war nerfs(srs bznz pls)

[Reynhart]

The problem as multiple people have clarified is the pairing of PLD and DRK.

Yes, I'm one of them, if you haven't noticed

• 

  All 3 combinations are viable. The only "problem" with DRK+PLD combo is that "WAR is better".

Nerfing WAR is not going to fix that.

Actually, it can. WAR's utility is what makes it that important. By splitting evenly this utility among the three tanks, this is no more an issue. And the existing utility of PLD and DRK will compensate for slight DPS loss.

You cannot nerf Warrior without fundamentally breaking them as a class, Storm's Path/Eye are invaluable, and removing/changing either of these would be a massive hit.

Switching RoH and Storm's Path mitigation is not going to "break" the job. Nor giving DRK the slashing debuff.

[ChaozK]

It really depends on which direction they are going with tanks in the future. Will they continue with the mantra that all tanks should be equally viable at everything, then they should give more incentive to have PLD/DRK as OT. If on the other hand they want to emphasize PLD/DRK as MTs and WAR/new tank as OT then they can just beef up PLD/DRKs mitigation.

[Reynhart]

Will they continue with the mantra that all tanks should be equally viable at everything, then they should give more incentive to have PLD/DRK as OT.

Actually, if you have a PLD in your setup, having is as an OT is a huge DPS boost, since its gap between MT and OT DPS is the biggest among the three tanks.

[Brian_]

Yes, I'm one of them, if you haven't noticed

You aren't one of them. Again, you call out others for not reading but completely miss the point. Yes, you are saying that PLD+DRK is a problem. But, you are saying that's it's because PLD is a problem, DRK is a problem, and WAR is the biggest problem.

As such, your proposals are based on shallow class adjustments rather than a deeper look at why the problem even exists.

Actually, it can. WAR's utility is what makes it that important. By splitting evenly this utility among the three tanks, this is no more an issue. And the existing utility of PLD and DRK will compensate for slight DPS loss.

Switching RoH and Storm's Path mitigation is not going to "break" the job. Nor giving DRK the slashing debuff.

You clearly don't understand tank balance if you think removing Storm's Path is either balanced or rational.

Path fills the same raid utility role that Divine Veil and Reprisal / Delirium does. If you removed Path without also removing DV and Reprisal / Delirium, you would never bring a WAR in this early progression meta because they'd give you nothing in terms of unique raid mitigation. You'd just bring PLD / DRK / DRG / NIN / MCH / BLM / WHM or AST / SCH to everything. You'd instantly flush both WAR and MNK out of the meta.

Actually, if you have a PLD in your setup, having is as an OT is a huge DPS boost, since its gap between MT and OT DPS is the biggest among the three tanks.

Patch 3.1 called and wants its information back.

[Starkbeaumont]

Path fills the same raid utility role that Divine Veil and Reprisal / Delirium does. If you removed Path without also removing DV and Reprisal / Delirium, you would never bring a WAR in this early progression meta because they'd give you nothing in terms of unique raid mitigation. You'd just bring PLD / DRK / DRG / NIN / MCH / BLM / WHM or AST / SCH to everything.

He suggested to give str down (or actually physical dmg dealt down) to path, not to remove it.
Also WAR is not just there for path. it's there cause path can be applied as OT, 100% of the fight is necessary while also boosting tanks and NINs dmg and doing the highest indiviual dmg (of the three tanks) on top of that. (without relying on any resources since OT tp is basically infinite)

Edit for comparison: Divine Veil has a rather long CD and doesn't even effect the PLD, Reprisal needs you to be MT and Delirium can be applied by MNKs as well

[Brian_]

Okay, so I regard the 10% damage reduction from Path as synonymous with Path since it's the entire point of the skill. If you remove the 10% damage reduction from Path, it's no longer Path.

What could be done is to have Slashing debuff, Physical Raidwide mitigation and Magical Raidwide mitigation, and you give each tank only two of them.

• PLD, Physical/Magical Mitigation
• WAR, Slashing debuff, Physical Mitigaiton
• DRK Slashing debuff, Magical Mitigation

So, for each pair of tanks, you always have those 3 effects available. But it means nerfing Storm's Path.

He clearly suggested to remove the damage reduction from Path and give WAR physical mitigation instead.

WAR is obviously not just there for Path but Path is vital in early progression. Yes, it has higher uptime than DV and Reprisal but they're used in effectively the same way.

For example (I'm going off loose memory here so things will be a bit off), A8S P3/P5/P7 has a sequence where you take ~3k damage, 2 people will take ~18k damage, the other 5-6 people will take ~15k damage, and you end taking another ~3k hit. In total, each person will take ~21-24k worth of raw damage.

In early progression, outside of your tanks, people had ~18-20k HP. So if you take that sequence of damage without any mitigation, people will die every single time. Due to forced movement and the speed at which the damage happens, you are limited to HoTs and instant healing.

So having mitigation like Delirium / Dragon kick / Path / Reprisal / Virus / etc. and shielding like Succor / Adlo + Deploy / DV / etc. becomes absolutely mandatory. It doesn't matter if it's DV, Reprisal, or Path. They all serve the same purpose -- lower incoming raid damage so people don't die. Note that physical damage reduction does nothing here since the damage is magical.

And, because that sequence happens multiple times with huge raid hits in between that also demand mitigation, you can't afford to just blow everything to mitigate a single sequence. You need enough overall raid mitigation tools to cover multiple raid-wiping hits.

So what happens when PLD still brings DV, DRK still brings Delirium and Reprisal, but WAR no longer brings anything? Yea. You no longer bring WAR because people die if you do.

[Reynhart]

He clearly suggested to remove the damage reduction from Path and give WAR physical mitigation instead.

Another proof you can't read, nice.

He suggested to give str down (or actually physical dmg dealt down) to path, not to remove it.

Yes, that's exactly what I suggested

[Freyyy]

snip

But the two quotes you just quoted say the exact same thing ? How can you disagree with one while agreeing with the other one ?

Edit :

Switching RoH and Storm's Path mitigation is not going to "break" the job. Nor giving DRK the slashing debuff.

Isn't that what Brian_ clearly said ? You suggested to remove the damage reduction from Path and give WAR physical mitigation instead. That's literally what "switching RoH and SP's mitigation" means.

Also, just saying that he can't read while he's bringing actually valid points and arguments is just disrespectful at this point.

[Brian_]

Another proof you can't read, nice.

Yes, that's exactly what I suggested

[Reynhart]

But the two quotes you just quoted say the exact same thing ? How can you disagree with one while agreeing with the other one ?

First Brian_ thought I'd like to remove Path's mitigation,

Path fills the same raid utility role that Divine Veil and Reprisal / Delirium does. If you removed Path without also removing DV and Reprisal / Delirium

then Stark pointed out that it was not removal but just focusing on physical raidwide mitigation.

He suggested to give str down (or actually physical dmg dealt down) to path, not to remove it.

Then Brian_ replied

He clearly suggested to remove the damage reduction from Path and give WAR physical mitigation instead.

instead of a simple "That's what I'm saying". So, it seems that he thought that by Physical mitigation, I meant personal physical mitigation.

If that's not that, then this exchange was just useless.

Image

What, so you actually understood what I meant, yet feel you still need to correct what Stark said ?! So you're arguing for the sake of arguing, or what ?

Also, just saying that he can't read while he's bringing actually valid points and arguments is just disrespectful at this point.

I don't deny that he brings some good point, I just feel that he put too much words into other people mouth, then bashing them for what they actually didn't really say. And also that if you didn't do Savage, you automatically have absolutely no understanging of how the game works, which is false and incredibly condescending.