Warrior Rework to Balance the job

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Jobs operate relative to their alternatives and their relative balance can absolutely have an impact on the game. An overpowered job necessarily impacts others (making content more difficult than intended if the OP job is tuned around and other jobs are taken instead or easier than usual if that job is stacked). An underpowered job that content is nonetheless tuned around necessarily impacts others (denying them a need to make full use of their kits / optimize appropriately).

"If you're not presently maxed in job Z, you are not allowed to voice concern for how job Z may impact jobs A-Y" is not a good look, even if we remove the hierarchical vibes there.

---

No, if you don't play the roles at max level you can't actually understand the difference between the classes at max level in order to lend an equally-representative voice to the discussion which seeks to impact design change. And as of the time I'm writing this, you do not have the tanks at max level.

I can't begin to describe my disinterest in your 'vibes'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crafoutis

No, if you don't play the roles at max level you can't actually understand the difference between the classes at max level in order to lend an equally-representative voice to the discussion which seeks to impact design change. And as of the time I'm writing this, you do not have the tanks at max level.

---

This alt does not have every tank at max level yet, no. That said...

By all means, tell me why basic math --let alone across abilities unchanged from the previous expansion and raw damage unchanged from across any other tank-- would require having personally hit each button oneself despite the plethora of vids, vods, and logs available from which to see exactly how their use has played out among players of varying skill levels (including even the top 1%)?

This reads like just another "it's only patch notes; you can't possibly understand how it will play" except in this case the encounters, too, are fully known, making the offhand dismissal make even less sense. One does not need to have hit Bloodwhetting on each alt in each Savage fight (let alone played each also on every other tank) to know Warrior's sustain output or its sources of contribution in DT endgame or, more relevantly, the content types actually being discussed (where Bloodwhetting is most absurd, dungeons).

(And that's ignoring that the same positions are held also by people with every tank leveled to 100.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ramiee

Why are you bringing up things besides dungeons, isn't PyurBlue only talking about dungeons.

---

Because only taking dungeons to ask for a nerf is cherry-picking.
Also if you absolutely want to limit yourself to dungeons: Criterion dungeons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magikazam

The game is designed so DPS don't need healing unless they are one failed mechanic away from death or if there a rare unavoidable party damage. That just how it is. The only one taking constant damage is the tank so he the only one who need constant healing.

---

So change the design? Which is my suggestion from the beginning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

So, for <11%, soon to be <9%, of the game's lifetime (as we already know how it will function in TWW). Because they realized how dumb that was and quickly corrected.

As should be done with any heal tuned for a single-target but then allowed to scale linearly with target count. Such as EW-DT Bloodwhetting (whereas Nascent Flash in ShB was extremely strong but at least had a workable scalar).

(Also, no, Wild Growth was not. It both had a CD and, more importantly, was a HoT, making it incomparable to CoH or any other truly spammable heal.)

---

Yeah, WG wasn't a problem because it was a HoT... but other healers almost burned the forums down over CoH. (and no- WG did not have a CD- but clipping heals didn't really get you anything, so they added the CD and front loaded it)

The point was that as powerful as it was, it wasn't fun, that's all. Power and fun are not the same. It led to some great discussions on what is fun to press vs what is not. Basically, mindlessness isn't fun... that is kind of where all healers in FFXIV are now.

Anyway, it has been nice talking- I canceled again. Maybe I will come back when DT is skippable or healing is fun again. Best wishes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

Because only taking dungeons to ask for a nerf is cherry-picking.

---

"Your left foot has suffered severe frostbite. It's nearly rotten off."
"Why you cherry picking, doc? The rest of me is fine, so I'm fine."

Again, the suggestion is solely to have the single weird-in-that-its-scales-in-an-absurdly-overpowered-fashion skill scale in the way that all other reasonable skills scale. Orogeny does not hit for Upheaval's damage per target. Decimate does not hit for Fell Cleave's damage per target. Ixochole does not heal for Durochole's heal per target. Why should Bloodwhetting, and Bloodwhetting alone, heal for its ST value per target?

Dungeons are where the discussion landed only because you and others refused to acknowledge that AoE events occur in the game despite, easy content or no, their being frequent in the overall most frequently run instanced content in the game (dungeons). But the core is still just that: AoE scaling. Which is independent of the skill's ST scaling and does not even necessitate a nerf, however justified that too may be, to Warrior's typical sustain in basically-single-target-only content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Again, the suggestion is solely to have the single weird-in-that-its-scales-in-an-absurdly-overpowered-fashion skill scale in the way that all other reasonable skills scale. Orogeny does not hit for Upheaval's damage per target. Decimate does not hit for Fell Cleave's damage per target. Ixochole does not heal for Durochole's heal per target. Why should Bloodwhetting, and Bloodwhetting alone, heal for its ST value per target?

---

Read what's below you just quoted. Criterion dungeon are fine.
Ironically, that's cherry picking again but this time it's my argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

So change the design? Which is my suggestion from the beginning.

---

Can't do that since the past 10 years of contents been designed around that. They would need to rework every boss fight, trial an raid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

Read what's below you just quoted. Criterion dungeon are fine.
Ironically, that's cherry picking again but this time it's my argument.

---

How big a part does mass AoE play across the playtime of Criterion Dungeons? Again:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Dungeons are where the discussion landed only because you and others refused to acknowledge that AoE events occur in the game despite, easy content or no, their being frequent in the overall most frequently run instanced content in the game (dungeons). But the core is still just that: AoE scaling. Which is independent of the skill's ST scaling and does not even necessitate a nerf, however justified that too may be, to Warrior's typical sustain in basically-single-target-only content.

---

And what's more, Bloodwhetting/Nascent (+Stem the Tide & Stem the Flow) is still much stronger than Holy Shelltron (+Knight's Resolve & Knight's Benediction), Heart of Corundum (+Clarity of Corundum & Catharsis of Corundum), or TBN + Oblation in Criterion's 3-mob pulls. The fact that it often enough contributes less than the likes of HS's or HoC's total sustain outside of those AoE pulls only makes clearer that its linearly scaling its AoE potential off its ST potential is problematic (in the same sense that, say, the likes of DRK's miti kit is problematic -- either unbalancing the job in certain fights [see even just DT's first Savage fight] or constraining fight design by forcing each encounter's tank-mitigatable damage to follow an exact proportionality within specific timings).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magikazam

Can't do that since the past 10 years of contents been designed around that. They would need to rework every boss fight, trial an raid.

---

It only concerns dungeons.
You don't even need to rework them all, just update the current expert dungeons and apply the recipe to future dungeons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Dungeons are where the discussion landed only because

---

Adapt. Dungeons.
You don't cut a fish's fin because the aquarium is too small for all fishes, you get a better aquarium. In Criterion Warrior isn't broken, stronger yes but not broken, which was the basis of nerfing Bloodwhetting.
Healers designs suffers from SQEX just focusing on the number game then having ridiculous low, unevenly spread numbers in dungeons. They removed debuff cleansing without replacing it while they should've expanded upon it.

Nerfing Warrior won't fix the core issue and will just be a placebo, that's why I'm adamant to not nerf Warrior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

Nerfing Warrior won't fix the core issue and will just be a placebo, that's why I'm adamant to not nerf Warrior.

---

Balancing WAR won't fix everything but it's a start. There is no danger of a placebo either, healing a WAR is vastly different from other tanks in a negative way, and trying to fix that by redesigning what isn't broken makes no sense. Dungeons pulls are built around a single target taking damage. There is nothing wrong with that, it has worked in the past, and it helps to give dungeons their own feel. WAR is the obvious problem so the path of least resistance is to address the problems it has created.

If Bloodwhetting's balance issues are related to standard dungeon content only, and there's a consensus here that such details don't matter in terms of the broader picture of job balance, then the sensible thing is to revise Bloodwhetting such that the heal applies only once per weaponskill. It's clearly a sticking point of perceived unfairness by the broader playerbase, but it costs you nothing in terms of job balance to change it. If anything, it's a hotfix, not a nerf, since the effect would actually match the tooltip description.

'Additional Effect: Restores HP with each weaponskill successfully delivered.'

The balance questions that do need to be raised are in the context of raidwide mitigation and invulns. If you're designing fights with physical raidwides, you can't have some tanks bringing conditional mitigation and others having universal mitigation. I think a decision needs to be made here. Either Shake, Veil, and Passage should apply to physical damage only, or Dark Missionary and HoL should apply to all damage types. There needs to also be a consensus about whether these raidwides provide sustain effects or not across the board.

Likewise, if we're seeing fight designs with four to five tankbusters to be distributed across two tanks, then you can't have a 3 minute variation between invuln recasts.

I think if you addressed these three issues, then the discussion over WAR should settle down. It would probably start up again over GNB, but that's a story for another day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

then the discussion over WAR should settle down. .

---

It's never really been a discussion, just a continuous dogpiling of complaints against WAR made by mostly non-WAR players.

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

But why give it only a flat 400p per action, needlessly copying PLD, when we already had a model that worked better (i.e., that was more easily balanced and more engaging) -- healing for a % of damage dealt, or at least the impact of that model (diminishing returns beyond ST)?

The only defensives not to really scale at all with incoming damage is TBN (since it's so bimodal with such a high cost for failing to pop it) and the heal per Req action on PLD. Neither is in an exceptional place, even if they are each interesting or decently fitting sources of sustain, respectively. But it would neither be more interesting or fitting on Warrior.

Moreover, future Criterion dungeons, if ever they had larger viable pulls but with that much higher damage intake, might require (similarly to Holy Shelltron, for which the %mit is higher but total healing given less), that more of its sustain output scales with context. That would require letting heal for a bit more as incoming damage increases (a % of damage taken) or at least as target count increases (as now) or the Warrior's own outgoing damage increases (as in Shadowbringers).

Healing per target hit makes decent sense for Bloodwhetting; it simply should have diminishing returns so that it doesn't heal for the same rate on each further enemy that it heals off the first struck, be those diminishing returns inherited (as from % of damage dealt) or forced (as per 50% less from each additional enemy).

A simple question on the core issue:

"Compared to other tanks, is the self sustainability of WAR balanced in dungeons or not?"

If yes, then please explain in the context of "tanks sustainability in dungeons"

If no, then limit BW heal scalibilty per target,which seems to be the solution requested by dissatisfied players, and a nerf which will only impact dungeons and no other content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

It only concerns dungeons.
You don't even need to rework them all, just update the current expert dungeons and apply the recipe to future dungeons.

---

Let's forget for the moment that it, in fact, concerns anything with AoE.

Even if we ignored that, you are suggesting that rather than simply adjusting the scaling factor for additional enemies struck by Bloodwhetting / Nascent so that it doesn't make up ~40% of a Warrior's sustain (vs. ~26% from Holy Shelltron, ~24% for TBN & Oblation, or ~24% for Heart of Corundum), we instead remove AoE from any and all future dungeons.

???

This would be like if the devs had taken Flare hitting for its full damage per target such that people would drop from Brayflox HM if they didn't enough BLMs and, rather than deciding to simply fix Flare's scaling, figured they would instead reduce all dungeons to a single mob pullable per wall.

Thankfully, they didn't. Because what you're suggesting would be absurd. Far too much so even for XIV's developments.

____________________

A simple way to balance warrior without having to constrain content further into doldrum for the entire game, is simply to...

1. Give Bloodwhetting diminished healing per target after the first enemy struck (more use cases for 2-3 targets, more engaging in terms of broader decisions) or heal for a portion of damage dealt (more engaging in terms of banking and bursting). (This brings it in check without costing it its flavor.)
   
   
2. Bring Holmgang's CD up roughly to everyone else's. (E.g., 7 minute Hallowed, 5 minute Holmgang, 6 minutes for the rest, at greatest spread.)
   
   
3. Have Dark Missionary and Heart of Light (and Dark Mind) grant some degree of general (not just magic-specific) mitigation, by whatever means, as to be a decent bit better against magic than purely general skills and a decent bit worse but not crippled against physical damage OR remove the categorical mitigation entirely and find another way to differentiate them.

Those three suggestions have been frequent since Endwalker dropped, btw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

It's never really been a discussion, just a continuous dogpiling of complaints against WAR made by mostly non-WAR players.

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

---

Indeed. It’s the most braindead option to try to hurt whats doing good for itself instead of trying to come up with actual ways to fix a bad job. Sadly these are the same people that want to keep the “uniqueness” of Dark Mind only blocking magic damage. Yikes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

---

As a Tank player, WAR is problematic to the enjoyments of others. Not only we got the current discussion where you know, sustain be strong in dungeon to an obvious state where the healer can forget to heal and no bad consequences will happen from that. But you also need to remember that Tank have Warrior as a punching bag due to the fact it known to canibalise on other tank unique stuff. Biggest exemple is, of course SHB DRK losing it self sustain gameplay for warrior to get it, but instead of recovering a small ammount of hp every weaponskill, they just overheal themselves and one ally for ammounts you would see on a healer spending ressources. all of that on a 17 sec coldown.

Hell, imagine they put some more magical damage next savage tier and it wouldn't be so surprising if warrior complain they can't compete with DRK niche anti-magic mitigation. And I wouldn't be surprise if SE give a similar magic mitig to warrior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

It's never really been a discussion, just a continuous dogpiling of complaints against WAR made by mostly non-WAR players.

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

---

DRK has nothing to do with it. Non-WAR players are going to complain when WAR as it is takes away from their enjoyment, and they should. That's why there is a thread. WAR isn't fun to party with and is at odds with parts of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThorinG

A simple question on the core issue:

"Compared to other tanks, is the self sustainability of WAR balanced in dungeons or not?"

If yes, then please explain in the context of "tanks sustainability in dungeons"

If no, then limit BW heal scalibilty per target,which seems to be the solution requested by dissatisfied players, and a nerf which will only impact dungeons and no other content.

---

This is the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Even if we ignored that, you are suggesting that rather than simply adjusting the scaling factor for additional enemies struck by Bloodwhetting / Nascent so that it doesn't make up ~40% of a Warrior's sustain (vs. ~26% from Holy Shelltron, ~24% for TBN & Oblation, or ~24% for Heart of Corundum), we instead remove AoE from any and all future dungeons.

???

---

"???" indeed, what are you talking about?
It's okay to have Warrior performing better against multiple target, at least that's a win against homogenizing the game.

My suggestion is to make Bloodwhetting less stronger by shifting the damage spread & increasing damages. Yes, Warrior will still be very strong in AoE situation (Which is good as it would be its identity) but the impact of this strength would be lessened by the additional sources of damages it can't cover.

Making Bloodwhetting capped on 1 target is only going to make Warrior similar to heal as PLD or GNB. Healing in AoE situation will remain the same boring mess except the healer ego will be less damaged.
It's putting the problem under a sheet so it won't be so blatantly visible.

Mate, I never suggested capping the heal to a single target. Multiple of my posts here speak directly against that approach.

And were the advantage mild (instead of huge) and was compensated for by a weakness outside of its conditions in which it's advantaged (instead of it and the job as a whole still being in the lead regardless), I'd be fine with Bloodwhetting/Nascent and Warrior overall outperforming other on-demands and their jobs in multi-target. That's why I suggested it do so -- just to a reasonable degree. But instead, we've got something like if Dark Mind were already as good as Thrill/Camo generally and then got triple that value against magic as a "favored job" perk.

Some niche advantages are fine, but when you base them on broad categories (multi-target or single-target, magic or physical), you needlessly constrain either competitive job choice or encounter characteristics far more than you add to job flavor. Those capacities should be near to each other, with the differences being primarily in HOW one reaches those capacities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Mate, I never suggested capping the heal to a single target. Multiple of my posts here speak directly against that approach.

---

One way or another it's a nerf that won't fix anything, neither it is a bandaid.
I want the real solution before we even consider nerfing.

The day healers will make full use of their kit in "aoe situations", then I'll agree for a nerf. But we're far from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

One way or another it's a nerf that won't fix anything, neither it is a bandaid.
I want the real solution before we even consider nerfing.

The day healers will make full use of their kit in "aoe situations", then I'll agree for a nerf. But we're far from there.

---

Leaving outliers around due to which we cannot simultaneously balance truly difficult AoE content for tank A and for tanks B, C, and D makes it that much harder and/or worthwhile to introduce that content.

Yes, what we have right now barely scratches the surface of what all is theoretically possible, but we don't get nearer those potential additions by adding or, later, bastioning uninteresting balance fetters like being, by nature of a skill's procedure, straight up overpowered in category X (nor by being blatantly neutered relative to others in category Y).

We can have more nuance in differentiation than just "best sustain in AoE situations", "best mit in purely physical fights", "best mit in purely magical fights" IF people obsessed less over their broad performance advantages. Small advantages can be flavorful little perks, certainly, but we shouldn't be content with them alone, and certainly shouldn't parade greater or lesser capacity (however we might veil it before dropping bombs to the effect of "but I like being the tank best able to solo dungeons", etc.) as "uniqueness".

Warrior shouldn't be "unique" primarily through historically being the overall best tank, but when people refuse any changes (especially, to a so frequently best-in-role job) based on capacity, that is the main kind of "uniqueness" they protect -- often at cost to anything more, be that through kit or context.

Tangent for CKNovel:

Let me be clear here that I don't want to see tanks further homogenized. My issue is simply when "specific" advantages are given so straightforwardly from basic categories that they become simply differences in broad performance for the given type of content.

We saw Warrior and Paladin suffer from this in 1.9 and 2.0:

• In 1.9, Warrior self-healed for so much in dungeons that any disadvantage in heal-efficiency or eHP was moot, since there was nothing Paladin could survive that Warrior could not yet Warrior required far less due to being able to Benediction itself with each Steel Cyclone.
  
  
• In 2.0, those self-heals were neutered when the healing from damage dealt was moved from Steel Cyclone to solely Inner Beast and Warrior's damage was reduced in general. That said, it could still be the more efficient tank... so long as someone else could kite mobs between Bloodbaths and one was hugely overgeared. Resultantly, before the 2.1 changes, we were on a path for Warrior to end up weak until overgeared and preferable thereafter -- broad categorical differences that left no competitive tank choice except at mid-high gear progression unless there was an AoE DPS check (since Paladin's only AoE damage at the time was Circle of Scorn, its only spammable AoE a suppressive debuff).

And for the last few expansions, we've see that among Dark Mind*, Dark Missionary, and Heart of Light. (*Dark Arts could have aided against this but almost never made room for enough healer offensive relative potency through its extra sustain generated to make up for the loss to the DRK's own relative potency otherwise spent augmenting Souleater's damage [and therefore its healing, too, as it healed for damage dealt back then].)

Now, apart from being almost wholly self-scaled vs. scaling with incoming damage, almost all of these can theoretically be fixed through context, yes. You can ensure that each fight has magic damage at amounts and spacing just enough for Dark Mind, for instance, to feel useful and for it and DRK as a whole to provide merely even performance. You can give each fight something to Cover with just enough value to make up for its gauge cost. You can give just the right amount of adds at just the right times for Bloodwhetting to compete on the whole even if its per-hit value were tuned to better fit its AoE potential (instead of just scaling like any other AoE in the game). All of that is theoretically doable.

But doing so would also add a burden to content creation and fetter to its available creativity.

That's not to say that content shouldn't give a damn about individual jobs kits or that it should just leave it a happy coincidence for iconic skills to see good use, of course. They should, likely far, far more than they do now, but that's a lot easier to do in varying ways if the skills themselves do not scale so wildly across broad categories (AoE vs ST, magic vs. physical, single hit vs. many, etc.) or there are at least counterweights across the kits that have those more variedly performing abilities. Such allows those interactions to focus more on utilities instead of just broad summative power likely from a given context.

For instance, Bloodwhetting's healing might scale with damage/hits dealt and therefore primarily with one's own stats, but maybe Warrior would take less damage and heal for more through its vampirics as its health decreases, which allows it to leverage higher amounts of incoming damage. And while Warrior could put out additional healing and damage in AoE via Raw Intuition/Bloodwhetting and Vengeance/Damnation, perhaps Paladin could debuff enemies that strike its shield during Shelltron or Bulwark with a slowing DoT, which would likewise scale better with single-target, while Camouflage might offer something through parry scored, etc.

That is, the means can still be different enough for tanks to feel different even if no tank is advantaged noticeably for a whole content type in its typical form or overall across a specific instance. Mixing up content types (having more adds in raids, more and less scripted damage to non-tanks in dungeons, etc., etc.) would still do a ton of good in that regard, but mixing up who's good at what by allowing them similar capacities in highly differing ways both does not homogenize what really matters (the gameplay) and better allows for freedom in design among each existing and potential future content types.

Sidenote:
If it sounds like I'm overly obsessed with future-proofing for potentially difficult dungeons that are not merely the (imo) barebone implementations that are Criterion Dungeons... I probably am. I very much want something along the lines of amped up Mythic dungeons in this game, with significant environmental mechanics, unique challenges, more cross-role (rather than role-less, as per mere stacking and dancing) responsibilities. I also want some changes to how tanking and healing work that others might fairly call massive (e.g., to make the first more about actively thwarting enemy offenses and making room or ideal access for their raid's own offenses and the second actually see meaningful use of mana beyond rez-charges and a per-60s auto-clickable Lucid). Now, one step at a time, of course. But I'd rather such content design not get blocked on the pebble of outlier abilities around which people confuse excess strength with uniqueness itself.

That being said, I would not suggest the changes to Warrior's on-demands, or anything else, if I thought they could do a net harm to the job. A large part of my interest in the change to Warrior's 25s is specifically because the change from Raw Intuition / Nascent Flash in Shadowbringers (choose between %DR and healing for 50% of damage dealt) to Bloodwhetting / Nascent (identical, but the latter gives double the total healing) made Warrior feel much less engaging to me (all atop, of course, creating a large issue in that skill's balancibility across AoE-heavy vs. ST-only content). The change into the Endwalker/Dawntrail OP and balance-problematic version of our on-demands gave us less interaction (and therefore, to me, less engagement) and less choice (and therefore less versatility, replaced by simple excessive power). In short, imho, the current especially OP version has made the job feel worse to play.

Since getting any sort of truly (imo) interesting dungeon content is such a scant possibility, for now, that gameplay is the larger portion of why I want Warrior's 25s defensives reverted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

It's okay to have Warrior performing better against multiple target, at least that's a win against homogenizing the game.

---

Except Warrior don't perform worst than other tank when in a single target situation. They still have 25 sec cd that mitigate and heal as much as Paladin clemency, on top of not having any meters or mana cost tied to it.

Also if they care about homogenisation, they wouldn't be giving every unique think other have to Warrior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

My suggestion is to make Bloodwhetting less stronger by shifting the damage spread & increasing damages.

---

That not gonna make Bloodwhetting weaker. even if you would make it so mob deal 30% of a tank hp per auto attack, it wouldn't change the fact BW let you overheal yourself each tiem you hit 3+ mobs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

Making Bloodwhetting capped on 1 target is only going to make Warrior similar to heal as PLD or GNB. Healing in AoE situation will remain the same boring mess .

---

Maybe Tank shouldn't have AOE Heal, like at all.

WAR fixes
enhanced tomahawk grants 10s of surging tempest
Chaotic cyclone and Inner chaos are separate buttons
Can gain wrath stacks outside of Inner release

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Give Bloodwhetting diminished healing per target after the first enemy struck (more use cases for 2-3 targets, more engaging in terms of broader decisions) or heal for a portion of damage dealt (more engaging in terms of banking and bursting). (This brings it in check without costing it its flavor.)

---

I'm not suggesting I'm against a nerf like this, although honestly unless it's nerfed to a point it becomes irrelevant to use I don't think it really matters. If it heals any significant amount at all it will likely remain the best ability of it's kind. What I question is the notion that this sort of solution does anything to actually address comments like these:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magikazam

WAR is problematic to the enjoyments of others..

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PyurBlue

Non-WAR players are going to complain when WAR as it is takes away from their enjoyment

---

How does diminishing one job's ability all of a sudden make an entirely different job more enjoyable? It doesn't. Don't be delusional. It's gonna be the same pile of dog s*** it was before. Only you won't have anything to compare it to to realize it's dog s*** anymore.

It seems to me the more enjoyable solution would be to give all the tanks equally effective sustain options. Flavored in their own likeness. Because, you know, it's enjoyable to play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

[*]Bring Holmgang's CD up roughly to everyone else's. (E.g., 7 minute Hallowed, 5 minute Holmgang, 6 minutes for the rest, at greatest spread.)

---

Again, I don't really see how it makes that much of a difference. Even if WAR gets an extra 1 or 2 uses per timeline there may not always be something to use it on. And it's still pretty useless for anything other than TB cheeses. IMHO the most interesting change they could make is to remove invulns altogether.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

[*]Have Dark Missionary and Heart of Light (and Dark Mind) grant some degree of general (not just magic-specific) mitigation, by whatever means, as to be a decent bit better against magic than purely general skills and a decent bit worse but not crippled against physical damage OR remove the categorical mitigation entirely and find another way to differentiate them.

---

I kind of agree, party stuff should for sure at least be somewhat universal in general effectiveness. It doesn't make a lot of sense to cling to the few fragments of phys/mag distinction when all the accompanying aspects that made it interesting got yeeted after HW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magikazam

As a Tank player, WAR is problematic ... due to the fact it known to canibalise on other tank unique stuff.

---

I think it's fair to say War has contributed as at least much as it's borrowed. Auto CDH burst windows being a prime example. And quite honestly, it could contribute a lot more if people were focused on job elements that are popular/fun to play/enjoyable instead of trying to suggest these elements be removed from the game.

Imagine wanting to remove fun stuff from a video game, some people are truly baffling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Imagine wanting to remove fun stuff from a video game, some people are truly baffling.

---

Sums it up pretty perfectly. Nerfing a good job won't change the fact that the bad jobs are bad. Just like how if DRK had its DPS buffed super high it still wouldn't fix how cursed it is. Always simpler for people to just nerf things though then to figure out how to make bad jobs good. That requires proper thinking, but unfortunately there's no convincing the true cope going around. Even after so many of these complaints back in EW, DT came around and somehow still hasn't been convincing enough to drop that particular line of attack.

If people want a particular thing to get fixed, maybe don't try to take away the fun toys others have. One, it ain't gonna happen, and two, it just means things like DRK's bad design will take that much longer to fix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

Sums it up pretty perfectly. Nerfing a good job won't change the fact that the bad jobs are bad. Just like how if DRK had its DPS buffed super high it still wouldn't fix how cursed it is. Always simpler for people to just nerf things though then to figure out how to make bad jobs good. That requires proper thinking, but unfortunately there's no convincing the true cope going around. Even after so many of these complaints back in EW, DT came around and somehow still hasn't been convincing enough to drop that particular line of attack.

If people want a particular thing to get fixed, maybe don't try to take away the fun toys others have. One, it ain't gonna happen, and two, it just means things like DRK's bad design will take that much longer to fix.

---

If you want a study on why never nerfing anything ever is a bad idea look no further than Diablo 3 that adopted that as a design principle, which over time lead them to buffing set bonuses on different classes to absurd heights (such as increasing a damage of a skill by 17500%, no I'm not making this up, this is an actual number) as new sets got released ended up outperforming older sets. That game still functions thanks to the infinite scaling endgame it has.

It's also not like SE is averse to nerfs in general, it's happened multiple times to multiple jobs as they got reworked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terhix

If you want a study on why never nerfing anything ever is a bad idea look no further than Diablo 3 that adopted that as a design principle, which over time lead them to buffing set bonuses on different classes to absurd heights (such as increasing a damage of a skill by 17500%, no I'm not making this up, this is an actual number) as new sets got released ended up outperforming older sets. That game still functions thanks to the infinite scaling endgame it has.

It's also not like SE is averse to nerfs in general, it's happened multiple times to multiple jobs as they got reworked.

---

Meanwhile look at Diablo 4 and how much nerfs have been "improving" things. I can tell you from Elsword and most KRMMO's as well that nerfing is also pretty unenjoyable, especially when I was unlucky enough to play a particular character and path that got nerfed for an entire year straight, and I wasn't going to pay up just to enhance my stuff to break through the nerfs which still made the jobs feel bad.

At most, if they nerf something they usually give a buff elsewhere, off the top of my head I only recall something like Reaper getting their Arcane Crest regen lowered a bit, in the grand scheme of things it really didn't change all that much though. As a main sentiment though, SE are known to buff more than nerf, just look at the recent patch notes alone despite how many people figured Pictomancer was going to get nerfed. Also imagine even bringing up Blizzard of all companies in the conversation. They're meme'd on for a reason and thrive only off of legacy. Irrelevant.

It's a known thing that nerfs are twice as noticeable as buffs, so unless there's plenty of compensation it's no good and it's a pretty whatever approach. In extreme and higher content, it's fine anyway, it becomes a part of your set of tools. That's what they're there for.

Regardless of anyone's feelings on the matter anyway, forums tried crying about it in EW to nerf the self sustain, and SE gave us even more tools and Damnation is so beautiful with the regen. Just like how some people want to return back to the HW days for whatever reason, it ain't happening. Just fix the unfun things to be fun, it takes some thought but if you bring the fun up to everyone else having fun, it's so much nicer.

It's really not about losing your 'toys'. If 8.0 is to be a systemic review of individual job designs, we need to ask ourselves whether tanking has been going in the right design direction. If not, it's important to identify where things have gone wrong.

Self-sustain is a lot of fun. But the amount of satisfaction that you get out it depends on how well it is implemented. Personally, I want to see clutch saves on tanks where they can create photo-finish victories for their teams. I recently linked an example of what this looks like on PLD. I think sustain, when done correctly, can open up similar opportunities for clutch saves on WAR. Those are the best moments to be a tank.

To create these moments, you need a credible threat. When you become completely self-sustaining, in the absence of a healer, then there is no credible threat. You're just at max HP. That's why the balance of self-sustain is so critical, and why it needs to be an active rather than a passive process (and why healers and tanks need to be interdependent, as they were in the past). No tank should ever be completely self-sustaining.

I think another problem is that the amount of sustain available is having a convergent effect on tank design. An isolated burst heal that is context dependent and resource-gated can create flavor on a single tank. But once you start baking in 'Additional Effect: heal' into your base combo, your personal defensives, and your raidwide defensives, then every tank has to start seeing that in their designs.

I remember in ARR and HW, WAR's traditional design philosophy was around their HP totals. You used to see people stack buffs like Defiance, Thrill of Battle, and even Vitality potions to see how high of a total they could get. I was really shocked to see Great Nebula end up with a 20% HP boost, of all things. But that's the current state of tanking. Everyone is protective of their 'toys', the result being progressive mitigation inflation and homogenization all around.

If you toned back the self-sustain across all tanks, made it more focused, deliberate, and judicious, then perhaps you can start giving each tank their own identity and start taking them in different directions. That's what I'd like to see going forward into 8.0. Because what I see right now is a formless mess, and it's been driven by this obsession with making WAR into a completely self-sustaining tank. That in turn warps the entire role around trying to keep up with a broken design direction.

Try job consistency instead of "homogenization", a much better term instead of the lameduck term that keeps coming up.

Tankings pretty fine, were sturdy, we do our job, DPS speed it up so its not unbearable and healers help when things are down or stuff gets heavy. More noticeable in extreme and higher but yeah, if dungeons were as much of a slog to get through as the SB era where nobody wants to use their buttons at all, yeah nah thanks.

Credible threats; DF and PF healers trolling by barely healing or dying repeatedly, and slow DPS making runs unbearably slow, and cotanks doing really bad jobs with tanking. The amount of runs I have to try to salvage in roulettes would add up real fast. Not to mention how nice it is in Eureka/Bozja to be able to self heal for various reasons, let alone deep dungeons or how handy it is in the higher tiered content where things actually hurt. I'm not part of any 0.1% speedkill group so we can safely rule that out given the general state of DF/PF at any given time. I don't need a snapshot moment of sustain, I just want to get the job done. Best moment as a tank is when everything goes smooth even after I greed and alternatively min/max my Damnation for that physical reflect.

Given the state as is where tanks didn't go through much of a rework from EW, it's a pretty solid ground especially with how PLD got a giant shield on Guardian, and as you mentioned the Thrill of Battle effect on Great Nebula for GNB, shoot even DRK got an excog on Shadowed Vigil. Clearly were doing fine, Healers just need to be more fun which is a whole other issue to work on, and DRK just needs to become consistent with the rest of the tanks. Dying is not a benefit, and Dark Mind is not a great cooldown, let's be real.

PLD is the tank with some nice range and really fun burst, GNB is the gas gas fast combo action tank, WAR is the slow man mode tank, DRK is the tank that needs help. DT didn't change the self sustain despite people complaining for months, I'd rather see the topic move on. Nerfing WAR isn't going to make other jobs automatically better, it's just going to make WAR's unhappy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

(...) As a main sentiment though, SE are known to buff more than nerf, just look at the recent patch notes alone despite how many people figured Pictomancer was going to get nerfed. (...)

---

Yes, and it has lead to the most lenient DPS check in a Savage tier in recent history.

The problem isn't that Bloodwhetting is just stronger than other tank oGCDs in aoe situations, the problem is that it's so absurdly stronger that you can't even bring other tanks to the same level without breaking balance elsewhere unless you give all tanks multi-target scaling. As of today the only other tank that has multi-target scaling is DRK with Abyssal Drain (which is 5.2% HPS of Bloodwhetting) and Living Dead (which has healing capped at 100% HP). It's fine if Warrior is the strongest dungeon tank, someone has to be, but it shouldn't be wild to ask for its abilities to exist within the same order of magintude as the other tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terhix

Yes, and it has lead to the most lenient DPS check in a Savage tier in recent history.

The problem isn't that Bloodwhetting is just stronger than other tank oGCDs in aoe situations, the problem is that it's so absurdly stronger that you can't even bring other tanks to the same level without breaking balance elsewhere unless you give all tanks multi-target scaling. As of today the only other tank that has multi-target scaling is DRK with Abyssal Drain (which is 5.2% HPS of Bloodwhetting) and Living Dead (which has healing capped at 100% HP). It's fine if Warrior is the strongest dungeon tank, someone has to be, but it shouldn't be wild to ask for its abilities to exist within the same order of magintude as the other tanks.

---

It's also the first tier which consistently also has a more lenient DPS check than other tiers in the expansion to get people ready for what's to come. We also have some pretty strong jobs in the lineup and the balance isn't so terrible right now where tanks are 10% apart from each other in DPS. Good job not looking at other factors though.

Oh no normal dungeon content or the very rare adds in other content, the horror. Meanwhile it's quite handy in EX2 especially during congalines where everything hits pretty hard, and also helps the healers not have to snapshot a benediction when I'm invulning both TB"s so I don't die to the coming auto, or EX1 with most things going on in general. PLD is pretty fine, it does have a tough time staying up without Holy Sheltron though for my liking, GNB can do pretty nasty stuff in bosses with HOC but it's also the gas gas high dps tank and if anything I'd rather Superbolide give the invuln first then push HP to 1 instead of the other way around, that was a real fun moment to see during a Temple of the Fist run due to a bad tick which just should not happen, and DRK really could use more self sustain, they used to have a good amount back in SB. Granted it took DA spam to achieve it but there's ways to fix it without hurting WAR.

If Bloodwhetting was such a problem it would've been changed and Bloodbath would also be changed. Except it didn't. Try another avenue, it gets sad to see after awhile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

It's also the first tier which consistently also has a more lenient DPS check than other tiers in the expansion to get people ready for what's to come.

---

This isn't my opinion. That the DPS check is more lenient than intended is the official position of SE, and the fact that job balance was done after content was locked in was cited as the cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

We also have some pretty strong jobs in the lineup and the balance isn't so terrible right now where tanks are 10% apart from each other in DPS. Good job not looking at other factors though.

---

Going by aDPS tanks are even closer to each other than that, so yes they did a good job on a patch that mostly just tunes potencies to things. I fail to see how that "other factor" makes Bloowhetting better or worse?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

Oh no normal dungeon content or the very rare adds in other content, the horror. Meanwhile it's quite handy in EX2 especially during congalines where everything hits pretty hard, and also helps the healers not have to snapshot a benediction when I'm invulning both TB"s so I don't die to the coming auto, or EX1 with most things going on in general. PLD is pretty fine, it does have a tough time staying up without Holy Sheltron though for my liking, GNB can do pretty nasty stuff in bosses with HOC but it's also the gas gas high dps tank and if anything I'd rather Superbolide give the invuln first then push HP to 1 instead of the other way around, that was a real fun moment to see during a Temple of the Fist run due to a bad tick which just should not happen, and DRK really could use more self sustain, they used to have a good amount back in SB. Granted it took DA spam to achieve it but there's ways to fix it without hurting WAR.

---

??? Nobody is asking for a potency nerf to the heal or anything that would affect WAR in EX or Savage. All the suggestions revolve around capping the number of heals per GCD, or having diminishing returns per target, or having it just heal 400p for first target hit and a little bit extra for all other targets, none of which affect WAR in any content that doesn't include AoE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

If Bloodwhetting was such a problem it would've been changed and Bloodbath would also be changed. Except it didn't. Try another avenue, it gets sad to see after awhile.

---

All melee dps jobs have Bloodbath, only one tank has Bloodwhetting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terhix

This isn't my opinion. That the DPS check is more lenient than intended is the official position of SE, and the fact that job balance was done after content was locked in was cited as the cause.



Going by aDPS tanks are even closer to each other than that, so yes they did a good job on a patch that mostly just tunes potencies to things. I fail to see how that "other factor" makes Bloowhetting better or worse?



??? Nobody is asking for a potency nerf to the heal or anything that would affect WAR in EX or Savage. All the suggestions revolve around capping the number of heaps per GCD, or having diminishing returns per target, or having it just heal 400p for first target hit and a little bit extra for all other targets, none of which affect WAR in any content that doesn't include AoE.

---

Literally read the first paragraph about the first tiers always being the easiest in terms of DPS checks. I literally just explained how it's not even an issue, it's just how it's been for years. Doesn't change how general PF's still have a hard time clearing it either, fun fact by the way.

Bloodwhetting is a tool, very lovely in dungeons, otherwise it's not the broken boogeyman everyone makes it out to be. Meanwhile the balance back in EW was actually a problem to the point where the P8S incident happened. The kind of thing that shouldn't happen, and thankfully other than Gordias, it hasn't but THAT was an actual balance problem.

Oh a ton of people ask for multiple things. Nerfing the potency, nerfing the cap, diminishing targets, including even just removing it outright on every job because "healers job man". Meanwhile, none of that is happening, there's no actual reason for it. Don't fix what isn't broken. If I can solo heal with 7 DPS in extreme onwards without any of them being RDM/SMN, then you can tell me how it's "Diablo 3 balance" as you loved to bring up.

For an actual reasonable discussion, talk more about how an actual problem like the state of DRK. Dark Missionary should come at lvl 70 instead of 76. How Dark Mind can mitigate all damage. Decouple C&S from AD because that's just been weird. TBN at least needs to remove MP cost but maybe extra cooldown to compensate so it's just a usable tool, and give 5 stacks of BW to Delerium so you can actually have normal mana gain since that got ripped out unfortunately. Don't have to touch any other job at all whatsoever, DRK would already be much more fun to play because it'd be more consistent with the other tanks, and meanwhile everyone else that's having fun can remain having fun. Do something more like that, or have a repeat of the opening of DT where somehow everyone was in shock that the self sustain only got better.

Shoot if I could suggest something for BW/RI, I'd rather it come at lvl 30 with TOB so I can actually be a WAR in 50 or lower content. However I actually don't expect that to happen though, and I'm fine with what I got now, so not sweating about it~.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

Bloodwhetting is a tool, very lovely in dungeons, otherwise it's not the broken boogeyman everyone makes it out to be.

---

And so we once again arrive at the same weak excuse over and over again: "it doesn't matter because it's dungeons".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

For an actual reasonable discussion, talk more about how an actual problem like the state of DRK.

---

There is like 20 threads about the state of DRK already, and I've given my feedback were appropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terhix

And so we once again arrive at the same weak excuse over and over again: "it doesn't matter because it's dungeons".



There is like 20 threads about the state of DRK already, and I've given my feedback were appropriate.

---

Cope harder, it's a proper response no matter how much you hate to hear it. Maybe wonder how it hasn't gotten changed despite that "excuse" being so "weak".

And you can guess why that is, maybe because it's an actual problem. If you've already done so, find another actual problem to deal with. Because with this clutter taking up space instead, it's only going to make it take that much longer.

You do you though~. I already called it months before DT arrived, and right now I'm just expecting my gap closer to get changed to DRK/GNB style, which will be great to have actual utility be utility. We already went through Low Blow having potency a long time ago, we can do that with the rest of the gap closers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikoRemi

Cope harder, it's a proper response no matter how much you hate to hear it. Maybe wonder how it hasn't gotten changed despite that "excuse" being so "weak".

---

I have wondered about it and it's baffling to me how scared SE is to upset WAR mains about such an obvious thing. That said, I have to say, I do at least appreciate your honesty here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Imagine wanting to remove fun stuff from a video game, some people are truly baffling.

---

In a game mode that would be cleared with or without the fun stuff.
To balance a crazy but harmless healing.
Just to save the ego of the poor healers who have 20 buttons for healing but only press 4 of them so they can press 5 buttons instead.

This sums up the whole thread, no one here is trying to balance the game by nerfing WAR, just trying to soothe the healer ego.
But instead put their hands on their ear and scream "LALALA BUT LOOK AT WAR TOPPING ITSELF" despite showing data of the root problem.

Its people saying "Lalala warrior is fine" and people saying "Lalala warrior is op" you're both as bad as each other.