Can we remove Tank Stance?

[Bright-Flower]

I highly disagree, tank stance penalty don't exist to create any artificial reward by not using tank stance, yoshi and the devs claim more that one time tanks are mean to tank in tank stance and they are dissapointed by how tanks avoid complety the tank stance plus they concerns about by result of all of this claiming tank damage its too high, at the same time i disagree tank stances exist to carry bad-new players, we have it bcs we are supose to stay on it, but the current desing and the poor sinergy betwen tank stances and everything in the game make it just a mere pull tool like the agro combo wasting a lot of space in our skill bars for anyone that care to use the jobs properly.

Tank stances right now create a gap betwen good tanks and bad/diferent ideology tanks, any tank who stay on tank stance for whatever reason are hurting himself and they party performance much more that one who never use it and use they kit properly to solve any kind problem in duty by a huge margin, it's a huge waste of potential specially since the tank role is pretty easy, agroo is not only a tank stuff its almost faceroll, everything hits like a wet noodle outside of TB and don't improve you gameplay at all since the "im a tank not a dps" and the lazy ones that don't care to use they skills will just sit on it and rolling around doing severely less that a bad dps or a bad healer.

Ideally tank stance would be used when tanking and dps stance would be used when OTing, soloing, or during phases where there's nothing to actively tank. Sadly with the way the game's designed, everything is pushed towards 'bare minimum mitigation/healing then all out dps.'

[AxlStream]

Fell cleave gives the inner beast mitigation and decimate gives the bonus healing, problem solved.

What is this heresy... Warriors would be nigh unkillable then. Go to fflogs and see how many Fell Cleave uses a Warrior has. Might as well just give them permanent 20% damage received reduction.

Also Decimate + Inner Release = live forever then? You'd heal to max HP twice over.

[Arkdra]

What is this heresy... Warriors would be nigh unkillable then. Go to fflogs and see how many Fell Cleave uses a Warrior has. Might as well just give them permanent 20% damage received reduction.

Also Decimate + Inner Release = live forever then? You'd heal to max HP twice over.

Both of these things are already the case when in tank stance. They're rearely used though, because dps is king, which should tell you how much it would matter if they got rolled into cleave/decimate.

[linay]

Or they could be like most reasonable mmo companys and let ppl choice the role they play

They do. Want to play as tank? Your character have three (soon four) jobs to choose from. Want to play as healer? Again, three jobs to choose from. Want to play DPS in melee, ranged, with magic? Lots of choices that your ONE character can choose to play. This is a very reasonable mmo company indeed.

As for tank stance, I don't really mind it either way. I do think it'd be neat if you have to use both enmity and DPS rotations instead of just using one and mostly ignoring the other.

[loreleidiangelo]

Sadly with the way the game's designed, everything is pushed towards 'bare minimum mitigation/healing then all out dps.'

As much as I think this game's tanking and healing jobs are designed like garbage, every MMO is honestly played with this goal in mind; all that changes is the ratio. The ratio is what's messed up about DPSing as a non-DPS role in FFXIV (arguably), not the fact that you do it in general. In the earlier example I gave about Method, even their Shaman pushed his Flame Shock button from time to time, it just didn't comprise over 50% of his gameplay like it does for healers here.

Tanking is harder to solve tbh because unless you turn mitigation into something more engaging than just "push button, reduce damage" all you're really doing by forcing players to sit in tank stance more is making their gameplay arbitrarily weaker for no real increase in APM.

[Satarn]

So what? Do you really feel like stance dancing is a reward? More than anything, I don't feel like I am being rewarded for being in damage stance, I feel like I am being put upon when I have to be in tank stance.

What I feel like is that I have no idea why would you ask me this question, considering I have never mentioned stance dancing.
What I said is: tank stance is training wheels and dps stance is a damage reward for when you graduate off the training wheels and actually menage your cooldowns correctly.
And yes, I do feel rewarded when I can reach high dps due to full time out of tank stance, while still requiring little healing due to mitigating all damage well.

I also feel annoyed when I queue as not a tank and get some nerdo who spends the entire dungeon in tank stance. Or conversely, queue into a real low level dungeon and get some sprout who isn't using it.

You can't reasonably use bad players as an argument to dumb things down like this. By that logic we should also remove all damage spells from healers because some of them might tunnel-vision dps without even putting regen on tank. We should replace all damaging actions with a single AoE button because bad DPS players don't understand they should use AoE on trash packs or even comprehend what a rotation is. Yes it is a hyperbole, but it's the same exact principle. "This rando in a dungeon didn't play to my standards, woe is me, lets dumb things down".
Also who even cares about a tank sitting in full time tank stance in a stupid dungeon, it's probably still gonna waste less time than what an average DF dps player is capable of.

I highly disagree, tank stance penalty don't exist to create any artificial reward by not using tank stance, yoshi and the devs claim more that one time tanks are mean to tank in tank stance and they are dissapointed by how tanks avoid complety the tank stance plus they concerns about by result of all of this claiming tank damage its too high

Citation needed. I have seen Yoshi say tanks do too much damage, but I have yet to see him saying he’s “dissapointed” in players tanking out of defensive stances. He didn’t even care about nearly everybody abusing WAR strat in o5s.
Even disregarding that, just because something wasn’t intended, doesn’t mean it’s bad and should go away. Housing glitches were certainly not intentional design, but they’re the main thing that keeps the system interesting.

Tank stances right now create a gap between good tanks and bad/diferent ideology tanks

That is the point. Having this gap is what having room for improvement means.

[Liam_Harper]

I highly disagree, tank stance penalty don't exist to create any artificial reward by not using tank stance, yoshi and the devs claim more that one time tanks are mean to tank in tank stance and they are dissapointed by how tanks avoid complety the tank stance plus they concerns about by result of all of this claiming tank damage its too high

Then explain why tanks cannot beat Stone Sky Sea for EX or Savage in tank stance at ilv. I mean they won't even come close, you literally can't do it.

SSS was created by the devs, tailored individually to each class, intended to show whether or not you have the recommended dps for your class. EX and Savage bosses, which have tight enrage timers, are designed with the assumption that both tanks spend the maximum time possible in dps stance.

The current use of stances is not only intentional, it's mandatory to beat the hardest content.

[Nedkel]

Then explain why tanks cannot beat Stone Sky Sea for EX or Savage in tank stance at ilv. I mean they won't even come close, you literally can't do it.

SSS was created by the devs, tailored individually to each class, intended to show whether or not you have the recommended dps for your class. EX and Savage bosses, which have tight enrage timers, are designed with the assumption that both tanks spend the maximum time possible in dps stance.

The current use of stances is not only intentional, it's mandatory to beat the hardest content.

I was to write just about the same thing.

Its only developers choice, not playebase to play tanks that way and not another.
They had over a year (if not longer?) to change that, but never bothered to do so.

[Melichoir]

Then explain why tanks cannot beat Stone Sky Sea for EX or Savage in tank stance at ilv. I mean they won't even come close, you literally can't do it.

SSS was created by the devs, tailored individually to each class, intended to show whether or not you have the recommended dps for your class. EX and Savage bosses, which have tight enrage timers, are designed with the assumption that both tanks spend the maximum time possible in dps stance.

The current use of stances is not only intentional, it's mandatory to beat the hardest content.

Just to play devils advocate a bit, If you consider most fights, there are tank swaps within those fights. That would mean Dropping tank stance when youre OT. So you would not, even in theory, do SSS in tank stance the entire way through it regardless if you were intending to MT or OT the fight. Because of this, SSS is probably designed around not being in tank stances because gauging how often youd need to be in tank stance or not probably isnt possible for the devs to measure in that regards.

And just as a note, you CAN beat EX and Savage fights wtih the MT being in tank stance. Its not ideal, and I am by no means saying its the recommended strat, but a geared group will have more than enough DPS to overcome the MTs 20% damage reduction. Its more burden on everyone else, of course, but the fights arent so tight that you couldnt do it.

[AxlStream]

Both of these things are already the case when in tank stance. They're rearely used though, because dps is king, which should tell you how much it would matter if they got rolled into cleave/decimate.

Not quite, Warrior Tank stance does not give any defense buff. It's gives healing increased and max HP increase.

Also are you seriously comparing a 350 potency attack with a 520 one? And a 200 AoE skill with a 280? Tacking on the additional effects would just be ludicrous.