Healers: Your heals are NOT more effective on WARs than they are on PLDs.

No really, they aren't. I know the number looks bigger, but the actual effect is basically the same, and actually your heals are slightly less effective on a Warrior.

Take 2 tanks, one of each. PLD in Shield Oath has 5,000hp and the War with Defiance has 6,250 (same health but with Defiance buffing it). Each tank gets hit for 1,000 damage.

The Paladin will reduce the 1,000 damage to 800, will have 4,200hp left and will require 800 worth of healing to top him up to full.

The Warrior will take the full 1,000 damage, and will have 5,250 health left. But Defiance also buffs healing received by 20%. 800pts of healing on a WAR would be boosted by 20% to 960, 40 short of being enough to top him off.

Your heals are ever so slightly LESS effective on a WAR than they are on a PLD. Yes, the number is bigger, but the effect is slightly smaller. Warriors have a certain amount of self healing available to make up for this deficit, so at the end of the day they're about the same in effectiveness.

... no one knew that...

btw u are comparing two low lvl tankers...

Well it has the benefit to get a new thread for new healers to know about it :)
Thanks for your input and a clear summary.

The information is lost in buried threads about stoneskin, warriors pre 2.1 etc...

You're talking about effective HP. You also just contradicted yourself. If basic heals are less effective on Warriors than they are on Paladins, yet they both have the same EHP; percentage heals/mitigation such as Lustrate and Stoneskin would infact be more beneficial on Warriors than they are on Paladins than said heals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NightWrath

btw u are comparing two low lvl tankers...

---

Irrelevant. The numbers work out the same no matter what level of gear they have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashira

You're talking about effective HP. You also just contradicted yourself. If basic heals are less effective on Warriors than they are on Paladins, yet they both have the same EHP; percentage heals/mitigation such as Lustrate and Stoneskin would infact be more beneficial on Warriors than they are on Paladins than said heals.

---

No. There is no contradiction.

It may be more beneficial to cast the % based heal on the WAR than the non% based heal, but the % based heal is the same effectiveness on either tank, and the non-%-based heal is less effective by a slight amount on the WAR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paikis

The % based heal is the same effectiveness on either tank, and the non-%-based heal is less effective by a slight amount on the WAR.

---

Sorry, I misread your original post, what you're saying seems true.

I am curious however if PLD and WAR do actually have the same EHP. That's the real question. In other words; is the PLD mitigation equal to the WAR HP boost? This is without even taking defensive CD into account.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paikis

Irrelevant. The numbers work out the same no matter what level of gear they have.



No. There is no contradiction.

It may be more beneficial to cast the % based heal on the WAR than the non% based heal, but the % based heal is the same effectiveness on either tank, and the non-%-based heal is less effective by a slight amount on the WAR.

---

An end game warrior has 9k hp and pld dosen't go even close to that, the difference gets a little bigger them just 1,2k hp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashira

Sorry, I misread your original post, what you're saying seems true.

I am curious however if PLD and WAR do actually have the same EHP. That's the real question. In other words; is the PLD mitigation equal to the WAR HP boost? This is without even taking defensive CD into account.

---

Actually the WAR has a slight advantage because their soulstone gives more VIT. But they are otherwise identical in terms of raw eHP. PLD does get block, but you do not include chance-based defence in eHP calculations. eHP is an absolute worst case scenario, where nothing triggers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NightWrath

An end game warrior has 9k hp and pld dosen't go even close to that, the difference gets a little bigger them just 1,2k hp.

---

I am an end-game WAR, and I do have 9,000hp. A PLD with the same level of gear as me will have 7200hp. Do the same maths above again with these numbers and you get the same result. Percentages don't care how big the numbers get. They are in the same proportion, 1:1.25 (the WAR will have 25% more health with the same gear).

PLDs are much easier to heal I've found, the ones that uses cooldowns in particular. WARs seem to feel they're above that, so in general they're a pain in the ass to heal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Everdark

PLDs are much easier to heal I've found, the ones that uses cooldowns in particular. WARs seem to feel they're above that, so in general they're a pain in the ass to heal

---

Only prob is that WARS dont have CD that they can use as easily as PLD, but none the less do have GCD skills that helps with their healing/mitigation.
A good WAR would proc Storm's Eye and Storm's Path as much as possible (healing/mitigation buff). They do have other skills that "gives" hp but its very situational based (except for Bloodbath) and shouldnt really be used over enmity skills (if the healer is healing right ofcourse).
However, i do believe in a dungeon like WP or AK, a WAR can maintain a fight without heals if they actually try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Everdark

PLDs are much easier to heal I've found, the ones that uses cooldowns in particular. WARs seem to feel they're above that, so in general they're a pain in the ass to heal

---

The healing behaviour with a WAR that can actually play (or rather knows when to use what ability) is almost the same as healing a PLD. Especially after 2.1.

Edit: I kinda misread your post, .. i guess :P

There are always people who won't use any CD, and of course they are a bit harder to heal, but for the most content it should not be relevant (up to coil, and at this point any tank should know that CDs are important O.o)

Did you know your example is flawed... Defiance has a damage mitigation buff as well as hp...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stryker12

Did you know your example is flawed... Defiance has a damage mitigation buff as well as hp...

---

No it doesn't. It's +25% HP, +20% incoming heals. His example is correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stryker12

Did you know your example is flawed... Defiance has a damage mitigation buff as well as hp...

---

Stop posting false info. This is part of why we have so many arguments.

You left out mantra from your figures. Warrior can cross class it, paladin can't.

Paladin gets Convalescence, but Warrior can cross class it as well.

Shouldn't we be worried about something else... like if the extra 20% heals does anything to YOUR aggro..... O_o

Wondering if anyone has done any research on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StouterTaru

You left out mantra from your figures. Warrior can cross class it, paladin can't.

Paladin gets Convalescence, but Warrior can cross class it as well.

---

Mantra is MNK 42. It's not worth leveling a MNK all the way to 42 to Mantra on WAR, instead it's much better to just take a MNK in your party and get the full strength Mantra instead of the gimped cross-class one.

My Coil static doesn't have a MNK for no apparent reason. He deals the highest single-target DPS of any class, he has the single-target LB, and he puts up Mantra for healing intensive situations like Ifrit EX. Learn to love MNKs and your life as a healer becomes much easier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Illya

Mantra is MNK 42. It's not worth leveling a MNK all the way to 42 to Mantra on WAR, instead it's much better to just take a MNK in your party and get the full strength Mantra instead of the gimped cross-class one.

My Coil static doesn't have a MNK for no apparent reason. He deals the highest single-target DPS of any class, he has the single-target LB, and he puts up Mantra for healing intensive situations like Ifrit EX. Learn to love MNKs and your life as a healer becomes much easier.

---

You're not limited to a single Mantra per fight, you know. The more people that have Mantra the better. It isn't a huge healing increase or anything, but every little helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kelberos

Shouldn't we be worried about something else... like if the extra 20% heals does anything to YOUR aggro..... O_o

Wondering if anyone has done any research on it.

---

It certainly does increase your aggro as a healer, as aggro were calculated based on how much you heal and overheal (multiplier). But WAR can compensate that by having a higher DPS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paikis

No really, they aren't. I know the number looks bigger, but the actual effect is basically the same, and actually your heals are slightly less effective on a Warrior. Take 2 tanks, one of each. PLD in Shield Oath has 5,000hp and the War with Defiance has 6,250 (same health but with Defiance buffing it). Each tank gets hit for 1,000 damage.

The Paladin will reduce the 1,000 damage to 800, will have 4,200hp left and will require 800 worth of healing to top him up to full.

The Warrior will take the full 1,000 damage, and will have 5,250 health left. But Defiance also buffs healing received by 20%. 800pts of healing on a WAR would be boosted by 20% to 960, 40 short of being enough to top him off.

Your heals are ever so slightly LESS effective on a WAR than they are on a PLD. Yes, the number is bigger, but the effect is slightly smaller. Warriors have a certain amount of self healing available to make up for this deficit, so at the end of the day they're about the same in effectiveness.

---

Yeah... no.
I agree on the fact that heals are not more effective on war in your example, but it depends.

You're not considering some factors:

1) fixed amount of damage
On fixed amounts of damage, like primal explosions or columns in king behemot fights, war has the upper hand. both pld and war gets hit by the same exact amount of damage, regardless of pld defense.

2) stoneskin/lustrate
They heal/protect a fixed hp %, so actually they have the same effectiveness on both tanks, but war has the upper hand on point (1) just above.

3) mitigation
On single target war has a flat +10% def thanks to storm's eye. Also defensive cooldowns are perfectly the same atm, with pld being more solid against groups of monters thanks to the shield (but well, war can spam aoes+bloodbath+veangeance to balance that a bit) and war being more solid against a single target boss thanks to storm's eye.
In your example a warrior that can keep storm's eye on boss 100% of the time has a virtual mini shield oath, so it would take 900 damage with 960 healing.

I don't consider storm's eye as a defensive cooldown, but as a 100% time buff. you can keep it up for the whole fight.

4) self heals
War may gain less cure effectiveness but it's balanced up with passive heals. Has a more effective bloodbath (not also powered up by vengeance and aoes, but also by maim and storm's path that give war a +33% damage buff). Also storm's eye and inner beast have a passing healing effect, not just a defense buff.

Warriors constantly heald during a fight. just try to parse it and you'll notice it. That's why defiance only gives 22% healing bonus and not 21.5%


Atm the only thing that a pld has and war doesn't is Hallowed Ground. Holmgang is not comparable and doens't work on endgame bosses.

If you are taking 1k damage or more then its something like a mountain buster. In this case WAR is a better tank because of Storms Path and Inner Beast which will reduce the MB by 30% where a PLD will only reduce it by 20%.

Also, WAR will get topped up much faster because not only did the MB hit for less, WAR have 20% increased healing. In the games current state i think PLD are better for AoE tanking and WAR for single target tanking.

lol innerbeast only lasts 6 seconds.. you can make it last a full 12 seconds with infuriate but w/o infuriate it takes 7-8 gcds to ramp it up

PLD has an improved convalescence, superior rampart over foresight (oh they can cross that too).. sentinel and halloweed OPness

and pallies can also stoneskin themselves during transition phases

wars can cross mantra and feather foot.. vengeance and thrill of battle are really good as well (tho vengeance only offers 30% damage redox @15secs while sentinel gives 40% at @10secs) .. but i dont think its enough to cover the gap between the two

for a warrior to get the same or a little above in mitigation and eHP he has to plan his CD's properly.. coordinate properly with healer ie. holmgang + benediction.. thrill of battle + lustrate


but any average paladin can still be as effective as a good warrior

and a good paladin cannot be matched under any circumstances matched by a good warrior (mitigation wise)

warriors are superior in aggro generation thats for sure (especially in AOE situations)

While the math is correct, I'm not certain if it really has any impact on gameplay or strategy. The tank is almost always overhealed in between big damage. If they're not topped off before potential one-shots with an extra Adloquium, then something else is wrong.

Rage of Halone, Stoneskin, and Rampart are roughly equivalent to Storm's Eye and Inner Beast (in terms of damage mitigation).

PLD's shield, Sentinel, and Hallowed Ground are either restricted by luck (shield block) or time (cooldowns) even though they are superior to Vengeance and Holmgang.

Parties seem to think that PLD is the "safe and reliable" tank, and WAR is the "min/max risky" tank, when it's really the other way around. Rampart's cooldown is laughable compared to Inner Beast, which can be up 4-5 times per minute (up to 50% of the time) compared to Rampart, which is only active 2/9 of the time at best.

The OP is correct. Adlo and stone skin are not more effective on warrior, adlo is actually more effective on pld. And... here is a massive explanation of why:

I shall endeavor to explain this in such a matter that even people who have never picked up an axe or gladius will readily understand these concepts. Should you not want to read the mathy explanation bits, just read the bold for the tl;dr updates through out the post. The ultimate point is to conclusively show that healing a paladin is 5% less time and mana consuming than healing a warrior with respects to their tanking stances. (I will discuss cool downs later, but once you understand EHP it become pretty clear that the existing cool downs will not really change this much).

Section 1: Terms and Basic Concepts

In tanking, there are three important terms: Effective HP (EHP), Effective Healing Received (EHR), and Fundamental Enemy Damage (FED). This discussion will lay out the math to explain why, in all situations, paladin benefits from 5% more EHR, and is thus easier to heal than a warrior. Let me define these terms:

Fundamental Enemy Damage: This is pretty straight forward, its the amount of damage an enemy deals to ta target before % modifications are applied. So, say you're a lvl 1 thm, no buffs, attacking a bumblebee. The bee hits you for 3. You have no buffs or damage mitigation, so you have suffered 3 pionts of FED. Protect, naturally does slightly reduce the damage received from attacks, but as all classes should always have this on in party situations, and it is so small, it can be more or less ignored. Similarly, defense is also going to be glossed over. For the purposes of this explanation, however, they are not relevant as both pld and war in equal gear will have the same DEF and both should have prot on. FED = Actual damage done to player (before any % reductions are applied).

Effective Health Points: EHP refers to the amount of FED required to kill a player. So, for every class except paladin, your EHP (when you aren't under the effects of any cool down) just is your actual hp. The boss hits you for 10 FED, you take 10 damage, and you die when you run out of HP. EHP = Amount of FED needed to kill you.

Effective Healing Recieved: EHR is the amount of FED restored by a given cure spell. As with EHP, for most classes the amount of healing you see just is your EHR as it is not modified in any way. A 1000 point physic cast by Nopax on Redeemer's blm will restore 1000 points of FED. EHR = Amount of FED restored per point of healing done.

Section 2: Defiance vs Shield Oath

Defiance and Sword Oath: EHP. Both of these buffs increase the tank's EHP. I will now demonstrate that both classes have exactly equal EHP when at equal VIT. Lets say you have a tank whose vit, without any buff on, places them at 7000 hit points. Let us see what happens if that tank pops defiance and shield oath.

Defiance: "Increases warrior's health by 25%." This is pretty straight forward. 7000 is increased by 25%, so 7000 X 1.25 = 8750 hit points. Defiance has increased the warrior's hp and ehp by 1750 points, or 25%.

Shield Oath: This trips most people up. They read the "Reduces incoming damage by 20%" and think, "cool get hit for less" and don't realize that what this is really doing is increasing paladin's EHP. You might be inclined to think "reduces by 20% so it increases EHP by 20%, cool war has a 5% advantage fuck you loserdin." But that's not how math works. Since damage is reduced by 20%, this means that a paladins health pool is equal to 80% of the FED required to kill them. Therefore, to know a pld's EHP, we must find the number that 7000 is 80% of: 7000 divided by 0.80 will give you this amount. (If you don't trust this, think of quarters. We all know 4 quarters in a dollar / a quarter is 25% of a dollar. If you were so inclined, you could find out how much a dollar was worth just form teh information "A quarter is worth .25 and is 25% of a dollar." .25 / .25 = 1. See look, my math is sound). 7000 / .80 = 8750. It, therefore, takes 8750 points of FED to kill the paladin, increasing its EHP by 1750, or 25%.

Tl; DR EHP Summary: Defiance-- 7000 x 1.25 = 8750. Shield Oath-- 7000 / .80 = 8750. 8750 = 8750. Both classes have exactly the same EHP at the same vit.


Section 3: Defiance vs Shield Oath - Effective Healing Received

Now, for the really important part:

Effective Healing Received: Defiance vs Shield Oath.
"Well no shit piper. Defiance says 'ncreases healing received by 20%' and shield oath doesn't do anything to heals so CLEARLY warrior is easier to heal. Fuck you piper, fuck you all failadins, warrior master race!" Well, my goose stepping friend, hold your horses. I'm about to crush you harder than Stalin did the thousand year reich at 'Grad. With math.

EHR--Defiance: "Increases healing received by 20%." Pretty straight forward, if you heal a warrior, the amount cured is increased by 20%. So, Say Nazipax Nopax casts physic on our tank and that his physic is worth 1000 points of healing. On our war, then, this is increased by 20%. 1000 x 1.20 = 1200. Since warrior's hp is equal to its EHP, every one point of health healed on a warrior is equal to one point of FED restored. Therefore, a physic cast on a warrior restores an extra 20% of FED as opposed to a physic cast on any non-tank class. A 1000 physic restored 1200 FED on a warrior. Defiance increased EHR by 20%

EHR--Shield Oath: So, this right here, this is the bit so many people haven't thought about / don't get. Shield oath has no explicitly stated healing bonus. It, however, amounts to a healing bonus. Let us see why:

So, a scholar casts physic on a paladin, and since there is no built in healing bonus, it heals the pld for 1000 hit points. Paladin hit points, however, are not like warrior hit points which are, like every other class, worth 1 point of FED each. Paladin hit points are actually worth 1.25 points of FED each (Again, 1 / .80 = 1.25). Therefore, for a paladin to have lost 1000 hit points, they must have received 1250 points of FED. Accordingly, any healing done on a paladin restores 25% more FED than when cast on a non tank class. (1250 - 1000 = 250. 250 / 1000 = .25.) Shield oath increases EHR by 25%

Tl; DR EHR: Defiance increases a warrior's EHR by 20%, Shield oath increases a paladin's EHR by 25%.

Section 4: Defiance vs Shield Oath Analysis

What all this means:
Because both war and pld enjoy a 25% EHP increase, the only differential between them regarding how easy they are to heal is in their EHR. As shown above, war EHR is +20%, pld EHR is +25%. This means paladin has a 5% EHR advantage. Paladin, therefore, requires 5% less healing than warrior does to restore the same amount of FED.

To understand the implications of this, lets first consider what is going on when you heal a target taking constant damage. So, the real limitation on how much FED a healer can restore on a tank isn't really their mana (both classes can heal a single target all but indefinitely). Rather, its how much FED they can restore each global cool down (spell cast time) relative to how much damage the tank is taking. So, in a high damage situation, such as Twintania or double dreads, or a movement heavy phase in titan, tanks will die not because healers ran out of mana but because they could not heal FED quickly enough. Remember, in all of these situations, there are other demands on the healers-- they also need to heal raid party damage, they need to buff before big aoes, they want to add dps to burn phases, they need time to avoid aoes. Etc etc. Thus, the less time a healer needs to cure a tank the better, and the more likely the tank will survive. Another way to state this is to say "the more FED cured per spell cast, the better."

Armed with all this math and knowledge, lets look at some examples, and I will, at last, prove to you that paladin is, in absolutely all situations, easier to heal than a warrior.

Lets try Twintania. Her major attack is death sentence. This attack is quite strong, with FED values occasionally up to and exceeding 7500. Her auto attacks can also hit for 1500 FED, and plummet can be as high as 2500 FED. Here's the fun part, you can take all three of these within 2 gcds (twin also has a gcd between her major moves, just like us) and you'll probably get two auto attacks. So let's call it 12500 FED in a space of time where healers will be able to give you 1-2 spell casts (depending on how they pre-cured, latency, etc). So, between the two healers, you're looking at 2-4 heals across the time you take 12500 FED. Let us not count on any crit heals, but assume the sch is using adlo and the whm timed the stone skin excellently.

So here are the numbers. Our 7k hp tank, for both classes, has 8750 EHP. Stone skin is 18%, (PLD: 7000hp x 1.18ss = 8260; 8260 / .80shield oath = 10325 EHP; WAR: 7000hp x 1.25 defiance = 87500; 87500 X 1.18 stone skin = 10325 EHP) Let's add a 1400 point adlo. For the first time, EHP will differentiate between the two classes, and this is because the classes EHR is different. PLD: 10325EHP + (1400 adlo / .8 SO = 1750 EHP) = 12075 EHP. WAR: 10325HP + (1400 adlo x 1.2 defiance = 1680) = 12005 EHP.

So, fully buffed with stone skin and a 1400 point adlo, our two tanks stand down the barrel from 12500 FED with 12075 EHP on the pld and 12005 EHP on the warrior. Both classes would be killed out right if unhealed, but, the pld does currently stand 70 hp closer to living to face another gcd.

Status: The PLD is at -425 EHP, the war at -495 EHP.

The healing begins: Whm cure 2 for 2k, another adlo for 1400.
PLD: 2000 / .8 + 1400 / .8 = 2500 + 1750 = 4250 FED healing done, and a 1750 EHP shield on the pld. The pld is now at 5575 EHP.
War: 2000 x 1.2 + 1400 x 1.2 = 2400 + 1680 = 4080 healing done, and a 1680 shield on the war. The war is now at 5265 EHP.

The warrior has 94% of the ehp as the paladin at this point. Thus, you can see the effective healing bonus on paladin actually amounts to even larger effective hp gains in the face of damage because of its gains on adlo.

Another round:
lets assume this first adlo wasn't consumed (since we didn't account for it in our intial damage subtraction, and it can't stack anyway, it just over writes up to the full amount).

PLD gains 4250 FED worth of healing, warrior gains 4080 FED. PLD = 9825 EHP, WAR = 9345 EHP. The warrior has closed the gap to 95% since a new adlo wasn't accounted for, but is still behind.

If you keep running this over and over, the warrior keeps loosing ground in terms of total EHP. The longer the fight goes on, the larger the number that 5% adds up too. By the time say, 30,000 FED has been dealt, the paladin will lose 24,000 hit points which need to be healed by 24,000 points of curing. The warrior will loose 30,000 which is cured by 25,000 points of healing. This may sound fairly small and arbitrary, but, actually, 30,00 FED is approximately how much you take in a given 30 seconds on Twintania. 3 Plummets, 1 death sentence, and assuming she auto attacks once per global tick (3 seconds, which is what most people have parsed her at) 10 auto attacks. For every thirty seconds a warrior tanks twin, he requires one more gcd spent healing than the paladin. This is an extra gcd even if a healer gets conflaged, an extra gcd the healers cannot restore the party to full, a gcd they cannot spend buffing the party and tank (so it makes it that much harder for the whm to stone skin the warrior, as an example). 12 gcd's pass in that 30 seconds, two healers, so its 1 more GCD out of 24, or about 5% more time healing the warrior. Sure, I'm not saying this is an impossible disadvantage or that war cannot tank twin. Just that it is that much easier to heal a paladin through it.

Okay, fine you say, its slightly (5%) easier to heal a paladin in high damage situations. Cool. Still better to have a war in low level cus war is easier to heal when teh damage coming in is lower.

Yeah... no. You see, no matter how big or small the damage coming in is, the healer will always need to work 5% harder to restore the same FED on a warrior than on a paladin. In low damage situations this will likely mean the healer can go longer between casting heals (allow for more dps / more mana regen / more time healing raid, etc). The only time this would really be swayed is if the damage in coming was so low, that second wind and blood bath were able to amount to 5% of the healing received over the duration of their cool downs, but then you could start arguing back and forth over all sorts of cd usage.. and that's just messy. I promise, I will do a follow up post comparing the cool downs over time between the classes. This discussion is just about the two tanking stances.

Way too long, Did not read cus Piper is the very essence of evil:
Okay, that's it. Be it twintania or stone vigil, paladin in shield oath requires 5% less time and mana to restore the same Fundamental Enemy Damage as is needed on a Warrior. Paladin has a small, but non-negligible advantage in effective healing received.


Note: I am independently working on comparing cool downs in depth. All of this will appear on the tanking forums in a much larger summary work on a total comparison between the two classes. A summary of that total math, not including passive mitigation from parry or shield, is as follows just as a reference tool lacking any real context:

Comparison Including Tanking Stances:
Paladin left, Warrior Right, second warrior number is if infuriate is always used for extra inner beast (largely impractical to get full effect of)
DR over time: 30.38% vs 9.42% - 11.42%
eHP over time: 36.58% vs 38.70% - 40.74%
HR over time: 41.58% vs 33.73 - 35.77%

Note: The important bit is the huge gap in HR, as opposed to the small gap in EHP over time. Also, the EHP advantage on war is because of Thrill of battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PiedPiper

snip

---

Thanks for the informative post. Not sure if all the math was necessary, but it's accurate.

The problem is that we're not factoring in cooldowns and abilities available to PLD and WAR, and so I don't know if the 5% advantage of PLD has any real impact on the choice between the two tanks (not that you're making any kind of conclusion on that point). In my previous analysis, both of them count out rather evenly, with WAR being more consistent in damage mitigation over PLD's superior "oh-shit" saves (awesome shield blocks, Sentinel, and Hallowed Ground).

EDIT: I see that you're currently crunching the numbers. I'd like to see the results of that analysis, because it seems to me that Inner Beast could theoretically be up several times a minute. Halone seems to pale in comparison to Storm's Eye. I'm guessing that the shield provides a large chunk of that damage reduction bonus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PlayFair

If you are taking 1k damage or more then its something like a mountain buster. In this case WAR is a better tank because of Storms Eye and Inner Beast which will reduce the MB by 30% where a PLD will only reduce it by 20%

---

I didn't realise a PLD's CDs couldn't be used for mountain buster?

Wish people would stop making arguments like "Aww yeah if I used all these skills and you didn't use any then I'd be better". There is no "Better tank". Only better players and if you're not gonna use CDs on MB as a PLD then sadly you're not one of these.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YuriRamona

I'd like to see the results of that analysis, because it seems to me that Inner Beast could theoretically be up several times a minute. Halone seems to pale in comparison to Storm's Eye.

---

Yuri you are correct but you assume too much or put too much faith on us warriors.

On paper you are probably correct that Inner Beast can offer better damage reduction throughout but one does not become a warrior simply to stack Inner Beast 100% of the time :) I rolled a warrior because I'm bored of stacking the same tank combo day in day out. That's why I now carry a giant axe and I don't use Inner Beast that much unless I know a big hit is coming. Steel Cyclone is so much fun to pop.

But if i know im going to get smacked around like a ragdoll you can bet your gil i'll have storm path and inner beast up with D-Cooldowns on deck.

And that sir, is why we are probably considered a more fickle bunch. Because we have more than one way (or combo) to tank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abigs

lol innerbeast only lasts 6 seconds.

---

What is that got to do with anything? Inner Beast will still be up during those big hits (mountain buster, wicked wheel) if you can not manage your Inner Beast timing for these important attack then you shouldn't be playing a WAR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kal-El

I didn't realise a PLD's CDs couldn't be used for mountain buster?

Wish people would stop making arguments like "Aww yeah if I used all these skills and you didn't use any then I'd be better". There is no "Better tank". Only better players and if you're not gonna use CDs on MB as a PLD then sadly you're not one of these.

---

I didn't realise a PLD's CDs could be used for every mountain buster?

Wish people would stop making arguments like "Aww yeah my CDs are up when ever i need them so i am a much better tank".

I agree that there is no "Better tank", in fact, i think the best setup is to bring 1 PLD and 1 WAR this way the PLD can benefit from Storms Path and a WAR can benefit from Rage of Halone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PiedPiper

...

---

Are you sure stoneskin/Aldo shields benefits from personnal damage reduction buffs (like shield Oath or Vengeance) ?

I see these as shields, so something that proceeds before our characters are hit, as if someone else was hit instead of me. So while my stoneskin is damaged, why would my own damage reduction buff apply to it ?

I could see abilities lowering monster damage like Storm's Path or Rage Of Halone lower damage done to stoneskin/shield.

Wanted to offer my thanks for the in-depth analysis on the why it seems that way.

It's probably one of the first things I picked up, healing my tank partner back when he had lower level gear on his PLD and WAR. Why? Cause I was allowed to be lazier healing his PLD. ;)

Or... a GOOD tank knows the 1000 damage is incoming and will hit IB and knock it to 800 damage, and still the healing buff....

A good warrior will keep his 10% debuff up throughout the whole fight? So aside from the 20% healing please account for the extra 10% mitigation warriors have on demand.

Warriors get to be a paladin for 6 seconds every 8 GCDs.

Paladins never get to be a warrior.

Advantage warrior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Warriors get to be a paladin for 6 seconds every 8 GCDs.

Paladins never get to be a warrior.

Advantage warrior.

---

That's not an advantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nalou

Are you sure stoneskin/Aldo shields benefits from personnal damage reduction buffs (like shield Oath or Vengeance) ?

I see these as shields, so something that proceeds before our characters are hit, as if someone else was hit instead of me. So while my stoneskin is damaged, why would my own damage reduction buff apply to it ?

I could see abilities lowering monster damage like Storm's Path or Rage Of Halone lower damage done to stoneskin/shield.

---

Shields are effected by personal buffs. I've done testing within 10 damage of a shields benefit and it is exact.

So that Stoneskin with Shield Oath and Sentinel is a pretty nice barrier.

Yeah well it's still cool to see a 4000 C2 Crit on a warrior so there!

4072 to be exact!

I think people are missing the point here... the original post stated that "heals are not more effective" which, bluntly put, is wrong. They are simply because of Wrath.

The fact that the overall contribution may or may not be as good as that on a Paladin is irrelevant, as it has nothing to do with the individual cure spells being cast. What you are trying to quantify is the overall healing ability of the mage, based on the cooldowns of both tanks, which in my experience are somewhat equal. That has nothing to do with healing potential, which is still maximised on warrior tanks, and everything to do with how well your tank can do their job.

Does anyone really care is the real question.

1 WAR / 1 PLD
1 WHM / 1 SCH

this should be the group makeup if you have a choice, so again what is the point? so you can go nah bro your big heals aren't as good as you think they are bro.

what I'm getting from this thread is that WARs using cooldowns are better than PLDs just standing there picking their noses.

Both tanks are great at tanking. You can't go wrong with either, and even less wrong with one of each.