The Definition of a Berserker [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

View Full Version : The Definition of a Berserker

Danelin

02-17-2009, 12:22 AM

Hello. Anyone who follows the 'in testing feedback' forums probably knows by now that I am (as most Berserker players are) massively opposed to the current test fighter revamp going live. This is not intended to be a thread to reiterate that. What I want is to hear a definition of the Berserker class. I will start with my own, along with a very rough mechanics breakdown of what that means to me. I am hoping to start similar threads in all of the fighter class forums, and see about presenting it to Aeralik as another example of how wrong he is to forcibly redefine our characters out from under us in the way he is trying to.What is a Berserker?A Berserker is a frothing homicidal maniac with an axe. A Berserker is a warrior so absorbed in the flow of battle that his body will continue fighting even after any medic in the land would have long declared him dead. He is an unholy, fearsome, howling monstrosity charging his foes and breaking their morale through the sheer terror and ferocity of his assault.What does this mean to me in EQ2 Terms?A Berserker as a fighter keeps the attention of his foes by tearing a bloody swathe through them, and roaring his madness as he does so. This means that 70% - 80% of our aggro should come from our damage output, and that between damage and taunts, we should be able to hold off of most DPS classes without using snap aggro unless they have fired a major damage ability. We are too potent to die even when 'dead'. This means to me that while our outright resistance to being damaged should be lower than other tanks in comperable armor (we just don't focus on our own defense while in a killing frenzy), that our survivability should be higher than seems possible within this fighting style. Our primary effective fighting style should be focused more on offense than defense.What does this mean to me in terms of our relation to other fighters?1 - We should be the most offensive of the plate fighters, perhaps matched by shadowknights, with different means to the same end.2 - When it comes to damage with a weapon, we should be the most potent of the plate fighters against a magic resistant mob, we should be able to outdamage a shadowknight, whereas against a more physically resistant mob, they should outdamage us.3 - We should hold aggro against packs of enemies better than a single enemy. One enemy faced with many sources of pain and death coming his way will maintain the presence of mind to consider all of the damage sources better than a group when mass panic begins setting in due to the sheer ferocity and terror of our presence. Keeping single target aggro should require more focused effort on the part of the player (learning CA rotations to maximize single target damage, and knowing when to weave in taunts for best recycle, along with needing to snap more often against a single target high DPSer than against AE) Likewise, it should require less focused effort to hold while in offensive stance than when in defensive, however both should be possible. A Berserker that has become cautious is less elementally frightening, but he is still a canny foe who is learned in the art of injuring his enemies in the ways that will be most effective.4 - We should be easier to damage than the other plate fighters, but not necessarily easier to kill at the same time. Something like allowing us to continue fighting while purple and an extended purple range (probably via AA) would be in line with this, but in simplest terms I feel that our overall survivability should be on par with Shadowknight, or slightly higher before lifetap is factored in, while being lower than the more defensive focused fighters.5 - Where we should sit on a DPS scale:Against a raid training dummy (doesn't exist, but should for testing these things), with all gear, player skill, and dps buffing being equal - An offensive stanced berserker should sit higher than all priests (including dps focused furies and inquisitors), both bards, and both enchanters. (Enchanters need to have their controller roll fixed for this to be viable of course). If resistance to magic and melee are equal on the mob, they should be parsing identical to the offensive Shadowknight, higher than the Guardian or Paladin, and lower than Bruiser and Monk. A Defensive Berserker should be sitting around equal with the offensive priests and bard/enchanters.To me, this is what a Berserker should be. Other than the way survivability is done mechanically currently, the imbalances that exist in the DPS of fighters overall right now, and the fact that defensive tanking isn't working properly for ANY fighter, this is largely where we sit on live.<hr />The Berserker is the personification of unbridled aggression and fury.They are fearsome opponents, especially when facing many foes at once.Berserkers stand at the forefront of battle, unleashing their devastating rage upon the enemy while keeping unwanted attention away from their allies.<hr />I went ahead and grabbed the initial class description off of the character creation screen. As an additional point to this exercise, how many of you were influenced in any way by this description when you made your character a Berserker?What do my fellow Berserkers think?

Aull

02-17-2009, 01:51 AM

I agree with you some what on your descriptions. Honestly I don't want to make this a this vs that post but I do think that in terms of dps you are correct. Warriors do not have the abilities to heal, ward, or leach life (except maybe with equipment). Other than that warriors fight with two weapons, one, or weapon and shield. To me both warriors should be able to do more damage cause that is all they are trained to know. Warriors do not practice magic to heal or inflict damage. They just fight.Since the warriors can't heal themselves damage should be where they accel incomparison to the crusaders all things being relatively equal.Sorry but my sk right now is able to both heal and inflict nice damage where my zerker is just inflicting comparable sometimes less damage than my sk. Again I would think that since my zerker can't honestly heal in the magnitude that my sk can then the zerker should inflict more damage to compensate.My zerker is on the shelf atm. No reason to play the zerker when my sk can do more aoe and single target damage and stay alive much easier doing it with the wards/lifetaps.

LygerT

02-17-2009, 05:25 AM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>I agree with you some what on your descriptions. Honestly I don't want to make this a this vs that post but I do think that in terms of dps you are correct. Warriors do not have the abilities to heal, ward, or leach life (except maybe with equipment). Other than that warriors fight with two weapons, one, or weapon and shield. To me both warriors should be able to do more damage cause that is all they are trained to know. Warriors do not practice magic to heal or inflict damage. They just fight.Since the warriors can't heal themselves damage should be where they accel incomparison to the crusaders all things being relatively equal.Sorry but my sk right now is able to both heal and inflict nice damage where my zerker is just inflicting comparable sometimes less damage than my sk. Again I would think that since my zerker can't honestly heal in the magnitude that my sk can then the zerker should inflict more damage to compensate.My zerker is on the shelf atm. No reason to play the zerker when my sk can do more aoe and single target damage and stay alive much easier doing it with the wards/lifetaps.</blockquote>i'm glad someone finally admitted it, it's gone to the point so many expansions of being given and taken away that the i can't continue to fight forever like this.all of the work that has been put into the coming fighter changes, i can't envision them being abandoned and i haven't seen the main highlighted point of issues with this class being noted and fixed. by continuing to note them down as time goes by i feel more like a whiner than someone who just wants to see some things balanced out in different ways. i have a job, i don't need a second one that doesn't pay.SKs are the new flavor, guard vs zerk vs SK aggro is another fight, pallies have their own issues to resolve. things were more balanced when we had more distinct differences in tanks but content was where the main issue lied. now things have changed, if they continue down this path they need to consider the possibility of just merging tank classes and truly finding a better balance instead of creating one overpowered class every xpac.

Danelin

02-17-2009, 10:01 AM

My issue isn't one of 'which fighter is overpowered', it is in response to the Fighter revisions as currently designed. If you got rid of two factors, it would accomplish the STATED goal of the revision: Allowing tanks to tank defensively and live out their 'primary roll' as narrowly defined by Aeralik.Factor 1 - Get rid of the taunt removal and detaunt on offensive stance. First of all [Removed for Content] a mob off less when you are hurting it more is completely idiotic. Second of all, it removes an entire playstyle from the game that SHOULD exist, and makes the name of our class into an outright lie.Factor 2 - Unlink the recast timer on stances. There is no reason why a fighter should be forced to 'decide how they will fight' in advance. It also is in direct opposition to Aeralik's original stated goal of allowing an offtank to 'provide DPS to the raidforce then switch to pickup an add'. A position he suddenly changed with NO explanation whatsoever, simply a statement that completely contradicted his original statement.

Destria

02-17-2009, 10:47 AM

Berserker-a blood crazed monstrosity of a warrior, fighting with a demonic fervor, seemingly immune to pain, and impervious to death, wielding even the most unruly of items as a weapon, dealing incredible amounts of damage with the rage of a frenzied bear.Simply put....weapons-not particular, but bigger is better; the idea that bigger=more damage, whether true or not, doesnt matter, we're not thinking here....just a matter of "big make big bash"rage-[Removed for Content] me off, I dare you, and you wont know what happeneddamage of a frenzied bear- do i really need to explain this??? "hulk smash"blood crazed monstrosity-see above 3 explanationsdemonic fervor-I know..sounds like I'm saying SK...but no, lets face it what would you think if you saw this fighter, with that crazy look in their eye, using whatever was convenient as a weapon and just mowing through mobs like jason at camp crystal lake????----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Now, thats what I think of when I think berserker....minus a few particulars in detail, as in what they wear, tho that really doesnt matter, theyre crazed and [Removed for Content]...and dont really care what they're wearing if anything at all.As we stand in game-2nd rate damage at best, low survivability, inability to control hate, and the new "fix" for fighters is gonna make us just one of 6 different molds of the exact same thing!!!!!a REAL fix=keep the hate increases and bonuses added in with the test updates, that is a GREAT idea. =bad idea-combining buffs, LEAVE OUR BUFFS SEPERATE, we like them, and they work that way =bad idea-all tanks must be in def. to tank--ok, let me reiterate-BERSERKER, emphasis-BERSERK =survivability-it works, leave it alone, we can alll be happy =for the love of all that is good evil and neutral, put some more 3s delay OH weps in game, because not all zerks are tanking, as they dont see the point. =do something about our DPS, in the optimal group setup, non mythic avg gear, tanking or not, our DPS is second rate on a GOOD day, but somehow, if we manage to survive pulling an entire room, and all procs are in our favor, we MIGHT get some pretty good DPS. =many of us have sat here and played, years and years, and now, we see this latest and greatest fix as a brand new fighter only version of the late GU13-combat revamp. only a much much more horrible version. we dont want to be like guardians or sk's or paladins or monks or bruisers, if I wanted to be an SK I wouldnt have deleted a dozen or more of them, if I wanted to be a guardian, I would HAVE one. STOP COOKIE CUTTERING THE FIGHTERS, we're not all the same class, we are different for a reason, KEEP THEM DIFFERENT, its why some of us are SKs and others are Pally's, or Zerkers, or Guards, Monks, Bruisers. =it was hard in RoK to really get into playing my zerk, finally with TSO I was really diggin it, then the speak of the fighter fix, I checked it out.....felt like a big /wrist was in order. blanket "fix" is not the answer.Anyways, bit off on a tangent, but that basically covers it all. In many ways, we're good like we are, theres still some bugs that need fixed, but the biggest problem in the game is this +++++++++I JUST STARTED PLAYING YESTERDAY AND I'M LVL 80, WHATS A TAUNT?? DETAUNT?? CURE??+++++++++

eidos

02-18-2009, 05:37 PM

<div>To roughly summarize the historical figures of the term in my own words:</div><div>Berserkers were warriors who fought with frenzied rage in battle without regard to their own lives or others as they were known to turn on their allies in the heat of battle. Their rage normally started out as almost a physical illness, thought to be drug induced, eventually turning into a loss of human reason while replacing it with animal behavior. This behavior extended outside of battle as well giving the berserkers incredible strength with flushed faces, wild eyes, howling and an immunity to pain or even physical damage in battle as they would fight only in bear or wolf hides instead of regular armor without being hit. This also lead to the belief that they were shape-shifters, especially werewolves, and/or spell casters as they seemed to be supernatural. This also lead to them being relegated to the second to the bottom of the social class. They were often shunned and avoided which, in turn, encouraged the berserkers to resort to theft and murder to get what they needed/wanted.</div><div>Okay, so there's the historical reference. The EQ2 reference for Berzerkers, along with the rest of the fighter archetype, that helps players decide what they want to play are shown here and I won't get into arguing over the archetypes and what they should do and I also know that classes will change over time since MMOs are far from static (courtesy of EQ2i):</div><div><img src="http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/eq2/images/c/cc/Berserker.jpg#20061122225401" width="275" height="385" /><img src="http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/eq2/images/f/fa/Guardian.jpg#20061122225706" width="276" height="363" /></div><div><img src="http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/eq2/images/d/d6/Paladin.jpg#20061201030955" width="284" height="341" /><img src="http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/eq2/images/5/51/Shadowknight.jpg#20061201031005" width="284" height="360" /></div><div><img src="http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/eq2/images/3/33/Monk.jpg#20061122225753" width="276" height="343" /><img src="http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/eq2/images/2/23/Bruiser.jpg#20061201032625" width="284" height="339" /></div><div>Here's a good summary of what the Fighter Archetype is thought to be (again from EQ2i but shared by many folks in the game if you ask them):</div><div>Fighters are the most straight-forward classes to play. They have terrific defense, so they can withstand a lot of abuse from enemies, but they also have decent damage output. They can switch between two stances at will, choosing between higher damage output or higher defense. Combat is interactive and (unlike some other games) each fighter class has several utility abilities. </div><div>Berserker: offensive warrior Guardian: defensive warriorPaladin: the healing tank Shadowknight: the tank-mageMonk: group-friendly light tank Bruiser: high damage light tank</div><div>Okay, so there's the definitions for you. Mind you, the original Everquest classes that shared similar names/abilities worked differently back then then they do now. Do I claim to know how to balance the classes? No. Am I saying that I hate everything about what's going on? No. I'm just a player with a love for the game (more than just the mechanics involved) so I wanted to throw in my two coppers since I'm not in any school of thought or camp. I have been on the Test Server. I am for and against some of the current state of things and the changes depending on which ones they are. I've already voiced my opinions on them. </div><div>Here's my issues with the way things seem to be now and where they are headed keeping in mind that we are discussing class definitions and not delving into a general discussion of the game, etc.:</div><div>There are three classes under the Fighter archetype with six sub-classes in total meaning that there should be SIX different styles to fit various roles. Saying that all six types of Fighters are tanks and that they all have to main tank in Defensive Stance effectively kills off-tanking as they would want to be in Defensive Stance to control the adds effectively (or in no stance to avoid the hate decrease in Offensive stance) but are not contributing much in the way of offense. However, even going down the pure DPS route still relegates fighters far behind the 'classic' DPS classes. This makes all fighters try to be the same mechanically. Also, there seems to be an inconsistency with the 'roles' since there seems to be the 'Single Target Tank'/'Main Tank' classes and the 'Multiple Target Tank'/'Off-Tank' classes that clearly point out that only 2 classes are needed because one role is better in certain situations than the other and there's one class that does said role better than the others. Having played all of the Fighter classes and seeing their 'less-than-stellar' damage abilities along with noticing how most of the classes share vary similar mechanics, some doing better than others, only one role of 'Tank' is really necessary with the current builds/abilities of all of the fighters. Now, with that said, it seems like there are some classes that are just better than others at the 'Tank' role and since the 'DPS' role is already spoken for by another class, it seems frustrating to say the least.</div><div>So to sum this whole post up:</div><div>The reason I play this game is variety it offers to allow me to do my job in a group setting and also soloing. If there's no difference in the mechanics, then really there's one class to play out of those six posted above that'll get the job done and the rest are just weak versions of the same class. I'm not saying which class is the best or whining that the class I like sucks, etc. I'm simply pointing out things that I see.</div>

Obadiah

02-18-2009, 05:48 PM

The personification of unbridled aggression and fury. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" />I'm sorry, I know it's old news. That just cracks me up.Lowest Aggression score of all Fighters and a misspelled title.

LygerT

02-19-2009, 05:36 PM

zerkers were offensive warriors, somewhere along the line we got mixed up in things. mobs hit hard enough now that offensive warriors still need to survive a group of adds. so focus is changing and all tanks are listed into groups of AE and single target but the offensive vs defensive still is skewed between the classes.so the definition i still see for us is offensive but how could you be an offensive fighter and still have some decent survivability in TSO? it's not an easy question to answer. i think they tried to do well by allowing tanks to actually take hits and manage aggro defensively since mobs are progressively getting more difficult and hitting for more which makes the offensive fighters obsolete. but if it's the case then our skills need to evolve to reflect the change, i can think of a small handful of abilities that still define us as offensive fighters and some that are missing that set others apart from us.

TheGreatBeast

02-20-2009, 05:04 AM

What is a Berserker?A Berserker is a frothing homicidal maniac with an axe. A Berserker is a warrior so absorbed in the flow of battle that his body will continue fighting even after any medic in the land would have long declared him dead. He is a unholy, fearsome, howling monstrosity charging his foes and breaking their morale through the sheer terror and ferocity of his assault.----------------------------------------100% Agree with you! This is why I picked the class from game launch, this is why I will NEVER stop playing the class....nerf it ALL YOU WANT ! I will NOT trade in my muscle car (Berserker) for a slow gas guzzling suv (Guard).Make me wear plate or fight with only a loincloth on but make my enemys FEEL it when I hit them!-H.Rex

LygerT

02-20-2009, 06:30 AM

til a mob owns your face, then what?

TheGreatBeast

02-21-2009, 03:23 AM

Then wipe off your face and destroy your enemy, no matter the time or cost!

Danelin

02-21-2009, 12:10 PM

<cite>Lyger@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>til a mob owns your face, then what?</blockquote>Then you go find a foe you are still strong enough to smash until you are in a position to fight it the one way you know how.I agree that defensive stances needs improvement, it is largely worthless on live now. My berserker still manages to get by in offensive. I bring what I have to in order to get the job done, I am restricted to easier content for longer than a comperably equipped defensive tank, an that is fine. I also lay waste to my enemies much more effectively than my defensive cousins.The horrible weapon skill penalties associated with defensive stances are one of the biggest problems. They never should have been there in the first place. If taunts had been kept scaling (or were repaired) and the dps penalty were there instead, Defensive would have been a hell of a lot more useful and used much more often. The problem is, I am betting that samples of 'who fights in what stance' were done on a simple check the code level, which does NOT give useful information.How many fighter do you know who solo in defensive? Hell, I died hundreds of pointless deaths on my guardian when I started him before I figured out that the only way to solo and survive was to step into offensive. (Was i in a meatshield mindset or what?) If I am tanking content where it is feasible to do so easily, or I trust my healers, I tank in offensive. If I am having aggro issues, I tank in offensive. I try to make sure I have the tools I need to make a group work. On the other hand, if I am getting hammered like nobody's business, I step back into D-stance. If my healers aren't cutting it, or can't possibly keep up, I step into D-stance. It isn't like I never use it.Every raid MT I know when fighting names or non-weak trash tanks in D-stance. In most difficult group content, tanks are in d-stance.Only people who are dripping in Avatar gear and top-end raid gear step into offensive and never leave it unless they are aiming their play locations purely at staying in offense.I mean, if our characters were truly berserkers, we wouldn't even HAVE a defensive stance, but we would also tend to turn on our allies when all of our foes were felled. I will say this much, with our AE damage eating as much as a 70% reduction on test this week, plus all our taunts being made more resistable AND weaker, we are becoming less and less viable with every passing moment. I am sure mythical equipped raid geared zerks with enough AA to buy TSO late abilities will be fine. The Myth generates a ton of aggro, as does the ability to gain aggro by triggering Adrenaline. On the other hand, not all berserkers have these things. Some of them are sorely behind on AA and instead of AA being neat things to enhance our characters, they are becoming what the devs stated they never wanted them to be when KoS launched - Requirements to perform our class functions. It isn't as bad as EQ1 AA yet, but it is going the wrong way fast, and Aeralik looks like he's hitting the gas when he should be slamming on the brakes.

LygerT

02-22-2009, 07:48 PM

the tso snaps suck due to resistabilityon live zerks all around bring less than an SK but we can still bring some mediocre dps while in a completely squishy role, the SK is our supposed different equivalent now but not quite equal. the changes on test are hideous to even look at and with every update things look even worse.

dreken

02-22-2009, 09:31 PM

well believe it or not i finally hit 80 WOOT ...... after 4 yrs 7 mths 23 days and ... ohh heck i finally made it <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" />Now i started this toon in Mar. 2005 and i will admit i am a on-par beserker, and i am a fairly casual player dont raid that much ( not wanted or needed or dont have a spot ) and now seldom tank, if at all, i honestly dont know enough to really know what is going on with the beserker but i do know that it has become a more of a challenge,, as of now i am doing fair at holding my own with most mobs love the AE attacks need a couple more though.When i first started him out it was beutimus i had no prob standing on my own, finding a group, or even tanking when i had to or wanted to, but with every change, every update, well you get the picture.( sissy)To me the definition of the Bezerker is what drew me to it in the first place .. damage elite... power ... devistation .. and total disreguard for the rules, .. there should really be no defensive stance for the beserker he is a Offensive tank (or OT ). A powerhouse of destruction who may not hit the top of the parse or even post in it but when he hits his target or targets (from his AE attacks) the heavens shudder with fear wondering if they are next on his to do list .. THAT is a Beserker <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/908627bbe5e9f6a080977db8c365caff.gif" border="0" />

Bremer

02-22-2009, 09:47 PM

I don't care about lore and all that stuff. I want to be able to be a viable tank. And not whatever you call that Beserker on the Test severs, whose DPS, hate gain and surviabilty all completely suck.

Obadiah

02-22-2009, 11:20 PM

New definition of a Berserker:<img src="http://i419.photobucket.com/albums/pp279/Skull4Ever/hello_kitty.jpg" width="139" height="160" />You know, LAST year when I canceled my subscription it was sort of a small and petty reason. It was just being completely ignored re: Adrenaline, which was eventually fixed (albeit not how I had hoped) once I PMed the right person instead of that Aerrogant [sic] guy. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" />This year the cancellation is for pretty much everything.Any benefit we bring to a raid is brought better by a [lesser-geared] Fighter of another type. This next update finishes the job that TSO started in that sense. It's a complete erasing of the role. Worst ST hate of any Fighter, most resistable taunts, medium survivability, lowest utility, and soon to be the lowest DPS of all with the possible exception of Guardians (assuming all are in Defensive Stance). Berserkers are now heroic instance tanks. If I had any other class my alliance needed I might stay, but my Necro is #2, and life sucks donkeys there too.My regret is that I may have rambled a bit in the exit surveys so the feedback, being too verbose, won't even be read.

Bremer

02-23-2009, 10:08 AM

Lol, yeah. That big white cat is probably the Guardian protecting the defenseless Beserker from those evil epic mobs...

LygerT

02-23-2009, 07:05 PM

well, at least i know i'm not crazy now. the differences become much more noticable as you get closer to the top. mainly because of the hybrid role SKs have where there is much more room they have to grow with where zerks have been capped in everything for going on over 2 expansions now. it was the same way when guardians started to creep into cap with dps and haste buffs as well as crit which we had buffs to keep us above them, class defining abilities that mean less over time. now being forced to tank defensively and having defensive abilities that have stiff penalties is destroying the desirability of the class. add in that we offer less AE hate on test well, that doesn't leave much left for the berserker class.maybe someday things will get fixed so we have some form of real usable role but as time goes on i'm starting to think that will never happen before it's a ghost town here. in heroic we still do fine but for raiding there just is no benefit to having a zerker anymore, we are now the SK of the plate tanks.this is no exaggeration of the truth and i just can't deal with the BS anymore.

ZerkerDwarf

02-23-2009, 10:34 PM

A berserker shouldn't be thought of as a brainless pile of raging meat filled up with drugs. There do not need to be white bubbles around his mouth. Neither out of nor in combat.A berserker foremost should be thought of something whirlwindish on the battlefield. Not neccessarily storming into enemies brainless and without thinking or having thought in advance. Storming, swiftness, rage, ignoring pain, multiple strikes however should be the terms to be applied to a berserker.A berserker is not a bruiser (not meant as EQ2 term) or mad killing machine that has never seen a school or temple from inside. He might even have a monkish character but using berserkish attributes and fighting techniques within a battle. He has learnt to channel rage onto multiple foes; he uses wildness and whirlwindish techniques.Nevertheless the fighter revamp is going to turn us into sitting ducks.That was slightly off topic and those background ideas do not influence actual gameplay; I just wanted to have it said.

darkdawn1

02-23-2009, 10:42 PM

I just rolled a zerk and came here and read this thread..... What a bummer. I wanted an offensive tank aka a fury warrior. If the zerk is broken what pray tell is the most offensive melee (non-scout) class now? Mind you, I wanted to roll a good toon as my other ones are the baddies(wizard and brigand.)

Xalmat

02-23-2009, 10:55 PM

<cite>darkdawn1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>I just rolled a zerk and came here and read this thread..... What a bummer. I wanted a offensive tank aka a fury warrior. If the zerk is broken what pray tell is the most offensive melee (non-scout) class now? Mind you, I wanted to roll a good toon as my other ones are the baddies(wizard and brigand.)</blockquote>Shadowknight or Bruiser, and both are Evil. Monk right now has so many problems that they aren't viable compared to a Bruiser imo, and Paladin isn't nearly as offensive oriented as a SK. Frankly you aren't going to find what you're looking if you want to stay good only.

Obadiah

02-24-2009, 02:50 AM

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>darkdawn1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>I just rolled a zerk and came here and read this thread..... What a bummer. I wanted a offensive tank aka a fury warrior. If the zerk is broken what pray tell is the most offensive melee (non-scout) class now? Mind you, I wanted to roll a good toon as my other ones are the baddies(wizard and brigand.)</blockquote>Shadowknight or Bruiser, and both are Evil. Monk right now has so many problems that they aren't viable compared to a Bruiser imo, and Paladin isn't nearly as offensive oriented as a SK. Frankly you aren't going to find what you're looking if you want to stay good only.</blockquote>Well, I think it depends on what you want to do.We'll be fine for all heroic content IMO. Still fun for short fights in particular, and for pulling rooms after you get Insolent Gibe.Monks are fine for heroic stuff too, and will be even better after this. A bit.But if I'm min/max-ing to assemble a raid force, well, I wouldn't look this way.

darkdawn1

02-24-2009, 09:32 AM

I was mainly loking for a solo experience with this toon. I wanted good solid DPS and level gain. I have other classes I'm playing slow to get the full AAs and do the majority of the content. This guy was going to be my solo farmer for plat not for group raids. That said, if you are on the good side who do you use for melee dps? Swashy?

Bremer

02-24-2009, 11:09 AM

If you want only to play solo take a Monk. FD, heals, FD. All you need for solo play.

LygerT

02-24-2009, 05:20 PM

monk or bruiser is your best bet for farming plat and shineys. SK is also decent in this department also since they solo well but you need decent gear to do it.

Elanjar

02-24-2009, 06:30 PM

If you're here for solo and you only want a fighter then you have to choose a brawler. Thats pretty much whats up.

Destria

02-25-2009, 12:20 AM

its sad, as it is I can solo pretty dam well, few issues as long as I dont get too carried away mass pulling by myself.But with this "revamp" or "fix", the increased damage will just cripple us, hands down. We will not be a solo playable class, reminds me of the nightmare trying to solo that short stint I had as a guardian.

LygerT

02-25-2009, 07:34 PM

5% more incoming damage will not be a crippling change, being forced to tank defnesively when we have always had issues doing so will be a crippling change. even with massive taunts, they would have to be more powerful than other fighters because our DPS will be even lower than theirs, especially with the gimpness that they are doing with our AE combat arts.

LygerT

02-25-2009, 07:35 PM

double post

Destria

03-04-2009, 01:57 AM

<cite>Lyger@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>5% more incoming damage will not be a crippling change, being forced to tank defnesively when we have always had issues doing so will be a crippling change. even with massive taunts, they would have to be more powerful than other fighters because our DPS will be even lower than theirs, especially with the gimpness that they are doing with our AE combat arts.</blockquote>Well, I havent tested this yet myself, however a friend and fellow guildmate on AB, was playing a guardian on test, with the hate changes, and keeping up with the threat>vs<DPS>vs<mob HP, he managed to build up more threat then the mob had HP before the fight was even half over, and simply sat back and taunted.....is it just me, or is this just stupid ridiculous??? I plan on testing it myself on my zerk by this weekend, if RL permits me the time; tho I will be sorely upset to see such an incredible class with so much potential reduced to a seething pool of taunting.As it is on Live, we already take a fair good bit of damage as is in off. stance, even in def. stance, a 5% increase is wholly unnecesary, and really will hurt us for soloability IMHO!

Bremer

03-04-2009, 12:06 PM

<cite>Erszebeth@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>is it just me, or is this just stupid ridiculous??? </blockquote>I ask myself this question after every test server update. Are the responsibles persons blind and have no clue or is the problem just me asking for balance?

Vanderlay

03-04-2009, 12:45 PM

To me the definition of a berserker reminds me of the Norse Vikings. We get a very unique class defining helm, which is of course a viking helm. Historically speaking, the Vikings raided towns, pillaged, killed, , looted, etc. usually while drug induced. Most Vikings wore little to no armor, but painted their bodies before battle, and most dual wielded axes or swords. Vikings struck fear into the hearts of those who happened to cross their paths, and many were not fortunate enough to get out of the way.Now, this is a fantasy game and does not have the same principles and logic as RL, but SOE's basic description of a Berserker is quite similar to a Viking. Not to mention the class hat is that indeed. So, shouldn't it go without saying that a Berserker is the most formidable offensive tank who strikes fear into the heart of the enemy with a single glance and brandishing of his weapons? Not likely at this point.I chose an Ogre Berserker because of the feeling I thought, and I say again I THOUGHT, that SOE envisioned the same style of play for a zerk. Now with these proposed changes we will be reduced to Meat Shields that are [Removed for Content] on taunts AND survivability. Why choose a zerk when an SK, or even a Pally can do the job fine?Anyone seen the movie Pathfinder?? That's a Viking/Berserker role that I envisioned when creating my zerker over 2 years ago.

darkdawn1

03-07-2009, 06:49 PM

Is the zerker still the top offensive DPS heavy tank when compared to the guardian and the pally?

Obadiah

03-07-2009, 07:32 PM

On Live, they perhaps hold an edge in that regard over Paladins and Guards, yes. Though not much of one in either case except on AE fights.On Test when tanking, the difference in DPS is still negligible. What's worse, they have barely over half the threat generation of either Guardian or Paladin on single targets and no sizeable advantage on groups under 5. Their taunts are about 3/4 what their AE counterparts taunts are.In Offensive Stance against single targets Guardians DPS will be higher, particularly on protracted fights.Crusaders and Brawlers in general will retain a higher percentage of their Defensive Stance DPS than Warriors will for different reasons.So in general, going forward when compared to all other Fighters Berserkers have substantially lower and more resistable taunts and the same or lower DPS, and the only misspelled suffix title.

Destria

03-11-2009, 03:59 AM

what this really translates out toBERSERKER IS A DEAD CLASS ON TESTdear gods lets hope the devs dont take this live

Axxe

03-14-2009, 01:31 AM

Berserkers are Fierce, and Fearless warriors, capable of delivering a powerful punch of physical destruction as well as sustaining it. Seething with sheer rage and self-willed adrenaline, acknowledging neither pity, nor mercy upon their victims; those found as opposistion(anything that moved). Generally recognized as madly-anguished and/or even insane, driven by chaotic-rage and the simple sounds of battle-worn sorrow, cast forth from those felled by the reckless means of these truly war-crazed combatants - the smell of smoldering cinders of blood, bone, flesh and toppled structures; all that would remain, following the brutal rampage they only Too eagerly sought to participate in day by day. Satisfied only by the sentencing of death and pure devastation upon those they willed. Finding no life of any kind to be of any cost too great - men, women, and children alike all stood equally susceptable to the unbridled madness of these cruel, and aweful, yet Truly powerful accelerators of War, So Known as ... "The Berserker" <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/908627bbe5e9f6a080977db8c365caff.gif" border="0" />

Seidhkona

03-14-2009, 01:46 AM

If you want to get at <a href="http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/berserke.shtml" target="_blank">what a berserker really is</a>, then they should wear either no armor or very light armor.The berserker should take wounds but not notice them until the fight ends, then he should fall over, unconscious for many hours or dead. Metal weapons (specifically those of steel or iron) should not be able to wound a berserker at all.Berserkers might have the ability to shape-shift into a wolf or bear, doing a lot of damage, but the "take a lot of damage then die when the excitement ends" should still be present. When not in animal form, a berzerker is hideously ugly, black-haired and evil-looking.And berserkers have no honor. When the fit is upon them, they should indiscriminately attack and kill friend and foe alike.

eidos

03-16-2009, 03:14 PM

When I first created my Berserker, it was with the intent of being able to tank for my group of friends since none of them like playing fighters. I also needed to get my levels quickly since they were higher level than me. My friends were not experts at EQ2 and stuck with specific roles/classes, so they had no insight for me at character generation except that they were Qeynosian which did some class limitations for me anyway. So when looking at the fighter classes since we didn't need any more non-fighters tanking as they were doing at the time and I wanted to pick one character as my main and not flip-flop between alts as I am a very focused person, my process of elimination went like this:Monk (Brawler): DPS, agile, very soloable, not a lot of protection; so not as viable a tank class.Paladin (Crusader): Part tank, part healer, some interesting mechanics, but we have a healer and I don't want to mess with spells and combat specifics as I'm new to this game.Guardian (Warrior): Wall of steel, lots of hit points, very group friendly in regard to hate, class seems to be made to make classic tanking role easy; very tempting, but may be hard to solo before I can actually play in a group.Berserker (Warrior): Use any armor/shield/weapon combo, can take a beating while being able to dish out some damage, has some hate generating abilities although not on par with the Guardian so I'll need to work a bit harder as tank; this seems just about right.Warriors were the way to go for me, so when comparing Berserker and Guardian, I 'thought' that the mechanics balanced the warriors equally, just allocated points in different areas depending on the class type. Such as Guardians had 10% more defensive skills where Berserkers had 10% more offensive skills, etc. Now I didn't have an exact percentage of difference in mind, it's just an example.Now that time has gone on, I am fighting harder and harder to do my job. When my friends who've gamed with me for all this tim, gotten use to our styles, etc. are suggesting to me that I may want to look at betraying so that I can switch to a guardian because the new zones are built so that it seems that a specific group makeup with specified classes and gear, I have to ask myself if they're right. I'd hate to do it after all the time I've put into this character and having to get my skills/fabled/etc. again on top of learning the new class, but if that's what I need to do to keep playing, I might just have to do it. I don't think that I'd want to continue leveling my other Guardian as my friends and guild would need me sooner than later along with all of the other things I've done with my toon that I don't want to repeat. So, I am still playing until the decisions are finalized, but not pushing for anything Berserker specific at this time so that if I do end up switching classes, I won't be out any more that what I already am.

Sreneth

03-16-2009, 04:14 PM

I created my zerker in BETA. When the game went live he was born not 5 minutes after the servers came up. Back then we were all Fighters at birth and had to level up to become Warriors at 10 and then finally Guardians/Zerkers at 20. I miss this progression to be honest. Gave the game a bit of character. I knew I wanted to be a fighter, having played Warriors and Wizards in EQ1, I was sure I preferred Warriors this time around. What I wasn't sure on was the type of warrior I wanted to be. I didn't know if I wanted to be a wall of stone, stand behind my shield and wait for the mobs to try and come through warrior, or the [Removed for Content] the rest and rush into battle bezerker frenzy guy. I had 20 beautiful and tedious ( at the time ) levels to figure out my perfect play style. By the time I hit 20, there was no question in my mind who I was. I did allot of soloing; when I did group it was with a Temp and Fury (family). I enjoyed being on the front lines, charging into battle axes flailing in the wind. I thought of myself as the kind to enjoy a good quick fight. I wasn't worried about my HP, I rarely looked at my health until the fight was over, or in the odd case of an ad. I never ran from battle, I think I must have one of the lowest D:K ratios is the game. I was a born and bred Berzerker. When LU13 hit I all but stopped playing my zerker. I found my Conjuror much easier to level and since I still did allot of soloing the Conjuror was just a better fit for me at the time. Fast-forward 3 year and a couple expansions. My Conjuror is becoming trivialized by nerfs and an over abundance of Conjurors being played (Mostly played badly I might ad) and getting a group was becoming increasingly more difficult. No one wanted nor needed a conjuror. Not sure what to do next, I decided to knock the dust off my Zerker. He literally hadn't been logged in in probably 18 months and was only level 43. Suddenly I was having a blast again. Grouping was easy because at those levels I found allot of people leveling alts to fill raid needs and none of those needs were tanks so I was a rare commodity. When I did have to solo, largely due to my end game experience with the conj, I found myself having none of the problems I was having when I retired the character. Granted at this point they had made so many changes to exp at lower levels, that what took my Conj months to finish took weeks, but I wasn't feeling like I was missing too much content. I had an AA advantage, simply because my conjuror was already 50 when AAs were introduced, and secondly I had allot more to choose from. Fast-forward ANOTHER couple of months and we are looking down the barrel of GU51 Lucan's Art of War. My Zerker was 80 and sitting on a decent set of AAs. I needed gear bad, but I was holding my own. I quickly copied my character to test to check out the changes. I almost immediately got into a group to do Deep Forge. I jumped at this since this was a zone I had struggled to keep aggro in on Live. It was almost too easy. I never lost agro ONCE and I had a couple PURE DPSers in the group with much better gear. I was still having fun because I wasn't "worried" about loosing aggro and looking bad. I decided I was probably going to switch my main to Zerker because now I wasn't too worried about looking bad in my bad gear. I went back to live and started pushing, I all but benched my conjuror ( save for raids ) and started shard hunting, grouping, questing, farming, anything I could do to better my gear and get as many masters as I could so when they combined the stances and spells I would be set. Now lets jump forward to last week. After a decent round of shard farming and grouping it occurred to me that now on live, due to my pushing and leveling, research, and generally making my Live character better, I wasn't having aggro issues anymore, I wasn't dieing in 4 hits anymore. I wasn't killing my healers from my weakness. I now, in my own humble opinion, have a TSO group worthy Tank. I might not be fully raid worthy, but that is ok, that comes in time, but I find myself ready to tank anything group oriented. As I read the changes to zerkers again, I find myself wondering if I will still like my zerker? So i decided to copy my character over again. Now I have a friendly ReathanX on Test Copy, I guess I tought they would have deleted the first one, oh well. I did some soloing, didn't seem to bad really. Offensive stance seemed good. I did get into a short group atempting Guk, Lower Corridors. I will have to say, holding aggro was almost too easy. I also noticed alot more missing, I guess due to the stance changes to melee skills. I am not sure now. Will he slip back onto the dusty shelves of my Character Select screen with my Monk and Ranger? I honestly hope not, because I am having a blast with him now. This post might not have much to do with the definition of Berzerker to most, but this is what it means to me. I hope it never changes. I truely hope Sony listens to the players.

Xalmat

03-16-2009, 05:07 PM

There's always the D&D Description of a Berserker (or rather the Barbarian class), which the Everquest series takes a lot from (the entire Everquest lore, class selection, etc., originates from D&D scenarios created a long time ago):.As taken from the 4th Edition rules:"Barbarians are savage warriors who deal out powerful blows from their mighty weapons. They charge from foe to foe and seldom feel the pain of an enemy's strike. For barbarians' foes, the moments of greatest terror come when barbarians call upon primal forces to lend power to their raging spirits. These rages, though temporary, give a barbarian incredible powers, a combination of skill, willpower, and a legacy of ancient tribal rituals."From that description, a D&D Barbarian is remarkably similar to an EQ2 Berserker.

LygerT

03-17-2009, 02:44 PM

<cite>Sigrdrifa@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>If you want to get at <a href="http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/berserke.shtml" target="_blank">what a berserker really is</a>, then they should wear either no armor or very light armor.The berserker should take wounds but not notice them until the fight ends, then he should fall over, unconscious for many hours or dead. Metal weapons (specifically those of steel or iron) should not be able to wound a berserker at all.Berserkers might have the ability to shape-shift into a wolf or bear, doing a lot of damage, but the "take a lot of damage then die when the excitement ends" should still be present. When not in animal form, a berzerker is hideously ugly, black-haired and evil-looking.And berserkers have no honor. When the fit is upon them, they should indiscriminately attack and kill friend and foe alike.</blockquote>our skill "adrenaline" was meant to serve this purpose. depending on the group you can be out of power quite quickly. hours in the game is only seconds in our timeframe so a group waiting on you to wake up from a nap, that sounds boring. just like healers can patch you up with a .5 second cast the perception of time in the game isn't how you see it when walking down the street in real life, it is much more compressed.