Tanks need more than just TankBusters

[Valence]

This is in the same vein as RNG mitigation, you assume everything is going to hit. It isn't changing anything about how you interact with the fight. As for crits, depending on the frequency, it might be something you need to worry about, it might not, who knows. But this also has to come with the caveat that getting an unlucky string of crits isn't going to kill a tank as you cannot plan for that as you cannot mitigate everything. It should be noted that this is based on the fact all mechanics are designed to always hit and never crit, if these could crit, that is just a stupid idea and I shouldn't have to explain why.

How is it not changing anything about fight interaction since it literally informs how much healing and bursts of healing the tank requires, either from the tank themselves or the healers? We're not talking about big mechanics, we're talking about filler damage outcome, something ARR fights used to do pretty well.
I mean we can agree to disagree on whether we like this or not, but the proof of concept is already there, both with copious amounts of constant autos AND rng crit autos, which bring variations to prevent boredom and adding some skill requirements (I shouldn't have to explain why).

It's a button to press that might or might not do something, that isn't indicative of skilful play and that is the point as to why it shouldn't be added. It is just a button to press to make it feel like you are doing something, whereas in fact, it has no meaningful impact on the fight. I also find is absurd that you think pressing one extra fluff button for some auto attacks would magically fix the issue of boredom in filler phases. It wwill not.

So by your logic any rng proc in the game isn't indicative of skillful play? What kind of nonsense is this?
Repertoire procs? Anything similar isnt skillful play? I'd argue it's a lot more skillful than just regurgitating a memorized scripted unchanging series of buttons, but I'd also aknowledge that what's left of rng in the game currently is really scrapping the bottom of the barrel as well.
Still, adding buttons to watch for and use when they proc, or keep for specific uses (for instance in the case of HW DRK it wasn't exactly the most interesting since it was tied to Low Blow resetting, I'd have loved if it had been on Dark Passenger instead since it consumed MP, but on the other hand low blow resetting was also useful in trashpacks). One can add many variables behind it and make it "skillful" enough to use, or just keep it as a proc you play whack a mole with when it procs much like all procs in the game currently work unfortunately.

In terms of mitigation, yes, it is bad. This is something that has been talked about since the start of the game. When Paladin had the original Bulwark, it wasn't used for tank busters as it was unreliable (it was not a guaranteed block), however, it was quite good in trash packs, essentially places where you had more chances for it to proc in the duration. Suzaku's tank buster is a good example of somewhere RNG mitigation could be useful, IF, the mitigation was strong enough when it triggered.

You say it is bad, and yet proceed to tell me it was good during trash pulls, so what will it be then?
And that's exactly my point, having varied mitigation with different purposes is a good thing in my book. Whether raid design wants to make use of this or not is another story, but it doesn't make it bad by essence, and only would make it bad if it doesn't make use of it. Dungeons for instance, made use of it a lot and in fact trash packs are where most mitigation has always been important.
Again, you jumped over it eagerly thinking "this is bad" because the only thing you seem capable of those days is to think in terms of current raid design where it's all about a single buster every 30s at most that becomes a % mitigation check. I'm not talking about scripted mechanics, i'm talking about what is currently missing in the game: white noise, aka autos, crits, etc. Or just trash/add phases...

The thing is, we have already been through the era of RNG mitigation, it was generally disliked, the main reason being, you could not predict it. It was not guaranteed mitigation. It is the same way healers do not rely on critical healing when they plan out their healing plans, unless they have a guaranteed way to critical heal, because you can then plan it in.

This goes the same for many other things in the game. Bosses could crit, Paladin had an action that prevented critical hits, wasn't very useful except in 2 places off the top of my head. Shiva EX bow phase as she had a massively increased crit rate that Awareness prevented a lot of damage from the auto attacks and Hallicarnasus tank buster, critical hit. It was an auto crit, awareness is then a form of mitigation by preventing that crit.

Going to Dark Dance, it's main use was in trash packs, Dark Arts Dark Dance + Dark Arts Dark Passenger gave the DRK increased evasion, increased Parry rate and gave the enemies blind, you didn't take much damage, then, coupled with Dark Arts Abyssal Drain to restore health, you could make yourself extremely hard to kill for a duration, though it cost a ton of MP to pull off. (Using guaranteed mitigation with DAAD was my preferred method). However, Dark Dance wasn't used for mit plans, mainly because it was a lot of magic damage, and so it done nothing, but also because, like Bulwark, it was RNG.

I don't know about that actually. Again, I think every kind of mitigation has purpose, and if you try to apply bullwark to a single nuke buster, then yes, it's not going to be great, same as applying dark mind to trash packs all hitting in physical damage. Are you one of those that constantly trash dark mind because of this? When in reality it's an incredible tool in most raids specifically for magical busters?

You continue on Dark Dance saying it wasn't used for mit plans, but what kind of strawman is this? Who even brought up mit plans? That's your problem again, you cannot think outside of modern design and scripted encounters. You're trying to apply squares to round holes. Square holes already exist, my fundamental issue is that the round holes have been removed, yet they worked, and I'd like them back.

The problem is, you cannot do that. Mitigation and healing plans exist for a reason, to make sure you have enough resources through a fight to mitigate everything you need to. You can put RNG mitigation in there, it won't be used for anything serious and it won't be planned around. Even crits might not be unless the crit rate/damage of the boss is significant enough.

Agree to disagree. I think your argument makes zero sense because we have had content making use of that and it worked fine.
Again filler content and white noise doesn't have to be part of mit plans. It just requires people to adjust to random little events and express their skill with it.

But this is still a spreadsheet. Everything will be planned around, those randomised party hits are going to be done at the same time each fight, so you already have the resources allocated to deal with it, it is just you hit player 2 rather than player 1.

Many tanks do enjoy planning out the mitigation strategy, that is part of the joy of tanking. I am mitigating as much damage as I can whilst staying alive. This is done in tandem with healers and planning out their healing strategy. The healers might have a better way to deal with something, they communicate that to the tank, the tank can adjust the mit plan etc. And I should note, nothing has changed in this aspect since ARR. This has always been the case.

I don't think I should have to explain how this isn't about removing mit plans again.

[PyurBlue]

The problem is, you cannot do that. Mitigation and healing plans exist for a reason, to make sure you have enough resources through a fight to mitigate everything you need to. You can put RNG mitigation in there, it won't be used for anything serious and it won't be planned around. Even crits might not be unless the crit rate/damage of the boss is significant enough.

I don't see rigid encounter planning as a necessary part of the game's design. We absolutely could have more variable encounters that would require different playstyles on account of players. There could still be some level of planning, but it wouldn't lead to a step by step, by the second plan. Instead players might work out a priority system and supplement that with short preplanned sets of actions for specific situations.

That would be a massive improvement over what we have now in my eyes, though for anyone who enjoys decoding a fight down to the second it might not be looked upon favorably.

Everything will be planned around, those randomised party hits are going to be done at the same time each fight

They don't have to be. I'd rather that they weren't.

[Carighan]

I don't see rigid encounter planning as a necessary part of the game's design.

I mean, I kinda even do. Or rather in the context of FFXIV I do, it's kinda "its thing". It's what you'd tell people about how FFXIV differs, "it's a ballet for 8-14 minutes", like you tell people about GW2's open world focus, that kind of stuff.

But even then, rigid encounter ability sequencing (Seat of Sacrifice EX was amazing but I think a lot of players hated it :'( ) does not preclude randomized player-affecting damage or abilities. That is, you can very much have "For these 20 seconds, the boss just autoattacks + does some form of raid damage on each autoattack" as a rigid step in the raid, but at the same time what the boss will do there you do not know. Likewise bosses randomly critting is only relevant around times non-random tankbusters happen. Which, as is expected, could just be removed if tanks take high damage anyways from random crits. And since full-raid AoEs as part of the ability sequence already affect tanks less than anybody else (at least most, which are a flat amount of damage not percentual) there's no need for tanks to intuitively always mitigate around those. You may want to, or not. Probably have to react to whether the 1-2 hits right before were crits.

[Voryn]

What’s the appeal of the big damage happening at random times? It feels like it would be similar to when you’re progging a fight and don’t remember when the busters happen, and just press your short mit + one other thing every time you notice that the cast bar is happening (or whatever the tell is for the damage).

It feels to me like tankbusters are fun when they’re actually part of mechanics, which makes them a lot more interesting than the usual “tanks stand north and press a couple mits, the rest of the party standa south and just hits the boss.” And IMO the best ones are mechanics for the whole party (like EX1 Mountain Fire, or DSR Hallowed Wing) so they’re not just standing around.

I personally also enjoy weaving a lot of abilities so it’s fun when I’m playing DRK or GNB and a buster is near when I’m doing my burst window or Gnashing Fang. But that’s just me enjoying pressing buttons and occasionally actually having to figure out a good order to use my abilities in.

[Carighan]

What’s the appeal of the big damage happening at random times?

I mean, reactive play is inherently interesting or even the core interest for a lot of gamers, just look at how popular the core gameplay of soulslikes is.

[Voryn]

I mean, reactive play is inherently interesting or even the core interest for a lot of gamers, just look at how popular the core gameplay of soulslikes is.

That makes sense. Especially if the damage from the busters isn’t trivial like in normal difficulty content.

Maybe it would also be fun if the random damage could lead to MT running out of cooldowns and then the tanks needing to swap. It hasn’t happened in my time raiding (since Endwalker), and in PF this could probably be communicated through chat macros, jumping a lot, or just pressing Shirk. It would also make OT be more than just an easier melee dps that occasionally gives a mit to the MT or takes two-hit busters.

These days the only tank swaps are when there’s vulnerability debuffs that force a swap for a few seconds (eg. M1S Biscuit Maker, EX3 Prosecution of War) or the occasions where the OT just grabs aggro just for a few seconds to invuln a buster that otherwise would require both tanks to mit and/or swap (eg. both above examples, and also M3S, M4S, M8S…). It would be really nice to have more reasons to swap.

[Mikey_R]

What if, on each auto-attack, the boss randomly gains a self-buff that makes the next attack crit? You could react to that, you'd eat the first, but if that crit buffs again, maybe you ought to start mitigating.

The question is, where does the mitigation come from? If you have to mitigate this random string of crits, could that not pull mitigation away from something where it is needed more, like a tank buster? If you were to add a mitigation that is designed to be used for these situations, what does that then look like, most importantly, the cooldown. If the cooldown is short enough, what is stopping someone from just using it off of cooldown etc. We also then have to look at healers and how these changes impact them, mainly looking at would it increase the frequency of having to use GCD heals.

There's tons of possibilities to handle this. The bigger issue in the devs unwillingness to massively change - or more likely management's unwillingness to budget for such change - the underlying combat system.

Whilst possibilities are numerous, it doesn't mean potential solutions are and that is the issue. How do you, as a tank/healer, deal with these RNG mechanics in a way that doesn't impact the more major mechanics of the fight. I would also be interested to know what your take on 'massively changing the underlying combat system' looks like.

Again, that's an assumption. Could very well make it so that the boss, on each autoattack, does one of three things and you see it from a self-buff:

* Crit the tank.
* 360° cleave in melee range for high damage (melee DPS would take 60%-80% damage).
* Fire two-four ranged bolts at random party members for 25%-40% of their health.

There is no planning for that, not more than one autoattack ahead. You could be getting the bolts the entire fight.

And that sounds horrible for the healers. 60-80% of a melee's HP every 2-3 seconds is just going to delete them in an unlucky situation, not to mention parties tend to group together so it will more likely be damage on the full party. Even your ranged bolts would just amount to full party healing because you wouldn't have the time to heal everyone up individually. Since these 2 are handled in the same way, 2/3 times you will just do a full party heal. Rather than spamming Glare, you are now spamming Medica 3. I know there is a lot of healer talk about how they want to change the healer role, but I'm pretty sure that isn't it.

[Carighan]

And that sounds horrible for the healers. 60-80% of a melee's HP every 2-3 seconds is just going to delete them in an unlucky situation

I mean, they could just get out of melee range after being hit until healed up? It's just a 360° cleave, they've been in MMOs from 25 years ago, they're not some arcane mystery as to how groups handle them.

Likewise, the random damage you handle by, and I know this is going to be wild: healing. The ones with the cast bar. The ones that don't have a CD. You make it sounds as if spamming Medica is a bad thing, I'm a healer, if I have to spam a spell, it better sure be a heal!

[Mikey_R]

How is it not changing anything about fight interaction since it literally informs how much healing and bursts of healing the tank requires, either from the tank themselves or the healers? We're not talking about big mechanics, we're talking about filler damage outcome, something ARR fights used to do pretty well.

I am fully aware we are talking about auto attacks. But just to point out, they really weren't threatening in ARR either, even with crits. Also, just checking a couple of videos (Ifrit EX in 2.1, M8S and Recollection Ex), and the auto attacks are looking to do the same amount of % damage to the tank. So it isn't that attacks have got weaker, it is more that the kits are better suited to dealing with them.

So by your logic any rng proc in the game isn't indicative of skillful play? What kind of nonsense is this?

In the case of using a skill and hoping it procs to reduce damage, no, it isn't skilful, that is luck.

Repertoire procs? Anything similar isnt skillful play? I'd argue it's a lot more skillful than just regurgitating a memorized scripted unchanging series of buttons, but I'd also aknowledge that what's left of rng in the game currently is really scrapping the bottom of the barrel as well.

This is different to RNG procs and would be an example of skilful play.

Still, adding buttons to watch for and use when they proc, or keep for specific uses (for instance in the case of HW DRK it wasn't exactly the most interesting since it was tied to Low Blow resetting, I'd have loved if it had been on Dark Passenger instead since it consumed MP, but on the other hand low blow resetting was also useful in trashpacks). One can add many variables behind it and make it "skillful" enough to use, or just keep it as a proc you play whack a mole with when it procs much like all procs in the game currently work unfortunately.

Of which this is then different to the initial claim I made that pressing a defensive and hoping it reduces damage is not skilful play.

You say it is bad, and yet proceed to tell me it was good during trash pulls, so what will it be then?

I think I missed a line of reasoning. The more chances you have for something to proc, the more it evens out. If you are hoping to reduce the damage from a bosses auto attacks that hits every 2 seconds, in a 10 second duration you get 5 chances to proc the damage reduction, that can be quite a varied spread of damage. Stick this in a pack of mobs where you have 6 mobs, that 5 chances to proc has turned into 30, you are much less likely to hit the extremes and as a result, it is more consistent.

And that's exactly my point, having varied mitigation with different purposes is a good thing in my book. Whether raid design wants to make use of this or not is another story, but it doesn't make it bad by essence, and only would make it bad if it doesn't make use of it. Dungeons for instance, made use of it a lot and in fact trash packs are where most mitigation has always been important.

Yes, varying mitigation is good, but the context you used was Dark Dance for boss auto attacks, not dungeon trash.

Again, you jumped over it eagerly thinking "this is bad" because the only thing you seem capable of those days is to think in terms of current raid design where it's all about a single buster every 30s at most that becomes a % mitigation check. I'm not talking about scripted mechanics, i'm talking about what is currently missing in the game: white noise, aka autos, crits, etc. Or just trash/add phases...

Then why did you not mention this. Also, Dark Dance is bad for crits as crits bypass any parry chance, same with Blocking on Paladins. No reason why this couldn't be changed, just thought it should be mentioned.

I don't know about that actually. Again, I think every kind of mitigation has purpose, and if you try to apply bullwark to a single nuke buster, then yes, it's not going to be great, same as applying dark mind to trash packs all hitting in physical damage. Are you one of those that constantly trash dark mind because of this? When in reality it's an incredible tool in most raids specifically for magical busters?

Current Bulwark is good for it as it does guarantee blocks now, in the past it wouldn't have been and it was common knowledge back then that you didn't use Bulwark on tank busters for the very reason it was unreliable. And no, trash is normally dead before I even have to think about getting that far into my defensive rotations in dungeons.

You continue on Dark Dance saying it wasn't used for mit plans, but what kind of strawman is this? Who even brought up mit plans? That's your problem again, you cannot think outside of modern design and scripted encounters. You're trying to apply squares to round holes. Square holes already exist, my fundamental issue is that the round holes have been removed, yet they worked, and I'd like them back.

Who bought up mit plans? Probably me. Due to, you know, having to plan where you use mitigation in a fight. Even if it is just for auto attacks, it is going to be 'planned' in somewhere, it is just going to be really unreliable. Also, we have been over this, fights have always been scripted, nothing has changed except fights needing more precision in how you handle mechanics and you have to plan more.

Agree to disagree. I think your argument makes zero sense because we have had content making use of that and it worked fine.

I just don't think you are quite understanding the angle I am coming from. You can have boss autos crits if you want, but not to the point where you start requiring mitigation in order to survive and the example you use is Dark Dance, a defensive that was reliant on RNG to reduce damage. You have to look past the initial suggestion and look to see what the ramifications of that suggestion actually has. It isn't as simple as just adding another defensive, as that can have other consequences down the road.

[Mikey_R]

I don't see rigid encounter planning as a necessary part of the game's design. We absolutely could have more variable encounters that would require different playstyles on account of players. There could still be some level of planning, but it wouldn't lead to a step by step, by the second plan. Instead players might work out a priority system and supplement that with short preplanned sets of actions for specific situations.

But it is still planned. You might have 2 different routes depending on what comes first, but that is still a plan. No matter what a fight does, you need to have the resources available to deal with it. If the boss tank busters you several times in a row, you are going to die as you run out of defensives, so even in designing fights, there is a level of planning required so the party doesn't get wiped out due to something out of their control.

I mean, they could just get out of melee range after being hit until healed up? It's just a 360° cleave, they've been in MMOs from 25 years ago, they're not some arcane mystery as to how groups handle them.

Likewise, the random damage you handle by, and I know this is going to be wild: healing. The ones with the cast bar. The ones that don't have a CD. You make it sounds as if spamming Medica is a bad thing, I'm a healer, if I have to spam a spell, it better sure be a heal!

Or, you just reduce the damage of the cleave to something more manageable. My 712 Sage (i700 weapon) prognosis heals for a little over 10% of my max HP, Eukrasian Prognosis 2 is about 50% stronger with the shield taken into account, which is then only about 15% of my max HP. My issue wasn't with the idea, the issue was with the damage, bring it down to say ~15-25% of their max HP and it is something the healers will still have to spam heals to keep the party alive, however, it is actually more feasible. (Also, you know no DPS is going to move out of range just on the off chance they might die, add in the fact you lose DPS not only to the healer having to heal but the melee/tank stepping away, which, if it happens enough, could lead to too little damage being done and the DPS check is failed.)