It's about time Shield oath and Grit become Abilities instead of Spells. (off-GCD)

[Aana]

Snip.

Yes, the HP vs mitigation thing entirely depends on how hard you are getting hit. Same with any shield really, and Shield+Mitigation will always combine more efficiently, (IB+Defiance, TBN+Grit) and why shelltron has stronger mitigation as pld lacks HP synergy. But (imo) the reason why war has so much 'ease' sliding in and out of tank stance is because their cornerstone mitigation is locked behind defiance and a GCD itself. Think of it this way: War/Pld have access to their primary mitigation all the time, but additional mitigation in tank stance is hard to access. War have easy access to tank stance but hard to access primary mitigation.

War is MUCH easier to use tank stance on, but that is because IB is very hard to access so they smooth out tank stance and reduce penalties (unchained, OGCD, etc). As long as IB is a GCD and behind defiance and TBN/Shell is OGCD and freely accessable, the tanks will not be able to work in the same way. This is not to say that Pld/War should not ease the costs (I personally would rather they leave them GCDs but reduce/remove MP cost and make sword oath like grit, click it off not another GCD on the backend). But with TBN/SHell on OGCD and stance free, I don't think the stance also needs to be OGCD without even more dramatic changes to all 3 tanks which would end up homogenizing them even more. Though bringing IB out of defiance would allow SE to put war defensive actions on similar timers and remove the 'extra' CD war's have, make tank stances all similar, etc. But that is a question of is homogenization for balance better than awkward balance but distinctive jobs. /shrug. If we are under the assumption that homogenization is 'bad' then I cant get behind making drk/pld tank stance as easy/forgiving as war's because war trades awkward IB for EZ stance and Pld/Drk have EZ TBN/Shell but awkward stances. (Also drk needs a snap enmity move to match scorn/onslaught so that tank stance isn't needed for add grabs just like Pld/War and not rework tank stance around Drk missing a tool. I like Dark passenger for this).

[Chrono_Rising]

Yes, the HP vs mitigation thing entirely depends on how hard you are getting hit. Same with any shield really, and Shield+Mitigation will always combine more efficiently, (IB+Defiance, TBN+Grit) and why shelltron has stronger mitigation as pld lacks HP synergy. But (imo) the reason why war has so much 'ease' sliding in and out of tank stance is because their cornerstone mitigation is locked behind defiance and a GCD itself. Think of it this way: War/Pld have access to their primary mitigation all the time, but additional mitigation in tank stance is hard to access. War have easy access to tank stance but hard to access primary mitigation.

War is MUCH easier to use tank stance on, but that is because IB is very hard to access so they smooth out tank stance and reduce penalties (unchained, OGCD, etc). As long as IB is a GCD and behind defiance and TBN/Shell is OGCD and freely accessable, the tanks will not be able to work in the same way. This is not to say that Pld/War should not ease the costs (I personally would rather they leave them GCDs but reduce/remove MP cost and make sword oath like grit, click it off not another GCD on the backend). But with TBN/SHell on OGCD and stance free, I don't think the stance also needs to be OGCD without even more dramatic changes to all 3 tanks which would end up homogenizing them even more. Though bringing IB out of defiance would allow SE to put war defensive actions on similar timers and remove the 'extra' CD war's have, make tank stances all similar, etc. But that is a question of is homogenization for balance better than awkward balance but distinctive jobs. /shrug. If we are under the assumption that homogenization is 'bad' then I cant get behind making drk/pld tank stance as easy/forgiving as war's because war trades awkward IB for EZ stance and Pld/Drk have EZ TBN/Shell but awkward stances. (Also drk needs a snap enmity move to match scorn/onslaught so that tank stance isn't needed for add grabs just like Pld/War and not rework tank stance around Drk missing a tool. I like Dark passenger for this).

The problem with this kind of thinking is that Warrior gets flexibility in stance to use an undesirable mitigation, and then get mitigation buffs so that they never need to use it.

The dev team is giving warrior their cake and letting them eat it too.

The logic behind warrior's balancing appears to be
(1) Warrior has higher dps because it has to give up mitigation
(2) Warrior mitigation is too low without those skills/buff flexibility with multiple uses and synergies so that warriors can use the defensive skills
(3) Flexibility wasn't enough because warriors refuse to use IB and instead use their skills for other utilities. Buff defensive options and flexibility until mitigation issues go away
(4) Oh no warrior is too strong. See you next expac.

There needs to come a point at which we cannot keep making work-arounds for every draw back in a kit. As it stands warrior currently has the following titles:
(1) DPS tank
(2) Emnity tank
(3) Self healing tank
(4) Flexibility tank

Any one of those would be an amazing title, warrior has all of them. Its enough already, start spreading things out.

[Aana]

The problem with this kind of thinking is that Warrior gets flexibility in stance to use an undesirable mitigation, and then get mitigation buffs so that they never need to use it.

This is why I often say SE painted themselves into a corner with War. The way IB relates to TBN/Shelltron means either (talking about defence/mitigation):
* War is equivalent in defiance to Drk/Pld but weaker in deliverance or
* War is equivalent at in deliverance to Drk/Pld but stronger in defiance
* War is both weaker and stronger but more flexible to 'even it out'.


What we currently have is:
War is slightly weaker in deliverance, significantly stronger in defiance and more flexible to get between them. Savy war's can really take advantage of the flex. Less savy ones don't. At the high end of skill war outperforms when optimized.

Without universal access to a cornerstone mitigation, it will be quite tricky to get them on the same page. We can homogenize everybody, but I'm assuming that's not actually what most people want. In which case were left with the awkwardness of two similar tanks with a completely wonky one that works under a completely different set of rules. But again, I think this problem is far deeper than a tank stance swap can fix or be healthy for.

Its obvious the tank stances need to be revisted. I'd rather we just reduce the resource costs and go from there than just copypasta war's stances on drk/pld. Once you start changing abilities fundamental interactions you are changing the entire class. Tweaking numbers doesn't tend to have unforeseen consequences and meta shaping problems. OGCD stances will dramtically change the way tanks are played which goes beyond a power imbalance. Power can be adjusted with simple number tweaks. Gameplay changes are a whole nother ball of wax.

[Thela]

I think it's about time (next expansion) they just remove the tank stances all together and bake them into the kit. Increase enmity gain from the enmity combos slightly but do not add increased enmity for dps moves. Obviously warrior would need a bit of rework which is why it should be done at the start of an expansion. I'm sure they can come up with ideas for better kit than a tank stance that nobody wants to use outside of the pull.

[Kabooa]

Its obvious the tank stances need to be revisted..

Sounds like its time for another rework that nobody asked for!

To the google doc!

[Saeno]

I think it's about time (next expansion) they just remove the tank stances all together and bake them into the kit. Increase enmity gain from the enmity combos slightly but do not add increased enmity for dps moves. Obviously warrior would need a bit of rework which is why it should be done at the start of an expansion. I'm sure they can come up with ideas for better kit than a tank stance that nobody wants to use outside of the pull.

But would there be a passive mitigation buff as well? A passive 20% mitigation/25% HP + 20% HP healing buff might be hard to balance.

[Thela]

But would there be a passive mitigation buff as well? A passive 20% mitigation/25% HP + 20% HP healing buff might be hard to balance.

Maybe 5-10% or so for all tank jobs? they can make up for the other part in other parts of the kit as it would be at the start of expansion anyway so they are free to rework it.

[shao32]

But would there be a passive mitigation buff as well? A passive 20% mitigation/25% HP + 20% HP healing buff might be hard to balance.

technically the fights are balanced with those bonus in mind as a MT all the time so it will be not a problem in terms on fights desing, as a raiders how are used to drop tank stances will be find survive more easy at the end.

[Mahrze]

I think it's about time (next expansion) they just remove the tank stances all together and bake them into the kit. Increase enmity gain from the enmity combos slightly but do not add increased enmity for dps moves. Obviously warrior would need a bit of rework which is why it should be done at the start of an expansion. I'm sure they can come up with ideas for better kit than a tank stance that nobody wants to use outside of the pull.

And then you'll have people cry foul for WAR and they'll do the same thing they did in 4.0 and we'll be here on this same spot.

[Thela]

And then you'll have people cry foul for WAR and they'll do the same thing they did in 4.0 and we'll be here on this same spot.

Well they would have to redesign the war a bit as i said to match the new system. I'm sure they can come up with something that works for them if they tried.