So what exactly IS the issue with Warrior?

[Judge_Xero]

Except that the game is obviously designed around a 1:1:2 ratio instead of the 1:2:1 ratio you're using thanks to the DF, as well as how the fights themselves are design (DPS races and whatnot).

There are no issues with Warrior in any of the DF Battles.

On top of that, there *isn't* any advantage when using that composition for a WAR compared to a PLD: you're sacrificing damage to increase survivability. Since WAR and PLD deal effectively the same damage, a PLD could get the exact same increase in survivability by going with your 2 healer composition and it would *still* be more survivable than the WAR while having the same damage output.

Warrior DPS = PLD DPS in Sword Oath - the extra Potency on PLD AA accounts for quite a bit on DPS. Switching both to Tank Stances, Warrior does ~20% more damage than Paladin in all DPS gear.

Also, as I pointed out last time you brought up that composition, you're not going to a perfect conversion with healer DPS. A healer that spends 40% of their time is not going to provide 40% of the DPS of an actual DPS. If they *could*, there would be no point in bringing DPS because healers in DPS stances could match them while also being able to swap to healing when needed. A healer in a DPS stance does roughly 75% of what a DPS does (a CNJ will manage ~200 mean magic potency per GCD whereas a BLM does ~270), so the comparative loss of DPS is actually 16% (40 * .75 + 100 + 50 = 210; 100 + 100 + 50 = 250; 210 / 250 = .84). Even if you only assume that they'll use attacks 40% of the time, they'll only get as high as 32.5% of what a DPS would manage in that same time frame, which is a 14% loss (32.5 * 2 + 100 + 50 = 215).

I actually played as White Mage to figure out a reasonable amount of DPS they can do while still healing. Because their DOTS provide great potency, with casting downtime for heals I was able to pull 60 DPS while still being a functional healer. This was with less than 400 MND and only a 58 Magic Damage staff, while switching to Cleric Stance. 70 DPS per healer is not that unreasonable as it's ~30% of an actual DPS.

So STR PLD vs STR WAR both in Tank Stance - with two healers
PLD 140 DPS - Healers 140 DPS - DD 200 DPS (480 DPS)
WAR 168 DPS - Healers 140 DPS - DD 200 DPS (508 DPS)
**VIT PLD - 110 DPS - DD x 2 400 DPS - (510 DPS)

So the STR Paladin doesn't do enough damage to warrant bringing two healers. There are only so many DOT's they can apply, so there are wasted heals. Bringing the extra DD is more effective for that party make-up.

Where are you getting *this* from? WAR doesn't generate more enmity than PLD. In fact, it ends up generating slightly less. It's also not like healers increase enmity generation or having more healers stops that 1 DPS from still putting out full numbers, so you can't argue that it's better comparative enmity.

I should have been more specific. It was STR War vs VIT Pld.

That's a complete and utter farce. Even if you average out the CDs rather than accounting for their burst contributions, they provide a lot more than 10.4% increased survivability: Rampart provides 4.44% over time, Sentinel 2.22%, Foresight 1.67%, Convalescence 5%, Bulwark 1.75%, and Hallowed Ground 1.39% (16.47%). Even if you factor in the WAR CD suite (Foresight provides 2.22, Featherfoot 2.5%, Convalescence 3.33%; ToB is a complete and utter joke because it's a 20% heal every 3 minutes), a WAR is going to be taking 91.95% of pre-CD damage and a PLD is taking 83.53%, which means that WAR is going to be requiring 110% of what a PLD is going to require. As such, you composition ends up providing WAR with, at best, *equal* survivability to a PLD and that's only if you're willing to treat the reactive and RNG mitigation provided by Featherfoot and Convalescence the same as the straight up static mitigation provided by 5/6ths of the PLD CD suite.

Put it all together and you get a composition that deals less damage and has no advantages. You really need to stop talking about your alternate composition as if it somehow *solved* problems rather than being completely and utterly absurd from the start (assuming you're capable of making simple logical leaps like "healers do less damage than DPS" and realizing that the PLD CD suite stops the living *hell* out of the WAR CD suite).

The reason I say with that setup that Warrior has better survivability is because it will be receiving 120% more healing with two healers. Add in the extra 15% with Infuriate and it's a total of 138% more healing received.

While it doesn't equate to Paladin's eHP value, as long as the Warrior doesn't get 1 shotted, then that alone will be equal to PLD CD suite.

[Hitokirinomad]

So STR PLD vs STR WAR both in Tank Stance - with two healers
PLD 140 DPS - Healers 140 DPS - DD 200 DPS (480 DPS)
WAR 168 DPS - Healers 140 DPS - DD 200 DPS (508 DPS)
**VIT PLD - 110 DPS - DD x 2 400 DPS - (510 DPS)

So the STR Paladin doesn't do enough damage to warrant bringing two healers. There are only so many DOT's they can apply, so there are wasted heals. Bringing the extra DD is more effective for that party make-up.




I should have been more specific. It was STR War vs VIT Pld.



The reason I say with that setup that Warrior has better survivability is because it will be receiving 120% more healing with two healers. Add in the extra 15% with Infuriate and it's a total of 138% more healing received.

Gonna break down my problems with your logic. First, I get your comparison of 1:2:1 may put the WAR slightly ahead (even though these numbers are extremely rough). However your VIT PLD for some reason ignored the DPS contribution of the Healer you used as a given for the other examples. So the VIT PLD composition would provide (using your own numbers) 580 DPS, utterly blowing your WAR comp out of the water.

Second...STR Warrior VS VIT PLD means 4 mans, or heavily outgearing the content. Otherwise the WAR just won't have the HP to survive the hit to use the IB. The extra STR brings extra DPS, it doesn't bring *that* much extra damage from IB to bridge the heals received gap.

Also, saying that bringing two the healers means an increase in survivability over one healer doesn't really...well of course it does. Does that make it the optimum group composition? As evidenced by Titan, you bring the least number of Tanks and Heals you can get away with so you can meet the DPS check. Why exactly would you start trickling back in Heals to make up for inefficient tanking, when you can just get an efficient tank?

[Judge_Xero]

However your VIT PLD for some reason ignored the DPS contribution of the Healer you used as a given for the other examples.

The reason I didn't include healer DPS in the case of Paladin is because in endgame content the Paladin would require near 100% healing. Saying that Paladin can survive with only 60% healing in any content that a Warrior would have eHP issues with would be a bit excessive.

Second...STR Warrior VS VIT PLD means 4 mans, or heavily outgearing the content. Otherwise the WAR just won't have the HP to survive the hit to use the IB. The extra STR brings extra DPS, it doesn't bring *that* much extra damage from IB to bridge the heals received gap.

Using Titan as an example, PLD (VIT) vs WAR (STR) in Darklight + Garuda Weapon - the Warrior would have ~5700 HP, the Paladin would have ~5300 HP. Mountain Buster @ 4400 HP (3500 on PLD) - Inner Beast would heal for ~1300 HP (average) - only needs to be used on the MB prior to Tumult followed by Infuriate.

*** Also interesting for that fight is that the average MB + Average Inner Beast (equal gear for equal content) = 5700 HP, so if you are between 4400-3200 HP and there are no incoming heals - you will live by using Inner Beast.

Also, saying that bringing two the healers means an increase in survivability over one healer doesn't really...well of course it does. Does that make it the optimum group composition? As evidenced by Titan, you bring the least number of Tanks and Heals you can get away with so you can meet the DPS check. Why exactly would you start trickling back in Heals to make up for inefficient tanking, when you can just get an efficient tank?

In a short answer, it's because of Warriors design. From other discussions it seems that HP Absorb Tanks are difficult to balance. If the HP absorb scales the same as Damage then Warrior would be OP. Why bring Paladin, when Warrior has the same mitigation and more damage right? You could just increase the potency of Warriors self heals right, then it wouldn't need to deal as much damage and could just stack HP. But what if you did stack STR anyways, so that every 20 seconds you could self heal 4k HP. *** still wouldn't scale with damage the same way PLD does.

Stacking just VIT on WAR, as others have said, requires your party to have some really good healers, who would have an easier time just using a Paladin. So it seems SE in an attempt to balance the HP Absorb style of Tank to the traditional Mitigation Tank, based it around party composition and DPS.

From my estimates given the current skillset - Damage wont scale higher than 120% HPS (equal gear for equal content to Healers).
So if a single healer can do 1000 HPS - DPS would be 1200.

It would be relative to the fight of course too. If for some reason SE does a fight that requires 3 Healers 100% to keep a Paladin alive, then it would take 3 100% Healers and 1 60-40 to keep a Warrior alive.

[Leiron]

Warrior DPS = PLD DPS in Sword Oath - the extra Potency on PLD AA accounts for quite a bit on DPS. Switching both to Tank Stances, Warrior does ~20% more damage than Paladin in all DPS gear.

That makes no sense.
If Warrior DPS is equal to PLD DPS in sword oath, and Warrior DPS suffers a 25% damage debuff compared to 20% Paladin debuff, they would still be doing the same damage.
The logic makes no sense.

I should have been more specific. It was STR War vs VIT Pld.

You just confounded your argument.

While it doesn't equate to Paladin's eHP value, as long as the Warrior doesn't get 1 shotted, then that alone will be equal to PLD CD suite.

I don't see why anyone should listen to what you say regarding PLD vs WAR.
Its so far off its not even funny.

[Giantbane]

*** PLD will receive 120% Healing in Shield Oath.

Not quite. PLD require 20% less healing due to Shield Oath because they take 20% less damage. But this isn't what you're saying. For a fair comparison, you need the inverse of this. How much more effective HP does the PLD have because he is taking 20% less damage, and how much more effective healing is the PLD receiving?

1.0 / 0.8 = 1.25

PLD has 125% total effective HP and receives 125% effective healing due to shield oath

That makes no sense.
If Warrior DPS is equal to PLD DPS in sword oath, and Warrior DPS suffers a 25% damage debuff compared to 20% Paladin debuff, they would still be doing the same damage.
The logic makes no sense.

WAR should be doing more in tank stance for 2 reasons.

1) the PLD suffers more than the WAR when switching stances, the PLD not only loses the 20% due to Shield Oath, he's also losing something like the 16%? (no idea, i think kitru had it around this during one of his/her math fests) from the loss of Sword Oath (<---- EDIT, clarified that the additional 16%? was from loss of Sword Oath).

2) Defiance isn't exactly a straight 25% penalty either. Defiance also brings 10% boosted crit with full wrath. This almost makes up for the 5% base difference between defiance and shield oath by itself. However, defiance also allows the use of inner beast (a solid dps move with no penalty when used with infuriate), and unchained (which can be stacked with berserk & Inner Release for some excellent burst).

So in ideal conditions the WAR should be pulling ahead while tanking.

[Kitru]

1) the PLD suffers more than the WAR when switching stances, the PLD not only loses the 20% due to Shield Oath, he's losing something like the 16%? (no idea, i think kitru had it around this during one of his/her math fests).

Actually, in the math, it showed that PLD in Sword Oath and WAR outside of it do about the same damage (WAR has a 1.7% advantage); PLD pulled ahead when running with a WAR thanks to getting bonus damage from the slashing debuff. PLDs often are seen to do less damage because they're not using CoS and Spirits Within like they're supposed to. SW and CoS make up 15% of a PLD's total DPS.

2) Defiance isn't exactly a straight 25% penalty either. Defiance also brings 10% boosted crit with full wrath.

If you want to get technical, it's a 4.76% increase in damage. Factoring in the 25% damage reduction, it puts WAR at 78.57% and that's assuming you maintain 100% uptime on Wrath V.

unchained (which can be stacked with berserk & Inner Release for some excellent burst)

Stacking up CDs amounts to less than you might think when you are forced to delay them to stack them. You actually get more out of using Internal Release only when you've got Berserk *and* Unchained active and, even then, it's not that much (delaying it by 50% reduces the contribution to 2/3rds of what it would otherwise do over time; Berserk adds 40% damage and Unchained 33% which puts the total average contribution at 124% of the mean; since you can only do that once every 3 minutes, which is once every 3 IRs, it'll net you an extra 8.15% of its already low 2.72% increase to total damage; stacking gives you an extra .222% damage, which is less than a percent).

So in ideal conditions the WAR should be pulling ahead while tanking.

You're forgetting about the 50 extra potency per GCD that a PLD gets completely off-GCD. WAR doesn't get anything of the kind. Plus, Berserk is laughably weak compared to Fight or Flight (Berserk is an 8.89% increase to auto-attack damage over time and a 3.33% increase to special attack damage; auto-attack damage is roughly 25% of your total damage, so that means that Berserk adds a whole 4.72% to average damage; Fight or Flight is a 10% increase to damage). WAR gets a lot more *multipliers* to its damage, but PLD gets a lot more straight up added. They end up doing within 5% of each other on OT damage, MT damage, and MT enmity.

[Giantbane]

Actually, in the math, it showed that PLD in Sword Oath and WAR outside of it .... [and stuff]

My reply was to (paraphrasing): if WAR & PLD are roughly balanced outside of tank stance, why would WAR be doing more DPS when both are in tank stance?

my point was that this is because the PLD loses more switching to tank stance because:

1) The PLD loses Sword Oath and then suffers the 20% penalty of shield oath. So they lose more than just 20% damage by switching stances.
2) The WAR doesn't just lose 25% dmg, they gain some of that back (not all, just some). PLD doesn't get any dmg boosters that counteract the damage loss from Shield Oath, so it's just lose 20% damage.

EDIT: another thought: you might also consider that the PLD is now getting hit a lot more, which effects Spirit's Within. So a PLD either needs to time the use of Spirit's Within to execute when at/near full health (so not always using on cooldown) or suffer the penalty from not being at full health. While this is harder to actually quantify, it is going to be another effective difference between DPS stance and Tank stance.

Therefore, it seems to me that the WAR should be putting out more damage in tank stance than the PLD. Are you debating that?

If you want to get technical, it's a 4.76% increase in damage. Factoring in the 25% damage reduction, it puts WAR at 78.57% and that's assuming you maintain 100% uptime on Wrath V.

If I wanted to get technical, I wouldn't have said it *almost* makes up for

EDIT2:

Stacking up CDs amounts to less than you might think when you are forced to delay them to stack them.

For the purpose of including Unchained above, it still provides *some* boost when you use it that isn't available without defiance. So whatever the boost is, it's still acting counter to the 25% reduction of Defiance. Something that doesn't happen with a PLD and Shield Oath's penalty.

However, as an aside, delaying either Unchained or Berserk for the pure purpose of stacking them shouldn't be necessary. Unchained at 180s and Berserk at 90s means Unchained should always line up with Berserk (both used on cooldown). The only reason this shouldn't happen is if you're delaying their use for non DPS purposes. Say, you are saving Wrath/Infuriate for Inner Beast usage, saving Berserk for an Inner Beast/Second Wind/Blood Bath combo, or saving both for an upcoming burst DPS phase. Even Inner Release at 60s, if you want to use it on cooldown (whether or not that's advisable), will still line up with both Unchained and Berserk every time Unchained is off cooldown provided they were all used at the same time (well, give or take actual cast times).

So as long as we're talking about the boost from Unchained, it should be considered to be used with Berserk and Inner Release because *if* you are in a scenario where you can use Unchained (DPS/Burst DPS more important than incoming heals/Inner Beast), I would think you should also usually be able to stack it with Berserk/Inner Release without penalty.

[Paikis]

Actually, in the math...

The math is all well and good, but it simply doesn't reflect reality.

By your own thread (linked in your sig):

WAR (BB>BB>SE):
((2 * (630) / .9 + 610) / 9) * 1.0556 + 83.33 * 1.11) * 1.2 * 1.0476 * 1.0272 * .75 = 325.3 potency per GCD

PLD (without WAR):
(205 + 83.33 + 25 + 25) * 1.1 * .8 = 297.73 potency per GCD

You failed to include Vengeance (50 potency with 12.5% up time, assuming you get hit once per GCD) which is another 6.25 potency per GCD per target.

These numbers are against a single target only, and while in their respective tanking stances. So we're looking at about a 15% damage advantage to the Warrior on a single target. But there are some other issues you failed to address.

1. What about multiple targets? Overpower is 120 potency per GCD per target, Vengeance is 6.25 potency per target, Steel Cyclone is also a large chunk of potency. This quickly ramps up as number of targets increases. Circle of Scorn simply doesn't compare amd F;ash does 0 damage.

2. Gearing. While it is true that anything a WAR can wear, a PLD can wear as well (AF gear excluded) how many PLDs do you see gearing for STR? Meanwhile the Gryphonskin jewellery is considered by many to be BiS for Warriors. 45 STR works out to be around 15% more damage and that doesn't count the secondary stats like crit/determination that you can also meld onto them.

[Giantbane]

You failed to include Vengeance (50 potency with 12.5% up time, assuming you get hit once per GCD) which is another 6.25 potency per GCD per target.

Oh yea! I forgot Vengeance, good call. Another boost the WAR gets only while tanking. Unfortunately the cool down on that one does not line up so nicely that it can be used with Unchained/Berserk on cool down without staggering it.

[Kitru]

You failed to include Vengeance (50 potency with 12.5% up time, assuming you get hit once per GCD) which is another 6.25 potency per GCD per target.

Those numbers also inflate that value of Berserk by 20% (was using 50% +dam instead of the 40% that it actually is) and don't completely ignores the fact that you often don't want to use Berserk asap because of timing issues, like wanting to prep a big IB or making sure you're not locked out with Pacification when an add spawns. The inclusion of Vengeance just offsets the correction in Berserk.

((2 * (630) / .9 + 610) / 9) * 1.0333 + 83.33 * 1.0888) * 1.2 * 1.0476 * 1.0272 * .75 = 318.6 potency per GCD

Add in Vengeance and you get...

((2 * (630) / .9 + 610) / 9) * 1.0333 + (83.33 + 6.25) * 1.0888) * 1.2 * 1.0476 * 1.0272 * .75 = 325.2 potency per GCD

So we're looking at about a 15% damage advantage to the Warrior on a single target. But there are some other issues you failed to address.

How are you getting 15% out of that? 325 / 297 = 1.094; WAR would have to get up to 340 for it to be a 15% advantage.

Keep in mind that you're ignoring how PLD benefits from the WAR debuff. As soon as you start looking at WAR + PLD in 8 man content, the WAR damage advantage vanishes completely and generally results in WAR doing *less* damage. You could feasibly give some of the credit to WAR but that gets into a kind of fuzzy place (since the WAR is doing it for itself and not the entire group).

1. What about multiple targets? Overpower is 120 potency per GCD per target, Vengeance is 6.25 potency per target, Steel Cyclone is also a large chunk of potency. This quickly ramps up as number of targets increases. Circle of Scorn simply doesn't compare.

I love it when people bring up AoE damage as a massive WAR advantage because Flash doesn't deal *any* damage and Overpower does (not to mention Vengeance). Of *course* WAR deals more AoE damage than PLD; PLD has next to *nothing* because it has *other* advantages over Overpower. Flash it pretty much free whereas Overpower costs a metric fuckton, not to mention that Flash has a larger area of effect (generally easier to use as well *and* faster activating) *and* has a debuff attached to it. What PLD gets out of Flash isn't damage; it gets every *other* imaginable advantage you could get out of an ability. Because of that cost, WAR can really only use it 1-2 times unless it's willing to stop attacking for an extended period afterwards. PLD can Flash til its out and get enough manage back every ~12 seconds to use it again (without relying on Riot Blade).

Tank AoE capability is not balanced around damage. It's balanced around a holistic analysis of the abilities.

2. Gearing. While it is true that anything a WAR can wear, a PLD can wear as well (AF gear excluded) how many PLDs do you see gearing for STR? Meanwhile the Gryphonskin jewellery is considered by many to be BiS for Warriors. 45 STR works out to be around 15% more damage and that doesn't count the secondary stats like crit/determination that you can also meld onto them.

A PLD gets the exact same benefits out of the STR gearing that WAR does: higher damage, higher parry value/rate. I've seen *plenty* of PLDs going with Gryphonskin and Rose Gold because you're getting 50 STR/DEX at the cost of 25 VIT, which is an *amazing* conversion rate. WARs just talk about doing it more because they want to increase their self heals.