is WAR the best MT now?

[Syzygian]

I do have to say that SE has a lot of nerve leaving PLD/DRK stances on the GCD with all of these tank swaps. They're straight up harder to do and time precisely and happen too frequently for you to significantly make up for the loss of turning the damn things on/off in the first place.

Making them not interrupt combos is nice but in practice it sets up and encourages techniques that detract from success. You have to activate Grit in advance of your combo, not during, if you want the combo to actually get hate for you after you voke. So you not only take the DPS loss from the GCD but the loss of having to activate it in advance if your timing isn't extremely precise.

Afterwards, I go into the same fight on my WAR and its just such fucking easymode, hitting sunder and then double-weaving your stance and voke in the same GCD leading into BB... like... seriously? Its a joke.

Its not even that WAR is OP at this point, its that SE straight up is making PLD and DRK harder to effectively and efficiently play.

[Reynhart]

You have to activate Grit in advance of your combo, not during, if you want the combo to actually get hate for you after you voke. So you not only take the DPS loss from the GCD but the loss of having to activate it in advance if your timing isn't extremely precise.

I didn't find it that difficult, playing DRK and PLD. You just do the first two steps of your enmity combo, change stance, provoke, and do the third step. We also benefit right away from out tank stance if the swap is just before a big hit, and we can also pop any mitigation skill without spending a GCD and while not having our tank stance.
I think it's a fair trade-off now.

And, are we still poiting fingers for DPS loss off ONE GCD ? Again ?

[Syzygian]

snip

Its not that it is inherently hard, its just so much more laughably easy on WAR. I don't see how that's even up for discussion.

And its not just one GCD. Its one for every tank swap, and there are many in savage atm. And they feel clunky as well with on-GCD stances.

Double-weaving your stance with voke? I'm sorry, but I'll take that any day of the week over instant mitigation, that's what CDs are for. And yes IB is on the GCD but guess what isn't? Every other CD the job has. Oh and SW and EQ are oGCD as well. EZPZ. I can't count the amount of times I've eaten a TB, NAKED, as a WAR, and just yolo-healed back up with SW+EQ.

No other job's stances or passive buffs need a GCD to activate. NIN poisons, MNK fists, cleric stance, none of them. Cleric stance is insanely powerful for being oGCD. Swaps INT/MND and then buffs damage dealt on top of that. I'd happily keep the MP costs of the Oaths/Grit, and even have a longer recast time so we must remain committed to the stance for longer and not leap in and out every 10 SECONDS like WARs can, if they were simply oGCD.

Some WAR mains really perplex me. They'll go on and on about how good their job is, the best in the game, and it shouldn't be nerfed, the others should be buffed, but then the nanosecond a PLD or DRK starts to talk about any of these hypothetical buffs, or think they're entitled to any of the things that make WAR so good, it suddenly becomes too much for people to handle, and all they can do is trump up perceived on-paper disadvantages that WAR supposedly has that do very little to actually gimp the job in practice.

tl;dr "no nerfs pls buff other tanks, w8 no, don't buff the other tanks, then they might actually be well designed like us, can't have that no sir" - this is what I feel like i'm reading sometimes. Feel free to disagree.

[Reynhart]

tl;dr "no nerfs pls buff other tanks, w8 no, don't buff the other tanks, then they might actually be well designed like us, can't have that no sir" - this is what I feel like i'm reading sometimes. Feel free to disagree.

Oh, I surely won't disagree on that.
Last night, one of my friend said the same about the recent MCH buffs : "MCH got something and BRD didn't have the same"..."Well, duh, it's because they deemed MCH a little weaker than BRD...if you buff BRD on top of that, then MCH will still be deemed weaker"

That's why, whenever someone rejects a PLD (or DRK) buff by screaming "OoooPppp !", I usually ask them "Will it make you chose that tank over a WAR ?" and, 9 out of 10, the answer is "Hmmm...no"

Oh, and don't judge by my profile, I'm not a MRD main...I still don't understand why the forum keep saying it

[SpookyGhost]

tl;dr "no nerfs pls buff other tanks, w8 no, don't buff the other tanks, then they might actually be well designed like us, can't have that no sir" - this is what I feel like i'm reading sometimes.

You're right that tank swapping as a WAR is definitely more fluid, however much like a WAR still needs to anticipate when the tank swap is happening, so does a DRK/PLD. So, knowing this, you just go "ok, turn on tank stance here, Provoke, enmity combo". It's definitely clunky if you're just going into a fight completely blind, but it's not exactly a big deal when you know when the tank swap is coming. A5S, for example (if you're not pulling) - figure out how many combos until Concussion, change stances during that combo, Provoke, and you're done. Same deal with WAR, we just... can do it oGCD. I dunno, I agree that it's definitely more fluid on WAR but it's about the same ease of use. I guess WAR's is faster but like... does that really matter?