[Discuss] Bringing back mitigation-damage interaction

[Marxam]

the problem with enmity is that it forces a tank role in fights where that is completely redundant. Going from tanks having to keep the boss and adds away from the party to just hitting a striking dummy is quite the change of pace. The only way they can necessitate tank roles without forcing enmity as a gameplay quirk is to just make all raidwides into wild charges. So regardless of who has enmity you will always want the strongest "defense" jobs in the front to protect the party in the back. However this might forces the current heavy mitigation meta into overdrive.

Honestly they've dug themselves into a hole in terms of job design.

[Shurrikhan]

The problem with enmity is that it forces a tank role in fights where that is completely redundant.

That's not a matter/issue of "enmity" so much as tankbusters themselves at a particular tuning, where that ends up just being a composition check (have tank or rez player). Though, giving all big enemy attacks a means to be collectively mitigated through stacking or lining up in descending order of eHP to protect a marked target --even if that were far less healing-efficient than just using a tank-- would largely deal with that, too.

Enmity exists as it does now, and even as it did back in ARR/HW/StB, primarily to make it so that there's less party gameplay that each member is expected to participate in: Rather than melees swapping in and out, relaxing pressuring and reasserting pressure to allow ranged to briefly kite and then to peel from them as they run out of space, and the party needing to CC, focus fire, and apply timely suppression to specific enemies contextually you get a Blue DPS who prevents the need for any of that largely through just existing. Instead of most of the positional and coordinating aspects of tanking you just have a "Tank" who is free to then act as a simplified DPS with a set of isolated mini-game mechanics atop it.

The only way they can necessitate tank roles without forcing enmity as a gameplay quirk is to just make all raidwides into wild charges.

I'm assuming you mean the T10 mechanic, where damage is cumulatively reduced (and so we tend to line up in %miti order insofar as each sequential member can survive)? I don't think that's the only way to necessitate tanks, but I certainly wouldn't mind seeing more mechanics like that.

However, this might forces the current heavy mitigation meta into overdrive..

If there's already good reason to correct the existing state (say, of barrier heals just being superior healers altogether), that your idea would require doing so isn't a significant mark against it.

[Marxam]

I'm assuming you mean the T10 mechanic, where damage is cumulatively reduced (and so we tend to line up in %miti order insofar as each sequential member can survive)? I don't think that's the only way to necessitate tanks, but I certainly wouldn't mind seeing more mechanics like that.

Yeah like HH. It would put back some of the tank responsibility of good positioning into play, especially with how often raidwides happen in relation to tank busters. It would also necessitate some good cd usage since the first two ppl to be hit with the raidwide will always take a majority of the dmg. Falling back on reprisal might not be effective since you want to save those for situations where there are partner splits and raidwides. Situations where the tanks can only cover half of the party.

Regardless, the increased hitbox, stationary and re-centering bosses really has shifted tanks into pusedo dps since they don't have to do anything outside of swap for TB's. You gotta give the tanks something to do and wild charge raidwides are a good start. It doesn't have to be like HH but the idea is that the tank needs to protect the party and they can do that by standing in front and taking the brunt of the hit.