Removing Tank Stance Argument

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

The only combat role the tank can claim sole responsibility of in this game now is add interception.

Everything else that used to be the sole realm of tanks have been part and parceled to every other job to share in or gets automated.

---

I didn't participate in Stormblood but I heard that boss auto positioning was pretty bad. Maybe the only solution left is to delete tanks altogether and have a controllable pet to tank. That'll fix tank population.

I don't think this is something that is solved by the presence or absence of tank stance, however.

How do you make tank positioning and movement matter? You design fights where it matters. The devs have done it before (A7S was the last memorable example). The problem is that it's easy for us to get caught up in playing as a sort of melee dps, such that we don't really notice that we're not actually doing any positioning work ourselves. The only way that we're going to see a change is if we make it clear that we don't want fights designed for just dps. We want fights designed for tanks.

How do you make mitigation matter? You design fights where it matters. Have more than 4 tank busters, such that you're used to use something different than an Invuln, Invuln, Supercooldown, Invuln rotation. Throw out punishing cleaves that force us to memorise subtle timings with resource-based cooldowns. Maybe this is just a confidence thing, but I seem to remember that raid bosses used to be much, much scarier.

It's okay to have a bit of 'optional' shared responsibility. It actually makes dps jobs more interesting to play if you can actually help your healers and tanks out. By that token, nothing is truly done by any one person, even snap enmity. Behind every well optimised add pick up is a NIN donating Shadewalkers and Smokescreens. The more prevalent these tools are, you give dps players the opportunity to feel like team players as well.

Right now, the gameplay surrounding tank stance is a bit of a distraction from these bigger, underlying problems. Only when you remove it will it become obvious how much has been stripped from tank gameplay due to underwhelming fight design. We need fights that are built around whether they're fun to tank, not just around whether they're fun to dps.

I had a shower thought the other day that they could maybe remove tank stance if they changed all mitigation skills (Rampart, Sentinel, Vengeance, Shadow Wall) to increase the amount of enmity you generate while they're active. 10-20 seconds of constant enmity generation on autos, weaponskills and abilities would be a substantial enough enmity lead for tanks to hold the enemies and bosses.

My initial thoughts:
(Hear me out) At this point, most of the people I see that are oppose to tank stance are those who do savage and extremes. This is a very small population of the game as a whole, however the vocal majority of the forums. All too often, the dps-centric meta is thrown in our faces. You have dps with high hp, dps, and dps with healing capabilities. There is nothing else. Due to this, there has become a sense of blurred lines between the roles. Tanks focus more on damage output than mitigation. Healers prioritize their globals on damage rather than healing... there aren't definitive roles. I believe that in order to truly fix the tank stance debate, this should be addressed.

My proposed solution:
Give tanks a reason to use tank stance -- even if it's primarily used for the main tank: make auto-attacks hit harder, make tankbusters threatening, give tanks a reason to be tanks. As it stands, they just keep aggro and let their health pools do all the work while using the occasional defensive CD.
Give tanks a personal responsibility on encounter dynamics. It was mentioned earlier that many of the bosses reposition themselves throughout the fight. They're too scripted.
Give healers a reason to heal. I understand that one of the alluring aspects of healing for top-tier players is that they're not healbots. I want to stress that I'm not vying for that design. That said, most of the healing done is tied to oGCD abilities such as Lustrate, Indom, Earthly Star, Tetra, etc. That's not to say that GCD heals are non-existent, rather, they're less common. As with much of this post, I will share an unpopular opinion: I think heals should be less strong. Currently, healers can top a tank off with little-to-no effort. Cure II can hit for 35k+ on a 76K tank. That's almost 1/2 the health bar... Regen can crit for over 10k. Earthly Star can hit for 20K+ on everyone, Cure III can lolbenediction the entire party under the right circumstances... because of this, healers have so much downtime that all they can do is dps: maintain one or two dots and spam Stone IV, Malefic III, or Broil II.

My theory behind all of this is that it's a consequence of the 2.5 sec GCD. Because we are gated behind how often we can act, incoming damage has to be more scripted... it has to be manageable within a 5 second window (the time it takes to use an ability, then be able to reuse another ability). This has had a huge impact on macro gameplay (macro meaning large-scale in this case). Heals are absurdly strong, damage is less intense. Tanks can disregard their tank stances because they know that the next Essential Dignity will heal them for 40K. If they insist on keeping tank stances, they should make it such that they're actually needed... otherwise, they might as well rename them Tether... they're just as useful.

I mean no disrespect to any of the fellow forum posters. We may share a difference of opinion, but I want it to be known that my opinion is not any more or less important than yours. I value this discussion and all ideas and thoughts associated with it. Regardless of the path Square Enix takes, we're all going to reap the consequences. I hope, for all our sakes, it's for the better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bright-Flower

I don't think SE wants tanks to have their dps stance damage at the same time as having the tank stance boost to enmity and defense.

I wouldn't particularly mind myself, but it would require additional changes. PLD oath gauge is gained differently depending on which oath we have active. Dark Knight has some abilities that are only active, or work differently, depending on if Grit/Darkside or both are activated. I'm not sure about warriors but I think they have changes too between stances.

So they could in theory strip away tank stances and say give tanks a passive trait that boost their defense and their enmity at all times, but it would requite more work tweaking the tanks, war and drk especially, without it. And then there's the question of damage. Do you let them keep the damage they get from dps stances? Because the whole point of these stances is to nerf their dps and buff defenses/enmity when tanking, so if you let them keep the damage with no tradeoff, the question is does that make tankes too powerful, having so much defense and keeping their dps stance dps? Or do you lock their dps at tank stance levels and make solo play more frustrating?

IMO, I'd rather they either increase boss damage output so that tanks need to consistently be in defensive stance rather than just needing it for an early enmity lead, or just leave it as is, than have their damage nerfed locked in for solo content.

---

Off the top of my head? The idea would be something like PLD: shield oath and sword oath removed. Oath gauge changed to be 1 gauge per auto attack and 10 for a block both available at all times. Add some enmity increasing abilities as mentioned before. Grit and darkside removed from DRK, blood price and blood weapon tweaked to offer different yet comparable benefits on a shared cooldown. Enmity is already baked into DRK through dark arts. WAR: keep defiance and deliverance but all benefits and drawbacks removed, making it purely about changing your moveset.

Then add a role skill to tanks like berserk (just change WAR’s version to be inner release from the start). Basically make it a dps stance that increases damage dealt and damage taken by 25% while reducing enmity generation by half.

With that, when tanking you’d just not have a stance, tanks are just naturally tanky. When OTing or solo you’d turn on the dps stance and become another dps with some OT utility. You wouldn’t be able to use it while tanking because the hit to enmity generation and massive increase to damage taken would make it impractical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novak_04

My proposed solution:
Give tanks a reason to use tank stance -- even if it's primarily used for the main tank: make auto-attacks hit harder, make tankbusters threatening, give tanks a reason to be tanks. As it stands, they just keep aggro and let their health pools do all the work while using the occasional defensive CD.

---

Something you’ve gotta keep in mind is the balance issues this would cause for other jobs.

If you start making monsters hit absurdly hard, what does that mean for dps/healers getting hit? If the tank dies, does the monster then proceed to run around 1 shotting everyone else while the tank is revived? If it’s hitting so hard that it requires tank stance, keeping in mind tanks already have higher hp and defence/m.defence, no one else will stand a chance.

Same goes for healing to a lesser extent. If you make the heals weaker, it’s not just the tank that’s going to require more GCD healing, the rest of the party will too. Both monsters hitting harder and heals being weaker combined? Stress on the healers would skyrocket and fights would become basically unrecoverable if the tank dies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big-Isaac

Nobody reasonable would say that tanks should do absolutely zero damage. That's just silly. However, dealing damage shouldn't be nearly as big a priority as it presently is.
If I was standing in front of a cyclops the size of a building with an uprooted tree in its hand, my first thought would not be to throw my shield to the ground and try to poke it in the jugular. Especially when there's 4 other people in my party who are (A) infinitely more efficient at poking it in the jugular and (B) aren't about to get smashed with a freaking tree

In my opinion, the best compromise would be to rebalance the tanks so that achieving max DPS also achieves max survivability. That way you'd still have incentive to optimize your deeps without abandoning what the role is supposed to be about.

---

I agree with this. They could make tanking far more interesting if they made it so that our mitigation and our damage dealing are one and the same.

We already see this in certain aspects of the tanks. Vengeance adds mitigation while also dealing more damage. Thrill of battle buffs upheaval. Blocking with sheltron or bulwark gives you shield swipes.

If they doubled down on this duality they could make tanks more actively use their mitigation so that they can achieve their maximum dps. And this would also help with killing off tank stance. Something I’ve noticed is a lot of newer players will sit in tank stance and not use any mitigation, which basically equals the same as a tank without tank stance that does use mitigation, only the former is contributing far less to the party. I’d much rather see players learning to use their skills properly than relying on tank stance to do the work for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabalabob

Then add a role skill to tanks like berserk (just change WAR’s version to be inner release from the start). Basically make it a dps stance that increases damage dealt and damage taken by 25% while reducing enmity generation by half.

---

That wouldn't work.

People would just find a way to tank with it active.

Because DPS is KING.

Also, since the majority of damage comes from Tankbusters, most of which are immuned by Holmgang/Living Dead/Hallowed Ground as well as the majority of Enmity being from Circle-Shirking, you already have grounds for ignoring the downsides of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabalabob

If you start making monsters hit absurdly hard, what does that mean for dps/healers getting hit?

---

It means:

HEAL THE TANK GODS DAMMIT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabalabob

If the tank dies, does the monster then proceed to run around 1 shotting everyone else while the tank is revived?

---

No... It's would proceed to start smacking the OTHER Tank.

Since, most content with actual difficulty utilizes Full Parties, which include 2 Tanks whom are normally the top 2 spots on enmity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabalabob

Same goes for healing to a lesser extent. If you make the heals weaker, it’s not just the tank that’s going to require more GCD healing, the rest of the party will too. Both monsters hitting harder and heals being weaker combined? Stress on the healers would skyrocket and fights would become basically unrecoverable if the tank dies.

---

One thing to remember is that the majority of damage to other party members comes in the form of partywide skills. Which means the use of AoE healing, which will also be healing the Tanks.

In addition, without heals being jacked up to 15, there would be more room to get more mileage out of TANKS ability to aid the party - Skills such as Reprisal, Shake It Off, Divine Veil and Passage of Arms as well as Tank Limit Breaks are all ways a Tank can mitigate damage dealt to the party.

Currently, these things are mostly overshadowed by a single Medica II/Aspected Helios which can easily replenish everyone's life by the time the next Raidbuster occurs. If the thing wasn't eaten by a Critlo + Deployment or Succor shield...

But it could very easily be a thing where the Tank in the OT position (Or rather, the one that's not currently Tanking the boss) could have some responsibility to manage tools like these to help mitigate damage to the party. Instead of right now where the current role of the OT is to just roll your face across your DPS rotation, unless you're Paladin where you can sometimes use Cover/Intervention to help soak a Tankbuster without needing to swap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novak_04

...

---

The discussion regarding tank stance has nothing to do with players wanting to do more dps.

Tank stance does not make you into a tank. It's not some kind of special ID badge that indicates to the world that you aren't a blue dps. Other roles do not require stances to perform their primary functions. DPS players do not toggle between a "damage dealing stance" and an "AFK stance" depending on what their priorities are. Healers got rid of their stances last expansion, to the betterment of all. If you wanted to push your dps on a healer before, you still do now. If you wanted to be an ever-so-pure healer, you still have the option to RP that in raid.

This isn't about tank damage output. This isn't about mitigation, or enmity. This is a discussion about whether it is necessary to have stances purely for the sake of having stances, especially when said stances are poorly implemented and are more detrimental to some jobs than others.

You could create a permanently active tank stance if you want. Congratulations, now everyone is a "tank". But that's functionally identical to removing stances altogether and just nerfing tank dps by an equivalent amount through gear. So why not just do the latter and save yourself the hotbar space? I mean, I know you swore an oath to your shield and all, but could we not just move that off into the traits section? "Trait: is actually a tank".

There are plenty of ways of designing both tank jobs and fights such that positioning and mitigation become more interesting. But that's a tangent for another day. The presence or absence of stances has nothing to do with this. If stances do something interesting as far as gameplay is concerned, then go ahead and make as many stances as you like. MNK seems to have gone this route. But don't introduce stances just for the sake of introducing them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novak_04

My initial thoughts:
(Hear me out) At this point, most of the people I see that are oppose to tank stance are those who do savage and extremes. This is a very small population of the game as a whole, however the vocal majority of the forums.

---

I heard you out but I have multiple issues with this statement. I wanna say the vocal majority is absolutely not raiders, but at the same time the advice given by raiders is repeated rhetorically.
Tank stance is an absolutely wonderful thing that nobody else has had since the removal of the old Cleric Stance. Allow me to explain. Tanking is, for some, a rather stressful position. Getting your tanks stance as a new player is empowering you to do your job significantly easier, and you can worry about your own safety a bit less. While levelling it gives you that extra umph when needed until you become confident in your role before you start using more dps stance. But that isn't to say it's a newbie clutch. It's used by endgame raiders just the same. It's an extra defensive cooldown, it's your enmity snap, it's your way to go from unstoppable force to unmovable wall. They really bring out the role of tanking.

There's just a large misunderstanding about how the stances are used. People repeating advice they don't fully understand.

In my personal opinion, old Cleric Stance should come back too, as it was effectively the exact same thing. Healing was a lot more fun back then.

DPS should have some sort of on-the-fly stance change too. Something in regards to status effects vs raw damage, perhaps. Swapping on the fly is really fun and adds some nice complexity to an otherwise exceedingly straightforward game design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabalabob

Something you’ve gotta keep in mind is the balance issues this would cause for other jobs.

If you start making monsters hit absurdly hard, what does that mean for dps/healers getting hit? If the tank dies, does the monster then proceed to run around 1 shotting everyone else while the tank is revived? If it’s hitting so hard that it requires tank stance, keeping in mind tanks already have higher hp and defence/m.defence, no one else will stand a chance.

---

It would not cause any issues whatsoever. Sure, a DPS or healer getting hit by a tank mechanic would get pounded into mulch, but they aren't supposed to get hit by those in the first place. Obviously, the massive damage buffs should only be applied to mechanics exclusively aimed at tanks, like auto attacks, tank busters and tank debuffs
And if nothing else, buffing the damage done by enemy auto attacks would teach ninja-pulling DPS some humility

Quote:

---

Same goes for healing to a lesser extent. If you make the heals weaker, it’s not just the tank that’s going to require more GCD healing, the rest of the party will too. Both monsters hitting harder and heals being weaker combined? Stress on the healers would skyrocket and fights would become basically unrecoverable if the tank dies.

---

Heals shouldn't be made weaker. Damage overall should simply increase, so healers are forced to engage in actually healing for the majority of the fight.

Quote:

---

I agree with this. They could make tanking far more interesting if they made it so that our mitigation and our damage dealing are one and the same.

We already see this in certain aspects of the tanks. Vengeance adds mitigation while also dealing more damage. Thrill of battle buffs upheaval. Blocking with sheltron or bulwark gives you shield swipes.

If they doubled down on this duality they could make tanks more actively use their mitigation so that they can achieve their maximum dps. And this would also help with killing off tank stance. Something I’ve noticed is a lot of newer players will sit in tank stance and not use any mitigation, which basically equals the same as a tank without tank stance that does use mitigation, only the former is contributing far less to the party. I’d much rather see players learning to use their skills properly than relying on tank stance to do the work for them.

---

IMO, active mitigation is the best possible way to handle tanking in an MMO. If you play well, you take vastly reduced damage, and if you mess up, the boss rips you to pieces. It makes tanking infinitely more engaging than playing the undertuned DPS jobs we have masquerading as tanks right now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big-Isaac

Heals shouldn't be made weaker. Damage overall should simply increase, so healers are forced to engage in actually healing for the majority of the fight.

---

I'd be fine with either one. The main difference is simply how long one can has to do that healing. If damage is increased, tanks are the ones most directly affected; they have fewer seconds of effective HP. If healing is nerfed, then it's healers; it takes more seconds of healing to restore a tank to full HP. When a tank needs to be topped off soon, there is no difference between the two, but for the majority of the time, it affects the degree to which a healer can partake in any action other than healing. If a healer must be constantly pre-casting and overhealing on the off chance that an auto-attack may two-shot a tank immediately after a cast-less special without a consistent timer, then even if most of that healing goes to waste numerically, it would also be wholly necessary, and the healer would have very, very little sense of agency in the fight. Decreasing healing itself, on the other hand, allows for a bit of leeway as not to reduce the healing experience to bar-watching. Of course, with too much lenience, the fight becomes unengaging, but I'd wager you'd get a better experience favoring reduced healing over increased damage, maintaining initial (or, from full %HP) eHP nearer to how it is presently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big-Isaac

IMO, active mitigation is the best possible way to handle tanking in an MMO. If you play well, you take vastly reduced damage, and if you mess up, the boss rips you to pieces. It makes tanking infinitely more engaging than playing the undertuned DPS jobs we have masquerading as tanks right now.

---

I don't particularly mind being a "blue DPS", but I'd certainly prefer for the tanking itself to be engaging enough that that the term wasn't so applicable.

I personally believe the reason the vast majority of people would like to see the tanks stance eliminated completely is because of the unnecessary stress it puts on the group. A lot of times the tank will drop the stance and go into DPS which at that point gives them the more likelihood of critical hits and an additional 20% of damage in addition to reduced hit points. As someone who plays both tank and healer I can tell you I don't see a need to ever drop a stance for a tank. The DPS is miniscule. When tanks do this there's usually heavy AOE damage the entire group is taking damage and if the Healer stops focusing for 1 Global cooldown or rather 2.5 seconds the tank ends up dead. And of course anybody whose use Duty Finder no it's that this creates rage and nasty comments back and forth between players in the group oftentimes one of the members will drop out if not the entire group. When I play a Healer and I'm healing a tank like that it drives me crazy because an easy dungeon is now turned into massive work and stress on the Healer. In addition to changing team stance I believe some of the DPS mechanics should be changed for healers as well. How many times have we all seen a scholar show up in a dungeon summoning Eos to do all of the healing in high-end content the tank dies. Same result in those nasty comments like this isn't World of Warcraft we're supposed to DPS heal yourself. So now the only way to Duty Finder is enjoyable is if you are massively over-geared for the content of that dungeon. At which point it begs the question why do the dungeon at all if you don't need anything from it? I like to level characters using the Duty Finder however leveling my tanks and healers is extremely frustrating because of the reasons I just mentioned. I'm the person who refuses to continue after a couple of wipes because I don't want to spend an excessive amount of time trying to complete the dungeon. If you find a dungeon boring don't play it's simple. Please don't ruin the experience for everyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lordfurious

Wall of text

---

As somebody that both heals and tanks at a Savage level, this comment is way overblown. No, you're not more likely to get crit when you're in DPS stance. That statement is an outright falsehood. Even if it were true we have Awareness for that. The DPS gain from going into your DPS stance is gigantic, and as long as you're rotating your cooldowns appropriately, there isn't a dungeon in this game threatening enough to turn an easy dungeon into some hellhole slog that's too stressful to heal. Also, funny note, even in Savage it's pretty rare for there to be so much AoE damage going out that properly cycling Indom and your Co-healer's Aoe ability of choice can't cover it. But hey, that's what Emergency Tactics, Whispering Dawn, and Deployment Tactics are for. Typically that's just the final fight in a given raid tier though. Heal checks ahoy!

When I'm healing, typically I just pop an Adlo on the tank on the way in, and I'm free to unleash my DoTs and spam Miasma II, even on the spicier pulls of your standard EXR. This also works for Benison and Regen before you pop out Aero III and begin the holy bomb. And, yes, this is with a tank that goes into DPS stance once they've secured threat.

Tanks, you pull wall to wall, and slap on your cooldown of choice. Typically I start with Rampart to get it on CD faster, squeeze another use or two out of it through the dungeon. Then, slap on that damage and go to town. Next pull you use Sentinel/Vengeance/Shadow Wall, etc etc etc. It's pretty rare that I ever feel like I'm in any actual danger. Especially because PLD can help pick up the slack with Clemency spam.

I don't really expect to change your mind specifically with any of this, Lordfurious, but this comment was false on so many levels that just letting it stand without contest would be a disservice to anybody who reads it and may not be aware.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lordfurious

Snip.

---

I feel compelled to take this post and deconstruct it, because it's not accurate and is spreading misinformation.

Quote:

---

like to see the tanks stance eliminated completely is because of the unnecessary stress it puts on the group

---

That hasn't been mentioned by my post earlier, or by any posts in this topic. Most of the discussion has been focused on the risk vs reward imbalances, limited rotations, and a lack of need in most encounters. The encounter brings the stress, not the tanks. Unless you're playing with subpar players.

Quote:

---

go into DPS which at that point gives them the more likelihood of critical hits and an additional 20% of damage in addition to reduced hit points.

---

This is one of the worst offenders by far, and shows a lack of understanding of what tank stance does on each tank, and what the defense stat is in reference to how the game deals damage. Nothing about tank stance does anything about Critical Hit rate. It does nothing. The only thing in the game that affects Critical Hit rate is Awareness, which you SHOULD be using on every pull in dungeons if it's available, or at periods with lots of movement or auto attacks in a Savage raid. O11S post-pantokrator 1/2, pre and post Tail End in O10S etc etc.

There is also a misconception on what 20% means in accordance to tank stance. First of all, WAR doesn't get this. It gets the HP increase of 25% with no increases in defense. DRK and PLD do not get increased HP from Tank stance either. They're all different, no one gets both. Also, the game should be tuned for default defensive values on tanks assuming proper gear, outside of some very specific scenarios. Essentially, you're not taking INCREASED damage. You're taking the INTENDED damage, and using tank stance to DECREASE that value. That's not the same thing from a damage intake or encounter design perspective.

Quote:

---

As someone who plays both tank and healer I can tell you I don't see a need to ever drop a stance for a tank. The DPS is miniscule.

---

This is not true. The difference between stances is so vast, multiple people IN THIS TOPIC have discussed on how overly punishing it is on the DPS. But I'll re-iterate it in this post.

Your base offensives are nerfed 20% (25% for WAR). I can say nerfed, because the game is ADJUSTING the damage, much like how tank stance ADJUSTS the damage you are taking. The actual problem is the removal of several abilities that comprise of the rotation and resource generation. On DRK and PLD, using tank stance REDUCES my resources to use cooldowns, which is what you should be using over tank stance. The damage reduction is higher then 25%, it's over 40% after you compensate for the lack of offensive skills that are gated behind the stance.

Seriously, I need to get this point across, that if we had more DPS enrage mechanics outside of Extremes and Savage, you would see so many more wipes from those checks alone. Tanks can pull over 60% of a DPS in an encounter. 2 tanks working together can do more damage then a single DPS in a trial. A good DRK/WAR in a dungeon can do the same, or even MORE damage then a DPS with cooldown management, proper positioning, and bursting. If they can't do that, it's the player's fault, not the design of the job or encounter.

If you don't understand these last few points, I wonder what you have actually healed or tanked that could promote such a mindset.

Quote:

---

heavy AOE damage the entire group is taking damage and if the Healer stops focusing for 1 Global cooldown or rather 2.5 seconds the tank ends up dead.

---

Where is this happening? I struggle to think of encounters in SAVAGE where this happens. Doesn't your party know when this is happening? Why isn't your tank using cooldowns? Better yet, why aren't your DPS using Second Wind/Bloodbath to mitigate the unavoidable damage? Better yet, why aren't your healers using regens or shields to mitigate incoming AoEs? Shouldn't they have topped the party before a AoE happens? A Largesse+Succor/Indom, Media II regen, or Largesse+Aspected Helios in either Sect, Earthly Star (OP), or pre-AoE Collective Unconscious are more then enough for any baseline AoE that a boss can do. Anything beyond that is Savage territory, where people actually help you mitigate AoEs further with Reprisal and Addle. If you can point to a specific encounter that you've seen trouble with, there are solutions available that are not exclusively relying on one person. It's a party effort with raidwides.

Quote:

---

some of the DPS mechanics should be changed for healers as well. How many times have we all seen a scholar show up in a dungeon summoning Eos to do all of the healing in high-end content the tank dies

---

This isn't Healer Roles, but I'm going to pretend it is. No. It's already easy enough to press one or two buttons to keep up DoTs and basic damage output when nothing is happening. I see SCHs not casting Physick/Adlo all the time. Why? Because Eos is actually pretty bonkers when used properly to boost healing, passive tether and embraces are really strong, and Aetherflow abilities with no cast time like Indom and Lustrate have INSANE potency. Tank is at half-health? Doesn't matter, Excogitation! If they're using their kit improperly, the kit is not broken, the player is not playing the job correctly. It's the same thing when DPS don't press weaponskill combos. They're playing the job wrong.

Quote:

---

this isn't World of Warcraft we're supposed to DPS heal yourself

---

Almost every job in the game can self-heal.
Tanks: Clemency for PLD, Soul Survivor + heavy shielding for DRK, Storm's Path on WAR. None of those require tank stance. You can weave an Equilibrium in Defiance or use Grit+Souleater healing if things are getting scary.
DPS: Bloodbath is HUGE. Second Wind has saved lives in my group, which are on every DPS except casters, who can help mitigate, and have increased magical defense. SAM has Third Eye. RDM has Vercure.
WoW is not a mythical scary monster that is destroying the game and the community with it's playerbase migration. Lessons from other MMOs are key for improving our own game. 2.0 literally would not exist without lessons learned from WoW in particular.

The rest of this post I can't quote. There are too many personal anecdotes that aren't backed up with factual information. If you're going to do this, I recommend citations like fight timelines you've taken of the encounter in question or an in-depth analysis of the encounter to better illustrate your points. I've posted this before in other threads, but just because YOUR tanks are bad, does not mean the job is broken. It means you have BAD PARTY MEMBERS. Although, I will address one last point that I feel is important.

Quote:

---

why do the dungeon at all if you don't need anything from it? I'm the person who refuses to continue after a couple of wipes because I don't want to spend an excessive amount of time trying to complete the dungeon. If you find a dungeon boring don't play it's simple. Please don't ruin the experience for everyone else.

---

This particular piece blows my mind. I do roulettes because they provide resources like tomes and gil to further my goals in the game. I still craft, I still want to earn gil, I still do WT, and I want to contribute to my guild, whether that means placing things in the Guild chest for future like raid food and potions, or gearing up our new players for Shadowbringers. I don't need a superfluous reason to play the game anyway, because that means unsubbing or AFKing in town, which has it's own "assumptions" on what you're doing. I find the game fun, so I play it.
If you're the kind of person to give up on an encounter after a few wipes, it makes complete sense why you have these thoughts. You've never actually gone through progression of a difficult encounter that can take dozens if not HUNDREDS of wipes before the team understands the encounter completely. You develop a lot of patience for other people and for mistakes that way. If you are having trouble in LEVELING dungeons, maybe it's because people are new? And leveling? They don't have their entire kit? Stop painting the entire playerbase with a broad stroke because you've had bad experiences in some of the most unbalanced, mandatory, and lackluster content in the game.

Please re-read the thread to better understand the points people are making about this topic, since a lot of it has been discussed already.

I doubt your opinion will change, because they never do about things like this(see signature), but this post simply cannot be unchallenged in case someone who's never read the forums comes across a post like this, without reading the rest of the thread, and does not possess the in-game knowledge to refute it on their own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OdinelStarrei

Snip

---

I appreciate you. I just wanted to make sure you knew that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OdinelStarrei

I feel compelled to take this post and deconstruct it, because it's not accurate and is spreading misinformation.

---

Every party encounter in the game is tuned around the Tank currently getting hit being in tank stance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Every party encounter in the game is tuned around the Tank currently getting hit is in tank stance.

---

Seems strange, then, that literally every strike allows for the tank's survival without said tank stance. Isn't that the very basis of a tuning point -- to either disallow X, forcing Y, or allow X and thereby discourage Y? If it allows for us to play without tank stance, therefore granting no meaningful advantage to the stance, one would figure that state is what we've been tuned around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Seems strange, then, that literally every strike allows for the tank's survival without said tank stance. Isn't that the very basis of a tuning point -- to either disallow X, forcing Y, or allow X and thereby discourage Y? If it allows for us to play without tank stance, therefore granting no meaningful advantage to the stance, one would figure that state is what we've been tuned around.

---

Only in Ultimate.

Every other content type is tuned around the lowest common denominator.

AKA tank stance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Only in Ultimate.

Every other content type is tuned around the lowest common denominator.

AKA tank stance.

---

Ultimate is tuned more leniently than casual content now? What? I can survive without tank stance in Ultimate, but... not elsewhere?...

Ahh, I see now you meant that the raid DPS requirements of most fights should allow for (whichever tank is at the time) the MT to remain in tank stance, not that tankbusters are tuned around tank stance.

Fair enough. But, is that at all relevant?

Remember, we allegedly tune around 0 healer dps, despite that healers would otherwise spend the vast majority of their time standing idle. Is that truly the obvious tuning point when there are still very significant benefits for dealing healer damage (or, further tank damage) and none at all for not doing so?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Ultimate is tuned more leniently than casual content now? What? I can survive without tank stance in Ultimate, but... not elsewhere?...

Ahh, I see now you meant that the raid DPS requirements of most fights should allow for (whichever tank is at the time) the MT to remain in tank stance, not that tankbusters are tuned around tank stance.

Fair enough. But, is that at all relevant?

Remember, we allegedly tune around 0 healer dps, despite that healers would otherwise spend the vast majority of their time standing idle. Is that truly the obvious tuning point when there are still very significant benefits for dealing healer damage (or, further tank damage) and none at all for not doing so?

---

It's not relevant. My entire gripe with tanks in this game is that so little is expected of them. I gave up in other threads not because I was wrong or they were right on a specific matter, but that they were right -in general- that it doesn't matter.

And that just made me realize Gunbreaker won't be some turning point. It'll have the bog standard 3 combos of threat, maintenance and spam, uninteresting stances, and a burst window to make them not seem so lifeless which will be their only deviation.

But by god, if someone is wrong on one irrelevant detail, I'll still be there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OdinelStarrei

There is also a misconception on what 20% means in accordance to tank stance. First of all, WAR doesn't get this. It gets the HP increase of 25% with no increases in defense. DRK and PLD do not get increased HP from Tank stance either.

Your base offensives are nerfed 20% (25% for WAR). I can say nerfed, because the game is ADJUSTING the damage, much like how tank stance ADJUSTS the damage you are taking. The actual problem is the removal of several abilities that comprise of the rotation and resource generation.

---

I just wanted to go into further detail with these things.

Paladin and Dark Knight get 20% damage reduction from their Tank Stance. However, it's worth noting that effects stack multiplicatively, meaning that this 20% damage reduction makes their CD's less effective.

For example, a Paladin popping Rampart isn't taking 40% less damage in Tank stance, they're taking 36% less damage. Making that Tank stance only providing 16% damage reduction. If they pop Sentinel, they're not taking 60% less damage, they're taking 52% less damage, making Tank stance only provide 12% damage reduction.

With Warrior... Well, their Tank stance doesn't even give them damage reduction! It only gives them extra health! But then there's the thing where extra health often doesn't matter. So long as you can survive the biggest burst that you will receive during an encounter, additional health is meaningless. Since, either way, it will need to be healed up (Yes, Defiance also gives increased healing to help with that, but it's not as if oGCD's aren't already healing for 50%+ a Tanks max health as is)

If a Tank is using Hallowed Ground, Living Dead or Holmgang... Well, their Tank stance is offering zero benefit at all because these are immunity skills!

Now, given that the vast majority of damage to a tank comes in the form of abilities such as Tankbusters and Raidbusters and thus are mitigated via defensive CD's, the worth of Tank Stances defences are being thus reduced from their already meagre stated value of 20-25% damage reduction/extra health.

Then on to damage!

Where the effect of Tank stances are HUGE.

Lets go through one by one:

For Warrior, they lose the 5% bonus damage from Deliverance and get the 20% damage reduction from Defiance to boot. Now, remember what I mentioned earlier? Effects stack multiplicatively.

A Warrior in Deliverance isn't simply dealing 5% more damage. Since Warrior has Storm's Eye for a 10% damage increase and Maim for another 10% damage increase.

This means that their damage modifier is actually 1.05 * 1.10 * 1.10 = 1.2705. That means they're doing 127.05% damage, 27.05% more than baseline.

Defiance thus means that their 20% less damage multiplier is being utilized into the stacking of the damage modifiers. So again, a Warrior with Defiance with Storm's Eye and Maim has the damage modifier of 0.8 * 1.10 * 1.10 = 0.968. That means they're are doing only 96.8% damage, 3.2% LESS than baseline.

This means that the difference is 30.25% damage. With the difference increasing for any further modifiers that will be applied during an encounter (Trick Attack, Embolden, Brotherhood, Radiant Shield, Hypercharge)

Furthermore, a Warrior in Defiance loses out on being able to use Fell Cleave and instead has to settle with Inner Beast. This is a comparison of 520 potency vs 350 potency which means a 33% loss in damage from the times when you would use this gauge dump (Which when you consider that Fell Cleave currently makes up about 40% of a Warriors total damage output, that's significant)

Next we have DRK.

Dark Knight has a 20% damage reduction modifier on their Tank stance.

But again, multiplicative stacking makes this much worse. Since they have a permanent 20% damage increase from their Darkside ability.

This means that instead of being a baseline of 120% damage (20% more than baseline) they are instead working off of 1.2 * 0.8 = 0.96 = 96% damage (4% less than baseline) making the difference 24% damage. This again, is amplified by any other effects they may receive during an encounter (Including Slashing debuff provided by say, a Warrior)

In addition to this, they lose access to Blood Weapon, the single most important skill for any Dark Knight as it provides a MASSIVE boost to resources, allowing them to deal more damage, to mitigate more damage (Via having MP to use The Blackest Night) and to even provide more enmity (Since they can use high enmity generating skills that cost MP such as Dark Arts buffed Plunge or Dark Arts buffed Dark Passenger). It is absurd how much better this skill is than the tank stance variant of Blood Price which is absolute garbage.

Next up, Paladin.

Paladin gets away with only a 15% damage loss from their tank stance right?

Wrong. Sword Oath's passive damage bonus on auto attacks, equates to roughly 10% of a Paladin's overall damage output.

In addition, multiplicative stacking rears its ugly head when Paladin's revolve heavily around their 2 CD skills, Fight or Flight (Providing 25% bonus damage) and Requiescat (Providing 20% bonus damage)

This is also to say nothing about how GARBAGE Shield Oath is for actually generating Oath Gauge to be able to use Sheltron - Which provides a ton of mitigation (Since it works outside of damage reduction modifiers because it's a Block effect which reduces the damage of an attack before it actually hits you and is affected by your damage reduction buffs) as well as an increase in DPS via Shield Swipe activation.

The TL;DR version of it is thus:

Tank Stance offers approximately 10-15% overall damage reduction. While costing up 30%+ of your damage output.

That is simply not a good deal. Thus is should be no wonder why people really don't want to be using Tank stances if they can help it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kalise

I just wanted to go into further detail with these things

---

You don't get less damage reduction.

Taking 20% less damage is 25% more effective hp. (For every 5 damage you take, you ignore 1, meaning you must take 125 HP worth of damage to die with 100HP).

.8 = 125% EHP
.64 (another 20%) = 156.25% EHP.

Stacking multiplicatively on -reductions- isn't less value per instance. It's the same ratio of increase. If things stacked -additively- than each instance of damage reduction is -stronger- than the prior one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kalise

WAR stuff

---

25%, keep in mind under defiance WAR have unchained, it's literally a 20% damage buff you don't have in deliverance that affects everything except inner beast and steel cyclone, treating unchained as a secondary burst window outside of inner release comparable to fight or flight WAR reduce the penalty in rough numbers in real combat.

And before you ask unchained makes onslaught being a DPS gain over inner beast and you can fit 2 of then with 1 upheaval so you don't waste gauge under unchained window.

It feels like all of the discussion about the stances revolves entirely around numbers, which says a lot about how much of a band-aid fix they are.
What about the gameplay, though?
Ultimately, the stances have next to no impact on your rotation.

For PLD, it literally doesn't matter what Oath you're in, because they have zero interactions with your other abilities.
And what do they actually do?
- affect how much damage you take
- affect how much damage you deal overall
- affect how much damage your auto attacks deal in particular
- affect how much enmity you generate
- affect how your thoroughly underwhelming gauge is generated
Of these 5 effects, 4 merely concern esoteric numbers that don't impact your gameplay. The only potential interaction there is the generation of your Oathgauge, which in itself is rendered moot because - as I said - Oathgauge is garbage. If you gave Sheltron and Intervention 2 charges and a shared 30s CD, you could slash Oathgauge from the game altogether with nary an impact on the job.

How is DRK looking in comparison?
Having Grit on or off determines which of 2 resource-generating CDs you have access to, and how much MP is restored by Syphon Strike
Admittedly, this means that Grit does a lot more than PLD Oaths, but it's still pretty darn limited.
The choice between Blood Price and Blood Weapon is mediocre IMO, because both once again only affect arbitrary numbers. Syphon Strike's MP generation is a bit more impactful, but even that is less than it should be, because you're spending most of your MP on Dark Arts, which is a oGCD spell that only boosts ...numbers.
It's like everything about the design of tanks is married to potency and other arbitrary numbers, rather than the quality of your gameplay.

As for WAR?
WAR is the job I have the least experience with, so I can't really comment on it much. Giving you the choice between the self heal via Inner Beast vs the extra damage from Fel Cleave is a step in the right direction, but it's smothered once again by the lackluster damage output of bosses and the meta's obsession with DPS. And if you move over to your other pair of spenders - Steel Cyclone and Decimate - you're back to clinical numbers differences again.

So what to do with these stupid things?
I say cut the lot altogether.
WAR would need some attention, but PLD and DRK would barely even notice. Stances are a husk of a mechanic that has next to no gameplay value. They do nothing - including the arbitrary numbers they do affect - that couldn't be accomplished in other, more streamlined and less community-splitting ways

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big-Isaac

Snip

---

War is imo a step in the right direction.

The core of the issue, as usual, revolves around the tank stance gimping your dps too much for too little benefit.

War, at the very (even without Unchained) have the benefit of having access to an extra mitigation on demand via Inner Beast.
25% more hp is rarely useful, but 25%+hp and -20% damage taken can definitely serve as proper mitigation for encounter with many TB. (Not that there are any beside UwU and.... maybe OS12 if you''re always targeted I suppose)

Still even without Unchained, while there is a dps loss of going into tank stance and doing Inner Beast, the simple fact that you can weave the stance, still generate rage and, above all, get some proper benefit out of it (Inner Beast basically).
Unchained is just another tool to help you deal with it.

I don't think we would have this conversation if all tank were in the same situation as the WAR.
Basically, what I think should be done :
1- remove the damage penalty from tank stance. The damage penalty should be minimal and come in an alternate form, for instance Inner Beast vs Fel Cleave (and the 5% crit I suppose)
2- Grant extra tool under Tank stance to make it worth it to stance swap (worth it =/= optimal). Inner Beast again, for instance, TBN could absorb 40% max health and Sheltron could mitigate furthermore
3- Make the stance ogcd. Simple, if swapping would be easier and less punishing, people would do it more. Ofc, you still want to avoid using it. But there's a clear difference between a War swapping for an Inner Beast and a PLD swapping for a ... nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sylvain

War is imo a step in the right direction.

---

This was pointed out before, as they are, stances right now exist for the sake of existing. I understand having stances as a gimmick for 1 tank, but not a requirement of EVERY tank. Not to mention, they are impacting some jobs more than others.

For example, WAR can go into stance on oGCD, but locked in it for 10 seconds (or 4~5 GCDs), at 20% less damage that's kind of like losing a GCD. DRK loses a GCD entering, and clips a GCD leaving. PLD pays 2 GCDs. Thanks to Unchained though, WAR is the clear winner and PLD is a clear loser.

But even if you put all stances off the GCD, you get the issue of them not bringing any game play value.

It doesn't end there, stance locked abilities that trade off damage for mitigation aren't really working. Your example of Inner Beast vs Fell Cleave is exactly that. Not a single WAR that cares about their DPS wants to use Inner Beast unless the other option is utterly dying. Heck, as much as I love Inner Beast (it's why I played WAR in the place), it feels so effing bad when I do use it. The fact remains, permanently trading resources of damage for mitigation just doesn't feel good. People would LOVE to use Inner Beast if Fell Cleave didn't exist, just like how PLDs use Sheltron now. Heck, even TBN feels better than using Inner Beast because, even though I'm trading off a Dark Arts for it (140 potency), breaking the shield rewards with 50 gauge that makes it DPS gain, or at the very least, DPS neutral. TBN is an excellent example of good trade-off game play, tanks stances and Inner Beast aren't.

And not trying to go back full circle, but why are we the only role that NEEDS a stance to do its job? I don't see DPS needing a DPS stance vs "I suck/AFK" stance. I don't see healers having a "healing" stance. Before you say AST, AST's stances are actually an example of VERY good stances. Neither of the stances nerf AST, they just change the playstyle. So why do we, tanks, require a stance to hold aggro and reduce damage when that's the basic principle of our job?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

It's not relevant. My entire gripe with tanks in this game is that so little is expected of them. I gave up in other threads not because I was wrong or they were right on a specific matter, but that they were right -in general- that it doesn't matter.

But by god, if someone is wrong on one irrelevant detail, I'll still be there.

---

Alright, that's fair. I'll stand by my point that the tuning point, for all intents in purposes, is unlikely to be set around use of tank stance -- not because Tank damage is not required, but because its contribution to Tank mitigation is irrelevant, which is honestly more important because it uniquely affects tanks (with tangible effect in the short term), rather than at worst providing more slack for others to take up (made subtle over in the long-term). But I'll agree that it's not relevant to the state of tanks whatsoever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

And that just made me realize Gunbreaker won't be some turning point. It'll have the bog standard 3 combos of threat, maintenance and spam, uninteresting stances, and a burst window to make them not seem so lifeless which will be their only deviation.

---

That was sadly my default assumption. Every new tank is a massive opportunity to break from the rut and improve the overall state of tanks, yet each seems to be taken only as another stone to put on their cairn and solidify one stagnant design.

That said, it's hard for me to immediately imagine what unique opportunities Gunbreaker could provide without having some of those general changes allowed for first. The cinematic trailer centers its concept on speed (kiting, quite nearly) and decisive blows. Yet, there's scarcely anything further from XIV's idea of a tank.

Well, apart from numbers crunching and questions about modifiers it seems almost everyone here is not against removing tank stances. Good to know

I think every time I see this argument, I see the same irritating argument. "Tank Stance just isn't needed in raiding, we should gut it altogether." No, because there's content outside of raids, which are done to get gear so we can do things IN raids. You want to start making dungeons impossible? Then stop making PF iLevels so obscenely high on week one so I can't even get into learning parties.

Now that that's out of the way, perhaps if tank stance didn't feel like such a crutch, we wouldn't be so angled against it? I have an idea I haven't seen anyone else suggest, so...

Why not give the tankstance a non-stacking vulnerability debuff on its autoattacks? If you're in tankstance, then you're already angling to give the party an easier time by decreasing the threat towards yourself. Why not angle it the other way and make it a double edged shield? Give it something like a 15 second duration, so that they can jump into DPS stance to exploit burst windows, but will jump back in as soon as its done to go back to team support. It could alternatively be a group damage buff, but I feel like that wouldn't mesh well with Alliance Raids (unless it's the first cross-alliance buff).

i don't consider tanks should be the only role that hold several skills that get they value reduced to 1 use per combat like tank stances and the agro combo, you don't even use it at all if you are OT and thats are what? 3-4 skills wasting space?, at the same time nobody ask to remove tank stances without ajustments to keep doing our dutys properly everywhere, tank stances have a space on our hotbars that can be used by skills that work more smoothly and don't loose value scaling properly with gear and content and don't punishing us for doing our job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekimmak

I think every time I see this argument, I see the same irritating argument. "Tank Stance just isn't needed in raiding, we should gut it altogether." No, because there's content outside of raids, which are done to get gear so we can do things IN raids. You want to start making dungeons impossible? Then stop making PF iLevels so obscenely high on week one so I can't even get into learning parties.

Now that that's out of the way, perhaps if tank stance didn't feel like such a crutch, we wouldn't be so angled against it? I have an idea I haven't seen anyone else suggest, so...

Why not give the tankstance a non-stacking vulnerability debuff on its autoattacks? If you're in tankstance, then you're already angling to give the party an easier time by decreasing the threat towards yourself. Why not angle it the other way and make it a double edged shield? Give it something like a 15 second duration, so that they can jump into DPS stance to exploit burst windows, but will jump back in as soon as its done to go back to team support. It could alternatively be a group damage buff, but I feel like that wouldn't mesh well with Alliance Raids (unless it's the first cross-alliance buff).

---

That... is an incredibly interesting idea!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekimmak

I think every time I see this argument, I see the same irritating argument. "Tank Stance just isn't needed in raiding, we should gut it altogether." No, because there's content outside of raids, which are done to get gear so we can do things IN raids. You want to start making dungeons impossible? Then stop making PF iLevels so obscenely high on week one so I can't even get into learning parties.

Now that that's out of the way, perhaps if tank stance didn't feel like such a crutch, we wouldn't be so angled against it? I have an idea I haven't seen anyone else suggest, so...

Why not give the tankstance a non-stacking vulnerability debuff on its autoattacks? If you're in tankstance, then you're already angling to give the party an easier time by decreasing the threat towards yourself. Why not angle it the other way and make it a double edged shield? Give it something like a 15 second duration, so that they can jump into DPS stance to exploit burst windows, but will jump back in as soon as its done to go back to team support. It could alternatively be a group damage buff, but I feel like that wouldn't mesh well with Alliance Raids (unless it's the first cross-alliance buff).

---

Why should a tank have less sustained efficiency against auto-attacks than even a Dragoon, though, whatever its stance?
At best I could see this for a compromising offensive stance than can be flexibly timed, like a revised Berserk -- not as a penalty for being, of all things, a tank (albeit one who doesn't want to actively sacrifice 15+% of its base damage or 25+% of its practical damage).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekimmak

I think every time I see this argument, I see the same irritating argument. "Tank Stance just isn't needed in raiding, we should gut it altogether." No, because there's content outside of raids, which are done to get gear so we can do things IN raids. You want to start making dungeons impossible? Then stop making PF iLevels so obscenely high on week one so I can't even get into learning parties.

---

Nobody is suggesting that tank stances just be gutted and nothing else changed. Tank stances not being used in raids is an argument for why they're not needed, but obviously some more systematic changes would need to be changed to facilitate it. Bump up tank aggro generation by default, balance outgoing damage specifically around Tank CDs, ETC ETC.

What we actually want is a more cohesive skill ceiling, one that doesn't instill bad habits into new players of the role, or facilitate the mindset that a Paladin going into level 70 content is doing his job "perfectly fine" by only using buttons he's gotten unlocked by level 30. I want my Maximum Damage rotation to also provide me with the maximum amount of sustain, or mitigation. I don't want any more stupid arguments about the "proper" way to play tank, or any more strawman arguments about why tanks should 'just tank' when they refuse to live up to their full potential.

well acording to some ppl on the media tour tank stances are gone, i just love it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shao32

well acording to some ppl on the media tour tank stances are gone, i just love it.

---

I'm not sure how I feel about that, you know, Warrior having the best tank stance in the game and all

:P

No voke, no shirk, no tank stance.. Man it does kinda sound like we'll be getting MT/OT split. Saddays

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I'm not sure how I feel about that, you know, Warrior having the best tank stance in the game and all

:P

No voke, no shirk, no tank stance.. Man it does kinda sound like we'll be getting MT/OT split. Saddays

---

the leak say WAR get the storm path old buff again, so yeah looks like they are going in to that, 100% uptime buffs-debuffs to split tanks meaby?

but losing tank stance don't mean lose provoke and shirk so idk what you mean with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shao32

the leak say WAR get the storm path old buff again, so yeah looks like they are going in to that, 100% uptime buffs-debuffs to split tanks meaby?

but losing tank stance don't mean lose provoke and shirk so idk what you mean with that.

---

Ah, there was that "other thing" about removal of role actions. Which I find kind of silly personally, but if true, would entail some interesting changes such as tank swap mechanics going away, or what class/job abilities are we losing to make room for them becoming regular actions instead of role actions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Ah, there was that "other thing" about removal of role actions. Which I find kind of silly personally, but if true, would entail some interesting changes such as tank swap mechanics going away, or what class/job abilities are we losing to make room for them becoming regular actions instead of role actions.

---

mmm i din't heard anything about that, not yet at least, but removing tank swaps mechanics would be a disaster mostly bcs its not a thing only of the tanks but several combats aswell and the need to rework those fights, something i highly doubt.

meaby they reduce the role actions or they make it like we learn the same actions witch each role, like all tanks getting provoke at certain level by force since the "we give you 10 skills and you pick 5" din't work and the "we give you all 10 skills now" was bad in terms of skill bloat for many jobs.

On the tank stances, what I'm seeing about it it could either be "stances are removed" OR "drk stances are removed" since they were talking about DRK first and said WAR didn't seem to be changed much (PLD apparently wasn't available at the event).

Another one when talking about role actions was also specifically playing BRD/MCH/DNC so it might be less role actions removed and rather ranged dps are getting bigger changes on theirs. Or people are just bad at wording things/listing changes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I'm not sure how I feel about that, you know, Warrior having the best tank stance in the game and all

:P

No voke, no shirk, no tank stance.. Man it does kinda sound like we'll be getting MT/OT split. Saddays

---

Shirk is without question the most overpowered ability in the game, and I frankly wouldn't mind seeing it go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dualblade

On the tank stances, what I'm seeing about it it could either be "stances are removed" OR "drk stances are removed" since they were talking about DRK first and said WAR didn't seem to be changed much (PLD apparently wasn't available at the event).

Another one when talking about role actions was also specifically playing BRD/MCH/DNC so it might be less role actions removed and rather ranged dps are getting bigger changes on theirs. Or people are just bad at wording things/listing changes.

---

mostly this, they point that enmity was ajusted, looks like WAR keep his stances and i heard it gets simplified even more so meaby his stances are gonna be part of his rotation and his flow now? apart of path getting his old debuff back.

from PLD i heard they get a new magic AoE so thats cool, and for DRK the rework make it more like HW, they remove the MP combo and we get a new combo of 4 GCD with a new big edgy sword smash.