DPS Stance vs Tank Stance Including Healer DPS

[KaldeaSahaline]

Interesting ideas in this post. I'm mainly a fan of WS giving a cumulated shield. I've posted something similar a long time ago, which I'd like to call Barrier Per Second. This way, mastering your rotation would have a huge impact on your survival, and no tank could ever advocate to simply spamming RoH all the time.

The point that bothers me is the removal of the stances. Like I said, I think stances are a good thing to give a proper damage balance between tanks and DPS jobs while allowing us to kill things when playing solo. I personally love "turtle" tanking, but since "aggressive" tanking gained a lot of flavor throughout the years, it's more interesting to tweak the stances to give two options, each with pros and cons, be it for progression or farm.

Got tied up at work for a while - The idea would be that RA wouldn't generate much (if really any threat), but you'd have an on demand short combo mitigation generator you could use. You wouldn't be able to spam it nonstop:

1) It generates less Oath than other skills
2) It generates little (no threat)

It wouldn't be so much about mastering a rotation though, but about intelligent decision making and resource management.

With regards to stances, the concept of "turtle" tanking still would exist. It just wouldn't be a flat toggle like current stances. It'd be decision making points throughout the encounter than tended towards safety and mitigation rather than DPS. I.e. you'd prioritize RA over JoA (mitigation > dps) and you'd focus on converting your Oath into defensive skills and threat benefits rather than DPS. The idea would be that you could then react to the skillset of your teammates to cover any gaps. This concept is not handled very well in the current design.

[Reynhart]

It'd be decision making points throughout the encounter than tended towards safety and mitigation rather than DPS.

But this would come back full circle. If the safety approach end with lower raidDPS, then it's a moot option.
The stance themselves are not really the issue there.

[KaldeaSahaline]

But this would come back full circle. If the safety approach end with lower raidDPS, then it's a moot option.
The stance themselves are not really the issue there.

Speaking personally - My issue with stances has always been about mechanics, not the underlying concept of a tanks responsibilities (mitigating damage). They simply aren't fun. They're prohibitive and binary. I created a solution that makes them more engaging and dynamic IMO. It's not fun to be in Shield Oath or Sword Oath. It's even less fun to switch between them. That's why I think a design where they don't exist but their functions are handled via additional decision points is a better approach.

In order to actually fix the issue you're referring to (that turtling isn't viable aka damage > all) encounters would need to be designed on some other formula for victory. Because the game declares victory on enemy hp = 0, damage will always be the most desired function. I suppose you could design some fights here and there where merely surviving is more important than killing, but that's more so an encounter gimmick, rather than a core systems approach IMO.

Please understand one thing; for me the only thing that matters is fun. If stances were fun, I'd be fine with them. If turtling was fun, I'd be down with it.

[Reynhart]

They simply aren't fun.

I'd say they don't really have to be. They're just mathematic adjustment to your damage taken/dealt. Gameplay don't have to be related to the stances.

In order to actually fix the issue you're referring to (that turtling isn't viable aka damage > all) encounters would need to be designed on some other formula for victory.

Some gimmick encounters could be, but it's not necessary. Since what matters is raid damage, one "easy" solution is that what you lose as damage can be compensated by the other party members. For healers, by giving more room to DPS, or DPS risking ripping hate and thus having to hold back if the tank don't build enough enmity in DPS stance.

[whiskeybravo]

Since what matters is raid damage, one "easy" solution is that what you lose as damage can be compensated by the other party members. For healers, by giving more room to DPS, or DPS risking ripping hate and thus having to hold back if the tank don't build enough enmity in DPS stance.

Gotta say I disagree with this. In a single player game something like that would make sense. Could you imagine a pug of 8 people who've never played together trying to figure out who is better at what particular mini-role and how every one should be playing as a cohesive unit? Cluster F waiting to happen lol

I agree with the general sentiment that tank stances are rather shallow. And while I think I could get used to some of those changes (for example baking tank stance effects in to the combos).. I think the dynamic being suggested by Reynhart is.. Too dynamic.. considering the vast majority of casual players. Would definitely need to have some sort of test encounters specifically for 8-man static teams to try out that kind of combat system instead of forcing it on to the game's playerbase at large.

[Reynhart]

In a single player game something like that would make sense.

In a single player game, no one would care how optimal your party setup is.

Could you imagine a pug of 8 people who've never played together trying to figure out who is better at what particular mini-role and how every one should be playing as a cohesive unit?

Keep in mind we're talking about optimal setup for challenging content. In dungeons, normal trials, and even several extreme trials, no one will care if you don't drop your stance to attain the best DPS available. And in Savage, you don't run with "8 people who've never played together trying to figure out who is better at what particular mini-role", so it's not that big of a deal.

[whiskeybravo]

And in Savage, you don't run with "8 people who've never played together trying to figure out who is better at what particular mini-role", so it's not that big of a deal.

There are certainly people that can't maintain a steady schedule and have to pug for weekly clears instead of joining a static.