Making Jobs Rotationally Easier in 4.0

[Jpec07]

While I'd have to disagree in part with SE tending rarely to overshoot with changes, they do at least hold back better than certain MMOs, sure, and I do hope they consider exactly how they think the actual gameplay of the "DPS meta" is somehow wrong before they attempt to modify it, rather than taking forum labels as the end all be all. (Case in point: the so-called "dps fixation" was just as present at release; there were just fewer people maximizing their jobs yet and standing as guides to the others. The rest comes down primarily to fight design, one tier in particular, and hype's positive-feedback loops.)

The issue with the "death by a million needles" mantra is that it intends to de-emphasize skillful (read: timely & trimmed) tanking in order to force particular toolkit use. A high-party-dps-check fight does the same in the opposite direction, but if Midas and the Creator are any indication, that isn't likely to be the design direction anymore. Periodic and rotational attacks put more responsibility on tanks by allowing them to better focus their input- vs. output-scaling, but the only alternative to that is to literally try to take away control, or the rewards for learning a fight. In other words, it's a spectrum between either interceptable, memorizable/analyzable/somehow-knowable damage and faceroll damage that keeps you from taking any output gambles, or in doing so leaves you susceptible to RNG.

Now, there is probably some point of better equilibrium on that spectrum that can de-emphasize tank dps slightly without having to adjust stance multipliers, tank damage generally, etc., with minimal cost to skillful-to-rewarding gameplay. Alternatively, it may require certain tank toolkit revisions so that, apart from Inner Beast, our debuff weaponskills, and maybe the saving DA-SE crit, we aren't dependent solely on our cooldowns for mitigation, allowing more frequent damage and interception that less skillful players can more prevolently and with lesser loss use their tank stances for while more highly skilled players, now under an even higher ceiling, can still maximize outputs and avoid tank stance where possible if they so desire.

I suppose that's fair. I would like to see more white damage, though, and more reward for tanky tanks, but perhaps a million needles need not be stabbed (aside: Accupuncturist [ACP] could be a very interesting healing job concept).

They'd also need to be careful with that last paragraph, lest we fall into WoW's rotational mitigation gameplay, but I do think it could liven things up a bit, and make tanking gameplay more interesting without necessarily raising the minimum skill threshold (oh to have RoH be compelling!).

[Shurrikhan]

I suppose that's fair. I would like to see more white damage, though, and more reward for tanky tanks, but perhaps a million needles need not be stabbed (aside: Accupuncturist [ACP] could be a very interesting healing job concept).

They'd also need to be careful with that last paragraph, lest we fall into WoW's rotational mitigation gameplay, but I do think it could liven things up a bit, and make tanking gameplay more interesting without necessarily raising the minimum skill threshold (oh to have RoH be compelling!).

To me the ideal looks a lot like just... more stance-dancing, decisive enough to make each swap crucial and weight in the decision, but free enough to have lots of points that make that decision available, which by now comes down mostly to Oath and Grit revisions. My favorite way of playing WAR I found when doing minimum ilvl Ex roulette dungeons for kicks (good memories from around Pharos Sirius HM) where it become maximally efficient to swap pretty close to the cooldown (one of the reasons I've argued that Defiance/Deliverance's CDs, along with those of skills like WM, GB, and Cleric Stance, should scale with attack speed).

In the strict sense of the word, our mitigation is already more rotational than WoW's, in that we'd be ideally popping RoH/Del/SP every third combo for maximum efficiency, but yes, its definitely more integral to WoW tank's gameflow, where there tends to be a particular ratio of regular to mitigating/absorbing/self-healing strikes or between such ability tools and the resources funding them. While I wouldn't want to jump to that design style just because it might seem more intricate or appealing, I'd like to see it used where it can produce results — starting from the result desired, and then backtracking to an identity-appropriate tool, and hopefully making our tanks more distinct in the process.

Hopefully more distinct than WoW's tanks, even, because with the all-in-one idea (or if we actually took that further, such as by balancing out stat weights a bit more across jobs, keeping gear role-specific instead of job-specific, and maybe even revising the leveling system eventually) we aren't actually bound to the same necessary at-all-costs sense of balance that WoW's one main spec (or you're spending a whole lot more time) system is. We can take a turtlier tank, losing some dps there, and gain it back with greater healer dps or even some weird life-spender dps shenanigans across the rest of the group composition, as long as those designs are each individually appealing.

[Reynhart]

(Case in point: the so-called "dps fixation" was just as present at release; there were just fewer people maximizing their jobs yet and standing as guides to the others. The rest comes down primarily to fight design, one tier in particular, and hype's positive-feedback loops.)

People mostly didn't realize that because we only had two tanks and two healers, and stacking was a bad idea, so none of them was excluded for the sake of maximizing DPS.

What bothers me, though, is that tank optimization doesn't have to focus solely on "how long can you avoid tank stance ?". Stance dancing is the most blatant way of increasing personal DPS, but personal DPS doesn't really matter. If you have to lose 10% of your DPS to increase everyone else's by 5%, it's a legit trade. That's why I'd like to see tanks' tools adjusted to offer a different contribution to raidwide DPS.

As for DPS stances, the only real reason we have them is that low-level tanks shoud not be as powerful as DPS. Apart from that, it would be easy to have "tank stance" and "no stance" modes...which is technically what DRK has.

[Khalithar]

I would not say that I think the tanks need to be simplified more but at the same time I'm not quite sure if the tanks are currently fine as is either. For one, I want the tanks to have a bit more agency and be more active in their mitigation and I think a good place to start with that would be reducing the cooldown on some of our defensive moves. For example, cooldowns like Foresight/Shadowskin/Rampart, in my opinion they should only have around a 60 second cooldown and thus able to be used more often while some of the stronger ones like Shadow Wall and Sentinel should be the two minute cooldowns that we have available. Staying on paladin specifically for a moment, I really don't think Bulwark needs to be a 3 minute cooldown, in my opinion it should have the same cooldown as Dark Dance (60 seconds).

As far as drk goes, I think it could use a few reworks. Dark Dance is pretty unreliable outside of the gimmicky DA DD/DA DP combo on trash, Blood Weapon can't be used in Grit, I think the MP cost of Grit should be much closer to the Pld MP cost for Oaths, and also in my opinion the MP restore on C&S should be baseline regardless of whether you DA it or not. I'd also prefer MP drain on Darkside that we see in PVP brought over the PVE side and I'd also like to see Sole Survivor's PVP effect work on PVE enemies as well. Drk could use a bit more utility and I actually think the Sole Survivor debuff perfectly fits that.

[Shurrikhan]

People mostly didn't realize that because we only had two tanks and two healers, and stacking was a bad idea, so none of them was excluded for the sake of maximizing DPS.

What bothers me, though, is that tank optimization doesn't have to focus solely on "how long can you avoid tank stance ?". Stance dancing is the most blatant way of increasing personal DPS, but personal DPS doesn't really matter. If you have to lose 10% of your DPS to increase everyone else's by 5%, it's a legit trade. That's why I'd like to see tanks' tools adjusted to offer a different contribution to raidwide DPS.

As for DPS stances, the only real reason we have them is that low-level tanks should not be as powerful as DPS. Apart from that, it would be easy to have "tank stance" and "no stance" modes...which is technically what DRK has.

For the last part: also Warrior, pre-Deliverance, and Paladin's Sword Oath probably would have been the same if only jobs were able to give traits, sad as that may be.

On the whole, agreed, though giving every tank some form of % vulnerability infliction seems every bit as uncreative or blatant. (Easy enough to vary up though, of course.) One thing I would personally like to see is just a lot more ability for a tank to support tankishly even when not the direct target of enemy attacks, such as through interception, staggering (damage causing suppression), and through debuffs that unlock certain similar mechanics for one's party. For instance, I've especially been looking into how I can create a Shield Oath that can be sort of a tank/utility stance that doesn't actually require you to be MT to still have a hell of an effect (or in this case, toolkit, mostly). And then there's that toss-word I've been throwing out on every thread looking for mechanics suggestions, progressive AoEs, wherein just about everything is at least partially interceptable.

I suggested an enmity revision before that would have the indirect result of increasing dps on tanked targets, by drawing the enemy's focus focus away from other attackers to reduce the active and/or passive defenses of the enemy against them. Though this would work between dps as well, especially with skillful enmity splitting and target swapping, it's easier and has a greater maximum effect with a tank. Another was Stagger, damage-based suppression (with an additional modifier, much like enmity now but tied more with what you'd expect from one's animations than just their role), which worked both for sabatoge-based mitigation (which DPS roles would be more greatly expected to coordinate into) and offense through that suppression of enemy defenses as well. Since tanks would have some of the highest Stagger modifiers, this would also mean some of the highest indirect damage contributions. The aim was for those systems to fit what we're actually seeing on screen, to make our animations feel like they have realistic weight and intuitive effects. But hey, would something like that also do what your looking for?

[Khalithar]

For instance, I've especially been looking into how I can create a Shield Oath that can be sort of a tank/utility stance that doesn't actually require you to be MT to still have a hell of an effect (or in this case, toolkit, mostly).

We can start with removing the damage penalty on the tank stances, WoW did this because they realized (correctly I might add) that it's not necessary as long as the DPS stance provides enough of a buff that it's still more damage to be in said dps stance. Secondly, for utility I offer you this ability that all tanks in SWTOR have some variation of (note that Soresu Form in the tooltip is the defensive tank stance for Jedi Guardian/Sith Juggernaut in that game):

Guard- You mark a target as a "Guarded" target. While active, the guarded player takes 5% less damage and generates 25% less threat. In addition, so long as you remain within 15 meters of the guarded player, 50% of all incoming damage from enemy players is transferred back to you. Requires Soresu Form.

[Lyth]

So, harkening back to an old thread from a little over a year ago, SE might not be satisfied with the fact that progression-level tanks "need" to stance dance to be successful. But the problem isn't tank design here so much as encounter design.

I'm yet to see an official statement made to this effect. I'm guessing that you're referring to this thread:

Four ways to die - why the tank meta feels "off"

Bear in mind that this was written a few months after Gordias was released, at a time where tanking was undergoing a lot of changes. PLD was no longer the de facto MT for every encounter, as it had been for nearly two years. It was no longer enough to simply to gear up with indestructible armor and go afk as a glorified striking dummy while the rest of your raid learned mechanics. Your team now had expectations, and you had to meet them. MT became fun again.

The post points out that the main group who objected to this were "career tanks" from previous MMOs who came into FFXIV with preconceived ideas that tanks were supposed to be nothing more than damage sponges. Problem is, their "careers" weren't long enough.

Tanking gets its origin from MUDs, where our forebears were originally melee damage dealers who could "rescue" their squishier allies from danger (not all that different from "Cover" when you think about it - we've come full circle). The foam sword/indestructable shield ideal only showed up much later, and threat systems were artificially strapped on top make it all work. It was an abstraction that made little sense: swords and axes are lethal weapons that can do devastating damage. You don't merely tickle your opponent with them to keep them distracted. The fact that doing serious damage with a bladed weapon could be construed as a "meta" or as a radical new innovation, is bizarre.

As far as I can tell, it was more wishful thinking from a subset of the community, rather than any official word from the devs.

What bothers me, though, is that tank optimization doesn't have to focus solely on "how long can you avoid tank stance ?". Stance dancing is the most blatant way of increasing personal DPS, but personal DPS doesn't really matter. If you have to lose 10% of your DPS to increase everyone else's by 5%, it's a legit trade. That's why I'd like to see tanks' tools adjusted to offer a different contribution to raidwide DPS.

Personal dps does matter when it bolsters raid dps. Using the numbers you suggested, sure. But that's almost never the case.

If the mob that you're tanking stops attacking you and starts to chain cast raid or avoidable AoEs, what's the point of giving yourself a 15-25% damage penalty? The mitigation serves no purpose, your healers gain no additional dps uptime, and your raid loses your dps. This seems like common sense; if you stop attacking an armored knight in order to cast a spell, they are going to stop defending and will proceed to beat the tar out of you. There are times where playing aggressively is bad for your group, and there are times when it is essential. Tanks need to be able to judge when it is appropriate to defend and when they need to counterattack.

There are already many ways in this game in which a tank can help the performance of their team outside of stance dancing. Some of these, such as efficient positioning and movement, are difficult to learn, assess, or teach, which is why groups recruiting and trialling tanks have often had to depend on videos of past performances when doing initial screening. But they all come out in the wash in both your personal and raid group's dps. The objection to dps metrics isn't about "aggressive tanking" vs. "defensive tanking". It's about being held accountable in a role where traditionally, there was none.

[Jpec07]

You don't merely tickle your opponent with them to keep them distracted.

I about died laughing at this. Thank you. XD

I'll concede your points. That thread was the one I was referring to, as it captured (and still does capture) why tanking has felt so strange to me in FFXIV. To me, the ultimate tank design meta was WoW patch 4.3, where tanks did a good chunk of damage, but also had a lot of reason to be tanky (where "good tanking" meant holding aggro, positioning bosses/mobs well, navigating mechanics, mitigating tankbusters, and gearing for CTC). Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part to hope SE will move closer to that. Mind, that's just my opinion, so if we don't move that way, I may be sad, but I probably won't complain.

[Shurrikhan]

We can start with removing the damage penalty on the tank stances, WoW did this because they realized (correctly I might add) that it's not necessary as long as the DPS stance provides enough of a buff that it's still more damage to be in said dps stance. Secondly, for utility I offer you this ability that all tanks in SWTOR have some variation of (note that Soresu Form in the tooltip is the defensive tank stance for Jedi Guardian/Sith Juggernaut in that game):

I'm not too big on the Vigilance / Guard mechanic personally, especially as something universal (I'd just prefer it to be a more unique 'focus' support/target mechanic that can accelerate defensive supports against a specific ally through procs and other certain effects and conditions, especially for say, Gladiator/Paladin), but I agree 100% with the tanks stances not needing to be damage penalties within the same tooltip. That said, depending on the mutually exclusive dps stance in place of damage reduction on the tank stance really only has the direct effect of requiring another button.

What I was looking for was more of different ways by which both the "dps" and "tank" stances could instead have benefits to either side. Imagine Shield Bash nuke hits via Shield Oath, but also being able to suppress enemies with accelerated attacks and counter-attack control afforded by Sword Oath. Each has different situations or flows by which it'd be preferable to the other, but both can be used for either purpose. Clever weaving and role-focusing of each within the moment and to line up with future timings and effects brings out the skill of the tank.

[Zieg_Einherjar]

I think tank jobs should lose tank and dps stances, and rely on actually needing to keep enmity rather than being a dps (like PLD, NIN, and WAR in FFXI).

You want to kill flavor in tanks without even providing a reason as to why?

Not to be mean, but If you think the DPS queues are long now.....