Results -9 to 0 of 214

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Player
    Mikey_R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,701
    Character
    Mike Aettir
    World
    Cerberus
    Main Class
    Paladin Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by BabyYoda View Post
    You said Paladin using filler combo 3-4 times between Imperator may become repetitive. That is a concern based on partial information.
    No, that is what we have seen. We were shown a version of Paladin, it is easy to see how it will play and based on that, gave feedback on that design.

    Quote Originally Posted by BabyYoda View Post
    You also said AoE may become boring if it becomes Shield Bash spam with Imperator every 40 seconds. That is also a concern based on partial information.
    Yes, which I explicitly stated. There has to be something missing from an AoE point of view, not just for Paladin, but the other jobs as well, so there was more speculation and questions being asked there, so, not feedback.

    Quote Originally Posted by BabyYoda View Post
    But by your own definition, are they “not feedback” because we do not have the full final kit yet?
    Again, I never said we needed a full kit, but we can base it on what we see. We have seen certain things, we have not seen other things. We can only provide solid feedback on the things we have seen, otherwise, it is just questions that need to be answered before proper feedback can be provided.

    Quote Originally Posted by BabyYoda View Post
    “If this system rewards tanks only inside their assigned label, it may become restrictive.”
    “If Party Finder treats those labels as fixed expectations, it may create friction.”
    “If a tank loses value outside its label, it may feel worse to play flexibly.”
    And these are questions that need to be asked before you can give proper feedback.

    Quote Originally Posted by BabyYoda View Post
    The substance is still the same:

    Do not make MT/OT restrictive.
    Do not make tanks lose value outside their assigned label.
    Do not let terminology become Party Finder policing.
    Do not make tank identity come from fixed labels instead of gameplay depth.
    Of which this isn't feedback, this is just essentially demanding the devs to make sure they fit to your demands. And yes, phrasing is everything here. You can hope they do not make the tanks restrictive. I mean, from what we have seen on Paladin, it likely isn't going to be the case (intervention has the same buff naming scheme as Holy Sheltron) and we don't know anything about the OT kit to say anything. The same sort of reasoning is applied to the rest. However, we can also extrapolate the fact that they want to give each job a unique identity, so this is going to be one of the first things they think about when designing a job. The fact you think it might not be the case says more about you than anything.

    Also, again, the devs cannot control how the playerbase reacts to naming conventions or how the PF policies the parties they make. They are free to make parties however they want after all. However, if the MT/OT label is different in this game than other games, the community is just going to adapt to it. Noone cares about what came before, all that matters is how it is used in this game.

    As a bit of a side comment, looking at kits, Paladin already takes damage better than the other tanks. Guardian objectively mitigates more damage than Damnation and Shadowed Vigil (the healing doesn't impact the direct mitigation and does anyone actually take the healing into account when planning?) and making the comparison, the 1000 shield from Guardian is roughly equivalent to the 20% extra HP Gunbreaker gets, so they are very similar. However, noone actually cares. What if the differences are as small as this? We already know Paladin is getting ways to mitigate damage on other people, it is just, the OTs are a bit more effective. Again, it just feels like people are making a bit song and dance about something that might turn out to be trivial and we need to see more before we can give good, proper feedback on the MT/OT split. Let's not bring in pre-conceived notions from other games, let's not act like everything is going to go to shit based on nothing. The best thing to do is wait and see. Every concern might have already been thought of and accounted for. They aren't going to change anything without you seeing it first. Just calm down and wait and see.

    Quote Originally Posted by Derio View Post
    Another thing to note is that PLD defensive kit is still heavily bloated. The only thing they lost was Bulwark but the tradeoff for that is more availability for holy sheltron which isnt bad. If anything PLD defensive kit is overtuned compared to the other tanks which further made the slide confusing because of the MT OT description with PLD current kit satisfying both parts of the slide.
    This is one of the reasons why I personally think there isn't going to be much difference in the 2 tanks. Paladin has already been shown to possess things that are shown in the OT list. I just think that the OT is going to do it better. This is similar to what I said above where Guardian is objectively better at mitigating damage than Damnation and Shadowed Vigil, which could be an MT that is 'skilled at taking direct damage'. Yes, the mitigation is going to be better, does it really matter? Not likely.
    (1)
    Last edited by Mikey_R; 05-10-2026 at 08:23 PM.