Results 1 to 10 of 75

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Player
    Ultimatecalibur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    2,737
    Character
    Kakita Ucalibur
    World
    Siren
    Main Class
    Paladin Lv 86
    Quote Originally Posted by Shurrikhan View Post
    It is, again:[/B]
    1. For ALLIANCE RAIDS
    2. when a TANK HAS DIED
    3. such that TANKS TAKE ON THE BURDEN OF TANKS' SCREW-UPS, rather than a random non-tank being killed for having played well.
    It is not random. If a member of your party messes up your party gets punished.

    Punishing the other tanks who might be doing their job well is an even worse idea, especially since many of those tri-tank busters include AoE elements and short magic vuln debuffs to prevent the tanks from stacking together or with the main body of the alliance. Also if these tank targeted AoEs did not target a member of the dead tank's party it would simplify the fight as the alliance would need to avoid fewer of these AoEs.
    (4)

  2. #2
    Player
    Shurrikhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    12,863
    Character
    Tani Shirai
    World
    Cactuar
    Main Class
    Monk Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur View Post
    It is not random. If a member of your party messes up your party gets punished.

    Punishing the other tanks who might be doing their job well is an even worse idea, especially since many of those tri-tank busters include AoE elements and short magic vuln debuffs to prevent the tanks from stacking together or with the main body of the alliance. Also if these tank targeted AoEs did not target a member of the dead tank's party it would simplify the fight as the alliance would need to avoid fewer of these AoEs.
    I'm not saying that would be preferable, only that enmity has absolutely nothing to do with the question at hand -- nor, therefore, would tanks be made any more "braindead" through the changes the OP has suggested, let alone that the OP is just too lazy to turn on their tank stance (as a DPS?). The OP was all of two sentences; I had hoped we could read that far, but quickly found otherwise given many of the replies here.

    This part, though, is irrelevant. You just have "both strikes" (or simply, double the damage) hit simultaneously. The only way for it to go Damage-Vuln, Damage-Vuln instead of simply Damagex2, Vulnx2, is if you purposely built in that delay to mimic the delay faced by any single multi-target action as it chains through its affectable enemies.
    (0)