QoL change with tank stance.

[Vahlnir]

And it's because of "issues" that both tanks should have their stance on.

First time into SoS on one of my alts (it had been out for over 2 months at that point) and I ended up MT even though I had asked the other tank to take MT since I had never tanked it on my other characters. He never replied, didn't turn his stance on. After waiting more than enough time for him to respond, I went ahead and pulled the boss.

At about 25%, I got a 90002 error and DC'd. Took me a minute to get logged in and back to the instance. The other tank had finally turned his stance on while I was DC'd but evidently hadn't thought to Provoke so he still wasn't at the top of the enmity table. DPS had been dying one by one and the boss had just turned to one of the healers. As soon as I was loaded and realized he was not in control of the boss, I Provoked and the healers were able to get the rest of the party back up. (Welcome to why I hate only being able to comm one player per instance - both those healers deserved it.)

If he had had his stance on from the start, it wouldn't have made a difference how bad a tank he was. The boss still would have stuck to him like glue the moment I DC'd instead of going after the DPS.

It is not hard to manage enmity when you need to. We can toggle stance off for a few GCDs to let the other tank get a comfy lead. We do have Shirk. If the other tank is still having trouble staying on top of the enmity table, they probably shouldn't be MT.

Obviously, enmity is more difficult to handle in an Alliance raid but there's still no reason to leave stance always off as OT. If it's always off, then you might as well just come as a DPS.

One tank should have it on, the other should have it off. This is the way.

However, the right way to go about it is something you brought up, and that is for the OT to keep it off while the MT establishes plenty of aggro. Then, every so often, the OT should turn it on periodically to generate some themselves, and then turn it back off again, just in case something happens. Doing it like this is a win for everyone should things start to go downhill quickly. And it avoids any unnecessary confusion/tension at the start. Personally, I'm confident enough to be able to hold my own, but I like doing things the optimal way without conflict.

Perhaps some communication would help at times, but not always. It is, at least in my experience, a silent acknowledgement of who is the MT and OT when one tank turns their stance on and the other either turns theirs off or avoids turning it on at all. When that doesn't occur, there is a bit of a standoff. If my co tank enters the instance, immediately does a ready check and/or countdown, it is also a safe assumption that they plan to take the lead. I have no issue standing down. But I also like knowing what my co tank has planned and, sadly, it is a common enough occurrence that I enter any instance requiring 2 tanks warily.

[Garnix]

Enmity management isn't really a thing anymore anyways.
So, at this point I think they could just increase the enmity generated by tanks when the stance is off. This way, even if you forget it, you'd still be the one generating the most enmity.
The stance would then just allow the MT to generate more enmity than the OT.

[Vahlnir]

Enmity management isn't really a thing anymore anyways.
So, at this point I think they could just increase the enmity generated by tanks when the stance is off. This way, even if you forget it, you'd still be the one generating the most enmity.
The stance would then just allow the MT to generate more enmity than the OT.

I'm not a huge fan of more simplification, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were going to head in this direction regardless.

[Seraphor]

One tank should have it on, the other should have it off. This is the way.

Nah, as OT you want to make sure you're second in enmity. You're not just there to be a weaker DPS, you need to be ready to pick up aggro when they mess up.
Turn your tank stance on after your opener and leave it on for the rest of the fight. You shouldn't have to worry about stealing aggro unless the MT is really undergeared, and even then, you'll just have to use shirk once in a while.

[Rongway]

The 10x enmity generation should be baked into Tank Mastery. Instead of getting a tank stance action at Lv10, they should just get

Significantly increases enmity generation.

which permanently increases enmity generation by a factor of 10x.

Then at Lv50, which is the earliest any tank should ever need to turn it off, along with their cheese button they should also get an enmity suppressing stance.

Significantly decreases enmity generation. Effect ends upon reuse.

which reduces enmity generation to 1/10, returning it to the universal baseline.

[Kewitt]

Enmity management isn't really a thing anymore anyways.
So, at this point I think they could just increase the enmity generated by tanks when the stance is off. This way, even if you forget it, you'd still be the one generating the most enmity.
The stance would then just allow the MT to generate more enmity than the OT.

This would be a way better option really.
I have no issues keeping it on while doing Raid content, I have no issue if the other tank wants to main tank, I can give them my enmity.
When I off tank, I make sure I'm 2nd in the enmity list that way if the MT dies, I don't have to remember to provoke or have someone else die before I do seen this a few times in normal 8 person content. So I do my normal opener without the stance off, put it on build my hate turn it off again.
But I've done DR expert enough times in the last week where the tank has totally forgotten to have it up more often than not for the 1st pull.

Making Enmity generation a little higher for tanks so normal combo will set them 5-10% above every other class and stance gives them a lead over other tank classes would solve basically all of these issues. You still have provoke for when you die and want to jump up in the list.