Quick thought with paladin and 1.22b

[Gidonoidon_Sur]

With the current battle team's approach, Paladin will never be as good as Warrior.

Think about it. What do you need from a tank? Just enough damage mitigation to allow 1-2 healers to keep you alive as well as the rest of the group. Nothing more is necessary, and anything less is unacceptable.

Warrior and Paladin both fulfill those conditions. However, because no more is necessary for a tanking role, improving each classes ability to tank does not make them a more valuable party member. And it is what makes them a valuable party member that gets them in the party, not how well they tank.

The difference between Warrior and Paladin, is their sub-roles. Warrior (when tanking) subs as a DD, while Paladin subs as a healer (and DD to a degree as well).

Because the benefits of Warrior's sub role far outweigh those of the Paladin, it becomes obvious that bringing a Warrior is superior. It wouldn't matter if the Paladin took next to zero damage, or had a million health. Your party will still need healers for the rest of the group, and as long as the same number of healers can keep both tanks alive, they are essentially interchangeable ( as far as their primary tanking role is concerned).

Thus, the only rational way to proceed is in balancing their tanking roles, getting them roughly equal, while giving each class separate and distinct sub roles.

Now, Imagine that every encounter until now did not require tanks. The optimal group would be the Maximum amount of DD, with just enough healing to get by. If you were suddenly to introduce tanks into the game, you would have to choose between Paladin and Warrior.

When you choose a Warrior, you only sacrifice some DD, and because, with the addition of a tank, the group is taking slighly less damage overall and some of your healing potential is wasted (The healers you had were able to heal without a tank, with the addition of a tank, they have an easier job and no longer need to perform as well).

When you choose a Paladin, you Sacrifice a greater amount of DD, but this is supposedly compensated for the Paladin having healing abilities. Because (if we are to suppose the two jobs possess a similar ability to mitigate damage), the group as a whole is still taking slightly less damage overall, the exact same proportion of healing potential is wasted again. The healing abilities of the Paladin should allow one of the healers to take the role as a DD.

To summarize, if you really want to balance these classes, you must focus more on their sub roles, rather than their actual tanking abilities. As tanks, the Paladin and Warrior should be equitable in mitigation and survivability for both physical and magical damage. However, the choice should lie in which sub role fits your group more. The Paladin being part tank and part healer, should allow the group to approach encounters with less dedicated healers than a group using a Warrior tank. The Warrior being part tank and part DD should be able to deal enough damage to justify the extra healing necessary from not using a Paladin.

Great rationale. They need to make PLDs better healers so parties can ditch one (both) of its healers.

[Enfarious]

Think the answer becomes, if PLD can successfully mitigate large amounts of damage, large enough that they can heal others with abils like divine succor, and the returned HP to themselves keeps them standing the need for a full time whm goes away, you bring one, but for "oh shit" moments and otherwise they act as a DD, now your party is effectively:
PLD(Tank and Heals and very small DD) WHM(DD backup Heals) BRD(Mages Ballad DD backup heals) DD DD DD DD DD that's the potential for 7 count em 7 functional DDs and a PLD that spits out a bit of dmg too.
vs.
WAR(Tank lowmid-DD) WHM(FT Heals and Support) BRD(Support, Heals, DD) DD DD DD DD DD

In the first you can up your pts DPS over the second cause the WHM and BRD both can focus on DD while just catching the "Oh shit" heals. The problem is PLD just can't achieve the kind of mitigation that this requires, if it could, and by my thinking it really should be able to after all that's what PLD(knights in heavy armor, tanks in modern war) do, they eat dmg and stay up so the rest of the party(squad, regiment, cadre) can kill more effectively. Super Tanks shouldn't need 2 engineers patching them up FT in every battle, just 1 mostly just after the battle is over can keep them running, and neither should PLD except in those "Oh shit" moments. If it could though PLD would be the preferred tank for 1 on 1 encounters while still leaving riot encounters to a tank aka WAR that will always out DD it, and be able to keep hate on the crowds, in bosses w/ lots of adds a PLD hangs onto the main boss, WAR grabs all the adds. Fights/Raids everything finds balance, a PLDs dual role becomes useful a WAR can still shine, and only MNK and DRG are left in the cold since they don't stand above any other job in anyway ...

Really 2 jobs that seve 0 secondary role, and can be out DDd or at least matched by almost all the other jobs, why does noone feel bad for them?

[baijiazi]

I dun play paladin but was having an idea of

Warrior = offensive tank (High Hp, High attack)
Paladin = defensive tank (High block rate, High defense)

Correct me if Im wrong but the tank's main job is to keep the mob on them right?
So getting and maintaining enmity is the primary purpose of the tank.

Warrior generate enmity by doing more damage,
Paladin could increase enmity by a partial or successful block.

Warrior should need more heals in a party when tanking
Paladin should require less heals (excluding that he heals himself)

This should gives more choice for a party if they need 1 more whm or DD.

Well, as I said I dun play pally so I'm not sure how it goes,
but generally speaking this is my thought when I was thinking about how to differentiate between pally and warrior

[Andrien]

I dun play paladin but was having an idea of

Warrior = offensive tank (High Hp, High attack)
Paladin = defensive tank (High block rate, High defense)

Correct me if Im wrong but the tank's main job is to keep the mob on them right?
So getting and maintaining enmity is the primary purpose of the tank.

Warrior generate enmity by doing more damage,
Paladin could increase enmity by a partial or successful block.

Warrior should need more heals in a party when tanking
Paladin should require less heals (excluding that he heals himself)

This should gives more choice for a party if they need 1 more whm or DD.

Well, as I said I dun play pally so I'm not sure how it goes,
but generally speaking this is my thought when I was thinking about how to differentiate between pally and warrior

That is all nice and dandy, but I think PLD should be the preferred tank regardless, since they ain't good at anything else. If a job can tank and also dish out damage then that is broken. I would prefer WAR as a damage dealer, while still being able to fend of foes, but not in a over powering way.

PLD should survive the most powerful attacks, and hold hate. That should go to PLD without a doubt.

[Duelle]

That is all nice and dandy, but I think PLD should be the preferred tank regardless, since they ain't good at anything else. If a job can tank and also dish out damage then that is broken. I would prefer WAR as a damage dealer, while still being able to fend of foes, but not in a over powering way.

PLD should survive the most powerful attacks, and hold hate. That should go to PLD without a doubt.

Limiting the game to one tank class is a very bad thing, so no thanks. We need more variety in our party roles, not less.

[Aion]

Limiting the game to one tank class is a very bad thing, so no thanks. We need more variety in our party roles, not less.

yeah,just like what happened now.....

[waldo]

Christ some really long post here. I was just saying, common sen e tells me warrior tanking stats match up perfectly, VIT & STR, for their role... Paladin doesn't seem to match at all for a tanking roll. STR and MND doesn't seem optimal for a paladin style tank.

My common since may be flawed, but all I'm saying is before warrior is dismantled and paladin skills and WS are changed all around, give the primary and secondary stats a look SE.

Thanks

[Duelle]

Christ some really long posts here. I was just saying, common sense tells me warrior tanking stats match up perfectly, VIT & STR, for their role. Paladin doesn't seem to match at all for a tanking role. STR and MND doesn't seem optimal for a paladin style tank.

My common sense may be flawed, but all I'm saying is before warrior is dismantled and paladin skills and WS are changed all around, give the primary and secondary stats a look, SE.

I don't think anyone here said anything about WAR being dismantled.

What we're arguing is that instead of changing PLD's main stats, the main stats should be adjusted in a way that they benefit PLD exclusively.

[Enfarious]

Christ some really long post here. I was just saying, common sen e tells me warrior tanking stats match up perfectly, VIT & STR, for their role... Paladin doesn't seem to match at all for a tanking roll. STR and MND doesn't seem optimal for a paladin style tank.

My common since may be flawed, but all I'm saying is before warrior is dismantled and paladin skills and WS are changed all around, give the primary and secondary stats a look SE.

Thanks

Most of the walls of text agree with that. Well mine do at any rate. I won't say it doesn't need alot more than just the stats changed cause it really does, but this is certainly a part of the problem.

[Enfarious]

Limiting the game to one tank class is a very bad thing, so no thanks. We need more variety in our party roles, not less.

But there is no variety now, it's all war whm brd blmx5, you can blame content or class/job inbalance but in either case it's broken.

WAR being picked over PLD means PLD needs to be fixed, not that WAR's ability to tank should be taken away. Try again.

It means they both need balancing. Buffing PLD to match WAR will just make PLD OP too. That's not to say take away a WAR's ability to tank but it shouldn't be a good DD while tanking, if it's going to get a dual role it shouldn't be so powerful. Unless they can make PLDs secondary role equally useful to a party, w/o making them both OPd.

Warrior either needs to be a good tank, or good DPS. Not both. Sorry for all those that don't want to hear this, but it's 100% true.

When paladin's start being both good tanks, and good healers, I will take what I said back, but until then, both classes should only get to do one thing well.

Yes