SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Complete? 100% but is it optimal? Clearly not. Is it really that bad to have a s/b on one bar for herioc slash and pierce armor?

I don't think it is about it being that bad, it is more about different forms of playstyle.

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Complete? 100% but is it optimal? Clearly not. Is it really that bad to have a s/b on one bar for herioc slash and pierce armor?

I don't think it is about it being that bad, it is more about different forms of playstyle.

Does every playstyle have to be 100% optimal though? You can do every in the game, short of timed vet trials with a dual ice build, isn't that enough?

No, why shouldn't a dual frost be viable in timed trials?
Why can't dual frost tanks have the full game experience?
If it doesn't allow you to do everything then it needs to be balanced to the point that it does.

idk wrote: »

Can it? Pretty sure it can. Not competitive group would run it because it is far from optimal. Running it with a group that is far from competitive just makes it more of a struggle for the group.

OP's statements are fairly incorrect though. Ebon and Alkosh are just as compatible with S&B tanking as it is with Frost tanking. Neither grant additional magicka or stamina and are very desired sets for tanking.

Even beyond that the statement about low resource pools seems rather odd as neither of those top sets provide sustain in any of the set bonus so why would a staff tank struggle more with resources than a S&B tank?

Beyond that it is irrelevent if frost staff is not as optimal as S&B. Zos changed the frost staff for tanking to give players choice. Play as you want was never intended to be any build is optimal. So while frost staff is viable (that it can get the job done) it is not optimal and that is perfectly fine.

EDIT: to answer the OP's questions they ask of someone else just before this post. Frost staff is viable. That means it is capable of working successfully which is the very definition of the word. I have already answered the question about competitive.

VaranisArano wrote: »

With sufficient experience and a tolerant group, yes.

I'd strongly suggest making sure there's a way to provide Major Fracture/Breach as well as using Inner Fire as a backup taunt for when that awkward heavy attack just isnt going to happen in time.

Varanis brings up a good point. I think the biggest challenge for a dual frost staff tank is going to be lack of experience. Experienced tanks would have no problem getting a group to put up with them using a frost staff tank for a run though it would be a one off run.

idk wrote: »

SinXGreen wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Can it? Pretty sure it can. Not competitive group would run it because it is far from optimal. Running it with a group that is far from competitive just makes it more of a struggle for the group.

OP's statements are fairly incorrect though. Ebon and Alkosh are just as compatible with S&B tanking as it is with Frost tanking. Neither grant additional magicka or stamina and are very desired sets for tanking.

Even beyond that the statement about low resource pools seems rather odd as neither of those top sets provide sustain in any of the set bonus so why would a staff tank struggle more with resources than a S&B tank?

Beyond that it is irrelevent if frost staff is not as optimal as S&B. Zos changed the frost staff for tanking to give players choice. Play as you want was never intended to be any build is optimal. So while frost staff is viable (that it can get the job done) it is not optimal and that is perfectly fine.

EDIT: to answer the OP's questions they ask of someone else just before this post. Frost staff is viable. That means it is capable of working successfully which is the very definition of the word. I have already answered the question about competitive.

VaranisArano wrote: »

With sufficient experience and a tolerant group, yes.

I'd strongly suggest making sure there's a way to provide Major Fracture/Breach as well as using Inner Fire as a backup taunt for when that awkward heavy attack just isnt going to happen in time.

Varanis brings up a good point. I think the biggest challenge for a dual frost staff tank is going to be lack of experience. Experienced tanks would have no problem getting a group to put up with them using a frost staff tank for a run though it would be a one off run.

The sustain actual isn't an op "question" you are blocking and casting with magicka whereas a S&B cast with magicka and blocks with stamina thus requiring a bit more sustain and or pool which as you stated neither sets help with to keep up block and cast from one pool. I'm honestly not trying to argue just looking for advice, opinions and solutions to some problems that I am not the only one facing according to the poll. None of them were questions, they were statement. You also only really address 2 of 6 statements. And so it still remains dual frost isn't competitively.
Ok so can we make it to the point where dual frost can be competitive?

1. You brought up sustain in your OP when you suggested their were a lack of sets for recovery. So it was an issue brought up in the OP which his why I mentioned it.

As for a S&B tank casting with magicka and blocking with stamina, that very much inaccurate. Their taunt is stamina and I am pretty sure most of us are using pierce armor as our primary taunt. Lets knot forget that we work to keep minor maim on target using slash which is another stamina skill.

Beyond that it really depends on the build but also no all builds are optimal. As such it is very irrelevant that dual frost staff tanking is not optimal which is exactly what you are arguing here.

You say you want advice. If you want to be optimal then you will use S&B and be able to use frost staff back bar and not put points into the passive where blocking costs magicka.

PS, I did not address all points you made, as you noted here, because I found it pointless as I already noted that frost staff was viable but not optimal. If you want to be optimal you will go with an optimal build. If you want to frost staff tank then you will find other means for some of the lines short comings but will never be optimal. Raid leaders of any decent team will tell you to ditch the dual staves and Zos is not going to make the staff optimal for tanking. That is just life.

Royaji wrote: »

The answer to your original question is yes. It absolutely can. As mentioned earlier, viable does not mean optimal.

The reality is fairly simple. S&B brings something to the table and so does a staff. Both offer different pros and cons. You can easily get 90% of the utility a weapon offers from one bar though. Double S&B is redundant. Double staff is redundant. A build which utilises both gets the best of both worlds. And gets to cover the weakness of their second bar by barswapping.

This is why changes to staves will not help double staff. It can get better but it is still redundant. The buff will affect both double staff and S&B/staff builds. S&B/staff will still be better.

And since you are so fixated on Fracture/Breach in one skill let me mention a couple of things double staff gets over double S&B.
1) Ranged interrupt. With increasing emphasis on interrupts in boss mechanics it just can't be overlooked.
2) Full power enchants. This is actually a pretty big deal and S&B has no acces to them at all.
3) Ground AoE DoT. Crucial for maintaining your enchant (be it crusher, weakening or sustain). Once again, not available at all in S&B toolkit.

Do you agree that all of those should be added to S&B as well?

Diversity is not only about the haves. It is also about the have nots. You trade something to get something else. As a result you can have a different approach to your build and encounters based on your choices. What you are looking for is homogenisation. Making both staff and S&B the same. Just a cosmetic skin. A stick instead of a sword and a shield. Blue resource instead of green resource. With the exact same underlying functionality.

You know what's the worst part? I can already tell your wish will be granted. Sooner or later the spreadsheet balancing will catch up to tanking too. And after that it will all be the same. Cosmetic differences. Your class defines the colour of your skills but functionally they are all the same. Fun for everyone. Or is it?

Royaji wrote: »

SinXGreen wrote: »

Royaji wrote: »

The answer to your original question is yes. It absolutely can. As mentioned earlier, viable does not mean optimal.

The reality is fairly simple. S&B brings something to the table and so does a staff. Both offer different pros and cons. You can easily get 90% of the utility a weapon offers from one bar though. Double S&B is redundant. Double staff is redundant. A build which utilises both gets the best of both worlds. And gets to cover the weakness of their second bar by barswapping.

This is why changes to staves will not help double staff. It can get better but it is still redundant. The buff will affect both double staff and S&B/staff builds. S&B/staff will still be better.

And since you are so fixated on Fracture/Breach in one skill let me mention a couple of things double staff gets over double S&B.
1) Ranged interrupt. With increasing emphasis on interrupts in boss mechanics it just can't be overlooked.
2) Full power enchants. This is actually a pretty big deal and S&B has no acces to them at all.
3) Ground AoE DoT. Crucial for maintaining your enchant (be it crusher, weakening or sustain). Once again, not available at all in S&B toolkit.

Do you agree that all of those should be added to S&B as well?

Diversity is not only about the haves. It is also about the have nots. You trade something to get something else. As a result you can have a different approach to your build and encounters based on your choices. What you are looking for is homogenisation. Making both staff and S&B the same. Just a cosmetic skin. A stick instead of a sword and a shield. Blue resource instead of green resource. With the exact same underlying functionality.

You know what's the worst part? I can already tell your wish will be granted. Sooner or later the spreadsheet balancing will catch up to tanking too. And after that it will all be the same. Cosmetic differences. Your class defines the colour of your skills but functionally they are all the same. Fun for everyone. Or is it?

So you are saying its homogenisation to want a dual frost to be as good as a dual S&B?
The range taunt actually has a stamina morph if you weren't aware. Never did I say to make them the same. I said for them to be on par with each other. As it stands Hybrid is best then dual S&B then Dual frost. I feel like both dual should be on par meaning able to play at the same level without 1 being better than the other. Sure you will have your pros and cons but as it is now there are far more cons to dual frost. The stamina morph of inner fire actually increases the damage output with range so actual dual frost doesn't have the advantage of range taunt unfortunately. Also we have addressed the terms optimal and viable and the original question actually doesn't say either.

It's homogenisation to want dual frost and dual S&B to have the exact same skills.

S&B/staff is indeed best. Although I disagree that the difference between double S&B and double staff is that black and white. It is much easier to find a source of Major Fracture (even from one of your DDs) than to get an interrupt for that mechanic which will absolutely wipe the whole group unless it is interrupted NOW. A DD/healer who is using crusher is also not the most common occurence. At this point I'm honestly not sure if I would rather use double S&B or double staff.

Not a single time do I mention ranged taunt in my post. The fact that you do not understand the difference between ranged taunt and ranged interrupt speaks volumes about your tanking experience (and reading comprehension).

SinXGreen wrote: »

Royaji wrote: »

SinXGreen wrote: »

Royaji wrote: »

The answer to your original question is yes. It absolutely can. As mentioned earlier, viable does not mean optimal.

The reality is fairly simple. S&B brings something to the table and so does a staff. Both offer different pros and cons. You can easily get 90% of the utility a weapon offers from one bar though. Double S&B is redundant. Double staff is redundant. A build which utilises both gets the best of both worlds. And gets to cover the weakness of their second bar by barswapping.

This is why changes to staves will not help double staff. It can get better but it is still redundant. The buff will affect both double staff and S&B/staff builds. S&B/staff will still be better.

And since you are so fixated on Fracture/Breach in one skill let me mention a couple of things double staff gets over double S&B.
1) Ranged interrupt. With increasing emphasis on interrupts in boss mechanics it just can't be overlooked.
2) Full power enchants. This is actually a pretty big deal and S&B has no acces to them at all.
3) Ground AoE DoT. Crucial for maintaining your enchant (be it crusher, weakening or sustain). Once again, not available at all in S&B toolkit.

Do you agree that all of those should be added to S&B as well?

Diversity is not only about the haves. It is also about the have nots. You trade something to get something else. As a result you can have a different approach to your build and encounters based on your choices. What you are looking for is homogenisation. Making both staff and S&B the same. Just a cosmetic skin. A stick instead of a sword and a shield. Blue resource instead of green resource. With the exact same underlying functionality.

You know what's the worst part? I can already tell your wish will be granted. Sooner or later the spreadsheet balancing will catch up to tanking too. And after that it will all be the same. Cosmetic differences. Your class defines the colour of your skills but functionally they are all the same. Fun for everyone. Or is it?

So you are saying its homogenisation to want a dual frost to be as good as a dual S&B?
The range taunt actually has a stamina morph if you weren't aware. Never did I say to make them the same. I said for them to be on par with each other. As it stands Hybrid is best then dual S&B then Dual frost. I feel like both dual should be on par meaning able to play at the same level without 1 being better than the other. Sure you will have your pros and cons but as it is now there are far more cons to dual frost. The stamina morph of inner fire actually increases the damage output with range so actual dual frost doesn't have the advantage of range taunt unfortunately. Also we have addressed the terms optimal and viable and the original question actually doesn't say either.

It's homogenisation to want dual frost and dual S&B to have the exact same skills.

S&B/staff is indeed best. Although I disagree that the difference between double S&B and double staff is that black and white. It is much easier to find a source of Major Fracture (even from one of your DDs) than to get an interrupt for that mechanic which will absolutely wipe the whole group unless it is interrupted NOW. A DD/healer who is using crusher is also not the most common occurence. At this point I'm honestly not sure if I would rather use double S&B or double staff.

Not a single time do I mention ranged taunt in my post. The fact that you do not understand the difference between ranged taunt and ranged interrupt speaks volumes about your tanking experience (and reading comprehension).

Sorry I did misread that, I was skimming. I know the difference. So have both taunts in the game apply major breach and fracture is really homogenisation? 1 skill? Never did I mention skills be change other than inner rage. So the fact that you jumped to the conclusion that I want them both to have all of the same skill speaks volumes about your comprehension period. 1 skill out of how many?

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

can we stop calling tanks "hybrids" they are not "hybrids", they are tanks. they, at least good builds, use both resources, extensively. that is just what the role calls for. it is not like healer or dps, where is makes sense to have complete specialization into one stat. tanks gain nothing by having, say 30k stam 35k health and 11k magic. they do gain from haveing 20k mag and stam and 35k health.

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Complete? 100% but is it optimal? Clearly not. Is it really that bad to have a s/b on one bar for herioc slash and pierce armor?

I don't think it is about it being that bad, it is more about different forms of playstyle.

Does every playstyle have to be 100% optimal though? You can do every in the game, short of timed vet trials with a dual ice build, isn't that enough?

No, why shouldn't a dual frost be viable in timed trials?
Why can't dual frost tanks have the full game experience?
If it doesn't allow you to do everything then it needs to be balanced to the point that it does.

so we are clear on what viable and optimal mean, becuase it seems you are confused on teh differance, here are the definations-

optimal
adjective
best or most favorable; optimum.

viable
adjective
capable of working successfully; feasible.

it is perfectly viable to run dual ice staffs, even in score runs, my point there is that you are not going to be optimal, meaning you are not going to get the best score with dual staffs. you are also not going to get the best score with dual s/b. the relays in this thread explain this, to great detail. please read them again.

Bro we already when over this. You are late... by an hour

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

can we stop calling tanks "hybrids" they are not "hybrids", they are tanks. they, at least good builds, use both resources, extensively. that is just what the role calls for. it is not like healer or dps, where is makes sense to have complete specialization into one stat. tanks gain nothing by having, say 30k stam 35k health and 11k magic. they do gain from haveing 20k mag and stam and 35k health.

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

SinXGreen wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Complete? 100% but is it optimal? Clearly not. Is it really that bad to have a s/b on one bar for herioc slash and pierce armor?

I don't think it is about it being that bad, it is more about different forms of playstyle.

Does every playstyle have to be 100% optimal though? You can do every in the game, short of timed vet trials with a dual ice build, isn't that enough?

No, why shouldn't a dual frost be viable in timed trials?
Why can't dual frost tanks have the full game experience?
If it doesn't allow you to do everything then it needs to be balanced to the point that it does.

so we are clear on what viable and optimal mean, becuase it seems you are confused on teh differance, here are the definations-

optimal
adjective
best or most favorable; optimum.

viable
adjective
capable of working successfully; feasible.

it is perfectly viable to run dual ice staffs, even in score runs, my point there is that you are not going to be optimal, meaning you are not going to get the best score with dual staffs. you are also not going to get the best score with dual s/b. the relays in this thread explain this, to great detail. please read them again.

Bro we already went over this. You are late... by an hour

i mention this, in my reply, read it again, bruh.