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.
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.
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.
And these are questions that need to be asked before you can give proper feedback.
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.
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.



Reply With Quote

