Do Warriors have any single disadvantage?

[Tila]

Holy snippy snip

Good post and well said. I learned a bit from it.

A shame it seems people are ignoring it.

[Giantbane]

@Launched

Stacking % mitigation is multiplicative not additive.
ShO equates to damage received multiplied by 0.8. With Sentinel it then reduces damage by (0.8 X 0.4) or 32% additional reduction to the 20% from ShO for a total of 52% damage reduction, not the 60% that it would be if it was additive.
Simply put Sentinel is 40% of 80%, not just an additional 40%.

Vengeance is not effected by this because Defiance is not a % mitigation buff, therefore it does not result in the 30% reduction from Vengeance being multiplied by another % to get its final effective % reduction, it is just simply the stated 30% (unless stacked with IB).

The eHP provided by the stances are virtually equivalent, that is true but one results in lessening other % mitigation abilities by roughly 20% due to the multiplicative nature of stacking buffs/debuffs in this game.

This isn't really how this works.

Defiance, Thrill, ShO, Grit, Rampart and any other ability that effects eHP are all multiplicative. Their effects when combined all multiply together to determine the final result.

PLD & WAR have 8000 hp.

PLD uses ShO and Rampart. PLD gets hit for 12500 damage. ShO reduces this to 80% so 12500 x 0.8 = 10000 damage. Rampart reduces this by a further 80% so 10000 x 0.8 = 8000 damage. PLD just barely dies.

WAR uses Defiance and Inner Beast. WAR has 10000 hp from Defiance. WAR gets hit for 12500 damage. Inner beast reduces this to 80% so 12500 x 0.8 = 10000 dies. WAR just barely dies.

You'll notice that after including the respective tank stances (Defiance, ShO), that the effect that the further 20% ability (Rampart/Inner Beast) has is exactly the same. Both tanks take the same amount of damage to die.

Mitigation abilities work equally whether they're on the WAR or the PLD.

I don't believe that anyone is saying that Defiance is inherently a better tank stance than the others, I believe what is being said is that the higher % reduction in the descriptions for some of the PLD and DRK defensive cd's is deceptive due to multiplicative calculation.

There's nothing deceptive, they have the exact same effect.

Only difference is if you include healing because Defiance is 4% less effective with healing spells and completely ineffective with healing abilities.

[karateorangutang]

And my point that is with how tank stances work, a PLD still reduces 40% of the incoming damage with Sentinel while a WAR reduces 30%. The maths doesn't lie, the PLD isn't taking only 2% less damage or whatever you originally said. Tank stances increase eHP to the same amount, so you're mitigating by whatever percentage is on the skill you use.

That's true if they aren't in tank stances.

However if the PLD is in shield oath and takes 10000 then shield oath knocks it down to 8000 then sentinel knocks that down to 4800.

If a WAR pops vengeance that knocks it down to 7000 then IB would knock it down to 5600.

Since WAR's stance gives them a 20% healing bonus on top of that in addition to more HP then the eHP involved by using the same amount of cooldowns roughly goes to WAR. Although its pretty negligible.

This is how I thought it worked anyway.

[Reynhart]

Problem is when you already have competent healers even that advantage is thrown out of the window

That's why I suggested that PLD could, as an off-tank, keep the MT alive by himself.

So, this dreaded "loss of DPS" would allow some setup to bring an additionnal DPS.

[NFaelivrin]

sounds like people just want cookie cutter classes and have absolutely no difference between the tanks... that is not a fun game we already have Bards turning into immobile turrets so they have to feel the pangs of the casters, why turn more of the games jobs into one another? Warrior is fine, it's in the center, able to DPS when needed, and tank when needed, then you got PLD on the physical mitigation side, and DRK on the magical, it's a perfect trifecta, and i think it's balanced myself and creates the synergy this games Armoury system was made for.

It's not a perfect trifecta for the reasons that have already been explained in this thread (IE, any raid group that doesn't bring a WAR is at a disadvantage) and due the fact that the way current, 3.0 gear works, you can't gear up all tanks simultaneously via esoterics as the gear is all locked to the job unless you want to rely entirely on RNG drops from Savage, which is ridiculous.

[MythToken]

All the tanks offer something different and have different play styles.
Understanding and exploiting those for the benefit of your group, and playing a tank that fits your personal play style is really where this thread's focus should be.

Just because at this very moment in the small context of a few bosses, War is shining a tiny bit brighter than the other tanks doesn't mean the tanks are not properly balanced.

This game patches very often with new content, and players are constantly finding different ways to use their class in a raid environment for maximum effectiveness.

I feel like saying WAR is OP at this point is pretty premature.

#jealous #war

[NFaelivrin]

We're still six months or so away from a new raid tier, and the fact is that warrior's advantages are so universal and there's so few disadvantages in their toolkit that I find it bloody unlikely that they'll fall behind in the next Alexander raid unless they introduce a boss with a debuff called "Hit yourself with your axe" that exclusively targets WARs and makes them Fell Cleave themselves every 30 seconds.

[TouchandFeel]

@ Giantbane

What your saying is completely correct and my statements were actually not to the contrary. We are actually saying the same thing, except I was talking about just damage received numbers and you were talking about damage received % equivalence to total HP or how it equates to eHP.

So really everybody is technically correct with what they said, just many, myself included, were perhaps not as clear as they could have been.

Riffing off of your math example.

Example showing what I was saying.
12500 X .48 = 6000 damage taken
Which results in the same as what you were saying.
(12500 X.8=10000)x.6=6000

The .48 that I got for the multiplier is from adding together the 20% from ShO to the effective additional 32% from Sentinel (which is 20% less than the 40% in the description) to get the stated combined total of effective 52% reduction to damage received.

Yet when you look at it from the totality of what damage received equates to in eHP, they equal out.

PLD: 10000hp - 6000hp = 4000hp = 40% of total HP.
WAR: 12500hp-(12500x.6=7500)= 5000hp = 40% of total HP.

Point being, as I said both sides of this debate are correct as there is no debate since we are actually all saying the same thing in different ways with different focus on different numbers.

P.S. the reason I said the percents given in the descriptions could be deceptive is that they could be seen as an additional 40% (or whatever %). I have seen many people make this mistake. To those that know they are multiplicative and know how to calculate them, they are of course not really deceptive.

P.P.S. I just used sentinel's 40% reduction as an equitable baseline for the math.

[Anienai]

Do Warriors have any single disadvantage?

I can think of 3.

1. kryptonite
2. lead
3. red sun


That's about it.

[Reynhart]

I can think of 3.

1. kryptonite
2. lead
3. red sun


That's about it.

I can't wait to see Man Of Steel Cyclone