4.1 Dark Knight Feedback and fixes

[Aana]

I think Im loosing the original point in the weeds a bit.

These costs are all most pronounced if you try to 'flash' their current tank stance (ie: on AND off quickly) for short term mitigation (use it like a CD). The game is actively discouraging players from doing that and does a darn good job. And I don't want that part to change. That's what I tend to find most 'make pld/drk stances OGCD' request end up becoming because they just remove the costs and say 'it works on war I want it too'. My apologies for assuming you guys meant the same thing.

*Drks cost is entirely frontloaded so it feels bad to get INTO tank stance. But it is literally FREE to change OUT of tank stance on command.
* Pld costs less to get INTO tank stance (MP is not as valuable), but also free to drop. However has to pay the toll yet again on the backend to get INTO dps stance later with an interest payment of missed AA damage in the gap between free drop tank stance and the AA offense stance.
*War is 'free' to get into tank stance but it doesn't actually do anything until we pay a secondary cost (ib/equal or have someone else pay the cost and heal us to full). However the tradeoff being OGCD is we are committed for 10 sec, 4gcds minimum of lost damage and 'access' to IR/FC which then take more GCDs to make up the lost damage (similar to other tanks 7-8 total to make up).

The game stomps on every tank for trying to 'flash' tank stance for 2-3 sec at a time as it should.

War DOES have do better in a transition for a more 'traditional' tank swap where you are in beast mode, then put on your hard hat and tank for ~2minutes then swap again as it washes out the costs over time (the 10 sec lock) while pld still has to pay again (later) and drk had to pay so steeply up front. I'm not arguing that.

The only note id add at this point is war has always been like that. ie: days of jumping to defiance, popping unchained, bustin a cap making their swaps just flat better than the other tanks equivalents. That was a (rather iconic imo) of war fantasy. Does that make it right for 1 tank to do traditional long swaps with less cost? Iunno. But it's always been a piece of war's 'thing', though much less pronounced with IR deleting unchained usage. Obviously this is a blatant Appeal to Tradition fallacy, but when were talking about tanks and their identities, its at least relevant to consider I think.
_____________________________
TLDR: I think we're agreeing sorta. I was focused on preventing the 'flashing' of tank stances on and off for a second at a time which is (currently) VERY costly for all 3 tanks, as it should be. No denying War has always had more efficient 'long term' swaps where you sit in tank stance for a good long while before handing it back. My only counter to the latter is a blatant appeal to tradition and has always been a part of the 'character' of the class.