Fighter Changes Coming to Test [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

Ashlanne

06-25-2012, 09:12 PM

Greetings everyone, Xelgad here! I'd like to explain some of the changes to our fighter archetype that you will be seeing on the Test Server soon.The biggest addition is that all fighters will be gaining a new combat stance called "Recklessness" that is a high risk, extremely offensive stance that greatly increases outgoing and incoming damage. For brawlers, Recklessness will replace Black Widow Stance and Bruising. Recklessness will increase the versatility of fighter classes by allowing them to contribute meaningful damage output when not tanking. <img src="http://www.everquest2.com/images/en/features/2012/06/fighter/fighter1.jpg" />We're also changing how the Strikethrough mechanic interacts with tank classes. First, Crouching Tiger and Bodyguard will no longer grant full time immunity to Strikethrough. As the Brawler classes have gained active and passive tools to reduce spike damage, full time Strikethrough Immunity is no longer necessary. Furthermore, our content designers will be able to use Strikethrough to challenge groups regardless of which tank class they're using. For the second half of this change, Strikethrough Immunity has been added to all buffs that temporarily increase uncontested avoidance by 20% or more. This will make those temporary buffs more reliable and intuitive.<img src="http://www.everquest2.com/images/en/features/2012/06/fighter/fighter2.jpg" />Lastly, we're tweaking fighter heals. All fighter heals will be percentage based and can no longer be modified by potency, except by direct means, such as an Alternate Advancements and Focus Effects. In most situations, this results in an increase in effectiveness. This also ensures fighter heals scale properly, regardless of level, gear quality and other variables.<img src="http://www.everquest2.com/images/en/features/2012/06/fighter/fighter3.jpg" />We've also made some class-specific changes, and we look forward to hearing your feedback once these adjustments reach the Test Server!Michael "Xelgad" Ganz

NrthnStar5

06-25-2012, 09:35 PM

Does this mean I can be a DPS Paladin? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />

Talathion

06-25-2012, 10:18 PM

When is this live?...going to test

Eshaac

06-25-2012, 10:43 PM

When you say "Test Server" do you actually mean "TestCopy Server"?Eshaac

Novusod

06-25-2012, 10:48 PM

<cite>Ashlanne wrote:</cite><blockquote>Greetings everyone, Xelgad here! I'd like to explain some of the changes to our fighter archetype that you will be seeing on the Test Server soon.The biggest addition is that all fighters will be gaining a new combat stance called "Recklessness" that is a high risk, extremely offensive stance that greatly increases outgoing and incoming damage. For brawlers, Recklessness will replace Black Widow Stance and Bruising. Recklessness will increase the versatility of fighter classes by allowing them to contribute meaningful damage output when not tanking.We're also changing how the Strikethrough mechanic interacts with tank classes. First, Crouching Tiger and Bodyguard will no longer grant full time immunity to Strikethrough. As the Brawler classes have gained active and passive tools to reduce spike damage, full time Strikethrough Immunity is no longer necessary. Furthermore, our content designers will be able to use Strikethrough to challenge groups regardless of which tank class they're using. For the second half of this change, Strikethrough Immunity has been added to all buffs that temporarily increase uncontested avoidance by 20% or more. This will make those temporary buffs more reliable and intuitive.Lastly, we're tweaking fighter heals. All fighter heals will be percentage based and can no longer be modified by potency, except by direct means, such as an Alternate Advancements and Focus Effects. In most situations, this results in an increase in effectiveness. This also ensures fighter heals scale properly, regardless of level, gear quality and other variables.We've also made some class-specific changes, and we look forward to hearing your feedback once these adjustments reach the Test Server!Michael "Xelgad" Ganz</blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.

Tekadeo

06-25-2012, 11:04 PM

<cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.</blockquote>What, exactly, is forcing a "tank who actually want to tank" into a dps role? Stop childishly throwing blind allegations around until you know something. Right now, we know nothing, really. And if you rage quit over a change that may or may not even affect you, no one will care anyway...But something tells me you are just a sadpanda that your brawler won't be king of the hill tank any more. This makes me smile. Fairness is a good thing, kid.

Talathion

06-25-2012, 11:06 PM

<cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.</blockquote>What, exactly, is forcing a "tank who actually want to tank" into a dps role? Stop childishly throwing blind allegations around until you know something. Right now, we know nothing, really. And if you rage quit over a change that may or may not even affect you, no one will care anyway...But something tells me you are just a sadpanda that your brawler won't be king of the hill tank any more. This makes me smile. Fairness is a good thing, kid.</blockquote>Agreed, no more unstoppable brawlers.

Novusod

06-25-2012, 11:22 PM

<cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.</blockquote>What, exactly, is forcing a "tank who actually want to tank" into a dps role? Stop childishly throwing blind allegations around until you know something. Right now, we know nothing, really. And if you rage quit over a change that may or may not even affect you, no one will care anyway...But something tells me you are just a sadpanda that your brawler won't be king of the hill tank any more. This makes me smile. Fairness is a good thing, kid.</blockquote>I have been a brawler for a LONG time. Do you know that we didn't even have strikethrough immunity at one time back in the day. Removing strikethrough immunity will return brawlers back to those days and I know exactly how that worked. Those were very bad times to be a brawler tank.

Bruener

06-26-2012, 12:05 AM

<cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.</blockquote>What, exactly, is forcing a "tank who actually want to tank" into a dps role? Stop childishly throwing blind allegations around until you know something. Right now, we know nothing, really. And if you rage quit over a change that may or may not even affect you, no one will care anyway...But something tells me you are just a sadpanda that your brawler won't be king of the hill tank any more. This makes me smile. Fairness is a good thing, kid.</blockquote>I have been a brawler for a LONG time. Do you know that we didn't even have strikethrough immunity at one time back in the day. Removing strikethrough immunity will return brawlers back to those days and I know exactly how that worked. Those were very bad times to be a brawler tank.</blockquote>This has been a long time coming. As was stated Brawlers have far out grown the need for strike through immunity. Now it can actually be used as a tool to lower Fighter avoidance.

DavidSpayed

06-26-2012, 12:06 AM

<cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ashlanne wrote:</cite><blockquote>e gaining a new combat stance called "Recklessness" that is a high risk, extremely offensive stance that greatly increases outgoing and incoming damage. For brawlers, Recklessness will replace Black Widow Stance and Bruising. Recklessness will increase the versatility of fighter classes by allowing them to contribute meaningful damage output when not tanking.</blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.</blockquote>So they add a new stance so tanks can be DPS if they want and you read that as forcing a tank to be DPS? Seriously it's hard to care about whiners when they only read part of a post. Nowhere does it say they're replacing tank stances with Recklessness, they are adding it, it's a new thing tanks can do when not tanking. I think it's a great addition, it'll help a tank geta role ina group and play DPS for a change.

Tekadeo

06-26-2012, 12:17 AM

<cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.</blockquote>What, exactly, is forcing a "tank who actually want to tank" into a dps role? Stop childishly throwing blind allegations around until you know something. Right now, we know nothing, really. And if you rage quit over a change that may or may not even affect you, no one will care anyway...But something tells me you are just a sadpanda that your brawler won't be king of the hill tank any more. This makes me smile. Fairness is a good thing, kid.</blockquote>I have been a brawler for a LONG time. Do you know that we didn't even have strikethrough immunity at one time back in the day. Removing strikethrough immunity will return brawlers back to those days and I know exactly how that worked. Those were very bad times to be a brawler tank.</blockquote>I was a Monk dating back to DoF, so I know all about this. Truth be told we had carved out a nice niche as the 3rd fighter and the Emergency tank. SoE gave us snaps and death saves and tsunami abilities for this purpose. We were given tons of skills with the idea that they weren't overpowered because they weren't MEANT to be MT-capable. I only switched to my Zerker in TSO because we needed an MT after our guild collapsed (due to the avatar gear nerfs). Now the tables are turned, except the DoV-era brawler was by far and away more powerful by comparison than any tank has been since Guardians in RoK, probably even more so. All the tricks we were given as emergency tanks became necessary and supreme tanking tools. Brawler's Tenacity is god-mode and WAY better than any other death save of other fighters. Be thankful you got to be gods for pretty much two years. You will still be amazing, all your damage-immunity skills will still be great, brawler's tenacity will continue to be overpowered too. Know how many damage immunity skills Zerkers have? One, for three seconds. Unless you waste 22 AA's to get Dragoon's Reflexes.TL;DR version: Quit whining about being brought back to the tank pack. Be happy you get flexibility to DPS if needed.

Flynnzero

06-26-2012, 01:27 AM

<cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>These fighter changes are seriously the worst thing to ever happen to this game. This certainly WILL be the straw that breaks the cammels back here. Forcing tanks who actually want to tank into a dps role is not going to fly. It is just going to make a lot of people ragequit including myself.</blockquote>What, exactly, is forcing a "tank who actually want to tank" into a dps role? Stop childishly throwing blind allegations around until you know something. Right now, we know nothing, really. And if you rage quit over a change that may or may not even affect you, no one will care anyway...But something tells me you are just a sadpanda that your brawler won't be king of the hill tank any more. This makes me smile. Fairness is a good thing, kid.</blockquote>I have been a brawler for a LONG time. Do you know that we didn't even have strikethrough immunity at one time back in the day. Removing strikethrough immunity will return brawlers back to those days and I know exactly how that worked. Those were very bad times to be a brawler tank.</blockquote>I was a Monk dating back to DoF, so I know all about this. Truth be told we had carved out a nice niche as the 3rd fighter and the Emergency tank. SoE gave us snaps and death saves and tsunami abilities for this purpose. We were given tons of skills with the idea that they weren't overpowered because they weren't MEANT to be MT-capable. I only switched to my Zerker in TSO because we needed an MT after our guild collapsed (due to the avatar gear nerfs). Now the tables are turned, except the DoV-era brawler was by far and away more powerful by comparison than any tank has been since Guardians in RoK, probably even more so. All the tricks we were given as emergency tanks became necessary and supreme tanking tools. Brawler's Tenacity is god-mode and WAY better than any other death save of other fighters. Be thankful you got to be gods for pretty much two years. You will still be amazing, all your damage-immunity skills will still be great, brawler's tenacity will continue to be overpowered too. Know how many damage immunity skills Zerkers have? One, for three seconds. Unless you waste 22 AA's to get Dragoon's Reflexes.TL;DR version: Quit whining about being brought back to the tank pack. Be happy you get flexibility to DPS if needed.</blockquote>Agreed! Except the fact that you consider Dragoon's Reflexes a waste, if you had any idea how many time's that has saved my butt. You would probably spend the 22 AA to get it yourself.I personally am looking forward to the change.

Talathion

06-26-2012, 01:52 AM

Brawler's Defensive Stance (w/ Strikethrough Immunity) + Reckless Stance would probably be a bit too Overpowered.

Rhita

06-26-2012, 03:34 AM

<cite>Ashlanne wrote:</cite><blockquote>We're also changing how the Strikethrough mechanic interacts with tank classes. First, Crouching Tiger and Bodyguard will no longer grant full time immunity to Strikethrough. As the Brawler classes have gained active and passive tools to reduce spike damage, full time Strikethrough Immunity is no longer necessary. Furthermore, our content designers will be able to use Strikethrough to challenge groups regardless of which tank class they're using. For the second half of this change, Strikethrough Immunity has been added to all buffs that temporarily increase uncontested avoidance by 20% or more. This will make those temporary buffs more reliable and intuitive.</blockquote>With the strikethrough immunity, will this also protect you against thunderclap? Nothing like using ToS to block a death touch and dragoon to avoid getting hit and watching thunderclap take out my stoneskins before the death touch hits.

Betchemin

06-26-2012, 03:38 AM

I'm not going to get into the debate about Strike through immunity. However I would not like to see the point where any one tank class is not considered good enough for MT duty. I will resever judgement till I see this in action.I would like to understand why the monks are losing a stance. Currently Brawlers have 3 ways to fight. Defensive, Widow and Offensive, while the Plate tanks have 4. Defensive with shield, Defensive withouth shield, Offensive with shield and Offensive without shield. Now with this change it looks like we are moving from 3 - Brawler against 4 Plate which was resonable to 3 Brawler and 6 Plate. Overall I am worried bout this change. I do not want to be a DPS. If the raid has spare slots and not tank space I will switch toon.Most people have more than one character. Turning fighters into Scout wanabees is not the answer to any issue I know about.

Boli32

06-26-2012, 06:20 AM

I hope this means the Paladin group heal AND Arch Heal will be worth casting now; both of those heals need to be re-evaluated; for example arch heal being a large reactive heal (with min health trigger) and group heal a HoT would be ideal.

TheSpin

06-26-2012, 06:36 AM

For those of you who don't like the reckless stance...Realize that the game is designed around groups having 1 tank, and raids gernerally having 2-3 tanks. They either have to change content drastically or give fighters something to do besides tanking.Also, I agree that some balance between tanking is necessary. Each fighter class should be able to feel capable of tanking if they are properly geared and specced for the task.

Wanic

06-26-2012, 10:17 AM

This buff is a warm welcome, as something different but.Will Recklessness reduce our hate gain? To eliminate any chance of taking aggro of the tank in the group?

Alaska

06-26-2012, 10:19 AM

If you are tanking anything before certain HM Drunder or PoW fights in defensive stance for Strikethrough Immunity as a Brawler either you or your healers need fo fail less. This change really only applies to true top tier Monks in top tier guilds.For me personally I like the change because when I am a 3rd option on some encounters I am already wedged snuggly between Tier 1 and 2 DPS. You give me a Reckless Stance and I start out parsing top tier Scout / Mages they are gonna be so jelly.

attikus

06-26-2012, 11:09 AM

Is this change going to test today as it was said on the webcast?I dont see anything on test update notes.

Iren

06-26-2012, 11:35 AM

<cite>Seshat@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Overall I am worried bout this change. I do not want to be a DPS. If the raid has spare slots and not tank space I will switch toon.Most people have more than one character. Turning fighters into Scout wanabees is not the answer to any issue I know about.</blockquote>im worried for the actual dps classes if it gets to the point where a tank class specced for dps is taking their spot , that counts for grp stuff too,

Talathion

06-26-2012, 11:42 AM

<cite>Iren@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Seshat@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Overall I am worried bout this change. I do not want to be a DPS. If the raid has spare slots and not tank space I will switch toon.Most people have more than one character. Turning fighters into Scout wanabees is not the answer to any issue I know about.</blockquote>im worried for the actual dps classes if it gets to the point where a tank class specced for dps is taking their spot , that counts for grp stuff too,</blockquote>This is a game that evolves around gear and skill, I've seen new assassins do 250k DPS and Raid geared ones do 90k DPS, its all about player skill.((Unless you play a beastlord, then it doesn't matter what you do, you still score 150k+ DPS.))

Landiin

06-26-2012, 12:12 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Iren@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Seshat@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Overall I am worried bout this change. I do not want to be a DPS. If the raid has spare slots and not tank space I will switch toon.Most people have more than one character. Turning fighters into Scout wanabees is not the answer to any issue I know about.</blockquote>im worried for the actual dps classes if it gets to the point where a tank class specced for dps is taking their spot , that counts for grp stuff too,</blockquote>This is a game that evolves around gear and skill, I've seen new assassins do 250k DPS and Raid geared ones do 90k DPS, its all about player skill.((Unless you play a beastlord, then it doesn't matter what you do, you still score 150k+ DPS.))</blockquote>What? There is zero skill needed in this game anymore. All you need is the gear and the ability to press 4+ buttons over and over. People who think this game still needs skill must be verry poor players.I do think it is unfair that tanks will now be able to fill two roles DPS and Tanking. When will the real DPS classes get to fill the tank roll also? IMO this is poor judgement from the EQ2 team.

Jeepned2

06-26-2012, 12:27 PM

Finally tanks will get to DPS. Since we all know that they couldn't before this change! So instead of being in the 8-13 on the parse they can move up to the 3-6 range on the parse? Ok that's cool, we can stop recruiting more squishy types like the Ranger, Necromancer and maybe a couple more and just go with mostly tank groups. Let's see new "tank" group would be ummmm, SK, SK, Illusionist, Dirge, Inq, Defiler or maybe Brawler, Brawler, Dirge, Inq, Defiler, Pally? I have a better idea, why not crap the whole thing, get rid of all classes and have just one. Then let us change them up threw a new AA system. Hey since the tanks are now going to be DPS, can the Mages start wearing Plate? Or maybe get a spell that boosts thier HP by say 100,000. You know it's not fair that mages die so much. It used to be the trade off, lots of DPS for the risk of taking a lot of damage. With tanks now, there are no risks. Because no matter how "High risk" you make it, for most tanks, they still get to wear plate. I KNOW! Make it that if you want to go into reckless stance you have to wear cloth instead of plate or you can't dps at all.Another stupid idea from Sony, but heck, that's about all we expected when we first heard about changes to the fighters.

Umeil

06-26-2012, 12:41 PM

It actually pretty amusing reading all the hate posts.What forced Sony to make these changes is the simple fact that they gave dumb classes the ability to tank and dps in the same spec. Your main line tank could never do this all they could do was tank but as a dps they were nothing but below average.Either remove leather tanks and leave the job to plate wearing classes or basically suck it up deal with it. At last plate tanks get something back after being almost reduced to rubble

Koleg

06-26-2012, 01:03 PM

<cite>Wanic@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>This buff is a warm welcome, as something different but. Will Recklessness reduce our hate gain? To eliminate any chance of taking aggro of the tank in the group?</blockquote>This change, as stated, will be the death of the SK class with AE positionals with "extremely" higher inbound damage.The Monks (not Brawlers, not bruisers) are currently parsing higher than T2 DPS now, giving Monks or Zerkers (specifically) anything that increases their DPS will start kicking out T1 Mages and Scouts from raiding. Why would any raid force run Mages over Monks or Zerkers then the fighters can do equal or more DPS AND have the ability to take massively more hits and inbound damage. There is ZERO need to make Palidins any sort of secondary healing source in either groups of raids... This is nothing more than a WOW'ification of EQ2. Why bother using Druids at all if they can be replaced by a plate wearing DPS'ing & Healing 4th or 5th OT? Are we going to be getting DeathKinghts in the up coming expansion as well??? Did the PSS1 deal sell domestic accounts to Blizzard???... After this update goes live there will only be Guardian and Brawler MT's left, Pally's will move to DPS and Healing, Monks and Zerkers will push out the T1 DPS slots and SK's will be left out in the cold... The idea is to fly-by-the-seat-of-SOE's-Pants, with too little forethought.

Piestro

06-26-2012, 01:21 PM

Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!

NrthnStar5

06-26-2012, 01:27 PM

Personally, I'd like to see some flexibility with the tank classes in their roles. If done right, I see no reason why at least some of the tank classes cannot play a DPS role. What is wrong with choice? Many other MMO's do this. Personally, I like the playstyle of many of the tank classes but I do not like to tank. I'd like to be able to play a Fighter Class without having to be relegated to a tank role. Fighter should not automatically equal tank imo.

kalaria

06-26-2012, 01:28 PM

With these changes: Fighter DPS in reckless stance should come no where close to the DPS levels of Scout/Mage DPSers.NO WHERE close. Assuming gear/skill is equal.

Rhita

06-26-2012, 01:31 PM

<cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>Do you know when the test server will be open? I still keep running into "could not connect to server" even after i've patched.

Koleg

06-26-2012, 01:41 PM

<cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>Currently in todays game environment we already know that Monk, Zerkers and SK's are doing T1.5 DPS, often showing in raids in the or near the top 5. Guardians, Pally's and Brawlers are not far behind and are very often higher than the T2 utility/DPS on the parse. Recklessness will only make those numbers higher and by the announcment "greatly increases outgoing damage".How?? is this not suppose to make the T2 utility/DPS and the T1 DPS feel HORRIBLE about the tasks which they once had the oportunity to fill?? Why would any raid use a Sorcerer, specifically the weaker wizards, when they can easily replace those low survivabile mages with plate wearing AE classes that can switch mid-fight between MT-OT-DPS?? We already know that the poor implementation of the assumed OP Beastlords have put several other classes on the sidelines. Rangers have all but been replaced in 99% of the situations. Wizzards, Assassins and Warlocks are equally replaced with Beastlords due to the DPS potentional. NOW, Monks SK , Zerkers and Pallys will push the remaining T1 DPS out of the game save for the Beastlords. I'd have to ask Why? Why bother playing a class that is tagged as a T1 DPS class which cannot compete with the raw DPS potential with 10x the survivibility?? why, bother?We won't even begin to talk yet about the actual fighter arch-type issues.Why wouldn't SOE Dev's simply fixed the actual fighter issue which was Snap Aggro management?

Yimway

06-26-2012, 01:55 PM

<cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>My testing on the test server will be as much speculation as my revieing the changes now.I'm not going to be able to replicate 'live scenarios' that are meaningful on test server, so forgive me if I don't get too excited about it.However, conceptually, parts of this update are just a bad idea to start with, and I don't need to run scenarios on test to identify things that are conceptually wrong.

Twyxx

06-26-2012, 02:03 PM

<cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote>Currently in todays game environment we already know that Monk, Zerkers and SK's are doing T1.5 DPS, often showing in raids in the or near the top 5. Guardians, Pally's and Brawlers are not far behind and are very often higher than the T2 utility/DPS on the parse. Recklessness will only make those numbers higher and by the announcment "greatly increases outgoing damage".How?? is this not suppose to make the T2 utility/DPS and the T1 DPS feel HORRIBLE about the tasks which they once had the oportunity to fill?? Why would any raid use a Sorcerer, specifically the weaker wizards, when they can easily replace those low survivabile mages with plate wearing AE classes that can switch mid-fight between MT-OT-DPS?? We already know that the poor implementation of the assumed OP Beastlords have put several other classes on the sidelines. Rangers have all but been replaced in 99% of the situations. Wizzards, Assassins and Warlocks are equally replaced with Beastlords due to the DPS potentional. NOW, Monks SK , Zerkers and Pallys will push the remaining T1 DPS out of the game save for the Beastlords. I'd have to ask Why? Why bother playing a class that is tagged as a T1 DPS class which cannot compete with the raw DPS potential with 10x the survivibility?? why, bother?We won't even begin to talk yet about the actual fighter arch-type issues.Why wouldn't SOE Dev's simply fixed the actual fighter issue which was Snap Aggro management?</blockquote>I think your T1's are doing it wrong.

Koleg

06-26-2012, 02:06 PM

<cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>For the love of God would someome please see some commonsence in this updateBruiser-- Bodyguard no longer makes the bruiser immune to Strikethrough. <-- Remove the Daze effect already, how much more of this is going to be shoved around before someone actually understand the effect of Daze in a DPS-Aggro'centric environment when you block the ability to melee. Now your forcing the Bruisers to push themeselves into a losing aggro situation when it actually means something due to the strikethru removal.

Koleg

06-26-2012, 02:09 PM

<cite>Twyxx wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote>Currently in todays game environment we already know that Monk, Zerkers and SK's are doing T1.5 DPS, often showing in raids in the or near the top 5. Guardians, Pally's and Brawlers are not far behind and are very often higher than the T2 utility/DPS on the parse. Recklessness will only make those numbers higher and by the announcment "greatly increases outgoing damage".How?? is this not suppose to make the T2 utility/DPS and the T1 DPS feel HORRIBLE about the tasks which they once had the oportunity to fill?? Why would any raid use a Sorcerer, specifically the weaker wizards, when they can easily replace those low survivabile mages with plate wearing AE classes that can switch mid-fight between MT-OT-DPS?? We already know that the poor implementation of the assumed OP Beastlords have put several other classes on the sidelines. Rangers have all but been replaced in 99% of the situations. Wizzards, Assassins and Warlocks are equally replaced with Beastlords due to the DPS potentional. NOW, Monks SK , Zerkers and Pallys will push the remaining T1 DPS out of the game save for the Beastlords. I'd have to ask Why? Why bother playing a class that is tagged as a T1 DPS class which cannot compete with the raw DPS potential with 10x the survivibility?? why, bother?We won't even begin to talk yet about the actual fighter arch-type issues.Why wouldn't SOE Dev's simply fixed the actual fighter issue which was Snap Aggro management?</blockquote>I think your T1's are doing it wrong.</blockquote>That might be true .. but how close you we all want that DPS line to be, becasue this is certainly going to close that gap and in the end why bother with any class than isn't wearing at least chain armor.

Rhita

06-26-2012, 02:15 PM

<cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>For the love of God would someome please see some commonsence in this updateBruiser-- Bodyguard no longer makes the bruiser immune to Strikethrough. <-- Remove the Daze effect already, how much more of this is going to be shoved around before someone actually understand the effect of Daze in a DPS-Aggro'centric environment when you block the ability to melee. Now your forcing the Bruisers to push themeselves into a losing aggro situation when it actually means something due to the strikethru removal.</blockquote>Theres a daze effect on Bodyguard?

Koleg

06-26-2012, 02:28 PM

<cite>Rhita@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>For the love of God would someome please see some commonsence in this updateBruiser-- Bodyguard no longer makes the bruiser immune to Strikethrough. <-- Remove the Daze effect already, how much more of this is going to be shoved around before someone actually understand the effect of Daze in a DPS-Aggro'centric environment when you block the ability to melee. Now your forcing the Bruisers to push themeselves into a losing aggro situation when it actually means something due to the strikethru removal.</blockquote>Theres a daze effect on Bodyguard?</blockquote>Oh Fudger!!! I read that in a blind rage as something else....But, while we're on the topic ... please remove the Daze from that other ability too <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Talathion

06-26-2012, 02:34 PM

I hope being reckless has its own melee animations!

Twyxx

06-26-2012, 02:43 PM

<cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Twyxx wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote>Currently in todays game environment we already know that Monk, Zerkers and SK's are doing T1.5 DPS, often showing in raids in the or near the top 5. Guardians, Pally's and Brawlers are not far behind and are very often higher than the T2 utility/DPS on the parse. Recklessness will only make those numbers higher and by the announcment "greatly increases outgoing damage".How?? is this not suppose to make the T2 utility/DPS and the T1 DPS feel HORRIBLE about the tasks which they once had the oportunity to fill?? Why would any raid use a Sorcerer, specifically the weaker wizards, when they can easily replace those low survivabile mages with plate wearing AE classes that can switch mid-fight between MT-OT-DPS?? We already know that the poor implementation of the assumed OP Beastlords have put several other classes on the sidelines. Rangers have all but been replaced in 99% of the situations. Wizzards, Assassins and Warlocks are equally replaced with Beastlords due to the DPS potentional. NOW, Monks SK , Zerkers and Pallys will push the remaining T1 DPS out of the game save for the Beastlords. I'd have to ask Why? Why bother playing a class that is tagged as a T1 DPS class which cannot compete with the raw DPS potential with 10x the survivibility?? why, bother?We won't even begin to talk yet about the actual fighter arch-type issues.Why wouldn't SOE Dev's simply fixed the actual fighter issue which was Snap Aggro management?</blockquote>I think your T1's are doing it wrong.</blockquote>That might be true .. but how close you we all want that DPS line to be, becasue this is certainly going to close that gap and in the end why bother with any class than isn't wearing at least chain armor.</blockquote>All depends on what the recklessness buff actually turns out to be. Not sure if anyone has gotten on to test yet to see it. If it's significant there will be fights where sk's are up there for sure, monks would be a real asset and people might dust off their zerkers. Unless they make them as "sky is falling" game-breaking as you're worried about I don't see it as an issue. Most of the harder fights right now you need 3-4 tanks for. Would be nice to have them all be a valuable contributer 100% of the time. I don't think good t1's are going to have anything to worry about with this. Swashes and bad t1's should be concerned. But they should already be concerned.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 02:44 PM

<cite>Twyxx wrote:</cite><blockquote>All depends on what the recklessness buff actually turns out to be. Not sure if anyone has gotten on to test yet to see it. If it's significant there will be fights where sk's are up there for sure, monks would be a real asset and people might dust off their zerkers. </blockquote>I'm concerned with the notion that a class gets to be a 'dps role' and not have to worry about agro. Which is certainly what Recklessness sounds like to me...

kalaria

06-26-2012, 03:07 PM

Fighter DPS in Reckless stance should come no where close to the DPS levels of Preds/Rogues/Sorcs/Summoners what so ever, all things being equal skill/gear wise.Unless SoE is going to give all classes the ability to fill an entirely new role with the press of a single button... which we all know wont happen.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 03:24 PM

<cite>kalaria wrote:</cite><blockquote>Fighter DPS in Reckless stance should come no where close to the DPS levels of Preds/Rogues/Sorcs/Summoners what so ever, all things being equal skill/gear wise.Unless SoE is going to give all classes the ability to fill an entirely new role with the press of a single button... which we all know wont happen.</blockquote>Yes, this is also part of my arguement of why Recklessness is a bad idea.Its really not needed. Just fix the other issues and see where we are.

ElectricPotato

06-26-2012, 03:28 PM

One stance for everybody? Probably not a fun way to go... There's not enough development resources to tune the "non-tank" tank stance for each archetype, or even each class? ((Some fighters are already at a very "pointy" place, how will a coverall stance close the gap?))Skill removal on brawler combo stance? We get the same level of mastery in reckless stance as we had in the combo stance?

Anastasie

06-26-2012, 03:37 PM

Maybe if they make the fighters as squishy as a mage while they have "Recklessness" stance on, it may be a bit more balanced. If they have tank survivability and can compete with wiz/lock/assn, then that would be way overpowered.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 04:06 PM

Letsee..Fighter AE block up every other AE. -CheckFighter Death prevents. -CheckFighter Stoneskins and damage reductions. -CheckFighter greater HP buffs. - CheckYeah, as squishy as a dps class, sure...

Talathion

06-26-2012, 04:09 PM

<img src="http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/6101/54769388.png" />Fighters will take 50% more Damage.They are effectively Wizards with the stance on.

Boethius_Permafrost

06-26-2012, 04:39 PM

Before even getting to test, I think it likely will needs some changes:Instead of -30 hate gain, make it prevent effects which increase hate gain and hate position changes. Just make recklessness nullify all the fighter tools for gaining agro, and nothing more. A fighter could be sitting at +100 - 30 = 70 hate gain, or at 0 - 30 = free -30 hate gain. This way allows reckless tanking and it gives a free large deagro. Special abilities to reduce agro should be restricted to dedicated dps classes. Instead of increase all damage received, make it increase damage received from weapon attacks. The whole point is to have a raid dps option, but doing dps in a raid means taking a lot of damage from ae's. If the idea is to penalize the fighter for taking agro in recklessness, then only increase damage that occurs when you are the direct target. edit: Also the damage penalty should not apply to intercede damage. That is a raid tool for non-tanking fighters, so don't break it with the recklessness implementation details.

Jeepned2

06-26-2012, 04:40 PM

<cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>I don't care either way. I have tanks, I have mages, I have scouts. But what you just did is make a bunch of classes easily replaceable in raids. When a plate tank can go from basically a plate tank, to a wizard, back to a plate tank with an easy click of thier stance button why wouldn't I take a whole raid of these people instead of wizards, warlocks, assassins, rangers, necromancers, and conjurors? Might need to add Swashies to the list. Man, make a group of SK's with and Illusionist, and a healer and watch out. You may now have to go back and change the scripting of the mobs.I learned a long time ago that it is useless to bring concerns up to Sony. Once you "set a path" the concerns of the player base is ignored and off you go. Write down my concerns.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH... Sorry out of useless scraps of paper.

Talathion

06-26-2012, 04:42 PM

<cite>Jeepned2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>I don't care either way. I have tanks, I have mages, I have scouts. But what you just did is make a bunch of classes easily replaceable in raids. When a plate tank can go from basically a plate tank, to a wizard, back to a plate tank with an easy click of thier stance button why wouldn't I take a whole raid of these people instead of wizards, warlocks, assassins, rangers, necromancers, and conjurors? Might need to add Swashies to the list. Man, make a group of SK's with and Illusionist, and a healer and watch out. You may now have to go back and change the scripting of the mobs.I learned a long time ago that it is useless to bring concerns up to Sony. Once you "set a path" the concerns of the player base is ignored and off you go. Write down my concerns.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH... Sorry out of useless craps of paper.</blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 04:44 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking

Jeepned2

06-26-2012, 04:46 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>What he said ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Talathion

06-26-2012, 04:50 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>I don't use Perfect Counter, I use Partisan Cleave.Sorry.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 04:51 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>I don't use Perfect Counter, I use partisan cleave.</blockquote>Certainly explains some things... but you don'thave a death save either?

Talathion

06-26-2012, 04:52 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>I don't use Perfect Counter, I use partisan cleave.</blockquote>Certainly explains some things... but you don'thave a death save either?</blockquote>Your a Guardian, I'm a berserker, Partisan Cleave on a berserker is increased by 60% base damage/hits for 170k In Raids, and Also increases my damage/damage reduction significantly.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 04:55 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Your a Guardian, I'm a berserker, Partisan Cleave on a berserker is increased by 60% base damage/hits for 170k In Raids, and Also increases my damage/damage reduction significantly.</blockquote>Yes, and I've seen a zerker hit 4mil on pefect counter... If your concerned with not dieing to canceling this buff, you can easily find ways around it.

kalaria

06-26-2012, 04:57 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>I don't use Perfect Counter, I use Partisan Cleave.Sorry.</blockquote>EVERY tank has a ton of stone skins/death prevents/damage reduction options.And guess what..... a tank isnt raiding solo, there are these crazy classes called healers that can top a tank off near instantly, and some of them even have crazing things called death prevents, stone skins, damage reductions they can put on tanks too. /gasp gasp!!!

Talathion

06-26-2012, 04:58 PM

<cite>kalaria wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>I don't use Perfect Counter, I use Partisan Cleave.Sorry.</blockquote>EVERY tank has a ton of stone skins/death prevents/damage reduction options.And guess what..... a tank isnt raiding solo, there are these crazy classes called healers that can top a tank off near instantly, and some of them even have crazing things called death prevents, stone skins, damage reductions they can put on tanks too. /gasp gasp!!!</blockquote>No, only Brawlers/Guardians have a ton of stoneskins and death prevents.Learn your classes before calling them out.

kalaria

06-26-2012, 05:00 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Learn your classes before calling them out.</blockquote>Yes.. YOU really do need to do that.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 05:00 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>EVERY tank has a ton of stone skins/death prevents/damage reduction options.And guess what..... a tank isnt raiding solo, there are these crazy classes called healers that can top a tank off near instantly, and some of them even have crazing things called death prevents, stone skins, damage reductions they can put on tanks too. /gasp gasp!!!</blockquote>No, only Brawlers/Guardians have a ton of stoneskins and death prevents.Learn your classes before calling them out.</blockquote>No Tala, we all have enoughto get around swaping out of this stance mid fight. Learn your own class sir.

Koleg

06-26-2012, 05:35 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>He is only concerned that his Zerker will no longer be usless and only cares about how much more he gets and brawlers lose. It's quite obvious.Hate Gain -30% when abilities have positions is a joke. Adds +50% Potencey and Then Doubles the casters Potencey? What will that make a raid geared toon sit at ... 500% Potency?!? No wonder all the Heal modifications had the Potency removed.If a fighter can figure out how to avoid aggro they will turn into the #1 DPS source of DPS easily... no?

Talathion

06-26-2012, 05:45 PM

<cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>He is only concerned that his Zerker will no longer be usless and only cares about how much more he gets and brawlers lose. It's quite obvious.Hate Gain -30% when abilities have positions is a joke. Adds +50% Potencey and Then Doubles the casters Potencey? What will that make a raid geared toon sit at ... 500% Potency?!? No wonder all the Heal modifications had the Potency removed.If a fighter can figure out how to avoid aggro they will turn into the #1 DPS source of DPS easily... no?</blockquote>Fighters CA's/Spells do not hit Nearly As Hard as a Necromancers.500% Potency may seem like alot to a necromancer, but to a fighter thats really not that much.The 50% drop in survivability is HUGE.

Yimway

06-26-2012, 06:09 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>500% Potency may seem like alot to a necromancer, but to a fighter thats really not that much.The 50% drop in survivability is HUGE.</blockquote>Just to be clear, that is huge only to Tala. The rest of us fighters realise if we aren't tanking we can survive just fine with the added penalty.

Talathion

06-26-2012, 06:10 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>500% Potency may seem like alot to a necromancer, but to a fighter thats really not that much.The 50% drop in survivability is HUGE.</blockquote>Just to be clear, that is huge only to Tala. The rest of us fighters realise if we aren't tanking we can survive just fine with the added penalty.</blockquote>That IS big when your not main tanking.

Hirofortis

06-26-2012, 06:24 PM

<cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Brawler's Defensive Stance (w/ Strikethrough Immunity) + Reckless Stance would probably be a bit too Overpowered.</blockquote>You obviously didn't realize that Reckless Stance is a Stance. It is taking over the spot of Black widow, etc. That means you could not be in defensive stance and offensive stance at the same time.Just thought I would clear that up for ya. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Talathion

06-26-2012, 06:35 PM

<cite>Hirofortis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Brawler's Defensive Stance (w/ Strikethrough Immunity) + Reckless Stance would probably be a bit too Overpowered.</blockquote>You obviously didn't realize that Reckless Stance is a Stance. It is taking over the spot of Black widow, etc. That means you could not be in defensive stance and offensive stance at the same time.Just thought I would clear that up for ya. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I didn't realise that either till I logged in test, sucks I cannot use offensive stance with it.

Chronus1

06-26-2012, 07:32 PM

Anybody else think it kinda sucks that most guilds use brawler tanks for raids and now they're going to have their deathsave nerfed to only a 50% heal and duration lowered by 30s, strikethrough immunity all but go and so will be forced to lose use their mit to take hits but along with everybody are losing 1656 of that?Coupled with mob buffs on emSSx4 and certain other names (Gindan commander off the top of my head) having the on a hit you take a bunch of extra damage will surely increase the incoming damage on the average raid guild's tanks and therefore make all content, in at least a small way harder? Kinda sucks especially if your guild doesn't have a guardian to take over the monk as main tank.

mcdave0

06-26-2012, 10:47 PM

Man... I miss playing my frog brawler so bad... This makes me really want to get back in the game... Unfortunately my wife would divorce me...

Boli32

06-27-2012, 08:19 AM

<cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Talathion@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Do you read your own abilities?Perfect CounterCancel StanceTinkered Life Stone and/or Death Prevent and/or healers that don't suckContinue tanking</blockquote>He is only concerned that his Zerker will no longer be usless and only cares about how much more he gets and brawlers lose. It's quite obvious.Hate Gain -30% when abilities have positions is a joke. Adds +50% Potencey and Then Doubles the casters Potencey? What will that make a raid geared toon sit at ... 500% Potency?!? No wonder all the Heal modifications had the Potency removed.If a fighter can figure out how to avoid aggro they will turn into the #1 DPS source of DPS easily... no?</blockquote>Fighter CAs work out to be about 20-25% of a parse doubling them doesn't do *that* much.Although I will admit the few "big CAs/Spells" Fighters do have will become insane. Harm touch for instance will easily break the 1 million mark and maybe 2 million; aside from those spikes however the actual DPS increase will be significantly lower than a true T1 DPS.25% of 250k is 62.5k -double that and you get a DPS of ~320k - compare that to 600-800k parses from wizards and I think the T1 DPS is safe <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> The *major* parses you see for fighters will be AE fights with auto attack providing the vast majority of DPS - so the recklessness buff will increases these parses by even less.

Novusod

06-27-2012, 10:04 AM

<cite>Chronus1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Anybody else think it kinda sucks that most guilds use brawler tanks for raids and now they're going to have their deathsave nerfed to only a 50% heal and duration lowered by 30s, strikethrough immunity all but go and so will be forced to lose use their mit to take hits but along with everybody are losing 1656 of that?Coupled with mob buffs on emSSx4 and certain other names (Gindan commander off the top of my head) having the on a hit you take a bunch of extra damage will surely increase the incoming damage on the average raid guild's tanks and therefore make all content, in at least a small way harder? Kinda sucks especially if your guild doesn't have a guardian to take over the monk as main tank.</blockquote>The Hardmode Gindan Cammander requires 4 real tanks. You need two tanks on the named to deal with the memwipe and forced detarget. You need one tank to hold the add that can't be killed. Then you need another tank to kill the swarm adds. There is also a couple encounters like that in the Plane of War that also require 4 tanks. I don't know where they are getting this idea not enough tank roles in raids. When the guild I am in pulls 4 tank mobs our troub or warlock have to play their tank alts. In reality there is a tank shortage.Most guilds that use brawler tanks are going to be in trouble after all these nerfs hit. There are certain adds such as Tempestor on the Sevelak encounter which require using every deathsave, heal, and stoneskin I have. Guilds are going to need TWO guardians to kill Sevelak if brawlers can no longer tank hardmode adds.

ratbast

06-27-2012, 11:36 AM

there are 3 base roles in eq2. tank, heal, dps. there are a few mongrel roles that fill in the gaps. support roles. buffing, mana healing, rezzing, hate xfer. its a major violation to repurpose a class across base roles, such as tank to dps. the only viable repurposing is into mongrel roles. even if a class is noticeably worse (but still able to fill new role), its still a violation. fighters are already noticeably worse but still able to fill dps role. buffing their dps for decrease in survivability makes all marginal dps classes a waste (think t2). making them have similar survivability is too much versatility. making them have worse survivability than mages makes it worthless. fighters need to repurpose to some type of utility that benefits others, not themself and their personal glory. this type of versatility is a violation.

Yimway

06-27-2012, 12:06 PM

<cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote> even if a class is noticeably worse (but still able to fill new role), its still a violation. fighters are already noticeably worse but still able to fill dps role. buffing their dps for decrease in survivability makes all marginal dps classes a waste (think t2). making them have similar survivability is too much versatility. making them have worse survivability than mages makes it worthless. fighters need to repurpose to some type of utility that benefits others, not themself and their personal glory. this type of versatility is a violation.</blockquote>Couldn't agree more.

Evilscent

06-27-2012, 12:16 PM

this change is the worse thing sony decided to do.. one reason the strike through immune being a temp buff. so that means Brawlers are nerfed once again to no one would want them to tank like they did durring DOF days all the way through til ROK. due to the tank will be not able to hold agro nor either able to stay up due to the one shots will be happening way too often once again.the other thing the reckless ness ability is just stupid in my opinion due to if i want to dps i would roll a dps class plain and simple.

Necrotherian

06-27-2012, 02:33 PM

<cite><a href="mailto:Talathion@Antonia">Talathion@Antonia</a> Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Jeepned2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Piestro wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obviously this is a change that we knew people would be passionate about. Of course until people see the actual changes any evaluation of their impact is premature. The best way to move forward is to write down your concerns, and then formulate a test plan based on those concerns. That will give you the best possible start to actually testing the changes, and seeing what their actual impacts are.Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on the Test servers!</blockquote>I don't care either way. I have tanks, I have mages, I have scouts. But what you just did is make a bunch of classes easily replaceable in raids. When a plate tank can go from basically a plate tank, to a wizard, back to a plate tank with an easy click of thier stance button why wouldn't I take a whole raid of these people instead of wizards, warlocks, assassins, rangers, necromancers, and conjurors? Might need to add Swashies to the list. Man, make a group of SK's with and Illusionist, and a healer and watch out. You may now have to go back and change the scripting of the mobs.I learned a long time ago that it is useless to bring concerns up to Sony. Once you "set a path" the concerns of the player base is ignored and off you go. Write down my concerns.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH... Sorry out of useless craps of paper.</blockquote><img src="http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/6101/54769388.png" />DID YOU READ THE STANCE...When you leave Reckless, it brings your HEALTH down to 1%, you can't just leave it and Tank.</blockquote>Did you read the stance? That only happens if you leave the stance while in combat. So learn the strat for the particular fight you are considering, decide which stance to use, then stick with that stance until combat is over. If there is a 50%+ chance that you will be the one that ends up tanking the mob, try the following:<ul><li>Use a different stance.</li></ul>What part of that is difficult to grasp? I'm not trolling, I honestly want to know the facet of the concept that seems to elude you. If the changes aren't to your liking, you essentially have four choices:<ol><li>Learn to play with the changes.</li><li>Play a different character not affected by the changes.</li><li>Play a different game.</li><li>Continue playing the way that you do now, with the realization that people probably won't want to group with you. (I don't know you personally, so I don't know if that is any different than what you currently experience.)</li></ol>tl;dr - One should not point out another's reading comprehension problems when one also has reading comprehension problems. Also, either learn to play with the changes or find another option from those above that is more to your liking.

Yimway

06-27-2012, 03:14 PM

<cite>Rotherian@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did you read the stance? That only happens if you leave the stance while in combat. So learn the strat for the particular fight you are considering, decide which stance to use, then stick with that stance until combat is over. If there is a 50%+ chance that you will be the one that ends up tanking the mob, try the following:<ul><li>Use a different stance.</li></ul></blockquote>The real thruth is we'll swap in combat, we'll just consume a deathsave, or maybe some stoneskins, or a self heal, or other possible solutions to overcome the trivial dump of hitpoints.Providing we're smart enough to swap back to tanking stances before we take aggro, there is nothing about the recklessness stance that prevents us from doing it in combat.I'm 100% confident I can swap out of it at any given time and not die.

Rainmare

06-27-2012, 03:18 PM

<cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote>there are 3 base roles in eq2. tank, heal, dps. there are a few mongrel roles that fill in the gaps. support roles. buffing, mana healing, rezzing, hate xfer. its a major violation to repurpose a class across base roles, such as tank to dps. the only viable repurposing is into mongrel roles. even if a class is noticeably worse (but still able to fill new role), its still a violation. fighters are already noticeably worse but still able to fill dps role. buffing their dps for decrease in survivability makes all marginal dps classes a waste (think t2). making them have similar survivability is too much versatility. making them have worse survivability than mages makes it worthless. fighters need to repurpose to some type of utility that benefits others, not themself and their personal glory. this type of versatility is a violation.</blockquote>no it's not. it's the only type of 'versatility' they can give that they can actually make mean something. the whole point of Reckless is to get MORE then 1 fighter in a group and to get MORE then a MT/OT in a raid setup with exception to a handful of encounters.it's to make it so when your doing PoW or your doing a SSx4 you don't have to have your 3rd and 4th tanks switch to thier 'dps' alts for half the zone, then to thier tanks for the 1-2 fights you need the tank on, and then hop back to thier dps...or be told to sit the whole time until the 'special' fight comes up.you really want fighters to get utility to compete with say, Brigs and Swashes? you really want them to be able to compete with bards and chanters? and I don't mean some BS crap about 'you can do this, but not even 1/10th as good as the class who's supposed to do it'. I mean a serious competition. I mean the only way I would see 'utility' being a feasable method to add tanks to groups and raids was if I could do it 80% at least as effectively as the 'support' classes.and you know good and well if they gave us that you'd be hear screaming about how OP we are.DPS is the ONLY thing they can give in the amounts they need to to make bringing other tanks along being actually not a detriment. yay with reckless my tank MIGHT do the damage of a swashy or a brig. so if a group of 5 needs 1 more DPS I might actually be able to say 'I can play in Reckless through the zone' and they might actually consider bringing me along.

Tekadeo

06-27-2012, 03:28 PM

<cite>Rainmare@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote>DPS is the ONLY thing they can give in the amounts they need to to make bringing other tanks along being actually not a detriment. yay with reckless my tank MIGHT do the damage of a swashy or a brig. so if a group of 5 needs 1 more DPS I might actually be able to say 'I can play in Reckless through the zone' and they might actually consider bringing me along.</blockquote>It's okay man. People are scared of change and their only way to address this fear is to attack it blindly. Parse-monkeys and cynical d-bags will never agree because they are simply afraid of something being different.

ratbast

06-27-2012, 04:32 PM

<cite>Rainmare@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote>there are 3 base roles in eq2. tank, heal, dps. there are a few mongrel roles that fill in the gaps. support roles. buffing, mana healing, rezzing, hate xfer. its a major violation to repurpose a class across base roles, such as tank to dps. the only viable repurposing is into mongrel roles. even if a class is noticeably worse (but still able to fill new role), its still a violation. fighters are already noticeably worse but still able to fill dps role. buffing their dps for decrease in survivability makes all marginal dps classes a waste (think t2). making them have similar survivability is too much versatility. making them have worse survivability than mages makes it worthless. fighters need to repurpose to some type of utility that benefits others, not themself and their personal glory. this type of versatility is a violation.</blockquote>no it's not. it's the only type of 'versatility' they can give that they can actually make mean something. the whole point of Reckless is to get MORE then 1 fighter in a group and to get MORE then a MT/OT in a raid setup with exception to a handful of encounters.it's to make it so when your doing PoW or your doing a SSx4 you don't have to have your 3rd and 4th tanks switch to thier 'dps' alts for half the zone, then to thier tanks for the 1-2 fights you need the tank on, and then hop back to thier dps...or be told to sit the whole time until the 'special' fight comes up.you really want fighters to get utility to compete with say, Brigs and Swashes? you really want them to be able to compete with bards and chanters? and I don't mean some BS crap about 'you can do this, but not even 1/10th as good as the class who's supposed to do it'. I mean a serious competition. I mean the only way I would see 'utility' being a feasable method to add tanks to groups and raids was if I could do it 80% at least as effectively as the 'support' classes.and you know good and well if they gave us that you'd be hear screaming about how OP we are.DPS is the ONLY thing they can give in the amounts they need to to make bringing other tanks along being actually not a detriment. yay with reckless my tank MIGHT do the damage of a swashy or a brig. so if a group of 5 needs 1 more DPS I might actually be able to say 'I can play in Reckless through the zone' and they might actually consider bringing me along.</blockquote>i dont follow your logic that dps is the only desired alternative to holding aggro.is there a lack of demand for utility?my position is that the 3 main roles are prime real estate. they are needs that ppl enjoy filling. imo letting ppl cross the chasm between these major roles violates those who actually belong in that role to begin with.the lesser mongrel roles are valid repurposing, but not tanking, healing, and dps'ing. alternative stances should be towards support. group buffs/debuffing mobs, mana healing, rezzing.

Tekadeo

06-27-2012, 04:42 PM

<cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rainmare@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote>there are 3 base roles in eq2. tank, heal, dps. there are a few mongrel roles that fill in the gaps. support roles. buffing, mana healing, rezzing, hate xfer. its a major violation to repurpose a class across base roles, such as tank to dps. the only viable repurposing is into mongrel roles. even if a class is noticeably worse (but still able to fill new role), its still a violation. fighters are already noticeably worse but still able to fill dps role. buffing their dps for decrease in survivability makes all marginal dps classes a waste (think t2). making them have similar survivability is too much versatility. making them have worse survivability than mages makes it worthless. fighters need to repurpose to some type of utility that benefits others, not themself and their personal glory. this type of versatility is a violation.</blockquote>no it's not. it's the only type of 'versatility' they can give that they can actually make mean something. the whole point of Reckless is to get MORE then 1 fighter in a group and to get MORE then a MT/OT in a raid setup with exception to a handful of encounters.it's to make it so when your doing PoW or your doing a SSx4 you don't have to have your 3rd and 4th tanks switch to thier 'dps' alts for half the zone, then to thier tanks for the 1-2 fights you need the tank on, and then hop back to thier dps...or be told to sit the whole time until the 'special' fight comes up.you really want fighters to get utility to compete with say, Brigs and Swashes? you really want them to be able to compete with bards and chanters? and I don't mean some BS crap about 'you can do this, but not even 1/10th as good as the class who's supposed to do it'. I mean a serious competition. I mean the only way I would see 'utility' being a feasable method to add tanks to groups and raids was if I could do it 80% at least as effectively as the 'support' classes.and you know good and well if they gave us that you'd be hear screaming about how OP we are.DPS is the ONLY thing they can give in the amounts they need to to make bringing other tanks along being actually not a detriment. yay with reckless my tank MIGHT do the damage of a swashy or a brig. so if a group of 5 needs 1 more DPS I might actually be able to say 'I can play in Reckless through the zone' and they might actually consider bringing me along.</blockquote>i dont follow your logic that dps is the only desired alternative to holding aggro.is there a lack of demand for utility?my position is that the 3 main roles are prime real estate. they are needs that ppl enjoy filling. imo letting ppl cross the chasm between these major roles violates those who actually belong in that role to begin with.the lesser mongrel roles are valid repurposing, but not tanking, healing, and dps'ing. alternative stances should be towards support. group buffs/debuffing mobs, mana healing, rezzing.</blockquote>Do you not realize tanks have to DPS to hold aggro? We are ALLLLLLL "mongrels," by your term. Every class in the game is a hybrid: tank/dps, healer/dps, utility/dps. There is zero repurposing going on; if you are referring to using Recklessness, the player using it surrenders their tanking ability to become a DPS. Therefore they aren't a mongrel anymore (which btw mongrel is a term mostly used for dogs and is generally a putdown----hybrid is a more fitting term).

Gemolis

06-27-2012, 04:47 PM

Was just wondering if it was intended for Zerkers to be the only tank class out of the 6 that did not get a strikethrough immunity added to one of their temp buffs? The way I see it is, Guards and Brawlers got 2 each they can rotate, Crusaders got 1, and Zerkers got 0.Now Zerkers did get it added to an AA ability, shared with Guards, but it is down the Agility line that also adds AE auto attack and Zerkers don't usually use since we have 100% AE auto with our Myth buff. That line is really a waste of AA for us. So it gives Guards a really good option for a 3rd strikethrough immunity but a bad option for Zerkers to even get 1.

Yimway

06-27-2012, 04:51 PM

<cite>Gemolis wrote:</cite><blockquote>Was just wondering if it was intended for Zerkers to be the only tank class out of the 6 that did not get a strikethrough immunity added to one of their temp buffs? The way I see it is, Guards and Brawlers got 2 each they can rotate, Crusaders got 1, and Zerkers got 0.</blockquote>Dragon reflexes works for zerkers.For guardians they got Dragoon Reflexes and Defensive Minded. The also got block, but that isn't a buff really, its a single tick stoneskinn that expires if you cast anything or if you get hit. Not really a buff.I'm not sure what the zerker have thats available as infrequently as defensive minded, and that may be the issue with why they didn't get another one.

Tekadeo

06-27-2012, 04:53 PM

<cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote>the lesser mongrel roles are valid repurposing, but not tanking, healing, and dps'ing. alternative stances should be towards support. group buffs/debuffing mobs, mana healing, rezzing.</blockquote>I could almost agree with this, but really why wouldn't the T1 DPS classes be responsible for this? They already complain they dont have enough utility to match beastlords or summoners, so why not give them those roles? Then after that happens, then the DPS roles would be a competition to see who can DPS the most while still helping the other members of the raid in their own way.

Tekadeo

06-27-2012, 04:57 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gemolis wrote:</cite><blockquote>Was just wondering if it was intended for Zerkers to be the only tank class out of the 6 that did not get a strikethrough immunity added to one of their temp buffs? The way I see it is, Guards and Brawlers got 2 each they can rotate, Crusaders got 1, and Zerkers got 0.</blockquote>Dragon reflexes works for zerkers.For guardians they got Dragoon Reflexes and Defensive Minded. The also got block, but that isn't a buff really, its a single tick stoneskinn that expires if you cast anything or if you get hit. Not really a buff.I'm not sure what the zerker have thats available as infrequently as defensive minded, and that may be the issue with why they didn't get another one.</blockquote>Don't forget to add that the entire AA line Zerkers must take to get Dragoon's is a waste; no other fighter gets shafted into choosing an unwanted AA tree, others get their own skills that they dont have to sacrifice other AA's for. The only other temp we get that could be considered is Gut Roar, but it is like block; three seconds where we can't take any -physical- damage. /golf clap.

Gemolis

06-27-2012, 05:01 PM

I understand Dragoon's works for Zerkers, just saying it isn't an option we like to use because the points spent above it in AE auto attack are useless for Myth'ed Zerkers. Obviously a Zerker wanting to be as Def as possible will sacrafice the AA and use it but my point is it favors the Guards to use this line. So they get the 2 options from other sources and this option which they also get some AE auto attack out of for an added bonus.I personally feel Guards should be "THE" tank class in EQ2. I am happy for these changes to put them back on par with Brawlers with the strikethrough immunities, and get even one option more then Brawlers with the Dragoons AA. I was just wondering if it was intended for Zerkers to be completely left out in the cold with the strikethrough immunities.Granted Zerkers will really benefit from the Recklessness stance so I am not complaining, but not all Zerkers want to be dps classes. Some of us actually would like to tank. I enjoy my role as OT just wish the class was better suited for it.Now I have been on the test server to make sure something wasn't missed in patch notes and we had something somewhere and did not see anything but Dragoons. We did get some changes to our heal procs which might increase the survivability of the class while raiding but can't really test CM Drunder or PoW on test. Maybe those changes to our heals will balance out the need for strikethrough immunity which is why it was left out for us.So again, just wondering if this was intended or just missed.

Yimway

06-27-2012, 06:38 PM

<cite>Gemolis wrote:</cite><blockquote>I understand Dragoon's works for Zerkers, just saying it isn't an option we like to use because the points spent above it in AE auto attack are useless for Myth'ed Zerkers. Obviously a Zerker wanting to be as Def as possible will sacrafice the AA and use it but my point is it favors the Guards to use this line. So they get the 2 options from other sources and this option which they also get some AE auto attack out of for an added bonus.So again, just wondering if this was intended or just missed.</blockquote>FWIW, Guards don't like spending points in that tree either, just to get to the end. But it certainly further exacerbates the issue of AE auto not overflowing into anything useful. I can only speculate that it was intended, as Xelgad is generally very thorough.

Tekadeo

06-27-2012, 08:13 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gemolis wrote:</cite><blockquote>I understand Dragoon's works for Zerkers, just saying it isn't an option we like to use because the points spent above it in AE auto attack are useless for Myth'ed Zerkers. Obviously a Zerker wanting to be as Def as possible will sacrafice the AA and use it but my point is it favors the Guards to use this line. So they get the 2 options from other sources and this option which they also get some AE auto attack out of for an added bonus.So again, just wondering if this was intended or just missed.</blockquote>FWIW, Guards don't like spending points in that tree either, just to get to the end. But it certainly further exacerbates the issue of AE auto not overflowing into anything useful. I can only speculate that it was intended, as Xelgad is generally very thorough.</blockquote>The difference is most guardians get a huge bonus from AGI2, which gives 40% AoE auto. That does literally nothing for Zerkers. Maybe they should add something similar to Guardian's Mythical proc to this AA to level the playing field some?

DeathMagus

06-27-2012, 08:30 PM

-- Berserker Issues --Adrenaline:The threat proc that can be specced for in the Shadows tree still has been not fixed to crit again since the Adrenaline nerf where the ability was changed from a damage reduction to a reactive heal that cannot crit. I realize that it was a mistake in coding, but This fix should have been addressed shortly after DoV launched. Berserk Focus:Only grants 10.7 skills compared to 17.4 on live. I would like to see the skill bonuses increased so that it is in line with the current bnuses from the focus or for the focus effect to be changed to something else entirely. Having and increase in weapon skills when berserk never really made sense to me in the first place because I doubt someone would use their weapons more skillfully when in a berserk rage, although they may swing faster and harder. I personally do notcare for the idea of having the berserk focus grant CB because it seems a bit generic. Personally I would like to see the focus changed to be immunity to crowd control effects since that is one thing that a Berserker lacks whereas all other tank classes have some means of countering such effects. Guardians have their mythical proc. Shadowknights and Paladins have Aura of the Crusader which grants immunity to stun, fear, root, stifle, target lock, and daze for 20 seconds if they dispel an effect with the ability. Shadowknights have the grpwide ability deathmarch which grants root, stifle, stun, daze and fear immunity so long as on the march is up. Bruisers have Closed Mind and Monks have their self cure. I'm not asking for immunity to all control effects to be added, but perhaps something in line with the immunities granted by Death March. Also, such immunities would seem to make more sense since I believe that a person in a berserk state would be harder to slow down or make afraid. Furthermore, this ability would not grant the entire group the immunities reliably since healers for example will not always be able to be dpsing to keep the proc up.

SisterTheresa

06-27-2012, 11:20 PM

I see alot of posts about how this will affect people focused on parsing which is fine. I don't use them ... so how are these changes going to affect Guardians?

Tekadeo

06-28-2012, 01:22 AM

<cite>Ridolain@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I see alot of posts about how this will affect people focused on parsing which is fine. I don't use them ... so how are these changes going to affect Guardians?</blockquote>It gives you strikethrough immunity on Defensive Minded, Block and Dragoon's Reflexes. The rest doesn't really pertain to Guardians as they aren't really brought to DPS, and they don't have any heals outside of Unyielding Will which is basically unchanged.

Yimway

06-28-2012, 12:42 PM

<cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote>It gives you strikethrough immunity on Defensive Minded, Block and Dragoon's Reflexes. The rest doesn't really pertain to Guardians as they aren't really brought to DPS, and they don't have any heals outside of Unyielding Will which is basically unchanged.</blockquote>Actually I think guardians have quite a bit of potential with recklessness since they have every tool under the sun to survive while using it. Couple that additional CA % enhancers when your target is targeting someone else...

Necrotherian

06-28-2012, 04:17 PM

<cite>Gemolis wrote:</cite><blockquote>I understand Dragoon's works for Zerkers, just saying it isn't an option we like to use because the points spent above it in AE auto attack are useless for Myth'ed Zerkers. Obviously a Zerker wanting to be as Def as possible will sacrafice the AA and use it but my point is it favors the Guards to use this line. So they get the 2 options from other sources and this option which they also get some AE auto attack out of for an added bonus.</blockquote>I understand your point, but almost every class has to spend points in crappy AAs to get to the good stuff. Unless a summoner is so close to the crit chance "cap"* that losing the ones gained in that line won't have much effect, a summoner has to spend points in the strength tree (animated dagger must have at least 4 points in it - and it isn't really that great of a dumbfire - 10 points in it only does 3211-4765 DD at level 92; and although Theurgistic Prowess is nice when you are first starting out, as time goes by the benefit is less noticeable - and 10 points in it would only increase the skills by 69 at level 92) to get Wild Channeling (10 points gives a crit chance bonus of 11.7 at level 92), and then Theurgist's Detonation (8491-13532 AE damage - max 8 targets - at level 92). So there is a bit of sacrifice involved in taking that line. I honestly only take that line for the Theurgist's Detonation, as the 11.7 isn't really that big of a difference.*The reason I used quotations around the cap part is that, as I understand it, there is no hard cap, but there is a point of severely diminished returns.

Yimway

06-28-2012, 04:21 PM

<cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote>The difference is most guardians get a huge bonus from AGI2, which gives 40% AoE auto. That does literally nothing for Zerkers. Maybe they should add something similar to Guardian's Mythical proc to this AA to level the playing field some?</blockquote>Eh, realistically I'm not fighting multimobs that matter very often, and when I am, it really doesn't matter as long as I'm holding agro. No one is looking for a guard to throw down big AE numbers with or without AGI2.

shots01

06-29-2012, 02:39 AM

All I have to say to this is, SOE why are you ruining the only character I like to play? My poor monk.....<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/c30b4198e0907b23b8246bdd52aa1c3c.gif" border="0" />

Tekadeo

06-29-2012, 02:41 AM

<cite>shots01 wrote:</cite><blockquote>All I have to say to this is, SOE why are you ruining the only character I like to play? My poor monk.....<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/c30b4198e0907b23b8246bdd52aa1c3c.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Ruining? Still smells like the best MT after this update still.........

Novusod

06-29-2012, 03:50 AM

Yes, ruining. Just like GU64 is ruining my bruiser which was great hybrid MT/OT and now its just garbage. Why can't you get that through your thick head. Maybe you just like the idea of every guild scrambling to recruit plate tanks now to replace their useless brawlers.

DeathMagus

06-29-2012, 05:26 AM

Obano... First off I would like to say that not all brawlers will be worthless after these changes go live. There will however be a larger gap between the ones that know how to use their saves/defensive buffs and those that do not. So... if you really want to claim that you will be worthless after the changes go live, feel free. However, I insist that you not use such blatantly slanderous and false blanket statements about everyone else that also happens to play a brawler as their main.

Novusod

06-29-2012, 10:27 AM

I am talking about brawlers being worthless as tanks. Sure the brawlers who play just to DPS are happy but the serious brawlers who are here to tank are watching their class go completely down the tubes.Due the the mitigation nerf explain how we are supposed to tank when we get one shot by auto attack without a parry up.Due to the strikethrough nerf explain how our class defining avoidance is still viable when we get hit all the timeExplain how our death saves are still viable when current hardmode content throws death touches and other one shots faster than the cool down allows it to save ourselves.Explain how we can still tank when the death save fails because it is no longer a full heal.This class is finished, done, dead, kaput. It is ended. You are just in denial DeathMagus.

Tekadeo

06-29-2012, 03:05 PM

Dear Obano:Brawlers are still MT choice #1 and #2 for raiding. Stop being a troll, you sound like a child who just got his toy taken away. A "serious" tank should be able to see this.

DeathMagus

06-29-2012, 03:44 PM

Obano... Do you understand how avoidance works? I'm serious.. do you? Because your avoidance will be pretty much the same so long as a mob doesn't have strikethrough. And guess what.. your avoidance temps will work just as well as they do now because you'll be strikethrough immune! Oh my gods they'll even be better when you're in an offensive stance because they make you strikethrough immune! Also, if you think you need to be in D-stance full time then either you're doing something wrong or the healers you have are slacking. All PoW trash for example can be tanked just fine by an O-stance brawler. The EM SS content can be tanked just fine by even a pathetic brawler in O-stance. Now perhaps this is too extreme a comparison for you.. since the difference between D-stance with strikethrough immunity and O-stance dwarfs the avoidance gap between D-stance with strikethrough immunity and D-stance sans strikethrough immunity. If you're going to cry like a child over the loss of the 1.6k physical mit and try to say it's the roughest on brawlers.. ask the mages how they feel. Because that straight boost to mit to them was more imbalanced than for any other class. And some of them are going to be getting wrecked by physical AOEs that didn't used to one shot them but will likely after this change. You claim that you don't have enough saves to keep yourself alive through every single DT/etc. but what is it you have in group on raids? Healers maybe? So how about you learn how to coordinate saves to keep yourself alive. If you can't figure out how to rotate saves with your healers you probably shouldn't be raiding in the first place. Also, if you can't figure out how to cap the reuse on tenacity reliably by yourself maybe you could ask Crabbok for some advice. Oh and non-full heal deathsaves work just fine... VoM is a fine example.

shots01

06-29-2012, 04:14 PM

<cite>DeathMagus wrote:</cite><blockquote>Obano... Do you understand how avoidance works? I'm serious.. do you? Because your avoidance will be pretty much the same so long as a mob doesn't have strikethrough. And guess what.. your avoidance temps will work just as well as they do now because you'll be strikethrough immune! Oh my gods they'll even be better when you're in an offensive stance because they make you strikethrough immune! Also, if you think you need to be in D-stance full time then either you're doing something wrong or the healers you have are slacking. All PoW trash for example can be tanked just fine by an O-stance brawler. The EM SS content can be tanked just fine by even a pathetic brawler in O-stance. Now perhaps this is too extreme a comparison for you.. since the difference between D-stance with strikethrough immunity and O-stance dwarfs the avoidance gap between D-stance with strikethrough immunity and D-stance sans strikethrough immunity. If you're going to cry like a child over the loss of the 1.6k physical mit and try to say it's the roughest on brawlers.. ask the mages how they feel. Because that straight boost to mit to them was more imbalanced than for any other class. And some of them are going to be getting wrecked by physical AOEs that didn't used to one shot them but will likely after this change. You claim that you don't have enough saves to keep yourself alive through every single DT/etc. but what is it you have in group on raids? Healers maybe? So how about you learn how to coordinate saves to keep yourself alive. If you can't figure out how to rotate saves with your healers you probably shouldn't be raiding in the first place. Also, if you can't figure out how to cap the reuse on tenacity reliably by yourself maybe you could ask Crabbok for some advice. Oh and non-full heal deathsaves work just fine... VoM is a fine example. </blockquote>Dear Sir:I have been playing this game since 2006, but there is still a LOT about game mechanics that confuse me. So, if you don't mind....can't see your first paragraph which is the one i need LOL.My monk plays in defensive stance all the time. I solo tons and raid none. I have an inq. healer that I use occasionally. I thought strikethrough immunity was being taken out? Or did I misread that. anyways. I do use black widow. I am not raid geared. I have some of the dragon scale armor from alivan? however you spell it. My weapons are fairly decent. My CC is 199.I fall within the category of I have no idea how the changes are going to affect my monk. From what other people are saying, it sounds as if I will not be able to play her due to survivability. I did put AAs etc. into avoidance. More so than increase to threat. I Have the option to reset my AAs on all trees but brawler. I have some AAs built up. I was going to wait for the GU to go live, see what you all said about it.. test myself out THEN decide what I should do, if anything.As of today, I cannot, with merc, .. well wait, I can go into the SS solo first instance and clear it to Commander M whatever his name is. I can get that far with not many problems. I however cannot kill the commander.After the update, in my current gear, and using my defensive stance, will I still be able to get to the commander OR is this where I am going ot see the change to brawlers and find out how it affects me?Essh I hope you understand what I am asking.

DeathMagus

06-30-2012, 03:55 AM

Basically the changes to avoidance will be that any defensive temp buff that grants greater than a 20% increase to avoidance will grant the caster strikethrough immunity for the duration. Which means that a guard/zerker with dragoon's reflexes up will be st immunne.. a guard with defensive minded up will be st immune.. an sk with sk's furor up will be st immune.. a monk with bob and weave or tsunami up will be st immune, etc. Therefore after the changes if a monk were to be in O-stance and cast Tsunami they would actually riposte/parry all incoming melee attacks whereas right now they would not if the mob had strikethrough. The "grand brawler nerf" is that brawlers will not be ST immune while in their defensive stances. Which means that mobs with strikethrough will have an increase to their hit rates when attacking the brawler despite the brawler being in their defensive stance. This does not mean that a brawler will have lowered uncontested block in their defensive stance or that the other contested forms of avoidance will be worthless against mobs without strikethrough. Now.. In my opinion your monk will probably still be fine for running CD with a merc after the changes go through. Though the best way to know would be for you to log onto the test server and find out for yourself. Just so people have an idea of the stats that I'm personally working with on my tank this is how I stand in my normal group but not in raid:DPS: 210HST: 273CST: 67.4RU: 105Rec: 102Crit: 433.7CB: 306.2Ab Mod: 1367.6Pot: 230.7MA: 608.5AE Auto: 100Flr: 54.4Strikethrough: 101.1Accuracy: 47.5

Koleg

07-02-2012, 12:27 PM

<cite>DeathMagus wrote:</cite><blockquote>Basically the changes to avoidance will be that any defensive temp buff that grants greater than a 20% increase to avoidance will grant the caster strikethrough immunity for the duration. Which means that a guard/zerker with dragoon's reflexes up will be st immunne.. a guard with defensive minded up will be st immune.. an sk with sk's furor up will be st immune.. a monk with bob and weave or tsunami up will be st immune, etc. Therefore after the changes if a monk were to be in O-stance and cast Tsunami they would actually riposte/parry all incoming melee attacks whereas right now they would not if the mob had strikethrough. The "grand brawler nerf" is that brawlers will not be ST immune while in their defensive stances. Which means that mobs with strikethrough will have an increase to their hit rates when attacking the brawler despite the brawler being in their defensive stance. This does not mean that a brawler will have lowered uncontested block in their defensive stance or that the other contested forms of avoidance will be worthless against mobs without strikethrough. Now.. In my opinion your monk will probably still be fine for running CD with a merc after the changes go through. Though the best way to know would be for you to log onto the test server and find out for yourself. ...</blockquote>That is what I thought I read, but I didn't see the test notes state that the Bruiser's Rock Skin was getting a Strikethrough immunity even though is booses Mit by 3.5k-ish. Is it that the Mitigation on Rock Skin doesn't count as avoidance?

Junniper

07-02-2012, 05:46 PM

I've had a Bruiser for many years.For quite some time now, they have been drastically overshadowed by how much DPS and tanking ability Monks can do.People can argue that Bruisers get a self stoneskin. But since it only has a 25% chance for the ability to proc on a sucessfull riposte and you really will only riposte 10% if at best, that's a fairly horrible stoneskin proc chance. (please tell me if your riposte chances are higher and that stoneskin doesn't go off more then 2-5% of the time)But considering a Monk dps doubles or tripples that of a Bruiser and both are getting the same nerf. It really seems like Bruiser is is getting pushed away.

Novusod

07-02-2012, 10:15 PM

The only thing that stoneskin proc does is keep the bruiser off the healing received parse. It has zero effect on my actual survivability. That proc has been used by monks to justify their superiority since EoF. If it were up to me it would have been replaced years ago by something that is actually useful.

Tekadeo

07-02-2012, 10:43 PM

<cite>Junniper wrote:</cite><blockquote>I've had a Bruiser for many years.For quite some time now, they have been drastically overshadowed by how much DPS and tanking ability Monks can do.People can argue that Bruisers get a self stoneskin. But since it only has a 25% chance for the ability to proc on a sucessfull riposte and you really will only riposte 10% if at best, that's a fairly horrible stoneskin proc chance. (please tell me if your riposte chances are higher and that stoneskin doesn't go off more then 2-5% of the time)But considering a Monk dps doubles or tripples that of a Bruiser and both are getting the same nerf. It really seems like Bruiser is is getting pushed away.</blockquote>You are playing with some truly awfulbadterrible Bruisers.

Tekadeo

07-02-2012, 10:44 PM

<cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>The only thing that stoneskin proc does is keep the bruiser off the healing received parse. It has zero effect on my actual survivability. That proc has been used by monks to justify their superiority since EoF. If it were up to me it would have been replaced years ago by something that is actually useful.</blockquote>Those first two sentences are a joke, right?

DeathMagus

07-03-2012, 01:43 PM

<cite>Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>DeathMagus wrote:</cite><blockquote>Basically the changes to avoidance will be that any defensive temp buff that grants greater than a 20% increase to avoidance will grant the caster strikethrough immunity for the duration. Which means that a guard/zerker with dragoon's reflexes up will be st immunne.. a guard with defensive minded up will be st immune.. an sk with sk's furor up will be st immune.. a monk with bob and weave or tsunami up will be st immune, etc. Therefore after the changes if a monk were to be in O-stance and cast Tsunami they would actually riposte/parry all incoming melee attacks whereas right now they would not if the mob had strikethrough. The "grand brawler nerf" is that brawlers will not be ST immune while in their defensive stances. Which means that mobs with strikethrough will have an increase to their hit rates when attacking the brawler despite the brawler being in their defensive stance. This does not mean that a brawler will have lowered uncontested block in their defensive stance or that the other contested forms of avoidance will be worthless against mobs without strikethrough. Now.. In my opinion your monk will probably still be fine for running CD with a merc after the changes go through. Though the best way to know would be for you to log onto the test server and find out for yourself. ...</blockquote>That is what I thought I read, but I didn't see the test notes state that the Bruiser's Rock Skin was getting a Strikethrough immunity even though is booses Mit by 3.5k-ish. Is it that the Mitigation on Rock Skin doesn't count as avoidance?</blockquote>Mitigation is not avoidance, and as such temps that increase mitigation will not grant strikethrough immunity.

DeathMagus

07-03-2012, 01:45 PM

<cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Novusod wrote:</cite><blockquote>The only thing that stoneskin proc does is keep the bruiser off the healing received parse. It has zero effect on my actual survivability. That proc has been used by monks to justify their superiority since EoF. If it were up to me it would have been replaced years ago by something that is actually useful.</blockquote>Those first two sentences are a joke, right? </blockquote>Sadly I think that it is not a joke or Obano trying to troll us. However, it is a nice example of how little the guy understands game mechanic and why he should not be taken seriously by the devs of this game.