DPS Stance vs Tank Stance Including Healer DPS

[Izsha]

It would only work out in a binary way. If healers gain more damage than tanks loose because of tank stance, then tanks are now REQUIRED to tank stance and healers are REQUIRED to DPS more. Or it works out that tanks gain more damage than healers loose by taking off tank stance and we have what we have now. DPS tanks all day ery day.

As long as the stance exists and the stance changes tank damage output in anyway, we will end up in this either/or scenario.

If tank stance DOESNT affect damage in anyway then it becomes a boring toggle with no interaction. "Oh im taking damage. Tank stance should be on." About as 'interesting' as darkside is now. "Oh im hitting things, I should turn on my damage buff that unlocks all my good skills." Things like this can just be passive traits as they serve no purpose.

The oft suggested make bosses hit so damn hard you need tank stance or you die is just the other side of the same boring coin. "Im getting hit guess ill put on the tank stance or I die" isn't a choice. It isn't 'fun'. Its just another bland toggle you have to hit every time you tank swap.

As long as tank stance affects damage it will be min maxed with healers. Removing any penalties (or 'forcing' tank stance via cray damage) will make them entirely unengaging toggles akin to darkside with no gameplay interaction. If you do the latter you might as well just bake it in passively to tanks all together.

If you want engaging tank stances you cant just make shit hit so hard you have to use it. Engaging tank stances require incentives to both have it on and off and force interesting choices. That is what we have now, just the incentives for keeping it on are not as strong as reasons to take it off (enmity is derp easy for one). Forcing stances isn't enhanced fun gameplay.

[Kabooa]

If you want engaging tank stances you cant just make shit hit so hard you have to use it. Engaging tank stances require incentives to both have it on and off and force interesting choices. That is what we have now, just the incentives for keeping it on are not as strong as reasons to take it off (enmity is derp easy for one). Forcing stances isn't enhanced fun gameplay.

We don't have engaging tank stances, because they're just number shifts.

[shao32]

If tank stance DOESNT affect damage in anyway then it becomes a boring toggle with no interaction

the problem tank stances are already that, a boring toggle for use it only on pulls, even you can pull without it if you have a ninja who know how to do they job, the penalty himself dont offer nothing more that a punishment that lead us to the current tanking meta, we can discuss how boring can be turn tank stances free of penaltys and keep it on when we are MT but it will be no more boring that tank stances we never touch in combat, is basically the other extreme of tank stances usability right now.
my personal biggest concern about tank stances is they dont let us have a straight way to how to tank, i mean by logic as a tank you want to use you tank stance, but the current status lead you to the other way, to almost never use it and create a gap betwen more expert tanks vs rookie or average ones, its anti intuitive, i mostly preffer tank stances without damage penalty, at least it dont hurt the esence of tanking, or better say the feeling of being tanky and i will have to turn it on and off more in combat by the tank swaps much more that now.

[Reynhart]

As long as the stance exists and the stance changes tank damage output in anyway, we will end up in this either/or scenario.

The thing is, the only adjustment you need to make is how much damage tanks take in and out of tank stance, until the overall gain/loss to healer's DPS will even out. So you just have to do it step by step.

The oft suggested make bosses hit so damn hard you need tank stance or you die is just the other side of the same boring coin.

I think healers do decent DPS even with tanks in DPS stance that you could increase healing requirement without completely crossing this line.

tank stances should give access to skills that let do the same damage as your dps stance. though it requires you to actually tank.

For that to work, tanking properly should require more skill than now. An idea I posted long ago to give benefit to the stance is having a debuff tied to enmity. Basically, the concept is that the monster would be so focused on you that it has a higher chance ok taking critical or direct hits from other party members. And the chance would increase the wider the gap between your enmity and that of the others. But for that, tank rotation should be a little more complicated so that building enmity would not simply be "spamming your enmity combo".

[Izsha]

The thing is, the only adjustment you need to make is how much damage tanks take in and out of tank stance, until the overall gain/loss to healer's DPS will even out. So you just have to do it step by step.

For that to work, tanking properly should require more skill than now. An idea I posted long ago to give benefit to the stance is having a debuff tied to enmity. Basically, the concept is that the monster would be so focused on you that it has a higher chance ok taking critical or direct hits from other party members. And the chance would increase the wider the gap between your enmity and that of the others. But for that, tank rotation should be a little more complicated so that building enmity would not simply be "spamming your enmity combo".

You can step by step it all day, but in the end, there will always be a numerically 'optimal' way to play. Someone will do more damage, even if it is as minor as "DPS stance with an astro cuz they do poor dps and buff the party, but tank stance with a sch who does more personal damage and doesn't buff the tank" which will still setup a meta composition and way to play. As long as tank stance affects damage in any way, it will get number crunched and analyzed until the optimal way to play is teased out. That's just how large communities play games and always has. The only difference is that in modern day this process happens REALLY fast because people can collaborate so quickly now. Within a few days people will run all the numbers and figure out what the bestest damage strat is.

I think healers do decent DPS even with tanks in DPS stance that you could increase healing requirement without completely crossing this line.

For healers to get a meaningful reduction in healing incoming damage would need to go WAAAAY up. Healers don't just heal the MT. THey heal preys, raid damage, OT with adds, etc. There (currently) isn't very much healing going to the MT. The incoming damage on a tank becoming high enough to really put a dent into a healers workload needs to be VERY high as healers are really overqualified for their jobs right now. And that would have some unintended consequences both on "herp derp stance or die" and making life harder for lower tiered players.

Personally, if you want to focus on tank stance, then it needs to be around enmity. Then you have an area to engage with that doesn't make tanking absurdly difficult (by hitting so hard) for lower skilled players further alienating the rarest jobs in roulettes. Enmity management still allows for the ride the line engaging play where you are always trying to squeak by with the minimum to do maximum damage. But as soon as they ninja and later shirk that got thrown out the window. Voke is already an obscenely powerful enmity tool. The combination makes it completely irrelevant for coordinated groups.

But I have to ask, why is using tank stance for pulls and adds a bad thing? People don't get mad that you only use shield lob for pulls and adds. Why are we annoyed that another ability shared by all 3 tanks is also only used in niche situations? If you start viewing stances just like every other ability we have, it begs the question, why the obsession with using more tank stance? No one is posting about how shield lob needs to be buffed to make it part of your rotation, so why are we doing it for a defensive toggle? What do we gain from using more passive skills like stances instead of active ones? Who cares what stance we use if we can do our jobs anymore than no one would cry if there was a more effective way to pull that didn't use shield lob and you took the skill off your hotbar.

[Reynhart]

Someone will do more damage, even if it is as minor as "DPS stance with an astro cuz they do poor dps and buff the party, but tank stance with a sch who does more personal damage and doesn't buff the tank" which will still setup a meta composition and way to play.

If the healers are balanced enough, what healer you have in your party will not change depending on your stance, cause the healing requirement will be the same.

As long as tank stance affects damage in any way, it will get number crunched and analyzed until the optimal way to play is teased out.

And if the numbers even out when pairing tank+healers DPS, people won't stop complaining when tank use their stance.

And that would have some unintended consequences both on "herp derp stance or die" and making life harder for lower tiered players.

Why does everybody thinks that it's either "You can avoid the tank stance 100% of the time and be healed easily" or "Tank stance or OS" ? There's a middle ground.

Then you have an area to engage with that doesn't make tanking absurdly difficult (by hitting so hard) for lower skilled players further alienating the rarest jobs in roulettes.

Just a reminder. Tank stance vs DPS stance doesn't matter in roulettes. Make tanking absurdly difficult in absurdly difficult content is...logical.