Enmity Management, Do we want it back?

[aodhan_ofinnegain]

Then gear the tank.

If gear stops being automatically funneled to DPS first because the tank needs it equally since he doesn't get free top aggro from a babyproofed tank stance multiplier anymore, this is sounding better and better.

I mean yet again this is also a stupid take, why wouldn't you funnel gear into DPS to speed up reclears and help with week 1 clears of the final floor, funnelling gear into tanks and healers does not help with DPS checks...remotely as close as it does funnelling gear to DPS.

[Mikey_R]

Then gear the tank.

If gear stops being automatically funneled to DPS first because the tank needs it equally since he doesn't get free top aggro from a babyproofed tank stance multiplier anymore, this is sounding better and better.

This might come as a shock, but not everyone runs everything with a static. I cannot control the gear level of the random tank that comes into my roulettes. This is something that needs to be considered across all content across all players, not isolated to static environments. However, in a static environment, the thought of enmity management is even more distant that it is in a PUG environment. Everyone will use their enmity tools and, as I have stated, any time you get the chance to coordinate a Provoke > Shirk, enmity management is non existent anyway. So it isn't a system that the hardcore raiders would even interact with except at the start of a fight anyway.

Hmm I'm bit torn on that one after having experienced tanking during 3.0 as well (granted I played WAR back then and it felt quite fun to stance dance but...) I think it's quite unneeded most of the time - not to mention most DPS would have to use quelling strikes again and healers use lucid to cut hate.

I'd rather have a focus on tank specific nuances like protecting the party by standing in front of them, pick up a target marker from others or even shield a healer with your special 25s mitigation to protect them from unavoidable damage.

Warrior was the only one that had some sort of flow in stance dancing, it felt really bad on PLD/DRK.

You do also see fights with tank specific mechanics, like picking up tethers, or being at the front of a stack. However, what I would like to see is more interactivity with stuns and interrupts. I won't go into detail here, but they are mechanics that could form something interesting. This is all for making it so that tanks control where damage is going and potentially what form it takes (massive hit, done in a DoT, split etc.).

[Absurdity]

I think I said this in another thread before but I would return stances back to tanks, just with a different approach.

Make the DPS stances provide a stacking benefit the longer you can stay in the stance (obviously with a cap) and the tank stance provide mitigation benefits.
Then cut down on tanks' mitigation cooldowns so you can't simply 30%+30% or 20%+10%+30% every buster, make tank stances a necessity to survive mechanics at some point.

Then it becomes about deciding when to use your defensive stance to survive and when to use your defensive cooldowns so you can stay in DPS stance.
Enmity doesn't even factor in here, because the most interesting part of old stances were the job mechanics attached to them.

[vetch]

I mean yet again this is also a stupid take, why wouldn't you funnel gear into DPS to speed up reclears and help with week 1 clears of the final floor, funnelling gear into tanks and healers does not help with DPS checks...remotely as close as it does funnelling gear to DPS.

Uh, changing that is the point. The whole topic of discussion in this thread is introducing a different system that shakes up how the game is played. If we are literally talking about designing the game differently, then of course gear priority might also see shifts under the new system.

Wanting some week 1 pieces to go to non-DPS isn't a weird thing to do in a case where you actually need them to ensure your reclears go smoothly.

I cannot control the gear level of the random tank that comes into my roulettes. This is something that needs to be considered across all content across all players, not isolated to static environments.

It doesn't matter in roulettes. If you have to baby a bad tank or he has to spend the whole fight in tank stance, whatever. It's all normal mode, 99% of it has no enrage timer.

In Extremes and Savages you can set an item level requirement on the PF.

However, in a static environment, the thought of enmity management is even more distant that it is in a PUG environment. Everyone will use their enmity tools and, as I have stated, any time you get the chance to coordinate a Provoke > Shirk, enmity management is non existent anyway. So it isn't a system that the hardcore raiders would even interact with except at the start of a fight anyway.

Easily solved in simple ways, for example by making Shirk dump the enmity instead of transferring it to another party member.

You do also see fights with tank specific mechanics, like picking up tethers, or being at the front of a stack. However, what I would like to see is more interactivity with stuns and interrupts.

This is a good idea, but having job systems be interesting in and of themselves is necessary for when lackluster boring fights DO inevitably get released. The DPS job designs mostly understand this. You can still expect to have some decent fun on a DPS just by managing your rotation, even when fighting a terrible boss like the boredom cube in Mt. Gulg.

[Elkanah]

That's... not possible.

You can't turn an un-failable system into a failable one without risking some people getting upset when the failures happen.

The argument is that it's worth doing in spite of that, because games where it's possible to fail due to insufficient personal skill are more entertaining, and for longer, than ones where it's not.

the problem with your argument is that yoshida wants everyone to play-- not a toxic environment pre heavensward. While some of us may enjoy the system it WAS before the changes, clearly YoshiP has the vision of avoiding that altogether for their theme park of being able to play any job you want regardless of experience. Skill level only applies to those who play endgame (you and I alike)-- and not the general population of playerbase who's 95% casual

[ValkyrieL]

Rather than enmity, tank position play a more vital role, now every major mechanic is designed with boss teleporting to center with a giant hitbox that all tank responsibility was taken alway....now...while it would be nice to have tank more control of boss I think it would be detrimental for PUG groups, I cam already see p12s p1 sh*&ting on all bad tanks if boss didn't teleport to center for mechanics.

[aodhan_ofinnegain]

Uh, changing that is the point. The whole topic of discussion in this thread is introducing a different system that shakes up how the game is played. If we are literally talking about designing the game differently, then of course gear priority might also see shifts under the new system.

Wanting some week 1 pieces to go to non-DPS isn't a weird thing to do in a case where you actually need them to ensure your reclears go smoothly.

I'm sorry but can you actually stop. The thread is asking if we want enmity management back, not if we want to shake up how the game is played, and you're asking for a DPS centric game not to allocate gear to DPS jobs for a flawed and god-awful design that, punishes the tank if they do not have gear, and the party's overall DPS because we have to sacrifice damage for more aggro, which at the end of the day is arbitrary and Adding enmity management adds nothing of engagement, it means cuck my damage at the start when raid buffs go up, then cuck my damage every once in a while for a top up of enmity, while my co-tank can do his maximum amount of damage without any issue, which punishes for no tangible gain.


What actually adds to tank gameplay that is engaging, is actually having adds that are active on the arena floor at the same time as the boss again, (the best designed floor 3 fight has yet to be matched in o3s), boss positioning, crowd control. While I agree with Valkyrie, there will be some players griefing for not positioning correctly, players will adapt to the fights, in SB we had to often position bosses, to help execute mechanics better or get more uptime.

Week 1 gear always exclusively goes to DPS lmfao with the exception of if the weapon drops for a non DPS job on the final floor.

[Payadopa]

Rather than enmity, tank position play a more vital role, now every major mechanic is designed with boss teleporting to center with a giant hitbox that all tank responsibility was taken alway....now...while it would be nice to have tank more control of boss I think it would be detrimental for PUG groups, I cam already see p12s p1 sh*&ting on all bad tanks if boss didn't teleport to center for mechanics.

Because some people are bad =/= valid argument. If I die at a boss I don't turn around and say let's delete bosses. It's about bringing engagement back to a video game that is supposed to be played.

[Mikey_R]

1. It doesn't matter in roulettes. If you have to baby a bad tank or he has to spend the whole fight in tank stance, whatever. It's all normal mode, 99% of it has no enrage timer.

2. In Extremes and Savages you can set an item level requirement on the PF.

3. Easily solved in simple ways, for example by making Shirk dump the enmity instead of transferring it to another party member.

1. This isn't about how quickly you can clear things, this is about feeling you can contribute. If you are being punished for no reason, it is going to feel bad.

2. Yes, but it is expected to have a certain gear level when going into those encounters anyway. Doesn't dispute the point at all.

3. Double Provoking becomes the way to increase your enmity over everyone else, tank swaps are now done with Shirk. Oh, you want to reduce the enmity lead Provoke gives? Makes Shirk useless, but then it is back to the points of, how do you balance things.

However, I think it is weird how you have focused on one point in my post, which isn't even the main issues I have with the old enmity system. There is a reason I didn't go into how to balance between gear levels etc. and instead, focused on what would a tank with their enmity/stances look like first, as that is going to be the biggest contributor in how a tank feels to play. It was post number 10 in this topic (Post #10.

Until a firm foundation is established on what a tank looks like skill wise with the enmity system and how this will affect gameplay and the feel of the job, then the talk of how exactly it will be balanced around gear and skill can be started. As I addressed in my post, the enmity combos just felt bad and really weren't used much, making them feel like dead actions taking up space for no reason. If you think there was no issues, that is fine, but it would be nice to know why you think that way, potentially commenting on my points and why you don't necessarily think they are an issue (and this does go for anyone).

[Rithy255]

It is not the Tank that gets punished for not holding aggro, it is the rest of the party that gets punished for a shitty tank. Do you honestly want a shitty tank in your party that constantly loses aggro?

Yeah it's not the healer who gets punished for not healing when they need its the party who gets punished.


awesome logic lol.

Not like you have to give aggro management to tanks, but tanks need something other then being "defensive dps"