Can we please get aggro management back?

[Videra]

"Aggro management"?

You mean letting the healers and DPS die, and then yell at them for not using their tools (even when they do) because you can't be bothered to do an extra aggro combo, right? That aggro management?

You can have aggro management back when it is solely a tank responsibility, and the optimal play for tank DPS becomes walking the line of losing aggro. Anything else is just gonna result in the same mess we had in SB, with people not geared/skilled enough blaming everyone but themselves. No thanks. Tanks can be diva enough as it is without the additional mess of "MUH DPS".

Has bad tanks and gets salty about a playstyle that was at the time objectively superior because some people were too stupid to remember they occasionally had to use Butcher's Block.

:Think:

Sorry you had bad experiences with bad tanks, but the majority of actually good tanks never let healers or DPS die. And it was perfectly fine that 'Aggro management' was a three-way street, as it should be, if it exists.

[Selova]

There was no aggro management lol. You used your aggro combo once and turned off tank stance and abused shirk for tank swaps. Anyone that claims that there was any kind of complexity with stance dancing to maintain aggro is not remembering things correctly.

[RyuSaarva]

There was no aggro management lol. You used your aggro combo once and turned off tank stance and abused shirk for tank swaps. Anyone that claims that there was any kind of complexity with stance dancing to maintain aggro is not remembering things correctly.

That would have been nice but nobody used any role skills and I saw ninja use smoke bomb once.

[Derby_Crash]

There was no aggro management lol. You used your aggro combo once and turned off tank stance and abused shirk for tank swaps. Anyone that claims that there was any kind of complexity with stance dancing to maintain aggro is not remembering things correctly.

I recall a specific thread back when Stormblood first released begging to remove the gauge penalty for stance dancing. So, yes, I do remember stance dancing, more so in dungeons than in raid content.

[Fynlar]

Has bad tanks and gets salty about a playstyle that was at the time objectively superior because some people were too stupid to remember they occasionally had to use Butcher's Block.

I like how you cited a warrior skill there specifically, as if you subconsciously already knew warriors tended to be a big source of the problem.

the majority of actually good tanks never let healers or DPS die.

Rosebud was the sled, Vader was Luke's father, Snape kills Dumbledore, etc.

There, helped you put a dent in the stack of other things people already know.

[Lersayil]

I recall a specific thread back when Stormblood first released begging to remove the gauge penalty for stance dancing. So, yes, I do remember stance dancing, more so in dungeons than in raid content.

It was a noob tax. Organized and competent people rarely had to deal with it. A few GCDs, switch it off, and hope people properly press oGCDs. Go down a bit on the casual scale however and you either awkwardly tried to dance between the stances, or just switched it on and ate the damage tax.

It was never complicated or fun in previous iterations.

[Claire_Pendragon]

So if you're the game developer, you had two choices.

Third choice would have been to separate the tanks based on playstyle. Make at least 1 tank have to work for its enmity, while the rest got it for free. But in return, one of the other tanks have to work for its mitigation (with enmity/DPS being free) and the other having to work for its DPS (and enmity/mitigation being free) which gives GNB a nice "in the middle jack of all trades" identity, that it sorta already is trying to be now.

Now if a tank doesnt want to deal with enmity, they dont have to. For the players who do enjoy controlling it, they have a tank for that. (Plus I miss having enmity control on my healer/DPS, in case im stuck with a bad tank)

[Ramura_Sono]

Has bad tanks and gets salty about a playstyle that was at the time objectively superior because some people were too stupid to remember they occasionally had to use Butcher's Block.

:Think:

Sorry you had bad experiences with bad tanks, but the majority of actually good tanks never let healers or DPS die. And it was perfectly fine that 'Aggro management' was a three-way street, as it should be, if it exists.

No. It was a problem because it was a source of optimization in savage/EX that leaked down to normal modes, endgame dungeons and even into leveling content. And people who understandably weren't used to dealing with "muh dps" tanks in this kind of content were repeatedly blamed, because heaven forbid a tank put tank stance on or use an extra aggro combo.

The "bad" tanks existed because "good" tanks continually told those with inexperience in the role to "drop tank stance" regardless of any other factors.
The expectation of "optimal play" that tanks had on everyone in all content was the problem. If it had remained an optimization in content where such was truly relevant no one would have an issue.

[MariaArvana]

Third choice would have been to separate the tanks based on playstyle. Make at least 1 tank have to work for its enmity, while the rest got it for free. But in return, one of the other tanks have to work for its mitigation (with enmity/DPS being free) and the other having to work for its DPS (and enmity/mitigation being free) which gives GNB a nice "in the middle jack of all trades" identity, that it sorta already is trying to be now.

Now if a tank doesnt want to deal with enmity, they dont have to. For the players who do enjoy controlling it, they have a tank for that. (Plus I miss having enmity control on my healer/DPS, in case im stuck with a bad tank)

There'd be a few glaring flaws with such a thing:

1) You'd have people that love the 1 tank that has to work for enmity complain about why it has to work for it when the other three don't.
2) The single tank that'd have to work for enmity would never have to work with it in 8-man content, as all you'd have to do is let any other tank build enmity, then have the hard tank voke. Done, their one weakness gone.
3) Fight design would be a mess. Do you balance mitigation around the tank who has the hardest time with it, thus causing the other three to utterly trivialize any mitigation requirements of the encounter? (I.E - Ultimates/savage floors), or do you design it around the tanks who have the easiest time with it, making it extremely difficult for the bad mitigation tank to keep up? Likewise, how do you balance dps? balance it around the tank that has to work for its dps + the tank that has to work for its enmity and thus give a huge advantage to any group that runs the other two tanks that have no issues outputting their full dps?

If they're going to adopt a system for tanks, it's gotta be all or nothing for all of them, or it just creates a whole nightmarish mess of balancing issues, compared to the very strong balance the tanks already have at the current moment. Considering that with SHB its clear they wanted to reduce the barrier of entry for newer tanks by simplifying aggro in response to how tanking ended up in SB, they made the right call. I've had a couple friends who were scared of tanking in SB actually try it this expansion and loving it due to a lot of weight being lifted off their shoulders from having to not worry (too much) about enmity.

[HeulGDarian]

Im pretty sure im the only one Who liked stance dancing. The thing is all those spells for enmity were utilised by everyone not Just the tank, the tank Just had the most control over it. People say it was Just one aggro combo then dps all the way, but i remember my little casual ass struggling to mt when the other tank was better, i had to coordinate with them to provoke then shirk me for a boost Just so that i could keep mting, also if the dps was good and you were watching edge ever closer you would need to put on your tank stance and do aggro combo a bit, the reason it got removed was from my understanding, good players didnt really care, bad or newer players found it a headache and too much of a hassle. The thing is that not only was the system not replaced by something else game play wise, it also took all the different buffs and spells tied to the stance. Sure pld lost Jack shit and drk only lost the haste but got reworked so Who cares, but warrior got screwed the most. He was the one with the different tank stance that made him unique, inner beast was also such a good skill that reflected what a warrior is, lvl 80 warrior is basicly a gutted version of the lvl 70 one trying to add all the buffs he lost and he still misses some. Removing the stances was one thing, not replacing and destroying identity in the process is another.







Also a bit of a personal request. Give me back my shirk, i cant troll my friend with the New aggro mechanics D:<