Tank Stance

[KDSilver]

What's with those DPS who think the entire world is against them while they could simply press one single button and end of the story.

[ArcaviusGreyashe]

Is it really ? Well then alright. Dps are responsible for damage, tank for holding aggro, and healer for keeping everyone alive. Well then, why would I bother use 70% of my WAR/PLD/DRK skills ? I mean, I could just use aggro combo. Why bother using CDs when it's the healer's role to keep me alive ?

Grow up.

[silverlunarfox]

I find that more than not, warriors are the worst tanks for actual tanking in their tank stance. Is there some trait in the warrior tool bag that makes the player an arrogant douche that I wasn't aware of?

I would like to ask SE to take out the dps stance for group play. NERF the shit out of it so it's mainly for solo play like cleric stance back in the day. Before they increased enmity for tank moves this would of been more welcome but at least tanks would be.... err....tanks. Or just make WAR a dps.

Bring on the onslaught of pro dps for tanks, idc. Tanks should tank and not be worrying about dps. Save the rhetoric of dps = enmity and dps should manage enmity and all that. We've heard it all before.

Now, one bad experience shouldn't condemn all of us...That being said. There's two sides of this story.



How well was the tank geared to begin with? Were the DPS effectively using their aggro dumping moves? Was the healer overhealing/using their aggro dump moves?

I'm leaning towards a poorly geared tank since that can make it harder to hold aggro in DPS stance.

However if properly geared, a warrior can hold aggro in dps stance if they maintain their rotations. Tank stance is only necessary for the opener then drop it right after. But it does fall also on the dps and heals to maintain their own aggro as well. They all have tools to do so, to not do so will bring down the rest of the team. It is a team game after all. So no, you won't see them drop the dps stances for tanks. I get your angry but this is silly.

[Ryaz]

I'm still leveling my Warrior, but I try to gauge how the group is doing and adjust from there.

I've had groups where I get aggro and can use DPS stance without issue. I've had groups where a DPS severely outlevels and outgears my Warrior and I have to not only use Defiance, but occasionally use my aggro combo.

A good tank adjusts to the needs of the group, imo.

Then again, I come from the old school train of thought that a tank is a tank first and then you get away with any DPS you feel safe getting away with.

[Kanitezz]

For me at least, theres no shame in hopping back into tank stance so I can gain an enmity lead back if my party members are climbing up the enmity list. When I gain that lead back though, I do go back into my dps stance.

[addz3]

I think some of you are misinterpreting the point I was trying to make. Or maybe it was my crap explanation. Tanks who refuse to use their enmity tools or stances to control enmity are crap. There's no need to do it. There's no need to lose enmity. Yes... we all know that other jobs have 1 or 2 abilities to help with enmity, and use them they should. However tanks have more because it's their role to control enmity. I fail to see how many of you can't understand basic fundamentals of a 3 job battle system. If a tank wants to go nuts on dps go for it, but not at the sacrifice of enmity because then they become useless. I suggested they nerf stances in PARTICULAR situations so you don't have chaos in situations because a tank would rather dps than control enmity.

On another topic the intent for stances could be better defined. However when they have penalties of swapping between stances such as high mp usage for DRK or just simply a long cool down. Why would these exist if it was intended for tanks to swap continuously. It is my belief like others have suggested that it was designed so you have a stance in content and a stance for soloing. It isn't that way but that's a design aspect which could get changed down the line maybe. The min max dps for tanks has always been an "issue" and will probably remain

[MoroMurasaki]

I think some of you are misinterpreting the point I was trying to make. Or maybe it was my crap explanation. Tanks who refuse to use their enmity tools or stances to control enmity are crap. There's no need to do it. There's no need to lose enmity. Yes... we all know that other jobs have 1 or 2 abilities to help with enmity, and use them they should. However tanks have more because it's their role to control enmity. I fail to see how many of you can't understand basic fundamentals of a 3 job battle system. If a tank wants to go nuts on dps go for it, but not at the sacrifice of enmity because then they become useless. I suggested they nerf stances in PARTICULAR situations so you don't have chaos in situations because a tank would rather dps than control enmity.

People have reacted poorly to your suggestion because it's unnecessary and, frankly, nonsensical. Jobs aren't balanced around content where this is even an issue because any healer or dps in Savage worth their spot uses all the enmity tools at their disposal to make their tank's life easier since it costs them nothing or next to nothing.

You got someone in more casual content who either expected too much competence from their party (anticipated you all using enmity reduction skills and you didn't) or just didn't know how to play their class. Neither of those things mean the natural conclusion to jump to is "Nerf tank DPS stances!!!1" they just mean watch your enmity better and sometimes people suck.

Basically like... move on?

If you have some trigger happy DPS, it's better for enmity to use some AoE enmity skills at the beginning even on a single target, since the first step of the enmity combo has no bonus.

So, again, if you take aggro from your tank, it means he does something wrong.

No, you should not be doing this. Even in Sastasha you have Tomohawk or the PLD/DRK equivalent - that is what you are pulling with, not Overpower/Flash/DRK Aoething. It is literally not a thing. Stop misinforming people please.

[Reynhart]

No, you should not be doing this. Even in Sastasha you have Tomohawk or the PLD/DRK equivalent - that is what you are pulling with, not Overpower/Flash/DRK Aoething. It is literally not a thing. Stop misinforming people please.

I'm not talking about pulling, I'm talking about keeping monsters on you when you risk losing hate.
980 potency enmity for Tomawhak vs 1300 potency enmity for Overpower, for the same TP cost. So, yes, IF enmity is your problem, you SHOULD be doing this.

[MoroMurasaki]

I'm not talking about pulling, I'm talking about keeping monsters on you when you risk losing hate.
980 potency enmity for Tomawhak vs 1300 potency enmity for Overpower, for the same TP cost. So, yes, IF enmity is your problem, you SHOULD be doing this.

If you're pulling use our ranged enmity generator.

If you're losing hate do your enmity combo.

This isn't rocket science.

[Jijifli]

If you're pulling use our ranged enmity generator.

If you're losing hate do your enmity combo.

This isn't rocket science.

He means that, if you have trigger happy dps that don't diversion, you do something like... Tomahawk, then an Overpower.

Because the first hit of your enmity combo has no enmity boost to it. If you know you don't need to overpower in that case and can just go right to enmity combo, then do that, that's better. If you have the scenario where the RDM is pre-casting a verthunder with no diversion right for the pull though, that helps.