Tank Stances, Traited

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

A single cleave or swipe is not going to be fatal to any player, but repeatedly standing the area in which those occur will be. That is what i meant by "if they do not move away"

---

If you die by staying in front of a cleave, you deserve to die. And, again, DPS and healers are already OS by those kinds of attacks...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

So, in your mind.. if it doesn't freeze or debuff, not moving out of the AoE and just keeping swinging because it isn't going to do any damage to you isn't ignoring a mechanic?

---

No, it's being a dick to your healer to save some pitiful damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

And you can't tell me that you would still want to avoid it, because you wouldn't. You wouldn't have to put in the effort because the damage it does to you would be negligible, and the tanking community has already shown that if the damage incurred is negligible, they would prefer to dps over mitigate (that's how this whole discussion got started because tanks would rather have higher constant dps than higher mitigation at the cost of dps).

---

But by taking damage you could have avoided, you reduce the healer's DPS, who should do more than you if you have your tank stance up. And if you don't have the stance up, then you'd take the same damage from that AoE as you do now.

Although the concept of tank stances is interesting and adds to strategy/gameplay FFXIV's main focus always revolves around DPS and because of that tanks will avoid tankstance like the plague.

Simply put tankstances dont work with the way this game is designed unfortunately it only adds to elitism and locking abilities behind tankstance only incites more resentment towards it.'

I'd like to see them redesign tanking without stances in the future if only to get rid of the toxic attitude and give tanks access to their full moveset with proper depth in it to reward skilled players.

This will also make emnity generators/combo's more important/indepth and not make NIN mandatory in every high-end comp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

Although the concept of tank stances is interesting and adds to strategy/gameplay FFXIV's main focus always revolves around DPS and because of that tanks will avoid tankstance like the plague.

---

Again, the game does not revole around personal DPS. If, by sacrificing your own DPS, you could increase someone else's to compensate, there's no reason to not do it if you want.
But, for now, the added mitigation does not add an apprioriate amount of raid DPS (i.e healer's DPS) for what you lose as personal DPS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Again, the game does not revole around personal DPS. If, by sacrificing your own DPS, you could increase someone else's to compensate, there's no reason to not do it if you want.
But, for now, the added mitigation does not add an apprioriate amount of raid DPS (i.e healer's DPS) for what you lose as personal DPS.

---

True but only to an extend even without tankstance good tanks i will mitigate enough so for healers to keep up.

The dps gain from turning tankstance off by far outweighs a few healer GCD's and when you add item level increase / overhealing into the equation dropping tankstance will always come out on top over having a healer heal a tiny bit more.

Of course all this is obvious or we would not be in this current predicament that''s why even though i like the stances im in favor of removing it it is affecting the game in too many negative ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

The dps gain from turning tankstance off by far outweighs a few healer GCD's and when you add item level increase / overhealing into the equation dropping tankstance will always come out on top over having a healer heal a tiny bit more.

---

If your tank stance would make you take half damage (or increase HP and healing received by 100%) all the time, we wouldn't be looking at "few healer's GCD"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

If your tank stance would make you take half damage (or increase HP and healing received by 100%) all the time, we wouldn't be looking at "few healer's GCD"

---

That would not matter as long as the enemies do not enforce tankstance and doing so would mean having to completely rework every enemy and that is not going to happen.

With 50% mitigation on stance you might as well remove every defensive cooldown in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

That would not matter as long as the enemies do not enforce tankstance

---

Why is that ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

Here is the thing even the developers you have been on record saying they dislike the idea behind tanks tanking in a dps stance.

---

i say im disagreed with this, SE put effort on adress tanks tanking outside of tank stance, we can start talking on heavensward when is this thing really statrted, SE nerf tank DPS over all shuting down the srt meta with that means less agro on dps stance, and the reduce PLD damage penalty from shield 20% to 15%, they could just buff PLD emity if they want but they reduce tank stance penalty plus give us acc bonus on it, worthless but it was there.

incoming to stormblood we started the expansion not only with a gauge penalty on WAR and PLD but with several ajustmens on DPS agro and defensive capabilities, self healing to be more precise and complety abolish WAR spaming butcher combo for max dps, and in fact will be imposible keep agro if isnt was for shirk with im pretty sure is not desing to be use like that, shirk is a amaizing tool for tank swaps, we actually need something like that in the past but the actual desing is a bit broken.

so SE really made ajustments to adress this but wasnt enough, there is not choice, dps stance is the optimal way, tanking on tank stance is like being a dragoon who dont use heavy trust (the old one not the actual), i will agreed limit options is bad only is both options are equal on performance, but the reality is DPS tanking is absurdly more better than tanking on tank stance and when for some reasonwhen you need stance dance like on OS4 or for watever weird reason in the middle of the run some tanks suffer a lot more that others, here is where we inster the extra penaltys on PLD and specially DRK.

for me having 2 ways of tanking is bad and should be fixed, more when the other "option" its just a excuse to play bad or lazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Why is that ?

---

Because tanks or not going to use tankstance unless they are forced to and incoming tank damage would have to be increased significantly for that and not in the shape of boss abilities since we can use defensive cooldowns for those.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

Because tanks or not going to use tankstance unless they are forced to and incoming tank damage would have to be increased significantly for that and not in the shape of boss abilities since we can use defensive cooldowns for those.

---

That's not true. If using tank stance allows the same overall raid DPS (Just spread differently), then it's just a personal preference of you (and the healer) as who should push its DPS while the other only focus on its core responsibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

That's not true. If using tank stance allows the same overall raid DPS (Just spread differently), then it's just a personal preference of you (and the healer) as who should push its DPS while the other only focus on its core responsibility.

---

50% mitigation on tankstance would break the entire game and everything would be easy so no bad idea.

Also if tankstance wont make a dps difference then there is no point in having it in the first place.

The situation you are describing is simply put unrealistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

50% mitigation on tankstance would break the entire game and everything would be easy so no bad idea.

---

No. Having lots of mitigation doesn't help you kill things or deal with mechanics...in case the current state of tank stance hadn't proved it already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

Also if tankstance wont make a dps difference then there is no point in having it in the first place.

---

Actually if tank stance dont have any negative impact on dps It Will be work extremly good to keep the agro and mitigate damage plus being able to be balanced with new mechanics in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shao32

Actually if tank stance dont have any negative impact on dps It Will be work extremly good to keep the agro and mitigate damage plus being able to be balanced with new mechanics in the future.

---

You cant balance things around the future in a game that already has like what 4-5 years worth of content?

The stuff you guys are asking for would only be reasonable if all the content got changed to match it.

Paladin already has a higher defense in generally because of the addition of the shield thusly they wouldn't need as high a defensive bonus. However i would go with 15% instead of 10 just to make them a viable and still attractive alternative to the warrior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

Also if tankstance wont make a dps difference then there is no point in having it in the first place.

---

Playstyle preference. Some tank are more comfortable playing it safe.
And I'm pretty sure more people would both play in Savage and play tanks if they knew they can focus on their job as long as they're paired with an "agressive" healer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

The stuff you guys are asking for would only be reasonable if all the content got changed to match it.

---

No, you just have to look at tank's DPS in and out of tank stance and healer's DPS and tweak the stance little by little until those two compensate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dio_Tiferet

You cant balance things around the future in a game that already has like what 4-5 years worth of content?

The stuff you guys are asking for would only be reasonable if all the content got changed to match it.

---

Figths are already desing on tanking in tank stance, reynhart change yeah Will need more that just tank stances chamges, but mine? Not really.

If SE want us to tank in dps stance they just have to change tank stances to be a ogcd more with emity bonus, but they keep this punishing desing how in the actual status is more punishing for PLD/DRK for no reason

Leave tank stances alone!

In most of the game tank stance is encouraged. Even 'pro' tanks use tank stance for dungeon pulls. In mid level content (not cutting edge primals etc) Tanks have a playstyle choice. They can go hard and no stance for the epeen damage, or play it casual and safe. The content isn't hard enough to require the mitigation or the DPS check bonus. SO play how you like. This even applies to savage. My group often uses tank stance because the safety net is more important than deeps at our ilvl. The only place this doesnt apply is world 1st/1st week style clears of new content (and ultimate). In those situations you are undergeared as a group and need to do more damage so you make that damage via no tank stance. Its an expression of skill at that level because less skilled players wouldn't survive with so little gear.

Outside of that extreme cutting edge, tanks have an actual CHOICE to use or not use depending on their group, skill, and general preference. Stop trying to force your preference on everyone else. We have choice now. Don't $&%# it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

Leave tank stances alone!

In most of the game tank stance is encouraged. Even 'pro' tanks use tank stance for dungeon pulls. In mid level content (not cutting edge primals etc) Tanks have a playstyle choice. They can go hard and no stance for the epeen damage, or play it casual and safe. The content isn't hard enough to require the mitigation or the DPS check bonus. SO play how you like. This even applies to savage. My group often uses tank stance because the safety net is more important than deeps at our ilvl. The only place this doesnt apply is world 1st/1st week style clears of new content (and ultimate). In those situations you are undergeared as a group and need to do more damage so you make that damage via no tank stance. Its an expression of skill at that level because less skilled players wouldn't survive with so little gear.

Outside of that extreme cutting edge, tanks have an actual CHOICE to use or not use depending on their group, skill, and general preference. Stop trying to force your preference on everyone else. We have choice now. Don't $&%# it up.

---

I don't get this obsess you show in numerous post asking for no change except thoses you want, and refusing other's ideas if they risk threatening your own pleasure you show as "What the game is, and is for".

Each one's pleasure is just a matter of personal preferences, for yours and for the others, and the choice you call could only be called a true choice if the risk wasn't so much inferior to the reward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

Stop trying to force your preference on everyone else. We have choice now.

---

sorry but you are worng on that and is not about impose my opinion over yours, but there is absolute no choice when we are talking about tank stances, or you tank in DPS mode or you are playing poorly, is that, tanking on DPS stance is far more efective that tanking on tank stance, there is not exist any argument against that, if bot stances have a efective performance, and i dont mean in terms of dps, then of course it will be have choices but for now one is god and the other is trash, to have real choices tank stances have to be at level of dps stances somehow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

Stop trying to force your preference on everyone else. We have choice now. Don't $&%# it up.

---

Oh, the irony of someone defending a unique playstyle asking for others to stop forcing mutliple playstyles...

Right now, there is an active choice in playing defensively with tank stance or not. Baking in tank stance outright or drastically widening the chasm between Damage/Mitigation of using offensive/defensive (50% mitigation etc) FORCE players to play a specific way.

Also reading comp. I often state my opinion that the style or character of a JOB should remain largely in tact. There are people that like the way jobs play. If you fundamentally change how those jobs play then you piss off everyone who likes it now and trade their 'fun' for the group that wants it to play differently. Example Drk is currently a 1-2-3 'simple' rotation. Some like that. Others want to change it to a multi combo system like pld/war. That's just trading 1 groups 'fun' for another. I generally feel that changing Job characterization (not balance considerations) is a waste of dev time. If you want a new 'experience' then make a new job instead of constantly pissing off half the players of that job rewriting its identity over and over.

What these tank stance ideas (most of them anyway) want to do is remove existing choices in playstyle and skill expression. That's bad.

Example: Bake in tank stance. Congrats. You went from 2 options (offense/defense) to 0 options. Playing Tanks. Nope.
Example2: Widen gap (make either defense much stronger or offense much stronger or both). Congrats. With mobs hitting 2x as hard and tank stance 50% reduction you have effectively removed the option to tank without tank stance. Vice versa if you increase offense significantly, or both. You went from choosing stance or no stance to "Am I taking damage? Tank stance. Am I not taking damage? No stance". That's not choice.

This is just removing choice that we ALREADY HAVE. That's bad. Many of my other posts are about not changing up job identities because you TRADE 1 style for another and rotate which fan base is angry. Also bad.

This is beside the fact that most of those aesthetic and choice based proposals also negatively impact balance while also just making people mad for no reason. Theres no point in it.
_____________________________________

The way tanks are now you can CHOOSE your playstyle. If you bake in tank stance or widen the gap drastically, you can no longer play how you choose. Whos 'forcing' whos play style on whom again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

Right now, there is an active choice in playing defensively with tank stance or not.

---

This is not a choice. Playing defensively brings not benefit at all once you have the skill and knowledge to play offensively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

If you fundamentally change how those jobs play then you piss off everyone who likes it now and trade their 'fun' for the group that wants it to play differently.

---

Changing the benefits of tank stance is exactly what doesn't change how the job plays since stances are "fire and forget" skills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

With mobs hitting 2x as hard and tank stance 50% reduction you have effectively removed the option to tank without tank stance.

---

Congratulations, you made up your own number to disprove an idea that wasn't yours, removing the other option available when I clearly stated that this option would remain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

The way tanks are now you can CHOOSE your playstyle. If you bake in tank stance or widen the gap drastically, you can no longer play how you choose. Whos 'forcing' whos play style on whom again?

---

Again, this is not a choice. If you're able to play aggressively, you're holding back the team by not doing it. If you're not, then you don't have a choice either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

snip

---

this like playing basketball, DPS stance represent playing with a profesional ball and tank stance represent playing with a medicine ball, are you telling me this is acceptable and a fair choice both "playstyle"?

i dont even want call it playstyle, not at least on DRK and PLD how tank stance dont modify they gameplay.

I'd rather stances change the playstyle while the stance is active rather than just being a number shift up or down. Even the Warrior doesn't really change when shifting stances because the abilities that change are functionally the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart;44735751.

This is not a choice. Playing defensively brings not benefit at all once you have the skill and knowledge to play offensively.

2.Changing the benefits of tank stance is exactly what doesn't change how the job plays since stances are "fire and forget" skills.

3. Congratulations, you made up your own number to disprove an idea that wasn't yours, removing the other option available when I clearly stated that this option would remain.

4.Again, this is not a choice. If you're able to play aggressively, you're holding back the team by not doing it. If you're not, then you don't have a choice either.

---

1: Tank stance as it is now, is a choice. Both are viable in all content except cutting edge world 1st clear scenarios. Optimized is not the same thing as choice. You are asserting that the ONLY way to play is the optimal theoretical way. That's on you. There will always be a numerically optimized way by no matter how slim a margin. Choice by its very nature cannot exist if you refuse to play anything but min-maxed optimization. That's why its not a choice at cutting edge hardcore levels. To be the best you play the objectively 'best' way the game allows, but at every other level those minute differences are washed out allowing regular folks to have some freedom. If you bind yourself to the elite hardcore meta when it doesnt even apply to you, that's your own mindset unnecessarily removing the choices before you.

2.You missed the point. Jobs don't have a variety of playstyle 'options'. A brd is a brd. A blm is a blm. If you want a different experience you play a different job. You don't respec like 1 job per toon games. Changing jobs IS respecs. Tank stances are the only active in-game flexibility you have in the way a tank plays. Wars are burst window tanks. If you want to play a different style you play pld/drk. Stances are fire and forget but change the dynamics of tanking. They are the only choice we actually have that affects our playstyle, and both are viable. Why restrict that? If you drastically widen the gap you reduce the windows where both options are viable. Its more all or nothing. That reduces the flexibility of stances. All this talk is just reduce remove. Why cut down and minimize what few options we have?

3. The numbers are irrelevant. The thread title is literally removing tank stances. Many a suggestions over 11 pages are similar or do the opposite, widen the gap between tank and no tank stance (drastically) in either defense, offense, or both. Both of those versions reduce the playstyle option we have with the current system.

4. See point 1. You are choosing to limit yourself to the world 1st meta when it doesnt apply to you and then basing your entire stance on that foundation. If you are still progressing today, your entire team is 240. World 1st walked in at 220 at best. You do not need that extra DPS they did, nor do you need the extra defense of tank stance. Both are viable. MC tanks in raid groups ACTUALLY use tank stance. The 'goal' is often to use none, but that's a goal. Not a real world experience in most cases. I am more conservative than my old co tank. He never used grit unless we made him. I tend to err on the side of caution until we are through prog. Its a choice. If you choose not to choose, thats your own deal. Its chasing a meta dream that isn't your practical reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

1: Tank stance as it is now, is a choice. Both are viable in all content except cutting edge world 1st clear scenarios. Optimized is not the same thing as choice.

---

Hurray, in the end, we have a lot of gearing choice then, since optimizing is different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

You are asserting that the ONLY way to play is the optimal theoretical way. That's on you.

---

That's on any tank that want to improve. But hey, it's your choice to stay in your comfort zone and potentially be a liability for bringing less than you could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

The thread title is literally removing tank stances.

---

A suggestion I'm clearly against.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

Both of those versions reduce the playstyle option we have with the current system.

---

No, they don't but I won't explain that for the 4th time...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

4. See point 1. You are choosing to limit yourself to the world 1st meta when it doesnt apply to you and then basing your entire stance on that foundation.

---

And you..are choosing to limit yourself. Period.

People seem to forget that vehicle for which we are named also came with one or two very large guns attached. Whats so bad about tanks fighting along side their friends, instead of just being a punching bag?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aana

snip

---

Eh. Although I vehemently disagree with Reynhart solution, I find it difficult to argue tank stance is more than a superficial choice at best. Only using Deltascape as an example, there simply isn't any benefit whatsoever once you have a little bit of gear. Even without a Ninja, the addition of Shirk made aggro management much easier. All tank stance does is gimp your damage. It isn't necessarily an e-peen argument either. Mitigation has a threshold that once reach gives no reason to continuously stack it, hence why we don't often pair defense cooldowns together. Dungeon pulls aren't really a good metric because tank stance only has any relevance if you mega pull. I can and have dropped it with just six mobs plenty. In fact, PLD/WAR can survive the super pull in Shisui without tank stance.

I just can't get behind tank stance being a choice when the immediate recommendation has always been to turn it off as quickly as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bourne_Endeavor

Eh. Although I vehemently disagree with Reynhart solution

---

I'm perfectly fine with you disagreeing with me. What I wonder, though, is how you would fix this issue.
Would you remove tank stance completely, forcing progression to be done through "agressive tanking" ?
Would you keep it that way so that those skills are doomed to leave our hotbars once we're comfortable with a content ?

Since tank stance only offer mitigation and enmity, I don't see how one could adjust them outside of making one of those desirable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

What I wonder, though, is how you would fix this issue.
Would you remove tank stance completely, forcing progression to be done through "agressive tanking" ?
Would you keep it that way so that those skills are doomed to leave our hotbars once we're comfortable with a content ?
Since tank stance only offer mitigation and enmity, I don't see how one could adjust them outside of making one of those desirable.

---

There is a simple way to correct the tank stance issue.. and it's reducing the amount of defense on items for tank gear to the levels of dragoon armour and then have the tank stance mechanics increase the defense of the wearer to bring them back up to current defense levels. Then trait the abilities so the +enmity bonuses are only triggered in the tank stance.
This alone would make tank stance not only desirable (Without changing the whole game around rediculous buffs and then trying to change every encounter in the game around them), but required to actually tank something and then when not actively tanking the current off-tank has the choice of higher damage output by not putting on the stance, or placing themselves in tank stance and shirking enmity onto the active tank and then still being able to put themselves into tank stance to assist in shared damage mechanics.

Sadly, the only way to make tank stance desirable is to make not being in the stance undesirable; because as long as you can survive without the tank stance and hold aggro without the tank stance, the tank stance is not needed and is simply a damage cooldown for specific attacks. The only other real alternative is to have tank stance baked into the tank class as a whole (making it a trait as the topic creator mentioned) and overhauling the damage potency and mitigation cooldowns for all tanks so they would be in roughly the same spot as they are now. (Which, let's face it.. is unrealistic to expect of SQE)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

This alone would make tank stance not only desirable (Without changing the whole game around rediculous buffs and then trying to change every encounter in the game around them), but required to actually tank something

---

It would shift the playstyle, but still left only one option. Even if we could argue that's what tanks are supposed to be, we have no right to force this playstyle upon everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

Sadly, the only way to make tank stance desirable is to make not being in the stance undesirable; because as long as you can survive without the tank stance and hold aggro without the tank stance, the tank stance is not needed and is simply a damage cooldown for specific attacks.

---

That's not true. Again, the problem with tank stance is not being able to do your job without it, but the damage you lose using it. If having the tank stance allows the party to retain the same overall DPS, then being in tank stance would not be a problem. And since tank stance gives mitigation and enmity, either increasing the mitigation so that healers do more DPS, or make high enmity generation have an effect on other members' DPS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

It would shift the playstyle, but still left only one option. Even if we could argue that's what tanks are supposed to be, we have no right to force this playstyle upon everyone.

---

Actually.. The Devs, have all the right in the world to force a particular playstyle if they wish. There are no "alternative play styles" to Damage classes. They are all there for one purpose, and people choose those classes for that purpose. The only reason tanks and healers have two playstyles is because the game is already at an imabalance but it can be fixed; but not by your method.
Tank classes are there to tank content; and in a game where you can raise multiple jobs on a single character, each role should be built around doing it's role. If anything, trying to accommodate two play styles of tank would hinder the balancing process. You do not seem to understand this; or are unwilling to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

That's not true. Again, the problem with tank stance is not being able to do your job without it, but the damage you lose using it. If having the tank stance allows the party to retain the same overall DPS, then being in tank stance would not be a problem. And since tank stance gives mitigation and enmity, either increasing the mitigation so that healers do more DPS, or make high enmity generation have an effect on other members' DPS.

---

Reyn. All of your changes are unrealistic, and would make the game harder to balance.
You DO NOT have good ideas; and in fact, your ideas show that you have a gross misunderstanding of how to balance a game appropriately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

Actually.. The Devs, have all the right in the world to force a particular playstyle if they wish. There are no "alternative play styles" to Damage classes. They are all there for one purpose, and people choose those classes for that purpose. The only reason tanks and healers have two playstyles is because the game is already at an imabalance but it can be fixed; but not by your method.

---

Yours is not fixing, it's amputating one big portion of the tank community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

You DO NOT have good ideas; and in fact, your ideas show that you have a gross misunderstanding of how to balance a game appropriately.

---

Considering that what you jabber shows that you have no idea what the real issue is and how to properly fix something without pissing off everyone, I actually don't care about your opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Yours is not fixing, it's amputating one big portion of the tank community.

Considering that what you jabber shows that you have no idea what the real issue is and how to properly fix something without pissing off everyone, I actually don't care about your opinion.

---

You obviously do, because you've responded to it again and again, trying to reinforce your horrible idea of "balance".
"Just increase the mitigation of tank stance and up the damage of bosses" is not balance and is not a solution. This change alone creates too much work, and too many factors that would need to be rebalanced in the aftermath of making so much damage trivial after such narrow selection of damage boosts but such a broad application to mitigation increase.

As for knowing what the real issue is, it has been said time and time again. The issue with tank stance is that currently, in the bulk of content, it is not needed as a stance; Attacks can be survived outside of it, enmity can held outside of tank stance and there is a noticeable dps increase outside of tank stance. All these things make tank stance unattractive to sit in, and will only be used as a glorified damage reduction cooldown before being toggled off as quickly as it can be.
The only way to counter this is to make tank stances more beneficial to the content than staying out of it; and this means making tanks that are outside of tank stance take noticeably more damage than the ones inside it. What you DO NOT do is do inane damage increases on the bosses and then match those increases with increases in tank stance mitigation; that requires much more balancing tweaks than you seem to be able to understand.

So yes, unfortunately, being outside of tank stance needs to be made unnattractive; and there are ways to do this that are MUCH simpler than your way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Yours is not fixing, it's amputating one big portion of the tank community.

Considering that what you jabber shows that you have no idea what the real issue is and how to properly fix something without pissing off everyone, I actually don't care about your opinion.

---

I wouldn't agree : His/her fix is the core of the problem about tanks : The passive defense on gear is enough to survive anything. To avoid having to scale to tremendous damage the mobs/bosses of dungeons, the more logical fix would be to tone this passive amount down and increase the efficiency of the stance to match the previous tankability, but with stance dependance.

That's pretty much what I already suggested, damage should not be tuned up, only passive resistance down. Because what makes tanks able to survive content withouth stance is not tied to the sole usage of cooldown and burst damage, but to the high resistance tanks already have just wearing gear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MauvaisOeil

I wouldn't agree : His/her fix is the core of the problem about tanks : The passive defense on gear is enough to survive anything.

---

That's not the problem. The problem is only what DPS the raid loses by having a tank using its stance.
And by making tanks unable to survive out of tank stance, you're just forcing turtle tanking upon every player, which will piss off a lot of people, and only shift the "only efficient playstyle".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MauvaisOeil

That's pretty much what I already suggested, damage should not be tuned up, only passive resistance down.

---

I acknowledged four pages ago that you don't necessarily have to increase damage received. And never suggested that you should to the point of making the stance mandatory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

I'm perfectly fine with you disagreeing with me. What I wonder, though, is how you would fix this issue.
Would you remove tank stance completely, forcing progression to be done through "agressive tanking" ?
Would you keep it that way so that those skills are doomed to leave our hotbars once we're comfortable with a content ?

Since tank stance only offer mitigation and enmity, I don't see how one could adjust them outside of making one of those desirable.

---

Honestly, I don't really know a good solution. FFXIV is heavily damage dependent for virtually all its content. Such is why people look at healers who refuse to DPS in a negative light. All that comes to mind is adding greater amounts of fluff damage and possibly reducing heal efficiency. This way fights are somewhat less predictable, especially once you couple together a simple Cure II healing upwards of 20,000. There just isn't enough outgoing damage at nearly enough velocity during bosses. Case in point, look at mass pull damages. You generally can't get away with dropping stance for long, if at all. So bosses would need some comparable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frostmagemari

As for knowing what the real issue is, it has been said time and time again. The issue with tank stance is that currently, in the bulk of content, it is not needed as a stance; Attacks can be survived outside of it, enmity can held outside of tank stance and there is a noticeable dps increase outside of tank stance. All these things make tank stance unattractive to sit in, and will only be used as a glorified damage reduction cooldown before being toggled off as quickly as it can be.

---

I find these threads always put the cart before the horse. "The PROBLEM with tank stance is that it is unattractive to sit in". Back up 1 step. Why does tank stance need to be 'sat in'? We have labeled them as 'stances'. Mnks have stances they use for 2 sec at a time. Tank stances are a tool. An action. They increase enmity and mitigation while on and have a cost, DPS, while doing so. If you want/need the enmity/defenses you use them. If you don't, you don't.

If you OT for an entire fight, do you need to 'fix' rampart just because you don't use it? Does it need to be used to justify its spot on your bar? Does tank stance need to be used ALL THE TIME while tanking to be useful? Why any more than anything else?

If you think of stances as a tool in your belt just like every other job action, it begs the question why all the hubbub about fixing it? Its a button you push that temporarily reduces damage and temporarily increases enmity and mitigation. Does butchers need fixing because you don't use it CONSTANTLY while main tanking? Its a TANK skill it should be used to TANK! That's how these 'fix tank stance' things sound to me. Its just an action. It has its uses. You don't ride every skill on CD in every situation and that's OK. Just because its a defensive ability doesn't mean it NEEDS to be on 24/7 while taking damage. Ask why tank stances need changing before going off on how to fix a problem that may not even exist.

Tank stances was necesary for tanking on 2.x all the time, now are trash, even if you look at It as mere pull tools the desing is trash, the cost is stupidly high for just 10 seconds of emity and mitigation Who no one needs in 99% of the fight, its need yo be fixed to work as you say or as they intend desing but can't stay like now.