Reckless Stance is not solving the problem it stated it would. [Archive]

Yimway

08-06-2012, 03:57 PM

I don't think this stance is working at all like Xelgad said it would. Specifically this was to increase dps from fighters not tanking to help raids running excess fighters. In doing so we would take significantly more damage as a result.There are 2 issues with the stance where it clearly isn't making the impact it was stated it would:1. DPS is not significantly increased for atleast 1/2 of the fighter classes.Running all SS EM raid content on my guard, I see only a 10-15% increase in DPS. This isn't even noticeable really to anyone else on the raid but me, as the numbers are generally in the same place I'd be without using reckless stance. I think this is partly exaserbated that the prestige ability that is also supposed to increase CA damage is not stacking with the potency increase, as in we're seeing CA's hit for similar damage if we are the mobs target or not. However; brawlers outside of some specific abilities in conjuction with TW are not seeing much of a boost at all from the stance. Essentially, for most fighters the dps increase isn't evident to the raid force, so we're still going to not want to run the fighters you seemed to be looking to help out.2. I can still MT atleast 50% if not more of the raid nameds we're pulling in reckless stance.Now granted, since reckless stance doesn't in fact add very much dps increase, tanking in it is a bit silly, but if issue #1 is addressed and the stance actually provides a DPS bonus to all fighters, then I'm afraid issue #2 would also need to be addressed.Are we going to get any communication from SoE on their observations of the intent of the ability working, and if we're going to see any more adjustments to fighter dps as a result?I'm happy to email parses of the same raid force doing diffferent raid encounters with and without this stance to provide exact comparison data of how little the stance is actually affecting dps. Or assist with any other data elements SoE development may find useful.Thanks,

Silzin

08-06-2012, 04:48 PM

Atan the problem is that on test there was a 100+ post thread laying out the problems and stating why it will not work and it was locked. I do agree that Reckless Stance is not doing what they intended it do it. As for part 2. There needs to be something that actually makes it hard to hold agro for long periods of time, change most (not all) tank snaps into Desnaps, Leave Rescue, and remove Block from working. these 3 things would probably make it work defensively the way it needs to. As for your Points 1. I am not sure without actually balancing the dps output of the fighters how to make Reckless benefit all tanks offensively the same. Using CB instead of Pot would not work since it would still favor the high dps fighters more than the low dps ones. I am just not sure what to do here, other than making a class specific buff that would have separate advantages and disadvantages for each tank.

Yimway

08-06-2012, 04:53 PM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>As for your Points 1. I am not sure without actually balancing the dps output of the fighters how to make Reckless benefit all tanks offensively the same. Using CB instead of Pot would not work since it would still favor the high dps fighters more than the low dps ones. I am just not sure what to do here, other than making a class specific buff that would have separate advantages and disadvantages for each tank. </blockquote>I don't disagree. My post was just to clearly illustrate how it is not working as intended and it is not addressing the issue they set out to address in the way they said they were.I was trying to avoid any discussion outside of, its clearly broken when the actual data is reviewed and compaired to their release information, and the interviews about the topic leading up to the change.

jjlo69

08-06-2012, 04:58 PM

there are 2 current post about reckless and both are over 150 post respectively i honestly dont think a thrid will make a differnce but i wish you luck with it

Yimway

08-06-2012, 06:51 PM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>there are 2 current post about reckless and both are over 150 post respectively i honestly dont think a thrid will make a differnce but i wish you luck with it</blockquote>I know there have been several debate threads. I created this one just about the ability being 'broken' and not doing specifically what the dev who created said it would.

Faildozer

08-06-2012, 07:11 PM

the problem with the stance is how do you increase the damage without making it so tanks get 1 shotted by trash aoes and the answer is remove avoidance mechanics.. AOEs that actually hit hard (none of the ones in EM SS) still hit the tanks for a LOT so increasinng the incoming damage would make the stance even moreso unusable on any challenging content.

Yimway

08-07-2012, 01:05 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>the problem with the stance is how do you increase the damage without making it so tanks get 1 shotted by trash aoes and the answer is remove avoidance mechanics.. AOEs that actually hit hard (none of the ones in EM SS) still hit the tanks for a LOT so increasinng the incoming damage would make the stance even moreso unusable on any challenging content.</blockquote>Set uncontested avoidance to 0 in reckless stance.Take the base 50 potency and change it to CB.Those are just some starter ideas that would accomplish what they said they wanted to accomplish.

Rageincarnate

08-07-2012, 01:10 PM

don't forget ability reuse ! please for the love of pete. (PETE NEEDS LUV)mr grayed out hotbars is sad when theres no buttons to push.

hoosierdaddy

08-07-2012, 01:36 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't think this stance is working at all like Xelgad said it would. Specifically this was to increase dps from fighters not tanking to help raids running excess fighters. In doing so we would take significantly more damage as a result.There are 2 issues with the stance where it clearly isn't making the impact it was stated it would:1. DPS is not significantly increased for atleast 1/2 of the fighter classes.Running all SS EM raid content on my guard, I see only a 10-15% increase in DPS. This isn't even noticeable really to anyone else on the raid but me, as the numbers are generally in the same place I'd be without using reckless stance. I think this is partly exaserbated that the prestige ability that is also supposed to increase CA damage is not stacking with the potency increase, as in we're seeing CA's hit for similar damage if we are the mobs target or not. However; brawlers outside of some specific abilities in conjuction with TW are not seeing much of a boost at all from the stance. Essentially, for most fighters the dps increase isn't evident to the raid force, so we're still going to not want to run the fighters you seemed to be looking to help out.2. I can still MT atleast 50% if not more of the raid nameds we're pulling in reckless stance.Now granted, since reckless stance doesn't in fact add very much dps increase, tanking in it is a bit silly, but if issue #1 is addressed and the stance actually provides a DPS bonus to all fighters, then I'm afraid issue #2 would also need to be addressed.Are we going to get any communication from SoE on their observations of the intent of the ability working, and if we're going to see any more adjustments to fighter dps as a result?I'm happy to email parses of the same raid force doing diffferent raid encounters with and without this stance to provide exact comparison data of how little the stance is actually affecting dps. Or assist with any other data elements SoE development may find useful.Thanks,</blockquote>1. You've written elsewhere that Guardians and Brawlers will still be the preferred MT's in nearly every raid force even after the fighter changes, which is completely true. Crusaders still do not have the amount or quality of saves and aggro snaps of guardians and brawlers.I guess what I'm getting at is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. That is, you can't say I'm currently the best main tank class in the game, yet am being out-dps's by our off-tanks. In most cases, off tanks are dealing with numerous adds, while the MT is forced to stick to the primary target. This in itself will produce wildly different parses.2. You can still tank 50% of names in reckless stance? Well, I'm guessing that is not the case for 95% of tanks whose gear would not compare to that of a long-time, established raider and leader of a guild who has ready access to whatever drops. I found too that I can tank all of EM Skyshrine and some HM Drunder in Reckless-(mainly trash in Drunder). But for the fights that really count, such as Sullon--or anything in PoW, there is no way on Norrath you're MT'ing it--or even OT'ing it--in Reckless.The fact is that certain, more difficult encounters require 3-4 tanks and, while en route to those encounter, those additonal tanks should be contributing to the raid in some measurable way. Developers have chosen DPS as this way, as well as whatever utility fighter classes already bring.The only fighter class I see as really being overlooked in this equation is berzerkers, who don't have the tools to MT as well as Guardians and Brawlers, yet who also do not have many abiltiies that would be affected by an increase in Potency. Perhaps a more direct addressing of their issues would solve this problem.

Yimway

08-07-2012, 01:44 PM

<cite>hoosierdaddy wrote:</cite><blockquote>1. You've written elsewhere that Guardians and Brawlers will still be the preferred MT's in nearly every raid force even after the fighter changes, which is completely true. Crusaders still do not have the amount or quality of saves and aggro snaps of guardians and brawlers.2. You can still tank 50% of names in reckless stance? Well, I'm guessing that is not the case for 95% of tanks whose gear would not compare to that of a long-time, established raider and leader of a guild who has ready access to whatever drops. I found too that I can tank all of EM Skyshrine and some HM Drunder in Reckless-(mainly trash in Drunder). But for the fights that really count, such as Sullon--or anything in PoW, there is no way on Norrath you're MT'ing it--or even OT'ing it--in Reckless.</blockquote>Regarding:1) And those times the brawler is MTing and I'm dpsing trash, it would be nice for reckless to actually do something to my dps that is remotely meaningful or even noticable. Which as I listened to the interviews with producers and developers about this mechanic, was what I understood it would do. 10-15% increase is nothing noticable at all, the raid is still better off sitting extra tanks until we get to the few encounters that actually need them.2) My point is, if the stance is actually fixed so that as I descrived in the first condition I can actually increase my dps by a recognizable amount (30%?) that it would then require fixing the fact that the stance doesn't really bias enough from tanking while using it. Cause fixing #1 without addressing #2 would be having my cake and eating it too.I'm bringing this up, as while these issues are evident to me, I think its only a matter of time before the masses realize the same thing. Ie, once all the hoopla dies down and everyone really compairs using it, not using it, having the tanks stay in raid, not having them stay in raid, the net effect will result in almost no change.I'm honestly leaving my personal fealings about the stance out of this thread, but if they really want to address the issue they said they did, this needs more work, cause what we have isn't what they sold us.

hoosierdaddy

08-07-2012, 02:03 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>hoosierdaddy wrote:</cite><blockquote>1. You've written elsewhere that Guardians and Brawlers will still be the preferred MT's in nearly every raid force even after the fighter changes, which is completely true. Crusaders still do not have the amount or quality of saves and aggro snaps of guardians and brawlers.2. You can still tank 50% of names in reckless stance? Well, I'm guessing that is not the case for 95% of tanks whose gear would not compare to that of a long-time, established raider and leader of a guild who has ready access to whatever drops. I found too that I can tank all of EM Skyshrine and some HM Drunder in Reckless-(mainly trash in Drunder). But for the fights that really count, such as Sullon--or anything in PoW, there is no way on Norrath you're MT'ing it--or even OT'ing it--in Reckless.</blockquote>Regarding:1) And those times the brawler is MTing and I'm dpsing trash, it would be nice for reckless to actually do something to my dps that is remotely meaningful or even noticable. Which as I listened to the interviews with producers and developers about this mechanic, was what I understood it would do. 10-15% increase is nothing noticable at all, the raid is still better off sitting extra tanks until we get to the few encounters that actually need them.2) My point is, if the stance is actually fixed so that as I descrived in the first condition I can actually increase my dps by a recognizable amount (30%?) that it would then require fixing the fact that the stance doesn't really bias enough from tanking while using it. Cause fixing #1 without addressing #2 would be having my cake and eating it too.I'm bringing this up, as while these issues are evident to me, I think its only a matter of time before the masses realize the same thing. Ie, once all the hoopla dies down and everyone really compairs using it, not using it, having the tanks stay in raid, not having them stay in raid, the net effect will result in almost no change.I'm honestly leaving my personal fealings about the stance out of this thread, but if they really want to address the issue they said they did, this needs more work, cause what we have isn't what they sold us.</blockquote>Perhaps those times the brawler is MT'ing and a third or fourth tank aren't needed, you shouldn't be DPS'ing trash, but you should be one of those tanks sitting and allowing the more DPS-capable OT's to do their jobs.I just find it difficult to give guardians and brawlers a substantial increase in DPS, when they are still so far above the rest of the fighter pack in terms of survivability.Part of me believes this change was to force guilds to break away from the strict practice of using Guardians/Brawlers exclusively as MT's/OT's, and of making the other fighter classes somehow desirable by filling a specific role within raids.I'm not directly refuting your argument that after some time has passed, server-side data should be reviewed and changes should be made if necessary.I just don't see recklessness being a game-breaking issue or detrimental to raid forces in any immediate way. From my own pexperience, more DPS has never been a bad thing.If that means occasionally sitting the undisputed best MT's in favor of OT's for the sake of their DPS cabilities, so be it.Guilds have not had a problem for the last two years altogether ignoring every other fighter class in game besides Guards and Brawlers, so why should they have a problem allowing these other classes to meaningfully contribute in some way to raids while they are not tanking or off-tanking?

Yimway

08-07-2012, 02:09 PM

<cite>hoosierdaddy wrote:</cite><blockquote>Guilds have not had a problem for the last two years altogether ignoring every other fighter class in game besides Guards and Brawlers, so why should they have a problem allowing these other classes to meaningfully contribute in some way to raids while they are not tanking or off-tanking?</blockquote>I don't really agree with this statement. There are quite a few HM encounters I can think of that strongly encourage us to have AE focused OT's. A zerker, sk or paladin does a far better job than I do dealing with the adds on dagarn HM for example.As you stated, I'm the leader of a long time raid guild, and we have kept classes like these on the roster, and in fact, brawler/guard are not our prefered OT, but sometimes I'm there and it would be nice to do some dps when I'm not needed to tank.But we're sorta getting afield, reckless was supposed to provide a dps increase to all fighters (not tanking) so that raids running more fighters would not be as penalized. They didn't sell it as raids running crusaders wouldn't be as penalized.

Silzin

08-07-2012, 02:28 PM

Not to get to fare off topic here, but lets try to stop with the generalizations and lumping both brawlers and both Crusaders together. I know that both brawlers are capable of OTing, Bruisers more than monks, and both are capable of MTing, monks more than Bruisers. Paladins are very capable of MTing and even OTing in the current content, sure there may be a few mobs they may have a harder time of, but I work with a Pally that does it all of time. Back on topic I do agree that it is not working as they said they wanted it to work. we can come up with ideas to fix it all day long, but till the Dev's admit that it not working as intended it will do no good. If classes need more offensive or defensive tools to bring them up to the perceived par of the other tanks then that is a nether discussion.

Neonblue

08-07-2012, 04:09 PM

For an SK, Reckless stance is great. I was two grouping the Skyshrine raid zones with some guildies with a jcap and UT, and it worked really well. I was just behind T1 dps on single target, and tops or close on group encounters on the parse. Which is about what I would expect, being it was our alts and I was also healing and dpsing on my other toons and mostly facerolling on the SK.Also I was able to switch to defensive stance for the few names I needed to tank, like the tank switch on the first name in UD. I still don't think my guild is ready to let my SK enter the raid as a DPSer and ask for the JCAP and UT, but its at least an option that evetually some guilds or people will try, which is something new and fun. My point is I think the stance does work, and there is still some stigma about the tank class being a dps that will take time to dissolve. I agree its not equal for all tanks right now, but a lot of things in the game isn't equal, so at least for now 3 or 4 tanks can at least raid on their tank as dps and be able to switch to OT or MT role if the main tank is afk killing his weeds in his yard or somethin.I think the main problem is with such power is it sucks to go back to defensive stance. I just want to keep killing in reckless or not at all. I have done all the heroic stuff in reckless and I have no desire to do it in defensive, so if I don't get a healer that can keep me up it would suck. When I go into the heroic CM zones I cry a little inside when I need to switch stances.

Yimway

08-07-2012, 05:15 PM

<cite>Neonblue wrote:</cite><blockquote>For an SK...<snip>...the stance does work</blockquote>Yes, you are correct, it works for SKs, it however does not really work for most other fighters, thus the point of my post. As stated, it only affects my dps by 10-15% at best which isn't even noticeable by anyone in the raid force other than myself.

Koleg

08-07-2012, 05:37 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Neonblue wrote:</cite><blockquote>For an SK......the stance does work</blockquote>Yes, you are correct, it works for SKs, it however does not really work for most other fighters, thus the point of my post. As stated, it only affects my dps by 10-15% at best which isn't even noticeable by anyone in the raid force other than myself.</blockquote>CB would have been a more even choice for the Dev's to make without a doubt, but they must have had a reason they chose Potency over CB. There could have been a larger weapon multiple inn place of Potency which would have been more evenly distributed across the fighter classes as well. But regardless of what particular Stat was boosted, there would ultimately be some fighter classes which would not fair as well as others.The past 2+ years has shown that Monk (not brawler) & Guardian tanks have been nearly the entire population of MT & OT positions. Raiding guilds want to carry more fighters for certain encounters. There is a large number of non-Monk & non-Guardian fighters available without a role in a raid. This is what Reckless 'seems' to be addressing. It's possible they sold everyone a bill of goods and left out some fine print.It's understandable that every class wants the best for their class, but is it reasonable. Changing Potency to CB will only make the best two tank classes even better than they are when stacked next to the 4 others. So, I'd have to ask; "Why would SOE support the continued monopoly of the tanking role when Reckless is designed implemented to be inclusive of all the fighter classes?" Making the best tank better is not going to make any raiding guild carry more fighter_001's, it would only make raiding guilds carry more of the best fighter_001's, a.k.a. Guardians & Monks.You know that is what you're pointing out. You're just painting the picture that SOE Dev's said one thing and did another, but I'm fairly sure that the community said all of that would happen back several months before it hit test.

Goozman

08-07-2012, 07:33 PM

Still dumbfounded by why people think this wasn't a huge benefit for brawlers. With recklessness, my generic heroic geared monk shot up to 290k dps on an epic dummy, 345k with a dirge in the group, not casting anything. By contrast my equally geared paladin was 175k. Paladin single target abilities are extremely low damage, whereas both brawlers have very high damage combat arts. I won't debate who benefitted the most between monks, bruisers and shadowknights, though.If everyone's still using nether wing parses to discern who received the most benefit from reckless stance... well, then everyone is stupid.I think Paladins and Berserkers need some other bonus from the stance to make it worthwhile on non-nether wing fights; but I can also agree that the stance should do more to inhibit tanking. Simple damage increases don't cut it. There needs to be some nerf to uncontested blocking.

Hammieee

08-07-2012, 07:40 PM

[QUOTE=chorboy;2000497]Mystic, Warden, Beastlord, Illy, Ranger. Tried out new recklessness over(lulz)poweredness: Edit: Merged Is Mystikus Terrorwing<img src="http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/ae184/chorboy01/RagebourneGregot.png" border="0" /><img src="http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/ae184/chorboy01/MystikusTerrorwing.png" border="0" /><img src="http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/ae184/chorboy01/Mrogr.png" border="0" /><img src="http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/ae184/chorboy01/Hragdold.png" border="0" /><img src="http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/ae184/chorboy01/AaranaeAcrimae.png" border="0" />

Davngr

08-08-2012, 02:59 PM

<cite>Goozman wrote:</cite><blockquote>Still dumbfounded by why people think this wasn't a huge benefit for brawlers. With recklessness, my generic heroic geared monk shot up to 290k dps on an epic dummy, 345k with a dirge in the group, not casting anything. By contrast my equally geared paladin was 175k. Paladin single target abilities are extremely low damage, whereas both brawlers have very high damage combat arts. I won't debate who benefitted the most between monks, bruisers and shadowknights, though.If everyone's still using nether wing parses to discern who received the most benefit from reckless stance... well, then everyone is stupid.I think Paladins and Berserkers need some other bonus from the stance to make it worthwhile on non-nether wing fights; but I can also agree that the stance should do more to inhibit tanking. Simple damage increases don't cut it. There needs to be some nerf to uncontested blocking. </blockquote>monks are boderline because of overpowerd dragon fire but for brusier this change was meh.

Davngr

08-08-2012, 03:10 PM

Laretha

08-08-2012, 11:51 PM

I dont actually think its working as intended and really it should never have gotten into the game.Its the wrong way to go around doing what it needs to do. Seriously there where far better ways to increase dps for melee fighters than upping PoT and honestly for raids I see where the balance between tanks fails but in group instance it just become OP and any one change that increases all fighter dps is just going to blow the whole problem out of proportions again.Why not make it a buff that added 2 more attacks ( Like MA so from 6 to 8 attacks) to auto attack either ranged or melee, that made it impossible to tank with so no tanks are tanking stuff in the stance. ( and with maybe the odd dehate)Rather a simple fix evey tank would benifit from. Oh if 2 is not enough make it 3 and there is ur 30% increase in DPS

Silzin

08-09-2012, 12:01 AM

thankfully this thread has had a difference. From the Test Patch Notes for 8/8/2012: "ABILITIES / ALTERNATE ADVANCEMENT Fighter While in Recklessness, you will not be able to block any attacks unless you have a “will block all attacks” buff active."Edit:this does not adress that it gives a larger boost to Crusaders than brawlers and Warriors tho.

Xaxtionlorex

08-09-2012, 03:09 AM

I'd rather they adress the amount of damage taken from AoE/non phsyical/non auto attack before they start changing other things, im fine getting rocked in the face tanking, but normal scripted aoe's shouldnt make me race for a stone skin, the threat gen as well is still pretty much worthless, need to get rid of that.

Geothe

08-09-2012, 11:15 AM

Removing the avoidance skills while in Reckless was a good first step.Now, modify the take 50% more damage from all the time to when the fighter is the direct target. Fighters will take normal AE damage (and not soak up all the group ward) while being penalized if they pull agro with taking increased damage.As for the DPS increase portion of the stance... adding massive amounts of potency was simply completely ill thought out.There should just be a flat-out percentage based damage modifier.ie. When in reckless stance, ALL damage (CA, Spell, Autoattack) is increased by 30% (applied after potency/CB etc).That way ALL fighters recieve the same damage increase and it is balanced across the archaetype.

hoosierdaddy

08-09-2012, 11:34 AM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>thankfully this thread has had a difference. From the Test Patch Notes for 8/8/2012: "ABILITIES / ALTERNATE ADVANCEMENT Fighter While in Recklessness, you will not be able to block any attacks unless you have a “will block all attacks” buff active."Edit:this does not adress that it gives a larger boost to Crusaders than brawlers and Warriors tho.</blockquote>This also does not address that Monks and Guards are quite a bit more defensive than Crusaders.In light of this "fix," can we see a mechanic introduced which reduces Brawler and Guardian survivability to be more in line with other fighter classes?Thanks in advance. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" />(I read this as, "Whew! Thankfully, we've cried enough about other fighter's viability that we'll retain our undisputed place at the top of the tanking ladder." I mean, really? A monk coming on the forums and complaining about another fighter classes abilities? Really?)

Rageincarnate

08-09-2012, 01:02 PM

<cite>Goozman wrote:</cite><blockquote>Still dumbfounded by why people think this wasn't a huge benefit for brawlers. With recklessness, my generic heroic geared monk shot up to 290k dps on an epic dummy, 345k with a dirge in the group, not casting anything. By contrast my equally geared paladin was 175k. Paladin single target abilities are extremely low damage, whereas both brawlers have very high damage combat arts. I won't debate who benefitted the most between monks, bruisers and shadowknights, though.If everyone's still using nether wing parses to discern who received the most benefit from reckless stance... well, then everyone is stupid.I think Paladins and Berserkers need some other bonus from the stance to make it worthwhile on non-nether wing fights; but I can also agree that the stance should do more to inhibit tanking. Simple damage increases don't cut it. There needs to be some nerf to uncontested blocking. </blockquote>yes, and your purposely leaving out the high reuse on brawler ca's. zerkers ca's are terrible. fix please.I have no input on pallies as i havent logged mine in except to farm in years.

Rageincarnate

08-09-2012, 01:07 PM

hoosierdaddy

08-09-2012, 01:18 PM

<cite>Rageincarnate@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>hoosierdaddy wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>thankfully this thread has had a difference. From the Test Patch Notes for 8/8/2012: "ABILITIES / ALTERNATE ADVANCEMENT Fighter While in Recklessness, you will not be able to block any attacks unless you have a “will block all attacks” buff active."Edit:this does not adress that it gives a larger boost to Crusaders than brawlers and Warriors tho.</blockquote>This also does not address that Monks and Guards are quite a bit more defensive than Crusaders.In light of this "fix," can we see a mechanic introduced which reduces Brawler and Guardian survivability to be more in line with other fighter classes?Thanks in advance. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" />(I read this as, "Whew! Thankfully, we've cried enough about other fighter's viability that we'll retain our undisputed place at the top of the tanking ladder." I mean, really? A monk coming on the forums and complaining about another fighter classes abilities? Really?)</blockquote>I'm fairly sure you are breaking forum rules by asking for nerfs without any reasoning. The post is about reckless.. not your classes abilities... You might disagree but "the monk" has a point.. you don't.</blockquote>Thanks for the refresher. After seven years posting here, I'd almost forgotten.What is this thread and the thread below it regarding Reckless Stance if not a request for a nerf?And anyway, my suggestion was a jestful response to the "class warfare" to which this issue has escalated.Lighten up. (I was born to speak only mirth and no matter.) <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" />Edit: Kidding aside, I think you'll see that I do have a point. I'm incredulous that a monk would come to these forums and ask for an ability which benefits certain classes more than others to be removed. I'd have liked Strikethrough immunity to have been removed a lot sooner, like everyone knows it should have, but I'd have never been petty enough to actually ask for it.

Silzin

08-09-2012, 02:07 PM

<cite>hoosierdaddy wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>thankfully this thread has had a difference. From the Test Patch Notes for 8/8/2012: "ABILITIES / ALTERNATE ADVANCEMENT Fighter While in Recklessness, you will not be able to block any attacks unless you have a “will block all attacks” buff active."Edit:this does not adress that it gives a larger boost to Crusaders than brawlers and Warriors tho.</blockquote>This also does not address that Monks and Guards are quite a bit more defensive than Crusaders.In light of this "fix," can we see a mechanic introduced which reduces Brawler and Guardian survivability to be more in line with other fighter classes?Thanks in advance. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" />(I read this as, "Whew! Thankfully, we've cried enough about other fighter's viability that we'll retain our undisputed place at the top of the tanking ladder." I mean, really? A monk coming on the forums and complaining about another fighter classes abilities? Really?)</blockquote> If you are infering that Guard's and Monk's are more Defensive then SK's. Well yes Monks and Guards are Defensive tanks and SK's are an Offensive tank. If you want a Defensive Crusader then look at the Paladin, they are not perfect, but I have seen them in action and they can tank just about anything I can. ...But I digress, back to Reckless Stance ... I am not saying that it needs to give Crusaders less of a boost to dps, it just needs to go all other tanks the same 30%+ boost. I know I can put up some nice dps on my monk when I have the gear setup for dps and all just right, but I know that Guards don't get that much out of this. Sorry Zerkers and Bruisers, I don't have any experience around yall. I really like the suggestion here about a +30% to all outgoing dps after everything. In that way it would help the lvl 20 warrior the same as it would help the 92 raid geared SK.

Yimway

08-09-2012, 03:29 PM

<cite>hoosierdaddy wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>thankfully this thread has had a difference. From the Test Patch Notes for 8/8/2012: "ABILITIES / ALTERNATE ADVANCEMENT Fighter While in Recklessness, you will not be able to block any attacks unless you have a “will block all attacks” buff active."Edit:this does not adress that it gives a larger boost to Crusaders than brawlers and Warriors tho.</blockquote>(I read this as, "Whew! Thankfully, we've cried enough about other fighter's viability that we'll retain our undisputed place at the top of the tanking ladder." I mean, really? A monk coming on the forums and complaining about another fighter classes abilities? Really?)</blockquote>No, he was stating that this thread has pushed the issue of not enough negative penalty for tanking in reckless stance. With the complete removal of block from the stance you will likely see no one tank anything more than a dozen seconds or so in this stance. With this change, if you get agro and hit one of your 'block all attacks for x seconds' or 'parry all for x' or whatever you wont immediately go splat, but since your avoidance is now practically nill, you'll be dead if you try to maintain agro in this stance.Its a step in the right direction, but doesn't exactly address the remaining 2 issues:1) Hate gain is still way too high2) Not all fighters get a measured increase in dps from the stance.

Xaxtionlorex

08-09-2012, 05:03 PM

People need to keep it in their minds that this isn't a magic stance to make every fighter do the same dps, there will always, and must be a difference. We have teirs in figter dps, as we have teirs in tanking ability, colum A and colum B, as some one else said, you can't have your cake and eat it too.THAT SAID, the testing for this stance woefully made it clear that there was none, in a vacum, it can be argued that this stance is the new SK dps stance, that other fighters some how got ahold of. If I'm gaining 30-40% more dps from this stance, then all fighters should, but not make us all do the same dps] This is not the great equilizer, only the great increaser. With out changing how some classes work as a core this stance can't fix the disparity.**Typed fully knowing some tank classes are in bad need of some love and buffs,sorry zerkers, it was fun back in the day fighting it out on aoe parses.

Faildozer

08-09-2012, 06:22 PM

Xax stated it perfectly.. Fighters should get different gains from it and I am ok with the fact that guardians dont get as much as a Shadowknight or Pally and TBH they are the ones that will actually be getting more use out of this in raid than say the MT or OT.. I will say this, zerkers definately have issues that need to be addressed but how much damage they gain while in recklessness is not one of those issues but would hopefully be solved by said fixes.

Destria

08-09-2012, 06:54 PM

I would have to call this stance an utter and complete failure, and almost completely broken from what its supposed to do. On my SK its beyond awesome for DPS...for my zerk....I get almost no gains in DPS but a huge impact on damage taken and loss of survivability. That said, tanking UD last night on my SK, with a friend playing their zerk in reckless stance, reckless has some serious issues with it. I was running with 91% hate mod, plus transfer from the assassin, and buffs from dirge; zerk in reckless with no direct buffs, our DPS was comparable, with mine being a bit higher, but the zerk with using JUST his auto attack would repeatedly rip aggro in spite of all taunts, grave sac, force target, etc.My SK out gears the zerk considerably, has 0 issue holding aggro in less then optimal group even without Xfer or utility.Reckless definitely doesn't work right.

Faildozer

08-09-2012, 07:12 PM

<cite>Erszebeth@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I would have to call this stance an utter and complete failure, and almost completely broken from what its supposed to do. On my SK its beyond awesome for DPS...for my zerk....I get almost no gains in DPS but a huge impact on damage taken and loss of survivability. That said, tanking UD last night on my SK, with a friend playing their zerk in reckless stance, reckless has some serious issues with it. I was running with 91% hate mod, plus transfer from the assassin, and buffs from dirge; zerk in reckless with no direct buffs, our DPS was comparable, with mine being a bit higher, but the zerk with using JUST his auto attack would repeatedly rip aggro in spite of all taunts, grave sac, force target, etc.My SK out gears the zerk considerably, has 0 issue holding aggro in less then optimal group even without Xfer or utility.Reckless definitely doesn't work right.</blockquote>So the fact that recklessness doesnt give zerkers as much as other classes isnt because of reckless but becuase of the class... People.. quit going on the forums and complaining about stuff where recklessness isnt even the problem.. Also if you have all that hate mod and xfers and you are losing threat you are doing something wrong and its not because of recklessness because if he was just auto attacking recklessness has NO affect on auto attack damage and if anythign would lower the threat.. Nothing in this post has anythign to do with recklessness being broken and just exemplifies the problem we have with getting stuff changed and that is too many people giving input that isnt at all helpful.

Destria

08-09-2012, 07:20 PM

Xaxtionlorex

08-09-2012, 07:49 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Erszebeth@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I would have to call this stance an utter and complete failure, and almost completely broken from what its supposed to do. On my SK its beyond awesome for DPS...for my zerk....I get almost no gains in DPS but a huge impact on damage taken and loss of survivability. That said, tanking UD last night on my SK, with a friend playing their zerk in reckless stance, reckless has some serious issues with it. I was running with 91% hate mod, plus transfer from the assassin, and buffs from dirge; zerk in reckless with no direct buffs, our DPS was comparable, with mine being a bit higher, but the zerk with using JUST his auto attack would repeatedly rip aggro in spite of all taunts, grave sac, force target, etc.My SK out gears the zerk considerably, has 0 issue holding aggro in less then optimal group even without Xfer or utility.Reckless definitely doesn't work right.</blockquote>So the fact that recklessness doesnt give zerkers as much as other classes isnt because of reckless but becuase of the class... People.. quit going on the forums and complaining about stuff where recklessness isnt even the problem.. Also if you have all that hate mod and xfers and you are losing threat you are doing something wrong and its not because of recklessness because if he was just auto attacking recklessness has NO affect on auto attack damage and if anythign would lower the threat.. Nothing in this post has anythign to do with recklessness being broken and just exemplifies the problem we have with getting stuff changed and that is too many people giving input that isnt at all helpful.</blockquote>Putting aside that any excuse you had for not holding aggro is completly gone, an sk with 91% threat is one spell away from afk tanking in a group.This is the biggest problem, recklessnes exacerbates any dps problems any class has, and people zero in on this,and not the fact that problem lies in the classes, and nothing to do with this magical button.I bolded the end because I couldn't agree more, its eltiest,yes, but so many people posting really shouldn't be commenting. People need to understand that sorry, stuff will be balanced against what the people are doing in the hardest talents, with the best players behind them. Because it can't work for you, or is over powered for some one else in your three hundredth UD em run, well, your input isn't that usefull. All input is not credited equailly , the guy posting he tanked group verion of UD in reckless is data,yes, but what kind of data, compare that if some one were to come in and say, i tanked berik or tagrin in reckless , that data says a much different thing. The reason this stuff gets balanced around the guilds and players doing PoW, and not you're guild doing UDX4 for the first time, is because at the end of the day, the PoW raiders are going to do things with that ability or spell,or item, the udx4 people would be shocked you could do to begin with. Its not that sony hates you and wants to do things you'll never see or understand, its what they have to do to balance[dont laugh to much] the game[tm]--------------So, that said,things wrong with reckless50% from all damage is illy planed, and makes tanks get one shotted by aoe's on trash and named, negating any dps gain.Threat: this isn't managed, we can still out threat and hold adds or the named if we really tried.Survibility :We still have to much of it passively, removing block atleast let us know they are listening,and willing to adjust this.Aggro :different problem then threat, our threat gen is still massive, in a vacum, if the warlock and i are both doing 500k aoe dos, chances are I'm still pushing out another 120k in threat or more. Dps only have to deal with their own dps threat, we still have to control aggro. We should have to control threat and manage it, but we shouldnt have to deal with two forms of threat.Classessk<monk<paladin>bruiser>zerker>Gaurd , something like that order.IM0 : SK/Zerker<Bruiser/Paldin>Monk>Gaurdian.Just some thoughts.

Faildozer

08-09-2012, 08:06 PM

<cite>Erszebeth@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Erszebeth@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I would have to call this stance an utter and complete failure, and almost completely broken from what its supposed to do. On my SK its beyond awesome for DPS...for my zerk....I get almost no gains in DPS but a huge impact on damage taken and loss of survivability. That said, tanking UD last night on my SK, with a friend playing their zerk in reckless stance, reckless has some serious issues with it. I was running with 91% hate mod, plus transfer from the assassin, and buffs from dirge; zerk in reckless with no direct buffs, our DPS was comparable, with mine being a bit higher, but the zerk with using JUST his auto attack would repeatedly rip aggro in spite of all taunts, grave sac, force target, etc.My SK out gears the zerk considerably, has 0 issue holding aggro in less then optimal group even without Xfer or utility.Reckless definitely doesn't work right.</blockquote>So the fact that recklessness doesnt give zerkers as much as other classes isnt because of reckless but becuase of the class... People.. quit going on the forums and complaining about stuff where recklessness isnt even the problem.. Also if you have all that hate mod and xfers and you are losing threat you are doing something wrong and its not because of recklessness because if he was just auto attacking recklessness has NO affect on auto attack damage and if anythign would lower the threat.. Nothing in this post has anythign to do with recklessness being broken and just exemplifies the problem we have with getting stuff changed and that is too many people giving input that isnt at all helpful.</blockquote>no...your right...a beastlord doing 3-400K dps that won't rip compared to a zerk in reckless <-30% hate, even after existing hate mods is significant> doing half that at the high end rips doing nothing...thats not bringing up a problem at all. Reckless is broken, it doesn't work the way its supposed to, in reckless the zerk had much greater hate gain then it did in just offensive; or is that a bad thing to bring up to...less then useful?? reckless not the problem?? seems like a problem...maybe I'm just a stupid noob and don't know what i'm talkin about...</blockquote>reckless does NOTHING to a tanks auto attack damage.. that is why recklessness has nothing to do with him pulling threat if he was indeed only auto attacking... And if anything recklessness would help his hate from auto attacks because it does nothing to increase its damage but give negative hate mod.. Honestly man, not trying to be rude but yeah you dont know what you are talking about here.. Im not saying they werent pulling hate but its not due to recklessness and lies more with you or them doing somethign wrong..

Silzin

08-10-2012, 02:06 AM

are you trying to say that only "warlock or wizard" should be T1 dps and all other mages and scouts should not be T1 dps? you do know that the Assassin and Ranger both are T1 dps in the game of Ever Quest 2? Summoners and Rouges also do dps to compare with the others on this list.

Davngr

08-10-2012, 03:22 AM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>are you trying to say that only "warlock or wizard" should be T1 dps and all other mages and scouts should not be T1 dps? you do know that the Assassin and Ranger both are T1 dps in the game of Ever Quest 2? Summoners and Rouges also do dps to compare with the others on this list. </blockquote> didn't really mean that at all. what i did mean to say is that making fighters T1 dps was dumb and also saying that it's laughable that some guy trys to say that this stance should be balanced via "end game" content when IN FACT end game content ALL READY required 4 tanks and thus this change accomplished NOTHING other than giving two classes obscene unwarranted damage.

Xaxtionlorex

08-10-2012, 03:27 AM

I dig that when you post you show and even deeper misunderstanding of the game.And yup, stuff gets balanced around end game, thats how MMO's work, this is almost as good of an argument on balancing pvp around 1v1. The most striking thing is that you dont get, is that this dosen't make crusaders T1 dps, thats why it gets balanced around high end game. If this sorta stuff were to get balanced in the parts of the game that you're playing in, stuff would be all sorts of backwards and upside down. We get it, you get out dps'ed by tanks in reckless on trash, and some times on named, get over it, in a real raid, fighters aren't going to be knocking T1 out of the winners circle.Any who, some where back some one posted, maybe it another thread about the +50% damage only coming into play when the figter is the direct target of something, thats brillent idea to making this stance work, even 70% woulnd't be to bad.Also, to adress the thing bothering me most, theres a good deal of us, who rolled FIGHTER, not tank, there is a huge difference between those two things, I would learn that.

Silzin

08-10-2012, 04:20 AM

<cite>Davngr wrote:</cite><blockquote> didn't really mean that at all. what i did mean to say is that making fighters T1 dps was dumb and also saying that it's laughable that some guy trys to say that this stance should be balanced via "end game" content when IN FACT end game content ALL READY required 4 tanks and thus this change accomplished NOTHING other than giving two classes obscene unwarranted damage.</blockquote> I do understand that you didn't mean that sorcerers are the only T1 dps. But sorcerers are the only T1 dps class that Fighters in Reckless Stance are being compared to. If they do not get one shotted by a trash mob sneeze AND do less dps than a lesser geared sorcerers then the Reckless Stance is Over Powered to a lot of people out here. I know a lot of very nice DPS classes that can tank all of UD given the right buffs and will not lows very much dps by doing so. So saying a tank doing the same thing is the same group set up is OVER POWERED is very hypocritical. ... Back on topic...since Test appears to have been down most all day since the reckless stance change has gone in we can't get good test data to see if this was enough to fix this portion of the buff. there is also the other 2 parts of the buff that still need to be addressed: the buff does not give a equal boost to all fighters and fighters hate gain needs to be addressed better than it is now.

Cyrdemac

08-10-2012, 05:50 AM

With newest changes on Test, you can't tank anymore in Recklessness. The removal of Block brings you down to a offensive scout avoidance and together with 50% more incoming damage, makes tanks more than squishy.Fighter have the biggest parses on big encounters. Only here they could come close to T1 DD's. Now they will die more often in Recklessness due to getting aggro - since they have no tools to get rid of the aggro like every other damage-dealing class has.You could say, fighter's have defense tools to counter this. That might be true, but after using them, they still have aggro and die. It's just a delayed death.Fighter's in general produce too much aggro, as most de-aggro buffs in the raid excepting the fighter class in general.

theriatis

08-10-2012, 05:54 AM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>I do understand that you didn't mean that sorcerers are the only T1 dps. But sorcerers are the only T1 dps class that Fighters in Reckless Stance are being compared to. If they do not get one shotted by a trash mob sneeze AND do less dps than a lesser geared sorcerers then the Reckless Stance is Over Powered to a lot of people out here. I know a lot of very nice DPS classes that can tank all of UD given the right buffs and will not lows very much dps by doing so. So saying a tank doing the same thing is the same group set up is OVER POWERED is very hypocritical. </blockquote>Hi Silzin,you are absolutely correct on that one. Yes, other classes can do comparable DPS while not supposed to do T1 DPS and are able to tank some low-end raid stuff.Thats what T1 DPS Classes are saying since years. Nobody cares - just whines about that all other classes which are on the Raid and not just for DPS, that they SHOULD REALLY, REALLY do also T1 DPS, because they say so.The Powers that be won't nerf every class to a point where they fit into the DPS Schematics, so why not bringing the T1 Classes up to Speed ? Easy explanation: Then there will be more DPS and more DPS, to a point where it will be spiraling out of control (if it isn't already) . And, don't forget: Nerfing every class correctly would need a deep understanding of every class' mechanics and some people tend to say that in this day and age, players have sometimes (!) more of it than a Dev.As a Wizard i feel that Pain since DoV started. But everytime i complain i get a "wahwahwah, you just suck!" back. So i tend to shut up and let others flame about (i'm too old for that *).Topic:The Reckless Stance should not favor some Tanks or specific Tank-Classes, it should equalize every tank (good Damage, paper survival) - nerfing the Mitigation, Blockchance and so on is easy; but getting the same damage out of every tank is more complex (i think - as my Tank twink is only 42 i have no Knowledge of really playing one nor deeper understanding of Tank-mechanics) as every Tank class does Damage in another way and other kind of damage (AE vs. Single, Autoattack vs. Skills, Melee vs. Spells). Thats quite a challenge.Regards, theriatis.

sintextblindsu

08-10-2012, 01:22 PM

yesterday an "END GAME" beastlord was outparsed on a NAME FIGHT by a crusader in reckless stance. that will start to happen more and more often as the game progresses because fighters receive tools for survivability and maintained damage. things like stun breaks, stoneskins, deathsaves, wards, damage reduction and the list goes on and on. the only time that END GAME is balanced is when a tank can't use this stance. because while IN this stance the way it is now a tank class will parse T1 quality damage. it's not just me and i'm a good player that knows what buttons to press. matter of fact this change is intended for bad players that want to do T1 quality damage since dealing damage on a tank is dependent on group buffs, gear and face rolling ie. ANY ONE CAN DO IT. a dps class at least has to time several damage dealing abilities along with putting together combos. after all that the fighter in reckless will be doing the same quality of damage facerolling. on harder content there will be a small requirement for skill to be a T1 dps fighter and that small skill will consist of timing death saves/stunbreaks/wards while the actualy T1 dps classes are stunlokced/feard/death/jousting. this stance needs to be evened out between all fighters and needs to NOT be potency. doubling potency is lazy and it also makes any tank in reckless the prime recipient of potency buffs that should go to dps classes.

sintextblindsu

08-10-2012, 01:31 PM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr wrote:</cite><blockquote> didn't really mean that at all. what i did mean to say is that making fighters T1 dps was dumb and also saying that it's laughable that some guy trys to say that this stance should be balanced via "end game" content when IN FACT end game content ALL READY required 4 tanks and thus this change accomplished NOTHING other than giving two classes obscene unwarranted damage.</blockquote>I do understand that you didn't mean that sorcerers are the only T1 dps. But sorcerers are the only T1 dps class that Fighters in Reckless Stance are being compared to. If they do not get one shotted by a trash mob sneeze AND do less dps than a lesser geared sorcerers then the Reckless Stance is Over Powered to a lot of people out here. I know a lot of very nice DPS classes that can tank all of UD given the right buffs and will not lows very much dps by doing so. So saying a tank doing the same thing is the same group set up is OVER POWERED is very hypocritical. </blockquote> unless there is some requirement that forces a non/fighter to tank then tanking is locked down by figters in raids and most of this game. also tanking UD has more to do with having great healers and a group working with said non figter to be able to tank. also before reckless there were tanks doing T1 damage all ready. with this change it's just ridiculous in heroic content. what people don't understand is that it's much easier to deal damage on a fighter than it is on an actual dps class in a raid/group setting. what will this mean? no one will want to play T1 dps classes anymore. why play T1? when you can play a fighter and do about the same damage (as long as you don't have to tank).

sintextblindsu

08-10-2012, 01:38 PM

<cite>theriatis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>I do understand that you didn't mean that sorcerers are the only T1 dps. But sorcerers are the only T1 dps class that Fighters in Reckless Stance are being compared to. If they do not get one shotted by a trash mob sneeze AND do less dps than a lesser geared sorcerers then the Reckless Stance is Over Powered to a lot of people out here. I know a lot of very nice DPS classes that can tank all of UD given the right buffs and will not lows very much dps by doing so. So saying a tank doing the same thing is the same group set up is OVER POWERED is very hypocritical. </blockquote>Hi Silzin,you are absolutely correct on that one. Yes, other classes can do comparable DPS while not supposed to do T1 DPS and are able to tank some low-end raid stuff.Thats what T1 DPS Classes are saying since years. Nobody cares - just whines about that all other classes which are on the Raid and not just for DPS, that they SHOULD REALLY, REALLY do also T1 DPS, because they say so.The Powers that be won't nerf every class to a point where they fit into the DPS Schematics, so why not bringing the T1 Classes up to Speed ? Easy explanation: Then there will be more DPS and more DPS, to a point where it will be spiraling out of control (if it isn't already) . And, don't forget: Nerfing every class correctly would need a deep understanding of every class' mechanics and some people tend to say that in this day and age, players have sometimes (!) more of it than a Dev.As a Wizard i feel that Pain since DoV started. But everytime i complain i get a "wahwahwah, you just suck!" back. So i tend to shut up and let others flame about (i'm too old for that *).Topic:The Reckless Stance should not favor some Tanks or specific Tank-Classes, it should equalize every tank (good Damage, paper survival) - nerfing the Mitigation, Blockchance and so on is easy; but getting the same damage out of every tank is more complex (i think - as my Tank twink is only 42 i have no Knowledge of really playing one nor deeper understanding of Tank-mechanics) as every Tank class does Damage in another way and other kind of damage (AE vs. Single, Autoattack vs. Skills, Melee vs. Spells). Thats quite a challenge.Regards, theriatis.</blockquote>you don't suck man. this stance is a joke and even an aeverage crusader in the caster group will blow up parses.

Faildozer

08-10-2012, 01:50 PM

OK, post your parse and post their parse.. if you are getting outparsed on 95% of the fights that dont have crazy extended aoes (dragarn) then you arent as good as you think you are.. If you think dps'ing on any class is difficult you are kidding yourself.. Doubling potency was a lot safer than doubling crit bonus or giving a huge auto attack multiplier which would scale even crazier and you would be whining about bruisers outparsing you by 200k+. Potency at least scales directly with gear upgrades and the same for everybody.. People dont seem to get this.. Potency at least keeps it safe and without affecting your auto attack damage brings fighters up to other classes in the amount of damage their ca's and spells do.. Yeah Shadowknights are going to get more benefit than my guardian but guess what? they are a damage dealing tank and have less stuff to keep them alive..This was put in for the tanks in the mage groups on fights where they dont need ot tank anything and guess what? it does a good job and HELPS THE RAID FORCE! No raid force is goign to be worse for having more dps on a burn fight.. With the game dying the way it is everybody should be jumping for joy for anything that helps the raids out and guess what? nobody is going ot lose their spot to a fighter for dps unless they are really bad and then they should have been replaced anyway. I am saddened that so many people not understanding the usefulness of this and the niche role it fills are trying to get this ability nerfed when it has only helped raid forces clear trash and trash named faster.. Start doing POW and spend an hour clearing just trash and you will probably feel different about it.

ratbast

08-10-2012, 02:09 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>OK, post your parse and post their parse.. if you are getting outparsed on 95% of the fights that dont have crazy extended aoes (dragarn) then you arent as good as you think you are.. If you think dps'ing on any class is difficult you are kidding yourself.. Doubling potency was a lot safer than doubling crit bonus or giving a huge auto attack multiplier which would scale even crazier and you would be whining about bruisers outparsing you by 200k+. Potency at least scales directly with gear upgrades and the same for everybody.. People dont seem to get this.. Potency at least keeps it safe and without affecting your auto attack damage brings fighters up to other classes in the amount of damage their ca's and spells do.. Yeah Shadowknights are going to get more benefit than my guardian but guess what? they are a damage dealing tank and have less stuff to keep them alive..This was put in for the tanks in the mage groups on fights where they dont need ot tank anything and guess what? it does a good job and HELPS THE RAID FORCE! No raid force is goign to be worse for having more dps on a burn fight.. With the game dying the way it is everybody should be jumping for joy for anything that helps the raids out and guess what? nobody is going ot lose their spot to a fighter for dps unless they are really bad and then they should have been replaced anyway. I am saddened that so many people not understanding the usefulness of this and the niche role it fills are trying to get this ability nerfed when it has only helped raid forces clear trash and trash named faster.. Start doing POW and spend an hour clearing just trash and you will probably feel different about it.</blockquote>if you make the mage tank a viable choice while not tanking, then ppl will bring them to not tank. so then you gotta ask yourself, WHO eactly are they gonna be pushing out?making room in raids for more fighters is fine, but their new role sux. there are other ways to help that dont involve raw dps. they simple dont deserve that glorious role. they need to be on something more like latrine duty.

theriatis

08-10-2012, 02:09 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>This was put in for the tanks in the mage groups on fights where they dont need ot tank anything and guess what? it does a good job and HELPS THE RAID FORCE! No raid force is goign to be worse for having more dps on a burn fight.. With the game dying the way it is everybody should be jumping for joy for anything that helps the raids out and guess what? nobody is going ot lose their spot to a fighter for dps unless they are really bad and then they should have been replaced anyway. I am saddened that so many people not understanding the usefulness of this and the niche role it fills are trying to get this ability nerfed when it has only helped raid forces clear trash and trash named faster.. Start doing POW and spend an hour clearing just trash and you will probably feel different about it.</blockquote>Then maybe they should up the DPS on T1 DPS classes too, because, the whole Raidforce benefits from it!-.-I didn't roll a Class which can provide NOTHING besides DPS to the Raid to get outparsed since DoV (!) on single Target fights from T2 and T3 DPS classes (and sometimes if not everything is up what i have, on AE Fights), just because they just got another Stance.I want a tank stance so that i won't die that often - this would also benefit the Raid. Just quadruple my mitigation but conviniently "forget" to lower my DPS.You go on, roll a pure DPS class, play it for 7+ years and start getting outdpsed by classes which can provide a lot more to the Raid as you - and then the Raidleader tells you that suddenly every world+dog does the same or just a little bit less damage then you, so he puts those classes in the raid because of it...My Single Target DPS is now a joke. My AE DPS is a little bit better. It's supposed to be the other way around.Regards, theriatis.

Hammieee

08-10-2012, 02:19 PM

Faildozer

08-10-2012, 02:42 PM

Theriatis, you CAN spec for a lot more defense and surviv at the cost of dps.. I dont care what you say, if you are playing correctly you will outparse a fighter.. If you arent you may need to look at gear choices, stat priority, aa selection, adorns, grp makeup, buffs you are receiving. Also dont act surprised if a conj or necro beats you because what utility do they provide other than hearts shards and a COH?? Ratbast, people will not recruit fighters for dps because it throws off group dynamic and they are limited on all the harder fights.. Again, you are taking 50% more aoe damage than any other class and have to be in melee range to do so.. Also they arent replacing classes they are just making it so you dont need to have to recruit dps so you can sit the fighters on fights where they have ABSOLUTELY NO PURPOSE. It helps the raid by not needing as many able bodies and spreading loot across even more people that wont be in the raid on fights that need 3 and 4 fighters and vice versa.

Silzin

08-10-2012, 02:49 PM

Trying to get this thread back on topic. If your class is having a problem with its class identity then make a thread about it and take it out of this thread PLEASE. This thread has nothing to do about your class not being able to be as good as whatever other dps class when ... whatever. Right here WE DON'T CARE.... this thread is about RECKLESS Stance and how we can fix it so it brings a relatively balanced alternative to fighters that are not needed to be in a tanking position at the moment. -this means that a fighter should be able to compete with your T1 dps on the parse when not tanking. -this means that a fighter that is played well may out dps you if you are not on your game. -this means that your ST dps class may need some tweaking from the dev's to bring it in line with the dps it should be able to do. Make a thread about it in your class forums, make a list of abilities that need adjusting and check it twice.

Yimway

08-10-2012, 03:38 PM

<cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote>People need to keep it in their minds that this isn't a magic stance to make every fighter do the same dps, there will always, and must be a difference. We have teirs in figter dps, as we have teirs in tanking ability, colum A and colum B, as some one else said, you can't have your cake and eat it too.</blockquote>I don't think anyone is suggesting anything otherwise. But its clearly 'off' when one class sees 30%+ benefit and another sees 10%.

ratbast

08-10-2012, 03:43 PM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Trying to get this thread back on topic. If your class is having a problem with its class identity then make a thread about it and take it out of this thread PLEASE. This thread has nothing to do about your class not being able to be as good as whatever other dps class when ... whatever. Right here WE DON'T CARE.... this thread is about RECKLESS Stance and how we can fix it so it brings a relatively balanced alternative to fighters that are not needed to be in a tanking position at the moment. -this means that a fighter should be able to compete with your T1 dps on the parse when not tanking. -this means that a fighter that is played well may out dps you if you are not on your game. -this means that your ST dps class may need some tweaking from the dev's to bring it in line with the dps it should be able to do. Make a thread about it in your class forums, make a list of abilities that need adjusting and check it twice.</blockquote>this thread was created to make a statement. if you can refute that statement go for it. this thread is not about fighters greedily justifying it and saying what tweak would make them squeal with glee.the topic is that reckless, as created, is a broken thing. it doesnt solve the problem it said it would. even those who LOVE reckless are saying its not giving tanks 6 raid slots. if it does increase raid slots for tanks, it will be arbitrary how many new slots they get, because then they will be able to step in for any of the dpsers.Reckless Stance is not solving the problem it stated it would.now tell me your post does anything to get this thread back on topic.edit: also this statement is fluff for just admitting reckless crusaders SHOULD beat ST in aoe fights. it just too overwhelming to admit because its so disgusting.

Silzin

08-10-2012, 04:43 PM

Recapping some ideas. DPS 1. Change the Potency boost to a 30% increase of all damage. I am not sure what mechanic would be used here though? 2. Remove the Potency Boost and make it a Single target DD proc with a 100% proc rate that will hit any target of any attack you make. this would need to be a desint DD and be completely modifiable. (just thinking here) 3. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread. Maybe see the Hate #1 idea though. Survivability 1. Removal of Bock Chance. Check this is on test and should help prevent tanking anything but some trash possible. 2. Change the 50% more damage taken to only when direct target of attack. 3. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread. Hate We know there is a problem with this, but I have not seen any suggestions for this. 1. Mate any ability that does Threat to damage instead. this may also help give hi thread lower dps fighter more of a boost. 2. Make the -30% hate larger like -50? 3. Make the halves all hate ability work on hate transferred and all hate gain received from others. 4. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread.

sintextblindsu

08-10-2012, 05:13 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>OK, post your parse and post their parse.. if you are getting outparsed on 95% of the fights that dont have crazy extended aoes (dragarn) then you arent as good as you think you are.. If you think dps'ing on any class is difficult you are kidding yourself.. Doubling potency was a lot safer than doubling crit bonus or giving a huge auto attack multiplier which would scale even crazier and you would be whining about bruisers outparsing you by 200k+. Potency at least scales directly with gear upgrades and the same for everybody.. People dont seem to get this.. Potency at least keeps it safe and without affecting your auto attack damage brings fighters up to other classes in the amount of damage their ca's and spells do.. Yeah Shadowknights are going to get more benefit than my guardian but guess what? they are a damage dealing tank and have less stuff to keep them alive..This was put in for the tanks in the mage groups on fights where they dont need ot tank anything and guess what? it does a good job and HELPS THE RAID FORCE! No raid force is goign to be worse for having more dps on a burn fight.. With the game dying the way it is everybody should be jumping for joy for anything that helps the raids out and guess what? nobody is going ot lose their spot to a fighter for dps unless they are really bad and then they should have been replaced anyway. I am saddened that so many people not understanding the usefulness of this and the niche role it fills are trying to get this ability nerfed when it has only helped raid forces clear trash and trash named faster.. Start doing POW and spend an hour clearing just trash and you will probably feel different about it.</blockquote>lets get one thing straight. the only "crying" here is from tanks trying to keep this broken ability. i CARE about game balance and when i see DAMAGE DEALERS in my raid getting out parsed by a TANK i know something is wrong because i'm not an idiot like other people posting here. when i raid a tank i raid to control encounters not to dps. if i want to dps then i PLAY A DPS CLASS. your constant insults that mods in this site continue to allow are hollow. before this change the crusaders were all ready pushing high damage but after this change they are in fact T1 dps in reckless no doubt about it. to say that's not so is to lie and all of you posting are constantly avoiding the facts. if this isn't change to be something OTHER than potency and more balanced among tanks then the imbalanced will only continue to grow in our raids. also the crusader in my raid does not outparse me but he does parse right behind me and out parses classes that he should not be out parsing. and guess what.. now those classes feel like they are "BAD" at this game because of ignorant people who blame the player instead of the BROKEN ABILITY that was introduced into the game with little to now foresight IF ANY. does that compute?

Yimway

08-10-2012, 05:34 PM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Recapping some ideas.DPS1. Change the Potency boost to a 30% increase of all damage. I am not sure what mechanic would be used here though?2. Remove the Potency Boost and make it a Single target DD proc with a 100% proc rate that will hit any target of any attack you make. this would need to be a desint DD and be completely modifiable. (just thinking here)3. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread. Maybe see the Hate #1 idea though.</blockquote><cite></cite> I think if you examine the buff (going off memory here) that it does two things for dps. First it increases potency by a static amount (50) and then it modifies overall potency by a percent (200-300%). So I know my own potency when using the buff is around 670. Sounds astronomical, but if you look at what my CA's do, it increases my largest CA's to average hit for roughly 1.2 swings of equivelant auto attack damage.Just doing something as simple as changing the static potency increase to a static CB increase will go a long way, however if you swap it to a static CB increase, i think you have to lower the potency % modifier some as well.A modifiable DD gets into some tough issues, and I don't think we can go down that path.<cite></cite> <cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Survivability1. Removal of Bock Chance. Check this is on test and should help prevent tanking anything but some trash possible.2. Change the 50% more damage taken to only when direct target of attack.3. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread.</blockquote>Removal of block chance is really what needed to happen. I don't think the 50% more damage should go away, it forces you to joust, it forces you to use defensive abilities to survive some ae's, and all in all the 50% increase is not a death sentence if you play well. Maybe I'm just not seeing much issue here as we generally have a guardian along and their generally ae blocking all the fighters from the really big hits, the other hits are mitigatable. Maybe there is an arguement for 30% over 50%, but all in all this is a much lesser issue from my viewpoint. There are just so many ways to avoid / mitigate / otherwise survive the bigger ae's that the 50% damage is just a 'you must be this good' bar to use the stance. I think I like it far more than I dislike it.<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>HateWe know there is a problem with this, but I have not seen any suggestions for this.1. Mate any ability that does Threat to damage instead. this may also help give hi thread lower dps fighter more of a boost.2. Make the -30% hate larger like -50?3. Make the halves all hate ability work on hate transferred and all hate gain received from others.4. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread.</blockquote>I don't think 1 is a good idea here, we're simply trying to futz with way more than we need to. Lets keep it simple and we can still achieve the goal. The primary issue we see is -30hatemod isn't enough as too many fighters are spec'd into more than 30 hate mod natively. Couple that with many of the group -hatemod abilities specificly exclude fighters as well. Currently, we have to run link crusaders if they are going to use this stance, and I'm not sure that is ideal or intended, but it makes it work.As you stated, making the -hatemod 50 would fix alot of the issue here. I'd almost prefer if it just flat out hardlocked your hate mod at -25%.

Silzin

08-10-2012, 06:10 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Recapping some ideas.DPS1. Change the Potency boost to a 30% increase of all damage. I am not sure what mechanic would be used here though?2. Remove the Potency Boost and make it a Single target DD proc with a 100% proc rate that will hit any target of any attack you make. this would need to be a desint DD and be completely modifiable. (just thinking here)3. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread. Maybe see the Hate #1 idea though.</blockquote><cite></cite> I think if you examine the buff (going off memory here) that it does two things for dps. First it increases potency by a static amount (50) and then it modifies overall potency by a percent (200-300%). So I know my own potency when using the buff is around 670. Sounds astronomical, but if you look at what my CA's do, it increases my largest CA's to average hit for roughly 1.2 swings of equivelant auto attack damage.Just doing something as simple as changing the static potency increase to a static CB increase will go a long way, however if you swap it to a static CB increase, i think you have to lower the potency % modifier some as well.A modifiable DD gets into some tough issues, and I don't think we can go down that path.<cite></cite> <cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Survivability1. Removal of Bock Chance. Check this is on test and should help prevent tanking anything but some trash possible.2. Change the 50% more damage taken to only when direct target of attack.3. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread.</blockquote>Removal of block chance is really what needed to happen. I don't think the 50% more damage should go away, it forces you to joust, it forces you to use defensive abilities to survive some ae's, and all in all the 50% increase is not a death sentence if you play well. Maybe I'm just not seeing much issue here as we generally have a guardian along and their generally ae blocking all the fighters from the really big hits, the other hits are mitigatable. Maybe there is an arguement for 30% over 50%, but all in all this is a much lesser issue from my viewpoint. There are just so many ways to avoid / mitigate / otherwise survive the bigger ae's that the 50% damage is just a 'you must be this good' bar to use the stance. I think I like it far more than I dislike it.<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>HateWe know there is a problem with this, but I have not seen any suggestions for this.1. Mate any ability that does Threat to damage instead. this may also help give hi thread lower dps fighter more of a boost.2. Make the -30% hate larger like -50?3. Make the halves all hate ability work on hate transferred and all hate gain received from others.4. ? out of ideas and don't see any others in the thread.</blockquote>I don't think 1 is a good idea here, we're simply trying to futz with way more than we need to. Lets keep it simple and we can still achieve the goal. The primary issue we see is -30hatemod isn't enough as too many fighters are spec'd into more than 30 hate mod natively. Couple that with many of the group -hatemod abilities specificly exclude fighters as well. Currently, we have to run link crusaders if they are going to use this stance, and I'm not sure that is ideal or intended, but it makes it work.As you stated, making the -hatemod 50 would fix alot of the issue here. I'd almost prefer if it just flat out hardlocked your hate mod at -25%.</blockquote> I couldn't get the multy quote to work for me.... As for Hate If you make the +50 Pot into CB then it will not help low lvl fighters very much and I think that is why it is here. but if you make the Double your Pot into + 50% of your CB, (2 CD = 3 CD) then it may have the desired effect. As for Survivability I can agree with you here. more testing needs to be doen before more speculation about this can be done. As for Hate I dont see it as much of a problem of the amount of -hate, a well buffed MT group gives the tank just so much hate it is stupid. ether the fighter needs to be considered a scout for other group/raid buffs, or they need a way to just say "any hate coming to you from outside of your self is also halved". the static -25% hate would be a very simple and probably effective way for most tanks. I still can see a Pally and some Guards being able to hold agro, that is why I think something else would be better.

Faildozer

08-10-2012, 06:11 PM

<cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>OK, post your parse and post their parse.. if you are getting outparsed on 95% of the fights that dont have crazy extended aoes (dragarn) then you arent as good as you think you are.. If you think dps'ing on any class is difficult you are kidding yourself.. Doubling potency was a lot safer than doubling crit bonus or giving a huge auto attack multiplier which would scale even crazier and you would be whining about bruisers outparsing you by 200k+. Potency at least scales directly with gear upgrades and the same for everybody.. People dont seem to get this.. Potency at least keeps it safe and without affecting your auto attack damage brings fighters up to other classes in the amount of damage their ca's and spells do.. Yeah Shadowknights are going to get more benefit than my guardian but guess what? they are a damage dealing tank and have less stuff to keep them alive..This was put in for the tanks in the mage groups on fights where they dont need ot tank anything and guess what? it does a good job and HELPS THE RAID FORCE! No raid force is goign to be worse for having more dps on a burn fight.. With the game dying the way it is everybody should be jumping for joy for anything that helps the raids out and guess what? nobody is going ot lose their spot to a fighter for dps unless they are really bad and then they should have been replaced anyway. I am saddened that so many people not understanding the usefulness of this and the niche role it fills are trying to get this ability nerfed when it has only helped raid forces clear trash and trash named faster.. Start doing POW and spend an hour clearing just trash and you will probably feel different about it.</blockquote>lets get one thing straight. the only "crying" here is from tanks trying to keep this broken ability. i CARE about game balance and when i see DAMAGE DEALERS in my raid getting out parsed by a TANK i know something is wrong because i'm not an idiot like other people posting here. when i raid a tank i raid to control encounters not to dps. if i want to dps then i PLAY A DPS CLASS. your constant insults that mods in this site continue to allow are hollow. before this change the crusaders were all ready pushing high damage but after this change they are in fact T1 dps in reckless no doubt about it. to say that's not so is to lie and all of you posting are constantly avoiding the facts. if this isn't change to be something OTHER than potency and more balanced among tanks then the imbalanced will only continue to grow in our raids. also the crusader in my raid does not outparse me but he does parse right behind me and out parses classes that he should not be out parsing. and guess what.. now those classes feel like they are "BAD" at this game because of ignorant people who blame the player instead of the BROKEN ABILITY that was introduced into the game with little to now foresight IF ANY. does that compute?</blockquote>You say that if you played a tank you would play to tank but not to dps. You fail to realize or choose to ignore that all tanks arent tanking at all times and all 4 tanks definately arent running Recklessness (i have only run 2-3 times since i MT stuff that is hard) and when those tanks arent called on to tank guess what? THEY CAN POP ON RECKLESS AND BRING SOMETHIGN TO THE RAID! You talk about equality and balance well guess what? It gives these tanks 3 and 4 a reason to be in raid and not have to be sat for most of the content.. Balance? They cant tank with it on outside of their temps now that they are removing blocking and they still shouldnt be in on stuff that hits hard because they take WAY MORE DAMAGE THAN ANYBODY ELSE. This is the reason why people arent goign to bring in 5th and 6th fighters unless they have empty slots or literally nobody has an alt they can bring in instead.. The first guild to recruit a fighter for a dps spot is a bad guild or literally cannot find any t1 dps that would be better and would have less threat and survivability issues.. again, how is this a bad thing? I guarantee you cant answer me without saying uh i play dps to dps tanks should only tank even when they arent tanking!AGAIN, you want it to be changed from potency and guess what? CB or damage multiplier will make tanks even MORE DAMAGE! CB not only affects combat art damage but MELEE DAMAGE.. Weapon Multiplier? wait until new CB and Weapons come out and you will see more people complaining than now when brawlers are doubling up people on the parse.. As it stands a crusader will see higher dps from it than my guard.. GOOD! They are the tanks that will primarily use it and they get more dps at the cost of survivability to begin with..Im sorry if your dps are getting outparsed they arent amazing like you say they are and your raid in fact can benefit from having more dps in it..

Brildean

08-10-2012, 06:51 PM

Thing is the 50% incoming damage should havn't been all damage and if anythign it should have reduced our mitigation to physical by 50-65%. so 10k becomes 5k look now we are druids. in plate. This would reduce tanking quite a bit more than a multiplier on tanking after mitigation.The 50% damage recieved penalty is much.. when it should be50% mitigation decreaseRemoves chance to block.Lowers Defense parry deflection by 200Increases Crit Bonus by 100Increases Potency by 50This way its fairer to all fighters instead of favorign the ones that cast spells more than relying on auto attack.

sintextblindsu

08-10-2012, 07:08 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>OK, post your parse and post their parse.. if you are getting outparsed on 95% of the fights that dont have crazy extended aoes (dragarn) then you arent as good as you think you are.. If you think dps'ing on any class is difficult you are kidding yourself.. Doubling potency was a lot safer than doubling crit bonus or giving a huge auto attack multiplier which would scale even crazier and you would be whining about bruisers outparsing you by 200k+. Potency at least scales directly with gear upgrades and the same for everybody.. People dont seem to get this.. Potency at least keeps it safe and without affecting your auto attack damage brings fighters up to other classes in the amount of damage their ca's and spells do.. Yeah Shadowknights are going to get more benefit than my guardian but guess what? they are a damage dealing tank and have less stuff to keep them alive..This was put in for the tanks in the mage groups on fights where they dont need ot tank anything and guess what? it does a good job and HELPS THE RAID FORCE! No raid force is goign to be worse for having more dps on a burn fight.. With the game dying the way it is everybody should be jumping for joy for anything that helps the raids out and guess what? nobody is going ot lose their spot to a fighter for dps unless they are really bad and then they should have been replaced anyway. I am saddened that so many people not understanding the usefulness of this and the niche role it fills are trying to get this ability nerfed when it has only helped raid forces clear trash and trash named faster.. Start doing POW and spend an hour clearing just trash and you will probably feel different about it.</blockquote>lets get one thing straight. the only "crying" here is from tanks trying to keep this broken ability. i CARE about game balance and when i see DAMAGE DEALERS in my raid getting out parsed by a TANK i know something is wrong because i'm not an idiot like other people posting here. when i raid a tank i raid to control encounters not to dps. if i want to dps then i PLAY A DPS CLASS. your constant insults that mods in this site continue to allow are hollow. before this change the crusaders were all ready pushing high damage but after this change they are in fact T1 dps in reckless no doubt about it. to say that's not so is to lie and all of you posting are constantly avoiding the facts. if this isn't change to be something OTHER than potency and more balanced among tanks then the imbalanced will only continue to grow in our raids. also the crusader in my raid does not outparse me but he does parse right behind me and out parses classes that he should not be out parsing. and guess what.. now those classes feel like they are "BAD" at this game because of ignorant people who blame the player instead of the BROKEN ABILITY that was introduced into the game with little to now foresight IF ANY. does that compute?</blockquote>You say that if you played a tank you would play to tank but not to dps. You fail to realize or choose to ignore that all tanks arent tanking at all times and all 4 tanks definately arent running Recklessness (i have only run 2-3 times since i MT stuff that is hard) and when those tanks arent called on to tank guess what? THEY CAN POP ON RECKLESS AND BRING SOMETHIGN TO THE RAID! You talk about equality and balance well guess what? It gives these tanks 3 and 4 a reason to be in raid and not have to be sat for most of the content.. Balance? They cant tank with it on outside of their temps now that they are removing blocking and they still shouldnt be in on stuff that hits hard because they take WAY MORE DAMAGE THAN ANYBODY ELSE. This is the reason why people arent goign to bring in 5th and 6th fighters unless they have empty slots or literally nobody has an alt they can bring in instead.. The first guild to recruit a fighter for a dps spot is a bad guild or literally cannot find any t1 dps that would be better and would have less threat and survivability issues.. again, how is this a bad thing? I guarantee you cant answer me without saying uh i play dps to dps tanks should only tank even when they arent tanking!AGAIN, you want it to be changed from potency and guess what? CB or damage multiplier will make tanks even MORE DAMAGE! CB not only affects combat art damage but MELEE DAMAGE.. Weapon Multiplier? wait until new CB and Weapons come out and you will see more people complaining than now when brawlers are doubling up people on the parse.. As it stands a crusader will see higher dps from it than my guard.. GOOD! They are the tanks that will primarily use it and they get more dps at the cost of survivability to begin with..Im sorry if your dps are getting outparsed they arent amazing like you say they are and your raid in fact can benefit from having more dps in it..</blockquote> the problem that you're not understanding is that people roll dps classes to dps and when a tank class starts doing about the same damage then people start to wonder.. why am i playing this dps class? when i could play a fighter and be tank when i want and dps when i feel like it. see that's the problem, this stance the way it is now gives crusaders way too much damage. it needs to be a direct CA boost (not potency) and some type of weapon mult bonus like the one that most scouts get. that will put them around T2. tanks don't need to do more damage than that, they all ready have a spot to tank that's just extra. the way the buff is now you will see in coming expansions that tanks will start to take up dps slots if it stays as is. and by tanks i mean crusaders. that's off. that's not the way this game has worked, that's a change in the wrong dirrecrtion unless they start to give every single class in the game double roles to the point that every class is the same.. why? people who want that, go play games that offer that.. they don't play this one! and still won't (play this one) because this is as halfas as it comes. i do play tanks and i do watch my parse and try to do as much damage as i can but i also understand that my tank class is not design for that and when i see good players get out parsed and have a crusader nipping at my heels, i KNOW this is not right. my first request is to take this terrible abilitie out ASAP.if that's not going to happen then devs need to do it right. they need to spend time balancing all the different tank classes and making sure that there aren't adverse, unwanted effects like the ones that are no present because of double POTENCY. just want to say this again because some players out there might not understand: THIS is a HUGE boost to select tanks damage. if you're now getting outparsed by a crusader or monk(cos of dragonfire) but was not before then you're probably going to continue being out parsed by them untill this broken ability is changed. it's not that you're a bad player it's that this is a BAD ability.

Yimway

08-10-2012, 07:31 PM

Can we please keep this thread on topic, there are plenty of other threads regarding tank vs dps stuffs.This thread is about since its in game, and they clearly communicated what it was supposed to do, and the effect it was supposed to have, that it clearly is bugged and not the right ability.I'd like to keep just this thread centered around what the ability needs to be to do what they said they wanted to do. Whether or not that was a good idea isn't for this thread, and really isn't relevant to this discussion.I would very much like to see the ability get tweaked, and that isn't going to happen by getting this thread also lockded down due to all the bickering, take that elsewhere kindly.

Yimway

08-10-2012, 07:37 PM

<cite>Silzin@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>the static -25% hate would be a very simple and probably effective way for most tanks. I still can see a Pally and some Guards being able to hold agro, that is why I think something else would be better.</blockquote>Providing the survivability is nerfed, this is a non issue. I'm really doubtful with hatemod locked at -25 that I'd be able to hold agro in a raid, maybe some misc pug group, but not against players even remotely in the same gear range. But if I die very easily using the stance (which I expect to do with no avoidance at all) then whether I could hold agro in it isn't terribly relevant.I see your point on low level tanks, but its hard for me to recognize that as an issue due to so little cooperative gameplay at player levels that wouldn't have atleast some crit chance to benefit from crit bonus. Reckless wasn't sold to us as a mega dps stance for soloing your lowbie fighter, so I'm still leaning towards the static potency going to CB. All in all though, a single buff for 6 classes is never really going to not favor some significantly more than others. Breaking this into 3 stances seems far more pragmatic to achieve the sollution they stated they were after.

sintextblindsu

08-10-2012, 07:44 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>Can we please keep this thread on topic, there are plenty of other threads regarding tank vs dps stuffs.This thread is about since its in game, and they clearly communicated what it was supposed to do, and the effect it was supposed to have, that it clearly is bugged and not the right ability.I'd like to keep just this thread centered around what the ability needs to be to do what they said they wanted to do. Whether or not that was a good idea isn't for this thread, and really isn't relevant to this discussion.I would very much like to see the ability get tweaked, and that isn't going to happen by getting this thread also lockded down due to all the bickering, take that elsewhere kindly.</blockquote>can't be any type of "doubling" or "all inclusive base damage boost". it needs to be something that only affects ca's and auto attack. maybe something like double all ca damage when reckless is active and add in an auto mult bonus similar to the scout one. again.. have to stay away from anything that would increase uncapped stats like potency or critical bonus.

Faildozer

08-10-2012, 08:07 PM

Why do you think that potency will cause scaling issues?? they used potency specifically to prevent scaling issues, im not sure why this is hard to grasp.. Sure fighter potency will go up but so will everybody elses.. so its all relative. These tanks are not doing this insane dps on the more challenging encounters and guess what? they arent dps when they are outside this stance? People will not be recruiting fighters for dps spots because again they are very limited in what role they can fill and take way more damage than anybody else while having to be meleeing when every fight in POW favors ranged dps..Again, i cant comprehend the reason why people are unhappy seeing somebody parse well 'because they are a tank' when it helps their raid kill trash and trash named faster... Who cares if its the shadowknight in g4 because guess what? they arent doing a whole lot outside of DPS'ing on most of this stuff so why not actually make them not terrible at it?? Or is it because they are tanks they shouldnt be able to add dps even when they are in a DPS group regardless of it making them squishy and unable to tank anything..Atan.. Recklessness does what it is designed to do, the problem you have with it lies moreso with the class you play and not the ability itself...

Xaxtionlorex

08-10-2012, 09:26 PM

It dosen't mater what we do, people in low teir guilds are going to come in and QQ it up. Let them do a few nights of PoW trash, see how much they feel about itI've been thinking about it more,the 50% all taken isn't that bad, it still needs to be changed some, but untill they fix our over bearing threat issues, it's moot. I'd like them to fix threat, so we can test that before they start messing around with how much damage we take, right now on any aoe fight I constantly pick up things just from passive aoe,boar adds, theldrek, fix the threat, then fix the damage taken. Damage taken still needs to be brought down though, -50% is to much for raiding, -25% would be alot more resonable.

ratbast

08-10-2012, 09:55 PM

<cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote>It dosen't mater what we do, people in low teir guilds are going to come in and QQ it up. Let them do a few nights of PoW trash, see how much they feel about itI've been thinking about it more,the 50% all taken isn't that bad, it still needs to be changed some, but untill they fix our over bearing threat issues, it's moot. I'd like them to fix threat, so we can test that before they start messing around with how much damage we take, right now on any aoe fight I constantly pick up things just from passive aoe,boar adds, theldrek, fix the threat, then fix the damage taken. Damage taken still needs to be brought down though, -50% is to much for raiding, -25% would be alot more resonable.</blockquote>no it should be +100-200% physical damage, +25-50% elemental/nox/arcane/focus.the only part of survivability that is even a challenge with reckless (nontanking role) is aoes. there is no need for them to take much extra non-trauma damage (only a little more due to higher hp). if this isnt a tanking stance it needs to take MASSIVE damage from mobs autoattacks. extremely massive, since they have so dam many temps and tools to keep themselves up. simply removing blocking is nothing. fighters armor and abilities still put cloth wearers to shame.without wards, a mage is 1shot by evenly geared content if they take aggro. fighters who are in an ill-conceived/ill-intended alternate stance should not be better off than them.personally i think it should be +200 trauma and 50 elemental/nox/arcane/focus because they should be penalized for going outside their role. but anything less than +100% physical is a joke.

Faildozer

08-10-2012, 10:13 PM

<cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote>It dosen't mater what we do, people in low teir guilds are going to come in and QQ it up. Let them do a few nights of PoW trash, see how much they feel about itI've been thinking about it more,the 50% all taken isn't that bad, it still needs to be changed some, but untill they fix our over bearing threat issues, it's moot. I'd like them to fix threat, so we can test that before they start messing around with how much damage we take, right now on any aoe fight I constantly pick up things just from passive aoe,boar adds, theldrek, fix the threat, then fix the damage taken. Damage taken still needs to be brought down though, -50% is to much for raiding, -25% would be alot more resonable.</blockquote>no it should be +100-200% physical damage, +25-50% elemental/nox/arcane/focus.the only part of survivability that is even a challenge with reckless (nontanking role) is aoes. there is no need for them to take much extra non-trauma damage (only a little more due to higher hp). if this isnt a tanking stance it needs to take MASSIVE damage from mobs autoattacks. extremely massive, since they have so dam many temps and tools to keep themselves up. simply removing blocking is nothing. fighters armor and abilities still put cloth wearers to shame.without wards, a mage is 1shot by evenly geared content if they take aggro. fighters who are in an ill-conceived/ill-intended alternate stance should not be better off than them.personally i think it should be +200 trauma and 50 elemental/nox/arcane/focus because they should be penalized for going outside their role. but anything less than +100% physical is a joke.</blockquote>Lets try this again with less mad.

ratbast

08-10-2012, 10:39 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote>It dosen't mater what we do, people in low teir guilds are going to come in and QQ it up. Let them do a few nights of PoW trash, see how much they feel about itI've been thinking about it more,the 50% all taken isn't that bad, it still needs to be changed some, but untill they fix our over bearing threat issues, it's moot. I'd like them to fix threat, so we can test that before they start messing around with how much damage we take, right now on any aoe fight I constantly pick up things just from passive aoe,boar adds, theldrek, fix the threat, then fix the damage taken. Damage taken still needs to be brought down though, -50% is to much for raiding, -25% would be alot more resonable.</blockquote>no it should be +100-200% physical damage, +25-50% elemental/nox/arcane/focus.the only part of survivability that is even a challenge with reckless (nontanking role) is aoes. there is no need for them to take much extra non-trauma damage (only a little more due to higher hp). if this isnt a tanking stance it needs to take MASSIVE damage from mobs autoattacks. extremely massive, since they have so dam many temps and tools to keep themselves up. simply removing blocking is nothing. fighters armor and abilities still put cloth wearers to shame.without wards, a mage is 1shot by evenly geared content if they take aggro. fighters who are in an ill-conceived/ill-intended alternate stance should not be better off than them.personally i think it should be +200 trauma and 50 elemental/nox/arcane/focus because they should be penalized for going outside their role. but anything less than +100% physical is a joke.</blockquote>Lets try this again with less mad.</blockquote>wasnt mad, you are projecting (or just an idiot). the damage penalties are what i think fighters should have while in a utility stance. +50% damage received is still EASY to tank in. *see purpose of threadwhile in an alternate stance, fighter temps should be to survive trauma aoes. fighter hp can weather a 25 to 50% boost in other types. giving tanks more usefulness without a significant penalty is terrible design, regardless if their new stance is personal dps or group utility. imo, +50% is not significant.

Faildozer

08-10-2012, 11:01 PM

<cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote>It dosen't mater what we do, people in low teir guilds are going to come in and QQ it up. Let them do a few nights of PoW trash, see how much they feel about itI've been thinking about it more,the 50% all taken isn't that bad, it still needs to be changed some, but untill they fix our over bearing threat issues, it's moot. I'd like them to fix threat, so we can test that before they start messing around with how much damage we take, right now on any aoe fight I constantly pick up things just from passive aoe,boar adds, theldrek, fix the threat, then fix the damage taken. Damage taken still needs to be brought down though, -50% is to much for raiding, -25% would be alot more resonable.</blockquote>no it should be +100-200% physical damage, +25-50% elemental/nox/arcane/focus.the only part of survivability that is even a challenge with reckless (nontanking role) is aoes. there is no need for them to take much extra non-trauma damage (only a little more due to higher hp). if this isnt a tanking stance it needs to take MASSIVE damage from mobs autoattacks. extremely massive, since they have so dam many temps and tools to keep themselves up. simply removing blocking is nothing. fighters armor and abilities still put cloth wearers to shame.without wards, a mage is 1shot by evenly geared content if they take aggro. fighters who are in an ill-conceived/ill-intended alternate stance should not be better off than them.personally i think it should be +200 trauma and 50 elemental/nox/arcane/focus because they should be penalized for going outside their role. but anything less than +100% physical is a joke.</blockquote>Lets try this again with less mad.</blockquote>wasnt mad, you are projecting (or just an idiot). the damage penalties are what i think fighters should have while in a utility stance. +50% damage received is still EASY to tank in. *see purpose of threadwhile in an alternate stance, fighter temps should be to survive trauma aoes. fighter hp can weather a 25 to 50% boost in other types. giving tanks more usefulness without a significant penalty is terrible design, regardless if their new stance is personal dps or group utility. imo, +50% is not significant.</blockquote>clearly you have no clue as to why tanks were still able to tank.. It was thru avoidance.. You are insane if you dont think 50% damage increase is not significant and that tells us all we need to know about your grasp on game mechanics and how stuff should be balanced..

Rasttan

08-10-2012, 11:15 PM

Ratbast just is vehemently against the stance and any class going out of there role, he has made that clear multiple timesAnything other than getting rid of the stance is not acceptable to him so don't waste your time on him.

Bruener

08-11-2012, 12:04 AM

Well since the /cry is starting to water down this stance into uselessness some changes to actually make it do what it needs to.Get rid of the hate problem. Brawlers actually can manage the stance well right now due to -hate positionals, but it sounds like that is a /bug they are going to fix. A Fighter in Recklessness has way too much hate issues and being stomped without having any block means that now that they changed that aspect and they are going to change the hate positionals on Brawlers it needs to protect fighters much better from agro. I would add to the buff -200 hate gain to ensure that a Fighter is always at the cap.Second remove the 50% more incoming damage. AEs hit way too hard because of it. To balance it I would recommend the Fighter gets 50% less mitigation. At least this way they hold up somewhat like melee scouts.See what happens when people complain out of jealousy on content that is extremely easy for anybody to do? You start making tweaks to a stance that was actually working and than you need to make more and more tweaks to get it back to the same usefullness. This just makes it worse because than in order for it to work it pushes the Fighter to be more and more like a Scout DPS class which than makes those classes even more upset. Which will probably lead to more unneeded changes that will call for even more changes to the stance to be made to make it useful again. Until SOE decides to stop wasting resources changing the ability to uselessness and back again and just end up leaving it useless meanwhile not fixing the entire reason the stance was put in.People are completely over reacting to the stance. Anybody that is a T1 DPS class that gets replaced on a roster with a DPS'ing Fighter is just not good. Anybody that cares that a Fighter can tank easy content while in recklessness needs to ask themselves that if they were given hate transfers/buffs and actually spec'd for hate gain on the same content if they would actually have an issue too.

Xaxtionlorex

08-11-2012, 01:49 AM

The exploding for aoes and threat are the major problems with this stance above everything else right now. Im on board the mit loss train now, easier to balance,just %s to tune. -200 hate would be nice, but not super needed ,I belive the main threat issue lies with how much threat is still conted with abilities at a core level, quickest fix, turn all threat into mental damage at 25% of the value,or something.

theriatis

08-11-2012, 07:13 AM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'd like to keep just this thread centered around what the ability needs to be to do what they said they wanted to do. Whether or not that was a good idea isn't for this thread, and really isn't relevant to this discussion.</blockquote>Hi Atan,one of the Problems seems that the different Tank Classes provide different DPS with the Reckless Stance and differentSurvival ability. If the Powers that be could bring them on one Level (which is hard enough) that would be a start.The two basic Questions someone could ask is: 1. How do the different tank classes do DPS ?Is it AE or Single Target ? Do they get the most of CAs or Autoattack ? Is Spell or Melee providing more DPS for them ?2. How do they survive an Encounter ?Is it mitigation ? Is it avoidance ? Is it Blockchance ? Is it CAs or Spells ? (or a weird mixture of all ?)This is just tackling the basics, what i have not (yet) in this equotation is Gear/AAs (and i will not go as far and bringing the individual players skill into it).Having three different Reckless Stances for the Three Subtypes would make sense, but this will be a little more Development Time (maybe doing less SC Sales and more Bugfixing would do the trick *coughs*).To bring every tank on one level in Reckless will not be possible, so at least bring them in the same league.Someone care to make a list so everyone could see were and how the Stance for every Class should be tweaked ?Thats what i was missing here...Regards, theriatis.Edit: Grammar, my old enemy, we meet again !

Xaxtionlorex

08-11-2012, 12:55 PM

<cite>theriatis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'd like to keep just this thread centered around what the ability needs to be to do what they said they wanted to do. Whether or not that was a good idea isn't for this thread, and really isn't relevant to this discussion.</blockquote>Hi Atan,one of the Problems seems that the different Tank Classes provide different DPS with the Reckless Stance and differentSurvival ability. If the Powers that be could bring them on one Level (which is hard enough) that would be a start.</blockquote>Sorry, no, we DON'T need to be on the same level,reckless or not, tank dps can never be the same, because at the end of the day, we're still going to be asked to tank something in a raid, and when we do, there are going to be some tanks who can do it alot better, unless you want them to do a sweeping class change, and allow crusaders and zekers to tank on the same level as Gaurdians and brawlers, then no, crusaders and zerkers should get more out of it.That said.All tanks should still gain the same dps boost that we crusaders get, but we shouldnt all be doing the same dps. If I go from 200k single target to 450, a gaurdian should be able to go from 110 to 260, ect ect.200% damage taken? really? Thats absurd. 50% from all damage when target at the top of a hate list is more then enough to keep it balanced.

sintextblindsu

08-11-2012, 02:55 PM

<cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>theriatis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'd like to keep just this thread centered around what the ability needs to be to do what they said they wanted to do. Whether or not that was a good idea isn't for this thread, and really isn't relevant to this discussion.</blockquote>Hi Atan,one of the Problems seems that the different Tank Classes provide different DPS with the Reckless Stance and differentSurvival ability. If the Powers that be could bring them on one Level (which is hard enough) that would be a start.</blockquote>Sorry, no, we DON'T need to be on the same level,reckless or not, tank dps can never be the same, because at the end of the day, we're still going to be asked to tank something in a raid, and when we do, there are going to be some tanks who can do it alot better, unless you want them to do a sweeping class change, and allow crusaders and zekers to tank on the same level as Gaurdians and brawlers, then no, crusaders and zerkers should get more out of it.That said.All tanks should still gain the same dps boost that we crusaders get, but we shouldnt all be doing the same dps. If I go from 200k single target to 450, a gaurdian should be able to go from 110 to 260, ect ect.200% damage taken? really? Thats absurd. 50% from all damage when target at the top of a hate list is more then enough to keep it balanced.</blockquote> could you please stop crying about not loosing your overpowered crusader ability? your tears make it hard to read ACTUAL important post. also YES we do need this ability to give EACH tank class the SAME benefit. if you were doing higher damage before the stance you will do higher damage after the stance. the way it is now is EXTREMELY broken balance wise.

sintextblindsu

08-11-2012, 03:01 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why do you think that potency will cause scaling issues?? they used potency specifically to prevent scaling issues, im not sure why this is hard to grasp.. Sure fighter potency will go up but so will everybody elses.. so its all relative. These tanks are not doing this insane dps on the more challenging encounters and guess what? they arent dps when they are outside this stance? People will not be recruiting fighters for dps spots because again they are very limited in what role they can fill and take way more damage than anybody else while having to be meleeing when every fight in POW favors ranged dps..Again, i cant comprehend the reason why people are unhappy seeing somebody parse well 'because they are a tank' when it helps their raid kill trash and trash named faster... Who cares if its the shadowknight in g4 because guess what? they arent doing a whole lot outside of DPS'ing on most of this stuff so why not actually make them not terrible at it?? Or is it because they are tanks they shouldnt be able to add dps even when they are in a DPS group regardless of it making them squishy and unable to tank anything..Atan.. Recklessness does what it is designed to do, the problem you have with it lies moreso with the class you play and not the ability itself...</blockquote> for a "top end" raider like you claim to be, you sure don't know much about this stance and how this ability will cause and IS causing balance/scaling issues. i don't want to get things nerfed as a result of this inane ability but it will happen and for no good reason since doubling potency is moronic and should have never happened.

sintextblindsu

08-11-2012, 03:03 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>ratbast wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote>It dosen't mater what we do, people in low teir guilds are going to come in and QQ it up. Let them do a few nights of PoW trash, see how much they feel about itI've been thinking about it more,the 50% all taken isn't that bad, it still needs to be changed some, but untill they fix our over bearing threat issues, it's moot. I'd like them to fix threat, so we can test that before they start messing around with how much damage we take, right now on any aoe fight I constantly pick up things just from passive aoe,boar adds, theldrek, fix the threat, then fix the damage taken. Damage taken still needs to be brought down though, -50% is to much for raiding, -25% would be alot more resonable.</blockquote>no it should be +100-200% physical damage, +25-50% elemental/nox/arcane/focus.the only part of survivability that is even a challenge with reckless (nontanking role) is aoes. there is no need for them to take much extra non-trauma damage (only a little more due to higher hp). if this isnt a tanking stance it needs to take MASSIVE damage from mobs autoattacks. extremely massive, since they have so dam many temps and tools to keep themselves up. simply removing blocking is nothing. fighters armor and abilities still put cloth wearers to shame.without wards, a mage is 1shot by evenly geared content if they take aggro. fighters who are in an ill-conceived/ill-intended alternate stance should not be better off than them.personally i think it should be +200 trauma and 50 elemental/nox/arcane/focus because they should be penalized for going outside their role. but anything less than +100% physical is a joke.</blockquote>Lets try this again with less mad.</blockquote>wasnt mad, you are projecting (or just an idiot). the damage penalties are what i think fighters should have while in a utility stance. +50% damage received is still EASY to tank in. *see purpose of threadwhile in an alternate stance, fighter temps should be to survive trauma aoes. fighter hp can weather a 25 to 50% boost in other types. giving tanks more usefulness without a significant penalty is terrible design, regardless if their new stance is personal dps or group utility. imo, +50% is not significant.</blockquote>clearly you have no clue as to why tanks were still able to tank.. It was thru avoidance.. You are insane if you dont think 50% damage increase is not significant and that tells us all we need to know about your grasp on game mechanics and how stuff should be balanced..</blockquote> after this change tanks won't be able to tank raid content but they will still tank heroic. you think my zerk even has a shield in his bags?

Xaxtionlorex

08-11-2012, 04:28 PM

<cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote> also YES we do need this ability to give EACH tank class the SAME benefit. if you were doing higher damage before the stance you will do higher damage after the stance. the way it is now is EXTREMELY broken balance wise.</blockquote>Thank you for repeating exactly what I said. As its been said, a hundred times in the last three threads, crusaders are getting the right kind of dps gains from this stance, other classes need to be getting the same, but a gaurdian dosen't need to be doing my level of DPS either.

theriatis

08-11-2012, 05:50 PM

<cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>theriatis wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hi Atan,one of the Problems seems that the different Tank Classes provide different DPS with the Reckless Stance and differentSurvival ability. If the Powers that be could bring them on one Level (which is hard enough) that would be a start.</blockquote>Sorry, no, we DON'T need to be on the same level,reckless or not, tank dps can never be the same, because at the end of the day, we're still going to be asked to tank something in a raid *snip*</blockquote>Hi,sorry, bit of misunderstanding perhaps...I didn't mean that every tank should do the same DPS, its the differences in tanking tactics which makes different tanks interesting and not who has the biggest.... dps scale <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />I was told (i have no Tank Main, so i have no experience in that) that one Tank class tanks with pure and brutal dps, one is good for AE one for Single Encounters, one can heal itself, one avoids hits, one has superfast CAs... so as each tank tanks different and is good for different situations and encounters, on a BASIC (!) Level they should all be good to tank BASIC Encounters.If you now throw Reckless into this Equotation then even the BASICs get thrown overboard - that was what i meant (and i hope i explained it right this time <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />)Regards, theriatis.

Faildozer

08-11-2012, 06:51 PM

<cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why do you think that potency will cause scaling issues?? they used potency specifically to prevent scaling issues, im not sure why this is hard to grasp.. Sure fighter potency will go up but so will everybody elses.. so its all relative. These tanks are not doing this insane dps on the more challenging encounters and guess what? they arent dps when they are outside this stance? People will not be recruiting fighters for dps spots because again they are very limited in what role they can fill and take way more damage than anybody else while having to be meleeing when every fight in POW favors ranged dps..Again, i cant comprehend the reason why people are unhappy seeing somebody parse well 'because they are a tank' when it helps their raid kill trash and trash named faster... Who cares if its the shadowknight in g4 because guess what? they arent doing a whole lot outside of DPS'ing on most of this stuff so why not actually make them not terrible at it?? Or is it because they are tanks they shouldnt be able to add dps even when they are in a DPS group regardless of it making them squishy and unable to tank anything..Atan.. Recklessness does what it is designed to do, the problem you have with it lies moreso with the class you play and not the ability itself...</blockquote> for a "top end" raider like you claim to be, you sure don't know much about this stance and how this ability will cause and IS causing balance/scaling issues. i don't want to get things nerfed as a result of this inane ability but it will happen and for no good reason since doubling potency is moronic and should have never happened.</blockquote>What scaling issues and what balance issues? The scaling issues? like as tanks get better gear they get more potency? golly gee so does EVERYBODY ELSE and their CAs still do more damage and they have much higher dps potential and dps tools.. Balance issues? like not being able to tank anything in raids and taking 50% more damage than any other class? making it unusable on harder fights? Nothing is going to get nerfed because of this ability because its not breaking anything and only HELPING mid tier guilds like yours and top tier guilds clear POW trash faster..

Xaxtionlorex

08-11-2012, 07:24 PM

Hey fail,I feel like i should ask you whos on first.

Faildozer

08-11-2012, 07:34 PM

Who is on first dude

Xaxtionlorex

08-11-2012, 07:45 PM

Naturally you know.

ratbast

08-11-2012, 08:00 PM

you guys are a couple of rugrats. the reason reckless potency does not scale well is because its multiplicative not additive. its not hard math. this is really sad. when ppl are getting stuff wrong, they ought to have the decency to not be condescending.

Drumstix

08-11-2012, 08:49 PM

How about getting base abilities looked at and we stop fighting over how Reckless stance should be changed/integrated. Go to the root of cause....Using a Stance as a DPS bandaid doesn't work for me simply because it doesn't cover the game in all aspects.If fighters are to do any high-dps output with "drawbacks", I really think we should leave it to temporary buffs or AA abilities. Simple as that.With that said, I obviously enjoy the Stance for doing high numbers, but I couldn't give a crap if it got removed. I just think people are looking at the wrong end of the spectrum to ge things changed. Should devs actually tweak things from the ground up, they should then change the stance accordingly. But idealy I would see the Stance removed, and go about fighter DPS a diffferent way. Slight tweaks to the current Stance are going to leave people crying -- no matter what they do. If you don't think that's true, I think you're kidding only yourself.

sintextblindsu

08-11-2012, 09:09 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why do you think that potency will cause scaling issues?? they used potency specifically to prevent scaling issues, im not sure why this is hard to grasp.. Sure fighter potency will go up but so will everybody elses.. so its all relative. These tanks are not doing this insane dps on the more challenging encounters and guess what? they arent dps when they are outside this stance? People will not be recruiting fighters for dps spots because again they are very limited in what role they can fill and take way more damage than anybody else while having to be meleeing when every fight in POW favors ranged dps..Again, i cant comprehend the reason why people are unhappy seeing somebody parse well 'because they are a tank' when it helps their raid kill trash and trash named faster... Who cares if its the shadowknight in g4 because guess what? they arent doing a whole lot outside of DPS'ing on most of this stuff so why not actually make them not terrible at it?? Or is it because they are tanks they shouldnt be able to add dps even when they are in a DPS group regardless of it making them squishy and unable to tank anything..Atan.. Recklessness does what it is designed to do, the problem you have with it lies moreso with the class you play and not the ability itself...</blockquote> for a "top end" raider like you claim to be, you sure don't know much about this stance and how this ability will cause and IS causing balance/scaling issues. i don't want to get things nerfed as a result of this inane ability but it will happen and for no good reason since doubling potency is moronic and should have never happened.</blockquote>What scaling issues and what balance issues? The scaling issues? like as tanks get better gear they get more potency? golly gee so does EVERYBODY ELSE and their CAs still do more damage and they have much higher dps potential and dps tools.. Balance issues? like not being able to tank anything in raids and taking 50% more damage than any other class? making it unusable on harder fights? Nothing is going to get nerfed because of this ability because its not breaking anything and only HELPING mid tier guilds like yours and top tier guilds clear POW trash faster..</blockquote>there are less obvious issues that i'm not looking to have changed as of yet but here are just a couple of OBVIOUS issues that a RAIDE TAHNK like your self should be able to realize with out me POINTING THEM OUT. why don't you gander over at any potency buff that is doubled by this stance? or is that also intended and not breaking anything? i'm curious to see how thick you actually are, sir.

sintextblindsu

08-11-2012, 09:11 PM

<cite>Drumstixx@Blackburrow wrote:</cite><blockquote>How about getting base abilities looked at and we stop fighting over how Reckless stance should be changed/integrated. Go to the root of cause....Using a Stance as a DPS bandaid doesn't work for me simply because it doesn't cover the game in all aspects.If fighters are to do any high-dps output with "drawbacks", I really think we should leave it to temporary buffs or AA abilities. Simple as that.With that said, I obviously enjoy the Stance for doing high numbers, but I couldn't give a crap if it got removed. I just think people are looking at the wrong end of the spectrum to ge things changed. Should devs actually tweak things from the ground up, they should then change the stance accordingly. But idealy I would see the Stance removed, and go about fighter DPS a diffferent way. Slight tweaks to the current Stance are going to leave people crying -- no matter what they do. If you don't think that's true, I think you're kidding only yourself.</blockquote> this is a fair post but i assure you that this is not "crying". this is about a broken ability anyway you look at it.

Faildozer

08-11-2012, 10:39 PM

Xaxtionlorex

08-11-2012, 11:06 PM

Its best to just ignore him, and hope the devs filter out people like that so we can work on making this stance something usefull.

Faildozer

08-11-2012, 11:30 PM

eh true, i guess no matter how you lay it out some peeps will never get it. I guess eventually when everybody realizes how badly they are overreacting we will see the people spewing hate move on to bigger and better things like ethereals or soemote.

sintextblindsu

08-11-2012, 11:58 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why do you think that potency will cause scaling issues?? they used potency specifically to prevent scaling issues, im not sure why this is hard to grasp.. Sure fighter potency will go up but so will everybody elses.. so its all relative. These tanks are not doing this insane dps on the more challenging encounters and guess what? they arent dps when they are outside this stance? People will not be recruiting fighters for dps spots because again they are very limited in what role they can fill and take way more damage than anybody else while having to be meleeing when every fight in POW favors ranged dps..Again, i cant comprehend the reason why people are unhappy seeing somebody parse well 'because they are a tank' when it helps their raid kill trash and trash named faster... Who cares if its the shadowknight in g4 because guess what? they arent doing a whole lot outside of DPS'ing on most of this stuff so why not actually make them not terrible at it?? Or is it because they are tanks they shouldnt be able to add dps even when they are in a DPS group regardless of it making them squishy and unable to tank anything..Atan.. Recklessness does what it is designed to do, the problem you have with it lies moreso with the class you play and not the ability itself...</blockquote> for a "top end" raider like you claim to be, you sure don't know much about this stance and how this ability will cause and IS causing balance/scaling issues. i don't want to get things nerfed as a result of this inane ability but it will happen and for no good reason since doubling potency is moronic and should have never happened.</blockquote>What scaling issues and what balance issues? The scaling issues? like as tanks get better gear they get more potency? golly gee so does EVERYBODY ELSE and their CAs still do more damage and they have much higher dps potential and dps tools.. Balance issues? like not being able to tank anything in raids and taking 50% more damage than any other class? making it unusable on harder fights? Nothing is going to get nerfed because of this ability because its not breaking anything and only HELPING mid tier guilds like yours and top tier guilds clear POW trash faster..</blockquote>there are less obvious issues that i'm not looking to have changed as of yet but here are just a couple of OBVIOUS issues that a RAIDE TAHNK like your self should be able to realize with out me POINTING THEM OUT. why don't you gander over at any potency buff that is doubled by this stance? or is that also intended and not breaking anything? i'm curious to see how thick you actually are, sir.</blockquote>lol again, fighter ca's are ~ half of the damage of dps ca's even a bit less for t1 dps like sorcs.. Therefore even if fighters get double potency on anything its goign to be about the same gain as any other dps.. only it will do more for other dps since their base is higher and they have more dps tools sooooo what is your point again?</blockquote>wow.. at this point i have realized that i have been arguing with someone with zero grasp of how anything in this game is balanced. further more why don't you flat out stop posting since you clearly don't even look at parse past "look at all the names!" and thus have zero actual input to put on this thread.

sintextblindsu

08-12-2012, 12:00 AM

<cite>Xaxtionlorex wrote:</cite><blockquote>Its best to just ignore him, and hope the devs filter out people like that so we can work on making this stance something usefull.</blockquote>sorry cupcake.. this won't go away because in it's current state it will continue to shine as a poorly thought out ability that will wreck havoc on raid/group buffs/procs.

Faildozer

08-12-2012, 12:18 AM

<cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why do you think that potency will cause scaling issues?? they used potency specifically to prevent scaling issues, im not sure why this is hard to grasp.. Sure fighter potency will go up but so will everybody elses.. so its all relative. These tanks are not doing this insane dps on the more challenging encounters and guess what? they arent dps when they are outside this stance? People will not be recruiting fighters for dps spots because again they are very limited in what role they can fill and take way more damage than anybody else while having to be meleeing when every fight in POW favors ranged dps..Again, i cant comprehend the reason why people are unhappy seeing somebody parse well 'because they are a tank' when it helps their raid kill trash and trash named faster... Who cares if its the shadowknight in g4 because guess what? they arent doing a whole lot outside of DPS'ing on most of this stuff so why not actually make them not terrible at it?? Or is it because they are tanks they shouldnt be able to add dps even when they are in a DPS group regardless of it making them squishy and unable to tank anything..Atan.. Recklessness does what it is designed to do, the problem you have with it lies moreso with the class you play and not the ability itself...</blockquote> for a "top end" raider like you claim to be, you sure don't know much about this stance and how this ability will cause and IS causing balance/scaling issues. i don't want to get things nerfed as a result of this inane ability but it will happen and for no good reason since doubling potency is moronic and should have never happened.</blockquote>What scaling issues and what balance issues? The scaling issues? like as tanks get better gear they get more potency? golly gee so does EVERYBODY ELSE and their CAs still do more damage and they have much higher dps potential and dps tools.. Balance issues? like not being able to tank anything in raids and taking 50% more damage than any other class? making it unusable on harder fights? Nothing is going to get nerfed because of this ability because its not breaking anything and only HELPING mid tier guilds like yours and top tier guilds clear POW trash faster..</blockquote>there are less obvious issues that i'm not looking to have changed as of yet but here are just a couple of OBVIOUS issues that a RAIDE TAHNK like your self should be able to realize with out me POINTING THEM OUT. why don't you gander over at any potency buff that is doubled by this stance? or is that also intended and not breaking anything? i'm curious to see how thick you actually are, sir.</blockquote>lol again, fighter ca's are ~ half of the damage of dps ca's even a bit less for t1 dps like sorcs.. Therefore even if fighters get double potency on anything its goign to be about the same gain as any other dps.. only it will do more for other dps since their base is higher and they have more dps tools sooooo what is your point again?</blockquote>wow.. at this point i have realized that i have been arguing with someone with zero grasp of how anything in this game is balanced. further more why don't you flat out stop posting since you clearly don't even look at parse past "look at all the names!" and thus have zero actual input to put on this thread.</blockquote>Lol at this guy saying somebody doesnt have any idea how the game is balanced when he thinks it should be balanced around 2groupable content.. riiight. How about this, how about you break down some parses and tell me how I am wrong and how you are right? Tell me how fighters have more dps potential than dps classes and how they benefit more from the buffs other than uhmm they get double potency duh and why dont you break down the actual gains from the potency in terms of the actual damage gained and the adjusted efficiency of the combat art compared to a dps classes. Please, do this for me and enlighten me and all the other ignorant people, show us the error of our ways!I guarantee you come back with some little retort about how you cant be bothered to waste your time doing something I can do for myself or if you do bring back data it will be so limited and skewed just to prove your point but will just make you look even more ignorant.. Anyway, i am not lying when i say i EAGERLY await your data!

Faildozer

08-12-2012, 12:32 AM

HAHAHAHA just found out that Sintextblindsu = davngr lol.. Not somebody new jsut the same old people complaining.. Hilarious. Didnt you get banned from o forums already?? and didnt you stop posting in the flames post because you got run out of there?? You know what dude, it really doesnt matter what you say lol all credibility you have is shot.. Have fun getting outparsed by fighters and saying its them being overpowered instead of you slacking.. I should havek nown from the spelling and claiming it is wreaking havoc on your raid even tho you raid admittedly with 2.5 grps and mercs.. you should be thanking sony for more dps.

Xaxtionlorex

08-12-2012, 01:13 AM

Lol is it really? Oh man, looking at his other posts, it all makes sense now. I should of seen it when he keeps going on and on about procs that don't scale with anything. I guess they were sitting him for fighter mercs in reckless.

sintextblindsu

08-12-2012, 02:07 AM

i made several post in my threads continuing discussions i had started with my other account. it's not my fault it took you this long to put two and two together. yes this is davngr and? it's the same bunch people crying to keep this stance in it's current broken state so again.. waht's your point?i'm not going to break down all the broken because it will lead to those abilities being nerfed NOT this broken stance so.. i will give devs some more time to fix this BS. if they dont' fix it then i will start getting everything nerfed at the very least bring this garbage stance to manageable proportions. i'm still amazed at either you gull to keep posting that this stance is balanced in current state knowing how broken it is or how truly inane someone would have to be to not know about it. also.. why don't you explain in detail how end game content mechanics are any different from solo content? the exact same rules apply to three toes the rat in antonica that apply to zek or whatever other end game mob you want to discuss. yes in some of the harder content (1%) tanks can't be in reckless stance but how does that make the stance balanced? this stance is balanced when tanks don't use it! durrrr fixed!!! duur drrrr durrrrrrrrr when tanks do use it, it's just as broken as it is in any other content. again. stop posting if all your post are only going to revert back to how "end game is hurd and WAY Different!@!" argument because it's laughable. game mechanics stay the same because they are STATIC. THEY DO NOT CHANGE depending on the zone you're in.

Faildozer

08-12-2012, 02:55 AM

<cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote>i made several post in my threads continuing discussions i had started with my other account. it's not my fault it took you this long to put two and two together. yes this is davngr and? it's the same bunch people crying to keep this stance in it's current broken state so again.. waht's your point?i'm not going to break down all the broken because it will lead to those abilities being nerfed NOT this broken stance so.. i will give devs some more time to fix this BS. if they dont' fix it then i will start getting everything nerfed at the very least bring this garbage stance to manageable proportions. i'm still amazed at either you gull to keep posting that this stance is balanced in current state knowing how broken it is or how truly inane someone would have to be to not know about it. also.. why don't you explain in detail how end game content mechanics are any different from solo content? the exact same rules apply to three toes the rat in antonica that apply to zek or whatever other end game mob you want to discuss. yes in some of the harder content (1%) tanks can't be in reckless stance but how does that make the stance balanced? this stance is balanced when tanks don't use it! durrrr fixed!!! duur drrrr durrrrrrrrr when tanks do use it, it's just as broken as it is in any other content. again. stop posting if all your post are only going to revert back to how "end game is hurd and WAY Different!@!" argument because it's laughable. game mechanics stay the same because they are STATIC. THEY DO NOT CHANGE depending on the zone you're in. </blockquote>Not sure if serious... If you think SS mobs = POW mobs in terms of what all is going on, dps checks, tank checks, power checks, fail conditions. The thing is, i dont even think POW fights are overly complicated from a what actually is going on standpoint what makes them suck is EVERYTHING hits harder, tanks have to actually use saves, adds hit harder than most SS raid names, the dps checks needed are pretty strict and teh biggest gate for most guilds not that you would know that since your only pow experience is the loot pinata known as boar and you couldnt even kill that.. If classes were balanced around SS guess what? Nobody could kill anything in POW without it being nerfed into the loot pinata state that is Skyshrine raiding because guess what? there are no dps checks other than kill a grp of glorified heroic adds before more spawn in 45 seconds.. Guess how many things tanks need to use saves for other than scripted red texts which can be avoided? the answer is ZERO.. Given your logic tanks shouldnt be given many saves because they dont need them..To further illustrate this point which I guarantee will be lost on you, guess how much hp mobs in skyshrine have? The answer is ~500million, some more, some less. Guess how much the EASIEST mob in POW has? 900million with a MUCH higher dps check on adds that if not killed fast enough is a guaranteed wipe. The named hits harder than any mob in SS.. Lets look at commanders, again a fight that i dont think is overly complex but classes are balanced around doing such encounters.. 1 grp has to fight corpsemaul and 3 grps fight goreslaughter, each do their own thing, 1 has a red text joust the other has a death touch.. the 1 group mob? guess how much the average hit of his aoe is? the one that is every 30 seconds.. 92k damage... guess how much power the grp loses PER SECOND 32k.. guess how many power drains their are in SS? not many, and almost all of them are completely preventable by curing before the det ticks.. raiding 101..Want to know why reckless should stay? So we dont have to drop our fighters to get in more dps in between named while clearing trash because guess how much 1 grp of boars in POW has? These are all over the zone mind you, about 15 groups of JUST BOARS and they have more health than SKYSHRINE RAID NAMED! yes! to kill one encounter you need about 550 million damage.. arraken skyward? 537million health.. Yes, each group of trash is equivelant of what takes your guild probably 5-8 minutes to do.. Trash dead faster? awesome, guess how many named tanks can use recklessness on without dying to normal aoes or if they pull threat on any of the adds? not many.. we dont allow our tanks to be in recklessness just because if they die on berik, spawns adds.. If they die on eriak and they get the red text or curse? raid wipe... Do you see where I am going with this? Just because people do massive dps on easy mode mobs that people box does not mean an ability is unbalanced because in teh end game where stuff is balanced around? it is working as intended especially wiht the block removal..I could go on and on and on, EASILY.. The fact of the matter is if classes and what they are capable of were balanced around easy or even solo content guess how many mobs would be dead in pow? Boar and MAYBE berik but that is a stretch.. If you really need explanation after this about why the endgame content actually is herr derr harder from a what is required standpoint you shouldnt be posting.. anywhere..

sintextblindsu

08-12-2012, 03:08 AM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote>i made several post in my threads continuing discussions i had started with my other account. it's not my fault it took you this long to put two and two together. yes this is davngr and? it's the same bunch people crying to keep this stance in it's current broken state so again.. waht's your point?i'm not going to break down all the broken because it will lead to those abilities being nerfed NOT this broken stance so.. i will give devs some more time to fix this BS. if they dont' fix it then i will start getting everything nerfed at the very least bring this garbage stance to manageable proportions. i'm still amazed at either you gull to keep posting that this stance is balanced in current state knowing how broken it is or how truly inane someone would have to be to not know about it. also.. why don't you explain in detail how end game content mechanics are any different from solo content? the exact same rules apply to three toes the rat in antonica that apply to zek or whatever other end game mob you want to discuss. yes in some of the harder content (1%) tanks can't be in reckless stance but how does that make the stance balanced? this stance is balanced when tanks don't use it! durrrr fixed!!! duur drrrr durrrrrrrrr when tanks do use it, it's just as broken as it is in any other content. again. stop posting if all your post are only going to revert back to how "end game is hurd and WAY Different!@!" argument because it's laughable. game mechanics stay the same because they are STATIC. THEY DO NOT CHANGE depending on the zone you're in. </blockquote>Not sure if serious... If you think SS mobs = POW mobs in terms of what all is going on, dps checks, tank checks, power checks, fail conditions. The thing is, i dont even think POW fights are overly complicated from a what actually is going on standpoint what makes them suck is EVERYTHING hits harder, tanks have to actually use saves, adds hit harder than most SS raid names, the dps checks needed are pretty strict and teh biggest gate for most guilds not that you would know that since your only pow experience is the loot pinata known as boar and you couldnt even kill that.. If classes were balanced around SS guess what? Nobody could kill anything in POW without it being nerfed into the loot pinata state that is Skyshrine raiding because guess what? there are no dps checks other than kill a grp of glorified heroic adds before more spawn in 45 seconds.. Guess how many things tanks need to use saves for other than scripted red texts which can be avoided? the answer is ZERO.. Given your logic tanks shouldnt be given many saves because they dont need them..To further illustrate this point which I guarantee will be lost on you, guess how much hp mobs in skyshrine have? The answer is ~500million, some more, some less. Guess how much the EASIEST mob in POW has? 900million with a MUCH higher dps check on adds that if not killed fast enough is a guaranteed wipe. The named hits harder than any mob in SS.. Lets look at commanders, again a fight that i dont think is overly complex but classes are balanced around doing such encounters.. 1 grp has to fight corpsemaul and 3 grps fight goreslaughter, each do their own thing, 1 has a red text joust the other has a death touch.. the 1 group mob? guess how much the average hit of his aoe is? the one that is every 30 seconds.. 92k damage... guess how much power the grp loses PER SECOND 32k.. guess how many power drains their are in SS? not many, and almost all of them are completely preventable by curing before the det ticks.. raiding 101..I could go on and on and on, EASILY.. The fact of the matter is if classes and what they are capable of were balanced around easy or even solo content guess how many mobs would be dead in pow? Boar and MAYBE berik but that is a stretch.. If you really need explanation after this about why the endgame content actually is herr derr harder from a what is required standpoint you shouldnt be posting.. anywhere..</blockquote>wait.. so you're saying that POW mobs would not die with out overpowerd crusaders? is that what your cry baby post is about? i have killed plenty of encounters that make POW seem like a kos script. i raided melee dps (assassin) thru TSO and that was quite possibly the worst possible class to play behind a healer. before you start telling me that a tank is melee dps.. lol you're first in line for cures and whatever else you need.. my dps class was left to fend for him self and if i made a mistake (that i didn't do often if ever) i was up on the chopping block or sat because i just was not needed since casters were much more effective and required very little care. again. your explanation about why you think this broken ability is balanced makes ZERO sense. two tanks are getting broken amounts of damage from this stance and are parsing T1 damage while the others are wondering why soe push this to live. if you want to make POW raids easier why don't you give more damage to dps classes or even bring back raid wide buffs and give chanters/bard more damage. since those classes are suppose to be dps classes along with utility. tanks were never suppose to be dps classes even if they have come close in the past. if soe wants to make tanks dps classes then make them use temps and combos the way the rest of the dps classes have to and FFS don't give them DOUBLE of any stat that is uncapped.edit. and yes the loot pinata was a problem but mostly because we didn't have the healers/right classes to stay alive not the dps check since i actually raid with very good damage dealers. unlike some of the "high end" guilds i have been a part off that just "heal thru" content.

Faildozer

08-12-2012, 03:12 AM

lol at thinking TSO was difficult.. look at how many guilds per server were clearing EVERYTHING.. outside of Ykesha, Miragul hm and munzok there were no 'difficult' encounters.. Assassins were bad in tso? really dude? really? you were bad in tso if thats how you feel lol.. assassins were fine.. comparing them to playing a healer in tso is even more lol..

Faildozer

08-12-2012, 03:14 AM

also how good are your dps if they are getting outparsed by tanks in reckless? not as good as you think sir. Also if you think beating the dps check on pinata is an accomplishment but dont have the healers or right classes to stay alive.. dude that is the easiest most simple fight in the zone and its not even close.. It is literally the glorified trash mob that any guild that can zone into POW with 4 grps should be able to kill.. If your healers are having problems keeping people alive GL with anything else.

sintextblindsu

08-12-2012, 03:26 AM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>also how good are your dps if they are getting outparsed by tanks in reckless? not as good as you think sir. Also if you think beating the dps check on pinata is an accomplishment but dont have the healers or right classes to stay alive.. dude that is the easiest most simple fight in the zone and its not even close.. It is literally the glorified trash mob that any guild that can zone into POW with 4 grps should be able to kill.. If your healers are having problems keeping people alive GL with anything else.</blockquote>we didn't have a full raid and didn't have the right classes and since then have had people go on vacation for the summer. i don't really care what we kill. i have fun either way but again that has nothing to do with this being a broken ability. having a hard time staying on topic guy? or you're deflecting because you know you can't match my superior intellect?<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>lol at thinking TSO was difficult.. look at how many guilds per server were clearing EVERYTHING.. outside of Ykesha, Miragul hm and munzok there were no 'difficult' encounters.. Assassins were bad in tso? really dude? really? you were bad in tso if thats how you feel lol.. assassins were fine.. comparing them to playing a healer in tso is even more lol..</blockquote>did you raid a melee dps in TSO? and yes i was pulling munzok and nothing compares to the fail that was raiding a melee dps in those times if you try to say other wise it's because you don't know any better but i guess it comes as no surprise.edit. seems you were raiding in mistimore in TSO so unless you were in hollow wrath or conviction you don't really have a leg stand on as far as what what mobs were hard and what mobs were not since the other guilds couldn't even kill gozak and that mob was a joke.. just saying elitist guy..

Faildozer

08-12-2012, 05:53 PM

<cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>also how good are your dps if they are getting outparsed by tanks in reckless? not as good as you think sir. Also if you think beating the dps check on pinata is an accomplishment but dont have the healers or right classes to stay alive.. dude that is the easiest most simple fight in the zone and its not even close.. It is literally the glorified trash mob that any guild that can zone into POW with 4 grps should be able to kill.. If your healers are having problems keeping people alive GL with anything else.</blockquote>we didn't have a full raid and didn't have the right classes and since then have had people go on vacation for the summer. i don't really care what we kill. i have fun either way but again that has nothing to do with this being a broken ability. having a hard time staying on topic guy? or you're deflecting because you know you can't match my superior intellect?<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>lol at thinking TSO was difficult.. look at how many guilds per server were clearing EVERYTHING.. outside of Ykesha, Miragul hm and munzok there were no 'difficult' encounters.. Assassins were bad in tso? really dude? really? you were bad in tso if thats how you feel lol.. assassins were fine.. comparing them to playing a healer in tso is even more lol..</blockquote>did you raid a melee dps in TSO? and yes i was pulling munzok and nothing compares to the fail that was raiding a melee dps in those times if you try to say other wise it's because you don't know any better but i guess it comes as no surprise.edit. seems you were raiding in mistimore in TSO so unless you were in hollow wrath or conviction you don't really have a leg stand on as far as what what mobs were hard and what mobs were not since the other guilds couldn't even kill gozak and that mob was a joke.. just saying elitist guy..</blockquote>Just lol at the superior intellect.. if you want to be taken seriously lets try not butchering the english language. I brought up Boar because YOU said you hadnt even killed that mob and that was the highest point you had raided and yet you feel the need to comment on how easy POW is and how stuff shouldnt be balanced around end game because its the same as raiding skyshrine (lol.) My point was it was balanced appropriately for the end game tier of raiding and you havent even set foot past the rug that gives loot at the zone in but you feel like you are qualified to make claims as to how the game should be balanced?? That is how this all relates to recklessness being balanced but im sure that you knew how this all tied in with that superior intellect and all.. Superior intellect.. please tell me you were giggling while typing that as much as i was while reading it.

sintextblindsu

08-12-2012, 06:34 PM

<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sintextblindsu wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>also how good are your dps if they are getting outparsed by tanks in reckless? not as good as you think sir. Also if you think beating the dps check on pinata is an accomplishment but dont have the healers or right classes to stay alive.. dude that is the easiest most simple fight in the zone and its not even close.. It is literally the glorified trash mob that any guild that can zone into POW with 4 grps should be able to kill.. If your healers are having problems keeping people alive GL with anything else.</blockquote>we didn't have a full raid and didn't have the right classes and since then have had people go on vacation for the summer. i don't really care what we kill. i have fun either way but again that has nothing to do with this being a broken ability. having a hard time staying on topic guy? or you're deflecting because you know you can't match my superior intellect?<cite>Faildozer@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>lol at thinking TSO was difficult.. look at how many guilds per server were clearing EVERYTHING.. outside of Ykesha, Miragul hm and munzok there were no 'difficult' encounters.. Assassins were bad in tso? really dude? really? you were bad in tso if thats how you feel lol.. assassins were fine.. comparing them to playing a healer in tso is even more lol..</blockquote>did you raid a melee dps in TSO? and yes i was pulling munzok and nothing compares to the fail that was raiding a melee dps in those times if you try to say other wise it's because you don't know any better but i guess it comes as no surprise.edit. seems you were raiding in mistimore in TSO so unless you were in hollow wrath or conviction you don't really have a leg stand on as far as what what mobs were hard and what mobs were not since the other guilds couldn't even kill gozak and that mob was a joke.. just saying elitist guy..</blockquote>Just lol at the superior intellect.. if you want to be taken seriously lets try not butchering the english language. I brought up Boar because YOU said you hadnt even killed that mob and that was the highest point you had raided and yet you feel the need to comment on how easy POW is and how stuff shouldnt be balanced around end game because its the same as raiding skyshrine (lol.) My point was it was balanced appropriately for the end game tier of raiding and you havent even set foot past the rug that gives loot at the zone in but you feel like you are qualified to make claims as to how the game should be balanced?? That is how this all relates to recklessness being balanced but im sure that you knew how this all tied in with that superior intellect and all.. Superior intellect.. please tell me you were giggling while typing that as much as i was while reading it.</blockquote>why would i bring up what i have killed when i KNOW that it does not mean squat? this stance is broken in EVERY facet of this game. the only time this stance is balanced is when it's NO IN USE. so please just stop posting your laughable drivel it's starting to annoy even one such as my self that enjoys trolling nitwits!