Kneejerk reaction to PLD changes.

[MaraD_]

Well it depends on if they were balancing enemy damage based on tanks being in tank stance or dps stance before. If they were balancing it based on tank stance there shouldn't really be much of a change at least for this reason.

They never directly stated what their intentions/designs were for tanks in that regard, except in SB they indirectly referenced making content for tanks outside of tank stance, but most likely just because everyone was already doing it in HW, and didnt feel the need to change anything.

But you also need to look at why developers would make a "stance" in a game where the tank class cant be a pure DPS/healer (like in WoW)
Stances were invented in old western MMOs as a way for them to swap roles. (And eventually shying away from that, via other methods)
People think tanks werent meant to stance dance, or take hits outside of tank stance, despite forgetting SE said all tanks were viable at endgame. This includes 2.0 WAR which didnt have mitigation.

So how did they manage a double WAR PT clearing Twintania Twisers? (Which they said was possible)
Same issue they ran into with Alexander Savage1-4.

People couldnt clear harder fights with certain jobs, until those jobs were far more geared up. (nearly maxed geared)

WARs required way better gear, which was weeks worth of locked tomes in 2.0.
Why wait on a WAR, when u can bring a PLD, who lowers the enemies damage directly?

Now, if you noticed, WARs stances may have been oGCD, but the part that actually mimics the mitigation of a PLD, was on the GCD.
so a PLD can double up with stance and rampart while WAR couldnt (excluding the CDS on much longer CDs)

Tank stances are emergency CDs. If you didnt plan to handle the tank buster correctly, you have an emergency CD that penalizes you in your DPS.
Every boss could be handled without tank stances, but requires better gear and teamwork.
If you cant mitigate a TB enough, then you arent properly tank swapping, so as to maximize your CDs better.

Even now, when people ask yoshida how he intended people to play jobs, he refuses to answer. So its easy to say we dont know his intentions, but you can piece enough of it together based on what is presented.
Only four times have we as players ever come up with a strategy the Devs didnt think of, and they immediately addressed it, usually because it helpped the players make the content easier than intended. (that im aware of)
I'm fairly certain if players did something unintended, SE would mention it. (back when tanking w/o a stance was picking up, yoshida ONLY mentions the healers being asked to DPS, and doesnt mention the tanks. All he said is tank DPS is already taken into consideration. Which most likely means he was surprised by healers focusing on DPS, but not surprised by tanks)

is a BIG stretch to make updated cover seem worse than it is.

Only as much of a stretch as saying the baked in -20% is the replacement to cover, when its clearly not (all tanks get it, not just PLD)
its just easier to say the PLD can just use the better Sheltron as a means to lower dmg as an OT. (and proc shield swipe) this is more accurate from a development perspective.
But i picked current tank stance, due to the fact ist going away. sheltron isnt going away, just changed, so using that in the comparison makes no sense.

EDIT: to clarify why its not a stretch. He's assuming the baked in -20% is somehow not the standard, when its not possible to NOT have the -20% active in SH. That also assumes that the current devs plan content with tanks staying in tank stance. The -20% is removed because it was being used on the MT, rather than squishy allies. (You'll almost never see a PLD cover thier healer, to survive raid wide that would otherwise wipe the party, so they can then LB3.) By removing it, it can still be used to cheese mechanics, but the current PLD players will no longer feel it was wasted on a non tank. Currently you feel its wasted if used on a BLM, rather than on the MT. But non tanks take more dmg than tanks, so -20% was baked in, as if the squishies had tank stance on.
So if his idea that the devs intended tanks to stay in tank stance, and the fact they inteded the tank to protect non tanks, then it would be comparable, and not absurd.