Regarding no DRK adjustments in 4.1

[akisya]

Tfw when stats show that there are more PLDs and WARs clearing savage than DRKs over 2 weeks.

[Erin_Singh]

If you can pop the shield, then use it. The end. Stop not handing out free shields because you think your parse will suffer. It wont. It can even GAIN you dps much of the time, and if you don't, its about 1/4 of 1% loss (infinitesimal) if you used it on CD every 15 sec forever AND ended the fight with zero blood. Just use the damn thing.

Really tired of every single drk refusing to use a free shield because they 'think' it hurts them.

Who said we refused to use them ? If someone dies I'm gonna do even less dps XD. Don't assume such things.

And no, using it on cd won't result in a 1% loss, because only a handful of those shields will break. At ilvl 339, TBN is a 11k+ shield, and it requires either 2 auto attacks in a 5 sec window or a crit, it's harder to break than it looks, and using it on someone during raid wide damage is pointless because they will be healed with raidwide heals. (I know you must have been joking, but I wanted to clarify it)

[Chrono_Rising]

TBN is a 3 potency gain immediately. Delaying the 10 blood on SE brings that from a +3 gain to a -6 loss. ie: Every 3 TBN you do could have been 1 SE combo and get 10 blood. But you don't actually GET that damage until you have piled up enough blood from SE to get another Spiller. If you don't end the fight with zero blood then its actually a DPS gain. Theres a buncha nuance on what GCD you end a phase or the fight on and if if that TBN spiller would have been better or worse etc, but its essentially a side grade.

Not to be super technical, but actually you don't see an immediate +3 potency from TBN either, that is also a calculated average which only tallies when you break your combo, be it a long phase change or the end of the fight. Same with the blood calculations, but I would argue that the lost resource has the potential to carry over phases (I would rather be 10+ blood ahead than not). If you pushed out a soul eater you lose 40 potency, siphon strike loses 60 potency and hard slash gains 110 potency, this is where the average of three potency gain comes from, ignoring blood generated naturally. Of course every 15 TBN uses (about 3.5 minutes) you have to lose a natural bloodspiller in blood resource, which nets you -140 potency. These calculations are based on mana as a damage resource, so siphon strike counts for 320 potency for the mana generated. People are uncomfortable with using blood in the calculation because its takes a large amount of time to resolve. Where do we draw the line on waiting for resources to turn into potency? Mana resolves quickly, blood doesn't. I'm guessing somewhere between 12 seconds and 3 minutes and 30 seconds.

[Exiled_Tonberry]

Another case of SE buffing the jobs that whine the most while leaving jobs that need actual help in the dust.

[Aana]

And no, using it on cd won't result in a 1% loss, because only a handful of those shields will break.

If you can pop the shield, then use it

Not to be super technical, but actually you don't see an immediate +3 potency from TBN either, that is also a calculated average which only tallies when you break your combo, be it a long phase change or the end of the fight. Same with the blood calculations, but I would argue that the lost resource has the potential to carry over phases (I would rather be 10+ blood ahead than not). If you pushed out a soul eater you lose 40 potency, siphon strike loses 60 potency and hard slash gains 110 potency, this is where the average of three potency gain comes from, ignoring blood generated naturally. Of course every 15 TBN uses (about 3.5 minutes) you have to lose a natural bloodspiller in blood resource, which nets you -140 potency. These calculations are based on mana as a damage resource, so siphon strike counts for 320 potency for the mana generated. People are uncomfortable with using blood in the calculation because its takes a large amount of time to resolve. Where do we draw the line on waiting for resources to turn into potency? Mana resolves quickly, blood doesn't. I'm guessing somewhere between 12 seconds and 3 minutes and 30 seconds.

You gain immediate DPS the moment you use the spiller you get from TBN. +50 blood. Use BS. Unless you are doing something silly like being over 50 blood when you use TBN. As long as you actually hit BS its a dps gain because there is no other GCD action you could have done for more damage. So long as you use the 50 blood you get from TBN then you get the gain as soon as you use the blood. The 'lost' blood from using TBN>BS (from delaying SE by 1) wont be immediately available until you hit that next SE, and even then the 10 blood may or may not ever result in another BS during the encounter. TBN however gives you an immediately useable quantity that will most certainly be used in the near future. instant 50 blood should be very immediately useable just like MP where as small portions of 10 blood are not immediately useable, and even when you CAN use that small portion its only the most miniscule bonus.

TLDR: You are correct that mana is gives a quicker return than blood, but only when blood trickles in little bits at a time (like SE). TBN gives immediately usable chunks of 50 that are usable very quickly to see the TBN gain. The potential DPS loss from TBN is the slow, delayed, maybe never even realized part you describe (small bits of blood cant be used immediately, if ever. Chunks of 50 are.)

[Chrono_Rising]

You gain immediate DPS the moment you use the spiller you get from TBN. +50 blood. Use BS. Unless you are doing something silly like being over 50 blood when you use TBN. As long as you actually hit BS its a dps gain because there is no other GCD action you could have done for more damage.

You propose TBN => Bloodspiller for the (400) potency and say there is no other GCD action that would have been better.

But this is not quite exact as it depends on what GCD I'm replacing by doing that. For the same resource costs I could have:
1) Dark Arts =>Soul Eater for a 40 potency gain + 10 blood
2) Dark Arts => Siphon Strike for a 60 potency gain (1200 mana converted to 70 potency)

However, I'm adapting this to your reasoning, I don't think of this as the potency I could have done on this GCD.

I think about this as the GCD's that are being pushed out of the phase. For example, I'm not really concerned with replacing hardslash with bloodspiller because technically I could do this every time, but then I end up pressing hard slash one GCD later. What I'm concerned with is when I push bloodspiller is what gcd will I now end on because of the extra bloodspiller. If I would have stopped on hardslash then its a gain I traded 150 potency for 260 (taking away a dark arts), if I would have ended on soul eater or siphon strike its a loss (I traded 70 mp and 250 potency for 260 potency in the case of siphon and I traded 300 potency and 10 blood for 260 potency in the case of soul eater). This is why if we use TBN people attempt to use it in intervals of three in the same phase, because then I can semi control what GCD I'm ending on, I necessarily lost a soul eater combo with every 3 TBN's that pop and gain 10 DPS for the trade but I lose 10 blood. The question then becomes do we ignore the blood entirely, or do we treat it as a form of potency like mana. I disagree with the idea that we can just dismiss it out right.

I think it is worth noting, mana suffers from the same resource considerations. If you are at the last minute and can end on siphon strike or break a tbn and bloodspiller, you should end on bloodspiller for a gain of ten potency since the mana resource potency associated with siphon strike will never resolve. The existence of special circumstances for resource to potency calculations is unavoidable.

[Aana]

You propose TBN => Bloodspiller for the (400) potency and say there is no other GCD action that would have been better.

But this is not quite exact as it depends on what GCD I'm replacing by doing that. For the same resource costs I could have:
1) Dark Arts =>Soul Eater for a 40 potency gain + 10 blood
2) Dark Arts => Siphon Strike for a 60 potency gain (1200 mana converted to 70 potency)

However, I'm adapting this to your reasoning, I don't think of this as the potency I could have done on this GCD.

I think about this as the GCD's that are being pushed out of the phase. For example, I'm not really concerned with replacing hardslash with bloodspiller because technically I could do this every time, but then I end up pressing hard slash one GCD later. What I'm concerned with is when I push bloodspiller is what gcd will I now end on because of the extra bloodspiller. If I would have stopped on hardslash then its a gain I traded 150 potency for 260 (taking away a dark arts), if I would have ended on soul eater or siphon strike its a loss (I traded 70 mp and 250 potency for 260 potency in the case of siphon and I traded 300 potency and 10 blood for 260 potency in the case of soul eater). This is why if we use TBN people attempt to use it in intervals of three in the same phase, because then I can semi control what GCD I'm ending on, I necessarily lost a soul eater combo with every 3 TBN's that pop along with the 10 blood.

All these threads are mixed up talking about the same stuff. In a couple post scattered around I mention the use of BS is nuanced based on phase jumps etc. What you describe is that nuance. In Exdeath I know before the 1st jump I am forced to either use a heavy swing or 1 more FC. This dumps my gauge a lot and id like to use that FC when I zerk again when he lands, but its better to just use it instead of a dumpy 150 pot heavy swing. Same deal for TBN. If you KNOW what GCD you end on then you can plot out TBN to be a guaranteed DPS gain on every use. If you are in the same situation as my war in that phase, youd better TBN something to get 1 more BS just like I use that extra FC because hard slash/heavy swing are trash to end a phase on.

Obviously if you know the fights well enough to KNOW what GCD you will end on, then you can make TBN ALWAYS be a DPS gain by not cutting off combos and junk. This is just standard min maxing. If you are able/willing to min-max to this degree more power to you.

The point I'm generally pushing is that if you DONT know the fight to that degree, just using it every time you can reliably pop the shield will still (on average) break even. And breaking even while shielding people is better than breaking even with no shields. So use the damn thing. As often as possible. The avg player doesn't know fights THAT well. If you are in that category just bank on the averages and spam that shit as often as you can safely break the shield.

[Chrono_Rising]

All these threads are mixed up talking about the same stuff. In a couple post scattered around I mention the use of BS is nuanced based on phase jumps etc. What you describe is that nuance. In Exdeath I know before the 1st jump I am forced to either use a heavy swing or 1 more FC. This dumps my gauge a lot and id like to use that FC when I zerk again when he lands, but its better to just use it instead of a dumpy 150 pot heavy swing. Same deal for TBN. If you KNOW what GCD you end on then you can plot out TBN to be a guaranteed DPS gain on every use. If you are in the same situation as my war in that phase, youd better TBN something to get 1 more BS just like I use that extra FC because hard slash/heavy swing are trash to end a phase on.

Obviously if you know the fights well enough to KNOW what GCD you will end on, then you can make TBN ALWAYS be a DPS gain by not cutting off combos and junk. This is just standard min maxing. If you are able/willing to min-max to this degree more power to you.

The point I'm generally pushing is that if you DONT know the fight to that degree, just using it every time you can reliably pop the shield will still (on average) break even. And breaking even while shielding people is better than breaking even with no shields. So use the damn thing. As often as possible. The avg player doesn't know fights THAT well. If you are in that category just bank on the averages and spam that shit as often as you can safely break the shield.

And I was plotted out to using soul eater as it decisive battled as well as grabbing the extra carve and spit and plunge for the fight with phase change. I agree most people don't min/max their offensives to this degree, and thats why I don't assume people will go through this kind of trouble, and I ask for it the 6 potency to just make it a break even in practically all cases because that would make sense against the rest of dark knights kit. The analysis assumes we aren't min/maxing but rather just introduce some regularity (use in intervals of three gain ten potency lose 10 blood) per phase.

But regardless of the min/maxing, how to analyze its potential losses or gains, assuming we don't carefully watch for buff windows and other things, is to consider the end of the rotation for a phase. Thats my point, most players don't know what they end on, and so using the average values is usually enough, but I digress. There are better moves for the same resource costs 2/3 times you would want to TBN => Bloodspiller if you are looking at it in the way you describe (this GCD). I agree this is a rediculously small loss, and I agree that if you need it for mitigation you should use it, dead is a bigger dps loss. But again, we were all responding to someone calling this an OP utility. Its really not unless you give us the 6 potency to make it essentially free. Considering PLD and probably now warrior will be able to mitigate the same or more damage for free (during raid wide damage), while it costs dark knight 42 potency to cover the same amount of damage over the same interval of time (less in the case of warrior) (comparing very loosely 7 shields to 7 shields I am aware one is aoe and one is not) this just does not make sense.

[Aana]

Agreed. If you are into that level of min maxing, then just understanding the math behind the losses and gains is enough and you can figure out the rest on your own. But the 'its a dps loss' has just become a headline that Joe Shmo drk takes with them everywhere they go and actively choose not to use it.

The rule of thumb should be turned from "its a dps loss" to "Its a zero sum gain and only gets better if you min-max it".

As long as the everyday Drk 'thinks' its a dps loss period, then the more complaining about TBN there will be, even when its not justified. Just like Onslaught for war, or any number of examples of things that don't actually suck but people assume they do then beg SE to fix things that aren't broken while overlooking things that are, or worse, abandon a job you like/unsub out of ignorance. Happened with SB War, happening now with drk, happens all the time. Everyone keeps saying your job is trash long enough and you start to believe it.

Better to know whats actually good/bad before you make a decision, not just regurgitate the clickbait headlines.

[Chrono_Rising]

We have found a point of agreement. To be clear, its the arbitrary use of TBN in dps stance that should be expected to be less than optimal, but in tank stance should be used when ever it can be popped. This is primarly a debate about the internal consistency of the dark knight kit, I think it should be fixed, but it won't fix the class as a whole. As far as drk balance issues, it brings less to the table now in all tank roles compared to the alternatives. The addition of a warrior party wide utility, which based on patch notes seems to be fairly good with an 8% base, now puts dark knight at the bottom of dps, party utility, and mitigation (though mitigation is a pretty close call) for tanks. The margin is smallish but we need buffs to our actual kit.

I've said this before, but drk needs a party wide utility (I think sole survivor is long overdue for a change), I think we need something to increase our resource generation (I feel like 20% would be enough) for more dark arts to close the dps gap, and shadow wall needs a cooldown reduction or some serious special effects for the 3 minute timer to help out our mitigation.

To give some thoughts and maybe starting some discussion I would like to quote my post from another thread here:

Assuming this off the warriors max HP, but as a later comment mentions it doesn't specify this, and so this may only concern the warriors shield. This is particularly powerful if during a down time the warrior can go into tank stance and raise their maximum hp by 25%, making it equivalent to a 10% base increasing by 5% for each buff consumed compared to the hp on a dark knight if my assumptions are correct.

If a dark knight has x HP and a warrior also has x hp in dps stance then in tank stance the warrior will have 1.25x HP. If the warrior converts "n" buffs then they gain .04n mitigation with a .08 base multiplier. (.08+.04n)*1.25x=(.10+.05n)x

Meaning that if this turns out to be correct the shield could be anywhere between an 8% shield to 30% aoe version of the dark knight HP shield. 8% at the low end with no buff consumed out of tank stance, 30% in tank stance with all buffs consumed (likely never going to happen). Which translates at max gear to be between 4.4k shield to a 17k shield with a 15 second duration.

I also wonder about the interaction between this and TOB. Like if this will capture ToB hp or if it will consider the buff consumed first and use the base hp of the warrior, if it catches the ToB HP then that upper % is more like 36%.

We will have to see if it will actually work this way with tank stance and if it has such synergy with ToB. Of course we have the "tank stance issue" but the really useful times for this would be during 10 second intervals when nothing is targetable on the field so that there is no dps loss.

Quote updated because it was pointed out that this may only refer to the target of the shield, and not the warrior themselves. I added a disclaimer to the beginning of the post.