Been in a few parties over the last few days where tanks weren't using their tank stance, were loosing hate, and dying without the damage resistance.
Could we just remove the stance and give them the damage resistance and enmity generation innately?


Been in a few parties over the last few days where tanks weren't using their tank stance, were loosing hate, and dying without the damage resistance.
Could we just remove the stance and give them the damage resistance and enmity generation innately?



If they did that they would nerf tanks damage to match healers. Thus pushing some players to not play tank. Enmity is a group effort not just the tank. I do expect enmity generation to be buffed in 5.0 though.
Not to mention, removing tank stances would require reworks, as some skills require you to be in a particular stance to use them.


honestly if you are normally equiped the emnity generation is not a trouble, the real trouble is when you have a huge difference of gear between the tank and the dps.... or if you don't use the tank stance.
i have seen a lot of tank thinking they was here for dps, but that not the role of the tank, the tank role is to get the aggros and survive, dps is secondary. yes in raid a good tank dps can make the run more smooth, but honestly with the right stuff, people don't need the tank dps.
the paladin will probably have a rework because of the merge between tp and mp... some skill loose them interest with this change or some tactic will not be used anymore, like the fact to empty your mp for use the spell of damage.This is partially my mindset on the matter. The other part is a "one stance" approach to each tank:
1) For Paladin, either remove Sword Oath or change it to a cleave effect buff (ST weaponskills hit nearby targets for x% damage) or some sort of buff that doesn't feel so underwhelming. Sword Oath now might look good on a parse, but to a player who isn't violating ToS for the better or worse of other players, there's no real visual appeal that makes using it worth it as a tank compared to the dps stances of the other two tanks.
2) While Warrior is more or less fine, it can be shortened even further by removing Deliverance, baking the damage increase from it into the Storm's Eye damage buff (if they don't want to bake it into ALL Warrior skills), put Fell Cleave and Decimate on the same 15 second CD, have Infuriate reset the CDs of both in addition to beast gauge increase, and Inner Release removing their CD for its duration. Furthermore, Beast gauge could just be a general thing to compensate.
3) With Dark Knight, when was the last time you tanked anything without Darkside up? Make it passive with the MP regen removal only active while in combat, reduce the penalty to damage dealt with Grit to offset it and have any weaponskills or abilities with an extra effect under Darkside to be baseline effects.
If anything, it's not the tank stances that should be removed, but rather the dps stances.
the trouble of the tank stance and dps stance, is mostly for make more smooth the change between mt and ot.... take this out and it will become a pain for the tank to work together and switch aggros.
people need to learn that them role as tank is being a tank and stop to try to switch stance in middle of tanking for get a bit of dps.... yes it's a viable technic, but honestly you are punished for do this, that why it cost gcd/mp and it's normal...
Last edited by silentwindfr; 01-31-2019 at 08:27 PM.


Eh. Just give them the damage. Everyone wants to be a DPS now a days anyway.
Me myself I don't like to play tanks not because of the damage but because of the "lead" of the party thing.


I hate the "everyone" argument. Speak for yourself. As a tank I'm more concerned on properly keeping the aggro than on doing some more numbers. My dps is ok, but if I'm a tank, I focus on tanking. And what's with the "lead" thing? It's better to have a tank pulling rather than the DPS doing it and wiping with 2 hits.


Tanks lead the party. I'm saying that's why I don't like playing them. They decide the pace of the run. In dungeons anyway. And with the "pull everything" mentality I'm not comfortable trying to keep hate on 8+ mobs. Thus I don't like playing tank. I also don't like my tanks not keeping hate or dying to a tank buster cause they refuse to use tank stance cause they don't want to impact their precious DPS.I hate the "everyone" argument. Speak for yourself. As a tank I'm more concerned on properly keeping the aggro than on doing some more numbers. My dps is ok, but if I'm a tank, I focus on tanking. And what's with the "lead" thing? It's better to have a tank pulling rather than the DPS doing it and wiping with 2 hits.


Give how much damage? If you are saying give Tanks the same damage as DPS, then what is even the point of having DPS jobs then when DPS could go into a dungeon as a tank and have the extra defence and HP. Only thing to preventing 3 Tanks 1 healer in a dungeon is DF which you can get around with a full premade party.


I meant give them their DPS that they normally have outside of tank stance while in tank stance. IE remove the damage penalty. That's if they removed tank stance or w/e... but I'm over the bad tanks I had the last few days, so... I could care less what they do to tanks now? lol. (Sorry)Give how much damage? If you are saying give Tanks the same damage as DPS, then what is even the point of having DPS jobs then when DPS could go into a dungeon as a tank and have the extra defence and HP. Only thing to preventing 3 Tanks 1 healer in a dungeon is DF which you can get around with a full premade party.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.
Reply With Quote


