GNB Mit

[ReiMakoto]

I don't know why you guys keep saying "60k".

It's only 60k if every tick of it crits.

The reason aurora is "bad" is because HoTs, and DoTs, exist to be higher return but over longer duration.

Aurora isn't stronger than anything other than small-pack Abyssal Drain. It's equal to equilibrium, but part and parcels over 18s.

No one would say "Regen is good" if it was 700 instead of 1200.

I agree with your reasoning if we were talking about GCD HoTs, they need to be higher potency than other options to justify their existance, when it comes to oGCD hots though I disagree, theyre essentially free at that point with only the caveat that they dont heal immediatly. If regen was 700 instead of 1200, but it was an off global people would say its good cos its free.

[TheRealQuah]

Jobs skill sets aren't designed around casual content (dungeons). They are so easy and you barely take any damage doing double pulls that cooldowns are hardly needed at all. If you are struggling in dungeons, it's the low dps not killing things quick enough, and not the lack of mitigation.

GNB Aurora is actually an average cooldown. Its not top tier, but its not trash either and anyone who thinks it's bad doesn't understand how to play GNB optimally.

[Hierro]

I missed you saying the raid part, ill admit that, the rest of it still applies to what you said about dungeons which youre still ignoring, 27% heal is more impactful (especially in dungeons where things are generally pretty weak) than using actual mitigation sometimes, you were also saying it is "bad", i still dont think it is bad in dungeons, and what i said still applies to that, most of the time in dungeons your health drops so slow that a 27% heal is still impactful provided folks arn't overhealing. I still dont see why just the fact that it is over time makes it bad. Also no need to be an ass about it lol, we're just talking about game balance. Id still love to see your reasoning as to why free 27% healing is bad when that free 27% is offering more mitigation than your other cds when used properly.

I will gladly tell you why it's bad in dungeons. Earlier I mentioned my own personal standard, DRK & WAR. Once per big pull, I can use aurora and potentially heal up to 27%. Aside from this healing, GNB has nothing else aside from traditional mitigation that all tanks have, and camo.

However, as DRK I can use TBN every 15 seconds and that's 25% hp everytime, and STILL have abyssal drain at my disposal which easily beats out aurora in a big pull. As WAR, well, I have bene basically that I can use a couple times per pull via NF+CC, and this doesn't even mention ToB+Eq.

Compared to the aforementioned, aurora is bad. GNB has no real sustain. It requires attention, more than any other tank purely out of the virtue of having less than all the others in terms of dungeon mitigation.

Also, if a bunch of things are hitting me for about 5k per hit, rampart reduces it to 4k a hit. If I have 8 targets, that's about 8k hp that I saved per round of hits. After four rounds of hits, I've mitigated more than aurora, and that's after like 12 seconds and rampart can still mitigate more, I don't understand how aurora could do more than rampart to mitigate a pull.

[ReiMakoto]

I will gladly tell you why it's bad in dungeons. Earlier I mentioned my own personal standard, DRK & WAR. Once per big pull, I can use aurora and potentially heal up to 27%. Aside from this healing, GNB has nothing else aside from traditional mitigation that all tanks have, and camo.

However, as DRK I can use TBN every 15 seconds and that's 25% hp everytime, and STILL have abyssal drain at my disposal which easily beats out aurora in a big pull. As WAR, well, I have bene basically that I can use a couple times per pull via NF+CC, and this doesn't even mention ToB+Eq.

Compared to the aforementioned, aurora is bad. GNB has no real sustain. It requires attention, more than any other tank purely out of the virtue of having less than all the others in terms of dungeon mitigation.

Also, if a bunch of things are hitting me for about 5k per hit, rampart reduces it to 4k a hit. If I have 8 targets, that's about 8k hp that I saved per round of hits. After four rounds of hits, I've mitigated more than aurora, and that's after like 12 seconds and rampart can still mitigate more, I don't understand how aurora could do more than rampart to mitigate a pull.

Okay so this is the foundation where we are disagreeing then. I wasnt talking here about comparisons to other classes i was talking about wether aurora is an intrinsically bad skill, not is it bad compared to NF or TBN, because i established page 1 that GNB is worse than WAR and DRK and better than PLD. Being worse than something else does not make a thing intrinsically bad it just makes it worse than the other thing. In a vacuum GNB is not bad at dealing with dungeons, no tank is, and in a vacuum aurora is an effective heal over time. And with proper cd rotations you can still heal a gnb through a dungeon with no more attention needed than the other tanks (because dungeons are balanced around the very low end).

EDIT: on the topic of "less than all the others" im still going to say its better than pld, cos if your pld is having to spam clem somethings very wrong, and outside of clem, pld has less to use.

On your final paragraph, again i refer you to the maths not anedote. On a 200k hp even if we were to say that aurora only healed 40k, you would need to take your entire healhbars worth of damage while rampart is up for the rampart to mitigate 40k (200k*0.2=40k). Now it might just be the folks i run with, but outside of maybe the large pull at the start of pag, i dont remember trashpacks dealing my whole healthbar 20s, but id happily go and check.

[Kabooa]

I agree with your reasoning if we were talking about GCD HoTs, they need to be higher potency than other options to justify their existance, when it comes to oGCD hots though I disagree, theyre essentially free at that point with only the caveat that they dont heal immediatly. If regen was 700 instead of 1200, but it was an off global people would say its good cos its free.

Except if Regen was OGCD, then so would be cure.

The cost is equivalent to other healing abilities - OGCD and 60s.

Instant return always beats return over time, and this is why return over time is tuned to higher total sums, because it has to be. Aurora would be better if it was instant return and the same strength.

Aurora is serviceable, but so is One Nuke + One DoT.

Here are some examples of more thematic and/or better Auroras

a 1200 Potency shield.

600 heal / 600 potency shield

1800 potency HoT

For 18 seconds, a portion of all damage dealt is stored. at the end of 18 seconds or upon reactivation, heal for that amount.

"---------------. ---- shield for that amount."

[ReiMakoto]

Instant return always beats return over time, and this is why return over time is tuned to higher total sums, because it has to be. Aurora would be better if it was instant return and the same strength.

I like a lot of those suggestions, but I would like to focus on this statement. This is not necessarily true, a HoT has the advantage of more consistency over an instantaneous heal through crit rolling. An instaneous heal will have higher highs as it only needs to roll a crit once, but a HoT will have multiple chances to get crit rolls across its duration. Given enough time theoretically they'll end up healing the same amount, but if you hit an equilibrium for example an it doesn't crit thats it until your next equilibrium, whereas with a HoT whilst its less likely to get the full amount, it'll more likely get more than the lowest amount. Theres also niche scenarious, for example a small trickle of damage when you're on high health can be covered by a HoT with little to no overheal, wheres a burst heal could overshoot. Again small things but its not as black and white as presented.

[Kabooa]

I like a lot of those suggestions, but I would like to focus on this statement. This is not necessarily true, a HoT has the advantage of more consistency over an instantaneous heal through crit rolling. An instaneous heal will have higher highs as it only needs to roll a crit once, but a HoT will have multiple chances to get crit rolls across its duration. Given enough time theoretically they'll end up healing the same amount, but if you hit an equilibrium for example an it doesn't crit thats it until your next equilibrium, whereas with a HoT whilst its less likely to get the full amount, it'll more likely get more than the lowest amount. Theres also niche scenarious, for example a small trickle of damage when you're on high health can be covered by a HoT with little to no overheal, wheres a burst heal could overshoot. Again small things but its not as black and white as presented.

I'd define these are pretty rare circumstances to consider, but fair enough.

Aurora being closer to an effetive 1400 HoT is still far below the margin I'd want it at to remain a HoT, and if Aurora can outpace or match the incoming damage, you're literally in zero danger. Natural regen and Brutal Shell will cover you until the heat death of the universe.

[RinaB]

Whenever people have to explain in great detail why something is good and break it down to the microscopic level to justify its existence it's usually because they're delusional and said thing is shit. Aurora sucks and it either needs to have potency increase or buff camo and get rid of it. Camo is weak as hell for a class specific mitigator especially if you want to compare it to TBN.

[Tracewood]

I would like to see them reduce the regen cooldown to about the same as N.Flash on WAR or TDN on DRK. If it is the same, then maybe just a touch faster? Or increase the regen potency.

Maybe another tool that reflects all types of damage for 15 seconds.

[aodhan_ofinnegain]

Heart of Stone is the TBN, NF/ Raw Intuition equivalent, which has similar cooldown. Aurora shares the same cooldown as Equilibrium, it's equivalent.

Also reflect in pve outside of Eureka and Bozja, would be pretty busted, so no thanks.