Tank's buffs

I did much run Duty : normal raid (8man) for farm tank mounts.

I noticed....which wanted main tank. When MT buff and aggor boss.
when off MT buff and turn tank-dps's buff.

I don't understand why they do like it? Wanted more damgee?
Worried if they lost aggor wihout MT's buff. Or healers confused "where main tank??"

It depends, WAR for example does a lot of DPS in Deliverance so you'll often see players dropping Defiance after they have established aggro. PLD and DRK sometimes may go DPS stance as well, but it's not uncommon for them to lose aggro to an overgeared DPS. The aggro and DPS combos often help in keeping aggro though in things like tank farm parties.

i asuming you are asking why the MT use the tank stance to pull and then switch to dps stance? well is simple its for more damage, the 20% mitigation is not worthy of the masive dps loose, specially when you can survive so easily without that bonus, current tank stances are just a outdate desing that only adds clunkyness and penalitations for just nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shao32

i asuming you are asking why the MT use the tank stance to pull and then switch to dps stance? well is simple its for more damage, the 20% mitigation is not worthy of the masive dps loose, specially when you can survive so easily without that bonus, current tank stances are just a outdate desing that only adds clunkyness and penalitations for just nothing.

---

Tell me that after you've tried to hold threat against Godka or Neo Exdeath.

Those have very nasty ways of making you stay in tankstance, either by constantly reducing your healthpool and forcing the White Mage to overdrive their healing, or by simply dropping hate all the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekimmak

Tell me that after you've tried to hold threat against Godka or Neo Exdeath.

Those have very nasty ways of making you stay in tankstance, either by constantly reducing your healthpool and forcing the White Mage to overdrive their healing, or by simply dropping hate all the time.

---

i actually have both kills and be MT in both, my raid dont have a nin but cycling shirk solve any agro problem, the 20% dont make you healers heal more at all especially if you use you defensive tools properly and neo was nasty bcs force to get in to tank stance every time he reset the agro if you dont have a nin but a agro combo on grit and no more, the rest was off-grit, but neo is the only fight in the game that force more tank stance uptime and even that you spend 95% of the fight out of it, godka dont have any mistery, a strong pull with proper cyrcle shirk and you done, you dont even need cyrcle shirk there, the natural swaps you have to dealt cover that.
if you know what are you doing you dont need tank stance at all outside the pull, its a burden more that helpfull mechanic for proper tanks and a big penalitation tool for who can't have such skill saddly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekimmak

Tell me that after you've tried to hold threat against Godka or Neo Exdeath.

Those have very nasty ways of making you stay in tankstance, either by constantly reducing your healthpool and forcing the White Mage to overdrive their healing, or by simply dropping hate all the time.

---

Even without ninja and not utilizing shirk fully, I have no problems with aggro on God Kefka.
DRK I just do 2x DA PS combo in Grit and forgot about enmity for the rest of fight.
WAR I swap to Defiance after first IR and do 2 BB combos + sit in it until Unchained runs out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shao32

i asuming you are asking why the MT use the tank stance to pull and then switch to dps stance? well is simple its for more damage, the 20% mitigation is not worthy of the masive dps loose, specially when you can survive so easily without that bonus, current tank stances are just a outdate desing that only adds clunkyness and penalitations for just nothing.

---

I'm not a Extreme/Savage mode raider but I agree, ESPECIALLY ON DRK where the bonus from Grit are outweighed by that 20% damage penalty and not being able to use Blood Weapon...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekimmak

Tell me that after you've tried to hold threat against Godka or Neo Exdeath.

Those have very nasty ways of making you stay in tankstance, either by constantly reducing your healthpool and forcing the White Mage to overdrive their healing, or by simply dropping hate all the time.

---

The only time our tanks go back into tank stance after establishing threat is if, for a variety of reasons, we start killing ourselves off, they'll do it to reduce the burden on the healers while we recover.

Tank stance doesn't help against Heartless Angel, a basic CD handles Wings of Destruction, and almost every single Embrace has an invulnerability ready for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DRKoftheAzure

I'm not a Extreme/Savage mode raider but I agree, ESPECIALLY ON DRK where the bonus from Grit are outweighed by that 20% damage penalty and not being able to use Blood Weapon...

---

i try to find a post where say all tanks loose 25% of they dps when they stay on tank stance but i dint have any luck with it, so in resume on every tank the bonus of the tank stance is outweighed by the penalty and the lock of some important skill not only DRK, the diference is PLD/DRK are more taxed that WAR to make the switch and WAR outperform the other 2 in a hypothetical full tank stance-stance dance uptime scenarios with is hilarious how something we avoid is still a very important thing on tank balance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shao32

i try to find a post where say all tanks loose 25% of they dps when they stay on tank stance but i dint have any luck with it, so in resume on every tank the bonus of the tank stance is outweighed by the penalty and the lock of some important skill not only DRK, the diference is PLD/DRK are more taxed that WAR to make the switch and WAR outperform the other 2 in a hypothetical full tank stance-stance dance uptime scenarios with is hilarious how something we avoid is still a very important thing on tank balance.

---

Yes, I forget the exact origins but this is about right. The loose math goes something like this:

Imagine a full time dps stance tank has a potential multiplier of 1.

What would a full time tank stance tank do compared to a full time dps stance tank if they were a:

(1) Paladin?
Paladin Sword Oath contributes roughly 11% of their dps and experiences a tank stance penalty of 15%.

I would expect a full time tank stance paladin to do:
(1-sword oath contribution)*Tank stance penalty = (1-.11)*.85 = .7565 times the amount of damage of a full time sword oath paladin. This is a slight upper bound since we are also losing some sheltron casts and therefore some shield swipe casts, this is likely very small and the true numbers is probably close to .75.

(2) Warrior?

Warrior is slightly more complicated. This is because warrior is losing access to Fell Cleave (which is approximately 40% of their dps) and suffering a tank stance penalty, at the same time warrior also has unchained which removes this penalty.
Basic facts: Warrior is taking a 36% damage reduction in changing Fell Cleave to Inner beast (350/546 for the exact number). Unchained is up 20 seconds of every 90 seconds, and Warrior is losing their dps stance damage bonus.

Calculate as follows: Damage penalty can be seen by computing change in Fell Cleave to Inner Beast damage (40% of damage) + Change in non Fell cleave damage (60% of damage which is a combination of unchained time and not in unchained time)
=.4*.64+.6*(2/9+.8*7/9)/1.05 = .74 as compared to a full time dps stance warrior.

Using the relative percents is justified by assuming the number of inner beast casts is the same as the number of Fell Cleave casts.

Not included in this are damage buffs like tank stance + upheaval and combining (ToB and Tank Stance) HP modifiers applied to upheaval and does not calculate the additional critical rate damage bonus from the dps stance, but I expect those two numbers will roughly balance out. Again I would think it is about 75%

Both Paladin and Warrior are experiencing approximately a 25% damage decrease when compared to their dps stance.

Dark Knight is far harder to calculate because there is a major shift in resources and cooldown use when in full time tank stance. Someone may have a clever way to estimate this but I do not at the time of writing, though I suspect it is around a 25% damage reduction. Some things that need to be taken into account for that calculation are: Increase in resource regeneration from syphon strike, use of TBN to increase bloodspiller use, loss of blood weapon, the loss of delirium use on blood weapon, gain of blood price, and the change in dark arts use to favor bloodspiller, and the general loss of bloodspiller potency as compared to dps stance only.

My guess: losing blood weapon likely washes out the bonus from syphon strike giving more mp, as well as the bonus blood gained from blood price (I believe I did that math showing this at one point and posted it on the forums), and likely still takes a loss from losing the haste bonus from blood weapon which is fairly sizable. The bloodspiller potency quantity/potency changes are likely nice but around the same order of magnitude as shield swipe losses and upheaval gains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono_Rising

snip.

---

thanks chrono thats what i was looking for

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono_Rising

Yes, I forget the exact origins but this is about right. The loose math goes something like this:

Imagine a full time dps stance tank has a potential multiplier of 1.

What would a full time tank stance tank do compared to a full time dps stance tank if they were a:

(1) Paladin?
Paladin Sword Oath contributes roughly 11% of their dps and experiences a tank stance penalty of 15%.

I would expect a full time tank stance paladin to do:
(1-sword oath contribution)*Tank stance penalty = (1-.11)*.85 = .7565 times the amount of damage of a full time sword oath paladin. This is a slight upper bound since we are also losing some sheltron casts and therefore some shield swipe casts, this is likely very small and the true numbers is probably close to .75.

---

Am I missing it or aren't we calculating the extra auto attacks from Sword Oath?
They really add up over time.

Or was that part of the 11%?

Sword Oath is the 11% (.11) which I subrtract off before applying the tank stance multiplier. I don’t think sword oath does “extra auto attacks” and more just adds damage for each auto attack you do, but if this is not what you mean if you could explain alittle more what you mean I might be able to better answer the question as I might be misunderstanding it.

You are correct, it's additional damage on top of the auto attack damage.
It's not an extra auto-attack per se, it's an attack of 75 potency every time you auto attack. My wording was bad there.