Tank 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

[Reynhart]

What I was responding to was blatantly wrong, just like you're wrong if you're suggesting tanks use their AoE threat generatos in a single-target situation.

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.

[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.

[Mixt]

Do you understand how WAR tank stance works? It's a bit more health and a passive buff to healing recieved. There is no built-in mitigation. Everything does the same amount of damage to a WAR in Defiance that it would do in Deliverance.

And that extra health and healing received would have made all the difference in those cases.

I mean, the "Little bit" of extra health (25%) means it's going to take a few more hits to down you, and the healing received up helps a great deal, it's on par with Convalescence, makes it way easier for the healer to keep you up when you are getting gangbanged by a ludicrous number of mobs because you decided to pull big.

But no, gotta do the biggest possible pulls in DPS stance, doesn't matter if the healer can't keep up without a little extra help.
Cue the epidemic of dead tanks in Levelling Roulette that i experienced back when i was levelling my other classes.
Maybe i'm just unlucky, but it was like some kind of bad running gag.

[akaneakki]

No, I would say the warrior was doing a good job. Get initial threat. It's a party responsibility for aggro. All dps and healers have tools that they should be using to manipulate their aggro. That is how you play tank in this game, you get aggro, then you dps.

Great reply. I mean those skills aka diversion, lucid etc are there for a reason as well. But I guess some people forget they have a purpose.

[Ayer2015]

No, I would say the warrior was doing a good job. Get initial threat. It's a party responsibility for aggro. All dps and healers have tools that they should be using to manipulate their aggro. That is how you play tank in this game, you get aggro, then you dps.

I strongly disagree. A tank is more than capable to building enough aggro without the dps pulling off them being in tank stance for the first few rotations only.

[BillyKaplan]

But I guess some people forget they have a purpose.

Or just that they exist. I just ran into a sprout healer who had no idea what role actions even were. This game assumes a great many things about what its playerbase knows, and fails rather miserably in explaining them to begin with.
Tank stance, on the other hand, is inescapable. Assuming, of course, comparable ilvls across the roles. There's little an undergeared tank can do against an overgeared dps save to provoke off of them. Which is also sadly a role action.

[Narangerel]

Regardless of how you feel, enmity is a job for two. We have enmity dumps and suppressors for a reason. Since the 3.0 we've been in the dps tank meta, and that was BEFORE they made vit increase tank damage, so you had dudes with like a base 16k hp with strength accessories tanking alex. There is nothing wrong with the way tank stances work. The only problem are people who do not know how their class works and how a specific encounter works when it comes to outgoing damage. Even for me who came from WoW where pre-WoD, I think every tank was in their tank stance (Though damage output differs) I learned to get used to tanking without grit up and learning when and where big damage was coming so i can use my CDs effectively. The only time I don't take it off is trash, but that's just me personally.

Let me be clear: destroying the way dps stances work in any fashion will certainly kill our already small pool of tanks who even bother to queue for anything with pugs. Then you'll be left with Johnny "Pulls one pack at a time" Smith who doesn't know jack about his job or fairweather tanks who will jump ship at any sign of a bad run.

[Ayer2015]

snip

The OP was regarding doma castle. the meta is irrelevant,,,,

[Narangerel]

The OP was regarding doma castle. the meta is irrelevant,,,,

In this case, no it's not because her complaint is a result of the meta.