Interesting Tank Research

[shao32]

that data only proves DRK have a lack of tools for being flexible, we still lack in physical mitigation options and some even suggest use TBN even for AA when is too risky to waste it, with the gear i have use it in boss dungeons is a waste it never pops, and on primals i have like a 50-50%, TBN is only effective against large aoes and TB and i was technically designe to be like that, if it was planeed to be used against AA the shield never will be so short.

but in resume we can survive and we can do it pretty well like the other 2 but in a clunky way and with less fluff mitigation and zero selfheals, in the end the problem is not the numbers we get at least on mitigation with are in some case lower, is how we get it and using TBN almost on coldown with the mechanics it have behind its not really good for poor-average players, i highly preffer the mitigation tools we have on heavensward that TBN, at least i will have the feeling i have something against fluff damage with dark dance and for physical with foresight.

[Cabalabob]

Well of course using TBN more is going to increase DRKs defence, no reason to stop the presses for that revelation. But there’s a reason people don’t use it much outside of tankbusters.

What does a PLD use to put up Shelton? Oath gauge, something not used for much else than sheltron. What does it get for using sheltron? Take any 1 hit in 10 seconds and you gain a large chunk of mp and a free oGCD attack proc. There’s no reason to not use it and everything to gain for using it.

Now let’s compare that to TBN, you’re using mp, a precious resource to DRK used for pretty much everything else in their kit. What do you get? A shield that when broken gives you blood gauge, a not as precious resource as the mp used to get it. But that shield may or may not even be broken in the next 7 seconds depending on the kind of damage you take, the only guarantee it’ll break is a tankbuster.

Hence why it doesn’t get used much outside of busters, the design is just so ass backwards when compared to sheltron.

Sheltron uses a fairly expendable resource to give you mitigation that is all but gauranteed to give you a precious resource/dps increase.

TBN uses a precious resource to give you mitigation that MIGHT give you an expendable resource that will pretty much only make you break even on the dps you would have gotten spending the precious resource on dps.

Basically the risk vs the reward on TBN is out of balance except on tankbusters where you at least know it will break.

[Chrono_Rising]

What the study doesn't get into is things like the usefulness of the mitigation. For example, when taking heavy damage at certain intervals (like tank busters or autos and aoes with mechanical damage) you will value that mitigation greatly, where as the mitigation from TBN is more smoothed out over the length of the fight. If you are using TBN nearly on cooldown, you will take on average the same amount of damage as the other tanks, thats what the data shows. Example, if a buster does 132k to a tank 10 TBN's doesn't equate to 1 hallowed ground use.

Whether or not that mitigation is keeping you alive more so than the other tanks was not studied/gathered. One thing which was painfully obvious was the extend to which tanks in general are not maximizing their defensive casts (not just dark knights this was clear on all jobs), which is also a conversation people should be having: mitigating effectively and not just for busters.

Its a good first step, but it certainly needs follow up.

[Reinha]

Basically the risk vs the reward on TBN is out of balance except on tankbusters where you at least know it will break.

I bet that if TBN cost half the MP and gave 50 blood immediately we'd see people using it a lot more.

[shao32]

I bet that if TBN cost half the MP and gave 50 blood immediately we'd see people using it a lot more.

Miss read It i edit It.
The cost of 2400 converted to 50 Blood is to make It dps neutral, i dont think It Will help make out principal mitigation tool being used as a ofensive tool all the time, if is was a small mitigation tool like SAM thirt eye yeah but no with TBN

[Deceptus]

I'll summarize it.

"Unless all three tanks are played at optimal level, Warrior and Paladin are still superior for the average player."

Another summary:

DRKs have to push a lot more buttons to get the same output as PLD/WAR. Which is why there is a huge skill gap between the best and the average.

[Canadane]

The constant struggle of players wanting to bring things down to their level vs. SE wanting players themselves to improve.

[Capn_Goggles]

The constant struggle of players wanting to bring things down to their level vs. SE wanting players themselves to improve.

If SE wanted players to improve then they wouldn't design 90% of their meat-and-potatoes content to be so easily accessible or render the rewards for completing savage content utterly irrelevant within a patch.

Furthermore, the response to "DRK has to work harder to get the same results" shouldn't be "git gud", the response should be a call for a better designed job. Machinist, for instance, is much harder to play than Bard, but is largely inferior and far more subject to factors outside of the players' control. Regardless of the fact that it's currently speedkill meta, I think it's safe to say that having to work twice as hard for the same result isn't good design. If DRK was slightly better than the other tanks in exchange for requiring more optimization and skill, then it'd be a fair trade.

[shao32]

The constant struggle of players wanting to bring things down to their level vs. SE wanting players themselves to improve.

You right, lets return WAR to the 4.0 status.

[347SPECTRE]

You right, lets return WAR to the 4.0 status.

Honestly I liked 4.1 just fine.