Tank Gearing help!

[Argyle_Darkheart]

When it comes to ways to increase the overall damage inflicted by the group, giving the Main Tank a little extra Strength is by and far the least effective option.

I disagree. The main tank is a constant source of outgoing damage with little to no opportunity cost; it's a reliable source of damage to optimize. DPS and the off tank take priority, but the main tank is just behind them. Besides, even if it weren't an effective option, it's still an option.

Meanwhile, a main tank who's stacked on mitigation can spend enough time not being healed that the healers can sling a few damaging spells of their own out.

First of all, the only "mitigation" you can stack is Parry, and that's not reliable. VIT can provide enough buffer HP between incoming damage to mitigate the opportunity cost of switching to Cleric Stance, but you need considerable amounts of HP above the minimum HP for that (I would say at least 25% above). But at that point, just how much STR are you sacrificing?

The job of the tank is to keep the attention of foes and, more importantly, not die. If the tank dies, so does the party. Doing as much damage as possible is not in that job description, and attempting to do so only makes your actual job harder unless you appreciably overgear the content. Even if making the job harder increases the difficulty from "Very Easy" to just "Easy", that's still more stress you're putting on the healers and by extension the rest of the party.

I don't understand why some people continually insist that it's not the tank's job to deal damage. If that were the case, then it wouldn't deal damage. Instead, damage occurs naturally while tanking (as opposed to healing), and in considerable amounts. The main tank will generally deal 40-60% as much damage as an equally geared and skilled DPS; that's not negligible.

As for putting stress on the healers, it would be far more stressful if they had to routinely contribute DPS in addition to keeping the raid alive. In my opinion, for end-game content, that's the last resort.


I think most tanks grossly overestimate the importance of VIT past a certain point. Maybe their healers really suck.

[Donjo]

I don't understand why some people continually insist that it's not the tank's job to deal damage. If that were the case, then it wouldn't deal damage. Instead, damage occurs naturally while tanking (as opposed to healing), and in considerable amounts. The main tank will generally deal 40-60% as much damage as an equally geared and skilled DPS; that's not negligible.

In the systems currently running this game, the tanks have to deal damage because 1 damage = 1 threat and a tank who isn't currently tanking needs to actually be able to kill things. In a party, a Tank needs multipliers on their threat in order to keep the attention of enemies. I'm not saying that the tank shouldn't deal damage. Their damage counts somewhere. I'm saying that out of all the things a tank should be worrying about, "tanking" is priority number one and "maximizing damage" is the absolute lowest priority. The job is called Tank, not DPS. The argument of "If that were the case, then it wouldn't deal damage." is empty. It supports a DPS healer too. They have damaging spells, so why aren't they DPSing? Because their job is Healer. In your post, you decried this very thing. The only reason Tanks deal damage is because damage = threat. If they were supposed to deal a lot of damage, they'd deal such amounts without having to rely on multipliers on their base damage to keep threat. Their "tanking" stances wouldn't directly reduce their damage. If the Tank's job was to deal damage, it wouldn't be called a Tank. It would be called a DPS.

In my experiences, a tank smacking something in their tank stance will deal only about 25-33% as much damage as an equal DPS. A tank who is not in their tank stance gets closer to 40-50%, and a tank fully specced into strength will creep closer to 60 or possibly even 70%. A tank is built to be able to do good damage if and only if they are not tanking in a party environment.

I think most tanks grossly overestimate the importance of VIT past a certain point. Maybe their healers really suck.

Let's split max health into chunks of, say, 500. If that tough boss' auto attack did about 500 damage per swipe, then every 500 health means you can survive one more. Every 500 health is one mistake the healers can make without getting you killed. Every 500 health is one heal the healers can spend on a hurt DPS instead of you. Every 500 health is one spike of unexpected damage(ie. critical hit, accidentally didn't dodge that AOE, etc.) that you might survive. That little green bar is the only kind of mitigation a tank can fully rely on. There is no such thing as having too much of it. If you stay at the absolute minimum to survive and replace extra Vit with Strength, then you will likely be killed the second something does not go according to plan. I've lost count of the times I've fallen into double digit health values. If I had even 7 less Vitality, I would have died. But I didn't, and we went on to win.

[Argyle_Darkheart]

In the systems currently running this game, the tanks have to deal damage because 1 damage = 1 threat and a tank who isn't currently tanking needs to actually be able to kill things.

No they don't; look at Flash. SE could of designed a tank that doesn't deal damage, but they didn't.

I'm saying that out of all the things a tank should be worrying about, "tanking" is priority number one and "maximizing damage" is the absolute lowest priority.

I agree, but not to that degree. I think you (and many others) undervalue the tank's ability to contribute damage and overvalue how much the tank needs to gear for survival. Let me be clear, I do not suggest prioritizing STR over VIT until you have enough HP to survive reliably.

The argument of "If that were the case, then it wouldn't deal damage." is empty.

Why? This doesn't mean anything. My point is that it's designed that way. It didn't "have" to be.

It supports a DPS healer too. They have damaging spells, so why aren't they DPSing? Because their job is Healer. In your post, you decried this very thing.

Because the opportunity cost for contributing damage on a healer is far greather than that of a tank's. My point was that damage occurs naturally as part of your job as a tank (it didn't "have" to; it's designed this way), but not as a healer. It's not like you deal damage when casting a healing spell.

The only reason Tanks deal damage is because damage = threat. If they were supposed to deal a lot of damage, they'd deal such amounts without having to rely on multipliers on their base damage to keep threat. Their "tanking" stances wouldn't directly reduce their damage. If the Tank's job was to deal damage, it wouldn't be called a Tank. It would be called a DPS.

The reason tanks deal damage is because they're designed that way. I never meant to suggest that this was their top priority. Everything else you mention is for balancing purposes; of course they're not designed to deal as much damage as an equally geared and skilled DPS. That would be ludicrous. Also, tying damage to threat naturally leads to the conclusion that the tank should optimize their damage in order to increase
their effectiveness. Again, I'm not suggesting this is priority one, but it's definitely there.

That little green bar is the only kind of mitigation a tank can fully rely on. There is no such thing as having too much of it. If you stay at the absolute minimum to survive and replace extra Vit with Strength, then you will likely be killed the second something does not go according to plan. I've lost count of the times I've fallen into double digit health values. If I had even 7 less Vitality, I would have died. But I didn't, and we went on to win.

HP is not mitigation; stop saying that. And there is such a thing as too much HP. Every time you didn't "go into double digits" is an example of when you had too much HP. I never said HP buffer isn't useful (quite the opposite), but there is definitely a point of diminishing return (practically, not mathematically). Now, where you draw the line depends on a case by case basis, and there is a time and place for having a larger HP buffer. But that often comes at the cost of a higher potential DPS. Whether that's more or less valuable at any given time needs to be evaluated at that time, but more DPS always makes a difference. Still, I firmly believe that nothing in the current end-game content requires, or appreciably benefits, from such enormous amounts of HP.


Let me be absolutely clear, VIT > STR up to a certain point. Once you can survive reliably, any extra HP you can achieve won't make that much of a difference in your tanking capability. I'll concede that there may be situations in the current end-game content where enough of an HP buffer may allow healers to DPS, but asking your healers to DPS can, and often will, be very risky. But, really, healer DPS comes down more to player skill and incoming damage frequency, rather than "500 more HP" on the tank.

[Donjo]

No they don't; look at Flash. SE could of designed a tank that doesn't deal damage, but they didn't.

Flash's existence does not address the statement that "Tanks need to do damage so they can actually kill things when they are not tanking." Therefore, this point has not been fully argued.

I agree, but not to that degree. I think you (and many others) undervalue the tank's ability to contribute damage and overvalue how much the tank needs to gear for survival. Let me be clear, I do not suggest prioritizing STR over VIT until you have enough HP to survive reliably.

The reason tanks deal damage is because they're designed that way. I never meant to suggest that this was their top priority. Everything else you mention is for balancing purposes; of course they're not designed to deal as much damage as an equally geared and skilled DPS. That would be ludicrous. Also, tying damage to threat naturally leads to the conclusion that the tank should optimize their damage in order to increase
their effectiveness. Again, I'm not suggesting this is priority one, but it's definitely there.

Okay, okay. I was getting the impression from your posts that any tank who maximized mitigation instead of strength was doing it wrong and they didn't deserve to be a tank. I still don't support the amount of priority you give tank damage, but I apologize if I've been heavy handed in my replies.

Why? This doesn't mean anything. My point is that it's designed that way. It didn't "have" to be.

When we're talking about how Tanks are designed, can't it be argued that Tanks are designed to be stacking Vitality since it's on all Tank specific pieces whereas Strength is only on half? Then again, all accessories are equippable by all classes, so maybe we're meant instead to have freedom both inside and between jobs.

HP is not mitigation; stop saying that. And there is such a thing as too much HP. Every time you didn't "go into double digits" is an example of when you had too much HP. I never said HP buffer isn't useful (quite the opposite), but there is definitely a point of diminishing return (practically, not mathematically). Now, where you draw the line depends on a case by case basis, and there is a time and place for having a larger HP buffer. But that often comes at the cost of a higher potential DPS. Whether that's more or less valuable at any given time needs to be evaluated at that time, but more DPS always makes a difference. Still, I firmly believe that nothing in the current end-game content requires, or appreciably benefits, from such enormous amounts of HP.

I think this whole "What is mitigation?" issue is just a difference in how we define the word.

The dictionary defines mitigation as "the action of reducing the severity, seriousness, or painfulness of something."

With this in mind, I would say that the act of "Increasing my HP Pool" is mitigation. It reduces the severity and seriousness of Attack X by allowing it to remove a lower percentage of my max health. Anything that makes Attack X less severe is mitigation, and "severity" is measured both in the actual amount of damage the attack did and how badly you're off afterwards. Thus, this includes Max(and current) Health, Cooldowns, Block/Parry, and Healer Shields. It all helps you not be killed by Attack X.

Let me be absolutely clear, VIT > STR up to a certain point. Once you can survive reliably, any extra HP you can achieve won't make that much of a difference in your tanking capability. I'll concede that there may be situations in the current end-game content where enough of an HP buffer may allow healers to DPS, but asking your healers to DPS can, and often will, be very risky. But, really, healer DPS comes down more to player skill and incoming damage frequency, rather than "500 more HP" on the tank.

So, my Paladin currently has about 7800 HP with food active. Referencing your proposed cutoff point of 7400, I could, say, respec my bonus points completely from Vitality to Strength and successfully hover around that 7400 mark. This sacrifices 30 Vitality for 30 Strength. Given that I'm currently tanking something, that 30 Strength is theoretically reduced by 20% to an effective 24 Strength. This is equivalent to gaining about 3 Weapon Damage. This would increase my DPS by 5 points or so, perhaps up to 10, I think. If we assume that I'm regularly doling out 125 DPS or so while actively tanking, I increased my overall DPS by 4-8% at the cost of now having the absolute minimum health necessary to survive the Second Coil.

In my opinion, the cost is simply too high for a benefit that will not save a fight 99% of the time. I suppose this is a comfort thing, but it's scary and stressful to often fall into double digit health, both for the Tank and the Healers... and stressed people make mistakes. Taking stats that help to ensure survival to their minimums requires the entire rest of the party to play flawlessly, and that's simply not feasible. We're human.