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

[Atreus]

This distinction probably isn't going to matter in anything except high-end raids. If that still bothers you, idk. Feel like there's some hurt tank egos flying around.

[ForteNightshade]

This distinction probably isn't going to matter in anything except high-end raids. If that still bothers you, idk. Feel like there's some hurt tank egos flying around.

But that's still a problem considering their whole spiel was talking about giving players more choices and accessibility in the ways they want to play. If the MT/OT split does have a noticeable enough impact you're forced to bring one of each to Savage or Ultimate, then it immediately contradicts their objective for Evercold. You now have less choice as a tank. If you prefer to MT, you'll have only two tanks to pick from instead of five.

And none of this gets into how difficult it is to balance all this.

[Mikey_R]

But that's still a problem considering their whole spiel was talking about giving players more choices and accessibility in the ways they want to play. If the MT/OT split does have a noticeable enough impact you're forced to bring one of each to Savage or Ultimate, then it immediately contradicts their objective for Evercold. You now have less choice as a tank. If you prefer to MT, you'll have only two tanks to pick from instead of five.

And none of this gets into how difficult it is to balance all this.

Imagine for a moment, that they had called the roles something else, would you still have these worries?

Really, that is what most of the worry is about, they have a notion of what a main tank and off tank is, likely from other games, and expect that same definition to apply here. It doesn't.

The best thing to do is wait until July, where I predict they will show more jobs, with one of them being Warrior, just to people can compare what Paladin has, as a 'main' tank, to Warrior, an 'off' tank.

Once we have a better idea of what they envision 'main' and 'off' tank to be, then we can start giving feedback, but as of right now, we know basically nothing.

[Carighan]

But that's still a problem considering their whole spiel was talking about giving players more choices and accessibility in the ways they want to play. If the MT/OT split does have a noticeable enough impact you're forced to bring one of each to Savage or Ultimate, then it immediately contradicts their objective for Evercold. You now have less choice as a tank. If you prefer to MT, you'll have only two tanks to pick from instead of five.

And none of this gets into how difficult it is to balance all this.

We already know from the healers that this is entirely a non-concern and works fine.

Was AST being able to be a regen or a shield healer fun? Sure, conceptually? Was it meaningful? No, because regen was strictly superior in 99,9% of cases with the odd exception being so rare and so marginal you could just go regen 100% of the time and be perfectly fine and never wipe anybody ever, while shield could.

So there was no player choice even back when AST had that stance choice. And then the split happened, and despite so many players on these forums insisting, the sky didn't fall. Surprise. And tank split will be exactly the same. You all insist it's doom, it'll be perfectly fine, and in hindsight it seems laughable anybody ever worried about this.

Source: start MMORPG gaming in 1999, this happens every time a larger class rework happens which in non-FF14 games is actually fairly common.

[Mukuku]

We already know from the healers that this is entirely a non-concern and works fine.

I don't think the healers' situation is comparable. IMHO the big issue is that the MT apparently would lose damage if they are not countering. You don't have a similar situation with healers.

In most content IMHO a difference in defensive ability is not going to matter that much, but as soon as you introduce even a small damage done penalty you can bet you'll get friction.

[Mikey_R]

IMHO the big issue is that the MT apparently would lose damage if they are not countering.

But we do not know for certain either way whether that will be the case. In the case of Paladin, you might only be able to counter when you use Holy Sheltron and not on every block, with Intervention essentially being Holy Sheltron, but on someone else, it might still consider the counter chance, especially since it also has the same buff profile as Holy Sheltron.

We just do not know, so there is little point trying to argue based on one way or another. At this moment in time, only the devs will know.

[Mukuku]

But we do not know for certain either way whether that will be the case.

Of course, but we can make educated guesses based on what was presented. If we are off-mark, the devs will know they need to clarify the message, if not they are made aware of some concerns they might have overlooked.

[Mikey_R]

Of course, but we can make educated guesses based on what was presented.

I think the problem is this. People aren't making educated guesses, or, at least, they aren't considering everything.

Going to Holy Sheltron and Intervention, I do believe they are going to serve the same purpose, just one is on the PLD and the other is on a party member, so Paladin can still proc the counters, even if they aren't the ones getting hit in the face. I will go over a couple of reasons for this.

First, the buff names. Holy Sheltron provides Surcoat of Satisfaction then Surcoat of Answers. Intervention provided Shield of Satisfaction then Shield of Answers. With the counter names being Answering Strike and Satisfaction, it makes sense that they both serve similar functions.

Going to the second reason, towards the end, when Yoshi covers Tamaki, it starts with Yoshi Interventioning Tamaki, then Cover, then Holy Sheltron, then Tamaki uses Holy Sheltron. Yoshi takes both hits and blocks both hits, however, Tamaki doesn't even flinch, which indicates that the damage never 'goes through' Tamaki. If we can still block the damage coming from Cover, even if you have to use Holy Sheltron to achieve it, that is still a way to proc the counter.

So, with this information, if you were to make an educated guess as to whether Paladin will still be able to block and counter damage, even if they aren't the one at the top of the aggro list, what would it be?