Bring back Aggro, resource management, bring back consequences!

[Mikey_R]

That's not an argument against TP or aggro, that's an argument that they implemented it poorly.

I don't think anyone here is advocating for the exact old aggro system to be brought back, or TP management system.

You say this, but offer no suggestions. I can give fairly accurate experiences from playing Monk alot in HW and SB. In HW, you Invigorate at ~550 TP, you then run out at about that point Invigorate comes back, which it takes no time at all to bottom out again...and so you are left with no way to restore your TP and attacking slower whilst waiting for TP to refresh. You are punished for being efficient, even more so the higher your uptime is, which you want to maximise. In SB it was different as the TP required for Monk's GCDs was reduced by 10 (60 -> 50). At this point, for single target, you really didn't have to worry about TP at all, or at least, you didn't have to be as strict in its placement. AT this point, is there really much point in it? You aren't really managing it, just pressing a button at about the right time, but this is single target.

In AoE, as I stated, your actions cost between 2 and 3 times as much TP, which means you bottom out much much quicker, even with Invigorate. Suddenly, you have to go from AoE to single target to even be effective, but you are still doing so much less damage. You could change the TP costs to be more inline with single target, but then the same argument can be used in AoE. Plus, with Invigorate's cooldown, you couldn't expect to use it on 2 trash pack one after the other, unless the trash is taking ages to kill. Compare this all to casters and the difference is night and day. Casters didn't have to worry about MP as much and so were much much better at dealing with dungeons. You are hindering physical jobs for no reason.

While I'm not a fan of bringing back Enmity without radical reform --nor do I care much about the loss of TP-- I want to touch on three points as exemplified in posts on the first page (quoted below):
[*]Running dry is not an issue fundamental to long-term resource consumption. Nor is a requirement for bloat skills like Invigorate or Lucid Dream. Both are externalities, matters of shoddy implementation. Had TP been granted per GCD's time, rather than per a fixed 3 seconds, Skill Speed would not have further penalized its users. Had TP been tuned slightly higher, Invigorate would not have been required. And finally, had TP simply made use of a simple compensatory system such as decreasing the potency and cost of attacks when below X% TP (or per % below X until reaching Y, etc.), starvation would be impossible even while that long-term resource consumption could still allow for further decision making via burstier, utility-carrying, or more highly tuned AoE skills.

If you make running out impossible, why have the system? If you want to make a system that gives you more damage the higher your TP is (from a certain value) then just doing your normal rotation would neccessarily need to force you to be negative, which would then require the implementation of an action that cost less TP to make up the deficit. At this point you have to think, are you really making a deep system, or one that has unnescessary hurdles to jump through. Again, it would just be forcing actions onto a job that could be used for something else that is more engaging.

As for Enmity, the important thing to note is that it is a Binary system, you either have it or you do not. If the old system was so bad, what could replace it?

Optimizing damage within the bounds of maintaining a lead in enmity by timing enmity-generation to where such would least decrease their overall damage to be dealt would not make enmity management "obsolete". It would instead be exactly what makes enmity management an actual mechanic. Anything less than a cost to damage --a cost which ought then to be skillfully minimized-- would render it a non-mechanic.

That being said, to say that there was skillful management to be done with that timing, beyond simply only using enmity skills while under tank stance, is perhaps a gross overstatement. Given that the more high-enmity attacks would generate that much more enmity, thus allowing that much less use of said enmity attacks in favor of further damage attacks, the only skill-gap involved in enmity management that could exist without tank stances would be to have minimized excess enmity by the time of the enemy's death.

The issue here is that the games UI does not support such a system. Enmity is being built up constantly and the only way to see how far ahead you are is with the gauge in the party list. The issues will start coming up the longer a fight goes on for. With low enmity values, like at the start of a fight, you have a good idea of how far ahead of the pack you are. As the fight progresses and enmmity increases, the same space on the enmity bar is eqivalent to a much higher value. What was one GCD worth at the start is now worth 100 in the same space. Enmity starts becoming more of a guessing game rather than something you can rely upon to accurately gauge the gap. I also do not know of any system that would be able to accurately track this short of giving actual numbers, which is then way too much info and still has it's own problems.