Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

XIV Needs More Tanks!Follow

#102 Jun 28 2009 at 8:33 AM Rating: Decent
**
456 posts
Quote:
I don't know about you guys but I know 2 jobs that are more than capable of tanking yet no one did it. Sam and war. I won't go into details since doing it from my phone would take an hour but people who have both played sam and war know what I'm talking about.


In certain situations they were able to tank, (war in more situations then sam), but we are are talking about real tank jobs, that could tank it all situations (or at least 99% of situations effectively). Weather the situation be mission tanks, endgame tanks, party tank, quest tanks, usually real tank jobs if done well can be used in 99% of situations.
#103 Jun 28 2009 at 8:45 AM Rating: Decent
*
169 posts
Quite the thread for me to start my Alla posting career on, but...

Quote:
Dodge tank
Blink tank
Armoured (physical barrier) tank
Magical barrier tank
Pet/automaton tank
Convoluted magical avoidance tank
Kiting instead of tanking


It seems that a lot of people (myself included, at least to start) didn't quite get the "two types of tanking" argument. Using the above examples, what Perspicacity and Co. are trying to get across is:

Survives Incoming Damage:
- Armoured (physical barrier) tank
- Magical barrier tank
- Pet/automaton tank (assuming you're splitting the damage between the pet and the owner)
- Also: HP recovery (PLD, LotRO warden)

Avoids Incoming Damage:
- Dodge tank
- Blink tank
- Convoluted magical avoidance tank
- Kiting instead of tanking
- Also: Attack prevention (Stun or Shield Bash, for example)

A tank must either survive getting hit (via reducing incoming damage or otherwise being able to recover from damage) or not get hit to begin with. That's pretty much it. How they accomplish that can vary from game to game and job to job, and can allow for quite a lot of variety in tanking "flavor".

===

On-topic:

Personally, I think the issue has more to do with the playerbase than it does with the actual game mechanics. PLD and NIN are the only acceptable tanks because those are the only jobs that people will accept in a tanking role, not because no other class can pull it off. I'm sure there are situations where that's not the case, where you need a "real" tank, but I'd bet there's a lot less of them than most people think.

Regarding FFXIV: I don't want to see a shift towards homogenized tank/DD hybrids. I enjoy the party dynamics in FFXI, and I think mashing all melee classes into a single "hybrid class" mold would destroy that. I've recently returned here from LotRO, I'm quite sick of the 5 DD + Healer approach. I do think there should be a bit of role flexibility, where a melee class can build towards tanking/burst damage/sustained damage as the situation demands, but it needs to be a "one, not the others" kind of situation. You build your WAR as a tank, he's a good tank, but his damage output suffers. You build him to be a burst damage class, his sustained damage output and survivability go down. That kind of stuff.
#104 Jun 28 2009 at 8:50 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
32 posts
There were some limited situations in Final Fantasy XI where jobs not normally meant to tank at all could do well. One situation involved a Thief relying on its naturally high evasion, its sub job, gear, plus the right amount of support. It was very risky, and when things went bad, they went bad fast, but when it was setup right, with some luck it worked pretty well. Of course, a Thief tank isn't ideal or recommended for most situations, but its more the style of tanking that I'm getting at, not that a Thief should be made a tank job.

Another example might be to include a job like "Fencer" for example, that relies on having a high parrying rate to negate damage, and using the Fencer job abilities from Final Fantasy Tactics Advance (abilities that did some damage and inflicted status on the target) to build enmity.

Basically, introducing different concepts of tanking, like using high evasion instead of high defense, or a high parrying rate. While this is essentially built around the usual concept of keeping the monster's attention while staying alive, ideally it would provide some different tanking styles and play mechanics, to maybe make tanking more attractive to at least a few more people. This would hopefully help make it a more diverse and interesting role, for those new to tanking and those who prefer tanking.
#105 Jun 28 2009 at 8:58 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
Jobangles wrote:

I've never needed TA tanking as either job. NIN/DRK is situational to the same extant that PLD/NIN are, they perform almost exactly the same end game. The advantages of PLD show up on mobs like JoL while NIN excels more against things like Cerberus. Mixing them gains a greater advantage through the constant use of Flash & Stun, making most fights laughable.

Pro Tip: Paladins self cure, Ninjas maintain a closer hold on the hate cap.


You obviously didn't read what I wrote. I was talking about tanking in all things from XP, low-man, and events that you would use situational sjs. NIN cannot hold hate in XP levels without a /TA anymore, it just doesn't happen unless you have crappy DD's. PLD's hold hate much better under those situations. My point was that no tank covers the full spectrum. PLD is more useful tanking XP/events vs merits/low man stuff. NIN is better at low man/merits than PLD, even though hate is bounced around more. I'm not satisfied with either account.

Quote:
Regarding FFXIV: I don't want to see a shift towards homogenized tank/DD hybrids. I enjoy the party dynamics in FFXI, and I think mashing all melee classes into a single "hybrid class" mold would destroy that. I've recently returned here from LotRO, I'm quite sick of the 5 DD + Healer approach. I do think there should be a bit of role flexibility, where a melee class can build towards tanking/burst damage/sustained damage as the situation demands, but it needs to be a "one, not the others" kind of situation. You build your WAR as a tank, he's a good tank, but his damage output suffers. You build him to be a burst damage class, his sustained damage output and survivability go down. That kind of stuff.


What level are you in FFXI? Because that 3 1/2 DD/1 healer is very present in FFXI in merit parties. 3 DD, 1 BRD, 1 COR(DD in disguise), and token RDM. At this point, melees should have more ability to hybrid tank at least for XP level stuff. I would never suggest to put a melee job above PLD, but by that same token give PLD another melee stance that helps them deal damage better if enmity is not theirs to hold. I'm a very strong advocate of holding to the realistic approach of the classes. PLD's in previous games had the tanking defenses, but they also did more damage on par with other DD's. Of course, you shouldn't be able to do both at the same time, but the option would allow for PLD's to remain useful no matter the situation including if they want to tank, DD, or back-up tank.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 12:09pm by ShadowedgeFFXI

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 12:12pm by ShadowedgeFFXI
#106 Jun 28 2009 at 9:08 AM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
CapnCrass wrote:
It seems that a lot of people (myself included, at least to start) didn't quite get the "two types of tanking" argument. Using the above examples, what Perspicacity and Co. are trying to get across is:

Survives Incoming Damage:
- Armoured (physical barrier) tank
- Magical barrier tank
- Pet/automaton tank (assuming you're splitting the damage between the pet and the owner)
- Also: HP recovery (PLD, LotRO warden)

Avoids Incoming Damage:
- Dodge tank
- Blink tank
- Convoluted magical avoidance tank
- Kiting instead of tanking
- Also: Attack prevention (Stun or Shield Bash, for example)

A tank must either survive getting hit (via reducing incoming damage or otherwise being able to recover from damage) or not get hit to begin with. That's pretty much it. How they accomplish that can vary from game to game and job to job, and can allow for quite a lot of variety in tanking "flavor".

The problem here is that you're trying to stretch too far to extend the categories. They're starting with the assumption that there are two types of tanks and trying to force everything to fit into those categories rather than examining the types of tanks and concluding there are those categories.

Honestly using their reasoning we could just group everything under damage mitigation. "avoiding incoming damage," is damage mitigation, because you're making yourself take less damage. Therefore there is only one type of tank. Do you see how silly that is?

Regen tanking isn't the same as damage mitigation. They aren't mitigating any damage, they're just healing themselves for the difference between them and one who actually mitigates damage. It's a completely separate category. If you want to pretend that it's damage mitigation , then there's no reason we can't pretend dodging and blinking aren't damage mitigation too.

Anyone who asserts that there are only two ways to tank has been playing FFXI far too long and can't understand how there are other styles of MMORPG and tanking that exist outside of that game.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 12:09pm by Allegory
#107 Jun 28 2009 at 9:21 AM Rating: Decent
*
102 posts
Quote:
You obviously didn't read what I wrote. I was talking about tanking in all things from XP, low-man, and events that you would use situational sjs. NIN cannot hold hate in XP levels without a /TA anymore, it just doesn't happen unless you have crappy DD's. PLD's hold hate much better under those situations. My point was that no tank covers the full spectrum. PLD is more useful tanking XP/events vs merits/low man stuff. NIN is better at low man/merits than PLD, even though hate is bounced around more. I'm not satisfied with either account.


I'll repeat myself, I've never needed TA tanking with either job. DD Ninja holds hate much better than PLD in XP unless you're fighting IT++ mobs. How useful they are low man depends entirely on your setup & what you're doing. I prefer PLD if I'm going to 6 man Fafnir, but I'll take NIN to 6 man Seiryu.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 1:22pm by Jobangles
#108 Jun 28 2009 at 9:43 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
777 posts
CapnCrass wrote:
It seems that a lot of people (myself included, at least to start) didn't quite get the "two types of tanking" argument.
*snip*
A tank must either survive getting hit (via reducing incoming damage or otherwise being able to recover from damage) or not get hit to begin with. That's pretty much it. How they accomplish that can vary from game to game and job to job, and can allow for quite a lot of variety in tanking "flavor".

Exactly. For the love of god, exactly.

We don't have just two damage dealing classes, and we could reduce them all to "Melee attacker" or "Ranged attacker" just like you can reduce all types of tanking to "Survive Damage" or "Avoid Damage"

Not being willing to introduce several varieties of tanking classes with different flavors, is just plain stupid. Unless you somehow think that an MMO shouldn't have more than 4 classes total. If so, I can point you to some MMOs that uphold that standard, most of them cruddy F2P cash shop MMOs.

Myself, I prefer the RPGs that are more similar to DnD, wherein you have a huge variety of classes and races that can be played, as that gives more variety, and let's people have more fun. Yes I used the three letter word... F U N. It's not a bad thing you know.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 1:45pm by Karelyn
____________________________
KUMQUATS
#109 Jun 28 2009 at 9:52 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
Karelyn wrote:
Myself, I prefer the RPGs that are more similar to DnD

I hope you're talking 4e.^^
#110 Jun 28 2009 at 9:54 AM Rating: Good
8 posts
I agree there are only two ways of tanking really, those being taking hits with high defense and damage mitigation, but that doesn't mean there should be only two tanking classes. Like an above poster said, there could be many tanks with different playstyles.

A tank that can be a basic DD and have high defense stemming from armor.

A mage tank that can cast magical shields to protect them from harm.

A pet tanking job that can use there pet to take aggro with different skills while healing the pet.

The list can go on and on. Yes they have the same basic ideas, but this is FFXI. Once a player maxes a tank they can start from scratch and level another tank which will put more tanks in circulation. It couldn't hurt to add more tanks, so those players who have a 75 NIN and PLD will have some more jobs to level. As long as SE makes them fun, the players who enjoy tanking will try these new jobs.

tldr; If XIV=XI, add more tank jobs, the players who maxed the other tank jobs will play them meaning more tanks.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 2:54pm by Raikusxox
#111 Jun 28 2009 at 9:54 AM Rating: Good
***
1,603 posts
Torrence wrote:
Hyanmen wrote:

So every DD would be a tank too? Good proposal


Actually, no. Not every DD would be, they would just have the potential to be if they wanted to be more than just a WS macro. That same SAM could just as easily get a weapon that doesn't teach him any hate-grabbing skills (I think they mentioned that we would be getting abilities from weaponry), so he wouldn't ever skill his defense and would be be pretty useless at higher levels as an actual tank.

That's the problem I refered to: Hybridism. Player expectations and preferences force jobs capable of tanking and damage dealing to just be a DD. Jobs capable of healing and support are forced to be healers. Players will get the weapons and the armor that enhances their damage output, and shun the pieces that decrease their damage intake. SE simply needs to create more classes that specialize in the roles of tanking, healing, support, and damage dealing, and stop creating classes that can a do a little of each, and/or one or the other.

Even the armor and weapons are ridiculous. You got pieces out there that a vast amount of classes can use. Yet, with a lot of these pieces of equipment you'll only ever see one or two classes actually use them because their stats compliment the roles those jobs partake in.

Versatility is great tool that should only be available for true hybrid classes, and these classes need to be extremely limited for the players with the time and patience to play those jobs to their full potential. Jobs like Paladin, White Mage, Bard, and Dark Knight; their roles are defined, they are specialist in what they do, therefore, players who choose to play them in a career sense do so because those roles are what they prefer.

The ratio of tanks, healers, support, and damage dealing is unbalanced, but SE has the right idea. You need more DD than anything else to bring the mob down so it makes sense that there are so many jobs capable of doing so. To balance everything out there simply needs to be more classes that specialize in tanking and healing. Instead of trying to balance the abilities of all of these freakin hybrid classes, you give the specialist the tools they need for their given roles. Most players who love those roles will level all those jobs without a doubt, and thus increase the availbilty of those jobs. I remember doing a lot of CoP missions and being stuck for hours looking for a Paladin. Other jobs perfectly capable of tanking couldn't do it because they did not own the proper gear. By the time we got a viable tank, people had to leave. It is a crock of sh*t, and must be corrected in FFXIV.

In my own opinion, or if it were up to me, the specialized tanks would be Paladin, Warrior, and Samurai. These are the classes that make sense to wear very heavy armor, and possess the abilities to keep hate. Give Paladins their swords and shields; give Warriors the dual wield trait since they are so versatile with weapons, and two-handed weapon profeciency to Samurais. The sole hybrid would be Ninja. Their tanking ability would be extremely situational, and never full-time. Classes that specialize in dealing damage just will not have the defensive capability to take on a prolonged series of enemy attacks the way tanks can.
____________________________
~Vendict of Alexander~

#112 Jun 28 2009 at 10:07 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Raikusxox wrote:

tldr; This is FFXI. Add more tank jobs, the players who maxed the other tank jobs will play them meaning more tanks.


Pssssst....not FFXI...FFXIV ;D
#113 Jun 28 2009 at 10:32 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
777 posts
Allegory wrote:
Karelyn wrote:
Myself, I prefer the RPGs that are more similar to DnD

I hope you're talking 4e.^^

I haven't switched over to 4e yet, sorry :(

Heck, I've barely even looked at it. I really should though.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 2:34pm by Karelyn
____________________________
KUMQUATS
#114 Jun 28 2009 at 10:49 AM Rating: Decent
**
456 posts
Quote:
Personally, I think the issue has more to do with the playerbase than it does with the actual game mechanics. PLD and NIN are the only acceptable tanks because those are the only jobs that people will accept in a tanking role, not because no other class can pull it off. I'm sure there are situations where that's not the case, where you need a "real" tank, but I'd bet there's a lot less of them than most people think.


Tanking is just not being able to take hits without dieing, tanking is also being able to keep hate. There was very limited situations, where other jobs could tank and actually keep hate. This is where I use the term "real tank" they can be used in 99% of situations, instead of the 1% of situations a thf could actually keep hate. I don't see it as really tanking if everybody has to water down their whole damage just to accommodate, for the lack of the job keeping hate. Even if jobs like thf or sam could blink tank (with evasion or what not), there was no way for them to keep hate effectively. This is where the term of "real tank jobs" fit in for me, the ability to tank and keep hate (really tanking), not just being able to survive for a while.
#115 Jun 28 2009 at 10:53 AM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
In the end it comes down to what real people like to play. Even if we had 2000 tank classes or implement tank builds in all the classes in the game, yes even make whm or brd able to tank, that doesn’t make people _want_ to tank.
#116 Jun 28 2009 at 10:57 AM Rating: Good
***
1,218 posts
Allegory wrote:

The problem here is that you're trying to stretch too far to extend the categories. They're starting with the assumption that there are two types of tanks and trying to force everything to fit into those categories rather than examining the types of tanks and concluding there are those categories.



No.

Breaking things down into "avoidance" and "mitigation" is a fundamental (though very healer-centric) way of describing the two ways in which tanks manage to take less damage than another class/job would in that same role. It is not any more a "stretch" than it is to say that matter exists as either vapor, liquid, or solid (or plasma, if you want to be completely technical). Total Avoidace and Total Mitigation would be the extreme ends of a range, and in a balanced game you would almost never reach those extremes.

If you were to graph the healing needed over time for every tank, those graphs would end up taking one of two general shapes. On the one graph (the avoidance tank) you'd have periods of no healing needed interspersed with periods of needing a lot of heals. For the mitigation tank, you'd have a consistent amount of healing needed, with very few spikes or periods where no healing was needed.

Obviously between the extremes there are an infinite number of possibilities which represent a compromise between mitigation and avoidance, but from a healer's perspective, all damage reduction comes in one of those two forms, or else has effects that exactly mimic those forms (a NIN's shadows are, from a healer's perspective, the same as a predictable Dodge, and a PLD's self healing is, from the healer's perspective, simply another mitigation tool).

So what is being said (correctly) is that mechanically you have a limited selection of things that you can make tanks think about. That doesn't mean that you can't have a lot of different mechanics that sort of mask this underlying situation, or that shift it around in different ways.

The way it is in FFXI, you have one tank that has a lot of avoidance (passive evasion as well as active use of Utsusemi) and another that has a lot of mitigation (shield blocks + high defense + stamina + self healing).

There's no reason though that you couldn't combine active evasion with passive mitigation, and another tank that has passive evasion and active mitigation (you dodge a lot, and then have something like Sentinel or Defense for when you take a string of hits). From a player's perspective, not all mitigation has to look the same as other mitigation. Not all avoidance has to look the same. There is *some* room for different styles.

That doesn't mean, however, that you are ultimately doing anything other than avoiding and mitigating. If you homogenize too much, or create too many tanking jobs, then it will quickly become apparent to the player that they are really just being given the same choice over and over with slightly different flavor. Unless a player is a true tanking "gourmet" who wants to savor every nuance of everything that is tanking, adding additional tanking jobs starts to lose its value very quickly. Any more than three tanking jobs/classes is starting to push things to the point where homogenization starts to become pretty apparent, or else you have a really difficult or impossible balancing task to do.

Quote:
Honestly using their reasoning we could just group everything under damage mitigation. "avoiding incoming damage," is damage mitigation, because you're making yourself take less damage. Therefore there is only one type of tank. Do you see how silly that is?


Well, technically there is only one type of tank. There's the type that keeps the mob's attention, and takes less damage doing it than a non tank would. The distinction between avoidance and mitigation is made because it changes the way that healing operates. Futher distinctions between different types of avoidance or mitigation largely come down to mechanical flavor (active vs passive, or types of resources used).

Quote:
Regen tanking isn't the same as damage mitigation. They aren't mitigating any damage, they're just healing themselves for the difference between them and one who actually mitigates damage. It's a completely separate category. If you want to pretend that it's damage mitigation , then there's no reason we can't pretend dodging and blinking aren't damage mitigation too.


From a healer's perspective, regen tanking IS mitigation. From the tank's perspective, what matters is whether it is active or passive (does he get to make a choice, is he required to activate an ability?). Regen tanking vs just taking smaller hits in the first place is really just paint applied to make things look and feel different.

#117 Jun 28 2009 at 11:18 AM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
Breaking things down into "avoidance" and "mitigation" is a fundamental (though very healer-centric) way of describing the two ways in which tanks manage to take less damage than another class/job would in that same role.

Except there are more ways to tank than simply avoiding or mitigating damage.

City of Heroes has regen tanking, someone who is neither good at avoiding or mitigating damage. He just regens health like crazy and relies on defenders (CoH equivalent of healers) to make him tougher rather than to directly heal him. This is fundamentally different than the established 2 categories.

There's also the way bosses tank. It's very unlikely you'll ever see a game implement it for characters, but bosses tank through massive hp. They neither avoid damage nor mitigate it (to an extreme extent). They just have enough health that they can eat it.

In fact, the two categories themselves are more similar than most of the methods within them. 25% dodge chance is more similar to 25% armor mitigation than 25% hp regen is to either of the two.
KarlHungis wrote:
If you were to graph the healing needed over time for every tank, those graphs would end up taking one of two general shapes. On the one graph (the avoidance tank) you'd have periods of no healing needed interspersed with periods of needing a lot of heals. For the mitigation tank, you'd have a consistent amount of healing needed, with very few spikes or periods where no healing was needed.

Actually, assuming spike damage could never one shot the dodge tank, ,f you take the limit of the two tanks as time approaches infinity then they are exactly identical. The sole two categories people are trying to establish are flawed.
KarlHungis wrote:
From a healer's perspective, regen tanking IS mitigation.

No, it most certainly isn't. Regen tanking doesn't scale with damage. The more DPS a mob produces the more damage a armor mitigation tank or a dodge tank is able to avoid. A regen tank doesn't scale at all with mob DPS. It's fundamentally different than the other two.


If people understood math better then they would see the problem with trying to break all tanking into either damage mitigation or damage avoidance. Certain elements they've group under those categories work drastically different than other elements. Some of the differences are far greater than those of dodging and flat mitigation.

The rule of taxonomy is that elements within each category should be as similar as possible while elements across each category should be as different as possible. This silly two tank system people are trying to establish blatantly spits on that rule.





There are at least 4 different types of tanking. I could probably set up more categories if I thought about it for longer, but I want to make a point that 2 is simply not enough.

A boss produces a certain amount of DPS. If elements of this DPS formula are change then tanks that are similar will change in the same way and tanks that are different will change differently.

Let's start with armor mitigation (25%) and dodge tanking (25%). As the interval for each hit of the bosses DPS approaches zero these two tanks function identically. That is, if the boss does a million tiny hits per second the dodge tank works nearly identically to the armor tank. However, as that interval increases that changes. The dodge tank becomes more variable. At a certain point there is an amount of damage where a dodge tank can be one shot but an armor tank cannot. This shows that the tanks are fundamentally different.

Now let's compare armor tanking (25% mitgation) to regen tanking (regen health per second equal 25% of the bosses current DPS). At a constant DPS regen tanking works similarly to dodge tanking. And there is a point where a regen tank would be one shot, the same point where a dodge tank would be one shot, that an armor tank would not. However, if we increase the bosses' DPS both the armor and dodge tank increase there effective mitigated damage. The regen tank does not. He regens a constant amount of health per second. In fact if the boss is weak enough with low enough DPS then the regen tank will never die, whereas an armor tank and dodge tank would eventually die without support. This means the regen tank is fundamentally separate from the other two.

Now let's examine a blocking tank. A blocking tank blocks a certain amount of damage every hit. Similar to the regen tank he doesn't scale very well, but he scales pooorly differently than teh regen tank. The blocking tank can theoretically tank infinite DPS, so long as each hit is for a damage amount below what he blocks. If he blocks 50 and the mob hits him for 50 then it doesn't amtter how fast the mob attack, whether it is once per second or a million times per second. He will never die. However he can tank low dps very poorly, so long as they are heavy, slow hits. He is fundamentally different from the 3 others.

Just playing around with total DPS and the ratio of damage to attack speed you can see how each of these tanks is complete distinct from the others.

I didn't even cover blink tanking, which is basically the inverse of block tanking and is complete separate from dodge tanking. a Blink tank can never be one shot or killed so long as the hits are slow enough.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 2:48pm by Allegory
#118 Jun 28 2009 at 11:36 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
1,569 posts
Allegory wrote:
There is nothing unreasonable about it. You are working off the ridiculous assumption that there has to be a 5:1 or more ratio of DD to tanks. There doesn't. There is no reason a game can't have a 1:1 ratio of tanks to DD if the developers wanted it to.
1:1 is a little more than I would ever hope for, but then again my tank to DPS ratio is very influenced by WoW and Lineage II.

WoW alone has four classes that can tank out of the 10 classes available (Warrior, Paladin, Druid, Death Knight). All four are reasonably different without being outlandish or violating their own concept (Warrior is the all-rounder tank, Paladin is the mana-based tank that relies more on blocking, Druids are about having tons of health with some focus on avoidance, Death Knights are parry tanks with several defensive cooldowns). That's not mentioning caster tanks that are used in certain encounters (Warlocks during the Illidan fight, Moonkin during Mimiron, etc). A 4-out-of-10 ratio is not really that bad, IMO.

Granted, Final Fantasy does not have many job class concepts that would support a tanking role (outside of Warrior and Paladin), so things would have to change in certain jobs to make them tankers, or at least give them the choice between tank and DPS roles (I'd love to see BST and SAM have tank options, for example).
____________________________
Products of boredom: 1 2 3 4 5
Besieged
Hopes for FFXIV: Fencer | Red Mage
#119 Jun 28 2009 at 11:43 AM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
Ruisu wrote:
1:1 is a little more than I would ever hope for

I do agree with you, but I wanted to make the point that an MMORPG doesn't have to have 5 DD for every 1 tank. SE has the opportunity to be creative. I'm not sure what they should do, but I think some people are placing silly restrictions on them and trying to tell them what they can't do, when they most certainly can.
#120 Jun 28 2009 at 11:59 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
777 posts
[DOUBLE POST]

:(

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 4:46pm by Karelyn
____________________________
KUMQUATS
#121 Jun 28 2009 at 12:01 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
777 posts
Ruisu wrote:
Allegory wrote:
There is nothing unreasonable about it. You are working off the ridiculous assumption that there has to be a 5:1 or more ratio of DD to tanks. There doesn't. There is no reason a game can't have a 1:1 ratio of tanks to DD if the developers wanted it to.
1:1 is a little more than I would ever hope for, but then again my tank to DPS ratio is very influenced by WoW and Lineage II.

To some extent, I'd like to see the idea of a tanking class completely abolished in MMOs. Note I said "class" not "role"

I'd like to see a time where in MMOs, all frontline fighters are tanks. Any melee class that is not a thief/rogue/ninja/indirect-melee/etc archetype.

Frankly, games would make more sense that way. That dragon you are fighting? Logically, he should not be attacking that single heavily armored person in front of him, he should be trying to maul everything within range. Samurai, Warrior, Paladin, Berserker, Dark Knight, whatever have you.

I'd like to see a world where being a tank isn't about sacrificing damage for survivability, but it's about sacrificing subtlety for survivability.

I'd like us to go back to the DnD concept of tanks (in-so-far as DnD had tanks), where a "tank" is simply anyone who isn't attacking from range, or attacking monsters stealthily. I'd like to see something akin to 1:2 ratio of "heavily armored melee" to "lightly armored melee and casters". 1:2 tank to non-tank DD ratio.
____________________________
KUMQUATS
#122 Jun 28 2009 at 12:23 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
43 posts
any kind of self healing is a form of mitigation.

If you take a hit for 1000, then heal up 400, you essentially took 600 damage.

If you take 10 hits of 100, and heal back 10 every time you get hit, you mitigated 10% of the damage.



There are only two things that happen while tanking: avoidance and mitigation. Nothing else. There are ways to dress it up and make it seem unique, but no matter what the fundamentals remain the same.
#123 Jun 28 2009 at 12:34 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
43 posts
any kind of self healing is a form of mitigation.

If you take a hit for 1000, then heal up 400, you essentially took 600 damage.

If you take 10 hits of 100, and heal back 10 every time you get hit, you mitigated 10% of the damage.



There are only two things that happen while tanking: avoidance and mitigation. Nothing else. There are ways to dress it up and make it seem unique, but no matter what the fundamentals remain the same.
#124 Jun 28 2009 at 12:35 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
43 posts
Any kind of self healing is a form of mitigation.

If you take a hit for 1000, then heal up 400, you essentially took 600 damage.

If you take 10 hits of 100, and heal back 10 every time you get hit, you mitigated 10% of the damage.



There are only two things that happen while tanking: avoidance and mitigation. Nothing else. There are ways to dress it up and make it seem unique, but no matter what, the fundamentals remain the same.
#125 Jun 28 2009 at 12:40 PM Rating: Decent
**
456 posts
Quote:
In the end it comes down to what real people like to play. Even if we had 2000 tank classes or implement tank builds in all the classes in the game, yes even make whm or brd able to tank, that doesn’t make people _want_ to tank.


This is impling the exaggerated point, that not many people like to play tank/support roles. This is not even remotely true, even tho it is true dd is played more often then tank/support. That does not mean theres a huge shortage of people that would like to play tank roles. Earlier on in FF there wasn't an issue finding tanks (a lot of people played tanks), but now after you have leveled it, most people are forced to be done with tanking because there are no other options. This in return makes it a shortage in the tank/support role. To imply that noone wants to play tank or support role is not true, id like ffxi to give out an graph of the % of people that have leveled pld or nin. I bet that graph stats would be way higher then most of you that say "no one wants to play tank", would think of. If there was only 2 DD jobs, 7-8 years after the game release, there would be a shortage of DD also, this would not imply that noone wants to play DD, but it would imply that there are not enough options.
#126 Jun 28 2009 at 12:50 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
gumpman wrote:
any kind of self healing is a form of mitigation.

Won't you please, please read thread before you post? You don't even have to read the whole thread. Just a few posts up from you I already demonstrated how regen is different than mitigation.
#127 Jun 28 2009 at 12:55 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,218 posts
Allegory wrote:

Except there are more ways to tank than simply avoiding or mitigating damage.


Except that you're completely talking around the point.

Your entire argument is that there are many mechanical methods to wind up at the same point. I am not disputing that there are many different mechanics possible.

What you are ignoring, seemingly on purpose, is that underneath all of those mechanics, there are still only a few fundamental elements to tanking. You want to keep the enemy's attention, and you want to be less of a burden (more efficient) taking the hits than a less specialized character would be.
In terms of reducing each source of damage, you have two fundamental choices.

1) Avoid all of the damage.

2) Avoid some of the damage.

Mechanically, you can make a lot of distinctions so that one form of avoidance looks different from another, or one form of mitigation looks different from another, but fundamentally you have avoidance and mitigation.

The more ways you try to splice those together, the more that your tanking classes start to look and feel similar/the same. It is not as simple as saying "you can only have two tanking classes" but you also can't say "you can have as many tanking classes as you want, as long as you can come up with a different mechanic for each." At some point they start to look and feel the same (because on a fundamental level, they ARE the same) and players have no need to play most of them.

#128 Jun 28 2009 at 12:58 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
777 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
Except that you're completely talking around the point.

And you are being deliberately obtuse.

Quote:
At some point they start to look and feel the same (because on a fundamental level, they ARE the same) and players have no need to play most of them.

I'm glad we are in agreement that there should only be two damage dealing classes. A ranged class and a melee class.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 4:59pm by Karelyn
____________________________
KUMQUATS
#129 Jun 28 2009 at 1:04 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
43 posts
Any kind of self healing is a form of mitigation.

If you take a hit for 1000, then heal up 400, you essentially took 600 damage.

If you take 10 hits of 100, and heal back 10 every time you get hit, you mitigated 10% of the damage.



There are only two things that happen while tanking: avoidance and mitigation. Nothing else. There are ways to dress it up and make it seem unique, but no matter what, the fundamentals remain the same.
#130 Jun 28 2009 at 1:07 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
777 posts
gumpman wrote:
There are only two things you can do while damage dealing: ranged attacks and melee attacks. Nothing else. There are ways to dress it up and make it seem unique, but no matter what, the fundamentals remain the same.

I'm glad we are in agreement.

Clearly the solution here is to remove all "dressing ups" and reduce all damage dealing classes to only two classes.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 5:07pm by Karelyn
____________________________
KUMQUATS
#131 Jun 28 2009 at 1:10 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
Your entire argument is that there are many mechanical methods to wind up at the same point. I am not disputing that there are many different mechanics possible.

No. My point is that there methods of tanking that all wind up in different places based on how the variables of DPS are set. There are methods of tanking are are equally if not greater in their difference of function than the difference between dodging and armor mitigation.
KarlHungis wrote:
What you are ignoring, seemingly on purpose, is that underneath all of those mechanics, there are still only a few fundamental elements to tanking. You want to keep the enemy's attention, and you want to be less of a burden (more efficient) taking the hits than a less specialized character would be.

I haven't even talked about the issue of hate, because that isn't what anyone here is talking about. I haven't ignored the efficiency of tanking; you are ignoring it. You didn't read my post. At best you skimmed it. You have yet to disagree or even reference with a single thing I've said.
KarlHungis wrote:
In terms of reducing each source of damage, you have two fundamental choices.

1) Avoid all of the damage.

2) Avoid some of the damage.

No, you have many, many more. I already showed you this. You just aren't understanding simple math. Armor mitigation and dodging can actually function extremely similar, they aren't as different as you think. Regening is far more different than either of the two in terms of the types of DPS it can handle and when it will be one shot.
KarlHungis wrote:
Mechanically, you can make a lot of distinctions so that one form of avoidance looks different from another, or one form of mitigation looks different from another, but fundamentally you have avoidance and mitigation.

You didn't even read my post. You're so haughty you're just giving a monologue and pretending it's a discussion.

They don't just look different, they function differently. Function different as in there are situation where a regen tank with similar overall mitigation to armor tank will be one shotted when an armor tank will not. Functional difference like a blocking tank being able to tank infinite DPS so long as each hit is under a certain damage threshold whereas an armor tank cannot.

These aren't cosmetic differences. These are functionally different. You're the one grouping based on cosmetics.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 4:11pm by Allegory

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 4:13pm by Allegory
#132 Jun 28 2009 at 1:20 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
43 posts
Karelyn wrote:
gumpman wrote:
There are only two things you can do while damage dealing: ranged attacks and melee attacks. Nothing else. There are ways to dress it up and make it seem unique, but no matter what, the fundamentals remain the same.

I'm glad we are in agreement.

Clearly the solution here is to remove all "dressing ups" and reduce all damage dealing classes to only two classes.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 5:07pm by Karelyn



Uhh, for any class/job creation you gotta start from the basics before dressing stuff up. people are arguing that different forms of mitigation are actually different, I'm trying to explain they're the same.

And, yes, you're right in what you said about damage dealing. The same applies for all classes.
#133 Jun 28 2009 at 1:21 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
gumpman wrote:
Any kind of self healing is a form of mitigation.

If you take a hit for 1000, then heal up 400, you essentially took 600 damage.

If you take 10 hits of 100, and heal back 10 every time you get hit, you mitigated 10% of the damage.


Well, no. If you have 990 HP, and you take a hit for 1000 damage, it doesn't matter what you would regen even a split second later...you're dead. Mitigation and avoidance are applied as the hit lands, not after. Regen impacts survivability in the same way as any other kind of healing, whether it's self healing or healing from an outside source.
#134 Jun 28 2009 at 1:23 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,218 posts
Karelyn wrote:

I'm glad we are in agreement that there should only be two damage dealing classes. A ranged class and a melee class.


No, there should be only four. Ranged magical, ranged physical, melee physical, melee magical.

I'll add one caveat to my earlier posts. All of what I wrote comes with the assumption that you want a dedicated healing role in your game. If you don't, then you have a lot more room to do things mechanically, and have them also be fundamentally different.

The downside is of course that by gaining more design room for "tanks" you lose design room for "healers" (because you don't have them).



Edited, Jun 28th 2009 5:26pm by KarlHungis
#135 Jun 28 2009 at 1:25 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
43 posts
AureliusSir wrote:
gumpman wrote:
Any kind of self healing is a form of mitigation.

If you take a hit for 1000, then heal up 400, you essentially took 600 damage.

If you take 10 hits of 100, and heal back 10 every time you get hit, you mitigated 10% of the damage.


Well, no. If you have 990 HP, and you take a hit for 1000 damage, it doesn't matter what you would regen even a split second later...you're dead. Mitigation and avoidance are applied as the hit lands, not after. Regen impacts survivability in the same way as any other kind of healing, whether it's self healing or healing from an outside source.



If you have 990 hp you shouldn't be taking 1000 damage hits. Mitigation and avoidance do not have to be applied right as the hits take place. Self-heals are a form of mitigation. Outside heals are available to everyone. A class/job designed with self heals will have less mitigation in other forms to compensate this to classes without self heals.
#136 Jun 28 2009 at 1:33 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
gumpman wrote:
Quote:

Well, no. If you have 990 HP, and you take a hit for 1000 damage, it doesn't matter what you would regen even a split second later...you're dead. Mitigation and avoidance are applied as the hit lands, not after. Regen impacts survivability in the same way as any other kind of healing, whether it's self healing or healing from an outside source.



If you have 990 hp you shouldn't be taking 1000 damage hits. Mitigation and avoidance do not have to be applied right as the hits take place. Self-heals are a form of mitigation. Outside heals are available to everyone. A class/job designed with self heals will have less mitigation in other forms to compensate this to classes without self heals.


Regen is not mitigation. Period. Mitigation is applied to the hit as it lands. That's what the concept of mitigation is all about. Anything that happens after the hit lands may contribute to survivability, but it's not mitigation.
#137 Jun 28 2009 at 1:36 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,218 posts
AureliusSir wrote:


Regen is not mitigation. Period. Mitigation is applied to the hit as it lands. That's what the concept of mitigation is all about. Anything that happens after the hit lands may contribute to survivability, but it's not mitigation.


This is the fundamental point of contention. From a healer's perspective, regen/drain mechanics have the same characteristics as mitigation, even though, strictly speaking, they are not mitigation.

#138 Jun 28 2009 at 1:38 PM Rating: Decent
*
102 posts
Quote:
To imply that noone wants to play tank or support role is not true, id like ffxi to give out an graph of the % of people that have leveled pld or nin. I bet that graph stats would be way higher then most of you that say "no one wants to play tank", would think of.


Totally reminded me of something! http://www.playonline.com/ff11us/guide/development/census/09/3.html

Tank jobs were pretty popular.
#139 Jun 28 2009 at 1:40 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
777 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
Karelyn wrote:
I'm glad we are in agreement that there should only be two damage dealing classes. A ranged class and a melee class.

No, there should be only four. Ranged magical, ranged physical, melee physical, melee magical.

*shrug* If that's what you want, then that's what you want. Less options for everyone!

Less options = More fun for you
More options = More fun for most people

If you want a FF MMO to have as few options as possible, you are probably barking up the wrong tree. I would suggest one of the F2P cash shop MMOs that were made on a budget. There are tons of them out there to play that would be more fun for you than FFXI was or FFXIV will be.

Jobangles wrote:
Totally reminded me of something! http://www.playonline.com/ff11us/guide/development/census/09/3.html

Tank jobs were pretty popular.

*looks at the bottom of the census*

A third of people said they were playing their class because it was fun.

Isn't that a good enough reason for variety?

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 5:42pm by Karelyn
____________________________
KUMQUATS
#140 Jun 28 2009 at 2:23 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
AureliusSir wrote:


Regen is not mitigation. Period. Mitigation is applied to the hit as it lands. That's what the concept of mitigation is all about. Anything that happens after the hit lands may contribute to survivability, but it's not mitigation.


This is the fundamental point of contention. From a healer's perspective, regen/drain mechanics have the same characteristics as mitigation, even though, strictly speaking, they are not mitigation.


Only in the most vague of senses.

Mitigation is what keeps the damage manageable so that a healer can heal through it. Anyone who plays MMOs has likely found themselves in group content where damage classes get one-shot by mobs that tanks stand up to on a regular basis. It's not a case of mobs getting a boost to their damage mechanics because they're hitting a non-tank...it's a case of the overall defensive mechanics of a tanking class keeping the numbers down to a level that gives the group room to work.

Self healing/regen/drain mechanics reduce the amount of work necessary from the healer end of things. The main issue is that regen tanks would suffer greatly in content tuned to be a challenge for a mitigation or avoidance tank. Regen tanks exist in MMOs, but in small numbers and they're considered as more offtanks or "light duty" tanks...the "real" tanking is done by mitigation/avoidance tanks because quite often, automatically recovering health after the fact just doesn't cut it, and if mobs are tuned so that a regen tank is viable in all areas, it trivializes the same content for a mitigation/avoidance tank, or forces mitigation/avoidance tanks to be so watered down that they might as well build for dps and just bring along an extra healer.
#141 Jun 28 2009 at 3:21 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
This is the fundamental point of contention. From a healer's perspective, regen/drain mechanics have the same characteristics as mitigation,

No, they don't. How many times must this be repeated to you.

As both Aurelius and I have pointed out if two tanks both 1000 hp, one has 25% mitigation and one has 250 regen for the same interval as the boss hits, then they aren't the same. The purely mitigation tank can't be one shot with a 1100 damage hit whereas the regen tank can. This is a huge difference.

There's also the fact that regen doesn't scale. Let's take the same tanks from before. A boss does 100 dps to both of them. The armor tank mitigates 25% so he takes only 75 dps. The regen tank regens 25 health per second so he effectively takes 75 dps (100 damage-25 regen). In this instance they are the same, but if you change the boss DPS they aren't the same. If the boss deals 200 DPS the armor tank is taking 150 DPS as damage (50 DPS is mitigated) while the regen tank is taking 175 DPS in damage because he still only regens 25 health per second. Are you starting to udnerstand yet? If the boss does only 50 DPS then the armor tank takes 37.5 DPS (25% of the 50 DPS is mitigated), but the regen tank is taking an effective 25 dps in damage because he regens 25 health per second (50dps-25hps=25). The regen tank doesn't scale like the armor mitigation tank does. They aren't the same.




Here is the problem you are having. Yes a regen tank can function effectively identically to an armor mitigation tank for a set DPS, but they're only identical for one situation. You're confusing "can be identical" for "are always identical." It's like a graph of two lines intersecting each other, yes for one specific point they have the exact same function value, but for the rest they are completely different equations.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 6:24pm by Allegory
#142 Jun 28 2009 at 3:26 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
43 posts
A tank with 1000 hp shouldn't be getting hit for 1100. Thats a fundamental problem right there.
#143 Jun 28 2009 at 3:32 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
gumpman wrote:
A tank with 1000 hp shouldn't be getting hit for 1100. Thats a fundamental problem right there.

It's an example. The point is that a regen tank has a weakness for burst damage that a mitigation tank doesn't.
#144 Jun 28 2009 at 3:34 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,218 posts
Allegory wrote:
KarlHungis wrote:
This is the fundamental point of contention. From a healer's perspective, regen/drain mechanics have the same characteristics as mitigation,

No, they don't. How many times must this be repeated to you.



Repeat it all you want, because we simply disagree. I'm not stupid. I'm not inexperienced with MMOs or games, or math, or science. On science/reasoning tests, I get perfect scores. I am a very logical person who can reason very well inductively and deductively.

I simply have a different perspective than you. I think there is a gap in communication here, because I fully understand what you are saying, but what you are saying is not addressing the subject, in my opinion. It is as if I say "the world is round" and you say "No, you idiot, an apple is a type of fruit!"

You are stating things that are factually true, but not understanding (or, at least not having the same perspective) on how they fit into the bigger picture.

I understand very well that regen does not reduce the magnitude of incoming damage. It is not a matter of me "not getting it" so you can continue to repeat yourself forever, because as far as I can tell, you're stuck on the details and not looking at the larger concepts.

We don't have to agree, but treating me like I didn't read or understand what you wrote is a waste of both of out time. I understand it, and I think that your perception is focused on the wrong concepts.

#145 Jun 28 2009 at 3:35 PM Rating: Good
******
48,703 posts
No amount of tank jobs is going to be enough considering the problem in XI wasn't that there wasn't enough tanks. It was that people simply didn't want to tank. Any melee can tank all but the highest level monster, and let's be honest: Those are extremely far and between, and should be limited to a selected few jobs.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#146 Jun 28 2009 at 3:41 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
gumpman wrote:
A tank with 1000 hp shouldn't be getting hit for 1100. Thats a fundamental problem right there.


I kinda get the impression that you don't really grasp the idea of damage reduction. If you did, you'd understand how it's a perfectly reasonable example. Big picture thinking leads to understanding. Narrow views perpetuate ignorance. Big picture please.
#147 Jun 28 2009 at 3:56 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
I'm not stupid. I'm not inexperienced with MMOs or games, or math, or science. On science/reasoning tests, I get perfect scores. I am a very logical person who can reason very well inductively and deductively.

I didn't say you were stupid, but you are not understanding the math here.

Like me try to put it another way. As enemy DPS approaches infinity, the armor tanks effective mitigation remains constant while the regen tanks effective mitigation goes to zero. As enemy DPS approaches the regen tank's regen rate his mitigation goes to 100% while the armor tank still remains constant. Surely you recognize that as being different right?

If an enemy does 49 DPS and I regen 50 HPS that enemy can never kill my regen tank. NEVER. I don't even need a healer. An enemy that does 49 DPS will always eventually kill an armor mitigation tank, so long as he doesn't have 100% armor mitigation. These two tanks aren't the same. One can tank an enemy the other cannot.
KarlHungis wrote:
I understand very well that regen does not reduce the magnitude of incoming damage. It is not a matter of me "not getting it" so you can continue to repeat yourself forever, because as far as I can tell, you're stuck on the details and not looking at the larger concepts.

I KNOW you KNOW regen doesn't reduce the magnitude of incoming damage. I have been listening to you. Your point is that taking 100 damage and regening 40 of it is the same as taking 100 damage and armor mitigating 40% of it. Yes you're right here. What you're not understanding is that if you change the DPS then the effective mitigation changes. If that enemy now deals 200 damage the regen tank still only regens 40 hp while the armor mitigation tank still mitigates 40%. Now they're no longer equal. The regen tank took 160 damage while the armor tank took 120.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 7:00pm by Allegory
#148 Jun 28 2009 at 3:56 PM Rating: Excellent
It is very clear there are 2 types of people posting on this thread.

1) People who are thinking about FFXIV and future possibilities,

and

2) People who can't get past FFXI game mechanics and are stuck in that mindset.

There are only 2 types of posters on these forums!




____________________________
Can you see what it is yet?
#149 Jun 28 2009 at 4:02 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,218 posts
AureliusSir wrote:


Self healing/regen/drain mechanics reduce the amount of work necessary from the healer end of things. The main issue is that regen tanks would suffer greatly in content tuned to be a challenge for a mitigation or avoidance tank.



If you have a mob that drops high damage single hits or even rapid bursts of medium sized hits, he will eventually kill the avoidance tank also. Using the earlier example of City of Heroes, this is why the Reflex scrapper power pool absolutely sucked (and may still suck, for all I know) at launch. A "mitigation" type of character might lose half of his HP to a large hit, whereas an avoidance type would simply die on every other hit. Avoidance would be a great strategy if you were fighting mobs that caused instant death with every hit (although not fighting those mobs would be an even better strategy), but against anything that hits JUST hard enough to kill you in a few hits, the mitigation approach is just superior, because you can plan around consistent damage better than you can for spiky damage.

Quote:
Regen tanks exist in MMOs, but in small numbers and they're considered as more offtanks or "light duty" tanks...the "real" tanking is done by mitigation/avoidance tanks because quite often, automatically recovering health after the fact just doesn't cut it, and if mobs are tuned so that a regen tank is viable in all areas, it trivializes the same content for a mitigation/avoidance tank, or forces mitigation/avoidance tanks to be so watered down that they might as well build for dps and just bring along an extra healer.


That's a function of specific design rather than an absolute rule.

The assumption (because it's all that's been done) is that regen has to be a static amount, rather than scaling with gear or damage taken, or whatever. It could easily scale however you want it to scale though.
#150 Jun 28 2009 at 4:07 PM Rating: Decent
38 posts
Quote:
People typically don't want to be tanks because it is an immensely boring job, fix the dynamic and it won't be as much of a "problem". Tanking in FF11 was shallow at the best of times.


I challenge this. Maybe with Paladin it was a snooze job, but I know with Ninja you constantly had to be on your toes counting/canceling shadows, spinning your ele wheel, macroing gear for WS/Throwing. Basically, doing everything you possibly could to maintain enmity. Honestly, the tank's responsibility in the party requires the player to remain attentive at all times, or, at least they very well should be. (Especially as your puller returned with a mob, so that your zealous MNK doesn't take a crit!)

What bugs me most are people who half-*** their jobs and are totally rigid in their style of play. People say, "White Mage is so boring, I hate it.", when, if they were playing the job to its full potential, would be at least relatively exciting because a good player never stops casting, just as a melee never stops attacking.
#151 Jun 28 2009 at 4:09 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,218 posts
Allegory wrote:


Like me try to put it another way. As enemy DPS approaches infinity, the armor tanks effective mitigation remains constant while the regen tanks effective mitigation goes to zero. As enemy DPS approaches the regen tank's regen rate his mitigation goes to 100% while the armor tank still remains constant. Surely you recognize that as being different right?



Regeneration doesn't have to be a static amount. Just because it's always been done that way doesn't mean that's all that it can possibly be.

Let me put it this way: Stoneskin is mitigation, but it is not % based mitigation. It suffers in the same way that regen suffers in terms of being a flat amount that doesn't scale up or down with damage received. Just because stoneskin is limited this way doesn't mean that all mitigation is limited this way. Rather than having a shield that absorbs X damage and then goes away, you can have a shield that absorbs 30% of all damage taken for X seconds, or gear that absorbs 5% all of the time.

Similarly, there's nothing preventing you from creating regen that scales with damage taken. Mob hits you, you lose life, you get a buff that heals you for some % of damage taken over some period of time. Voila, scaling regen. The only real specific issues are 1) How do you make sure the regen tank doesn't get one shotted, and 2) How do you let him scale that "migitation" with gear, the same way that a high armor tank would?

The much bigger issue, and the one that I brought up in the very first place is: How do you make this guy feel different than another mitigation tank? Is it enough for him to take bigger hits and have a bigger health pool, but regen a lot of HP on his own?

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 8:12pm by KarlHungis
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 19 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (19)