Dear Square-Enix: You Forgot About Buffs to Dark Knight's Off-Tank Utility.

[Syzygian]

You can't pretend MNK doesn't exist because they do.

If you have a DRG/NIN setup and need an OT, there's no reason to take DRK over WAR. Zero. DRK only competes as a MT. Path mitigates everything Delirium does and more. What serious group would take a DRK instead of a WAR for that role?

The reality is again, MT and OT does not matter. The two roles swap constantly in content.

You're consistently saying this and consistently (and conveniently) leaving out the fact that PLD and WAR don't lose utility from that swap. DRK does.

I'm noticing you're saying all sorts of things about my comparison between DRK and PLD but being very careful to avoid saying anything about DRK vs. WAR for the OT spot because you know that argument can't hold water. If you don't have a MNK, but need an OT that can reduce magic damage, you'll bring a WAR (like yourself... you'll forgive me for pointing that out), because it reduces both, and reduces them by more.

You're also being very careful to not address the topic of a DRK/PLD composition being a complete handicap to a progression raid-group.

A job shouldn't have to hope for a given raid composition in order to be viable or even optimal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEBV_zEM7_M

^^^Here you can see a pair of the bigger names in tanking absolutely rip DRK apart in regards to issues that this patch barely touched and issues that you seem determined to sweep under the rug.

Things were fine when we were guaranteed the MT slot b/c we were being propped up by the nature of the content (high DPS checks, high magic mitigation checks)... but now that's likely to not be a thing anymore, and the issues are no longer overshadowed by PLD's need for buffs.

I understand you have a dog in this fight

What is your dog is in this fight? Are we trying to make sure DRK stays gimped unless content favors and melee DPS compositions favor it? Can we say the same about WAR? Is it being propped up? Should all the tanks not be equally well designed in their own way and able to offer EQUAL levels of (different) utility regardless of whether or not they have aggro at a given moment? Answer my questions instead of just saying "that doesn't matter".

Just because DRK's problems were overshadowed by how horrible PLD was in comparison does not mean, now that PLD has been substantially buffed, that we can just pretend those problems never existed or that DRK is "working as intended".

[Brian_]

What is your dog is in this fight? Are we trying to make sure DRK stays gimped unless content favors and melee DPS compositions favor it? Can we say the same about WAR? Is it being propped up? Should all the tanks not be equally well designed in their own way and able to offer EQUAL levels of (different) utility regardless of whether or not they have aggro at a given moment? Answer my questions instead of just saying "that doesn't matter".

Just because DRK's problems were overshadowed by how horrible PLD was in comparison does not mean, now that PLD has been substantially buffed, that we can just pretend those problems never existed or that DRK is "working as intended".

I play all three tanks and am full i210 on all three of them (with their relics). I was a PLD main in 2.X. I switched to WAR in 3.0 because my raid group needed a WAR. On fflogs, I have 90th percentile parses with PLD and WAR. If something happens and I need to play DRK for my group, I'd be fine switching. To me, it doesn't matter what job I play. I am a responsible progression tank so it's my duty to be prepared for anything.

It's about getting the job done. Not bickering about MT or OT or whatever. Tanks operate as a singular unit. The raid operates as a singular unit.

I have no dog in this fight. Nobody should.


The major problem you have is you do not understand progression raiding. And, balance of this degree only matters in progression. If you're going to link Mog Talk, maybe you should take some time to watch their video about raiding in 3.2.

Progression raiding is attempting to clear content while being below the ilevel the content is tuned for.

There are two major ilevel hurdles groups have to overcome in progression. The first is the DPS gap. The second is the eHealing / eHP gap. All raid utility and all raid composition balance has to be viewed under that lens -- not this MT OT BS. If you are bringing a tank to a raid, you are bringing a tank to the raid. Utility does not suddenly matter more or less because it's coming from the MT or OT spot because that definition is inherently very obscure in content and the line separating the two is becoming increasingly blurred.

If you're working through progression and need to compensate for the lack of a MNK in a situation where you are not reaching to clear a DPS check, you will bring a DRK. In the scenario where your other tank is a WAR, path does not stack with path. In the scenario where your other tank is a PLD, reprisal + INT debuff > path for raid mitigation.

DRK + PLD comps were only handicapped because you needed to maximize raid DPS in 3.0's raid meta. If you are instead trying to push for max raid eHP, DRK + PLD is better than any WAR comp.

Again, we do not know what direction the meta is heading. From what we do know, the DPS checks won't be as tight. That inherently favors any non-WAR/DRK tank pairing.

[Starbirth]

I play all three tanks and am full i210 on all three of them (with their relics). I was a PLD main in 2.X. I switched to WAR in 3.0 because my raid group needed a WAR. On fflogs, I have 90th percentile parses with PLD and WAR. If something happens and I need to play DRK for my group, I'd be fine switching. To me, it doesn't matter what job I play. I am a responsible progression tank so it's my duty to be prepared for anything.


It's about getting the job done. Not bickering about MT or OT or whatever. Tanks operate as a singular unit. The raid operates as a singular unit.

I have no dog in this fight. Nobody should.


The major problem you have is you do not understand progression raiding. And, balance of this degree only matters in progression. If you're going to link Mog Talk, maybe you should take some time to watch their video about raiding in 3.2.

Progression raiding is attempting to clear content while being below the ilevel the content is tuned for.

There are two major ilevel hurdles groups have to overcome in progression. The first is the DPS gap. The second is the eHealing / eHP gap. All raid utility and all raid composition balance has to be viewed under that lens -- not this MT OT BS. If you are bringing a tank to a raid, you are bringing a tank to the raid. Utility does not suddenly matter more or less because it's coming from the MT or OT spot because that definition is inherently very obscure in content and the line separating the two is becoming increasingly blurred.

If you're working through progression and need to compensate for the lack of a MNK in a situation where you are not reaching to clear a DPS check, you will bring a DRK. In the scenario where your other tank is a WAR, path does not stack with path. In the scenario where your other tank is a PLD, reprisal + INT debuff > path for raid mitigation.

DRK + PLD comps were only handicapped because you needed to maximize raid DPS in 3.0's raid meta. If you are instead trying to push for max raid eHP, DRK + PLD is better than any WAR comp.

Again, we do not know what direction the meta is heading. From what we do know, the DPS checks won't be as tight. That inherently favors any non-WAR/DRK tank pairing.

This is not the Marines. I've known people that are/were in the Marines that do not treat this game like the Marines. Doing so may help you complete raids but only if you and seven other individuals view it as a 2nd and 3rd job, after you find said individuals of course. You seem like you've had the same static since 2.X days and that's nice. I wish I had a static that didn't have people quit the game, leave for another static or have that one clown with his pants always down that forgot to cap weekly tomes and upgrade his weapon effectively gimping the raid for a week. So 99% of the player base has to make do with what they can find and hopefully get a decent team to complete raid content. That is totally doable if the devs in charge of Alex Savage didn't completely miscalculate the difficulty of it and create static destroying content that excludes entire classes. People play a class they like because its fun, they may like playing difficult content on that class because it's fun and they like playing a class they think is fun while feeling like they contribute to a groups success.

The problem here is you do not understand when devs throw these things out the window and it impacts a class to the point people don't find it appealing to play anymore and that can ruin their gaming experience. It can even happen vice versa as well. Warrior is too good because of Alex Savage and is deemed too sacred to touch. So now SE has to power creep PLD to make it seem less shitty to a large majority of statics and guess what? People are afraid of the same thing happening to DRK because PLD is going to take back its raid spot from DRK. These are legit concerns. Not everyone wants to main swap every patch.

Everyone wants a raid spot for their Job. Everyone here commenting has a dog in this fight. You have the first and claim to not have the second. Why are you here?

[Brian_]

Everyone wants a raid spot for their Job. Everyone here commenting has a dog in this fight. You have the first and claim to not have the second. Why are you here?

The point is this -- I will have a raid spot regardless of the job I am playing. This has nothing to do with my current static -- a static I have only been with since a month or two into HW. So, I have no vested interest in the balance of the jobs or anything to gain from lobbying for a specific job. As a result, I have no bias.

You can continue to blame your lack of progression on the job you play but as many others have repeatedly said, outside of world progression with exceptional players, most balance issues don't matter. I don't see any world progression players in any topic worrying about losing their raid spot because of these changes.

So I take a step back just like I do in any topic about PLD or WAR and I can see many blatant flaws caused by individual biases. DRK when tanking gritless is the highest individual DPS tank. They are also half of the highest raid DPS tank pairing and half of the highest raid mitigation tank pairing. To me, that seems to be a pretty damn good position if all you are concerned about is whether or not they are raid viable. They are raid viable.

What I don't agree with is the separation of OT and MT utility. No such separation exists in real content. Tank utility is tank utility. Overall balance is what matters.

You should probably not throw terms around you do not understand. It only makes you look stupid. Power creep in relation to game design does not mean what you think it means. When you buff something outside of the meta, that is not power creep. When you buff something or release a stronger version of something within the meta, that is power creep. Buffing PLDs when PLDs are not a viable tank in the progression meta is not power creep. If you buffed DRK, a viable tank within the progression meta, that would be power creep. Adding more utility to a tank job that is already a staple within the meta is power creep.