Reasonable buff to war

[ReiMakoto]

So you were just pretending to be an idiot earlier? Well, either way, you're still wrong.

The fact of the matter is that WAR benefits more from CH compared to the other tanks at lower values and less at higher values.

If you don't believe me, go check a DPS calculator. You'll see that as you stack more and more CH, the other tanks will see larger percentage increases to their DPS than WAR.

So, the idea that the DPS disparity between WAR and the other tanks will "self-correct" as they stack more CH isn't correct in the slightest.



Well, then it's a good thing I never claimed this. I chose my words very carefully; show some respect.

Wow you are completely insufferable reign your ego in son. You claimed it to be nearly linear which is blatantly untrue. Youve neither earned respect nor shown yourself to be worth any

[Argyle_Darkheart]

Wow you are completely insufferable reign your ego in son.

No.

You claimed it to be nearly linear which is blatantly untrue.

It's not blatantly untrue. At the least, it's far more true than you seem to think.

Youve neither earned respect nor shown yourself to be worth any

I was perfectly respectful in my first reply to you, but then you pretend to be an idiot and mis-characterize what I've said. I have no tolerance for that, sorry.

[Shurrikhan]

Wow you are completely insufferable reign your ego in son. You claimed it to be nearly linear which is blatantly untrue. Youve neither earned respect nor shown yourself to be worth any

But, it is linear. A .05% expected damage increase from Critical Hit is takes ~16.5 Critical Hit stat, whether currently at 430 CH or over 2400 CH.
When the slope (stat count per interval of return) is equal at any point in the function... it's linear.
Critical Hit does never changes its stat-per-%damage (or, %damage-per-stat) as the total stat value increases. Critical Hit, itself, is therefore linear.

Its only non-linearity is its interaction with Direct Hit, which provides only faintly more multiplicity than either's interaction with Determination.

You should probably look these things up before calling someone else both a liar and egotist...

[MaraD_]

But, it is linear. A .05% expected damage increase from Critical Hit is takes ~16.5 Critical Hit stat, whether currently at 430 CH or over 2400 CH.
When the slope (stat count per interval of return) is equal at any point in the function... it's linear.
Critical Hit does never changes its stat-per-%damage (or, %damage-per-stat) as the total stat value increases. Critical Hit, itself, is therefore linear.

Its only non-linearity is its interaction with Direct Hit, which provides only faintly more multiplicity than either's interaction with Determination.

You should probably look these things up before calling someone else both a liar and egotist...

Id assume the reason he thinks the other is being "an egotist" is because he was confident in the truth.
Which makes sense, having confidence in the truth. But since this guy refuses to use the damage calculator to see the proof, he's assuming he's still right, and the other is wrong.
And when you assume you're in the correct, then the other person being confident comes off as egotistical.

But yeah, I was also surprised by the idea 1st presented, and when looking it up, saw he was correct. But it seems rather normal here on the forums.
When someone points out a little known fact, that seems to defy the very concept we ingrained in ourselves, everyone throws a fit, even when the proof is presented.
(like when people found out a powerful ability that takes up a resource, makes its own damage lower, by taking up the resource needed to use the very same move. People argued forever saying you cant calculate an ability having some negative dps due to its resource cost. Since the value of the resource was only ever towards the ability in question.)

No, this is a major issue. DPS isn't the only reason.

While I agree with you, this argument isnt fully convincing because the end result was 2%, like they said.
in the case of WAR not offering anything on its own, despite this, all of the weaknesses still leads to a win, with only a 2% difference between it and another tank.

The real argument is that the WARs -2% means that there is no other benefit to counter this 2%.
Back in early SB, when PLD was the guaranteed tank, WARs shake it off (removed debuffs) and DPS, was put against DRKs TBN for utility.
The obvious answer is the higher DPS.

But some people actually argued they valued the higher utility of TBN. This demand lead to the JP players asking SE to fix shake it off into the utility it was. (which was mostly better for the sake of utility, not for TBs)
So not only was WAR better than DRK, it was made a step ahead again.
But the only reason this happened, is because theoretical/perceived bonuses/uniqueness gives value to jobs, even when faced with an obvious flaw/weakness.

In short, you're asking for WAR to have something the other tanks dont. As compensation.
(Which it technically does, but the fights just arent tailored for WARs positives. just as HW wasnt tailored for PLD to abuse cover, to the point that PLD could abuse it in SB to cheat mechanics)

Others will argue the "compensation" is the fact tanks are in demand, so having a tank with only negatives is fine, if the negative is as minor as -2% from the top tank.
(This makes sense, but the designers shouldnt have ever made the mistake in the 1st place.)

So while being correct, the end result is "good enough" so you wont find many supporters, as plenty either
(1) dont want to waste resources on WARs, when other jobs need more balance
or
(2) dont want to rock the boat. or 'dont fix what isnt broken', as they will fear it will have the reverse effect and break something else.

I think its best to ask SE to make future savage fights use every tanks pro/con be considered with either every savage fight, or at least the last 2 fights of savage. (3rd/4th floors)

[JarvisAulin]

Warrior has probably the best kit at keeping itself alive with a decent party buff that grants an AoE shield instead of magic damage only. Warrior damage is only slightly behind the other three tanks by less than 200 dps. It's not reasonable to ask for a damage buff to Warrior because any damage buff would just make it the best tank again and YoshiP already stated he did not want Warrior to be the best and he does not intend to make changes to tank damage.

[Greywolfamakir]

Warrior has probably the best kit at keeping itself alive with a decent party buff that grants an AoE shield instead of magic damage only. Warrior damage is only slightly behind the other three tanks by less than 200 dps. It's not reasonable to ask for a damage buff to Warrior because any damage buff would just make it the best tank again and YoshiP already stated he did not want Warrior to be the best and he does not intend to make changes to tank damage.

Totally agree.

People want the highest amount of personal CDs and the highest DPS, why? because old expansions..."Warrior was the best tank in Heavensward and was top DPS in Stormblood, and now in Shadowbringers we have a lot of personals CDs but we aren't top DPS, it can't be !!!! ". Something like that.

[ForteNightshade]

Warrior has probably the best kit at keeping itself alive with a decent party buff that grants an AoE shield instead of magic damage only. Warrior damage is only slightly behind the other three tanks by less than 200 dps. It's not reasonable to ask for a damage buff to Warrior because any damage buff would just make it the best tank again and YoshiP already stated he did not want Warrior to be the best and he does not intend to make changes to tank damage.

Except it doesn't. First and foremost, virtually every raid wide AoE in the game is magic damage. Therefore, it's rather moot. Dark Knight has far better defensive options; Paladin is better as an OT and all three tanks do higher damage. Now that isn't to say Warrior is bad. It isn't. But it doesn't excel in any area beyond HP recovery—which isn't nearly as valuable given how much healers can heal for. Furthermore, Warrior does not benefit from half the raid buffs the other tanks do, and is prone to much bigger losses due to how Inner Chaos, IR and Fell Cleave work. No one is asking Warrior be the best tank again, but as it currently stands, it's the worst in almost every category. Again, not by a large margin but enough that some small tweaks would go a long way.

[BarretOblivion]

Warrior has probably the best kit at keeping itself alive with a decent party buff that grants an AoE shield instead of magic damage only. Warrior damage is only slightly behind the other three tanks by less than 200 dps. It's not reasonable to ask for a damage buff to Warrior because any damage buff would just make it the best tank again and YoshiP already stated he did not want Warrior to be the best and he does not intend to make changes to tank damage.

No, PLD has the best kit at keeping itself alive. Its called clemency. WAR dies as soon as it can't target someone with Nascent flash which is already a 'meh' heal. Soon PLD will have almost the same mitigation as WAR when we get even better shields with more block. WAR is pretty darn worthless outside of specific fights that throw alot of forced tank swap tankbusters. Eden Prime? Don't use WAR. E2S? (can't remember the name right now of the boss XP) WAR is clunky at best in there. Leviathan? Well WAR/DRK combo is great there but... vengeance is a dead skill so its going to deal even less damage than it could in any other fight. Titan? F no. Bring a PLD/DRK in there or even a GNB, WAR is straight up trash in that fight basically requiring much more work than you need in it.

WAR doesn't need a potency buff... it needs a rework. Holy crap does it play like dog crap outside of IR, its the worst feeling tank job by a long shot even with DRK's clunkiness.