Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.
Last edited by Iagainsti; 09-23-2015 at 03:09 AM.
Yes apparently, we've decided that homogenization can only come in an absolute form, didn't you get the memo? We can't homogenize component parts anymore, just the whole thing; according to this forum anywho. You don't question the tank forum bruv.Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.
Last edited by RapBreon; 09-23-2015 at 03:38 AM.
the amount of people spewing that word without any real evidence in these forums is seriously ridiculous. all three tanks have very unique playstyles, and itd take a lot more than a few balance changes to take away the fact that the other two tanks play and feel VASTLY different than warrior. how about we just give all tanks stacks based on their combos and give them ridiculously strong on demand mitigation at the cost of removing those stacks. that would be homogeneization. the notion that tanks should be somewhat balanced in terms of damage output and damage mitigation shouldnt be offset because you think that its making them the sameDid I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.


the amount of people spewing that word without any real evidence in these forums is seriously ridiculous. all three tanks have very unique playstyles, and itd take a lot more than a few balance changes to take away the fact that the other two tanks play and feel VASTLY different than warrior. how about we just give all tanks stacks based on their combos and give them ridiculously strong on demand mitigation at the cost of removing those stacks. that would be homogeneization. the notion that tanks should be somewhat balanced in terms of damage output and damage mitigation shouldnt be offset because you think that its making them the same
This.
Tanks should be able to deal roughly equivalent damage, some more than others here and there, but not 100-200 dps descrepancies. And they should have roughly equal mitigation, with maybe some being slightly stronger than others in certain fights.
They will never be actually "homogenized" in any real since of the word since the way that the jobs play mechanically is so, SO different. If MNK/DRG/NIN all did equal DPS (and actually i'm pretty sure they do factoring in raid-dps increases) no one would cry about it since, well, they all still play crazy differently. NIN has mudras and some support abilities to keep track of, DRG has a lot of mobility, rng-based positionals and BoTD uptime management, MNK has stacks, complex positionals, and various forms of stance management. There is no reason they can't strike this kind of balance with the 3 tanks. Simply no reason. Period.
They do, roughly. What hampers PLD is:
- They lose the most damage in their tanking stance. WAR loses 10% of their damage in Defiance, DRK loses 8% in Grit, and PLD loses 20% in Shield Oath.
- The above is amplified by the fact that PLD generates the least amount of enmity out of the three tanks meaning they have to swap to their tanking stance more often than the other two tanks do to stay ahead in enmity.
- The coup de grâce is PLD's enmity combo is the weakest single combo any of the tanks possess
They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.
Last edited by Airswimmer; 09-23-2015 at 04:44 AM.


They do, roughly. What hampers PLD is:
- They lose the most damage in their tanking stance. WAR loses 10% of their damage in Defiance, DRK loses 8% in Grit, and PLD loses 20% in Shield Oath.
- The above is amplified by the fact that PLD generates the least amount of enmity out of the three tanks meaning they have to swap to their tanking stance more often than the other two tanks do to stay ahead in enmity.
- The coup de grâce is PLD's enmity combo is the weakest single combo any of the tanks possess
They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.
The damage penalty will always take what you have and minus it by 20%. I know your trying to say your bonuses make up for it, but honestly the first step towards making other tanks closer to warriors.
Would be to remove the damage penalty from PLD/DRK and making the Damage Penalty for Warrior Stance 15%.
I assumed this would be obvious since I assume, and hope, everyone here can read tooltips.
This. I'm speculating here, but Paladin and DRK are designed with MT in mind, where Warrior is designed as an OT. Granted they can MT fine, to balance out 4 man content, they'd have to, but they are the damage tank by design, able to facilitate extra damage when not being used as a meatshield. This is why I believe Nerfing is nothing but smoke, those calling for it don't see the forest for the trees, and "balance" is the worst thing that can happen to MMOs. History doesn't always repeat itself, but it does rhyme.They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.



No. I can't remember the exact terms since it was over a year ago and I've lost the interview since then, but Yoshida explicitely said that the tanks were designed to do anything on the same level. MT, OT, doesn't matter, they have the tools to do anything.
As an example, the "most dps" set up in 2.0 was WAR MT and PLD OT, while a more "survival" approach was the contrary.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.


Reply With Quote




