Xeno believes paladin should NEVER be main tank

[Yuni_Queen]

Kurai speaks about him like Levi fangirls in heat.

Xeno is good WAR.
That's enough informations.

First of all, redesigning tanks won't happen until 6.0 if it will ever happen.
Secondly, in old, good 2.0 content we had PLD and MRD. MRD, with buffs like Raging strikes and Blood for Blood was doing as 5th dps with ability to provoke, i.e, Ramuh, to switch tanks.
Dunno how BCoB or SCoB, but in FCoB PLD was always MT, becuase of the shitty dmg (compared to WAR's raw, tankless stance dmg output). It was so shitty, that actually there was no point in wasting WAR potential to deal additional dmg.


Bonus:

As a WAR MT in most PUG parties hes top DPS

Wow. Calm down. PUGs have shitty dps, but thats a rare case of "carry me pl0x", "I don't know the fight, i will say <I watched vid> and all will be cool".
A lot of PUG parties have dps much higher than any tank can pull off.
Do not exaggerate the subject.

Hmmm....what if Rampart and Sentinel applied their damage reduction on the member with the highest enmity in the party?

Come now... Do you really believe it would be fair? :P

[Jpec07]

And who is Xeno???

Honestly, this is my biggest question out of the whole thread.

EDIT: Ah, so he's a popular Twitch streamer and YouTuber who does FFXIV tank stuff and is claimed by some to be responsible for the aggressive tanking meta. Got it.

[Yuni_Queen]

Honestly, this is my biggest question out of the whole thread.

Right? Treating the guy, as like a Jesus have descended from heavens and said to all paladins: "You suck"

[Lyth]

This is hyperbole, as are most 'always/never' statements. Elysium's DRK switched to PLD in order to MT during A7S progression. Should we say instead "PLD should never be main tank, unless you're trying for world first?"

This sort of thing goes on all the time. A little under a year ago, there was a 36 page thread on how DRK would never cut it as a progression tank (http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...roups-as-a-DRK). We all know how that turned out.

It comes down to understanding and playing to each tank's strength. PLD takes significantly less damage in a physical fight by virtue of block (one of the reasons why Parry needs a rework is to actually give the other two tanks some degree of parity) and the RoH debuff. This isn't very noticeable if you're only tanking in short bursts, but if you're tanking for an extended period, it becomes extremely obvious. DRK may have a cooldown advantage in a magical fight, but it doesn't begin to compare with the passive advantage PLD gets for simply showing up to a physical fight.

In addition, Hallowed Ground is one of the most powerful cooldowns in the game, and it's absurd not to take advantage of it if your group has access to it. It's not just an issue of negating damage. Often, damage is required to apply the debuffs that force a tank swap. This allows you to avoid stacks and bypass tank swaps, significantly reducing healing requirements. It should be fairly obvious why these qualities would lend themselves well to certain fights during progression.

Besides, with the changes to Vitality and Strength, I'm not certain that the old MT/OT dichotomy is really necessary any more. Both your MT and OT are generally geared equivalently, and there's no difference in HP thresholds. If there's a forced swap, there's generally no need for the previous MT to swap right back - the previous OT just keeps tanking and becomes the new MT. Some of the better groups that I've been observing don't seem to follow rigid roles, especially on the present raid tier.

[Jpec07]

Right? Treating the guy, as like a Jesus have descended from heavens and said to all paladins: "You suck"

My first thought after reading the title: "....who?"

Groups have had success with multiple comps. You might have sub-optimal DPS with a Paladin in the MT spot, but I don't think I'd go as far as to say it's holding the group back. There's a lot more to beating an encounter than optimizing DPS (not that such a thing is bad, but I also don't think it should be The Measure of Group Awesomeness).

[Reynhart]

Come now... Do you really believe it would be fair? :P

If you count average mitigation, rampart gives 4% and sentinel, 2%, I think it would be very fair, since having a PLD over any tank makes you lose far more than 6% DPS.
Keep in mind that having a WAR can also bring up to 10% damage reduction if you want to play safe. Do you think it's fair ?

[Yuni_Queen]

well, what i see, is one tank with insane amount of mitigation now.
really, like at least 4 additional cooldowns. 20%, 40%, another Conva, another Foresight, Bulwark.
No need to switch for mechanics. Just push Thrill of Battle and let paladin use his Sentinel on you.

Those percentages you give are actually meaningless, until you struggle for life whole fight, raiding with around 20% HP whole time. And you don't!

[Reynhart]

really, like at least 4 additional cooldowns. 20%, 40%, another Conva, another Foresight, Bulwark.

Last time I checked, I only talked about Rampart and Sentinel.
Besides, if you have a PLD, you have all those CD in your party already. What it does is indeed prevent some swap mechanic, which Cover already does.
And it would also allow a MT to take a tankbuster out of tank stance, for a little boost on damage.

Not really gamebreaking, considering that, again, having a PLD impairs your overall DPS, compared to any other tank.
Again, a WAR OT can put a permanent 10% damage reduction at the cost of 40 potency every 2 combos.

Or, like I said, make mitigation works with Cover, and reduce it's CD to 60s. After all, Cover is supposed to be the staple skill of PLD, and we can only do it once every 2 minutes.
While DRG can jump every 30s...

[SpookyGhost]

Xeno's cool and he's got a lot of XIV knowledge, but you shouldn't take anyone's word as gospel. Form your own opinions, decide for yourself.

I think PLD having more raid-wide mitigation is a 10/10 idea, it's one I originally brought up long ago before 3.0 - I thought they'd make PLD more focused on it's utility, which they kinda did in DV... but then they just gave it 2 more combos... and Clemency... At least it got Sheltron I guess. Ah well, maybe things will be better in 4.0.

[Gameplayzero]

Secondly, in old, good 2.0 content we had PLD and MRD. MRD, with buffs like Raging strikes and Blood for Blood was doing as 5th dps with ability to provoke, i.e, Ramuh, to switch tanks.
Dunno how BCoB or SCoB, but in FCoB PLD was always MT, becuase of the shitty dmg (compared to WAR's raw, tankless stance dmg output). It was so shitty, that actually there was no point in wasting WAR potential to deal additional dmg.

wait what. I thought paladin wass MT for other reasons. Someone already mentioned why in this thread (with warrior being bad and the stigma carrying on even until the buffs). I heard paladin was close or better in OT dps than warrior with slashing debuff for 2.0 content. Where I heard this from wasn't from reliable sources so that's why I'm hesistant. All I know is that war had no dps stance vs SwO.


as you can tell I wasn't huge on 2.0 raiding. I played the game when it came out for a bit but took a long break and warrior'd casually before World of Darkness was a thing. I hardly played back then. So I'm all up for corrections.

also just putting Xeno as "good" is a mislabel imo. I sound like I'm bandwagoning but anyone can be a good warrior. Especially since he tries to push his War in all of the raids he can and has cleared plenty of raids. He has added some extra data and debate to game so idk if that's all you can consider him as, but please don't blow this part of the post out of proportion lol. Again I'm not fanroeing. I respect his warrior guide as it helped be back then, his knowledge, and he can be silly but I mainly use him to learn new things lol. Same with dervyy and a few other of the bigger known players.