What is the General Consensus?

[Chrono_Rising]

Unchained is a 4.4% dps boost (taking cd into consideration), berserk is 10%, storm eye is 10%, inner release on defiance is a waste imho.

It is even with DRK, but the DRK combo is way stronger than the Warrior, its 840 potency for DRK + 475 bloodspiller, warriors one is only 640 and +350 inner beast.
Not to mention DRK plunge or slated earth, i dont know how you see DRK worse in DPS in tank stance, its not even comparable.

Warrior could change the stance for equilibrum, but the stance themselves are 10 sec cd and it just hurts your DPS to switch between them.

You have missed the point of the warrior tool set. Inner release in deliverance is warrior's highest potency move, because it is not augmented by tank stance, and it is up frequently this will balance out with the less frequent bloodspiller.

The 475 bloodspillers are nice, but is lowered slightly by tank stance, and also less frequently used compared to inner beast. You can make this look as bad as you want by comparing base potency to base potency without factoring in things like damage buffs and stance penalties. You can also wave your hands at things like salted earth and other Dark oGCD's without even mentioning that warrior has some as well, but you aren't really presenting a balanced case, it seems more like you are intentionally skewing things to make a point.

All tanks lose about the same percentage of their dps in tank stance. Warrior does more damage out of tank stance compared to dark knight, and so I expect it to be higher when both have similar penalties imposed. You can wave your hands at combo potency as much as you please, but nothing short of an excel spreadsheet and damage calculator would convince me that the difference in potency is unbalanced between the two in tank stance, especially compared to the relatively simple argument many have presented before you.

As far as the stance changing immediately hurting your dps you can stop it by: planning an unchained use to minimize it to nearly nothing and even gain dps on moves like upheaval to minimize any losses even further. The main point here is that if you needed that clutch self heal on warrior you can go into tank stance and gain access easily, all moves involved are oGCD. Dark Knight loses a GCD going into tank stance and then spends 3 GCD's trying to restore its HP at an 80% reduction thanks to tank stance. The main point here being that if you are about to die the non optimal thing to do is to continue to dps and not try to save yourself.

[Hruodig]

All the tanks are completely fine, to address the op. I personally feel that drk shines in 5 (just get good at plunge timing), 6, and god kefka. Progressing in god kefka with pld/war, it was pretty obvious that drk would've had it good in that fight with tbn and 60 second dark mind. There's so much damage going out in that fight almost all the time (auto attacks crit for 25k by the way), so having that tbn every 15 seconds would be really really nice. It also alleviates your cd management throughout the fight.

[Hierro]

I never disregarded this, so I am not sure why you are so up in arms about it—I ignored it as there was no reason for me to bring it up.

In regards to TBN, you are being misleading. By bringing up the fact that TBN shares a resource with your "offensive abilites," you are implying an opportunity cost. This is far from the case, as I've pointed out, and why I've brought it up. What you did was deceptive.

My post was also centered around bad design.

Just in case you missed the keypoints, here's what I stated:

I like how you pick and choose exactly what you stated. In reality, you went on to say all three can perform the bare basic function of a tank-- to me, this screams "only to take hits!" Your post goes on to detail the other can excel in other areas, and drk can do nothing else. You then sum your post up with "poor mitigation, poor offensive capabilities," and a bunch of loaded words with no real meaning.

By the way, the former two claims are something that's based on actual numbers, and not something vague and subjective like "feeling."

Dark Knight has a lot of risk involved with play compared to the other two tanks and they are rewarded very little for taking said risks, and often time punished if they don't pan out.

Risk? Yeah, right. You keep your oGCDs on cooldown and make sure to never cap out on resources. Boy, that sure was risky... You talk like DRK is all about olympic gymnastics, when in reality it has less risk involved than PLD!

I pugged all of Deltascape with it

Congratulations on your 4.1 clear.

The complaints, the doom and gloom as many perceive it, is often mentioned or stated in regard to the fact that it had the most stripped from it at launch out of the three.

It plays the same way as 3.0, more or less.

TBN was a band-aid fix that was supposed to shore up the losses but only does so marginally and not to the extent that they presumably hoped.

Ah, yes, how could I forget that useful dark dance?

This has led to an aimless, disjointed play-style that lacks any real flow and is overly reliant on resources and breaking an OGCD shield that costs said resources. Again, bad design.

Great, more loaded words. BTW, breaking that oGCD shield is not hard on a 7 second timer.

Like all of my posts about Dark Knight, I do not and will not mention numbers, I avoid it due to people like you

People like me? Well excuse me for not being born white You avoid talking about numbers because you can't offer an argument based on substance. Instead you focus around popular sentiment while being misleading on your argument. You avoid it because numbers and facts are not convenient to your argument.

So cease, desist, stop bringing up useless details that have nothing to do with the original point I was trying to make and move along.

How dare I bring up numbers in a game about numbers?

[Jukebox12]

I got a question for you

can I give you a hug?

[Anienai]

Then why do people fight over it exactly?

Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this: the peak of your civilization. -Agent Smith

[Sarcatica]

Oh you DRK mains.

[Capn_Goggles]

snip

I'm inclined to agree that numbers are irrelevant to the issue at hand, which is that regardless of whether TBN is a DPS loss or gain is less important than the fact that it sits on Dark Knight's kit like a brain tumor. From a mitigation standpoint, it's an incredibly powerful (possibly overly so) tool against tank busters, but is horridly underpowered when it comes to dealing with all other damage that DRK inevitably sustains. To put it simply, it's an issue with two layers: Dark Knight sucks at dealing with sustained damage in an efficient manner, and furthermore any attempt to rectify this by adding more tools to its mitigation toolkit will invariably make it too powerful against tank busters.

On top of this, the other issue is that TBN makes Dark Knight's defensive toolkit sit too close to its offensive toolkit. Any ability requiring blood is going to have to be designed so as not to actively encourage players to take unnecessary damage; this is probably why bloodspiller feels so tacked on despite appearing as DRK's answer to fell cleave or holy spirit. Any attempt to fix Dark Knight is going to have to begin with a rework of The Blackest Night.

[Adventica6]

The general consensus is Pld has tons of utility but less dmg than War, War has more burst but less utility, drk is not a job anymore.

[Nedkel]

You have missed the point of the warrior tool set. Inner release in deliverance is warrior's highest potency move, because it is not augmented by tank stance, and it is up frequently this will balance out with the less frequent bloodspiller.

The 475 bloodspillers are nice, but is lowered slightly by tank stance, and also less frequently used compared to inner beast. You can make this look as bad as you want by comparing base potency to base potency without factoring in things like damage buffs and stance penalties. You can also wave your hands at things like salted earth and other Dark oGCD's without even mentioning that warrior has some as well, but you aren't really presenting a balanced case, it seems more like you are intentionally skewing things to make a point.

All tanks lose about the same percentage of their dps in tank stance. Warrior does more damage out of tank stance compared to dark knight, and so I expect it to be higher when both have similar penalties imposed. You can wave your hands at combo potency as much as you please, but nothing short of an excel spreadsheet and damage calculator would convince me that the difference in potency is unbalanced between the two in tank stance, especially compared to the relatively simple argument many have presented before you.

As far as the stance changing immediately hurting your dps you can stop it by: planning an unchained use to minimize it to nearly nothing and even gain dps on moves like upheaval to minimize any losses even further. The main point here is that if you needed that clutch self heal on warrior you can go into tank stance and gain access easily, all moves involved are oGCD. Dark Knight loses a GCD going into tank stance and then spends 3 GCD's trying to restore its HP at an 80% reduction thanks to tank stance. The main point here being that if you are about to die the non optimal thing to do is to continue to dps and not try to save yourself.

Bloodspiller is not lowered by tank stance, DRK has 0 dmg penalty on tank stance because of Darkside.
It will remain 475 potency ability, with no damage penalty.
I may be less frequent but it does not matter, because 1-2-3 combo is still way stronger than warrior get.

There is no way warrior in tank stance could do more damage than DRK in tank stance, not even a chance in hell.
I could demonstrate it with the numbers, in the 60 seconds of time the DRK in tank stance, comparing to warrior using only highest potency combo, inner beast use with generated furry gauge with combo and infuriate, considering all the buffs unchained, inner release inner beast 5 times use and even 10% bonus dmg from storms eye combo is 880 potency lower than DRK using 1-2-3 combo, salted earth, plunge, carve and spit without bloodspiller.
I could show you the numbers if you want.

[SaberYukihira]

There is no way warrior in tank stance could do more damage than DRK in tank stance, not even a chance in hell.
I could demonstrate it with the numbers, in the 60 seconds of time the DRK in tank stance, comparing to warrior using only highest potency combo, inner beast use with generated furry gauge with combo and infuriate, considering all the buffs unchained, inner release inner beast 5 times use and even 10% bonus dmg from storms eye combo is 880 potency lower than DRK using 1-2-3 combo, salted earth, plunge, carve and spit without bloodspiller.
I could show you the numbers if you want.

The fact you are talking about doing a fight in tank stance already means you're not tanking correctly. There is literally no point in arguing what tank does more in tank stance since you should not be using it other than on pull for MT.