Dark Knight Megathread

[Lyth]

Overcapping is an issue on any job with a resource meter, so I'm not sure why anyone would present this as a unique issue on DRK. The risk of overcapping is reduced when you have a bigger capacity relative to the cost. Having dead space on your meter just locks down resources for no good reason. Your functional capacity is still the same. If the 200 MP/tick is worrying you, then get rid of it.

Edge and Flood cannot create double weaves on their own, because they have a 1s shared recast. Many jobs, including GNB, RPR, SAM, and NIN utilize this 1s recast to prevent double weaving the ability with itself. In fact, even if you took away Edge and Flood altogether, you would still have plenty of double weaves.

If you want to reduce the number of double weaves, then you need to incentivize spreading them out. On RPR, for example, all your Soul spenders generate Soul Reaver stacks. So while you could in theory double weave Blood Stalk with Gluttony, you never want to, because you override the stacks. You could do something similar by having attacks like Shadowbringer and C+S/Abyssal Drain cost MP but generate blood in return. Or you could redesign the Dark Arts system around this.

Plunge is another unnecessary culprit for weaves. Melee DPS have moved away from gap closers that are damage gated. I'm not sure why this isn't the standard now on tanks as well. You should be allowed to use your movement tool as a movement tool.

It's also worth noting that both GCD length and weaves contribute to APM. You'd actually have a slightly higher APM with a 1.5s GCD and single weaves between every GCD than you would with a 2.5s GCD and double weaves between every GCD.

[DRKoftheAzure]

Overcapping is an issue on any job with a resource meter, so I'm not sure why anyone would present this as a unique issue on DRK. The risk of overcapping is reduced when you have a bigger capacity relative to the cost. Having dead space on your meter just locks down resources for no good reason. Your functional capacity is still the same. If the 200 MP/tick is worrying you, then get rid of it.

Edge and Flood cannot create double weaves on their own, because they have a 1s shared recast. Many jobs, including GNB, RPR, SAM, and NIN utilize this 1s recast to prevent double weaving the ability with itself. In fact, even if you took away Edge and Flood altogether, you would still have plenty of double weaves.

If you want to reduce the number of double weaves, then you need to incentivize spreading them out. On RPR, for example, all your Soul spenders generate Soul Reaver stacks. So while you could in theory double weave Blood Stalk with Gluttony, you never want to, because you override the stacks. You could do something similar by having attacks like Shadowbringer and C+S/Abyssal Drain cost MP but generate blood in return. Or you could redesign the Dark Arts system around this.

Plunge is another unnecessary culprit for weaves. Melee DPS have moved away from gap closers that are damage gated. I'm not sure why this isn't the standard now on tanks as well. You should be allowed to use your movement tool as a movement tool.

It's also worth noting that both GCD length and weaves contribute to APM. You'd actually have a slightly higher APM with a 1.5s GCD and single weaves between every GCD than you would with a 2.5s GCD and double weaves between every GCD.

Honestly overcapping is a non issue when it doesn't even matter such as the boss becomes un-targetable for a specific mechanic, or dumping resources like it was cooldown, and ESPECIALLY if players don't even know it can be an issue such as new players.

As for gap closers still be using to do damage, the "but muh APM" argument that some people love parroting. In fact a lot of the discussion involving Dark Knight is those who hate the high APM or love it but still hate how cluttered it is, and the people trying to find a middle ground are usually ignored by the people who love the high APM as they are the VERY vocal minority. A high APM doesn't always equal fun, in fact a APM could potentially cause even more balancing problems than intended, especially for tanks, with Gunbreaker and maybe Paladin being an exception to this rule. But players going armchair developer can get players so far, especially if they have ANY interest game development, and the most we, the players, can do is provide feed back that is meaningful enough to matter for players to enjoy.

[Oizen]

Heavensward Dark Knight and maybe Stormblood Dark Knight if we count enmity combos for a little extra credit.

All the tanks had an enmity combo, and you used it like once in a fight. They were removed for a reason.
These were never alternate combos that you went back and forth between, you almost always stuck to the higher damage souleater combo.

Again, all we need to do is look at Heavensward, which for ALL tanks, they were ALL GCD centric, Dark Knight had only had Low Blow which was VERY luck based with parry procs, Reprisal which was a parry proc, Plunge, Dark Passenger,Carve and Spit, and Salted Earth as oGCDs, Dark Arts enhanced certain GCD effects and/or potencies

Dark Arts was an ogcd that you spammed, and you really ever powered up attacks for potency bumps, most Dark Arts effects were pretty useless, especially when considering DRK's other gimmicks like taking damage for MP with Blood Price and parry procs.
I don't think saying the job was GCD focused is very accurate, Dark Arts spam was the centralizing mechanic of DRK back then, all thats changed now is instead of Dark Arts spam to empower the next GCD, you're getting the damage immediately with an oGCD.

I'm not against turning a few into gcd actions, honestly Abyssal Drain would be better served as a GCD spell with a larger heal, or more spammable in general rather than tying it to be the AOE version of Carve and Spit like its Upheaval/Orogeny, but as a whole I think DRK should keep the ogcd spam focus.

[Shurrikhan]

Overcapping is an issue on any job with a resource meter, so I'm not sure why anyone would present this as a unique issue on DRK.

I didn't. You picked MP on PLD as an example from which to insist that DRK's MP costs must be perfect tenths, fifths, quarters, or halves of their MP.

Except, again, PLD does not use MP like DRK does. PLD, however uniquely that may be, overcaps its MP for the majority of its rotation. It has nothing like Edge/Flood. In practice, MP may as well not exist on PLD, because outside of emergency uses of Clemency, it only ever spends MP under other conditions (Requiescat or Divine Might). I'm not happy about that, but it is what it is.

While yes, Holy Shock spends 1k MP while Riot Blade and Atonement generate 1k MP, you do not use Holy Shock as MP permits; it's a damage loss without Divine Might, which is only usable twice per minute without drift. During the combo that permits it, you generate 4k MP, while only spending 1k. It's not an even amount taken in for an even amount put out, unlike your earlier implications.

DRK needs 90%-92% of its MP to get every Edge it possibly can inside its burst, depending on when the MP tick would hit, leaving it with ~10% spare margin. PLD's has 60% spare margin; it only spends 40% over its Confiteor combo.

They're night and day, so I do not understand why you would try to use the MP spending of the one to support such a niche concern as whether DRK's MP costs should be perfect quarters, etc., of its max MP; such only reduces its tolerance anyways, making it that much more finnicky.

Having dead space on your meter just locks down resources for no good reason. Your functional capacity is still the same.

Which would you rather have as the duration of a GCD-affecting buff on a job that has no increases to Attack Speed and doesn't stack SkS? 11 seconds, or 10? They have the same number of attacks and total potency possible. The only difference is that on the latter, even 0.05 seconds of lost uptime means you lose a buffed hit, while the first takes a full second to lose any effect.

That's effectively the difference between a integer-denominator cost and what we have now, the difference between 10% safety margin, and none. If we could consume 4 charges off the bat, then rather than having 800-1000 spare MP at the end, that spare amount would make the difference of having or losing an Edge. All just to ensure that our 2-min bursts are even more packed. Why?
________________

For all intents and purposes, your max MP during raid buffs isn't just 10000, but also the amount you can generate and spend during the duration of those raid buffs. And the tighter you make that, the more finnicky you do. I do not want my number of Edges do a depend on an MP tick, or to fall short for even a single 600 MP overcap; that seems unnecessarily finnicky.

Edge and Flood cannot create double weaves on their own, because they have a 1s shared recast.

No one claimed otherwise. Yes, that'd potentially push one or the other Edges gained out of 20s raid buffs when you have both Tincture and Salted->Darkness, but again... why do you want even more Edges able to be concentrated into just a narrow span of time?

This seems like an obsessive compulsion over integer denominators first and implications/gameplay only a very distant second.

You could do something similar by having attacks like Shadowbringer and C+S/Abyssal Drain cost MP but generate blood in return.

I wouldn't mind this, but they'd have to generate 40 or more for that to have much effect, and then you're forcing particular timings of Bloodspiller while forcing drift around Delirium and likely removing that option (EarlyDel) for creating more weave space.

Plunge is another unnecessary culprit for weaves. Melee DPS have moved away from gap closers that are damage gated. I'm not sure why this isn't the standard now on tanks as well. You should be allowed to use your movement tool as a movement tool.

They haven't entirely; any target-aimed gap closers outside of Thunderclap still have damage.

Note also, though, that all Melee DPS but Reaper have higher APM than DRK despite that, all of them would have higher APM than DRK if we removed the damage from Plunge.

Yes, you can remove damage from Tank gap closers, but you'd have no higher mobility for doing so (since even some 10-16% of a GCD of uptime increased through the gap closer will outweigh their being used under raid buffs), just slightly less reward for fight knowledge and 2 less APM.

It's also worth noting that both GCD length and weaves contribute to APM. You'd actually have a slightly higher APM with a 1.5s GCD and single weaves between every GCD than you would with a 2.5s GCD and double weaves between every GCD.

Again, I'm totally fine with the occasional 1.5s GCD or 60%-length GCD.

I feel like of the two, GNB is the job that more feels like it should get 1.5s GCDs while DRK remains the double-weave job, but I'll take whatever increased sense of speed or similar engagement I can get between bursts regardless, so long as it avoids weaves that affect each other within the same GCD (the likes of old DA-defensives, etc.).

[Zairava]

I enjoy having busy bursts and engaging downtime, so the most "Enjoyment" I will ever have is either in our 2-minutes on DRK or when I'm playing Gunbreaker or Reaper. Between the two, I'd rather they take examples from Reaper by a far margin.

That said...We literally cannot fit any more ogcd's into our big burst windows, and we require a rework at the least if we're going to fix the issues with a) MP management being practically non-existent, b) Darkside Gauge/Timer and c) Blood Gauge.

If we're going to make any current oGCD's and turn it into a GCD, Abyssal Drain is my candidate. Give Abyssal Drain an MP cost.

While we're at it, make Shadowbringer cost Darkside, it's comically easy to keep up since it basically feels like a passive.

[DRKoftheAzure]

I enjoy having busy bursts and engaging downtime, so the most "Enjoyment" I will ever have is either in our 2-minutes on DRK or when I'm playing Gunbreaker or Reaper. Between the two, I'd rather they take examples from Reaper by a far margin.

Agrede.

That said...We literally cannot fit any more ogcd's into our big burst windows, and we require a rework at the least if we're going to fix the issues with a) MP management being practically non-existent, b) Darkside Gauge/Timer and c) Blood Gauge.

Also agreed.

If we're going to make any current oGCD's and turn it into a GCD, Abyssal Drain is my candidate. Give Abyssal Drain an MP cost.

I have a lot of choices as well wanting them to be consolidated combos, and as for Abyssal Drain, if people really want APM, give it second charge on a 30 second cooldown.

While we're at it, make Shadowbringer cost Darkside, it's comically easy to keep up since it basically feels like a passive.

We already something similar to that in Heavensward, it was called Blood of the Dragon on Dragoon, and they got rid of it.

[mallleable]

Some other thoughts of how I would declutter some of DRK's actions. The Blackest should upgrade to Oblation, and when Oblation's barrier breaks it grants, and transforms into Abyssal Drain.

[DRKoftheAzure]

Some other thoughts of how I would declutter some of DRK's actions. The Blackest should upgrade to Oblation, and when Oblation's barrier breaks it grants, and transforms into Abyssal Drain.

If Oblation costs MP, good luck trying to get people to use it...

[Shurrikhan]

the people who love the high APM as they are the VERY vocal minority.

Evidence? {Do you have any?}

Imagine that communication without any perceived 'loudness' beyond the number of people posting/liking/voting one way or the other, as per a poll. Are you really so sure that those who like higher APM or what has historically been a higher-APM tank... are a minority?

A high APM doesn't always equal fun, in fact a APM could potentially cause even more balancing problems than intended, especially for tanks, with Gunbreaker and maybe Paladin being an exception to this rule.

While an APM does not always equal fun, generally doing things is, yes, more fun than time spent idle, so long as there is time enough at peak obligatory button-presses still to use conditional presses and the average APM isn't knuckle-wrenchingly high.

Higher APM also does not include balancing issues unless a unique degree of the job's output depends on having lower ping (which is ultimately a universal issue, but, sure, we'll count it against just the jobs most affected by that universal problem for now).

There is literally no difference, in itself, to balance between dealing a total of 1000 relative potency across a GCD, a GCD and oGCD, a GCD and 2 oGCDs, etc. Relative/effective potency is relative/effective potency.

:: Note also that fitting 2 actions (GCD animation lock + oGCD animation lock) into a 1.5s GCD is actually tighter, technically, than fitting 3 actions (GCD animation lock + 2 oGCD animation locks) into a full 2.5s GCD. I'm fine with both, honestly, but converting oGCDs into quick-GCDs doesn't actually do any favors for the limits of what all we can weave.

Finally, GNB and PLD, are not uniquely immune to the high-latency issues possible from double-weaving or high APM. They merely have fewer enticed double-weaves due to having fewer oGCDs meant to be spent under the 15s of full raid buff value (6 for PLD and 10 for GNB vs. DRK's 16).

[DRKoftheAzure]

While an APM does not always equal fun, generally doing things is, yes, more fun than time spent idle, so long as there is time enough at peak obligatory button-presses still to use conditional presses and the average APM isn't knuckle-wrenchingly high.

Higher APM also does not include balancing issues unless a unique degree of the job's output depends on having lower ping (which is ultimately a universal issue, but, sure, we'll count it against just the jobs most affected by that universal problem for now).

There is literally no difference, in itself, to balance between dealing a total of 1000 relative potency across a GCD, a GCD and oGCD, a GCD and 2 oGCDs, etc. Relative/effective potency is relative/effective potency.

:: Note also that fitting 2 actions (GCD animation lock + oGCD animation lock) into a 1.5s GCD is actually tighter, technically, than fitting 3 actions (GCD animation lock + 2 oGCD animation locks) into a full 2.5s GCD. I'm fine with both, honestly, but converting oGCDs into quick-GCDs doesn't actually do any favors for the limits of what all we can weave.

Finally, GNB and PLD, are not uniquely immune to the high-latency issues possible from double-weaving or high APM. They merely have fewer enticed double-weaves due to having fewer oGCDs meant to be spent under the 15s of full raid buff value (6 for PLD and 10 for GNB vs. DRK's 16).

There is also the issue that sometimes Dark Knight is forced to have Skill Speed on their BiS gear, which can cause GCD clipping issues with the oGCD spam unless you use spells, which is yet ANOTHER reason why I would want a good chunk of oGCDs to become GCDs.