I told you so, but we can still fix this!

[Mnemosynia]

I am a returning FF14 player,i quit shortly after the Stormblood launch after the atrocious changes to DRK with the loss of reprisal and low blow. Feel free to check my post history, i was one of the few maybe only voice at the time of the Stormblood release that saw this coming and I would like to say, IF we had been more vocal at the start we would have gotten better changes.

And yes i still play DRK because quietus is alright for dungeons, but again TBN trade for reprisal and Lowblow and scourge was not worth it. I suggest we return back delirium to our combo and have it have it cost 25 blood to use reduce the refresh time as you guys see fit return the INT reduction and GIVE US BACK Scourge, i can live w/o reprisal because TBN kinda fulfills that instant punish Greatsword niche that we had in Heavensward with reprisal and low blow procs.

Quietus is absurdly good what what its supposed to fill Bloodspiller is fine tho i do suggest taking it off ogcd or giving it a combo with power slash to atleast make as feel like we have options in single target fights after we get aggro is just soul eater combo away.

This is just my two cents from a guy who had the foresight to see this coming months in advance thanks square for making a great game which is why i'm back but please take this post into consideration for future changes.

Just as a small note i do feel like TBN will continue to hamper us to my other DRK players we may have to advocate for its removal or nerf to get real changes to our class i cannot confirm squares intentions but i do feel like they thought of that skill first and then balanced the class around it after the fact.

[whiskeybravo]

There's really no good reason for DRK not to have a 3rd combo, both the other tanks do and there's no problem. I don't think there is a real need for Int reduction, however. After taking away Halone's STR debuff and Storm's Path damage down it probably made sense to get rid of DRK's Int down as well. We have enough mitigation options right now with Addle, Feint, Dismantle, Reprisal, Palisade. Don't forget about all the shields.. And honestly I think it's a bit more engaging to have to time these abilities vs easy 100% uptime debuffs.

DRK changes have been discussed at length so hopefully the devs are properly getting our feedback and they get to work. There's still a few months before next raid tier so they have plenty of time to get it right.

[Mnemosynia]

I doesn't matter if the other tanks had there debuffs removed we aren't them and they aren't us, and i do feel like DRK's being the only tank with a debuff that's INT down fits the niche that DRKs are supposed to fill because atm, DRKS do not fill any role outside of weak sauce puns aside we have no identity atm it would do us a great justice to give us that.

Our biggest issue we have a bunch of individual skills that are balanced around TBN and nothing else, our blood costs our damage our lack of mitigation is all tied to TBN, i respect your opinion but i disagree we need a forth option on top of Delirium to add a combo potency damage to BS in PS combo for good measure, or take BS off GCD. We need skills that have costs other then 50 blood because to me its so painful obvious square worked backwards from TBN from blood costs, to lack of mitigation its absurd.

This is a suggestion thread i truely do respect your opinion and its as good as mines i just wanted to state my opposition to your point.

I'd just like to add theres no right or wrong answers in this thread as reading to forums i can see now people generally agree DRK needs work.

(Albeit 10months late but better late then never)

[Risvertasashi]

Well, here's the counter-argument.

The only thing wrong with Dark Knight is you - a Damage Intake Analysis

I suppose it follows that Dark Knight might be simplified similar to how Warrior was.

[Chrono_Rising]

Well, here's the counter-argument.

The only thing wrong with Dark Knight is you - a Damage Intake Analysis

I suppose it follows that Dark Knight might be simplified similar to how Warrior was.

The point of that post is that when it comes to total tank damage for compositions, dark is not an hindrance to the party, in other words, parties with dark knights are not taking more damage on average than a paladin warrior composition. The post does let go of the utility and dps argument though. It is not the be all end all in terms of is dark knight in the best place.

[TouchandFeel]

*only quoting Chrono since I'm continuing that convo, not posing a rebuttal to what he said*

Reading that analysis, it makes me feel like the poster went into it wanting to prove a certain point and due to this confirmation bias perceived the data in a way that would support what they wanted the outcome to be.

Them pointing out that DRK's need to use TBN more is spot on and something I have seen for myself, but not using defensive CD's as much as they should is a general issue I have encountered with many tanks regardless of job.

Another poster from that Reddit thread I feel hits the nail on the head with the way the confirmation bias of the poster affects a situation like the one regarding tanks not using defensives enough.

"How convenient for the intended and admittedly biased conclusion that when DRK abilities are being used incorrectly, it means DRK is better than it actually perceived. But when PLD and WAR abilities are being used incorrectly, it means that PLD and WAR aren't as good as perceived."

I would suggest people not just read the post itself but look through the comments as well, as there a number of good responses in there that echo my own feelings towards the analysis.

[Risvertasashi]

The point of that post is that when it comes to total tank damage for compositions, dark is not an hindrance to the party, in other words, parties with dark knights are not taking more damage on average than a paladin warrior composition. The post does let go of the utility and dps argument though. It is not the be all end all in terms of is dark knight in the best place.

It does, in fact, mention these points. They are not the focus, but they are mentioned. Raid utility gets a whole section and... your basic point is wrong anyways.

DRK is better than not a hindrance:

The Blackest Night, when used effectively, puts a Dark Knight on the lowest-damage taken for single target mitigation.

DRKs could be the easiest tank to heal instead of the hardest... if they but only used their cooldowns.

[Chrono_Rising]

It does, in fact, mention these points. They are not the focus, but they are mentioned. Raid utility gets a whole section and... your basic point is wrong anyways.

DRK is better than not a hindrance:


DRKs could be the easiest tank to heal instead of the hardest... if they but only used their cooldowns.

That wasn't actually accounted for in the data, it is opinion.

[Aniya_Estlihn]

It does, in fact, mention these points. They are not the focus, but they are mentioned. Raid utility gets a whole section and... your basic point is wrong anyways.

DRK is better than not a hindrance:


DRKs could be the easiest tank to heal instead of the hardest... if they but only used their cooldowns.

Just like, so you know, Chrono_Rising is one of the main contributors to that reddit post so you're actually arguing against one of the people who supplied the data.
And I'll admit, it's kind of amusing to watch, as Chrono was one of the driving forces behind that "so-called" counter argument and you've seemingly missed the entire point—as have most others. lol

Chrono and Emiin were referring to damage taken in that post, not damage done, not playstyle, not utility and certainly not strength.
Using their post for your argument against them is only going to make yourself; or anyone else, look foolish.

[Deceptus]

Well, here's the counter-argument.

The only thing wrong with Dark Knight is you - a Damage Intake Analysis

I suppose it follows that Dark Knight might be simplified similar to how Warrior was.

And the author of that has come to the forums to state that his work is being completely taken out of context.