It's about time Shield oath and Grit become Abilities instead of Spells. (off-GCD)

[whiskeybravo]

Things work out for WAR because they have a huge amount of cooldowns and its near impossible for a job with that many defensive CD's to ever be bad at tanking.

Meanwhile I drop Shirk for Awareness in 5 & 6 because RI is practically useless in those fights... I imagine DRKs feel similar when DM is practically useless. (I've actually considered going DRK in 5/6 but haven't yet, mainly because of SiO utility)

I still get the feeling this is like a vendetta against Warriors. Wars get this, wars get that, etc etc.. PLD is as good as they've ever been both defensively and offensively. Being able to block magic is a significant advantage. No more TP problems thanks to Holy Spirit windows. Being able to cover people to make mechanics easier on the group. Intervention on people taking high damage to lessen burden on healers. There's a lot of things that only a PLD can do. And PLD and WAR together have unrivaled mitigation and support utility. So I know this isn't the "fix DRK" thread, but they are the ones that could benefit the most from a stance re-work. If PLD is changed to off-global as well it doesn't really change anything about how they are played, they don't need to instantly swap to shield to access Sheltron or Clemency or any of their abilities. It would just make them more defensive and further reinforce PLD/WAR comps (barring significant improvements to DRKs overall kit)

[Kabooa]

I just don't believe content was designed around War being 100% Deliverance main tank.

They aren't. I can tell you that pretty confidently.

Barring exceptional cases, your 'Main Tank' position is designed to be in Tank Stance, while the 'Off Tank' position is designed to swap as required, because by definition you won't always be tanking something.

But tank stance has no meaningful multiplier outside Threat, so it hardly matters.

I doubt anyone here would be happy about 'turning on' Tank stance for a mandatory defensive baseline, especially because it doesn't offer any change in gameplay.

[Saeno]

I still get the feeling this is like a vendetta against Warriors. Wars get this, wars get that, etc etc..

WAR is very fluid and personally thats why I love the job so much. That fluidity feels more like an advantage over the other tanks and personally I don't see the issue with the other tanks becoming more fluid. Nobody likes clunk. I also think WAR's getting nonstop buffs with every release of patch notes helps fuel the fires of the "why does WAR get everything AGAIN?" mentality.

PLD is as good as they've ever been both defensively and offensively. Being able to block magic is a significant advantage. No more TP problems thanks to Holy Spirit windows.

In fairness, WAR hasnt had Tp problems since 3.0 thanks to fell cleave and Equilibrium. PLD losing its TP problems is something new to PLD with 4.0

Being able to cover people to make mechanics easier on the group. Intervention on people taking high damage to lessen burden on healers. There's a lot of things that only a PLD can do. And PLD and WAR together have unrivaled mitigation and support utility.

100% agree here. O7S without a PLD is like night and day for healing. The synergy between PLD and WAR is insane since WAR covers PLD's weakness of being awful at pulling and never wanting to leave sword oath, and WAR is just a behemoth on its own so anything WAR brings only aids the party.

So I know this isn't the "fix DRK" thread, but they are the ones that could benefit the most from a stance re-work. If PLD is changed to off-global as well it doesn't really change anything about how they are played, they don't need to instantly swap to shield to access Sheltron or Clemency or any of their abilities. It would just make them more defensive and further reinforce PLD/WAR comps (barring significant improvements to DRKs overall kit)

I really dislike the idea of fixing tank stance for just DRK but not PLD. If they were to make Grit an ability but not the Oath's, that would raise a lot of questions because while WAR and DRK have oGCD stances, PLD has TWO stances on the GCD making it feel incredibly clunky and it would just make the community ask for at least one of the oaths to be oGCD (prefferably Sword oath). And yeah the PLD/WAR comp is really damn powerful but only because PLD and WAR are very strong jobs on their own while DRK... isn't. I think WAR/DRK would still work just fine, its really the PLD/DRK comp that raises questions.

[whiskeybravo]

Consider this

I wasn't really referring to how swapping to shield or grit was going to save you while defiance wasn't. I mainly just wanted to point out there's not nearly as much thought involved to spam one-button in a pinch vs swapping stances + activating 2 abilities (gonna need that Unchained too). It's much easier if you are going to plan for it, but not so easy on the fly.

Taking stances off the GCD is good for the game. It is one less reason to have to have a warrior in your party, it brings the game one step closer to being balanced, because like it or not, warrior being the sole tank with the ability to not lose significant dps picking up adds, pulling bosses, and other such things is going to lock its position in for the raid scene.

Not gonna disagree on it being good for the game in general, but most of Warriors damage comes from 10k DPS burst windows. Not tomahawk/Eq pull, not random unchained use throughout a fight. All the time in between is virtually shite, losing a GCD to pick up an add or a transition disconnect outside burst window is hardly noticeable. Compared to PLD where losing a GCD is very costly

It is really very little to ask that tank stance not be tied to the GCD, and after really considering it I think I was wrong, I don't think paladin or dark knight needs an mp cost to balance the 80% damage down they suffer is probably enough since warrior can still get around that.

I agree, the MP cost is not reasonable at this point in the game due to how MP is now being used on PLD and specifically DRK. It's needs to be looked at. I'm still up the air on whether shield/sword really need to be off the GCD. The aggro generation on War and Drk would still be superior to Shield Oath Shield Lob, so Pld still likely wouldn't be pulling bosses - and Halone is still the weakest potency combo finisher. My only real concern is instant, free +20% mitigation to augment normal CD usage. There needs to some cost whether it's much lower MP amount, a GCD, or a 10-second recast like Defiance so players wouldn't be inclined to abuse it.

[Izsha]

Who boy, the point about IB was how it relates to tank stance and swapping, not to derail into another how OP is war today fight.

The reason I brought up IB in the 1st place is that you cant look at War tank stance and say “Drk/Pld NEED THAT” without looking beyond the stances to how the entire kit is designed. War is designed from the ground up around IB and stance dance. Pld/Drk tank stances are not used in the same way as a core design feature as the gameplay of the classes remains virtually unchanged no matter your stance. War is designed around multiple abilities that change functions based on stance. It’s the fundamental design principle of war. Toeing the blurred line between controlling and unleashing your inner beast without going to far either direction. That’s literally war’s entire class design.

Please try to separate Design and Power. They are different things. I have said war is the strongest tank before. It still is. It is also (imo) the best designed tank. But those two things are not the same and desiring additional power doesnt mean you need the same design. You could nerf every number in War’s kit from damage to mitigation % to healing and make war a trash tier job. But the design would not change. Just the power. Similarly, copy pasting a core part of war design onto Drk and Pld is not a power play but a design change.

If tank swapping is to punishing (loose power), you don’t need to change the design of something. You adjust the power of the thing. Reduce MP costs. Reduce tank stance damage penalties. Increase enmity snap actions enmity generation like scorn. Stance without combo breaks. Any number of options and combinations of options are available You don’t need haphazardly copypasta another jobs design characteristics to get the desired effect.

Saying not to copypasta fundamental war design on another job is not saying tank stances are fine or somehow denying that war is strong. I’ve said as much. But the desired effect can be achieved without homogenizing or dramatically changing gameplay that SE has designed all content around since 2.0. We don’t need some core tanking makeover because it costs to much mana to shield/grit. If the problem is that swapping costs to much, then change the cost-reward payments. Dont get a new job.

[Chrono_Rising]

Not gonna disagree on it being good for the game in general, but most of Warriors damage comes from 10k DPS burst windows. Not tomahawk/Eq pull, not random unchained use throughout a fight. All the time in between is virtually shite, losing a GCD to pick up an add or a transition disconnect outside burst window is hardly noticeable. Compared to PLD where losing a GCD is very costly

I believe refers to:

... warrior being the sole tank with the ability to not lose significant dps picking up adds, pulling bosses, and other such things is going to lock its position in for the raid scene.

I never claimed the pull ability is the reason for its dps, but it does give a nice chunk of dps back to your cotank. It isn't the warrior who benefits from pulling, they barely notice the difference, but the other tanks do. And that is what matters, losing a GCD here and there on paladin or dark knight and you are loosing a big chunk of your dps as you are forced to lose alignments of your personal buffs with raid buffs. Bringing a warrior circumvents that, and it enjoys being able to line up its buffs with raid windows because it isn't giving up GCDs.

As far as removing tank stance from the GCD and adding a preset amount of time to be stuck in tank stance, I thought that just goes without saying, is there an oGCD in the game that doesn't have a cooldown timer?

If tank swapping is to punishing (loose power), you don’t need to change the design of something. You adjust the power of the thing. Reduce MP costs. Reduce tank stance damage penalties. Increase enmity snap actions enmity generation like scorn. Stance without combo breaks. Any number of options and combinations of options are available You don’t need haphazardly copypasta another jobs design characteristics to get the desired effect.

Interesting. The cost that I would say it too high is the GCD to swap between stances. But once that is the cost it is a fundamental design of the class and represents homogenization.

If I were to try and pick out one thing about warrior that is "Design" I would have picked out the extreme synergy the class has within itself. I wouldn't have said the thing that represents warrior's design is the ability to switch between tank and dps stances.

Consider:
(1) Tank stance gains strengths from its cooldowns reinforcing each other (convalescence and thrill of battle)
(2) Tank stance gains strength from party abilities and cooldowns (Healing output increases/bard songs/HP increases)
(3) Cooldowns for personal use can be transformed instantly into powerful party shields
(4) Offensive cooldowns turn into powerful defensive cooldowns in tank stance (try IR with Inner Beast and tell me the 20% mitigation for 15 seconds with 10k+ restored each hit doesn't feel defensive and powerful)

Those are the kinda of things that I felt defined warrior "design". Not whether or not its tank stance is oGCD. If I were to talk about the tank stance I would be talking about:
(1) Snap aggro/gap closer for quickly picking up adds that also functions as a guage dump
(2) Its ability to ignore its penalties
(3) Tank stance gives up damage to increase survivability
(4) DPS stance gives up survivability to increase damage

Those are the main highlights of the warrior tank/dps stance abilities. Whether a single move is oGCD or not on all tanks is such a far cry from homogenization I cannot help but need to point out this list to you.

[Izsha]

Snip

Well, after playing the job since 2.0, the story associated with it, the feel of playing it, i would solidly place the fluid and constant tug of war to unleash the beast and yank its chain as a defining characteristic of war. Tank stance is an integral part of that, though obviously not the entire thing as I already mentioned the synergizing skills that are affected by it. Just as much as saying I need a shield and cover would steal from pld or i want sacrifice for power moves would steal from drk. So i'll have to just agree to disagree about what makes war feel like war.

So why is the GCD so bad?

If its because you loose to much damage, then there are plenty of ways to get damage returned in any number of existing actions from the mundane like potency buffs to entirely new class themed enhancemets like "Shield oath temporarily adds holy magic damage to every attack for 10 seconds" or whatever to soften the pain of short swaps without buffing permanent tank stance forever.

If its the MP cost you can lower the MP cost.

If its snap aggro you can buff Pld's snap aggro (and give drk some snap period. Why it doesnt is still dumb).

If the GCD cost is to much, then its not the GCDs fault. Its what the GCD is worth and that is damage, or MP, or gauge, or whatever. GCDs do not have value in and of themselves. Just opportunity costs which are measured in other currencies and you can simply adjust those currencies to match the cost.

So why does the solution have to be OGCD when all of the stated "reasons" for changing tank stance can be easily addressed without messing with it? This would be like (insert not Drk job) saying "I need more damage. The only fix is to get an OGCD skill that increases damage on my next ability that I can spam" or "Drk needs more fluff mitigation. I think we need a shield and thats the only viable solution". Theres no reason to get so stuck OGCD as the only viable solution.

Of course 1 action wont suddenly make War indistinguishable from Pld. But why take 1 completely unnecessary step in that direction when there are 100 other paths to the same destination? All 3 tanks have unique ways to get in and out of tank stances that have their own nuances. Tanks already took some big steps towards each other in stormblood. 1 more wont be the nail in the coffin, but we dont even need to look at that path 1 step or not to solve this problem.

Tank stances are to punishing for Drk/Pld. IIRC correctly i said that in my 1st post in this thread. But you dont have to 'fix it' with another jobs actions. Thats terribly uncreative and unnecessary.

[Chrono_Rising]

So why is the GCD so bad?

If you read the entire post this is already answered. The lost GCD is lost potency and lost alignment with raid buffs that you don’t get back makes giving up a GCD bad. I'm not sure how we got so far into the post history without knowing what the issue we are trying to fix was since you started posting as Aana.

If its because you loose to much damage, then there are plenty of ways to get damage returned in any number of existing actions from the mundane like potency buffs to entirely new class themed enhancemets like "Shield oath temporarily adds holy magic damage to every attack for 10 seconds" or whatever to soften the pain of short swaps without buffing permanent tank stance forever.

Doesn’t address alignment with raid buff issues issues.

If its the MP cost you can lower the MP cost.

Does MP have value on its own? I’m pretty sure many jobs don’t use MP like warrior. It has no intrinsic value on its own. I ask because of what you are going to say later.

If its snap aggro you can buff Pld's snap aggro (and give drk some snap period. Why it doesnt is still dumb).

Sure we could give it an ability that mimics the effect of tank stance, and maybe even make it oGCD, but why reinvent the wheel?

If the GCD cost is to much, then its not the GCDs fault. Its what the GCD is worth and that is damage, or MP, or gauge, or whatever. GCDs do not have value in and of themselves. Just opportunity costs which are measured in other currencies and you can simply adjust those currencies to match the cost.

This is a very weird argument. Ok technically the only things that have value are the moves. Warrior guage has no more intrinsic value than warrior’s mp because only the action of Fell Cleave gives you damage. On the other hand I need the guage to execute Fell Cleave and thats where its value comes from… like a GCD for actions.

Tank stances are to punishing for Drk/Pld. IIRC correctly i said that in my 1st post in this thread. But you dont have to 'fix it' with another jobs actions. Thats terribly uncreative and unnecessary.

Izsha/Aana, I find it hysterical that when people were posting creative solutions to dark knight problems you wanted only tweaks to numbers and that could be the only solution because introducing new actions would be a source of unforeseen consequences. And now here we are arguing that we should add new mechanics to jobs rather than add an effect which we know what it does. I think you just like being contrary to be contrary.

As for why people want it to be oGCD, switching stances messes with two things:
(1) waste a GCD switching from one stance to another
(2) Using a GCD to switch stances moves your rotation out of alignment with party buffs

The first problem can be corrected with tweaking numbers and maybe adjusting snap aggro, but you need to be careful here because if those moves have potency we should avoid situations in which your OT is fighting with you for emnity. However, I doubt a single move will be a replacement for tank stance, that is too powerful.

The second issue cannot be fixed with tweaks to potencies and effects, maybe you could change the recast on it to be .00001 seconds, but essentially the answer is to move it to be more of an oGCD. And this makes sense for tanks as a whole, it is unreasonable for one tank to have free stance when the entire reason for having free stance has been addressed with adjustments to its defensive kit. They tried to rectify this with the start of SB by adding costs to warrior stance, and we saw how that went. The other direction I'm positive would work just fine, take off the GCD from paladin and dark knight.

As far as homogenization, I believe it is sometimes good and sometimes bad. The tanks are still very varied and stance swapping is fairly uncommon enough that I don't believe it would make a difference.

[whiskeybravo]

Who boy, the point about IB was how it relates to tank stance and swapping, not to derail into another how OP is war today fight.

IMO opinion it's not so much derailing as it is just digging deeper into the conversation to have a more thorough discussion about why tank stances need to be looked at by the dev team. This nugget from Chrono is a great example:

Consider:
(1) Tank stance gains strengths from its cooldowns reinforcing each other (convalescence and thrill of battle)
(2) Tank stance gains strength from party abilities and cooldowns (Healing output increases/bard songs/HP increases)
(3) Cooldowns for personal use can be transformed instantly into powerful party shields
(4) Offensive cooldowns turn into powerful defensive cooldowns in tank stance (try IR with Inner Beast and tell me the 20% mitigation for 15 seconds with 10k+ restored each hit doesn't feel defensive and powerful)

To be honest I hadn't really thought about that aspect in much detail. I recognized the correlation of abilities but when you compare to the other tanks it is a rather unique aspect that makes War a well designed job overall. Thanks for pointing that out o/

[Mahrze]

To be honest I hadn't really thought about that aspect in much detail. I recognized the correlation of abilities but when you compare to the other tanks it is a rather unique aspect that makes War a well designed job overall. Thanks for pointing that out o/

And if you keep reading into WARs design kit, you realize that WAR has an overpowered synergy. Don't get me wrong, I am not for nerfing war or toning it down, but I'd like to see a comparable* synergy for the other two tanks. They keep talking about balance, but it seems they can only do "one job" right.

* By comparable I mean that is as satisfying, not that they should copy/paste.

Please try to separate Design and Power. They are different things. I have said war is the strongest tank before. It still is. It is also (imo) the best designed tank. But those two things are not the same and desiring additional power doesnt mean you need the same design. You could nerf every number in War’s kit from damage to mitigation % to healing and make war a trash tier job. But the design would not change. Just the power. Similarly, copy pasting a core part of war design onto Drk and Pld is not a power play but a design change.

I'm sorry but here is where you are confusing things. Power is a result of design, and Design is a venue for power. WAR is not powerful "just because" but because the design choices they made, made the job powerful.

Designing <something> needs a goal. And while the goal might not have been "power", the design route reached that goal, that's why if you design something, you aim to what you want it to do and what you want it not to do. And with WAR, they forgot a lot of the nots.