PLD and sks

[Februs]

I just still want GLD to be the tactical speed-hitting tank who feels more dual-wield-y (Sword & Board) than a Rogue does... Sadly, TP generation oversights and unwillingness to meaningfully revisit class/job designs will make that impossible.

I couldn't agree more. There were a lot of early indicators that Gld was going in a different direction from Pld. I was really hoping for a much faster kit which placed more emphasis on build up, prepping, and alternating between the sword and shield, but Pld's kit totally destroyed that idea. Unsustainable Tp consumption practically cripples the job and has been a festering nightmare for a very long time now (on top of Pld's numerous other deficiencies). I'd really like to hope that SE might, someday, do something about it, but their last set of adjustments made it pretty clear that they'll never actually make any real and committed efforts to fix the job. The fact that they called those changes "major adjustments" was a pretty big kick in the nuts to that job. It would have been funny, if it wasn't so pathetic and sad.

[White_Devil]

As far as I know with PLD, I believe SKS to only be useful in a PVP scenario in terms of stunlocking, I've yet to put this to practice and it wouldn't matter because lolpvp.

[Brian_]

I couldn't agree more. There were a lot of early indicators that Gld was going in a different direction from Pld. I was really hoping for a much faster kit which placed more emphasis on build up, prepping, and alternating between the sword and shield, but Pld's kit totally destroyed that idea. Unsustainable Tp consumption practically cripples the job and has been a festering nightmare for a very long time now (on top of Pld's numerous other deficiencies). I'd really like to hope that SE might, someday, do something about it, but their last set of adjustments made it pretty clear that they'll never actually make any real and committed efforts to fix the job. The fact that they called those changes "major adjustments" was a pretty big kick in the nuts to that job. It would have been funny, if it wasn't so pathetic and sad.

They were major adjustments, though. If you think closing the gap with DRK to within ~100 DPS (<10% at current DPS levels), buffing their utility quite a bit, and making some much needed QoL changes didn't have a major impact on PLD's end-game viability, then I don't know what to say.

Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean it's not what it is. Are you saying it's pathetic and sad SE didn't redesign PLD from the ground up in a regular content patch?

[Shurrikhan]

I couldn't agree more. There were a lot of early indicators that Gld was going in a different direction from Pld. I was really hoping for a much faster kit which placed more emphasis on build up, prepping, and alternating between the sword and shield, but Pld's kit totally destroyed that idea. Unsustainable Tp consumption practically cripples the job and has been a festering nightmare for a very long time now (on top of Pld's numerous other deficiencies). I'd really like to hope that SE might, someday, do something about it, but their last set of adjustments made it pretty clear that they'll never actually make any real and committed efforts to fix the job. The fact that they called those changes "major adjustments" was a pretty big kick in the nuts to that job. It would have been funny, if it wasn't so pathetic and sad.

I feel like the changes did a pretty good job at bringing in line the perks of bringing a PLD to a fight; it's just that it does feel limited to exactly that. DV times out better against numerous mechanics, and what little time we spend in Shield Oath feels that little bit stronger, and the Oath changes (while far less effective to me than their being oGCDs that would still cancel your combos) are appreciated, but it did very little to make the job feel any more attractive in its own right.

I'm damn glad for the buff. I'd just be a lot more glad if I wasn't fairly sure it's the last I'll see of positive changes. Now that it's balanced it's basically a done deal.

They were major adjustments, though. If you think closing the gap with DRK to within ~100 DPS (<10% at current DPS levels), buffing their utility quite a bit, and making some much needed QoL changes didn't have a major impact on PLD's end-game viability, then I don't know what to say.

Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean it's not what it is. Are you saying it's pathetic and sad SE didn't redesign PLD from the ground up in a regular content patch?

It'd have to say that it is a bit pathetic that it took that long to be adjusted at all. And, it's a bit sad that we've no reason to believe it will be touched hereafter. Slap one modifiers on, adjust one CD, remove two conflicts. And that will be it. I feel like we might see something come 4.0 if SE decided to completely readdress the way all tanks function, but until then, the band-aid is working, which gives us a well-tuned result, but without looking into any of more internal workings of the job, which most posters I've seen talking about tanks on these forums have agreed feels about the flattest or outright dullest of the three.

[Februs]

As far as I know with PLD, I believe SKS to only be useful in a PVP scenario in terms of stunlocking, I've yet to put this to practice and it wouldn't matter because lolpvp.

Not even. The stun duration of a Pld in PvP is 4s > 2s > 1s. The standard Skill Speed cap is more than enough to apply a full stun lock on a target, assuming they don't use Purify. At a 2.33 (ish) GCD with standard skill speed, you're only .3 seconds slow on the final stun of the rotation. That's not enough time to really make a difference unless the target exercises their own CC on you (such as a knock back + sleep combo).

The only time additional Skill Speed would be useful is if the target uses purify on your first stun, but even then it's not overly useful as your GCD will never be fast enough to reapply the stun instantly. You already lost time on the total duration, so it's a mute point after Purify is involved.

[Februs]

They were major adjustments, though.

Surely you're joking ...

Firstly, Dps is not the be all end all of Pld's problems. I couldn't care less about how much they closed the gap between Drk and Pld, especially when that gap, no matter how small, still exists. As long as Dps is the highest standard of party utility, then Pld will always take a back seat. 3.2 buffed their Dps a bit, but so what? Drk and War still do it better, so there's no reason to bring a Pld to the party as long as Dps is the only thing you're concerned about. As it happens, Dps is not the only thing I was concerned about, which is why I found the changes so lack luster.

Secondly, those QoL changes are exactly that: QoL changes. That's not what I consider a "major" change, because most of those changes are things that should never have been needed in the first place. Further, none of those changes actually changed ANYTHNG about the way Pld plays. It still works and operates exactly the way it did before. The only difference is that some of it's moves (namely Divine Veil and Clemency) are slightly more convenient to use. I'm not about to throw a parade over that. As convenient as they are, they didn't actually change Pld's utility. They just made it more accessible.

Regardless, what I was calling "pathetic and sad" was the way in which SE handled Pld's Tp consumption. There's no way in hell this can be considered a "major adjustment." All they did was reduce a few Tp costs, and it didn't work. That band-aid starts to peel off the moment Skill Speed starts to increase with gear upgrades. It's already started to slip now, and it didn't take very many upgrades for it to happen. Reducing Tp costs was quite possibly the laziest and most ineffective way in which they could have approached this issue, and given the level of commitment they've shown to Drk and War, I think "pathetic" is actually being quite generous.

I'm not asking for SE to rebuild that job from the ground up (though I wouldn't be opposed to it, at this point), but they should at least by applying the same level of commitment across all three tanks. It only took one patch cycle for them to decide on meaningful adjustments for Drk (the same can be said for War back in 2.1). Yet, Pld has gone from 2.0 all the way up to 3.3, and hardly any of it's longstanding problems have been addressed. That's pretty pathetic and inexcusable, in my opinion.

[Brian_]

In basic theory, DPS has never been the "highest standard of party utility." The only standard for utility is whether or not it helps you clear the fight. When we're given an A3S or A4S with very tight DPS margins, that means utility with a DPS focus is important. When we're given an A8S with very tight eHP margins, that means utility with a survivability focus is important. There is one constant here. It's not DPS. It's a focus on clearing content.

How good PLD is will always be balanced on the back of content design. For the most part, the DPS checks in Midas are pretty tame and do not require a DRK comp by any measure. For three straight major patches now, we've seen PLD completely demolish DRK in terms of their usefulness in EX trials.

Divine Veil getting reduced from a 150s CD to a 120s CD is a huge deal -- especially when paired with the changes to STR and VIT. That's 20% higher up-time on a ~3k raid-wide shield. For many fights, it results in an additional activation and AoE coverage you otherwise wouldn't have had. Shield / Sword Oath no longer breaking your combo does change the way you play because it gives flexibility to a job that was notoriously inflexible before. These days, I actually feel more restricted playing WAR due to stack manipulation and debuff up-time issues than I do playing PLD. That was not the case in Gordias.

PLD was largely fine in 2.X. Again, you can complain about design but that's a separate issue from balance. PLD was the highest single target DPS MT and OT and had some very substantial advantages over WAR. Block with an i135 shield was much stronger than it currently is and it worked on meaningful attacks like Critical Rip, Revelation, Flatten, etc. Shield Swipe was at worst DPS neutral and actually worked for TP conservation. RoH was their only combo so threat never was an issue.

Most of PLD's most glaring practical issues didn't even emerge until the dust settled in 3.0. By that standard, it took SE the exact same amount of time to adjust both DRK and PLD. And, if you consider DRK's adjustments meaningful and PLD's not, that's just blind bias.

And level of commitment to DRK and WAR? What commitment? They hit a redesign home-run with WAR and have just stayed the course since. If you think PLD in its current state is as bad as WAR was before their redesign, again, that's just blind bias. DRK? Since 3.0, PLD has gotten more buffs than DRK and 3 very favorable EX trials in a row. I'd say it's pretty blatantly clear SE is more committed to helping PLD.

[IskarJarak]

I fail to see how all this discussion has to do with SkS. A good Drk maybe able to do slightly more deeps then a Pld, but with a Pld healers can dps more which means overall raidwide dps is higher.

[Donjo]

I fail to see how all this discussion has to do with SkS. A good Drk maybe able to do slightly more deeps then a Pld, but with a Pld healers can dps more which means overall raidwide dps is higher.

I fail to see what this discussion has to do with Skill Speed either. This is just what happens once the question in the OP has been answered :P

[Sarcatica]

I fail to see how all this discussion has to do with SkS. A good Drk maybe able to do slightly more deeps then a Pld, but with a Pld healers can dps more which means overall raidwide dps is higher.

Okay, for the sake of clarifying, good groups will do way more DPS total than what the average joes are doing. And it just so happens that DRK with any healer is still a DPS gain over taking PLD. That's a fact and you can't argue about it. Proof? See the fastest clears of Midas Savage in FFlogs, they are mostly DRKs as MT slot.

PLD with SkS isn't optimal, that's has been said throughout the entirety of 3.0. Period.