4.1 Dark Knight Feedback and fixes

[SyzzleSpark]

Me: Dark mind is fine! Its a good and useful CD
Drks: Dark mind isn't strong!

People hold this view because DM provides nothing in the way of fluff mitigation. In fact most of DRK's CDs fall flat in this regard. They're all very short duration "use me on a tank-buster b/c I'm not that good for much else" kind of buttons. People are suggesting changes to DM to have it fill this hole, not because DM fails in the context where it has always been used. Nobody said "Dark Mind sucks for mitigating big magical tank-busters!" DM isn't the only option here. They could cut Shadow Wall's recast or reinstate Dark Dance+Reprisal in some form or another. Dark Mind is aging however, because whereas it used to be a tool unique to DRK that gave it a niche, now the other tanks can mitigate magic just as well (WAR always could, actually, but that's another topic). So its not really that special, especially when the equivalent abilities that other tanks would use on magic busters, do not cease to be useful on physical busters, or on the AAs before/after.

At this point we are carrying on totally different arguments and you've completely lost me with your metaphysical pontificating about what balance actually is. You still haven't really done much to disprove my original point, which was that the ease of the current content and its magic focus is a likely cause for DRK's issues not getting very much attention. And I only ever implied that this was probably a contributing factor, not the sole reason. And my statement about "if we get another tier like Midas" was me wondering out loud if such a scenario might get more people to pay attention. And that's where this whole derailing argument about "what is balance? no, but like, DUDE, what is... like, BALANCE?" came from.

If you don't wanna see Dark Mind changed, cool! Fine. Suggest something else.

DRK works in practice because of raid design.

Yes. It does work. It can clear all content fine right now. But we still realize it has problems, but some people might not because...

This past raid tier was one of the easiest in the game.

So unless content doesn't change or get easier, more people might see problems in the future. I fail to see anything unreasonable about this statement.

As soon as we get something more on the level of Midas, that isn't overflowing with TBs that are Dark Mind Bait, I guarantee you'd start seeing problems.

And you would. But it hasn't happened yet as you keep pointing out. But I'm not permitted to wonder if people that aren't seeing the problem now, might see the problem were content to get harder? Also, by your statements, am I to infer that even though you claim to want DRK to be buffed and that it is not fine, we are supposed to wait until content is released that DRK underperforms significantly in so that it is no longer a "what if"?

It hasn't happened yet. It might not ever happen. What does this have to do with DRK being 100% inferior to both of the other tanks again?

[Aana]

And you would. But it hasn't happened yet as you keep pointing out. But I'm not permitted to wonder if people that aren't seeing the problem now, might see the problem were content to get harder? Also, by your statements, am I to infer that even though you claim to want DRK to be buffed and that it is not fine, we are supposed to wait until content is released that DRK underperforms significantly in so that it is no longer a "what if"?

It hasn't happened yet. It might not ever happen. What does this have to do with DRK being 100% inferior to both of the other tanks again?

Things that 'might' be a problem are not actually problems in balance for games. I dont know how else to say it. The fact that A4 was ENTIRELY magical contributing to making Drk OP (at the time vs pld) has ZERO bearing on Drks current relative weakness does it? No. It doesn't. Just like some future fight imaginary fight also has ZERO bearing on the current state of balance. I don't know how else to say it. Things that haven't and may not happen are not justification for anything regarding balance.

So we balance for now. Because now is all that matters. Drk mind is a good skill NOW. It doesn't protect against fluff AAs. As a magic centered skill, I don't see why it makes sense that it should. Ive already listed my list of changes like 4 times, but here it is again since you keep asking.

* Shadowall: 40%. Match pld. EZPZ.
* TBN: Make it 'safer' to use without an explicit power buff. Increase shield duration to make it easier to break. Maybe something like cut the shield into 2 shields and if 1 breaks you get the refund or something to make it 'safer' to use and reduce the risk in using it.
* Sole survivor: Shake it off treatment. Its a bad skill that can be used to fill any hole left over. Damage. Mitigation. Utility. Rework.
* Passenger: Costs to much because it gives blind. debuffs don't work on bosses so the skills shouldn't be balanced around them.
* AOE skills. To many. Convoluted. Trim that crap down to a more usable set of AOE skills. Variety of ways to adjust.
* Damage: Increase it a smidge to match other tanks. ~5% or so should do it. Potencies or through the above changes. (ie: if survivor is a trick attack, don't buff direct damage quite as much etc)
* If slight buff to mitigation isn't met through above changes then delete one of the AOE skills and add some light fluff CD like a parry move.

[SyzzleSpark]

Things that 'might' be a problem are not actually problems in balance for games. I dont know how else to say it. The fact that A4 was ENTIRELY magical contributing to making Drk OP (at the time vs pld) has ZERO bearing on Drks current relative weakness does it? No. It doesn't. Just like some future fight imaginary fight also has ZERO bearing on the current state of balance. I don't know how else to say it. Things that haven't and may not happen are not justification for anything regarding balance.

You actually DO know how else to say it. What you are proclaiming now with the certainty of the rising sun is the same thing you phrased as a question on the very first page of this thread.

Question though. Is it really a balance problem when it only exists in theory?

=/

Also, you went on to list buffs, some of which are to DRK's mitigation, which you have spent the last 3 pages saying didn't need a buff because it was "fine in practice, theoryland doesn't matter". Is DRK's lack of a 40% Shadow Wall or a fluff parry CD really a balance problem when it only exists in theory? This is why I don't understand why you began this debate. You're in agreement but you have this other train of thought going on that is causing disagreement for no apparent reason.

[Aana]

It was a rhetorical question. I then continue in that very post to describe why theoretical balance problems are not balance problems and therefore not justification for buffs/nerfs. Just like it wouldn't make sense if I demanded raw intuition be changed because in A4 it was a useless skill 2 years ago. It also doesn't make sense to say "X needs buff because of a fight that may or may not exist 1 year from now".

Balance is only, can only, be based in the now.

[SyzzleSpark]

Balance is only, can only, be based in the now.

So what is it about the now that makes a physically effective DM a solution to a problem that only exists in theory, but a 40% Shadow Wall and additional fluff CD a solution to a problem that exists in practice?

Both provide the same thing, more mitigation, specifically higher uptime physical mitigation. I do not understand whence cometh the disagreement or why it was worth derailing a thread intended to discuss buffs to the job, hopefully as a united front.

[Aana]

So what is it about the now that makes a physically effective DM a solution to a problem that only exists in theory, but a 40% Shadow Wall and additional fluff CD a solution to a problem that exists in practice?

Both provide the same thing, more mitigation, specifically higher uptime physical mitigation. I do not understand whence cometh the disagreement or why it was worth derailing a thread intended to discuss buffs to the job, hopefully as a united front.

Your original post I responded to couched your ideas for buffs on the premise that 'Drk is fine now, but will have problems in the future if fights are different' idea. I have been trying to say that if you honestly think drk is 'fine now' then it doesn't need the buffs you you described because its 'fine now'. Later you clarified that it has problems 'now' (such as the lack of fluff damage mitigation in current content). I then added salt for my own distaste of the constant exaggeration of (insert sad job of the month's) in my responses (a bit to heavily probs). I assumed, on your 1st post, that you were just another "DRK SO SAD NEEDS BUFFS" that aren't based in any logic/reason (ie: Well it needs buffs cuz it might be broken in the future QQ!!").

You have since more specifically described what the current issues you feel are with drk. I realize i can come off as just nitpicky/combative over stupid crap. But most fourms are just filled with baseless complaints about misunderstood ideas or feelings instead of facts. I just want people to drill down to the root and be able to articulate, rationally, what their issue is instead of just parroting what some reddit post said or demanding things because 'feelings' that don't actually make sense or worse, flatly untrue.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

Balance is only, can only, be based in the now.

This reactionary philosophy is what led to the balancing disaster in Heavensward. The devs were constantly playing catch up with Machinist and Bard until both overtook Casters. Likewise, they waited so long to fix Astro that despite it being fairly good in Midas, no one was willing to play it, thus it was overbuffed in Creator. Job balance should always be proactive. They should be looking at why Dark Knight is the least popular tank currently, what feedback has been provided and adjust accordingly. Not wait until the community declares it "dead" and starts arbitrarily locking it from content like what happened with Paladin throughout Heavensward. You can fault reddit, this forum and shout how every job is viable (they are), but people will follow hardcore comps. I would much prefer a proactive stance so we see less jobs being relegated to obscurity like what's been happening to Black Mage.

Granted, a significant problem with the dev team's approach is their refusal to nerf when necessary. Hence why the Heavensward meta persists.

No, Warrior was powerful enough to be balanced even before the stance cost was taken away. They still had the highest burst damage, best sustained damage, and best personal defence. At 4.00 PLD and WAR were quite well-balanced against one another, and DRK was behind WAR in optimized runs but was a legitimately good alternative with legitimate upsides in unfamiliar, non-optimized, or progression content. If the only change from 4.0 to Savage had been for PLD to get the slight nerf to Holy Spirit, tank balance would have basically been achieved.

I disagree. Dark Knight would still be inferior as it pulled less DPS than either of its counterparts, had the worst mitigation options and more than a few abilities that have become straight up useless. (Hi, Dark Passenger, Unleash and Blood Price). A slight nerf to Holy Spirit wouldn't have achieved balance, but just made Warrior the strongest tank again, which it arguably was. Not to mention, the stance penalty was straight up awful. Can't say I wasn't delighted that died in less than a month.