MT/OT solution

[AstreaLove]

Instead of naming Paladin & Bastion as "Main Tank" they should consider using the word "Vanguard".
And for Warrior, Dark Knight & Gunbreaker, consider using the word "Rearguard".

That way Tank players won't feel locked in to a role, and the description of MT/OT would be more fluid.

[Chelsei]

Instead of naming Paladin & Bastion as "Main Tank" they should consider using the word "Vanguard".
And for Warrior, Dark Knight & Gunbreaker, consider using the word "Rearguard".

That way Tank players won't feel locked in to a role, and the description of MT/OT would be more fluid.

It's the same... giving people a illusion of something won't change the bad stuff behind it.

[Tizzy_Tormentor]

I suggest we bully and abuse all off tanks.

Sorry buddy, I need a tank that is skilled at taking direct damage, I don't need an off tank, I need an on tank. When an off tank takes damage meant for a tank designed to take direct damage, we will all feel the consequences.

"Where were the off tanks when the Westfold fell?" "I hear off tanks don't wash their hands after using the bathroom" "Did you know off tanks said 'no we can't' when Bob the Builder asked if we can fix it?"

[Fawkes]

I think the solution is to just ignore it like we did the last time they tried this.

[Kansene]

Ya, I suspect the divide will do absolutely nothing.
Both paladin and bastion have abilities that mitigate and heal party members, which is supposedly the OT niche, and I strongly suspect OTs will have lots of personal mitigation.

I personally think the main difference will lie in how they deal damage (MTs focusing on counter attacking while OTs have another way).

[Calysto]

It's just because it has to make the new jobs OP for at least their expansion.
PLD are also the "special" boys, so you can't upset them

[Miki_L]

I doubt this system will live past this expansion or it will only exist in name only. In Dawntrail, they gave the shield healers more throughput tools and the pure healers more mitigation/shielding tools, defeating the purpose of the split in the first place.

The only way I think they can actually make this work is to give exclusive debuffs. Like a Main Tank that parries an attack will give a vuln debuff to the enemy that does not stack. Off tanks have a damage debuff that does not stack.

We still need to see an off tank's kit to be sure; but based off what we know about the game currently, party mit is one of the most important things to bring to a raid. If off tanks have more party mits and they stack, then everyone will be trying to make double off tank work as much as possible.

[Wildsprite]

I personally think this is more micromanagement that was never needed. MT/OT doesn't need to be split into roles. It needs communication between the tanks.

[Miki_L]

I personally think this is more micromanagement that was never needed. MT/OT doesn't need to be split into roles. It needs communication between the tanks.

I think it's less about responsibilities during the fight, but rather they don't want people arguing about who gets to trigger the parries that were added from the boss's auto attacks. So they are dividing it into "parry tanks" and "non-parry tanks" and having it be specific to certain jobs makes it simpler in party finder to ensure you only have one tank that can even benefit from being auto attacked.

Except damage from tanks is probably one of the last things to actually optimize so they are also saying that they will somehow get the balance of main tanking having better personal mitigation and off tanks having more party mitigation work. A lot of us are very skeptical of this because party mit is way more important than the tank's ability to survive. If a tank dies it's usually a minor inconvenience; if the party dies then it's a wipe.