PLD or MRD?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kitru

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? BB>SE refers to using the relevant combos in that order. Hell, you even use a similar model when you described your method. Being able to copy-paste ability descriptions doesn't really mean anything when you're incapable of actually understanding what's being discussed.

---

reading comprehension has nothing to do with interpreting someones points without a full explanation. Granted in this case it is correct I should have assumed this combo.
Also don't try to be a tool and attempt to degrade me or I will simply drive you idiocy into the ground. I am simply trying to prove a point and have a conversation and not try to be a child about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kitru

If you want simple evidence, just do the math for the explicit potency/GCD that WAR and PLD are each capable of. Unless you want to believe that PLD somehow gets more out of each individual point of potency than WAR does, you're doing it wrong. Hell, I seriously doubt that you're actually counting GCDs properly if that's really what you're doing over long periods of time.

---

I will do what you failed to and build empirical data instead of screwing with theory craft and completely screwing up everything relative to mechanics. I should have it posted tonight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kitru

The person I was quoting that you were explicitly responding to explicitly said "more mitigation skills". If you're going to get anal retentive about quoting, at least go back and read the quotes as they're written. The person I was quoting was explicitly wrong about the number of mitigation skills. Even if the number doesn't have much bearing upon performance (and, yes, I know it doesn't; average and burst performance over time are what matter), the person was still explicitly wrong in their statement, and it's also why I described the general difference between the WAR and PLD CD suites while pointing out that they perform equally well over time.

---

1. I was explicitly responding to you
2. What makes you think I am taking what others said over what I said. 'You specifically said that PLD had "more mitigation skills" which is explicitly wrong as I pointed out' again no I didn't.
3. This is completely irrelevant and pointless if you are simply counting the number of defensive abilities. My point still stands PLD has higher mitigation than WAR which is offset by warrior higher HP and healing to a fairly equal amount.

Back to the OP's question:

The two classes (PLD and WAR) are both in a good place right now.
Either can main tank or off-tank anything in the game.
The differences between them in certain situations in 4man content are extremely slight.

In 8 man content groups almost always prefer to take one of each because they compliment each other REALLY well.
So if you're leveling a tanking class specifically to help your FC raid, then the first thing you should do is find out what other tanks are available to them.

If they have more people playing PLD, then go WAR. Or Vice Versa.
Simple.

Warrior PROs:
-Better Enimity
-Slighty More DPS
- Stun Off GCD
-More Fun to Play
-20% DR every 25sec (Potentially; but doesnt always work that way due to fight mechanics )


Warrior CONs:
-Weaker Mitigation.
- Less ultility.
- No shield
- Higher Skill Cap

PLD PRO's
- Easy to pick up
- Stonger Mitigation
-More ultility ( AoE Blind, Silences, Can Stun Back to back, Cover, Stoneskin).
- Best Defensive Skill in Game. ( Hallow Ground)

Paladin CONs
-Boring to play for most people.
- AoE Threat/DPS isnt as good as WAR
- Lower DPS than Warrior while tanking.


I find I tend to be more successful at END Game Content with PLD, Less to worry about and somethings PLD have are just better. (Hallow Ground for Double Dreadnaught, Back to back Stuns for DreadKnights, Silences, and ofcourse a Shield ). Both are great, just saying from my experience.

Since your only doing this for your FC, I suggest PLD for thier need. If you want to have more fun while tanking, Roll WAR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Set

Ok give numbers, I showed a way to test it.

Every single test pld came out on top with damage.

---

Take no offense but you must be doing something really wrong for PLD to out DPS WAR. Theres too many factors that Weight in favor of Warrior.


WAR's have to much DPS boosting Tools in their arsenal for PLD to out dps them. IE:
- Higher Potency Attacks
- Unchained
- Berserk (+50 Attack every 90 Secs)
- Maim ( 20% Damage, can be up 100% of a fight)
- Storm Eye (-10% Slash Resistence, Can be up 100% of the fight)
- Better AoE Damage via Overpower and Steel Cyclone
- Increase Crit In Defiance
- Internal Release (+15% Crit chance, every 60sec)
- Vengeance which does 50 potency counter attack on 2min CD.
-Wrath Abilities unaffected by the -25% damage penatly.



Take a look at this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fsPp9IQXuc , and watch at 7:00 on. She's Crit for 1500+ Skull Sunder. She's most likely wearing all DPS accessories but still. WAR is capable of pushing amazing DPS for a tank. I myself have seen crits of 1300ish, but that doesnt surprise me when im on war. However, I am suprised if my PLD crits 1k.

empirical data in true testing scenario with parser. http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...ata-and-parser

TLDR
Warrior does more in the long run
Paladin can do more in the first rotation or 2

The outliers are minimal and the results are fairly accurate.

you are correct on the result not sure on the calculations because you are still missing a lot of things in the calculations you posted and I am going to stop messing with this and go back to playing the game.

Never quite understood why people say samurai should be dps. Samurais have always been tanky jobs, being able to wear heavy armor and weaken enemies. The advantage they had over other tank jobs is higher damage thanks to gil toss. Even historically they are closer to tanks as they drew attention on the battlefield due to their flashy armor and were all about protection of the nobility, very much like a Knight in fact.