Additional Issue with the Fighter Buff "Roll up" [Archive]

View Full Version : Additional Issue with the Fighter Buff "Roll up"

Morrolan V

01-12-2009, 02:45 PM

As I understand it, the primary reason for rolling up the fighter buffs into the stances was to prevent tanking in offensive stance by disallowing the combination of hate increasing abilities and the fighter's offensive stance. This goal has been completely achieved -- the conversion of taunts and threat increasers into detaunts and threat decreasers in offensive stance, together with the elimination of all significant threat transfers, has made it effectively impossible for a fighter to hope to maintain aggro over time in offensive stance.The removal of ALL flexibility on fighter buffs has some unintended consequences.Example:My main is a monk. Monks' primary non-taunt threat increaser on live is dragon stance line, which has a chance to proc additional hate on each successful melee hit.My primary role on raids is DPS/utility. The combination of my high avoidance and the minor threat transfer in our AA line means that I always have my avoidance on the main tank. On particularly tough fights, I will sometimes put on my tanking gear and switch to defensive stance, thereby substantially increasing the secondary avoidance I give the MT. I also do this if I am in a group and another fighter is tanking.On live, I am able to do this, but still toggle dragon stance off, thereby not risking drawing aggro. As currently composed on test, dragon stance is rolled into my defensive stance -- there is no way for me to go defensive and not have a chance of procing significant hate on each hit, plus, I have no way to reduce my hate as it accumulates over time. Remember - in this situation, I am NOT the offtank. I am in a DPS group with one healer -- I am not trying to stay at or near the top of the hate list and if I draw aggro, I will die. Drawing aggro on raids in that circumstance is less likely than in groups, but I have seen it happen even on live, with me in defensive stance and with my dehate AA line active. This is a real issue.To me, this reflects an undue restriction on fighters' creative use of their abilities to maximize the effectiveness of a raid force. The current state of the stances on test reflects an overly simplistic view of fighters' roles: we are either tanking (or offtanking) in which case we want all the hate we can get, or we are pure DPS, in which case we want to lose all the hate we can. I can understand, if not agree, with wanting to eliminate tanking in offensive stance. Surely the opposite is not a problem -- why would you want to eliminate the possiblity of DPS'ing in defensive stance?This point also illustrates another issue with the current composition of the stances -- the combination of the offensive skill penalties and the .5 autoattack damage multiplier is far too much of a hit. It hits brawlers VERY hard, since so much of our threat comes only when we hit the mob. If you are going to maintain the damage reduction, please remove the offensive skill penalties.I will also /feedback this on testcopy.

Junaru

01-12-2009, 03:03 PM

Both Brawlers are hit very hard with these changes. Since Dragon Rage requires us to hit the mob to taunt, being in defencive stance is counter productive. SOE needs to remove the negative melee skills from the stance or it once again puts Brawlers at a disadvantage.As started before, Crane Twirl needs to have it's percentage changed to be inline with every other fighter. They need to raise it from 16% to 40% (same as every other fighter).Also SOE needs to look into Mongoose stance (Monk AA) as it is useless now. In fact our shard armor as well as Bruisers epic could work the oppisite depending on our stance. A lot of the AA's need to be looked at before these changes go live.

RafaelSmith

01-12-2009, 04:05 PM

My copy to test finally went thru over the weekend so I got to log on and play around with some stuff....did not group or anythine like that but I was able to run around fighting solo mobs using various stances and using ACT to parse threat.Their changes to O-stance are not well thought-out.... Given my little knowledge of how brawlers work I think they are the worst hit by the proposed mechanics for fighter O-stance.D-stance and even its buff roll-ups at least for Guardian seem ok...actually no much difference in how I play my class now..if anything holding aggro will be easier.O-Stance however is a mess... From what i parsed both DPS and TPS I can say without a doubt I will never ever be in O-stance while on a raid...MT or OT I need to be in D stance. All our +threat turning into -threat when I O-stance is simply too dangerous to risk on a raid...or even as a 2nd fighter in a group. As a Guard..when I am on a raid...no matter what "role" i serve...I have no business doing DPS if it means being at the bottom of the hate-list...my JOb title always as a T at the end...MT/OT/ST, yada yada yada.My brief feedback thus far is:1) Get rid of the turning +threat into -threat when in O-stance....make O-stance give a huge 50% or more reduction in hate gain...even make us take more DMG in O-stance...Rescue and rescue type abilities should be usable irregardless of what stance we are in...if the need arises that we need to rescue someone...rescue should never be a de-aggro...that simply does not make sense. When I examined my Reinforcement skill while in O-stance...i laughed..its really pretty silly.2) Get rid of the reduction in to_hit skillz when in D-stance...DPS reduction is all that is needed.

Lethe5683

01-13-2009, 07:37 PM

<cite>Junaru wrote:</cite><blockquote>Both Brawlers are hit very hard with these changes. Since Dragon Rage requires us to hit the mob to taunt, being in defencive stance is counter productive. SOE needs to remove the negative melee skills from the stance or it once again puts Brawlers at a disadvantage.As started before, Crane Twirl needs to have it's percentage changed to be inline with every other fighter. They need to raise it from 16% to 40% (same as every other fighter).Also SOE needs to look into Mongoose stance (Monk AA) as it is useless now. In fact our shard armor as well as Bruisers epic could work the oppisite depending on our stance. A lot of the AA's need to be looked at before these changes go live.</blockquote>Brawlers should definatly have no penalties on either stance. It's completly un-fair that warriors get this while it makes more sense for brawlers than it does for warriors.

Lethe5683

01-13-2009, 07:39 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>My copy to test finally went thru over the weekend so I got to log on and play around with some stuff....did not group or anythine like that but I was able to run around fighting solo mobs using various stances and using ACT to parse threat.Their changes to O-stance are not well thought-out.... Given my little knowledge of how brawlers work I think they are the worst hit by the proposed mechanics for fighter O-stance.D-stance and even its buff roll-ups at least for Guardian seem ok...actually no much difference in how I play my class now..if anything holding aggro will be easier.O-Stance however is a mess... From what i parsed both DPS and TPS I can say without a doubt I will never ever be in O-stance while on a raid...MT or OT I need to be in D stance. All our +threat turning into -threat when I O-stance is simply too dangerous to risk on a raid...or even as a 2nd fighter in a group. As a Guard..when I am on a raid...no matter what "role" i serve...I have no business doing DPS if it means being at the bottom of the hate-list...my JOb title always as a T at the end...MT/OT/ST, yada yada yada.My brief feedback thus far is:1) Get rid of the turning +threat into -threat when in O-stance....make O-stance give a huge 50% or more reduction in hate gain...even make us take more DMG in O-stance...Rescue and rescue type abilities should be usable irregardless of what stance we are in...if the need arises that we need to rescue someone...rescue should never be a de-aggro...that simply does not make sense. When I examined my Reinforcement skill while in O-stance...i laughed..its really pretty silly.2) Get rid of the reduction in to_hit skillz when in D-stance...DPS reduction is all that is needed.</blockquote>Well as a barwler I never use offensive stance while tanking unless it's a very easy zone. I'm almost always using mid-stance but I am afraid to see that they might have ruined that with these changes. I only use defensive on nameds or if I have a warden or dirge in the group, otherwise I can't hit anything.