Try to predict Nerf/Buff/QoL of 4.2 Tank Edition

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Similar here. I leveled up DRK as an option to help my static, but after realizing we had no other source of slashing it wasn't really worth trading slashing for TBN utility. So I just stayed War.

---

You'd also be trading Shake it off for TBN as well, which also isnt worth it imo.
(In O4S prog, me and another were constantly dying to raid wide dmg, and TBN can only save one of us. I was the last person to win upgrade drops, so I was still getting 1 shot by meteors and the like, even with passage of arms, healer shields, full hp, reprisal, and addle up. (plus VIT melds) 75%of the time. So with the shake it off change we could both be shielded, and anyoen who wasnt topped off, or missed the aoe heals/shields has another chance at life.)
I doubt i need TBN/shake it off now, but our WARs current shake it off is easily more useful of the 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crater

The closest you're going to find to a coherent argument in favour of Slashing/Piercing/Blunt debuffs is the idea some people seem to have that it's supremely important to the game's sense of depth and challenge that you open every fight, every add spawn, and every post-downtime reengagement with 2-3 GCDs where you're missing 10% of your damage.

Every other argument is inconsistent at best, and more frequently, just completely incoherent. There's just really no other defence - the most likely explanation for their current incarnation is that SE flat out did not think things through.

---

You argument sounds like you didn't think things through.
You're accusing the fights design as the problem, but start off accusing the idea of having damage type debuffs is the problem.
And of course wrap up "its a combo of both".

Then technically neither is wrong, just wrong in combo.
You can keep either, but need to change the opposite to fit better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bourne_Endeavor

Take away Slashing from Warrior and you've made Ninja more or less a guaranteed lock in every group.

---

isnt it already like that tho for all hardcore groups

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

We see this idea thrown around a lot. If there's a power difference between two jobs, it's better to buff one than nerf the other. It seems nice ta

---

they already nerfed pali, by cutting the potency of hs, leave pali alone and just fix drk and I really just want a fourth tank anyway in 5.0 they just arent gona balance three tanks I dont see it ever happening so rather have a choice to have 4 different options and maybe things will even out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bswpayton

they already nerfed pali, by cutting the potency of hs, leave pali alone and just fix drk and I really just want a fourth tank anyway in 5.0 they just arent gona balance three tanks I dont see it ever happening so rather have a choice to have 4 different options and maybe things will even out

---

I agree I would like to have another option to play. My issue, and I think a few people's issues is that the current tanks already fill so many roles it doesn't feel like adding a fourth would bring anything unique. And this is what I think people mean by handing out some nerfs, if we want a 4rth tank that does something unique we either need to accept that all tanks are homogenized (the worst possible option) or we need to not have self healing, party shielding, high damage, high mitigation, gap closing monsters as every possible option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono_Rising

We need to not have self healing, party shielding, high damage, high mitigation, gap closing monsters as every possible option.

---

I agree with what you said about having a 4th tank wouldn't help as it paves the way for homogenization, I honestly see SE just making Plds have a Shield Charge move and then giving Drk an AoE raid utility shield and then call it a day which is probably what they'll do as sad as it sounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono_Rising

I agree I would like to have another .

---

I know it's probably not the most popular option but homogenizing tanks and heals seem to only be the real solution to balance in this game. All heaks will have aoe heals, all will have some type of damage mitigation, all will have their lustrate, benediction type heal. Same with tanks they all will have similar defensive cool dreams, aoe Argo abilities. The only thing I think that can separate these roles are aesthetics, at the end of the day they the rolls gonna be copy and paste of each other

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claire_Pendragon

You'd also be trading Shake it off for TBN as well, which also isnt worth it imo.

---

True now, but it was before the SiO change. Absolutely no reason to knock the dust off that greatsword now lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

True now, but it was before the SiO change. Absolutely no reason to knock the dust off that greatsword now lol

---

Oh, for me, I dont play DRK because its boring now.
That alone is why I shelved my DRK.
Even if it were balanced, I still wouldnt choose it over my other options yet, unless I had to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bswpayton

I know it's probably not the most popular option but homogenizing tanks and heals seem to only be the real solution to balance in this game. All heaks will have aoe heals, all will have some type of damage mitigation, all will have their lustrate, benediction type heal. Same with tanks they all will have similar defensive cool dreams, aoe Argo abilities. The only thing I think that can separate these roles are aesthetics, at the end of the day they the rolls gonna be copy and paste of each other

---

IMO, by having 4 tanks, you can make them less homogenized.
We tend to look at;
DPS
Mitigation
Threat
Utility

You can essentially make 2 tanks sorta of "MT" specialists, and 2 tanks "OT" specialists, with the ability to fill the role of the other type for easier content. (Sort of how AST was meant to pick a stance, based on which other healer they were with, though it didnt quite work out.)

You "should" always see 1 of the 2 for MT, and 1 of the other 2 as OT for the savage content.
Of course this depends on how its implemented/balanced.
Right now we see homogenization due to only having 3 tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bswpayton

The only thing I think that can separate these roles are aesthetics, at the end of the day they the rolls gonna be copy and paste of each other

---

I think we're definitely heading this way even without new jobs. There's not really a decent enough demand for specialty tanks with the content we have at present (strangely for a game where we can roll every job). Not that I wouldn't like a 4th tank just for fun.

P.S. Get rid of weapon vulnerabilities, they're just weird at this point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bswpayton

I know it's probably not the most popular option but homogenizing tanks and heals seem to only be the real solution to balance in this game. All heaks will have aoe heals, all will have some type of damage mitigation, all will have their lustrate, benediction type heal. Same with tanks they all will have similar defensive cool dreams, aoe Argo abilities. The only thing I think that can separate these roles are aesthetics, at the end of the day they the rolls gonna be copy and paste of each other

---

Personally speaking as long as jobs have similar tools but play sufficiently differently I'm fine with that. If the job is fun enough to play and reasonably balanced for the fight (IE damage and raid-wide shielding abilities) then I don't really care if Dark Mind is weird Sheltron or w/e.