How do we feel about tank damage right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

The mere fact that tanks' rotations are something unalterable, i.e. to be merely "maintained", indicates that there may well more complexity in the healers' offensive actions than the tanks'. Apart from DRK (via TBN DA banking for raid buffs), I can't think of a single tank that has to consider damage taken or party actions in any way that would change its behavior.

And let's remember how much "buffier" they are. They mitigate just over half of all damage dealt to them when you take the multiplicative effects of Defense, Trait, and their defensive skills. (Defense and Trait alone compound to around 46% mitigation, while defensive skills tend to be used where the most damage is inflicted, thus skewing the contribution of their heightened % mitigation to an even effect overall.) They remove the need for more healing than they could actually ever even receive from a healer.

---

I mean same can be said about healers in optimised fights where every heal is mapped then all they have to do is press glare/malefic/broil and refresh dot, can be considered unalterable. Also your statement is a bit disingenuous of optimised opener for specific fights in regards PLD and GNB, where very much their rotation do in fact alter from the standard.

So Hurrdurrikan's posts boil down to "I like standing about taking hits and just taking hits all day, you better start liking that real soon as well lads". Glad we sorted that out buddy, your contribution is appreciated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Dia refreshing alone has more moving parts to it than most of the tank 'rotation'.

---

This is not an argument for tanks having the same dmg as healers.

Healers does not have to time their "rotation" since they are ranged casters and could cast from anywhere they want. On tanks you have times off from melee range and you cant just stand there and eat all aoes, same goes to melee dps thus why their dps on average is high.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aodhan_ofinnegain

I mean same can be said about healers in optimised fights where every heal is mapped then all they have to do is press glare/malefic/broil and refresh dot, can be considered unalterable. Also your statement is a bit disingenuous of optimised opener for specific fights in regards PLD and GNB, where very much their rotation do in fact alter from the standard.

---

The first is a fair point. Eventually, both all healing and damage can be seen a single "rotation", which is largely likewise unalterable. That's an eventuality, though. Everything until then is subject to alteration.

But it's at least as disingenuous to use a change in opener as evidence for tanks having to change their actions ("rotation") based on circumstances occurring over the course of the fight. You altered the starting sequence, not the fact that you will thereafter maintain it exactly as you would with any other sequence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

This is not an argument for tanks having the same dmg as healers.

Healers does not have to time their "rotation" since they are ranged casters and could cast from anywhere they want. On tanks you have times off from melee range and you cant just stand there and eat all aoes, same goes to melee dps thus why their dps on average is high.

---

There is no argument in this thread that is exclusive to tanks.

Having a 'rotation' doesn't mean you should do more damage, nor the difficulty or lack there of in the rotation itself. To say tanks must do more because they push a wider variety of buttons to achieve their damage ignores that Healers juggle their own challenges to free up their GCDs.

That tanks primarily interact with enemies ignores that Healers optimize around maximizing their interactions while tanks get it as a default. A healer should be properly rewarded for that, no?

Healers of all the jobs have the least tools to deal with forced movement - A tank loses uptime when forced out of melee, a healer loses it when targeted by mechanics, with the possible exception of Astro who make liberal use of downtime between mechanics and the Malefic Cast time to shuffle from one place to another.

Healers doing as much damage as tanks further pushes this game's terrible design where the opportunity cost of a single GCD heal is so enormous as to make healers want to avoid them at all costs. This has only gotten worse over expansions as GCD heals maintain their effective 0 damage potency but a healer's main nuke becomes replaced by increasingly powerful ones, with the only attempt at addressing this being White Mage's lily system.

If the healer community wasn't already upset at much of how this expansion has treated them, I would suggest substantially nerfing healer DPS output, but this would not on itself suffice to address the fact that healers simply don't have enough healing to do in raids due to every single raid being designed around spike damage and boss auto-attacks being effectively trivial to heal.

Given that addressing the bad design of healers requires substantial changes to encounter design, at this point it might simply be a better idea to boost tanks by 10% or so, or raid strategies will likely begin developing where tanks losing uptime is considered a non-issue, given the embarrassing state of tank DPS at the moment, and the fact that tanks scale so poorly with strength that by the next raid we might encounter tanks being seriously out-DPSed by every healer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RadicalPesto

If the healer community wasn't already upset at much of how this expansion has treated them, I would suggest substantially nerfing healer DPS output

---

I'm personnaly on the side to reduce the healer's healing output, so that, like the dev claimed, they'd have to spend more time actually healing. Or, if they don't want to "nerf" anything because people will rage, just make sure that the next bosses deals significantly more damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FirstnameLastname

So Hurrdurrikan's posts boil down to "I like standing about taking hits and just taking hits all day, you better start liking that real soon as well lads". Glad we sorted that out buddy, your contribution is appreciated.

---

You got any of that straw left?

You need only look at any other of my posts here to see that I'd rather tanks were able to output damage nearer to that of dps, if only to make their effort-to-reward ratio more appreciable so that tanks don't feel like stepping stones to the optimization available to DPS.

That doesn't change the fact, however, that tanks are already incredibly strong; while healer oGCDs are the sum total of their contribution that does not eat into their damage output, tanks provide more effective sustain on themselves (via mitigation more than 50% damage on average) than healers can provide them without paying a single point of damage for the opportunity.

By all means, let's see tank damage increased a little bit, but that should then come with cost to the percentage of damage we are able to nullify over the course of a fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

By all means, let's see tank damage increased a little bit, but that should then come with cost to the percentage of damage we are able to nullify over the course of a fight.

---

That was called "the tank stance" ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

That was called "the tank stance" ;)

---

Yeah, I'd rather we have the choice between mitigation (healing spared) and damage, just as healers do, and for more of our mitigation (again, effectively the same as healing) be skill-based, rather than the majority of it being passive.

Nearly half of all damage mitigation is passive, making even a 30% CD effectively only some 16-17% additional mitigation, even if still a true 30% increase to eHP. That... doesn't feel great, given that while it certainly improves survivability, it doesn't actually increase throughput.

I could see why the devs might prefer that, but I'd just prefer... largely the opposite, more manipulation of efficiencies (and thereby throughput) than just whether one survives or not.