Knights stance VS Duel Wielding Debate [Archive]

Boli32

08-29-2010, 06:20 AM

Warriors/brawlers can use a 2hander and DW - crusader can use a 2handed. After the change to autoatatck mechanics a few things become obvious> 2handed vs DW even with flurry and AoE Auto procving off both hands it *should* be equal due to increase in damage> There are very few decent 2handers in the game right now, we have 2 from 4 rune theer and hard mode construct I think. Given you can't use a 2hander or DW past or at these mobs it seems a bit weird to have them coming from later mobs. there shyoudl be DPS centric weapons drop from lower level mobs> Warriors and Brawlers still have the 20% crit bonus advantage but since crusaders are less focused on autoattack to DPS (more procs) then honestly it doesn't matter too muchVerdict: Who cares on this one... I see the options as pretty equal... the only problem I see is lack of decent 2handers on the earlier mobs... when you will actually USE them.Knight's stance is irrelavent due to needing a shield... so why even bring it up KS vs CB is roughtly equal; the additional benefit warriors/brawlers gain from the crit bonus doesn't *really* matter as there are quite frankly more important things to balance in the fighter debate.

Xalmat

08-29-2010, 06:23 AM

Sounds to me like its just fine.Hypothetically if a warrior or brawler chose to use a 2 hander instead of dual wielding and they wanted to switch back to sword and board or DWing they are in the same boat.

Cyrdemac

08-29-2010, 06:31 AM

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sounds to me like its just fine.Hypothetically if a warrior or brawler chose to use a 2 hander instead of dual wielding and they wanted to switch back to sword and board or DWing they are in the same boat.</blockquote>Except Crusaders can't DW, warriors and brawlers can. So warriors and brawlers can avoid the forced delay on switching, crusaders cannot.

Xalmat

08-29-2010, 06:36 AM

Uh, youre arguing about the forced 2 second delay from switching items mid combat, a mechanic that has existed for years. I highly doubt it will be changed for any reason.

Edminime

08-29-2010, 11:40 AM

KS was put in the game to balance crusaders to dw guardians and there 5 different abilities to block incoming damage on very short timers.And guardians like to avoid talking about these 5 different abilites to block incoming damage as a hole.

Kahling

08-29-2010, 12:50 PM

If you ask me there are too many factors involved when looking at Knights stance, personally you cannot have a debate of just Knights Stance vs Duel Wielding you would have to have a deep understanding on how each of the other classes work. I certainly don't pretend to have this knowledge, nor do I have time to get it, I am happy concentrating on one class as I have done since day one.It is never as clear cut as the name of this thread suggests.Example, when comparing just the two, allot of the raid content now can be duel weilded. Duel weilding is worth approx 40% more auto attack damage, you loose uncontested avoidance when duel weilding but if your living it doesn't matter. Knights stance is 25% more auto attack damage but keeps uncontested avoidance, this uncontested avoidance is required for some raid mobs. Seems like a nice trade of to me to be honest, BUT there are so many other factors involved that what I just said should be taken with a pinch of salt.Im in the same mind as Boli on this one, with the changes to 2H and DW it looks pretty equal, and the only problem I see is that the only semi decent 2 hander before HM mobs is from the x2. From this I wouldn't mind a sublime 2 hander from the merch for seals and a slightly better one adding to someone like Pera Celsis then an even better one on Waansu. (That way people arent forced to go back to killing an easy mode mob for one), and obviously they shouldnt be as good as the ones from 3 rune theer or the construct.Kahling

Rahatmattata

08-29-2010, 01:21 PM

Contested avoidance vs no contested avoidance?Yea... I'll take knight's stance plz.

Boli32

08-29-2010, 01:33 PM

So you're happy to trade your 20% crit bonus for Knight's stance then?... fine by me <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> -just remember it only works with a shield only for auoattack (not CAs) oh.. and you need 120 AA and spend 5 AA to get it. <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Kota

08-29-2010, 01:34 PM

if you ask me, making offhand aoe and flurry etc for dw is a bad idea. i think it will be op. pretty much ruins any motivation for me wanting a 2h too.

Aull

08-29-2010, 02:42 PM

Do I detect envy? Honestly crusaders have been and will still pack a punch offensively and defensively. This should be good for guards and brawlers since these fighters have been keeping the bench warm for the last two expacs.

BChizzle

08-29-2010, 03:40 PM

<cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>So you're happy to trade your 20% crit bonus for Knight's stance then?... fine by me <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> -just remember it only works with a shield only for auoattack (not CAs) oh.. and you need 120 AA and spend 5 AA to get it. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Apparently you haven't read the instructions on this thread, this isn't CB vs KS 2.0. Please stop bringing it up, KS is a buff that exists to combat the fact crusaders cant DW, it has nothing to do with a .2 crit bonus advantage, it existed before that advantage was even added to the game. When crit was made universal crusaders spells became grossly overpowered due to the fact you guys went from like 30%ish spell crit and hardly any spell crit bonus to full on 100% critting and full crit bonus of your spell attacks. Your spells and thier damage numbers were balanced on the fact that as a crusader capping spell and melee crit would be extremely difficult as would spell and melee mods. Rather then adjusting your spells down in damage the devs gave non crusaders an extra amount of crit bonus. That is why there is a .2 difference it has nothing to do with KS please let it go.

Cyrdemac

08-29-2010, 04:56 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>So you're happy to trade your 20% crit bonus for Knight's stance then?... fine by me <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> -just remember it only works with a shield only for auoattack (not CAs) oh.. and you need 120 AA and spend 5 AA to get it. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Apparently you haven't read the instructions on this thread, this isn't CB vs KS 2.0. Please stop bringing it up, KS is a buff that exists to combat the fact crusaders cant DW, it has nothing to do with a .2 crit bonus advantage, it existed before that advantage was even added to the game. When crit was made universal crusaders spells became grossly overpowered due to the fact you guys went from like 30%ish spell crit and hardly any spell crit bonus to full on 100% critting and full crit bonus of your spell attacks. Your spells and thier damage numbers were balanced on the fact that as a crusader capping spell and melee crit would be extremely difficult as would spell and melee mods. Rather then adjusting your spells down in damage the devs gave non crusaders an extra amount of crit bonus. That is why there is a .2 difference it has nothing to do with KS please let it go.</blockquote>Wrong. Before stat consolidation, crusaders had at least 70% spellcrit due to the crusader-INT line already and with the new crusader-loving TSO equipment easily 100%. So the only thing that changed damage with SF was CB and potency, but this happened to every other class too.And the only real change for crusaders was heal crit, wich was around 50ish usually and came to 100% now. The first time those heals actually felt like heals.

Bruener

08-29-2010, 05:54 PM

To the OP...Yes KS does need an adjustment IF they aren't going to beef up 2h weps even more than what they are on test to catch up with the new DW mechanics.As a Brawler I am sure you understand how powerful the huge amount of AE auto attack is with both weapons being able to proc it, along with how much more DPS DW will give on single targets due to the flurry mechanics. Xelgad bumped 2h weps 12% roughly to catch up with DW.....but that 12% increase only catches up to DW mechanics pre-AE/flurry from the offhand. As the game progresses and people reach capped AE auto attack and start getting more and more flurry it is going to become obvious the gap that DW has over 2h. Shocking really because we all know 2h weps should have been brought up 12% to match what DW'ing is doing on Live....makes no sense.KS really should be changed to 15-25%(pending testing) base damage to all wep types. This would help close the big gap between 2h and DW.I mean what Brawler/Warrior is going to use a 2h to DPS at all when DW has such an obvious advantage. Not to mention the much faster change to 1h+board that DW'ing gets over 2h...and for Brawlers even that is moot since they are a DW all the time class.

Cyrdemac

08-29-2010, 07:32 PM

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>Uh, youre arguing about the forced 2 second delay from switching items mid combat, a mechanic that has existed for years. I highly doubt it will be changed for any reason.</blockquote>Interesting. Heal crit has existed for Paladins since the beginninng of the game but it was recently completly removed, rendering those spells useless. So I wont bet on your idea of never-changing-mechanics.

Rahatmattata

08-29-2010, 07:53 PM

Bruener

08-29-2010, 08:28 PM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>So you're happy to trade your 20% crit bonus for Knight's stance then?... fine by me <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> -just remember it only works with a shield only for auoattack (not CAs) oh.. and you need 120 AA and spend 5 AA to get it. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>You obviously didn't read the thread, but yes: I would give up the ability to duel wield for knight's stance in a flash. I play a tank and uncontested avoidance is more important to me than pretending to be a swashbuckler.</blockquote>Oh but you would have to give up all the Block abilities too, since that is obviously part of the picture. As somebody stated earlier you can not just pick 1 little piece of each class and compare it....its all about the whole picture.Change KS to all weapons to actually make 2h = DW as was the stated intent of the changes.

BChizzle

08-30-2010, 02:11 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>So you're happy to trade your 20% crit bonus for Knight's stance then?... fine by me <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> -just remember it only works with a shield only for auoattack (not CAs) oh.. and you need 120 AA and spend 5 AA to get it. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>You obviously didn't read the thread, but yes: I would give up the ability to duel wield for knight's stance in a flash. I play a tank and uncontested avoidance is more important to me than pretending to be a swashbuckler.</blockquote>Oh but you would have to give up all the Block abilities too, since that is obviously part of the picture. As somebody stated earlier you can not just pick 1 little piece of each class and compare it....its all about the whole picture.Change KS to all weapons to actually make 2h = DW as was the stated intent of the changes.</blockquote>So using KS removes all your life taps, your parry blocks. legionarres conviction, your extremely overpowered death save? Um nope no it doesn't. Way to try and manipulate the conversation with BS.

BChizzle

08-30-2010, 02:16 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>To the OP...Yes KS does need an adjustment IF they aren't going to beef up 2h weps even more than what they are on test to catch up with the new DW mechanics.As a Brawler I am sure you understand how powerful the huge amount of AE auto attack is with both weapons being able to proc it, along with how much more DPS DW will give on single targets due to the flurry mechanics. Xelgad bumped 2h weps 12% roughly to catch up with DW.....but that 12% increase only catches up to DW mechanics pre-AE/flurry from the offhand. As the game progresses and people reach capped AE auto attack and start getting more and more flurry it is going to become obvious the gap that DW has over 2h. Shocking really because we all know 2h weps should have been brought up 12% to match what DW'ing is doing on Live....makes no sense.KS really should be changed to 15-25%(pending testing) base damage to all wep types. This would help close the big gap between 2h and DW.I mean what Brawler/Warrior is going to use a 2h to DPS at all when DW has such an obvious advantage. Not to mention the much faster change to 1h+board that DW'ing gets over 2h...and for Brawlers even that is moot since they are a DW all the time class.</blockquote>For one, brawlers don't get even close to the same amount of ae auto attack that warriors get, in fact the ae auto attack buffs will mearly bring us in line with the ae auto attack % of a crusader doing 1 handed damage without knights stance. Get it? The changes will bring us in line with your ae auto attack dps while at the same time you still hold a significant advantage on ae agro through your superior ca's and spells. On top of that, you are under some sort of delusional mind set that 2 handed weapons aren't in fact the best options right now for any tank, the whole purpose of buffing offhand dps is to bring it in line with 2 handed weapons so clearly you missed the memo about 2 hander OPedness. But I guess u know better then the devs right lawl.

Rahatmattata

08-30-2010, 03:27 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>So you're happy to trade your 20% crit bonus for Knight's stance then?... fine by me <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /> -just remember it only works with a shield only for auoattack (not CAs) oh.. and you need 120 AA and spend 5 AA to get it. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>You obviously didn't read the thread, but yes: I would give up the ability to duel wield for knight's stance in a flash. I play a tank and uncontested avoidance is more important to me than pretending to be a swashbuckler.</blockquote>Oh but you would have to give up all the Block abilities too, since that is obviously part of the picture. As somebody stated earlier you can not just pick 1 little piece of each class and compare it....its all about the whole picture.Change KS to all weapons to actually make 2h = DW as was the stated intent of the changes.</blockquote>You're right again Brownie. Let's look at the big picture: 150k harm touches, 70k+ dps, reflecting ridiculous amounts of damage, 3 bloodletters, 30% block, life taps, and feign death. Did I miss anything? Oh... lolevac.

TheSpin

08-30-2010, 05:57 AM

The current buff to 2 handers is just the first part of a couple changes coming to even things out. I think 2 handers might be getting some additional aoe auto attack or something else as well.

Bruener

08-30-2010, 09:14 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>To the OP...Yes KS does need an adjustment IF they aren't going to beef up 2h weps even more than what they are on test to catch up with the new DW mechanics.As a Brawler I am sure you understand how powerful the huge amount of AE auto attack is with both weapons being able to proc it, along with how much more DPS DW will give on single targets due to the flurry mechanics. Xelgad bumped 2h weps 12% roughly to catch up with DW.....but that 12% increase only catches up to DW mechanics pre-AE/flurry from the offhand. As the game progresses and people reach capped AE auto attack and start getting more and more flurry it is going to become obvious the gap that DW has over 2h. Shocking really because we all know 2h weps should have been brought up 12% to match what DW'ing is doing on Live....makes no sense.KS really should be changed to 15-25%(pending testing) base damage to all wep types. This would help close the big gap between 2h and DW.I mean what Brawler/Warrior is going to use a 2h to DPS at all when DW has such an obvious advantage. Not to mention the much faster change to 1h+board that DW'ing gets over 2h...and for Brawlers even that is moot since they are a DW all the time class.</blockquote>For one, brawlers don't get even close to the same amount of ae auto attack that warriors get, in fact the ae auto attack buffs will mearly bring us in line with the ae auto attack % of a crusader doing 1 handed damage without knights stance. Get it? The changes will bring us in line with your ae auto attack dps while at the same time you still hold a significant advantage on ae agro through your superior ca's and spells. On top of that, you are under some sort of delusional mind set that 2 handed weapons aren't in fact the best options right now for any tank, the whole purpose of buffing offhand dps is to bring it in line with 2 handed weapons so clearly you missed the memo about 2 hander OPedness. But I guess u know better then the devs right lawl.</blockquote>Only one warrior gets an extreme amount of AE auto attack. And please save the auto attack compared to Crusaders argument. Our Bruiser does a lot more auto attack damage than I do....thats right he just knows how to play better. This change just up'd your DPS in both Offensive and Defensive.And no 2h weps aer not clearly the best. The only one taking advantage of 2h at all right now is a Zerker with 100% AE auto attack on large groups of mobs. There is 0 incentive on Live for me to use a 2h....and according to the BEST bruiser WW his DW'ing > 2h already....its why he uses 2 awesome weapons instead of the junk from Vaclaz.Yes, I do know better than the devs. The 2h mechanic has been weak for a long long time...and everybody knows it. Now they are looking to even things out and what do they do? The raise DW'ing even more because they are worried about the gap that the bow changes are going to cause against DW scouts. All that the stupid change did was raise up all melee DPS while closing the gap for rangers using the new bow mechanics. It did nothing to close the gap between 2h and DW that is glaringly obvious. And I am a little confused why you are so argumentative since you are the one that made the OP about the need for change to KS. You obviously know there is a discrepency and you know it was going to be brought up, and yet you seem dead set on making sure that gap stays in. Bored much?

Wasuna

08-30-2010, 11:42 AM

You have to be out of your mind. Adding KS to 2H will just push Crusaders over the top. You already out DPS everybody else in the fighter world and you want to do more damage? Your crazy.1. KS should not allow a crusader pump up their DPS while still having the benefit of uncontested avoidance.2. KS should not allow the crusader to pump up their DPS even higher than they can now.Get real, your a fighter. If you want to do crazy DPS make an Assassin or Wizard and live with the draw backs of those classes. As it is now you can click a button and instantly have uncontested avoidance back, Click another button and be 80-90% raid tank efficient in defensive and then click another button and have all your weapons back on for tanking. Name me an Assassin that can do that? Or Wizard?And don't give me any crap about you can't do as much DPS as they can. You have a choice to be able to tank and therefore you should be NOWHERE near any real DPS numbers.

BChizzle

08-30-2010, 07:45 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>To the OP...Yes KS does need an adjustment IF they aren't going to beef up 2h weps even more than what they are on test to catch up with the new DW mechanics.As a Brawler I am sure you understand how powerful the huge amount of AE auto attack is with both weapons being able to proc it, along with how much more DPS DW will give on single targets due to the flurry mechanics. Xelgad bumped 2h weps 12% roughly to catch up with DW.....but that 12% increase only catches up to DW mechanics pre-AE/flurry from the offhand. As the game progresses and people reach capped AE auto attack and start getting more and more flurry it is going to become obvious the gap that DW has over 2h. Shocking really because we all know 2h weps should have been brought up 12% to match what DW'ing is doing on Live....makes no sense.KS really should be changed to 15-25%(pending testing) base damage to all wep types. This would help close the big gap between 2h and DW.I mean what Brawler/Warrior is going to use a 2h to DPS at all when DW has such an obvious advantage. Not to mention the much faster change to 1h+board that DW'ing gets over 2h...and for Brawlers even that is moot since they are a DW all the time class.</blockquote>For one, brawlers don't get even close to the same amount of ae auto attack that warriors get, in fact the ae auto attack buffs will mearly bring us in line with the ae auto attack % of a crusader doing 1 handed damage without knights stance. Get it? The changes will bring us in line with your ae auto attack dps while at the same time you still hold a significant advantage on ae agro through your superior ca's and spells. On top of that, you are under some sort of delusional mind set that 2 handed weapons aren't in fact the best options right now for any tank, the whole purpose of buffing offhand dps is to bring it in line with 2 handed weapons so clearly you missed the memo about 2 hander OPedness. But I guess u know better then the devs right lawl.</blockquote>Only one warrior gets an extreme amount of AE auto attack. And please save the auto attack compared to Crusaders argument. Our Bruiser does a lot more auto attack damage than I do....thats right he just knows how to play better. This change just up'd your DPS in both Offensive and Defensive.And no 2h weps aer not clearly the best. The only one taking advantage of 2h at all right now is a Zerker with 100% AE auto attack on large groups of mobs. There is 0 incentive on Live for me to use a 2h....and according to the BEST bruiser WW his DW'ing > 2h already....its why he uses 2 awesome weapons instead of the junk from Vaclaz.Yes, I do know better than the devs. The 2h mechanic has been weak for a long long time...and everybody knows it. Now they are looking to even things out and what do they do? The raise DW'ing even more because they are worried about the gap that the bow changes are going to cause against DW scouts. All that the stupid change did was raise up all melee DPS while closing the gap for rangers using the new bow mechanics. It did nothing to close the gap between 2h and DW that is glaringly obvious. And I am a little confused why you are so argumentative since you are the one that made the OP about the need for change to KS. You obviously know there is a discrepency and you know it was going to be brought up, and yet you seem dead set on making sure that gap stays in. Bored much?</blockquote>I outparse the best bruiser WW using a 2 hander, lets ignore the fact that in theory a monk should never outparse a bruiser, I wonder what causes the differences? Could it possibly be that I used a 2 hander, omg no way! As far as the rest go, until you come to grips with the reality that DW was buffed to become as good as 2 handing it you should just stay out of that conversation. Anyways stop trying to manipulate the conversation, it isn't about 2 handers its about KS vs DW and now that offhands will ae auto and flurry is KS still balanced (not that it was ever really balanced to DW dps)?

Boli32

08-30-2010, 08:05 PM

> DWing *should* do more damage than sword+board+KS - it does> 2handers *should* do more damage than sword+board+KS - ir oes although the itemisation means in reality the choice/quality of 2handers mean the average crusader has access to a decent 1hander LONG before he gets a 2hander which out ranks it.> Crit bonus on brawlers/warriors mean when they DW and use a 2hander they gain an advantage over crusaders - but this bonus balances out with crusader due to knight's stance when *both* using sword+board.My answer: So what?Knights stance has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with dual weilding.. given you cannot use it whlist DW or a 2hander... so what this post bascially saying is : whine whine whine why has another class been buffed than me. I want some?This and other similar debates will go on constanly untill Knight's stance is nerfed or removed completly because many people just can't can't do maths; So grow up - put this down as "class flavour"; there are many more issues to be more concerned with by how much DPS a fighter can put out whilst being unable to tank hard mobs effectively - if you are so concerned with the DPS *when you can't take a hit* you should have rolled a scout.The reason crusaders do their maxium DPS with a 1hander +shield + KS right now is due to itemisation. A powerful 1hander has done more DPS than all 2handers since RoK and mythicals. (excluding avatar axe of war).

Bruener

08-30-2010, 08:12 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>To the OP...Yes KS does need an adjustment IF they aren't going to beef up 2h weps even more than what they are on test to catch up with the new DW mechanics.As a Brawler I am sure you understand how powerful the huge amount of AE auto attack is with both weapons being able to proc it, along with how much more DPS DW will give on single targets due to the flurry mechanics. Xelgad bumped 2h weps 12% roughly to catch up with DW.....but that 12% increase only catches up to DW mechanics pre-AE/flurry from the offhand. As the game progresses and people reach capped AE auto attack and start getting more and more flurry it is going to become obvious the gap that DW has over 2h. Shocking really because we all know 2h weps should have been brought up 12% to match what DW'ing is doing on Live....makes no sense.KS really should be changed to 15-25%(pending testing) base damage to all wep types. This would help close the big gap between 2h and DW.I mean what Brawler/Warrior is going to use a 2h to DPS at all when DW has such an obvious advantage. Not to mention the much faster change to 1h+board that DW'ing gets over 2h...and for Brawlers even that is moot since they are a DW all the time class.</blockquote>For one, brawlers don't get even close to the same amount of ae auto attack that warriors get, in fact the ae auto attack buffs will mearly bring us in line with the ae auto attack % of a crusader doing 1 handed damage without knights stance. Get it? The changes will bring us in line with your ae auto attack dps while at the same time you still hold a significant advantage on ae agro through your superior ca's and spells. On top of that, you are under some sort of delusional mind set that 2 handed weapons aren't in fact the best options right now for any tank, the whole purpose of buffing offhand dps is to bring it in line with 2 handed weapons so clearly you missed the memo about 2 hander OPedness. But I guess u know better then the devs right lawl.</blockquote>Only one warrior gets an extreme amount of AE auto attack. And please save the auto attack compared to Crusaders argument. Our Bruiser does a lot more auto attack damage than I do....thats right he just knows how to play better. This change just up'd your DPS in both Offensive and Defensive.And no 2h weps aer not clearly the best. The only one taking advantage of 2h at all right now is a Zerker with 100% AE auto attack on large groups of mobs. There is 0 incentive on Live for me to use a 2h....and according to the BEST bruiser WW his DW'ing > 2h already....its why he uses 2 awesome weapons instead of the junk from Vaclaz.Yes, I do know better than the devs. The 2h mechanic has been weak for a long long time...and everybody knows it. Now they are looking to even things out and what do they do? The raise DW'ing even more because they are worried about the gap that the bow changes are going to cause against DW scouts. All that the stupid change did was raise up all melee DPS while closing the gap for rangers using the new bow mechanics. It did nothing to close the gap between 2h and DW that is glaringly obvious. And I am a little confused why you are so argumentative since you are the one that made the OP about the need for change to KS. You obviously know there is a discrepency and you know it was going to be brought up, and yet you seem dead set on making sure that gap stays in. Bored much?</blockquote>I outparse the best bruiser WW using a 2 hander, lets ignore the fact that in theory a monk should never outparse a bruiser, I wonder what causes the differences? Could it possibly be that I used a 2 hander, omg no way! As far as the rest go, until you come to grips with the reality that DW was buffed to become as good as 2 handing it you should just stay out of that conversation. Anyways stop trying to manipulate the conversation, it isn't about 2 handers its about KS vs DW and now that offhands will ae auto and flurry is KS still balanced (not that it was ever really balanced to DW dps)?</blockquote>You know, you can take your fricken whining and [Removed for Content] it on your guild to see if they will listen. Brawlers just got another huge boost, an unneeded one, and anytime anything is mentioned about Crusaders all you can do is talk about how they can smoke you in everything.KS is outdated because 1h doesn't even come close to DW in DPS, and 2h are still way behind DW. Everybody knows this. At the bottom end BEFORE you consider procs, AE auto, and Flurry yeah 2h = DW. Now add in all that other 100% proc abilities and AE auto in AE fights and Flurry to the Offhand and things are imbalanced still.The best fix for that since KS is not doing its purpose is change it to work for all weapons that way 2h becomes an obvious choice for DPS still.OR maybe a better suggestion if 2h is never going to become equal to DW is to raise KS to increase DPS even more? I mean is that the answer you are looking for? Oh hey, how about changing KS to also make Crusaders immune to strike-thru if they are going to keep that dumb mechanic while giving Brawlers equal mit. I mean really what are you after here? Or is it just that you luv to see yourself type on these forums and it makes you feel good behind your keyboard?

RAYVEN2

08-30-2010, 09:05 PM

The main problem I see here is perception. Half the guardians here that are complaining are not regular raiders and don't have access to top end gear. Guardians are more gear dependent than just about any of the other tanks. Therefore many of them dont see that guardian DPS is competitive with crusader dps. Knights Stance makes up for the fact that Crusaders can not DW, have .2 less crit bonus and have less defense and mitigation than warriors. Knights stance increases crusader damage while in sword and board which was and in most ways still is the only viable fighting style for crusaders. 2h (at the moment) still blows. The only good 2hander even most raiders have access to right now is the one off Vaclaz. All of this costs us how much AA to get where as all of the above skills are given to warriors for free. This is a gear driven game. If your gear sucks then you are not going to be able to hit the potential for your class especially one so gear driven. If your a guardian and your complaining about Paladin DPS you might want to check your gear against his. I know even when I'm out DPSing our MT its not by much. Both are capable of getting to 30k+ if your gear is good. I'm betting a lot of the people complaining dont realize that to do those insane numbers on the parse you see SKs doing they need to switch into DPS gear trading off a lot of that defense and tanking goodness. Compare a decked out guardian in full SavageT3 armor vs a Paladin geared out in full SavageT3 armor. Compare the dps. I bet you'd be shocked to find out how close it is. The people that scream the loudest tend to get classes nerfed for no reason... To bad the people who scream the loudest and the people that are best informed on that issue are seldom the same people.

Rasttan

08-30-2010, 11:45 PM

There is this hopefully the DW changes went in so that other classes can top some of the abilities of the tank classes other than the 2-3 classes that currently dominate them all. When a class is the best or close to the best inSingle target threat, AE threat, Survivability, DPS, DPS while tanking, Tanking offensive with uncontested avoidance, Tanking and giving up very little dps, Group buffs, Death Saves...etc if they lose 1-2 spots great some other class should be at the top of something.Thats the way it is currently I run with one of the better Crusaders out there, now the other classes did not get nerfed in anyway but a couple other classes clearly underpowered in the overall content a tank can bring to a raid or group got a boost fu..ing great its about time. To complain when your class does so well about something that did nothing more than knock you off the top of the heap in 1-2 of many categories makes you look pretty rediculas.Some classes after these changes will still be tops in 5-6 of the tanking abilities listed above.So my stand is nothing should change KS combined with 40%AE auto is allready allowing 80k parses I see them nightly so forgive me for wanting a boost myself when I cant do half of what that class does with out giving up a ton of stats/dps/gear to even come close to them.

circusgirl

08-30-2010, 11:57 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>You know, you can take your fricken whining and [Removed for Content] it on your guild to see if they will listen. Brawlers just got another huge boost, an unneeded one, and anytime anything is mentioned about Crusaders all you can do is talk about how they can smoke you in everything.</blockquote>Again. Brawlers do not have the same mit as plate tanks. We are no closer to you in mit than you are to us in avoidance. I've explained why before, if you really need me to go into how much uncontested avoidance a nice shield translates to compared to brawler avoidance I can do that for you. When brawlers are MTing more frequently than warriors or crusaders, you can complain about us being overpowered. At the moment though, I don't know of a single brawler MT in any high-end guild. To me, that seems to imply that we still need improvement.

Bruener

08-31-2010, 01:01 AM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>You know, you can take your fricken whining and [Removed for Content] it on your guild to see if they will listen. Brawlers just got another huge boost, an unneeded one, and anytime anything is mentioned about Crusaders all you can do is talk about how they can smoke you in everything.</blockquote>Again. Brawlers do not have the same mit as plate tanks. We are no closer to you in mit than you are to us in avoidance. I've explained why before, if you really need me to go into how much uncontested avoidance a nice shield translates to compared to brawler avoidance I can do that for you. When brawlers are MTing more frequently than warriors or crusaders, you can complain about us being overpowered. At the moment though, I don't know of a single brawler MT in any high-end guild. To me, that seems to imply that we still need improvement.</blockquote>Why would you see a Brawler MT when they can OT great and more imporantly raise the over-all survivability of the MT with their much much superior avoidance buff?Just because a class doesn't fill in the MT role doesn't mean they are sitting extremely well. Everything a Brawler brings to the raid in todays game is what makes them great to have around.

Aull

08-31-2010, 01:05 AM

I am seeing this as a brawlers shouldn't be getting any dps gains because they can now approach plate type mitigation?Why then is it ok for crusaders to keep their obviously high dps and survival?I mean come on. I am getting the strange feeling that there is a double standard.From what I have gathered it was totally wrong for mythed guards to have this back in ROK but now there are no problems with crusaders being exactly what they said guards shouldn't be.I still agree with Vinka. When we see brawlers MT'ing raids more frequently than warriors or crusaders then eye brows can raise. It would be something to see crusaders scrambling around like brawlers are now trying to find their place in a raid slot. Not that it needs to happen but brawlers have been asking this type of questions for a long time.If that ever happens I would venture to say that many plates will start claiming that six fighters are just to many for eqII. Brawlers have never threatened the plates when it came to being a choice MT tank for raids.Again not that I want to see the demise of crusaders but brawlers have been the laughing stock of the fighter arch-type for to long.

RAYVEN2

08-31-2010, 02:17 AM

Brawlers are great. Not saying they are overpowered but they always have a raid spot OT or not. They raise the MTs survivability , can tank as well as any plate tank and dish real good dps. We use a brawler all the time as an OT on mobs like Tox. Anyone saying brawlers are [Removed for Content] have no clue what they are talking about. I agree that you dont need to be the MT for you to be doing well. Crusaders are not everything that guardians were pre and during ROK. Guardians were the defacto tank. There was no other tank who could fill that MT role as well. RIGHT NOW guardians fit the MT role just as well as any crusader and dish just as much DPS when they DW. The guild I'm in STILL uses a guardian as the MT doing hard mode mobs without issue. We dont raid without him but could a crusader tank the content he is tanking? Sure, why not. But the point is that both tanks can do it almost as well as one another which is the balance we've been looking for for a long time. There is no defacto MT anymore. The MT could be a warrior or a crusader which is what other tanks were asking for back in the ROK days. Does anyone want to go back to the days of only one tank type can be the MT? BTW - the 60k+ parses you guys are seeing are on AE mobs. I could show you guys tons of crazy parses on those because of the speed that they die at and AE attacks. Thats not the norm you would see on a real raid mob. Dont take extream examples and then say ahah look how overpowered.

Enoe

08-31-2010, 10:09 AM

this discusion is about autoattack dmg.but why some of you are bringing total parses to the table is beyond me.Wariors/brawlers do most of their total parse from autoattack - so if any of them do lets say 30k dps it means that thay gain 20k from auto only (imo more but im too lazy to check)Now u are taking about sk doing 60k total dps its all true on ae fights and so on - but autoattack in this parse will be 12-15k only.now with planed changes to dw/2h auto warriors/brawlers autoattack dmg will rise significantly. Their parses as well since its huge part of their total dps.It will not change a crusaders dps from auto a bit if there will be no changes to KS.so after auto update will go live this hipotetical numbers from above can look like 40k total dps for warriors/brawlers including 30k auto attack dmg and crusader still will sit on 12-15k from it.

Bruener

08-31-2010, 11:38 AM

<cite>RAYVEN2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>BTW - the 60k+ parses you guys are seeing are on AE mobs. I could show you guys tons of crazy parses on those because of the speed that they die at and AE attacks. Thats not the norm you would see on a real raid mob. Dont take extream examples and then say ahah look how overpowered. </blockquote>You mean like an AE parse of our defiler throwing up 100k+?

urgthock

08-31-2010, 12:21 PM

Please do not feed the Bruener troll anymore. It is obvious from his numerous posts everywhere that he is self centered and apparently lives in deathly fear that his "I win button" class will be nerfed. He will NEVER EVER admit what almost everyone else universally sees. Crusaders (although mainly SKs) are imbalanced and overpowered.

Wasuna

08-31-2010, 01:15 PM

<cite>RAYVEN2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>The main problem I see here is perception. Half the guardians here that are complaining are not regular raiders and don't have access to top end gear. Guardians are more gear dependent than just about any of the other tanks. Therefore many of them dont see that guardian DPS is competitive with crusader dps. </blockquote>Wrong. Breuners Guardian MT posted logs and parses of raid tanking and his DPS was less than the raid's SK that was holding back to keep from grabbing agro. Then, when the parse was evaluated, the MT's DPS was ~30% from MT buffs that would have also applied to any other MT. Therefore, the highly geared Guardian MT DPS is ~50% less than SK DPS.Please try to keep from making totally incorrect statements in the future. It just further muddies the water so people can't see the truth.

Wasuna

08-31-2010, 01:21 PM

<cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>> DWing *should* do more damage than sword+board+KS - it does> 2handers *should* do more damage than sword+board+KS - ir oes although the itemisation means in reality the choice/quality of 2handers mean the average crusader has access to a decent 1hander LONG before he gets a 2hander which out ranks it.> Crit bonus on brawlers/warriors mean when they DW and use a 2hander they gain an advantage over crusaders - but this bonus balances out with crusader due to knight's stance when *both* using sword+board.My answer: So what?Knights stance has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with dual weilding.. given you cannot use it whlist DW or a 2hander... so what this post bascially saying is : whine whine whine why has another class been buffed than me. I want some?This and other similar debates will go on constanly untill Knight's stance is nerfed or removed completly because many people just can't can't do maths; So grow up - put this down as "class flavour"; there are many more issues to be more concerned with by how much DPS a fighter can put out whilst being unable to tank hard mobs effectively - if you are so concerned with the DPS *when you can't take a hit* you should have rolled a scout.The reason crusaders do their maxium DPS with a 1hander +shield + KS right now is due to itemisation. A powerful 1hander has done more DPS than all 2handers since RoK and mythicals. (excluding avatar axe of war).</blockquote>I like math. I have a minor in it as a result of my Major. One thing you need to be aware of is that math is suppose to model real life events. When the results of the math do not match the actual results then you need to correct/expand/rethink your math.The fact is, Crusaders get to do more DPS with a IH + Shield + KS becasue that is how the game is designed. Adding a 2 hander that would allow a Crusader to out parse their IH + S + KS combo would just further break the game.You do to much DPS now. You do to much now with uncontested avoidance still on. You do to much to the point that it breaks the game and 100% breaks any kind of fighter balance. Your a tank for god sakes. Act like it and get back into the reality of this Fantasy MMO game.

Bruener

08-31-2010, 01:22 PM

<cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>RAYVEN2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>The main problem I see here is perception. Half the guardians here that are complaining are not regular raiders and don't have access to top end gear. Guardians are more gear dependent than just about any of the other tanks. Therefore many of them dont see that guardian DPS is competitive with crusader dps. </blockquote>Wrong. Breuners Guardian MT posted logs and parses of raid tanking and his DPS was less than the raid's SK that was holding back to keep from grabbing agro. Then, when the parse was evaluated, the MT's DPS was ~30% from MT buffs that would have also applied to any other MT. Therefore, the highly geared Guardian MT DPS is ~50% less than SK DPS.Please try to keep from making totally incorrect statements in the future. It just further muddies the water so people can't see the truth.</blockquote>What are you talking about. I have never seen a parse from my MT on these forums with his DPS. The Guard I play with is not nearly as concerned about DPS as a lot of others. He does a great job being the MT. He builds himself to survive, and even DPS'ing less he controls the mob. He does it with both me and the Bruiser in the guild that parses high are beating on the mob.Not sure what these parses that you are talking about are. None that I have seen.Guard = highest survivability. With the changes going in it means even better agro control, ST and AE. Not to mention some real nice tools to increase the over-all survivability of their group/raid. Those are the changes Guards needed...if you are hoping for equal DPS keep dreaming.

Yimway

08-31-2010, 01:25 PM

<cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>The reason crusaders do their maxium DPS with a 1hander +shield + KS right now is due to itemisation. A powerful 1hander has done more DPS than all 2handers since RoK and mythicals. (excluding avatar axe of war).</blockquote>The DPS potential of 1hand + shield + KS is higher than any other class retaining uncontested block.This is why KS is OP and needs to be adjusted to a 2hand only modifier that could make crusaders the highest plate dps potential, but would take a reasonable survivability hit to do so.

Wasuna

08-31-2010, 01:31 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>The DPS potential of 1hand + shield + KS is higher than any other class retaining uncontested block.This is why KS is OP and needs to be adjusted to a 2hand only modifier that could make crusaders the highest plate dps potential, but would take a reasonable survivability hit to do so.</blockquote>I agree that soemthing needs to be done, but allowing Crusaders to do even more DPS is unacceptable. Allowing for maxium DPS while maintaing uncontested avoidance is just plain wrong and the solution your propose is just as bad.

Rasttan

08-31-2010, 01:36 PM

<cite>RAYVEN2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Brawlers are great. Not saying they are overpowered but they always have a raid spot OT or not. They raise the MTs survivability , can tank as well as any plate tank and dish real good dps. We use a brawler all the time as an OT on mobs like Tox. Anyone saying brawlers are [Removed for Content] have no clue what they are talking about. I agree that you dont need to be the MT for you to be doing well. Crusaders are not everything that guardians were pre and during ROK. Guardians were the defacto tank. There was no other tank who could fill that MT role as well. RIGHT NOW guardians fit the MT role just as well as any crusader and dish just as much DPS when they DW. The guild I'm in STILL uses a guardian as the MT doing hard mode mobs without issue. We dont raid without him but could a crusader tank the content he is tanking? Sure, why not. But the point is that both tanks can do it almost as well as one another which is the balance we've been looking for for a long time. There is no defacto MT anymore. The MT could be a warrior or a crusader which is what other tanks were asking for back in the ROK days. Does anyone want to go back to the days of only one tank type can be the MT? BTW - the 60k+ parses you guys are seeing are on AE mobs. I could show you guys tons of crazy parses on those because of the speed that they die at and AE attacks. Thats not the norm you would see on a real raid mob. Dont take extream examples and then say ahah look how overpowered. </blockquote>Wrong those 60-70-80k parses are on raid mobs and named and many of the fights stretch into a couple of minutes of course there AE mobs 90% of the entire content is AE what else would they be. Thats the current standard of the game AE so thats what all the parses are from.And a Guard duel weilding will not touch a crusader especialy on hardmode mobs unless the crusader is a poor example of what his class can do and I mean real poor example.The arguement of they can do it is the worst in the book, sure they can do it but that doesnt mean balance when some classes do it with alot less risk, alot more dps, alot better group buffs, alot more damage reduction abilities, alot better threat generation. Both a Yugo and a Ferrari can drive you somewhere, given the choice what one would you pick.

circusgirl

08-31-2010, 01:59 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>You know, you can take your fricken whining and [Removed for Content] it on your guild to see if they will listen. Brawlers just got another huge boost, an unneeded one, and anytime anything is mentioned about Crusaders all you can do is talk about how they can smoke you in everything.</blockquote>Again. Brawlers do not have the same mit as plate tanks. We are no closer to you in mit than you are to us in avoidance. I've explained why before, if you really need me to go into how much uncontested avoidance a nice shield translates to compared to brawler avoidance I can do that for you. When brawlers are MTing more frequently than warriors or crusaders, you can complain about us being overpowered. At the moment though, I don't know of a single brawler MT in any high-end guild. To me, that seems to imply that we still need improvement.</blockquote>Why would you see a Brawler MT when they can OT great and more imporantly raise the over-all survivability of the MT with their much much superior avoidance buff?Just because a class doesn't fill in the MT role doesn't mean they are sitting extremely well. Everything a Brawler brings to the raid in todays game is what makes them great to have around.</blockquote>All tanks (plus clerics and bards) have that very same avoidance buff. Look, I don't think brawlers suck. We sucked in TSO, sure, but we're hardly useless now. We're not broken, we're just a smidge underpowered. Maybe the changes on test will fix us to the point of being balanced--it certainly seems like they're well suited to helping with the areas where we're falling behind right now (survivability, dps when tanking, and AE aggro). I don't particularly want to be the MT, to be honest. I'm one of our offtanks, and I'm happy tanking Penda and Aaskas, dragging spores and blobs, picking up Roehn Theer and holding him when the tank gets punted off the platform, etc. I think most OTs in raid guilds are probably pretty happy with their position. However, I would like my class to exist in a place where either MTing is an option for us (even if I don't take advantage of that option), or where we have some sort of role that no one else can fill.

Maveric_LOL

08-31-2010, 02:42 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>The reason crusaders do their maxium DPS with a 1hander +shield + KS right now is due to itemisation. A powerful 1hander has done more DPS than all 2handers since RoK and mythicals. (excluding avatar axe of war).</blockquote>The DPS potential of 1hand + shield + KS is higher than any other class retaining uncontested block.This is why KS is OP and needs to be adjusted to a 2hand only modifier that could make crusaders the highest plate dps potential, but would take a reasonable survivability hit to do so.</blockquote>Its almost like people dont understand what the origonal intent for knights stance was...oh...wait..

Ryai

08-31-2010, 03:12 PM

Knight's Stance is even more necessary now actually, because since the fighter nerf crusaders have one thing to bring to the table, AE DPS and aggro control. And now a bunch of people call for that to go away?As a paladin I now have an entire AA line that is completely worthless to spend any points in, and 4 class defining spells that are utterly pointless to cast unless I want to waste power. And a number of useless red adorns.Bottom line, stop calling for nerfs, its not constructive. Instead spend your time suggesting ways to improve your own class. Or just learning how to not suck.

Ryai

08-31-2010, 03:15 PM

<cite>Rasttan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>Wrong those 60-70-80k parses are on raid mobs and named and many of the fights stretch into a couple of minutes of course there AE mobs 90% of the entire content is AE what else would they be. Thats the current standard of the game AE so thats what all the parses are from.And a Guard duel weilding will not touch a crusader especialy on hardmode mobs unless the crusader is a poor example of what his class can do and I mean real poor example.The arguement of they can do it is the worst in the book, sure they can do it but that doesnt mean balance when some classes do it with alot less risk, alot more dps, alot better group buffs, alot more damage reduction abilities, alot better threat generation. Both a Yugo and a Ferrari can drive you somewhere, given the choice what one would you pick.</blockquote>Those parses have absolutely nothing to do with the Knight's Stance. They are a direct result of the spell reflection AA. Learn something about a class you are talking about before you complain.

Boli32

08-31-2010, 03:16 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>The reason crusaders do their maxium DPS with a 1hander +shield + KS right now is due to itemisation. A powerful 1hander has done more DPS than all 2handers since RoK and mythicals. (excluding avatar axe of war).</blockquote>The DPS potential of 1hand + shield + KS is higher than any other class retaining uncontested block.This is why KS is OP and needs to be adjusted to a 2hand only modifier that could make crusaders the highest plate dps potential, but would take a reasonable survivability hit to do so.</blockquote>Warrior +1hander+shield+crit bonus === crusader+1hander+shield+KSUnless a warrior suddenly looses uncontested avoidance when using a shield now - if you have read through my previous posts and understood the maths (here's a tip: 1+1=2) this woudl be obvious.Knight's stance with 2hander only *is* overpowered; very much so and no crusader worth anything has advocated for this change

Wasuna

08-31-2010, 04:15 PM

<cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Warrior +1hander+shield+crit bonus === crusader+1hander+shield+KSUnless a warrior suddenly looses uncontested avoidance when using a shield now - if you have read through my previous posts and understood the maths (here's a tip: 1+1=2) this woudl be obvious.Knight's stance with 2hander only *is* overpowered; very much so and no crusader worth anything has advocated for this change</blockquote>The fact is that Crusaders seriously out DPS Guardians with a shield equiped (without the sheild also but that's a different topic). It's not even close.You might be saying that a Crusaders AUTTOATTACK alone might be equal to a Warriors AUTTOATTACK and that might be true... but who cares? It's the total parse that is important. Autoattack is just a line in the total parse.

Ryai

08-31-2010, 04:27 PM

<cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Warrior +1hander+shield+crit bonus === crusader+1hander+shield+KSUnless a warrior suddenly looses uncontested avoidance when using a shield now - if you have read through my previous posts and understood the maths (here's a tip: 1+1=2) this woudl be obvious.Knight's stance with 2hander only *is* overpowered; very much so and no crusader worth anything has advocated for this change</blockquote>The fact is that Crusaders seriously out DPS Guardians with a shield equiped (without the sheild also but that's a different topic). It's not even close.You might be saying that a Crusaders AUTTOATTACK alone might be equal to a Warriors AUTTOATTACK and that might be true... but who cares? It's the total parse that is important. Autoattack is just a line in the total parse.</blockquote>Knight's Stance only affects auto-attack, and from that regard, it is balanced. To attempt to counteract the overall parse by nerfing auto-attack damage is faulty logic at best.A large portion of crusader DPS comes from their procs, and they have AA's to boost that. If you think something else is broken, then it is a matter of correcting other skills, on the other characters. And if you want crusader DPS nerfed in that regard, then I think we need to nerf guardian survivability.Its simply a clear case of you can't have your cake and eat it too. When crusaders get something as powerful as stoneskins for mitigating damage, I'll say their DPS needs to be nerfed. Until then, I say stoneskins need to be nerfed, as it makes guardians mitigate way to much damage. Maybe a stoneskin that mitigates 50% of incoming damage would be balanced.

Bruener

08-31-2010, 04:33 PM

<cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Warrior +1hander+shield+crit bonus === crusader+1hander+shield+KSUnless a warrior suddenly looses uncontested avoidance when using a shield now - if you have read through my previous posts and understood the maths (here's a tip: 1+1=2) this woudl be obvious.Knight's stance with 2hander only *is* overpowered; very much so and no crusader worth anything has advocated for this change</blockquote>The fact is that Crusaders seriously out DPS Guardians with a shield equiped (without the sheild also but that's a different topic). It's not even close.You might be saying that a Crusaders AUTTOATTACK alone might be equal to a Warriors AUTTOATTACK and that might be true... but who cares? It's the total parse that is important. Autoattack is just a line in the total parse.</blockquote>And a Guard will block a huge amount of damage that a SK would take. 2 different classes with different abilities. I mean you want Guards to have equal DPS...AND...retain clearly superior survivability? So if we are going to keep trading back in forth am I going to get my ToS ability and my LMS ability, oh and hey how about changing GS back to what it was since you will have an AE target lock, etc etc etc.Yes other fighters CAN survive in content, but that is because of outrageous healer mechanics. 2 healers though will have a way easier time keeping a Guard from ping ponging over a SK and over the course of anything that is challenging at all the Guard will take significantly less damage over the fight. Not to mention the ability to time their massive block abilities with AEs which do more spike damage than any other part of encounters.

altuslum

08-31-2010, 05:10 PM

The problem with Knight's Stance is that it removes the choice of max/optimal DPS vs uncontested avoidance. I don't think 2k-4k DPS in a raid is going to break any crusader, but it needs to be a choice presented to them just like the other four fighters.I think Knight's Stance should be changed to allow a crusader to swing a one-handed weapon as a two-hander. I'm not sure what the multiplier is for converting a one-hander to a two-hander, but I think it is about a 1.4 multiplier on test, might be 1.5. KS could be changed to add 20% of that multiplier per point when wielding a one-handed weapon and no shield. So at 5 points into KS a crusader could wield a one-handed weapon as if it were a two-handed weapon and only be one click away from equipping a shield.This would give crusaders the choice of doing more damage or using a shield, which what warriors are presented with.

Bruener

08-31-2010, 05:30 PM

<cite>altuslumen wrote:</cite><blockquote>The problem with Knight's Stance is that it removes the choice of max/optimal DPS vs uncontested avoidance. I don't think 2k-4k DPS in a raid is going to break any crusader, but it needs to be a choice presented to them just like the other four fighters.I think Knight's Stance should be changed to allow a crusader to swing a one-handed weapon as a two-hander. I'm not sure what the multiplier is for converting a one-hander to a two-hander, but I think it is about a 1.4 multiplier on test, might be 1.5. KS could be changed to add 20% of that multiplier per point when wielding a one-handed weapon and no shield. So at 5 points into KS a crusader could wield a one-handed weapon as if it were a two-handed weapon and only be one click away from equipping a shield.This would give crusaders the choice of doing more damage or using a shield, which what warriors are presented with.</blockquote>The problem with this idea is it completely negates the idea of 2h weapons, well at least for Crusaders. A wield style that is envisioned as a Knight-type ability...hence Crusaders not being able to DW, and even in EQ1 2h weps designed for Crusaders to tank with.Really I would like KS to change into an ability for Crusaders to tank with a 2h weapon. Basically you could have the 1h+board style for tough content. Than make KS give the Crusader an innate shield ability when wielding a 2h weapon. It could be like 2/3 the avoidance of what a regular shield gives and just like a shile +block chance would somehow work with it.

Wasuna

08-31-2010, 06:04 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Boli32 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Warrior +1hander+shield+crit bonus === crusader+1hander+shield+KSUnless a warrior suddenly looses uncontested avoidance when using a shield now - if you have read through my previous posts and understood the maths (here's a tip: 1+1=2) this woudl be obvious.Knight's stance with 2hander only *is* overpowered; very much so and no crusader worth anything has advocated for this change</blockquote>The fact is that Crusaders seriously out DPS Guardians with a shield equiped (without the sheild also but that's a different topic). It's not even close.You might be saying that a Crusaders AUTTOATTACK alone might be equal to a Warriors AUTTOATTACK and that might be true... but who cares? It's the total parse that is important. Autoattack is just a line in the total parse.</blockquote>And a Guard will block a huge amount of damage that a SK would take. 2 different classes with different abilities. I mean you want Guards to have equal DPS...AND...retain clearly superior survivability? So if we are going to keep trading back in forth am I going to get my ToS ability and my LMS ability, oh and hey how about changing GS back to what it was since you will have an AE target lock, etc etc etc.Yes other fighters CAN survive in content, but that is because of outrageous healer mechanics. 2 healers though will have a way easier time keeping a Guard from ping ponging over a SK and over the course of anything that is challenging at all the Guard will take significantly less damage over the fight. Not to mention the ability to time their massive block abilities with AEs which do more spike damage than any other part of encounters.</blockquote>Based on the feedback of all of the raid tanks here on this forum the difference between the overall survivability of equally geared Guardians and SK in a raid enviroment is ~1%. Your comment that it's the healers that make this work is incorrect based on the conculaion of the people here. Ping Ponging doesn't matter when you have 2-3 triggers of Bloodletter hence the use of Overall Survivability above.So, yes.. I want my DPS to be ~1% less than the SK.

Edminime

08-31-2010, 06:23 PM

Based on the feedback of all of the guardians that cann't play there class with out god mod here on this forum the difference between the overall survivability of equally geared Guardians and SK in a raid enviroment is ~1%. Your comment that it's the healers that make this work is incorrect based on the conculaion of the people here. Ping Ponging doesn't matter when you have 2-3 triggers of Bloodletter hence the use of Overall Survivability above. There fixed it for you.

Rahatmattata

08-31-2010, 06:36 PM

<cite>Edminime wrote:</cite><blockquote>Based on the feedback of all of the guardians that cann't play there class with out god mod here on this foru</blockquote>You're an idiot. Any guardian here could pick up a paladin and within a week be twice the tank they were playing a guard.

Rasttan

08-31-2010, 06:46 PM

<cite>Ondten@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rasttan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>Wrong those 60-70-80k parses are on raid mobs and named and many of the fights stretch into a couple of minutes of course there AE mobs 90% of the entire content is AE what else would they be. Thats the current standard of the game AE so thats what all the parses are from.And a Guard duel weilding will not touch a crusader especialy on hardmode mobs unless the crusader is a poor example of what his class can do and I mean real poor example.The arguement of they can do it is the worst in the book, sure they can do it but that doesnt mean balance when some classes do it with alot less risk, alot more dps, alot better group buffs, alot more damage reduction abilities, alot better threat generation. Both a Yugo and a Ferrari can drive you somewhere, given the choice what one would you pick.</blockquote>Those parses have absolutely nothing to do with the Knight's Stance. They are a direct result of the spell reflection AA. Learn something about a class you are talking about before you complain.</blockquote>Its called Legioniars Conviction, and thats not why he parses so high, maybe you need to relize people who really know [Removed for Content] is happening in this game breakdown every fight and know where and what is happening. I see what his melee is hitting for I see his inc damage for mobs we dual tank, And I see mine, I see the gear he can wear tanking compared to what I have to equip.Listen if you play your class to its potential and dont see what it can do I feel sorry for you, I never call for nerfs of another class and I havent on this post. The fact is KS doesnt need to change and the duel weild changes are good maybe the tanks with less threat, less ae ability, less dps tanking, less group buffs as in exactly zero for a monk, and the classes that have to swap gear and go defensive to tank any mob of any worth have got the little edge they needed to even the playing feild some.Now as for Zerkers there going to be insane but more power to them.

BChizzle

08-31-2010, 08:00 PM

Not sure why you guys are going so far off topic again but lets see if I can get it steered in the right way again.Brawlers and warriors will be getting essentially all their flurry and ae auto attack damage doubled with the changes while duel wielding.Crusaders will stay the same.Is this balanced or no? Is the advantage crusaders get with sword and board a balancer. At the end of the day the changes aren't going to result is some kind of crazy dps jump like this will maybe be 2-3k on a zonewide, but is it balanced?

Wasuna

09-01-2010, 11:07 AM

<cite>Rasttan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>Its called Legioniars Conviction, and thats not why he parses so high, maybe you need to relize people who really know [Removed for Content] is happening in this game breakdown every fight and know where and what is happening. I see what his melee is hitting for I see his inc damage for mobs we dual tank, And I see mine, I see the gear he can wear tanking compared to what I have to equip.Listen if you play your class to its potential and dont see what it can do I feel sorry for you, I never call for nerfs of another class and I havent on this post. The fact is KS doesnt need to change and the duel weild changes are good maybe the tanks with less threat, less ae ability, less dps tanking, less group buffs as in exactly zero for a monk, and the classes that have to swap gear and go defensive to tank any mob of any worth have got the little edge they needed to even the playing feild some.Now as for Zerkers there going to be insane but more power to them. </blockquote>I've played the Guardian class for 6 years. I know how to get the full potential out of my class and the sad fact is that for the last 2 years my class could not compete with several others.As for Berserkers, I'd be exciting about the DPS jump they are gonna see for this but at the same time I'd have to call crap on it. Your kidding? More AoE DPS for a berserker? I'm not a Berserker so when I say something like that people get really upset.Back to the Topic. KS might compare to DW in termsa of DPS Generated for auroattack only buit who gives a crap. It allows a Crusader to ability to equal autoattack of others but it still gives you Uncontested avoidance in a setup that allows you to push your DPS very high. You can't seperate the two no matter what the OP asked for and you calculated.Cars have wheels. You can't talk about how wheels perform without talking about the car, the road, the driving conditions.. etc. If you leave all that other stuff out then you can only talk about how round the wheels are and how black the rubber is.