Please Reconsider Splitting Main and Off-Tank Roles Based on Job

[Mikey_R]

You seem to be setting an impossible standard where feedback is only valid once we know every tooltip, potency, encounter design, and final implementation detail. But by that point, the feedback is already far less useful.

Far from it, we just need more information about how the jobs play before making unfounded requests of the dev team, for example, knowing whether Intervention can proc the counter attacks. We do not need a full tooltip for that, but we do need more than we currently do. Once we know, we can then provide feedback and lest you worry, if it doesn't, I will be there with most other tanks saying it probably should.

Early feedback is not supposed to be a final verdict. It is supposed to identify risks before they become baked into the system.

...

The risks are simple:

If MT means a tank gains more value while holding aggro, that can create friction.

If OT means a tank gains more value while not holding aggro or supporting the other tank, that can create friction.

If PLD is labeled MT and other tanks are labeled OT, Party Finder may turn those labels into expectations.

If a job feels worse when played outside its assigned label, that becomes restrictive even if it is still technically playable.

But that is the thing, we do not know. Will an MT get no benefit by not tanking? No idea. OT, No idea, how is the community going to act? No idea. Is it going to feel worse to play? Well, that is subjective.

The point in feedback is, there is no ifs. If they reveal that MTs lose access to counter attacks by not being attacked, you can feedback that it is not a good design decision as you lose value. You identify the issue, explain why it is an issue using the facts available and then if you so desire, provide a way to potentially change the system, in this case, still allowing the MT to counter attacks, even if they aren't tanking the boss.

I am saying, “This direction has obvious risks, so please avoid making it restrictive.”

That is feedback.

Request.

To make an anecdote. If you are designing a new system, and you pitch your idea to a room full of people. This system does 2 things, at the moment, you are really only ready to give a glimpse of 1 thing, but you give a short rundown of what the 2nd thing does.

If someone says they think the system is looking good, based on what we have been shown, that is feedback, if they say, can it do X, Y, Z, that is asking for more information, if you pipe up and say, I think there could potentially be some issues based on how I think it is going to work, that, again, is not feedback, that is again, a request for more information. Which is what I have been saying to you the whole time.

This is honestly a lot of reason why I do push back against some people. Most of the time it is trying to get people to think what the causes and issues are. 'All jobs play the same' was a common moniker, but it doesn't actually say what the issue was. When you actually dug down, it was the 2 minute raid buffs forcing every job to fit that mould. But the original statement gives a completely different meaning to what the actual issue is.

So, lets not confuse feedback with general commentary, requests or queries. If you want some actual feedback, I made this post in my topic about what we had seen at the dev panel. The first part is about the Paladin rotation and how we are going to be using the filler combo 3-4 times on average per Imperator use and how that is going to get repetitive. I even considered whether the counter only came from Holy Sheltron or all blocking. The second half of the same post is then a concern I had about AoE damage. Spamming Shield Bash and getting Imperator every 40 seconds isn't going to be fun, not to mention no Expiacion procs. I did also speculate on how they could do AoE, but ultimately, it wasn't feedback as there wasn't enough information to go off off.

However, it is also worth noting that every single one of our current 21 jobs has been implemented in the game as of February, with mechanical tweaks needed. If you were hoping to change direction before they had implemented the jobs, you are a couple of months too late. We do not know what they have done, we do not know how they have balanced things, all we can do is wait and see and provide proper feedback on what we do see.