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

[Phoenicia]

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.

[RecklessLion]

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.

[Reynhart]

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 ?

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 ?

[SpookyGhost]

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).

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

[Reynhart]

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 !"

[Phoenicia]

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.

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".

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.

[Reynhart]

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? )
• 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.

[RecklessLion]

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.

[Ercapote]

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....