Removing Tank Stance Argument

[Derio]

Enmity overhaul pretty much. Enmity combos would have to have their generation increased by x5 or even x10. I am sure you have seen the chaos when tanks fight for aggro because they are both in tank stance.

This removing of tank stance is literally putting all tanks in a permanent tank stance. Forcing a playstyle on all tank players.

One big problem is every expansion there are general enmity problems all around. Look at the patch shortly after 4.0 released when they had to make several enmity changes. All the buffs to diversion.

Removing tank stance and you have to rework all 3 job gauges, enmity, enmity combos and role actions, alongside the existing job changes and the tp/mp change.

I have faith in the dev team but you have to remember the effort to fix healers as well. I just dont think they can do all these changes without something going horribly wrong.

[Kalise]

Removing tank stance and you have to rework all 3 job gauges

Actually... You only need to rework one.

Warrior's are the only one that have some actual "Tank Stance" related change to their job gauge, though it's mostly centred around their actual skills (Basically the Inner Beast/Fell Cleave and Steel Cyclone/Decimate thing)

DRK's stance doesn't interact with their job gauge in any way (At best it's a case of Blood Weapon vs Blood Price... But given that DRK's feel like complete and total trash without Blood Weapon it would simply be easier to just let them use Blood Weapon all the time and cut Trash Price)

PLD's stance simply just generates less Gauge during Shield Oath due to it being only generated on block rather than on AA which is a major frequency difference (Outside of Bulwark vs multiple enemies). Which again, could be simple enough to just cut the Shield Oath effect...

How about this:
Main-tanks: Get a trait at 30 that decreases damage and increases defence, and a cooldown/ability that disables this.
Off-tanks: Get a cooldown/ability at 30 (or starts with it for Gunbreaker) that increases their defence and decreases their damage.

Whys Tanks gotta get their damage gimped to do their role?

Like, not only is this literally the reason why Tanks already don't want to use "Tank Stance" but it's an asinine facet that no other role deals with.

There's no "DPS Stance" for damage dealers that increases their damage and reduces their defence.

There's no "Healer Stance" that increases healing and decreases damage.

Why do Tanks need to be arbitrarily punished for trying to do their damn job?

Like, that's the biggest thing to consider... It's not that Tank players are simply going "Hurr durr muh sick DEEPS" when they opt to not use Tank Stance, it's that they're actively punished for using it. So why continue this trend which would only serve to maintain "Tank Stance" as being a crutch for newer players and otherwise a redundant skill for people whom are capable enough to use CD's correctly.

[347SPECTRE]

There is also the fact tanks tank without a stance for 15 levels (15-30). It's not necessary when you know what you're doing.

[Seraphor]

"There's no "DPS Stance" for damage dealers that increases their damage and reduces their defence."

Blood for Blood?

You don't have to say it "decreases damage" but if the opposite, DPS stance increases damage, then, in relative terms, the tank variant must be less.
In this sense, all DPS classes have a DPS stance.
Astral Fire is a DPS stance, and not being in AF is a damage decrease, etc.

I propose that it should still decrease damage, because you'd need to balance these two paradigms with each other.
If OT's are in default DPS stance, and MT's are in default tank stance, then how do you balance those default stances with each other?
Without a decrease to the MT's default tank stance, then the MT's DPS boost will be above and beyond anything the OT can put out.
Without any damage modification, you simply have a tank that has an ever present defense boost, and a tank that only gets it occasionally. Obviously that's not balanced, in both cases the MT outclasses the OT in all ways.

MT: always has boosted defence, doesn't have any damage penalty, has a damage boosting cooldown.
OT: just has a defence boosting cooldown that puts it back on par with the MT's constant defence.

[347SPECTRE]

Blood for blood is a cooldown. There's also the fact that in a party with two tanks of decent skill, neither the MT or OT would be in tank stance to begin with.

[Seraphor]

Blood for blood is a cooldown. There's also the fact that in a party with two tanks of decent skill, neither the MT or OT would be in tank stance to begin with.

...which is exactly what I've suggested tank stances become...

And with the system I've suggested, the MT would either be in permanent tank stance with DPS cooldowns, or the OT could act as MT, necessitating the use of its tank stance cooldowns. Both playing differently, but both able to fulfill either role.

[347SPECTRE]

...which is exactly what I've suggested tank stances become...

And with the system I've suggested, the MT would either be in permanent tank stance with DPS cooldowns, or the OT could act as MT, necessitating the use of its tank stance cooldowns. Both playing differently, but both able to fulfill either role.

Or leave it as is or remove tank stances all together since a decent tank really doesn't use tank stance. The only thing I'd agree with would be a cooldown that boosts emnity generation. Why try to fix what isn't broken.

[Kalise]

"There's no "DPS Stance" for damage dealers that increases their damage and reduces their defence."

Blood for Blood?

That's not a stance, that's a CD.

You don't have to say it "decreases damage" but if the opposite, DPS stance increases damage, then, in relative terms, the tank variant must be less.

That's literally the same thing.

A Tank will look at it and be like "Well... I lose damage for being in this stance"

And again, NO OTHER ROLE IN THE GAME has to take a penalty to do their job (Outside of the singular CD from Dragoon, the DPS job with higher than average defences due to wearing medium armour for thematic reasons)

I propose that it should still decrease damage, because you'd need to balance these two paradigms with each other.

It shouldn't decrease damage.

SINCE THAT'S THE ENTIRE PROBLEM WITH TANK STANCE AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE FOR AS LONG AS IT EXISTS

There is literally not a single reason why Tank stance needs to reduce damage output.

Just like there is literally not a single reason why DPS stance needs to offer less defence.

Since, unless you're proposing that "DPS Stance" Tanks should be doing equal damage to actual DPS jobs, then there's no balance issue arising that needs to be compensated by penalties.

Since that's literally the only possible scenario where these penalties would make sense. If Tanks were doing equal damage to DPS jobs and thus people were incentivised to just run Tanks instead of DPS because they deal the same damage but are tankier.

But if Tanks, even in DPS Stance, are not doing the same damage as DPS jobs... Then there's already no risk of people taking Tanks over DPS, because people want more damage especially when Enrage Timers exist. (This even includes progression raiding, whereby you might think "Hmm... Wouldn't it be easier if the raid was tankier" but it's counteracted by progression raiding also has the issue of being less capable of meeting the Enrage Timer)

If OT's are in default DPS stance, and MT's are in default tank stance, then how do you balance those default stances with each other?

By... Not making horrible design decisions like forcing "OT's" and "MT's" and giving them default "DPS" and "Tank" stances respectively?

Especially ones that look to alter stats in bland and ultimately problematic ways that literally have existed for long enough that people are having discussions about simply "Removing Tank Stances"?

[Seraphor]

So.. what? tanks just become braindead DPS that by default have a constant enmity boost to all their attacks?

DO MY POINTS HAVE MORE WEIGHT IF I USE BOLD AND CAPS TOO?

[347SPECTRE]

So.. what? tanks just become braindead DPS that by default have a constant enmity boost to all their attacks?

DO MY POINTS HAVE MORE WEIGHT IF I USE BOLD AND CAPS TOO?

No, it would have more weight if you showed you actually know about tanks.