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

[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.

[Phoenicia]

Snip.

As I said in my post, the ideas are too "raw" and need a lot of things to consider so you don't break more than you fix. I'm not against your ideas.

Snip.

No one is disagreeing that the content is what's forcing people to pick up WAR. This heavy "Bring more DPS for DPS check" content is what the PLD doesn't mesh well with.

What I'm personally against is buffing one tank without any "balancing" just to match the content. As long as PLD has "better defenses" than the other two tanks, it should not do more damage. Even if said defenses aren't relevant in today's content.

DRK needs more reliable ways to defend against physical damage and if content shifts to physical damage, DRK will be the tank that is left out and complaining on these forums.

[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....