Tenacity

[VenKitsune]

Calling your bias, and requesting calculation on how many GCDs that 2% difference in damage makes.

If extra Tenacity only maybe saves the very occasional heal cast, I'd be willing to suspect extra Direct Hit only maybe saves you an occasional extra attack.

Basically, if your claim were flipped around, would it still hold just as true? "You gain mitigation, but lose enough damage to maybe require an extra hit from time to time to compensate."

Or, shorter, "The difference is minimal and rarely effects any outcome in the majority of content."

2% is pretty big.

For context - Everyone in a party gains an extra 1% main stat gain for having one of each role in a party - Tank, Healer, Ranged, Caster, Melee. If you took 8 of the best players in the game, that 5% difference (1% for each role) would mean about 30-40 seconds in kill time.

So...2%, on a tank, sure, its not going to prevent you from clearing content, but it is simply silly to meld something sub optimal when you KNOW that tenacity is by and large a worse stat to meld and to priorities.
At the end of the day, Vitality, and by extension general ilvl is whats going to get you your biggest eHP increase. The difference between lvl 80 AF gear (ilvl 430) and raid gear (ilvl 470), 40 ilevels, is about...30k-40k flat health...However, the difference between ZERO tenacity and have as much as you can possibly have in game right now? It doesn't even breach 4 digits in terms of eHP as far as im aware.

So to summarise, having an extra few hundred eHP will not prevent a healer to have to heal you, the whole point of mitigation, and so it's just flat out better to take that 2% especially when you consider both grade 8 tenacity, and grade 8 dh/crit is bought for the same token, Cracked Stellaclusters...Not like there is much else to spend gil on in the game anyway, so even if that wasnt in the game it still wouldnt matter. If, for example, Tenacity allowed the healer to have to heal you a noticable ammount less, it'd be worth it, but it simply isn't.

It's also worth noting that tanks have 100% uptime on the boss, or atleast as much as is possible in any given fight. Healers, meanwhile, are casters and have to aoe heal the group and thus dont have 100% uptime. a 2% increase on tanks is simply vastly more valuable than even an equal 2% on healers, would that tenacity provide that.



....Also, Why is this thread in the General discussion, and not the tank roles subforum? Someone light the batmod signal.

[Fhaerron]

If you fail to use your CD for tankburst in Savage you will die. Having 100 more tenacity or less will not change that.
Meanwhile you will get higher damage using DH over tenacity.


tenacity and det can be usefull in ultimate for prog when you're learning where the damage spikes are and such but there too you will die if you fail to use your CD. When going for the kill it's best to use your BiS materies anyway.

[Hasrat]

2% is pretty big.

Ok, but this is still largely framed from the perspective of "this doesn't really change the number of heals that will be needed." The closest you came is referencing how much difference this would make with the best most optimal players, across the entire party.

All I'm saying is, taking a step back, instead of looking at the heals, asking, for that one particular tank, and only the tank, with a "2% damage increase" for taking dhit over tenacity, what will be the difference in time or dps or apm or whatever you want to measure? Like, even just from a pure striking dummy attempt, SSS style. Pick a dummy, test each build, compare time, compare number of actions, gcds, whatever. Something tells me the difference will still be within margin of error, so to speak. Minimally influential, either way.

[Barraind]

Calling your bias, and requesting calculation on how many GCDs that 2% difference in damage makes.

If extra Tenacity only maybe saves the very occasional heal cast, I'd be willing to suspect extra Direct Hit only maybe saves you an occasional extra attack.

Basically, if your claim were flipped around, would it still hold just as true? "You gain mitigation, but lose enough damage to maybe require an extra hit from time to time to compensate."

Or, shorter, "The difference is minimal and rarely effects any outcome in the majority of content."

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...on-vs-Tank-DPS.

It's actually 1 in 17 heals at best.

Because of how mitigation stacks in this game:

In terms of raid tanking: A hit that does 160k pre-mitigation will do 128k to a tank. It will do 89.8k to a tank that uses a cooldown. It will do 85.1k to a tank that has stacked tenacity and popped a cooldown.

The actual effect of the most tenacity you can stack in this patch is, in practice, 15% of the value of the tank passive.

It takes roughly 700k base damage incoming to a tank using a single cooldown for the maximum amount of tenacity currently available to save one 700 potency heal.

This also ignores all incidental healing the tank will be taking. It also ignores heals that heal differently than x potency heal. It's the best case scenario for when tenacity is good.

I'm not saying the idea of tenacity isn't good. My tank in EQ takes 700k pre mitigation damage every 5-15 seconds when tanking. Id take 14s tenacity over half the stats on his gear. I'm saying it's not good in this game because damage packets dont work the way they need to for it to be good without significantly more mitigation on it.

If it doesnt realistically affect how a healer heals you, or how 2 healers time their cooldowns, its worse than just taking the damage boost.

[Rasikko]

@Whole thread: Translation: Tenacity sucks.

/thread?

[ForteNightshade]

Ok, but this is still largely framed from the perspective of "this doesn't really change the number of heals that will be needed." The closest you came is referencing how much difference this would make with the best most optimal players, across the entire party.

All I'm saying is, taking a step back, instead of looking at the heals, asking, for that one particular tank, and only the tank, with a "2% damage increase" for taking dhit over tenacity, what will be the difference in time or dps or apm or whatever you want to measure? Like, even just from a pure striking dummy attempt, SSS style. Pick a dummy, test each build, compare time, compare number of actions, gcds, whatever. Something tells me the difference will still be within margin of error, so to speak. Minimally influential, either way.

2% damage will be considerably higher than 2% mitigation because we attack far more frequently than any boss does. Regardless, damage will always be preferred over mitigation due to the latter having a threshold. Having more of the latter isn't going to accomplish anything whereas damage might. Even if it's by small margins. That can be the difference between a higher parse. And that matters more to most people.