war nerfs(srs bznz pls)

[DaulBan]

As a PLD, if I need to switch from ShO to SwO and switch back later on, I'll lose more DPS than a WAR having to do Inner Beast instead of Fell Cleave.

So can you do some math for me to prove that switching oaths costs you 500 - 300*.75 = 275 potency? Because I'm seeing a lot of opinions, but not a whole lot of evidence.

=

I didn't say "it's a godly comp". I'd say that if you could stack double Eye, I'm sure more parties would run double WAR.

So your point is actually just moot.

[Reynhart]

So can you do some math for me to prove that switching oaths costs you 500 - 300*.75 = 275 potency? Because I'm seeing a lot of opinions, but not a whole lot of evidence.

First, your calculation is a bit off. FC is 525 potency thanks to Deliverance. Inner Beast is 300 potency, since it ignores Defiance penalty. So you're losing 225 potency.

We've assumed that PLD ppGCD is around 320 for its optimal rotation while using SwO. Using a GCD to switch to ShO or SwO makes you lose those 320 potency each time. Even if you count that GB is ticking for 50 during this (But will probably fall off for one or two GCD), it means you lose more than your 225 potency each time you switch. And it's not even counting how many GCD you stay in ShO where you "lose" 15% of your damage +50pot/GCD.

Technically it's not a waste of DPS too if you need the extra mitigation to survive (whether just barely or safely).

WARs are claiming that using Inner Beast instead of Fell Cleave is a "waste", not me

Nevermind the reality that there are actually plenty of gaps in uptime to swap Oaths at no DPS loss.

Shouldn't you advocate being in SwOath until right before the tankbuster to maximize DPS ?

PLD has better physical mitigation and DRK has better magical mitigation.

Yes, they have. But instead of very specific situations where PLD can top both of them thanks to HG, there is nothing that PLD and DRK can survive that WAR can't.

Judged independently, PLD and DRK both have higher raid mitigation than WAR does -- DRK having persistently higher raid mitigation with Delirium and Reprisal and PLD having higher one-time raid mitigation with DV. And, because of their equally valuable unique utility, just like WAR, they will be ensured a raid spot.

Considering that Delirium only affects magical damage, and Reprisal needs to be proced by a parry, I'd say that DRK's raid mitigation is less reliable than WAR's. As for PLD, yes, DV is a very good skill but only for burst damage.

[Reynhart]

GB 150 + 230 + 540 = 920, 306.7 ppgcd

150 + 230 + 640 = 1020, 340 ppGCD

Since it's 1 GB to 2 RA, (920 +2*700)/9 = 257.8 ppGCD.

1020+2*700 = 2420
2420/9 = 268

But SA actually gives you 50 potency per auto. Assuming that it was 50 potency per auto, and an auto was 2.5s (which it's not), you have to subtract 9*50 potency.

What ? We're counting the DPS loss from having to switch to ShO from SwO, like a WAR that needs to switch to Defiance and use Inner Beast instead of Fell Cleave under Deliverance.

SwO gives you 50 potency (almost) per GCD so your averagge ppGCD is 268+50 = 318 ppGCD.

For the same combo in ShO, you'd have

GB = (1020*0.85)/3 289 ppGCD
RA = (700*0.85)/3 198 ppGCD
GB+RA+RA = (1020+700+700)*0.85/3 = 228 ppGCD

So, by being in ShO instead of SwO, you're losing 90 ppGCD. And that's not counting the 2 GCD where you'll actually deals 0 potency.

[DaulBan]

snip

Yeah I realized my mistake in what you were saying, which is why I deleted the post, I don't know why I got your meaning turned around there. That's my bad

I will point out that despite the DPS loss from switching oaths, there is also the loss of the cleave potency, any held stacks for the inner beast (since the inner beast duration is pretty short), and the 10s following the swap where you can't switch oaths, while a Paladin might be able to swap back faster. The fact that there are these extra requirements (5 stacks, losing none, 10s of guaranteed 25s less damage) means that the inner beast might wind up being either messier (barely up during the buster) or cost a lot of potency (wasted stacks that might've gone towards a FC).

[Brian_]

Just because you don't define something as a trade-off doesn't mean it's not a trade-off according to the English language. This has nothing to do with views and everything to do with a dictionary.

You also conveniently left out the most common situation in progression -- situations that require you to have both maximized DPS and maximized mitigation. And, WAR can't do that nearly as well as either PLD or DRK. That is the reality of why WARs OT -- because of the trade-off they need to make that PLD and DRK can do better.

[DaulBan]

That's another great point, you don't expend damage using Shadowskin or Rampart, but the equivalent move in Inner Beast comes with a price in terms of overall damage to use.

[Reynhart]

Just because you don't define something as a trade-off doesn't mean it's not a trade-off according to the English language. This has nothing to do with views and everything to do with a dictionary.

Even in dictionnaries, "trade-off" rarely describes a situation where you can go back and forth at will. In economics or computer science, it's usually a one time decision that drives your entire plan of action.

You also conveniently left out the most common situation in progression -- situations that require you to have both maximized DPS and maximized mitigation.

How much time does your MT spend in tank stance if you need "maximized mitigation" ?

That's another great point, you don't expend damage using Shadowskin or Rampart, but the equivalent move in Inner Beast comes with a price in terms of overall damage to use.

You also don't have the same eHP by using Rampart than a WAR using IB.

[Lambdafish]

snip

Sorry, but I agree with Reynhart here. The problem here is that you are treating WARs versatility like it is a detriment. WARs have high damage and good survivability all rolled into one, yes they can't have both at the same time, but the point is that are good at both (not to mention their self healing which makes them the best job in the game for soloing). PLD and DRK have no such versatility and only marginally beat WAR in one area, mitigation, and the problem with that is that if you can survive the damage, any extra mitigation means nothing (and there is no fight in the game that a WAR can't comfortably MT). Yes, WAR has to go into tank stance for tank busters, but so do all tanks if they aim to survive, WAR just has an easier time with it than others.

Your points are moot regardless as the devs do share Reynharts (and my own) view and have talked about job balancing (citing WAR and SCH specifically as being too good) in recent interviews, and the reason that this is the case is because PLDs and DRKs do not share the same versatility as WAR, making DRK/PLD compositions are unviable, guaranteeing WAR a space. This is combined with PLD and DRKs specializations in magic/physical damage (for reference PLD only has 2 (3 including HG, which has a 7min cooldown) cooldowns that it can use in magic damage fights, wheras WAR has 2 that it can use while in deliverance (Vengence and Holmgang) and 3 while in Defiance, and this is not counting the fact that Storms path works in both magic and physical fights)

[Sarcatica]

You don't get it. WAR needs to time Inner Beast. That by itself is already a loss. WAR only has 2 on demands (Raw Intuition normally used for that 3rd FC). PLD/DRK have the huge flexibility to pop CDs when they want/need to use. I don't even turn on Grit/ShO for most of the fights barring A8S and for the starting aggro.