Lets nerf WAR :D

I assumed one of two nerfs would hit warrior in 3.1
1) potency nerf on fell cleave
2) damage taken increase added to dps stance.

People seem to forget that pld had better tank cool downs and potential dps through the entire 2.0 block

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Einheri

2) damage taken increase added to dps stance.

---

If this does become a thing since apparently multiple people are suggesting it, SwO PLD and No-Grit-DRK should also take increased damage.

This thread reeks of #DarkWarriordin homogenization.

Phoenicia! you've been summoned to lay the truth on these Nerfmongers!!

They do. 25% more. :-P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iagainsti

This thread reeks of #DarkWarriordin homogenization.

Phoenicia! you've been summoned to lay the truth on these Nerfmongers!!

---

http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/3...me_FP_Wide.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Einheri

People seem to forget that pld had better tank cool downs and potential dps through the entire 2.0 block

---

1. Oversimplified/Untrue, post 2.1 a WAR had very close to equal mitigation to PLD including its shield.
Simply finding the % uptime of each cool down and multiplying it by its mitigation shows 2.x WAR and PLD on par for Physical and PLD behind on magical damage.
The deciding factor was that PLD can drop a lot of cooldowns back to back making it preferable for things like T4, but WAR has more frequent garunteed mitigation for fights like T5.
WAR mt had better DPS and OT provided much better support at a minor DPS loss.
It was this imbalance that made SE give PLD shelltron and WAR raw intuition, although the second should arguably not be garunteed mitigation because all of WARs kit already was.


2. Irellevant. How balanced the past was has no bearing on whether or not a class is balanced now. Never will. This is not an argument. It is salt.

Edit 3: even if it was a valid argument, 1.x was all about WAR with PLD getting far less use than WAR did in 2.x. So it is either one a piece or WAR with a better history. Same balance team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

Equilibrium TP is a joke and people saying it is absolutely necessary because WAR can overwhelm spam has been completely spoilt by the current state of WAR.

---

Please show me any serious content where a WAR can "overwhelm spam", and then show me any content where a DRK can't do the same with Abyssal Drain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

If this does become a thing since apparently multiple people are suggesting it, SwO PLD and No-Grit-DRK should also take increased damage.

---

but... they do...? Both grit and shield oath decrease damage take , therefore switching out of them increases damage taken. currently, the only thing warriors lose from switching to their overpowered dps stance is a healing decrease, and emnity generation, neither of which is really necessary any more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisersoke

but... they do...? Both grit and shield oath decrease damage take , therefore switching out of them increases damage taken. currently, the only thing warriors lose from switching to their overpowered dps stance is a healing decrease, and emnity generation, neither of which is really necessary any more

---

Um... They also lose a grip of HP without defiance...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisersoke

but... they do...? Both grit and shield oath decrease damage take , therefore switching out of them increases damage taken. currently, the only thing warriors lose from switching to their overpowered dps stance is a healing decrease, and emnity generation, neither of which is really necessary any more

---

Defiance = 25% HP increase, 20% increase to healing received
ShO/Grit = 20% damage reduction

These are the same. In fact, WAR's is actually worse as you receive less per heal (%-wise) on top of healing abilities not working with the increased healing received. The former is made up by WAR's self healing, the latter is just an error that hasn't been fixed.

Anyway, the point is that without them all 3 jobs take the same damage. If you suddenly make WAR take INCREASED damage while in Deliverance, then WAR is now taking more damage than PLD/DRK. PLD/DRK will remain to be able to tank outside of their tank stance, whereas WAR will now be forced into using Defiance.

I genuinely didn't realize this needed explaining, but there you are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NFaelivrin

http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/3...me_FP_Wide.png

---

Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airswimmer

Please show me any serious content where a WAR can "overwhelm spam", and then show me any content where a DRK can't do the same with Abyssal Drain.

---

You missed the point, AoE encounters cannot justify infinite TP in single target encounters for one class in the game and not for any of the others. Also, Eviscerate vs Dark passenger easily gives WAR the edge and any good WAR will drop two off right when the group pops. Furthermore DRK has to maintain their MP through combos whereas equilibrium is free TP.

Then there is PLD.

Edit: You ask, I provide,

http://www.fflogs.com/statistics/7#b...Any&dataset=90

It is a 20% difference between WAR and DRK, WAR doing almost 2x PLDs damage.
DRK clearly cannot do the same as WAR to the same effect, the parses don't lie.

20% is a massive gap and a factor of 2 is ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

You missed the point, AoE encounters cannot justify infinite TP in single target encounters

---

The only real use for Equilibrium in Deliverance is for trash/A2S, unless you're actually on the boss for infinity you're not going to run out of TP anyway due to Fell Cleave/IB up time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

The only real use for Equilibrium in Deliverance is for trash/A2S, unless you're actually on the boss for infinity you're not going to run out of TP anyway due to Fell Cleave/IB up time.

---

Yes, which is why a lot of the community didn't like when it was implemented in the first place (why they were is covered in he second half of the sentence you quoted).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

You missed the point, AoE encounters cannot justify infinite TP in single target encounters

---

They don't have "infinite TP." They have as much TP as melee DPS do throughout an encouter, at least MNK and DRG, which all tanks should have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

Eviscerate vs Dark passenger easily gives WAR the edge and any good WAR will drop two off right when the group pops

---

Yes. "Eviscerate" is better than Dark Passenger, but that's how WAR is designed. They're suppose to have the best AoE DPS out of all the tanks; regardless, DRK is always right on the heels on WAR in terms of DPS in A2S because DRK AoE DPS is more sustainable due to Blood Price; which, brings us to our next point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

Furthermore DRK has to maintain their MP through combos whereas equilibrium is free TP.

---

It seems you're forgetting about Blood Price which is 10 seconds of MP regen on a 40 second cooldown. In AoE pulls that gives DRK nearly infinite MP while it's up.

You know, for someone acting as an authority on how to balance tanks you sure don't know a thing about them, but what do I know? "Eviscerate" and "overwhelm" are just too powerful. WAR needs those nerfs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iagainsti

Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.

---

Yes apparently, we've decided that homogenization can only come in an absolute form, didn't you get the memo? We can't homogenize component parts anymore, just the whole thing; according to this forum anywho. You don't question the tank forum bruv.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iagainsti

This thread reeks of #DarkWarriordin homogenization.

Phoenicia! you've been summoned to lay the truth on these Nerfmongers!!

---

Yea let's bring phoenica, the one who you're somehow obssessed with to the point of being creepy. Where is he/she anyway? Haven't seen a post in ages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisersoke

but... they do...? Both grit and shield oath decrease damage take , therefore switching out of them increases damage taken. currently, the only thing warriors lose from switching to their overpowered dps stance is a healing decrease, and emnity generation, neither of which is really necessary any more

---

PLD and DRK take more damage, to get to 100% damage taken.

WAR still take 100% damage, and lose the bonus HP and HP healed that made up for that.

All the non-tank stances are already equal in terms of damage taken.

Then PLD get better auto attacks, WAR gets 5% damage increase, and idk for DRK. More DARKNESS stuff probably, with higher damage in the end.

Seems that PLD could get an increase (maybe put the potency of sword to 100?) but apart from this, seems good enough. (strictly comparing stances)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OPneedNerfs

Yea let's bring phoenica, the one who you're somehow obssessed with to the point of being creepy. Where is he/she anyway? Haven't seen a post in ages.

---

You're just jealous he's not obsessed with you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iagainsti

Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.

---

the amount of people spewing that word without any real evidence in these forums is seriously ridiculous. all three tanks have very unique playstyles, and itd take a lot more than a few balance changes to take away the fact that the other two tanks play and feel VASTLY different than warrior. how about we just give all tanks stacks based on their combos and give them ridiculously strong on demand mitigation at the cost of removing those stacks. that would be homogeneization. the notion that tanks should be somewhat balanced in terms of damage output and damage mitigation shouldnt be offset because you think that its making them the same

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

If this does become a thing since apparently multiple people are suggesting it, SwO PLD and No-Grit-DRK should also take increased damage.

---

I agree with that. But I highly doubt their going to do it to war's and I highly doubt their going to nerf war

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuwagami

PLD and DRK take more damage, to get to 100% damage taken.

WAR still take 100% damage, and lose the bonus HP and HP healed that made up for that.

All the non-tank stances are already equal in terms of damage taken.

Then PLD get better auto attacks, WAR gets 5% damage increase, and idk for DRK. More DARKNESS stuff probably, with higher damage in the end.

Seems that PLD could get an increase (maybe put the potency of sword to 100?) but apart from this, seems good enough. (strictly comparing stances)

---

while the facts and sources on this remain to be seen, it still doesnt address the fact that warriors do a better job both in tank and out of tank stance. they dont really need the hp the gain from defiance, considering they even go as far as to wear str accessories, and the extra boost to healing is just healer buffer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisersoke

while the facts and sources on this remain to be seen

---

http://xivdb.com/?skill/48/Defiance
http://xivdb.com/?skill/28/Shield-Oath
http://xivdb.com/?skill/3629/Grit

If no one has their tank stance on, they take the same damage, have the same health, and receive the same amount of healing. If all tanks take 1x damage out of their tank stance, and you force one of these tanks to take 2x damage, they can no longer take off their tank stance as they will be nothing but a burden to the healers. This would not only harm them as MT, but also as OT where every raid AOE will do 2x damage to them. I don't think you've thought this through.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisersoke

they dont really need the hp the gain from defiance, considering they even go as far as to wear str accessories, and the extra boost to healing is just healer buffer.

---

This is straight up ignorant.

ALL tanks go with STR accessories and go out fine.

and the extra boost to healing combined with the increased HP results in the same (actually, super slightly lower) overall damage mitigation than shield oath or grit. It's NOT a "healer buffer". It's an actual meat sponge to soak the extra 25% damage we warriors take over the other 2 tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisersoke

they dont really need the hp the gain from defiance, considering they even go as far as to wear str accessories, and the extra boost to healing is just healer buffer.

---

You do know that every tank wears STR accessories, right?
The HP and heal increase on Defiance is the only way WAR has comparable eHP to both the PLD and DRK in their respective tanking stances. This has been established since 2.1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airswimmer

You do know that every tank wears STR accessories, right?
The HP and heal increase on Defiance is the only way WAR has comparable eHP to both the PLD and DRK in their respective tanking stances. This has been established since 2.1.

---

And the increase to their eHP is dependant on the healer for it to be effective. It's only relevant if the Warrior is topped up, otherwise is irrelevant.
@kaisersoke #byeFelicia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airswimmer

They don't have "infinite TP." They have as much TP as melee DPS do throughout an encouter, at least MNK and DRG, which all tanks should have.



Yes. "Eviscerate" is better than Dark Passenger, but that's how WAR is designed. They're suppose to have the best AoE DPS out of all the tanks; regardless, DRK is always right on the heels on WAR in terms of DPS in A2S because DRK AoE DPS is more sustainable due to Blood Price; which, brings us to our next point.



It seems you're forgetting about Blood Price which is 10 seconds of MP regen on a 40 second cooldown. In AoE pulls that gives DRK nearly infinite MP while it's up.

You know, for someone acting as an authority on how to balance tanks you sure don't know a thing about them, but what do I know? "Eviscerate" and "overwhelm" are just too powerful. WAR needs those nerfs.

---

Sure, Decimate, mixed up with GW2 axe skill, concept is there regardless of name.

WAR TP usage in almost all scenarios is notably lower due to stack abilities. Name one physical DPS with the same TP sustainability.

As for all tanks having it, yes, but PLD and DRK have tiny amounts and WAR has twice what it needs. Prime spot for a nerf, this is one of the SOFTEST nerfs WAR can receive.

'WAR is better than X at a Y' by design, fine, read my posts I said make it worse in the areas it is not supposed to be better to justify this. However this is false, pre heavensward interviews and live letters said this was supposed to be a DRK strength. Also, there is a limit to things you can say WAR is supposed to be better at by design, you also HAVE to accept some weakness. Which brings us back to my original post.

Side note: I explicitly mentioned PLD, way to brush it to the side, let's balance every part of WAR with respect to its strongest competitor with 0 consideration for other classes shall we? WAR buys an extra minute against the enrage if taken over a PLD, imagine how valuable that was in the first couple of raid weeks.

Blood price meet temporary insanity, unless we are balancing based around tome farming again, someone specified serious content. Even if mobs did hit, as I said already this is a DRK strength by design, not WAR not hard to find Yoshi saying, yet WAR is still better. The stock argument of 'we are better at x because SE wants us to be' works against you here. Conversely I would ask for evidence of SE explicitly stating WAR was supposed to be top AoE dps, and that was part of the fundamental design.

Finally, the entire post was about equilibrium, and in the end you said I was proposing nerfs to overpower and Decimate. Typo?

I'm not acting as an authority, but as a career omnirtanker I trust myself to be a bit more
Impartial than a WAR or PLD only player. Put it this way: I'm posting this and my first 1.x relic (far more effort than 2.0) was Bravura. Also, I am not confident in my posts than others because as you will see at the bottom of this one I justify my points with actual data rather than making up the numbers.

WAR is my favourite class but trying to maintain or justify its current state will do everyone bad in the long run. It is one of those cases where it just has to step up and take the hit so everyone can move forward.


Before you try to pick numbers out of thin air to try say DRK and WAR are close HERE IS ACTUAL DATA

http://www.fflogs.com/statistics/7#b...Any&dataset=90

WAR 1200
DRK 1000
PLD 700

Clear difference. 20% and 70% more respectively.

The problem with this thread, and others like it, is that no one really cares why WAR has the kit it has, or deals the damage it does. All they see is that WARs have it, and they want it. SE will buff PLD if it sees fit. No ammount of arguing on the forums will help, and they likely wont take any of these dreadfull ideas with them. I understand the need to vent, but do we really need 2 or 3 threads a day devoted to it? This community (tank forums) useed to be a treasure trove of info. not the insult driven debacle it has devolved to. This is Anger all over again. DON'T FEED THE TROLL!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisersoke

the amount of people spewing that word without any real evidence in these forums is seriously ridiculous. all three tanks have very unique playstyles, and itd take a lot more than a few balance changes to take away the fact that the other two tanks play and feel VASTLY different than warrior. how about we just give all tanks stacks based on their combos and give them ridiculously strong on demand mitigation at the cost of removing those stacks. that would be homogeneization. the notion that tanks should be somewhat balanced in terms of damage output and damage mitigation shouldnt be offset because you think that its making them the same

---

This.

Tanks should be able to deal roughly equivalent damage, some more than others here and there, but not 100-200 dps descrepancies. And they should have roughly equal mitigation, with maybe some being slightly stronger than others in certain fights.

They will never be actually "homogenized" in any real since of the word since the way that the jobs play mechanically is so, SO different. If MNK/DRG/NIN all did equal DPS (and actually i'm pretty sure they do factoring in raid-dps increases) no one would cry about it since, well, they all still play crazy differently. NIN has mudras and some support abilities to keep track of, DRG has a lot of mobility, rng-based positionals and BoTD uptime management, MNK has stacks, complex positionals, and various forms of stance management. There is no reason they can't strike this kind of balance with the 3 tanks. Simply no reason. Period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

WAR TP usage in almost all scenarios is notably lower due to stack abilities. Name one physical DPS with the same TP sustainability.

---

It's comparable to DRG and, to some extent, MNK. No. It's not exactly the same, but the difference is negligible. You're also ignoring the fact that Equilibrium doesn't only restore TP, so by using it for TP restore you're giving up a defensive cooldown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

this is one of the SOFTEST nerfs WAR can receive

---

It really isn't. Did you even play WAR in Turn 4 during 2.0/2.1?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

'WAR is better than X at a Y' by design, fine, read my posts I said make it worse in the areas it is not supposed to be better to justify this. However this is false, pre heavensward interviews and live letters said this was supposed to be a DRK strength. Also, there is a limit to things you can say WAR is supposed to be better at by design, you also HAVE to accept some weakness. Which brings us back to my original post.

---

And what exactly is WAR better at that they need to be worse at? Don't say TP regen.

Pre-Heavensward interviews and Live Letters also said Heavensward would be a unique and exciting departure from what was previously in the game, and said that crafting/gathering would be more "casual friendly".

WAR has, by ability design, been the more damage focused tank since 2.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

Blood price meet temporary insanity, unless we are balancing based around tone farming again.

---

You do know A2/A2S exist, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

Even if mobs did hit, as I said already this is a DRK strength by design, not WAR not hard to find Yoshi saying, yet WAR is still better.

---

I've never seen anything said by Yoshi to suggest this, nor is Yoshi a class designer. That should be evident by his "suggestions" on how to use Ley Lines during the anniversary Live Letter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeeYow

The stock argument of 'we are better at x because SE wants us to be' works against you here. Conversely I would ask for evidence of SE explicitly stating WAR was supposed to be top AoE dps, and that was part of the fundamental design.

---

The evidence is how the class is designed. WAR has the strongest AoE enmity generation skill, and how Decimate is by design, which no other class has an equivalent, clearly caters them towards strong AoE DPS.
Despite all this, DRK is still only ~5% behind the WAR in encounters like A2S.

By the way, your WAR is only 52. You haven't even gotten Equilibrium yet alone used it in anything serious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Syzygian

Tanks should be able to deal roughly equivalent damage, some more than others here and there, but not 100-200 dps descrepancies. And they should have roughly equal mitigation, with maybe some being slightly stronger than others in certain fights.

---

They do, roughly. What hampers PLD is:

• They lose the most damage in their tanking stance. WAR loses 10% of their damage in Defiance, DRK loses 8% in Grit, and PLD loses 20% in Shield Oath.
• The above is amplified by the fact that PLD generates the least amount of enmity out of the three tanks meaning they have to swap to their tanking stance more often than the other two tanks do to stay ahead in enmity.
• The coup de grâce is PLD's enmity combo is the weakest single combo any of the tanks possess

They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airswimmer

They do, roughly. What hampers PLD is:

• They lose the most damage in their tanking stance. WAR loses 10% of their damage in Defiance, DRK loses 8% in Grit, and PLD loses 20% in Shield Oath.
• The above is amplified by the fact that PLD generates the least amount of enmity out of the three tanks meaning they have to swap to their tanking stance more often than the other two tanks do to stay ahead in enmity.
• The coup de grâce is PLD's enmity combo is the weakest single combo any of the tanks possess

They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.

---

The damage penalty will always take what you have and minus it by 20%. I know your trying to say your bonuses make up for it, but honestly the first step towards making other tanks closer to warriors.

Would be to remove the damage penalty from PLD/DRK and making the Damage Penalty for Warrior Stance 15%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iagainsti

Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.

---

No, that is in role Balance. Balanced and homogenized are different. Balanced means that results are roughly the same. Homogenization would be that the jobs play identically.

Removing Wrath/Abandon management from Warrior play and MP management from Dark Knight play would be homogenization.

You can have homogenized and balanced (where all classes play the same and have the same effectiveness), non-homogenized and imbalanced (where all classes play differently but one is more effective than the others), homogenized but imbalanced (where all classes play the same but one class is more effective), and balanced but non-homogenized (where all classes play differently but have the same effectiveness).

The first is considered boring, the second is considered imbalanced, the third is considered imbalanced and boring, and the fourth is considered good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

The damage penalty will always take what you have and minus it by 20%. I know your trying to say your bonuses make up for it, but honestly the first step towards making other tanks closer to warriors.

---

I assumed this would be obvious since I assume, and hope, everyone here can read tooltips.

This thread is stupid though since Tanks should be doing more DPS like Warrior, bringing Warrior down might make a lot of content (Un-clearable)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airswimmer

They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.

---

This. I'm speculating here, but Paladin and DRK are designed with MT in mind, where Warrior is designed as an OT. Granted they can MT fine, to balance out 4 man content, they'd have to, but they are the damage tank by design, able to facilitate extra damage when not being used as a meatshield. This is why I believe Nerfing is nothing but smoke, those calling for it don't see the forest for the trees, and "balance" is the worst thing that can happen to MMOs. History doesn't always repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

For anyone that's curious about why Warrior has an endless well of TP in a single target encounter (training dummy), its because we have finisher attacks that don't cost TP but still use a GCD (Inner Beast, Steel Cyclone / Fell Cleave, Decimate). It's got nothing to do with Equilibrium.

On the issue of Warriors being too strong, they really aren't. The changes that need to be made should focus on the other tanks and not Warriors. The class plays extremely well and does what its supposed to do, tank and dish out sexy burst damage.

edit: 1000 character limit ya
Something as simple as making Sentinel/Bulwark a 120s cooldown (instead of 180s) would instantly transform Paladins into a stronger defensive alternative to Warriors while at the same time, not break the game or the meta. Removing the TP cost from Shield swipe would drastically increase Paladins TP sustainability. Reducing the Cooldown of Sheltron to 25 seconds would put it more in line with the up time of inner beast and would further increase Paladins effectiveness while not messing with warrior.

See what I'm getting at?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airswimmer

It's comparable to DRG and, to some extent, MNK. No. It's not exactly the same, but the difference is negligible. You're also ignoring the fact that Equilibrium doesn't only restore TP, so by using it for TP restore you're giving up a defensive cooldown.



It really isn't. Did you even play WAR in Turn 4 during 2.0/2.1?



And what exactly is WAR better at that they need to be worse at? Don't say TP regen.

Pre-Heavensward interviews and Live Letters also said Heavensward would be a unique and exciting departure from what was previously in the game, and said that crafting/gathering would be more "casual friendly".

WAR has, by ability design, been the more damage focused tank since 2.0.



You do know A2/A2S exist, right?



I've never seen anything said by Yoshi to suggest this, nor is Yoshi a class designer. That should be evident by his "suggestions" on how to use Ley Lines during the anniversary Live Letter.



The evidence is how the class is designed. WAR has the strongest AoE enmity generation skill, and how Decimate is by design, which no other class has an equivalent, clearly caters them towards strong AoE DPS.
Despite all this, DRK is still only ~5% behind the WAR in encounters like A2S.

By the way, your WAR is only 52. You haven't even gotten Equilibrium yet alone used it in anything serious.

---

Possibly DRG, serious MNKs use forbidden chakra. The cure provided by tank Eq is a very small price so I left it out, but yes it is there.

You might want to look up what temporary insanity is before you talk about A2, I will do the work for you, it is the buggy move that stuns all the mob packs - preventing them from triggering blood price. Do you raid savage?

For the Third time: what about PLD? Not a word. At least say you think that is how it is supposed to be.

Current eventuality is not explicit evidence of intent. Let me clarify: Explicit statements by SE please. With regards to not seeing discussion of DRK, summaries are available on these forums.

Single and AoE DPS have always been two different games, that doesnt require too much discussing, SMN does all the talking for that right now.) WAR was always a good single target job, AoE it was OK, better than PLD but now it has run away with itself.

Yes it is a shame my WAR is 52 and currently my DRK is only full level On an alt account, why I put career omnirtanker rather than current, but I static with one and understand it very well through constant discussion with them. How is your PLD, do you tank with one? Is it safe to assume you understand the other side of the argument right now?

Good argument though, you have no idea how often I XIVPads peoples characters while they are ranting about how X is fine and find they are missing half their cross class abilities. Sadly I see you don't have PLD either which is the real hot potato.

Also I was in one of the first 5-10 groups in the world through T1-4 (don't know exactly because people formally didn't keep track as much) with Legacy, clearing it on BLM WAR PLD and BRD in consecutive weeks, special place in my heart that turn, dropped because I began a PhD which was a big RL time sink and transferred to EU when server changes were promised. Hence he current job spread, how early did you do it? (That derail BTW)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iagainsti

This. I'm speculating here, but Paladin and DRK are designed with MT in mind, where Warrior is designed as an OT.

---

No. I can't remember the exact terms since it was over a year ago and I've lost the interview since then, but Yoshida explicitely said that the tanks were designed to do anything on the same level. MT, OT, doesn't matter, they have the tools to do anything.

As an example, the "most dps" set up in 2.0 was WAR MT and PLD OT, while a more "survival" approach was the contrary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nektulos-Tuor

This thread is stupid though since Tanks should be doing more DPS like Warrior, bringing Warrior down might make a lot of content (Un-clearable)

---

This logic needs to die horribly in a grease fire. Savage was not intended to be cleared in i190, WAR made it possible. So basically, whether intentionally or not, they designed a raid tier that could be progressed on and cleared with one tank but not the others. WAR+other tank was mandatory.

If they designed raids with a DPS check that that is achievable regardless if your tank composition, this would be a different conversation. But that's not what they did.

Saying that "other tanks should be buffed to WAR DPS levels because nerfing WAR would make content unclearable" is an intensely telling statement on its own.