Why did PLD get such a buff

[Instrumentality]

Nah, if you want DRK to be considered the DRG of tanks, it shouldn't be able to outDPS WAR in any situation. But it does.

What situation would this be?

[Syzygian]

Nah, if you want DRK to be considered the DRG of tanks, it shouldn't be able to outDPS WAR in any situation. But it does.

Let me get this straight.

Its okay for WAR to be the MNK of tanks on DPS and the NIN of tanks on utility at the same time with none of the drawbacks. But its not okay for DRK to have at least DRG level utility?

WAR and DRK each get a +1 for their top DPS in OT and MT respectively, but on utility, its more like 2:0.5 WARRK.

DRK should have equal utility to WAR.

Anyway, I'd happily sacrifice the one niche situation where I can outDPS WAR for better utility, because that one situation where I can outDPS WAR requires an extremely co-operative WAR (one that is willing to sacrifice BB spam) and requires me to tank out of tank stance for 90% of an encounter, otherwise it ain't happening.

[SpookyGhost]

DRK should have equal utility to WAR.

Personally (and I've posted this before), I've always felt like to separate the tanks all 3 should have equal damage and mitigation, but be separated by the utility they bring. Make it so that any composition can clear it, but certain jobs unique utility can be complimentary to the fight, or maybe even have all 3 have some unique contribution to the fight. It'd be min/maxed by world first raiders, but it'd be very small gains in only certain aspects of the fight that would be trivialized by anyone not racing for world clears (even then if it's a small enough difference people might not care at all). Some could argue that this would be homogenization, but you could definitely make the utility pretty unique while still making them all equally beneficial. I dunno, I always thought it was weird that WAR did more DPS - maybe if it had horrible mitigation, but that seems like a really poor trade off for a y'know... tank.

[Syzygian]

snip

I mean, it can be totally different utility, and I'm all for that. The balance of DPS is fine IMO. Hell, even PLD could still use some utility buffs. They both could, because neither of them can bring the personal DPS contribution that WAR can, unless the DRK is lucky enough to have a group that is willing to cater to Gritless MTing, which requires a lot of sacrifices, and may not even be a thing this tier.

[Atoli]

Darks will be left in the dark

Thanks for making me laugh very hard

[MrsFluffyButt]

OP clearly knows things, folks.

[Anubis_Nephthys]

Have you seen fflogs? In terms of dps, it's WAR>DRK>PLD
Top 10 WARs are doing 1392.4 (averaged) dps on AS1.
Top 10 DRKs are doing 1340.3
Top 10 PLDs are doing 1125.4
For AS1, the top PLD is ranked #96 in terms of all tank dps.
That's why they got a buff.

[Thunda_Cat_SMASH]

Look at the balance of the melee DPS for guidance. Its arguably perfect:

MNK: best personal DPS, unused in cutting edge as of 3.0
DRG: Mandatory
NIN: Mandatory
.

I don't see how it's balanced per se when one class is nearly entirely unused. Most raid groups I know of are running drg and nin so they can maximize raid DPS. I only know of one monk with a static, rest will take a monk to high end raids when they'll take a paladin.

[Violette]

Put deliverance and defiance on the gcd. Boom, war kicked in the teeth.

But if the damage is not squeezed into 5 seconds out of 25, then we see wars ability to dps during the mt phase hampered.

[Valkyrie-Amber]

So will someone tell me why a sword and board can out dps a great sword? It just doesn't make sense.

Just like how A great axe wielder or great sword wielder is more tanky than a sword and board it makes no sence eiter.

Ballance matters get used to it