Yoshi -P and Dev Team are doing a Great Job, WAR will Not Outshine PLD. PLD is Fine

I'm hearing alot of chatter of People Complaining about the changes to WAR and im begining to see a trend. Most of the complaints are coming from PLD's. I'm not sure what all the outrage is about but im here to debunk alot of statements ive seen in threads that are totally ridiculous. Please note, Both my WAR and PLD are 50 with ilvl 90 gear so be at ease, as this isnt another WAR Fanboy/troll thread.

1. Myth Buster 1: WAR will have Superior Mitigation.


I wanted to debunk this myth first because it is the most common statement I see since Yoshi-P announced changes in development. WAR's will not have superior mitigation. In fact, WAR's Mitigation will still fall short of PLD. With each in their respective stance (Shield Oath, Defiance) and nothing else, PLD will have more eHP. The change only slightly put WAR behide PLD eHP.

Also, Alot of people making these statements forget to account that PLD has a Shield. The changes to Inner Beast Only compensates WAR lack of Shield, and thats only if a WAR Spams Inner Beast everytime its up.So the arguement that Inner Beast is Better than Rampart is just...welll...stupid. Lets look at the numbers. PLD has 20% passive mitigation in Shield Oath + 10% Str mitigation from Rage of Halone Combo + 20% Rampart so Essentially, PLD can have +50% mitigation with just Rampart for 20 secs every 90secs (not including damage mitigated by parry and shield) .


2. Myth Buster 2: PLD will be useless post patch 2.1

As I stated above, PLD will still have better mitigation and as We get deeper and deeper into content, that will become important. WAR's will still get hit like a truck without their mitigations moves up, PLD will still scale better because PLD scales with content, WAR scale with Healer. I believe post patch 2.1 The optimal set up will be PLD+WAR+SCH+WHM as it should be.

Lets not forget PLD still has toolkits that WAR's just do not have. AoE mitigation via Flash and Stance, AoE DoT, Stun on Demand, Silences, Pacification, Cover. Alot of these tools can become very useful as SE becomes more and more creative with content. Its not just tank and spank anymore. For example Cover is very useful for Castrum meridianum final boss where mobs are untankable. Tempered Will is Useful for Demon Wall, and Lets not forget the all Mighty Hallowed Ground.

3. Warrior will have Superior DPS and this will make them favored Tanks for Content.

Warriors always had Better DPS, nothing has changed. PLD has better Mitigation, WAR has better dps. It's a Tradeoff. Cant give 1 class eveything. I think that is why they gave PLD Sword Oath and Didnt Give WAR something compareable, because WAR does Great DPS without defiance on and if they did, I think WARs could compete with true dps classes. But just because WAR's DPS is slighty better doesnt mean they will become perfered tanks. It will all depend on the content. And even if people want WAR to be Main Tank, Being Off Tank PLD is Awesome.

There is more for PLD to do as Off tank:

- Cast Stoneskin on Healer, Main Tank, Kiter
- Debuff Boss
- Flash Mobs
- Cast Cover On Main tank/Healer When HP is Low.
- Rotate Stun on Mobs on MT ( Huge Mitigation)
- Silent, Stun on Demand

Conclusion

If People really took the time and see PLD true potential, they wouldnt complain at all. Although I love the upcoming changes to WAR and feel like they are on equal footing as far as survivability goes, i still think WAR has some catching up to do. True Tanks dont complain about which tank class is better. True Tanks level up both classes and bring which ever tank is best for Content.

DPS for a WAR vs PLD is a difference of about 6%.
So...yeah...DPS is a non issue.

Like someone said around the forums. Paladins are crying because they get to share the spotlight now. Hurt right in their egos.

This changes are really needed on WAR and I play both classes to the MAX so I know what you mean.

The truly sad thing that is being argues here is the controllable aspect of Inner Beast's 20% damage shield.

Reason why it's so sad is because Paladins already do fine on the content that asks for such a mechanic, while they will still do better in every other scenario. Not all attacks in the game are predictable, and that's where Paladins have more long term consistency than a Warrior will.

And finally, they think they will be no longer brought along to Coil and such, which is total BS, because that reinforces the game's community being FOTM Only. In which case, why do we see Dragoons/Warriors allowed to run anything?

The buff is fine L2P. I have both war and pld to 50 with ilvl 70+ gear and I still find reasons for both cases where one will always most likely outshine the other. Plus any team that uses PLD+WAR+WHM+SCH is a team that has proven that good teamwork and communication trumps any in-game restriction.

Please don't White Knight for SE.

The reason this situation even exists is because of their terrible inability to balance Tanks and instead of improving the way self-heals operate (making them a function of damage received), they decided to opt for the lazy way out and increase their mitigation.

Ugh, this entire post is painful to read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OmegaSinX

Being Off Tank PLD is Awesome.

---

Hell. yeah.

For instance, T1 Caduceus - I was the better geared tank in a PUG, but the other guy couldn't handle taking aggro on the split, so we let him MT the first portion. I found I had A LOT to offer!

- Spawning slimes: Even though Bards are pretty good at this, PLDs are way freakin' better. Spawn the slime > Stun the slime > Stoneskin myself > Run .8 hexagons away > Wait for slime > Stun it > Stone Skin > Feed it. When two were needed, I could just stoneskin spam and Chain stun the slimes until they were ready, ensuring the bards didn't get hit, and I could mitigate their damage. Also, we had a 3500 hp BRD in there, I stoneskinned him then Popped cover 2s into the spawn - mitigating all of his damage, and letting my bigger stoneskin eat it up as well. SO much you can do to add to your party
- Flashing (obv) if you don't have a reliable blinder
- DPS, Stance Dancing on slimes, RB combo'ing, and keeping stone skin on every single other char in the instance made OTing more challenging than MTing by a lot, and my healers appreciated it.

Obviously at the split I had to tank, d'oh! With our new Warrior Overlords, I am relieved to see that I will have a lot of chances to shine as an off-tank/specialty tank - that's how the two Tank classes have always felt to me anyways, and WAR just needed a buff to set all right in the world. They SHOULD be better at single target tanking, all they have is that, and DPS - we have a TON of other stuff we can do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garnatian

Please don't White Knight for SE.

The reason this situation even exists is because of their terrible inability to balance Tanks and instead of improving the way self-heals operate (making them a function of damage received), they decided to opt for the lazy way out and increase their mitigation.

Ugh, this entire post is painful to read.

---

Every single post you make is painful to read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garnatian

Please don't White Knight for SE.

The reason this situation even exists is because of their terrible inability to balance Tanks and instead of improving the way self-heals operate (making them a function of damage received), they decided to opt for the lazy way out and increase their mitigation.

Ugh, this entire post is painful to read.

---

I'm trying to understand this position. How is changing heal % any more difficult than adding damage mitigation? If anything it seems increasing heal% for IB or SP would have been the much simpler route, but I'm not exactly sure that's what you're referring to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I'm trying to understand this position. How is changing heal % any more difficult than adding damage mitigation? If anything it seems increasing heal% for IB or SP would have been the much simpler route, but I'm not exactly sure that's what you're referring to.

---

It's not increasing the % heal, it's changing how it scales. It's far more complicated than using a flat damage mitigation model.

The problem with self-healing on a WAR was that it scaled with gear (very poorly) rather than content, however PLD scales with content. So the issue is that self-healing wasn't a function of damage received, which is why is was terrible.

Aye and really, people need to stop looking at who's going to replace who. I can already see a WAR+PLD setup is going to be infinitely better than stacking x2 WAR or PLD's.

What would we get with 2 WAR's helping one another:
+OT can keep up the SE/SP debuffs while MT focus on enmity generation.
+OT can Holmgang pull adds out of range of one another in dire situations.

What we get with 2 PLD's helping one another:
+OT can cast Stoneskin on MT.
+OT can cast Cover on MT in dire situations.

Other than that you get an overlap on abilities/effects which kind of reduces the full efficiency of the party.

What we can get from a WAR+PLD setup:
+STR down
+Damage down
+WAR can Holmgang targets away from MT in dire situations/PLD can cover WAR.
+Slash damage up for PLD and WAR
+Blind from Flash
+PLD OT can Stoneskin WAR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garnatian

It's not increasing the % heal, it's changing how it scales. It's far more complicated than using a flat damage mitigation model.

---

Haha.. Well complicated does not always equal better. But I think I see what you're trying to say, in that basically it was not right to begin with. I honestly haven't been playing as Warrior long enough (just got to 50 the other night) to notice the hardships everyone else seems to have endured, I didn't even know about the damage mitigation differences until the last week or so when I started wondering why they are changing Warrior. After learning about the differences I think damage mitigation for Warrior is a good thing, and that both tanks (and all classes for that matter) should be viable in all instances. I can't comment on whether the implementation is better or worse, but if it prevents classes from being left out I'm all for it. Diversity is important and keeps the game interesting.

Just to dispel falsity in original post:

Blind does not work on most mobs in coil

Pacification doesn't work on anything in coil or even most content in general, timing of pacification means having the debuff up on the target when it finishes the cast so unless timing is perfect it doesn't work even when it does actually apply the debuff

Stun on demand that is locked by gcd and skill animations, so only truely useful when doing nothing I would so much rather have an off the gcd stun like war/drg/monk anyday

Why Warriors are all in a hurrah? Weren't they the preferred tank in 1.0 and people shunned Paladins?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I'm trying to understand this position. How is changing heal % any more difficult than adding damage mitigation? If anything it seems increasing heal% for IB or SP would have been the much simpler route, but I'm not exactly sure that's what you're referring to.

---

To give a better example (not directed at necessarily) If you have -50% dmg taken on PLD and heal for 50% of dmg dealt on WAR, you have the issue of either being too good on easier content, and being too weak on hard content, or actually making WARs dmg scale properly, so that it can be useful, which in turn would be broken as hell, to do that much dmg.

It should be a mixture of how much MAX HP you have (which doesnt scale to enemy dmg) and how much the enemy does. (Which actually ends up being the very same thing as -x% dmg taken.)

So if i have 1,000 hp, and heal 10% back every 3rd combo, i heal 100 hp on easy content, where mobs hit for 100 dmg, and i heal for 100 hp on hard content where bosses do 500 dmg a hit.

But if i scale to THEIR dmg, I would need something that scales a counter heal.
Such as "Heal 10% hp back, after taking dmg." If im hit for 100 dmg, i heal back 10 (same as having a -10% dmg taken)
Hit for 500, i heal back 50.

Only real difference, is that i need to survive the initial amount, before i counter heal.
Which makes that class the inferior tank, when we start using larger pools of -x% dmg taken.
(Such as -90% dmg taken, and a boss hits for 1,000 dmg, a WAR would die, and a PLD would live.)

Hey guys, gameplay is totally not dictated by how a class plays, and more on what the class does.
So like...even if Innerbeast remained a damage mitigation mechanic that worked off stacks, its totally different now that it mitigats damage according to incoming damage...and still uses stacks.
OH WAIT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leiron

Hey guys, gameplay is totally not dictated by how a class plays, and more on what the class does.
So like...even if Innerbeast remained a damage mitigation mechanic that worked off stacks, its totally different now that it mitigats damage according to incoming damage...and still uses stacks.
OH WAIT!

---

Technically not true.

Pre-emptive tactics, versus reactive tactics are two different things.

And the reason ppl want classes to have different mechanics of play styles, is for you to pick what you enjoy doing more.
Some like to plan, some like to react.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claire_Pendragon

Technically not true.

Pre-emptive tactics, versus reactive tactics are two different things.

And the reason ppl want classes to have different mechanics of play styles, is for you to pick what you enjoy doing more.
Some like to plan, some like to react.

---

Not necessarily, with the reaction mechanic, you still needed to understand what attack you would be using inner beast on.
So for example, on the tonberry king you wouldn't pop an inner beast on anything except Everybody's grudge.

On Titan, you would not use iNner beast unless it was a mountain buster/bomb.

Reaction mechanics don't really differ from pro-active outside of how they mitigate the damage.
As long as the way a class plays remains in tact, then I am fine with IB becoming a percent mitigation mechanic over a reaction heal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leiron

Not necessarily, with the reaction mechanic, you still needed to understand what attack you would be using inner beast on.
So for example, on the tonberry king you wouldn't pop an inner beast on anything except Everybody's grudge.

On Titan, you would not use iNner beast unless it was a mountain buster/bomb.

Reaction mechanics don't really differ from pro-active outside of how they mitigate the damage.
As long as the way a class plays remains in tact, then I am fine with IB becoming a percent mitigation mechanic over a reaction heal.

---

Oh, I agree that it's not best to use it reactionary, instead of at the right time, but such a mechanic could be done right (as in purely reactionary) but it would need to be built properly, to be done that way, so some people (from what I have seen) wanted WAR to be "fixed" to be MORE of what it started, rather than what PLD started.

I could understand, but unless tat mechanic scaled with the damage incoming, it would either be overpowered or underpowered.
If it scaled with incoming damage, then its the exact same as a PLD mitigation mechanic.

i.e. 20% of all incoming damage, for the next 30 seconds is absorbed as healing.

Its still a 20% damage mitigation mechanic, it just gets turned into a heal.
People are just far too focused on the healing aspect, rather than how mitigation is done.

I'm glad they are buffing wars.
I'm glad wars are getting damage mitigation.

What I'm pissed at is they are keeping their HP boost....

Hey if they were going to get damage mitigation... Why not make it equal a paladins mitigation. Heck- I'm ok with giving them equal mitigation and increased healing received... Heck give them a shield like item for their off hand too- that's cool with me. I can imagine warriors blocking with their massive axes! Heck, I don't care if they even remove the damage penalty defiance adds...

What I'm not happy with is they are keeping their HP buff...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leiron

DPS for a WAR vs PLD is a difference of about 6%.
So...yeah...DPS is a non issue.

---

This is only true on the forums.
Most PLDs gear for tanking and tanking only, good WARs know they need two sets of accessories or HQ griph to be ready for everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yunnie

What I'm not happy with is they are keeping their HP buff...

---

Clueless. If they dropped the WAR's health buff they would have less base eHP than a PLD (by 25%) and even with the changes they will still have LESS eHP OVERALL when their new abilities are put up against PLD CDs and their ability to block.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

This is only true on the forums.
Most PLDs gear for tanking and tanking only, good WARs know they need two sets of accessories or HQ griph to be ready for everything.

---

If a WAR can get away with using Gryphonskin to tank then a PLD can do so just as effectively for more DPS. This is a poor argument, the damage gains from 40 STR does not somehow magically make your IBs significantly more potent to justify doing such a trade off of ~350 health. In fact a PLD could gear exactly like a STR oriented WAR and still be a more efficient tank than a WAR doing the same.

PLDs and WARs wear the same gear, have the same stat budgets, and perform the same role. There are no snowflake stat stacking builds in this game you either gear for DPS or you gear for eHP and have 1-2 sets of almost identical gear to work with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yunnie

I'm glad they are buffing wars.
I'm glad wars are getting damage mitigation.

What I'm pissed at is they are keeping their HP boost....

Hey if they were going to get damage mitigation... Why not make it equal a paladins mitigation. Heck- I'm ok with giving them equal mitigation and increased healing received... Heck give them a shield like item for their off hand too- that's cool with me. I can imagine warriors blocking with their massive axes! Heck, I don't care if they even remove the damage penalty defiance adds...

What I'm not happy with is they are keeping their HP buff...

---

lol, this forum always brings me funnys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yunnie

snip

---

I always see your posts everywhere, I explained it to you before, PLDs have MORE eHP

I hate having to re-type this but:
5000 damage from enemy

Two tanks at 6000 base HP, WAR and PLD
WAR pops Defiance, PLD pops Shield Oath
War = 7500 HP, PLD = 6000 HP +20% mitigation

The 5000 damage hits the war for 5000
So he's at 2500/7500 HP

The 5000 damage hits the PLD for 4000
So he's at 2000/6000 HP

Say a WHM Cure's for 1000 HP each, (1200 on the war)

The PLD needs 4 cure's to fill back up, the WAR needs 5 to fill back up (technically it's a decimal but you can't cast less than a single Cure)

Please, bring your stupid elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mihael_Longclaw

I always see your posts everywhere, I explained it to you before, PLDs have MORE eHP

---

Please don't say things like this because it's not true. eHP or Effective Health Points refers to the maximum amount of beating a person can take from full to zero with no other outside factors involved once you start bringing in things like Heals per Second/Heals per Cast it's no longer Effective Health Points but Effective Healing.

At base with full health PLD and WAR have the same eHP, the only thing balanced between them until 2.1.

Warrior 7500
Paladin 6000

Attack hits for 7500

Warrior is dead (7500-7500 = 0)
Paladin mitigates hit by 20% so hit only hits for 6000
Paladin is also dead (6000-6000 = 0)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mihael_Longclaw

I always see your posts everywhere, I explained it to you before, PLDs have MORE eHP

---

eHP != mean mitigation. You're conflating the two. As Phreak said, eHP is your *effective hit points*, or how much damage you can take in a single blow/short series of blows. Mean mitigation is how much less (base) healing you require than normal in order to zero out the damage you're going to be taking (base healing refers to what a healer can throw out rather than what numbers they throw up on you after factoring in your +healing buffs).

Right now, WAR and PLD have the exact same eHP because 25% +hp is the same as 20% DR where eHP is concerned. WAR and PLD do *not*, however, have the same mean mitigation because WAR *explicitly* requires more healing than a PLD to keep them alive in 8 man content (it's roughly balanced in 4 man). With 2.1, a WAR and a PLD will *still* have the same eHP, effectively (if the WAR leverages IB for burst damage, they have more, but that's the whole "skill tank" benefit), while maintaining the nearly identical mean mitigation in both 4 man and 8 man content (since we're getting less self-healing and more damage reduction/+healing, so that our mitigation actually *scales*).

I really feel that there should be a dictionary of terms for people discussing all of this because so many people are guilty of egregious misuse of them:

Mitigation = any reduction in damage taken or required healing (evasion/dodge, parry, block, self-healing, absorb shields, damage reduction, +healing)
RNG based mitigation = any mitigation mechanism that does not have a 100% chance of success (dodge/evasion, parry, block)
Static mitigation = any mitigation mechanism that has a constant 100% chance of working (damage reduction, +healing)
Reactive mitigation = any mitigation mechanism that can only be applied after damage has been received (+healing, self-heals)
Proactive mitigation = any form of non-static mitigation that needs to be applied before damage is taken in order for it to be effective (absorb shields)
CDs = cooldowns = any form of survivability provided that does not have 100% uptime and, generally, has an uptime of no greater than 33%
Mean Mitigation = the total percent of base incoming healing required, over time, based off of a standard point of comparison (factors in evasion, block, parry, damage reduction, self healing, absorb shields, and +healing; also factors in the average contribution of CDs)
eHP = effective hit points = the amount of damage that can be taken before requiring any healing without factoring in any reactive or RNG based mitigation mechanisms (factors in +hp, damage reduction, and sometimes absorb shields, if they are expected to be up at nearly all times)
CD survivability = the total eHP generated over a short period of time while certain short duration abilities are active (factors in eHP and CDs with mechanisms that contribute to eHP) averaged over the mean contribution over time *of* those short duration abilities

That covers pretty much everything in game at the moment. There are a few others not in game that could be added (blink mechanisms, which are charged based mechanisms that allow you to ignore a certain number of attacks or special attacks based upon the number of charges, which is what Utsesumi from FFXI was), but they're not in game so they're not relevant to the discussion. CD survivability is a somewhat fuzzy definition, but that is, in my experience, the most common definition. The rest of them are explicit definitions of terms used pretty much everywhere.

The primary performance of tanks is directly measured on three axes, such that one axis is directly measured against the same axis of the comparative (or standard) tank: eHP, which measures the ability of a tank to survive burst damage without CDs active; mean mitigation, which represents how efficient the tank is to heal over time; and burst mitigation, which measures the ability of a tank to survive intense bursts damage using the abilities in their CD suite. To be balanced, a tank must have performance similar but not necessarily identical to all other tanking options (generally means performance within 5% of the other tanks, though increased performance in one area should be balanced by a similar amount of decreased performance in one or more of the other areas). If eHP is too low, the tank will not be able to survive burst damage mechanics designed for other tanks. If mean mitigation is too low, the tank will require too much healing over time and prevent the tank from being effective in long duration fights. If burst mitigation is too low, the tank will die to unexpected emergency situations (e.g. dead/dc'd healer, not at full health for a large burst, debuffed to take especially large amounts of damage, enrage timer, etc.) and require perfect or near perfect play on the part of all players involved in order to be effective.

For the purposes of other factors, such as damage, utility, and enmity, there still needs to be roughly equivalent performance but the requirements are not nearly as strict as the performance in the primary areas (generally within 10% as opposed to 5%) and are judged on an asymmetrical basis so that higher damage can be balanced out against a superior suite of utility capabilities even though the two are not even remotely comparable.

On all of these bases, PLD and WAR will *not* be unbalanced; WAR and PLD already have the same eHP, WAR is getting buffed so that it has equivalent mean mitigation and CD survivability of the PLD, PLD and WAR *still* generate virtually identical enmity, and WAR will have *slightly* better damage while PLD maintains a significantly better suite of utility capabilities (universal applicability of damage is balanced by the specific/situational applicability of the utility capabilities). That's damned good balance and nothing that PLD should be afraid of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

This is only true on the forums.
Most PLDs gear for tanking and tanking only, good WARs know they need two sets of accessories or HQ griph to be ready for everything.

---

You are confounding your argument.
Of course a WAR who wears DPS accessories will do more damage than a PLD who doesn't use DPS accessories.
It does not at all refute my statement at all, just makes you look silly and desperate, especially since a PLD can equal Gryphonskin as well.

Nice wasting millions of gil btw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leiron

Nice wasting millions of gil btw.

---

I got friends crafting for me, you know you can *gasp* gather the mats? Not your business anyway the way i "waste" my gil ;)
As i already said, of course PLDs can wear DD gear, the argument is: how many of them do in reality? Log in Revenant's Toll/Wineport and do a quick check.
Silly? Sure! Desperate? Not really, im about to get buffed :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

As i already said, of course PLDs can wear DD gear, the argument is: how many of them do in reality?

---

If people don't do it, you can't simply ignore it. WARs have been going with really wonky gear allotments because WAR sucked and people experimented like crazy to find out how/if they could make WAR not suck. PLDs never had to experiment to figure out how to not suck so you didn't see a lot of people doing that (and, actually, on my server, I see *loads* of PLDs with gryphonskin and rose gold jewelry; more than WARs, in fact, but that's largely because I almost never see a WAR around because most WARs doing end game have leveled up PLD and only roll as WAR when they're with a group comfortable with them).

I like the OP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

As i already said, of course PLDs can wear DD gear, the argument is: how many of them do in reality? Log in Revenant's Toll/Wineport and do a quick check.
Silly? Sure! Desperate? Not really, im about to get buffed :D

---

The actual question is; why would they? They certainly don't *need* it. Only Warrior needs that kind of thing based on their skills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Exstal

The actual question is; why would they? They certainly don't *need* it. Only Warrior needs that kind of thing based on their skills.

---

Nevermind... this is becoming the forum of people that doesnt play a tank but still wants to argue about tanks <.<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

Nevermind... this is becoming the forum of people that doesnt play a tank but still wants to argue about tanks <.<

---

You act like how to play tank isn't an issue that has been beaten to death. You could theorectically not even unlock THM (which from your profile you haven't) and easily go teach another THM how to play it. Why? You can just ask someone who is good at the class how to play and just relay the information. See where I'm going with this? Also if you can do it (tank) without DPS accessories, why would you go out of your way to do it with?

Seriously though, what is more reasonable;
a) chance/farmed i90 VIT acc
b) very expensive i70 crafted DPS acc

Probably because it's more efficient. If I can tank in Sword Oath or DPS accessories, then I will. Already do it through Turn 4, if I had more 90 armor pieces I'd do it in Turn 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Exstal

You act like how to play tank isn't an issue that has been beaten to death. You could theorectically not even unlock THM (which from your profile you haven't) and easily go teach another THM how to play it. Why? You can just ask someone who is good at the class how to play and just relay the information. See where I'm going with this? Also if you can do it (tank) without DPS accessories, why would you go out of your way to do it with?

Seriously though, what is more reasonable;
a) chance/farmed i90 VIT acc
b) very expensive i70 crafted DPS acc

---

You didnt really read the thread, did you?
We were discussing about PLDs being on par with WARs damage in a DD "stance".
To which i replied that this is often only true in theory, since not many PLDs are using "damage dealing" gear (this means either a griph set or just a secondary set of jewels with attack stats, you dont need to be millionaire to get a DD set: "striking" gear works perfectly).
Then you come and tell me there is no reason for a PLD to wear such gear... kinda proving my point, nope?

Btw you dont see me on the THM forum you know why? I dont play one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

I got friends crafting for me, you know you can *gasp* gather the mats? Not your business anyway the way i "waste" my gil ;)

---

I like how easily prickled you are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

As i already said, of course PLDs can wear DD gear, the argument is: how many of them do in reality? Log in Revenant's Toll/Wineport and do a quick check.

---

Who cares how many do it and who many don't.
THe fact is that a PLD CAN do it, and they derive just as much of a benefit from doing it that a Warrior does if not more so given Shield oath is better than Defiance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

Silly? Sure! Desperate? Not really, im about to get buffed :D

---

Your argument is desperate because you hate the idea of being wrong.
It happens, you're wrong.

I am speechless XD
/trolldance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maqaqa

I am speechless XD
/trolldance

---

Ah you desire the last word, have at it then.
Btw, a PLD has more eHP than the HP you have in that post.