Tank Gear's Value for the Future.

[HorseBoots]

Snip.

I don't see what's exactly the issue here. Oppressor hits like a wet noodle outside of his tank busters. My static's WAR was doing in with 100% STR accessories by week three. With A1S specifically, the only thing that WAR needs to worry about outside of micromanaging cooldowns is making sure puddles aren't in a bad place and that his Oppressor isn't kissing the other.

Any DPS in that fight has to deal with dodging mechanics, dodging each other, going off the boss to take out and position adds. All these lead to DPS loss, meanwhile that WAR is in that same place whacking away at his robot.

You're getting more bloated numbers because a majority of Savage doesn't demand much up-time of tank stance for the tanks and very little for the tanks to actually do outside of just whacking things. I can count the amount of times I enter Grit on A3S as MT on one hand and I'm never in it for longer than two hate combos to keep the table steady.

Meanwhile in Thordan EX, even if it's an easier fight than the latter half of Savage, Thordan is a much more aggressive boss, throwing out tank busters followed by hard hitting cleaves on top of raid wide damage being thrown out as well, which can overwhelm your average healer, which then leads to more time in tank stance.

If any one DPS was given the freedom to ignore mechanics and keep up a 100% up-time on the boss like any tank does you'd see just as high bloated numbers in their percentile. The difference is that if a DPS were to be given that freedom the rest of the party has to adapt to compensate while any tank worth their salt just does it naturally.

[Mycow8me]

Honestly depending how much VIT overpowers STR in terms of gains if it even does at all... A vit ring that is melded with str can still beat a higher ilvl vit only ring. How much more Vit by itself is enough to beat a vit + str combination will only be determinable after the update unelss they post some real numbers... obviously not happening.

They pretty much have to keep STR worth having cause it is on all our armor and weapons... My guess is still 50/50 but 40/60 still seems somewhat reasonable for STR/VIT, 30/70 is pushing it..

I dont know what all this fuss is about tanks doing damage. War and dark are DPS tanks, Paladin is a mitigation tank as will the next tank be most likely RDM. Why should a DPS tank not be seen doing high damage, obviously whoever is doing it is performing their job well with the tools and gear available. If the new update brings a small nerf, so be it, I can accept it. Not because we were doing too much damage though, but to compensate for people feeling like they NEED to meld or wear DPS gear which shouldn't be the case to achieve a desirable dps level or overcome a dps clock.

[Kaurie]

I don't see what's exactly the issue here. Oppressor hits like a wet noodle outside of his tank busters. My static's WAR was doing in with 100% STR accessories by week three. With A1S specifically, the only thing that WAR needs to worry about outside of micromanaging cooldowns is making sure puddles aren't in a bad place and that his Oppressor isn't kissing the other.

Any DPS in that fight has to deal with dodging mechanics, dodging each other, going off the boss to take out and position adds. All these lead to DPS loss, meanwhile that WAR is in that same place whacking away at his robot.

You're getting more bloated numbers because a majority of Savage doesn't demand much up-time of tank stance for the tanks and very little for the tanks to actually do outside of just whacking things. I can count the amount of times I enter Grit on A3S as MT on one hand and I'm never in it for longer than two hate combos to keep the table steady.

Meanwhile in Thordan EX, even if it's an easier fight than the latter half of Savage, Thordan is a much more aggressive boss, throwing out tank busters followed by hard hitting cleaves on top of raid wide damage being thrown out as well, which can overwhelm your average healer, which then leads to more time in tank stance.

If any one DPS was given the freedom to ignore mechanics and keep up a 100% up-time on the boss like any tank does you'd see just as high bloated numbers in their percentile. The difference is that if a DPS were to be given that freedom the rest of the party has to adapt to compensate while any tank worth their salt just does it naturally.

The issue is that WAR DPS is through the roof (as is DRK, and PLD is too high).

If you'd like the statistics for Thordan, here is the link http://www.fflogs.com/statistics/4/#class=Any

In this case, WAR performs better than in A1S, where they are ahead of both BRD and MCH and put out 85% of the top DPS job (MNK at 981) at the 75 percentile.



If you're curious as to how I think it should be balanced, this roughly how I'd like to see damage numbers. (numbers are to give a general scope and not actual balanced numbers)

Single target
MNK 100%
NIN 98%
DRG 96%
BLM 95%
SMN 90%
BRD 80% (depending on song use, without song use numbers would be higher)
MCH 80% (depending on turret use, without support use numbers would be higher)
WAR 45%
DRK 40%
PLD 35%
SCH 15%
WHM/AST 10%

AoE
SMN 100%
BLM 95%
MNK 80%
BRD 90%
MCH 90%
DRG 75%
NIN 70%
WAR 20%
DRK 15%
PLD 10%
SCH 20%
WHM 15%
AST 10%

give or take, but that general spectrum. In other words, a WAR should be pulling less than half of the top DPS, not 70-85%.

[Phoenicia]

EDIT/PS: I used Oppressor information, as 1. it's more-or-less single target and 2. there is a much larger pool and higher skill range of players entering A1S,

Okay, not sure if anyone else pointed this out since I am only skimming through these forums. However, while Oppressor is a more accessible fight, it is VERY "padding" friendly. Classes that NEVER single target as much as others, i.e. SMN and Bard, come out on top simply because of double DoT'ing. Not to mention the opportunities to AoE targets each time adds spawn during Emergency Deployment without breaking rotations. WAR can cheese so much here by replacing a FC with Decimate each time adds spawn. Just like how summoners and scholars can Bane those adds. So Oppressor information should not be a good fight to use as measurement to be frank.

FFLogs in general is a very bad a tool to measure DPS, imo. A lot of the top numbers in there only happen if the whole team agrees to pad a single member's DPS, meaning they come up with strategies that caters that that 1 person's strengths to make sure that they do the most DPS possible at the expense of other people's DPS. Heck, to pad our healer's HPS on Faust for lols, we had the WAR tank the adds while facing them towards the group (getting the group cleaved lol). At the same time, the WAR kept spamming Overpower and I actually used Bane... So much padding opportunities for laughs and kicks.

Take A2S for example, with the way my group does it, no matter how I personally spin my CDs and rotations, or who I DoT first, I never broke the 2030 DPS. Simple because they cater to a more single target DPS heavy group. We run a monk + DRK + MCH, so I don't have Foe's at my disposal either. Mobs are rarely stacked in an optimal way where I can bane from a 5 vulnerability stacked mob to the rest.. And when they are, the other mobs are already dying because everyone's DPS is near the 2K DPS. On the other hand, we could've strategized to prioritize stacking invulnerability while mobs stack so I can DoT first, I could also wait for bombs to spawn before I Bane and/or Deathflare, and I would easily break the 2400 DPS. Actually a few weeks ago, I stopped using SMN in there and started using BLM since our strategy is really more priority target focused than AoE oriented. (Granted I used SMN the last couple of weeks because otherwise I wouldn't use my Gordian weapon ).

TL;DR: FFlogs is not a good indicator for class DPS balance.

As for single target and AoE balance percentages like you posted, I don't necessarily agree. Mainly because I believe it shouldn't be a matter of individual DPS, but raid DPS. You have NIN doing more ST than DRG when NIN brings, by far, the most utility out of DPS jobs after BRD/MCH.

Another problem in your approach to DPS balance, is what if you end up with a group that has only the lowest guys in there? So AST+WHM and PLD+DRK and BRD/MCH/SMN/BLM?

Also on what bases should BLM be lower than DRG and NIN? BLM has no means to increase anyone else's DPS like DRG and NIN do. You basically are asking for BLM to not be competitive at all since all 3 melees are better and the utility of BRD and MCH are indispensable. As it stands, BLM should be doing exactly the same DPS as MNK. Why? Well, MNK can't leave target or he drops stacks, BLM can't move or he drops Enochian. MNK is risky because melee. BLM is still risky because movement (and dodging) hurts DPS. MNK only has some defensive utility, so does BLM. MNK does not increase raid DPS, same as BLM. Raid contribution should remain the same! But then MNK "can" run out TP, BLM can refill MP indefinitely. I guess BLM has to pay a bit of DPS for that as a price.

Imo, if you want DPS balance, you should have a simple rule to follow: If you switch class A for B (or maybe classes A and B for C and D), you still get roughly the same total raid DPS.

[Instrumentality]

Single target
*

I too would like to raid with four monks in my raid group.

If this was sane it would be more like MNK/BLM 100% > DRG 98% > NIN/SMN 96% > etc.

[Alahra]

If this was sane it would be more like MNK/BLM 100% > DRG 98% > NIN/SMN 96% > etc.

They did say the numbers were only meant to give a general scope.

[PArcher]

They did say the numbers were only meant to give a general scope.

Not a very good scope. If the values were as he wants, you'd ONLY bring MNK (well, 3 MNK, 1 MCH when you absolutely need the support abilities), none of the other DPS would be able to get anywhere near MNK's DPS-level even factoring in their support.

[Phoenicia]

Not a very good scope. If the values were as he wants, you'd ONLY bring MNK (well, 3 MNK, 1 MCH when you absolutely need the support abilities), none of the other DPS would be able to get anywhere near MNK's DPS-level even factoring in their support.

As long as the disparity in individual DPS is not made for in raid DPS, you will have a problem and class stacking will simply be unavoidable.

Yes, I will always run 2 warriors, 2 scholars and 4 monks/SMNs (based on encounter) in numbers varying that much.

On a second note: I do not care/mind if tanks (and even healers) had the potential to match dedicated DPS. Why? I think it would be interesting to see how much a healer can pull off while keeping everyone alive! Imo, it adds depth that the tank or healer cannot do its DPS because it actually has to tank or heal, not because of some artificial cap to its DPS that is 10% or 40% compared to an actual DPS.

As I said earlier, the simple rule for balance is: If you substitute class A for B, do you still get the same raid DPS? It might be a bit more interesting if you consider things like: Get a DRG for the BRD, and a machinist for the monk. But as long as any combination of classes can net you roughly the same raid DPS, you got "balance".

SPECIALLY that this game has no PvP that is worth while. (No world PvP or any PvP that actually matters in a way that affects PvE), class balance should not be based on just individual performance.

[Kaurie]

Okay, not sure if anyone else pointed this out since I am only skimming through these forums. However, while Oppressor is a more accessible fight, it is VERY "padding" friendly. Classes that NEVER single target as much as others, i.e. SMN and Bard, come out on top simply because of double DoT'ing. Not to mention the opportunities to AoE targets each time adds spawn during Emergency Deployment without breaking rotations. WAR can cheese so much here by replacing a FC with Decimate each time adds spawn. Just like how summoners and scholars can Bane those adds. So Oppressor information should not be a good fight to use as measurement to be frank.

I also compared Thordan, where WAR did better. As for A1S, BLM actually comes out on top, because single target is superior there. I'd also advise against a SMN using bane on the adds, but that is another discussion. However, if you are curious, that top WAR did use Decimate and it contributed to 3% of their damage.

FFLogs in general is a very bad a tool to measure DPS, imo. A lot of the top numbers in there only happen if the whole team agrees to pad a single member's DPS, meaning they come up with strategies that caters that that 1 person's strengths to make sure that they do the most DPS possible at the expense of other people's DPS. Heck, to pad our healer's HPS on Faust for lols, we had the WAR tank the adds while facing them towards the group (getting the group cleaved lol). At the same time, the WAR kept spamming Overpower and I actually used Bane... So much padding opportunities for laughs and kicks.

I already addressed the concern of FFLogs top tier players. They do have percentiles, and I showed the difference in each bracket - including the bottom 10th percentile. Not everyone on FFLogs is working to pad numbers.

Take A2S for example, with the way my group does it, no matter how I personally spin my CDs and rotations, or who I DoT first, I never broke the 2030 DPS. Simple because they cater to a more single target DPS heavy group. We run a monk + DRK + MCH, so I don't have Foe's at my disposal either. Mobs are rarely stacked in an optimal way where I can bane from a 5 vulnerability stacked mob to the rest.. And when they are, the other mobs are already dying because everyone's DPS is near the 2K DPS. On the other hand, we could've strategized to prioritize stacking invulnerability while mobs stack so I can DoT first, I could also wait for bombs to spawn before I Bane and/or Deathflare, and I would easily break the 2400 DPS. Actually a few weeks ago, I stopped using SMN in there and started using BLM since our strategy is really more priority target focused than AoE oriented. (Granted I used SMN the last couple of weeks because otherwise I wouldn't use my Gordian weapon ).

I don't fully understand the relevance of this paragraph.

TL;DR: FFlogs is not a good indicator for class DPS balance.

I don't think you made a good argument against that. Have you looked at the statistics which look at various percentiles? You are actually around the 75% percentile for SMN on that fight, http://www.fflogs.com/statistics/7#boss=19&class=Any (75th percentile for SMN is 2083).

As for single target and AoE balance percentages like you posted, I don't necessarily agree. Mainly because I believe it shouldn't be a matter of individual DPS, but raid DPS. You have NIN doing more ST than DRG when NIN brings, by far, the most utility out of DPS jobs after BRD/MCH.

DRG brings the most raid DPS, which is why I had it lower than NIN, and I had both NIN/DRG lower than MNK due to their utility.

Another problem in your approach to DPS balance, is what if you end up with a group that has only the lowest guys in there? So AST+WHM and PLD+DRK and BRD/MCH/SMN/BLM?

I am not 100% sure I see the problem with that. That said, we currently have similar issues at the beginning of raid tiers already.

Also on what bases should BLM be lower than DRG and NIN? BLM has no means to increase anyone else's DPS like DRG and NIN do. You basically are asking for BLM to not be competitive at all since all 3 melees are better and the utility of BRD and MCH are indispensable. As it stands, BLM should be doing exactly the same DPS as MNK. Why? Well, MNK can't leave target or he drops stacks, BLM can't move or he drops Enochian. MNK is risky because melee. BLM is still risky because movement (and dodging) hurts DPS. MNK only has some defensive utility, so does BLM. MNK does not increase raid DPS, same as BLM. Raid contribution should remain the same! But then MNK "can" run out TP, BLM can refill MP indefinitely. I guess BLM has to pay a bit of DPS for that as a price.

BLM should be lower due to higher AoE and the ability to sustain DPS much more easily with MP regen vs TP outages. There is also the factor that they are ranged.

I too would like to raid with four monks in my raid group.

If this was sane it would be more like MNK/BLM 100% > DRG 98% > NIN/SMN 96% > etc.

That makes sense, and I appreciate your input on it. I was just throwing out numbers and didn't calculate anything. It was more to give an order in terms of DPS and a comparative value between DPS and tanks. If people are concerned over the precision, I can edit my original post.

They did say the numbers were only meant to give a general scope.

Thank you for understanding.

[FallenWings]

I don't understand why we even have to compete for class damage ratios since this is ultimately a co-operative game. You're not even supposed to be fighting your team mates for whoever has the bigger sword(d*ck).

Nerfing tank contribution to miniscule amounts ultimately just hurts everyone. I mean, whats the point? Just so the DPS can be the actual players in the fight and tanks and healers are reduced to sidekicks whom are only there to glorify the DPS classes?
I don't understand why we can't even have anything above half of what a DPS can do. Something considerably significant.

Like if you were a party of four adventurers going up against a fearsome dragon of ultimate death and you(the edgy thief with 1000 knives of dark bloodshed) want your Knight(a warrior armed to the friggin teeth for BATTLE) to wield a pool noodle because his sword detracts from your narutoxsasukexichigo awesomeness.

We've all seen what the strict trinity did. 5 Billion year DPS queue times because only a comparatively small handful of people liked being just an immovable object(no offense to you guys, you guys are still cool) that frankly was there just so that everyone else could play.

I'm quite sure most people like the idea of y'know, actually feeling like they're contributing to defeating the enemy. Y'know for those times when your thief and archer are probably completely worthless, it'd be a good idea for the knight to pull out his sword and plunge it into the heart of the dragon while the cleric clubs the f*** out of the dragon's brain.

Back when I first joined FFXIV in 2.0 I was pretty new to MMO's in general having no clue what class roles or the trinity was. I chose WAR because I frankly adore axes and like the idea of a durable fighter that challenges enemies head on! I wondered what enmity meant in my tooltips and assumed it was either some cool latin flavour or some unknown cool debuff I place on the enemies. My first Satasha run I wondered why my job icon was a different color to everyone else. Eventually as I levelled up I understood the concept of tanking and enjoyed what the role had to offer. As such being a newbie I went with the mindset that I should focus on that role and that is to tank. Tanking in of itself is fun and challenging but as I played more I never really felt like I was important. I mean, it didn't help that people were always finding ways to Solo tank content or even go as far as to replace tanks altogether with titan-egi. Being felt like I was only a neccessity until a certain point and figured welp... I guess that's tanking. But then I learned that tanks had the potential to actually contribute to a fight. That's when I felt like the fighter. That's when I really really enjoyed tanking as a whole.

I can do damage. I can take a hit. I can FIGHT.

EVEN IF YOU GIVE ME A POOLNOODLE I'M GOING TO JUMP ON THAT DRAGON AND BITE ITS THROAT, SHREDDING ITS JUGULAR VEIN AND THEN PROCEED TO EAT ITS HEART.

triggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredDo you even know what a real tank does? It's an armored vehicular with a friggin CANNON on it that blows things up.triggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggeredtriggered