GU51 - Thank You(s) [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

Kalinmoor

01-13-2009, 04:12 AM

That's right, for one would like to offer my thanks to Aeralik and all the other's at SoE for trying to balance the tanks and fix issues that needed fixing. whether or not they were successful at this is up to each of you to decide, but I for one am reserving my judgment until I have played very extensively with the changes.Therefore, I reiterate. Thank you SoE for your good intentions, it is heartening to see developers actively trying to better their game.Please don't turn this into a flame thread, and yes I am playing devil's advocate because it seems no one else is willing too, and we really need some balance here.

Troubor

01-13-2009, 05:53 AM

I won't flame you, since I do think your post is sincere. But I don't see any attempt to balance the tanks with his actions to be honest. I will "flame" (since he seems to take a lot of critique that way) Aeralik and say that he has most likely made a huge mistake. He's making us a single target tank, yet not giving us enough tools, at least with raid tanking to be such. He also isn't considering so many things. For instance, let me take the liberty of cutting and pasting something from our private forum (This is the forum of the guild I raid with, I'm technically not in that guild, but I am their OT). To set this up, the fellow who posted this saw the master I's of each taunt linked to him on TEST server:"All amounts are flat and have been averaged to save room.GuardianSingle Target Taunt: 7990Group taunt: 3149PaladinSingle Target Taunt: 7990Group taunt: 3149Guard and Pallys are dead even here. Makes sense to me.BerserkerSingle Target Taunt: 4993.5Group taunt: 6298Shadowknights:Single Target Taunt: 4993.5 (plus 695.5 dot component) 5689 totalGroup taunt: 8397.5Note that the Zerkers and SKs have weaker single taunts but bigger group taunts. Now to a 5 year old this might sound like it makes sense seeing as they want one type of tank as single and one as multi target. But oh wait a minute...*shock*...you can use a group taunt on a single target...(crazy outside the box thinking here I know). So now let's compare the total threat generated (average) on a single mob (Guard's and Pally's "specialty") using these taunts.Guardian: 11,139Paladin: 11,139Berserker: 11,291.52 <-hm a bit more, seems oddShadowknight: 14,086.5 <-1.26 times the "single target" tanks ... wha?"Is it my intent to nerf Shadowknights with this example? No. One castration..excuse me, nerf of a tank class is enough. And obviously taunts aren't the only way to hold aggro. But with this, SK's suddenly have about 3000 more points of hate when they use their single & group taunt on a single target.Or to put it another way, before I thank him, even for good intentions, I'd like him to at least comprehend what he's doing. This right there if nothing else shows he doesn't.Again, I'm not flaming the OP. I strongly disagree with thanking Aeralik, but I also respect his desire to thank him and compliment him, even if I don't see why anyone would for what he's doing with GU 51. But I did want to post this just to show one of many things he's breaking with this glorious change. Again, I DON'T also want SK's nerfed, and I know the example I copied only considers taunts, nothing else. But just using that, this shows me Aeralik just doesn't even comprehend some of the changes he's making himself.

Marcusaval

01-13-2009, 06:41 AM

<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/136dd33cba83140c7ce38db096d05aed.gif" border="0" /> Thank him ?Ok I am not going to Flame but your are off your tree<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/1069449046bcd664c21db15b1dfedaee.gif" border="0" />You are the only Paladin that supports this change I have not read your self excluded a single positive comment conerning GU51 and you have stated else where this suits your play style and set up which is you have said unique to you.Don't have a choice but to give it a go if its forced on me but then it comes down to if i dont enjoy it any more or my role or play style changes out of all recognition then I am all out of options and will hang up my spurs. A lot of people feel the same way.Theres no way I am going to thank anyone for spoiling my leisure time fun!

Feydakeen

01-13-2009, 08:10 AM

Why would we flame?I'm not going to flame just say you are wrong to thank the devs. Even if you are happy with the fact we are getting rid of amends as passive hate gainer the changes are fundamentally flawed. It's easy to comprehend though that an AOE tank will have as good hate on single targets as the pally/guard who is supposed to be single target specialist...So if you have 2 classes Zerk/SK who do as good on multiple adds as on single ones, and you have one class Guard who is good at single target but has more defense/HP etc and better ways to hold aggro on stuns/stifles etc...Guess who won't get a role in raids then?The changes are flawed, i will say it again and say it again till next expansion or next nerf... Truth is EQ2 design was flawed from the start. They made 6 tank classes because they thought everyone woul like a game where you have 24 classes, which mmorpg can boast these numbers? But the fact is they couldn't and still can't really design 6 tanks with different viable functions.Oh they tried before...I remember the time when they said ok...we'll make the tanks good at certain mobs...eg SK would rule against noxious/disease based mobs , pallies against divine attack mobs, guards versus high trauma damage mobs etc..... Guess what happened...it failed....

Antryg Mistrose

01-13-2009, 08:43 AM

I like what they've done with stances (but I tank currently in defensive a lot anyway).I like getting rid of amends - its been buggy on and off, and I don't like relying on another playerBut thanks for turning the best AoE offtank in the game into a 2nd rate single target tank, during the first decent AoE expansion?I think not

shadowedwolf

01-13-2009, 09:15 AM

I'll toss a thanks for not nerfing my Inquis yet. Or my Dirge. Well... atleast not that I'm aware of. :pSeriously, I think the dev's mostly do a good job but I'll politely agree to disagree with you on the changes. I can live w/o amends since I solo alot with my Pally anyways, but merging our buffs into our stance is... honestly... I'm speechless. I mean... really? Why? The money I invested into upgrading those buffs just fluttered out the window with no reason (that I've found) why. And turning our group taunt into a de-agro in offensive stance. Hmmm... I don't like that either. It means now I'll have to duo with DPS or let the other guy tank while I dish the damage out. No... there's nothing I can find to be thankful for. I mean seriously, our group taunt a de-agro. And umm... ya know, our TSO line has UPGRADES to blessed weapon (or whatever it's called) so... ummm... [Removed for Content] are they thinking?!/SighOkay, I'm good. The dev's desearve to be thanked for alot of things but not this... atleast not all of it. I do like that each player is now responsible for thier agro, making them responsible for thier own actions... but I do think more thought should have gone into the 'fighter balance.'

Loxus

01-13-2009, 11:36 AM

@ KalinmoorI commend your courage to stand up and state your views especially on such a unpopular topic. I agree with you, the devs are working hard to make the game better. You can tell they have devoted alot of time and energy to the changes they are instituting, but that's thier job. Problem is, I don't believe they have fully grasped the concepts of their actions, I see zero passion for the work on this update as opposed to the last update, and there is zero compassion for the people they are stomping all over.Single target tanks Vs. group target tanks isn't going to work in reality for the reason troub mentioned. That being you can still use group taunts on single targets but not vice versa. I think they believe the power usage would be the deterant to this, however with the power regen in the game now, it won't. The way I see it is, Guards will be reduced to raid only toons. Pallys (or the 2nd string guard) will just be shelved and pretty much vanish (excpet for the hardcore fans of the class) until next expansion or when ever they decide to fix this sad excuse for a Greek tragedy and SK's and Zerkers will continue to come out of the woodwork. Morevover lets not forget (such as the devs did) the plight of the bruisers who are still in no man's land because the devs have no clue how to fit them in.All in all I was extremely pleased and excited with the release of the last update! They were on the right track, but after seeing the plans for this one I feel tank balancing has failed in conceptual form (there's still time to save it devs) because they didn't actually balance the tanks; they just changed their roles and their popularity based on how overpowered/easy/enjoyable they are. My suggestions to the devs isRethink the stances: Tanks should tank in defensive agreed, but do you need to take more dps from them when you are taking 22 from slash/crush/pierce? I thought that was the purpose of taking the 22 in abilities in the first place was to lower the dps. Offensive side I can see, it gives extra tanks in raids the ability to work as a dps. But again, why .5 extra damage if you are already taking 20 point hit to defense? Seems rather redundant.Are the combining of buffs with the stances really necessary? Maybe the community just needs to hear an explaination why. I'm not seeing the logic though and apparently I'm not alone.Taunts are looking good... but the whole concept of group vs single taunt needs to be looked at. A taunt is a taunt. Moreover, what chalenges are stuns/stifles going to bring for tanks. This one seriously needs to be looked at.After 20 years in the military the one thing that beaten into my skull repeatedly was "Keep it simple, stupid." Edited to remove the venom.

Freliant

01-13-2009, 12:11 PM

Meh... I will chime in.First, for those of you that say "I wont flame but (insert flame", way to be oximoronic, lolAnyways, guardians will NOT be raid only tanks. they are very viable for groups and can solo without a stance on (which is something many other forum users seem to want to ignore).As for hate generation... most of you already know that its a combined effort. The skilled player will shine much better than a power-leveled alt. Taunts are not the end all. There are positional taunts, melee skills, spells and in some cases, even roots (like guardian entrench abilities which roots the mob in place for a small amount of time) that all factor into keeping agro.I will agree about the AoE agro issues however. IMO, aoe agro should not be a result of solely aoe taunts. Single target tanks should get the higher AoE taunts, while AoE tanks should get the higher AoE damage and procs, all things being equal.To the OP, I commend you on starting a post I didn't have the guts to start, specially being the class you are. I have seen the changes on test, and while I have not grouped extensively (only slightly) I can attest that the changes are much better than most posters will have you believe. I have gotten used to fighting without a stance for trash mobs and defensive for certain named. It works out great (being a guardian and all).I am very much afraid that all this crying "we are nerfed" is gonna get the classes really nerfed. The changes feel overpowered to some extent since its hard to loose agro when in no stance, and almost impossible when in defensive stance.*** I do not speak for raiders, but I did group with mythical wielding dpsers while not wielding a mythical myself ***

Santi Dominiti

01-13-2009, 12:47 PM

The level at which this change effects you deals alot on what you do in this game, ie. are you are soloer, instance tank, part time raider, or a hardcore raider.If ya solo if wont matter to you since hate isnt an issue, grps youll probably be ok. But here comes the people that get screwed.... I feel bad for any paladin who doesnt have a spot locked down in a raid guild, if they are looking to raid because after this goes live you wont see guilds lf paladins, cause we dont bring anything to the table that other classes cant do better.Is the idea behind the change ok? I guess if it was put into effect years ago, but now its just screwing paladins out of raid spots.This is were the difference in opinions is coming from in the pally community. Who will Aeri**** listen to? Probably the people that like it because its less work for him.So in conclusion my point being changes ok for people who dont raid and people who do raid get screwed.Oh and btw dont tell me to go "Test" this cause find me 24 people on test at one time that arnt all tanks.

Kordran

01-13-2009, 02:45 PM

<cite>Santi Dominiti wrote:</cite><blockquote>But here comes the people that get screwed.... I feel bad for any paladin who doesnt have a spot locked down in a raid guild, if they are looking to raid because after this goes live you wont see guilds lf paladins, cause we dont bring anything to the table that other classes cant do better.</blockquote>And there's the clincher. There doesn't seem to be an real testing of what's been done to Paladins in raids, because every single time I've been on the test server, there hasn't even been 24 people on (and half of those that are on aren't 80). So this is the big unknown, but just looking at the changes, it doesn't look like its going to be pretty.I think Paladins will be fine soloing and for heroic instances; it'll take some adjusting, but it can be managed. But what raiding guild in their right mind would choose a Paladin over a Guardian as their MT or a Shadow Knight as their OT? Sure, player skill matters, but I'm sure there's plenty of skilled SKs out there, so why stick with a suboptimal class, all other things being largely equal? Like I wrote in another post, I think a lot of guilds are going to have a sit-down with their Paladin OTs and tell them that if they want to keep their raid slot, they'll need to betray. Raiding experience is valuable, so if they can preserve that, I'm sure they'll try by encouraging betrayal as an option... but they're not going to wait for a year or two before SOE finally decides that they've broken Paladins and need to fix them. Push comes to shove, if the Paladin doesn't want to betray for some reason, they'll be sidelined.

Kordran

01-13-2009, 02:57 PM

<cite>Troubor wrote:</cite><blockquote>Is it my intent to nerf Shadowknights with this example? No. One castration..excuse me, nerf of a tank class is enough. And obviously taunts aren't the only way to hold aggro. But with this, SK's suddenly have about 3000 more points of hate when they use their single & group taunt on a single target.</blockquote>The way to address this is obvious, if they really want to keep going down the single-target/multi-target path as a distinguishing feature of the fighter classes: make encounter taunts scale based on the number of mobs in the encounter. The more mobs, the higher the threat to each individual mob. For Guardians and Paladins, make the encounter threat around 3,000 and have it scale up slightly for each additional mob, say 500 points. For SKs and Berserkers, have it start around 1,500, and scale up at 1,500 points for each additional mob. Against a single mob, using their encounter taunt, Guardians and Paladins generate superior hate; against a group of 4 mobs, SKs and Berserkers generate superior hate.

Niou

01-13-2009, 05:20 PM

There's an old saying, "if it isn't broken, don't try and fix it"GU51 is an unneeded change on every level. Guardian's were fine, SK's could hold their own completely, Zerkers are also doing great, Paladin's were fine, Monks and Bruisers were doing what they always have done. The game was, imo, in a very good state for the first time in a long time.To the OP, theres such a thing as playing devils advocate, and then theres another thing entirely to play the idiot. Every post you've made so far, including this ridiculous thread only hurts the effort that real Paladin's are carrying forward to try and make a change. It's honestly best if people like you who know nothing of the class to simply keep quiet.Also important to remember that this is product and we are their customers that continually choose to buy every month. When you make a change that helps very few but completely screws over one, it's not a wise choice business wise.Ask yourself, who is benefiting from this change?Guardian's? They were and will remain to be the MT's of the game.SK's? They could control AoE hate completely and are considered OP by many in the game currently.Zerkers? With their changes had also come full swing into their prime, able to tank single and aoe targets.Paladins? I think with the number of threads and posts here, its very obvious that we are not benefiting from this at all.Monks? Little to no effect for them at all.Bruisers? Same.So before you make a thread, thanking people for breaking the game with "good intentions", why don't you try thinking a bit.

Freliant

01-13-2009, 05:28 PM

NiouAre you honestly telling me that if this change hadn't gone through, that the pallies could see "upgrades" in reguards to maintaining agro as the next few expansions are coming out?Do you not realize that you are using a SEVERELY outdated skill to maintain agro because there was just no possible way to make it better?Paladins were at a plataeu, and agro management was being made viable by agro transfers and increases and NOT by tank abilities. Ask any raid group and they will be quick to say that the MT group, and almost any normal group for that matter, NEEDED a good agro transfer/increase class to be even remotely viable vs any pure dps class.This is a welcome change because agro control is back in the fighter's arena and not in any other archtypes.You have to admit it at one point.. the game had reached a plateu that was going to be very hard to progress from... hence, the change was needed.

Kordran

01-13-2009, 06:28 PM

<cite>Freliant wrote:</cite><blockquote>You have to admit it at one point.. the game had reached a plateu that was going to be very hard to progress from... hence, the change was needed.</blockquote>You seem to be completely missing the point. The loss of Amends (as it works now) isn't an issue because of the threat being generated, but the type of threat. Changing it to effectively be a weaker version of Rescue with a faster recast has transformed the Paladin from a multi-target tank to a single-target tank with no passive threat generation capabilities.Forget about soloing, and even heroic instances. I think Paladins will be (mostly) fine there. But tell us, what exactly do you see as the role for the raiding Paladin? It's not going to be MT, because Guardians will continue to have that slot locked up tight with superior survivability. It's not going to be as the OT, because the role of the OT in raids is generally to handle encounter fights like Overking, where you have waves of mobs coming in that need to be controlled. In that circumstance, the Shadow Knight or Berserker is clearly superior because of their AE attacks and CAs like Insolence. And any raiding guild that's serious about it does not choose "good enough" over "best". And clearly, the Paladin is not the best in either the MT or OT role once GU51 hits.So, I say again. Where exactly in this glorious vision does the Paladin find himself or herself?Sitting out the raid, watching the loot drops in guildchat. That's where.

DMIstar

01-13-2009, 07:53 PM

Guardian: 11,139Paladin: 11,139Berserker: 11,291.52 <-hm a bit more, seems oddShadowknight: 14,086.5 <-1.26 times the "single target" tanks ... wha?"Dont Mind The generalizations but theres clearly taunts spells thats not included in this at all. Atleast take in all the taunt spells each class has with hate positioning and reuse timers.. That would start painting a clearer picture.

Kalinmoor

01-13-2009, 07:58 PM

Well, to start with Araris, you can tell me I don't know what I am talking about all you want, that's not going to change the fact I have been playing a paladin since beta and can guarantee you I know my class way better then the vast majority. and as I don't feel I need to prove that to you or anyone else anyway, I'll leave it at that.At Troubor, I completely agree with the AoE Taunt issues, a good way of fixing that IMO would be to quickly amend all encounter taunts and make it read something like this:- Increases Threat to target encounter by X to Y - If multiple targetsAlso, I do have a secure raid spot that's not going anywhere, so I am quite lucky in that. that being said I remember not being able to find guilds or spots for long periods of time, so i understand that issue too.BUT. the changes are NOT LIVE and have not been THOROUGHLY TESTED BY US. None of you can honestly say you can, testing this on open test is absolutely impossible as the only people who ever log on are fighters and less than 10 of them at that.As much as I know tons of people hate SOE, give them a break, they are not so insane as to brake their own game, just because they brake it in your mind, doesn't mean it's broken from an objective standpoint.Give it time, see what happens, then if you just, cannot, manage, then you can start screaming like it's the end of the world and then maybe the devs will listen to your feedback, provided your not just insulting them.On a side note: really, who taught people that the best way to get people to help you is to insult them? (statement not aimed at anyone in particular.)

Troubor

01-14-2009, 03:02 AM

<cite>Freliant wrote:</cite><blockquote>Meh... I will chime in.First, for those of you that say "I wont flame but (insert flame", way to be oximoronic, lol</blockquote>If you mean me specfically, well "meh" back at you. :p To quote myself:"I won't flame you, since I do think your post is sincere. But I don't see any attempt to balance the tanks with his actions to be honest. I will "flame" (since he seems to take a lot of critique that way) Aeralik..."The "you" in that is of course the OP, and I never do flame him. Again if I do flame anyone, it's Aeralik, and I state that I will do such (or at least comment on Aeralik and assume he'll take it as a flame). So again, "Meh" back at you. :p I never did flame the OP, and even though I strongly disagree with thanking Aeralik, respect his desire to do so and have no problem if he wishes to do so. But anyway, that is mostly neither here nor there.Istar replied with this: Start quote: "Guardian: 11,139Paladin: 11,139Berserker: 11,291.52 <-hm a bit more, seems oddShadowknight: 14,086.5 <-1.26 times the "single target" tanks ... wha?" Dont Mind The generalizations but theres clearly taunts spells thats not included in this at all. Atleast take in all the taunt spells each class has with hate positioning and reuse timers.. That would start painting a clearer picture." End quoteTo be honest, I think you possibly missed my point. Sure, I can also add in such. But that isn't the point of my comparsion. I can also add in CA's and spells, add in "typical" gear and try to justify why I feel such gear is typical and so forth. I can add as many variables as I want if you'd like. My point was to show that if I (or really our MT, this was a cut and paste from his post on another forum) distill it down to two variables, each single taunt for each plate tank, and each group taunt for each plate tank, for whatever reason SK's end up with 2800 to 3000 more hate generation. Yes, we have what was amends, I don't think SK's have that but they typically (from what I've seen) pour out more DPS too on average, so one could say that right there might balance out.Again, I don't wish to nerf SK's or any other class. Again, one castration of a class is MORE then enough for this expansion. My only intent was to point out that our glorious developer who instigated these changes didn't even do the math correctly IMO.Finally to the OP's reply..I won't quote but I have a secure spot as OT with Gathering Storms still, so yes in that sense I'm "secure". If you know their history, they were the raid alliance "FRED" until early 2008, in 2008 they formed a guild, most FRED members joined, a few like myself stayed in our own guilds but continued to have our rank and position with them. So yes, with this in that sense I am quite secure in my raid spot with GS. But if I can't function as an OT with them, even if they do keep me on, I will quit for their benefit. If I end up useless, then why drag down the rest of the guild? As for the comment about "The changes are not love, and haven't been tested by us", well not to be scatalogical or too sarcastic, but if someone handed me a cow manure sandwich, I wouldn't have to sample it to tell you that it probably is disgusting, and probably isn't edible. Maybe GU 51 isn't a cow manure sandwich, but so far it sure looks and smells like one.Saying this in general, it could be a mostly "chicken little, the sky is falling!!" sort or reaction. Maybe in a week or two I can figure out how things work again, and be as or even more effective. But so far, I'm just not really seeing such. So far, it looks much more like a possible but very misguided try to balance things, with small details like the one I posted about taunts pretty much almost ignored. It seems like they had this wild idea on how to balance things, but never really thought it out past "Oh, we'll dump in some changes, see how they work!". But again, I could be wrong. If after a week or two the changes do work much better then I expect, then I will make sure I post such, and even will admit that my worries of an overt nerf with no logic behind it were wrong.

Kimber

01-14-2009, 03:03 AM

I know GU51 is not on the reg servers yet but I will say this. I have a 51 Pally on Naggy and my wife has 50 Sk there also. We group all the time and tbh we can ""kite"" mobs with our hate gain/aggro while both in Off or Def stance. Granted this is not T8 end game content and what not but they seem rather even at this lv on single targets even with the SK's bigger aoe's. In a multi mob encounter it depends on who gets the first aoe off tbh the fights usually dont last much longer than a few aoe's though. Oh and the only aa line we share is the Int line her SK went down Stam while I went down Wis on my Pally.As for the statments that the AE taunt v's Single target taunt what you are missing is while a Zerk or Sk can hit for x amount of AE taunt in an area not all of that will hit a single target even if there is only 1 target in the area. If you would like to see what I mean by this take a zerk out and hit an AOE on one target and see what it hits for then get 2 mobs and do it again then 3 then 4 and so on you will find that the attack/taunt will not hit a single target for full strength ( at least I never have on my Zerk) but when I have more than 1 and the more I get the stronger it gets up to 5 or 6 depending on lv and evens out till 8 targets.This has been what I have seen and expericanced thus far. Yes I agree things may be very differant in T8 but then I believe gear plays an even bigger role in T8 than it does in lower tiers.

DMIstar

01-14-2009, 01:46 PM

<cite>Troubor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Freliant wrote:</cite><cite></cite>Istar replied with this:Start quote: "Guardian: 11,139Paladin: 11,139Berserker: 11,291.52 <-hm a bit more, seems oddShadowknight: 14,086.5 <-1.26 times the "single target" tanks ... wha?" Dont Mind The generalizations but theres clearly taunts spells thats not included in this at all. Atleast take in all the taunt spells each class has with hate positioning and reuse timers.. That would start painting a clearer picture." End quoteTo be honest, I think you possibly missed my point. Sure, I can also add in such. But that isn't the point of my comparsion. I can also add in CA's and spells, add in "typical" gear and try to justify why I feel such gear is typical and so forth. I can add as many variables as I want if you'd like. My point was to show that if I (or really our MT, this was a cut and paste from his post on another forum) distill it down to two variables, each single taunt for each plate tank, and each group taunt for each plate tank, for whatever reason SK's end up with 2800 to 3000 more hate generation. Yes, we have what was amends, I don't think SK's have that but they typically (from what I've seen) pour out more DPS too on average, so one could say that right there might balance out.Again, I don't wish to nerf SK's or any other class. Again, one castration of a class is MORE then enough for this expansion. My only intent was to point out that our glorious developer who instigated these changes didn't even do the math correctly IMO.</blockquote>The Orignal Point was about How Group Tuants was hitting the single Target for the same Hit apon Cast .. But There was other things intentially Left out on this comparison ... WE are not going to have the the same cookie cutter spells given to us per class as this Generalization is trying to dictate.My Problems with single Class Complarisons, How this was explained it was obtained. Is that "Red" Spells aka spells not for that class, have scewered numbers when viewed by a different class.. (This was my problem when i was doing Damage comparisons several Months back) The numbers come out higher.. and the only true way to determine this is by haveing that same class at that "level" of the spell examine it for the true number.. this will also take in true attributes to that class.The other thing that this generalization does.. is forces the perception of that each class has the same hate positioning abilities and Hate attributes via spells and AA's, which is off balance.My point is, this generalization doesnt even give 25% of taunt comparisons between the classes, and realy is more of misinformation then not. Saying that any class is overpowering due to this comparison is hugely off base since it blatently ignores the other attributes, abilities and DPS gains. That and by its own account most of the information was taken on the perspective of what one class sees in spells that is not alloted to that class and being effected by the wrong classes attributes. also it does not take into consideration the basics of the spells, cast/recast, per second on taunts ...

Azurro

01-14-2009, 03:35 PM

I really don’t care rather Amends stays or goes to be honest (Although our raids Brigand might) but if SOE is going to remove it they better give us the tools to do our job just we well if not better then before. This update doesn’t do that by a mile. The new taunt proc on our defensive stance proc’s on melee hits to the mob. So not only will this thing NOT proc on over half our damage abilities but the very stance it’s applied to is designed to make it harder to set off by lowering our change to hit the mob. Amends was originally intended to give Paladins breathing room to use wards/heals and it works. To call it a easy button is ridiculous except in the most limited of conditions. In normal groups or raids where you have multiple classes competing closely with each other for top spot on the parse it still requires using all of our existing taunts plus hate procing gear to hold agro. What most people seem to ignore is we have fewer hate generation CA’s/Spells then other fighters because we have amends. Take amends away and where does that leave our wards/heals? We just don’t have time to manage our own health, dps, and hate in that manner. Guardians Reinforcement, Tower of Stone, and Wall of Armor are easy buttons not amends. They are removing all hate from our AOE’s except for the one Spell that has a direct threat on it. Does anyone really think that is going to be enough to keep hate off of a aggressive healer when fighting multiple encounters where our direct group taunt won’t work? The warlocks will be fine since their aoe’s won’t affect encounter mobs anymore either but the healers and mezzers are SOL. Where does that leave us for zones like befallen where it’s designed so you have to pull multiple encounters and keep moving because the repop times are so low? The crusader AA lines have our Crits spread all over the place. Having to go Str 4 4 4 8, STA 4 4 8, and INT 4 4 8 just to get decent crit rates on Melee, Spell, and Hate is ridiculous. At the very least Spell and Melee crits should be combined into one ability to reflect the fact that warriors don’t have to worry about spell damage. The taunts they added to our CA’s barely make up for the lose of DPS we will suffer from being in Defensive stance much less the lost of Amends. The concept of single target and multi target tanks is fundamentally flawed. A multi target tank must be able to hold agro on all the individual mobs in a encounter or they can’t do there job which is to soak up the damage. This will always result in a multi target tank being better at what they do then a single target tank. Not to mention SOE is pigeon holing Paladins with Guardians but not giving us the survivability tools to really compete. It isn’t the idea of losing Amends my so called “easybutton” that makes me upset about this update it’s the fact that SOE is removing it without more then a feeble attempt to make up for it. This update as it’s currently implemented isn’t a small nerf for Paladins, we have been bludgeoned into a coma by the nerf stick from this one.

denmom

01-14-2009, 05:44 PM

<cite>Feindoren@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>BUT. the changes are NOT LIVE and have not been THOROUGHLY TESTED BY US. None of you can honestly say you can, testing this on open test is absolutely impossible as the only people who ever log on are fighters and less than 10 of them at that.As much as I know tons of people hate SOE, give them a break, they are not so insane as to brake their own game, just because they brake it in your mind, doesn't mean it's broken from an objective standpoint.Give it time, see what happens, then if you just, cannot, manage, then you can start screaming like it's the end of the world and then maybe the devs will listen to your feedback, provided your not just insulting them.On a side note: really, who taught people that the best way to get people to help you is to insult them? (statement not aimed at anyone in particular.)</blockquote>/sighs and shakes off the paint from the overly large brush that was used to paint withI have been on Test Copy and I have tested with my usual two whom I group with.Look for Jrral/Arreala's posts. He's the one I've been running with on Test Copy. My husband doesn't post to the forums, but he has his Warden over there and we've done testing. He also has his L80 Paladin, one who's much better geared than mine, who's a new L80 and I've not yet geared her up out of the rest of her mc'd. Check her profile to see what gear I have on Pheep.I also have my L80 Warden over on Test Copy and I have run with Jrral and we tested out how it'll be when we duo.I've given my feedback here, in the Test threads, and in Test Copy.Yanno, it's a little ironic your statement about insulting people when you just did in your post. /sighLook, I'm not out to argue or fight. I'm out to get things changed for the better for our class. I have been trying to./sighs and heads off to scrape off what paint is left

Troubor

01-14-2009, 06:31 PM

<cite>Istar@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>The Orignal Point was about How Group Tuants was hitting the single Target for the same Hit apon Cast .. But There was other things intentially Left out on this comparison ... WE are not going to have the the same cookie cutter spells given to us per class as this Generalization is trying to dictate.My Problems with single Class Complarisons, How this was explained it was obtained. Is that "Red" Spells aka spells not for that class, have scewered numbers when viewed by a different class.. (This was my problem when i was doing Damage comparisons several Months back) The numbers come out higher.. and the only true way to determine this is by haveing that same class at that "level" of the spell examine it for the true number.. this will also take in true attributes to that class.The other thing that this generalization does.. is forces the perception of that each class has the same hate positioning abilities and Hate attributes via spells and AA's, which is off balance.My point is, this generalization doesnt even give 25% of taunt comparisons between the classes, and realy is more of misinformation then not. Saying that any class is overpowering due to this comparison is hugely off base since it blatently ignores the other attributes, abilities and DPS gains. That and by its own account most of the information was taken on the perspective of what one class sees in spells that is not alloted to that class and being effected by the wrong classes attributes. also it does not take into consideration the basics of the spells, cast/recast, per second on taunts ...</blockquote>I'll make one last reply on this specific subtopic since I think we're going to politly agree to disagree (which is fine) and I also don't want to derail too much here, and turn this into a "is one class overpowered with taunts" post.Part of my point was that for someone who is trying to balance out the classes, at least with our two most basic taunts, the developer failed. Yes, each one has very different spells. But one would assume that with this huge change, they are attempting to make it so each class does the same thing in a different way. If this is the case, then one should be able to distill it down to the most basic variables and see similar results. We do with three classes, but not one of them. Doesn't matter to me which one, I'd say it was just as much of a mistake if Paladin's had 2800 more points instead of SK's. And the last thing I want is a nerfing of a different class before this fiasco known as GU 51 comes out to someone else also. My only point is that the changes are potentially broken.Again, I could add in variables. Okay, for instance amends will now be a "super taunt" for lack of a better term (or maybe Rescue 2.0 is more accurate). So we have that, SK's never had amends so maybe that's why they got a 2800 bonus. But fine, if that's the case, why don't Guardians and Berserkers have that then? Also, when tanking it looks like they want hate generation from taunts to be much more the case for holding aggro then DPS. So sure, one class may do more DPS then us, one might do less but DPS is becoming a smaller variable now anyway.I'll admit my example isn't perfect, but it's an attempt to strip things down to as few variables as possible. It was done by someone else but I agree with the example. Again, maybe I have blinders on and am being too simplistic, maybe your point with that is more valid then I see it. But I don't think so, I think we need to strip down to simple variables in order TO do an apples to apples comparsion. If I am right, then we can see that one class, probably not even noticed by the developers got a bigger apple. Do I say take away said bigger apple from the SK's? No. I do say let's show this as an example as to why this GU is a huge mistake. Maybe an exercise in futility, we're probably stuck with it. But who knows, might as well try.Anyway, done with the partial derailment. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

DMIstar

01-14-2009, 09:56 PM

Ill Disagree, I dont think a fragment of the entire taunt base should automatically show Equalization out between the classes. Considering its a more complex system then that..Three "Basic" Spells would be Kick, Bash, Rescue... If i only dealt with these three, should i see immediate Equalization between the classes ? No, I dont expect to, Even though the 4 fighters share it, that does not mean that it should show "Balance" Just on that specific Case .. For then its pretty much restriction in a cookie cutter view.The only thing that can be hoped to be done, is trying to simulate the charts in which these taunts are realy Being based off of.. yes there is inbound charts that the devs are looking at when viewing what is going on.. This information however is not shown to us.and even though these graphs are dead on average between the classes, People are going to gripe because they will never believe otherwise.

Troubor

01-17-2009, 04:39 AM

<cite>Istar@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ill Disagree, I dont think a fragment of the entire taunt base should automatically show Equalization out between the classes. Considering its a more complex system then that..Three "Basic" Spells would be Kick, Bash, Rescue... If i only dealt with these three, should i see immediate Equalization between the classes ? No, I dont expect to, Even though the 4 fighters share it, that does not mean that it should show "Balance" Just on that specific Case .. For then its pretty much restriction in a cookie cutter view.The only thing that can be hoped to be done, is trying to simulate the charts in which these taunts are realy Being based off of.. yes there is inbound charts that the devs are looking at when viewing what is going on.. This information however is not shown to us.and even though these graphs are dead on average between the classes, People are going to gripe because they will never believe otherwise.</blockquote>Fair enough, and don't mind that at all. I do agree that we do need to see things like the inbound charts that the devs are basing things on, and of course we aren't being shown such, nor will we ever be most likely.Anyway...my feeling right now is to just sit back, wait..hope I'm effective post GU51. Again, if these changes don't nerf me, then I'll be one of the first to post "Oh, I wasn't nerfed, let me correct all of my pre GU 51 assumptions, if a dev feels I was insulting in a post let me offer an apology". BUT, until then I do think we'll be nerfed, as I call it sometimes a "castration" and I do think that even IF the developers don't intend to cripple us, they are. But, I will admit to being wrong if I do end up being wrong. I'll even give GU51 a week or two before I decide. Until then, I won't thank them, far from it. A massive change that has so much potential to cripple our class, tanking classes in general to (maybe) a lesser degree and that IMO will most likey cause more harm then good doesn't deserve thanks. Call this what you will, but I won't praise a mistake, even a well meaning mistake. If I am wrong on this, I will post that. But I don't think I will be.

Antryg Mistrose

01-17-2009, 10:24 AM

<cite>Troubor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Freliant wrote:</cite>Istar replied with this: Start quote: "Guardian: 11,139Paladin: 11,139Berserker: 11,291.52 <-hm a bit more, seems oddShadowknight: 14,086.5 <-1.26 times the "single target" tanks ... wha?" </blockquote>I haven't found where you got this "ranking" from, but it doesn't match entirely with my own (My paladin is also an 80 alchemist and inspecting the recipe book on test, I get ALL plate tanks within 6% of the same tps (threat per sec) from the spells with explicit threat on them for single targets, and SK isn't highest.I say again - ALL plate tanks have hate/sec for single target within 6 miserable percent.Where it starts getting completely unfair is on AoEs, as the number of mobs goes up to 8, there is a 700% difference between top and bottom, with SK the overall winner over zerker, and guard/paladin ridiculously far behind.Which tanks do more damage, and how much inherent haset they have for speeding up procs will also skew things, as will the tanks who have a better hit rate in defensive stance (Guardian).My assumptions were, procs were at the frequency given (e.g if it says on hit you get 1.6/min thats what I used), damage/taunt shields assuming every mob hits you once every 4sec, all spells at adept3, not looking at AA (although my alchemist was inspecting the spells in defenive stance with aa maxed for hate), not including spells that all fighters have (e.g. rescue - despite that favouring some classes who get to buff it more)Single Target: 2988 paladin, 2967 SK, 2830 zerker, 2801 guardAdditional tps - Encounter of 4: 6043 Zerker, 5666 SK, 3555 Guard, 1911 paladinAdditional tps - Blue AoE of 8: 8665 SK, 6811 Zerker, 1508 Guard, 1184 paladinFrom spells:Guard: Impede, Gut Kick, Guard, Amored, Slanderous Assault, Siege, InfractionZerker: Mock, Trample, Bellow, Insolence, Blood Shower, War PledgePaladin: Clarion, Penitent Kick, Heroic Dash, Excoration, Bayle's Stance, Circule Smite, RestitutionSK: Insinuate, Lucan's Boot, Hateful Slam, Chastisement, Fiendish Circle, Crimson Circle, Grave SacrementI didn't include: Recapture, Reinforcement, Holy Ground, Sigil of Heroism, Death March, as these don't have any fixed threat per second, and there sustained tps is hard to judge. (and in general their recasts are high enough for their effect to be reduced a fair bit).

Troubor

01-17-2009, 05:24 PM

<cite>Antryg Mistrose wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Troubor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Freliant wrote:</cite>Istar replied with this: Start quote: "Guardian: 11,139Paladin: 11,139Berserker: 11,291.52 <-hm a bit more, seems oddShadowknight: 14,086.5 <-1.26 times the "single target" tanks ... wha?" </blockquote>I haven't found where you got this "ranking" from, but it doesn't match entirely with my own (My paladin is also an 80 alchemist and inspecting the recipe book on test, I get ALL plate tanks within 6% of the same tps (threat per sec) from the spells with explicit threat on them for single targets, and SK isn't highest.</blockquote>To be honest, as stated in my other posts it's second hand. I quoted our MT, who has /testcopied. He saw a link of every Master I version of the single and group taunt, his numbers are based on that. I cut and paste part of a post he put on our guild/raid group forums here.

thekyle

02-19-2009, 02:31 PM

Just don't steal my purple chalice you mean devs!