Don't you think the different between Def of Pld/War is so little compare to dps?

So far, anything that Pld can handle, is also proven that War can handle.
Pld HG is better than War HG, but Pld HG has 2x cool down longer, so War can use more often.

their buff are very similar, as Pld has Sentinel, but War has less cool down and more buff to cover himself. In the end, their defensive power is on par.

Then why the different between dps of a War and a Pld is so big ? I think that if War always keep up to Pld on defensive then Pld suppose to keep up to War on offensive also!

(War DPS can go up to 900 on 2 min dummy.)

Happy that Pld got some more dmg skills, but then I heard War get even better ones to make more different than before so the gap on dps become larger while the gap on defend buff remain the same.

I do not mind the different, but I think the different between dps should be the same as different between survivability. If War has so much dps more than Pld, then Pld should have so much survivability than War. If Pld has only little survivability than War, then War should have only little more dps than Pld.

Oh another one of these threads. For crying out loud.

Okay, so you want WAR to be unable to handle some fights since it does slightly more DPS than PLD? Then why not change WAR icon from blue to red and call it "DPS".

If a tank cannot tank all fights, there is no point of it being a tank. PLD still takes hits better than WAR. The fact that healers need to heal the PLD less than WAR is proof enough.

Hallowed Ground is 5 times better than Holmgang. It having twice the CD is still unfair.

PLD DPS isn't so low, it's only 8% less than WAR.

Also you only parse 900 on a dummy? Your WAR has a serious case of gitgud. Also check this video.

What DPS skills are you talking about? WAR should've always had Deliverance. WAR was supposed to be the DPS tank since 2.1, but PLD had Sword Oath and WAR had nothing. What gap are you talking about? Are you saying WAR did more DPS than PLD in 2.5? Because that's not true, PLD in Sword Oath did the same or more DPS than WAR without Defiance.

WAR's strongest attack before 3.0 was Inner Beast (300 potency) and WAR couldn't use it when it tried to DPS (by dropping Defiance). Now instead of having WAR use such a strong defensive ability while DPSing, (if WAR used IB in Deliverance, there is no point in having Defiance), they gave WAR a stronger attack (Fell Cleave) with no defensive effects.

This thread is so full of wrong and should just die. Honestly.

Everytime i peek into a tank debate, there you are phoenicia lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhaken

Everytime i peek into a tank debate, there you are phoenicia lol

---

Because it's getting ridiculous.

I mean look at this guy! He wants there to be situations where ONLY Paladin can defend but the other tanks should literally die because they do 70 more DPS! I mean I would understand that if WAR and DRK could fill the same spot of actual DPS classes. But they don't! As long as WAR and DRK tags and icons are blue (tanks) they should be able to tank ALL things in all situations as long as they can get heals.

In reality though most of the expert players can play their tank roles as DPS and put out better numbers than DPS.

Im stating this because the general population flock to DPS roles because they dont have to learn much. While the veterans play more than one class to learn the ins and outs of other classes they play with, wether it be them or another player, when it comes down to it all these Tank forums are really about player skill vs player skill, of set roles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhaken

Everytime i peek into a tank debate, there you are phoenicia lol

---

My thoughts exactly! Lol though always welcome :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenicia

Because it's getting ridiculous.

---

Your percentage of difference between a Paladin DPS and Warrior DPS is incorrect. There is greater than 8% difference. You may rely on smacking a dummy for three minutes but a PLD will fizzle out very fast in a longer fight while the Warrior has little trouble maintaining TP.

At the end of the fight the final numbers will be much greater than 8%. People keep throwing out these weird percentages, 5%, 8%, without basis. But you really need to look at the final figures for a Savage encounter. If the difference was so minimal, people wouldn't care what tanks they brought in world firsts groups.

I can only really see a PLD fizziling out if there is a consistent up time. Haven't done savage, but normal mode there are quite a few battle phase switch times where PLD's have a fuck ton of time to regain their TP. But I'd still want Shield swipe to get off GCD. Lower potency and restore a small bit of TP with each use for more MT damage and consistent up time while being MT.

Check out this a3 sav kill video the pld is pulling awesome dps because thanks to his superior defense which is coming from his shield and good timed shelltron use he can way easier tank the dmg thrown at him in sword oath than war or drk could do in deliverance/outside of grit. Also about the tp problems everyone always complains about in most fights due to downtimes this isnt even an issue and even if it is this is still a team game you are not alone inside the battles.

Square screwed up on tanks. Their idea behind tanks post lvl 60 is that you'll have three different type of tanks. One that mitigates a lot more on physical fights and another one on magical fights. And then the last one that takes more damage into the face but instead of mitigating correctly, does more damage. Warrior is still a tank and that would be beyond stupid if there was a certain encounter where a job wouldn't be able to clear.

Square tried to let groups decide between damage and utility. If you take paladin then you'll have an easier time dealing with physical damage while having some cool utility and if you pair it up with a dark knight any encounter will significantly be easier to heal through. However your overall group dps will be slighty lower because you chose the path of utility and mitigation. If you pick up a warrior you'll have more damage but instead you'll miss out on some mitigation which can be great for healers.

But in reality it doesn't work that way. Since any tank can clear any encounter, the extra utility you'll get with a paladin will never be worth the extra damage a warrior brings. The dps check is ridiculous. Back then on coil you were never ask as a healer or a tank to dps on the first two turns because the damage brought by the dps was clearly enought. I cleared T6/T7, T10/T11 two weeks after their release and there wasn't this pressure on tanks and healers because of DPS check if every DPS was pulling their weight. The DPS check would become a problem after those turns. T8 led people to solo tank it, and T12 was much harder the less dps you had.

Right now every job has to DPS if they can. Tanks have to drop their tanking stance so they can do more dps and healers have to deal with that while still doing DPS. So your paladin or you dark knight are for sure better at mitigating but since you'll want to meet DPS check it doesn't matter since they'll drop their flat 20% damage reduction. By doing so they're as hard to heal as a warrior because the warrior's tanking stance is only effective when healed.

You can brag as much as you want about paladin having more utility but in fact these utility spell will not make or break an encounter, DPS will. Paladins can help out healers on A1 for preys with Clemency, divine veil and stoneskin but no matter what happens they'll still have to heal their target twice. On the other hand Warriors can be really interesting to have even if your group doesn't have a ninja. The damage provided by tanks are gonna be boosted by a margin. Storm Path is not mandatory but since healers have to dps it can be helpful at times.

In perfect situations the dps difference between tanks is not huge but in reality a warrior pulls out a lot more while still being able to maintain tank capabilities. As current clears rely heavily on DPS, you can't blame people for not wanting extra utility instead of DPS.

I think everyone should play the job they like because by loving your role/job you'll be able to be more efficient. Also Square always balanced things out so you shouldn't switch to another "OP" job like a lot of people apart if you're an hardcore raider and are looking for early clears. But as of right now there is no reason to not bring a warrior to your party, but no one should feel forced to play it if they prefer to play paladin for example. And as people get gear DPS will not be that important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anger

Your percentage of difference between a Paladin DPS and Warrior DPS is incorrect. There is greater than 8% difference. You may rely on smacking a dummy for three minutes but a PLD will fizzle out very fast in a longer fight while the Warrior has little trouble maintaining TP.

At the end of the fight the final numbers will be much greater than 8%. People keep throwing out these weird percentages, 5%, 8%, without basis. But you really need to look at the final figures for a Savage encounter. If the difference was so minimal, people wouldn't care what tanks they brought in world firsts groups.

---

"Smacking a dummy for three minutes" is "Dealing maximum damage in optimal environments". Compared to a real fight, you will always do LESS damage. So if at maximum damage a WAR is barely 80 DPS ahead of PLD, any non-optimal fight, the WAR will be less than that ahead of a PLD. That's how MATH works.

In real encounters, bosses jump and go invulnerable and put things on you so you can't attack, etc. You will have downtime, if you have downtime, TP recovers. Any downtime happening while FoF is on CD is beneficial to your overall DPS. FoF is the best DPS CD in the game, it's better than even Berserk in terms of overall DPS.

So no, my percentages aren't off. And they ARE with basis, check the video I linked! Your comment, on the other hand, is definitely without basis. Show me a video proving that a PLD doing optimal rotation is more than 8% behind WAR.

As a matter of fact, this video linked by Shinzee shows an actual fight where WAR is only 60 DPS ahead of PLD while the PLD was MT'ing most of the fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croisciento

Snip..

---

Clearing T6/7 and T10/11 two weeks after patch is clearing content with a better weapon and ilv than the groups clearing on first week. If you check videos of first clears, you will see that healers and tanks optimized DPS.

As I told Anger and showed in the video I linked, WAR isn't so far ahead of the other tanks. It's like 80 DPS difference in maxed environments between WAR and PLD and DRK is somewhere in between.

PLD mitigates a lot more than DRK and WAR in almost every encounter. The only exception is A4 where DRK mitigates slightly more than PLD. Check this analysis. It bringing more utility is a plus.

This whole issue of PLD doing less DPS is a knee-jerk reaction of the world first two groups clearing A3S switching PLD with DRK BECAUSE they wanted to switch MNK with NIN for Trick Attack which led to more raid DPS. They would've switched DRG but DRG is highest DPS and Battle Litany is overpowered.

Let this topic die. It's retarded.

Yeah, for a good portion of the video the paladin 100 dps less than the war. I wonder if their gear was controlled for? Different gear can make a big difference to damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenicia

Clearing T6/7 and T10/11 two weeks after patch is clearing content with a better weapon and ilv than the groups clearing on first week

---

What are you talking about? I'm talking about my group. When we cleared T6 and T7 my whole group only had ilvl 95 weapons, we would only had access to better weapon once we cleared T7. Same goes for T10 and 11. Never did our healers were forced to DPS on these fights nor tanks to drop their tanking stance and we still managed to clear them without facing the enrage. We only really looked at crafted gear later for things like T12 when we realized it would make things a lot easier if we could grab more gear. As for T8 bringing another DPS solved our issues right away, didn't even have to pick up crated gear.

My statement was about groups thinking if there's a good reason to not pick a warrior which is no. Right now all the tanks are required to drop their tanking stance if possible and even if you have your shield you are almost as hard to heal as a warrior. Perfect conditions means you either have a NIN or a WAR applying the debuff on your target which is obviously not always the case.

Yes the difference in maxed environments is not that big, I never said so. I stated that by not bringing a war to your group your overall dps will be signicantly lower and if tanks are dropping their stance to dps i'd rather choose one that does more dps.

My point is I wouldn't give a damn about dps if the encounters didn't ask so much to start with. Yes even 80 dps is huge. My group is running PLD/DRK without a NIN and we wiped so many times at 2% before getting a clear. We eventually got it, that does mean it's doable (never said it wasnt like many seem to claim) but its harder and I can understand why groups would want to make fights easier by having more dps.

Is this where I'm told all the tanks are fine?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN-QgZO2RU4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ladon

Is this where I'm told all the tanks are fine?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN-QgZO2RU4

---

Clearly this wouldve gone way better if they had 2 paladins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ladon

Is this where I'm told all the tanks are fine?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN-QgZO2RU4

---

You can do the same w/ DRK (or PLD) + WAR + NIN, WAR + WAR is just the most optimized for that fight due to the split.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croisciento

My point is I wouldn't give a damn about dps if the encounters didn't ask so much to start with. Yes even 80 dps is huge. My group is running PLD/DRK without a NIN and we wiped so many times at 2% before getting a clear. We eventually got it, that does mean it's doable (never said it wasnt like many seem to claim) but its harder and I can understand why groups would want to make fights easier by having more dps.

---

It's a greater than 80 dps disparity. These numbers are mostly fabricated and I've proven there to be a 20 - 30% advantage in terms of DPS in favor of the warrior. Any video I show indicating this Phoenicia just says are "baddies" and won't accept it as reality.

I agree with you, I don't care if the warrior does that much DPS and still takes hits the same as a PLD it's just that now encounters are asking for massive DPS checks to be made and its making PLD a pariah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anger

It's a greater than 80 dps disparity. These numbers are mostly fabricated and I've proven there to be a 20 - 30% advantage in terms of DPS in favor of the warrior. Any video I show indicating this Phoenicia just says are "baddies" and won't accept it as reality.

I agree with you, I don't care if the warrior does that much DPS and still takes hits the same as a PLD it's just that now encounters are asking for massive DPS checks to be made and its making PLD a pariah.

---

Ive been following all your post and the only thing Im seeing is a PLD that doesnt want to push his class and want to stay on his comfort zone. Calling PLD pariah, lol. You should do yourself a favor and start maining WAR; at least that way I think we will stop reading your nonsense posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wizhard

Clearly this wouldve gone way better if they had 2 paladins.

---

meh the video proves nothing- i did as1 savage with pug pld for my 2ndary FC group that usually only clears content once to experience all the game has to offer- using all fending right side ans they maintained 600+ DPS on Faust and 540ish on oppressor. which is what the healers are doing in this video you linked. if you notice the whm and sch maintain a solid 700-800 dps for most of the fight and then both dip to about 600 and sch at one point at the very end drops as low as 500 but then goes back up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croisciento

snip

---

Like a lot of people have pointed out, the video Phoenicia keeps linking has a number of flaws.

I stopped taking him seriously because the BG forums treat him like a joke. And, in general, I respect their overall opinion on things much more than these forums.

No point in 5 minute parses. All of their rotations just repeat after a certain point and the strange cut off point only messes with the numbers. The only point it shows is how hilariously bad the TP issues are for DRK and PLD.

PLD and DRK are given TP support and 100% uptime on the slashing debuff at no personal expense.

WARs are given no TP support (because they don't need it), have no one removing pacification from them after berserk, and cannot use their optimal DPS rotation because they have to upkeep the slashing debuff themselves (Maim's upkeep allows for SE>BB>BB, SE's upkeep forces you to SE>BB).

All in all, it's a dummy parse of pure DPS output. In a live raid, it's far from as ideal. If any tanking is involved, the PLD's DPS will drop because RoH is their lowest potency combo while BB is the WAR's highest potency combo.

On A1S where there are jump phases, I still find myself needing to weave in shield swipes in order to not bottom out on TP as PLD and as a DRK, I have to use unmend as filler after bottoming out on TP. I guess I could also just not use Blood Weapon off CD but that would also be a DPS loss. So, the only way to deal with it without having a loss of raid DPS is for a NIN to goad you (BRD singing is a DPS loss). It's not balanced that 2/3 tanks require that. And, on that point about NIN, unless you have one in your raid, you won't have 100% up-time on the slashing debuff as a PLD or DRK after 0.5 enters the fight. Even then, it's a DPS loss for the NIN and the slashing debuff can fall off while the NIN is off playing with his add. WAR has no such issues with TP or with the slashing debuff.

A2S is what I would consider an actual trade off. Hallowed Ground allows you to cheese a wave which is actually important. You are giving up 300-500 raid DPS in bringing a PLD vs. a DRK / WAR but HG really helps stabilize your raid during the last few waves. What people need to realize about Hallowed Ground is that it hasn't been as good in HW yet. There are situations where it's just another defensive CD like A1S and A3S. Then there are situations where it's raid changing like in A2S or Ravana EX. There was an abundance of the latter in FCoB. In T10, paired with tempered will (and Holmgang), it basically just negated the tank swap mechanic. In T12, it let you just ignore one revelation cycle. In T13, it made later Akh Morns a lot more manageable. It altered the way you did content which is why it was so good. AS hasn't been designed in the same way -- probably for tank balance concerns. Ultimately, it comes around to hurt PLD's because their stand-out ability has been marginalized.

A3S you have the hand phases where the boss splits and you have a similar situation to A1S. You also have polarities which result in the slashing debuff likely falling off. You also have the WAR leaving the boss to handle tethers which also results in the slashing debuff falling off.

From what I've seen, heard, and experienced of live situations, the difference while MTing is something like 80-100 DPS (somewhere around 10~15% higher DPS for the WAR). While OTing, it's closer to 100-200 DPS depending on downtime (somewhere around 10~20% higher DPS for the WAR). It's not a gigantic difference in DPS but it's a difference that matters. So you give Warriors the best tank DPS (MT and OT), the best tank utility, and better raid comp choices as a result while also giving them adequate survivability. Good for them. Now bring the other tanks in line with that so that there is some semblance of balance and a real choice to make when composing a raid.

You should be able to bring any two of the three tanks to any content and be able to perform equally overall. As is, PLD / DRK comps are strictly worse. You have less raid DPS even with a NIN keeping the slashing debuff up and less raid mitigation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

You can do the same w/ DRK (or PLD) + WAR + NIN, WAR + WAR is just the most optimized for that fight due to the split.

---

I'm going to have to ask to prove this then. Because I have serious doubts that you can do this without two Warriors because:

1) Ninja is not going to be able to do enough damage and keep the slashing debuff up for the PLD or DRK and come anywhere close to the dmg the MNK and DRG were able to push out.
2) There is no way in hell a PLD or DRK is going to push anything close to those numbers while tanking even with a Ninja slash debuff.


Also some solid points by Brian. And just to add another, the bursty damage nature of Warrior damage also fits the phase change meta that most bosses follow. A lot of people seem to be under the very wrong impression that the other tanks can 'catch up' to Warrior damage due to the lower overall potency of their combos. This is very wrong as the phase change downtime hurts PLD damage a huge amount (and DRKs to a lesser extent since they have no real burst abilities other than a few oGCDs) where the phase changes are happening in between Warrior burst cooldowns. This is the basic reason why the dummy parse is well...dumb because real fights play into the burst damage method of Warriors. This is why you see Warriors at 1-1.1k on A1S while the other two tanks are lucky to be at 600-800DPS for the fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian_

The above

---

I totally agree with you. What this forum lacks are numbers coming from actual situations rather than bland theory crafting based on optimal situations which never happen in reality.

You made a great point with Hallowed Ground it's probably not that great (or at least not yet) because they want to balance things out and make things doable with any tank comp. But even then I can't understand why SE did give Equilibrium to warriors, it's like the least of their concerns. I never ran into TP issues on a solo target because thanks to pacification and things like fell cleave being on the gcd it allows the warrior to have an excellent TP management. It's getting really useful on A2 where you have to spam overpower under deliverance but that's it. Tanks like DRK are starving and begging for TP after 2m30 and would have had a better use for this kind of spell, it doesn't feel right.

SE literally said "we want warrior to have more damage" but yet gives it two amazing utility spell and an amazing versatility overall. Nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian_

Like a lot of people have pointed out, the video Phoenicia keeps linking has a number of flaws.

I stopped taking him seriously because the BG forums treat him like a joke. And, in general, I respect their overall opinion on things much more than these forums.

No point in 5 minute parses. All of their rotations just repeat after a certain point and the strange cut off point only messes with the numbers. The only point it shows is how hilariously bad the TP issues are for DRK and PLD.

PLD and DRK are given TP support and 100% uptime on the slashing debuff at no personal expense.

WARs are given no TP support (because they don't need it), have no one removing pacification from them after berserk, and cannot use their optimal DPS rotation because they have to upkeep the slashing debuff themselves (Maim's upkeep allows for SE>BB>BB, SE's upkeep forces you to SE>BB).

All in all, it's a dummy parse of pure DPS output. In a live raid, it's far from as ideal. If any tanking is involved, the PLD's DPS will drop because RoH is their lowest potency combo while BB is the WAR's highest potency combo.

On A1S where there are jump phases, I still find myself needing to weave in shield swipes in order to not bottom out on TP as PLD and as a DRK, I have to use unmend as filler after bottoming out on TP. I guess I could also just not use Blood Weapon off CD but that would also be a DPS loss. So, the only way to deal with it without having a loss of raid DPS is for a NIN to goad you (BRD singing is a DPS loss). It's not balanced that 2/3 tanks require that. And, on that point about NIN, unless you have one in your raid, you won't have 100% up-time on the slashing debuff as a PLD or DRK after 0.5 enters the fight. Even then, it's a DPS loss for the NIN and the slashing debuff can fall off while the NIN is off playing with his add. WAR has no such issues with TP or with the slashing debuff.

A2S is what I would consider an actual trade off. Hallowed Ground allows you to cheese a wave which is actually important. You are giving up 300-500 raid DPS in bringing a PLD vs. a DRK / WAR but HG really helps stabilize your raid during the last few waves. What people need to realize about Hallowed Ground is that it hasn't been as good in HW yet. There are situations where it's just another defensive CD like A1S and A3S. Then there are situations where it's raid changing like in A2S or Ravana EX. There was an abundance of the latter in FCoB. In T10, paired with tempered will (and Holmgang), it basically just negated the tank swap mechanic. In T12, it let you just ignore one revelation cycle. In T13, it made later Akh Morns a lot more manageable. It altered the way you did content which is why it was so good. AS hasn't been designed in the same way -- probably for tank balance concerns. Ultimately, it comes around to hurt PLD's because their stand-out ability has been marginalized.

A3S you have the hand phases where the boss splits and you have a similar situation to A1S. You also have polarities which result in the slashing debuff likely falling off. You also have the WAR leaving the boss to handle tethers which also results in the slashing debuff falling off.

From what I've seen, heard, and experienced of live situations, the difference while MTing is something like 80-100 DPS (somewhere around 10~15% higher DPS for the WAR). While OTing, it's closer to 100-200 DPS depending on downtime (somewhere around 10~20% higher DPS for the WAR). It's not a gigantic difference in DPS but it's a difference that matters. So you give Warriors the best tank DPS (MT and OT), the best tank utility, and better raid comp choices as a result while also giving them adequate survivability. Good for them. Now bring the other tanks in line with that so that there is some semblance of balance and a real choice to make when composing a raid.

You should be able to bring any two of the three tanks to any content and be able to perform equally overall. As is, PLD / DRK comps are strictly worse. You have less raid DPS even with a NIN keeping the slashing debuff up and less raid mitigation.

---

The BG forums and Mr Happy are a joke on Guildwork. Heck, the whole official forums are a joke on Guildwork. Posts like this end up there for joke fodder. So saying that me being a joke on a joke forums platform proves nothing other than encouraging hateful comments on these forums. I won't stoop as low. Oh and please take me seriously, I can't live if you don't! I mean the world definitely revolves around you and you only! Btw, nothing against Mr Happy or the people on BG forums. I was just trying to point out the effect of such comments.

The whole people pointing out that the dummy video has flows are mainly you and Anger. It's not a perfect video but it IS a guide line.

I never said PLD and DRK TP issues are balanced. But they are for the most part negligible because almost none of the fights have you sit on the boss for over 2 minutes without breaks.

WAR doing SE > BB > BB is NOT optimal for DPS, it is for aggro, not DPS. Anyone thinking it's optimal has no idea how WAR works and is just spewing BS. If that's the level of BG forums, I can see why they are the joke of Guildwork. (Not that Guildwork people are of any consequence).

Maim lasts 24 seconds, that's 9.6 GCDs. Following SE > BB > BB, you have EXACTLY 9 GCDs before you reach Maim again, this leaves you no space to use Fracture or Fell Cleave, use 1 GCD and Maim drops before reapplied and you will have at least 1 hit without Maim. Using Infuriate for double Fell Cleave is out of the question. Berserk Pacification screws you hard.

In a SE > BB > BB, dropping Fracture is a DPS loss because fracture is ~93 potency higher than your average potency. Fell Cleave is an obvious DPS loss as well. There is NEVER a situation where WAR will do SE > BB > BB where it is optimal. So even if 2 warriors coordinate it, it's not ideal. Try it, you can test it in game, I'm not gonna bother proving it to you.

Yes, WAR not getting Esuna on pacification was not ideal, but WAR wouldn't get Esuna all the time in actual fights. Even then, Esuna is not more than 20 DPS difference and it is a loss on the healers' DPS (Since that's the only thing behind Pacification removal in their priority list). It is not like if you Esuna the WAR he'll suddenly do 2k DPS and without TP DRK and PLD can't do DPS for the first 2.5 minutes (longer than 1.5 minute cycle!)

Also, 5 minute parses serve to normalize the effect of RNG on your DPS. Parses should be repeats of 1.5 minute cycles (Berserk/FOF CD). You repeat that cycle more often so crits are normalized. For example, a triple zerked FC critting along with a stream of lucky crits on t he other hits will edge your DPS higher than it should, you repeat that cycle a few times so lucky crit streaks and unlucky non-crit streams normalize each other. In the dummy video, you can capture the DPS right at the 4min30s mark. If you want, you can drop the TP buffs and just repeat the 1.5 min cycle (Pop FoF and stop when it comes back on CD, take a TP break, repeat) for 3 or 5 times. Take your DPS average and compare it to WAR. You'll get "more accurate" parses and normalized DPS difference.

As I stated before, in an ideal situation, the gap between classes is at its largest. Any non-ideal situation makes this gap smaller. Losing 10% DPS due to mechanics affects everyone's DPS equally. Also, another point which shows you don't know what you're talking about, any down time in a fight while Berserk is on CD is as beneficial to WAR as it is to PLD while FoF is on CD. Out of the three tanks, breaks affect DRK the most as they have no "burst phases" in their, pretty much, flat line DPS curve. You have it in the wrong order.

In my other video (A3S kill) a PLD did 730 DPS, which is only 70 DPS behind the WAR OT! Anyone saying PLD is so far behind WAR needs to link a video of a WAR MT in the same fight doing over 80 DPS (the disparity in the ideal (dummy) fight).

Also, stop looking at it as if NIN "loses" DPS without WAR. NIN applying DE is its optimal rotation. Having a WAR in party means it gains some DPS (70 DPS according to your so knowledgeable Mr Happy in his guide). That is like saying "MNK applying its own DK is a DPS loss because if another MNK applies it they can crit the Bootshine!"

Also, to any PLD saying Hallowed Ground isn't great: In 2.xx, WAR used to say "We're better MTs because we handle busters better!" and PLD's reply has always been: "No, we have Hallowed Ground!"...... The joke's on you now.

All I see here is PLDs refusing to accept the proof right before their eyes because they still cannot accept that they are no longer the MT of choice.

You're right that the PLDs are salty they're no longer the go to tanks. However it's kind obvious that a highly skilled warrior shines the most. Warriors can range from hitting harder then dps due to skills like berserk, unchain, infuriate, and internal release. Eventually warriors will out scale other tanks due to high burst. Just enough defensive cd to help survive the horrors. So I can see the bias feeling towards warriors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenicia

WAR doing SE > BB > BB is NOT optimal for DPS, it is for aggro, not DPS. Anyone thinking it's optimal has no idea how WAR works and is just spewing BS. If that's the level of BG forums, I can see why they are the joke of Guildwork. (Not that Guildwork people are of any consequence).

---

You're right. Unless someone else keeps the slashing debuff, like...another WAR doing SE > BB (repeat), maybe ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenicia

All I see here is PLDs refusing to accept the proof right before their eyes because they still cannot accept that they are no longer the MT of choice.

---

Ok, let's say we're not the MT of choice...it's cool, we can live with it.
But we're not the OT of choice too..

So, we're the...what ?

I mean what did you think was going to happen when they introduced ANOTHER tank ?

God help us when they introduce a forth tank <.<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noira

I mean what did you think was going to happen when they introduced ANOTHER tank ?

---

We could have :
- Best MT on single target
- Best MT on multiple targets
- Best OT on single target
- Best OT on multiple targets

Or we could have
- The tank that (heaviliy) mitigates
- The tank that heals
- The tank that buffs
- The tank that debuffs
- The tank that gives ressources

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

You're right. Unless someone else keeps the slashing debuff, like...another WAR doing SE > BB (repeat), maybe ?

---

Unfortunately this puts you in a weird situation where the MT is using SE > BB and the OT is using SE > BB > BB. As long as they're equal on gear and the WAR opens with Unchained + buffs vs saving the buffs, I think it's perfectly viable. Alternatively, the WAR MT can do the SE > BB > BB and the OT can do SE > BB for safety (that's what I used to do in 2.0 at least).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Ok, let's say we're not the MT of choice...it's cool, we can live with it.
But we're not the OT of choice too..

So, we're the...what ?

---

While I understand this sentiment (you want to be included in general), if PLD were the OT of choice and DRK were the MT of choice... where would WAR be? :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

While I understand this sentiment (you want to be included in general), if PLD were the OT of choice and DRK were the MT of choice... where would DRK be? :P

---

That's exactly why we didn't have an issue in 2.x.

And that's also why tank needs to have something more "unique", and that can only be applied when looking at the full party setup.[LIST][*]I suggested WAR to be the tank that "DPS"....which he already is, anyway.[*]PLD could be the tank that heals. More precisely, the off-tank that heals the main tank, with skill specifically designed for this. That would allow for setup with two tanks, only one heal (To keep the raid alive and occasionnaly heals the MT), and 5 DPS. Of course, focusing on healing the MT, the PLD wouldn't do much damage, but the additionnal DPS would balance the overall DPS.[*]And DRK could be the tank that "refills". DRK's gimmick include leeching HP and MP, what if it could put debuffs so that anyone hitting the target would either recover MP or TP. This way, you wouldn't need a MCH or BRD to do it so they can focus on DPSing. And again, the additionnal DPS gain by the BRD/MCH should be balanced by the DRK doing still a little less DPS than the WAR.

This way, there wouldn't be a "best" tank, but several setup, and each setup would work better depending on the content.
Several big targets ? Two tank, so a WAR is probably your best bet.
Single target for a short fight ? No ressource management, pick a PLD as an OT and a single healer.
Long fight where managing ressource can be difficult ? Bring a DRK to sustain everyone.

The concept would be that "Main tanking" wouldn't be where each tank shines, but instead, more emphasis would be on how to properly off-tank.

It's a raw idea, but it's an example on how tanks can be much more that just "surviving and keeping aggro" without automatically falling into "moar DPS !"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

While I understand this sentiment (you want to be included in general), if PLD were the OT of choice and DRK were the MT of choice... where would DRK be? :P

---

but that's where the unbalance is, there should not be a TANK OF CHOICE all tanks should be able to be good to either MT or OT not matte what class, that was YOSHI-P philosophy for a balance community, but we have this situation on which PLD is just not a "CHOICE" for either one or the other spot. if paladins where balance there would not be any problem on which tank is on the party and the difference they should bring is their play style and some minor raid utility that separates them from one or the other but ultimately will not exclude any of the other tank classes, but WAR does everything and better and DRK does almost everything and better than PLD so....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

Unfortunately this puts you in a weird situation where the MT is using SE > BB and the OT is using SE > BB > BB. As long as they're equal on gear and the WAR opens with Unchained + buffs vs saving the buffs, I think it's perfectly viable. Alternatively, the WAR MT can do the SE > BB > BB and the OT can do SE > BB for safety (that's what I used to do in 2.0 at least).

---

The problem with SE > BB > BB is not aggro, it is if you use Fell Cleave/Inner Beast/Fracture once, you drop Maim buff. This is where this "rotation" fails since the whole point of adding a third combo is to fully use the duration of Maim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpookyGhost

While I understand this sentiment (you want to be included in general), if PLD were the OT of choice and DRK were the MT of choice... where would WAR be? :P

---

The whole mentality of having a tank of choice is messed up, but it's a, let's use the FotM word, "hive mind" issue.

There should be no XT of choice. People should freely choose any combination of two of the three tanks based on what they bring (DPS, utility, mitigation).

The game currently succeeded at making any combination of two "work", but it hasn't in making any combination of two "desired".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

List of good raw ideas.

---

First, in 2.x we had an issue of PLD being MT of choice and WAR relegated to OT though they were fully interchangeable with additional benefits. But that doesn't matter now.

While the ideas themselves sound like a good place to start, they are too raw to accept them as is. They need a lot of work otherwise it'll create more problems than it would fix.

I think each tank should have an area where it shines as a MT and an area where it shines as an OT. The problem is tanks are already homogenized and what little differences between them makes it hard to adjust them without making them more of the same.

In your Scenario DRK/PLD is the best combo for anything since dropping BRD/MCH for a third melee and another melee or caster instead of the healer will net you far more DPS than bringing a WAR/DRK or WAR/PLD. BRD/MCH are brought for their utility and if DRK fulfills that niche, you can drop them entirely (people already dropping MNK entirely when they have DRK). Add in PLD replacing the need of a second healer and you have 5 strong DPS (4 melee 1 caster? 3 melee 2 casters?).

I think that added utility shouldn't be "so strong" that it replaces the need of someone whose role has been that. PLD shouldn't replace a healer and DRK shouldn't replace MCH/BRD. Unless you make WAR a full fledged melee DPS to make up for the difference. But then we'll have people running 6 WARs and we go back to square one.

I think the adjustments should be more moderate. PLD has added defensive/healing utility (already does, but bit clunky) without replacing a healer. DRK needs added utility as it has none and some form of TP management. WAR is fine as is.

From there, it should come down to: "Which two tanks did I end up with? Okay, who is MT and who OT for maximum raid benefit?" instead of the: "Oh, we're at A4S, PLD please change to DRK, WAR put moar STR for moar DPS" that we have now.

That said, as long as we have different classes, there will always be a best and a worst, which is healthy from a balance perspective.

Meh I actually agree with the whole certain tanks for certain role aspect. If all tanks balance to be exactly the same then where does that put warrior? Surely you wouldn't expect people to chose a tank with no real utility and now no dps because dps is balanced. I agree with tanks shining in one department and not the other. Square knew this and to make it a fail safe situation they gave us the option to choose other classes while remaining in the same job so YOU the player do not miss out on content. Sucks.....yeah at the same time you again the player will be that much versatile. I agree with Phoe the main complaints " my class isn't the best anymore! Make everyone balance" and this after PLD had their shine. Makes no sense to have all tanks perform the same. Utility will dominate if that situation occurs and we'll be right back in this situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenicia

From there, it should come down to: "Which two tanks did I end up with? Okay, who is MT and who OT for maximum raid benefit?" instead of the: "Oh, we're at A4S, PLD please change to DRK, WAR put moar STR for moar DPS" that we have now.

---

The "problem" is that "Which two tanks did I end up with ?" is exactly the situation where no tank is excluded because people just deal with "what they end with". It's also why, most of the time, you can play any job you want.

But, if whatever couple tanks you end with, you'll still have two healers and a "refresher", it means that, the overall DPS and usefulness of the party will be the same. And if the rest of the party is the same anyway...bring the couple tanks with the more DPS.
To balance it, you don't have to increase WAR to be a full fledged DPS. You have to DECREASE DRK and PLD DPS so that the additionnal DPS only "compensate" for their lack of damage.

Let's suppose the following DPS numbers (Numbers probably not accurate, but the idea is there):

• MT : 600 (Since we're talking hypothetical adjustments, why not all tanks doing around the same DPS when MT'ing? :p)
• Healers : 300 DPS when they don't have to heal all the time, 0 when they're on full heal duty
• "Refresher" : 800 DPS since they have to reduce their damage to refill MP or TP
• Full fledged DPS : 1200
• WAR OT : 1000 (It'll be used as a base to adjust other tanks OT DPS)

First setup :Any MT/WAR OT/2 healers who can DPS/1 Refresher/3 DPS
600+1000+300+300+800+1200+1200+1200 = 6600 overall DPS.

Second setup :Any MT/PLD OT/1 healer full healing duty/1 Refresher/4 DPS
600+x+0+800+1200+1200+1200+1200=6200+x overall DPS.
=> So a PLD OT would need to do around 400 DPS. Even less than when MT'ing since he'll probably use most of its GCD on healing duty and probably only do incomplete Riot Blade combo to refill its MP.

Third setup :Any MT/DRK OT/2 healers who can DPS/4 DPS
600+y+300+300+1200+1200+1200+1200=6000+y overall DPS.
=> So a DRK OT would need to do around 600 DPS.
Same as MT. It could mean that neither of its stance should really affects its damage output, or that he'd use both stances even when OT'ing.

Again, my numbers are probably not really accurate but the ratio could be calculated to obtain the same results.

Meh warriors only getting the massive shine because of burn phases. Once another massive hard hitting mob with multiple phases watch how PLD take charge with their mighty shields haha. It is what it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Snip.

---

As I said in my post, the ideas are too "raw" and need a lot of things to consider so you don't break more than you fix. I'm not against your ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RecklessLion

Snip.

---

No one is disagreeing that the content is what's forcing people to pick up WAR. This heavy "Bring more DPS for DPS check" content is what the PLD doesn't mesh well with.

What I'm personally against is buffing one tank without any "balancing" just to match the content. As long as PLD has "better defenses" than the other two tanks, it should not do more damage. Even if said defenses aren't relevant in today's content.

DRK needs more reliable ways to defend against physical damage and if content shifts to physical damage, DRK will be the tank that is left out and complaining on these forums.

Why I agree with you on a few of comments. I'm against the buffing for exact result because results will never be the same. Favors will eventually come into play. This system is flawed just like everything else. At the same time I'm content with this idea. It ignores the one tank being the best in all situations. It turns into a no brainer eventually if that idea plays a part. It will become a tier base choice like fighting games. Here there's a situation this tank excells at and vice versa for other situations. It eliminates one tank from being the greatest. So I take back my very first comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenicia

Because it's getting ridiculous.

---

Seriously this.^^

There are about 5-6 threads about this same topic within a week. From a pro-warrior standpoint, it's ridiculous to see this over and over. Put your thoughts on a class you'd rather complain about instead of play as and have fun in ONE thread please. You're points are nothing new and tired news really. Warrior is not getting nerfed #justchill

I doubt it will stop though. People want to be the best with no real challenge at everything instead improvising, using what you have available, and riding out a bad storm. Complaints will happen no matter. I'm coming from the fighting game community where player blame tiers and not their horrible play style. I didn't think the same concept would happen in what suppose to be a friendly not big pvp route mmo. Guess that's not case here haha.