war nerfs(srs bznz pls)

[DaulBan]

-snip-

I'd love to see PLD get some abilities like Bard songs (be them called chants or prayers or whatever) for DPS gains/mitigation. It'd be a nice addition to the game. Possibly also changing cover to a 120s 'give the target +20% damage reduction' to make it feel better.

[Reynhart]

I'd love to see PLD get some abilities like Bard songs (be them called chants or prayers or whatever) for DPS gains/mitigation. It'd be a nice addition to the game. Possibly also changing cover to a 120s 'give the target +20% damage reduction' to make it feel better.

For me, all three tanks should provide the same overall mitigation and DPS when main tanking. This, way, no tank should be the "de-facto" MT.

As for OT, though, WAR should be the one to do higher DPS, PLD should be the one to Cure and Protect (mostly the main tank), and DRK should be the one to debilitate and put raidwide leech.

[Lambdafish]

Sorry, you're right. Pld is so starved for mp use that they should be frequently using Riot blade. In fact, forget goring blade completely. You're probably best served aborting the combo prematurely to get in more mp quicker.

Actually in AOE heavy fights (A2S as an example), PLD has a tonne of MP management, with their 4 MP consuming moves taking up a good chunk of their MP. In my current PLD MP pool of 5198 (i239), I can use 7 flashes, switch stances 5 times, or use clemency twice. In order to maintain hate, while stance dancing, your MP would drop fast (not taking into account any situation where I might use clemency, as they are few and far between, but should still be accounted for). Your misconception comes from the fact that PLDs MP management is not normally relevant, but that does not mean that in certain scenarios PLDs do have a hard job managing MP.

[Reynhart]

Sorry, you're right. Pld is so starved for mp use that they should be frequently using Riot blade. In fact, forget goring blade completely. You're probably best served aborting the combo prematurely to get in more mp quicker.

And earlier, you complained about PLD not using their utility skills...maybe you should try using Clemency a bit more...or not, since people will cry that it lowers your DPS anyway...

EDIT to following question because of daily limit post :

How would this not just reaffirm the existing meta where MT is a toss up and WAR is guaranteed OT? O.o seems like a lousy idea.

First, imagine that boss auto-attacks are much stronger (And some fights less scripted). The idea would be to put more emphasis on using tank stance.

After that, PLD's utility as a protector should be to split damage between the two tanks a little more, by providing support mitigation for the MT. This way, both tanks could stay longer out of tank stance. And with support healing, it would also allow healers to stay longer in Cleric Stance, thus increasing their DPS too.

As for DRK, it could have a new spell, with a 3-4 second casting time, thus impratictal as a MT, that refresh status ailments on the enemy. This way, other party members would not have to refresh their DoT and debuffs as often, and could focus on doing higher damage. I think MNK would be glad if someone else could refresh their Dragon Kick, WAR could apply both Path and Eye with an OT DRK, PLD could use more RA with GB still ticking, etc... And let's not talk about SCH and SMN paired with a DRK...

[Sarcatica]

And earlier, you complained about PLD not using their utility skills...maybe you should try using Clemency a bit more...or not, since people will cry that it lowers your DPS anyway...

The idea is good, but it sucks so much when your cast gets interrupted, be it Clemency/Stoneskin. These 2 skills are just too situational for what they can do in vacuum. In what situation where you will find yourself casting those 2 skills? There are very limited situations where they shine and that's it. Good raiders will always adjust to what's good to use, and this current patch? These 2 skills don't go too far.

Watch this if you are interested in the PLD/DRK talk, many skills were addressed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3ubyxLdvxQ

[SyzzleSpark]

For me, all three tanks should provide the same overall mitigation and DPS when main tanking. This, way, no tank should be the "de-facto" MT.

As for OT, though, WAR should be the one to do higher DPS, PLD should be the one to Cure and Protect (mostly the main tank), and DRK should be the one to debilitate and put raidwide leech.

How would this not just reaffirm the existing meta where MT is a toss up and WAR is guaranteed OT? O.o seems like a lousy idea.

[DaulBan]

snip

To be fair, WAR hasn't pushed out any tank in the meta. Dark Knight doing more damage than Paladin is the primary reason why it isn't chosen, and that has nothing to do with WAR. To be honest, the WAR/MT layout doesn't really affect many people, just the odd person who wants to do DRK/PLD and doesn't think it fair that WAR have the utility they do. Neither PLD nor DRK are going to get thrust out of the game completely, aside from fights where there's too much physical/magical damage for one to handle. On the other hand, Astrologian for a long while was in a situation where it simply wasn't represented.

OT WAR isn't nearly as dire as people make it out to be, as it has few implications for tanks as fights themselves dictate comp. Healers had more legitimate concerns about AST pre buffs, though competing with SCH puts them in the same position as the WAR debate.

[SyzzleSpark]

snip.

I was more just saying his idea was really bad, than I was saying anything about WAR tbh.

It was worse when he elaborated.

[DaulBan]

Snip.

Ah, my bad, sorry!

[Brian_]

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" ?

Except you can't go back and forth at will. Once you spend those 5 stacks on either mitigation or DPS, that's it. You gain either mitigation or DPS and sacrifice the other. You don't get both, you never get those 5 stacks back, and you don't get another chance to make that decision before you wipe and reset. That is factually a trade-off.

And during early prog, even the best tanks spend a considerable amount of time in tank stance.

snip.

It's obviously not a detriment. But, people in this topic need to stop acting like WAR isn't a job of trade-offs. They also need to stop acting like PLD and DRK are completely outclassed by WAR when they aren't. The three tanks in current content are pretty evenly balanced. PLD and DRK are better in ways and WAR is better in ways. If you are a DRK or PLD at this point who feels threatened by WARs in any way, it's not a problem with the job, it's a problem with you. The primary issue is that due to PLD and DRK's design overlap and lack of synergy, their pairing is not ideal for early progression.

And Yoshida was very specific in his answer. He pointed out WAR and SCH's utility in his analysis of why they're strong. That has nothing to do with the large majority of garbage posting in this topic. So no, he doesn't share your view nor Reynharts. You two are talking about things completely unrelated to what Yoshida viewed as the issue with WAR. He didn't mention any of your projected BS about versatility, defensive CDs, or Reynhart's ranting about WAR's offensive / defensive synergy, or how Berserk boosts AP instead of damage.

All the smart posts in this topic have agreed that the problem is Eye and Path, WAR's utility, just like Yoshida pointed out. Those 2 skills are the primary reasons WAR is so strong. The issue just like Yoshida says is that there really isn't a simple solution.

They were capable of doing fine (Some of them even did 1000 DPS but not per second ), but less than BLM when mobility wasn't needed.

Which is why some BRD complained that mobility was overrated...and thus, Wanderer's Minuet.

They were doing more than just fine. For all the end-game content, their raid DPS contribution was significantly higher than BLM mobility or not while having invaluable utility at the same time. So much for your example of a trade-off.