avoidance and mitigation.

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<DIV>I would after some months the Devs would finally act and start looking at tanking. I just perused the tank threads and its sad that Guards are braggin about self buffing themselves to 7k hit points, and can be buffed to 100% mitigation and 100% evasion, with 4 extra lvls of def buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>When are we going to see tank adjustments? This make almost all raid encounters trivial. I will agree that most raid mobs are now pretty useless, but nerfing raid mobs so we can kill them is ridiculous. How about adjusting (balancing) tanks to make encounters more challenging?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would think, as many people have stated, that more mitigation would equal less avoidance?  That more mitigation would also equal less DPS. As it stands some guards are out cranking out really nice DPS, tanking at 100% miti and avoi, with the most aggro skills, most + def buffs, and the ability to use every weapon, including bows. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is ridiculous. How can this be justified as balanced? its not, and it needs to be looked at, as more and more tanks reach lvl 50 and find themselves playing second fiddle.  I superbly played Monk, Bruiser, Paladin, SK is about as effective as an average guardian player, due to sheer silver spoon that Guards are getting. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We're not seeing ANY tank balancing, other than Bers nerfs, almost 2 months after devs said they would look at tank issues. Now, they are working on an expansion, still leaving us with broken spells, unbalanced chars, and buggy zones. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I agree that guardians should be the heavy tank, but as it stands they are the being handed almost tanking skill by the Devs, while the rest of the tanks are either nerfed or just ignored (SK's)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Why arent bruisers and monks given so much DPS that they can tank as well as guards by killing the mobs that much faster, thereby making up for mitigation, instead of the one or 2 hit kill blows by raid mobs? How about fixing SK abilities, instead of letting them tank with half their valuable skills broke? How about fixing crusaders abilites so we dont burn through our mana trying to keep aggro? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Does SoE EVER keep their word? </DIV>

[Dovifat]

<span><blockquote><hr>uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<div>Why arent bruisers and monks given so much DPS that they can tank as well as guards by killing the mobs that much faster, thereby making up for mitigation, instead of the one or 2 hit kill blows by raid mobs?  </div> <div> </div> <div>Does SoE EVER keep their word? </div><hr></blockquote> Well, it works within normal xp groups. To some degree anyway. If the player is somewhat competent, Brawlers can tank most group content just fine. Does that mean balance ? Not necessarily, look at Berserkers, they take less damage, can hold aggro better and do more dps on multiple mob encounters. Anyway, point being: the concept of less defense, more damage to shorten the encounter can and does work here ( provided you'r in a group that actually knows Brawlers are tanks, but players' ignorance isn't SOE's fault ). Raid encounters are an entirely different story though. Giving Brawlers enough dps to significantly shorten the encounter would insanely overpower them. There are two obvious solutions: </span> <ul> <li><span>Give Brawlers mitigation in the same league as the plate tanks ( inherent ability, or change the deflection skill )</span></li> <li><span>Change game mechanics, so that mitigation tanks tank by actually <i>mitigating</i>, not by avoiding as well. Then introduce a variety of encounters, utilizing both types of tanks.</span></li> </ul> The second choice is certainly the better one, but probably requires more effort. First one is the easy way out. <div></div>

[Ceruline]

<DIV>Er... They have.  The first part of the combat changes had significant changes to avoidance and mitigation.  Those were backed off of Test for a while in preparation for the later stages of the changes.  So the changes to address these issues are there, it's just that with the magnitude of the combat changes, it really wouldn't work well to only patch in part of the changes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not sure what the effects on tanks are, but I know that with the avoidance/mit changes in my Scout was getting hit a LOT harder (They actually scaled them back after the initial go - Scouts had become completely unplayable).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The general effect of the defense changes is that it's harder for both NPCs and PCs to avoid and mitigate damage across the board.</DIV>

[hoop]

<DIV>If you give brusiers any more DPS it would be stupid they already double my DPS in most situations. As for MT's they are guardians they guard stuff heh they are the MT's for this game dont try to make classes in the same archtype able to do the things that others can do it gets bland that way, more variety would be nice. The reason their avoid is so high is beacause of the group make ups, not the guards self buffing. Make other types of enounters for differnt types of tanks make mobs harder but plz dnt nerf guards.</DIV> <DIV>                                                          Hoopdee 50 swash</DIV> <DIV>                                                                   Shadowed Strife</DIV> <DIV>                                                                       Befallen </DIV>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>hoopde wrote:As for MT's they are guardians they guard stuff heh they are the MT's for this game ...<hr></blockquote>This is exactly what SOE is trying to <b>counteract</b> in EQ2, not foster. All Fighters are Tanks, period, end of discussion. <b>For the most part</b> any Fighter sub-class should be about as good at being MT as any other Fighter sub-class. This is not EQ1, there is not one, single MT class. Deal with it.<blockquote><hr>... dont try to make classes in the same archtype able to do the things that others can do it gets bland that way, more variety would be nice.<hr></blockquote>I would agree with this if there was a greater variety in the mobs in the game. However, given the world SOE has created, the best that they can shoot for, and for my money they're doing a pretty good job, is to create <i>different ways</i> to "do the things that others can do." That's plenty of variety for plenty of fun.<blockquote><hr>The reason their avoid is so high is beacause of the group make ups, not the guards self buffing. Make other types of enounters for differnt types of tanks make mobs harder but plz dnt nerf guards.<hr></blockquote>From the notes about what has been done on Test so far (regarding the Big Combat Revision) you're likely to be disappointed. It sounds like all classes are "getting nerfed" defensively but Guardians and Berserkers may be hit the hardest. They've placed caps on how far defensive traits can be buffed, so those group make-ups that currently result in "100% Avoidance and 100% Mitigation" won't work any more, for anyone.Of course, I expect that it'll be quite awhile before the Big Combat Revision goes live so you've got some time left yet with the way things are now.

[Goozman]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> hoopde wrote:<BR>As for MT's they are guardians they guard stuff heh they are the MT's for this game ...<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>This is exactly what SOE is trying to <B>counteract</B> in EQ2, not foster. All Fighters are Tanks, period, end of discussion. <B>For the most part</B> any Fighter sub-class should be about as good at being MT as any other Fighter sub-class. This is not EQ1, there is not one, single MT class. Deal with it.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>That's kinda not true :smileytongue: Moorguard has already said there will be tanking and dps imbalance between fighters. I believe he specifically said that tanking and dps will be the tradeoff between fighter classes.<BR></DIV>

[Bi]

pretty much stopped playing my monk when i read that. my troub is also gonna be hit hard in the coming patch (she's 50 now - my +def buff  i am worried is going to be trivialised) tbh, I think that only having guards as the mt is a bad idea.. esp as paladins outnumber guardians like 2 or 3 to1? I guess more and more ppl are making guards now that they realise that there really IS only 1 tank worth playing to the end game. the rest are just nice for the groupbuffs. Its sorta sad that this game really is turning into something where only xxx class can do that. I guess its like trying to kill anything heroic without a healer.... (if its not green) tho not 100% true, it sorta is the same as raiding. Sure you CAN raid with a  pal, but you will most likely get owned. if he gets fortunate rolls on hits at every stage, it might be different tho. but unlikely. <div></div>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Goozman wrote:That's kinda not true :smileytongue: Moorguard has already said there will be tanking and dps imbalance between fighters. I believe he specifically said that tanking and dps will be the tradeoff between fighter classes.<hr></blockquote>He specifically said that, "With fighters, damage potential is weighed against tanking ability. The latter is defined not just by avoidance or mitigation, but by the kind of buffs and abilities they get."I call avoidance+mitigation "Damage Dissipation." If "tanking ability" is a combo of Damage Dissipation and "buffs and abilities," as Moorgard says, it's quite possible to balance classes by leaving Damage Dissipation the same between classes and trading off DPS for "buffs and abilities." In fact, that seems to be what they're doing; the notes on what they've done so far on the Big Combat Revision seem to give all plate tanks about the same mitigation and avoidance in the end, particularly when group- or raid-buffed. What distinguishes them at that point is their gear, their "buffs and abilities," and their DPS.I'm not sure yet how Monks and Brawlers fit into that scheme. I simply don't know how the new Deflection values (which only Monks and Bruisers get) stack up against a shield (which plate tanks can use, but Monks and Bruisers can't), nor exactly how much mitigation difference there is between heavy armor and light armor. I can't even, at the moment, whip up a character on Test to find out since the Big Combat Revision is turned off for now (to be honest, I'm not really willing to spend the time, either! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />).

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<div>I would after some months the Devs would finally act and start looking at tanking. I just perused the tank threads and its sad that Guards are braggin about self buffing themselves to 7k hit points, and can be buffed to 100% mitigation and 100% evasion, with 4 extra lvls of def buffs. <font color="#ff0000">Keep in mind, that "100%" is only against an equal level opponent.  As opponents are farther and farther above the level of the tank, the numbers displayed are increasingly meaningless.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>When are we going to see tank adjustments? This make almost all raid encounters trivial. I will agree that most raid mobs are now pretty useless, but nerfing raid mobs so we can kill them is ridiculous. How about adjusting (balancing) tanks to make encounters more challenging? <font color="#ff0000">Trivial?!?!?  Have you DONE a raid encounter?  Let me assure you, raid encounters are NOT trivial.  Yes, once a tank has farmed raid encounters for a couple months and gotten to the point of having mostly fabled gear and huge numbers of Adept 3 and Master skills, things get easier.  That's how it should be no?  Every change I've seen recently has made raid mobs stronger.  Frankly, the entry point for an upcoming guild is pretty high.  YES!  Guilds who have been farming this content are now geared to the point where the encounters are easier, some very easy.  That doesn't mean an upcoming guild won't get smoked!  You simply can't have content that an upcoming guild has a hope in hades of defeating that won't be trivial to a well geared guild.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>I would think <font color="#ff0000">Yes.  Good plan.</font> </div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[quetzaqotl]

<DIV>got this of the class guid page as i just started lvling my brawler/monk:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cccccc><STRONG>Solo Analysis<BR></STRONG>Brawlers are able to solo well. They will, however, take some damaging hits due to their decreased ability to mitigate damage. This is made up for by an enhanced ability to avoid being hit altogether, and good damage dealing capability.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cccccc><EM>Tanking<BR></EM>The idea of tanking is to have a creature attack the most durable member of your party at all times, keeping the less durable members of the party from harm. Brawlers can tank, though it might not always be the best choice for this job, and may often be called upon to fill this role.<BR><BR><EM>Secondary Tanking</EM><BR>In groups with two fighters it is beneficial to designate one Fighter as the “Main Tank.” This should generally be the fighter with more Hit Points and better Armor Class. The other Fighter assumes the role of a “Secondary Tank,” making use of abilities that defend his group members from harm, and cause good damage to his enemies. The brawler shines in this role, providing especially good damage support</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffffff>Yeah i know they added the guides long after a lot of you guys chose the way of the monk (same goes for me as a fury they added the druid guide later too) but it shows how soe thinks brawlers/monks/bruisers should function i guess...</FONT></DIV><p>Message Edited by quetzaqotl on <span class=date_text>06-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:44 AM</span>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>Bandit man. Last count I had over 160+ raids. How many have you been part of? you might have more, but 160 is VERY respectable I would think. Enough so I might even have a little knowledge about how easy raids are?? Anyone that raids knows that its stupidly easy to kill every mob in this game. Darathar is a joke, Nagalik is a joke, Vox can be killed  by 7 people and Venekor is not much tougher. Even new guilds have little trouble with these encounters. </P> <P>Im a member of Eternal Chaos, one of the top 20 guilds world wide, so please don't tell me I don't know what im talking about.  A guardian can self buff himself to lvl 57 equivalent and 7k+ hit points. Some are even posting 8k numbers..so what exactly do the other tanks have to make them balanced against this? so other tanks get less hit points, less mitigation, less def buffs, less aggro skills? Because last time I checked these are the skills that tanks require, not a rez, not an evac, not an FD, not self heals. Paladins cant self heal themselves to equal guardian hitpoints, taking into account the def buffs. Berserkers started getting the nerf bat because Guards cried about their aggro skills, but now i see continuous posts from guards about how the other tanks should just deal with it. Its bull[expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].</P> <P>Other people keep saying Guards tank, thats it, take that away and their nothing. Guess what? So do Berserkers, Paladins, Bruisers, Monks, and SK's. Thats what  <U><STRONG>WE</STRONG></U> do too. I also hear the argument that if you balanced the tanks then all they would be the same, which is another stupid bull[expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] excuse. </P> <P>No, they would not be the same. They would all tank equally but differently, which still gives it flavor. A bruiser should be able to tank Nagalik, just differently..same as an SK. Guards keep spouting that is you make the other tanks equal to guards then whats the point of playing one? </P> <P>Guess what, smart ones. If you keep making one class so much better than the others that they can tank Raids mobs easily, while other tanks play "utility", then whats the point of making other tanks? That arguement that balancing guards will make them obsolete reverses itself. You make every other tank class second rate by having such a gap between tanking ability, specially the avoidance classes.</P> <P>Banditman, that was a sad attempt to make me look like a newb that doesn't know what I'm talking about. Next time try a bit harder.</P> <DIV>Uzhiel, lvl 50 Paladin, Eternal Chaos, Faydark.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>06-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:03 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<BR> <DIV>I would after some months the Devs would finally act and start looking at tanking. I just perused the tank threads and its sad that Guards are braggin about self buffing themselves to 7k hit points, and can be buffed to 100% mitigation and 100% evasion, with 4 extra lvls of def buffs.</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Ok lets try and set the record straight.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hit Points you are correct on.  (i believe)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As far as 100% avoidance goes, anybody can get that.  It's not self buffed that gets you there, but a combination of a number of buffs from a number of classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>From what I understand the 100% values for Mitigation are including the Hero's Armor HO (semi-rare I think).  Though with the right group buffs I see getting into the 90's fairly easy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You also need to keep in mind that this is only against White color solo mobs.  And does equate to 100% for Group or Raid mobs.   I believe it also does not include Magic and special attack damage.</DIV>

[Raahl]

<DIV>BTW it's been stated by Moorgard that the fighter classes are not equal when it come to tanking ability.  Some classes give up tanking ability for more DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've always disliked the percentage for the display of these stats.  I prefered when they showed us the raw numbers.  100% is not 100%.  In my mind if you have 100% in either of those stats you should never take any damage from the mob, which is not the case.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

Put simply..Guards are either over powered, or the other tank classes are underpowered. Either way, im frustrated at the pace of the Devs in fixing this. If you read my original post that was my gyst. How can they try to crank out an expansion when there are so many broken skills and bugs as it stands? I'd never thought I'd say it, but this is truly a "pay as you play" beta.

[Raahl]

<P>{edit to elaborate}</P> <P>I disagree with you. Guardians are not overpowered as compared to the other fighter classes.   </P> <P>Guardians should always have a higher mitigation than the other fighter classes.</P> <P>Avoidance is messed up across the board.  All fighter classes can get 100%.</P> <P> </P> <P>If you really want to compare the fighter classes, you need to compare them without any equipment, with only self buffs (No HO's).  You will then have a better view of the classes without having to factor in equipment or outside buffs.</P> <P> </P> <P>I only hope the upcoming combat changes makes things better, not worse.</P> <P>Oh and I agree with you that it's taking an awful long time to get these changes.  Though I'd rather wait for Sony to get it right vs. having them rush the changes before they are fully implementd and tested.</P><p>Message Edited by Raahl on <span class=date_text>06-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:56 AM</span>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>I appreciate your courtesy, Rahl. Its rare these days :smileyhappy:</P> <P>I agree that guards should have more mitigation and more hitpoints, but were seeing guards with almost 3000 more hitpoints that other plate tanks and more than double the amount of hit points that evasion tanks have. My personal opinion is that evasion tanks should have MORE hit points, due to the nature of their tank mechanics. A Plate tank health doesnt spike like evasion tanks, therefore they dont need as much hit points as evasion tanks, who take damage spikes. Also, evasion tanks dont get the +def buffs than plate tanks get. This has a huge impact on hit points.</P> <P>Also, look at aggro. Why are guardians getting 5 taunts compared to the rest of us? where is the balance in that? Many things can be argued, but this is just a gimme by the devs. Crusaders BURN through mana using DPS skills to maintain aggro, because we have only 3 taunts, same for evasion tanks. The only tank out there that has comparable aggro is the Bers, and they have been nerfed over and over, because of Guards posting that Bers kept stealing their aggro. These posts can be found using a forum search. </P> <P>We can even examine DPS. With such an advantage in aggro, mitigation, hit points, and def buffs, you would expect guards to have extremely poor DPS, but look at parses. Guards are getting good to excellent DPS, which is crazy. How can this be justified? How can a char who can self buff to a lvl 57 tank, who gets 3000 extra hit points, who gets extra aggro skills, and who is getting more mitigation, still be clocking decent DPS? this is supposed to balance against my rez and heals? to an SK's evac? to a bruiser/ monks FD or DPS? </P> <P>Its not about tank A having more utility than tank B. Its about tank A being at such a disadvantage in tanking that they are FORCED to play utility. Every tank has utility.</P> <P>I'm not advocating a Guard nerf, im saying lift the rest of tanks so they can at least compete. Please dont say that some already do. Just because one or 2 or 20 non-guards can tank, doesnt justify the thousands who dont.</P> <P>Uzhiel, lvl 50 Paladin, Eternal Chaos, Faydark.</P><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>06-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:18 AM</span>

[Rodney]

<P>"They would all tank equally but differently, which still gives it flavor. A bruiser should be able to tank Nagalik, just differently..same as an SK. Guards keep spouting that is you make the other tanks equal to guards then whats the point of playing one? "</P> <P>Ya know this WAS one heck of a good idea, but its just that an idea.  I have been writing software for over 30 years and have had a lot of people come to me with good ideas and then I ask  HOW, just how do we do that?  So I am going to ask you the same question</P> <P>HOW do we make a brusier tank Nagalik?      and remember over 90% of tanking is done in groups NOT raids!  I am NOT saying you are wrong, I just would like to see how you think it should be done.</P> <P>Does the FACT that SOE could not do this at least give you some idea that its not easy and still keep some form of balance for the rest of the game?</P> <P>Also PLEASE name the 5 taunts that a guard can use on an EPIC mob ?</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Nightt N'D]

<DIV> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>I don’t think all Tanks can be balanced without getting into a cookie cutter syndrome and losing any justification for having diverse classes.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>All the different fighter classes need to have different strengths and weaknesses and the game NEEDS to have diverse encounters that play towards these strengths and weaknesses. As a 38 monk I should be a better tank than a 38 Guard in some instances and a worse tank than a 38 Guard in other instances. The same goes for all other classes within their class branch.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>Nightt Enday</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><SPAN><FONT color=#ffffff>38 Monk</FONT></SPAN></DIV>

[Nibbl]

<P> </P><p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>08-10-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:31 AM</span>

[Dovifat]

<span><blockquote><hr>Nibblar wrote:Being happy with your tank is based on doing a little research before you create your toon... <hr></blockquote> I did. I was told every subclass can fullfill the archetype role. It works in most group content. It doesn't work in raid content. That's what Brawlers complain about, you rarely see one asking for improvements in regular xp grind. </span><div></div>

[Nibbl]

<P> </P><p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>08-10-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:33 AM</span>

[Moorgard]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Goozman wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR>Moorguard has already said there will be tanking and dps imbalance between fighters. I believe he specifically said that tanking and dps will be the tradeoff between fighter classes. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>People have taken what I have said on this subject to mean two very different things. Either:</DIV> <UL> <LI>All tanks can tank the same, thereby turning all of them into generic copies of each other.</LI> <LI>All tanks tank differently, meaning they can never be balanced and one will always be preferable over the others.</LI></UL> <P>Which is correct? Both.</P> <P>Why? Because balance isn't just about data in a table or the result of a series of calculations. It's also a factor of luck and of player skill, neither of which we as developers control.</P> <P>Two guardians of the same level with the same gear tanking the same mob will not tank the same. Are they balanced? Sure, as balanced as we can make them. If Kate is more skilled as a tank than Bob, though, Kate will make a better tank. If you ask me, that's as it should be.</P> <P>Parsing has value if you eliminate all variables except the one you are trying to measure. Statistically speaking, you can account for the luck factor if you do your test enough times to make up for random variance. But you can never, ever eliminate skill from the equation, at least when more than one person is involved. Even if skill is only defined as punching the right buttons at the right times, one person will always be faster or smarter at hitting their buttons than somebody else is.</P> <P>This is an oft overlooked concept, but not one that's difficult to understand. Back in my raiding guild in EQ, we all knew we had a better chance to succeed if our raid leader was kept alive. When he went down and we had to switch to other warriors, even ones that were comparably equipped, every one of us knew our chances dropped. Why? He was a better tank because of the skill with which he played his character.</P> <P>So if this is all so impossible to measure, can tank balance ever be achieved? Sure, in a manner of speaking. You can have variance in abilities among fighter classes so long as player skill can overcome any of them. That, to me, is balance.</P> <P>The problem is, that answer won't satisfy everyone because most people would prefer to assume that they are playing their class the best way it can be played. Therefore, imbalance must be due to some other factor.</P> <P>Unfortunately, many people like to think in simple terms. "Joe can't be main tank. He's a monk. Let Toby the guardian be MT." A guild could go through dozens of raids with Toby as the main tank, never realizing that Joe knows his class a hundred times better than Toby knows how to play a guardian. Joe could be a huge asset to the guild, but some players are far more comfortable applying easy labels to others. So Joe misses out on tanking, but the guild misses out on a lot more.</P> <P>No matter what changes our spell/combat revamp brings, the concept of class balance will forever be elusive. There will always be people who are unsatisfied and maintain that they are broken beyond repair. Perhaps the ultimate lesson of message board culture is that those looking for an excuse to be unhappy will always be able to find it.</P>

[Alun Rhyian]

I disagree Moorgard, I think it was cause AV used a merit based loot system! J/K, sorry for the thread jack <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <div></div>

[Ogrebe]

I agree with Moorgard. Skill has a lot to do with success of a raid, or group. I've grouped with random people outside of my guild and constanly get whiped by a name. But when i'm in a guild group with people i know, know what there doing we can normaly allways take out the name that would have easly whiped the nonguild group.  Becasue these people know how to play there classes. <div></div>

[kerev]

One thing that might help 'shake up' tank roles is having occasional boss mobs that bypass x-mitigation and other boss mobs that bypass some avoidance, perhaps?

[Karde Shar]

<P>Moorgard, I've played EQ 1 since Beta.</P> <P>What a well-written reponse to a volatile subject.</P> <P>Having played EQ since Beta 3 of the original, I can't help but to agree with you 110%.</P> <P>Give the players the tools...allow them to determine when and how to use them (versatility) and players will be satisified that they can fill different roles at different times and ultimately enjoy the game for years to come.</P> <P> </P> <P>Thanks for the post, Karde 50 Coercer (I'm not quite dead yet...(TM Monty Python))</P>

[Mentin]

<P>Yes, skill matters. But!</P> <P>What people are complaining about are the tools given to work with those skills. Just blaming it all on skill is sidetracking the discussion really.</P> <P>The requirements for a tank is very different in a raid setting than in a group hunt or in a solo setting.</P> <P>Raids: Tank dps barely matters, tank hps matters a little to give healers time to get heals in, tank defenses matters a lot.</P> <P>Group: Tank dps matters a little, tank hp start affecting how long group can fight, tank defenses matters less as it is easier for healers to keep up and opposition is easier than in raid.</P> <P>Solo: Tank dps matters a lot since victim must be killed before hps run out, tank hp decides how long you can fight(hp including self heals in this case), tank defenses decides how long you can keep fighting but opposition usually is easier than in raid and group settings.</P> <DIV>Unless you make all fighter classes identical, they will have different abilities in the different situations. And from that follows one will be best for each type situation. It has to be that way too.. if one fighter class was best for all situations there would be little reason for the other classes to exist.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So currently guardians rule the raid game, and lose for grouping. Crusaders might be best at soloing because of their self heals. Etc etc. A class cannot be best at everything, all classes needs to be more or less equal in 'goodness', meaning their appeal and what they can do. People picking a class that is not suited for the role they want to play is another matter.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Only way I see to make other fighter classes desirable as raid tanks is to give the bossmobs differing abilities so some bosses have abilities best tanked by one tank type while other tank types are best for other bosses. However eroding the guardian raidtank monopoly that way means the guardian 'goodness' will need to be buffed to make them a meaningful class to play.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Ramsy02]

<span><blockquote><hr>FamilyManFirst wrote:<blockquote><hr>hoopde wrote:As for MT's they are guardians they guard stuff heh they are the MT's for this game ...<hr></blockquote>This is exactly what SOE is trying to <b>counteract</b> in EQ2, not foster. All Fighters are Tanks, period, end of discussion. <b>For the most part</b> any Fighter sub-class should be about as good at being MT as any other Fighter sub-class. This is not EQ1, there is not one, single MT class. Deal with it. <font color="#ff0000">So, basically a Monk should do 3x the dps a guardian does and tank the same. Ok lets just get rid of the guardians since their is no use for them, problem solved.</font><blockquote><hr>... dont try to make classes in the same archtype able to do the things that others can do it gets bland that way, more variety would be nice.<hr></blockquote>I would agree with this if there was a greater variety in the mobs in the game. However, given the world SOE has created, the best that they can shoot for, and for my money they're doing a pretty good job, is to create <i>different ways</i> to "do the things that others can do." That's plenty of variety for plenty of fun.<blockquote><hr>The reason their avoid is so high is beacause of the group make ups, not the guards self buffing. Make other types of enounters for differnt types of tanks make mobs harder but plz dnt nerf guards.<hr></blockquote>From the notes about what has been done on Test so far (regarding the Big Combat Revision) you're likely to be disappointed. It sounds like all classes are "getting nerfed" defensively but Guardians and Berserkers may be hit the hardest. They've placed caps on how far defensive traits can be buffed, so those group make-ups that currently result in "100% Avoidance and 100% Mitigation" won't work any more, for anyone. <font color="#ff0000">That is good to hear . </font>Of course, I expect that it'll be quite awhile before the Big Combat Revision goes live so you've got some time left yet with the way things are now.<hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Khilendel]

<DIV>In response to Kereven, a true bypass is not in place for mitigation or avoidance, but, other systems in the game create a side effect similar to what your speaking of. At least as far as raid targets go. Many mobs have gigantic mitigation debuffs, and or very powerful magic (certain instances have been known to get you ice cometted for 13k+ dmg without proper resists) And most raid targets (those 55 and up) practically bypass avoidance alltogether because they recieve such a large to-hit bonus based on comparitive levels.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, as far as moorgard's post, You are absolutely right as far as skill making alot of difference, myself being the most "gimpy" of the healing classes (a mystic) and my buddy endo (a 50 monk) are both well geared, and very skilled, and can drop some level 50 groupx2 (obviously not the larger targets) duo, feats that full groups of comparably geared folks wipe on regularly. Skill does make a gigantic difference, however, that balancing factor dissapears to a large extent on most high-end raid targets. Mitigation tanks are required on these both simply because of the pure volume of physical and magical damage being doled out (even a raid-buffed well-geared monks will have trouble hitting 8k whereas ive seen guards at 11k) and to top off the smaller pool, they cannot mitigate the damage nearly as well, and there dodge becomes almost negligible as the level of the raid monster exceeds the monk's by over 3 levels. In short, moorgard is absolutely correct, skill makes a world of difference, but as for them being balanced, there simply are some things a guard can do and a monk can't. Conversly, in small groups (2-3man, especially namers) a monk can be better, there is alot of resistance light armor out there, and with lower level targets they can dodge easily, and there DPS can make the crucial difference.</DIV>

[Grabb]

The number one thing I have always "not liked" about most MMORPG's, EQ Live & EQ2 in particular is the stoic elimination of tactics. Anytime a player or group of players uses thier smarts and thier knowledge of thier classes to develop a system / strategy that makes them better than thier peers (and thier foes) either the class abilities are changed (in the name of balancing) to prevent the tactic from working or the group / guild / player is reprimanded for "not playing by the rules". So in my opinion the comments you make Moorgard are "new thinking" concepts and ones that I hope you live up to. Kate SHOULD advance faster / get more loot / defeat more monsters if she knows her class better and has used her head to figure out a new and ingeniuos strategy to defeat her foes. Just keep in mind that SOE needs to allow that gray area of difference between the classes that allows Kate to be a bit better ..... and not balance every class to the point were it is mindless button pushing and no longer a game of skill. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <div></div>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<DIV>The problem as it stands is that player skill has little to do with it. Some tank classes are at such a disadvantage that player skill alone is not enough to bridge that gap.  Some changes make even less sense such as:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wards taking mitigation into account. Wards are alot more useful to evasion tanks than plate tanks. This just makes the balance between plate tanks and evasion tanks even worse. If my mitigation is 2700 and a bruiser is 1700, who is getting the ward benefit? Am I reading this wrong? As for crusaders, no matter how much player skill we have, our aggro skills need alot of improvement. It takes way too much power to keep hate to allow us to use our wards and heals in any efficient manner.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>By the way, Guardians do have the following taunt/hate skills that are on diff timers are lvl 50. Deafen, taunting blow, taunting challenge, invigorating threat, vengeful strike, shouting cry, protect, taunting assault (hold the line?) Maybe I'm wrong, so will a guardian please set the record straight, I box a guard sometimes and these are the ones i was using.  Where is the player skill in that? This is in response to a poster who said which 5 taunts did Guards have.</DIV><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>06-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:17 AM</span>

[ugl]

<P>Yes, you are wrong. </P> <P>Many of those you listed are on the same timer.  Not sure where you get that.   Sorry, your two boxed guardian must be bugged.  We got 2 AEs   (one must use low level (grey), as protect and the one before it does not effect epic mobs) and 3 (4 if ya snagged the right trait) single target taunts, 2 of which are grey. </P> <P> </P> <P>Guardians do not have the best aggro control of the tank classes.  They are somewhere in the middle.  Zerkers have the best aggro control (and high on the tank and DPS scale), and bruisers can snag aggro at will as well.</P> <P> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>06-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:53 AM</span>

[Dovifat]

<span><blockquote><hr>Nibblar wrote:btw, bruisers and groups, quotes from offical game guide  "... the group role of a bruiser is DPS..."  "Brusiers may be considered secondary tanks..." <p></p><hr></blockquote> Which "official game guide" are you talking about ? I hope it's not the Prima one ? If so, you just lost about all your credibility. Prima guides are known to be outdated before even printed and generally contain more misinformation than truth. Give me a statement of anyone from SOE's  EQ2 team, everything else is fluff. In reply to Moorgard: How much skill do i need to make up for a couple thousand hit points and several levels worth of +defense ? </span><div></div>

[Frametree]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dovifat wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nibblar wrote:<BR>btw, bruisers and groups, quotes from offical game guide  "... the group role of a bruiser is DPS..."  "Brusiers may be considered secondary tanks..." <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Which "official game guide" are you talking about ? I hope it's not the Prima one ? If so, you just lost about all your credibility. Prima guides are known to be outdated before even printed and generally contain more misinformation than truth. Give me a statement of anyone from SOE's  EQ2 team, everything else is fluff. <BR><BR>In reply to Moorgard: How much skill do i need to make up for a couple thousand hit points and several levels worth of +defense ? <BR><BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I know a guild that had an SK as its main raid tank, and she was successful even on Darathar.  The answer to your question is:  a lot of skill.  The issue, it seems to me, is not resolved by saying that skill can make a class able to do the end game stuff.  I know that's true; I've seen it.  The issue is the level of skill.  If only the most exceptional player can with skill overcome her class's setbacks, then things aren't quite right.  In other words, it shouldn't be the case that a mediocre guardian does as well at role of raid tank as an exceptional SK.  </P> <P>If you want skill to matter, Moorgard, make skill matter.  I know I want it to matter.  As things currently stand, however, skill matters only with respect to the classes who need it to overcome inherent liabilities.  It should matter to everyone, though.  The mediocre guardian (and we all know there are a lot of them) shouldn't be able to rise merely on his class's inherent abilities.  Make skill matter; make it so that the guardian who lacks skill cannot raid tank end game content.  Make it so only the talented tanks can.  Make it so that skill matters, for real, always.</P>

[Bron]

Honestly when it comes to tanking a raid mob, it's not so much in the hands of the tank themselves as the healers and the raid leader who assembles the group and comes up with the strategy. The tank has to worry about holding agro and maybe firing off a debuff or two at the proper time.  While this is important to the raid, there's generally not a whole lot a tank can do to keep themselves alive aside from turning off autoattack when they get low to avoid taking a big fat riposte in the head. So really we have two seperate issues here...when you talk about tanking skill, for many of us it's generally about holding agro.   I don't really believe tanking skill can include staying alive against raid mobs because the tank is actually one of the people with the least influence on this factor when it comes to skill.  Since we're not counting gear and upgrades as part of "skill" there really isn't a whole lot else some of us can do in the ways of self preservation.  As a Shadowknight I get 2 debuffs that may be able to slightly decrease my attacker's ability (Siphon Strength 100+ power, 36 seconds maximum (rarely ever lasts this long if it sticks at all), 15 less STR for the attack).  I get a lifetap that at master1 that gives me back 132 health, again at a fairly large power cost and assuming it isn't resisted.  I get a ward that gets chewed through like it's hardly even there.  Berserkers are in a similar boat.  Paladins and Guardians have far more abilties at their disposal for staying alive...but since the discussion is about the classes who can't tank as well overcoming their deficiencies with skill, it doesn't really matter what the better tanking classes have.  The miniscule effect I have at keeping myself alive using my abilities pales in comparison to the skill required by the rest of my raid force. I've tanked some pretty tough mobs when required, and I've generally done a good job.  However I'd never be so arrogant as to claim that it's any real skill of my own that kept me alive against these foes.  I do everything I can to help, and I always try to have the best equipment, and use potions, and buffs, and everything I can before the fight to get an edge.  But once we actually engage the mob, I'm in the hands of my 23 fellow players, and they will almost always have an easier time keeping a decent guardian alive than even the best Shadowknight. <div></div>

[TwistedFaith]

Reading in between the lines I bet 'balancing' isnt going well at SoE HQ, lol.As for skill playing a part, I dont care how 'skillful' you are, if the tools you are given are not upto it then it wont matter.If Bob the monk is the most skilful player in the world with insane avoidance, it wont matter if the game mechanics are balanced against him. Along come Dave the guardian who's a ok player, but because of the game mechanics, he's able to tank far better.

[John_Hammerhand]

<DIV>Yes, please make skill matter. I have a lvl 31 monk, who no matter what I do gets hit better than 60% of the time in solo even con encounters. My avoidance is 75% and mitigation is over 53% yet I get my a%@ handed to me on a regular basis. I know avoidance is based on even con no arrow up mobs, so that should mean that at 75% avoidance, I should avoid 75% of the blows incoming from an even con mob. NOT. It takes most of my power and almost half my health to take down a 31 mob. No amount of skill can overcome broken avoidance. If I am doing something wrong, someone please tell me. I quit playing the monk because, DPS or not, he can't even take on single mobs without having to take long rests in between fights.</DIV> <DIV>How can skill matter against mobs that can melee hit from 50 feet away (really long spear maybe? wait, bears don't use weapons or have ranged attacks) , or chase you under water without drowning (scuba diving motley bears?) or melee hit you for twice to 3 times what you can at even con? It can't. I don't care if I make a good raid tank. I don't want to. Hell, I don't care to be a MT. But I would like to be able to tank solo mobs with some degree of success and speed. </DIV>

[Dovifat]

<span><blockquote><hr>John_Hammerhand wrote:<div>Yes, please make skill matter. I have a lvl 31 monk, who no matter what I do gets hit better than 60% of the time in solo even con encounters. My avoidance is 75% and mitigation is over 53% yet I get my a%@ handed to me on a regular basis. I know avoidance is based on even con no arrow up mobs, so that should mean that at 75% avoidance, I should avoid 75% of the blows incoming from an even con mob. NOT. It takes most of my power and almost half my health to take down a 31 mob. No amount of skill can overcome broken avoidance. If I am doing something wrong, someone please tell me. I quit playing the monk because, DPS or not, he can't even take on single mobs without having to take long rests in between fights.</div> <div>How can skill matter against mobs that can melee hit from 50 feet away (really long spear maybe? wait, bears don't use weapons or have ranged attacks) , or chase you under water without drowning (scuba diving motley bears?) or melee hit you for twice to 3 times what you can at even con? It can't. I don't care if I make a good raid tank. I don't want to. Hell, I don't care to be a MT. But I would like to be able to tank solo mobs with some degree of success and speed. </div><hr></blockquote> Well, i don't know..I happen to have a small Bruiser on another server, at lvl 30 currently. He doesn't have any exceptional stuff, the EL Far Sea quest reward armor and some  Cesti capping out at lvl 28, skills are adept 1 for the most part. I have little trouble soloing most yellow solo content, except caster faeries. It's not as easy going as my Frog Warden, but works well enough. </span><div></div>

[Knightrid]

<DIV>Ok, here's my 2 cents on Avoidance and Mitigation...(btw if I say monk I mean bralwers so monks and bruisers)</DIV> <DIV>I"m in a good high level guild on Oasis server, so all of our fighters have at least decent equipment...(legendray or fabled for all of their slots).  It seems to me that all tanks in fact cannot tank equally well.  I have no idea why anyone would think so either. Yes, monks generally have 15-20% higher avoidance than a guardian, so what?  If you're on a raid a level 55+ triple up doesn't care about your measly 20% more avoidance, and he's going to hit you all the same.  At this point you pretty much have to have a guardian in there with extremely high mitigation and a large number of hp (9500 +) preferably.  If you stick a monk up against darathar he may literally 1 shot kill the monk.  Please, if anyone knows of a class other than a plate class tanking Darathar and being successful, let me know and I'll bow down to your guilds uberness.  My point is you put a monk in the group for quick exp and killing.  You put a plate wearer in (usually a guardian) to kill ^^^ level 55+ raid mobs.  Monks have turned into dps classes, not tanks.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Another point, yes monks are going to do a ton more dmg (usually 1.5-2x that of a real tank).  But the class that should really be po'd about this is scouts.  They have an avoidance comparable to a plate wearing tank.  Scouts have less mitigation than a monk, less health, and do equal or less damage than monks.  (I'm speaking from a parser standpoint and from people that have adept 3s, fabled weapons, and play their classes well.)  If this is considered balanced for bruisers and monks to out do every scout in every form of combat, why even make a scout to begin with?  So you can get sneak?  So you can shoot arrows?  Hmm, doesn't seem too great to me...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Heisenberg 50 Guardian</DIV> <DIV>Dirac 50 Warlock</DIV> <DIV>Oasis Server</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Knightrider on <span class=date_text>06-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:33 PM</span>

[Margen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Goozman wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR>Moorguard has already said there will be tanking and dps imbalance between fighters. I believe he specifically said that tanking and dps will be the tradeoff between fighter classes. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>People have taken what I have said on this subject to mean two very different things. Either:</DIV> <UL> <LI>All tanks can tank the same, thereby turning all of them into generic copies of each other.</LI> <LI>All tanks tank differently, meaning they can never be balanced and one will always be preferable over the others.</LI></UL> <P>Which is correct? Both.</P> <P>Why? Because balance isn't just about data in a table or the result of a series of calculations. It's also a factor of luck and of player skill, neither of which we as developers control.</P> <P>Two guardians of the same level with the same gear tanking the same mob will not tank the same. Are they balanced? Sure, as balanced as we can make them. If Kate is more skilled as a tank than Bob, though, Kate will make a better tank. If you ask me, that's as it should be.</P> <P>Parsing has value if you eliminate all variables except the one you are trying to measure. Statistically speaking, you can account for the luck factor if you do your test enough times to make up for random variance. But you can never, ever eliminate skill from the equation, at least when more than one person is involved. Even if skill is only defined as punching the right buttons at the right times, one person will always be faster or smarter at hitting their buttons than somebody else is.</P> <P>This is an oft overlooked concept, but not one that's difficult to understand. Back in my raiding guild in EQ, we all knew we had a better chance to succeed if our raid leader was kept alive. When he went down and we had to switch to other warriors, even ones that were comparably equipped, every one of us knew our chances dropped. Why? He was a better tank because of the skill with which he played his character.</P> <P>So if this is all so impossible to measure, can tank balance ever be achieved? Sure, in a manner of speaking. You can have variance in abilities among fighter classes so long as player skill can overcome any of them. That, to me, is balance.</P> <P>The problem is, that answer won't satisfy everyone because most people would prefer to assume that they are playing their class the best way it can be played. Therefore, imbalance must be due to some other factor.</P> <P>Unfortunately, many people like to think in simple terms. "Joe can't be main tank. He's a monk. Let Toby the guardian be MT." A guild could go through dozens of raids with Toby as the main tank, never realizing that Joe knows his class a hundred times better than Toby knows how to play a guardian. Joe could be a huge asset to the guild, but some players are far more comfortable applying easy labels to others. So Joe misses out on tanking, but the guild misses out on a lot more.</P> <P>No matter what changes our spell/combat revamp brings, the concept of class balance will forever be elusive. There will always be people who are unsatisfied and maintain that they are broken beyond repair. Perhaps the ultimate lesson of message board culture is that those looking for an excuse to be unhappy will always be able to find it.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>As a Shadow Knight I have to disagree with you perception.  I understand that tank balance is extremly difficult to achieve and your not going to make everyone happy.  But there are problems as I see it with some of the balance issues.  Tanking if broken down to the simplist of terms is:</P> <P>A: mitigating/avoidianing damage </P> <P>B: Maintaing aggro</P> <P>As it stands now our avoidance/mitigation is behind the other tank classes due to our wards not taking mitigation into account, and our lifetaps are very ineffiecant IMHO (and alot of SK's it seems).  As for aggro, I think I am a descent player, but my aggro generation is much less then either Guardians or Beserkers.  No argument that Sk's do descent DPS, but for some reason, least at my level, our dps doesn't seem to balance between the aggro/mitigation problems.  </P> <P>Plus the fact that groups usally need only a single tank and raids only 2, this makes the issue much more difficult for the tanking community.  Can everyone tank through the current content at this time, from what I've seen yes, can they do it as effiecently, I would have to say no. And the next question is when you at Sony bring in new content, with increased DPS from the mobs, making mitigation even more important, will the difference become even more drastic as we saw in EQlive.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 36th Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[Frametree]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Bronto wrote:<BR>Honestly when it comes to tanking a raid mob, it's not so much in the hands of the tank themselves as the healers and the raid leader who assembles the group and comes up with the strategy.<BR><BR>The tank has to worry about holding agro and maybe firing off a debuff or two at the proper time.  While this is important to the raid, there's generally not a whole lot a tank can do to keep themselves alive aside from turning off autoattack when they get low to avoid taking a big fat riposte in the head.<BR><BR>So really we have two seperate issues here...when you talk about tanking skill, for many of us it's generally about holding agro.   I don't really believe tanking skill can include staying alive against raid mobs because the tank is actually one of the people with the least influence on this factor when it comes to skill.  Since we're not counting gear and upgrades as part of "skill" there really isn't a whole lot else some of us can do in the ways of self preservation.  As a Shadowknight I get 2 debuffs that may be able to slightly decrease my attacker's ability (Siphon Strength 100+ power, 36 seconds maximum (rarely ever lasts this long if it sticks at all), 15 less STR for the attack).  I get a lifetap that at master1 that gives me back 132 health, again at a fairly large power cost and assuming it isn't resisted.  I get a ward that gets chewed through like it's hardly even there.  Berserkers are in a similar boat.  Paladins and Guardians have far more abilties at their disposal for staying alive...but since the discussion is about the classes who can't tank as well overcoming their deficiencies with skill, it doesn't really matter what the better tanking classes have.  The miniscule effect I have at keeping myself alive using my abilities pales in comparison to the skill required by the rest of my raid force.<BR><BR>I've tanked some pretty tough mobs when required, and I've generally done a good job.  However I'd never be so arrogant as to claim that it's any real skill of my own that kept me alive against these foes.  I do everything I can to help, and I always try to have the best equipment, and use potions, and buffs, and everything I can before the fight to get an edge.  But once we actually engage the mob, I'm in the hands of my 23 fellow players, and they will almost always have an easier time keeping a decent guardian alive than even the best Shadowknight.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>These are good points, Skrull.  I think I was not focussing in my mind on raids, even though that's what I was writing about.  Let me add one thing I wished I'd said, although it isn't raid-tanking skill per se.  It took lots of skill for you to "prove" to people that you were worthy of a shot at raid tanking end game mobs.  I doubt the guardians have to display that same level of skill in order to get the shot.  They just have to show up with their inherent abilities.  </P> <P>Anyway, good points.  See you on the server. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <p>Message Edited by Frametree on <span class=date_text>06-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:43 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<P>Pfft.  Guardians can do damage when they want to, ask Sigon.  Besides, Xminos beats me, and he is an assassin.  But yes, my uber omg dps has been equalled by Sigon, on a few x4s when Noah was tanking.</P> <P>So this "huge fighter DPS chasm" does *not* exist.</P>

[Styk]

Guards and Berserkers can stack HP buffs atm and that isnt right... ( that cant be fixed till they do the proper scaling of all buffs in the game ) I as a berserker can NEVER  tank as well as any other  plate class solo wise ( meaning a 56^^ will rip me a new one while a Guard , SK and Pally can beat the fight)  --------> that is fine with me for atm i have my DPS ( which will prolly take a severe hit ) Berserker Defense buffs are at a flux atm... Stance gets overwritten easily by other class defense buffs our 3 min defense buff over rights stance, weaponshield seems like the only skill working atm ( parry buff which guild got me the master for the other day ) As for me...... You want to realign tanks do it like this Shields for one SHOULD BE MOVED TOWARDS MITIGATION INSTEAD OF EVASION SINCE BRAWLERS CAN NOT USE THEM ) that means the 6% more evasion we get from them currently is gone and will count towards mitigation.... Also base avoidance ON PLATE ARMOR should take a penalty since they are bulky and you can dodge etc well in them while light armor has an evasion bonus since they are meant to hug your body ( these penalties/bonuses should only apply to fighter classes ) Defense tanks = Guardian, Paladin and Monk ( 2 mitigation and 1 evasion tank ) Offense tanks = Berserker, Shadow Knight , Brusier ( 2 mitigation and 1 evasion tank ) Defense tanks SHOULD have at least a 15% damage intake or evade bonus  OVER an Offense tank while Offense tanks have a 15% DPS bonus over Defense tanks Scouts types ( excluding bards ) should marginally do 15% more dps then offense tanks ( comparing say a berserker with a swashbuckler, they have comparable skills and gear etc ) these are based upon a group , solo based encounter, IMO raid dps should scale maybe 5% more towards scout types since they can utilize poisons more effectively ( aka will get the full effect from it since raid mob takes longer to die _) This is just a base thought i think of tank realignment.... im really tired atm so i cant think in more detail atm... ALSO PLS DONT FLAME THIS.... lets be constructive and add or maybe critque what i posted.... Thank you <div></div>

[Margen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Styker wrote:<BR>Guards and Berserkers can stack HP buffs atm and that isnt right... ( that cant be fixed till they do the proper scaling of all buffs in the game ) <BR><BR>I as a berserker can NEVER  tank as well as any other  plate class solo wise ( meaning a 56^^ will rip me a new one while a Guard , SK and Pally can beat the fight)  --------> that is fine with me for atm i have my DPS ( which will prolly take a severe hit ) <BR><BR>Berserker Defense buffs are at a flux atm... Stance gets overwritten easily by other class defense buffs our 3 min defense buff over rights stance, weaponshield seems like the only skill working atm ( parry buff which guild got me the master for the other day ) <BR><BR>As for me......<BR><BR>You want to realign tanks do it like this <BR><BR>Shields for one SHOULD BE MOVED TOWARDS MITIGATION INSTEAD OF EVASION SINCE BRAWLERS CAN NOT USE THEM ) that means the 6% more evasion we get from them currently is gone and will count towards mitigation.... Also base avoidance ON PLATE ARMOR should take a penalty since they are bulky and you can dodge etc well in them while light armor has an evasion bonus since they are meant to hug your body ( these penalties/bonuses should only apply to fighter classes ) <BR><BR>Defense tanks = Guardian, Paladin and Monk ( 2 mitigation and 1 evasion tank ) <BR><BR>Offense tanks = Berserker, Shadow Knight , Brusier ( 2 mitigation and 1 evasion tank ) <BR><BR>Defense tanks SHOULD have at least a 15% damage intake or evade bonus<BR><BR> OVER an Offense tank while Offense tanks have a 15% DPS bonus over Defense tanks<BR><BR>Scouts types ( excluding bards ) should marginally do 15% more dps then offense tanks ( comparing say a berserker with a swashbuckler, they have comparable skills and gear etc ) these are based upon a group , solo based encounter, IMO raid dps should scale maybe 5% more towards scout types since they can utilize poisons more effectively ( aka will get the full effect from it since raid mob takes longer to die _) <BR><BR>This is just a base thought i think of tank realignment.... im really tired atm so i cant think in more detail atm...<BR><BR>ALSO PLS DONT FLAME THIS.... lets be constructive and add or maybe critque what i posted....<BR><BR>Thank you <BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>While you make some good points.  The problem I see is this though, why would you ever have a dps tank.  Can't speak for either Beserkers (got a 20 level alt, but still learning the class) or Bruiser's (never even thought of playing one), but with Shadow Knights, if we are main tanking we are not really doing dps due to one fact, we have to work our butts off to maintain aggro.  And we have very limited secondary abilities, FD after 35 seems to get really buggy, and evac really is only for ease of travel, due to long casting time.  We do get a nice debuff vs AC at 50 I think (not there yet and don't have cheat sheet with me <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ), but that isn't a class defining spell from what I've heard.  So my point is if you do the trade off for strickly dps vs damage taking, then every one will pick the defensive tank and take a scout instead for the dps ( and yes dps scout classes should out damage us)</P> <P>My thought is this as I said tanking is broken down between:</P> <P>A: mitigation/avoidance</P> <P>B: Maintaing aggro</P> <P>So make it this way, the defensive tanks have the edge in taking/avoiding damage and the DPS tanks have the edge in aggro generation, that way a group has to make the decision do I want a class that can make life easy for the healers, or do I want a class that makes mobs stick to them like dirt on a white teeshirt, due to the increased DPS they provide.  Now beserker already are awsome in aggro generation (got to admit I am really jealous too LOL), but Shadow Knights do need a bit of loving in that area IMHO (heck we are evil incarnated, that should count for something in having the mob hate our guts LOL).  If Sony did it that way then both sets (defensive vs offensive) have an edge in an area of the tanking sceam.</P> <P>Plus give all the tanks some form of usefull and important secondary ability, so if they are not MT, they provide something that makes group/raids want them.</P> <P>Just my 2cp on the issue.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 36th Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[Moski]

<span><blockquote><hr>Moorgard wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Goozman wrote: <div>Moorguard has already said there will be tanking and dps imbalance between fighters. I believe he specifically said that tanking and dps will be the tradeoff between fighter classes. <hr> </div></blockquote> <div>People have taken what I have said on this subject to mean two very different things. Either:</div> <ul> <li>All tanks can tank the same, thereby turning all of them into generic copies of each other.</li> <li>All tanks tank differently, meaning they can never be balanced and one will always be preferable over the others.</li></ul> <p>Which is correct? Both.</p> <p>Why? Because balance isn't just about data in a table or the result of a series of calculations. It's also a factor of luck and of player skill, neither of which we as developers control.</p> <p>Two guardians of the same level with the same gear tanking the same mob will not tank the same. Are they balanced? Sure, as balanced as we can make them. If Kate is more skilled as a tank than Bob, though, Kate will make a better tank. If you ask me, that's as it should be.</p> <p>Parsing has value if you eliminate all variables except the one you are trying to measure. Statistically speaking, you can account for the luck factor if you do your test enough times to make up for random variance. But you can never, ever eliminate skill from the equation, at least when more than one person is involved. Even if skill is only defined as punching the right buttons at the right times, one person will always be faster or smarter at hitting their buttons than somebody else is.</p> <p>This is an oft overlooked concept, but not one that's difficult to understand. Back in my raiding guild in EQ, we all knew we had a better chance to succeed if our raid leader was kept alive. When he went down and we had to switch to other warriors, even ones that were comparably equipped, every one of us knew our chances dropped. Why? He was a better tank because of the skill with which he played his character.</p> <p>So if this is all so impossible to measure, can tank balance ever be achieved? Sure, in a manner of speaking. You can have variance in abilities among fighter classes so long as player skill can overcome any of them. That, to me, is balance.</p> <p>The problem is, that answer won't satisfy everyone because most people would prefer to assume that they are playing their class the best way it can be played. Therefore, imbalance must be due to some other factor.</p> <p><font color="#cc0033">Unfortunately, many people like to think in simple terms. "Joe can't be main tank. He's a monk. Let Toby the guardian be MT." A guild could go through dozens of raids with Toby as the main tank, never realizing that Joe knows his class a hundred times better than Toby knows how to play a guardian. Joe could be a huge asset to the guild, but some players are far more comfortable applying easy labels to others. So Joe misses out on tanking, but the guild misses out on a lot more.</font></p> <p><font color="#cc0033">No matter what changes our spell/combat revamp brings, the concept of class balance will forever be elusive. There will always be people who are unsatisfied and maintain that they are broken beyond repair. Perhaps the ultimate lesson of message board culture is that those looking for an excuse to be unhappy will always be able to find it.</font></p><hr></blockquote> i agree here but skill isnt everything The Difference in Tanking ability between me (bruiser) and guardians is obvious. In a Raid, full buffed my stats look something like 7.200 HP 55% Mitigation 100% Avoidance 1 Single Taunt 1 Melee Skill with small taunt (270 hate) 1 AE Taunt (doesnt work on epics!!!) so i have to use my lvl 10 ae taunt The Stats of my Guildmates (Guardians) are ~ 8.500 - 9.000 HP   (10k is possible) 75% Mitigation (more is possible) 100% Avoidance between 5 and 10 taunt (single/AE/Skills with taunt) </span><div></div>

[Merrygr]

<P>The problem as I see it is that EQ1/2 has always catered to "pure" classes and not "hybrids". The new archetype system was supposed to do away with this, but there seems to be a few "pet" classes that are still the purest.</P> <P>A "perfect" group would likely be:</P> <P>MT<BR>Priest<BR>Utility<BR>DPS<BR>DPS<BR>DPS</P> <P>If you put the "pure" archetype classes in their slots I think that the same 6 people (to avoid any difference in skill) would be a lot more succesfull if they picked:</P> <P>Gurdian<BR>Templar<BR>Illusionist (not sure about this choice, but I'm sure there is one class that fits this best)<BR>Wizard (Again, not sure this is the best DPS, but I'm sure there is one class that fits best)<BR>Wizard<BR>Wizard</P> <DIV>than any other combination of classes. I'm sure there would be some encounters where a different combo of classes might be better, but overall there is likely not much that this group can't do better than any other group.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Given the archetyp system you should be able to switch out any priest or any tank in the above group, but given how the classes ended up I don't think that is true. Put a mystic in place of the templar and the group would be seriously gimped compared to the original. It might have been that you could have put a monk instead of the Guardian as mt to complement the mystic, but I think that would likely make the group even worse.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm sure I have put my foot in it by this post, but that is the way I have seen the archetype system work out. By design, by unconscious choices by devs or whatever, it all boils down to the "pure" classes being better than "hybrids". We were promised that this would not be the case in EQ2, but from what I have seen that was simply never true. The "pure" class is likely even more important on a raid. The only difference is that you want to pick a few "hybrids" to get the best collection of buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I hope I will get to eat my words, but my guess is that after the revamp we will still see the same group being the ideal group and swapping other classes from the same archetype will lessen the group. Hopefully the gap will have shrunk, but I think that is the best we can hope for.</DIV>

[Nibbl]

<P> </P><p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>08-10-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:32 AM</span>

[Nibbl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moskito wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>i agree here but skill isnt everything<BR><BR>The Difference in Tanking ability between me (bruiser) and guardians is obvious.<BR><BR>In a Raid, full buffed my stats look something like<BR>7.200 HP<BR>55% Mitigation <BR>100% Avoidance<BR>1 Single Taunt <BR>1 Melee Skill with small taunt (270 hate)<BR>1 AE Taunt (doesnt work on epics!!!) so i have to use my lvl 10 ae taunt<BR><BR><BR>The Stats of my Guildmates (Guardians) are ~<BR>8.500 - 9.000 HP   (10k is possible)<BR>75% Mitigation (more is possible)<BR>100% Avoidance<BR><FONT color=#ff0000>between 5 and 10 taunt (single/AE/Skills with taunt)</FONT></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>at level 50 a gard has between 5-7 taunts, depending on mob type, i.e. epic or not...  epics are also immune to gard AE taunts... 2 of the 5-7 taunts are from skill/buffs that cause hate, not sure if these effect epic targets or not...</P> <P>thread on gard taunts and skills  <A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=4789&view=by_date_ascending&page=1" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=4789&view=by_date_ascending&page=1</A><BR></P>

[Syndic]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Moorgard wrote:<div></div><p>Two guardians of the same level with the same gear tanking the same mob will not tank the same. Are they balanced? Sure, as balanced as we can make them. If Kate is more skilled as a tank than Bob, though, Kate will make a better tank. If you ask me, that's as it should be.</p> <p>Parsing has value if you eliminate all variables except the one you are trying to measure. Statistically speaking, you can account for the luck factor if you do your test enough times to make up for random variance. But you can never, ever eliminate skill from the equation, at least when more than one person is involved. Even if skill is only defined as punching the right buttons at the right times, one person will always be faster or smarter at hitting their buttons than somebody else is.</p> <p>This is an oft overlooked concept, but not one that's difficult to understand. Back in my raiding guild in EQ, we all knew we had a better chance to succeed if our raid leader was kept alive. When he went down and we had to switch to other warriors, even ones that were comparably equipped, every one of us knew our chances dropped. Why? He was a better tank because of the skill with which he played his character.</p> <p>So if this is all so impossible to measure, can tank balance ever be achieved? Sure, in a manner of speaking. You can have variance in abilities among fighter classes so long as player skill can overcome any of them. That, to me, is balance.</p> <p>The problem is, that answer won't satisfy everyone because most people would prefer to assume that they are playing their class the best way it can be played. Therefore, imbalance must be due to some other factor.</p> <p>Unfortunately, many people like to think in simple terms. "Joe can't be main tank. He's a monk. Let Toby the guardian be MT." A guild could go through dozens of raids with Toby as the main tank, never realizing that Joe knows his class a hundred times better than Toby knows how to play a guardian. Joe could be a huge asset to the guild, but some players are far more comfortable applying easy labels to others. So Joe misses out on tanking, but the guild misses out on a lot more.</p> <p>No matter what changes our spell/combat revamp brings, the concept of class balance will forever be elusive. There will always be people who are unsatisfied and maintain that they are broken beyond repair. Perhaps the ultimate lesson of message board culture is that those looking for an excuse to be unhappy will always be able to find it.</p><hr></blockquote> I would have to agree Moorgard.  Players perceptions of classes affect balance more than anything done by Sony so far. Shamans come to the board complaining they can't heal as well as others, other players start to believe them, it is all downhill from there.  I have grouped with some very good shamans, but also some very bad ones.  Same could be said for any class. I'm sure to some people I'm considered a poor player, but I would hope that some would consider me a good player.  I don't think that has any indication on the balance on the class.  Recently I was in a group where both myself (guard) and a SK were both level 36.  The leader made the SK the main tank.  Even though I believe he played his SK poorly we still survived and had a good play session together.  Does that mean the SK is over balanced, well balanced or under-balanced, from the outside I could not tell.  </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Syndic on <span class=date_text>06-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:51 PM</span>

[Feaw]

<DIV>Right now your balance is working like this in raids:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardians are the tanks</DIV> <DIV>Beserkers are a DPS class</DIV> <DIV>Paladins can help heal the priest and battle rez ( but arnt real tanks )</DIV> <DIV>Other tanks classes are ... filler ( but arnt real tanks )</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>At the beginning of the game Im pretty sure we were told that any class of an archetype would be able to preform that archetype's function in the same situation.  The above list isnt how I feel about it, Im really trying to make it work.   Many guilds however are rapidly adopting the above sterotypes though and its a cause of wide spread frustration amont those of us who believed in the balance when we chose our class. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>:smileyindifferent: :smileysad:</DIV>

[Izudin]

<div></div><div></div><strong></strong><hr><strong>Group Analysis</strong>A brawler makes a decent main tank, but suffers somewhat from his poor damage mitigation ability. A brawler makes a very good secondary tank, however, using combat arts like Defend to improve the tanking ability of the main tank, and at the same time delivering excellent damage.<hr>Quote from the "official" brawler guide, linked off the eq2players site. You can find the full thing <a href="http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/classes/playguide.vm?classId=5" target="_blank">here</a>. There's no such article for bruisers/monks however last I looked. EDIT: This does not represent my personal opinion. I think all tanks should be equally useful for all types of encounters (solo/group/raid). Of course there can be  some encounters where one tank type may be better than another, but generally you should look for a fighter, not for a guardian/monk/paladin or whatever. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Izudin on <span class=date_text>06-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:43 PM</span>

[kcirrot]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Goozman wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR>Moorguard has already said there will be tanking and dps imbalance between fighters. I believe he specifically said that tanking and dps will be the tradeoff between fighter classes. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>People have taken what I have said on this subject to mean two very different things. Either:</DIV> <UL> <LI>All tanks can tank the same, thereby turning all of them into generic copies of each other.</LI> <LI>All tanks tank differently, meaning they can never be balanced and one will always be preferable over the others.</LI></UL> <P>Which is correct? Both.</P> <P>Why? Because balance isn't just about data in a table or the result of a series of calculations. It's also a factor of luck and of player skill, neither of which we as developers control.</P> <P>Two guardians of the same level with the same gear tanking the same mob will not tank the same. Are they balanced? Sure, as balanced as we can make them. If Kate is more skilled as a tank than Bob, though, Kate will make a better tank. If you ask me, that's as it should be.</P> <P>Parsing has value if you eliminate all variables except the one you are trying to measure. Statistically speaking, you can account for the luck factor if you do your test enough times to make up for random variance. But you can never, ever eliminate skill from the equation, at least when more than one person is involved. Even if skill is only defined as punching the right buttons at the right times, one person will always be faster or smarter at hitting their buttons than somebody else is.</P> <P>This is an oft overlooked concept, but not one that's difficult to understand. Back in my raiding guild in EQ, we all knew we had a better chance to succeed if our raid leader was kept alive. When he went down and we had to switch to other warriors, even ones that were comparably equipped, every one of us knew our chances dropped. Why? He was a better tank because of the skill with which he played his character.</P> <P>So if this is all so impossible to measure, can tank balance ever be achieved? Sure, in a manner of speaking. You can have variance in abilities among fighter classes so long as player skill can overcome any of them. That, to me, is balance.</P> <P>The problem is, that answer won't satisfy everyone because most people would prefer to assume that they are playing their class the best way it can be played. Therefore, imbalance must be due to some other factor.</P> <P>Unfortunately, many people like to think in simple terms. "Joe can't be main tank. He's a monk. Let Toby the guardian be MT." A guild could go through dozens of raids with Toby as the main tank, never realizing that Joe knows his class a hundred times better than Toby knows how to play a guardian. Joe could be a huge asset to the guild, but some players are far more comfortable applying easy labels to others. So Joe misses out on tanking, but the guild misses out on a lot more.</P> <P>No matter what changes our spell/combat revamp brings, the concept of class balance will forever be elusive. There will always be people who are unsatisfied and maintain that they are broken beyond repair. Perhaps the ultimate lesson of message board culture is that those looking for an excuse to be unhappy will always be able to find it.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Moorgard, you just keep telling it like it is, great post!<BR>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>You know the funny thing. Most people, in fact, the overall majority of people who play this game probably NEVER bought the guide. I chose this game because over and over, SoE stated that all subclasses would be interchangeable. </P> <P>This is not the case. Also, Moorgard posted that player skill has a much to do with tanking and I would agree mostly. Unfortunately, tell that the the avoidance tanks. </P> <P>You have Guardians who are silver spoon fed, and then you got the rest of the tank classes, some that have tons of skills broken, such as SK's.</P> <P>Its boggles the mind how Guards, over and over, state that its ok.  Also, and this is the kicker, since that guide was put together by SOE its probably worthless now. This game has been nerfed, patched, and "updated" so many times that the info is about as useless as LU10.  People put alot of time and effort into their toon, just to be told, "oops, SoE screwed up, now live with it"? I dont think so. </P> <P>The boards are indicative of player sentiment. If the majority of tank posters are unhappy with the direction of tanking, does that mean nothing? Notice that the people that continually defend the status quo are mostly Guardians. I started this thread and most of the posts are from people who who are dissapointed that SoE went back on their word and is instituting a permament tanking inbalance. Bruisers/MONK DPS and evasion is meant to bridge the gap in tanking, but guards keep using this as a reason why evasion tanks SHOULD not be given a boost, but guards sure are happy they get 100% evasion and those extra +def buffs, which I still dont understand why the other tank classes dont get them.</P> <P> If I can make a thread and have people keep posting about how tanking is inbalanced, then there is a problem.  As it stands player skill rarely can compete against SoE badly- constructed subclasses.</P> <P>Guards get 100% evasion, 100% mitigation, a ton more hit points that other tanks. more def buffs than other tanks, more taunts than other tank classes, the ability to use every weapon and shield in the game...</P> <P>And Paladins get a rez and heals, super!</P> <P>and SK's get a FD, fantastic!</P> <P>and Bruisers and Monks get, well, FD and DPS, magnificent!</P> <P>and Berserkers get nerfed when SOE gets bored, stupendous!</P> <P>The only thing we share with is the 100% evasion bug. This is SoE tank balance at its best, right? Where does player skill come into effect?</P> <P>Look at this thread in the Guard section <A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=12972" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=12972</A></P> <P><U><STRONG>Granted, ill admit this is very unusual, even by Guard standards</STRONG></U>, but i regularly see guards in the 10 k range during raids. BY the way, mods..I didnt start that thread, so please dont lock this one. The link is to a post by a guard with a screenshot of his numbers. I'm using it as a example</P> <P>Uzhiel, lvl 50 Paladin, Eternal Chaos, Faydark.</P> <P>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <SPAN class=date_text>06-06-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:43 AM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>06-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:48 AM</span>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Ramsy02 wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>FamilyManFirst wrote:This is exactly what SOE is trying to <b>counteract</b> in EQ2, not foster. All Fighters are Tanks, period, end of discussion. <b>For the most part</b> any Fighter sub-class should be about as good at being MT as any other Fighter sub-class. This is not EQ1, there is not one, single MT class. Deal with it. <font color="#ff0000">So, basically a Monk should do 3x the dps a guardian does and tank the same. Ok lets just get rid of the guardians since their is no use for them, problem solved.</font><hr></blockquote><hr></blockquote>Now, that's not what I said. I said that, for the most part, any Fighter sub-class should be about as good at being MT as any other Fighter sub-class. This isn't just Monk vs. Guardian, either, this is Shadow Knight vs. Guardian vs. Berserker etc.A few more points in the Monk vs. Guardian theme, though:1) Monks don't do 3x the DPS of a Guardian. <i>When they focus on DPS</i> (which they seldom do) Guardians do a lot more than than many like to admit.2) Monks <i>shouldn't</i> do 3x the DPS of a Guardian, either; if/when they do they are unbalanced. Monks should do more DPS than Guardians as they have to deal with damage spikes, lower Health, and fewer Taunts and other hate-inducers (like group buffs), but, as Moorgard posted previously, the DPS gap between Monks and Guardians, <i>when each is focusing on DPS</i> shouldn't be huge. Perhaps in the half-again range.3) IMHO, given the tradeoffs mentioned in 2, the Damage Dissipation (overall effectiveness of Mitigation and Avoidance combined) of Monks should be about the same as Guardians.<blockquote><hr>From the notes about what has been done on Test so far (regarding the Big Combat Revision) you're likely to be disappointed. It sounds like all classes are "getting nerfed" defensively but Guardians and Berserkers may be hit the hardest. They've placed caps on how far defensive traits can be buffed, so those group make-ups that currently result in "100% Avoidance and 100% Mitigation" won't work any more, for anyone. <font color="#ff0000">That is good to hear.</font><hr></blockquote>What will be interesting to see, if these caps remain, is how Avoidance tanking stacks up against Mitigation tanking. Presently plate tanks in groups are using both high Mitigation <i>and</i> high Avoidance to do their job; as near as I can tell just from update notes, they're going to lose some of that Avoidance. I regret that they've turned off the combat adjustments on Test for now; I'd almost be willing to whip up a Monk on Test (to the mid-20s or so) just to see, numerically, how Deflection stacks up against the Avoidance plate tanks will be getting from shields.

[FamilyManFir]

Moorgard, I have a suggestion for you. I don't expect a reply, this is just a recommendation.Take your Bruiser and go tank Darathar with him and a raid of your coworkers (or some other players if you're comfortable with them). Presumably you're fairly skilled with him by now.Then borrow a Guardian from a friend (or have one dev-boosted to 50 with appropriate gear) and tank Darathar with that char. Presumably you're not very skilled with a Guardian yet.Then come back and tell us that tanks are balanced and skill determines the outcome.I would love to have skill be the defining factor in how good a tank is. If that were the case I could compare my performance with my Monk to any other tank and, if I came out wanting, I could go scour the boards, talk with other Monks in the all-servers Monk channel, experiment on my own, learn some new techniques to tank with, practice with friends and guildies, and improve my skill to the point where I could equal or better that other tank. I've actually experienced that with my Berserker; I've learned things on the Berserker board that have improved how I've played that class from level 20 to level 36 (his current level). However I really percieve a stacked deck right now, with Guardians at the top and Monks and Bruisers at the bottom (might share that spot with Shadow Knights). As others have said, if it takes an exceptional Monk to equal an average Guardian then tank balance is lacking.

[Fromingo]

<DIV>The game needs lots of work still but don't sell some of these other classes too short.  I have played a high level fury and am getting up there with a dirge.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Here's my take(opinion) on tanks from a my perspective from months of healing as a Fury(the highest aggro healers in the game)...  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I have seen crap guardians I had to work my [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] off keeping alive.  I have seen great guardians that made my job easy.  They have pretty good aggro control however even the great guardians could lose aggro if I was forced to spread my exceptionally high aggro Fury HoT's around.    </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Paladins I like because they can tank well and provide some healing boost if I need it.  They are slightly  worse at holding aggro than the comparable skilled guardians.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SK's sorry but I havn't met an SK yet that I can honestly say I'd love to be my MT.  Maybe I have just met crap ones these last several months but so far I have never been wow'd.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monk/Bruiser I don't really like healing them.   Either they are not getting hit and wasting my HoT or they are getting creamed and forcing me to chain heal.  Their tanking ability is too unpredictable.  They also are not the best aggro holders.  They look [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] cool though heh.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Beserkers.  I used to never prefer a beserker in the group because I traveled with a chanter a lot and they were forced to hold off their AE's which seemed to [Removed for Content] them.   However having played with a several different ones I can honestly say I have grown to love them.  Good ones can hold aggro like a champ even under very stressful situations like lots of AE where I have to spread heals around.   Even the not so good zerkers hold aggro pretty well.  Their tanking ability is not bad IMO.  I have seen beserkers tank some amazing things including Yellow con Epic X2 ^^^ mobs with just 4 people  (Zerker, healer, 2 DPS).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Take that for what you will.  My opinion as the healer of various tanks.  I like Beserkers, Pallys and Guardians.   I'm not particarlly a fan of SK/monk/bruisers.</DIV>