Warrior Rework to Balance the job

[Crafoutis]

They'd have to have a system by which the hit they are about to take is mitigated by what the mitigation value of their HP as it would be if the hit went through. This should solve the problem below

Describing the problem:

(We assume there is a new tank that has greater mitigation the lower their HP is)
(We assume for simplicity that this mitigation is linear between [0% mit] to [50% mit], and relates to the Tank's HP between [100% hp] to [0% hp])
(Lastly, let's assume the tank has 1,000 HP)

If the Tank is full HP receives a hit from the boss that does 900 damage. They are now at 100hp, and their mitigation is now at 45%. The tank buster that hit them for 900 damage was unmitigated by the Tank's passive due to the fact that it front-loaded all of that damage.

If the Tank is at 900 (90%) HP when he receives that same hit for 900 damage, that hit would be mitigated by 5% due to their passive mitigation they gained from being at 90% HP, therefore making the hit do 855 damage instead, and letting them live with 45 HP.


Solution, as described in the beginning: Mitigation for this theoretical new Tank (Or let's be honest, DRK, since they're sorely lacking), should be calculated based on the damage of the pre-mitigated hit against their current HP, prior to damage being applied. Then their mitigation reduces the incoming damage appropriately.

What does the above scenario look like under this system?

Tank, 1,000 (100%) HP, incoming tankbuster for 900 (90%) damage.

IncomingDamage * ( 1 - ( 0.5 * ( 1 - (( CurrentHP - IncomingDamage ) / MaxHP ))))) = PostMitDamage

900 * ( 1 - ( 0.5 * ( 1 - (( 1000 - 900 ) / 1000 ))))) = 495

The 900 damage is turned into a 495 damage hit. This way, regardless of the size of the hit, monsters can't 'skip' the tank's mitigation, and in fact it would be more effective to load on more frequently smaller ticks of damage against this tank for the same time expenditure value per hit. New encounters could be tooled to allow different tanks to shine in different ways, all useful, but different in their application of their survivability.

[whiskeybravo]

Do you see why one is fine, and the other isn't?

That's not really what I was responding to. The previous statement of "Restoring HP to yourself or the party has nothing to do with that. That's for the healers to take care of." doesn't mention anything about shielding. Why is only healing mentioned and not shielding? That was my point, not suggesting TBN and BW are "numerically" equivalent, but that both serve the same function of "alleviating healer burden". But I guess I'd just have to assume if TBN was a something like a 150k shield maybe they'd have included it in their statement as well.

Because a good healer can't actually cover for a bad tank -- not indefinitely, not in scenarios outside of pulling one trash mob at a time.

The healer's resources will be drained faster than they recover. At some point, the tank dies to lack of healing, or the rate of healing being less than the rate of incoming damage. Then it's a matter of hoping the tank gets raised and retakes aggro before the squishy jobs get beaten to a pulp.

This is just shifting the goal post. A good tank will not be able to indefinitely cover for a bad healer either, with WAR potentially being the only exception. Of the handful of situations I've been in where the healer dies during a dungeon boss, I'd say about half of them I was able to sustain and half I wasn't. It's definitely not a given even with the incredibly powerful healing.

[Lyth]

No. Flat shields are a variant of the standard %DR mitigation that have been on tanks since forever. The key differences are that flat shielding:

• is more effective than equivalent %DR when the incoming damage is less than 100% of your total HP
• is less effective than equivalent %DR when the incoming damage is greater than 100% of your total HP
• can keep you alive indefinitely if and only if you can mitigate all incoming damage

Healing is not equivalent to mitigation because it cannot stop a tankbuster from oneshotting you. However, it can keep you alive indefinitely so long as you can outheal the incoming damage. It's fine for tanks to have some access to self-healing, but if they can outheal all the incoming damage, then you no longer need a 'healer' role.

If you want to identify a situation where flat shielding would be equivalently excessive, then you would need to mitigate all incoming damage through shields. But at that point you're just playing with invincibility mode on. Hence

I bet lol, so were Game Shark owners back in the day

[Crafoutis]

Is the fun of WAR really from constant full self heals?

Yes, being able to full heal once every 30 seconds during trash packs only (it doesn't work this way in actual content, against bosses), is a majority of the flavor which makes me prefer WAR, and even subscribe to FFXIV at all.

I primarily play solo, while I do max out all classes and gear my roles via raiding, my primary method of interfacing with this game is soloing on WAR. It is why I choose WAR, it is my fun in the game. Whenever I'm playing SGE, I thank my lucky stars whenever I get a WAR as my tank, because I get to spend more time DPSing. So I personally don't get the whinging about 'mah role', because I spend a great deal of time healing and presently the only tank that makes me hate my job is DRK, the weakest one right now, the one that you can't take your eye off of for half a second otherwise it's curtains. That's not fun (for me).

I'd say that people taking issue with WAR ought to pick a more fun tank to heal for their static, but it's clear none of this conversation is about raiding at all, and is purely about Dungeons, which is the only place Bloodwhetting is so effective in group content.

[whiskeybravo]

It's fine for tanks to have some access to self-healing, but if they can outheal all the incoming damage, then you no longer need a 'healer' role.

Sure you do, for the other 3-6 members of the team.

Even if in the unusual 4 tank m4s or 1 war/3dps dungeons type shenanigans it's possible to "outheal (mit) all incoming damage" with tanks instead of healers, that's not the common circumstance the majority of players will find themselves in, and I doubt it's something one could just jump in and complete without practice. Rare occurrences or exploits like this don't invalidate the entire healer role, not everyone had or used Game Sharks. And all that says nothing of encounter design itself.

Dungeons are designed to be quick and casual daily content that any level of player with a minimum level of job experience can complete. They aren't a grinding wheel to make you shine like a diamond before going into raid content. If the expectation is that you're going to use dungeons to hone your skills, or doing it for a "challenge, well you have to be aware not everyone is partaking in that endeavor with you because that's not the purpose of said content. It's going to range from boring to interesting/challenging on a case by case basis.

As for current raids.. By my count there are 2 major heal/mit checks, one in 2s and one in 3s. It is possible to mit through transition on 4s, but my healers, at least, preferred to keep using LB. That may change as we finish gearing up, and the alpha/beta in 2s will probably just start getting skipped. As I mentioned previously there are no heavy bleeds, hp to 1, doom, etc style mechanics, coupled with the (lack of) frequency of raidwides basically everything is being over-mitigated right now. Again encounter design can't be discounted here.

If they aren't going to make encounters lethal enough require all the abilities we have, it's inevitable that all these abilities will perceived as OP and "ruining" the game. So do they just starting yeeting these abilities, or actually design content around the fact that we have them?

[Shurrikhan]

That's not really what I was responding to. The previous statement of "Restoring HP to yourself or the party has nothing to do with that. That's for the healers to take care of." doesn't mention anything about shielding. Why is only healing mentioned and not shielding? That was my point, not suggesting TBN and BW are "numerically" equivalent, but that both serve the same function of "alleviating healer burden". But I guess I'd just have to assume if TBN was a something like a 150k shield maybe they'd have included it in their statement as well.

That would be a fair assumption, as probably has most to do with some people using the term "healing" (eHP increases that do not increase your maximum eHP) interchangeably with "sustain" (which includes anything and everything that keeps you alive for longer without outright avoiding enemy attacks such as through CC or kiting, be it self-scaled or scaling with incoming damage, increasing only current eHP or also increasing max eHP).

If something's sustain is higher in practice, it provides more survivability than its competition. Simple as that.

Until such time as the %DR and flat shield on Bloodwhetting is insufficient to survive certain tankbusters without needing wasteful overhealing, it will provide more sustain over time than other on-demands simply because its practical output, too, is higher than others' (since none is necessarily wasted from overhealing nor from dying before the self-heal).

And until such time as incoming damage is high enough that most unique defensives (Camo, Bulwark, Dark Mind) exceed the value of Thrill of Battle, it, too, will provide more sustain than its analogs on other jobs.

Between those advantages and more, Warrior's free (at no dps cost) sustain is, quite simply, far higher than that of other tanks, especially those other than PLD. (In practice, usually >33% higher, which can net enough extra GCDs of damage in early prog to make up for its <2% rDPS loss even before factoring in what risks are thereby reduced.)

If they aren't going to make encounters lethal enough to require all the abilities we have, it's inevitable that all these abilities will perceived as OP and "ruining" the game.

Only if it's given to a single job at some 30+% more strength than what's given to everyone else. (Or, per Warrior's case, usually nearer to 3x for its highest practical output vs. the job with the lowest in-practice output, each in their most favorable but realistic contexts.)

[whiskeybravo]

Only if it's given to a single job at some 30+% more strength than what's given to everyone else. (Or, per Warrior's case, usually nearer to 3x for its highest practical output vs. the job with the lowest in-practice output, each in their most favorable but realistic contexts.)

Look, BW/nascent is probably going to get nerfed, whatever. I've accepted that. Healers will get to cast a few more heals onto WARs as a result, and WARs won't be able to complete content without them. Congrats.

[ApolloGenX]

Why do healers think the only ones that need healing are tanks?

Also, why do they think gimping tanks is fun for anyone?

All the talk is just tanks.... what about the rest of the party???

[Marxam]

Look, BW/nascent is probably going to get nerfed, whatever. I've accepted that. Healers will get to cast a few more heals onto WARs as a result, and WARs won't be able to complete content without you. Congrats.

Its already been nerfed to the ground. How much more can you go outside of removing the healing entirely? Ironically they solved this issue back when tanks had two stances. If you wanted to heal yourself you had to be in defiance and take a damage hit in exchange for staying alive.

While people are here debating on BW being op in dungeons (content that is meant to be casual), I'm sitting here wondering why SiO got a regen when all it needed was higher % on the shields when sacrificing your buffs. Equilibrium also didn't need the regen imo. It would have been better if it was a 1200 potency heal when HP below 50% or 1200 potency barrier when HP above 50%.

[whiskeybravo]

Also, why do they think gimping tanks is fun for anyone?

Nah, it's just WAR specifically. Gimp WAR enough that PLD takes it spot, while WAR joins DRK in the abyss and GNB just keeps doing what it's doing (I guess).