Tanking feels unimportant

[Shurrikhan]

So you are basically saying that you want to do away with positional bonuses/requirements on melee DPS...?

Because why cater to the midcore audience when you want to cater to hardcore audience but also cater to the casual audience...?

No. Weren't you just on the thread where I was defending positionals?

You used a term ("a necessary evil") that, in its context (their implementations, not their concepts), implied that systems cannot be refined, only reduced. I see otherwise. You can have the engagement of positioning and enmity without the frustrations owed specifically to how they were previously implemented.

[DRKoftheAzure]

Considering that thread was in general discussions instead of DPS role, it's no wonder I couldn't find it the thread again until you mentioned it existing and that you posted in it.

But you defend positionals, but you don't defend enmity combos...

I defend both positionals and enmity combos but apparently enmity combos is "not the hill to die on" so I won't feel sorry for melee DPS once positionals are outright removed along with True North...

[Shurrikhan]

But you defend positionals, but you don't defend enmity combos...

I defend both positionals and enmity combos but apparently enmity combos is "not the hill to die on" so I won't feel sorry for melee DPS once positionals are outright removed along with True North...

You're strawmanning me yet again. I never said enmity mitigation, enmity GCD skills, or even enmity combos were a bad concept. I said that no single implementation is ever "necessary", and that no player should ever have to just sit in silence and deal with a poor implementation when it could be improved. The fact that so little were willing to engage in that discussion, treating it as "[precisely this implementation] or it's dead and gone" is why they're now dead and gone. I don't want to see the same happen to another concept with (even better) potential. And so, when I saw your claim, which I thought was both fundamentally wrong and destructive, I commented accordingly.

And let's be clear: "Audiences" -- be they casual, midcore, hardcore, veterans, new, smart, average, social, reclusive, or whatever else -- aren't perfectly packaged and inseparable sets of mutually exclusive characteristics. Find what few of those characteristics actually matter for a given implementation and you'll find things that are so commonly perceived as better design, among nearly all those groups, they they might as well be considered objectively better design. Stop reducing discussion as to how an ends can best be achieved (e.g. better implementations) to solely catering to X, Y, or Z. There's a place for discussing how changes might affect some more than others, but that should come only in compliment to a larger discussion of utility.

[Quor]

Stormblood TBN was a way better use for MP spending since if and when it broke you got a free Bloodspiller/Quietus out of it over using Dark Arts, but that's only if you knew when it would be break on either yourself or co-tank, whereas Shadowbringers TBN is pointless on break since you would have used that 3k MP for Edge/Flood of Shadow anyway, and I know someone might have some weird rotation where they can get 5 Edge of Shadows in with 5 Bloodspillers in an opener, but I would rather TBN give me a free Edge/Flood of Shadow use, 50 Blood gauge, AND reset Abyssal Drain and Carve and Spit recast timers if it broke and just a free Edge/Flood of Shadow if it just fell off...

Oh no, it was not as simple as that, because the MP used for TBN in SB was the same as the MP used for DA, and DA was a flat 140 potency boost to most GCD skills DRK had. Given that DA functioned essentially as an oGCD potency boost, you can easily make the comparison that the 2400 MP for DA and TBN was equivalent to 140 potency on average. Since it applied to GCD skills, and getting a "free" BS meant adding an additional GCD skill into your rotation, you weren't actually getting the full potency from BS, you were simply raising your average ppGCD by a small amount. Mathed out over time, the potency gain from using BS via TBN instead of DA was largely a negligible one, and during certain snapshots would actually result in an absolute loss. I went over it in a thread some time ago during Stormblood and showed that while there are discrete moments where using a DA (assuming an MP neutral environment for the sake of calculation) would outpace BS via TBN, there were also discrete moments where using BS via TBN would outpace pure DA usage.

As it stands now, proper usage of TBN grants a strong shield on top of a raw 500 (or 300*X in aoe) if it breaks. This is pure potency gain because it's oGCD so there's no mucking about in the average ppGCD realm to drag actual damage gain down.

In regards to your other suggestions, sure, it would be nice if AB and CnS were reset on top of a "free" Bloodspiller, but that's just a bit too much. Practically speaking you'd be using AB and CnS about three times as often as you do now, which effectively amounts to at least a tripling of the damage gained from those attacks. While I think the core idea is a good one the target you're aiming for is a bit high. If tanks needed drastic buffs to damage I could get behind it, but balance is very tight (in a good way) right now. Anything that screws with said balance in such a drastic way is going in the wrong direction.

Conversely, all the tanks could be buffed in a similar fashion (and indeed, I hope they are to one degree or another, at least in terms of how the kits of each tank feeds back into itself) but that's a whole other ball of wax. Bottom line, I like the general idea, but it has flaws. Maybe instead of a full reset it provides something else that boosts the output of AB and CnS. The issue that would need to be avoided is ensuring that the optimal playstyle isn't to focus the job entirely on getting TBN to pop. While the feedback loop TBN provides is an interesting one in and of itself, there's still enough decision making involved such that using TBN exactly on CD isn't for the best. If too much power comes from TBN popping then the job starts to revolve around getting TBN to pop as often as possible, to the exclusion and detriment of everything else. It wouldn't be a choice to use TBN in this situation; you would want to get it on CD as fast as possible in an effort to get it to pop so you could unload another few big oGCD hits alongside an additional BS.

But anyway, like I said, I'm down with the core idea you're presenting.

[DRKoftheAzure]

You're strawmanning me yet again. I never said enmity mitigation, enmity GCD skills, or even enmity combos were a bad concept. I said that no single implementation is ever "necessary", and that no player should ever have to just sit in silence and deal with a poor implementation when it could be improved. The fact that so little were willing to engage in that discussion, treating it as "[precisely this implementation] or it's dead and gone" is why they're now dead and gone. I don't want to see the same happen to another concept with (even better) potential. And so, when I saw your claim, which I thought was both fundamentally wrong and destructive, I commented accordingly.

And let's be clear: "Audiences" -- be they casual, midcore, hardcore, veterans, new, smart, average, social, reclusive, or whatever else -- aren't perfectly packaged and inseparable sets of mutually exclusive characteristics. Find what few of those characteristics actually matter for a given implementation and you'll find things that are so commonly perceived as better design, among nearly all those groups, they they might as well be considered objectively better design. Stop reducing discussion as to how an ends can best be achieved (e.g. better implementations) to solely catering to X, Y, or Z. There's a place for discussing how changes might affect some more than others, but that should come only in compliment to a larger discussion of utility.

If that's how you see it, then let it burn like World of Warcraft, because I'm honestly at the point where I don't care what happens after 6.0... I'll only stick around for 6.0 if battle changes are even worth praising or not...

[Nephyleem]

Well, let us get back to the core of the matter: "Tanking feels unimportant".
From what I read, it is mainly felt because, notably, aggro management has become too easy...

WELL. LET US SUMMARIZE.
What is the role of a tank?

1 - Being the center of attention of their foes
2 - Being the HP pool of the team
3 - Protecting their allies
4 - Leading the group

Point one has become exceedingly easy to achieve nowadays. But is it truly so bad as a thing? I do not know...
I do not know, because it is the very base of the pyramid. And if people fail at it, all the group's progress through an instance is being compromised. Aside, that management was not THAT MUCH of an ordeal before neither, so making it even simpler is, to me, not so great of a loss.

... AT ONE CONDITION...

By taking out the part one from the challenge, they could focus more on the rest. And that, they seem to have pretty much forgotten it in the long run.
If they had put more emphasis on the other roles of a tank, notably "protecting their team", it could have given more edge to exploit to those willing to be perfect.
Some tools do ALREADY exist, though, and for all jobs: Pass of Arms, Shake It Off, Heart of Stone, Dark Missionary, and others...
Making it easier to hold hate allows you to put more thought into the use of this kind of actions. Assuming that you are willing to bother, of course.

As for leadership... Do remember that, for being the tank, you get to decide WHERE the fight occurs (unless you are stuck in an arena, and even so, where in that arena things are happening depends on you).
If you are bored with aggro generation, and do not want to bother with assisting your team (or perhaps are you already through with it?) work on your placement, remember that, regarding the composition of your team, the needs change. You do not have the same placement needs with a party made of melee fighters than with ranged ones (the latter generally meaning that you do not even have to think much about it, while, when I am being a melee, how many times have I found myself unable to do my positionnals because my tank does not grant me access to the foes' rear/leaves it in an AoE field...).

But whetever you may say, the TANKS are not unimportant. They remain one of the core elements of a team. And if they do their job wrongly, the others will have to pay the price.

My point in all this is...
I can understand the frustration of the enmity generation becoming easier. But instead of complaining, see it as an opportunity to focus on something else. Something more useful to your party.
There are ways. Well... more like hidden routes to it... But it is worth a try, don't you think?

[RadicalPesto]

Can't believe that part of this thread was someone straight up claiming Paladin's job is to self-proc Clemency every single time because healers do more damage at the 100th percentile when they don't heal at all. It's like people forget that aside from fflogs outliers any mechanic that calls for Veil usage will almost always also involve some kind of aoe healer shield or regen that will activate veil, because most raid scenarios aren't "both healers doing 100th percentile dps with 0 gcd heals ever used", which is one of extremely few scenarios where Paladin doing 0 damage gcds to save healer ones even makes sense.

[Falar]

Seems like tank damage could use a buff. I like where it was in Heavensward compared to the other roles.

[Saix027]

Well, let us get back to the core of the matter: "Tanking feels unimportant".
From what I read, it is mainly felt because, notably, aggro management has become too easy...

WELL. LET US SUMMARIZE.
What is the role of a tank?

1 - Being the center of attention of their foes
2 - Being the HP pool of the team
3 - Protecting their allies
4 - Leading the group

Point one has become exceedingly easy to achieve nowadays. But is it truly so bad as a thing? I do not know...
I do not know, because it is the very base of the pyramid. And if people fail at it, all the group's progress through an instance is being compromised. Aside, that management was not THAT MUCH of an ordeal before neither, so making it even simpler is, to me, not so great of a loss.

... AT ONE CONDITION...

By taking out the part one from the challenge, they could focus more on the rest. And that, they seem to have pretty much forgotten it in the long run.
If they had put more emphasis on the other roles of a tank, notably "protecting their team", it could have given more edge to exploit to those willing to be perfect.
Some tools do ALREADY exist, though, and for all jobs: Pass of Arms, Shake It Off, Heart of Stone, Dark Missionary, and others...
Making it easier to hold hate allows you to put more thought into the use of this kind of actions. Assuming that you are willing to bother, of course.

As for leadership... Do remember that, for being the tank, you get to decide WHERE the fight occurs (unless you are stuck in an arena, and even so, where in that arena things are happening depends on you).
If you are bored with aggro generation, and do not want to bother with assisting your team (or perhaps are you already through with it?) work on your placement, remember that, regarding the composition of your team, the needs change. You do not have the same placement needs with a party made of melee fighters than with ranged ones (the latter generally meaning that you do not even have to think much about it, while, when I am being a melee, how many times have I found myself unable to do my positionnals because my tank does not grant me access to the foes' rear/leaves it in an AoE field...).

But whetever you may say, the TANKS are not unimportant. They remain one of the core elements of a team. And if they do their job wrongly, the others will have to pay the price.

My point in all this is...
I can understand the frustration of the enmity generation becoming easier. But instead of complaining, see it as an opportunity to focus on something else. Something more useful to your party.
There are ways. Well... more like hidden routes to it... But it is worth a try, don't you think?

Thing is i see with tanks, they lost a lot of responsiblity, tank stances got changed so they not care for it anymore due damage output stays the same, same for damage reduction now, no positoning anymore due you can block and parry from all sides now, now most tanks i see not bother to turn around or positon the adds or boss right anymore.

CD's removed or changed, most has the healer to deal with now. PLD once king of CD has like 2-3 CD left and it feels painful as main PLD myself and i can see why other Tanks barely bother now. Tankign became ot easy i say, ntohing against simplifying thigns but the recent changes maked things brain dead at times and i can see why Tanks and Healers both complain here.

[MerlinCross]

CD's removed or changed, most has the healer to deal with now. PLD once king of CD has like 2-3 CD left and it feels painful as main PLD myself and i can see why other Tanks barely bother now. Tankign became ot easy i say, ntohing against simplifying thigns but the recent changes maked things brain dead at times and i can see why Tanks and Healers both complain here.

The changes made playing a tank brain dead, at least to me. However at the start of the expansion this was countered by how hard the new waves of enemies hit and how unexpected that was. With gear and practice this becomes less and less of a problem and thus becomes more and more boring to the classes that deal with getting hit.