How do we feel about tank damage right now?

[Kabooa]

Okay, but... how does this make tanking, or dealing damage as a tank, less shallow by any noticeable margin?

How does adding 50 potency to every GCD?

[Quor]

snip

Suggest it then. Also, please define exactly what it is you want in complexity, so everyone here can understand beyond a shadow of a doubt. I keep suggesting complexity (and dps too, both p and r!) and I have yet to see someone give any substantive criticism beyond "muh bloat." And to be clear, when I say "criticism" I'm talking about more than just going "nah, this won't work." I want to hear tweaks, counter-suggestions, modifications. I want to see people take the idea and run with it, not a bunch of defeatists stubbornly claiming that SE won't do anything so let's just add more dps.

Overall, I'm seeing a lot of regular posters in this thread who can't walk the talk they're talking. You have people complain about dps and a lack of complexity, so I offer an option that increases both (by a larger margin than is suggested elsewhere no less) and suddenly it's all about ability bloat and then the goal posts move. "Shallow complexity." What the fuck even is that? Please, enlighten me.

[Nedkel]

Average TA gain over the course of 60s is ~1.66% damage (using current TA values). My idea gives tanks a better TA (2% instead of 1.66%) for nothing more than - at most - 3 GCD's of input. On top of that, there are other mechanics to manage beyond simply boosted damage that provide greater engagement for each tank. And yet, you still complain. Of course, looking at your next post, it's clear you don't want more complexity (what you describe as "bloat") and instead simply want buffed damage.

Lets assume its still a gain, im not going to argue with it.
You will need 3 GCD uses to apply it, the skills you are going to use need to give much more than the 2% dmg buff, otherwise it wont be used by majority of playerbase.
Complexity is subjective, for ones GNB is already complex, for someone who play dps jobs its not.
Giving GNB, PLD and WAR another GCD combo they have to go for before doing cool stuff is going to hurt these jobs, regardless of the 0.4% dps gain that ACT will barely even be able to recognise, and yes i mean here aDPS.
But you got the idea on DRK part, yes those buffs are too small, the numbers are small, tanks are not buff class, those buffs need to be higher otherwise it will look like you are making a fun out of people who play tanks.
Dancer going to have some nice stuff +300 potency (just speculating) to the cool skill they use, and next to these changes tank are going to get buffs 2% to damage. And SE are going to write in the patch notes this: Dear tank players we recognize that white mage is able to outdps you by pressing few buttons, so we decided to buff your jobs accordingly by 2% in form of the 7 seconds drudgery so you are going to do the same damage, no need to thank us.

Absolutely no one gives a damn about aoe situations. The entire premise of this thread has been focused around raid dps, which is overwhelmingly single target. Stop introducing unrelated topics into the discussion.

A good dev takes into account all situations in which each class finds itself in.
Raids does not have to be only single target, also these is eureka, Dungeons, alliance raids, world PVE all of which are going to be important part of the game at one time or another.

Better than the tripe you constantly vomit up. I'm offering constructive suggestions; you're laughing at an rDPS increase that's greater than TA and calling it "useless." Also, this entire thread wouldn't exist if it weren't for ACT and FFlogs, so any take your "consfuse" and shove it.

I dont like 2% damage buff in form of additional "storms eye" buttons, its called bloat and its not a good design, even assuming it will serve its purpose, there are much better ways to increase tanks damage and increase it not only in raids.

Nah, I never said those were great propositions or whatever, in fact I haven't even properly read all of them.
I'm merely poking fun at how unconstructive and out of touch your rebuttals always are, lol. You mock other person's ideas trying to sound like you know better, but you just show how little you understand of how numbers work. Again.
Full uptime 2% vuln that works for entire raid would be pretty damn significant and most people don't care that your perception "recognizes change starting at 10% and that anything below is something that you wont notice".

You dont even know what we are discussing here, you are attacking me on my opinion about something you didnt even care to read. (ง ͠° ͟ل͜ ͡°)ง

[Satarn]

You dont even know what we are discussing here, you are attacking me on my opinion about something you didnt even care to read. (ง ͠° ͟ل͜ ͡°)ง

I've read enough. Don't exactly need full context to know that calling 2% for entire raid at full uptime a "waste of 10 seconds", is laughably inaccurate, or that "lul, reddit would be mad" is a shite argument.

[FirstnameLastname]

So much of unnecessary fluff.
Giving combos with buffs is not the answer to anything, people hate them especially one digit % buffs. Human perception regocnizes change starting at 10%, anything below is something that you wont notice.
Tank mains would start a revolution after all those changes, not only you are tying their gameplay to trash buffs, but also making fun of them, here waste 10 seconds in order to apply 2% dmg buff, really. xD
Reddit would blow up with memes.

I counted around 9 generalizations in here but seem to miss anything at least somewhat justified in terms of assumptions. Great meme though.

[Shurrikhan]

How does adding 50 potency to every GCD [make tanking less shallow]?

Never said it did.

In fact I said it didn't.

I don't need to agree with another poster's own solution just because we both agree that some other solution is bloated. There can exist more than two opinions.

Suggest it then. Also, please define exactly what it is you want in complexity, so everyone here can understand beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Working on it. Will post it here once done. The main bottleneck is making sure that any generalized systems made in increasing that depth each work to double down on, rather than detract from, the unique aspects of the tanks and their enjoyable playflows--not just for the purposes of diversity, but more because that simply (1) feels better to play and (2) that provides a precedent counter to reduction-centric streamlining (which I feel guided ShB design more than it should have).

I define complexity as having competing options that are given weight based on situational need, upcoming fight mechanics, and alignment to macro-rotation.

For point of comparison, merely throwing in another plate to spin does not necessarily increase what I consider complexity. If adding that stronger but more constricted option actually takes away or makes non-competitive more options than it creates, we could call that negative complexity, or more aptly convolution (more buttons and tooltips required for at best the same complexity). This is often the case with maintence debuffs, where one or two tends to give benchmarks and rotational breakpoints around which to use varying rotations (think of the equally viable 3-step, 4-step, and 5-step DRG combos in SB before Lance Mastery was tremendously buffed), but a further maintenance buff without a clear idea of working with the complexity already in place (or simply overtune any of those rotational options) and you occlude one or more of those choices, making it at best, again, a net convolution rather than an increase to complexity.

"Shallow complexity", meanwhile, is about the least amount of complexity (use per 30 seconds [prioritize above all other effects, even if this means resetting your combo or otherwise making a mess of your playflow]) possible for the number of parts involved. Think of every way possible to make a more modular mechanic which can more seamlessly integrate with existing play. Now avoid those options. Think also of however the same effect in terms of capacity and complexity can be generated with fewer added actions. Now, ignore those means of efficiency. The result is "shallow complexity".

[Nedkel]

I've read enough. Don't exactly need full context to know that calling 2% for entire raid at full uptime a "waste of 10 seconds", is laughably inaccurate, or that "lul, reddit would be mad" is a shite argument.

Because it is from the design standing point.
You are a TANK, not a buffer and you put this buff behind 3 GCD use.
If you want to maximise your dps output you will have to turn this on first and then go into the meat, in some cases you are going to use 6 GCD before getting to the action part of your gamplay and this is unnecessary fluff. We could as well make a job that has only GCD and all of them are party buffs, sure team will love to have them in team, but only in specific duties and not always and playing it outside raids will be a pain.
I dont play a tank to be a raid-only second class weak buffer, 2% could be good party buff but we are talking here about personal tank damage, lol.

[Satarn]

Because it is from the design standing point.
You are a TANK, not a buffer and you put this buff behind 3 GCD use.
If you want to maximise your dps output you will have to turn this on first and then go into the meat, in some cases you are going to use 6 GCD before getting to the action part of your gamplay and this is unnecessary fluff. We could as well make a job that has only GCD and all of them are party buffs, sure team will love to have them in team, but only in specific duties and not always and playing it outside raids will be a pain.
I dont play a tank to be a raid-only second class weak buffer, 2% could be good party buff but we are talking here about personal tank damage, lol.

First of all, debuffs are way more conventional tank identity than personal damage, there's games where tanks are primary debuffers. In fact all FFXIV tanks used to have defensive debuff combos up until SB, WAR used to have a slashing dmg vulnerability skill until SHB and in PVP all tanks used to have combos that made things easier to kill, be it through straight up vuln or by reducing healing.

Second of all, you don't understand what "fluff" or "button bloat" means if you think that an extra combo which provides a strong debuff that you want to keep up at all times is those things. You can argue that it's clunky and badly designed due to the opener concerns you added later, sure, but If something changes your rotation and becomes a regular part of it, while providing a significant advantage, it ain't no "fluff". You know what is fluff? Current Darkside, because it's really just a side-effect of something you'd do regardless and could as well be a passive.

That doesn't even matter though, because third of all, your initial "lul meme skills, reddit would be angry" post was mocking the 2% part specifically and that was what I made fun of. You can backpedal all you want, but you dismissed a huge rDPS gain as garbage, because you - as you yourself so proudly admitted - don't register numbers lower than 10, lol.

[Awha]

I am going to throw my hat into this with my own terrible not very well thought out idea as to make tanking more engaging and enjoyable from my perspective.

What I personally would do to make tanking more enjoyable would be reduce the boss threat generation from tank stance, while giving classes back their enmity dump skills. Also I would bring back tank and dps stance however I would keep them off the 2.5 GCD and gauge cost but will place a 1 second internal cooldown or longer the intended effect would be to as one gains mastery fight they will be able to push how long they stay in battle stance. Have powerful defense skills require tank stance and powerful offensive skills require battle stance. Each stance can have a slight bonus, but having cooldowns tied to a stance depending on the skill and knowledge of the tank would either focus a more dps or heal centric playstyle from the healer plus tank combo based off skill or even preference. Though the trade off between tank and battle stance in terms of damage should be noticeable in short I wish to offer a high risk high reward play style for tanks and groups that desire it, while offering a safer more bulwark style for those that prefer. That is the intent behind my idea.

Not the best idea, but for some reason I get this feeling that for certain people only those with ideas regarding how to make tanks enjoyable since wanting more damage is simply not a a valid enough reason. Which I disagree with but I tried.

[Shurrikhan]

First of all, debuffs are way more conventional tank identity than personal damage, there's games where tanks are primary debuffers. In fact all FFXIV tanks used to have defensive debuff combos up until SB, WAR used to have a slashing dmg vulnerability skill until SHB.

That was in a time where every composition was expected to have access to every maintainable vulnerability affliction usable by its party... Maintainable vulnerability afflictions are not a tank mechanic so much as simply that every tank happened to deal slashing damage and one tank happened to be able to apply it (making it one of three jobs that could).

That last bit may say much for Warrior's original design (which has almost nothing in common with any modern XIV's tank's), but does not in any way represent the tank role as a whole.