EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > Class Discussion > Fighter's Arena
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-22-2011, 06:27 PM   #61
circusgirl

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,424
Default

Soul_Dreamer wrote:

My uncontested avoidance is 45% or there about when raid buffed, out of 395 auto attacks which is a fair sized group, my actualy block chance was 30%, this is a reduction of 33%.

When you say your "block chance" is 30%, you do realize that this number is not your uncontested block, it's a modifier which affects your block?

So for example, as a brawler, I have 27% base block chance, 22% from my defensive stance and 5% from AAs.  For a plate tank this base value would be determined by your shield quality.  If I have 30% block chance this would mean that my actual uncontested bock is 27*1.30=35.1% chance.  I think you might be seeing smaller numbers than you are expecting because you're looking at the wrong stat.  You might have 30% block chance modifying a base block value that' fairly low (for example 20%), which would give you a smaller uncontested block amount than your block chance.

20*1.30=26% actual block chance, as an example.

Edit:

Also, you should be aware that different uncontested avoidance stats are not additive.  If your uncontested block is 40% and your uncontested parry is 5%, you do not have 45% uncontested avoidance.  You actually would have 43% net avoidance, because only 60% of a mob's attacks would fail the block check and have a chance to roll against the parry check, so you only get 60% of the benefit of that 5% parry, which works out to 3%, not the full 5%.

This is all explained in much greater detail in the stickied avoidance mechanics thread, you should read through it thorougly to make sure you're calculating your avoidance correctly. 

circusgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2011, 06:40 PM   #62
Soul_Dreamer

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London UK
Posts: 537
Default

Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Soul_Dreamer wrote:

My uncontested avoidance is 45% or there about when raid buffed, out of 395 auto attacks which is a fair sized group, my actualy block chance was 30%, this is a reduction of 33%.

When you say your "block chance" is 30%, you do realize that this number is not your uncontested block, it's a modifier which affects your block?

So for example, as a brawler, I have 27% base block chance, 22% from my defensive stance and 5% from AAs.  For a plate tank this base value would be determined by your shield quality.  If I have 30% block chance this would mean that my actual uncontested bock is 27*1.30=35.1% chance.  I think you might be seeing smaller numbers than you are expecting because you're looking at the wrong stat.  You might have 30% block chance modifying a base block value that' fairly low (for example 20%), which would give you a smaller uncontested block amount than your block chance.

20*1.30=26% actual block chance, as an example.

Edit:

Also, you should be aware that different uncontested avoidance stats are not additive.  If your uncontested block is 40% and your uncontested parry is 5%, you do not have 45% uncontested avoidance.  You actually would have 43% net avoidance, because only 60% of a mob's attacks would fail the block check and have a chance to roll against the parry check, so you only get 60% of the benefit of that 5% parry, which works out to 3%, not the full 5%.

This is all explained in much greater detail in the stickied avoidance mechanics thread, you should read through it thorougly to make sure you're calculating your avoidance correctly. 

Yes I know this, sorry I should have been clearer when saying "30% block chance", these are the values I'm seeing in actual avoidance reports for my number of blocks. BAck in previous expansion the number I'd see in ACT would be very similat to the number in the persona window. The numbers I'm seeing now can be much, much lower.

Sorry, just thought I'd add, I'm using the HM shield from Kraytoks, and have 87% shield mod from AA and other sources. This makes my solo uncontested block to be 40.9%. 

These are all from kill parses, 3 for Kol/Mord and 5 kills for Gunnr.

Kolskeggr - 20.81% Block chance, 1264 auto attack swings.

Modrfrost - 27% Block chance, 1006 auto attack swings.

Gunnr - 36% Block chance, 1198 auto attack swings.

These mobs are the same level, the only thing that can be effecting these block chances over these large samples is strike through since none of the 3 mobs disarm, no changes in AA's between kills, I've had the same HM setup for months.

__________________
Lurtz Guardian - MT, Guild Lead and Raid Lead of KotWS
Souldreamer Warlock
Murukan Brigand
Knights of the White Shield - Splitpaw

Soul_Dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2011, 07:23 PM   #63
Silzin
Server: Crushbone
Guild: Revelations
Rank: Raider

Loremaster
Silzin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 537
Default

Based on the original reasoning around given for the Zerker Adrenaline nurff I very much doubt that Zerkers and SKs are going to get tools to rival the Guards ability to MT a Boss mob. Bursars are not as good at MTing as monks and that is as designed (I think). Which leaves the Pally for the 3rd MT raid spot and they as stated MANY MANY time they do need some help against one-shotting and a few other problems. Zerkers and SKs need to be looked at for their designed rolls and balanced accordingly. As for Strickthrow and Immunity to it... the game designers need to be more sparing in its use and NEVER get above ~25% and that would only be on a few select named. One thing to remember is that even back in TSO when brawler tanks where a joke. when we did tank our overall damage taken was still less than a equally geared plate tank but we just couldn't tank the content because of the random on- shottes . (I know some did but that where the exception to the roll)
__________________
Silzin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2011, 08:35 PM   #64
Soul_Dreamer

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London UK
Posts: 537
Default

Silzin@Crushbone wrote:

Based on the original reasoning around given for the Zerker Adrenaline nurff I very much doubt that Zerkers and SKs are going to get tools to rival the Guards ability to MT a Boss mob. Bursars are not as good at MTing as monks and that is as designed (I think). Which leaves the Pally for the 3rd MT raid spot and they as stated MANY MANY time they do need some help against one-shotting and a few other problems. Zerkers and SKs need to be looked at for their designed rolls and balanced accordingly. As for Strickthrow and Immunity to it... the game designers need to be more sparing in its use and NEVER get above ~25% and that would only be on a few select named. One thing to remember is that even back in TSO when brawler tanks where a joke. when we did tank our overall damage taken was still less than a equally geared plate tank but we just couldn't tank the content because of the random on- shottes . (I know some did but that where the exception to the roll)

Agreed on pretty much all of it, but I don't think SK's and Zerks are asking for this, most are just asking for small tweaks to some abilities, or an addition of 1 or 2 things.

Paladins should be up there with Guardians and Monks though, or at least a lot closer than they are currently.

With regards to strikethrough, and I maybe wrong here, I don't mind being wrong, what I mind is outright denial of the facts my parses are showing me with nothing to back it up or even reasonable debate about it.

The only 2 mechanics in game that contest uncontested avoidance are.1. Mob level.2. Strikethrough.The only thing that explains a 20%/30%/40%/50% drop in my block chance (uncontested avoidance) is a strikethrough buff of that amount or near it. Each of the above parses are of decent sample sizes 1000+ and against mobs of the same level, the only thing that explains the wildly varying block chances is strikethrough....... 

__________________
Lurtz Guardian - MT, Guild Lead and Raid Lead of KotWS
Souldreamer Warlock
Murukan Brigand
Knights of the White Shield - Splitpaw

Soul_Dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2011, 09:34 PM   #65
Novusod

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,719
Default

Soul_Dreamer wrote:

Where have I been discredited, by you? LOL.... And when did I downplay Guardian Stone skins? Sorry, but you're talking straight out of your as***le here. I posted my Avoidance numbers to show the reduction in avoidance from Strike through which you claim is only a small amount, I don't consider 30%-50% to be a small amount. You then bring stoneskins into it.. 

Below are the monk avoidances, while not all of them outright block the damage like a stoneskin does they allow you to block or reduce almost every single AOE that hits a monk. Monks will also gain the same % Stoneskin chance that Guardians or any other tanks gain from being in the MT group, that is the 17% Stoneskin you're seeing on the auto attack, seriously, why even include it when all tanks have it?

As I've said, I play both Monk and Guardian, and there is a noticable difference in incomming damage between the two. What we have now is not "Balance", there are 3 tanks out of 6 making possible MT's for hard mode content, the other 3 don't even get a look in.

Please read this and get it through that thick skull of yours... I'm NOT asking for an increase in anything to my Guardian directly, I don't want more stone skins, I don't want more DPS, I don't want more utility.. I'm happy as my Guardian is, I can still MT and I do it very well. However, ALL tanks need to be able to MT and it's simply not possible for 3 out of the 6 at the moment. 3 of the fighters need help in some areas and all tanks need to be balanced with strike through immunity. The immunity needs to be added to all temp abilities that are designed to avoid 100% of damage for a short duration, AND Brawlers need this immunity removed from their defensive stance. Really, it's not "a few" guilds using brawlers to MT hard content now, it's the MAJORITY of guilds using them, as you said, plate tanks had it all to themselves for a while and that wasn't ok, why is it suddenly ok that Brawlers have the same situation?

Also please answer the question I posed earlier on, have you even MT'd any of this content you're talking about? I looked at your guild "Redemption" and could find no kills either on Flames or on guild progress. EQ2 players is very shoddy though so this may not even be your guild

I'm sorry but if you're not tanking these mobs or you don't know much about them you simply can't comment very well. For example with the EM And HM brawler weapons from Drunder a Brawler can duel weild 2 weapons, both of these weapons have ~30% block chance, there are brawlers running around with 60% uncontested avoidance. All the while on the same mobs the plate tanks barely scratch 30% with the best gear they can get due to high strike through amounts. And remember at the same time the mitigation difference is in the region of 10%.....

You have been discredited because you refuse to bring Stoneskins into the equation of total damage reduction and you actually think it is serious arguement. It is not just avoidance that needs looking into when considering it is total damage reduction that matters. Mobs can't strikethrough a stoneskin so in a way you have your own version of strikethrough immunity. It is just not called strikethrough immunity but either way you are not taking any damage.

Tank Ballance works as follows:

Brawlers = High Avoidance + Strikethrough Immunity

Warriors = High Mitigation + Stoneskins

Crusaders = High Mitigation + Wards/Lifetaps

BTW I am a Bruiser not a Monk. All my stoneskins require that I take a huge amount of damage before they trigger. These types of stoneskins only trigger if I am half dead already. Most of the time incoming damage that is strong enough to trigger the stoneskin usually just ends up killing me. Stone Deaf is my good stoneskin but it only absorbes magic damage

Once again your ingenuinity is showing. You say guards don't need any buffs yet you want to Nerf bralwers even though you have no probem keeping up with them. That is just another way of saying you want the monopoly back.

Let look at the other 3 tanks though and why they are they in the state they are in now.

Zerkers - I don't agree with the way their old adrenaline was nerfed. I blame the mindset of certain zerkers being more concerned with other tanks had. First it was SK envy and then it was brawler envy combined with over the top suggestions.

Crusaders - Another class of players that got distracted and lost sight of what they were supposed to be. Not sure what happened to the thread maybe it was deleted. The premise was crusader wards not scaling because of the fighter crit heal nerf. Crusaders should have got their crit heals back but the thread turned into another rant about bralwers and Strikethough immunity.

When are you going to get it though your think head that Brawler strikethough immunity is "Working as Intended" and will not be changed anytime soon. Talking about it only distracts from real issues. Legitimate issues such as your "Dragoons" reflexes being hit with Strikethrough should be changed I agree. I also feel Warriors should be able to use CAs and not have "Dragoons" drop off like currently does. But that is not going happen if you keep raging on Brawler strikethough immunity. This class envy you keep spouting is not going to get you anywhere.

To answer your other question Redemption is NOT my guild. I play on Eq2X and the guild's name is Empire. It is at the same point in progression as your guild. The only mob I have not tanked is Kraytok Hardmode but I have killed Vallon which is something you have not according to Guildprogress. I have videos of me tanking HM Kolskeggr and HM Modrfrost. We are both pretty much at the same spot so I don't get what you are trying to prove here.

Guilds are using all varieties of tanks regardless of progression. There is no brawler monopoly. That is a fiction coming from your own bias view points. The state of tank ballance is where it needs to be.

__________________
Novusod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2011, 09:57 PM   #66
Controlor

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 767
Default

Novusod wrote:

Tank Ballance works as follows:

Brawlers = High Avoidance + Strikethrough Immunity

Warriors = High Mitigation + Stoneskins

Crusaders = High Mitigation + Wards/Lifetaps

Crusaders - Another class of players that got distracted and lost sight of what they were supposed to be. Not sure what happened to the thread maybe it was deleted. The premise was crusader wards not scaling because of the fighter crit heal nerf. Crusaders should have got their crit heals back but the thread turned into another rant about bralwers and Strikethough immunity.

Guilds are using all varieties of tanks regardless of progression. There is no brawler monopoly. That is a fiction coming from your own bias view points. The state of tank ballance is where it needs to be.

Ignoring most of the other post because it is concerning guards and brawlers. Just want to make a few points on your crusader notions. First off in a raiding environment heals and wards do not scale up as stoneskin and strikethrough immunity does. Not to mention brawlers get stoneskins and death saves as well so its not just strikethrough immunity.

To your comment about "crusaders" wanting heal crit back you are mistaken. It is not crusaders, but just a select few shadowknights. When the heal crit happened in SF both crusader heals were crippled and paladins were asking for improvements knowing that we would be living without heal crits. If you go to that thread we were not asking for heal crits back. However even though paladin heals have been improved (there are still some issues with it but that is primarily an aa issue and our group heal). SK's heals are still SF levels and they have NOT scaled at all... and they need adjusting (mainly just increasing the heal ammount really). 

Any thread that started as a heal crit again for "fighters" and then turned into a strikethrough immunity thread i can guarantee was not crusaders as a whole but just select sk's or zerkers (2 i am thinking in particular) calling for it. So kindly not lump all crusaders in with them.

Controlor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2011, 10:08 PM   #67
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Healing Criticals and a mechanic that increases healing when facing a raid mob would be a great step to balancing tanks.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2011, 10:14 PM   #68
Soul_Dreamer

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London UK
Posts: 537
Default

Novusod wrote:

Soul_Dreamer wrote:

Where have I been discredited, by you? LOL.... And when did I downplay Guardian Stone skins? Sorry, but you're talking straight out of your as***le here. I posted my Avoidance numbers to show the reduction in avoidance from Strike through which you claim is only a small amount, I don't consider 30%-50% to be a small amount. You then bring stoneskins into it.. 

Below are the monk avoidances, while not all of them outright block the damage like a stoneskin does they allow you to block or reduce almost every single AOE that hits a monk. Monks will also gain the same % Stoneskin chance that Guardians or any other tanks gain from being in the MT group, that is the 17% Stoneskin you're seeing on the auto attack, seriously, why even include it when all tanks have it?

As I've said, I play both Monk and Guardian, and there is a noticable difference in incomming damage between the two. What we have now is not "Balance", there are 3 tanks out of 6 making possible MT's for hard mode content, the other 3 don't even get a look in.

Please read this and get it through that thick skull of yours... I'm NOT asking for an increase in anything to my Guardian directly, I don't want more stone skins, I don't want more DPS, I don't want more utility.. I'm happy as my Guardian is, I can still MT and I do it very well. However, ALL tanks need to be able to MT and it's simply not possible for 3 out of the 6 at the moment. 3 of the fighters need help in some areas and all tanks need to be balanced with strike through immunity. The immunity needs to be added to all temp abilities that are designed to avoid 100% of damage for a short duration, AND Brawlers need this immunity removed from their defensive stance. Really, it's not "a few" guilds using brawlers to MT hard content now, it's the MAJORITY of guilds using them, as you said, plate tanks had it all to themselves for a while and that wasn't ok, why is it suddenly ok that Brawlers have the same situation?

Also please answer the question I posed earlier on, have you even MT'd any of this content you're talking about? I looked at your guild "Redemption" and could find no kills either on Flames or on guild progress. EQ2 players is very shoddy though so this may not even be your guild

I'm sorry but if you're not tanking these mobs or you don't know much about them you simply can't comment very well. For example with the EM And HM brawler weapons from Drunder a Brawler can duel weild 2 weapons, both of these weapons have ~30% block chance, there are brawlers running around with 60% uncontested avoidance. All the while on the same mobs the plate tanks barely scratch 30% with the best gear they can get due to high strike through amounts. And remember at the same time the mitigation difference is in the region of 10%.....

You have been discredited because you refuse to bring Stoneskins into the equation of total damage reduction and you actually think it is serious arguement. It is not just avoidance that needs looking into when considering it is total damage reduction that matters. Mobs can't strikethrough a stoneskin so in a way you have your own version of strikethrough immunity. It is just not called strikethrough immunity but either way you are not taking any damage.

I'm not ignoring them... The 15% stoneskin you're seeing in the auto attack avoidance is from group buffs, which any fighter in the MT group with a dirge/Templar will get. All tanks in the MT group will have a stoneskin percentage against auto attack of around 10-15%. I don't use my stone skins just for auto attacks, in the same way you don't use similar abilities just whenever. The stoneskins are use to block AOE's and handle spikes, in exactly the same way you are using your abilities. 

I'm not bringing a lot of attention to them because all 3 classes, Guardian, Monk and Bruiser have enough of these abilities to do the job. Guardian and monk especially have a similar number which perform similar fucntions. 

Tank Ballance works as follows:

Brawlers = High Avoidance + Strikethrough Immunity

Warriors = High Mitigation + Stoneskins

Crusaders = High Mitigation + Wards/Lifetaps

BTW I am a Bruiser not a Monk. All my stoneskins require that I take a huge amount of damage before they trigger. These types of stoneskins only trigger if I am half dead already. Most of the time incoming damage that is strong enough to trigger the stoneskin usually just ends up killing me. Stone Deaf is my good stoneskin but it only absorbes magic damage

Once again your ingenuinity is showing. You say guards don't need any buffs yet you want to Nerf bralwers even though you have no probem keeping up with them. That is just another way of saying you want the monopoly back.

I don't care if Brawlers keep it as I've stated, just the amount on some encounters now is huge. When it's at 10-20% things are balanced, when it starts getting higher it's not.

Let look at the other 3 tanks though and why they are they in the state they are in now.

Zerkers - I don't agree with the way their old adrenaline was nerfed. I blame the mindset of certain zerkers being more concerned with other tanks had. First it was SK envy and then it was brawler envy combined with over the top suggestions.

Crusaders - Another class of players that got distracted and lost sight of what they were supposed to be. Not sure what happened to the thread maybe it was deleted. The premise was crusader wards not scaling because of the fighter crit heal nerf. Crusaders should have got their crit heals back but the thread turned into another rant about bralwers and Strikethough immunity.

When are you going to get it though your think head that Brawler strikethough immunity is "Working as Intended" and will not be changed anytime soon. Talking about it only distracts from real issues. Legitimate issues such as your "Dragoons" reflexes being hit with Strikethrough should be changed I agree. I also feel Warriors should be able to use CAs and not have "Dragoons" drop off like currently does. But that is not going happen if you keep raging on Brawler strikethough immunity. This class envy you keep spouting is not going to get you anywhere.

I don't have a problem with strike through immunity if it's kept at reasonable levels, I have parses though where my avoidance is as low as 20%, this is my block chance. This can only be due to strike through and being at a pretty high level. 

The further we get into HM progression the lower I've seen this value going, but at the same time, non of the other abilities you keep bringing up, stoneskins etc are increasing. So the damage I'm taking is getting progressively higher. Something needs to be done or a cap needs to be put on strike through because while this is happening with the plate tanks it's not with Brawlers because you're immune to it. 

Like I said, some mobs are reducing my block chance down to 20% at present ( it also reduces the effectiveness of avoidance food and adorns for plate tanks), what happens in 6 months time when yet more raid zones come out. More than likely these mobs will have even higher strikethrough, at which point my avoidance will drop even further, while yours will still stay the same.

Sorry, but I don't understand how you can't see a problem here. Strike through being used to balance the tanks isn't a problem if it's kept at levels that create balance, when it keeps going up it's throwing balance out.

To answer your other question Redemption is NOT my guild. I play on Eq2X and the guild's name is Empire. It is at the same point in progression as your guild. The only mob I have not tanked is Kraytok Hardmode but I have killed Vallon which is something you have not according to Guildprogress. I have videos of me tanking HM Kolskeggr and HM Modrfrost. We are both pretty much at the same spot so I don't get what you are trying to prove here.

Because I had asked a couple of times and gotten no answer so I was starting to assume you were just trolling. We've not killed Vallon because we're working on other targets and spending time on him and his army of rangers to net 1 BP per kill doesn't have the same pay off as working on DoV HM named. 

Guilds are using all varieties of tanks regardless of progression. There is no brawler monopoly. That is a fiction coming from your own bias view points. The state of tank ballance is where it needs to be.

Tanks aren't fine where they are currently, 3 of them have some pretty large issues.

I don't like posting in the quote, but please read above.

__________________
Lurtz Guardian - MT, Guild Lead and Raid Lead of KotWS
Souldreamer Warlock
Murukan Brigand
Knights of the White Shield - Splitpaw

Soul_Dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 01:19 AM   #69
The_Cheeseman

Loremaster
The_Cheeseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,285
Default

I'm going to have to come out and say that fighter balance is simply not possible with the current mechanics. No matter what is changed, somebody will be left out to dry. Here is what needs to happen:

*Uncontested avoidance needs to go away. All avoidance needs to be contested, and raid-tier MOBs need to have their hit rates scaled properly against the expected defensive attributes of characters they are intended to challenge. This restores the ability for content designers to actually have some control over MOB hit rates while also allowing players a way to adapt to such accuracy variances via itemization.

*Strikethrough needs to go away. It is a bad mechanic that was only added as a band-aid on the gushing wound that is current avoidance mechanics.

*The mitigation curve needs to be adjusted so that there is a greater difference in actual damage reduction between plate and leather tanks, and so that higher-end armor has a greater benefit in damage reduction against the most challenging content. It seems pretty obvious to me from reading many of these debates that hardmode MOBs are simply hitting too hard in general and therefore putting too much emphasis on stoneskins, deathsaves, and avoidance temps.

*Deathsaves need to be scaled-back significantly, and instant-kill mechanics removed except as fail conditions.

*Crusader heals/lifetaps need to scale properly with content and itemization, which seems to me to mean that they need to crit. Personally, I'd prefer to see the entire critical hit mechanic done away with, but that would require a huge amout of work on the part of the devs, so I don't see that happening. However, I can't see crusaders ever being balanced when one of the core facets of their class (self-healing) totally ignores a significant aspect of the game's itemization strategy.

Some additional thoughts that I feel warrant mention:

Comparing avoidance to mitigation is a lot more complicated than people seem to think. Avoidance% vs. mitigation% cannot be a strict, linear comparison because the actual effectiveness of avoidance is a lot more curved than mitigation. Avoidance cannot be viewed through the lens of total damage prevented over time, because avoidance is very streaky and the longer the encounter, the more likely you are to have a catastrophic failure. 45% mitigation is always a 45% increase in survivability, regardless of how long the fight lasts. However, as the duration of the fight increases, the chance of getting an unlucky streak on the RNG and dying just continues to rise.

In other words, avoidance is inherently less reliable in terms of actual, practical survivability when compared with damage reduction. Also, avoidance is a lot tougher to balance, since it relies heavily on being perfectly within the "sweet spot." Too much avoidance quickly trivializes and encounter, but even just slightly too little can make it impossible to survive for the duration of the fight without getting randomly killed.

I believe this is very important for people to understand. I have played a monk since launch day, and I have felt the effects of various changes to avoidance mechanics in this game first-hand. Brawlers are a very complex class to balance properly, and a lot of that complexity is not obvious without significant experience with the class. Brawlers were broken for a very long time, and it's great that we're finally in a position where we can be considered among the most effective tanks in the game. Rather than risk putting brawlers back in the dog house, I'd much rather see berserkers and crusaders raised to the same level. Especially since it's obvious that nobody is trivializing the content at this point.

__________________
The_Cheeseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 06:18 AM   #70
Novusod

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,719
Default

Soul_Dreamer wrote:

I'm not ignoring them... The 15% stoneskin you're seeing in the auto attack avoidance is from group buffs, which any fighter in the MT group with a dirge/Templar will get. All tanks in the MT group will have a stoneskin percentage against auto attack of around 10-15%. I don't use my stone skins just for auto attacks, in the same way you don't use similar abilities just whenever. The stoneskins are use to block AOE's and handle spikes, in exactly the same way you are using your abilities. 

I'm not bringing a lot of attention to them because all 3 classes, Guardian, Monk and Bruiser have enough of these abilities to do the job. Guardian and monk especially have a similar number which perform similar fucntions.

<>

I don't care if Brawlers keep it as I've stated, just the amount on some encounters now is huge. When it's at 10-20% things are balanced, when it starts getting higher it's not.

<>

I don't have a problem with strike through immunity if it's kept at reasonable levels, I have parses though where my avoidance is as low as 20%, this is my block chance. This can only be due to strike through and being at a pretty high level. 

The further we get into HM progression the lower I've seen this value going, but at the same time, non of the other abilities you keep bringing up, stoneskins etc are increasing. So the damage I'm taking is getting progressively higher. Something needs to be done or a cap needs to be put on strike through because while this is happening with the plate tanks it's not with Brawlers because you're immune to it. 

Like I said, some mobs are reducing my block chance down to 20% at present ( it also reduces the effectiveness of avoidance food and adorns for plate tanks), what happens in 6 months time when yet more raid zones come out. More than likely these mobs will have even higher strikethrough, at which point my avoidance will drop even further, while yours will still stay the same.

Sorry, but I don't understand how you can't see a problem here. Strike through being used to balance the tanks isn't a problem if it's kept at levels that create balance, when it keeps going up it's throwing balance out.

<>

Because I had asked a couple of times and gotten no answer so I was starting to assume you were just trolling. We've not killed Vallon because we're working on other targets and spending time on him and his army of rangers to net 1 BP per kill doesn't have the same pay off as working on DoV HM named.

Tanks aren't fine where they are currently, 3 of them have some pretty large issues.

I think you are missing a couple of points here as this is a multi fassetted issue:

1. Total Damage reduction is the only thing that matters in end. This is acheived through a combination of Mitigation, Avoidance, Strikethrough Imunities, Stoneskins, Wards, self heals, percentage based damage reduction, life taps, death prevents, and various temp abilities such Dragoon's reflexes, Divine aura, Tsunami, Inpenatrable will, etc.

Brawlers are Avoidance tanks and they were given strikethrough immunity because Avoidance tanking doesn't work at all if the brawler is getting hit constantly because of strikethrough. A plate tank can fall back on their mitigation and stoneskins if their avoidance gets struckthrough while a brawler cannot. You may say the differnece in mitigation is only 10% but that is for only one attack. What happens when a brawler gets multi attacked and flurried by five or six hits in under a second. Suddenly the brawler took a chain of 10% more damage than the plate tank while the diffence in damage became greater than my entire HP pool. If some of those hits don't get parried the brawler is going to die. Even with Strikethrough immunity I have to watch my health bar constantly with my mouse over the parry temps if the RNG streaks on me.

2. Brawlers were given the tools they have because they needed them. They were added over a long period of time over the course of several expansions and were very well thought out to not be over powered. Brawler Strikethrough immunity will not be removed because it is working as intended part of the avoidance tanking mechanic. There are some tanks that do need a little bit of adjusting but talking about the removal of brawler strikethrough immunity will NOT get them the help they need and I am glad you decided to back peddel on this issue. I am all for helping these classes get what they need to be successful raid tanks as long it is reasonable and doesn't involve throwing brawlers under the bus or restoring the the old monopoly.

The adjustments I talked about earlier in this thread and previous ballance threads:

All plate tanks should have 360 degree avoid so no more getting destroyed from behind

Warriors: Dragoon's Reflexes becomes strikethrough Immune and can be used while casting other CAs

Zerkers: Get their old adrenaline back as it didn't need to be nerfed in the first place

Crusaders: Divine Aura becomes more reliable in surviving large attacks

Pally: Larger heals and wards

SK: Improved life taps

3.  Mobs with excessive strikethrough is a Content issue not a class issue. As stated earlier I agree 50% strikethrough is way to much even for hardmodes to have. It has been an ongoing issue that the buff packages on DoV raid mobs clearly need adjusting. Strikethrough should be capped in the 10% to 20% ranage where the ballance is. If they want to make raid bosses harder they need to use something that increases difficulty for all tank class and not just makes it harder on plate tanks. This is a reasonable change that will happen if both brawlers and plate tanks are asking for it in the name of objective fairness. But first we have to recognise that this is a content issue not a class issue.

__________________
Novusod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 01:17 PM   #71
Controlor

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 767
Default

Novusod wrote:

The adjustments I talked about earlier in this thread and previous ballance threads:

All plate tanks should have 360 degree avoid so no more getting destroyed from behind

Warriors: Dragoon's Reflexes becomes strikethrough Immune and can be used while casting other CAs

Zerkers: Get their old adrenaline back as it didn't need to be nerfed in the first place

Crusaders: Divine Aura becomes more reliable in surviving large attacks

Pally: Larger heals and wards

SK: Improved life taps

3.  Mobs with excessive strikethrough is a Content issue not a class issue. As stated earlier I agree 50% strikethrough is way to much even for hardmodes to have. It has been an ongoing issue that the buff packages on DoV raid mobs clearly need adjusting. Strikethrough should be capped in the 10% to 20% ranage where the ballance is. If they want to make raid bosses harder they need to use something that increases difficulty for all tank class and not just makes it harder on plate tanks. This is a reasonable change that will happen if both brawlers and plate tanks are asking for it in the name of objective fairness. But first we have to recognise that this is a content issue not a class issue.

I agree for the most part except the bolded part. Paladins are not asking for larger heals / wards because in doing so it than trivializes non raid content. If anything we would be asking for an adjustment in what our heals would do such as instead of our primary heal being a direct heal to be a reactive heal. As well as asking for a few more aa adjustments to heals. Even with Divine aura more reliable paladins still need a better stoneskin than that and one more snap. Everything else pretty much yes (with the inclusion that ALL fighter temp avoids be strikethrough immune).

Controlor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 06:42 PM   #72
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Novusod wrote:

I think you are missing a couple of points here as this is a multi fassetted issue:

1. Total Damage reduction is the only thing that matters in end. This is acheived through a combination of Mitigation, Avoidance, Strikethrough Imunities, Stoneskins, Wards, self heals, percentage based damage reduction, life taps, death prevents, and various temp abilities such Dragoon's reflexes, Divine aura, Tsunami, Inpenatrable will, etc.

Brawlers are Avoidance tanks and they were given strikethrough immunity because Avoidance tanking doesn't work at all if the brawler is getting hit constantly because of strikethrough. A plate tank can fall back on their mitigation and stoneskins if their avoidance gets struckthrough while a brawler cannot. You may say the differnece in mitigation is only 10% but that is for only one attack. What happens when a brawler gets multi attacked and flurried by five or six hits in under a second. Suddenly the brawler took a chain of 10% more damage than the plate tank while the diffence in damage became greater than my entire HP pool. If some of those hits don't get parried the brawler is going to die. Even with Strikethrough immunity I have to watch my health bar constantly with my mouse over the parry temps if the RNG streaks on me.

Thanks for bringing up this point and the fact that IF said happens Brawlers will actually take 30% less damage due to their heroic AA.  Any time a Brawler is hit they proc a 30% damage reduction which parses out to Brawlers taking much less damage on MAs/Flurries/Procs.  Further more, assuming that there is this magic 10% difference in mitigation based on high level mobs....you are forgetting other tools that especially monks have closing that gap a lot with damage reduction.  The diff

2. Brawlers were given the tools they have because they needed them. They were added over a long period of time over the course of several expansions and were very well thought out to not be over powered. Brawler Strikethrough immunity will not be removed because it is working as intended part of the avoidance tanking mechanic. There are some tanks that do need a little bit of adjusting but talking about the removal of brawler strikethrough immunity will NOT get them the help they need and I am glad you decided to back peddel on this issue. I am all for helping these classes get what they need to be successful raid tanks as long it is reasonable and doesn't involve throwing brawlers under the bus or restoring the the old monopoly.

The adjustments I talked about earlier in this thread and previous ballance threads:

All plate tanks should have 360 degree avoid so no more getting destroyed from behind

Warriors: Dragoon's Reflexes becomes strikethrough Immune and can be used while casting other CAs

Zerkers: Get their old adrenaline back as it didn't need to be nerfed in the first place

Crusaders: Divine Aura becomes more reliable in surviving large attacks

Pally: Larger heals and wards

SK: Improved life taps

3.  Mobs with excessive strikethrough is a Content issue not a class issue. As stated earlier I agree 50% strikethrough is way to much even for hardmodes to have. It has been an ongoing issue that the buff packages on DoV raid mobs clearly need adjusting. Strikethrough should be capped in the 10% to 20% ranage where the ballance is. If they want to make raid bosses harder they need to use something that increases difficulty for all tank class and not just makes it harder on plate tanks. This is a reasonable change that will happen if both brawlers and plate tanks are asking for it in the name of objective fairness. But first we have to recognise that this is a content issue not a class issue.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 06:59 PM   #73
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Novusod wrote:

I think you are missing a couple of points here as this is a multi fassetted issue:

1. Total Damage reduction is the only thing that matters in end. This is acheived through a combination of Mitigation, Avoidance, Strikethrough Imunities, Stoneskins, Wards, self heals, percentage based damage reduction, life taps, death prevents, and various temp abilities such Dragoon's reflexes, Divine aura, Tsunami, Inpenatrable will, etc.

Brawlers are Avoidance tanks and they were given strikethrough immunity because Avoidance tanking doesn't work at all if the brawler is getting hit constantly because of strikethrough. A plate tank can fall back on their mitigation and stoneskins if their avoidance gets struckthrough while a brawler cannot. You may say the differnece in mitigation is only 10% but that is for only one attack. What happens when a brawler gets multi attacked and flurried by five or six hits in under a second. Suddenly the brawler took a chain of 10% more damage than the plate tank while the diffence in damage became greater than my entire HP pool. If some of those hits don't get parried the brawler is going to die. Even with Strikethrough immunity I have to watch my health bar constantly with my mouse over the parry temps if the RNG streaks on me.

Thanks for bringing up this point and the fact that IF said happens Brawlers will actually take 30% less damage due to their heroic AA.  Any time a Brawler is hit they proc a 30% damage reduction which parses out to Brawlers taking much less damage on MAs/Flurries/Procs.  Further more, assuming that there is this magic 10% difference in mitigation based on high level mobs....you are forgetting other tools that especially monks have closing that gap a lot with damage reduction.  The difference in physical hits is close to non-existent, maybe a couple % at best when as you put in the above paragraph you really need to look at the whole picture.

2. Brawlers were given the tools they have because they needed them. They were added over a long period of time over the course of several expansions and were very well thought out to not be over powered. Brawler Strikethrough immunity will not be removed because it is working as intended part of the avoidance tanking mechanic. There are some tanks that do need a little bit of adjusting but talking about the removal of brawler strikethrough immunity will NOT get them the help they need and I am glad you decided to back peddel on this issue. I am all for helping these classes get what they need to be successful raid tanks as long it is reasonable and doesn't involve throwing brawlers under the bus or restoring the the old monopoly.

Brawlers were given a lot of tools because they needed them to perform their role of an emergency tank that would be almost invincible for a short time while the raid recoveried, or while the Brawler was doing some CC.  They added the strike through mechanic first and realized this would not work well for Brawlers that could not have certain abilities struck through while they were doing their CC job.  They gave Brawlers strike through immunity to make sure they could keep doing what they were designed to do.  Than people got this idea that they needed to move out of this role, out of the 3rd tank role, and into the MT/OT role to compete.  SOE closed the gap in damage taken with much buffs and abilities added.  SOE gave the best Death Save in the game on top of it while itemizing them with near equal mitigation.  SOE gave and gave and gave and even near the end of SF when guilds were really starting to figure out how powerful Brawlers were...they gave more.  Now while taking close to the same damage on physical hits, they take less damage on non-physical hits while having a large avoidance advantage due to how their uncontested block is calculated....and than throw the fact that strike through is still out there.

The fact is, strike through was invented to lower all Fighter avoidance, the strike through immunity was a band aide fix that is no longer needed.  The mechanic of strike through is good because it gives SOE a way to keep uncontested avoidance in check....having that check only work on 2/3 of the Fighters makes it look broken.

The adjustments I talked about earlier in this thread and previous ballance threads:

All plate tanks should have 360 degree avoid so no more getting destroyed from behind

Warriors: Dragoon's Reflexes becomes strikethrough Immune and can be used while casting other CAs

Zerkers: Get their old adrenaline back as it didn't need to be nerfed in the first place

Crusaders: Divine Aura becomes more reliable in surviving large attacks

Pally: Larger heals and wards

SK: Improved life taps

I would add to this list that along with removing strike through immunity from Brawlers that ANY fighter avoidance survivability ability like Dragoons, Stonewall, Furor should have strike through immunity.  As for the Crusaders you are way off base there.  Yeah I think Fighters should have heal crit back because it just means that heals/lifetaps will never ever scale if they don't.  Lifetaps though for a SK even when they did crit were a joke because EQ2 is all about damage prevention before it happens instead.  Hence why avoidance is king, wards are king, reactives are king, stoneskins are king, damage reduction is king.  Heals are like a last resort the healers failed type of thing.

Besides a few minor tweaks to Crusaders and Zerks all that really needs to be done is balancing Brawlers.

3.  Mobs with excessive strikethrough is a Content issue not a class issue. As stated earlier I agree 50% strikethrough is way to much even for hardmodes to have. It has been an ongoing issue that the buff packages on DoV raid mobs clearly need adjusting. Strikethrough should be capped in the 10% to 20% ranage where the ballance is. If they want to make raid bosses harder they need to use something that increases difficulty for all tank class and not just makes it harder on plate tanks. This is a reasonable change that will happen if both brawlers and plate tanks are asking for it in the name of objective fairness. But first we have to recognise that this is a content issue not a class issue.

Why do you fight for it so hard if you think it is a content issue instead of a class issue.  As I stated above having Brawlers immune to it is what is broken...its not the strike through itself.  Putting all the Fighters on an even level to have their uncontested avoidance kept in check would allow SOE to put the content where they can easily see are good levels.  Brawlers still maintain a significant avoidance advantage while as stated by the other abiliites they maintain having a pretty minimal difference in damage taken per hit.  How can you keep going on in this thread about how keeping strike through immunity on Brawlers full time is ok?  It breaks the entire mechanic and on content that other Fighters are getting destroyed on it allows Brawlers to push through with offensive healers calling for a save once every 5 minutes or so.  You can ask any progression raiding healer that has healed different Fighters what it feels like to heal Brawlers versus others.  They get bored from the lack of activity.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 07:03 PM   #74
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Crusaders/Berserkers need...

Bigger Wards/Heals/Lifetaps to Critical.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 07:39 PM   #75
Controlor

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 767
Default

Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Crusaders/Berserkers need...

Bigger Wards/Heals/Lifetaps to Critical.

NO THEY DONT.... Please stop with this. It will not happen and should not happen. Berzerkers were not meant to heal themselves anyways. SK's need a tweek to their life tap in the way of increasing the heal amount due to the crit nerf. Crusader aa's regarding healing needs to be changed a bit (namely in crusader tree the ones that affect heal amount do not affect life taps. Other than that very few things need to change to fighter heals. CRITTING IS NOT ONE OF THEM.

Controlor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 08:23 PM   #76
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Controlor wrote:

Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Crusaders/Berserkers need...

Bigger Wards/Heals/Lifetaps to Critical.

NO THEY DONT.... Please stop with this. It will not happen and should not happen. Berzerkers were not meant to heal themselves anyways. SK's need a tweek to their life tap in the way of increasing the heal amount due to the crit nerf. Crusader aa's regarding healing needs to be changed a bit (namely in crusader tree the ones that affect heal amount do not affect life taps. Other than that very few things need to change to fighter heals. CRITTING IS NOT ONE OF THEM.

I'm entitled to my opinions, and its only a matter of time...

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 10:44 PM   #77
The_Cheeseman

Loremaster
The_Cheeseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,285
Default

There goes Bruener again with this imaginary, "emergency tank" role. "Emergency tank" is not an intended class role, it's just a tank that isn't good enough to tank full-time. Maybe that's all brawlers used to be able to handle, back when we were broken, but that was never our class's actual focus. Brawlers, just like every other fighter, are meant to be able to tank for the entire duration of an encounter, not just for 30 seconds while the "real" tank get's rezzed. Brawlers do have a lot of powerful temporary immunity buffs and death saves, but this is due to the fact that avoidance is streaky and we need them to stay alive when the RNG decides it likes to roll 1's.

Again, I'd like to reiterate here that if the problem is indeed that crusaders and berserkers are not capable of tanking the most challenging MOBs in the game right now--while brawlers and guardians are--the solution is to improve crusaders and berserkers to match brawlers and guardians, not nerf brawlers and/or guardians. All the latter would accomplish is ensuring that nobody can tank.

__________________
The_Cheeseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 11:38 PM   #78
Novusod

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,719
Default

Bruener wrote:

1. Total Damage reduction is the only thing that matters in end.

Thanks for bringing up this point and the fact that IF said happens Brawlers will actually take 30% less damage due to their heroic AA.  Any time a Brawler is hit they proc a 30% damage reduction which parses out to Brawlers taking much less damage on MAs/Flurries/Procs.  Further more, assuming that there is this magic 10% difference in mitigation based on high level mobs....you are forgetting other tools that especially monks have closing that gap a lot with damage reduction.  The difference in physical hits is close to non-existent, maybe a couple % at best when as you put in the above paragraph you really need to look at the whole picture.

2. Brawlers were given the tools they have because they needed them.

Brawlers were given a lot of tools because they needed them to perform their role of an emergency tank that would be almost invincible for a short time while the raid recoveried, or while the Brawler was doing some CC.  They added the strike through mechanic first and realized this would not work well for Brawlers that could not have certain abilities struck through while they were doing their CC job.  They gave Brawlers strike through immunity to make sure they could keep doing what they were designed to do.  Than people got this idea that they needed to move out of this role, out of the 3rd tank role, and into the MT/OT role to compete.  SOE closed the gap in damage taken with much buffs and abilities added.  SOE gave the best Death Save in the game on top of it while itemizing them with near equal mitigation.  SOE gave and gave and gave and even near the end of SF when guilds were really starting to figure out how powerful Brawlers were...they gave more.  Now while taking close to the same damage on physical hits, they take less damage on non-physical hits while having a large avoidance advantage due to how their uncontested block is calculated....and than throw the fact that strike through is still out there.

The fact is, strike through was invented to lower all Fighter avoidance, the strike through immunity was a band aide fix that is no longer needed.  The mechanic of strike through is good because it gives SOE a way to keep uncontested avoidance in check....having that check only work on 2/3 of the Fighters makes it look broken.

I would add to this list that along with removing strike through immunity from Brawlers that ANY fighter avoidance survivability ability like Dragoons, Stonewall, Furor should have strike through immunity.  As for the Crusaders you are way off base there.  Yeah I think Fighters should have heal crit back because it just means that heals/lifetaps will never ever scale if they don't.  Lifetaps though for a SK even when they did crit were a joke because EQ2 is all about damage prevention before it happens instead.  Hence why avoidance is king, wards are king, reactives are king, stoneskins are king, damage reduction is king.  Heals are like a last resort the healers failed type of thing.

Besides a few minor tweaks to Crusaders and Zerks all that really needs to be done is balancing Brawlers.

3.  Mobs with excessive strikethrough is a Content issue not a class issue.

Why do you fight for it so hard if you think it is a content issue instead of a class issue.  As I stated above having Brawlers immune to it is what is broken...its not the strike through itself.  Putting all the Fighters on an even level to have their uncontested avoidance kept in check would allow SOE to put the content where they can easily see are good levels.  Brawlers still maintain a significant avoidance advantage while as stated by the other abiliites they maintain having a pretty minimal difference in damage taken per hit.  How can you keep going on in this thread about how keeping strike through immunity on Brawlers full time is ok?  It breaks the entire mechanic and on content that other Fighters are getting destroyed on it allows Brawlers to push through with offensive healers calling for a save once every 5 minutes or so.  You can ask any progression raiding healer that has healed different Fighters what it feels like to heal Brawlers versus others.  They get bored from the lack of activity.

1. Looking at total damage reduction from unrivialed focus is only about 1-2% over a ten second period. Firstly it doesn't work the way you say it does. I actually have to take a hit to trigger it and then it only reduces the next hit by 30%. If I don't get in the next 3 seconds the trigger got wasted and it won't trigger again for 10 more seconds. In a ten second period I might be hit by 20 to 30 swings and just one of those swings will be reduced by 30%. It is a mediocre ability and I am not even fully specced into it. Put a few AA into it just to get it but certainly isn't worth maxing out. If you think it is so good then be sure to ask for as similar ability for crusaders.

2. Brawlers were moved into MT / OT position because it was a high level developer decision to break up the plate tank Monopoly and get brawlers involved in serious tanking. There is no such thing as an Emergency tank and never was. It just wasn't viable and shouldn't be part of this discussion. Emergency tanking is just part of the OT's larger responsibility. When there are scripts in DoV that take out the MT for a full minute a tank designed to only live for 20 seconds just does work. Brawlers were given all those buffs because they needed them to rival the considerable power of the plate tanks.

The second part here is plate tanks are by no means really broken. What they need is constructive adjustments. While brawlers were getting these defensive buffs the plates got stuff that had nothing to do with tanking. I look at the Warrior and Crusader heroic endlines and all I see is offensive crap. Instead of blameing brawlers for your difficulties you should look to getting you house in order first. As mentioned previously there were all kinds of changes that could have been made but because these threads always turn into rants on brawler strikethrough immunity the changes don't happen.

3. I continue to fight here because avoidance tanking is the brawler's class defining ability. Strikethrough immunity is the only thing that keeps avoidance tanking viable. The devs are smart enough to know what would happen if they took it away. I have been tanking on bruiser long enough to know what it was like to tank in the pre strikethrough immune era. Plate tanks in offensive stance had more uncontested avoidance than my fully defensive specced bruiser tank. It was completely broken. Strikethrough and brawler strikethrough immunity corrected that inballance. It was why it was put into the game and the devs know this. The arrogance of your post is you think you know more than the devs. They have not listened to you in the past and they are not going to listen to you now.

Bruener you have been consistantly one of the most unreasonable posters on these boards going back the last two beta cycles. We have had this very same debate many times before I have not forgotten who you are. You are asking to effectively delete brawlers from the raiding game and you go to obtuse lengths to present it as a serious arguement. You have no credibility all when you ask to remove a working as intended mechanic or criple another class.

__________________
Novusod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 12:56 AM   #79
Elskidor

Loremaster
Elskidor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Raise the zerker and crusaders a tad, then bump up the guardian or nerf the brawler. Ban Talathion, Novusod and Bruener  from posting, and then give all fighters a significant xp penalty to lower their obnoxious population.

Elskidor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 01:06 AM   #80
Silzin
Server: Crushbone
Guild: Revelations
Rank: Raider

Loremaster
Silzin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 537
Default

In the long run i think The_Cheeseman's idea is the best. but i fear the time and effort it would take to implement properly, and i dont think the Div team is willing to do it right atm.
__________________
Silzin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 01:44 AM   #81
Elskidor

Loremaster
Elskidor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Default

If every tank, or any other class, wants to be capable of doing the same exact thing then there really isnt a reason to have 6 classes. Tank merge! Bruisers and Monk are the same thing...they are just in denial, and Zerkers have never been anything more than a Guardian on steroids that forgot how to hold damage. Not sure how one could merge the SK and Pally though...maybe just give the Warlock and Inq some better tanking armor or AA shielding and a few taunts. Hell, just merge nearly all the classes. There has always been too many classes for SOE to keep balanced.

Elskidor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 02:07 AM   #82
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Elzeenor@Splitpaw wrote:

If every tank, or any other class, wants to be capable of doing the same exact thing then there really isnt a reason to have 6 classes. Tank merge! Bruisers and Monk are the same thing...they are just in denial, and Zerkers have never been anything more than a Guardian on steroids that forgot how to hold damage. Not sure how one could merge the SK and Pally though...maybe just give the Warlock and Inq some better tanking armor or AA shielding and a few taunts. Hell, just merge nearly all the classes. There has always been too many classes for SOE to keep balanced.

Comparing everyone to being the same tells me how much you know about what your talking about.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 07:37 AM   #83
Soul_Dreamer

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London UK
Posts: 537
Default

Elzeenor@Splitpaw wrote:

If every tank, or any other class, wants to be capable of doing the same exact thing then there really isnt a reason to have 6 classes. Tank merge! Bruisers and Monk are the same thing...they are just in denial, and Zerkers have never been anything more than a Guardian on steroids that forgot how to hold damage. Not sure how one could merge the SK and Pally though...maybe just give the Warlock and Inq some better tanking armor or AA shielding and a few taunts. Hell, just merge nearly all the classes. There has always been too many classes for SOE to keep balanced.

There have always been classes that could have done with merging really, the differences could then have been put in via AA, my list would have been...Warlock/Wizard > Sorcerer.Illusionist/Coercer > Enchanter.NecromancerCongurorBerzerker/Guardian > WarriorMonk/Bruiser > BrawlerShadowknightPaladinSwashbuckler/Brigand > RogueTroubador/Dirge > BardAssassinRangerDefiler/Mystic > ShamanFury/Warden > DruidInquisitorTemplar.The only one I'm not relaly sure on is the Priests, there isn't really a pair thats distict for roleplay reasons or other any reasons. 16 classes instead of 24, which would have been easier to balance, this needed to happen at LU13 or in Original beta though really, it's way to late to do it now. The amount of rework it would take would be huge due to all the AA/Gear/Quests etc and EQ2 devs don't have the resource to pull it off smoothly.

With regard to fighters and strike through though... 

If strikethrough was removed tomorrow, it just didn't exist anymore, then the Brawler tanks wouldn't even notice, they wouldn't suddenly start getting 1 shotted randomly, they wouldn't suddenly become poor tank choices. What would happen?? Plate tanks would take up to 20% less damage on some encounters due to their block chance actually working. Brawlers wouldn't suddenly be replaced by other tank classes because they would still be just as powerful tanks as they are now, and the Zerk/Paladin/SK still wouldn't have the tools to stay alive to the Large killer AOE's consistently. You simply can't argue this because you're immune to it so it wouldn't directly effect you, you would stay EXACTLY the same as you are now!

SOE has the data for fighter avoidances, if after this plate tanks are taking substantially less sustained damage than the leather thanks, say 10%.. Just nerf shield protection values by 10% across the board. Job done, there is no need for this mechanic to be in game when SOE have control over everything anyway. The only reason this mechanic should be in game is on a select few encounters that you want to make harder and even then it should effect all fighters evenly.

As it is more likely it is going to stay in game then the values mobs have needs to be lowered substantially and never exceed around 10-20%. Then ALL fighter temp abilities need immunity to it, on my Guardian these are.

1. Dragoons Reflexes.2. Defensive Minded.

For those that don't think high numbers of strike through already exist in game.. Strike through is the % to hit through an avoidance check. So if a mob has 5% strike though then my avoidance has a 95% chance of still working as intended, over a large sample size this will result in my avoidance being 5% lower.uncontested Avoidance chance X (1- mobs strike through chance) = Actual uncontested avoidance.If my uncontested block chance is 45%, this is the number I should see against the named when it has 0 strikethrough over a large sample size, just because of the nature of uncontested avoidance nothing but strike through will reduce it.

(10%) - 45% x 0.9 = 40.5%(20%) - 45% x 0.8 = 36%(30%) - 45% x 0.7 = 31.5%(40%) - 45% x 0.6 = 27%(50%) - 45% x 0.5 = 22.5%

I'm parsing avoidance numbers as low as 20%, so high number DO exist in game and you CAN parse it! As previously said, strikethrough is NOT "working as intended", it is NOT "balanced" because the values in game are getting too high. Strikethrough needs a little work, either immunties changing or a reduction in the amount in game.Paladins need a decent 2 shot stoneskin or similar on about a 2 min reuse. Maybe another snap also.SK's need a reduction in inc damage and another snap.Zerks need 100% AOE uncapping and some buffs changing from DPS/Haste to more modern stats such as flurry/MA.

@NovusodIn an edit you've changed your text color so it's unreadable without highlighting it. Not sure if this was deliberate is all.

__________________
Lurtz Guardian - MT, Guild Lead and Raid Lead of KotWS
Souldreamer Warlock
Murukan Brigand
Knights of the White Shield - Splitpaw

Soul_Dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 12:32 PM   #84
SOE-MOD-02

Community Moderator
SOE-MOD-02's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,001
Default

This post has moved: /eq2/posts/preList.m?topic_id=49996...post_id=5648487 Let's keep the personal bickering out of this discussion. Thank you!
__________________
|| Forum Guidelines || Knowledge Base || Tech Support ||
SOE-MOD-02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 01:56 PM   #85
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

I'm tired of people going against and taking away exactly what makes classes Unique.

Paladins need bigger wards to prevent these AOEs, NOT stoneskins.

Shadowknights need MUCH BIGGER lifetaps and maybe a "Blood Ward" that whatever lifetap overheals them turns that much into a ward. (So if your at 100% and you use a lifetap, it turns it into a ward and stacks up to 4000.)

Berserkers need Adrenaline back to DR and our heals to be ALOT stronger.

This is what makes classes unique, you remove that and you might as well remove all 6 fighters.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 02:18 PM   #86
Netty

Loremaster
Netty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 227
Default

giving fights the tools they need to survive and be able to tank everything is not the same things as all classes being the same. It still can be done with small changes so aoe tanks can still tank only you will find it alot easier on a st tank. Kinda much the same as it goes for aoes. ST are able to only easier on a aoe tank. How is that the same?

Zerks dident have heals back in the days. And a heal wont help you from getting one shooted. And thats the problem the aoe tanks have atm. Yes zerks have a few stoneskin as some say but its physical only and wont do anything vs some of the deathtouch and so on. So you still would pref a guardian to tank stuff. When it comes to tank more than one mob however brawlers take less damage atm since they have so high avoidance. 360 aswell... Fixing adrenaline again would fix that.

Im not sure why my post got removed but i hope you did read it tallon. Since i stand for every word i said in it.

Netty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 02:23 PM   #87
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Netty wrote:

giving fights the tools they need to survive and be able to tank everything is not the same things as all classes being the same. It still can be done with small changes so aoe tanks can still tank only you will find it alot easier on a st tank. Kinda much the same as it goes for aoes. ST are able to only easier on a aoe tank. How is that the same?

Zerks dident have heals back in the days. And a heal wont help you from getting one shooted. And thats the problem the aoe tanks have atm. Yes zerks have a few stoneskin as some say but its physical only and wont do anything vs some of the deathtouch and so on. So you still would pref a guardian to tank stuff. When it comes to tank more than one mob however brawlers take less damage atm since they have so high avoidance. 360 aswell... Fixing adrenaline again would fix that.

Im not sure why my post got removed but i hope you did read it tallon. Since i stand for every word i said in it.

We had in-combat regeneration, which was really nice along time ago, but when fighters/players started getting more health, it didn't scale properly at all. (And was pretty useless.).

Then it got changed to a heal, which crit, and was very balanced and awesome, until SF released and everything became AOE content... which is our strength.

Anyways... 2 posts above me is my point.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 02:30 PM   #88
Netty

Loremaster
Netty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 227
Default

Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Netty wrote:

giving fights the tools they need to survive and be able to tank everything is not the same things as all classes being the same. It still can be done with small changes so aoe tanks can still tank only you will find it alot easier on a st tank. Kinda much the same as it goes for aoes. ST are able to only easier on a aoe tank. How is that the same?

Zerks dident have heals back in the days. And a heal wont help you from getting one shooted. And thats the problem the aoe tanks have atm. Yes zerks have a few stoneskin as some say but its physical only and wont do anything vs some of the deathtouch and so on. So you still would pref a guardian to tank stuff. When it comes to tank more than one mob however brawlers take less damage atm since they have so high avoidance. 360 aswell... Fixing adrenaline again would fix that.

Im not sure why my post got removed but i hope you did read it tallon. Since i stand for every word i said in it.

We had in-combat regeneration, which was really nice along time ago, but when fighters/players started getting more health, it didn't scale properly at all. (And was pretty useless.).

Then it got changed to a heal, which crit, and was very balanced and awesome, until SF released and everything became AOE content... which is our strength.

Let me tell you something in-combat health regn was not nice a long time ago. It works if you solo thats it. If they dident nerf the heal crit i bet you even a zerk in Rygorr gear would be able to get of heals from bloodrage for around 4kish if not more. You would then be able to solo all heroic instances once you got the gear. And even if you could. You wouldent still be able to survive a death touch or a huge none physical aoe on raids. How is that balaced for you ???? This really show how much you know about anything. It had nothing to do with SF being aoe content. And was it really? Tear well yeah that one had some nice adds to it. but again most was ST. apart from UD. So where is this aoe content you are talking about?

Netty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 02:35 PM   #89
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Novusod wrote:

1. Looking at total damage reduction from unrivialed focus is only about 1-2% over a ten second period. Firstly it doesn't work the way you say it does. I actually have to take a hit to trigger it and then it only reduces the next hit by 30%. If I don't get in the next 3 seconds the trigger got wasted and it won't trigger again for 10 more seconds. In a ten second period I might be hit by 20 to 30 swings and just one of those swings will be reduced by 30%. It is a mediocre ability and I am not even fully specced into it. Put a few AA into it just to get it but certainly isn't worth maxing out. If you think it is so good then be sure to ask for as similar ability for crusaders.

There is no way you are seeing that many hits in a 10 sec period.  For one, you are probably only seeing 20-25% of hits ACTUALLY land due to avoidance.  You are hit few and far between in other words and so when you are hit you immediately proc a 30% damage reduction for 3 seconds.  So a combo of being hit less and when hit having damage reduction up up to significantly lower MAs/Flurries/Procs and the rare rare situation the mob might actually get a lucky roll against you and follow up with another Auto Attack.  The more mobs you are tanking the more often you can ensure that the damage reduction is up and working on lots of hits.  Tank a large group of mobs like the trash in Drunder zones and it basically means 30% of the time you have 30% damage reduction.  Starts to look like Adrenaline that was reducing 50% of the damage basically 50% of the time.....and nerfed because of it.  Why should I ask for that for Crusaders?  Having OP'd Fighters just makes it hard to balance content for all of them.  Despite what a bunch of you chumps here believe, my goal is not to OP Crusaders....the goal is to ACTUALLY balance Fighters, something that DoV totally messed up.

2. Brawlers were moved into MT / OT position because it was a high level developer decision to break up the plate tank Monopoly and get brawlers involved in serious tanking. There is no such thing as an Emergency tank and never was. It just wasn't viable and shouldn't be part of this discussion. Emergency tanking is just part of the OT's larger responsibility. When there are scripts in DoV that take out the MT for a full minute a tank designed to only live for 20 seconds just does work. Brawlers were given all those buffs because they needed them to rival the considerable power of the plate tanks.

 I didn't say that the move wasn't intentional.  SOE decided for whatever reason to make that move.  That is not how it was and that is not how Brawlers were designed for a long time around.  The problem is having the class designed around being invincible short term tanks for CC/Recovery and than giving them equal sustained survivability as well.  You get 2 classes with a ton of abilities that raises their survivability far above other fighters still for periods of time, while in between they take the same.  Its OP'd.

The second part here is plate tanks are by no means really broken. What they need is constructive adjustments. While brawlers were getting these defensive buffs the plates got stuff that had nothing to do with tanking. I look at the Warrior and Crusader heroic endlines and all I see is offensive crap. Instead of blameing brawlers for your difficulties you should look to getting you house in order first. As mentioned previously there were all kinds of changes that could have been made but because these threads always turn into rants on brawler strikethrough immunity the changes don't happen.

Crusaders got jack for abilities in DoV because of whiners complaining from TSO still that they were OP'd.  You don't think there was a whole herd of us in Beta talking about how junky Manawall is, or how junky the AE is, or how junky Soulclaim is for anything other than Power Leveling?  You don't think both Crusaders were in there talking about the lack of tools they had all of a sudden especially after a big nerf to LC that basically made it an ability to not spec for?  You don't think that I have had personal conversations with devs, in person, about Crusaders and despite the fact they are in agreement there is too much of a rush to get Beastlords out so even though they know about the issues it is on the back burner?  You don't think those same devs don't laugh when talking about how OP'd Brawlers are?  The problem is all this stuff was pointed out in DoV beta even, and just ignored.  The fact is strike through immunity is a bad mechanic to have when the whole purpose of strike through is to keep uncontested avoidance in check.  In fact I started a thread very eary about this issue and at that time pointed out that all Fighters should have the immunity on defensive or none.  Its just not a good mechanic as is.

3. I continue to fight here because avoidance tanking is the brawler's class defining ability. Strikethrough immunity is the only thing that keeps avoidance tanking viable. The devs are smart enough to know what would happen if they took it away. I have been tanking on bruiser long enough to know what it was like to tank in the pre strikethrough immune era. Plate tanks in offensive stance had more uncontested avoidance than my fully defensive specced bruiser tank. It was completely broken. Strikethrough and brawler strikethrough immunity corrected that inballance. It was why it was put into the game and the devs know this. The arrogance of your post is you think you know more than the devs. They have not listened to you in the past and they are not going to listen to you now.

Avoidance tanking is all Fighters tanking.  Avoidance is the single greatest survivability tool that ALL Fighters have.  The fact is if they took away strike through immunity Brawlers would be more on a level playing field with other Fighters in the amount of sustained damage they take.  They already have the tool to avoid 1 shots from bad rolls as we have discussed above.  Now if they took away that tool AND removed the immunity AND put the damage taken to the levels they were before than you would be hurting.  Really though we are way off on a tangent.  The strike through isn't even the reason that Brawlers are such superior tanks right now.  Its the ability to have a lot of abilities to avoid the one shot AEs on fast reuse.

Bruener you have been consistantly one of the most unreasonable posters on these boards going back the last two beta cycles. We have had this very same debate many times before I have not forgotten who you are. You are asking to effectively delete brawlers from the raiding game and you go to obtuse lengths to present it as a serious arguement. You have no credibility all when you ask to remove a working as intended mechanic or criple another class.

I say things you don't want to hear.  What I have said in the last couple beta cycles miraculously have become issues that I foresaw.  It didn't take a lot of brains to see how messed up DoV was going to be for both Fighter balance and balance against non-Fighters right from beta.  I would not delete Brawlers, I enjoy Brawlers and any raid worth their salt recognized the advantage of Brawlers before DoV.  They bring the largest survivability buff to another tank anybody can give, they could CC great and need very little support for the duration of doing it, they could save a raid countless times.  SOE already took measures to make sure Brawlers really don't take any more damage and yet they still avoid a lot more.  How do you expect them to balance encounters when 2 of the Fighters hardly get hit and are completely self reliant on saves to stay alive through mechanics that other Fighters die in?

Yes.  Its time to look over fighters for next expansion.  Its time to balance.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 02:36 PM   #90
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:53 AM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.