Gunbreaker breaks my heart

[Az-man]

PLEASE, could you make gun breaker job have a dps spec... goddammit.... so annoying. I was so excited to play gun breaker until I found out that it'd be a tank class. T_T

You have plenty of DPS classes, let us tanks have a new class for once.

[NessaWyvern]

In terms of looking at previous characters

Squall/Seifer - Protectors of a sorceress
Lightning - Becomes a defender in the later two games

Makes sense to me why they figured gunbreaker could easily be seen as a tank

Don't forget Laguna! The first and only time he used a gunblade, he used it to protect a "sorceress" from a Ruby Dragon

[ChaseNetwork]

Just main OT. That's basically being DPS spec.

[TaranTatsuuchi]

...
FF8 was broken further with the way enemy levels scaled on your party level so it was possible to clear that entire game while only reaching like lv 15.
...

IIRC...

Picking up the card ability early allowed you to go through the game without leveling up at all by carding all the enemies instead of defeating them.

And bosses didn't give exp. So no leveling off them.

[Kaedan]

That has been said about Warriors and Dark Knight too. If DPS had their way, every job would be DPS and we'd only have PLD tanks and WHM healers.

[kikix12]

Is there a MMO out there, who did this really really well?
I would love to see the Gameplay of that, because till today, I never saw a MMO doing this really well.

Doubtful. "Tanking" is unrealistic. The closest to tanks in real life was the roman phalanx.

For a "tank" to work, the concept of enmity would need to be completely removed and the enemy should always go after the weakest link in the party, except if opportunity struck. That means that a tank would need to use skills and actively move to stop attacks rather than draw the attention. That's possible, but it either would make positioning more important to a point where dodging is possible, and at that point why tank if it's easier for the victim to avoid the attack altogether, or tanking would require extremely high reflexes making it even worse to play.
If you want to know what I'm talking about, play a pen and paper RPG. When I did, I had to actively make stupid decisions as a game master to avoid wiping the party up with basic monsters like goblins or orcs, just because "tanking" is simply not realistic.


Also, most people don't play tanks because majority of people prefer dealing damage. It's as simple as that. Tanks would be played the most if they dealt the most damage, but at that point, why have DPS?! There's nothing really to consider here. Playing supportive characters is a less common interest and every single game in existence shows exactly that.

[Shurrikhan]

Doubtful. "Tanking" is unrealistic. The closest to tanks in real life was the roman phalanx.

For a "tank" to work, the concept of enmity would need to be completely removed and the enemy should always go after the weakest link in the party, except if opportunity struck. That means that a tank would need to use skills and actively move to stop attacks rather than draw the attention. That's possible, but it either would make positioning more important to a point where dodging is possible, and at that point why tank if it's easier for the victim to avoid the attack altogether, or tanking would require extremely high reflexes making it even worse to play.
If you want to know what I'm talking about, play a pen and paper RPG. When I did, I had to actively make stupid decisions as a game master to avoid wiping the party up with basic monsters like goblins or orcs, just because "tanking" is simply not realistic.


Also, most people don't play tanks because majority of people prefer dealing damage. It's as simple as that. Tanks would be played the most if they dealt the most damage, but at that point, why have DPS?! There's nothing really to consider here. Playing supportive characters is a less common interest and every single game in existence shows exactly that.

While I don't at all think that the Macedonian phalanx is particularly iconic of "tanking", let alone the limit of such a space-making role in real life, I have to agree that we cannot have actual tanking so long as AI considers only who stacked an alternate-damage value (enmity) highest. Tanking works well enough in games like Overwatch precisely because they have the ability to thwart offenses against their team (via interception paired with their mitigation) despite not necessarily being the most desired target -- certainly not in the long run.

[Derio]

People dont play support because of the responsibility. There are games where all you do tanking wise is pull an enemy and hold block. DCUO and ESO are good examples, but people still think thats too much responsibility.

The big thing with FFXIV is dps are held with little to no responsibilites. IMO there are not enough dps checks in the game outside of ex, savage and ultimate.

[Dualgunner]

People dont play support because of the responsibility. There are games where all you do tanking wise is pull an enemy and hold block. DCUO and ESO are good examples, but people still think thats too much responsibility.

The big thing with FFXIV is dps are held with little to no responsibilites. IMO there are not enough dps checks in the game outside of ex, savage and ultimate.

EX, Savage, and Ultimate basically describe all three difficulty tiers of endgame. Besides that, the other problem is 4 mans have 2 dps, of whom you can't (without a parser) easily tell who is not shouldering their share of the group's damage output. Let alone 8 mans where there are 4 dps, all of whom can hide behind their peers if damage is ever an issue.

While I agree that yes, the game's leveling process could incorporate more dps checks, I also say they would need to officially allow parsers at that point as well.

[LUNELAGOS]

Gunbreakers don't only break guns, they break hearts too.