Interview with xenosys-vex

[Exiled_Tonberry]

It really feels like people are overplaying how weak Warrior is compared to PLD
They're pretty much neck and neck in all regards.
Who cares if you aren't the top tank DPS by the end of the fight? WARs identity has always been about extremely hard hits after a window of build up, which is does now. It has by far the highest burst of the tanks. It can't have the highest burst and the highest sustained while also offering all the defensive capabilities of a PLD. All that'll do is reverse the positions so WAR is the objective best.

Meanwhile DRK has the weakest party mitigation, the weakest burst and weakest sustained damage. DRK should be the only tank being talked about, WAR is completely fine.

Sidenote: Since when did people start complaining about WARs difficulty? All since 2.0 and 3.0 Wars seemed to accept that and say it's difficulty is one of the things that makes it funner to play, in comparison to the simple playstyle of PLD. Nothing's changed? PLD is still simple, WAR is still more difficult. Is it really just because WAR isn't, by the end of the fight, top DPS?...

[Aana]

It really feels like people are overplaying how weak Warrior is compared to PLD
They're pretty much neck and neck in all regards.
Who cares if you aren't the top tank DPS by the end of the fight? WARs identity has always been about extremely hard hits after a window of build up, which is does now. It has by far the highest burst of the tanks. It can't have the highest burst and the highest sustained while also offering all the defensive capabilities of a PLD. All that'll do is reverse the positions so WAR is the objective best.

Meanwhile DRK has the weakest party mitigation, the weakest burst and weakest sustained damage. DRK should be the only tank being talked about, WAR is completely fine.

Every tank is within a couple % of each other. Being 'weakest' is a couple % in various areas under the next guy. You could rewrite that post but replace War with Drk and Pld with War. Every single tank thread on this board is pumping out hyperbole everywhere. All tanks are viable in all content. DPS is within a couple% across the board. Minor baby tweaks will bring everyone in line, and even if they do nothing, tanks are, objectively, in a passable spot (no extreme discrimination, all viable, within a few % of each other. Will not dramatically affect your in game experience). I get it. Everyone looks up the hill and sees the class shining above them. But when you realized that shining paragon on the hill is only 2 feet above, you realize its not that big a deal.

[Eyvhokan]

Burst is utility.

[Exiled_Tonberry]

Balance dictates what, exactly? If war has lower utility than pld their dps should be higher because of balance, as well. That they get there through "burst" windows is just a coincidence of design. At the end of the encounter is what matters, not necessarily how they got there.

Except WAR does have utility. Not as much as PLD, no. But you also don't see PLD bursting for more than some DPS'.

I'd also argue that SiO is much better and accessible than PLD AOE mitigation.

[MauvaisOeil]

Well if utility should, like Xeno or Whiskey are claiming, balanced around DPS, DRK should be hand down the best damage dealer out of tanks. However argument against it will come as much as necessary, because no warrior wants to be beaten in damage.

[Mycow8me]

Well if utility should, like Xeno or Whiskey are claiming, balanced around DPS, DRK should be hand down the best damage dealer out of tanks. However argument against it will come as much as necessary, because no warrior wants to be beaten in damage.

And the vicious circle goes round and round. It might actually help if devs stated how and what they are balancing exactly so we don't just assume.

[MauvaisOeil]

And the vicious circle goes round and round. It might actually help if devs stated how and what they are balancing exactly so we don't just assume.

I agree. Do they want equality in damage ? In threat ? In mitigation ? In sustain ? Is the flavor seen as superior to the balance ?

[TouchandFeel]

Party utility potential is not solely based on the number of utility abilities you have but also by the strengths and weaknesses of said abilities, the frequency they can be used and whether there are any costs associated with their use.
It seems like these basic considerations are being overlooked for the point of bolstering arguments.

[shao32]

snip

Shake it off is pretty good, better that divine veil and have the best defensive kit, you can complaing paladins dealt almost almost same dps that WAR with less effort, i dont really agreed i think WAR is more easy, but on HW WAR was just a fell cleave bot and dealt huge dps numbers with so little effort and no DRK or PLD complaing about that.

[Exiled_Tonberry]

Party utility potential is not solely based on the number of utility abilities you have but also by the strengths and weaknesses of said abilities, the frequency they can be used and whether there are any costs associated with their use.

Exactly this. That's why I said I'd argue that SiO is a better mitigation tool than anything PLD has.
It's easy to just list the numbers of tools a job has, but did you mention that Divine Viel needs a heal to work and doesn't effect the caster?
And that Passage of Arms completely stops you from attacking?
Or how Intervention costs some of you gauge?

In comparison, SiO is simply use a CD and use the skill for instant benefits. It's easier to use, almost always stronger than what a PLD has and most importantly the WAR benefits from the mitigation as well.

WAR doesn't have as many party mitigation tools as PLD, because the one it has is extremely strong.