Are you the sister of JadedSins?
@OP: can you explain where is the problem of having MT and OT in a duty? I dont understand it.
Last edited by Caitlyn; 09-14-2021 at 02:06 AM.
- Queen of Heal 2022 -
But... You can already use shirk to avoid fighting over hate, or just drop tank stance so...I haven't run out of arguments; if you want me to keep defending the idea I'd be happy to.
Alright, let's address the points you've all made so far. Point number 1) CAN'T TANK SWAP!! WAH!!... Sure you can; just use shirk. Point number 2) What if the MT literally can't MT the content due to being new or bad gear!!... The only actual good point you've all made; to which we could just make it possible for MT and OT to swap roles if needed.
There, all of your masterful, brainy arguments have been refuted completely. Can I go back to condescending to you all about how gullible you are now?
It's a pointless request that doesn't really fix anything.
I just see this causing a problem where one doesn't exist. The problem being that the players queuing MT will be considerably less than those queuing OT because being quite honest from my experiences in DF on things like trials or 8 player raids a very noticeable number of tanks doing it in DF are only queuing tank so they don't have to wait in DPS queue and have no actual desire to tank anything because tanks are already in high demand without trying to divide it further.
Well, the problem it solves for me is I wouldn't have to either fight the OT for aggro or just drop stance and submit if I wanted to MT content; I could just queue MT. The general problem it solves is it would make provoke wars mid fight impossible.
I like how you've transitioned away from your position that this would break the game, though. If you don't think the benefits of this are worth the work that's fine; I probably wouldn't have even argued that with you. People being all dramatic and emotional just makes me want to poke them and see what happens, though. See if they pop.
It's rare when you see a suggestion so devoid of actual meaning that the only way to resolve having posted it in the first place is to unironically embrace 'n-no I was being bad the whole time! and you fell for it! h-haha! hahaha!'
We've finally done it. Can we get like a 'and I'd have gotten away with it if it weren't for you pesky main tanks, and your little Provoke, too'?
Oh no, I 100% back the idea and have defended it against every point made. I'll also continue to do so if you all come up with any new points.It's rare when you see a suggestion so devoid of actual meaning that the only way to resolve having posted it in the first place is to unironically embrace 'n-no I was being bad the whole time! and you fell for it! h-haha! hahaha!'
We've finally done it. Can we get like a 'and I'd have gotten away with it if it weren't for you pesky main tanks, and your little Provoke, too'?
What's happened here is that I've already addressed the only 2 points you all could come up with, so now you're just posting vague, non sequitor victory speeches as a bluff. This is how these discussions always go: As a community you all have about 1-2 counterarguments in you. Once I address them you move to ad hominem attacks, bringing up old discussions and try your hardest to stay off-topic. At that point I really have no choice but to mock you.
All I'm saying is I knew that's how this thread would go, and I've decided to just have fun with it. It doesn't mean I don't fully support the idea; I'm just saying I'd post it somewhere that SE cares about if I wanted to drum up support from others. I only ever post things on this forum to observe reactions and have fun with them; knowing how little this forum matters makes it a nice consequence free place to just do stuff and see what happens.
Last edited by Goji1639; 09-14-2021 at 03:39 AM.
Just talk/give unsolicited advice, mate. Say things like "you shouldn't be using Provoke on cool down," or some such of that nature. Or let the OT be MT and let them take the blame if things go south. Easy problem to fix that's completely in your control.
Tanks already have to wait "years" for their 24man queues to pop, this idea will only make them wait even longer.
Yes, but you addressed them by both undermining your own argument basically completely and then immediately insulting people, at which point there's more or less no discussion left to be had, and that was before the point at which you said outright that you weren't actually looking for a discussion.
I only reflect back the tone people take with me. If people are polite then so am I.Yes, but you addressed them by both undermining your own argument basically completely and then immediately insulting people, at which point there's more or less no discussion left to be had, and that was before the point at which you said outright that you weren't actually looking for a discussion.
Also, how did I undermine my own argument? That's the kind of thing you have to elaborate on if it's going to be your counterpoint; you can't just say it.
It takes like 5 seconds... "Hey insertname you want to MT or would you like me to MT?" Boom doneEh, if it really will make tank swapping too complicated then it is what it is.
I'll have to apologize; It didn't really sound that difficult to me. I'm used to playing much harder games than this, though.
Adjusting is what I've been doing, but it's still dumb to have us queue without clear roles. Having to figure out who's actually going to tank at the beginning of every single run isn't difficult, it's just tedious.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.