war nerfs(srs bznz pls)

[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.

[DaulBan]

If you're at full HP (and you probably won't be) then a 2k inner beast might give you another 7% HP for a total of like 1.28x eHP. But if you're not at full HP, and that inner beast doesn't put you over your max non-defiance HP, then there is no difference in eHP (because Defiance's benefit is only when you have more than 100% your base (deliverance or w/e) HP.

[Reynhart]

But if you're not at full HP, and that inner beast doesn't put you over your max non-defiance HP, then there is no difference in eHP (because Defiance's benefit is only when you have more than 100% your base (deliverance or w/e) HP.

Defiance helps you recover much faster. That's its main benefit, exactly because it's here whatever your HP is.
And if you need this extra HP to survive the incoming hit, it means that a SwO PLD with Rampart alone would have died too.

[ArdorGrey]

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.

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

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

A: I think you mean "dictionaries". if you're going to be petty *AT LEAST* get your spelling right.

B: since you clearly advertised an appetite for the shallow things in life, you need to acknowledge that warriors ARE ALWAYS MAKING A CHOICE.

You can't (logically) gripe that we have better offensive cooldowns and then complain that IB is maybe, arguably, slightly better than things like shadowskin or rampart. The class is *built* around making choices.

The reality is inner beast is only used when absolutely necessary and if none of warriors stack choices were any good then the whole point of having stacks and making intelligent choices would be rendered MOOT.

That's why I MADE this topic in THE FIRST PLACE: to get the opinion on how WAR could be adjusted without absolutely DESTROYING its power of choice that make it so fun, engaging, and rewarding for intelligent players. unfortunately it's been co-opted by everything but intelligent tanks interested in intelligent discussion.

It seems like for every rational post on here about actual issues with the class I see one or two dozen people COMPLETELY ignorant of how the classes mechanics actually handle, griping left and right about how they won't be sated until pld and drk are both easier to play and don't have to deal with spur of the moment decision making, while also both having better dps and universal Edef and self healing and everything war has but better but easier and blah blah blah. the best part is most of these people are dps mains.... or pld mains... or drk mains..... making brilliant posts left and right.

Someone seriously said holmgang was better than HG.... wth is wrong with this community? o_O

[DaulBan]

snip

That's sort of irrelevant to what I said. Doesn't matter whether or not the tank needed the HP, all I said is that so long as the WAR has less than full HP the eHP isn't the same.

A:

Someone seriously said holmgang was better than HG.... wth is wrong with this community? o_O

To be fair, Holmgang is a lot more fun than hallowed ground.

[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)

[ArdorGrey]

Defiance helps you recover much faster. That's its main benefit, exactly because it's here whatever your HP is.
And if you need this extra HP to survive the incoming hit, it means that a SwO PLD with Rampart alone would have died too.

A pld in Swo can use rampart without swapping or giving anything up, including a GCD(kinda a big deal, if you disagree look at any post ever about clemency. If you know a fraction of what you're claiming to this should be super familiar to you and you should be able to concede this point. that assumes you're actually familiar with this subject matter though. PLD can ALSO switch before the hit comes in and gain another 20% mitigation just for switching, AND burn rampart for 40% mitigation. That is the reason pld and drk should never have ogcd stance switching. /obvious logic

And ffs forget rampart, if you want to talk pld cooldowns heaven FORBID we mention shelltron. Roughly another 20% physical mitigation cooldown on a 20 second timer, and again off gcd....

Sorry, but how are you trying to pretend WARs tank stance is as good as anything plds can do? War's advantages lie in self healing and dps, and the two do go hand in hand. The biggest gray area is in the utility of path and eye. Trying to pretend they're currently as durable as pld on top of all that is hilariously fallacious.

[ArdorGrey]

To be fair, Holmgang is a lot more fun than hallowed ground.

........ ;P

[Reynhart]

you need to acknowledge that warriors ARE ALWAYS MAKING A CHOICE.

Every job is constantly making choices of what GCD they need to use. WAR are the only one to bitch about how they waste offensive capabilities to survive. God, what will it be when every PLD complain that they're losing DSP when casting Stoneskin, losing DPS when healing themselves (or other) with Clemency, losing DPS to stun an add, losing DPS to keep aggro on a group of mobs, losing DPS to boost their enmity or simply replenish their MP...oh, wait, they don't... because the whole community already complains that they do so instead of DPSing DPSing DPSing DPSing...

You can't (logically) gripe that we have better offensive cooldowns and then complain that IB is maybe, arguably, slightly better than things like shadowskin or rampart. The class is *built* around making choices.

Of course I can. For the most of 2.x, WAR did higher damage than PLD on every WS, despite being able to stack more frequent and higher mitigation except for HG.
Tell me what "trade-off" it has, back then...

The reality is inner beast is only used when absolutely necessary and if none of warriors stack choices were any good then the whole point of having stacks and making intelligent choices would be rendered MOOT.

The reality is that WAR sounds like its a very skilled base decision when all fights are totally scripted and you always know exaclty what attacks will come at what time.

PLD can ALSO switch before the hit comes in and gain another 20% mitigation just for switching, AND burn rampart for 40% mitigation.

36%

Roughly another 20% physical mitigation cooldown on a 20 second timer, and again off gcd....

30 seconds

If you're going to be petty *AT LEAST* get your numbers right

[DaulBan]

snip

I don't think that any argument that boils down to 'this comp is bad so we must make this other comp worse'. Say you take path off of WAR and give them just a 100% damage done is turned into regen. That utility, gone, whatever. But SE would still be valuable to NIN/PLD/DRK damage. You'd still want the +10% damage from that (and make NIN's life easier) so you would still take a Warrior. Then do you take both away? Make SE worse, similar to Delirium (just the healing down?). I mean, I'd almost rather they gave SE to the DRK and then buff PLD utility so that it'd be DRK/PLD DRK/WAR, but then people would complain that DRK is too popular.

I'd argue that the tankiness of a WAR is almost irrelevant unless they absolutely cannot tank. An OT that only takes swaps and has a CD for it will be fine in all ways for damage... But if they just had no mitigation at all (IE 2.0 WAR) then we have a completely different situation.