Warrior Rework to Balance the job

[Shurrikhan]

I literally do the same thing every dungeon, 1st pack BW > Damn > Rep > BW. 2nd pack BW >Ramp > Rep > BW. With thrill and eq if needed at some point. That's literally it. I don't care if something is redundant, I care that I will have these CDs in this order for every pull, if it overheals it overheals if it doesn't it doesn't.

Yeah, that... sounds kinda awful to me as a frequent tank-main across multiple MMOs. That sounds like the over-boiled vegetables version of what it would mean to be a tank.

If I can leave 4 of my survival tools (Equilibrium, Thrill, Shake it Off, and Holmgang, in this case) all as just "if needed" without even an rDPS loss for having neglected them that seems like a kit poorly tuned for its content.

:: Remember, there's still an ocean of difference between "grants literally 0 rDPS even if you use it" and "heals can't spam Adloquiem fast enough to keep you alive".

Raid encounters aren't handled much differently, because it's all just a script in the end.

That at least can't be uniquely blamed on WAR, as XIV raids in general are just overly scripted. Which is probably why I always preferred tanking in WoW, especially M+.

[whiskeybravo]

If by rDPS you are referring to healer damage, sure, if I did every dungeon with half my static then things could be worked out in a way to make use of more of my WAR kit for higher rDPS. (counter to what the healers here suggest) But in general DF? Ain't no way I'm using HG on a pack unless I'm about to die, and if damage is on point packs don't need much more than those 2 CDs on rotation anyways.

[PyurBlue]

If by rDPS you are referring to healer damage, sure, if I did every dungeon with half my static then things could be worked out in a way to make use of more of my WAR kit for higher rDPS. (counter to what the healers here suggest)

I'm not sure what you would do as 100% DPS uptime on healer is the norm. When I've run dungeons in organized groups the biggest gain is often from removing the healer entirely.

But in general DF? Ain't no way I'm using HG on a pack unless I'm about to die, and if damage is on point packs don't need much more than those 2 CDs on rotation anyways.

I have the opposite experience. Using invulns to take stack markers by myself is one of the more interesting things that can be done as OT in raids. In dungeons specifically, I aim to use invulns on the first pull so I get the maximum number of usages in the dungeon, though sometimes incoming damage is so low it feels like a waste.

[Shurrikhan]

I'm not sure what you would do as 100% DPS uptime on healer is the norm. When I've run dungeons in organized groups the biggest gain is often from removing the healer entirely.

There's no risk of needing at-cost heals on the tank at higher ilvl or with WARs, but thankfully that's not quite guaranteed before max ilvl and/or with non-Warriors, at least.

What's more, I think we can pretty well all agree that increasing healing requirements to where at least every healer CD save Lilybell/Panhaima/etc. and every tank CD save for raidwides, PoA, and invulns are required in order not to have a single mid-fight at-cost heal regardless of ilvl and the tank's job... would probably be a healthier and more iconic tuning goal.

At present, it's either-or at most with non-WARs and only half of either with WARs.

As for dropping heals, especially at that point... yes, without also increasing healers' damage potential or balancing out tank sustain so each could still provide equal rDPS amid those slightly but noticeably increased healing requirements, a WAR MNK DNC +1 comp, for example, would still do their best rDPS by just replacing the healer with another DPS, but at least there would more consistently be rDPS gains from actually using the reasonable whole of the tank and healer kits both, rather than WAR needing only half of one to already prevent any need for most healing CDs, let alone at-cost heals.

[PyurBlue]

What's more, I think we can pretty well all agree that increasing healing requirements to where at least every healer CD save Lilybell/Panhaima/etc. and every tank CD save for raidwides, PoA, and invulns are required in order not to have a single mid-fight at-cost heal regardless of ilvl and the tank's job... would probably be a healthier and more iconic tuning goal.

With current role design that's a fair goal. Casted heal spells and MP are relegated to being back ups with the presence of OGCD skills, and it's a large resource pool to use up so we shouldn't see less experienced healers running out of options even with a damage increase. More experienced healers might move on from never casting heals to finding ways to fit them between OGCD's to keep some portion of abilities available for all pulls and bosses or for MP efficiency.

[whiskeybravo]

I'm not sure what you would do as 100% DPS uptime on healer is the norm. When I've run dungeons in organized groups the biggest gain is often from removing the healer entirely....
In dungeons specifically, I aim to use invulns on the first pull so I get the maximum number of usages in the dungeon, though sometimes incoming damage is so low it feels like a waste.

Yea, Hallowed Ground gets used. Bolide too. Holmgang? It's slightly better than what LD used to be, but still difficult to maximize without enough communication. Quite frankly it's not required and better saved for an emergency imo.

I'm not generally concerned with potential of irregular/organized comps. I'm referring mainly to DF instances, what the vast majority of players experience. There are "broader context" considerations, sure, but these 2 perspectives keep getting muddled up for some reason.

[Venks]

What's more, I think we can pretty well all agree that increasing healing requirements to where at least every healer CD save Lilybell/Panhaima/etc. and every tank CD save for raidwides, PoA, and invulns are required in order not to have a single mid-fight at-cost heal regardless of ilvl and the tank's job... would probably be a healthier and more iconic tuning goal.

That sounds really fun. I can't imagine though the game going back in that direction like it was in older expansions. FFXIV has progressively been trying to become more and more accessible. The healer role for most non-end game content is not necessary by design. The idea is that even if someone dies, the party can carry on. Minimizing potential player friction between party members who feel like they can't clear due to less skilled team mates.

If the healer dies in a dungeon? Everyone using mitigation should lead to beating the boss.
If the tank dies? With how much avoidable damage there is, it's reasonable the healer many times can rez the tank and you just carry on like normal.

I'm not against tanks/dps mitigation getting weaker or boss damage getting higher to allow healers to stand out more. I just don't think this fits the current vision for FFXIV.

[Shurrikhan]

That still is entirely accessible, though. We still have all our GCD heals available to us, after all. At absolutely worst case, we'd need only increase regen out of combat and/or reduce their MP costs.

If the "current vision" strictly necessitates such poor tuning, it's a vision intended to fail any player more than whimsically/fancifully/distractedly engaged with combat, I suspect.

[Tunda]

Why tanks mitigations are oGCD and healers heals are GCD(most of them)?

[Carighan]

Why tanks mitigations are oGCD and healers heals are GCD(most of them)?

Most healer heals are oGCD, I got no clue what version of the jobs you are talking about. That's one of the core issues of healer balance right now, that virtually all raid healing is covered by oGCDs so we spend all time spamming our single GCD nuke.