Yes. If it's "a bad idea" for WAR to be able to use 2 DPS increasing abilities at the same time, then it should be for PLD and DRK as well. If by chance you don't feel that FoF/Req is a problem, or if you feel that Blood Price and Blood Weapon should be separated, then it's consistent to think that IR/Unchained change was appropriate in that regard.
Additionally, even if we accept that IR/Unchained needs to go in order to "knock WAR down a peg" - that doesn't solve the underlying issue of other tanks having a poor "pull game". If we accept the premise of MT/OT split, you're going to be stuck with 2 tanks that probably have a weak "pull game" too. So what exactly is going to solve your concern?
To say that the war community wanted unchained to be free of cost IS dishonest, which is why I called it out. That's not how it went down. Unchained was useless because it meant losing IR, which was in no way whatsoever an acceptable trade off. There was already the cost of losing gauge to activate on top of the general losses associated with swapping to tank stance. In regards to selective commenting, yes I don't want to spend all my time on this article because 1) I don't actually think it's likely to happen and 2) there are plenty of obvious contradictions being pointed out (like the above) that just keep getting hand-waived away, which is creating a pretty repetitive conversation.
It was obvious they wanted to reduce tank dps coming in to the expansion, I was one of the few on this forums actually arguing on behalf of SE for the community to suck it up and deal with it. There were ways to mitigate the wonky gauge costs and realistically it only caused a problem in those moments where a tank died and the other tank had to pick up threat quick. I've been one of the few to consistently argue on behalf of the other tank jobs to bring them up to the level of WAR - because it's actually a well designed job. Chrono Rising made a great post capturing how synergistic WARs kit was, and that the other tanks should also focus around those kind of synergies on their own.Players asked for several different things with regards to Unchained, Inner Release, Shake it off, and WAR's stance costs. Whose fault was it? Was it the prominent streamers who campaigned for it? The playerbase which echoed and copypasted those demands? Or the devs for actually listening? It's hard to say, but I didn't see any WAR players arguing that the changes were too powerful after the fact.
That being said, I don't recall seeing any bandwagon of WARs asking for themselves to be nerfed after the fact. Has that happened with an "OP" job in any game? Ever?
We both agree there is a point of balance that needs to be achieved/strived for, we just disagree on how to get there. I think they should look at what made WAR successful and emulate that on the other jobs.Regardless of how you want to spin it, they were a bad set of decisions. As far as tank balance goes, anything that erodes WAR's set of systemic advantages built over Heavensward and Stormblood and brings tanks into parity is going to be a good thing.
I actually wanted to address this separately because it's more or less the crux of my half of the argument. "No one tank that's good at everything" means that you won't actually be able to play the job you want. You'll only be able to play the job that's more effective in a given situation. Is that really what you're hoping for? To be locked in specific jobs, for specific roles, instead of being able to play whatever job you prefer - with the confidence that you can handle anything thrown your way?Anything that puts checks and balances such that no one tank is good at everything is going to be a good thing.
Kinda, yea. If you want to succeed then you have to lay it down like a boss.