MT/OT assumptions in multi-tank groups

[MoroMurasaki]

Hi there Tank friends!

I'm newish to tanking (WAR is in the mid 50's and I love it thus far) but one thing I've noticed from 50 onward is that multi-tank situations can be... awkward.

To start at my level I exclusively get 50 raids for Alliance Roulette and as a WAR I'm often the only tank without my DPS stance unlocked. It feels a lot like AST in 50 dungeons without Gravity all over again. I assume I should MT in those situations unless someone else speaks up. I have no issue MTing, I've run all those things enough at this point I know how, but I've run into a few situations where others would like to MT themselves and that's fine too.

My personal favorite was the first WoD (and indeed the first alliance raid I tanked) where both other tanks were also WARs. Both considerably outgeared me as well. One claimed MT and kept dying so I would step in each time and he would want things back. After the first boss which was swapping between both of them when I wasn't MT I spoke up and asked them to DPS on the premise that I seemed to have the strongest healers. I knew this to be true not only because my healers hadn't let me die but also because one was a friend of mine.

It became awkward, with them arguing for the use of Defiance even as OT under the premise that the DPS gain from Iner Beast offset the penalty of Defiance which it most certainly does not.

I digress i had a few similar sticky situations during Trial Roulette that also wound up with pingpong enmity.

My thoughts on MT/OS(s) would be this...

1. Is one of us a WAR in 50 content? Without DPS stance that person should MT.
2. Is one of us considerably better geared for that content? Assuming the less geared tank is not woefully undergeared the less geared tank should MT to allow the better geared tank to DPS.
3. In Alliance situations if someone has exceedingly weaker healers (see: deaths on their team, OOM healers, etc) that person should not MT.

To an extent I'm wiling to disreguard some of this (basically points 1 and 2) if someone is very attached to an MT/OT role for whatever reason but I feel like number 3 is kind of a non-negotiable.

So I ask you guys - does this make sense? I feel like my last few Alliance raids were being tortured until I forcibly took over MTing (which is disconcerting in and of it's self - I am almost always the least experienced tank in any given group) and I just want things to run smoothly.

Are these reasonable, logical assumptions that I'm making or am I missing a piece of this puzzle?

[SummerScorcher]

HAHA I know exactly what you mean. My preference always goes to OT so tend to wait 10-15 seconds or so for someone else to pop their tank stance, else I just activate Grit and go at it. But to answer your question, I agree if there's a War on lv50 alliance MT role should go to them (unless they just really dont want to I suppose).

As for lv50 Warrior OT, it's definitely a dps loss to use Defiance the whole fight, but if you feel like doing a bit of experimentation, you can pop Defiance/Unchained/Infuriate/Inner Beast whenever they're up and drop Defiance again when Unchained wears off.

[Alien_Gamer]

I'm not sure I'd agree with points 1 and 2 as a definitive rule because gear can be a potent factor. Simply put, if the OT is overgeared enough there is a good possibility that he'll generate enough enmity in DPS stance that the less geared MT won't be able to MT. Instead of risking an aggro fight I tend to prefer the better geared tank MT. And if you're a level 50 something tank partnered with a lv 70 tank, you're going to have a fraction of the ilevel in gear; thats not something that should be readily ignored. But if you can hold the aggro, then yes I'd agree it would be better for the better geared tank to DPS.

As to point 3, absolutely yes. If your healers can't keep you up, you have no business being MT. Tanking and healing is a team effort, if one part fails then the party/raid is going to suffer.

[Jim_Berry]

As a tank main (all three), I prefer the MT role, so I always assume mo one else will MT, until I get that group where the other tank pulls DURING the countdown or when people are still gathering to the room. However, if I am MT, and I so much as see a Provoke from someone else, I drop tank stance and let them have, no questions asked.

Even as a WAR, I prefer to MT. I did come to terms that if there's a PLD/DRK in the group when I'm WAR, they assume I will OT without asking.

[MoroMurasaki]

I haven't had any enmity issues on WAR apart from times that other tanks were also in tank stance. I suppose I would if I were able to stance dance perhaps but since that isn't an option in 50 content it's kind of a moot point.

I've generally got no issue with going OT, DPSing is fun when I get to do it, but I still don't see a compelling reason to OT without Deliverance against other tanks who have their DPS stances readily available.

I encountered it again this morning. Merrily doing my thing since no one spoke up in alliance chat when I said "I'll take MT if no one objects?" and them I'm losing the first boss (again in WoD) to a PLD in Shield Oath.

Best part is he was standing with the group so the boss spun, lasered him and killed several people including both of his own healers. I can't lie, I lolled.

[HoodRat]

I haven't had any enmity issues on WAR apart from times that other tanks were also in tank stance. I suppose I would if I were able to stance dance perhaps but since that isn't an option in 50 content it's kind of a moot point.

I've generally got no issue with going OT, DPSing is fun when I get to do it, but I still don't see a compelling reason to OT without Deliverance against other tanks who have their DPS stances readily available.

I encountered it again this morning. Merrily doing my thing since no one spoke up in alliance chat when I said "I'll take MT if no one objects?" and them I'm losing the first boss (again in WoD) to a PLD in Shield Oath.

Best part is he was standing with the group so the boss spun, lasered him and killed several people including both of his own healers. I can't lie, I lolled.

In level 50 content, not too sure since the changes made in SB. I would say either war or pld, but probably pld since enmity combo is still the only combo they have worth using at that level. In level 70 content, it would be war > drk > pld (at least in terms of pulling). But I would say it doesn't really matter in 24 man content since most of the people (that I get anyway) play extremely poorly.

[Reinhardt_Azureheim]

Ahh, the famous "I don't have a DPS stance yet, so I should MT" Lv50 Warrior quote.

Judging all three tanks really quickly for Lv50 content:

Warrior
--------
MT WAR explains itself. While no DPS stance, you have a skill to off-set the damage penalty of your stance. Unchained + Defiance, build 100 beast gauge, dump 100 gauge + infuriate on 3x Inner Beast (ideally in Berserk popped right after you have the full gauge), then turn the stance off and play Warrior like a semi-dps until next Unchained is up.

No-stance + Eye + Berserk OT WAR is stronger than DPS Paladin though.

Paladin
--------
The difference between WAR and PLD at 50? WAR has no DPS stance, PLD has no DPS combos. Your stance dictates what you are doing, but neither is really a difference. Should MT over DRK in alliance raids (cuz no Shirk there) unless DRK goes heavy on Grit for a while.

Dark Knight
-------------
Good flex-pick, can do well on both MT and OT. Should OT tho if someone else WANTS to MT.

[RopeDrink]

Up until the recent patch(es) I had close to max (non-deltascape extreme) gear, so it was passable.

However, I'm not really a tank-main thus my gear improvements trickle in slower compared to actual main-tanks, plus the fact I typically heal (rather than tank) most content, which means despite being a PLD (often considered MT material by default as far as pre-Stormblood mentality goes), I'll always enter content I'm not overly familiar with on the tanking end and throw on DPS stance as an indication of this. However, if I see that I have more health than, say, a Warrior or DRK, I'll likely suck it up and main-tank it despite that as it is usually clear they are probably in a similar position, gear wise, though I tend to wait and see if they swap to tank stance - for all I know, they may have done it before, in which case experience wins.

The only time this sucks is in lower content where your only DPS combo is literally Fast/Riot (no RA or Gore at the very least), to which you may as well MT with the Fas/Sav/Rage. Chances are, even in DPS stance, using that combo for the extra damage is just going to give your MT a headache.

[Anienai]

I forcibly took over MTing

Kinky..

At 50 just run in with tank stance and tell the other tank to GFY. You will be surprised how well this goes over in a group.

[Lyth]

With regards to 24-player content:
If you want to OT, wait until someone else takes initiative.
If you want to MT, ready check and then pull the boss when everyone has responded. If you still have enmity on the boss at the end of your opener, then you're probably MT.
If you have to ask for someone else's permission to be MT, then you're probably not MT.
If you have to use provoke/ultimatum at any point, then you're probably not MT.
If you're dead, then you're probably not MT.
There are no official rules of conduct.

The less amount of verbal communication this requires, the better.