For the Betterment of the Brawler Classes. [Archive]

Paperninja

08-19-2009, 07:10 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Paperninja wrote:</cite><blockquote></blockquote>You have to understand, this expansion they buffed our mythical (monks), they fixed our str line, they gave us deflection chance then put it on items that were missing it, they fixed our weapon delays, they had us set up with the fighter changes to be awesome. Its not like they have done nothing. Brawler issues aren't your list of 5 the list is like this.1) AE Agro generation2) Spike damage management3) a group buff would be nice</blockquote>Fine with me. Let's get that done then. What we shouldn't be doing is saying that everything is fine and crossing our fingers for next expansion. I'd like to see some changes in one of the many GUs coming out prior to the expansion. Can we agree on that?Let's not flame in this thread. It'll just get shut down again. Bchizzel & Couch - keep the destination in mind. We're tyring get things acomplished. Having our "help brawlers" threads locked doesn't help. Keep it civil. I won't flame if you don't.Same Team gentlemen.

BChizzle

08-19-2009, 07:20 PM

<cite>Paperninja wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Paperninja wrote:</cite><blockquote></blockquote>You have to understand, this expansion they buffed our mythical (monks), they fixed our str line, they gave us deflection chance then put it on items that were missing it, they fixed our weapon delays, they had us set up with the fighter changes to be awesome. Its not like they have done nothing. Brawler issues aren't your list of 5 the list is like this.1) AE Agro generation2) Spike damage management3) a group buff would be nice</blockquote>Fine with me. Let's get that done then. What we shouldn't be doing is saying that everything is fine and crossing our fingers for next expansion. I'd like to see some changes in one of the many GUs coming out prior to the expansion. Can we agree on that?Let's not flame in this thread. It'll just get shut down again. Bchizzel & Couch - keep the destination in mind. We're tyring get things acomplished. Having our "help brawlers" threads locked doesn't help. Keep it civil. I won't flame if you don't.Same Team gentlemen.</blockquote>I highlighted the parts of my quote I feel you should reread, the devs have been working on brawlers and have buffed us. While I would like something done about ae agro yesterday and have suggested they buff cranetwirl, I can't imagine it being a good thing that they make any major changes mid expansion, the fighter changes being scrapped is the best example of it not working, sadly if they had gone through we wouldn't have these complaints.

Blu

08-19-2009, 07:24 PM

Just something I had to clarify.Couching said:<blockquote>Xerq@Crushbone said:<blockquote>I think a valid point to all this is that it's easier to gear up a brawler as a backup MT than another plate tank (less competition for patterns), yet hardly anyone is doing it. Regardless if it's only poor perception, this perception is shaping reality, and SOE needs to do something to change it.</blockquote>There is no pattern competition for plate tanks; different patterns for different fighters.</blockquote>This is my mistake.I was thinking about another thread that mentioned a common min/max raid setup had 2 SKs. And the 2 SKs do compete for patterns in that case. But this problem is not specific to brawlers, and has to do with SKs being op, so it's still moot for a discussion of brawler issues.

Paperninja

08-19-2009, 07:30 PM

I'm not familiar with the history of these "Fighter Changes"What happened? Development had proposed a fighter re-balance and then scrapped it before deploying? If so, why?

Lilvoice

08-19-2009, 07:30 PM

my opinion is where you place your aa points determines. If you are speccing for tanking you are effective in that but [Removed for Content] your dps vice versa.

BChizzle

08-19-2009, 07:43 PM

<cite>Paperninja wrote:</cite><blockquote>Development had proposed a fighter re-balance and then scrapped it before deploying</blockquote>That is what happened, as to why well making changes like that 3 months into an expansion turned out to be a bad idea, they are coming though.

Maamadex

08-19-2009, 07:52 PM

I dunno, maybe they were scrapped because they were ill-conceived? The fighter rebalance had some merit and still does, but I think it would be better to fine tune things bit by bit instead of making sweeping changes. Stick with what makes sense, fix classes that are broken or who need some attention, I fail to understand why everything has to be done at once. Why can't it be done with some discretion and feedback from people?

Blu

08-19-2009, 08:23 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>... While I would like something done about ae agro yesterday and have suggested they buff cranetwirl, I can't imagine it being a good thing that they make any major changes mid expansion, the fighter changes being scrapped is the best example of it not working, sadly if they had gone through we wouldn't have these complaints.</blockquote>Even if they only boost simple things about brawlers for the next yea-many months (e.g. add threat to our 1 or all 3 of our aoes, reduce reuse of group taunt, etc. -- things that could EASILY go in with a hotfix), and then take it all back to introduce the permanent fixes in the next expansion, that would be MUCH BETTER than leaving us to wait and hang all our hopes on the next expansion.Not to mention that such obvious class imbalance is a maintenance issue (i.e. the reason we pay subscriptions), and only including it in new content that costs extra seems ethically debatable at best.

Aull

08-19-2009, 08:51 PM

<cite>Xerq@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>... While I would like something done about ae agro yesterday and have suggested they buff cranetwirl, I can't imagine it being a good thing that they make any major changes mid expansion, the fighter changes being scrapped is the best example of it not working, sadly if they had gone through we wouldn't have these complaints.</blockquote>Even if they only boost simple things about brawlers for the next yea-many months (e.g. add threat to our 1 or all 3 of our aoes, reduce reuse of group taunt, etc. -- things that could EASILY go in with a hotfix), and then take it all back to introduce the permanent fixes in the next expansion, that would be MUCH BETTER than leaving us to wait and hang all our hopes on the next expansion.Not to mention that such obvious class imbalance is a maintenance issue (i.e. the reason we pay subscriptions), and only including it in new content that costs extra seems ethically debatable at best.</blockquote>I will mention this again so bare with me. What about making monk's dragonrage an encounter taunt? It would have the same 10ppm rating. Do the same for the bruiser's manhandle and it still remain 5ppm. Is that a bad idea? Would it be to complicated to impliment this into the game by next game update?Opinions please.

BChizzle

08-19-2009, 08:56 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xerq@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>... While I would like something done about ae agro yesterday and have suggested they buff cranetwirl, I can't imagine it being a good thing that they make any major changes mid expansion, the fighter changes being scrapped is the best example of it not working, sadly if they had gone through we wouldn't have these complaints.</blockquote>Even if they only boost simple things about brawlers for the next yea-many months (e.g. add threat to our 1 or all 3 of our aoes, reduce reuse of group taunt, etc. -- things that could EASILY go in with a hotfix), and then take it all back to introduce the permanent fixes in the next expansion, that would be MUCH BETTER than leaving us to wait and hang all our hopes on the next expansion.Not to mention that such obvious class imbalance is a maintenance issue (i.e. the reason we pay subscriptions), and only including it in new content that costs extra seems ethically debatable at best.</blockquote>I will mention this again so bare with me. What about making monk's dragonrage an encounter taunt? It would have the same 10ppm rating. Do the same for the bruiser's manhandle and it still remain 5ppm. Is that a bad idea? Would it be to complicated to impliment this into the game by next game update?Opinions please.</blockquote>It would be something at least but its not in encounter tanking that really needs the work it is blue encounter fighting. Other tanks get ae auto attacks we don't, by just buffing our proc you only half fix things.

Rahatmattata

08-19-2009, 10:35 PM

<cite>Maamadex wrote:</cite><blockquote>I dunno, maybe they were scrapped because they were ill-conceived? The fighter rebalance had some merit and still does, but I think it would be better to fine tune things bit by bit instead of making sweeping changes. Stick with what makes sense, fix classes that are broken or who need some attention, I fail to understand why everything has to be done at once. Why can't it be done with some discretion and feedback from people?</blockquote>WTB threat crits and scaling with the agression stat.

Bruener

08-20-2009, 11:09 AM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Maamadex wrote:</cite><blockquote>I dunno, maybe they were scrapped because they were ill-conceived? The fighter rebalance had some merit and still does, but I think it would be better to fine tune things bit by bit instead of making sweeping changes. Stick with what makes sense, fix classes that are broken or who need some attention, I fail to understand why everything has to be done at once. Why can't it be done with some discretion and feedback from people?</blockquote>WTB threat crits and scaling with the agression stat.</blockquote>The reason the fighter revamp was scrapped because it was like a piece of legislation going through the House to be passed. The original Bill was great and had a lot of usefull changes but than SOE decided to tack on a bunch of other crap that really killed the play style of fighters and made it boring. Mechanics like Taunt Crit should have been added a long time ago, same with adding a mechanic like DT (Double Taunt). That in combination with beefing taunts up a little would have gone a long way in allowing hate to increase exponentially with DPS.What wasn't liked was the idea of buff consolidation into stances and also completely removing the concept of tanking in offensive stance and stance dancing. If a tank is completely over-geared for an area why should they have to go defensive in order to tank it? Also, not allowing stance dancing really takes a lot of fun out of the game for OTs, 3rd and 4th tanks on a raid. Having to sit in defensive in case something happens, so completely killing the DPS you give to your raid, is not enjoyable if you are not tanking. Also, if a mob becomes debuffed to the point where your gear is above the encounter why not be able to go offensive and help the burn a little faster. Not to mention that a lot of encounters have DPS checks so severly nerfing all of your fighters' DPS hurts for the burn that is required on the mobs.Hit rates. Nobody likes it when they can't hit the mobs they are trying to fight and SOE made sure that hit rates for tanks tanking was through the floor and that was a bad move. The -damage mod itself was probably inline but why is it that the tank also has to miss the mob a whole bunch.Finally, the idea that legendary geared tanks would easily hold agro off of raid geared DPS with no transfers and no hate buffs is asinine...especially when it is done with a single taunt macro. Thats like saying legendary geared healers can heal anybody by spamming a heal macro. Or legendary geared DPS can put out raid type DPS numbers with a single DPS macro. If a tank is under-geared compared to his fellow group members it should be noticeable, agro should not be that easy.I thnik what a lot of people would like to see go through from the original fighter revamp is Taunt crit mechanic, increased taunts, increased hate in defensive with the -.5 damage mod, taking slightly more damage in offensive (maybe 10% more damage taken). NO buff consolidation into stances. NO taking away stance dancing. NO decrease in hit rates in any stance.

RafaelSmith

08-20-2009, 11:23 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Maamadex wrote:</cite><blockquote>I dunno, maybe they were scrapped because they were ill-conceived? The fighter rebalance had some merit and still does, but I think it would be better to fine tune things bit by bit instead of making sweeping changes. Stick with what makes sense, fix classes that are broken or who need some attention, I fail to understand why everything has to be done at once. Why can't it be done with some discretion and feedback from people?</blockquote>WTB threat crits and scaling with the agression stat.</blockquote>The reason the fighter revamp was scrapped because it was like a piece of legislation going through the House to be passed. The original Bill was great and had a lot of usefull changes but than SOE decided to tack on a bunch of other crap that really killed the play style of fighters and made it boring. Mechanics like Taunt Crit should have been added a long time ago, same with adding a mechanic like DT (Double Taunt). That in combination with beefing taunts up a little would have gone a long way in allowing hate to increase exponentially with DPS.What wasn't liked was the idea of buff consolidation into stances and also completely removing the concept of tanking in offensive stance and stance dancing. If a tank is completely over-geared for an area why should they have to go defensive in order to tank it? Also, not allowing stance dancing really takes a lot of fun out of the game for OTs, 3rd and 4th tanks on a raid. Having to sit in defensive in case something happens, so completely killing the DPS you give to your raid, is not enjoyable if you are not tanking. Also, if a mob becomes debuffed to the point where your gear is above the encounter why not be able to go offensive and help the burn a little faster. Not to mention that a lot of encounters have DPS checks so severly nerfing all of your fighters' DPS hurts for the burn that is required on the mobs.Hit rates. Nobody likes it when they can't hit the mobs they are trying to fight and SOE made sure that hit rates for tanks tanking was through the floor and that was a bad move. The -damage mod itself was probably inline but why is it that the tank also has to miss the mob a whole bunch.Finally, the idea that legendary geared tanks would easily hold agro off of raid geared DPS with no transfers and no hate buffs is asinine...especially when it is done with a single taunt macro. Thats like saying legendary geared healers can heal anybody by spamming a heal macro. Or legendary geared DPS can put out raid type DPS numbers with a single DPS macro. If a tank is under-geared compared to his fellow group members it should be noticeable, agro should not be that easy.I thnik what a lot of people would like to see go through from the original fighter revamp is Taunt crit mechanic, increased taunts, increased hate in defensive with the -.5 damage mod, taking slightly more damage in offensive (maybe 10% more damage taken). NO buff consolidation into stances. NO taking away stance dancing. NO decrease in hit rates in any stance.</blockquote>There is a first for everything I guess.......I agree 100% with you with regards to that revamp <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />I thought of the revamp as it was presented as trying to cure a broken toe but first cutting off the entire leg then replacing it with a stump.There were a few concepts in that I would like to see in game but as a whole it was stupid. Last thing I want is for tanking to be dumbed down even more than it already is. And any tank.....I dont care what class should have to at least match or better the gear/experience level of his group to be able to tank for them.

Barx

08-20-2009, 11:33 AM

<cite>Xerq@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Not to mention that such obvious class imbalance is a maintenance issue (i.e. the reason we pay subscriptions), and only including it in new content that costs extra seems ethically debatable at best.</blockquote>Any fighter changes, including brawler changes, that would happen with SF would actually be happening with GU55 (or whatever GU Sentinel's Fate comes out in). They could not possibly make such changes part of the actual expansion, it affects the underlying code not just new areas whereas with a new expansion you are paying for things being added to the game, not things already in the game being changed.{end sidetrack} <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Blu

08-20-2009, 03:12 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xerq@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>... While I would like something done about ae agro yesterday and have suggested they buff cranetwirl, I can't imagine it being a good thing that they make any major changes mid expansion, the fighter changes being scrapped is the best example of it not working, sadly if they had gone through we wouldn't have these complaints.</blockquote>Even if they only boost simple things about brawlers for the next yea-many months (e.g. add threat to our 1 or all 3 of our aoes, reduce reuse of group taunt, etc. -- things that could EASILY go in with a hotfix), and then take it all back to introduce the permanent fixes in the next expansion, that would be MUCH BETTER than leaving us to wait and hang all our hopes on the next expansion.Not to mention that such obvious class imbalance is a maintenance issue (i.e. the reason we pay subscriptions), and only including it in new content that costs extra seems ethically debatable at best.</blockquote>I will mention this again so bare with me. What about making monk's dragonrage an encounter taunt? It would have the same 10ppm rating. Do the same for the bruiser's manhandle and it still remain 5ppm. Is that a bad idea? Would it be to complicated to impliment this into the game by next game update?Opinions please.</blockquote>This is certainly a good idea. I just didn't know if that would be as easy to add in a hotfix as adding +threat increase to Cobra Circle, for instance. A blue aoe also has an advantage in zones like CoA, where you can easily pull 2 large groups by accident.

Aule

08-20-2009, 03:21 PM

Could just make them like the sk and berserker hate tools and make the proc deliver the to all targets the brawler is on the hatelist of (threat for monk, threat and damage for brawler). No random engaging on unpulled encounters, no limitation to only the encounter. Give it a range of 15 or 20m so that in a raid where the boss is being fought at a distance from the adds you don't have to worry about peeling the boss somehow.

Blu

08-20-2009, 03:25 PM

<cite>Barx@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xerq@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Not to mention that such obvious class imbalance is a maintenance issue (i.e. the reason we pay subscriptions), and only including it in new content that costs extra seems ethically debatable at best.</blockquote>Any fighter changes, including brawler changes, that would happen with SF would actually be happening with GU55 (or whatever GU Sentinel's Fate comes out in). They could not possibly make such changes part of the actual expansion, it affects the underlying code not just new areas whereas with a new expansion you are paying for things being added to the game, not things already in the game being changed.{end sidetrack} <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I haven't seen specific plans on when or how they are implementing the changes they mentioned at FF (aoe aggro, and avoidance changes). So as far as I know we have no guarantees it won't be rolled into the next expansion. Maybe you have more info than I do.And you could also say that TSO AAs and itemization (content for which you must pay extra) pushed us more into tanking than we were previously. Albeit leaving out some tools that we really need to tank TSO content, like aoe aggro. So the sidetrack could still apply to TSO. Even though they failed to adequately balance us, they did attempt it and charged us extra for it.

Blu

08-20-2009, 03:28 PM

<cite>Aule@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote>Could just make them like the sk and berserker hate tools and make the proc deliver the to all targets the brawler is on the hatelist of (threat for monk, threat and damage for brawler). No random engaging on unpulled encounters, no limitation to only the encounter. Give it a range of 15 or 20m so that in a raid where the boss is being fought at a distance from the adds you don't have to worry about peeling the boss somehow.</blockquote>I was only suggesting things that I thought would be easy to put in a hotfix and would put us in a reasonable position while they figure out the permanent fixes. Something like what you mention, while a good suggestion, would take more programming (I would guess) than slapping +threat on cobra circle. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /> Maybe not tho, I dunno. My point is devs could do something quick and easy to mitigate the problem for the time being, instead of leaving us hanging for months.

Nero

08-21-2009, 03:49 PM

Compared to plate fighters, Brawlers receive less favors from Bane Warding of Shaman because Brawlers avoid mob's attacks.

Rahatmattata

08-21-2009, 04:10 PM

Maybe vs level 80 heroics, but vs orange x4s any fighter that can use a shield will avoid more attacks (assume equally geared).

BChizzle

08-21-2009, 04:40 PM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Maybe vs level 80 heroics, but vs orange x4s any fighter that can use a shield will avoid more attacks (assume equally geared).</blockquote>Even on the highest of raid mobs a properly equipped brawler will avoid 10-15% more then an equally geared plate tank. Your statement is completely false.

circusgirl

08-24-2009, 02:41 AM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Maybe vs level 80 heroics, but vs orange x4s any fighter that can use a shield will avoid more attacks (assume equally geared).</blockquote>This is blatantly untrue, unless you're in offensive stance with no buffs as compared to a plate tank with shield ally and tranquil vision.As far as the brawlers 2 major weaknesses (AE hate and spike control...)Spike ControlPlate tanks have naturally high mit and low avoidance, however they can make up for their low innate avoidance in several ways, most notably Shield Ally and Tranquil Vision, which use other characters avoidance checks if the plate tank's check fails. Brawlers have no equivalent means of making up for their weakness of low mitigation, and benefit less from avoidance buffs both because plate tanks have little avoidance to give and brawlers don't fail as many checks. This creates an imbalance in the total defensive abilities that can be gained by a brawler as opposed to a plate tank.Solution: Remove the avoidance transfers from plate tanks, and instead give them other survivability oriented buffs in the same style. For example, warriors could be given a buff that gives the target a 50% chance to use the caster's mitigation instead of the target's. So if a guard has 70% mit and his brawler target 60%, then half the time the brawler would take hits with 70% mitigation instead of 60%. This sounds quite powerful, yes, but in reality it is no more powerful than tranquil vision or shake off is when placed on a plate tank.AE Aggro<ul><li>Make Dragon Rage and Manhandle enounter procs</li><li>Change Crane Twirl to 40% AE autoattack</li><li>Remove the proc from the Fist of Judgement and replace it with Ferocious Presence (Trak shield clicky)</li><li>attach hate to crescent strike/dragonfire</li><li>lower recast of encounterwide taunt</li></ul>

Rahatmattata

08-24-2009, 03:49 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Even on the highest of raid mobs a properly equipped brawler will avoid 10-15% more then an equally geared plate tank. Your statement is completely false.</blockquote>Maybe I'm wrong, but I figured with 25ish % block a plate tank would avoid more hits than a brawler. Brawlers only get 15% uncontested iirc, any other uncontested is obtainable by plate tanks as well, unless deflection is uncontested (which would be news to me), or the brawler sets have uncontested avoid on them. Usually I'm a hair over 80% total avoid raid buffed in dstance, + shield ally, + a shadowknight's or bruisers avoid buff. I've seen some brawlers that can push 90% total avoid, but if I'm right and they have a good 10% less uncontested avoidance than a plate tank + tower shield, seems like they'd get hit more.I rarely have logging on, but I do have a few trash mobs (like 5 or 6) from one tombs run. I had no shield ally, swash, or fighter avoidance on me... was in ostance of course... so this probably doesn't really prove much. I was most likely around 72ish % total avoid. I wish I had an avoidance report for an orange named, or some trash tanked in dstance with the usual group setup, but I left my guild and probably won't be fighting an orange x4 any time soon <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> I was totally not set up for defense and I don't even remember why I had logging on during this raid, but I'll post anyway, cuz it's all I have atm.Anyway, I'm sure some brawlers here have avoidance reports for tanking tombs trash. I'm in mostly t3 on the left & woe/soh lewtz down the right side. Stoneskin from dirge kind of inflates things, but my own personal stoneskin procs from sent sphere should count.<img src="http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8793/avoid.png" />I was using the Harbinger Kite shield for trash, but I use Savage Wall for named... which any raiding warrior/crusador has access to. On Thet in tombs without shield ally or swash debuffs or other fighter avoidance... with me in normal tank gear, I'd guess I'd avoid close to 60% (including stoneskin). Would be nice to see avoid report from similar geared brawler tanking Thet... or even other plate fighters tanking whatever for that matter.My avoidance seems pretty low for what I expected, and you're probably right if there's some uncontested avoid brawlers get I don't know about, and considering they also get another avoidance type (deflection). I have no prob admitting I'm wrong. Would like to see some evidence as opposed to just taking your word for it though.

circusgirl

08-24-2009, 01:25 PM

Brawlers have significantly more than 15% uncontested avoidance. There are 3 types of deflection stat, each of which does something different:+deflection: basic, contested avoidance, works like +parry, +block, or +defense+minimum deflection chance: uncontested avoidance. 5 minimum deflection chance=5% chance to deflect incoming blow+deflection chance: multiplier that works on +deflect and +minimum deflection chanceTo calculate a monk's uncontested avoidance for example, you would do the following:22% uncontested deflection from defensive stance5% uncontested deflection from monk mythical27% Base uncontested avoidanceThen, this number is modified by deflection chance. Mostly this modifier is only present on raid gear, but for heroic stuff the difference between contested and uncontested avoidance isn't as important anyway. In full defensive gear, at the very top end, I can get to 82% deflection chance. This means I multiply both my deflection and my uncontested deflection by 1.8227%*1.82=49.14% minimum (uncontested) deflection. Sure enough, if I mouse over my avoidance stat in the persona modifier, it lists my minimum deflection as 49.1%. This is about as high as its possible for a brawler to get in terms of uncontested deflection, unless I'm missing some deflection chance, but this number will be going down soon as a result of avatar gear nerfs. Additionally, brawlers can get some uncontested avoidance from a few other sources. The T4 6-piece set bonus adds a flat 6% riposte chance. We (and plate tanks) can get 4.4% parry from food and drink and 6% parry from wrist adorns. Currently brawlers don't get any uncontested from weapon adorns unless they're using the void knuckles, since we mostly use crushing weapons, but this is changing on test soon.Add all this up and on the high end brawlers can reach 49.1+6+4.4+6=65.54% uncontested avoidance. Again though, this is on the very high end.HOWEVER, if a brawler switches into offensive stance, this amount drops to almost nothing. Redoing the calculations for a monk in offensive, we have the following:5% minimum deflection from mythical*1.82=9.1%+4.4 (food/drink)+6(parry adorns)=19.5% uncontested avoidance. It's really a huge drop, it's next to impossible to tank seriously in x4 content while in offensive stance.Strikethrough, of course, means that even uncontested avoidance isn't really accurate though. In my opinion, just making brawlers immune to strikethrough would be huge for preventing spike damage.

Couching

08-24-2009, 03:59 PM

Bralwers in defensive have more uncontested avoidance than plate tanks. But the calculation in your post is incorrect. All of the uncontested avoidance checks are separate.In your example, (2.2% dodge x2, 6% riposte and 49.1% deflection) the overall uncontested avoidance in defensive is 54.24% instead of 65.54%In offensive, (2.2% dodge x2, 6% riposte and 9.1% deflection), the overall uncontested avoidance is 18.27% instead of 19.5%.

circusgirl

08-27-2009, 07:19 PM

Oooooops, you're right Couching. My mistake, thank you!

jrolla777

08-28-2009, 12:39 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>AE Aggro<ul><li>Make Dragon Rage and Manhandle enounter procs</li><li>Change Crane Twirl to 40% AE autoattack</li><li>Remove the proc from the Fist of Judgement and replace it with Ferocious Presence (Trak shield clicky)</li><li>attach hate to crescent strike/dragonfire</li><li>lower recast of encounterwide taunt</li></ul></blockquote>since i dont kill avatars, i could have to vote No on this bolded point. why should i have to kill avatars to get something plate tanks get from previous instanced contentedit: but it still would be a nice change for some brawlers

Gungo

09-02-2009, 10:22 PM

Up until this expansion plates had better uncontested avoidance. Then they added deflection chance in TSO.Now its changed brawlers have the most uncontested avoidance.Of course they also gave raid mobs 25% strikethrough on avoidance checks.And the trak clicky is getting fixed to be no longer usable without the shield.This is being done afaik with the fighter revamp for obvious reasons.

Quicksilver74

09-03-2009, 09:38 AM

We need: Immunity to Strikethrough Altruism targettable to self WIS line proc damage GREATLY scaled up (STA line too for that matter)

Aull

09-03-2009, 09:04 PM

I guess all that can be said has been said cause these forums are sure slowing down.

Rahatmattata

09-04-2009, 01:09 AM

Yea. Almost every post in this section is just rehashing things that have already been suggested many times before anyway. But, whatever. I still recieve enough enjoyment by having access to their game to warrent a $15 monthly fee. When that changes I'll quietly stop sending them monthly payments. Honsetly though, I'm sure I'll be throwing down another 40 bucks in Feb for new content and more nerfs/fixes/changes.

Gungo

09-04-2009, 01:43 AM

<cite>Crabbok@Befallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>We need: Immunity to Strikethrough Altruism targettable to self WIS line proc damage GREATLY scaled up (STA line too for that matter) </blockquote>I will take immunity to strikethrough on our tsunami type abilites (mythical and indestructible will) and be happy. Add a nice change to our avoid other buff and some dps improvements and some group/raid buff improvments.

BChizzle

09-04-2009, 05:08 AM

They should just make it so riposte/parry/dodge can't be struck through and keep deflection and block as the only things that get struck through. Strikethrough seems to happen just way too much.

Gilasil

09-07-2009, 10:45 PM

I keep thinking about what needs to be done with brawlers. This is where I'm at:1. It woudn't be all that hard to tweak brawlers so they could tank for groups as well as comparably equipped plate tanks. They can tank for groups now although they generally need superior gear/AAs/CAs for equivalent functionality. Into this category I'd probably put tweaks such as doing something about strikethrough. Anything done to help them on raids shouldn't conflict with this.2. Making them raid tanks would take more tweaking and would involve compromises which would cause them to loose their uniqueness and some of their appeal in solo/group settings.3. Even if brawlers could be made into raid tanks every bit as good as plate tanks it brings up another problem affecting all fighters -- they simply don't need six fighters in a raid. In fact, filling six raid slots with fighters nowadays is a good way to doom a raid if it has a tough goal. So brawlers would STILL be relatively undesired on raids simply because they'd be competing with all the other fighter classes for the two fighter spots in typical raids. SoE needs to fix that problem regardless, since it affects all the plate fighters, but it's probably best not to toss brawlers into the same boat with the same problems. This would make the problem worse for plate fighters and it wouldn't help brawlers.4. If brawlers are not going to be allowed to funcation as their archetype in a raid setting then they need something else to make them desireable. After all, some classes in the scout archetype aren't particularly great at the stated scout main function of melee dps but are desired for other things. There was some indication that perhaps brawlers' function would be in a tank support role. Well, if they go that route they need to flesh it out more. A lot more. One passive buff does not a raid spot make. However, brawlers need and should be entitled to raid spots every bit as much as any other class. 5. Whatever is done, it should be such that player skill is important. If they're only in the raid for a passive buff, then player skill isn't going to count for much. Any old brawler is about as good as any other. Buy them a master for their avoidance buff, put them on autofollow, and be done with it. That's no good.6. If they do flesh out brawlers into a MT support role with a variety of buffs and other arts it's very likely they'd infringe on existing support classes. So they can't JUST be MT support. They need additional functionality of which MT support would only be a part. They old standby is DPS of course. If that's the case they they should be SOLID tier 2 dps able to easily pump out as much dps as any tier 2 scout dps class such as brigand or swashbuckler with equivalent gear and player skill. In that role they'd come along on raids for their avoidance buff, emergency off tanking, and for putting out some respectable tier 2 dps.So that's where I end up. Brawlers need essential raid functionality. It shouldn't be as raid MT. It shouldn't compromise non-raid functionality which is probably secondary dps and group tanking. It shouldn't depend solely on one passive buff. It should be such that all raids want a brawler. It's probably best if brawlers are not viewed as solely tank support as this would infringe on existing classes. It probably needs to be tank support + dps + emergency (20 sec or less) offtanking. If it's to be tank support and DPS, then they should be tier 2 DPS, able to easily DPS as much as an equivalently geared brigand or swashbuckler.

BChizzle

09-07-2009, 11:07 PM

<cite>Gilasil wrote:</cite><blockquote>I keep thinking about what needs to be done with brawlers. This is where I'm at:1. It woudn't be all that hard to tweak brawlers so they could tank for groups as well as comparably equipped plate tanks. They can tank for groups now although they generally need superior gear/AAs/CAs for equivalent functionality. Into this category I'd probably put tweaks such as doing something about strikethrough. Anything done to help them on raids shouldn't conflict with this.2. Making them raid tanks would take more tweaking and would involve compromises which would cause them to loose their uniqueness and some of their appeal in solo/group settings.3. Even if brawlers could be made into raid tanks every bit as good as plate tanks it brings up another problem affecting all fighters -- they simply don't need six fighters in a raid. In fact, filling six raid slots with fighters nowadays is a good way to doom a raid if it has a tough goal. So brawlers would STILL be relatively undesired on raids simply because they'd be competing with all the other fighter classes for the two fighter spots in typical raids. SoE needs to fix that problem regardless, since it affects all the plate fighters, but it's probably best not to toss brawlers into the same boat with the same problems. This would make the problem worse for plate fighters and it wouldn't help brawlers.4. If brawlers are not going to be allowed to funcation as their archetype in a raid setting then they need something else to make them desireable. After all, some classes in the scout archetype aren't particularly great at the stated scout main function of melee dps but are desired for other things. There was some indication that perhaps brawlers' function would be in a tank support role. Well, if they go that route they need to flesh it out more. A lot more. One passive buff does not a raid spot make. However, brawlers need and should be entitled to raid spots every bit as much as any other class. 5. Whatever is done, it should be such that player skill is important. If they're only in the raid for a passive buff, then player skill isn't going to count for much. Any old brawler is about as good as any other. Buy them a master for their avoidance buff, put them on autofollow, and be done with it. That's no good.6. If they do flesh out brawlers into a MT support role with a variety of buffs and other arts it's very likely they'd infringe on existing support classes. So they can't JUST be MT support. They need additional functionality of which MT support would only be a part. They old standby is DPS of course. If that's the case they they should be SOLID tier 2 dps able to easily pump out as much dps as any tier 2 scout dps class such as brigand or swashbuckler with equivalent gear and player skill. In that role they'd come along on raids for their avoidance buff, emergency off tanking, and for putting out some respectable tier 2 dps.So that's where I end up. Brawlers need essential raid functionality. It shouldn't be as raid MT. It shouldn't compromise non-raid functionality which is probably secondary dps and group tanking. It shouldn't depend solely on one passive buff. It should be such that all raids want a brawler. It's probably best if brawlers are not viewed as solely tank support as this would infringe on existing classes. It probably needs to be tank support + dps + emergency (20 sec or less) offtanking. If it's to be tank support and DPS, then they should be tier 2 DPS, able to easily DPS as much as an equivalently geared brigand or swashbuckler.</blockquote>You wrote all this but fail to realize brawlers can tank fine in raids grats.

Dechau

09-08-2009, 07:10 AM

I find myself using my Middle stance more and more, both for grps and for Raids..My gear is not the best out there, only have 1 T4 set item rest is a mix of TSO fabled and RoK fabled..Still I have instance tanked all instance bosses, except for Palace.. I'm sure I can do it, I just hate the zone and have never had any reason to go there..In raids, I am OT, have tanked Palace trash and first sisters, Tombs trash and first 2 nameds, Ykeeshan trash and Kultak adds, all in my middle with out the biggest problems..To make me a happy man, I would say, make me imune to Strikethrough, cause right now that is my biggest problem, everything else I can handle..I manage AoE hate fine (Wis line specced for it), and in my middle stance I can get close to 90 % avoid where about 40 % is uncontested..Everytime I go down, I see a huge hut spike me down, and healers can't get me in full health before my avoid misses next hit..So, to fix Brawlers, well Bruisers atleast.. make us imune to Strikethrough and we are good imo.. (Maybe give us the 40 % AoE autoattacks like the other fighters, but that's not a must have for me)my 2cp