Lets nerf WAR :D

[Iagainsti]

Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.

[RapBreon]

Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.

Yes apparently, we've decided that homogenization can only come in an absolute form, didn't you get the memo? We can't homogenize component parts anymore, just the whole thing; according to this forum anywho. You don't question the tank forum bruv.

[Kaisersoke]

Did I really get Inigo Montoya'd?? Anyway, Last time I checked, homogeneity is a sameness of constituent structure, homogenization(disambiguation) being the verb.
Ex. Nerfing a Warrior's dps or altering it's formula in the hopes to put all 3 tanks on par would be homogenization.

the amount of people spewing that word without any real evidence in these forums is seriously ridiculous. all three tanks have very unique playstyles, and itd take a lot more than a few balance changes to take away the fact that the other two tanks play and feel VASTLY different than warrior. how about we just give all tanks stacks based on their combos and give them ridiculously strong on demand mitigation at the cost of removing those stacks. that would be homogeneization. the notion that tanks should be somewhat balanced in terms of damage output and damage mitigation shouldnt be offset because you think that its making them the same

[Syzygian]

the amount of people spewing that word without any real evidence in these forums is seriously ridiculous. all three tanks have very unique playstyles, and itd take a lot more than a few balance changes to take away the fact that the other two tanks play and feel VASTLY different than warrior. how about we just give all tanks stacks based on their combos and give them ridiculously strong on demand mitigation at the cost of removing those stacks. that would be homogeneization. the notion that tanks should be somewhat balanced in terms of damage output and damage mitigation shouldnt be offset because you think that its making them the same

This.

Tanks should be able to deal roughly equivalent damage, some more than others here and there, but not 100-200 dps descrepancies. And they should have roughly equal mitigation, with maybe some being slightly stronger than others in certain fights.

They will never be actually "homogenized" in any real since of the word since the way that the jobs play mechanically is so, SO different. If MNK/DRG/NIN all did equal DPS (and actually i'm pretty sure they do factoring in raid-dps increases) no one would cry about it since, well, they all still play crazy differently. NIN has mudras and some support abilities to keep track of, DRG has a lot of mobility, rng-based positionals and BoTD uptime management, MNK has stacks, complex positionals, and various forms of stance management. There is no reason they can't strike this kind of balance with the 3 tanks. Simply no reason. Period.

[Airswimmer]

Tanks should be able to deal roughly equivalent damage, some more than others here and there, but not 100-200 dps descrepancies. And they should have roughly equal mitigation, with maybe some being slightly stronger than others in certain fights.

They do, roughly. What hampers PLD is:

• They lose the most damage in their tanking stance. WAR loses 10% of their damage in Defiance, DRK loses 8% in Grit, and PLD loses 20% in Shield Oath.
• The above is amplified by the fact that PLD generates the least amount of enmity out of the three tanks meaning they have to swap to their tanking stance more often than the other two tanks do to stay ahead in enmity.
• The coup de grâce is PLD's enmity combo is the weakest single combo any of the tanks possess

They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.

[Nektulos-Tuor]

They do, roughly. What hampers PLD is:

• They lose the most damage in their tanking stance. WAR loses 10% of their damage in Defiance, DRK loses 8% in Grit, and PLD loses 20% in Shield Oath.
• The above is amplified by the fact that PLD generates the least amount of enmity out of the three tanks meaning they have to swap to their tanking stance more often than the other two tanks do to stay ahead in enmity.
• The coup de grâce is PLD's enmity combo is the weakest single combo any of the tanks possess

They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.

The damage penalty will always take what you have and minus it by 20%. I know your trying to say your bonuses make up for it, but honestly the first step towards making other tanks closer to warriors.

Would be to remove the damage penalty from PLD/DRK and making the Damage Penalty for Warrior Stance 15%.

[Airswimmer]

The damage penalty will always take what you have and minus it by 20%. I know your trying to say your bonuses make up for it, but honestly the first step towards making other tanks closer to warriors.

I assumed this would be obvious since I assume, and hope, everyone here can read tooltips.

[Iagainsti]

They also do have roughly the same mitigation... encounter willing. The problem with both PLD and DRK is they're specialized to specific damage, physical and magical respectively.
Both the PLD and the DRK have better mitigation than WAR when looking at their respective damage types.

This. I'm speculating here, but Paladin and DRK are designed with MT in mind, where Warrior is designed as an OT. Granted they can MT fine, to balance out 4 man content, they'd have to, but they are the damage tank by design, able to facilitate extra damage when not being used as a meatshield. This is why I believe Nerfing is nothing but smoke, those calling for it don't see the forest for the trees, and "balance" is the worst thing that can happen to MMOs. History doesn't always repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

[Kuwagami]

This. I'm speculating here, but Paladin and DRK are designed with MT in mind, where Warrior is designed as an OT.

No. I can't remember the exact terms since it was over a year ago and I've lost the interview since then, but Yoshida explicitely said that the tanks were designed to do anything on the same level. MT, OT, doesn't matter, they have the tools to do anything.

As an example, the "most dps" set up in 2.0 was WAR MT and PLD OT, while a more "survival" approach was the contrary.

[Synestra]

[*]They lose the most damage in their tanking stance. WAR loses 10% of their damage in Defiance, DRK loses 8% in Grit, and PLD loses 20% in Shield Oath.

Yet most peoples here only talk about SwO buffs when real problem is in tank stance, SwO damage is more than fine its the ShO that lags behind coupled with lower enmity modifiers like you said. Now if penalty was roughly same as WAR/DRK and modifiers got fixed alot of issues would propably go away, only real issue left would be clunky stance swapping due GCD but that can be dealt.