How do we feel about tank damage right now?

[Lyth]

Forcing more active mitigation through more challenging damage patterns is interesting. Forcing more passive mitigation where you press a button to stay turtled up is not. You don't want to go back to the old stance system. You might think you do, but you don't.

Also, the "tank stance debate" was two people arguing for the sake of arguing on why we can't 'maximise our mitigation' or why we can't redesign this game into a new game in which we 'maximise our mitigation'. There was never any real debate on how this game gets played in practice.

[Reynhart]

Forcing more passive mitigation where you press a button to stay turtled up is not. You don't want to go back to the old stance system. You might think you do, but you don't.

Forcing passive mitigation during some heavy damage phases while allowing room to deactivate it during other phases is still more intereting than what we have now or even what we had before. And having the choice of what damage to trade (tank's or healer's) for more survivability would cover different types of players.

Also, the "tank stance debate" was two people arguing for the sake of arguing on why we can't 'maximise our mitigation' or why we can't redesign this game into a new game in which we 'maximise our mitigation'. There was never any real debate on how this game gets played in practice.

Sure, not in practice, but tweaking some numbers would have been enough to open the two paths without one completely crushing the other when it comes to optimization. We wouldn't have needed a heavy redesign.