Silly tank melds

[Klongol]

Well of course, I melded for tenacity at first as well because I hoped it would simplify substats and that they actually made a tank stat worth using. I saw no notable improvement in offense or defense whatsoever, when I melded direct hit I noticed I direct hit more often. Simple as that really..

Muh big numbuhs!!!

seeing 8581!! does not mean better. just because you personally didn't notice a difference after piddling around in tenacity doesn't mean it wasn't there.

That's confirmation bias.

[EusisLandale]

If that is true, there is no much reason for a DHit Tank, since we gain for defense and heals.

The healing component to Tenacity seems to have a different rate than the Damage output and mitigation. To the point where it honestly looks like it just is not working at all.
The main reason to take Direct Hit is that it is the highest DPS gain we can manage and will never be on our gear naturally. The point I have been making is just that, when only the highest end players will really benefit from the gap between the stats, calling Tenacity melds silly is kind of insane when most tanks are going to be in the DF more than any premade and organized groups and have no idea what sort of healers they're going to be stuck with so they opt for a bit more mitigation for a low dps drop.

I saw no notable improvement in offense or defense whatsoever, when I melded direct hit I noticed I direct hit more often. Simple as that really..

The problem here is that Tenacity damage just looks like damage, Tenacity crit damage looks like crit damage, while Direct Hit damage looks like damage, and Direct Crit damage looks like DAMAGE!!. Even if the numbers come out to be really close Direct Hit's unique display is designed to be noticed.

[Naberrie]

Well of course, I melded for tenacity at first as well because I hoped it would simplify substats and that they actually made a tank stat worth using. I saw no notable improvement in offense or defense whatsoever, when I melded direct hit I noticed I direct hit more often. Simple as that really..

I can understand not redoing melds on gear you're going to replace but if tenacity is really objectively worse than direct hit and people start melding it on to their new gear (the new locked tome/omega gear) I would have to wonder why..

But I see no problem with a person doing it for testing purposes. Now, if I saw someone weeks later still walking around with it I might have to ask, but if I queued with a random tank who had it it wouldn't bother me. I find people learn better from experience than if they're told what to do.

[Xtrasweettea]

Stuff I noticed from this thread and other tank complaint threads:

Seriously, though:

• Tenacity is still being tested, no one really knows the rate of return of tenacity versus Direct Hit, Critical Hit, etc. Just because Tenacity does fill multiple things, its return on investment may not be worth it in the long run without testing.
• The whole X seconds saved point is ignoring the timed saved from being able to skip mechanics which could add minutes to the run. Whenever someone states that "Well you only save 7 seconds! It's not worth making the healer work hard!" that person is leaving out the opportunity cost. That healer may have to work harder having to heal through mechanics that people may not execute versus a tank DPSing with DPS melds.
• Just because you waited in queue for a while and "paid into the system", doesn't grant you a run without risk from different playstyles. If you didn't bring a tank that fits your style, that is your fault.
• Keep telling tanks to play DPS if they want to "DPS", I am sure there are no negative repercussions from telling tanks that. /s

[Arutan]

It seems like every tank i come across has tenacity melds. To this I have two questions. What are you smoking? And can i have some?

OR MAYBE they are tank who actually know what the role of tank is! Little thought for all those tank duo in EX never using tank stance!

[MrSmiley]

OR MAYBE they are tank who actually know what the role of tank is! Little thought for all those tank duo in EX never using tank stance!

whoever is offtanking never needs to be in MT stance, besides on swaps on susano...provoke can place at MT's aggro very easily and only needs to be done twice in lakshmi

[Zfz]

It's so sad that some people in the thread say a player is being wilfully negligent and actively choosing sub-optimal play.

If I'm melding INT to my tank gear, I'm being wilfully negligent and actively choosing sub-optimal play. Tenacity is obviously, clearly, undoubtedly, any-reasonable-player-will-say, "a tank stat". How is it when the game clearly tells you that this stat is a tank stat, that choosing it is being wilfully negligent? Being actively sub-optimal?

Since when was FFXIV a game where you have to keep up on the latest theorycrafting and analysis or else you are wilfully negligent?

This is really sad.

[dragonseth07]

snip

As of this moment, I wouldn't fault someone for not knowing how good stats are (or trusting what we do think). Data is preliminary, dervy hasn't put out his numbers, nothing is hard and fast yet.

[Freyt]

If fully geared Tenacity is a 5% swing in Damage given, Damage recieved, and self healing, then I see that as a 15% swing in the pendulum.

Honestly if you're not so concerned about the damage I receive then let me take Grit off when I pull big.

[AngelyLowell]

I don't see any problem with Tanks doing their job AND doing a good damage.

A tank that just tank, it's cool too, they mitigate damage and use his skills to help the party to survive.

But tank that just hold aggro and don't use any of his skills, leaving everything in the hands of the healer, they need to improve.

The tanks who thinks they are DPS, they are a problem too, they simple focus on DPS and forget to use his defensive skills.

Example: I went V4 with a OT with STR acc, and he died in Thunder III because he don't have enough VIT (and voke without tank stance). That is a bad tank in my opinion.