XIV WAR Tanking - Baseline Mitigation and PLD comparison

[Tanaya]

That's what makes completing hard stuff "IMPRESSIVE". And for a few they find this kind of challenge as the only game they want to pay for. Others don't ... they want "Balance". And that's fine; I agree with Community run games b/c they pay for it. In the end they should get what they are paying for. If they want an easier Warrior class that scales with CONTENT then I hope SE gives it to them. Me and my true WArriors will fight until that end.

So you're saying you'd take the worse class into content because it's more exciting for you? I understand that. Personally, I don't care if a class is worse or the best, as long as I enjoy it, I'll play it. For the record I've always seem to pick the classes that lean towards the "worse" side in my MMO career.

The problem I'm seeing here is one side is saying Warrior and Paladin is unbalanced, while the other side is saying Warrior is still viable for all content. Frankly, it seems you all actually agree. So the actual argument here is whether the Warriors are content with this current lack of balance right now.

[Gamemako]

...while the other side is saying Warrior is still viable for all content.

Now, this is something I have avoided even talking about (because I think it's not relevant -- even if both are viable, they must still be balanced). However, has anyone seen an example of two WAR successfully tanking BC? There are plenty of examples of two PLD doing it (e.g. random google search, go!), but I haven't seen two WAR successfully complete any turn, let alone 4-5. In that sense, I don't actually know if WAR is truly viable at all.

[RougeBuffle]

Now, this is something I have avoided even talking about (because I think it's not relevant -- even if both are viable, they must still be balanced). However, has anyone seen an example of two WAR successfully tanking BC? There are plenty of examples of two PLD doing it (e.g. random google search, go!), but I haven't seen two WAR successfully complete any turn, let alone 4-5. In that sense, I don't actually know if WAR is truly viable at all.

Do you think a 4x BRD and/or 4x BLM comp would stand a chance in Turn 4?
No? So... what's the problem?
Even if WAR has to run alongside a PLD to be viable... they are still... viable.
{Plus I don't see why 2x WAR wouldn't be able to clear Turn 1/2}

[javid]

So you're saying you'd take the worse class into content because it's more exciting for you? I understand that. Personally, I don't care if a class is worse or the best, as long as I enjoy it, I'll play it. For the record I've always seem to pick the classes that lean towards the "worse" side in my MMO career.

The problem I'm seeing here is one side is saying Warrior and Paladin is unbalanced, while the other side is saying Warrior is still viable for all content. Frankly, it seems you all actually agree. So the actual argument here is whether the Warriors are content with this current lack of balance right now.

there area few other side. But the majority of warriors; well those that play it to end game; ARE NOT SATISFIED with the way it is now; they want it EASIER (to put it simply); for the most of them its TOO HARD; the imbalance TOO HIGH between tanking classes....I get the gripe.

[Jediman]

WAR class need to be remapped because it sucks right now. =DPS

[Maelwys]

One thing's evident... both WAR and PLD can pull a HECK of a lot of hate.
And that's just on the Forums.

[Gamemako]

So... WARs can be at times, "clubbed by a special mechanic" but are otherwise fine?
What 'task' are they failing to do? Who assigned that 'task'? You?

I don't think I was clear. The task is main tanking. That is what we're talking about a WAR doing. WAR is not a viable DPS; that much is clear, just as DRG is not a viable tank. We are discussing whether WAR can tank the opponents necessary to clear content. This is not a matter of any particular mechanic; once a damage threshold is reached, WAR will struggle.

Isn't all of this beyond your ability to judge? What Coil experience do you have?

Doesn't matter. I only state what is observed, and that which is mathematically demonstrable.

Of course Two PLDs can clear everything, they are the bread and butter... one sided pure defensive tanks.

That also does not matter. You are saying that because they are proactive tanks, they are innately able. If all of their abilities were nerfed to 1% mitigation, they would still be "pure defensive" tanks, but they would also no longer be viable. Put simply, WAR is weak and PLD is strong because they are poorly-balanced, not because of some innate function of design.

Doesn't change anything to the fact that a PLD/WAR duo can also clear everything... WARs are viable, end of the story.

Non sequitur. You have only shown that WAR can play second fiddle, not that WAR is viable as a main tank. If WAR can be carried with PLD as main-tank, then WAR is viable as off-tank/add-tank only, not as main tank. That would suggest that PLD is main-tank and off-tank while WAR is off-tank only. You need to demonstrate that WAR can main-tank any endgame content.

You can keep saying that two WAR can complete turns 1 and 2, but you have not given any evidence. I cannot prove a negative. With the excess of WAR unwanted for endgame content, I would expect that someone would have done it and recorded it, but I was not able to find an example. Can someone demonstrate this occurring?

[Hachiko]

Not sure why people are now arguing about warrior viability. Anyone can be carried through content given enough effort by the other party members.

The biggest thing isn't that playing a WAR isn't just more effort on the part of the WAR, like many people seem to insist.

The fact of the matter is that playing a WAR doesn't show off your skill as a WAR. It shows off the skill of the rest of your party. The weaknesses of the WAR don't even fall that heavily on the WAR when it comes to endgame. It falls on everyone else.

The WARs who are complaining aren't complaining because they want it to be easier for them. They are complaining because they don't like being a handicap for the rest of their party.

P.S. WAR is clearly not viable for all content. It's only viable as an "off tank" with more effort than would be required for a PLD "off tank." So claiming that WAR is viable for all the content in the game is no more accurate than saying a healer in ilvl 40 equipment is viable for Titan as long as everyone else has relics and ilvl 70 gear.

[javid]

Not sure why people are now arguing about warrior viability. Anyone can be carried through content given enough effort by the other party members.

The biggest thing isn't that playing a WAR isn't just more effort on the part of the WAR, like many people seem to insist.
The fact of the matter is that playing a WAR doesn't show off your skill as a WAR. It shows off the skill of the rest of your party. The weaknesses of the WAR don't even fall that heavily on the WAR when it comes to endgame. It falls on everyone else.

The WARs who are complaining aren't complaining because they want it to be easier for them. They are complaining because they don't like being a handicap for the rest of their party.

P.S. WAR is clearly not viable for all content. It's only viable as an "off tank" with more effort than would be required for a PLD "off tank." So claiming that WAR is viable for all the content in the game is no more accurate than saying a healer in ilvl 40 equipment is viable for Titan as long as everyone else has relics and ilvl 70 gear.

This is not true. AND EVEN IF IT WAS! It still demonstrates skill the "carry" a gimp job through content. That last statement is simply uninformed... Several; severallllllllll WAR mt; double WAR have completed everything to titan to turns 2! Just b/c most ppl can't do it ; doesn't mean no one can do it or HAS already done it.


Regardless of all this it doesn't change the FACT OF THE MATTER.

some people want the WARRIOR class adjusted. Made an EASIER class ( you can't get around that easier word no matter how HARD you try).

Others prefer the class AS IT.


You guys make it appear like this is some Worldview we discussing.....


ONE SIDE: "CHANGE IT MAKE IT EASIER PLEASE"
ANOTHER SIDE: "LEAVE IT ALONE WE LIKE IT AS IT"

How can you say " your side is 'wrong' ? ". HOW can you be wrong for preferring the game as is??? WRONG??!

[Dhex]

Some of the responses in this thread...