WAR damage is lacking

[Maltothoris]

Did I miss something here? Where does it say in any of the patch notes that WAR was nerfed? Looking through all of them, it's clear that they haven't been touched at all with the exception of the 3.2 patch where all tanks' damage was adjusted to with vitality in mind and enmity changed. That's it. That was the only change that ever happened to WAR throughout the entire expansion. So I'm pretty sure that WAR wasn't nerfed at all recently.

[The_Last_Dragoon]

What warriors are you playing with that don't have maim and eye up permanently? My main point with this that seems to have gotten lost in the replies is that warrior damage has been nerfed and pally/dark damage has become so comparable to them that warrior is losing its style and becoming the tank bard.

I would love it if Bards could naturally dominate the top of the damage charts without even trying. Honestly, you're trying to complain that Warriors aren't the obvious go to tank choice and that Paladins are actually a viable class to take with you into Duties now. Before the balancing, players were legitimately kicking other players from their groups simply because they weren't warriors. Sure, Paladins are actually catching up, but they are nowhere near taking over Warrior's dominance as the best tank damage-wise. Show me a current report where 50% of the tanks in the top 100 damage rankings are PLD and I'll concede that you're right.

[aleph_null]

My main point with this that seems to have gotten lost in the replies is that warrior damage has been nerfed and pally/dark damage has become so comparable to them that warrior is losing its style and becoming the tank bard.

Well that's a good thing though. Now give them better OT utilities and better aoe for pld as well.

Did I miss something here? Where does it say in any of the patch notes that WAR was nerfed? Looking through all of them, it's clear that they haven't been touched at all with the exception of the 3.2 patch where all tanks' damage was adjusted to with vitality in mind and enmity changed. That's it. That was the only change that ever happened to WAR throughout the entire expansion. So I'm pretty sure that WAR wasn't nerfed at all recently.

I guess war (and drk) dps was relatively nerfed against pld's since they got boosted quite a few times since 3.0 release. But that's not a bad thing, considering pld has been quite lackluster compared to drk (less dps, lots of magic tank busters).

[Brannigan]

This seems like an odd time to complain about balance considering that no new content where it matters will be coming out before the expansion, which may shake everything up. I think it's fairly likely that warrior will get some new broken stuff in Stormblood that will allow them to retain their permanent party spot.

[bardaboo]

Aoe holmgang that lasts 30 seconds!

[Pyrali]

People are whining that WAR is too good as OT, but every tank has its moments to shine. I don't complain (As a WAR main) in situation where I'm not an ideal pick for something, or go demanding the class that gets picked over me gets nerfed (or that I get buffed to match it).

This name needs more diversity, not less.

Let the different tanks be different. Let them excel in different areas of gameplay. That makes it more worthwhile to level them all--and stay subbed longer in doing so.

As it is right now in the direction SE has hinted they're taking (with the shared move pool and promised WAR nerfs), it's gonna be leveling a new Aesthetic soon, not a new class.

It's good that we have a spectrum of tank classes that has room for both defensive and offensive playstyles to find their niche.

I'd argue the same for SCH.

Diversity is good in cases like this. No one needs to be 'nerfed' and classes don't need to all feel like each other.

[Ultimatecalibur]

Paladin loses 15% and a 75 potency attack after every auto-attack while warrior loses 25% and fell cleave plus the 5% from deliverance. Paladin damage is weirdly high for the amount of mitigation they have.

Couple corrections. Sword Oath deals 75 potency over 3 seconds with each extra auto-attack scaled based on weapon auto attack speed. This tends to be around 15% of a Paladin's total dps while in Sword Oath.

You are also not factoring Unchained into Warrior dps in Defiance. Properly factoring it in makes Defiance's penalty closer to 20%.

These factors make the losses from going from DpS stance to Tank stance:

• Dark Knight - -20% of the middle dps (100% DRK) for ~80% DRK dps
• Paladin - -26% of the lowest dps (90% DRK) for ~66.6% DRK dps
• Warrior - -24% of the highest dps (~110% DRK) for ~84% DRK dps

[Reynhart]

You are also not factoring Unchained into Warrior dps in Defiance. Properly factoring it in makes Defiance's penalty closer to 20%.

Also not factoring the fact that WAR can easily switch to Deliverance, pop a Fell Cleave (Or even a double), then switch back on Defiance 5 seconds later. Or that even if you have to use Inner Beast or Steel Cyclone, they also igore Defiance's penalty

[CoolCat]

I don't complain (As a WAR main) in situation where I'm not an ideal pick for something, or go demanding the class that gets picked over me gets nerfed (or that I get buffed to match it).
.

So when are those situations, where you a WAR is not an ideal pick?

[LilLemay]

So when are those situations, where you a WAR is not an ideal pick?

well clearly those situations are whenever you need a tank that can do good AoE dp- oh.. well then it must be when you need a tank who can be an amazing OT and a really solid M..T.. oh.. um.. how about when you need to take a massive tankbuster, cause you know WAR doesn't have any cooldowns so they'd have to have a MASSIVE hp.. pool.. hrm..

There is a point here though, does kinda suck that whenever you're picking tanks you say ''okay so we need a WAR, and then a PLD/DRK"