The fact DRK hasn't been fixed in 10 months is disgraceful.

[LeoLupinos]

Stop saying that Blackest Night fix all our mitigation problem, it's a lvl 70 skill, what about 69 and below? We are not tanks until lvl 70 then? Stop being superficial! It's a very long battle we were fighting since the launch of Stormblood and there still people joking of a serious problem. We are discusing and proving with math since BEFORE SB launch, I WAS the one that started the first thread "DRK will be nerfed in Stormblood". Many people gived a "level up to 70 first", "it's just preliminary patch, wait for final patch".


We literaly FILLED ALL THE TANK SECTION with DRK feedback and complains, and we got nearly NOTHING of what we complained. DRK was being ignored since the my very first post 6/2017. They ignored MOST of the feedback that they asked.

This is my very first post in the section since much long time, and it infuriates me that we still got nearly nothing.
This must be a very long April Fools joke.

WHM and WAR got FIRST HAND changes, and even OFFICIAL threads for suggestions, and they got it in soo less time than DRK. Why they are ignoring a job that is SCREAMING all over the tank sections about the need of changes for 10+ months? What we need to do for it to finally get fixed, or to give proper information of the balance plan?

We don't discuss other things in here since so much time, there's only DRK this, DRK there, it's unacceptable the lack of feedback from SE.

They must be doing it so we can change to WAR or PDL, but we will not. We will keep the complaints loud and clear, until we get the fair judgement.

And it's not only about DRK, if PDL or WAR get a bad nerf, same DRK got when SB launched, we will complain loud and clear too.

[Tint]

Stop saying that Blackest Night fix all our mitigation problem, it's a lvl 70 skill, what about 69 and below? We are not tanks until lvl 70 then? Stop being superficial!

i agree. i just did Susano story in trial roulette and i simply hadn't enough cooldowns for the tank busters! Rampart - Shadow Wall - Rampart - ???

i used Living Dead and died 10 seconds later...

[Deceptus]

And it's not only about DRK, if PDL or WAR get a bad nerf, same DRK got when SB launched, we will complain loud and clear too.

100% absolutely this. When WAR was utter trash in 2.0 I was complaining then. All the tanks should want all the tanks to be in a good place.

[Hierro]

We literaly FILLED ALL THE TANK SECTION with DRK feedback and complains, and we got nearly NOTHING of what we complained. DRK was being ignored since the my very first post 6/2017. They ignored MOST of the feedback that they asked.
[...]
We don't discuss other things in here since so much time, there's only DRK this, DRK there, it's unacceptable the lack of feedback from SE.

It's because, and I know it's hard for the OF to understand, DRK is ultimately fine. There's an analysis done on reddit to reiterate this. Chrono Rising even pitched in.

Main issue is that most DRK players are bad players, the same ones that are complaining. I don't know how many times I've said this. As to the amount of complaints, I'd attribute that to players blaming their shortcomings on the job instead of themselves. People who understand the class and can play it effectively know that at the very core, there will always be a third place tank, and that's okay.

[Valdegarde]

the same ones that are complaining. I don't know how many times I've said this.

Isn't this just a bit hypocritical, you think?

[Hierro]

my conclusion was that dark knight is taking damage at nearly the same rate in a random sample of data

Then at the very least we can say this study debunks this myth of DRK's "lacking" mitigation. In either case, we know DRK's dps isn't far behind PLD. We are to apply our statements to the general public, and to that extent this data does a great job. Consider that the general public does not even do savage content to begin with. Even within that random sample, utility is a non-factor. With that in mind, does the statement "DRK is fine" not hold water in a general sense?

Isn't this just a bit hypocritical, you think?

I'm not the one littering the forum with nonsense of fear mongering. All I'm trying to do is get people to play a class without fear.

[Chrono_Rising]

Then at the very least we can say this study debunks this myth of DRK's "lacking" mitigation. In either case, we know DRK's dps isn't far behind PLD. We are to apply our statements to the general public, and to that extent this data does a great job. Consider that the general public does not even do savage content to begin with. Even within that random sample, utility is a non-factor. With that in mind, does the statement "DRK is fine" not hold water in a general sense?

You can say I would agree with dark is fine in the sense of mitigation. I would not agree with the statement dark is fine in a general sense. The comment I responded to lacks the context that makes my position clear.

[Hierro]

snip

But it also appears you agree with the sentiment that there is a need for players to account for their own skill.

We know using a DRK isn't causing healers to work harder, because the study also shows that neither DV nor SiO affected healing done. Now, if SiO is WAR's only real party utility, and if it's not making a difference, then it could be concluded DRK lacking such a tool does not hamper it much.

We can see its damage trails behind the other tanks, but it's not something to write home about. That it's behind WAR is a given, but so is PLD. But how much is the difference between PLD and DRK? It's practically non-existent.

So, if it's fine in mitigation, and the damage is on par with pld, and if utility doesn't seem to be affecting parties, how is that not fine?

[Chrono_Rising]

But it also appears you agree with the sentiment that there is a need for players to account for their own skill.

We know using a DRK isn't causing healers to work harder, because the study also shows that neither DV nor SiO affected healing done. Now, if SiO is WAR's only real party utility, and if it's not making a difference, then it could be concluded DRK lacking such a tool does not hamper it much.

We can see its damage trails behind the other tanks, but it's not something to write home about. That it's behind WAR is a given, but so is PLD. But how much is the difference between PLD and DRK? It's practically non-existent.

So, if it's fine in mitigation, and the damage is on par with pld, and if utility doesn't seem to be affecting parties, how is that not fine?

Again, I feel the need to point out that though yes the primary findings were that skills are only useful when effectively used, that does not mean that they do no have uses that can be exploited by better using cooldowns.

You cannot make this argument:

Dark Knights just need to hone their skills and push their buttons more effectively and they are equal.

SiO and DV are not being used effectively, they are useless.

We cannot have that argument in both directions just because we want it to so it supports our conclusion.

[Chrono_Rising]

It's because, and I know it's hard for the OF to understand, DRK is ultimately fine. There's an analysis done on reddit to reiterate this. Chrono Rising even pitched in.

I did, and my conclusion was that dark knight is taking damage at nearly the same rate in a random sample of data. My final thoughts and conclusions were:

Thoughts from a 3.0 dark knight and 4.0 paladin.
Going into the analysis I expected there to be differences in total damage taken based on tank composition, and many of these were born out by the data collected. I expected dark knight paladin to excel on turns like O6S where access to on demand mitigation would likely provide a significant advantage, I expected on turns like O7S we would see a large advantage conferred to groups with a warrior. The most unexpected result of this analysis, for me, was the low explanatory strength of cooldown use on total damage taken. Pairing this with the lack of coordinated and effective uses of tank utilities suggests that we need to take a good look at our own strategies before worrying about the exact power of our composition. On the whole I do not feel there is a truly significant difference when it comes to tank damage on the basis of composition, using our class mitigation and utilities seems to be the far more important factor. The primary focus of this study was aimed at tanking composition’s interaction with total damage. The results were suggestive of a variety of ideas which I look forward to exploring in the future, such as: comparisons using effective mitigation strategies, speedrun strategies, cotanking strategies, and solo tanking strategies.

The analysis does not come to the conclusion that dark knight is balanced, instead it ended up highlighting that dark knights are under-using TBN, dark mind, and rampart, which leads them to taking higher damage. This also wasn't unique to dark knight, it was true of all the tanks.

Furthermore the informal study we posted has limitations. It uses a random sample, we don't look at its place in balance with the other tanks in serious play, and we don't place value on utilities which were used poorly in most turns. It was meant to combat the stigma that dark knights are a detriment in one area, damage taken. It says nothing of their relative dps, utilities, and falls very short of analyzing it in a multidimensional way that captures balanced tanking.