Tank Gear's Value for the Future.

[Phoenicia]

I think you mean Astral Fire III which is the only issue now.

That's the direct result, I was speaking of the ultimate result. It depends on when the movement happens and what spell is dropped/interrupted. Even if what was dropped is Astral Fire III, recasting F3 to get it back (with how long the cast time is and how expensive the MP cost), you might as well B3 > B4 >F3. Dropping a whole Enochian refresh. Moving during UI3 by dropping B4 just flat risks dropping Enochian entirely if you were in a tight switch. My point was BLM deals with just as much, if not more, flak for interrupted rotations, even if it is ranged, it is in no way "safer" than monk at dealing uninterrupted damage.

[FallenWings]

Snip

*phew*

Logically speaking even at a 75% output of real DPS you would still require the superior output of real DPS especially at a progression level since the extra survivability, as we can see with the tank STR meta, is largely irrelevant.

If by example you had 6 War's and 2 Healers instead of the usual party setup, you'd lose out on a raid wide DPS of -100%. Pretty much one man less than an actual 4 DPS setup. This huge disparity will break fights and it just means that 6 tank shenanigans is truly only feasible when people are overgeared as it would be with anything else.

The extra survivability is worthless if its ultimately a net loss of DPS. And really, by the point that you could run it with 6 tanks, running it with the regular setup would be vastly superior(assuming competent play is taken account for).

Anyone willingly running the 6 tank setup to be lazy for mechanics are probably already skilled enough to run it regularly. It's harmless player-devised strategy at that point that doesn't really hurt anyone.

There are multiple of other factors of stacking classes that are less than desirable such as the reduced LB bar growth and loss of unique buffs and debuffs that are more than likely required for the progression of the fight.

At the end of the day, even a 5% difference, people would naturally take the stronger one just to either have the edge and the difference just continues to stack up with more people in a fight.

To me 60-80% is a sweetspot, strong enough to be a considerable chunk of raid wide DPS, but weak enough to not completely replace the DDs.

We have different opinions for how balance should be based on our own experiences and I personally don't see any issue with the current ratios as they're, aside from DPS stanced BRDS and MCH, reasonably balanced in the context of the fight designs.

I don't know about Guild Wars 2 but that really just sounds like they don't even have a semblance of Tank/Healer roles whereas here, it is ultimately still the main priority of the respective classes and the DPS contribution is just the icing on the cake that was missing.

If we get pure mechanic only fight with abysmal DPS checks that even that Ice Mage in Duty Finder could pass, you probably have a point. But then that's ultimately just bad fight design, as if the developers completely forgot about the DPS capabilities of class as shown by the players. Nobody wins then.

Excuse me if I insulted you or sounded rude. They weren't directed at you specifically and were mostly just examples of personal disdain for the attitudes of unreasonable people.

[Alahra]

To me 60-80% is a sweetspot, strong enough to be a considerable chunk of raid wide DPS, but weak enough to not completely replace the DDs.

I think I agree in general—but right now, tanks are definitely hovering around that 80% number, which is problematic because that's also around where BRD and MCH hover compared to the other DPS. Tanks shouldn't be competing with BRD/MCH in DPS, in my opinion. There should be a perceptible gap between them. At most a tank should be doing like 90% of a BRD/MCH's DPS and that's arguably too close, especially given how both classes require relatively high execution to perform well with WM/GB (not to mention the strict nature of Wildfire burst for MCH).

If we get pure mechanic only fight with abysmal DPS checks that even that Ice Mage in Duty Finder could pass, you probably have a point. But then that's ultimately just bad fight design, as if the developers completely forgot about the DPS capabilities of class as shown by the players. Nobody wins then.

Thordan EX got a pretty early 7 WAR clear, didn't it? I don't follow that stuff too closely so I'm not sure how geared the group was or anything, though.

[Kaurie]

There is a difference between 75% of the top DPS and 75% of a DPS.

[Instrumentality]

I think I agree in general—but right now, tanks are definitely hovering around that 80% number, which is problematic because that's also around where BRD and MCH hover compared to the other DPS. Tanks shouldn't be competing with BRD/MCH in DPS, in my opinion. There should be a perceptible gap between them. At most a tank should be doing like 90% of a BRD/MCH's DPS and that's arguably too close, especially given how both classes require relatively high execution to perform well with WM/GB (not to mention the strict nature of Wildfire burst for MCH).

If you take a gander at fflogs parses for all bosses of savage Alexander (at 75th, 80th, 90th, and 99th percentile) you'll notice that what you think should be the case is already reality. (Where squeezing out every tiny percent of a percent gain is necessary).

Where it is not true is the absolute middle of the road players (50th percentile) where ninja falls off dramatically in comparison to all other dps.

The only fight where tanks are in general above the 90% of mch/brd dps margin you mentioned is A4S, and that's DRK and not WAR. :v

[Alahra]

The only fight where tanks are in general above the 90% of mch/brd dps margin you mentioned is A4S, and that's DRK and not WAR. :v

But I also said that 90% might be too close, and overall I think it probably is. But I'm not a numbers guru or a developer, so I don't want to come down and say that one number is the perfect ratio. (And I think DRK DPS is too high as well, not just WAR. PLD is obviously nowhere near problematic at this point.)

Of course, it's quite likely that the forthcoming change to accessories is going to address this, anyway, creating just enough space between tanks and BRD/MCH that it probably won't be an issue anymore.

[KinSlayer009]

Vit 70 / Str / 30. Or something like that. All this stupid posts about 60 to 20 or 50 to 25 is retarded.

[Vivi_Bushido]

credit to the forum poster with this as his banner

I think that would be me lol

I almost mistook your post as my own thinking I saw my signature. XD

[Instrumentality]

But I also said that 90% might be too close, and overall I think it probably is.

I understand the rest of what you're saying, but what I was saying was that tanks everywhere in savage (except a4s and only for one job) are already doing less than 90% of BRD/MCH. (It's more like 85-87%.) And the only reason that happens is because sacrificing the BRD/MCH is the most sensible thing generally (and tanks their dps).

So it's not like tank numbers are very out of control right now at all? Like if they drop another percent or three (at most) overall it should be perfectly fine?

[Alahra]

So it's not like tank numbers are very out of control right now at all? Like if they drop another percent or three (at most) overall it should be perfectly fine?

It's hard to say—like I said, I'm not a developer or a numbers guru. 85% in general is probably too high since if the tanks are, well, tanking, their DPS shouldn't be that close, and much of Savage does require active tanking from both tanks at various points, even if there are phases where they're mainly just DPS. If tanks were at 85-90% in a 100% DPS-focused encounter (like the OT on say, Titan HM would be—not that anyone used one for it, but you'll take my meaning), it would be a lot different. But they're performing an entirely separate role and still closing in on the lower DPS classes. That's just too much, especially when you consider that BRD/MCH have a "support tax" for their MP/TP regen abilities, even if they aren't using them in a given encounter.

80% feels better to me, but 75% or something lower might be better in practice, and I certainly don't expect the game to necessarily be balanced around my gut feelings, because balance depends a lot on encounter design, overall rotation difficulty, and a lot of other things. All I've said is that I think they're probably too high.

That doesn't mean they're "out of control," just that they probably need some adjustment for the overall game's balance. I suspect even without any further modification, the accessory adjustments in 3.2 will probably widen the gap enough.