So.. is there any point to playing a SK? [Archive]

Bramwe

07-24-2007, 05:06 PM

You can raid in any raid and do just fine. Some guilds who only want a certain makeup of players wont let you raid with them but it really doesn't matter if there is an SK or Monk or paladin or any other type of fighter when it should be a scout instead. You can raid basically any content in this game without the "perfect" raid makeup. We raid all the time with 5 or 6 fighters consisting of monks, SKs, paladins, zerkers, multiple Guards and we do just fine and are progressing through EoF raids. Sure having 2 more casters and a scout on our raids would increase our dps a whole thousand points or something but that isn't what will make the difference between being successful and unsuccessful. You just need to play smart. The people telling you that you are not desirable for a raid are the people with the contested on lock down, killing avatars and farming Woushi every week. If you are an up and coming raider you will not be at this point for a very long time anyway no matter what class you are. Honestly, now that I think of it Guardians aren't really needed either. A Zerker can out dps me and tank anything in the game so I guess I should quit.

MadLordOfMilk

07-24-2007, 05:09 PM

<cite>Jihrun wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cyris wrote:</cite><blockquote>If you want to raid? Everyone I've talked to says they're pretty much worthless in raids, and the last man picked... Am I wasting my time? Or should I just go reroll on a PvP server so I at least have something to do while I'm not raiding. Is there another class thats a melee/mage hybrid? </blockquote> I don't raid so I can't give any advice but I just read on the Monk board that Monks are the least desirable class for raids. *shrug* </blockquote>Pretty much, actually - taking a Monk is like bringing a Ranger who parses like a Bard <img src="/smilies/e78feac27fa924c4d0ad6cf5819f3554.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> SKs at least have some utility.

Morgane

07-24-2007, 05:19 PM

Kraaj@Everfrost wrote: <blockquote><cite>Jihrun wrote:</cite><blockquote> I don't raid so I can't give any advice but I just read on the Monk board that Monks are the least desirable class for raids. *shrug* </blockquote>Pretty much, actually - taking a Monk is like bringing a Ranger who parses like a Bard <img src="/smilies/e78feac27fa924c4d0ad6cf5819f3554.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> SKs at least have some utility. </blockquote>Eh, bite me. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Juuuuuust kidding. I don't raid so no big deal for me. I love playing the Monk. I also have a Guardian and a Wizzy I'd drag out if ever I felt the need to raid. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Ravaan

07-24-2007, 05:54 PM

i have to say i have never understood why the MT always has to be a guardian or zerker. I mean from the start of the game i thought the philosophy for every tank class was "to tank equally but differenty".when i started my shadowknight back in the day, i lived by that phrase. I didnt become a shadowknight to be someone armor [Removed for Content] or to bring utility. I became a shadowknight so i can tank crap.im sure the same with paladins, im sure people didnt roll them to be backup healers or monks/bruisers to be bastardized raid dps.Gaurds/Zerkers should NOT be the only tank capable of doing the hardest raid zones. this was the philosophy from the beginning and it should get back to it.

Bramwe

07-24-2007, 06:21 PM

Yannos@Unrest wrote: <blockquote>i have to say i have never understood why the MT always has to be a guardian or zerker. I mean from the start of the game i thought the philosophy for every tank class was "to tank equally but differenty".when i started my shadowknight back in the day, i lived by that phrase. I didnt become a shadowknight to be someone armor [Removed for Content] or to bring utility. I became a shadowknight so i can tank crap.im sure the same with paladins, im sure people didnt roll them to be backup healers or monks/bruisers to be bastardized raid dps.Gaurds/Zerkers should NOT be the only tank capable of doing the hardest raid zones. this was the philosophy from the beginning and it should get back to it.</blockquote>The problem is that a very large portion of the players who started playing this game from the beginning played EQ1 where there were more defined classes; Warrior was the best tank. Paladin and SK were hybrids(good for group tanking not raid tanking and everyone knew and accepted it) and Monks were straight DPS. Along comes EQ2 and the development team thinks to themselves....let's take these classes from EQ1 and make them all equal in ability but different in how they do it since everything in this whole world needs to be equal. That is fine and all for a game that is brand new but this is Everquest TWO. People who played the first are naturally going to assume the classes in EQ1 are similar in this game but they are not. The new players to the Everquest series are going to read the descriptions and base their decisions solely on that. Then you get into the game and the new players are in combat with the EQ1 veterans over what is the best tank vs dps vs utility vs crappy unneeded class. IMO there are too many classes in this game(of course I played EQ1 so my opinion is influenced by that). Guard/Zerker could be one class. Monk/bruiser could be one class. Illusionist/coercer, mystic/defiler....etc. Some classes should stay as they are Paladin/SK for example.....completely different.

Norrsken

07-24-2007, 06:38 PM

<cite>Bramwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yannos@Unrest wrote: <blockquote>i have to say i have never understood why the MT always has to be a guardian or zerker. I mean from the start of the game i thought the philosophy for every tank class was "to tank equally but differenty".when i started my shadowknight back in the day, i lived by that phrase. I didnt become a shadowknight to be someone armor [Removed for Content] or to bring utility. I became a shadowknight so i can tank crap.im sure the same with paladins, im sure people didnt roll them to be backup healers or monks/bruisers to be bastardized raid dps.Gaurds/Zerkers should NOT be the only tank capable of doing the hardest raid zones. this was the philosophy from the beginning and it should get back to it.</blockquote>The problem is that a very large portion of the players who started playing this game from the beginning played EQ1 where there were more defined classes; Warrior was the best tank. Paladin and SK were hybrids(good for group tanking not raid tanking and everyone knew and accepted it) and Monks were straight DPS. Along comes EQ2 and the development team thinks to themselves....let's take these classes from EQ1 and make them all equal in ability but different in how they do it since everything in this whole world needs to be equal. That is fine and all for a game that is brand new but this is Everquest TWO. People who played the first are naturally going to assume the classes in EQ1 are similar in this game but they are not. The new players to the Everquest series are going to read the descriptions and base their decisions solely on that. Then you get into the game and the new players are in combat with the EQ1 veterans over what is the best tank vs dps vs utility vs crappy unneeded class. IMO there are too many classes in this game(of course I played EQ1 so my opinion is influenced by that). Guard/Zerker could be one class. Monk/bruiser could be one class. Illusionist/coercer, mystic/defiler....etc. Some classes should stay as they are Paladin/SK for example.....completely different. </blockquote>not to mention, guardians were THE tank back in the day. At release sks were pretty [Removed for Content], and so on. Most tanks still have a bad stigma from release. the SKs have proven time and time again that they can pull some crazy [Removed for Content], but still we're considered a [Removed for Content] class. :'(

Yask

07-24-2007, 08:27 PM

My guilds main raid MT is a SK and we do ok.

Ravaan

07-24-2007, 08:30 PM

<cite>Bramwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yannos@Unrest wrote: <blockquote>i have to say i have never understood why the MT always has to be a guardian or zerker. I mean from the start of the game i thought the philosophy for every tank class was "to tank equally but differenty".when i started my shadowknight back in the day, i lived by that phrase. I didnt become a shadowknight to be someone armor [Removed for Content] or to bring utility. I became a shadowknight so i can tank crap.im sure the same with paladins, im sure people didnt roll them to be backup healers or monks/bruisers to be bastardized raid dps.Gaurds/Zerkers should NOT be the only tank capable of doing the hardest raid zones. this was the philosophy from the beginning and it should get back to it.</blockquote>The problem is that a very large portion of the players who started playing this game from the beginning played EQ1 where there were more defined classes; Warrior was the best tank. Paladin and SK were hybrids(good for group tanking not raid tanking and everyone knew and accepted it) and Monks were straight DPS. Along comes EQ2 and the development team thinks to themselves....let's take these classes from EQ1 and make them all equal in ability but different in how they do it since everything in this whole world needs to be equal. That is fine and all for a game that is brand new but this is Everquest TWO. People who played the first are naturally going to assume the classes in EQ1 are similar in this game but they are not. The new players to the Everquest series are going to read the descriptions and base their decisions solely on that. Then you get into the game and the new players are in combat with the EQ1 veterans over what is the best tank vs dps vs utility vs crappy unneeded class. IMO there are too many classes in this game(of course I played EQ1 so my opinion is influenced by that). Guard/Zerker could be one class. Monk/bruiser could be one class. Illusionist/coercer, mystic/defiler....etc. Some classes should stay as they are Paladin/SK for example.....completely different. </blockquote> well then those people should have been straight out that "EQ2 is NOT EQ1" so things will be different. Like i said when i start my Sk i envisioned tanking raids im sure many others that didn't pick guard/zerker when it first came out did as well.know not only do brawlers and crusaders not tank ... they are lucky if they get invited to raid groups.

LordPazuzu

07-24-2007, 09:35 PM

I never saw much point to the SK class in EQ2. But then again, I played one in EQ1 and thus had considerably higher expectations coming into the class than someone who did not.

Wildmage

07-24-2007, 09:55 PM

<cite>LordPazuzu wrote:</cite><blockquote>I never saw much point to the SK class in EQ2. But then again, I played one in EQ1 and thus had considerably higher expectations coming into the class than someone who did not.</blockquote> my main EQ1 character was an Sk and honestly I like the EQ2 version better though back when I was playing Sks did not have a good reputation many a group I would walk up with my Troll Sk and ask if I was main tank only to hear "Sks can't tank LOLz" then have some blue conning to me warrior be the main tank pull, overpull, and I ended up the last man standing after the rest of the party wiped/ran off from resulting overpull.

Ama

07-24-2007, 10:03 PM

<cite>Cyris wrote:</cite><blockquote>If you want to raid? Everyone I've talked to says they're pretty much worthless in raids, and the last man picked... Am I wasting my time? Or should I just go reroll on a PvP server so I at least have something to do while I'm not raiding. Is there another class thats a melee/mage hybrid? </blockquote> It's really sad, but SKs are just not very useful on raids from what I found out. Every time I try to join a raid with my 70 SK I always get the message "no more plate tanks". Have only raided with him 3 times which freakin sucks imho. We are useful because we have several abilities that can make us great MAs or off tanks if properly utilized. <ol><li>Despoiling Mist (lvl 70 ability)-This is a great ability that reduces the enemies mitigation vs physical attacks and adds a portion of that back to our physical mitigation. This is a group AoE ability which makes it really effective. </li><li>Death March even at adept I is a great ability for augmenting mages. It increases their int and makes em cast faster allowing em to crank out the dps. Now if you couple that with an illusionist's intensity line decreasing threat you have a potent combination. </li><li>Siphon Str, Wis decreaser, Harm Touch Line and our ability to heal ourselves makes us great upfront dps. The damage shield is also great since it can help heal the tank and create aggro/hurt the mob at the same time. If you increase the healing potential of the damage shield we can become "Minor" healers. I say minor since the damage shield doesn't heal for too much, but just enough that it can make a difference. </li></ol>Even with all those abilities and great gear we are ruled out for zerkers, monks, and bruisers. Heck I even see pallys getting into it because of their direct healing abilities along with pure damage ward.

LordPazuzu

07-25-2007, 01:15 AM

<cite>Wildmage wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>LordPazuzu wrote:</cite><blockquote>I never saw much point to the SK class in EQ2. But then again, I played one in EQ1 and thus had considerably higher expectations coming into the class than someone who did not.</blockquote> my main EQ1 character was an Sk and honestly I like the EQ2 version better though back when I was playing Sks did not have a good reputation many a group I would walk up with my Troll Sk and ask if I was main tank only to hear "Sks can't tank LOLz" then have some blue conning to me warrior be the main tank pull, overpull, and I ended up the last man standing after the rest of the party wiped/ran off from resulting overpull. </blockquote> I don't know, they just seemed rather flavorless and weak compared to their EQ1 counterparts.

Gnevil

07-25-2007, 02:05 AM

I love posts like this...If you are trying to be in a min/max hardcore raid guild.... most likely you will not be welcome with 90% of them. But for the rest of the raid guilds that don't worry about blasting through each raid with the optimum setup and aren't worried about their worldwide standing you could tank any of it. It just depends on the guild and how they handle their raids... no one said you coudln't raid it's just a matter of getting in, or starting a guild whose policy is to try different tank classes for the raids.So tired of the whining about how I wanna tank like a guardian/zerker but don't want to give up all my unique abilities that give me far more utility damage then said guardian... If you can't find a raid guild that will let you tank, and at this point it's probably hard most of the top tier raid guilds have set membership and only occasionally look for new players to add, then start your own guild make yourself the main tank you do all the work on the strats and get 23 other players to follow you.

Ravaan

07-25-2007, 02:36 AM

<cite>Gnevil wrote:</cite><blockquote>So tired of the whining about how I wanna tank like a guardian/zerker but don't want to give up all my unique abilities that give me far more utility damage then said guardian... </blockquote>um the guardian/zerkers in my guild are always in the top ten dps. So what were you saying again about damage?

Ether

07-25-2007, 02:43 AM

Sadly most of this is true. You will be at the bottom of the list of needed raid classes.However, unless you are the MT, guardians and zerkers are also incredibly difficult to get into raids if you have a more appealing alt.With more and more guilds needing to do pick up raids to fill ranks during the summer, its funny to watch the channels as "Guild X looking for more for a labs raid.. no tanks please".I will be overjoyed when they fix the "all tanks can tank, but differently" clause in the original development plan. Can then dust of my bruiser.

Ravaan

07-25-2007, 04:56 AM

its sucks from level 1-70 I as a shadowknight will be a tank (yeah im not at 70 yet). however once i hit 70 and start raiding I will be utility or support class. that my tanking abilities just dissolve into nothing when it comes to raids.

Rahatmattata

07-25-2007, 05:10 AM

It's definatly not the #1 class to pick for a sure fire raid slot. But it depends on the guilds on your server, how involved in raiding you want to get, and what those guilds need at the moment when you are raid ready. You might be able to get a slot in a really fun group of people that do lite raiding a couple times a week fairly easily, and do heroic content/arenas/events with each other on other nights. However your chances of getting into a hardcore contested killing raid guild will be pretty slim TBH, with a SK as your main. It's one of those classes you really don't want to bring more than 1 of, if even 1 at all. While you can viably have 2 or 3 or even 4 sorcerers, it would be pretty silly to have 4 crusaders.But, for example, if you just want to do some Labs raiding, maybe some other KoS raiding, you shouldn't have too much trouble getting a spot in a more casual raid. An SK could easily tank Labs, or off-tank or dps or whatever, it doesn't really matter in the easier zones.

Norrsken

07-25-2007, 06:36 AM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's definatly not the #1 class to pick for a sure fire raid slot. But it depends on the guilds on your server, how involved in raiding you want to get, and what those guilds need at the moment when you are raid ready. You might be able to get a slot in a really fun group of people that do lite raiding a couple times a week fairly easily, and do heroic content/arenas/events with each other on other nights. However your chances of getting into a hardcore contested killing raid guild will be pretty slim TBH, with a SK as your main. It's one of those classes you really don't want to bring more than 1 of, if even 1 at all. While you can viably have 2 or 3 or even 4 sorcerers, it would be pretty silly to have 4 crusaders.But, for example, if you just want to do some Labs raiding, maybe some other KoS raiding, you shouldn't have too much trouble getting a spot in a more casual raid. An SK could easily tank Labs, or off-tank or dps or whatever, it doesn't really matter in the easier zones.</blockquote>A tank specced sk is actually able to tank everything a guardian does. Thing is, apart from the bad stigma and all, raids dont need more than 2 tanks. If you bring more, you are wasting dps spots. sad but true. But lets see what they do in GU37 and 38 now. Seems they have some stuff brewing for non MT tanks in raids

Beldin_

07-25-2007, 07:48 AM

<cite>Bramwell wrote:</cite><blockquote> Honestly, now that I think of it Guardians aren't really needed either. A Zerker can out dps me and tank anything in the game so I guess I should quit. </blockquote>Always funny to read how some people say how uber zerkers are .. and then read in other threads zerkers whining how useless they are, and that noone wants them on raids and that guards are so much better in all aspects <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />@openerYou have to decide if you want primary a fun class, or want to be a raid-[Removed for Content]. If first .. go with your SK .. if second .. that changes from time to time .. brigants were wanted a long time, and also a fun class .. however now there a already too much around .. at the moment i think bards or defilers are a good choice <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />However .. never ever roll any tankclass if all you want is raiding. Raidguilds/allies also have already their guardian, and don't need a second, so guard would also not be better then SK, except you want to create your own raidforce.

Drewx

07-26-2007, 12:20 AM

This issue always crosses my mind.The replies are what tickle me though.I'm a 70 Sk. I've been playing since EQ 2 started and have lived through many changes in tanks/tanking. Yet I've always loved my SK. I only wish the EQ 2 world loved it as much.Its undeniable and unanimous(spell check?) that SKs are not wanted for raids. They CAN tank some I'll even say most raids. Most people who say they are worthless are "Class [Removed for Content]" 80% of the time, and they want the perfect set-up. However I've seen even the most unorthodox set-ups pull off raids to a tee.I'm not a big raider so I can't say much more than that.Whats getting me is...how everyone says Guardians & Berserkers are the best around, that Shadowknights & Paladins are only good for groups, and lastly Monks * Bruisers are just another form of DPS. Yet I myself have seen Monks & Bruisers MT groups and MT a raid (much to even my own surprise). However it sems now adays every tank but Guardians and Berserkers are not wanted. I see so many groups looking for a Tank in chat, but when I send a tell I get: "We need a REAL tank." - "SKs aren't tanks." - "You should role a guardian."The killer is I'll get told: "We don't need any plate tanks." then my monk friend will get a tell from the same group saying "We don't need and leather tanks." So what are they looking for I wonder... Then I hear in Chat that the game needs more tanks. Yet I see over a dozen SKs and Pallys LFG. Which brings one to think that apprently the only classes that are CONSIDERED tanks are Guardians and Berserkers? True...from the 1st day of EQ 2 Guardians were desgined to be the most defensive tank around, you're number one choice for a Raid Tank, Berserkers were their offensive counterpart. Shadowknight was a more offensive caster/tank hybrid, Pally was more defensive, I forget the bruiser/monk differences. Then they evened things out alot more, I remember during DoF LOTS of Guards hated the mitigation nerf.Anyways SKs are still worth playing, not only can we tank, we can also DPS, Off-Tank, and evac groups. We're awesome DPS, Support/Utility, and can tank just as good as other classes. (Why some groups will have a Swashie tank over an SK/Pal....is beyond me)The real problem lays iwthin the players of the game. A MMO's playerbase often decides the market, grinding spots, and unfortunately desireable classes. This reminds me alot of FFXI where the playerbase turned the market into a hellhole, you were rich or you hgad nothing, and you HAD no choice but to be the race and Job combo that people wanted. There was no middle class, there was no reasonable job mix. On some servers it seems EQ II is going this way...well...atleast when it comes to Classes.[Removed for Content] I rambled on too much...*Goes back into Seclusion*

Cyris

07-26-2007, 01:03 AM

They should just replace all SK tanking skills with DPS skills, then they'd be fine...

Wildmage

07-26-2007, 01:27 AM

<cite>Cyris wrote:</cite><blockquote>They should just replace all SK tanking skills with DPS skills, then they'd be fine... </blockquote>No Crusaders and Brawlers are tanks they have tank abilities and are designed from the ground up to tanks outside or raiding they do just fine. Raid situation is honestly gotten unhealthy right now with a good 1/6 of the classes in the game being excluded. GU 37 and 38 are going to be addressing the fighter classes problem it looks like and the raid structure should be come more fluid and healthy for it. While right now its true that raids only need at best 2 tanks...my gut feeling is that post Kunark or sooner that will no longer be true.

Naubeta

07-26-2007, 05:11 AM

What is "utility damage" and how is it better than just doing more dps?

Cyris

07-26-2007, 05:46 AM

<cite>Wildmage wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cyris wrote:</cite><blockquote>They should just replace all SK tanking skills with DPS skills, then they'd be fine... </blockquote>No Crusaders and Brawlers are tanks they have tank abilities and are designed from the ground up to tanks outside or raiding they do just fine. Raid situation is honestly gotten unhealthy right now with a good 1/6 of the classes in the game being excluded. GU 37 and 38 are going to be addressing the fighter classes problem it looks like and the raid structure should be come more fluid and healthy for it. While right now its true that raids only need at best 2 tanks...my gut feeling is that post Kunark or sooner that will no longer be true. </blockquote> Lets be honest. A game does NOT need 6 types of tank. It doesn't need 6 types of anything. There are way too many classes in this game, with a raid size too small to accompany them all. If raids where like 50 people, it wouldn't be such an issue, but unless you plan to take 1 player of each class (obviously not the case on pvp servers) you're going to leave certain classes out. And if you do only take 1 player of each class, who gets to be that lucky player? The only way it works is if people don't bother to show up. If you're short on classes you'd like to take, you'll take anyone just so you can go. Like it or not, its a design flaw and its here to stay.

Khurghan

07-26-2007, 05:53 AM

This problem is pretty much true for all tanks, its just more visible for SK's. Most EoF content requires 2-3 tanks at most, anything more is just dead weight.

jagermonsta

07-26-2007, 10:11 AM

Hmm this is all very interesting to me. Perhaps the problem is a lot of people haven't seen a good SK in action. Check out the SK forum, there are many people there that are raid main tanks. What I don't understand is what happens at level 70 that supposedly makes Zerkers and Guardians out DPS Shadowknights so greatly? I am currently in T6 and I out parse my group (rogues, nukers, tanks...) 95% of the time as main tank (in defensive stance...). Is there something I'm missing?

Norrsken

07-26-2007, 10:14 AM

Ranadin@Antonia Bayle wrote: <blockquote>Hmm this is all very interesting to me. Perhaps the problem is a lot of people haven't seen a good SK in action. Check out the SK forum, there are many people there that are raid main tanks. What I don't understand is what happens at level 70 that supposedly makes Zerkers and Guardians out DPS Shadowknights so greatly? I am currently in T6 and I out parse my group (rogues, nukers, tanks...) 95% of the time as main tank (in defensive stance...). Is there something I'm missing? </blockquote>PErcieved deficiensies that perhaps were true about the classes a few years back, and hav eproven hard to shrug off.

CHIMPNOODLE.

07-26-2007, 01:44 PM

Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote: <blockquote>Ranadin@Antonia Bayle wrote: <blockquote>Hmm this is all very interesting to me. Perhaps the problem is a lot of people haven't seen a good SK in action. Check out the SK forum, there are many people there that are raid main tanks. What I don't understand is what happens at level 70 that supposedly makes Zerkers and Guardians out DPS Shadowknights so greatly? I am currently in T6 and I out parse my group (rogues, nukers, tanks...) 95% of the time as main tank (in defensive stance...). Is there something I'm missing? </blockquote>PErcieved deficiensies that perhaps were true about the classes a few years back, and hav eproven hard to shrug off. </blockquote> Pretty much ya. Perceived being the operative word there. Either way, with 2 to 3 tank slots as more than sufficient for the vast majority of zones....and a high number of tanks available, getting your slot can be tough regardless of tanking class.I'm interested to see what kind of effects LU37 and 38 will have. The changes sound interesting anyway.

KBern

07-26-2007, 01:48 PM

Our SK is great. When the Guards cant show up, she has tanked EH and MMIS from start to finish.We use her for the adds on Mayong, tanking with the court packs, and any thing you could use any other tank class for.CHIMP had it right, it is mainly perception, or crappy SK experiences....and there are only a certain amount of slots per raid for tanks but we usually have one when she is able to raid.

Beldin_

07-26-2007, 02:51 PM

Ranadin@Antonia Bayle wrote: <blockquote>What I don't understand is what happens at level 70 that supposedly makes Zerkers and Guardians out DPS Shadowknights so greatly? I am currently in T6 and I out parse my group (rogues, nukers, tanks...) 95% of the time as main tank (in defensive stance...). Is there something I'm missing? </blockquote> Yeah .. don't believe all the crap about DPS that some uber-raiders are posting <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Wildmage

07-26-2007, 03:00 PM

<cite>Cyris wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Wildmage wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cyris wrote:</cite><blockquote>They should just replace all SK tanking skills with DPS skills, then they'd be fine... </blockquote>No Crusaders and Brawlers are tanks they have tank abilities and are designed from the ground up to tanks outside or raiding they do just fine. Raid situation is honestly gotten unhealthy right now with a good 1/6 of the classes in the game being excluded. GU 37 and 38 are going to be addressing the fighter classes problem it looks like and the raid structure should be come more fluid and healthy for it. While right now its true that raids only need at best 2 tanks...my gut feeling is that post Kunark or sooner that will no longer be true. </blockquote> Lets be honest. A game does NOT need 6 types of tank. It doesn't need 6 types of anything. There are way too many classes in this game, with a raid size too small to accompany them all. If raids where like 50 people, it wouldn't be such an issue, but unless you plan to take 1 player of each class (obviously not the case on pvp servers) you're going to leave certain classes out. And if you do only take 1 player of each class, who gets to be that lucky player? The only way it works is if people don't bother to show up. If you're short on classes you'd like to take, you'll take anyone just so you can go. Like it or not, its a design flaw and its here to stay. </blockquote>I game only odesn't need 6 tanks if raids are not designed for there to be roles for all 6 tanks that can be changed. From the looks of things it will be despite the inflexible mindset that seems to be pervading the raiding community increasingly over the years.

Talz

07-26-2007, 04:30 PM

With 24 classes and 24 raid slots it doesn't take a genius to see what the original logic was. I don't believe that there is anything in the game outside of contested that a competent guild can't do with one of each class. I don't include contested because I am never on for them so can't speak from experience. The problem you have is that this game has an almost sexual fetish with DPS. People play the parse first and then the game. Much of that has to do with boredom I am sure but it doesn't change things. The problem this creates is that people too often blame their failures on a lack of DPS. Remember everyone is Rambo and in the best guild ever. So take a guild that wouldn't be able to go the distance with six fighters and replace three or four with parse toppers in the hopes you can burn it down before you fall apart. Throw in some ignorance and some random isolated anecdotal reason for the stereotype and there you have it. This is why officers should be competent leaders and not the guy that was funny in that FG group when you were both twenty.

Giral

07-26-2007, 11:37 PM

The arguement back from release for Guardians being Raid MT was simple they did it the Easiest , Sk's had even back then when the level cap was 50 with Truly broken skill lines Tanked everything in the game. and even after SK's had Tanked it all , the simple logic remained " So what a guardian would have done it easier, so you did it Big Deal all you did was make it tougher on your Raid force by not using a gaurdian , and to them Easiest = Best way possible, Luckily some player's like a Challange : ) " also there is NO Mob in the game that you cannot Use a guardian to Tank, the same can be Said about an SK tho, but when every single raid can be done with a Guardian MT eveen if it would be easier with an SK , its a NO brainer they have a GUardian MT so they will do the Encounter until they figure out how to do it with a Guardian MT even tho in Some cases it would have been Easiest to use an SK = There rule of Easiest = Best way possible is Flawed becuase they only try with One way Guard MT Always so maybe they are making encounters harder on themselves instead of trying an SK tank out /wink Now you see the same thing, as a poster in this thread said "SK" tanked EH and MMIS , so Obviously an SK can tank Anything in the Game, and also as stated in this post a few times so far its a Matter of Perception and Alot of people experiance with Bad Sk MT's in Group Content. Pallies and SK are Not Guardians or Berzerker's, they Play totaly diffrent, and even play totaly diffrent then each other, a Certain Finesse is required with both Pallies and SK's, it's not a Pure tank class, you will need to utilize every skill, you will need to WORK for it, you will have to learn what all your skill's do, what way to best utilize them in difrent situations or with difrent classes to maximize your Tankage. SK's are a Fun class but they take a Bit of elbow greeze to be great tanks i also have a Inquisitor and i have seen my fair share of bad Tank's of every class Guard,Zerker,SK,Monks.. etc,,, and i have also seen Amazing Pally Tank's(one was mowing thru mobs, pulling rooms, i could have sworn for a minute they was an SK until i saw there Feathery helm /GAG : ) i have Solo healed a Bruiser thru UnRest, i have even tanked for friends on my Inquisitor ; ) , i skilled player will make any class a valuable addition to any group or raid, regarldess if they arent the best choice on paper, i would rather have 2 Skilled SK's in a raid then 1 unskilled Dp's ; )i have played an SK since release and i have Raided since i was level 45 = about 1 Year into the game, i have been in 4 different Raid guild's and have always Earned my Spot , am i The best at 1 thing? NOPE . do i have the best buffs in a Raid ? NOPE , so why then do i have a Spot in a raid ? Becuase Other Skilled player's see when Someone Knows how to play there class, i can and do Many things and do them Very well, i have saved many raids from a wipe, i have puled many lose mobs off and brought them back to the mt and FD'd myself , i have FD'd many players who Pulled Agro off the mt and have gotten many /tells of thanks from those people i saved : ), i have MT'ed on raids , i have Ot'd on many raid's, etc,, etc,,, So to answer your question of "So is there any point to play an SK?" no ; ) = a Good solo class(not the best) a Great Group MT(if played well) and can MT/OT anything in the Game(what else do you need to know ; ) !p.s. as others have said there are only so many spots in Raid's, and most guilds have Alot of Alt's, you only need 1 MT for raids, and possibly an OT for some of them, other then that another raid spot is best utilized by another class, BUT (and there's always a But) you dont Need the perfect set up for 95% of the raid's, people have killed Taranix with less then 20 people(i know our guild did it with 19 people a wyle back) and i have heard of other's doing it with Less, so if you can clear LAb's, LOA,HOS,DT,FTH with less then 24 People there is no reason not to use a Sk in one of those slot : ), Pick up raids are often Tank heavy , if your Serious about Raiding you would be better off in a Guild that Raid's, so people get to know you , group with you and would welcome you into any raid regardless of your class, and who know's : ) you might just Save the day (a couple Hundred times /wink)

Norrsken

07-27-2007, 05:44 AM

And the whole problem with raids isnt that there are too many tanks in the game, but the raids arent built for the amount of tank classes there is in this game. Its basically one big, bad mob that you need to down. Some heroic trash that wont matter much to a guy with 23 others backing him up. Why not make raids need more tanks by changing the way they do content from the old way to a new way adapted to this games mass of tank classes? All the tanks can arguably tank all the mobs in the game. (Not sure about brawlers, but pretty sure they can), and theyd o it fairly equally well. If they have problems its mostly a case of bad raid setup. that one mob isnt hard to handle. Instead make raid mobs consist of several different linked mobs. Make it two or more debuffers with virtually no dps at all, but that will leave you at virtually no mit against anything (or the different debuffers debuff different things like this), no aviodance and so on. You will basically die if anything hits you in that state. If the tank has that on him at the same time as the damage dealers of the linked mobs, he's gonna die. And fast. And oh, yeah, have fixed damage dealers in the group too. Like REAL mage mobs, and scout mobs. Ones that acually do the bulk fo their dps with skills rather than autoattacks. (Make this game wide please). also have the main badass around with his huge health pool and stuff, so someone gets to face off with death. And, if one of the mobs were to die when all the others arent down to like 5%. It goes right back up to 100% health and power (not that raid mobs use power anyway.). There, you'll need several tanks to ever take that down. Having the main mob on you with the debuffers will kill you. HAving the debuffers at the same time as anything else will kill you. And having the dps mobs on you with the main named should also get you killed. Or you can simply make the mobs debuff for eachothers, but not their own damage type, and make 6 of them. that way, if you tank two, you die. If you tank one, it shouldn't be too hard. Having one mob, with heroic adds will basically never need more than two tanks. Having just one mob is obviously never ever gonna call for more than one tank. Its not the tanks fault the content isnt built for more than that.

Finora

07-27-2007, 01:11 PM

Cyris

07-27-2007, 02:26 PM

Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote: <blockquote>And the whole problem with raids isnt that there are too many tanks in the game, but the raids arent built for the amount of tank classes there is in this game. Its basically one big, bad mob that you need to down. Some heroic trash that wont matter much to a guy with 23 others backing him up. Why not make raids need more tanks by changing the way they do content from the old way to a new way adapted to this games mass of tank classes? All the tanks can arguably tank all the mobs in the game. (Not sure about brawlers, but pretty sure they can), and theyd o it fairly equally well. If they have problems its mostly a case of bad raid setup. that one mob isnt hard to handle. Instead make raid mobs consist of several different linked mobs. Make it two or more debuffers with virtually no dps at all, but that will leave you at virtually no mit against anything (or the different debuffers debuff different things like this), no aviodance and so on. You will basically die if anything hits you in that state. If the tank has that on him at the same time as the damage dealers of the linked mobs, he's gonna die. And fast. And oh, yeah, have fixed damage dealers in the group too. Like REAL mage mobs, and scout mobs. Ones that acually do the bulk fo their dps with skills rather than autoattacks. (Make this game wide please). also have the main badass around with his huge health pool and stuff, so someone gets to face off with death. And, if one of the mobs were to die when all the others arent down to like 5%. It goes right back up to 100% health and power (not that raid mobs use power anyway.). There, you'll need several tanks to ever take that down. Having the main mob on you with the debuffers will kill you. HAving the debuffers at the same time as anything else will kill you. And having the dps mobs on you with the main named should also get you killed. Or you can simply make the mobs debuff for eachothers, but not their own damage type, and make 6 of them. that way, if you tank two, you die. If you tank one, it shouldn't be too hard. Having one mob, with heroic adds will basically never need more than two tanks. Having just one mob is obviously never ever gonna call for more than one tank. Its not the tanks fault the content isnt built for more than that. </blockquote> Totally agree. I'm really surprised that people continue to do the raid mentality of one giant mob instead of a real "raid" where its you against a BUNCH of other mobs. Taking down a single mob is easy, taking down 10 or 20 mobs is a lot harder, and they don't have to be near as "uber" as raid mobs. There's one game in closed beta right now that's taking this approach. It gets insane when you suddenly get attacked by 10 mobs, even though they die in a couple hits. The tactics you have to use are completely different from a simple tank and spank approach of single mob encounters.