Fine, Bloodwhetting is too OP

BW is also 2000 potency of healing on a single target.

When being hit by a flat tankbuster it’s mitigation effect is weaker than the others (though the 40%’s have largely mitigated this issue and holmgang covers the rest) but it’s better at shrugging off autos as 2000 potency is nothing to scoff at considering HS the next strongest is 1200

In single target raid situations I’d say holmgang is the most problematic tank CD followed by guardian, after that it would be great nebula then HS and BW.

In cleave situations BW is the obvious worst offender followed by guardian then roughly the same order from there

Pure healing is more problematic than mitigation but incredibly strong mitigation that allows other pure healing to catch up can also be problematic

The invulns I really don't get. I understand that the fight designers probably asked them to make them all 10s so that they can more readily plan for tank invulns, but then they promptly didn't plan for the CD, which makes me wonder what happened.

They were so much cooler when they had different durations and limitations. Paladin with its huge CD, Warrior self-rooting, Gunbreaker cardiovascular health check, Dark Knight having to die. They kept three of these, and removed one. One could easily argue they weren't well-balanced before, but making it worse in balance is so not helping... If at least the fight designers had then utilized the same 10s duration meaningfully I would say it was maybe a worthwhile tradeoff, but that's not something they did!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

BW is also 2000 potency of healing on a single target.

When being hit by a flat tankbuster it’s mitigation effect is weaker than the others (though the 40%’s have largely mitigated this issue and holmgang covers the rest) but it’s better at shrugging off autos as 2000 potency is nothing to scoff at considering HS the next strongest is 1200

In single target raid situations I’d say holmgang is the most problematic tank CD followed by guardian, after that it would be great nebula then HS and BW.

In cleave situations BW is the obvious worst offender followed by guardian then roughly the same order from there

Pure healing is more problematic than mitigation but incredibly strong mitigation that allows other pure healing to catch up can also be problematic

---

It's 1600 potency, hs is 1000 (i don't know where you got 1200 from), Both are also less stronger the healer potency healing because everyone always forgets healers have a passive that boosts their healing.

Pure healing generally isn't the full "issue" here, it's mostly the mitigation, not to say that they can't reduce healing on tank cooldowns, but the way to nerf tanks wouldn't be just to remove self healing it would be to reduce some self sustain and some mitigations, even give healers better & stronger target mits (like upping aqua veil's mit and or duration) to give healers more to give to tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rithy255

It's 1600 potency, hs is 1000 (i don't know where you got 1200 from), Both are also less stronger the healer potency healing because everyone always forgets healers have a passive that boosts their healing.

Pure healing generally isn't the full "issue" here, it's mostly the mitigation, not to say that they can't reduce healing on tank cooldowns, but the way to nerf tanks wouldn't be just to remove self healing it would be to reduce some self sustain and some mitigations, even give healers better & stronger target mits (like upping aqua veil's mit and or duration) to give healers more to give to tanks.

---

It’s a 400 potency shield and 4 400 potency heals which is 2000 (or about 1300 healer potency), that’s still stronger than almost all the healer heals

Besides guardian which is problematic for the reasons I explained (it’s basically a second invuln) the bigger problem is pure healing because without a healer your HP should be on a downward slope, you shouldn’t have enough healing to outheal incoming damage as a tank

If BW's shield is a heal then The Blackest Night is a heal as well, which makes no sense.
Guardian isn't an invuln, the shield value should be around 35k HP.

I get you want to reduce tank capacities of HP recovery but going after shield&mits makes no sense, what's the motivation here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

If BW's shield is a heal then The Blackest Night is a heal as well, which makes no sense.
Guardian isn't an invuln, the shield value should be around 35k HP.

I get you want to reduce tank capacities of HP recovery but going after shield&mits makes no sense, what's the motivation here?

---

I specifically didn’t go after shields and mits. The shield on BW is fine. Guardians problem is the fact that it’s a 1000 potency shield AND a 40% mitigation. Do you understand how strong 40% mitigation is. Great nebula is functionally not any better but PLD is also naturally tankier than GNB

BW’s raw healing is 1600, I have zero problem with its shield I just count it as part of the healing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

If BW's shield is a heal then The Blackest Night is a heal as well, which makes no sense.

---

Understanding how mitigations, healing, absorbs and bladeturns and so on can be calculated as EHP isn't exactly rocket science. Sorry if it doesn't make sense to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

I specifically didn’t go after shields and mits. The shield on BW is fine. Guardians problem is the fact that it’s a 1000 potency shield AND a 40% mitigation. Do you understand how strong 40% mitigation is. Great nebula is functionally not any better but PLD is also naturally tankier than GNB

---

I know it's strong, I'm just pointing out you said, and I quote you:
"(it’s basically a second invuln)"

Yes, 40% + 1K shield is strong but nowhere near a second invuln.
Just don't call it an invuln.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carighan

Understanding how mitigations, healing, absorbs and bladeturns and so on can be calculated as EHP isn't exactly rocket science. Sorry if it doesn't make sense to you.

---

It's true mitigation and active healing are both actors on the HP Economy but they're different actors.
If anything that plays a part on HP is a healing then dodging AoE is healing, gear's defense is healing, kiting is healing, killing the boss faster is healing.
And I'm not going to debate a meme.

Healing shouldn't really be calculated as eHP, because effective health is the amount of damage you can take before dying without healing, by definition. The classical case where eHP is used is in tankbuster design, because a heal isn't going to influence whether you survive a oneshot. Flat damage reduction, percentage damage reduction, and max HP boosts are all fair game though.

There really isn't a problem with tanks having powerful personal mitigation tools, because predicting incoming personal damage to survive is exactly what tanks do. However, invulns are a problem, because they're much too accessible and often end up simplifying/bypassing proper swap technique. I would rather they just opted for a higher tier (i.e. 60-80% DR) of mitigation tools to replace the current invulns.

I can agree that the current state of tank self-sustain is excessive, but anticipating single-target damage patterns and mitigating them to survive is definitely well within the realm of tanking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

[...]There really isn't a problem with tanks having powerful personal mitigation tools, because predicting incoming personal damage to survive is exactly what tanks do. However, invulns are a problem, because they're much too accessible and often end up simplifying/bypassing proper swap technique. I would rather they just opted for a higher tier (i.e. 60-80% DR) of mitigation tools to replace the current invulns[...]

---

Probably a hot take: invulns should be a niche, not one of the standard cooldown. Say, let PLD keep their HG and delete the other 3 tank's invulns in exchange for something that's not 'an invuln'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

Those two claims don’t contradict, WOW hits for more which justifies a higher sustain level. Is WOW’s sustain still too high……arguable. Is WOW’s sustain better balanced because the tanks take more damage……yes

And the only reason the sustain nerf was bought up was because Anjou doomed about a sustain nerf leading the population of 14 to collapse. Which WOW’s sustain nerf directly refutes

---

That's a radically extreme take that shows you know nothing. The two games have very different communities. Most players in FFXIV are too easily butt hurt by the smallest things. We already lost 5%-10% of NA over the "Woke Lamat" drama. As if the game isn't already "woke" thanks to the community. You think the same, or worse, wouldn't happen over a Bloodwhetting nerf? You are fooling yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnjouMaaka

That's a radically extreme take that shows you know nothing. The two games have very different communities. Most players in FFXIV are too easily butt hurt by the smallest things. We already lost 5%-10% of NA over the "Woke Lamat" drama. As if the game isn't already "woke" thanks to the community. You think the same, or worse, wouldn't happen over a Bloodwhetting nerf? You are fooling yourself.

---

Oh so now we can’t nerf BW because wuk lamat’s voice actor is trans

This is it folks. This is officially the worst argument I’ve ever heard in regards to 14

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

Oh so now we can’t nerf BW because wuk lamat’s voice actor is trans

This is it folks. This is officially the worst argument I’ve ever heard in regards to 14

---

You twisting my comment to justify yourself is the bad argument. Reread the comment you're quoting until you understand what I said.

In fairness, if you wanted insight into the playerbase's distaste around watching a WAR player solo a boss in current content while everyone else watches, WL provides an excellent case study of this. I think even the people who managed to find something likeable about her character cringed at that moment.

The biggest risk impact will be on new players, because they're the ones most likely to die and be forced to sit around while a WAR solos fights in casual content over a course of 20 minutes. If SE wants to keep that cohort of players, the answer is pretty obvious. They might as well forget about their 'Hall of the Intermediate' and reworks of old content. You aren't keeping those players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

In fairness, if you wanted insight into the playerbase's distaste around watching a WAR player solo a boss in current content while everyone else watches, WL provides an excellent case study of this. I think even the people who managed to find something likeable about her character cringed at that moment.

The biggest risk impact will be on new players, because they're the ones most likely to die and be forced to sit around while a WAR solos fights in casual content over a course of 20 minutes. If SE wants to keep that cohort of players, the answer is pretty obvious. They might as well forget about their 'Hall of the Intermediate' and reworks of old content. You aren't keeping those players.

---

The good thing is that these Hall of the Novice upgrades are an extra learning tool. There will now be no excuse for not knowing how to do stack/spread mechanics. Looks like it will even teach what a tankbuster is. The big downside is that Hall of the Novice is not mandatory for character progression, and the 30% xp accessory only helps below level 30, so there's no real incentive for players to do it.

I wouldn't celebrate the tankbuster thing, tankbuster damage is a joke, if you want people to learn about tankbusters then tankbusters need to be a credible threat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

Besides guardian which is problematic for the reasons I explained (it’s basically a second invuln) the bigger problem is pure healing because without a healer your HP should be on a downward slope, you shouldn’t have enough healing to outheal incoming damage as a tank

---

Know what I actually agree with you on that last part I do think tanks should need some form of healing from healers, I do think in some instances (like warrior even Paladin/Gunbreaker) should lose some sustain, but theirs also a argument to be made that mostly it's actually the mitigation and actual damage that the tanks take. I would actually agree with you if your solution wasn't just to make tanks more boring for people who actually enjoy the role (aka removing most forms of sustain makes the role more boring, Mitigation doesn't feel that interactive esp in casual content).

No Paladins Guardian isn't a invul, do that on savage mechs where you actually need a invul and it will show you that it's not a invul, I'm also fine with the "shield tank" that doesn't do as much damage as gunbreaker to feel a more defensive then GNB, Lets be real though both actually have very similar defensive kits and self healing, Besides the fact that Gunbreaker also has a shorter cooldown on its invul, I do not think Paladin in it's current state is a "op tank" it's actually just good for once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rithy255

Know what I actually agree with you on that last part I do think tanks should need some form of healing from healers, I do think in some instances (like warrior even Paladin/Gunbreaker) should lose some sustain, but theirs also a argument to be made that mostly it's actually the mitigation and actual damage that the tanks take. I would actually agree with you if your solution wasn't just to make tanks more boring for people who actually enjoy the role (aka removing most forms of sustain makes the role more boring, Mitigation doesn't feel that interactive esp in casual content).

No Paladins Guardian isn't a invul, do that on savage mechs where you actually need a invul and it will show you that it's not a invul, I'm also fine with the "shield tank" that doesn't do as much damage as gunbreaker to feel a more defensive then GNB, Lets be real though both actually have very similar defensive kits and self healing, Besides the fact that Gunbreaker also has a shorter cooldown on its invul, I do not think Paladin in it's current state is a "op tank" it's actually just good for once.

---

I’m not sure why mitigation doesn’t feel interactive but self healing does in your mind

My “solution” isn’t just taking sustain away from the tanks and calling it a day. My solution involves the tanks actually being tanks in terms of agro, mitigation control over long periods of time (not just flashing mitigation right before a TB) and boss positioning. Right now tanks are just a fusion of basic melee and off healer. My solution isn’t just to nerf tanks I don’t know how many more times I can say that

And why should sustain not be changed because tanks enjoy it when healers don’t. Why don’t healers get a say in tanks doing their role for them

It's a bit hard to draw a clear line between what tanks and healers should be capable of doing. At some point people will turn around and ask if healers should have access to single target mitigation tools because it encroaches on the tank experience of mitigating tankbusters.

Interdependence is important. If you want tanks to be completely dependent on healers to survive, then you also have to accept a gameplay environment in which any auto attack on a non-tank results in a oneshot. That's the foundation on which the classical trinity design was based. Otherwise the support power balance just shifts from tanks to healers instead.

The current design substitutes interdependence for redundancy. It's more accessible in some respects, but diminishes the value of support players because there's so much cross-cover.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice_Rivers

I wouldn't celebrate the tankbuster thing, tankbuster damage is a joke, if you want people to learn about tankbusters then tankbusters need to be a credible threat.

---

Yeah nowadays they usually fall only into two categories:

1. Did you withhold at least 1 of your CDs for this instead of using it to decrease incoming damage? Ideally 2, but 1 works.
2. Have you put Provoke on your hotbar for a quick tankswap or are you a Warrior and can just invuln each instance because your invuln CD is too low?

They've become too formulaic. Every so often we see something semi-clever, like a 15s+ DoT that kills you if you also got the debuff from the second hit, so even if you invuln you die a few seconds later. But with autoattack damage being ignorable already (since bosses rarely have time to AA) and tankbusters being just a "did you withhold CDs"-check, it's just... boring.

If nothing else, I want tankbusters to be unreliable! Any AA has a small chance to be "upgraded" to a simple big hit with a short cast bar, meanwhile there is a PPM-limitation for how frequently this can happen so that if nothing else, the OT can always grab the boss and use their timers (cast selects target at the end, as it just applies a short buff making the next AA be a big hit).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carighan

Yeah nowadays they usually fall only into two categories:

1. Did you withhold at least 1 of your CDs for this instead of using it to decrease incoming damage? Ideally 2, but 1 works.
2. Have you put Provoke on your hotbar for a quick tankswap or are you a Warrior and can just invuln each instance because your invuln CD is too low?

They've become too formulaic. Every so often we see something semi-clever, like a 15s+ DoT that kills you if you also got the debuff from the second hit, so even if you invuln you die a few seconds later. But with autoattack damage being ignorable already (since bosses rarely have time to AA) and tankbusters being just a "did you withhold CDs"-check, it's just... boring.

If nothing else, I want tankbusters to be unreliable! Any AA has a small chance to be "upgraded" to a simple big hit with a short cast bar, meanwhile there is a PPM-limitation for how frequently this can happen so that if nothing else, the OT can always grab the boss and use their timers (cast selects target at the end, as it just applies a short buff making the next AA be a big hit).

---

Alternatively they could just return crit autos and actually make autos dangerous

Anyone remember when a boss like kefka had a mit plan that went down to the GCD rather than down to per “event every 30 seconds”

Oh true, or that. Which in turn would even open up more balancing knobs: Some tanks could be better at getting crit less or for less, but in return take more damage baseline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

It's a bit hard to draw a clear line between what tanks and healers should be capable of doing. At some point people will turn around and ask if healers should have access to single target mitigation tools because it encroaches on the tank experience of mitigating tankbusters.

---

In my opinion it's very simple:
-Tanks should shine when it comes to single target sustain.
-Healers should shine when it comes to party wide sustain.

The line should be considered crossed when 2 tanks can sustain 6 players.
PLD can be excused as using white magic is its identity and comes at a DPS loss.

A tank able to recover from the mistakes of a healer is good to the game rather than having all the healing responsibilities on healers, especially in casual, unorganized content where the lacking of a healer can lead to toxic situations.
I don't think anyone here is unfamiliar with situations similar to "where were de healzzzz???", a common thing in MMOs. Obviously, XIV is leaning too much in the healer friendly balance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

In my opinion it's very simple:
-Tanks should shine when it comes to single target sustain.
-Healers should shine when it comes to party wide sustain.

The line should be considered crossed when 2 tanks can sustain 6 players.
PLD can be excused as using white magic is its identity and comes at a DPS loss.

A tank able to recover from the mistakes of a healer is good to the game rather than having all the healing responsibilities on healers, especially in casual, unorganized content where the lacking of a healer can lead to toxic situations.
I don't think anyone here is unfamiliar with situations similar to "where were de healzzzz???", a common thing in MMOs. Obviously, XIV is leaning too much in the healer friendly balance.

---

Does that not lead to the equally toxic situation of tank soloing

Right now in casual content there is no check on tank power. DPS lack adequate sustain to singularly keep themselves alive and healers keeping themselves alive tanks their DPS potential. Tanks meanwhile have no restrictions on either side which leads to how often tanks will solo a boss

If tanks are going to “shine” in single target sustain yo the point they can out sustain the damage being done to them they need to be checked in some other way because right now the only check in tanks power is the enrage on savage content that forces DPS (at least while its current)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

DPS lack adequate sustain to singularly keep themselves alive

---

They can sustain themselves.
Dark Knight & 3 DPS run exists, here's one where the Dark Knight doesn't even cast Dark Missionary once and keep Oblation/TBN to themselves. Here's another one for the second Expert dungeon and finally Alexandria where the DRK press slightly more buttons.

And no, before you point out the Pictomancer, Star Prism didn't played a major role, I feel like this group was trying to see the limit of DPS self survival while using the least amount of defensives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

They can sustain themselves.
Dark Knight & 3 DPS run exists, here's one where the Dark Knight doesn't even cast Dark Missionary once and keep Oblation/TBN to themselves. Here's another one for the second Expert dungeon and finally Alexandria where the DRK press slightly more buttons.

---

This DRK at the end of last pull before the first boss is down to 20% HP. This isn't sustain, this is mitigating and absorbing enough damage to survive before the trash dies. Doing a speed run of a dungeon in savage gear is not indicative of normal play, and ironically replacing one of the DPS with a healer in this run would vastly increase the odds of DRK needing some healing due to the DPS drop.

If you do a random roulette, and you get players that are not geared or just not very good at pumping out DPS, DRK will need healing period. Compare that to a WAR who can go into the same dungeon by themselves, w2w pull and clear the whole thing alone without any help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terhix

This DRK at the end of last pull before the first boss is down to 20% HP. This isn't sustain, this is mitigating and absorbing enough damage to survive before the trash dies. Doing a speed run of a dungeon in savage gear is not indicative of normal play, and ironically replacing one of the DPS with a healer in this run would vastly increase the odds of DRK needing some healing due to the DPS drop.

If you do a random roulette, and you get players that are not geared or just not very good at pumping out DPS, DRK will need healing period. Compare that to a WAR who can go into the same dungeon by themselves, w2w pull and clear the whole thing alone without any help.

---

Very cool, however the point isn't the DRK but the DPS sustaining themselves.
I took DRK as it has the least healing capabilities on the teammates and this one in particular tried to avoid pressing their party wide mitigation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

Very cool, however the point isn't the DRK but the DPS sustaining themselves.
I took DRK as it has the least healing capabilities on the teammates and this one in particular tried to avoid pressing their party wide mitigation.

---

I meant the DPS sustaining themselves if they are the target of the bosses agro (ie there is no tank). That’s why i also said the healers have to tank their damage to stay alive. Healers don’t need to lose damage to keep themselves alive during the 1 raidwide per 30 minutes the bosses put out

My point was in a situation where tanks shine in self sustain there can be no check on their power in content that doesn’t have an enrage because if the tank can outheal the damage they take the healers role becomes babying the DPS who also aren’t needed if there is no DPS check

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

I meant the DPS sustaining themselves if they are the target of the bosses agro (ie there is no tank). That’s why i also said the healers have to tank their damage to stay alive. Healers don’t need to lose damage to keep themselves alive during the 1 raidwide per 30 minutes the bosses put out

My point was in a situation where tanks shine in self sustain there can be no check on their power in content that doesn’t have an enrage because if the tank can outheal the damage they take the healers role becomes babying the DPS who also aren’t needed if there is no DPS check

---

Fair.
Yes, they should take much more damage on tank buster and tank buster should happen during trash pack. Since Shadowbringer we don't have to think about how we mitigate,
The fact that DRK can do this 1 tank 3 DPS run when keeping mitigation should be telling enough. DRK's kit shouldn't be able to allow it to last it a whole dungeon by itself, wether they finish at 50, 20, 1%.

If you look at the run, the group took 5 to 7 vulnerability up per dungeon yet they never got KO'd.
I believe they were trying to find the limit of their survivability while using the least defensives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

I believe they were trying to find the limit of their survivability while using the least defensives.

---

There's a Samurai.

They took vuln stacks to pop Tengetsu when aoe raid wides weren't coming out because it gave them 10 Kenki.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

There's a Samurai.

They took vuln stacks to pop Tengetsu when aoe raid wides weren't coming out because it gave them 10 Kenki.

---

While it's true, they only took the majority of vulnerability up in Tender valley. In Alexandria, 2/5, Straighbourg Deadwalk 1/5.
On other content they've cleared I've seen the mitigation being used, so I just assume they went in those dungeons with shit&giggles in mind.

In any cases, Samurai survives 5 vulnerability stacks with 3 from the last boss alone without the need for a Warrior, Paladin or any healer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

While it's true, they only took the majority of vulnerability up in Tender valley. In Alexandria, 2/5, Straighbourg Deadwalk 1/5.
On other content they've cleared I've seen the mitigation being used, so I just assume they went in those dungeons with shit&giggles in mind.

In any cases, Samurai survives 5 vulnerability stacks with 3 from the last boss alone without the need for a Warrior, Paladin or any healer.

---

Sure, take it away from DPS too.

Won't see me complain about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice_Rivers

I wouldn't celebrate the tankbuster thing, tankbuster damage is a joke, if you want people to learn about tankbusters then tankbusters need to be a credible threat.

---

They are in ultimates and these reflects this Square Enix philosophy of scripted incoming damage best.

Consider that all ultimates have phases where you do trios (downtime mechanics) and targetable boss comes back between them only to do tankbusters and get spanked.

TOP phase 5 is good example of this since it is double tankbuster - trio - double tankbuster - trio - double tankbuster - trio with a bit of targetable boss - double tankbuster into enrage.

Each of these tankbusters do up to 300k damage while tank HP is ~110k, so as you can see each tank is forced to kitchen sink these + have party and healers to mitigate if they are swapping them to have ~65% mitigation, or invuln these.

They are spread apart enough for rampart, feints, healer cds to come back. So incoming damage comes in intervals matching defensive/healer cooldowns. Even the short CDs like bloodwheting have to be used on specific things here.

While the rest of the game is easier, fundamental scripted nature of damage still remains.

And the proposals of more threatening autos, encounters forcing spreading of cooldowns etc. do not match this at all.

Big issue is that the healing is secondary to mitigation and encounters forcing overlapping mitigations from entire party results in huge issues if somebody misses theirs.

Shield healer tends to suffer as a consequence, but even they do not have enough tools to deal with all of this by themselves, so no wonder they are rarest role in PF.

I'm glad that they got tankbusters right somewhere, that doesn't really help the rest of us though, tankbusters in dungeons and such are still pointless. While I wouldn't advocate for having to kitchen sink them in normal content, they should still require spending cooldowns to survive at all and still make an appreciable hole in the tank's HP. Maybe have them apply a vuln/DoT/both if the devs are feeling particularly harsh so the healer actually has to deal with it.

On the subject of scripting, I've suggested elsewhere that at every 'mechanic point' there should be three to five mechanics to choose from at random so that while you might know when damage is coming you won't know what form it's going to take until the mechanic starts playing out. combine that with a reduction in generic 'dodge the aoe' mechanics, instead having forced damage of some kind would increase the value of healers a bit at least.

I agree with BW nerf to one instance healing per weapon skill. I don't think this would kill Warriors Identity because I don't think anyone is really thinking a jobs "identity" is linked to the fact that something procts multiple times. Paladin still has a on demand healing GCD if anything else and if we are talking identity I feel like they should really look at Dark Knight and bring it in line with it's class design in other mainline Final Fantasy games.

Tanks over healing isn't a boggyman and should be looked into before it gets too far out of hand, it won't though because as long as content is being cleared and the sub fee is still there SE has no reason to look into this. To give more context I find it funny that Xeno's suggestion for living dead got implemented before War got BW nerfed or that Drk got a real rework.

The instances of DPS healing and mitigating is funny when trying to put it up against Tanks as they (the dps) are limited by their CD's and the mages have to give up their DPS and or resources to heal. Tanks CD on their heals are next to non existent and often doesn't come at the expense of DPS, though I wouldn't be opposed to this. That is giving up on another part of the role in order to fill another.

I still think retooling the underlying "specialization" of tanks would work better but yeah I agree, in the short term maybe focusing Bloodwhetting more on single-target would work better:

* Heal per-weaponskill-used, not per-target-hit.
* Increase healing to make the skill more potent against bosses etc. Or just increase the duration of the healing.

BW scales strongly with AoE. It's actually fairly weak in single-target situations because it provides less mitigation than the other tanks' kits. This makes a situation where Warrior is weak in, e.g., TOP P6 or DSR P6, but also it's soloing dungeons. Just don't make it scale in AoE.

Not OP enough to be changed. Again~.
Happy 7.1 everyone!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shiftweave

BW scales strongly with AoE. It's actually fairly weak in single-target situations because it provides less mitigation than the other tanks' kits. This makes a situation where Warrior is weak in, e.g., TOP P6 or DSR P6, but also it's soloing dungeons. Just don't make it scale in AoE.

---

not really if you compare it to other tank cooldowns on single target it's still on par, 400 Potency shield might seem small but it scales with your mits which BW is already two mits stacked ontop of each other, I'm also pretty sure 400 healing Tank potency is around 10% of your HP. Ignoring all healing effects Wars is 10% + 10% and a 400 Potency shield while Plds/gnbs is 15% + 15% Which are all pretty close in power level, but if we include Healing effects then warrior has the best effect even in Single target.