.
As for Tenacity, the only change they should make (apart from maybe some scaling tweaks) is to give Tenacity a significant effect over Enmity*; i.e. more Tenacity = more Enmity = less time spamming Enmity builders = more time doing more damage, and all without the chunkiness of stances. *And adjust Enmity appropriately so that you can't just do a single Enmity combo and then forget about it. -
10-17-2017, 11:20 AMLlus
All these suggestions about what to do in order to force tanks to use tank stance; I just have to ask "Why?" What's wrong with DPS stance? Is it a personal opinion as to what "this is what a tank does, because I say so"? Is it about having to use some off globals to reduce your enmity when a tank is in DPS stance? Is it about being shamed because your DPS numbers are low? Is it about pushing fights to such an extreme level of damage that, by the end of the fight, you could make diamonds by putting coal between your cheeks? Personally, I'd take the diamonds from coal fights; but I think that would end up killing off a lot of the tank population.
If they took away DPS stance we'd be back to ARR meta where you'd just turn off tank stance to increase their DPS, except PLDs would suffer a 70 potency DoT reduction (basically sword oath is a 70 potency DoT as long as you're in mele range of the boss +20% damage increase over shield oath). Everyone thinks that "DPS stance" came out in HW. The only tank to gain a "DPS stance" was WAR. PLD's already had a DPS stance, WAR "DPS stance" was just turn off defiance. DRK has the same type of "DPS stance" that ARR WARS had: turn off grit. The bonus DRK gets is a 20% constant DPS buff, now with more improved faceroll because MP doesn't matter and dark arts everything! (Srsly tho DRK needs a ton of fixes, low DPS, low raid utility, grit locked weaponskill bonus effects and blood price - do DRKs even use that skill anymore?) -
10-17-2017, 11:55 AMshao32
Its any problem to want tank stances being actually usefull and let the ppl how dont like sacrifice defense for offense like a dps peasant being able to play they job as full performance?.
Its not force us to use tank stance per se, is more make it usefull specially on DRK/PLD who are not desing to constantly switching, removing tank damage penaltys or just give tank stances the proper benefics make the game more interesting, and keep WAR being a true stance dance tank and leave the other 2 how dont take more that huge penaltys every time they switch have the own style of MT. -
10-17-2017, 02:10 PMShinkyoThere’s nothing wrong with a dps stance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Llus
I always like stance dancing and having to compromise offence vs defence.
The problem is that there’s no compromise anymore when you can clear the hardest with 100% uptime.
Maybe Ultimate bahamut will change that but I just wish we had more incentive to stance dance.
I know we’re outgearing the content at this point but even in BiS, there should still be a need for some tank stance uptime.
Reduced enmity would a good mechanic imo.
Basically, you’d build an aggro lead in tank stance (or through shirk) and you’d swap to dps stance until others are about to catch up then you’d have to build some me more aggro lead.
That would be interesting for me. -
10-17-2017, 03:02 PMFallenWingsIt pretty much boils down to peoples idea of what a Tank should focus on and the fact that said stances are referred to as "Tank" stances because of their defensive bonuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Llus
Tanks should only be stacking defenses and holding aggro is the basic premises for everyone who thinks of/plays tanks.
It's not a completely wrong way to go about it, but people simply greatly over value defense, especially when it is a great detriment to their offense, the latter of which they believe is none of their responsibility because they should only be focusing on that thing they believe their class is all about instead of thinking about the bigger picture. -
10-17-2017, 03:29 PMrenmabiao
Tank stance seems to be in contest here. The metric of performance : dps, AFTER 'acceptable tanking', loosely defined as
: top aggro
: appropriate defensive CDs without taxing other party members
: good boss positioning to max out party efforts.
Most play with the attitude that others 'should know' the tank dps-push style 'perfection' and if they don't, its their fault.
For PuGs, I'm uncertain if this is good. Everyone is shoving for dps rights. Guys like me don't like to devolve this game to DPS-flavours with tanking/healer 'chores'
Nobody talks about 'tanking' stuff that is difficult to quantify that separates the good from bad. This dps-approach from the community is shrouding newbie tanks as they put dps as top priority before their tanking roles.
I hope we can measure 'relevant dps' as much as we argue about 'relevant mitigation'. e.g. 'appropriate dps' on Shinryu like tail placement and killing hearts before it regenerates a 'tick'. -
10-17-2017, 04:29 PMMinas-tepes
Op post is why developpers shouldn't listen players
-
10-18-2017, 12:22 AMLlusFor WAR, stance dancing has been a thing since ARR just because our stances are on the off-global. And I appreciate a fight that makes me stance dance into tank stance to burn some stacks on IB or to throw an equilibrium or even thrill of war+vengeance to survive a buster (A1S at min iLevel for example). For DRK, you just drop grit and you're in "DPS stance". For PLD, stance dancing is aids because both sword and shield are on the global. So the only one that really has a problem with their DPS+Tank stance is PLD and that could be fixed by moving sword oath to an off-global.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinkyo
Now to the heart of your issue, is that nothing forces you to tank in tank stance; meaning nothing hits hard enough to require tank stance to survive and voke+shirk swapping means you should never lose your lead. Even with the aggro reset on every grand cross on O4S with voke+shirk, lucid, diversion, shade (and PLD cover cheats) aggro isn't a big issue. So in the end it's the fights that are the issue, not stances. -
10-18-2017, 12:37 AMLlusSorry, but that's the way it's been since ARR and it's a good design from my view. You gain X by giving up Y. I find the sacrifice of defense (or HP for war) for offense is a good one. What would you give up in tank stance in order to gain the additional 20% constant damage bonus? Would you want Royal authority combo, Requiescat and FoF locked behind DPS stance to gain a constant 20% DPS increase in tank stance? What about DRK, lock darkside and DA to usage only when not in grit?Quote:
Originally Posted by shao32
As far as PLD and DRK not being designed for constant switching, I believe grit and shield oath being on the GCD to be a good thing. You instantly gain a 20% defense bonus when going into SO or Grit; WAR needs to be healed before you gain Defiance's benefit. For DRK, dropping grit instantly gives you a DPS boost; while PLD requires a CGD to be useful so sword oath needs to be on the off global. DRK stance dancing is just as easy as WAR and for PLD, if you just DROP shield oath you get the same benefit as DRK would get but you'd lose your 75 potency mele-range-only DoT; depending on the fight this could be a net 0 loss (like if the boss jumps away from you, drop sword and start casting HS). -
10-18-2017, 01:26 AMLlusNewbie tanks need to worry about aggro, mitigation (self and party) and boss positioning before anything else. They need to learn the fights before they start going for DPS stance. Once they're comfortable with that, then they can start pushing for DPS. Some people will be able to do that sooner than others. Once they learn stance dancing or mitigating appropriately at 100% DPS stance uptime, they can start worrying about the nuances between different fights that push that extra 1% or 5%Quote:
Originally Posted by renmabiao
Either way, newbie tanks will either learn how to be a DPS tank or they'll be the turtle tank for their FC's dailies. If YOU (general tank population) don't want to run DPS stance, then don't. Stay in tank stance and accept the 20% damage penalty; just don't stay in tank stance or use aggro combos if you're not holding the boss...
Still, nothing from the OP on this and I still don't know what the OP wants other than not having to trade DPS for Defense which is a non-starter.
As of now the OP has changed their post so much that there's absolutely NOTHING about tank stance anymore and it's just about the tenacity stat, but they're still under the assumption that pentamelded accessories are required for clearing content. They're not. 100% NOT required to clear ANY content in this game. pentamelded accessories are used by people trying to push that extra 2-3% damage and is 100% a personal choice (unless you're in a world first prog group). The TEN stat is there for those players that want extra mitigation as well as extra damage and if that's your play style, then use tenacity. If you're comfortable with handling incoming damage and want to push the extra 2-3%, meld DH & Crit.Quote:
Originally Posted by DRKoftheAzure
-
10-18-2017, 01:31 AMShinkyoIt depends how you look at it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Llus
To me, dps stance is too strong as the reduced mitigation/enmity is a small cost for the significant dps gain you get.
Put a higher cost in the form of reduced survivabity/enmity and you can balance stance dancing in an engaging/meaningful way without touching the content at all.
Personally, I blame the stances more than the content. -
10-18-2017, 02:00 AMMauvaisOeilThat was good design back when War sacrified less than 20% dps for 20% EHPS gain, as unchained, inner beast, and passive crit from rage stack, all lowered the true reduction of the stance. Now it's loose 40% dps for 20% EHPS, which is crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Llus
-
10-18-2017, 02:26 AMLlusNothing much has changed with the tank stances other than the introduction of deliverance in HW and reduced DPS penalty in SB since ARR and I clearly remember having to stance dance in order to survive busters at min iLevel in coil and alexander (at least A1-3, I quit after A3S). Once you over geared any of those fights though you could run DPS stance all day (most of the time... - hell T9 could be solo tanked by a PLD once you overgeared the content); so I blame the content. Also, we're now forced to wear VIT gear instead of letting us use pentamelded STR accesories which makes survivability in these fights TONS easier. Tankbusters now never drop me below about 40% where previous busters would drop me to 20-30% in tank stance fully healed with thrill of war+vengeance. Any time now that a buster drops me or drops me below 35-40% is when I didn't mitigate properly. Remember too that O1S is 310, O2S is 315 and O3S & O4S are both 320 and at this point even late starters (returners) like me are already overgeared for the content. I still didn't find mitigating O1S-O3S difficult at min-iLevel and I'm already overgeared for O4S and not finding that difficult either (in terms of mitigation - still in prog on neo). We'll see with UC and the next raid tier if the difficulty gets adjusted given the fact that you can stay in DPS stance all day; but eventually we're going to overgear the content and no longer need tank stance for those fights. So, maybe you're right - an adjustment to DPS stance to increase damage taken would be the way to go and might make running 100% DPS stance when you're overgeared (with the top gear available at the time) impossible; but eventually (next raid tier & iLevel increase) you'll still overgear the content.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinkyo
-
10-18-2017, 03:22 AMLlusQuote:
Originally Posted by MauvaisOeil
ARR Defiance: -25% damage, unchained or no defiance +25% damage
HW Defiance: -25% damage, HW Deliverance +30% damage (5% for deliverance and 25% non-defiance base)
SB Defiance: -20% damage, SB Deliverance +25% damage (5% for deliverance and 20% no-defiance base)
So unbuffed DPS stance difference:
ARR: +25%
HW: +30%
SB: +25%
The biggest problem isn't the base stance, but the berserk nerf from 50% to 30%
ARR w/ unchained or no defiance +25% damage +50% berserk = 75% damage up
HW deliverance +30% damage + 50% berserk = 80% damage up
SB deliverance +25% damage + 30% berserk = 55% damage up
Ohh and I don't think wrath EVER gave a crit bonus, just abandon in HW up to 10% (max stacks). In SB, we still max at +10% crit under deliverance; but I don't know if that's maxed at 50 rage or 100 rage. -
10-18-2017, 04:48 AMMauvaisOeilQuote:
Originally Posted by Llus
You're counting wrong, first because you don't count unchained, that was basically a return back to 100% dps with a 1/6 uptime. Basically a 4.17% damage up overall, a bit more complicated but the picture also flavored :
IB was a 300 Potency attack ignoring the penalty of defiance, with a combo average from a SE-BB combo over 6 hit beeing 206.6 potency, with the damage penalty of 25% was 155 potency average. IB here was a wrecking ball compared to the average potency, that made every stack of wrath worth ((300-155)/5) 29 potency, which is basically a 18.7% damage increase over the average combo worth of defiance. Let's resume the wrath gain from 2 hit per 3 attachs as a 12.47% Damage increase. Which makes the defiance penalty go from 75% damage to 84.35% damage, a sole 15.65% damage nerf from stance.
With a poor addition, because I don't have time to calculate the loss of an IB to go into Unchained, you get the DPS of a war in defiance from 15.65% to 11.48% (15.65-4.17).
During ARR, Defiance also gave 2% CRIT per stack, the parry per stack only came for heavensward when deliverance was added and took the crit buff while defiance got some shitty parry stacks. Since ARR crit was non scaling on damage, it was a flat 50% damage boost, making the median of 10% crit (full stack) a 5% average crit gain, for a few less of 2.5% damage gain.
Whats the point here ? A warrior stanceless had no rage, no IB, no unchained, no critical bonus, and the penalty from going into defiance was around 10% damage less, from 20% EHPS gain.
When HW came, defiance was stripped of it's interested, as crit got taken, delivrance got abandon stacks, and fel cleave became a powerfull tool competing with IB for the consume of stacks. At the same time deliverance got a 5% damage up. The gap began to widen between a warrior tanking and a warrior DPSing.
With SB, IR came and deliverance took away the benefit of Unchained, while pushing the gap even further between a tanking warrior and a DPS ing warrior, making the tanking stance even less desirable.
This made the tanking stance of warrior less and less relevant with every xpac since ARR, leading to the now "fel cleave frenzy" we know now, but affecting every job in the same way : turning on tank stance is a huge DPS loss for a moderate resilience gain. -
10-18-2017, 05:15 AMKaldeaSahaline
I tank because it lets me basically be a DPS without positionals and have extra things to do. I'm a melee DPS at heart, but I really don't care for the positionals or mDPS archetypes in this game (due to the netcode) so tanking lets me do all of that.
If I could change anything it'd be to flat out remove stances and just shift the responsibilities around the toolkit and let us make these decisions organically rather than by forced stances. Let me dump my Oath gauge for bonus threat/damage, or bonus defense, etc. Not in huge 50/50 chunks, but maybe in much more smaller meaningful ways and more frequently. -
10-18-2017, 05:26 AMLlusQuote:
Originally Posted by MauvaisOeil
You're talking to a career war from 2.2 and I really don't remember defiance giving 2% crit per stack in ARR or parry in HW. I could be wrong and it was on the abandon buff tooltip; but I don't remember that at all. Crit rate buff was on Internal Release from monk with a 20% 15s buff.
https://ffxiv.consolegameswiki.com/m...or&oldid=11836
https://ffxiv.consolegameswiki.com/m...or&oldid=98519
Still dps stance vs tank stance is 25%, 30%, 25%
Unchained only took stacks in SB which they quickly reverted because you couldn't do an unchained pull (because for SB you still can't infuriate out of battle) and was useless outside of pull and when you needed to go back to defiance for a buster.
A Stanceless war in ARR blew shit up.
Unchained, Tomahawk, Overpower, Heavy Swing, Pot, Maim, Internal Release, Berserk, Storm's Eye, Infuriate, Heavy Swing, Skull Sunder, BB, Inner Beast, Drop stance
Trying to get 2 IBs in 1 zerk window was just a PitA. HW, getting 3 cleaves per zerk window was pretty easy because they gave wrath for buffs and not just on path & eye so you could infuriate before the pull and spend RI to keep your stacks before the pull.
It took 5 eye combos to get 1 IB, total potency for those combos was 3050 at a 25% damage penalty during that time frame so you ended up with a 762 effective potency loss - more than double that of a single IB. Wrath on maim, butchers block, and berserk didn't happen until HW. You could short 1 combo if you burned or needed a vengeance during that time frame to gain 1 wrath, but that still left you with a combo potency of 2440 at a 25% damage penalty of 610 potency. Also since BB combo was the higher potency attack and PLD's were stuck with just their rage of halone combo stanceless wars could OT and BB for days just keeping maim and eye up. -
10-18-2017, 05:45 AMSylvain
There is a very easy way to make tank stance more used, you increase both boss damage and the stance mitigation to the point where tanking without it is borderline suicidal and a dps loss as you'd need so much heal that you'd loose all full heal dps.
No wonder it is unused when caster don't even loose 50% of their max hp when hit by a boss AA -
10-18-2017, 06:16 AMAanaThis kinda of change gets to what I was talking about. 'forcing' tank stance goes one of 2 ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvain
A: (Your option). Make the game beat you into submission to tank stance. Now theres ZERO choice. No skill expression. Nothing. 'I have enmity what should I do? Tank stance or die?
B: Remove the incentive to drop tank stance. This would be buffing tank stance damage to match out of stance damage (or just nerfing offense stances to oblivion). Again, were just removing the option.
In either scenario you just remove the incentive to do anything but a single, binary choice. "If tanking hit the toughness button". From a gameplay perspective, this is boring AND limiting.
What possible advantage is this from a gameplay perspective? Bosses are already completely 'untankable' by any other class. Theres no secret bard tank strategy (lol FFXI). The tank role is doing its job.
Can we stop asking HOW to force more tank stance and instead ask WHY should we force more tank stance 1st? Before you make a thread explaining how to make tanks sit in defensive posture 100% of the time, 1st ask WHY we should be in tank stance all the time. Please explain why more tank stance is a goal in the 1st place.
I see lots of prescriptions here. What 'problem' are we trying to solve here exactly? -
10-18-2017, 06:30 AMLlusThis! EXACTLY THIS! Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aana
Anyone besides a tank will be 1-shotted by autos in anything other than dungeon runs (and tanks too if you don't mitigate them in DPS stance)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvain
Alte Roite: Wyrmtail - dead dps or healer
Catastrophy: Paranormal wave - dead dps or healer
Halicarnasus: Any auto - dead dps or healer, tanks in dps stance can handle the autos unmitigated
Exdeath: autos - dead dps or healer, dead tank in 2 if they're unmitigated
Neo: no autos, but the mini busters HAVE to be taken by a tank and well mitigated -
10-18-2017, 06:45 AMShinkyoSorry to burst your bubble but you don’t remember ARR WAR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Llus
2.0: stacks gave 2% healing received increase
2.1: statcks gave 2% crit rate
3.0: wrath gave 2% parry, abandon gave 2% crits
And all combo moves except Heavy Swing gave stacks. It took 2.5 combos to get to 5.
Unchained required 5 stacks until they reduced it to 2 in 4.0 and now 0 since 4.01.
Stanceless average potency was 206.6/gcd (SE>BB)
Defiance average potency without unchained and infuriate was 172.5/gcd (SE>BB + IB every 5 stacks)
That’s ~18% dps reduction. Now, add the increased crit, unchained uptime and extra IB from infuriate and you mostly get 10-15% net dps reduction.
Defiance WAR was a very close to stanceless WAR in ARR. -
10-18-2017, 06:56 AMLlusNope, i don't remember ARR war: https://ffxiv.consolegameswiki.com/m...er&oldid=44422Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinkyo
Wrath did give a 2% crit up https://ffxiv.consolegameswiki.com/m...or&oldid=39062
Then it did give a 2% parry up https://ffxiv.consolegameswiki.com/m...or&oldid=98519
I probably forgot about the crit rate because I was NEVER in Defiance when running OT and was only in Defiance+Unchained for pulls and busters.
Maim didn't give wrath, only vengeance, storm's path and storm's eye - so it took 5 path/eye combos or 4+vengenace so the potency calculations for unstanced wars still stand -
10-18-2017, 07:05 AMwhiskeybravo
Yea, they eventually replaced the healing bonus with crit and changed the healing bonus to be active full time instead built up in steps (and then lost). Then gave the crit to deliverance when that came out.
I think the old tool tips are simply wrong. Maim, SE, SP, SS and BB all gave stacks. Heavy swing did not (only the subseqeunt combos).
See old Xeno vid (24:35 is where he starts talking about rotation and you can see stack accumulation/expenditure in vid): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkUuBQ7VPug
I don't specifically recall if Vengeance gave a stack in ARR or if that was introduced in HW with the addition of Raw Intuition. But Unchained for sure consumed stacks. -
10-18-2017, 07:12 AMFalgernhttps://ffxiv.consolegameswiki.com/m...ned&oldid=2910Quote:
Originally Posted by Llus
I'm sure they didn't just make the infuriated part upQuote:
Unchained
Nullifies the damage penalty inflicted by Defiance for 20s.
Can only be executed when Infuriated. All Wrath is lost when used.
Effect is canceled if Defiance ends.
-
10-18-2017, 07:19 AMLlusQuote:
Originally Posted by Falgern
Yea I remembered that after I posted which is why I removed it, infuriate+unchained pull. -
10-18-2017, 07:21 AMLlusI really don't remember maim giving wrath, that's why I was double checking the wiki. It's been 3 years ... Shit, now i'm wondering if the wiki is wrong about maim..Quote:
Originally Posted by whiskeybravo
-
10-18-2017, 07:24 AMwhiskeybravoEdited post. See vid. I ain't even trying to remember the rotation for 3+ years ago lol (pretty sure I had it wrong).Quote:
Originally Posted by Llus
I just remember being all about that 9-gcd berserk window. I guess it was something like infuriate>unchained>HS>berserk>8-gcds>IB -
10-18-2017, 07:30 AMLlus
Yea, rewatching some shitter's old patch 2.5 video maim did give you wrath, so did berserk: https://youtu.be/YkUuBQ7VPug?t=5m5s omg i'm a failure as a war ;-;
-
10-18-2017, 07:33 AMwhiskeybravo
Alright then maybe vengeance did give a stack too. I have vague memories about 60-sec pre-pulls (infuriate.. wait til almost over then pop vengeance to extend "infuriated" and let infuriate cd come close to resetting). I never really did them so can't remember
-
10-18-2017, 07:45 AMShinkyoYup Vengeance gave a stack back in ARR.Quote:
Originally Posted by whiskeybravo
-
10-18-2017, 08:32 AMshao32bcs is a bad desing? if you think like that then why all the warriors have the right to ask for a change on shake it off in the first place? or sole survivor on DRK? or any other situational skill in the game? tank stances have less use and utility that those skills, are working as a simple emity buff on pulls, for that they can just delete tank stances and make a 30 seconds emity buff with damage reduction every 60-90 seconds and all happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aana
why we have to dealt with high cost tank stance on DRK how technically dont offer nothing to my gameplay as a tank and WAR having extremly unnecesary skill on defiance aka innerbeast and unchained wasting space? for rookies? are you kidding me?
are you come and say tanking on tank stance is more boring when its dont change nothing of what you do on DRK and PLD? much worse making WAR skills wasting space.
tank stances need to be there for main tanking or being remove but dont keep this middle ground, we want better sinergy on it, being a benefc not being a drag aka better sinergy with all our skills.
plus the actual status already make sociial isues when one tank choose stay on it or not we all already see this.