Removing Tank Stance Argument

[OdinelStarrei]

Hello, thank you for making this topic. I've been meaning to seriously take a position on "tank stance removal" for quite some time. Since early Creator back in HW. I am a somewhat wary supporter of it. This post may be drawn out so...
TL;DR : Tank Stance is a failure conceptually and is the ONLY role mechanic to directly punish it's playerbase for the use of a major role skill.

First, I'd like to discuss how Tank Stance is not optimal in a vast majority of content in the game. There is not a single tankbuster in the entire game where I feel Tank Stance is 100% needed, outside of things like UwU Homing Laser/Mountain Buster or UCoB Flatten/Nael in general(jesus christ). Things that are incredibly high single target tank damage. When it comes to standard savage content, I've taken every tankbuster from all raid bosses this expansion in DPS stance with minimal issue, assuming nothing goes wrong with my CD planning or healers, even with crafted gear, not BiS. I don't want this to be a statement of how good I am, but rather, how I don't see tank stance as a solution to a tank problem(damage intake). At this moment, tank stance is used for aggro generation in my opener for 3 GCDs if I'm pulling, which it does very well. It's also really handy for emergency situations and progression in difficult encounters. But with practice and information from multiple clears, emergencies don't happen often, reducing Tank stance's usefulness the more adept you become. For a personal example of defensive planning being superior over sitting in tank stance:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...VSc/edit#gid=0

That spreadsheet used to be my group's first cooldown map for Final Omega. Outside of low-HP Solo Stack on the WAR(lol Unchained anyway), under no circumstance were me, or my co-tank required to use Tank Stance for Savage Wave Cannon, Solo Stack explosions, Monitors, or post Archive All auto attacks. This is typically how I think about encounters. When something doesn't go to plan, THAT'S when tank stance gets used, to my detriment. If I have everything mapped out, knowing I will survive in DPS stance, where does tank stance fit in? My healers are already healing me to full regardless of how much damage I'm taking, and I trust them, since they trust me to mitigate properly. Once you've solved the defense problem of an encounter that will never change because of how scripted they are, the only thing left for tanks is damage gains. There is no other goal. There can't be under the encounter design. So tank stance is the first thing to go.

Another issue is that tank stance generates so much aggro, in dungeons, I can freely drop it after a single enmity combo/AoE enmity tool, and upkeep the enmity lead with high personal DPS. Not only do I do more damage, I'm also keeping my rotation accurate, and maintaining my resources on ALL tanks. Any bonus enmity does nothing for me, and if a DPS is creeping for some reason, I can just work in an aggro combo due to their high enmity multipliers, rather then wasting a GCD going back into tank stance. (WAR is different of course.)
The same mentality follows in raids, but it's EVEN WORSE, because Shirk is overpowered and makes enmity completely trivial except in fights that have aggro resets. Which is a major component of the issue as a "concept". There is no purpose for aggro management if a single DA Power Slash or Butcher's Block+Equilibrium can be multiplied by tank stance, copied by provoke, and redirected onto a chosen tank at will with shirk. No DPS on the planet can compete with proper shirking.

So, since the positives of tank stance are not really needed in most situations, that means the negatives of tank stance are all the more punishing. The reduction of damage does nothing but extend the encounter, meaning you're going to be taking more damage in the long run, or even worse, hit an enrage and wipe completely. Not only is there a heavy percentage damage decrease, on EVERY tank, using Tank Stance OR aggro combos directly screws with your optimal rotation, further lowering your damage.
On PLD, using Rage Of Halone or Shield Oath can catastrophically misalign your MP management, meaning no Req Holy Spirits when you need them lined up with raid, and gives you a random amount of Oath gauge for Sheltron/Intervention from blocking, rather then the consistent rate under auto attacks from Sword Oath. You also waste a GCD, which on PLD is crippling, and a pain to re-align.
On DRK, using Grit means no Blood Weapon. That's a huge deal, as your MP regen is seriously gutted in ways that boosted Syphon Strike MP cannot compete with. Anything Grit can do, I can do better with a planned CD, and The Blackest Night (my favorite CD). You instead get Blood Price, which is awful, and Souleater HP steal, which should be innate to the skill. Decreased mana means I can't use TBN as much as I want either, lowering my defenses against raidwide AoE, and auto attacks. Tank stance can make up for that, but TBN costs just mana. Grit costs mana, my rotation, a GCD, and Blood Weapon/Delirium usages.
On WAR, Unchained removes the damage penalty, which is FANTASTIC for progression, can't compliment it enough. But using it with no planning means you can miss out on Fell Cleaves, or have to delay your Inner Release, a MASSIVE component of WAR's damage output. WAR is punished the least by it's tank stance(Unchained/Equilibrium), and if PLD/DRK had an equivalent to Unchained in application to their individual job mechanics, you would see less pushback on tank stance overall.

I think it'd make tanking extremely boring gameplay-wise.

I think the exact opposite. It's because tank stance is so punishing that I am FORCED to think of alternate solutions to keep my personal damage as high as possible, rather then pressing the infinite "don't take as much damage" cushion. We're all asking, why are we losing crucial components of our job kits when in tank stance? It does nothing but limit our options, both defensively as a team if used improperly, and offensively as a personal metric for improvement. Within the playerbase, it's now flipped around. Now TANK STANCE is the alternate solution to a situation that we literally have to determine is unwinnable without it, on the fly, such as raid progression, or a potential team wipe. That's engaging, in my opinion, and is where tank stance truly shines, before I immediately turn it off again once the danger has passed.

But I don't think we need tank stance. Think about all those times you've encountered a tank who does nothing but sit in tank stance and spam aggro combos. Is that fun for them? Do they think they are really contributing by doing the absolute basic requirement of their role? Is there any room for advancement if all beginner tanks just see tank stance as mandatory? I'm coming to terms with "player skill differences", but I still would rather SE elevate their players by ripping off the tank stance bandage, and seriously pushing the importance of cooldown management in the Hall of the Novice to promote more active tanking gameplay and personal responsibility for understanding their job. We already have enmity multipliers on aggro combos, shirk exists, so aggro is not a problem, and SE has history of tweaking enmity multipliers for abilities throughout SB. We already don't use tank stance, to avoid relying on it as a crutch for ourselves and the healers, or to push our limits as players, so why even have it at all? Why not have that button do something else? Because of tank stance, the skill floor of tanks is artificially lowered, and teaches the wrong lessons by making them complacent or even worse, think they are performing well, by performing sub-optimally.

I will admit that this will make the early leveling experience even more awkward then it already is, and may throw some people into the deep end head first. But I think if you are taking on the tank role in any MMO, you are signing up for increased responsibility as default. I also realize that this point of view comes from a raider's perspective, and may not be applicable to most casual players, but I still think it's a benefit for both the non-raider and raider audience for stopping this insane tank DPS "argument" we've been having for years now(check this forum, it's STILL happening). This is why the introduction of GUN and the live letter this month are so crucial to me. We're probably going to see a huge upheaval of the role that hasn't been seen since the start of Gordias. A complete redesign is not out of the question, and, based on my experience, the first thing on the chopping block is tank stance, in my opinion. Coming back to this thread in a month will be interesting.

Hopefully I've explained my position in a way that clears up some of the confusion. I started out as wary, but after writing this up, I'm 100%. Delete tank stance.