Radical thought...remove the off-tank?

[BillyKaplan]

It worked for raids.

Even after the changes, you still have 3 tanks per raid. That's more than enough redundancy and add-management while six tanks was overkill. The only place where 2 tanks per party might come in handy is on Ozma because all 3 tanks have to pull their weight and losing even the one means a potential wipe if you don't recover fast enough (all things said relating to when that raid was on-level, on-gear), but that's about the one place I can think of. Even in Void Ark, one tank grabs the tree, the other grabs the puppy, and the last one hits DPS stance unless one of the other tanks dies.
None of this applies to 8-player content where the 2 tanks is all you ever had and you don't have other parties picking up your party's slack. And that's before we get to 'easier content' like A9 where if you remove the OT mechanic you might as well scrap the fight because that's all the mechanics you have in there, the add management, and you need the OT for that.

[TouchandFeel]

Personally, I would prefer to see more content be built to make use of the off-tank instead of potentially only having one tank.

There are so many ways to do this like more add waves, multiple bosses at a time, mechanics that force tank swaps, etc.

[Javey]

My second experience off tanking, main tank died so I put up grit and fought for aggro until they were up. Yes, the party could have recovered but depending on the phase, a dps or two could die increasing the number of weakened players. It's a problem in raids because no one knows who is second in line and both hesitate.

There are also mechs that attack the top two threat targets and they are meant to be taken by the tanks. As a dps I've taken a few tank busters and didn't even have a chance x(

Respect the OT.

[Canadane]

Tank swap mechanics are fun. Don't take them away!

[Sylvina]

Tank swap mechanics are fun. Don't take them away!

Agreed with that it makes tanking more interesting.

Also for the person who said "if people know what theyre doing both tanks wont be in tank stance" well if thats the case theres major issues with either tank stances or the balance of the game.

If tank stance isnt going to be useful for 99% of the content, get rid of it.

[HoodRat]

If tank stance isnt going to be useful for 99% of the content, get rid of it.

Talk with SE about that, not me.

[Sylvina]

Talk with SE about that, not me.

The point I was making was theres a problem when the meta becomes "never use tank stance"

[HoodRat]

The point I was making was theres a problem when the meta becomes "never use tank stance"

The point I was making is the only way to change that is on SE's end.

[Reinha]

Tank swap mechanics are fun. Don't take them away!

This. I wish they happened more frequently and that Provoke and Shirk had a shorter cooldown.

Two tanks also allows the devs to design two boss encounters where the bosses aren't stacked together and cleaved to death.

[Dzian]

I'm in agreement with the OP.. Look if people want things to matter in this game changes do have to be made. I think getting rid of the offtank is a step in the right path. I mean what could it hurt? I only see good things in that it makes content harder which is what most want right?

It typically makes content easier not harder to roll with one tank

There's so many fights in this game that have some degree of off tank swap mechanic but the damage of those mechanics is so trivially tuned a main tank can usually just eat it. and ignore the swap.

O4n was one example some groups would swap after x number of stacks. some would just plough through the whole fight even on week one. The swap mechanic was so loose that it could be ignored.

And even going as far back as coil, premade groups were running 1 tank for t5, t9 and a few others because taking a 5th dps made the run easier not harder.

The 2 2 4 party composition is the cause of many of the games problems though because it's built so heavily around balance. Thus doesn't allow jobs to stand out at all. Yet the devs also push jobs into pure roles which simply don't fit the dps meta.

Whm is a pure healer for example. But because of balance sch and ast can both heal well enough to clear content. it means the extra healing power a whm had was worthless to groups and thus whm was side lined in favour of sch / ast that bought more dps to the group

If they scrapped the fixed 2-2-4 comp though that pure whm healer might be powerful enough a party that they only needed one and thus that whm would offer something usefull to a party even as a pure healer.

Or a pld always concepted to be a defensive fortress but again balance says war and dark must also be able to tank so all that extra defence a pld has isn't necessary. however if you scrapped the 2-2-4 comp it could be that defensive fortress tank enough he could tank the whole raid Single handedly but a warrior might need another war or drk. To take some of the strain.
but the problem was the other tanks can tank well enough and they bring more dps. so A pld just isn't useful. But ya know balance has destroyed job identity and that defensive tank is now arguably the most kick ass offensive tank in the game. Because of a 2-2-4 comp and heavy obsession with balance. Which has destroyed job identity in many cases.

So if you really want to be radical scrap the whole 2-2-4 thing and let players build a comp they choose. Be it 1 tank 1 heal 6 dps or 2 tanks 1 heal 5 dps or 1 tank 2 heals 5 dps. or any combination under the sun.

That would be radical and allow for some solid job variation and identity. Then they really could have a viable pure healer class or viable pure defensive tank class. which would also gives players a lot more choice in playstyles those healers / tanks that don't want to dps then don't have to they have roles to play that suit pure heals or pure tanking sort of thing. would also open up the door to like pure support classes as well...