Add different type of monsters attacks

[Shurrikhan]

Hello

While I was playing Monster hunter stories 2 I found a really good concept that makes things fun for me

Which is attack type
Strength / speed / technique

What if we had similar concept for tank mitigation

If wrong type of mitigation it will loose 50% of its effectiveness

As a risk and reward thing

What do you think?

Knowing what to save your categorical mit for isn't "risk and reward". It just reduces the net complexity of optimizing one's sustain, since so much of the finer details (and maximum permissible incoming damage relative to tank base eHP at the encounter's tuning point) will be next to nothing compared to the simple mitigation types, which would then determine which (likely singular) CD schedule is permissible.

Rather, you're simply replacing...

• mitigation that can play a part in most mechanics/attacks and with therefore greater net potential for cognitive load (especially, if damage were increased to make tank swaps worthwhile without necessitating vuln swap or move-the-AoE-out gimmicks)
  --with--
• mitigation that can meaningfully play a part only within certain attacks and frequency of action to see even the small degree of cognitive load already present.

By all means, see how much DRKs and GNBs enjoyed having their categorically-specific raid-mitigation button rendered useless to press in certain fights.

Chances are, tanks wouldn't get much more fun out of having their capacities arbitrarily reduced in a given fight if the portions of each mitigation type varied across tanks nor would they enjoy needing 3x the buttons to achieve the same agency they have now even if the tanks were homogenized to carry the same portions of each miti type (as to prevent certain tanks just being outright stronger/weaker in certain encounters).

No, I'd much prefer to keep mitigation mostly general and simply amp up our agency through increased frequency and interaction among mitigation tools (atop perhaps a fair bit more randomization and some added bankability). Simon Says provides far less overall engagement, let alone agency, than being more able to choose how much potential mitigation to invest over what windows of time.

[Tunda]

Knowing what to save your categorical mit for isn't "risk and reward". It just reduces the net complexity of optimizing one's sustain, since so much of the finer details (and maximum permissible incoming damage relative to tank base eHP at the encounter's tuning point) will be next to nothing compared to the simple mitigation types, which would then determine which (likely singular) CD schedule is permissible.

Rather, you're simply replacing...

• mitigation that can play a part in most mechanics/attacks and with therefore greater net potential for cognitive load (especially, if damage were increased to make tank swaps worthwhile without necessitating vuln swap or move-the-AoE-out gimmicks)
  --with--
• mitigation that can meaningfully play a part only within certain attacks and frequency of action to see even the small degree of cognitive load already present.

By all means, see how much DRKs and GNBs enjoyed having their categorically-specific raid-mitigation button rendered useless to press in certain fights.

Chances are, tanks wouldn't get much more fun out of having their capacities arbitrarily reduced in a given fight if the portions of each mitigation type varied across tanks nor would they enjoy needing 3x the buttons to achieve the same agency they have now even if the tanks were homogenized to carry the same portions of each miti type (as to prevent certain tanks just being outright stronger/weaker in certain encounters).

No, I'd much prefer to keep mitigation mostly general and simply amp up our agency through increased frequency and interaction among mitigation tools (atop perhaps a fair bit more randomization and some added bankability). Simon Says provides far less overall engagement, let alone agency, than being more able to choose how much potential mitigation to invest over what windows of time.

I disagree.. Tank gameplay is braindead because it is so simple to the point where you span any mitigation for next attack with no consciousness..

That create less complex gameplay system which reduce tanks thinking for what to do for next attack..
Thats why most people don't play or even skipping tanks,

people would rather play Job with complex rotation than 1 2 3 + any mitigation I have for next attack kind of gameplay..

Since shadowbringers people are skipping tanks because how they reach to the point of braindead jobs (TBF warrior is tank+healer at this point) I encourage you read other posts

[SquigglySquigs95]

Also I feel it's important to point out that once upon a time, FFXIV had full elemental damage times. Ice/Wind/Fire/Earth, you name it, FFXIV had it.

It was ditched for a reason and it's because early raids would require you to meld elemental Materia on a fight-by-fight basis, it's stupid and everyone is almost universally glad it's been reduced to Phys/Magic/Unaspected damage types.

Speaking on where DRK and GNB currently fall in with their efficacy in raids that don't have a ton of magic damage to mitigate, yeah it feels shit. The solution is to make their magic mits work on phys damage with 50% efficacy and vice-versa for phys-only mitigations, as it allows the tanks to keep the flavour they currently have without the risk of completely undermining certain tanks based on encounter. Like in M1S where there's only one instance of magic damage for the whole encounter.

[SquigglySquigs95]

I disagree.. Tank gameplay is braindead because it is so simple to the point where you span any mitigation for next attack with no consciousness..

Reads like you've never even dipped your toes into current-release Savage fights, let alone Ultimate encounters.
My team in TEA literally had to spreadsheet when they use what mitigation to ensure the correct mits come back up at the right time on a per-phase basis, in a fight that has 5 phases.

This is also present in current-tier Savage fights, boiling it down to "I press Shadow Wall every time" is disingenuous, that's what bad tanks do. Competent tank players actually think with some foresight to see if/when they'll need such a heavy mit available to them again. This also changes on a per-fight basis. Not taking into account tank-swapping in fights that don't explicitly require it for increased mitigation capacity on the main tank at all times.

Highly suggest you actually go play some of the harder content the game has to offer before you speak as if you are an expert on the subject.

[Tunda]

Reads like you've never even dipped your toes into current-release Savage fights, let alone Ultimate encounters.
My team in TEA literally had to spreadsheet when they use what mitigation to ensure the correct mits come back up at the right time on a per-phase basis, in a fight that has 5 phases.

This is also present in current-tier Savage fights, boiling it down to "I press Shadow Wall every time" is disingenuous, that's what bad tanks do. Competent tank players actually think with some foresight to see if/when they'll need such a heavy mit available to them again. This also changes on a per-fight basis. Not taking into account tank-swapping in fights that don't explicitly require it for increased mitigation capacity on the main tank at all times.

Highly suggest you actually go play some of the harder content the game has to offer before you speak as if you are an expert on the subject.

I don't think you know what are you talking about.. let alone that you are talking like an "expert"

I suggest that you try to play games that make your think before doing action.

Well you see, OP thinks Simon Says is a complex game with tons of room for player expression, clearly.

it is clearly not path of exile kind of system.. complexity isn't "hard" it gives RPG games variety of gameplay,
it doesn't need to be hard thing to understand it needs to have quick action kind of style that I think it can be understandable for people who play casually and hardcode

if you play only FFXIV there are people are casual more than FFXIV casuals and play games like MHS2 and other RPGs and can understand + have fun with such system.

Also I feel it's important to point out that once upon a time, FFXIV had full elemental damage times. Ice/Wind/Fire/Earth, you name it, FFXIV had it.

It was ditched for a reason and it's because early raids would require you to meld elemental Materia on a fight-by-fight basis, it's stupid and everyone is almost universally glad it's been reduced to Phys/Magic/Unaspected damage types.

Speaking on where DRK and GNB currently fall in with their efficacy in raids that don't have a ton of magic damage to mitigate, yeah it feels shit. The solution is to make their magic mits work on phys damage with 50% efficacy and vice-versa for phys-only mitigations, as it allows the tanks to keep the flavour they currently have without the risk of completely undermining certain tanks based on encounter. Like in M1S where there's only one instance of magic damage for the whole encounter.

the system was implemented badly and it is still implemented badly Idk why you try to defend it..

there is a difference between "bad system" and "bad implementation" I know it is hard to think about it if you only play 2 to 3 games.. educate yourself or you will look like someone thinks they are "expert" but not look even close to one

BTW welcome to the form this is your 6th post as I see it seems that my subjects interest you that you create another account to just participate.. you are welcome

[SquigglySquigs95]

I don't think you know what are you talking about.. let alone that you are talking like an "expert"

I suggest that you try to play games that make your think before doing action.

You didn't actually disprove or address anything I said with this comment. It was a poor attempt at deflection to try and avoid coming up with an actual counter to the point I made, which is still correct btw. I also never claimed to be an expert.

it is clearly not path of exile kind of system.. complexity isn't "hard" it gives RPG games variety of gameplay,
it doesn't need to be hard thing to understand it needs to have quick action kind of style that I think it can be understandable for people who play casually and hardcode

if you play only FFXIV there are people are casual more than FFXIV casuals and play games like MHS2 and other RPGs and can understand + have fun with such system.

Okay but again, the game literally isn't designed for an alternate system, and I don't think the current system needs replacing. It's pretty good and has decent allowance for skill expression. There's also timed elements to like every tank-specific low-cooldown mitigation now, which if anything they should lean into that more than some fucked up triangle mitigation system like you suggested. Which we also did have a form of at some point previously. We had Pierce/Blunt/Slash damage types and the systems around that ALSO sucked.

the system was implemented badly and it is still implemented badly Idk why you try to defend it..

there is a difference between "bad system" and "bad implementation" I know it is hard to think about it if you only play 2 to 3 games.. educate yourself or you will look like someone thinks they are "expert" but not look even close to one

BTW welcome to the form this is your 6th post as I see it seems that my subjects interest you that you create another account to just participate.. you are welcome

The system as it is currently, is like 95% fine. It could use with minor improvements but as it stands it's solid as is.
It's not a bad system or poorly implemented. The only thing that really needs to be addressed is having magic only mits have half efficacy on phys attacks and vice versa. I don't play 2-3 games, I'd argue I probably have more experience when it comes to MH alone than you do. I'm educated enough to understand that you can't just rip a system from one game and transplant it into another, entirely different game with little to no changes and think it's a bright idea.
I've been on the forums since 2019, longer than you. I've just been a longtime lurker is all. You didn't do anything to bring me here and bringing up my relative lack of posts is odd to be honest.

[Shurrikhan]

Food for thought:

Try these categories (formalized/nominal types A, B, and C into one of which each attack must fall) from any other perspective.

Take basic elemental damage, for instance:

Maybe an enemy is vulnerable to Fire and Wind. Okay, then you're forced to run WHM, SMN, BLM, and maybe MNK and NIN.

You can try to fix this by then aspecting a variety of attacks to various elements, but then you still end up reducing full toolkits or degrading their reward structures to just those particular attacks. NIN now has to spam Gust Blade and Aeolian Edge, Monk's damage lives or dies by whether Reply of Fire and Reply of Wind direct crit, DRG spams the newly wind-aspected Chaos Thrust / Chaotic Spring, etc. Whatever the case, you take something of which you had 100% useful... and reduced it to being useful some 16.7% of the time.

That waste, and subsequent loss of gameplay of need for extreme button bloat to return what we already had... is essentially what the suggestion would do to mitigation tools.
_______________

Now, compare that to what can be achieved through what differences can exist even without any nominal categories dividing them (no magical vs. physical or STR vs. INT) -- namely via differences in duration, depth, scaling factors (and therefore synergies), frequency, and source of mitigation tools:

Enemies might have, for instance, a flurry of weak attacks with nonetheless high total damage, or singular strong attacks. Against the first, a duration of flat damage reduction is best, while against the latter, a single-hit high %DR is best.

But, they have additional potential synergies, too. For instance, one may pair the %DR with a flat reduction in order to take 0 damage, thereby preventing the attack from inflicting its debuff.

If you have an attack that steals Haste from an enemy, not only does that reduce their AA frequency or slow a flurry of attacks enough to be healed through, but it might also provide you enough hits to ready an extra active (gauge-sourced) mitigation/healing/suppression tool.

Etc., etc.

Such provides actual room for agency, rather than a mere color-matching pretense of complexity. Rather than playing Simon Says with a third each of a mitigation kit, you're rewarded for precise knowledge enough to minimize excess flexible mitigation spent in avoiding a debuff or in making an attack survivable if a latter one might not be without sufficient resources saved for it, for knowing not just what tools your cotank has available but also how they might synergize with, rather than merely supplement, your own..

[CKNovel]

As Shurrikhan said, we also have different attacks that fits the request.
Single Hit, multi hit, bleed...

Tank Cooldowns aren't equals against those, some might do better, PLD's Guardian will be very strong against single hit while WAR's damnation will be stronger against sustained damage.

[Ramiee]

You can't really apply single player RPG system to an MMO. FF14 did have elemental resistances it just didn't work long term, same as WoW. A game where player power kept increasing every level cap makes this just so incredibly hard from a mathematical standpoint to do, it's not like OSRS or GW2 where you have a static max level.