What the Brawlers and Palladins are really asking for.

[Stra]

<div></div>I picked a guardian to take damage. <-- note the period. I didnt want DPS skills, I didnt want divine magic or lay on hands. I wanted to be the uber damage sponge of my guild. But now it looks like the other tanking classes are having success in lobying for me to be cast into the same pit of irrelevancy that the EQ1 Warrior was thrown into. We can summarize it as follows: Guardian: Tanks at 100% ... does nothign else Monk/Brawler: Tanks at say 75% ... also has devcent DPS attacks. Pally: Tanks at say 75% and has heals, bufs and Lay on Hands SK: Tanks at 75% and has damage spells decent DPS. What these people are tryign to get changed is the above system to be the below system. Guardian: Tanks at 100% ... does nothign else Monk/Brawler: Tanks at say 100% ... also has devcent DPS attacks. Pally: Tanks at say 100% and has heals, bufs and Lay on Hands SK: Tanks at 100% and has damage spells decent DPS. What this means is that as a guardian we would be little more than gimped berzerkers. Everyone else can tank as well as us and yet can also use their DPS attacks and heals and divine magic. These people chose these classes knowing that they wouldnt tank as good as a guardian and now they want both worlds. If we let this happen, if we dont make our voice heard, we are going to get nerfed so hard that the only option will be to reroll or leave the game. I remember being a level 55 EQ warrior and the utter pain it was to basically nto be able to play because I just wasnt needed. I dont want to go down that road again. Yet if we dont get out there and start countering the Brawler / Crusader / Berzzerker one star propaganda, that is exactly what will be happening. If you are reading this SOE, let us tank. We chose guardians only to tank. We made enormous sacrificies just to tank. My aentire traits and traditions are aroudn tanking. Dont mess with us and render us irrelevant. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Strast on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:19 AM</span>

[Mouadieb]

this has basicly been said sooooo many times. I agree other classes can do as good of a job as me but I did finally hit 30 and I like my guardian again.  I have all adept 1 or higher taunts so I can hold agro ok.  I do wish we had more of a DPS skill or something that would do a bit more damage but I am happy with the class again. <div></div>

[Gaige]

That isn't what we are asking.  You get an "A" for effort and dramatical influence though.

[-Aonein-]

<P>In your post you are missing one thing, Berserkers are a Guardians Brother, we are both from the Warrior tree, Berserkers are happy where we are, we have no complaint with the way we are or the way Guardians are, we are basically a 50 / 50 Fighter class, decent tank not the best, decent DPS not the best, what Berserkers want is our Combat Arts and Abilities to work like there suppose too. Nothing else.</P> <P>Guardian and Berserker in the same armor, same level, have the <STRONG><U>exact</U></STRONG> same mitigation, we do more DPS then a Guard due to Offensive Combat Arts, Guards protect better due to Defensive Combat Arts, and we know if it all hits the fan on a Raid, we can back up a Guard, cause we have some minor self Defensive buffs that can make us 75% of what a Guardian can do, but we are never better then a Guardian, we are happy like that.</P> <P>Your quarrel is with Monks / Bruiser, not us, we basically want what you want, people to wake up and smell the coffee.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Blood and Ice<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:52 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>Your quarrel is with Moorgard and the SoE dev team.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Blood and Ice<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Its only too obvious that guardians and all plate tanks are avoiding too much.  Its going to be changed.  Deal with it.<BR>

[Madruk]

<DIV>Actually, you haven't the faintest clue how they are going to change tanks.  As Moorgard already stated it's all in discussion.  Avoidance is a problem across all boards right now, because with the correct buffs anyone can reach 100%+ avoidance.  This isn't just an issue with guardians and plate tanks.  They will have to rework mobs hit rates and damage to coincide with any change they make, especially raid based mobs.   This will take some time before you see any major changes.</DIV>

[Arsen]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<div></div> Its only too obvious that guardians and all plate tanks are avoiding too much.  Its going to be changed.  Deal with it. <div></div><hr></blockquote>It should be equally as obvious that plate tanks, and especially Guardians do not mitigate enough damage.  SK, Paladin, Inquisitor, Templar, Beserker - all these have the exact same mitigation capabilities as a guardian does, probably more since the Guardian's AC buffs are pretty poor.  A Guardian's defensive/parry buffs and tower shield abilities are what sets them apart from other classes in their tanking abilities - these all increase our avoidance.  These abilities <i>should </i>be increasing our mititgation instead.  That change is likely coming somewhere down the road.  It will be a big change for Guardians, and I have a feeling it will affect the combat system as a whole - I don't believe there is going to be a simple fix for this.  However, I am ready for it.  My Character is built to be a mitigation based tank, and as long as the change is done properly, it shouldn't be a big deal.</span><div></div>

[EvilIguana9]

<div></div>You seem to have a very narrow minded and paranoid view.  Nobody expects a paladin to have the same skills as a guardian + class specific benefits.  Ditto with the 4 other fighter sub classes.  What people want is balance.  Currently guardians mitigate better than any other class, and have higher avoidance than any other class, as well as access to more defense skill buffs than any other class.  That isn't balance my friend.  Brawlers should be the kings of avoidance and warriors the kings of mitigation.  Paladins and shadow knights SHOULD tank better than either in situations where we can get our spells off and the fight is short enough for our mana to last.  Guardians should not be able to tank better than the other fighter classes without expending any power, which it seems they can currently.  Oh and this is downright funny: "same pit of irrelevancy that the EQ1 Warrior was thrown into. " That leads me to believe you never played EQ 1, or if you did only during the few month period during planes of power when Paladins were actually useful.  Warriors is EQ 1 were the best tanks by a large margin in all areas in all situations, not taking defensive into account.  If you add in the ridiculously overpowered defensive disicipline and it's horrendously cheesy upgrade stonewall that removed any real downsides then you see a picture where one class dominates every tank situation with no real pitfalls.  Even warrior aggro stopped being an issue when they were given no fail, ranged +aggro spells in addition to their aggro magnet procs and dual weapons. <div></div><p>Message Edited by EvilIguana966 on <span class=date_text>03-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:05 PM</span>

[Seomon]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote:<BR>Guardian: Tanks at 100% ... does nothign else <BR>Monk/Brawler: Tanks at say 100% ... also has devcent DPS attacks. <BR>Pally: Tanks at say 100% and has heals, bufs and Lay on Hands <BR>SK: Tanks at 100% and has damage spells decent DPS. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I get the point of your post, and I feel for you guys with all this nerf screaming from the Avoidance Fighters, but honestly, this is kind of the way it should be. We're all tanks. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the Paladin part... My Mitigation shouldn't be as high as a Guardians, because I have heals to make up for that, and since I don't have anywhere near as many HPs as a Guardian can get, my DPS should be a little higher. But that's basically the way it is now. No Paladin that I've ever run into, or read on the Paladin forums, wants to be just like a Guardian. We tank in different ways, and we can both do a good job in the Main Tank role or the Off Tank role (though most Guardians don't like to admit that <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ).</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Arsenal wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR>Its only too obvious that guardians and all plate tanks are avoiding too much.  Its going to be changed.  Deal with it.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><FONT color=#ffff00>It should be equally as obvious that plate tanks, and especially Guardians do not mitigate enough damage.</FONT>  SK, Paladin, Inquisitor, Templar, Beserker - all these have the exact same mitigation capabilities as a guardian does, probably more since the Guardian's AC buffs are pretty poor.  A Guardian's defensive/parry buffs and tower shield abilities are what sets them apart from other classes in their tanking abilities - these all increase our avoidance.  These abilities <I>should </I>be increasing our mititgation instead.  That change is likely coming somewhere down the road.  It will be a big change for Guardians, and I have a feeling it will affect the combat system as a whole - I don't believe there is going to be a simple fix for this.  However, I am ready for it.  My Character is built to be a mitigation based tank, and as long as the change is done properly, it shouldn't be a big deal.</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Exactly.  Leave the avoidance to us and mitigate like you are designed to do.</P> <P>You guys are NOT avoidance tanks.</P> <P>We are NOT mitigation tanks.</P> <P>We rely on avoidance first, with minor mitigation in order to even our spikes, and make our damage over time manageable for the healers.</P> <P>You should rely on mitigation first, with minor avoidance in order to make your damage over time manageable for the healers.<BR></P>

[tas]

<DIV>Well all I have to say is that it is not the bezerkers who are  crying. I am a bezerker and I know I should not tank as well as a Guardian since I do not have the defensive skills that you all have. I am fine with that and so are most to all the bezerkers I know. If I wanted to tank that well I would of picked a guardian. The problem is with people like Gage who are monks. They want to be the supermen of this game. They want to out tank every other class and  out dps every other class. It short they want to do it all. I am sure he would want to be able to heal himself like the priest class too.  The berzerkers  have already been nerfted a few times because of people like him who all they know to do  is to cry. Their is no way monks should out tank bezerkers since they do not have  plated armor  and not in a million years should they come close to tanking like a guardian. They should just out dps us. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sumloard 35 berserker</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<P>okay so what part of not making sense????</P> <P>Avoidance: Spiky, risky, inconsistent, dangerous</P> <P>Mitigation: Constant, not failsafe but closer, consistent</P> <DIV>Okay so fine if you still can tank a raid mob or anything else. a bad roll will still exist. period. there is no way to get a consistency around a random number, even if the slider for its ability to fail is this long..    <______________></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>there is still the same exact possibility for that exact same bar to ding 5 times right here <___1____________></DIV> <DIV>and if that happens against a mob that hits for 4000 then??? =dead player, of any king that relies strictly on avoidance to tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>that is not a complicated concept. which leads me back down the road of even if they make us exclusively avoidance, and guardians, exclusively mitigation, mitigation will still be more consistent. especially if they change all the buffs to effect Mitigation as opposed to defense. then what??? that would make the templar even more desire because a reactive heal would be godly in that case.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We know what **** SOUNDS**** right in our heads as far as the way things *****SHOULD***** be, but in actuality, i think another direction is in order simply because the odds will NEVER be in our favor unless we magically become better tanks over all than the ac=hp=mitigation= aggro contrl = that a guardian provides.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>with or without brawlers being the kings of avoidance.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> task1 wrote:<BR> <DIV>Well all I have to say is that it is not the bezerkers who are  crying. I am a bezerker and I know I should not tank as well as a Guardian since I do not have the defensive skills that you all have. I am fine with that and so are most to all the bezerkers I know. If I wanted to tank that well I would of picked a guardian. The problem is with people like Gage who are monks. They want to be the supermen of this game. They want to out tank every other class and  out dps every other class. It short they want to do it all. I am sure he would want to be able to heal himself like the priest class too.  The berzerkers  have already been nerfted a few times because of people like him who all they know to do  is to cry. Their is no way monks should out tank bezerkers since they do not have  plated armor  and not in a million years should they come close to tanking like a guardian. They should just out dps us. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sumloard 35 berserker</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Congratulations on never reading any of my posts.</P> <P>You think I want to outdamage everyone?</P> <P>HAHAHAHA.<BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

well i would vouch for that sumloard , gage would gladly turn in his sticks to sit back and be a punching bag:smileyvery-happy::smileyindifferent:

[maluv]

<P>Just my opinion, but i highly doubt that SoE would make brawlers full advoidence and plate full mitagation. they'd just even it out and make it or more dominenating characteristic</P> <P>yes, i am a horrible speller :smileywink:</P>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Arsenal wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR>Its only too obvious that guardians and all plate tanks are avoiding too much.  Its going to be changed.  Deal with it.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><FONT color=#ffff00>It should be equally as obvious that plate tanks, and especially Guardians do not mitigate enough damage.</FONT>  SK, Paladin, Inquisitor, Templar, Beserker - all these have the exact same mitigation capabilities as a guardian does, probably more since the Guardian's AC buffs are pretty poor.  A Guardian's defensive/parry buffs and tower shield abilities are what sets them apart from other classes in their tanking abilities - these all increase our avoidance.  These abilities <I>should </I>be increasing our mititgation instead.  That change is likely coming somewhere down the road.  It will be a big change for Guardians, and I have a feeling it will affect the combat system as a whole - I don't believe there is going to be a simple fix for this.  However, I am ready for it.  My Character is built to be a mitigation based tank, and as long as the change is done properly, it shouldn't be a big deal.</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Exactly.  Leave the avoidance to us and mitigate like you are designed to do.</P> <P>You guys are NOT avoidance tanks.</P> <P>We are NOT mitigation tanks.</P> <P>We rely on avoidance first, with minor mitigation in order to even our spikes, and make our damage over time manageable for the healers.</P> <P>You should rely on mitigation first, with minor avoidance in order to make your damage over time manageable for the healers.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Gage, your view seems to have changed over the long run.  This change, as posted by moor said that they are thinking of making mobs hit more often but for less damage.  This won't change much.</P> <P>First, you yourself said that in groups you are perfectly fine.  All you keep complaining about are raiding situations.  So lets go back to the discussion I had with you about Migitation tanking.  It doesn't matter what they do, migitation tanking is still the most reliable cause it keeps the most constant damage on a MT.  It's more predictable.  Migitation tanking will still be the preferred when usable by most people.</P> <P>Avoidance tanking is still going to always be spikey.  There is no way to perfectly balance between the two.  </P> <P>Plus, with the change Moor said was in discussion was for mobs to hit more often and for less damage.  This makes a migitation tank even more useful as he'll be migitating even less damage.  Making the damage coming in on teh migitation tank even more predictatable.</P> <P>I don't see a nerf to guardians coming honestly.  Least if it does, it will have an added benefit I believe.</P> <P>And you want things to be balanced, I want my [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] taunts to actaully work.  It pisses me off that a berserker at the same level as me can expend absolutely nil amount of power while i'm sitting there with Adept iii taunts and pushing 6 different taunt buttons.  And the berserker still pulls aggro.  Thats annoying.</P><p>Message Edited by Eelyen on <span class=date_text>03-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:39 PM</span>

[Seomon]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <P>I don't see a nerf to guardians coming honestly.  Least if it does, it will have an added benefit I believe.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I don't see a nerf to guardians, but I see a nerf to the +Defense skills. Since you guys have more of that than anyone else (mine's at +16 self-buffed), it'll hurt you a little more than the rest of us, but all tanks will feel that nerf. Will it be for the better? I don't know. I'm not sure if it would be better to have a hardcap or to change all the +Defense skills to +Mitigation skills. It's going to be interesting how this turns out, mostly because anything that affects tanks affects everyone else in the game.<BR>

[Morriz]

Paladin two levels lower than me with almost identical gear (I have a couple of minor pieces better than his, like my ring/boots), had 3% less mitigation unbuffed than I did. Self buffed I had 8% higher mitigation. Class Balance...<div></div>

[Seomon]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Morrizar wrote:<BR>Paladin two levels lower than me with almost identical gear (I have a couple of minor pieces better than his, like my ring/boots), had 3% less mitigation unbuffed than I did. Self buffed I had 8% higher mitigation. Class Balance... <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I don't see what you're trying to get at there, could you be a little more specific? If you're talking about the mitigation number in general, I believe that unbuffed, a Paladin and a Guardian with identical gear and identical stats will have the same mitigation number.</P> <P>And just for the record... I'm not here screaming for a Guardian nerf or anything like that. I'm trying to say that from my personal exerience, we (Paladins) can tank just as well as you can, and we (Paladins) are not looking for a Guardian nerf. If it comes to a nerf at all, it will be to the +Defense skill, and we both have that. We'll both feel the pain of it, but if they're changed to +Mitigation buffs instead of +Defense buffs, then you'll still have a higher Mitigation number than us because you have more buffs than we do that will do that. That's fine with me though, I get heals. But I can only talk from a Paladin point of view, not a Berzerker or Brawler point of view.</P> <P>PS. To the OP, we're Paladins, not Palladins <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <FONT color=#000000 size=1>(<FONT color=#333333>I'm just kidding, don't kill me please</FONT>)</FONT></P>

[Ashtaro]

<DIV>Imo, a brawler should kick butt.  A guardian should protect others from getting their butt kicked.  Neither should do the others respective job as well.  I do not think, under any circumstances, a brawler should tank as well as a guardian, nor do I think a guardian, under any circumstances, should out-dps a brawler.  To me, a brawler should be exceptional at DPS, decent at tanking.  A guardian should be decent at DPS, exceptional at tanking.  You cannot "even out" their tanking abilities (whether it be tweaking out avoidance and/or mitigation of either class), and yet allow one to retain superior dps.  Also, if you make them have equal DPS, and tank equally well, then you may as well get rid of one or the other, as they are functionally equivalent.  The classes are too blurred as it is.</DIV>

[Kryog]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR>That isn't what we are asking.  You get an "A" for effort and dramatical influence though. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>While I generally enjoy your posts and 5 star you for the effort and gusto you put forth in your points, I have to say the man has a point.   Although I don't profess to assume what others wishes are, I do agree that if everyone could tank equally well as a Guardian under any and all circumstances then there would be no point to being a Guardian.  <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If playing a Guardian means you have one certain natural advantage, what adavantage would that be?   I'd say overall hit points and mitigation factor.  Right now we achieve that goal, so we're pretty much in line with the vision I personally had for us.  I'm not a developer, but it shows me I chose the right class for my desires (also, like the OP, to be a "meat shield" for my guild).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So throughout all your arguments, gripes, and complaints, the fact of the matter is if the developers are going to make you equally as effective as a tank, it means they pretty much have to make you equal as a tank, which runs the risk of putting us as identical classes.   We don't do as much damage as Monks, and that's fine.   Monks don't mitigate as well as Guardians, and that's fine.  Because they can't means they end up being less effective tanks on epic raid encounters, and apparently that's not fine to you and some others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've seen many people post that they should improve a brawlers ability to mitigate/avoid and what not, but reduce the damage they do.   Would that not then make them identical to the Guardian, only with different colored pixels and different names on the buttons they push?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gaige]

<P>That isn't what I want.</P> <P>I want the option to be able to tank raid mobs effectively.</P> <P>I want to be an evasion tank because that is what I am.  I do not want the other four tank classes to rely on evasion first, mitigation second.  This makes brawlers always less effective, because we lack mitigation and hp, not to mention taunts.</P> <P>Our DPS scales fine.  We aren't that far ahead of other fighters, zerkers can beat us on group mobs, and guardians can contribute adequate DPS in a dual wield off tank scenario.</P> <P>All fighters have some sort of "protection" buff to use when offtanking.</P> <P>I just want the brawler class to be the best at evasion/avoidance because that is our niche.  Its not balanced to have heavy armor mitigation tanks buffing up and relying on avoidance to be "better" tanks.</P> <P>I don't care if you are "better" tanks on raid mobs, just not the only.  (Jez is slowly proving that we can in fact tank x4).</P> <P>I also think its totally broken that the heavy armor fighters are relying on avoidance so much while having superior (by a long shot) mitigation.</P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:14 AM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>That isn't what I want.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>We know what <STRONG><U>you</U></STRONG> want, we have seen 1000 posts of it.</FONT></P> <P>I want the option to be able to tank raid mobs effectively.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>To have the option means to do the job equally like a Guardian does, reguardless of if its in the form of Avoidance or Mitigation resulting in no <STRONG><U>Diversity</U></STRONG> cause you can do more DPS then a Guardian, but do the job equally or just as well in the form of avoidance.</FONT></P> <P>I want to be an evasion tank because that is what I am.  I do not want the other four tank classes to rely on evasion first, mitigation second.  This makes brawlers always less effective, because we lack mitigation and hp, not to mention taunts.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You already are a Evasion tank having 77% Avoidance unbuffed speaks for itself.</FONT></P> <P>Our DPS scales fine.  We aren't that far ahead of other fighters, zerkers can beat us on group mobs, and guardians can contribute adequate DPS in a dual wield off tank scenario.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You dont understand that the reason it looks like a Berserker out damages you is because our DPS is being spread across a number of mobs, where you do the same amount of DPS to the single target you have targeted, and you do it in the same time it takes us to cast a series of 4 second cast time AE spells, by the way Gage, in that 4 seconds it takes us to cast them, we are not causing any damage what so ever.</FONT></P> <P>All fighters have some sort of "protection" buff to use when offtanking.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>This is ture, but use your common sense Gage, if there is a Guardian and Monk LFG, who do you think there going to invite for DPS?</FONT></P> <P>I just want the brawler class to be the best at evasion/avoidance because that is our niche.  Its not balanced to have heavy armor mitigation tanks buffing up and relying on avoidance to be "better" tanks.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Currently any class in the game can buff upto 100% avoidance, its not only Plate tanks, its to do with buff stacking, nothing more. If you played EQ1, which you havent, and someone tryed to cast a buff on you that was weaker then the one you had, it told you that you cant cast it on your target, and if the spell was stronger that was cast on you then the one you had, it would over write it, not stack with it, which is what needs to start happening here, but since they didnt spend enough time in beta working these problems out, we get to do it for them.</FONT></P> <P>I don't care if you are "better" tanks on raid mobs, just not the only.  (Jez is slowly proving that we can in fact tank x4).</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Gage, you are missing the whole point, Avoidance no matter how you look at it is spikey and unpredicable, there is no way around it then by making it over powering, which is why SoE made the mistake of putting Brawlers in the Fighter class as Tanks. The disparity between Mitigation and Avoidance is a impossible gap to close and they cant do it, so they will more then likely leave your Avoidance where it is, and take away most of Plate class avoidance and convert it into extra Mitigation, it only makes sense, seeing at the moment, you can get 75% Avoidance unbuffed. If you think there going to give you anymore Avoidance techniques then you already have, then you will be sadly mistaken.</FONT></P> <P>I also think its totally broken that the heavy armor fighters are relying on avoidance so much while having superior (by a long shot) mitigation.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Gage, how are we relying on Avoidance, when Defense Skill, Agility, Parry Skill and Block Skill all add to Avoidance, its a part of the games mechanics, we arent relying on anything, we are simply playing the game. Again, they need to stop Defense from adding to Avoidance, and convert the entire Defense skill to add to Mitigation, and if thats not enough to make a difference in Avoidance, then take some of the massive amount of Agility from the Plate class armor, replace it with STA / STR stats, and extra Mitigation values.</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:14 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Blood and Ice<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server<p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:38 PM</span>

[SageMarrow]

<P>i saw some light armor gloves tonight for level 40, +8agi with +1deflection and +1 parry... not good AC, but in essnce a decent trade off...</P> <P>i think they may be going this direction, but even still - it will just equal a nerf if a player has a full set at level 45 and has + 10 deflection and parry, and cant be hit by mobs of equal level... but hey.. its worth a try.</P>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Sorry one thing i forgot to add in that Gage, Health Points. There is a significant difference between the amount a Warrior and Brawler has or can obtain. As time goes on, and mobs become more and more powerful, and start hitting in the 7 - 8k melee damage range, do you think a Monk / Brusier is going to be standing there absorbing that kind of damage, or is your next plea for help from Moorgard and friends going to be to boost Brawler HP too?</P> <P>Its simple, if a Hit pass's through Avoidance, it gets sucked up in Mitigation, if it pass's through Mitigation, at least we have 3 - 4k more HP then you do to withstand any uncommon spikey damage due to Mitigation failing. So i guess, if you dont get what you want out of the next adjustment that Devs bring upon us yet again, Monks / Bruisers have one last get out of jail free card to use and try and then equal the same amount of HP that a plate class has because you are going to learn your lesson the hard way, and discover that you can have 100% avoidance, but when tanking a mob that has 200% attack rating, your Avoidance has just left you wide open and its down to mitigation baby, if that fails, well pray the Priests can heal fast enough to keep a Tank alive. </P> <P>Mitigation is the final form of defense, after that, it all comes down to how much HP you have.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Blood and Ice<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:31 PM</span>

[Stra]

<div></div><a target="_blank" href="../view_profile?user.id=49373"><span></span></a><b>@Aonein:</b> I 5 starred you twice for excellent answers. On topic now: But lets assume that they take away guardian avoidance and replace it with mitigation. Lets even assume that they do a 1 to 1 ratio with mitigation and avoidance tradeoff. There are yet more problems on the way. The first one that I cn think of is that Im going to spend half of my time stunned or stifled. There are many mob attacks that have a chance to stun or stifle if they land the attacks. Now we are talkign about a situation where they will be landing virtually all attacks. When fighting 6 mobs, who do you choose? The guy that spends the whole fight stunned and cant taunt anything or the guy who can avoid the stuns and keep off the aggro?There are a multitude of problems with the suggestions comming out of the brawler / crusader camps and these players are ONLY talking about tanking ability. I dont see monks volunteering to give up their DPS or paladins volunteering to give up their heals and LoH. I just see them comparing tanking ability as if that is the whole equation. With a guardian, it IS the whole equation. Those other classes have many more tools at their disposal than we do.There is a trend being set where you are absolutely right. The monks will be getting hit 2 or 3 times in an epic fight for 3k to 4k damage. They will be doing just fine then by pure random odds, the mobs will land 3 in a row and they will go from 90% health to dead in less than a second. At that point they will be back here asking for more mitigation and more HP. Gage wants to be able to tank epic mobs, but that means he will need much more than avoidance. Even at level 36 I can be buffed to have 4k+ hp. A monk cant be buffed anywhere near that. That makes a big difference when that mob DOES land damage. So Gage wont be able to have his dream unless he gets mitigation, HP and his coveted avoidance. The trend I am seeing now is that they are going exactly for that goal.Some other observations.* Guardians do not get invited to group for DPS. (note the period) The only time you will see a second guardian in a group is 1) if they are friends in a guild or something and 2) if there is no one else available to fill the spot.* Anyone who says that guardians have "decent DPS" has clearly not played one. There are fights (especially epics) where I wont use one attack combat ability. Im too busy holding aggro to worry about killing the mob. If you parse the logs my damage is laughable. Why? Because Im keeping the bad guys off my freinds.* When in multiple encounters or multiple mob encounters, avoidance becomes critical for not being stunned by one of the 7 mobs that can stun you in the encounter.* Guardians still have our issues that we cant mitigate any damage from special attacks nor do our resists work properly. Mages have higher resists than I do and that silly.I also offer appology to my Berzerker brothers for including them in this feeding frenzy. Its good to know at least the berzerkers know what is at stake here.<div></div>

[Corv]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote: <p>You guys are NOT avoidance tanks.</p> <p>We are NOT mitigation tanks.</p> <p>We rely on avoidance first, with minor mitigation in order to even our spikes, and make our damage over time manageable for the healers.</p> <p>You should rely on mitigation first, with minor avoidance in order to make your damage over time manageable for the healers.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> The whole point to mitigation oriented tanks is that they should take damage at a more consistent rate than an avoidance based class.  (i.e The guy in plate gets hit often, but lighty, while the guy in a loin-cloth gets hit damned hard when he does get hit.)  Right now, the guy in plate *has* to avoid nearly as much as the guy in a loincloth does because mitigation is currently gimped.  Even when encased in a half tonne of steel, Guardians still get hit pretty darned hard when they do get hit.  I won't dispute the fact that the balance between mitigation and avoidance is currently out of whack.  However, I feel obliged to point out that if Guardians do become mitigation based tanks they will only become more desireable for raids, since the damage they take will be that much more predictable.  Keeping an avoidance based class alive will be much trickier to do reliably since a few lucky hits in a row will lay them out flat.  The shift from avoidance to mitigation for guardians will only make monks look worse for raid encounters where reliability is paramount for your MT.  Chortle all you wish about the impending "nerfs" coming for Guardians.   You still won't me maintanking anytime soon.  </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Corvan on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:04 AM</span>

[Wulfe]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>Its simple, if a Hit pass's through Avoidance, it gets sucked up in Mitigation, if it pass's through Mitigation, at least we have 3 - 4k more HP then you do to withstand any uncommon spikey damage due to Mitigation failing.<BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I agree with your posts but this thing here is something I do not agree and I think not even Monks do... becouse I have leveled last 20 something levels together with paladin and monk and now , at lv48 I, guardian have most hp's but both monk and paladin are really close behind. Really close. I do not have numbers but <STRONG>fully buffed,</STRONG> same level, tanking geared, we are talking about few hundred hp difference - which is something that happens even within the different guardian races ....</DIV> <DIV>To many times other classes compare their own hp and ac to guardians <STRONG>buffed</STRONG> stats. Not all buffs are groupbuffs. So groups tank usually has some extra buffs from healer(s) that make him tank better at that time than any other tank class in that group who does not have those buffs...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wulfeen 48 Guardian.</DIV>

[Jay]

<DIV><FONT size=2>Wow. The paranoia, class-hate, and melodrama infect the guardian boards too, huh? Go figure. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2>Let's just reduce it back to archetypes. No subclasses, just four professions: fighter, mage, cleric, scout. Of course each class would still think it is somehow the most broken, each class would still worry that some other class is going to infringe on its sacred territory, each class would still blame the others for any changes to their own class, each class would continually want more. Round and round we go...</FONT></DIV>

[CherobylJ]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Its only too obvious that guardians and all plate tanks are avoiding too much.  Its going to be changed.  Deal with it.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Dont be a jerk.  You win zero points with me (and others) when you start posting like this.<BR> <p>Message Edited by CherobylJoe on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:41 AM</span>

[nig]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>Your quarrel is with Moorgard and the SoE dev team.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Blood and Ice<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Its only too obvious that guardians and all plate tanks are avoiding too much.  Its going to be changed.  Deal with it.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>If it is so obvious we are avoiding too much, Then im fine if they twink their code so that  avoidance is decreased for any classes, Brawler will avoid more and Fighter less , but we have to change the way mitigation work and  we, warrior, have to mitigate far more than we do and lower the brawler mitigation as well.</P> <P>At end Fighter will get hit more often but for less dmg, Brawler will be hit less often but for more dmg.</P> <P>Also Brawler dps have to be decrease a lot down as if on long fight warrior and brawler need the same amount of healing, we do deserve the same dmg output.</P>

[Ashtaro]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> nigni wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>If it is so obvious we are avoiding too much, Then im fine if they twink their code so that  avoidance is decreased for any classes, Brawler will avoid more and Fighter less , but we have to change the way mitigation work and  we, warrior, have to mitigate far more than we do and lower the brawler mitigation as well.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P>At end Fighter will get hit more often but for less dmg, Brawler will be hit less often but for more dmg.</P> <P>Also Brawler dps have to be decrease a lot down as if on long fight warrior and brawler need the same amount of healing, we do deserve the same dmg output.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>/agree</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A monk should be able to avoid attacks like crazy, but when the opponent does manage connect, it <EM>should</EM> be downright devastating.  Light armor should offer a great deal of avoidance, but very, very little mitigation.</DIV>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Ashtaroth wrote: <blockquote> <hr> nigni wrote: <blockquote>If it is so obvious we are avoiding too much, Then im fine if they twink their code so that  avoidance is decreased for any classes, Brawler will avoid more and Fighter less , but we have to change the way mitigation work and  we, warrior, have to mitigate far more than we do and lower the brawler mitigation as well.</blockquote> <p>At end Fighter will get hit more often but for less dmg, Brawler will be hit less often but for more dmg.</p> <p>Also Brawler dps have to be decrease a lot down as if on long fight warrior and brawler need the same amount of healing, we do deserve the same dmg output.</p> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>/agree</div> <div> </div> <div>A monk should be able to avoid attacks like crazy, but when the opponent does manage connect, it <em>should</em> be downright devastating.  Light armor should offer a great deal of avoidance, but very, very little mitigation.</div><hr></blockquote> I wonder if some sorta avoidance cap based on armor type can be implemented?.  Heavy would cap lower than Medium, etc. I just think that from a realisitc view point..the more and more heavy armor I wear the less and less mobile i shout get. Also Shields being avoidance doesnt really make logical sense to me..I mean If I put on a big honkin shield my intent is to stand there and get beat on..not become even more mobile and hard to hit    If something hits my shield, sure im gonna take alot less dmg but I should still take some simply due to the blunt force of the hit..i,e back of shields smacks into my chest, etc.. </span><div></div>

[Fyvoclok_Shadow]

<P>I would go so far as to say that all plate tanks are meant to mitigate and avoid equally, and therefore absorb damage equally.  What sets them apart is their alternate focus.  For zerkers, it's added offense.  For paladins and shadowknights, it's a mixture of offense/defense/utility.  For Guardians, it's the unrivaled ability to protect other group members, and take damage meant for them.  Just look at the skills.  What makes guardians the best pure tank (and they are, if tanking is defined as keeping monsters from harming other group members, while also being able to withstand punishment), are the guardian's skills that add to the whole group's defensive abilities, while also directing incoming damage to the guardian.  That's why the guardian's skill tree is entitled "protect".</P> <P>By contrast, the berserker is (and/or should be) equally able to take and avoid damage.  Likewise, the berserker should be as good at taunting.  The difference is that, where the guardian is the best at keeping the priest/mage/scout from taking damage (if they draw aggro away from the tank), the berserker sacrifices that ability so that he can deal more damage.  That's it.  End of story.  Now, there are probably skill bugs and such that keep this from being in perfect balance, but that's the way it seems to be intended, and would result in good balance between the tanks.  Bottom line, though, all plate tanks should (as to themselves) be able to avoid and mitigate equally.  The balance comes in the form of the other things they bring to the group.</P> <P>We just need to get past this outmoded concept that "tanking" means only the ability to taunt, and take damage.  EQ2 expands the definition of "tanking" by adding other methods of keeping your group from taking damage.  Tanking is not just taking damage anymore.  Other plate tanks should be just as good at taking damage as guardians.  But that's a far cry from saying other plate tanks are just as good at tanking.</P> <DIV>EDIT: I know this is nonresponsive to the ongoing "who is meant to be best at avoidance" argument.  Rather, this is meant to respond to the original poster.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by Fyvoclok_Shadow on <SPAN class=date_text>03-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:32 AM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Fyvoclok_Shadow on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:48 AM</span>

[Geothe]

<P>"Also Shields being avoidance doesnt really make logical sense to me..I mean If I put on a big honkin shield my intent is to stand there and get beat on..not become even more mobile and hard to hit    If something hits my shield, sure im gonna take alot less dmg but I should still take some simply due to the blunt force of the hit..i,e back of shields smacks into my chest, etc.."</P> <P>Our Shields and our Parry is part of the reason for our "really high" avoidance for plate wearers.  Yes, technically, these two skills should be included in avoidance, because they allow you to not take any damage at all from an attack. ie, Block an attack or parry an attack entirely.</P> <P>I guess it all comes down to what you define real avoidance as.  Personally, I see avoidance more of dodging... jumping out of the way of an attack entirely to avoid getting hit.  ANd this is where Monks/Bruisers should totally dominate.  But, with sony including parry and blocking into avoidance (and Guardians getting self buffs that increase parrying) our avoidance, by sony's definition, because quite high.</P> <P>Since Sony decided to split of AC values... they may as well split them up all the way, to avoid such confusion.</P> <P>I see Plate tanks as "avoiding" (dodging) attack very little.. but standing there and blocking/parrying many attacks and then tanking less damage when they get hit. (ie high mitigation, parry, block, and low dodge).</P> <P>Monks, on the otherhand, jump all around to avoid gettin hit at all, but when they do get hit. its like a ton of brikes (ie high really dodge, decent parry, low block, low mitigation).</P> <P> </P>

[mauiwuchild]

<P>I played a Monk for years in EQ1, this issue is at the core of why I am playing a Guardian now.</P> <P>Monks got shafted in EQ1, by the equipment SOE allowed them to wear. There were not even a handful of Monks tanking things they weren't supposed to because of all the ridiculous ALL/ALL gear EQ1 had, and omg there went Monk mitigation, which absolutely SCREWED the 'decent' but not 'uber' Monks. But YAY.. Monks got to be rampage tanks sometimes (when there were no SKs).</P> <P>Fast-forward to EQ2. I don't think anyone wants to Tank *as good* as Guardians. Brawlers are asking for a niche, one that is VERY hard to find especially when SOE doesn't even know it's encounters very well.</P> <P>The GOOD thing is that they have great tools to play with now to balance it out. I still don't want to play a Brawler because I had enough of the 'good at some things but not BEST at one thing' (even pulling was taken away from Monks eventually in EQ1... and don't get me started on the 'content' they put in the game designed around making Monks try and exploit pathing to pull... anyway).</P> <P>We as players tend to get a little posessive over our favorite hobbey, and that is attatched to your favorite class here in EQ2.</P> <P>Know that even in Beta, I knew this team of devs would work hard to make this a great game, and this time, nobody is going to get screwed, however, it's going to take some time to make some changes that everyone can be happy with. The game has changed several times over in just a few months, and core changes are not to be taken lightly.</P> <P>I personally think they key to Brawlers is Hitpoints scaled to content, then a delicate balance of spikey damage (due to low mit) in relation to healing abilities. I think it should take about 1 more healer to every 4 to keep a Brawler up as opposed to a Guardian, with it being deadly to try with 4, but doable (mind you this is for argumentative reasoning... nothing based on data)</P>

[Owa]

<P>Mr Strast,</P> <P>If you took the time to read the posts on this subject on the Monk boards, you would see that there is by no means a majority view that Brawlers should be as effective Tanks as Warriors. Some monks feel that way - some don't. And I don't think even Gage wants to have the Superman character you describe. In fact he's perfectly happy to lose his DPS to gain more defensive strength. </P> <P>Personally, I'm in favour of Guardians and Berserkers having the edge defensively and Brawlers having the edge in offense - kinda sorta how it says in the handbook. There does seem to be an issue with avoidance but please read through the arguments on this subject on our boards before claiming to your guardian and Berserker 'brothers' that we all want you nerfed. </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> -Aonein- wrote: <P>Its simple, if a Hit pass's through Avoidance, it gets sucked up in Mitigation, if it pass's through Mitigation, at least we have 3 - 4k more HP then you do to withstand any uncommon spikey damage due to Mitigation failing.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Its simple, you shouldn't have avoidance, you SHOULD get hit.  You should use your mitigation to lessen the damage.  Not avoid it entirely.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>WE should rely on our minor mitigation IF we get hit.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Besides, 3 to 4k more HP than me?  Doubtful.  I have 4225 unbuffed or so so I can get some pretty good HP numbers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Besides, if the system worked I wouldn't need the HP because I wouldn't be getting hit as much, you would need the HP because you would be getting hit every time.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote: <P>There are fights (especially epics) where I wont use one attack combat ability. Im too busy holding aggro to worry about killing the mob. If you parse the logs my damage is laughable. Why? Because Im keeping the bad guys off my freinds.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I've had fights where I didn't use one attack combat ability either.<BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Fyvoclok_Shadow wrote:<BR> <P>I would go so far as to say that all plate tanks are meant to mitigate and avoid equally, and therefore absorb damage equally.  What sets them apart is their alternate focus.  For zerkers, it's added offense.  For paladins and shadowknights, it's a mixture of offense/defense/utility.  For Guardians, it's the unrivaled ability to protect other group members, and take damage meant for them.  Just look at the skills.  What makes guardians the best pure tank (and they are, if tanking is defined as keeping monsters from harming other group members, while also being able to withstand punishment), are the guardian's skills that add to the whole group's defensive abilities, while also directing incoming damage to the guardian.  That's why the guardian's skill tree is entitled "protect".</P> <P>By contrast, the berserker is (and/or should be) equally able to take and avoid damage.  Likewise, the berserker should be as good at taunting.  The difference is that, where the guardian is the best at keeping the priest/mage/scout from taking damage (if they draw aggro away from the tank), the berserker sacrifices that ability so that he can deal more damage.  That's it.  End of story.  Now, there are probably skill bugs and such that keep this from being in perfect balance, but that's the way it seems to be intended, and would result in good balance between the tanks.  Bottom line, though, all plate tanks should (as to themselves) be able to avoid and mitigate equally.  The balance comes in the form of the other things they bring to the group.</P> <P>We just need to get past this outmoded concept that "tanking" means only the ability to taunt, and take damage.  EQ2 expands the definition of "tanking" by adding other methods of keeping your group from taking damage.  Tanking is not just taking damage anymore.  Other plate tanks should be just as good at taking damage as guardians.  But that's a far cry from saying other plate tanks are just as good at tanking.</P> <DIV>EDIT: I know this is nonresponsive to the ongoing "who is meant to be best at avoidance" argument.  Rather, this is meant to respond to the original poster.</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>If plate tanks can mitigate and avoid equally, we should be able to too.  So where is our increased mitigation?<BR>

[Geothe]

<P>"Its simple, you shouldn't have avoidance, you SHOULD get hit.  You should use your mitigation to lessen the damage.  Not avoid it entirely."</P> <P>WRONG.</P> <P>We should have avoidance.  Just our avoidance should be base more off of our Blocking and Parry instead of plain old mob missing (aka dodging).</P>

[Gaige]

<P>Then your mitigation should be lessened.  You said it yourself, mitigation is the end all be all of defense.</P> <P>It isn't balanced to have close to the same avoidance (no matter how its classified) and superior mitigation.  </P> <P>If you want avoidance to be close to the same value, then mitigation has to be also.</P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>still wouldnt make the plight of tanking raids any better...</P> <P>would probably help my tanking at level 37... but still wouldnt be optimal for a raid situation, and as he said, even if they take the ability for a plate tank to be missed entirely, they will still have to replace it with more mitigation that would inherently make mitigation of a guardian class even more predictable and manageable by reactive heals first and regens second... (but we wont get into the optimal healer thing,,)</P>

[Stra]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Fyvoclok_Shadow wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <p>For Guardians, it's the unrivaled ability to protect other group members, and take damage meant for them.  Just look at the skills.  What makes guardians the best pure tank (and they are, if tanking is defined as keeping monsters from harming other group members, while also being able to withstand punishment), are the guardian's skills that add to the whole group's defensive abilities, while also directing incoming damage to the guardian.  That's why the guardian's skill tree is entitled "protect".</p><hr></blockquote>This is so much BS. By the time I can cast all of my 2.5 minute (yes you read that duration right) buffs on a group member, they would be dead. If I want to save their life, I will get aggro off them. Those "protect" skills are quasi useless. SOMETIMES I use allay to give me a few extra seconds to get thee mob off them. Otherwise its more efficient if I merely maintain aggro. And the fact is that I maintain aggro unless I mess up or we get adds and Im good at even takign aggro off adds. The protect spells that a guardian gets are designed for a healer or scour or mage tanking a mob for an extended period of time. Something that NEVER happens in properly run groups. The whole purpose for those skills is stupid. And if that wasnt enough, once you have soldier's stance up, three concentration slots are gone. Intervene takes 2 PER PERSON, allay takes one. We simply dont have enough concentration to hold it. If you want to protect someone from damage, the best thing you can do is invite a mystic. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Strast on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:58 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote: <P><SPAN>This is so much BS. By the time I can cast all of my 2.5 minute (yes you read that duration right) buffs on a group member, they would be dead. If I want to save their life, I will get aggro off them. Those "protect" skills are quasi useless. SOMETIMES I use allay to give me a few extra seconds to get thee mob off them. Otherwise its more efficient if I merely maintain aggro. <BR><BR>And the fact is that I maintain aggro unless I mess up or we get adds and Im good at even takign aggro off adds. <FONT color=#ffff00>The protect spells that a guardian gets are designed for a healer or scour or mage tanking a mob for an extended period of time.</FONT> Something that NEVER happens in properly run groups. The whole purpose for those skills is stupid. And if that wasnt enough, once you have soldier's stance up, three concentration slots are gone. Intervene takes 2 PER PERSON, allay takes one. We simply dont have enough concentration to hold it. <BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>If you want to protect someone from damage, the best thing you can do is invite a mystic. <BR></FONT></P></SPAN> <P>Message Edited by Strast on <SPAN class=date_text>03-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>09:58 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>No, genius they are for casting on a different fighter when you are offtank, so that they can tank better.  Kind of like Shrug Off was for bruisers.</P> <P>So sad you don't understand how to play your class.</P> <P>All this utility and you say "its useless".</P> <P>No wonder you guys complain about your DPS and utility, it seems some of you don't even know how to play.</P> <P>You know, I bet you guys think you can only be tanks because none of you understand any other way to play.</P> <P>You have SOME OF THE BEST offtank buffs in the game.<BR></P>

[ugl]

Only thing worse then a troll, is a troll that has no idea [Removed for Content] he is talking about.

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>No, genius they are for casting on a different fighter when you are offtank, so that they can tank better.  Kind of like Shrug Off was for bruisers.</P> <P>So sad you don't understand how to play your class.</P> <P>All this utility and you say "its useless".</P> <P>No wonder you guys complain about your DPS and utility, it seems some of you don't even know how to play.</P> <P>You know, I bet you guys think you can only be tanks because none of you understand any other way to play.</P> <P>You have SOME OF THE BEST offtank buffs in the game.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>WOOHOO!, Guardians are a buff support class. Just what we always wanted.</P> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR></P>

[mauiwuchild]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Then your mitigation should be lessened.  You said it yourself, mitigation is the end all be all of defense.</P> <P>It isn't balanced to have close to the same avoidance (no matter how its classified) and superior mitigation.  </P> <P>If you want avoidance to be close to the same value, then mitigation has to be also.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>That's pretty much the crux of the problem, mitigation rules the school on something that is a hard hitter, the damage is much easier to control.</P> <P>Mitigation SHOULD be the balancing point. For gameplay reasons. I could care less about 'supposed to'. Lets just hope SOE doesn't muck with avoidance too much and THEN have to balance mitigation. (just like what happened in EQ1).</P> <P>I think if SOE can find a reasonable amount that EACH class should mitigate on all levels of mobs, they should then balance avoidance. Do it the other way around, and you will be in the same hole you dug with EQ1 classes.</P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>Gage, if we are all meant to be tanks, then spells like shrug off werent meant for the MT in the group while off tanking, they were meant for the caster types in group that had high potential to pull aggro.</P> <P>There is no REAL use outside of buff stacking for more than 1 MT in groups in comparison to the other archetypes. Shrug off just found a better use as for being placed on another MT than actually a caster. When the game set out, we were supposed to be avoidance tanks on the same level as plate tanks. agility just kinda added a un-forseen kink in thier plan.</P> <P>TO ME, the set up was supposed to be 1 healer 1 MT 2 scout potentially, 2 mage potentially. which would be a perfect group set up and allow an even chance for everyone to have a place based on classes etc.</P> <P>im not positve, but my hunch is that since we are tanks and that was the intended role of the class, it was meant to give the caster type in group that would most often pull aggro a boost that may be enough to keep it alive in a pinch</P> <P>which would explain why spells like shrug off and others on that line provided +12 or so agility to the caster as well.</P> <P>just a hunch.</P> <P> </P> <P>(edit- which would also explain as to why they nerfed the mitigation when they saw what it was <EM>Really</EM> being used for, instead of its "intended" purpose. theres just nothing in the code that says that a spell can only be cast on a certain player of a certain class. while some you cant cast on yourself... i think it would be another stretch as to say in code terms you cant cast x spell on x class of x race... or however those programmer gurus do it.)</P> <p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:21 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>WOOHOO!, Guardians are a buff support class. Just what we always wanted.</P> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Oh!</P> <P>But it was okay when bruisers could do it?</P> <P>Oh I see.  Its okay for a bruiser to be brought along to a raid/group just to buff YOU as YOU MT, making you a better tank.</P> <P>Its okay that now since SO got nerfed, a lot of bruisers have little to no purpose in a raid.</P> <P>Its okay because THEY AREN'T YOU!</P> <P>When someone brings up the idea that 25% OF YOUR COMBAT ARTS, which are to make your group/TARGET better at defending, to actually USE them as an offtank to make another fighter better... then its:</P> <P>OH HELL NO!!!  WE AREN'T A BUFF SUPPORT CLASS!</P> <P>Well guess what, we aren't either.  But every fighter has those spells.  If you choose not to use them, that is a choice, but they are far from useless.</P> <P> </P>

[mauiwuchild]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>No, genius they are for casting on a different fighter when you are offtank, so that they can tank better.  Kind of like Shrug Off was for bruisers.</P> <P>So sad you don't understand how to play your class.</P> <P>All this utility and you say "its useless".</P> <P>No wonder you guys complain about your DPS and utility, it seems some of you don't even know how to play.</P> <P>You know, I bet you guys think you can only be tanks because none of you understand any other way to play.</P> <P>You have SOME OF THE BEST offtank buffs in the game.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>WOOHOO!, Guardians are a buff support class. Just what we always wanted.</P> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>If you wouldn't look at what he says with blinders on, maybe you would learn a thing or two. He's not saying we are a support buff class, he's saying that if you use the buff for what it's intended for, then you would be doing something rather than wasting it on someone who would get owned and die regardless of the buff.

[Dedi]

<div></div><font size="3">As much as</font> <font size="1">gage  <font size="3">trolls this board you'd think he would have picked up on the fact that the MAJORITY of our defensive skills are useless.  The allay line is really the only one that i've found to be of any use whatsoever, and I'm still not sure just how useful it is.</font></font> <div></div><p>Message Edited by Dedite on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:21 PM</span>

[Banditman]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR><BR>If you want to protect someone from damage, the best thing you can do is invite a mystic. <BR></SPAN> <P>  <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Don't go there.  You *really* don't want to open that can up.</DIV>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>WOOHOO!, Guardians are a buff support class. Just what we always wanted.</P> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Oh!</P> <P>But it was okay when bruisers could do it?</P> <P>Oh I see.  Its okay for a bruiser to be brought along to a raid/group just to buff YOU as YOU MT, making you a better tank.</P> <P>Its okay that now since SO got nerfed, a lot of bruisers have little to no purpose in a raid.</P> <P>Its okay because THEY AREN'T YOU!</P> <P>When someone brings up the idea that 25% OF YOUR COMBAT ARTS, which are to make your group/TARGET better at defending, to actually USE them as an offtank to make another fighter better... then its:</P> <P>OH HELL NO!!!  WE AREN'T A BUFF SUPPORT CLASS!</P> <P>Well guess what, we aren't either.  But every fighter has those spells.  If you choose not to use them, that is a choice, but they are far from useless.</P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>If I was any of those other classes I would provide my buffs but be able to use my DPS as well. As guardian I would do the same  . . . but . . . well we dont have useful DPS. Oh, I keep forgetting, that doesn't count.</P> <P>When I want to be a buff class I play my cleric.<BR></P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mauiwuchild wrote:<BR><BR><BR>If you wouldn't look at what he says with blinders on, maybe you would learn a thing or two. He's not saying we are a support buff class, he's saying that if you use the buff for what it's intended for, then you would be doing something rather than wasting it on someone who would get owned and die regardless of the buff.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>If you would listen to what Gage is saying it would make you as ridiculous as him. He is saying he wants us to be a support class so he can tank.</P> <P>BTW I use my buffs for everything they are intended for.<BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <P>If I was any of those other classes I would provide my buffs but be able to use my DPS as well. As guardian I would do the same  . . . but . . . well we dont have useful DPS. Oh, I keep forgetting, that doesn't count.</P> <P>When I want to be a buff class I play my cleric.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>*sigh*</P> <P>While your DPS is lacking when compared to other fighters, the difference isn't buy much.  With a good set of dual weild weapons and upgraded combat arts you can do some decent DPS, over 100 on most encounters.</P> <P>Now, although you would be providing the group a little less DPS than say a monk/bruiser, your offtank buffs are better than anything we have.  They add HP, mitigation, parry and sometimes allow you to take the entire brunt of the damage.</P> <P>We have a few of these buffs too, but no where near as good.  Also because of our lack of mitigation using sacrifice will just straight out kill us.</P> <P>I tanked the other day for a group (mentoring) and had a guildmate guardian with me (getting him to 50) and I was doing SUBSTANTIALLY better with his buffs on me.</P> <P>In fact, I was doing better with his buffs on me, than he was with my buffs on him (although I admit its prob cuz my gear is so good even when scaled /shrug).</P> <P>The point is that you guys get the absolute best target/group defensive buffs in the game, bar none.  You also get some slows, some decent AoE's and more than a single attack combat art.</P> <P>You can dual wield, you can use almost any weapon in the game, etc etc.</P> <P>So to say "these are useless" and "our dps sucks" is stupid.</P> <P>It just makes you look like a bad player.</P> <P>Say "I always tank, I don't have experience with those" or something along those lines.  Something that shows you are ignorant to being an offtank, not just plain stupid.</P> <P>Besides, I'm under the impression that if you were to be all MT all the time, every defensive art would be self, every buff would be group, and every combat art would be a taunt.</P> <P>I mean after all, why have skills to make others tank better, or do damage, etc if SoE expects you to never budge from MT?</P> <P>As it is, sounds like you guys are getting ripped off, having all these target spells with no one to use them on.<BR></P>

[RafaelSmith]

I really wish /ignore worked on these Forums.  The discussion of mitigation/avoidance is important and ide like to be able to read the threads w/o having to also see the countless, useless, pointless self-serving posts by certain individuals that could care less about overall balance and just want to "have their cake and eat it too". <div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>He is saying he wants us to be a support class so he can tank.</P> <P>BTW I use my buffs for everything they are intended for.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>In some scenarios, yes.  If the game was working as intended then there would be scenarios where an avoidance tank with guardian (and other fighter buffs) on them would be better than a guardian or sk tanking.</P> <P>Just as there should be scenarios where the opposite is true.</P> <P>I find it humorous that "being a support class" is good enough for other fighters so you can tank, but not for you so they can tank.</P> <P>Heh.</P> <P>Oh well, your loss.  You are missing out on some of the best skills of your class.<BR></P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>While your DPS is lacking when compared to other fighters, the difference isn't buy much.  With a good set of dual weild weapons and upgraded combat arts you can do some decent DPS, over 100 on most encounters.</P> <P>Now, although you would be providing the group a little less DPS than say a monk/bruiser, your offtank buffs are better than anything we have.  They add HP, mitigation, parry and sometimes allow you to take the entire brunt of the damage.</P> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Other classes get equal tanking, I want equal DPS. Not close, not almost as good, not just shy. NOT ANY OF THAT. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.</P> <P>Any other arguement is COMPLETE SELF ABSORBED HYPOCRACY.<BR></P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>He is saying he wants us to be a support class so he can tank.</P> <P>BTW I use my buffs for everything they are intended for.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>In some scenarios, yes.  If the game was working as intended then there would be scenarios where an avoidance tank with guardian (and other fighter buffs) on them would be better than a guardian or sk tanking.</P> <P>Just as there should be scenarios where the opposite is true.</P> <P>I find it humorous that "being a support class" is good enough for other fighters so you can tank, but not for you so they can tank.</P> <P>Heh.</P> <P>Oh well, your loss.  You are missing out on some of the best skills of your class.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I don't mis out on anything. Having a great time.<BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Other classes get equal tanking, I want equal DPS. Not close, not almost as good, not just shy. NOT ANY OF THAT. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.</P> <P>Any other arguement is COMPLETE SELF ABSORBED HYPOCRACY.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Fine.  Go ahead.  But our DPS isn't a tanking tradeoff, its a taunt trade off.  </P> <P>Am I asking for an increase to brawler mitigation?</P> <P>No.</P> <P>Am I asking for more taunts?</P> <P>No.</P> <P>Don't put words in my mouth.</P> <P>Besides your arguement is lacking.  Zerkers get better aggro generation, better group DPS and superior mitigation.  Heh.  You should've been a zerker <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[mauiwuchild]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mauiwuchild wrote:<BR><BR><BR>If you wouldn't look at what he says with blinders on, maybe you would learn a thing or two. He's not saying we are a support buff class, he's saying that if you use the buff for what it's intended for, then you would be doing something rather than wasting it on someone who would get owned and die regardless of the buff.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>If you would listen to what Gage is saying it would make you as ridiculous as him. He is saying he wants us to be a support class so he can tank.</P> <P>BTW I use my buffs for everything they are intended for.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Maybe I came late to the party since I was playing a cleric until a couple weeks ago but it sounds to me like he wants what was promised when he picked 'fighter' then 'brawler'. It's a delicate issue for sure, but I don't think it needs so much posturing. It seems like people are taking what he says then exaggerating it to make him sound unreasonable.</P> <P>I don't think any one person in this discussion has the answer, but we could be more productive about it... however the original post doesn't set a good example.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>I don't mis out on anything. Having a great time.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Congratulations <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>I do too <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[Wasuna]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR>I really wish /ignore worked on these Forums.  The discussion of mitigation/avoidance is important and ide like to be able to read the threads w/o having to also see the countless, useless, pointless self-serving posts by certain individuals that could care less about overall balance and just want to "have their cake and eat it too".<BR><BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>100% agree. The volume that this 'certin individual' posts just makes people ignore him out of course. I know that if I see a post that he has contributed to I move on. Not due to any personal animosity, just due to the total lack of interest in dealing with the volume of worthless information that is coming. There are good bits of information sprinkled in but I have no interest in putting out the effort to find them.

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>I don't mis out on anything. Having a great time.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Congratulations <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>I do too <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Good to know, but hard to tell considering how much you complain about your class.<BR>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>While your DPS is lacking when compared to other fighters, the difference isn't buy much.  With a good set of dual weild weapons and upgraded combat arts you can do some decent DPS, over 100 on most encounters.</P> <P>Now, although you would be providing the group a little less DPS than say a monk/bruiser, your offtank buffs are better than anything we have.  They add HP, mitigation, parry and sometimes allow you to take the entire brunt of the damage.</P> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Other classes get equal tanking, I want equal DPS. Not close, not almost as good, not just shy. NOT ANY OF THAT. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.</P> <P>Any other arguement is COMPLETE SELF ABSORBED HYPOCRACY.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Would you be satisfied if you DPS had huge spikes and as a whole undependable as avoidance is?  For example if you could go 3-4 fights knocking out 120 DPS then go 3-4 fights where you did 20, couldn't hit a thing, dropped your maces on your own foot, accidentially wacked the wizard out from a wild swing (I digress into humor <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> )....?

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>Wasuna wrote:<BR>100% agree. <FONT color=#ffff00>The volume that this 'certin individual' posts just makes people ignore him out of course.</FONT> I know that if I see a post that he has contributed to I move on. Not due to any personal animosity, just due to the total lack of interest in dealing with the volume of worthless information that is coming. There are good bits of information sprinkled in but I have no interest in putting out the effort to find them.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>That's ok.  I get pm's everyday from people thanking me for my input and "work" for my class.  Just as many as I get from people telling me to play in the freeway.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/shrug</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My post count is what happens when you have internet access at work.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Nothing more, nothing less.<BR></DIV>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Would you be satisfied if you DPS had huge spikes and as a whole undependable as avoidance is?  For example if you could go 3-4 fights knocking out 120 DPS then go 3-4 fights where you did 20, couldn't hit a thing, dropped your maces on your own foot, accidentially wacked the wizard out from a wild swing (I digress into humor <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> )....? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>What's a huge DPS spike? As a Guardian I have never see one. Combine that with my slow swing and misses. As it is I think I DPS like a chanter tanks.

[mauiwuchild]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P><STRONG>In some scenarios, yes.  If the game was working as intended then there would be scenarios where an avoidance tank with guardian (and other fighter buffs) on them would be better than a guardian or sk tanking.</STRONG></P> <P>Just as there should be scenarios where the opposite is true.</P> <P>I find it humorous that "being a support class" is good enough for other fighters so you can tank, but not for you so they can tank.</P> <P>Heh.</P> <P>Oh well, your loss.  You are missing out on some of the best skills of your class.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You know, that's a real important point, TEAMWORK to tank something that is set up for a Brawler/Guardian would be VERY cool, a lot like the days in EQ1 where a Monk was the rampage tank, but in EQ2 they can both play a more central and dependant role.</P> <P>Having some mobs be set up for Monk as the main tank and Guardian sharing damage, or Guardian as the main tank and Monk sharing damage.... which one would be ideal for which mob? Cool concept really.</P> <P>Thinking about a giant monster where the Monk was running around blocking and fending off full attacks and the Guardian is throwing himself in front of the Monk when there is no avoiding... sends chills up my spine.</P> <P>I would LOVE to be able to have BOTH classes looking for one another so they could function better AS A TEAM.</P> <P>On the point of being a 'support class' I could care less about doing great damage, give me more defensive and 'keep the party alive by throwing myself at stuff' skills.<BR></P>

[Rodney]

<P>" Warriors is EQ 1 were the best tanks by a large margin in all areas in all situations, not taking defensive into account"</P> <P>That leads me to believe you never played EQ 1 or that you know nothing of Warriors in eq1, which is it?  </P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Would you be satisfied if you DPS had huge spikes and as a whole undependable as avoidance is?  For example if you could go 3-4 fights knocking out 120 DPS then go 3-4 fights where you did 20, couldn't hit a thing, dropped your maces on your own foot, accidentially wacked the wizard out from a wild swing (I digress into humor <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> )....? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>What's a huge DPS spike? As a Guardian I have never see one. Combine that with my slow swing and misses. As it is I think I DPS like a chanter tanks. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I was referring to your statement regarding DPS equal to monks, nothing in the game now...Monk DPS would be steady (like mitigation) while Guardian DPS would be streaky, like my example above (like avoidance)</DIV>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>I was referring to your statement regarding DPS equal to monks, nothing in the game now...Monk DPS would be steady (like mitigation) while Guardian DPS would be streaky, like my example above (like avoidance)</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>If monks get equal tanking it won't be streaky anymore now will it? It will be equal to the BEST FIGHER TANKING. Monks get that, I want DPS equal to the BEST FIGHTER DPS in return.</P> <P>They can call it fighterlikemonkdpstomakeupformonktanking spell.</P><p>Message Edited by sidgb on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:01 PM</span>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>I was referring to your statement regarding DPS equal to monks, nothing in the game now...Monk DPS would be steady (like mitigation) while Guardian DPS would be streaky, like my example above (like avoidance)</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>If monks get equal tanking it won't be streaky anymore now will it? It will be equal to the BEST FIGHER TANKING. Monks get that, I want the BEST FIGHTER DPS in return.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I know this is going to sound funny, but EQUAL tanking does not mean EQUAL results.  The numbers for avoidance vs mitigation could be balanced to where every fighter class was going to divert (either through mitigation or avoidance) the same X amount of damage...but the avoidance tanks would still be streaky due to a run of bad rolls or whatever....</DIV>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> -Aonein- wrote: <P>Its simple, if a Hit pass's through Avoidance, it gets sucked up in Mitigation, if it pass's through Mitigation, at least we have 3 - 4k more HP then you do to withstand any uncommon spikey damage due to Mitigation failing.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Its simple, you shouldn't have avoidance, you SHOULD get hit.  You should use your mitigation to lessen the damage.  Not avoid it entirely.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>WE should rely on our minor mitigation IF we get hit.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Besides, 3 to 4k more HP than me?  Doubtful.  I have 4225 unbuffed or so so I can get some pretty good HP numbers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Besides, if the system worked I wouldn't need the HP because I wouldn't be getting hit as much, you would need the HP because you would be getting hit every time.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Gage we should have avoidance, in the form of Block and Parry, Defense should be converted into Mitigation, once you take the value 250 Defense skill can add to Avoidance and convert it inti Mitigation, id say you would see a significant difference.</P> <P>Gage, a Guardian can self buff himself over 6k hp, no buffs from anyone else, in a raid a Guardian can push out around 10 - 12k HP. If he is from a Raiding guild, he will be more then likely around the 12k mark.</P> <P>The system does work Gage, we just avoid to much at the current moment, like i said, there not going to adjust you, you have 77% avoidance UNBUFFED, they are not going to change a thing for you, there more likely going to stop buff stacking and adjust Plate Class Avoidance values and increase our Mitigation. What do you think there going to do, take our Avoidance away all together, rendering Shields useless, Parry not worth a pinch of salt, and Give Monks / Bruisers the ability to Deflect, Parry and a Base avoidance due to Agility ? You live in a pure Dream world Gage.</P> <P>Here let me say this again for you Gage so you can understand something we already know about. We know we avoid too much, we dont want to avoid so much. We want to Mitigate damage, not Avoid it, its simple, Take away Defense, convert the number Defense adds to Mitigation, if thats still too much, remove some Agility from our Armor and convert that into extra Mitigation values per peice of armor and add STA / STR bonus in place also seeing as we are meant to be hit.</P> <P>This is what im having trouble understanding, <STRONG><U>ANY</U></STRONG> Fighter class can Tank a Group x2 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> Epic Raid Encounter, <STRONG><U>ANY</U></STRONG> Fighter can Tank a Group x3 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> Epic Raid Encounter, the only one that requires a Guardian to tank, is a Group x4 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> Epic Raid Encounter. Any Fighter class can tank 95% of the game, the last 5% which is high lvl raid encounters, are upto Guardians. Even then it does not require a Guardian to tank it, it just makes the job easier. But one more thing, Gage you have told us time and time again, all the people in your guild are around lvl 30, so why are you even considering tanking Group x4 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> encounters, when they cant even get to them? What, are you going to solo them ?</P> <P>Anyway Gage, Monks have on averge 75% avoidance unbuffed, that is plenty when concerning game mechanics on how much a Monk should Avoid damage, now all they need to do is increase our Mitigation, decrease our Avoidance and fix buff stacking and nothing will change Gage, except we might be getting Stunned and interupted a bit more, which i dont mind, i like a challenge.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Blood and Ice<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>as ive said a billion times, leave us with the tanking we got.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>give us half on our combat arts power cost, give us half on refresh timers = more dps in high intervals</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>would equal out a taunt skill lack, would equal our timefighting/damage taken ratio perfectly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>give a utility buff - a simple one - the ability to give the chance to critical strike to a bruiser and his melee group mates, and a group avoidance buff to the monks</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>while we wont be able to tank raid mobs, we know for a fact that we have a spot there for the buffs and dps...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>this wont co - inside with the raid tanking dreams - but it would be perfect for the other 99.9% of content in game. allowing us to use dps as taunts outside of what he have presently, allow the class to keep its roots without having to use mitigation as the tanking balance or anything else that will potentially have adverse effects.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>since we wouldnt be able to tank raids, we would be the optimum tank in speed based exp groups. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>Gage you have told us time and time again, all the people in your guild are around lvl 30, so why are you even considering tanking Group x4 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> encounters, when they cant even get to them? What, are you going to solo them ?</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Contrary to popular opinion, I have friends in numerous guilds who are level 50.  These guilds raid.</P> <P>I didn't solo to 50, heh.</P> <P><BR></P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <BR> <DIV>I know this is going to sound funny, but EQUAL tanking does not mean EQUAL results.  The numbers for avoidance vs mitigation could be balanced to where every fighter class was going to divert (either through mitigation or avoidance) the same X amount of damage...but the avoidance tanks would still be streaky due to a run of bad rolls or whatever....</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You need to get together with Gage and rethink then. Because ultimatly that is what is being asked for reguardless of how much you may argue otherwise.</P> <P>Without equal results, equal tanking is a myth.<BR></P>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <BR> <DIV>I know this is going to sound funny, but EQUAL tanking does not mean EQUAL results.  The numbers for avoidance vs mitigation could be balanced to where every fighter class was going to divert (either through mitigation or avoidance) the same X amount of damage...but the avoidance tanks would still be streaky due to a run of bad rolls or whatever....</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You need to get together with Gage and rethink then. Because ultimatly that is what is being asked for reguardless of how much you may argue otherwise.</P> <P>Without equal results, equal tanking is a myth.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I have not asked for anything...Gage has some good points and I agree to a point on a lot of them...might not agree with how he comes across sometimes, but then Gage is his own person and can deal with that on his own...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Dispite what some may think, there is not a double secret underground Monk gathering where we all get together, chant Gage's name, watch Bruce Lee movies, and drink tea from little tiny cups...Most of us do have our own separate opinions....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>edit:  I mean sheesh...drinking tea out of little tea cups....yeah right...!! <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><p>Message Edited by MoonglumHMV on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:29 PM</span>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Dispite what some may think, there is not a double secret underground Monk gathering where we all get together, chant Gage's name, watch Bruce Lee movies, and drink tea from little tiny cups...Most of us do have our own separate opinions....</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Nah, actually Gage gets in a closet of mirrors with his many personalities and they all chant his name. Afterwards they take a vote giving him the impression his ideas have merit due to the unanimous support.</P> <P>BTW, Hi Gage</P> <P><img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <p>Message Edited by sidgb on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:29 PM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <P>I know this is going to sound funny, but EQUAL tanking does not mean EQUAL results.  The numbers for avoidance vs mitigation could be balanced to where every fighter class was going to divert (either through mitigation or avoidance) the same X amount of damage...but the avoidance tanks would still be streaky due to a run of bad rolls or whatever....</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Equal tanking does mean Equal results, reguardless of if its in the form of Mitigation or Avoidance. If Monks / Bruisers Avoided damage like we can Mitigate, NO ONE would make a Plate class tank for the simple fact, Monks / Bruisers can far out DPS any Fighter class, i dont care what Gage says about his DPS, he doesnt seem to know how Monks work very well in the DPS department and is just hell bent on Tanking Group x4 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> Epic Raid encounters, I bet he has never even tryed to play from a DPS point of view cause all he has done since day 1 is Tank, its all wants to do, which is his choice, but there is limitations with any class. I've parsed Monks on our server doing over 200 DPS, let me ask the Guardians, Can a Guard do that? Only reason a Berserker can is because we can fool a Parser with our low damage AE's, when it comes to Single target mob, no way a Berserker can pump out a 200 DPS number. If i can hold agro off a Bruiser, which most of the time i can, and let him go all out DPS, he can easily pump out 300 DPS, but its hard to keep agro of him.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So tell me again Gage, Can a Guardian pump out 200 - 300 DPS? Do you see Enchanters crying out for the same DPS that a Mage can do? Do you see Priests crying out for the same DPS that a Fighter can do with Auto Attack on? Do you see Wardens, Furys, Defillers, Mystics with 1000 hp heals like a Templar can get crying out for them?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As you can see Gage, there is a reason that you cant tank 100% of the game, its called Diversity, and called Class's having certain Niche's, yes at the current moment, Plate class's avoid too much, we know that, but to fix it, they need to increase our Mitigation and decrease our avoidance, its a simple, logic fix that wouldnt require anything crazy like retuning every single mob with in the game.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Blood and Ice<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<P>ok non tanking monks and other classes who this would effect does this sound like a good solution?</P> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>, leave us with the tanking we got. (brawlers)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>give us half on our combat arts power cost, give us half on refresh timers = more dps in high intervals</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>would equal out a taunt skill lack, would equal our timefighting/damage taken ratio perfectly.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>give a utility buff - a simple one - the ability to give the chance to critical strike to a bruiser and his melee group mates, and a group avoidance buff to the monks</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>while we wont be able to tank raid mobs, we know for a fact that we have a spot there for the buffs and dps...</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>this wont co - inside with the raid tanking dreams - but it would be perfect for the other 99.9% of content in game. allowing us to use dps as taunts outside of what he have presently, allow the class to keep its roots without having to use mitigation as the tanking balance or anything else that will potentially have adverse effects.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>since we wouldnt be able to tank raids, we would be the optimum tank in speed based exp groups. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>(EDIT: or also it would also make sense or *work out* if the brawler types had a instant riposte any time they blocked parried or missed and just call it a freaking counter attack. that would increase frontal tanking dps and help out a bit)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>just a thought....</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:01 PM</span>

[MoonglumHMV]

And as others have said numerous times...I hope they do a lot more fixes to broken combat arts for all classes before the move out of the talking phase of whatever changes they are discussing with the avoidance vs mitigation issues...

[SageMarrow]

well yeah, the fixes need to come, but something tells me that they are making strides to get the core of the game straight - which would explain all the economic changes and such that came before anything class balance related. the avoidance/mitigation values is just the start of the class balancing act that is too come. all classes will soon be getting nerfed and twinked and patched into thier final forms for the most part in the next 3 months i would presume.

[Ashtaro]

You have the gall to tell a guardian he should have played a berzerker?  You're a guardian wannabe!  If you wanted to be MT whenever, wherever, against whatever, and don't care about your dps, YOU SHOULD HAVE PLAYED A GUARDIAN. <p>Message Edited by Ashtaroth on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:05 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ashtaroth wrote:<BR>You have the gall to tell a guardian he should have played a berzerker?  You're a guardian wannabe!  If you wanted to be MT whenever, wherever, against whatever, YOU SHOULD HAVE PLAYED A GUARDIAN. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>It's called ironic sarcasm.  I was kidding.  Because people always tell me to "roll a guardian" if I want to tank raids.</P> <P>I'm actually not a guardian wannabe.</P> <P>A "wannabe" if I'm not mistaken is someone who wants to be something they can't.</P> <P>I can either use one of my two slots and make a guardian, buy a new account or make a guardian, or something of the sort.</P> <P>So I do not want to be a guardian at all, I'm quite content with my class.  </P> <P>As for your last statement, opinions vary <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[Ashtaro]

P.S.  I want breeze, a pet, illusions, and mez, and I really don't give a sh*t about tanking, but I'm too lazy to reroll.  Please change all guardians to be like this. kkthxla~

[Chog]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Just thought I would let you know.  Saudia Arabia (nothig but desert) imports sand in large amounts (used to be the #1 import, usure if it still is).  So selling sand to people who live in a desert is not uncommon.</DIV>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Chogar wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Just thought I would let you know.  Saudia Arabia (nothig but desert) imports sand in large amounts (used to be the #1 import, usure if it still is).  So selling sand to people who live in a desert is not uncommon.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Just thought you should know. Seeing as how it was a metaphor and not actual sand I doubt Saudi Arabia intentionally imports metaphorical sand as it can be easly produced domestically. Attempts to selling actual metaphorical sand in a desart is actually quite common so I guess my metaphor failed before it ever got a chance to be exported to Saudi Arabia.</P> <P>Be sure to point out any of my future spelling errors as well. I got time to kill reading poiuntless critacisms if you have time to point them out.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[Chog]

<P>sidgb,</P> <P>Guess the question is, what where you trying to say with your reference to Gage and selling sand?</P> <OL> <LI>Gage will try to sell an item to a market that has no need of said item.</LI> <LI>Gage will make millions selling an item to a market in great need of said item.</LI></OL> <P>You complimented Gage with your sand reference.  If you wanted to compliment Gage you are spot on and did a great job.  Otherwise I do not understand how saying Gage would make millions of dollars a year selling sand to people that live in a desert a bad thing.  Guess it is just me.</P>

[mauiwuchild]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Chogar wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Just thought I would let you know.  Saudia Arabia (nothig but desert) imports sand in large amounts (used to be the #1 import, usure if it still is).  So selling sand to people who live in a desert is not uncommon.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Just thought you should <FONT color=#ffff00>know.</FONT> <FONT color=#ffff00>Seeing as how</FONT> it was a metaphor and not actual <FONT color=#ffff00>sand I</FONT> doubt Saudi Arabia intentionally imports metaphorical sand as it can be easly produced domestically.<FONT color=#ffff00> Attempts to selling</FONT> actual metaphorical sand in a <FONT color=#66ff00>desart</FONT> is actually quite common so I guess my metaphor failed before it ever got a chance to be exported to Saudi Arabia.</P> <P>Be sure to point out any of my future spelling <FONT color=#ffff00>errors as well</FONT>. <FONT color=#ffff00>I got</FONT> time to <FONT color=#ffff00>kill reading </FONT><FONT color=#66ff00>poiuntless </FONT><FONT color=#66ff00>critacisms</FONT> if you have time to point them out.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Very quickly; grammatical errors are in yellow, misspellings are in green. Let me know if you need help with 6th grade English again.<BR>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>"Your food stamps will be stopped effective March 1992 because we received notice that you passed away. May God bless you. You may reapply if there is a change in your circumstances."--Department of Social Services, Greenville, South Carolina </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT size=5>LOL, that is the funniest [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] ever man... ROFL!!!! aww man thats great,</FONT></EM></DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT size=5></FONT></EM> </DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT size=5>sidgb - that was a nice reply too= much better than me and gages psychological flames of misplaced with and skill in urination!</FONT></EM></DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT size=5></FONT></EM> </DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT size=5>keep up the good work!!!</FONT></EM></DIV>

[Stra]

<div></div><span>Oh my lord .. you have stooped to all new evels of insanity.<blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<p>No, genius they are for casting on a different fighter when you are offtank, so that they can tank better.  Kind of like Shrug Off was for bruisers.</p><hr></blockquote><p>Thanks for the complement but Im really not a genius. I simply dont choose to selectively ignore facts and make posters repeat them back to me 3 posrs later. Since you arent of that persuasion, let me repeat.</p><p>Guardians DO NOT get invited to groups if someone else is tanking unless they are either personal friends with the group or there is absolutely no one left to fill the spot. If you are tanking (and everyone knows you wont give up tanking) and there is a mystic, a scout, a healer and a guardian waiting for group, the guardian would be the LAST on the list. Our DPS sucks, and the "protection" spells we get suck hard enough to draw a gold ball through 10 meters of garden hose. Guardians are far inferior to every other class if they arent main tanking.</p><blockquote><hr><p>So sad you don't understand how to play your class.</p><hr></blockquote><p>Strange you should say this when I rarely loose people in groups. When I have gone over 100 play hours without a death and constant pulling of yellow con mobs in GROUPS. Of course, you have never played with me once, so, unlike my guild, you dont know that I am very good at playing my class. Since you dont know, you speak. About par for your course there.</p><blockquote><hr><p>All this utility and you say "its useless".</p><hr></blockquote><p>You dotn use the spells, you dont have a guardian in combat, you dont know how to BLOODY READ MY EARLIER POSTS. I have two choices when a mob is on my mage or scout: Try to cast protection spels (the full line of which will take 15 seconds to run or try to get the aggro off the mage. Which would I do? Any SANE guardian would fire off his crgroup buffs, taunts and rescue and pull the aggro. The ONLY time I have ever used those spells is when all of my group buff timers are cycled down and I am hoping for a few extra seconds.</p><blockquote><hr><p>No wonder you guys complain about your DPS and utility, it seems some of you don't even know how to play.</p><p>You know, I bet you guys think you can only be tanks because none of you understand any other way to play.</p><p>You have SOME OF THE BEST offtank buffs in the game.</p><div></div><hr></blockquote>Show me an experienced guardian complaining about his DPS? After you are done looking around for what doest exist you can pull your head out of your rectal orafice. The only guardians that complain about DPS are total newbies and even those are rare. We didnt sign up to be guardians to do DPS. Furhtermore, parse the DPS from an off-tanking guardian and compare it. It will be laughable. Second of all, we didnt sign up to be guardians to allay and snetinel your butt and act as half backed cheesy, inefficient Mystics.</span><div></div>

[Stra]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<blockquote><hr>Ashtaroth wrote:You have the gall to tell a guardian he should have played a berzerker?  You're a guardian wannabe!  If you wanted to be MT whenever, wherever, against whatever, YOU SHOULD HAVE PLAYED A GUARDIAN.<hr></blockquote><p>It's called ironic sarcasm.  I was kidding.  Because people always tell me to "roll a guardian" if I want to tank raids.</p><p>I'm actually not a guardian wannabe.</p><p>A "wannabe" if I'm not mistaken is someone who wants to be something they can't.</p><p>I can either use one of my two slots and make a guardian, buy a new account or make a guardian, or something of the sort.</p><hr></blockquote><p><span>I agree with you. You are not a guardian wannabe. You are a superman wannabe. You want the guardian's tankign efficiency AND your monk DPS and other attack abilites. You arent a wannabe, you are just unreasonable and greedy. </span></p><blockquote><hr><p>So I do not want to be a guardian at all, I'm quite content with my class. </p><p>As for your last statement, opinions vary <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><div></div><hr></blockquote>If you are content with your class then why in the hell are you trying to get it enhanced to tank like a guardian?</span><div></div>

[Nemi]

<div></div><div></div>Here is the class I chose:<hr>Fighters use brute strength and sturdy weapons to deal physical damage to their enemies. Always at the forefront of combat, fighters stand toe-to-toe with opponents while keeping their allies from harm. No matter the risk, fighters never back down from a challenge.<hr>Now, it quite clearly states above, that as a fighter I should be able to:1) Always at the forefront of combat (Main tank)2) fighters stand toe-to-toe with opponents (Main tank)3) keeping their allies from harmNow I went on to choose:<hr>Brawlers specialise in physical combat styles that bring them face-to-face with the enemy.<hr>So far it still seems the Brawler I chose is a Main Tank class.Finally I specialised into:<hr>Monks are disciplined combatants who specialise in Martial Arts. Their natural agility allows them to avoid their enemy's blows and strike back with clean efficient counterattacks<hr>Funnily enough, that still seems to be a Main tank to me.End of discussion.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>03-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:33 AM</span>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>Brawlers specialise in physical combat styles that bring them face-to-face with the enemy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>it says that they BRING you face to face with the enemy, didnt say anything about you walking out lol....:smileyvery-happy:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>and as everyones buddy would reinforce:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>MOORGARD said:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>class discriptions are just flavor that add to the lore of the class, nothing more, and they dont reflect the overall outcomes of a class.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>and what does that line about physical combat styles mean? combat, hmmm. lets see what does combat mean?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>On a side not nemi - just picking with you - but how would you like it if in addition to our dps we have now, and our tanking we have now, they gave us the ability to counterattack for riposte type damage every time a block, parry, or miss came in?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i think that would embody what the class is REALLY supposed to be like... so we kill mobs faster and every fight would be like a real martial artist bruce lee fight. dodge attact, dodge attack, block, attack.. .you see? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i think that would be awesome and make us better tanks 1-50, but your raid tanking issue... naw bra..</DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:42 PM</span>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> -Aonein- wrote: <P>Its simple, if a Hit pass's through Avoidance, it gets sucked up in Mitigation, if it pass's through Mitigation, at least we have 3 - 4k more HP then you do to withstand any uncommon spikey damage due to Mitigation failing.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Its simple, you shouldn't have avoidance, you SHOULD get hit.  You should use your mitigation to lessen the damage.  Not avoid it entirely.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>WE should rely on our minor mitigation IF we get hit.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Besides, 3 to 4k more HP than me?  Doubtful.  I have 4225 unbuffed or so so I can get some pretty good HP numbers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Besides, if the system worked I wouldn't need the HP because I wouldn't be getting hit as much, you would need the HP because you would be getting hit every time.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>We shouldn't have avoidance? Gage, now you are just starting to lose it.  That wouldn't ever fit in with the setting.  What the heck is parry and shield for then?  It's all avoidance.  If we had 0 avoidance they'd have to literally double our migitation to make up for it.

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>^^^^that would make us great in group fights as well, technically fighting 5 mobs at once. and it only works while tanking , so we dont have to hear the scouts cry about dps issues...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i couldve added this to the other post but i just wanted 600 post...sorry about that. :smileyhappy:</DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:48 PM</span>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>While your DPS is lacking when compared to other fighters, the difference isn't buy much.  With a good set of dual weild weapons and upgraded combat arts you a little less DPS than say a monk/bruiser, your offtank buffs are better than anything we have.  They add HP, mitigation, parry and sometimes allow you to take the entire brunt of the damage.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually, The whole absorbing damage thing is busted as we totally don't migitate it at all.  So you end up causing even more damage to the group or raid over time.  Causing your healers to have to heal more.  And heal more power, causing their spell recycles to be a negative thing when trying to keep the primary tank up.</P> <P>Overall, it's bad.<BR></P>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Other classes get equal tanking, I want equal DPS. Not close, not almost as good, not just shy. NOT ANY OF THAT. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.</P> <P>Any other arguement is COMPLETE SELF ABSORBED HYPOCRACY.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Fine.  Go ahead.  But our DPS isn't a tanking tradeoff, its a taunt trade off.  </P> <P>Am I asking for an increase to brawler mitigation?</P> <P>No.</P> <P>Am I asking for more taunts?</P> <P>No.</P> <P>Don't put words in my mouth.</P> <P>Besides your arguement is lacking.  Zerkers get better aggro generation, better group DPS and superior mitigation.  Heh.  You should've been a zerker <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I want more taunts, other tank classes can pull aggro off me by blowing wind on a mob.  It's quite annoying.  And yes, I use all my skills rather effectively.  rescue works maybe 1 out of 20 times.<BR>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mauiwuchild wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Chogar wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Gage would try to sell people sand in the middle of the desert. Gotta admit though he has real gall.<BR><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Just thought I would let you know.  Saudia Arabia (nothig but desert) imports sand in large amounts (used to be the #1 import, usure if it still is).  So selling sand to people who live in a desert is not uncommon.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Just thought you should <FONT color=#ffff00>know.</FONT> <FONT color=#ffff00>Seeing as how</FONT> it was a metaphor and not actual <FONT color=#ffff00>sand I</FONT> doubt Saudi Arabia intentionally imports metaphorical sand as it can be easly produced domestically.<FONT color=#ffff00> Attempts to selling</FONT> actual metaphorical sand in a <FONT color=#66ff00>desart</FONT> is actually quite common so I guess my metaphor failed before it ever got a chance to be exported to Saudi Arabia.</P> <P>Be sure to point out any of my future spelling <FONT color=#ffff00>errors as well</FONT>. <FONT color=#ffff00>I got</FONT> time to <FONT color=#ffff00>kill reading </FONT><FONT color=#66ff00>poiuntless </FONT><FONT color=#66ff00>critacisms</FONT> if you have time to point them out.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Very quickly; grammatical errors are in yellow, misspellings are in green. Let me know if you need help with 6th grade English again.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Cool. I was shooting for 5th grade. I must have gotten extra credit somewhere.<BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote:<BR> <P><SPAN>Oh my lord .. you have stooped to all new evels of insanity.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Heh.</FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>Thanks for the complement but Im really not a genius. I simply dont choose to selectively ignore facts and make posters repeat them back to me 3 posrs later. Since you arent of that persuasion, let me repeat.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Go ahead.</FONT></P> <P>Guardians DO NOT get invited to groups if someone else is tanking unless they are either personal friends with the group or there is absolutely no one left to fill the spot. If you are tanking (and everyone knows you wont give up tanking) and there is a mystic, a scout, a healer and a guardian waiting for group, the guardian would be the LAST on the list. Our DPS sucks, and the "protection" spells we get suck hard enough to draw a gold ball through 10 meters of garden hose. Guardians are far inferior to every other class if they arent main tanking.  <FONT color=#ffff00>That guardians don't get invited as offtanks is assumption, not fact.  Your DPS doesn't suck, your protection spells don't either.  IF you feel that they do then /bug them and submit /feedback.  Don't hide behind "broken" and "useless" utility spells.  That is an EXCUSE to try to convince yourself and others that you HAVE to always be main tank.  Save it.</FONT><BR></P> <P>Strange you should say this when I rarely loose people in groups. When I have gone over 100 play hours without a death and constant pulling of yellow con mobs in GROUPS. Of course, you have never played with me once, so, unlike my guild, you dont know that I am very good at playing my class. Since you dont know, you speak. About par for your course there.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Aside from actually playing with someone, you can take the statements they make regarding their class and how it works as "how well they know how to play their class".  Seeing as you don't feel your class has anything to offer in an offtank scenario, its either a lack of know how on your part, or broken abilities.  Neither of which are an excuse for "claiming" NO dps and NO utility, as you have both.  You don't have super DPS, as that isn't intended, but you have the best group/target defensive utility in the game.  Use it or choose not to, but don't claim to have none.</FONT></P> <P>You dotn use the spells, you dont have a guardian in combat, you dont know how to BLOODY READ MY EARLIER POSTS. I have two choices when a mob is on my mage or scout: Try to cast protection spels (the full line of which will take 15 seconds to run or try to get the aggro off the mage. Which would I do? Any SANE guardian would fire off his crgroup buffs, taunts and rescue and pull the aggro. The ONLY time I have ever used those spells is when all of my group buff timers are cycled down and I am hoping for a few extra seconds.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Those buffs are NOT just for mages and scouts!!!  One of their best uses is to bolster the defense of ANOTHER FIGHTER WHO IS MAIN TANKING.  You "guard" them, you "aid" their defenses, you "protect" them as an offtank while also protecting and buffing up the defense of the group.  All the other fighters are adequate tanks, but they are great when guardians buff them and "guard" them.  Heh, wonder why?  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>It amazes me that YOU don't understand the intended use of those spells and then have the audacity to try to say I'm wrong.</FONT></P> <P>Show me an experienced guardian complaining about his DPS? After you are done looking around for what doest exist you can pull your head out of your rectal orafice. The only guardians that complain about DPS are total newbies and even those are rare. We didnt sign up to be guardians to do DPS. Furhtermore, parse the DPS from an off-tanking guardian and compare it. It will be laughable.<FONT color=#ff3300 size=4> Second of all, we didnt sign up to be guardians to allay and snetinel your butt and act as half backed cheesy, inefficient Mystics.</FONT>  <FONT color=#ffff00>I have.  I've read posts from guardians who have, and I've talked to other people who have parsed guardians who have.  When offtanking and dual wielding guardians can easily parse 100+ DPS.  Not bad for "the worst DPS of the fighter tree", is it?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Your last statement proves my point:  Most guardans are egotistical, elitest, uber wanna-be JERKS.  They don't care about any role besides being main tank.  Any skill that isn't used to make them a better main tank is USELESS.</FONT></P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I doubt bruisers signed off to be "shrug off" experts.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I'm glad you made that statement though:  It proves your opinion is so biased that it shouldn't even matter.  It comes off as condescending and "too good".  OMG YOU ARE A GUARDIAN, YOU ARE TOO GOOD TO ALLAY AND SENTINEL AND PROTECT A MONK!  Why would I even suggest that!  OMG, the nerve of that Gage guy suggesting we use our offtank protection buffs on another fighter, as intended!</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>There is no way I'm going to be in a group just buffing the MT and doing DPS, I'm too good for that, I'm a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] guardian, leave that to the <STRIKE>chumps</STRIKE>  I mean other fighter classes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You know what sir?  Guardians aren't all that w/o other people to buff them.  You can't play by yourself, so quit with the stupid attitude.  All fighters should be able to offtank and make other fighters better depending on the scenario, and as such all fighters should be able to maintank, depending on the scenario.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Oh, and NO raids are not a "scenario".</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You make me sick.</FONT></SPAN></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> Here is the class I chose:<BR><BR> <HR> Fighters use brute strength and sturdy weapons to deal physical damage to their enemies. Always at the forefront of combat, fighters stand toe-to-toe with opponents while keeping their allies from harm. No matter the risk, fighters never back down from a challenge.<BR> <HR> <BR>Now, it quite clearly states above, that as a fighter I should be able to:<BR><BR>1) Always at the forefront of combat (Main tank)<BR>2) fighters stand toe-to-toe with opponents (Main tank)<BR>3) keeping their allies from harm<BR><BR>Now I went on to choose:<BR><BR> <HR> Brawlers specialise in physical combat styles that bring them face-to-face with the enemy.<BR> <HR> <BR>So far it still seems the Brawler I chose is a Main Tank class.<BR><BR>Finally I specialised into:<BR><BR> <HR> Monks are disciplined combatants who specialise in Martial Arts. Their natural agility allows them to avoid their enemy's blows and strike back with clean efficient counterattacks<BR> <HR> <BR>Funnily enough, that still seems to be a Main tank to me.<BR><BR>End of discussion.<BR><BR><BR><BR> <P>Message Edited by Nemi on <SPAN class=date_text>03-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:33 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>But you can do all that. But you die. So in reality, SoE has already given you what you wanted so you should be happy.<BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>While your DPS is lacking when compared to other fighters, the difference isn't buy much.  With a good set of dual weild weapons and upgraded combat arts you a little less DPS than say a monk/bruiser, your offtank buffs are better than anything we have.  They add HP, mitigation, parry and sometimes allow you to take the entire brunt of the damage.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually, The whole absorbing damage thing is busted as we totally don't migitate it at all.  So you end up causing even more damage to the group or raid over time.  Causing your healers to have to heal more.  And heal more power, causing their spell recycles to be a negative thing when trying to keep the primary tank up.</P> <P>Overall, it's bad.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>So get it fixed.</DIV>

[IvarIronhea]

<P>These buffs are not wards. The damage is still taken, albeit by another person. It still needs to be healed.</P> <P>Why not just bring another healer(any healer, including a paladin)?</P> <P>Even if the buffs are "fixed" to allow for guardian's mitigation, how does it provide for a route better than adding another healer to the MT group for raids?</P> <P>For single groups they are more or less useless, no one is getting 2 rounded in a normal grind, and any other class would be better than a damage sponge. The damage is still being taken, and needs healing. Bring another healer if you need, or another DPS to speed up encounter completion.</P>

[Gaige]

<P>Because not all of them absorb damage.</P> <P>But even if they did.</P> <P>Lets say a monk gets hit 3 times out of 10.</P> <P>Lets say intervene (or its upgrades) absorb 1 of those.</P> <P>Now we are only getting hit 2 out of 10 times.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P> </P>

[IvarIronhea]

<DIV>There are two I've found that don't just absorb the damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Never surrender and allay. Never surrender is matched by every other fighting class(martial discipline, shrug off, aegis of hope, etc). Allay adds 24% avoidance to target, app 4. It is unknown whether this stacks with the never surrender line, it also takes concentration. If the patch notes hold true, the higher skill buff overrides the lower one, then it does not stack. Hard to tell, no numbers register on the avoidance stat when it is cast.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As to the second part of your post. For the absorption buffs, bring another healer if the tank will need more healing. If you want more efficiency bring DPS to end the encounter faster(as that will save you more healing mana and speed up the encounters at the same time).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>These buffs are not wards. The damage is taken. The concept, let alone the implementation, of the buffs is flawed.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> IvarIronheart wrote:<BR> <DIV>There are two I've found that don't just absorb the damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Never surrender and allay. Never surrender is matched by every other fighting class(martial discipline, shrug off, aegis of hope, etc). Allay adds 24% avoidance to target, app 4. It is unknown whether this stacks with the never surrender line, it also takes concentration. If the patch notes hold true, the higher skill buff overrides the lower one, then it does not stack. Hard to tell, no numbers register on the avoidance stat when it is cast.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As to the second part of your post. For the absorption buffs, bring another healer if the tank will need more healing. If you want more efficiency bring DPS to end the encounter faster(as that will save you more healing mana and speed up the encounters at the same time).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>These buffs are not wards. The damage is taken. The concept, let alone the implementation, of the buffs is flawed.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Right, I'm aware other fighters get them.  The "other" fighters are the ones guardians always try to push into an offtank role with our "uber" utility and devastating DPS.</P> <P>The truth is, all of us really aren't that different.  Just a few things, but its mostly style.</P> <P>Guardians get the best defensive utility and taunts in the game, and we get FD/invis/mend/safefall and some DPS.</P> <P>Our DPS isn't all that uber though, considering an entire archetype is designed to be better at doing it.</P> <P>Its the second best of the fighter tree, and rightfully so.</P>

[IvarIronhea]

<P>How does this address my post?</P> <P>Trying to frame the debate to something entirely different isn't a valid argument.</P> <P>I pointed out the flaw in the concept of the intervene line and you bring up utlity/dps/taunts?</P> <P>Let me say it again.</P> <DIV>The intervene line is flawed in concept.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For a single group bring more DPS. No one is in danger of getting two rounded in a grind. Splitting the damage is inefficient.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For a raid, if the tank is in need of more healing, add a healer to the MT group.</DIV>

[tas]

Gage I am sure you have heard of ( R.I.F) You should try it. If you bother reading all of my post, I said that you not only want to out dps every other warrior class which you already do since you are  monk and are suppose to;  but you also want to out TANK us all. That seems very fare to me. How about SOE takes DPS away from monks and gives them the best def. in the game. Oh wait we al ready have a class like that it is call a guardian. HMMM. How about that.  Yes I have read some of your post but it is so hard to get pass all of your  crying and whining you do about how monks should be better able to tank . Plus after a while it  gets  kind of old. If you like to tank so much why did you not  make a guardian them and have all the def you want. It is that easy. You can't gave great dps and be a great tank. You can't have your cake and eat it to but in your case you want to have your cake eat it and steal some from the person who is next to you. Whining and getting other classes nerf is not the way to go. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sumloard 35 berserker</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> task1 wrote:<BR>Gage I am sure you have heard of ( R.I.F) You should try it. If you bother reading all of my post, I said that you not only want to out dps every other warrior class which you already do since you are  monk and are suppose to;  but you also want to out TANK us all. That seems very fare to me. How about SOE takes DPS away from monks and gives them the best def. in the game. Oh wait we al ready have a class like that it is call a guardian. HMMM. How about that.  Yes I have read some of your post but it is so hard to get pass all of your  crying and whining you do about how monks should be better able to tank . Plus after a while it  gets  kind of old. If you like to tank so much why did you not  make a guardian them and have all the def you want. It is that easy. You can't gave great dps and be a great tank. You can't have your cake and eat it to but in your case you want to have your cake eat it and steal some from the person who is next to you. Whining and getting other classes nerf is not the way to go. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>LoL.  Its obvious you have no idea what I want.  /shrug</P> <P>I want the fighter archetype to be balanced, it currently isn't, especially in end game raids.  While I had felt that 1 to 50 it was balanced, the avoidance numbers have proven this to be untrue.  While all fighters can fill their role adequately in xp groups from 1 to 50, plate tanks are avoiding more than they should while having superior mitigation, giving them more of an advantage than they should possess.</P> <P>Obviously I'm not the only one who feels this way.<BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV> <P>Because not all of them absorb damage.</P> <P>But even if they did.</P> <P>Lets say a monk gets hit 3 times out of 10.</P> <P>Lets say intervene (or its upgrades) absorb 1 of those.</P> <P>Now we are only getting hit 2 out of 10 times.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>and yet again gage, this, just like avoidance is done on a number and a percentage of random occurence,  when ive used it in past scenarios, it seems to actually throw off the numbers that i wouldve gotten in some cases in terms of misses, avoids, etc. And even still the fact still remains that the damage recieved is UN-MITIGATED.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>which also alludes to the fact that they arent offtank=MT skills, they were meant to be cast on healers and wizard types that had high potential to pull aggro. Not the other MT in groups.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>So even if the attack only hits 3/10 times, the fact still remains that when it does hit it will hit for FULL damage, which in some cases is usually upwards of 1200dmg on anything level 38+^^.  and in standard groups isnt functional for 2 people to be taking damage of that sort when one healer can run the entire groups heals easily with the current game mechanics...</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>its not good math, and further illustrates that the spell was meant to divert damage from group members who couldnt take the blows, and chance saved his/her behind.</FONT></P></DIV>

[Stra]

There goes gage again in replys to my post. We state fact and back it up with evidence and description, he states fiction and tries to say it is fact just because he says so. Apparently the fact that the sky is blue is an indication that guardians dont know how to play .... no ... not one of us ... but accordign to gage, all of us. <div></div>

[Stra]

<span><blockquote><hr>SageMarrow wrote:<div> <p>Because not all of them absorb damage.</p> <p>But even if they did.</p> <p>Lets say a monk gets hit 3 times out of 10.</p> <p>Lets say intervene (or its upgrades) absorb 1 of those.</p> <p>Now we are only getting hit 2 out of 10 times.</p> <p>/shrug</p> <p>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____</p> <p><font color="#ffff33">and yet again gage, this, just like avoidance is done on a number and a percentage of random occurence,  when ive used it in past scenarios, it seems to actually throw off the numbers that i wouldve gotten in some cases in terms of misses, avoids, etc. And even still the fact still remains that the damage recieved is UN-MITIGATED.</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff33">which also alludes to the fact that they arent offtank=MT skills, they were meant to be cast on healers and wizard types that had high potential to pull aggro. Not the other MT in groups.</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff33">So even if the attack only hits 3/10 times, the fact still remains that when it does hit it will hit for FULL damage, which in some cases is usually upwards of 1200dmg on anything level 38+^^.  and in standard groups isnt functional for 2 people to be taking damage of that sort when one healer can run the entire groups heals easily with the current game mechanics...</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff33">its not good math, and further illustrates that the spell was meant to divert damage from group members who couldnt take the blows, and chance saved his/her behind.</font></p></div><hr></blockquote>Sage, Didnt you say this several posts ago? Do you expect him to actually read it this time? Ive gained respect for you in this thread and I retract anything rude I might have said in the past. </span><div></div>

[Styk]

Sidgb is your sig hella old ? Your a 40+ tank now correct? I hope so because you are talking alot of talk like you know the guardian class very well..... Also why is it that some Guards want more taunts? Lets see you already have the most defense out of every tank class, now you want to be like a berserker and have more taunts also? You cant have your cake and eat it too you know, be happy with knowing that youhave the most HP and Defense out of any tank class... Also post 40 Guard dps does not suck.... they DPS over 100 easy... Shields and Block skill should have never been avoidance.... they should have always been counted as mitigation instead... that is where Sony Fubared.... Also Figthers should have been given a seperate Defense Table period.... reason being? when they instituted the AGI nerf it was meant for scouts.... but brawlers got hammered also because we all share the same defense table.... If sony wants to step in the right direction they need to do 2 things 1.) Make shields and Block Mitigation instead of avoidance 2.) Place figthers on a seperate defense table from scouts,mage and priest Then work the values from there Strykr Destructicus 49 Berserker <div></div>

[SageMarrow]

<P>i totally agree about the tables,</P> <P>each branch shouldve had thier own personal table instead of this blanket approach they took to keep thier lives simple. Those with programming knowledge saw it coming from a mile away considering that the took out the race restrictions on classes, or at least i did post agility nerf issue.</P> <P>this was apparently an attempt to keep life simple for them so that they could use it as a "marketing strategy' as to say they are doing something different (any race - any class) and also manage the races and classes in a blanket fashion until the kinks started arising left and right with the "proposed" system.</P> <P>they planned to an extent but they also didnt do any preventative maintenace before hand either.  These things wouldve been a simple thing if each branch at least had its own personal design and were balanced against each other, then against the archetype, then against all classes as opposed to the tree being upside down as it is now. (aka - balanced at the archetype level, then the branch, and so on.)</P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>You know what sir?  Guardians aren't all that w/o other people to buff them.  You can't play by yourself, so quit with the stupid attitude.  All fighters should be able to offtank and make other fighters better depending on the scenario, and as such all fighters should be able to maintank, depending on the scenario.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>Only Gage could type this while complaining about how guardians are overpowered.<BR>

[manimal2]

<DIV> <DIV>Why would I want to provide inferior dps  while another "tank" class tanks the mob and does less dps because he is cycling taunts/buffs to hold aggro?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Since we are the lowest on the fighter dps tree (guardian) why not just put us to tank so you can probably do equal or more dps than guardian (not tanking) and non-guardian (tanking) combined?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Are you non-guardians actually calling for every fighter class to do the same dps, same damage avoidance or absorption rate?  Currently as it stand I thought all tanks could tank almost everything, with very few exceptions which were of recent starting to be tanked by non-guardians now.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Ive been reading all the posts,  and all it seems like to me is they aren't even asking for equality, they don't bother to consider that if all the tanking abilities were evened out there would be other lacking departments which would make the guardians the least preferred over a group.  I don't care what you "think" about that, it's true.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Defensive/avoidance buffs on a non-guardian main tank in group?  I laugh at you.  See my first sentence.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'll state what someone else has stated before, the only time I get invited into a group that already has a tank is because they are friends/guildmates or there is absolutely no one available at all and even then I end up becoming the main tank 50% of the time in said group because of my skills at aggro management and my consistent mitigation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I have seen gage asking for 2 distinct things among these numerous posts......one day he's asking for his class to perform as well as a guardian in tank mode but wants to keep all his other class bonuses, the next day he's asking for every fighter class to be a cookie cutter template, basically the same in every way except in class name.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Then he goes on to tell us our class is broken to get it fixed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Which is it today?  Supermonk? monk=guardian=bruiser=berserker</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>or are you really trying to be just like my broken class you claim we are?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You keep flip flopping reasons, excuses, you tell many guardians how to play their class after insulting them telling them they don't know [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] they are doing.  You seem to be the center of all knowledge for all classes on our boards.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One thing is consistent tho, you are lobbying for monks to be "made better".  your reasoning/arguing skills are lacking tho, it's obvious you are just saying whatever comes to mind to keep the posts going and the discussion visible to the devs so that hopefully someone looks in your direction and mistakenly listens to what you are saying.  You have no obvious direction other than "make monks better".  Other than that you are ALL OVER the board concerning class balance and mainly raid tanking which I believe was the main point of the original post.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I really wish another monk with more reasoning/people skills had taken up the fight you are trying to win, it's getting to the point where people see your name on a post and take a deep breath knowing they are about to read a bunch of bull [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].</DIV></DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> manimal2k5 wrote:<BR> <DIV> <DIV>I really wish another monk with more reasoning/people skills had taken up the fight you are trying to win, it's getting to the point where people see your name on a post and take a deep breath knowing they are about to read a bunch of bull [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].<BR> <HR> </DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Opinions vary.  Besides all I really want is mitigation tanks avoidance tuned down.  As heavy armor wearers relying on avoidance first in order to tank better is broken.</P> <P>I'm also far from the only person who thinks that.</P> <P>Besides, they are looking into changing a few things, doesn't really make sense to talk about anything until we see what they come up with.<BR></P>

[Wilin]

<DIV>Correct, it doesn't make sense to argue yet. But, I started an ogre ranger just to be prepared. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> (Reference to a thread on the monk boards)</DIV><p>Message Edited by Wilin on <span class=date_text>03-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:56 PM</span>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> manimal2k5 wrote:<BR> <DIV> <DIV>I really wish another monk with more reasoning/people skills had taken up the fight you are trying to win, it's getting to the point where people see your name on a post and take a deep breath knowing they are about to read a bunch of bull [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].<BR> <HR> </DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Opinions vary.  Besides all I really want is mitigation tanks avoidance tuned down.  As heavy armor wearers relying on avoidance first in order to tank better is broken.</P> <P>I'm also far from the only person who thinks that.</P> <P>Besides, they are looking into changing a few things, doesn't really make sense to talk about anything until we see what they come up with.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR> <DIV>Guardian avoidance is just fine where it is, however what it can reach with buffs  is the problem here. It isn't  Guardian issue its's a stacking buff issue. I have 10-20% less avoidance than brawler types, period. It's the stacking of buffs, in fact not even my own buffs that allows it. I have zero problem with you reaching a higher level of avoidance than i can. Create seperate tables for each class on what they can personally reach with avoidance and you solve the problem.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Brawlers would probably be right on the money with 25% more avoidance than plate tanks can achieve. It's simple lower the cap for plate tanks and allow brawlers to go above that cap but not to an overpowering level.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There is NO need to nerf avoidance pre buffs. Brawlers are significantly higher in avoidance without buffs than plate tanks are. This is not a class issue. It is an issue with buffs from other classes stacking that allows plate tanks to achieve such high avoidance comparable to brawlers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>However this change will not make Brawlers take damage any better than currently, in fact it will worsen across the board to all fighter types including guardians.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just pointing out that what gage is crusading for is a nerf to ALL fighters not just guardians.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR> <DIV>Guardian avoidance is just fine where it is, however what it can reach with buffs  is the problem here. It isn't  Guardian issue its's a stacking buff issue. I have 10-20% less avoidance than brawler types, period. It's the stacking of buffs, in fact not even my own buffs that allows it. I have zero problem with you reaching a higher level of avoidance than i can. Create seperate tables for each class on what they can personally reach with avoidance and you solve the problem.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Brawlers would probably be right on the money with 25% more avoidance than plate tanks can achieve. It's simple lower the cap for plate tanks and allow brawlers to go above that cap but not to an overpowering level.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There is NO need to nerf avoidance pre buffs. Brawlers are significantly higher in avoidance without buffs than plate tanks are. This is not a class issue. It is an issue with buffs from other classes stacking that allows plate tanks to achieve such high avoidance comparable to brawlers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>However this change will not make Brawlers take damage any better than currently, in fact it will worsen across the board to all fighter types including guardians.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just pointing out that what gage is crusading for is a nerf to ALL fighters not just guardians.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The problem lies in the difference in avoidance between fighters when buffed and unbuffed does not equal the same difference in mitigation.  Therefore fighters who should rely on mitigation as their form of defense on relying on avoidance FIRST.</P> <P>Since the brawler subclasses have lower mitigation but roughly the same avoidance (especially buffed) the obvious outcome is that plate tanks will avoid almost on par with the brawler subclasses and then mitigate more, which is unbalanced.</P> <P>Although we should have lower mitigation and suffer spikes, plate tanks should not have such high avoidance that it becomes their staple defense AND superior mitigation.</P> <P>That trend leads to substantially less damage taken over time, especially on raid mobs that hit harder, widening the already wide gap between the subclasses.</P> <P>As per Moorgard, SoE realizes this issue (with the avoidance differences AND the buffs) and are talking about it and trying to figure out a way to change it, as this level of avoidance for plate tanks (and in general) is not intended.<BR></P>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR> <DIV>Guardian avoidance is just fine where it is, however what it can reach with buffs  is the problem here. It isn't  Guardian issue its's a stacking buff issue. I have 10-20% less avoidance than brawler types, period. It's the stacking of buffs, in fact not even my own buffs that allows it. I have zero problem with you reaching a higher level of avoidance than i can. Create seperate tables for each class on what they can personally reach with avoidance and you solve the problem.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Brawlers would probably be right on the money with 25% more avoidance than plate tanks can achieve. It's simple lower the cap for plate tanks and allow brawlers to go above that cap but not to an overpowering level.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There is NO need to nerf avoidance pre buffs. Brawlers are significantly higher in avoidance without buffs than plate tanks are. This is not a class issue. It is an issue with buffs from other classes stacking that allows plate tanks to achieve such high avoidance comparable to brawlers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>However this change will not make Brawlers take damage any better than currently, in fact it will worsen across the board to all fighter types including guardians.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just pointing out that what gage is crusading for is a nerf to ALL fighters not just guardians.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The problem lies in the difference in avoidance between fighters when buffed and unbuffed does not equal the same difference in mitigation.  Therefore fighters who should rely on mitigation as their form of defense on relying on avoidance FIRST.</P> <P>Since the brawler subclasses have lower mitigation but roughly the same avoidance (especially buffed) the obvious outcome is that plate tanks will avoid almost on par with the brawler subclasses and then mitigate more, which is unbalanced.</P> <P>Although we should have lower mitigation and suffer spikes, plate tanks should not have such high avoidance that it becomes their staple defense AND superior mitigation.</P> <P>That trend leads to substantially less damage taken over time, especially on raid mobs that hit harder, widening the already wide gap between the subclasses.</P> <P>As per Moorgard, SoE realizes this issue (with the avoidance differences AND the buffs) and are talking about it and trying to figure out a way to change it, as this level of avoidance for plate tanks (and in general) is not intended.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The issue is with the buffs PERIOD. It isnt guardians or plate classes, i dont have any avoidance buff, well a couple will add like 1% total. Go to the classes forums that have those buffs and you tell them that you think their buffs are overpowering fighters and that they ought to be nerfed, It has nothing to do with guardians. Moorgard never once said that plate classes have too much base avoidance. It is an issue with certain buffs stacking to a level that is unacceptable.</P> <P>Even with this buff nerf coming, guardians will still be the best choice, we will still be better than you.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Aethane wrote: <P>The issue is with the buffs PERIOD. It isnt guardians or plate classes, i dont have any avoidance buff, well a couple will add like 1% total. Go to the classes forums that have those buffs and you tell them that you think their buffs are overpowering fighters and that they ought to be nerfed, It has nothing to do with guardians. <FONT color=#ffff00>Moorgard never once said that plate classes have too much base avoidance.</FONT> It is an issue with certain buffs stacking to a level that is unacceptable.</P> <P>Even with this buff nerf coming, guardians will still be the best choice, we will still be better than you.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <P>To be clear once again: brawlers are intended to be tanks.</P> <P>Displaying mitigation and avoidance has indeed revealed a class disparity, <FONT color=#ffff00>because the tanks that are supposed to be avoidance based are, in certain cases, not avoiding as well as a tank that is meant to be mitigation based.</FONT></P> <P>It was never our intent that avoidance is a 100% thing, but that's basically how it is currently being used. This isn't just a problem with raid mobs, one that is present at all levels of play. There is, at every level range, a spot where you can select opponents that have little to no chance to hit you. Once again, that's not our intent.</P> <P>A change that makes everyone not as good at avoiding damage isn't the solution in and of itself. When our mobs hit, they tend to hit for high amounts of damage, so suddenly even common fights would become a slaughter. Therefore any change to the way avoidance works will be accompanied by other changes that shift game balance such that mobs could hit more frequently but for much less damage.</P> <P>This is still in the discussion phase, so additional changes will probably be made as well, such as to the effects of +Defense buffs or to the buffs themselves. But like I said we're still talking about this, so I will post details once a decision has been made on how we plan to tackle this issue.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Heh, oh and I like that last statement.  I'm the one with ego?<BR><BR>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Aethane wrote: <P>The issue is with the buffs PERIOD. It isnt guardians or plate classes, i dont have any avoidance buff, well a couple will add like 1% total. Go to the classes forums that have those buffs and you tell them that you think their buffs are overpowering fighters and that they ought to be nerfed, It has nothing to do with guardians. <FONT color=#ffff00>Moorgard never once said that plate classes have too much base avoidance.</FONT> It is an issue with certain buffs stacking to a level that is unacceptable.</P> <P>Even with this buff nerf coming, guardians will still be the best choice, we will still be better than you.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <P>To be clear once again: brawlers are intended to be tanks.</P> <P>Displaying mitigation and avoidance has indeed revealed a class disparity, <FONT color=#ffff00>because the tanks that are supposed to be avoidance based are, in certain cases, not avoiding as well as a tank that is meant to be mitigation based.</FONT></P> <P>It was never our intent that avoidance is a 100% thing, but that's basically how it is currently being used. This isn't just a problem with raid mobs, one that is present at all levels of play. There is, at every level range, a spot where you can select opponents that have little to no chance to hit you. Once again, that's not our intent.</P> <P>A change that makes everyone not as good at avoiding damage isn't the solution in and of itself. When our mobs hit, they tend to hit for high amounts of damage, so suddenly even common fights would become a slaughter. Therefore any change to the way avoidance works will be accompanied by other changes that shift game balance such that mobs could hit more frequently but for much less damage.</P> <P>This is still in the discussion phase, so additional changes will probably be made as well, such as to the effects of +Defense buffs or to the buffs themselves. But like I said we're still talking about this, so I will post details once a decision has been made on how we plan to tackle this issue.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Heh, oh and I like that last statement.  I'm the one with ego?<BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>What is that mess Gage??? You didn't disprove what i said. Moorgard still didn't say we had too much base avoidance. If you read everything that has been said on the subject, it is an issue caused by BUFFS! Same buffs you get raid buffed with there scooby.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR><BR>What is that mess Gage??? You didn't disprove what i said. Moorgard still didn't say we had too much base avoidance. If you read everything that has been said on the subject, it is an issue caused by BUFFS! Same buffs you get raid buffed with there scooby. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, but he specifically says that tanks who are NOT avoidance based have more than they should.</P> <P>Which, regardless of buffs, would still happen.</P> <P>He specifically addresses that.</P> <P>If that wasn't an issue he would've just said "defensive buffs are messed up".  But as you see he said that AFTER he addressed the avoidance disparity between avoidance and mitigation tanks.<BR></P>

[Troodon]

Whuh? Did someone miss me off the secret no-guardians mailing list? Hmm... "What the Berzerker, Brawlers and Palladins are really asking for" Perhaps this responce I wrote to someone whom was posting in the Pally forums sums up my <b>personal</b> views on where I think fighters should go: "<font color="#ccffff">Well first I cant speak for all Paladins but personally I think (and </font><font color="#ccffff"><a href="message?board.id=6&message.id=13301#M13301" target="_blank">at least for Brawlers so does SoE</a></font><font color="#ccffff">) that all Fighters are tanks. That is everyone subclass should be able to fuffil the role of tank but approaching it in different manners. e.g.</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font> <font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> What I think Fighters should be:</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font> <font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> Guardians                 100% tanks (100% "meat shield")</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> Berzerkers                100% tanks (75% "meat shield" 25% reactive dps)</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff">Monks                       100% tanks (100% Jackie Chan)</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> Brawlers                   100% tanks (75% Jackie Chan 25% Bruce Lee)</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> Paladins                   100% tanks (75% "meat shield" 25% Priest)</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> Shadow Knights       100% tanks (75% "meat shield" 25% Mage)</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font> <font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> The problem SoE face is how to ballance things so that all those 75% and 25% in design terms actually add up to 100% in real game terms.</font><font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> </font><font color="#ccffff"> Reguarding my "tirade", if I knew exactly how to square this circle do you think Id be spout off my ideas here? No, they'd be off in an email along with a CV to SoE for the job as chief of game design </font><font color="#ccffff"><img src="../../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif" border="0" height="16" width="16"></font><font color="#ccffff"> All I can try to do by debating this with my fellow Paladins and anyone else whom cares to post here, is to try to come up with some coherent thoughts that at least might catch the passing muse of an SoE dev, that it might help shape the future of what we develop into, because change is comming both in terms of the reballancing of dps amoungst all achetypes and adjustments to the relative values of Avoidance and Mitigation and how the subclasses use them.</font>" <div></div>

[Stra]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Aethane wrote:What is that mess Gage??? You didn't disprove what i said. Moorgard still didn't say we had too much base avoidance. If you read everything that has been said on the subject, it is an issue caused by BUFFS! Same buffs you get raid buffed with there scooby. <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <p>Yes, but he specifically says that tanks who are NOT avoidance based have more than they should.</p> <p>Which, regardless of buffs, would still happen.</p> <p>He specifically addresses that.</p> <p>If that wasn't an issue he would've just said "defensive buffs are messed up".  But as you see he said that AFTER he addressed the avoidance disparity between avoidance and mitigation tanks.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>Oh would you just shut up for gods sake. We have heard all of your lame idiotic arguments and platitudes before and we are sick of it. Go troll the monk forums. </span> <div></div>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV><FONT color=#ccffff>Reguarding my "tirade", if I knew exactly how to square this circle do you think Id be spout off my ideas here? No, they'd be off in an email along with a CV to SoE for the job as chief of game design <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif" width=16 border=0> All I can try to do by debating this with my fellow Paladins and anyone else whom cares to post here, is to try to come up with some coherent thoughts that at least might catch the passing muse of an SoE dev, that it might help shape the future of what we develop into, because change is comming both in terms of the reballancing of dps amoungst all achetypes and adjustments to the relative values of Avoidance and Mitigation and how the subclasses use them.</FONT>"<BR>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do know how to square the circle, but no one wants to listen to lil ole me...:smileysad:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>its just going to take more work than what was initially put into the class balance.</DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:34 AM</span>

[Troodon]

SageMarrow wrote: "<font color="#ccffff">its just going to take more work than what was initially put into the class balance.</font>" Indeed, trying to beat a certain other mmorpg's release date by rushing things hasnt really paid off. EQ2 is an engrossing game, but fundementally there is a lot that needs to be done, many things that really should have been addressed in a beta: crafitng achetype-class-subclass balance and roles spring immediately to mind. Hopefully, gradually the game will be able to be nudged into shape, its just a shame that it wasnt more polished (well even spot welded) on release. <div></div>

[Nemi]

Well I kinda disagree, every Fighter class could tank raid mobs on release, albeit it was trivial.Then they up the mobs damage, stats and hps, then they nerfed agility which skewed everything into the realm of mitigation tanks.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Strast wrote: <P><SPAN>Oh would you just shut up for gods sake. We have heard all of your lame idiotic arguments and platitudes before and we are sick of it. Go troll the monk forums. </SPAN></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>There we go Strast, let it all out.</P> <P>Why are you mad at me for what Moorgard said?</P> <P>Oh, and I love you <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>Well I kinda disagree, every Fighter class could tank raid mobs on release, albeit it was trivial.<BR><BR>Then they up the mobs damage, stats and hps, then they nerfed agility which skewed everything into the realm of mitigation tanks. </DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>Well yeah nemi- thats respcetable, but its just yet another illustration of a broken system that had rushed written all over it. Its apparent that it was all proactively done.  No preventative maintenance was in place.  If once change such as adjusting a stats potency completely cripples another class for an entire month, that screams that someone didnt even think about it as a possibility, then they throw in a bandaid in the form of the mitigation increase, but that is still only a bandaid where as in actuality they created a rift the size of the grand canyon when they did it.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>A rift that cant be closed in a few days, or even in a month to be realistic. A rift that will take what everyone called me insane for saying a long time ago.   an OVERHAUL, which is what we are currently experinceing now, an overhual of the defensive and avoidance mechanics to better suite the gameplay that we are experiencing as tank across the board.</FONT></DIV>

[Zerofault]

<DIV>First off, I love one starring Gage... its become a sort of past time... </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Secondly, I am the tank of choice, 50 berserker, in my guild.  I hold aggro better, and tank just as well.  I am not sure if I just "know" the tricks to aggro and others don't.  I'm not saying that the guild wizard doesn't die... alot... but I do think he dies less with me tanking heh.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, I would never change my class.. even with all our nerfs... I have tanked everything that guardians have.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lodoz - Nektulos - Archons</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Zerofault wrote:<BR> <DIV>First off, I love one starring Gage... its become a sort of past time... </DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I love to get one starred.  </P> <P>The more I get one starred, the more I feel loved.</P> <P>Awwwww.</P> <P>Edit: Thank you.  You guys need to work harder though, my average overall is still 3 stars.</P> <P>Slackers.</P> <P><BR> </P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:05 PM</span>

[Zerofault]

<DIV>Gage, I don't just randomly 1 star you... I read the post, disagree 100% with it, and give it the earned 1 star.  If you come up with something that makes sense and isn't so selfish and ignorant... I promise i'll grade it with a higher lvl star.  Warriors will always be the number one tanks for any and every encounter.. thats how it works, thats common sense, which you seem to lack.  Monks/Bruisers, Pally's/SK's are great Secondary Tanks.  They have their roles in raids... and they play them well..  I feel bad for any guild that has you in it trying to convince them to let you MT anything lol</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lodoz</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Zerofault wrote:<BR> <DIV>Gage, I don't just randomly 1 star you... I read the post, disagree 100% with it, and give it the earned 1 star.  If you come up with something that makes sense and isn't so selfish and ignorant... I promise i'll grade it with a higher lvl star.  Warriors will always be the number one tanks for any and every encounter.. thats how it works, thats common sense, which you seem to lack.  Monks/Bruisers, Pally's/SK's are great Secondary Tanks.  They have their roles in raids... and they play them well..  I feel bad for any guild that has you in it trying to convince them to let you MT anything lol</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lodoz</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ha Ha.  Earned one star!  Woot.</P> <P>One stars don't do anything anyway.  The only forums where they meant something were SWG and ppl just one starred ppl they didn't like, so the system was removed.</P> <P>You can go ahead and feel sorry for my guild all you want, I'll be sure to pass along your sentiment to them.</P> <P>Oh, and can you show me the post where SoE says they are doing away with the archetype system?  Which is what would have to happen for warriors to be the only main tanks.</P> <P>Thanks.<BR></P>

[SomeDudeCRO]

<div></div>"Warriors will always be the number one tanks for any and every encounter.. thats how it works, thats common sense, which you seem to lack." One star from me, you [Removed for Content]! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> You should be happy, you earned it and was certainly well deserved! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <div></div><p>Message Edited by SomeDudeCRO on <span class=date_text>03-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:56 PM</span>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>One stars don't do anything anyway.  The only forums where they meant something were SWG and ppl just one starred ppl they didn't like, so the system was removed.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You saying you got the SWG system removed by being a pain there too? :smileytongue:</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<P>whether i like it, you like it, or anyone else likes it for that matter, sticking too tightly to the archetype system in that equal but different phylosophy will destroy this games player base. whats the point in playing a rpg when its all in your head and not in the game. whats the point in playing a monk and just being a tank in format? any other game out there online on pnp or anywhere else doesnt promote a monk class as a tank, its a versatile dps class.</P> <P>same thing for *bersker* otherwise known as barbarians in the D&D universe. berserker means crazy lunatic with a big sword that was a bit more tankish, but not quite so much as a paladin or warrior.</P> <P>Now if you dont believe that the classes here all stem from one good ole game called D&D. look it up.</P> <P>maybe you will enjoy it a bit more gage, maybe others will too, but trust me when i say that soe cant afford to lose even 1 extra person at this rate, especially since they lose on a guestimate about 25 per day as is to players shuffling MMO's.</P> <P>when eq1 first came out, it was eq1 or a mud, there was not too much in between as far as USA player base was concerned. Now if you dont believe that = look it up. </P> <P>So with this being the case, IMO, putting the classes any closer together than they already are would be suicide considering what else is available and will soon be available in the near future.</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>One stars don't do anything anyway.  The only forums where they meant something were SWG and ppl just one starred ppl they didn't like, so the system was removed.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You saying you got the SWG system removed by being a pain there too? :smileytongue:</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ha Ha, nah I left before that system was really implemented.  Wouldn't have mattered though they also had time based ranks like this board does <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>maybe you will enjoy it a bit more gage, maybe others will too, but trust me when i say that soe cant afford to lose even 1 extra person at this rate, especially since they lose on a guestimate about 25 per day as is to players shuffling MMO's.</P> <P>when eq1 first came out, it was eq1 or a mud, there was not too much in between as far as USA player base was concerned. Now if you dont believe that = look it up.</P> <P>So with this being the case, IMO, putting the classes any closer together than they already are would be suicide considering what else is available and will soon be available in the near future.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sage, while I appreciate your keen insight, I somehow doubt the chicken littles of EQ2 know what they are talking about.  There are a lot worse MMOs out there, and also smaller ones (Eve online, Knight online) that aren't closing up shop.</P> <P>I understand your opinion is that the archetype system is boring and spells imminent doom, but somehow I imagine EQ2 will be around for awhile.  If you want class diversity etc etc then there are plenty of other MMOs out there.</P> <P>Oh, and its funny that you bring up WoW a lot in your other posts.  Do you ever read their forums?  People say the same thing, that its going to die, it sucks, all the players are unhappy, etc etc.</P> <P>The simple fact is you can't please everyone.  SoE even readily admits and realizes that as a fact.  So they aren't even trying to.</P> <P>Besides, they don't need to make this game anymore like EQ1... they already run EQ1 which fills that purpose <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR><BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-27-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>10:27 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:27 PM</span>

[Stra]

<span><blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:Well I kinda disagree, every Fighter class could tank raid mobs on release, albeit it was trivial.Then they up the mobs damage, stats and hps, then they nerfed agility which skewed everything into the realm of mitigation tanks.<hr></blockquote>Nemi: you either didnt read the whole thread or didnt understand. Mitigation isnt emough. In this game there are multiple random rolls that hit on successful attack. One example is the hold the line spell. Each time you hit, it has a 33% chance to proc a low power consuming shout. Mobs have similar abilities. Each time they hit you with them, they have a chance to stun you. Now if they are missing me 60% of the time due to avoidance, I am avoiding 10 to 20 stuns per fight. Put that avoidance to 20% and I will be stunned half the bloody fight. There are also stifles and so on. Nerfing guardian avoidance would cripple our ability to tank. We would spend the entire fight stunned and stifled. Any group in their right mind would choose avoidance tanks, ie monks. Gage-Mikel wants this. He wants to turn guardians into his own personal mystics. He thinks we should be relegated to allaying and sentineling him while he tanks better than us. Also keep in mind that he is not willing to give up his DPS to get this tanking either. If you nerf guardian avoidance so that monks tank as good as we do (damage taken wise) and still retain their DPS abilities and feign death and so on, then there will be absolutely no more reason to play a guardian. </span><div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Thats easily fixed Strast. </P> <P>Give Warriors / Curasders a buff that uses 1 concentration with the ability to be immune to a frontal stun attack, meaning that any mob behind them or out of the 180 degree arch can potientally stun a Tank, anything that comes in from the front, the Tank is immuned to it, Stun wise, or interuption wise. Similar to a Ogre in EQ1 where they were immuned to most stuns from the front, not all, just 95% of the stuns that came in from the front, a Ogre was immune to it, there was certain raid mobs that there stuns would pass through such a ability though, just ignored the Stun resist altogether. </P> <P>Seeing as making Ogres the only ones that could obtain such a skill wouldnt work in this situation in this game because of the diverse amount of ways one can become any class with any race, then it would put Ogres into a " better race for that class " bracket, when that wouldnt make it diverse anymore. Now, if they put it in the form of a Buff that requires 1 concentration point to use and lasts for 12 hours, then Plate class's wouldnt have the problem of being stunned half the fight. Monks / Bruisers wouldnt get hit half as much as a Plate class there fore wouldnt need the ability, when they did get hit, they would get hit hard and a chance to be stunned.</P> <P>Just a thought, something that would work though if enough thought went into it.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:46 AM</span>

[maluv]

<DIV>As far as eq ever dieing, i find it hard to beleave.... after playing eq1 since almost the release all the way up to lke 4yrs later.... theres only a small faction that u ever see visit the forums.. if your trying to get numbers from there thats horrible.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>theres a ton of ppl that careless about what goes on in the forums. and eq2 imho will only grow. hence its just a game that needs a *good* computer to play it on, when more ppl are able to get thoughs comps, i'm sure they be playing asap. not everyone can afford or buy one atm but i think theres a ton of ppl waiting to try eq2 when they can get a decent opperating system</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>as far as this post... monks /pwn all, dont be jealious, but we'd deffinitly take your guardian abilitys too. if u think there is an un-balance then do what gage does and GET IT FIXED! he doesn't post all this none since for sh*ts and giggles, he does it for the reason that he reads ALL post of valuble info, mostly the devs in general since they do know what there talking about.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all classes should and will be able to tank equaly. they will all give trade offs for that tho. wether it is dps, utility or what not, there will be a slight disadvantage to every class, along with advantages. eq2 just came out, its still a baby, not even a year old yet. weather it was unfinished or not. i doubt... SoE is a professional business i think they know what there doing. thats what they have patches and scheduled updates. to fix everything and make the game as perfect as possible... but it all takes time, people need to learn patience, and if there if a big enough problem and the devs notice it. it will be changed</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>people who work for SoE play eq2 too. they see whats going on, but most important issues need to be addressed first and foremost. thats what there doing.. </DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV> <P>Sage, while I appreciate your keen insight, I somehow doubt the chicken littles of EQ2 know what they are talking about.  There are a lot worse MMOs out there, and also smaller ones (Eve online, Knight online) that aren't closing up shop.</P> <P>I understand your opinion is that the archetype system is boring and spells imminent doom, but somehow I imagine EQ2 will be around for awhile.  If you want class diversity etc etc then there are plenty of other MMOs out there.</P> <P>Oh, and its funny that you bring up WoW a lot in your other posts.  Do you ever read their forums?  People say the same thing, that its going to die, it sucks, all the players are unhappy, etc etc.</P> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>well yes gage, i understand that very clearly, but just a few things from a business standpoint.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>since SOE has corporate ties, they have much bigger shoes to fill than your average game company. They in essence have 2 sets of shoes to fill to be considered successful.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>1. being the marketing/advertising "We have got to meet our numbers side"</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>2. being the developers desire to actually make a good game.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Not to say that they will fall off the planet, not to say that they will kill the game and end it and give everyone thier money back, moreso just lose some of the funding that they have to the program in the form of man power. In the form of financial resources that are needed to run a game of this calibur.  There were countless hours of manpower put into the graphics engine, computers that had to be specially built to run it.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>(keep in mind the post that was made about the bloodline chronicles movies and how there own computers could barely run it and they had to split the movie into cuts then paste it all back together.)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Since Eq2 is a totally new project and Eq1 was not sacrificed in eq2's launch, they are not financially tied, and one has to be financially self sufficient as does the other. SOE has a budget, and the budget has to be met so that the bills get paid, the systems involved, the sponsors that come up everytime that you play the game, (DELL, INVIDIA< ETC) there is a trade off in that process, not to mention server upkeep, maintenance cost, the electicity bill..haha.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>So basically all of that ties to one crucial thing, SOE isnt a hole in the wall back room production that stumbled upon something great. Verant was when they ran Eq1. The SOE stepped in and took over a gold mine, which we see alot in todays business market but thats another story for another day. Still, they have liabilities and have quotas to be met, one way or another. If that means cutting funding to the project so that the bills can get paid, so be it. (why do you think they are advertising like mad on every video game website on the internet?)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>And as far as my WoW comments, yes i read their forums quite often, as well as MxO, as well as CoH.  But there is a very simple explanation for my comparison. This was supposed to be Eq2's spotlight, not WoW.  The 750,000+/350,000- numbers cant even compare.  I would rather have players waiting to play my game than not have 8 full servers. Which is also why you see blizzard running full steam and adding employees like there is no tommorow, gage didnt you have an interview with blizzard a while back as well? (or were you just joking?) </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>There are good reasons for these things, which is why i dont doubt that Blizzard wont start massively fixing bugs, that blizzard wont massively start adding great and creative content that they are KNOWN for already in such a short time, simply because they will have the Mone and man power to do it.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33> They have no reason to coast in silence at the pace they are going, when you have money and an audience of this calibur, you take the party everywhere you go. And i see them doing that, from a business POV. If not because they are undoubtledly using the same money the made over the years off of the actual warcraft series, so there isnt any fall out if the game bombs, they just lost what they put in. The biggest risk of any investment of this nature, so hey..</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>And you best believe if blizzard screws this up, they will be all over ever business magazine in america, in the top 50 business spoofs of 2005.</FONT></P></DIV>

[Mig]

1)

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>gage didnt you have an interview with blizzard a while back as well? (or were you just joking?)</FONT></P> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yeah, for a GM position.  I ended up declining due to personal reasons.</P> <P>I understand your views Sage, I just don't agree with them.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:36 AM</span>

[kr8ztwin]

<P>wow actually sat here and read most all of this thread.   Why would ANYone want ANY classes to be the same in ANY shape or form?  You want to tank as well as a guardian?  Basically your asking to ballance monks to warriors so are you also willing to lose DPS and everything else to your "ballance" as well?  I think SOE made a slight mistake when they declared on release that  ALL fighter classes will be effective tanks.  Now we have all these kids playing monks and crusaders that cannot handle that a guardian just might fill the tank role better than them.  </P> <P>This is like saying a Warden should get platemail because hes jealous that the Templar looks so shiney or maybe they want reactive heals too because they feel its unfair they don't have them.  If anything why not ask for more DPS or something that will make you stand out?  </P> <P>There is a reason there are multiple class choices in the game.  They appeal to different ppl because they are DIFFERENT.  If you are so jealous that you cannot tank a raid mob....then be a guardian.  GUARDian.  Personally I would love ALL classes to be more unique in their gameplay and I have never been so childish as to cry everytime I saw someone do something I couldn't do.  </P> <P>I would really hate to see the crybabies of the game ruin it for those of us that actually enjoy the basic mechanics of a MULTI-CLASS system.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> kr8ztwin wrote:<BR> <P>wow actually sat here and read most all of this thread.   Why would ANYone want ANY classes to be the same in ANY shape or form?  You want to tank as well as a guardian?  Basically your asking to ballance monks to warriors so are you also willing to lose DPS and everything else to your "ballance" as well?  I think SOE made a slight mistake when they declared on release that  ALL fighter classes will be effective tanks.  Now we have all these kids playing monks and crusaders that cannot handle that a guardian just might fill the tank role better than them. </P> <P>This is like saying a Warden should get platemail because hes jealous that the Templar looks so shiney or maybe they want reactive heals too because they feel its unfair they don't have them.  If anything why not ask for more DPS or something that will make you stand out? </P> <P>There is a reason there are multiple class choices in the game.  They appeal to different ppl because they are DIFFERENT.  If you are so jealous that you cannot tank a raid mob....then be a guardian.  GUARDian.  Personally I would love ALL classes to be more unique in their gameplay and I have never been so childish as to cry everytime I saw someone do something I couldn't do. </P> <P>I would really hate to see the crybabies of the game ruin it for those of us that actually enjoy the basic mechanics of a MULTI-CLASS system.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Hey, I'm glad you enjoy the mechanics of a multi-class system...TOO BAD THIS GAME DOESN'T HAVE ONE! <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>Oh and wardens don't need reactives they have regens, and we don't want more DPS... we are tanks not scouts and should be balanced as such.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:00 AM</span>

[maluv]

Also all classes arn't the same, they have trade offs, if only you'd bother to look at them

[Geothe]

<P>"we are tanks not scouts and should be balanced as such"</P> <P>Yes, BUT you are offensive tanks, dont Defensive.  </P> <P>You do have higher DPS then guardians.</P> <P>You have group buffs that increase the offensive skill of your group (while guardians have buffs that increase the defensive skill of our groups),</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>"we are tanks not scouts and should be balanced as such"</P> <P>Yes, BUT you are offensive tanks, dont Defensive. </P> <P>You do have higher DPS then guardians.</P> <P>You have group buffs that increase the offensive skill of your group (while guardians have buffs that increase the defensive skill of our groups).</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>And?</P> <P>Actually we are the defensive side of the avoidance tank tree.  Bruisers are the offensive side.</P> <P>Yes, and so do berzerkers and sks.</P> <P>Yes, but guardians have always had defensive utility, that has nothing to do with the role of the classes though.</P> <P>Oh, and to reiterate:</P> <P>Defensive fighter subclasses:</P> <P>Monk / Guardian / Pally</P> <P>Offensive fighter subclasses:</P> <P>Bruiser / Berserker / Shadowknight</P> <P>So are you trying to infer that all the "offensive" flavor tanks should fill DPS roles, while the defensive ones tank, or what?<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:56 PM</span>

[Geothe]

<P>Ok.</P> <P>Then why do you make the claims that monks are a defensive fighter, when, infact, they are given OFFENSIVE self and group buffs?  The +Off to self and group, the +attack speed.  You -aren't- defensive fighters, you are offensive.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>Ok.</P> <P>Then why do you make the claims that monks are a defensive fighter, when, infact, they are given OFFENSIVE self and group buffs?  The +Off to self and group, the +attack speed.  You -aren't- defensive fighters, you are offensive.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>So then bruisers are defensive?</P> <P>One of us is, which is it?</P> <P>You mean to tell me you are basing whether we are offensive or defensive because of one group buff we have lol.<BR></P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Oh, and to reiterate:</P> <P>Defensive fighter subclasses:</P> <P>Monk / Guardian / Pally</P> <P>Offensive fighter subclasses:</P> <P>Bruiser / Berserker / Shadowknight</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Oh and to reiterate. No wonder your concept of what is what is so screwed up.</P> <P>You could be taken seriously if not for this kind of delusional nonsense.</P><p>Message Edited by sidgb on <span class=date_text>03-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:17 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Oh, and to reiterate:</P> <P>Defensive fighter subclasses:</P> <P>Monk / Guardian / Pally</P> <P>Offensive fighter subclasses:</P> <P>Bruiser / Berserker / Shadowknight</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Oh and to reiterate. No wonder your concept of what is what is so screwed up.</P> <P>You could be taken seriously if not for this kind of delusional nonsense.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Okay, then explain it to me?</P> <P>Fury = offensive</P> <P>Warden = defensive</P> <P>Mystic = defensive</P> <P>Defiler = offensive</P> <P>Troub = defensive</P> <P>Dirge = offensive</P> <P>etc and so on.</P> <P>Every subclass is balanced like that on its most general level.</P> <P>I find it funny that you can't grasp that concept.<BR></P>

[Geothe]

<P>Gage,</P> <P>Then why do YOU say that monks are defensive?  What skills and evidence?</P> <P>I see that monks have skills that increase their attack speed.</P> <P>I see monks have skills that increase their, and their groups Offensive skills.</P> <P>I see monks have many skills that sacrifice their own HP to do damage (yeah, great set of skills for defensive tanks there!)</P> <P> </P> <P>Overall, I'd say monks "tank" by killing the mob FASTER so that it does less damage over all.  Their skills are set up to allow them, and their group to do this.</P> <P>Guardians, on the other hand, are set up to take more time in killing mobs, but increase their defense and their groups defense so that they take less damage over the longer period of time required to kill the mob.</P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Okay, then explain it to me?</P> <P>Fury = offensive</P> <P>Warden = defensive</P> <P>Mystic = defensive</P> <P>Defiler = offensive</P> <P>Troub = defensive</P> <P>Dirge = offensive</P> <P>etc and so on.</P> <P>Every subclass is balanced like that on its most general level.</P> <P>I find it funny that you can't grasp that concept.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>This is one of those things that doesn't have to be explained to a rational person. And can never be explained to an irrational one like you.<BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>Gage,</P> <P>Then why do YOU say that monks are defensive?  What skills and evidence?</P> <P>I see that monks have skills that increase their attack speed.</P> <P>I see monks have skills that increase their, and their groups Offensive skills.</P> <P>I see monks have many skills that sacrifice their own HP to do damage (yeah, great set of skills for defensive tanks there!)</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>First: all of our taunts.  Straight taunts.  No add in like fear.</P> <P>Second:  We have 0 abilities that are better from behind the mob, or *require* you to be flanking to cast.  Bruisers do.</P> <P>Third: Our stances.  We get defensive stances that up our defense/deflection by 15.  Even our t5 offensive stance increases our defense by 10 (two levels).</P> <P>Fourth: Face of the Mountain and Stone Stance.  These are buffs that increase our mitigation.</P> <P>Fifth: Control Breathing (increases our parry).  (An upgrade to karmic focus which increased our parry and deflection).</P> <P>Sixth: Our intervene line.</P> <P>Yes we have haste.  Yes we have an offensive group buff.  But we are not the offensive oriented evasion tank, that is the bruiser.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR>This is one of those things that doesn't have to be explained to a rational person. And can never be explained to an irrational one like you.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>So you can't do it.  Thought so.<BR>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR>This is one of those things that doesn't have to be explained to a rational person. And can never be explained to an irrational one like you.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>So you can't do it.  Thought so.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Nope, a dozen people or so , over a dozen or so threads have been trying to explain it to you for over a month and you still are clueless.</P> <P>Since I have tired of repeating myself and everyone else I will settle for calling you stupid and clueless. You want the answer go back and actually read the stuff posted before. It's all there.</P><p>Message Edited by sidgb on <span class=date_text>03-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:47 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>Nope, a dozen people or so , over a dozen or so threads have been trying to explain it to you for over a month and you still are clueless.</P> <P>Since I have tired of repeating myself and everyone else I will settle for calling you stupid and clueless.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ha Ha, that's fine.  Opinons vary and everyone has one.</P> <P>I shall struggle to work on my self-esteem issues that will invariably rise up from your new found opinion of my intelligence, I only hope I can come out of it while still being able to look at myself in the mirror.<BR></P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ha Ha, that's fine.  Opinons vary and everyone has one.</P> <P>I shall struggle to work on my self-esteem issues that will invariably rise up from your new found opinion of my intelligence, I only hope I can come out of it while still being able to look at myself in the mirror.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>As I said, you would make good sense if not for that one ridiculous blind spot. It undermines everything you say and makes you a caricature.<BR> <p>Message Edited by sidgb on <span class=date_text>03-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:50 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> sidgb wrote: <P>As I said, you would make good sense if not for that one [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] blind spot. It undermines everything you say and makes you a caricature.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>That's those big headed cartoon drawings right, like they do at Six Flags?<BR>

[Rah]

<DIV>Wow this had definatley turned into Im right your wrong and my dads bigger thread. I will say that I have the distinct feeling that Gage is rocking the forum boards just to keep attention focused on GageII ....errr I mean EQ2 monks. At any rate for the record.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_monk.php" target=_blank>http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_monk.php</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><U>48 usable Monk Skills from 20 to 50</U></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>23 Offensive based (DD and AoE)</DIV> <DIV>7 Defensive Based ( one gives haste and one gives Underwater breathing)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2 Group Offensive Buffs</DIV> <DIV>4 Group Defensive Buffs ( Monks can intervene with Sacrifice so maybe they should be intervening on guardians?)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6 Taunt lines (included stuns)</DIV> <DIV>6 Utilitys ( Heal invis hate reducer and 2 FD lines that oh no they dont work at all????)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Capstone 50 spells for a monk?</DIV> <DIV>You guessed it 2 Offensive spells</DIV> <DIV>Agitate Spirit + hate and AoE DD</DIV> <DIV>Flying Dragon Kick DD</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So if you combine all other lines of skills the monk use 7 Defensive, 4 Defensive group, 6 Taunt, and 6 Utility thats 23 skills.</DIV> <DIV>     if you combine the offensive skills 23 Off and 2 Group Offensive thats 25 skills</DIV> <DIV>     if you combine just the defensive skills (7 Def and 4 Def group) 11 Defensive skills?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So okay how are monks defensive tanks?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now I fully expect that the link will be debunked as inaccurate and that my count of the skills from 20 to 50 have a Im a guardian the best tank slant to them. So I invite you to look for yourself and make your own determination. I can also attest to the fact that the monks I have grouped with that are over 30 all have one thing in common (Everfrost server) they are the first ones to cut and paste DPS by individual for each fight into group text! I swear it Im not making it up it has happened on 3 of the 5 monks I have grouped with as a guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the nonsense that we should offtank and use our abilitys to take the damage you recieve I think a counter argument could be used for you to do the same.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>lvl 32.6 Martial Deflection                      increase tgt defelection                                             0 concentration</DIV> <DIV>lvl 38.6 Sarifice                                     monk takes targets damage                                     2 concentration</DIV> <DIV>lvl 40    Phins Mountain Stance            Shield ally from attks +Deflection + Agility                0 concentration</DIV> <DIV>lvl 56  Transcendant Vision                  Shield Ally fropm Attacks                                          0 concentration</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now given that it takes you 2 concentraitons to absorb my damge taken and you have near as much hp as I do and 2x the DPS ( yes Taemek is right I parse as well and you do put out that much DPS) It makes more since to me that you defend me the one that mitigates better damage and you still get to do mad DPs and cut and paste it into groupsay after each encounter! And if you do get aggro you can FD to BOOT!!!!!!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Okay so I dont know if you do or dont cut and paste  but im betting you do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Anyways you can tank you cant hold one logical line of argument on this board that bears any proof other than the Gage crusade to make the Gage the tank for all situations. I have taken the time to read alot of your post as I play both Monk and Guardian frequently and I ahve to say you are on a witch hunt here for any Guardian that post anything contrary to your Gage mind set.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Rahge </DIV> <DIV>Everfrost</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<P>rahge--- look at the dev tracker, what we think will happen is going too.</P> <P>Pretty soon enchanters will dps like wizards, so will conjureres, and all the priest will be pretty cookie cutter too.</P> <P>Welcome to Everquest 2: You are in our NEW world now!!</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <DIV>Wow this had definatley turned into Im right your wrong and my dads bigger thread. I will say that I have the distinct feeling that Gage is rocking the forum boards just to keep attention focused on GageII ....errr I mean EQ2 monks. At any rate for the record.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_monk.php" target=_blank>http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_monk.php</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><U>48 usable Monk Skills from 20 to 50</U></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>23 Offensive based (DD and AoE)</DIV> <DIV>7 Defensive Based ( one gives haste and one gives Underwater breathing)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2 Group Offensive Buffs</DIV> <DIV>4 Group Defensive Buffs ( Monks can intervene with Sacrifice so maybe they should be intervening on guardians?)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6 Taunt lines (included stuns)</DIV> <DIV>6 Utilitys ( Heal invis hate reducer and 2 FD lines that oh no they dont work at all????)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Capstone 50 spells for a monk?</DIV> <DIV>You guessed it 2 Offensive spells</DIV> <DIV>Agitate Spirit + hate and AoE DD</DIV> <DIV>Flying Dragon Kick DD</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So if you combine all other lines of skills the monk use 7 Defensive, 4 Defensive group, 6 Taunt, and 6 Utility thats 23 skills.</DIV> <DIV>     if you combine the offensive skills 23 Off and 2 Group Offensive thats 25 skills</DIV> <DIV>     if you combine just the defensive skills (7 Def and 4 Def group) 11 Defensive skills?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So okay how are monks defensive tanks?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now I fully expect that the link will be debunked as inaccurate and that my count of the skills from 20 to 50 have a Im a guardian the best tank slant to them. So I invite you to look for yourself and make your own determination. I can also attest to the fact that the monks I have grouped with that are over 30 all have one thing in common (Everfrost server) they are the first ones to cut and paste DPS by individual for each fight into group text! I swear it Im not making it up it has happened on 3 of the 5 monks I have grouped with as a guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the nonsense that we should offtank and use our abilitys to take the damage you recieve I think a counter argument could be used for you to do the same.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>lvl 32.6 Martial Deflection                      increase tgt defelection                                             0 concentration</DIV> <DIV>lvl 38.6 Sarifice                                     monk takes targets damage                                     2 concentration</DIV> <DIV>lvl 40    Phins Mountain Stance            Shield ally from attks +Deflection + Agility                0 concentration</DIV> <DIV>lvl 56  Transcendant Vision                  Shield Ally fropm Attacks                                          0 concentration</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I'm very aware of our skillset.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, how about you post the guardian ones, including all of the damage arts you get.  Its almost half of your abilities.  No worries, we have this comparison going on in the monk forums also <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Mie]

<DIV>Forget Gaga. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If one day Brusier can tank raid mob, its time for us to whine for Fear, Mez, Mend, FD and built in tower shield:smileyvery-happy:</DIV>

[Chanliang]

You guys are going a bit of from topic :p But now step back and look overall picture and compare subclasses and this time Cage is right or was it Gage.. nvm.  That  usually quenos side profession tend to be a more defencive that freeport counter part  like monk vs. bruiser, mystic vs. defiler, templar vs. inquisitor and so on.  Of course monk is not defencive profession if you compare it to warden but within class like brawlers, druids, etc. usually other is more built on offence and other defence. <div></div>

[Stra]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <div></div> <p>Thats easily fixed Strast. </p> <p>Give Warriors / Curasders a buff that uses 1 concentration with the ability to be immune to a frontal stun attack, meaning that any mob behind them or out of the 180 degree arch can potientally stun a Tank, anything that comes in from the front, the Tank is immuned to it, Stun wise, or interuption wise. Similar to a Ogre in EQ1 where they were immuned to most stuns from the front, not all, just 95% of the stuns that came in from the front, a Ogre was immune to it, there was certain raid mobs that there stuns would pass through such a ability though, just ignored the Stun resist altogether. </p> <p>Seeing as making Ogres the only ones that could obtain such a skill wouldnt work in this situation in this game because of the diverse amount of ways one can become any class with any race, then it would put Ogres into a " better race for that class " bracket, when that wouldnt make it diverse anymore. Now, if they put it in the form of a Buff that requires 1 concentration point to use and lasts for 12 hours, then Plate class's wouldnt have the problem of being stunned half the fight. Monks / Bruisers wouldnt get hit half as much as a Plate class there fore wouldnt need the ability, when they did get hit, they would get hit hard and a chance to be stunned.</p> <p>Just a thought, something that would work though if enough thought went into it.</p> <p>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker16th OutfitterEverfrost ServerEnlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )70th Stone Fist of The Celestial FistFive Rings on Luclin Server</p><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class="date_text">03-29-2005</span> <span class="time_text">12:46 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote>I gather you dont play a guardian. Slate's Protective Stance: 3 concentration slots, NECESSARY for any main tank guardian. You dont have it and you die. Intervene: 2 slots PER PERSON. Allay: 1 Slot per person. Just exactly where are we going to get the concentration for this buff? Furthermore, making us immune to stuns doesnt cover stifles and the other probabalistic damage incomming; ie: mob has x% chance to critical on a successful hit, and we just quadrupled their number of successful hits. </span><div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV>Ally is hardly needed when tanking, and if i was tanking i wouldnt be woring about trying to give someone a avoidance boost if i had a chance at being immune to stun or interuptions for the cost of one concentration point.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So whats it going to be, give a person in your group 20% more avoidance ? OR the chance to be immune to stuns and interuptions, i know which one id chose.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for stifles and other probabalistic damage incomming; ie: mob has x% chance to critical on a successful hit, and we just quadrupled their number of successful hits. Well every class has to deal with that, not just Guardians, thats something that comes with being a skilled player and knowing how to pull a mob into a group.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Everyone and every mob has a chance to critical hit, dont even know why you brang that up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</DIV>

[Stra]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote: <div>I'm very aware of our skillset.</div> <div> </div> <div>Now, how about you post the guardian ones, including all of the damage arts you get.  Its almost half of your abilities.  No worries, we have this comparison going on in the monk forums also <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><hr></blockquote>As usual Gage, you take one point of many, yank it out of context and try to attack it in isolation. You are now going to pick on the buffs and skills of Guardians. You have failed to grasp the big picture in every post. You compare tanking ability to tanking ability as if that was the entire picture. When people point out skill sets, you compare skill sets to skill sets as if THAT was the entire picture. When people mention DPS, you compare your DPS to that of a scout for ..... well ... actually Im still trying to figure out the relevance of that in a tanking discussion, but I'll get back to you on that. It isnt just the tankign ability, it isnt just the skills, it isnt just the DPS, it isnt just avoidance versus mitigation. ITS THE BIG PICTURE THAT YOU FAIL TO SEE. You fail to see how this all goes together and makes the Monk a far better soloer, far better DPS fighter and so on and makes the guardian useful basically ONLY for main tanking. Thats fine by us. We dont mind having only one role, being only one slot per group for us. Not at all. But now you want to usurp this too. That way you can be great at soloing, Fighter DPS, utility spells and TANKING. This would of course invalidate any reason for the existence of a guardian when we have to share that one slot per group with another tank that can do what we can, and do it better with DPS on top of it for icing. Gage, you seem to have failed to grasp not only the big picture but the concept of balance. Now dont start going off on avoidance versus mitigation because that is only one small part of balance. When you chose your class you picked a fighter that had more DPS. You traded certain things that we had for certain other things. Now you want all of the things we have as well. You cant main tank raid mobs without the HPs, Mitigation AND avoidance. We cant main tank without all three as well. Stifles, stuns, melee criticals and probabalistic damage would destroy us. On top of that we have NOTHING but main tanking. That is ALL we have. You can put out twice our DPS, breathe underwater, safe fall, and if the excrement really hits the ventilation device, you can feign death. </span><div></div>

[Stra]

Changed topic title to exclude our brothers, the berzerkers from this attempted gank fest. Sorry guys, I now realize you arent with these dweebs. <div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Mielx wrote:<BR> <DIV>Forget Gaga. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If one day Brusier can tank raid mob, its time for us to whine for Fear, Mez, Mend, FD and built in tower shield:smileyvery-happy:</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Jezekiel tanked two x4s.  Start whining.<BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR></SPAN>We are guardians and if other people can tank, no one will play with us!! <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Heh.</P> <P>Well I understand your desire to be the "best" and "only" raid tank.  The end all be all.  I mean who wouldn't.  You know I find it quite humorous, the things you say.</P> <P>You ask me why I bring up DPS in a discussion about tanking, and the proceed to bring up not only our DPS, but our utility as well.  </P> <P>You talk about solo'ing, in this, a discussion about tanking.</P> <P>Then you explain to me exactly how useless guardians would be if monks could tank raids equally.  Which I mean, everyone knows we are talking about raids, because its evident from all sides that the 1 to 50 grind game is pretty much balanced.</P> <P>You know what though?  No guardian has ever answered me something.</P> <P>You say time and time again that if it wasn't for MTing, you'd never get a group.</P> <P>You say that if the other tanks (especially monks and bruisers) could tank as well as you (which isn't what we want anyway) that your whole class would cease and desist, and die, of worthlessness.</P> <P>But I see plenty of guardians dinging 50 everyday.  In grind groups, in pickup groups.  Not in guild groups.  These same lackluster guardians, who offer no utility, no DPS, nothing.  Getting chosen to MT for grind groups even though all the other fighters can adequately fill the role.</P> <P>Weird isn't it?</P> <P>I mean, how is it that the normal game allows us to tank the same content as guardians, adequately (albeit not as effectively, you are the most defensive after all) while keeping our damage, our utility; and yet... guardians continue to get groups, day in and day out, getting xp and gaining levels.</P> <P>You sit right here and preach to me how this isn't possible.  How if monks and pallys and sks and bruisers could adequately tank raids for their guild, the same as normal content works, your class would die.</P> <P>See, the thing I fail to understand is...how are you guardians all getting to 50 to raid then?  Obviously, by your keen insight, none of you should ever get groups past 20.  Because I mean, monks can tank the same stuff you can, and our damage and dps make us so much more desirable.  Right?<BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>gage, you ARE level 50, i shouldnt have to tell you this.</P> <P>ALOT of MIN/MAX goes into building a raiding guild.  That means they will pick the best class/player for the best spot 9/10.</P> <P>The same goes in normal exp groups, you pick the class/ player for the best spot. Until you are left with no options </P> <P>If there comes up as one MT spot in a guild for the nights raid... As of now, its going to be the guardian.  Guardians dont want to have to compete with other classes for things that they cannot do. If you would make just as good a tank technically with buff stacking and 5 healers up your behind, all while getting all the perks of a monk...</P> <P>then truly WHAT IS THE POINT IN PLAYING A GUARDIAN?</P> <P>there is none at that point. If a player sets out to make a raiding guild, they can easily say - well we will just build it around the monk... they get more useful crap anyway longterm - heals, FD, dps, etc...</P> <P>there indeed wont be a need for a dedicated class. i hold aggro just as well as a monk or even a guardian for that matter, and im a [Removed for Content] bruiser. Holding aggro isnt a task with group buff aggro building combined with regular taunts and such.  Especially since they are talking about increasing taunt lines anyway, it will become even more trivial and simply a way to keep aggro off the healer, dps classes wont even be a concern anymore.</P> <P>think about it realistically. if the same job can be done all be it .5% less relaibly with 25% more utility and tradeoff over the course of 50 levels...</P> <P>thats not an equal give/take relationship...at all. </P> <p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:02 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>gage, you ARE level 50, i shouldnt have to tell you this.</P> <P>ALOT of MIN/MAX goes into building a raiding guild.  That means they will pick the best class/player for the best spot 9/10.  <FONT color=#ffff00>A lot of this game's strategies are being used from EQ1.  That will change.  These aren't even close to the same game.  Besides, big changes on the way.</FONT></P> <P>The same goes in normal exp groups, you pick the class/ player for the best spot. Until you are left with no options.  <FONT color=#ffff00>/shrug I see all classes dinging 50.</FONT></P> <P>think about it realistically. if the same job can be done all be it .5% less relaibly with 25% more utility and tradeoff over the course of 50 levels...</P> <P>thats not an equal give/take relationship...at all.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Neither is one class being so good at one thing it makes the other classes in that archetype worthless.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Gage, why do i get this funny feeling you are going to be sorely dissapointed when what ever changes they finally do make, do make? </P> <P>Like you have already been asked, once you have been made to be able to tank this raid material, which has already been proven that Brawlers <STRONG><U>can</U></STRONG>, but when they do make these changes and people still pick Guardian over Brawler for the simple fact that Mitigation > Avoidance, plus the fact that Plate class's have more HP then Brawlers, what part of this dont you understand Gage ?</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P> <P> </P>

[Stra]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>Gage, why do i get this funny feeling you are going to be sorely dissapointed when what ever changes they finally do make, do make? </p> <p>Like you have already been asked, once you have been made to be able to tank this raid material, which has already been proven that Brawlers <strong><u>can</u></strong>, but when they do make these changes and people still pick Guardian over Brawler for the simple fact that Mitigation > Avoidance, plus the fact that Plate class's have more HP then Brawlers, what part of this dont you understand Gage ?</p> <p>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker16th OutfitterEverfrost ServerEnlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )70th Stone Fist of The Celestial FistFive Rings on Luclin Server</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>He understands fine. Once he gets his way, he will be back asking for mitigation and HP. Fortunately I think this thread has done three things: 1) Expose what a fraud Gage-Mikel is 2) Expose what a bad idea giving monks the same tanking ability as guardians would be. 3) Make SOE very careful about what the changes in avoidance will be and expose some potential issues with these changes before they are even made. </span><div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <P>Edited cause its early morning here and putting my foot in my mouth :smileyvery-happy:</P> <P>/sigh, im giving up on the whole Gage scenario, its probally the reason im hating the game so much. He has Mastered the Ostrich though thats for sure. Art of a-s-s in the air and head in the sand.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P> <P>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <SPAN class=date_text>03-30-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:31 AM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:32 AM</span>

[Rah]

<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Here I’ll stand up as the Guardian that can answer that question for you. They level because the game is balanced from 1 to 50 as you stated. They level because they are part of guilds or groups of friends that allow them to. They DON’T level because everyone knows that when they get to 50 they will be, as you perceive, the ONLY tank to kill Epic Raid mobs. </FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>The question is in groups optimized for xp the efficiency of a High DPS tank vs a low DPS tank it’s a NO BRAINER!</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Tell me something what was the name of the guardian that tanked that one mob that one rounded you and led you down this path of post more on my class forum than yours?<SPAN>  </SPAN>Its not a flaming statement I just really believe some guardian did you wrong at some point and set you on this crusade…..I could be wrong.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Well I <SPAN> </SPAN>took a relook at my class skills …..since I obviously don’t know them as you have inferred and here is what I think you would have categorized. Now keep in mind the offensive spells almost always have a offensive debuff, power drain, stifle, parry add to them but we wont count those as defensive since in your eyes it would have probably done damage and been subsequently viewed as offensive in nature.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3></FONT> </P> <P><A href="http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_guardian.php" target=_blank><FONT color=#cc00cc>http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_guardian.php</FONT></A></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P><U><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>51 Usable Skills from 20 to 50</FONT></U> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>21 Offensive (ya it was<SPAN>  </SPAN>a stretch and try to ignore those defensive adds to almost 60% of them)</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>11 Defensive ( I’m sure some of those should have been offensive as well)</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>10 Group Defensive buffs</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>1 Group Offensive Buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>8 Taunt Lines</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>0 Utility</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Capstone Skills for a Guardian</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Drum roll please…………………………………</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>50<SPAN>   </SPAN><SPAN>    </SPAN>Blast (offensive)<SPAN>            </SPAN>High damage extra attack</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>50 <SPAN>           </SPAN>Guardian Sphere <SPAN>           </SPAN>Allows Guard to sometimes absorb damage of the group</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>50<SPAN>        </SPAN>Protect <SPAN>           </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>AoE taunt </FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>So now the part were we add up the Def and Off skills</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Guardian<SPAN>          </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>Monk </FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>22 Offensive<SPAN>     </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>25 Offensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>21 Defensive<SPAN>    </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>11 Defensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>8 Tuant lines <SPAN>   </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Taunt</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff><SPAN>                       </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Utility</FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>By crackee I think you were right all along Gage, I will log on today and duel wield my way into Off Tank history!</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Those defensive adds mixed in with my ubber offensive skills add up on making the mob hit less often and for less damage. I have almost double your Defensive abilities (and I tried to look at Guard skills from a monk prespective) and 2 more Taunt lines than you do. My Hall mark skills state my case<SPAN>  </SPAN>I take damage for the group when I can and I make sure the mob stays angry at me…..not put out 2 high damage skills!</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>So as a friend I ask you this one question. Arne’t you a closet Guardian? Don’t be afraid to answer on this forum we will all understand!</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Rahge</FONT></P>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Here I’ll stand up as the Guardian that can answer that question for you. They level because the game is balanced from 1 to 50 as you stated. They level because they are part of guilds or groups of friends that allow them to. They DON’T level because everyone knows that when they get to 50 they will be, as you perceive, the ONLY tank to kill Epic Raid mobs. </FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>The question is in groups optimized for xp the efficiency of a High DPS tank vs a low DPS tank it’s a NO BRAINER!</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Tell me something what was the name of the guardian that tanked that one mob that one rounded you and led you down this path of post more on my class forum than yours?<SPAN>  </SPAN>Its not a flaming statement I just really believe some guardian did you wrong at some point and set you on this crusade…..I could be wrong.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Well I <SPAN> </SPAN>took a relook at my class skills …..since I obviously don’t know them as you have inferred and here is what I think you would have categorized. Now keep in mind the offensive spells almost always have a offensive debuff, power drain, stifle, parry add to them but we wont count those as defensive since in your eyes it would have probably done damage and been subsequently viewed as offensive in nature.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3></FONT> </P> <P><A href="http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_guardian.php" target=_blank><FONT color=#cc00cc>http://eq2.ogaming.com/db/list/abilities_guardian.php</FONT></A></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P><U><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>51 Usable Skills from 20 to 50</FONT></U> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>21 Offensive (ya it was<SPAN>  </SPAN>a stretch and try to ignore those defensive adds to almost 60% of them)</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>11 Defensive ( I’m sure some of those should have been offensive as well)</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>10 Group Defensive buffs</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>1 Group Offensive Buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>8 Taunt Lines</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>0 Utility</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Capstone Skills for a Guardian</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Drum roll please…………………………………</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>50<SPAN>   </SPAN><SPAN>    </SPAN>Blast (offensive)<SPAN>            </SPAN>High damage extra attack</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>50 <SPAN>           </SPAN>Guardian Sphere <SPAN>           </SPAN>Allows Guard to sometimes absorb damage of the group</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>50<SPAN>        </SPAN>Protect <SPAN>           </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>AoE taunt </FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>So now the part were we add up the Def and Off skills</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Guardian<SPAN>          </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>Monk </FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>22 Offensive<SPAN>     </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>25 Offensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>21 Defensive<SPAN>    </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>11 Defensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>8 Tuant lines <SPAN>   </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Taunt</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff><SPAN>                       </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Utility</FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>By crackee I think you were right all along Gage, I will log on today and duel wield my way into Off Tank history!</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Those defensive adds mixed in with my ubber offensive skills add up on making the mob hit less often and for less damage. I have almost double your Defensive abilities (and I tried to look at Guard skills from a monk prespective) and 2 more Taunt lines than you do. My Hall mark skills state my case<SPAN>  </SPAN>I take damage for the group when I can and I make sure the mob stays angry at me…..not put out 2 high damage skills!</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>So as a friend I ask you this one question. Arne’t you a closet Guardian? Don’t be afraid to answer on this forum we will all understand!</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Rahge</FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Rahge, let me help you a little there, keep in mind that the offensive arts of a monk will do like 300 + damage each skill plus Monks have a Self Haste spell for DPS so even when they are tanking seeing as many has pointed out that they rely on there power for taunting so they can do the <STRONG><U>RAW</U></STRONG> DPS generated by just auto attack alone, so not only can they tank to lvl 50, they can also tank raid content like has previously been outlined, plus play a DPS role if they cant get a group tanking and when they can get a group tanking they can still out dps a Guardian and add a Monk to a group of say 3 high Melee damage dealers, like Scouts ( where they also have 46% self haste spells ) and they can add to the group a 9%+ increase to total damage ouput, where a Guardian offensive art will do like 100+ damage and have a debuff, stifle, self buff added into them meaning they no work on Raid Epic mob, no haste to do DPS like a Monk can reguardless of if its in a tanking role or DPS role and they buff the group with HP. So as anyone can see disparity between a Monk and a Guardian and the whole sad thing to this entire fiasco is, Jez the Bruiser proved all the Monks wrong and went one better and Tanked, succesfully i might add group x 4 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> lvl 54 mobs. According to Gage, isnt evil class's suited more towards offensive then defensive and if so, arent Bruisers a evil Monk? Help me out here please Gage, im a tad confused.</P> <P>Your are so correct its not even funny Rahge, it is a no brainer, its called common sense.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:48 AM</span>

[Nemi]

The issue I have with Guardians in this post is that they believe Guardians should be the only class for *some* mobs. I hold that ALL fighters should be able to tank ALL mobs.I don't really care how SoE achieve that.

[Death4]

<P>It's been said before but I do agree:<BR>If Avoidance for armor <U>types</U> was capped/defined, say,<BR>(Remember this includes <STRONG>Parry</STRONG>, <STRONG>Block</STRONG>, <STRONG>Deflection</STRONG>, and <STRONG>Base</STRONG>)</P> <P>40% <FONT color=#666666>Heavy Armor</FONT> (Heavy on Block)</P> <P>55% <FONT color=#cccccc>Medium Armor</FONT> (Heavy on Base)</P> <P>75% Light Armor (Heavy on Deflection)</P> <P>That the avoidance <U>[expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing</U> might be solved.  Most <FONT color=#6633ff>Avoidance</FONT> comes from the Base stat, which in turn comes from agility and <FONT color=#ff0000>Defens</FONT>e.  So, if <STRONG>Brawlers</STRONG> had their <FONT color=#ff0000>Defense</FONT> funneled <U>directly</U> into <FONT color=#6633ff>Avoidance</FONT> and <U>not</U> <FONT color=#66ff00>Mitigation</FONT> and <STRONG>Warrior</STRONG> classes had <FONT color=#ff0000>Defense</FONT> funneled into <FONT color=#66ff00>Mitigation</FONT> <U>only</U> with<STRONG> Crusaders</STRONG> split 50%/50% between <FONT color=#66ff00>Mitigation</FONT> and <FONT color=#6633ff>Avoidance </FONT>things might be finely balanced.  But, if this is done, <FONT color=#66ff00>Mitigation</FONT> <U>must</U> be raised for <FONT color=#666666>Heavy Armor</FONT> classes.  For instance, I'm below 50% mitigation as a Guardian.  Now, considering the spectrum fighter classes are always compared too, shouldn't I (As a Guardian) have a much higher <FONT color=#66ff00>Mitigation</FONT> that 50%?  Not to mention all <FONT color=#666666>Heavy Armor</FONT> classes generally get the same mitigation percentile.  </P> <P>Now, for Mitigation ideals, I think it should cap somewhere around...</P> <P>65-80% <FONT color=#666666>Heavy Armor</FONT> (Varied by classes, later to be discussed)</P> <P>45-55% <FONT color=#999999>Medium Armor</FONT> (Brigadine/Chain is pretty durable)</P> <P>25-35% Light Armor (You're going to get a serious [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] whooping if you get nailed wearing a tarp)</P> <P>Now, I think we can all be civil and see where i'm coming from.  Let's hope no one has diarrhea of the mouth before i'm done.</P> <P>80% Guardians (Not far fetched considering ammount of <FONT color=#ff0000>Defense</FONT> buffs)</P> <P>80% Berserkers (Although hard to get, due to less <FONT color=#ff0000>Defense</FONT> oriented buffs)</P> <P>75% Paladins</P> <P>75% Shadowknights</P> <P>65% Templar</P> <P>65% Inquisitor</P> <P>Now, you may think those are high mitigation percents, <U>but</U> take into consideration the low avoidance rate of <FONT color=#666666>Heavy Armor</FONT> classes coupled with Special attacks (Most mobs hit exclusively with these) not being <FONT color=#66ff00>Mitigated</FONT>, these seems more and more like a great idea.  I'll continue later.</P> <P> </P>

[Geothe]

<P>All fighters -can- tank all mobs.</P> <P>As was already posted, a Bruiser has tanked group x4 lvl 54s now.  And they are supposed to be the "offensive" version of avoidance tanks which people have been complaining can't tank raid mobs. heh</P> <P> </P>

[Sunrayn]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>ALOT of MIN/MAX goes into building a raiding guild.  That means they will pick the best class/player for the best spot 9/10.  <FONT color=#ffff00>A lot of this game's strategies are being used from EQ1.  That will change.  These aren't even close to the same game.  Besides, big changes on the way.</FONT></P> <P>thats not an equal give/take relationship...at all.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Neither is one class being so good at one thing it makes the other classes in that archetype worthless.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Gage, let me explain as simply as I can to you so that even you can understand.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Two tanks show up for a group, one wearing pajamas and carrying two sticks.  The other wearing enough steel to build a '64 Chevy, a sword in the main hand and a shield the size of the back door on a semi trailor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Who do you think is going to get picked to be the tank? Seriously?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, of those two, who is going to be picked to do damage?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You keep comparing your tanking ability to a fighter but you compare your dps to a scout.  In doing this, you are WRONG, just plain wrong.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>So now the part were we add up the Def and Off skills</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Guardian<SPAN>          </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>Monk </FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>22 Offensive<SPAN>     </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>25 Offensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>21 Defensive<SPAN>    </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>11 Defensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>8 Tuant lines <SPAN>   </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Taunt</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff><SPAN>                       </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Utility</FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Wow, so in your opinion you get ZERO utility?  Just becuase your utility is defense (making the group/target's defense better, or protecting the target) doesn't mean you don't have any.</P> <P>I mean oh my goodness, 3 less combat arts that do damage.</P> <P>/shrug I know you have more defensive arts, read my posts, I've always said you are the most defensive fighter <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and check out the lvl 50 skills<BR></DIV> <DIV>Monk - silent fist (dmg/silence ~ which by your rules can be considered defense~!) - AoE taunt - flying kick - dmg</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So 2 out of 3 versus 1 out of 3 are damage.  Like I said, I always knew you are the most defensive fighter.  But why didn't you get 3 defensive spells at 50?</DIV><p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:34 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR> <DIV>Gage, let me explain as simply as I can to you so that even you can understand.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Two tanks show up for a group, one wearing pajamas and carrying two sticks.  The other wearing enough steel to build a '64 Chevy, a sword in the main hand and a shield the size of the back door on a semi trailor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Who do you think is going to get picked to be the tank? Seriously?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, of those two, who is going to be picked to do damage?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You keep comparing your tanking ability to a fighter but you compare your dps to a scout.  In doing this, you are WRONG, just plain wrong. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>For one, its fantasy.  I don't give a crap what <EM>your</EM> perception of a tank is, kthx.</P> <P>I'm not the one who compares our damage ability to scouts, everyone else is.  I keep informing them that BY DESIGN we will do less damage than scouts.</P> <P>So you guys say "you are designed to tank worse than us" and I say "we are designed to do less damage than scouts" so please tell me what use the monk class is for groups/end game raids?<BR></P>

[Demothis]

<P>I currently have a bruiser, with extra slots given to us I have chosen a Guardian as well. I still think of the guardian to be the tanks tank. What most scensable brawler types want is to be able to tank xp mobs at the high game which is understandable since they are fighters. But for raids, I still belive a mitigation tank is always best. To balance the brawlers types to be able to tank raid mobs would make them GOD against a standard xp mob. For starters epic mobs are suposed to be nasty, hits hard, and dosn't like to miss (hints the 20+ people it takes to down them). In a raid I would hope you would be able to find at least 1 mitagation tank let alone a warrior type.</P> <P> Also Mit tanks will always be perfered in raid situation. Here are my reasons. Mitigation is a set reliable number, where avoidance is random. If you go with a Mit tank you know they are going to get hit, but it get lessed to the point where healers can deal with it. This is coming from a healers stand point. Avoidance tanks on the other hand are all chance, and when they get hit, BOY OH BOY do they get hit, and then healers have to scramble to get them back up. With the mit tanks in a raid, (im not level 50, but im not stupid, ive played MMOs for a long time) you will want your best mit tank up there, with vering types of healers so the tank can get the best number of buffs, and in this game so you can have the lesser heal methos such as regen, wards and rective heals on your main raid tank.</P> <P>This dose not make brawlers usless, they get nice buffs to aid in deflecting blows for other, these could be used to assist the main tank, but a guard is designed to be the tank of all tanks, end of story. They do not get good DPS, and they have little utillity. If you look downthier combat arts list, there is very few in there that dosn't either mitigate damage, or pull hate. For anyone who has ever played raided in EQ1 in POP, you will know good and well avoiding damage is only 1/2 of it. Holding agro against nuke happy wizzards is also crucial. And brawlers cant do that.</P> <P>If the balance for tanking in XP groups is there at level 50, thier should be no real complaints.</P> <p>Message Edited by Demothises on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:54 PM</span>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>So you guys say "you are designed to tank worse than us" and I say "we are designed to do less damage than scouts" so please tell me what use the monk class is for groups/end game raids?<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Monks besides you:</DIV> <DIV>groups - Tanking, DPS</DIV> <DIV>raids - DPS</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You in particularly:</DIV> <DIV>groups - Tanking DPS</DIV> <DIV>raids - DPS and whining</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>So you guys say "you are designed to tank worse than us" and I say "we are designed to do less damage than scouts" so please tell me what use the monk class is for groups/end game raids?<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Monks besides you:</DIV> <DIV>groups - Tanking, DPS</DIV> <DIV>raids - DPS</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You in particularly:</DIV> <DIV>groups - Tanking DPS</DIV> <DIV>raids - DPS and whining</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Can you explain to me why you feel its okay for us to take scout slots in raids/groups?  Scouts can't tank and when they could they got nerfed.</P> <P>Thank you.</P> <P>I'm being serious by the way, I wonder why its okay for monk/bruisers to take scout slots in groups/raids but it wasn't okay for them to tank.  I mean hell, look how [Removed for Content] you guys get when we want to take the slot you fill (which by archetype design *IS* our slot).<BR></P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>Can you explain to me why you feel its okay for us to take scout slots in raids/groups?  Scouts can't tank and when they could they got nerfed.</P> <P>Thank you.</P> <P>I'm being serious by the way, I wonder why its okay for monk/bruisers to take scout slots in groups/raids but it wasn't okay for them to tank.  I mean hell, look how [Removed for Content] you guys get when we want to take the slot you fill (which by archetype design *IS* our slot).<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Roughly speaking optimum Raid = 5% tank slots, 35% healers, 60% DPS (though I am sure someone will nitpick my percentages). Better a monk doing DPS then a Guardian. And who says anyone needs to be kicked out of the raid besides too many guardians.<BR> <p>Message Edited by sidgb on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:01 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>Can you explain to me why you feel its okay for us to take scout slots in raids/groups?  Scouts can't tank and when they could they got nerfed.</P> <P>Thank you.</P> <P>I'm being serious by the way, I wonder why its okay for monk/bruisers to take scout slots in groups/raids but it wasn't okay for them to tank.  I mean hell, look how [Removed for Content] you guys get when we want to take the slot you fill (which by archetype design *IS* our slot).<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Roughly speaking Raid = 5% tank slots, 35% healers, 60% DPS (though I am sure someone will nitpick my percentages). Better a monk doing DPS then a Guardian. And who says anyone needs to be kicked out of the raid besides too many guardians.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You didn't answer my question.</P> <P>By design scouts should do superior melee DPS than us.  This is being changed/balanced along with everything else.  Eventually they will outdamage us by a lot, because melee damage is their primary role.</P> <P>So there would no reason to settle for our DPS which is less than the scout classes, because everyone wants the best DPS.</P> <P>That has to be true, you've said it a million times that its why monks/bruisers get "dps" slots and you don't, right?</P> <P>So if you aren't wanted for DPS, and we can't outdamage scouts... well then.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:03 AM</span>

[Demothis]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>By design scouts should do superior melee DPS than us.  This is being changed/balanced along with everything else.  Eventually they will outdamage us by a lot, because melee damage is their primary role.</P> <P>So there would no reason to settle for our DPS which is less than the scout classes, because everyone wants the best DPS.</P> <P>That has to be true, you've said it a million times that its why monks/bruisers get "dps" slots and you don't, right?</P> <P>So if you aren't wanted for DPS, and we can't outdamage scouts... well then.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:03 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I beg to differ, try a playing a Bard, monk wins.<BR>

[Sunrayn]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>For one, its fantasy.  I don't give a crap what <EM>your</EM> perception of a tank is, kthx.</P> <P>I'm not the one who compares our damage ability to scouts, everyone else is.  I keep informing them that BY DESIGN we will do less damage than scouts.</P> <P>So you guys say "you are designed to tank worse than us" and I say "we are designed to do less damage than scouts" so please tell me what use the monk class is for groups/end game raids?<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You win.  You are absolutely right about everything.  In fact, what SOE should do, just for you, is get rid of every class except for four.  Tank, healer, magic user and melee damage.  They dont need to have a variety of classes just for playing.  There should be no class that can do a bit of everything.  Each class should be *designed* to do only one thing.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If they did all this, then it would be much easier for *you* to choose a class and play it.  But, judging from your whines, it wouldnt be long before you were complaining that *you* couldnt do something another class could do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You are right about EQ being fantasy.  Where plate wearing tanks stood in the forefront taking the beating, mages nuked from a distance, scouts rained arrows down and *monks* jumped, kicked and punched while avoiding the monster's feet, tail. wild swings that were *aimed* at the tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It is obvious that you have never ever played a *fantasy* rpg before.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But, nonetheless, you WIN.  Are you happy now?</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Demothises wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>By design scouts should do superior melee DPS than us.  This is being changed/balanced along with everything else.  Eventually they will outdamage us by a lot, because melee damage is their primary role.</P> <P>So there would no reason to settle for our DPS which is less than the scout classes, because everyone wants the best DPS.</P> <P>That has to be true, you've said it a million times that its why monks/bruisers get "dps" slots and you don't, right?</P> <P>So if you aren't wanted for DPS, and we can't outdamage scouts... well then.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:03 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I beg to differ, try a playing a Bard, monk wins.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yeah but when was the last time I could play a mana regen song, buff all primary stats and cast SoW?</P> <P>I love my troub alt but I don't think that's a hard decision for a group.</P> <P>Besides, they are still working on damage balance between the classes.  The next couple of live updates should address a lot of the descrepancies in the formula of:</P> <P>mage/scout/fighter/priest<BR></P>

[Geothe]

<P>Why Include a monk for DPS on a raid?</P> <P>Because your -group- buffs that increase attack skills.  You do good DPS, AND, you make it so the rest of melee in the group/raid do even BETTER DPS.</P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>You didn't answer my question.</P> <P>By design scouts should do superior melee DPS than us.  This is being changed/balanced along with everything else.  Eventually they will outdamage us by a lot, because melee damage is their primary role.</P> <P>So there would no reason to settle for our DPS which is less than the scout classes, because everyone wants the best DPS.</P> <P>That has to be true, you've said it a million times that its why monks/bruisers get "dps" slots and you don't, right?</P> <P>So if you aren't wanted for DPS, and we can't outdamage scouts... well then.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:03 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sure I did you just refuse to see it. </P> <P>If there are lots of DPS classes around then pretty much all tanks get screwed over and left out of the raid just like additional guardians would now if other DPS tanks were available.</P> <P>Dang man, you worry about being squeezed out of a raid by being out tanked on one side and out DPSed on the other. Heck at least you can go either way in most cases and there are lots more DPS slots and OT slots.</P> <P>You have a bad musical chair incident as a child?<BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sidgb wrote:<BR><BR> <P>You have a bad musical chair incident as a child?<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, I've never been the same since.<BR>

[Noah]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>So now the part were we add up the Def and Off skills</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Guardian<SPAN>          </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>Monk </FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>22 Offensive<SPAN>     </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>25 Offensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>21 Defensive<SPAN>    </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>11 Defensive</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>8 Tuant lines <SPAN>   </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Taunt</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffff><SPAN>                       </SPAN><SPAN>           </SPAN>6 Utility</FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Ok dood you asked for it <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  my cat is [Removed for Content] off and I gotta do something about it.</FONT></P> <P>Wow, so in your opinion you get ZERO utility?  Just becuase your utility is defense (making the group/target's defense better, or protecting the target) doesn't mean you don't have any.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>When you dont memorize a spell for 30 levels or still have it app1 in your book, "Ii might just be a useless skill".   These are not utility by any means.  They cause more harm than good in all situations.  So, please stop the love for our so called "utility" skills since it is really upsetting Diddy (thats my cat's name).</FONT></P> <P>I mean oh my goodness, 3 less combat arts that do damage.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Your arts to a ton more damage.  If you want to compare this we can but it would rather not waste time doing so.</FONT></P> <P>/shrug I know you have more defensive arts, read my posts, I've always said you are the most defensive fighter <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and check out the lvl 50 skills<BR></DIV> <DIV>Monk - silent fist (dmg/silence ~ which by your rules can be considered defense~!) - AoE taunt - flying kick - dmg</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So 2 out of 3 versus 1 out of 3 are damage.  Like I said, I always knew you are the most defensive fighter.  But why didn't you get 3 defensive spells at 50?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>I was so upset at 50th lvl skills.  Protect - AE taunt - doesnt work on raid mobs (+++).  Guardian Sphere ..... might as well put that with your monk invis vs 50th lvl mobs.  Blast... this is suppose to be our BIG, common used attack... 300dmg roughly every 30 seconds. WUWU!!11</FONT></DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>Pls don't bring up the intervene/protection line of spells again.  You have never used them and really, they sound GREAT under the description but they are horrible in usage.  I never mention your uber utilities that are used more thru the lvls than ours.  </FONT><BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Demothis]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Demothises wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>By design scouts should do superior melee DPS than us.  This is being changed/balanced along with everything else.  Eventually they will outdamage us by a lot, because melee damage is their primary role.</P> <P>So there would no reason to settle for our DPS which is less than the scout classes, because everyone wants the best DPS.</P> <P>That has to be true, you've said it a million times that its why monks/bruisers get "dps" slots and you don't, right?</P> <P>So if you aren't wanted for DPS, and we can't outdamage scouts... well then.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:03 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I beg to differ, try a playing a Bard, monk wins.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yeah but when was the last time I could play a mana regen song, buff all primary stats and cast SoW?</P> <P>I love my troub alt but I don't think that's a hard decision for a group.</P> <P>Besides, they are still working on damage balance between the classes.  The next couple of live updates should address a lot of the descrepancies in the formula of:</P> <P>mage/scout/fighter/priest<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Balancing maybe coming, but the whole 7-8 power ever 6 sec song sucks.  Nor wil a troubs and dirges stack because it is the esxact same spell based of the melody skill which is the fundamental bard skill. There are much better spells to use then that. Sow aint much use in combat mode and the stat buff is the only bard buff worth beans. This is the biggest reason dirges have a slight edge on troubs for raids is they get more debuffs, but even those are lame compared to the full blown version other casters use. At 37 I can slow a mob a whole 10 %. Power regen 7 per 6 sec.</P> <P>As I stated above, Mit tanks are more concrete for a have 2-3 diffrent types of healers on them with all 3 types of specialty healing. They are a wiser choice then chancing with avoidance. It is possible to disign some new epic encounters , some the bypass % of mitagation to make the brawler types more favorable, but for the 1s that exist now a brawlers can bring in a stable DPS that isn't soley relied upon thier power using abilities, they can use their deflection perks to a Mit tank aiding in the tanking process. Cant speak for monk, but bruisers can add up thier thundering fist line and fiery fist line to interup spell casters really well. Brawlers can bring in some good utility and dps into a fight, if a raid coordinater cant see that, then they are out a usefull tool to a raid party.</P> <DIV>As I just mentioned some epic mobs they could put in could be desined to ignore 50% of mitigation, forcing some raids to go with a monk. This would prob be ghost types of epics since that would actually make some logic, attack passing through armor. I think it would be better of them to try to add in content with avoidance tanks in mind as opposed to trying to balance them out in every aspect, because it would be impossible to do it w/o turning monk/bruisers into Mit tanks themselves.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Demothises on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:44 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> DemosthenesEQ2 wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>I was so upset at 50th lvl skills.  Protect - AE taunt - doesnt work on raid mobs (+++).  Guardian Sphere ..... might as well put that with your monk invis vs 50th lvl mobs.  Blast... this is suppose to be our BIG, common used attack... 300dmg roughly every 30 seconds. WUWU!!11</FONT></DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>Pls don't bring up the intervene/protection line of spells again.  You have never used them and really, they sound GREAT under the description but they are horrible in usage.  I never mention your uber utilities that are used more thru the lvls than ours.  </FONT><BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually I have used intervene but it sucks for us, which I had assumed was because of our lower mit, but now I've learned.  /shrug.  Just seems a waste that you guys get so many upgrades to the line then.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[Demothis]

Enough with the 1 staring the guy already, its a debate, if ya disagree with him post. I think he has goten the point and dosn't really care.

[Ay]

<P>I take a few weeks forum break and looks like Ol Gage's crusade has picked up. I honestly dont feel i shoudl have to come on these forums every 5 minutes to defend my character in order to enjoy the game. I just want to log on and enjoy the game.</P> <P>I'll tell ya what though: IF THEY MAKE ALL TANKS EQUAL IN TANKING WITHOUT GIVING GUARDIANS HEALS, WARDS, FEIGN DEATH, INVIS, SAME DAMAGE AS MONKS ETC.. I'LL F'N QUIT!! Don't like the capitals? oh well <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  This is not much to ask! You want to make us equal tanks.. make us equal in every single MotherLoving thing!</P> <P>/flip Gage</P> <P>And i refuse to keep forum camping like this dipshyte Gage loser. </P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Dbil]

Please.  Tell us how you really feel.  :smileyvery-happy:

[Gaige]

Ayun, from the bottom of my heart, I love you.

[Death4]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR> <DIV>Gage, let me explain as simply as I can to you so that even you can understand.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Two tanks show up for a group, one wearing pajamas and carrying two sticks.  The other wearing enough steel to build a '64 Chevy, a sword in the main hand and a shield the size of the back door on a semi trailor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Who do you think is going to get picked to be the tank? Seriously?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, of those two, who is going to be picked to do damage?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You keep comparing your tanking ability to a fighter but you compare your dps to a scout.  In doing this, you are WRONG, just plain wrong. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>For one, its fantasy.  I don't give a crap what <EM>your</EM> perception of a tank is, kthx.</FONT></P> <P>I'm not the one who compares our damage ability to scouts, everyone else is.  I keep informing them that BY DESIGN we will do less damage than scouts.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>So you guys say "you are designed to tank worse than us" and I say "we are designed to do less damage than scouts" so please tell me what use the monk class is for groups/end game raids?<BR></FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>And that's EXACTLY why your vision will ALWAYS be skewed towards your self-progression.  You remind me of a child (You)clinging to their parent (SoE) screaming like a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] whenever someone proves you wrong.  Either that, or you stay silent.  Which you often do as well.  Good job picking your fights.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Oh and in my haste I forgot.  The answer to your question is utility.  Monk buffs, monk dps, monk everything.  Don't portray your class as useless.  Everyone has utility.  EVERYONE (Even Guardians, much to the dismay of what some would say).</FONT><BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Death40k on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:59 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Death40k wrote: <P>And that's EXACTLY why your vision will ALWAYS be skewed towards your self-progression.  You remind me of a child (You)clinging to their parent (SoE) screaming like a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] whenever someone proves you wrong.  Either that, or you stay silent.  Which you often do as well.  Good job picking your fights.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ha Ha.  Because I don't feel a tank has to be covered in steel with a shield to be successful, I'm skewed towards my own self-progression?</P> <P>I'm sorry, I didn't realize everyone had the same definition of what constitutes a tank.</P> <P>Besides, I haven't been proven wrong often, and when I have I've said so.  The whole "tank" thing is opinion anyway.  Apparantly SoE (oh my goodness I did it again) thinks that heavy armor and shields aren't required either, look what archetype they put monks/bruisers in.</P> <P>Everyone should pick their fights, its the smart thing to do.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:51 PM</span>

[Death4]

Oh...finally he answers.  Takes a lot to draw you out doesn't it?  The first of many I hope.<BR>I meant that because you only view tanks being one way, you'll never be open the opinions of others on this board (Not just Guardians) who have something intelligent to say.  SoE did put brawlers in the Fighter archtype but hey, they've made plenty of mistakes before right?  But, as I said, you pick your fights.  Do so in shame [Removed for Content].

[Sunrayn]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Apparantly SoE (oh my goodness I did it again) thinks that heavy armor and shields aren't required either, look what archetype they put monks/bruisers in.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Everyone should pick their fights, its the smart thing to do.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:51 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, and where did they put bards? even though they dont have the dps of a ranger.  And where did they put furies even though they dont have the healing of a templar?</P> <P>Do you also think bards and furies should do damage or heal as well as the other classes in their archtype?<BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Apparantly SoE (oh my goodness I did it again) thinks that heavy armor and shields aren't required either, look what archetype they put monks/bruisers in.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Everyone should pick their fights, its the smart thing to do.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:51 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, and where did they put bards? even though they dont have the dps of a ranger.  And where did they put furies even though they dont have the healing of a templar?</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Do you also think bards and furies should do damage or heal as well as the other classes in their archtype?<BR></FONT></P> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I also think illusionists and coercers should do more DPS.</P> <P>Funny, all of these things are happening too.</P> <P>Looked into the priest balance going into LU#7?  What about the summoner/enchanter DPS increases?<BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Death40k wrote:<BR>Oh...finally he answers.  Takes a lot to draw you out doesn't it?  The first of many I hope.<BR>I meant that because you only view tanks being one way, you'll never be open the opinions of others on this board (Not just Guardians) who have something intelligent to say.  <FONT color=#ffff00>SoE did put brawlers in the Fighter archtype but hey, they've made plenty of mistakes before right?</FONT>  But, as I said, you pick your fights.  Do so in shame [Removed for Content]. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yeah, like giving plate tanks too much avoidance.</P> <P>I don't [Removed for Content], I'm a guy.<BR></P>

[Death4]

<P>In my reading browsing the forums, I came across an interesting peice.</P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gage-Mikel wrote:</P> <P>The sentiment about expectations is very true.  Having expectations can very easily end up in feeling let down.</P> <P>I think one of the biggest mistakes SoE made was naming this game EQ2, because they set up a lot of people with expectations that they couldn't meet, due to its design.</P> <P> <HR> <P></P> <P>The sheer irony.  Joy. :smileyindifferent:</P>

[Death4]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Death40k wrote:<BR>Oh...finally he answers.  Takes a lot to draw you out doesn't it?  The first of many I hope.<BR>I meant that because you only view tanks being one way, you'll never be open the opinions of others on this board (Not just Guardians) who have something intelligent to say.  <FONT color=#ffff00>SoE did put brawlers in the Fighter archtype but hey, they've made plenty of mistakes before right?</FONT>  But, as I said, you pick your fights.  Do so in shame [Removed for Content]. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yeah, like giving plate tanks too much avoidance.</P> <P>I don't [Removed for Content], I'm a guy.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Dude, did you NOT read my post about Heavy Armor avoidance caps and mitigation and all that other crap?  I color co-ordinated that [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] thing not only to get peoples attention, but to make it easier to read.  I totally agree we avoid to [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] much.  I'm well aware of it.  I'm also aware I have mitigation that's laughable as a Heavy Armor tank, and that in itself is fubared.

[Sunrayn]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Apparantly SoE (oh my goodness I did it again) thinks that heavy armor and shields aren't required either, look what archetype they put monks/bruisers in.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Everyone should pick their fights, its the smart thing to do.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:51 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, and where did they put bards? even though they dont have the dps of a ranger.  And where did they put furies even though they dont have the healing of a templar?</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Do you also think bards and furies should do damage or heal as well as the other classes in their archtype?<BR></FONT></P> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I also think illusionists and coercers should do more DPS.</P> <P>Funny, all of these things are happening too.</P> <P>Looked into the priest balance going into LU#7?  What about the summoner/enchanter DPS increases?<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>You really think any changes will allow bards to be picked over rangers for dps,  or furies over templars for healing  in raids?</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR> <P>You really think any changes will allow bards to be picked over rangers for dps,  or furies over templars for healing  in raids?<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Bards to outdamage rangers?  Nah.  But they will outdamage all the fighters.</P> <P>Well, druids use regens, templars use reactives, so I don't think you need to make them heal "over" a templar, as their healing stacks.  I do think they all priests will be balanced to ensure they are all worthwhile healers and there isn't one "end all be all" healer class.</P> <P>/shrug<BR></P>

[Sunrayn]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR> <P>You really think any changes will allow bards to be picked over rangers for dps,  or furies over templars for healing  in raids?<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Bards to outdamage rangers?  Nah.  But they will outdamage all the fighters.</P> <P>Well, druids use regens, templars use reactives, so I don't think you need to make them heal "over" a templar, as their healing stacks.  I do think they all priests will be balanced to ensure they are all worthwhile healers and there isn't one "end all be all" healer class.</P> <P>/shrug<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Now I didnt say 'outdamage' or 'outheal'.  I said 'will it allow people to choose a bard over a ranger or a fury over a templar for raids'

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR> <P>You really think any changes will allow bards to be picked over rangers for dps,  or furies over templars for healing  in raids?<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Bards to outdamage rangers?  Nah.  But they will outdamage all the fighters.</P> <P>Well, druids use regens, templars use reactives, so I don't think you need to make them heal "over" a templar, as their healing stacks.  I do think they all priests will be balanced to ensure they are all worthwhile healers and there isn't one "end all be all" healer class.</P> <P>/shrug<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Now I didnt say 'outdamage' or 'outheal'.  I said 'will it allow people to choose a bard over a ranger or a fury over a templar for raids' <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>/shrug</P> <P>Depends on what the raid needs, but sure.  I see no reason why a fury can't be as good a healer as a templar.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[sidgb]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Well, druids use regens, templars use reactives, so I don't think you need to make them heal "over" a templar, as their healing stacks.  I do think they all priests will be balanced to ensure they are all worthwhile healers and there isn't one "end all be all" healer class.</P> <P>/shrug<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>If other priests get my templars healing power I want their DPS and utility too. :smileytongue::smileyvery-happy:<BR>

[Sunrayn]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>/shrug</P> <P>Depends on what the raid needs, but sure.  I see no reason why a fury can't be as good a healer as a templar.</P> <P><BR> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>But, there is a reason a fury cant be as good a 'main' healer as a templar or healer.  It is because a fury has other abilities that make him less of a healer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You keep saying that guardians have other abilities that make us other than main tank.  No, we have abilities that make 'us' better tanks.  Like healers have abilities that make them better healers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My wife plays a pally, since I gave up my shaman, guardian has become my main and my shaman is relegated to making WORTs and spells.  Yeah, sometimes I wish I could heal or ward or summon up a damm horse to ride around instead of waiting until I am rich enough to buy one, but, I cant.  What I can do though is tank.  I cant put out the damage to kill something, but I can sure as hell take the beating so others can, well, at least until LU.  That is what guardians were designed for.  If I wanted to do more damage or dual wield ( I know, we can but, I like having a huge board in my off hand) I would have made a monk.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Think of EQ as a game of trade offs.  No class can do everything, some classes can do a few things but not as well as the specialists, and a couple classes give up everything to do one thing better than all the others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Asking for changes to your class to make you better at something without giving up something in return is bad form.  Since you are asking for a change to make you more like a guardian (and that is exactly what you are asking for whether you believe it or not), then you have to give up something that really sets you apart from guardians.  Since you are asking for our number 1 ability, you should be prepared to give up a whole bunch of stuff.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>But, there is a reason a fury cant be as good a 'main' healer as a templar or healer.  It is because a fury has other abilities that make him less of a healer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You keep saying that guardians have other abilities that make us other than main tank.  No, we have abilities that make 'us' better tanks.  Like healers have abilities that make them better healers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My wife plays a pally, since I gave up my shaman, guardian has become my main and my shaman is relegated to making WORTs and spells.  Yeah, sometimes I wish I could heal or ward or summon up a damm horse to ride around instead of waiting until I am rich enough to buy one, but, I cant.  What I can do though is tank.  I cant put out the damage to kill something, but I can sure as hell take the beating so others can, well, at least until LU.  That is what guardians were designed for.  If I wanted to do more damage or dual wield ( I know, we can but, I like having a huge board in my off hand) I would have made a monk.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Think of EQ as a game of trade offs.  No class can do everything, some classes can do a few things but not as well as the specialists, and a couple classes give up everything to do one thing better than all the others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Asking for changes to your class to make you better at something without giving up something in return is bad form.  Since you are asking for a change to make you more like a guardian (and that is exactly what you are asking for whether you believe it or not), then you have to give up something that really sets you apart from guardians.  Since you are asking for our number 1 ability, you should be prepared to give up a whole bunch of stuff. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ah but you see, I do not agree.  I think there are a few way to build a game like this:  archetype roles or specialized classes.  EQ2 chose the first.  Other games have chosen the latter.</P> <P>What I feel the major road bump has been, is getting people to accept it.</P> <P>Radric had the best post I've ever read about it, so I'll share.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RadricTycho wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT></DIV> <P><FONT size=3>The whole tank argument runs along the lines of:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#99ffff size=3>A place for everything.... and everything in its place.</FONT></P> <DIV><FONT size=3>I say this because on the one hand you have people like familymanfirst who believe that if you give every subclass a general, archetypical role, then anyone will have a role in a group, or a raid. <EM><FONT color=#99ffff>A place for everything</FONT>.</EM></FONT></DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT size=3></FONT></EM> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>On the other hand you have people like sagemarrow who believe that if you give every subclass a specific role to play, they will have a role in a group, or a raid.  <EM><FONT color=#99ffff>Everything in its place.</FONT></EM> </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>The question is: which is right?  And another question is: What is the difference?  </FONT></DIV> <UL> <LI><FONT size=3>In the first case your subclass is unimportant, call it fluff or customization.  What really matters is your archetype; your purpose in the game and your balance relative to players of other archetypes is based on this.  What the subclass gives you is a chance to say yes I am a mage but I like to use pets so I am a summoner.  The subclass changes your style of game play but does not change your role.  When groups go looking for someone to serve a role, they can choose any of 6 subclasses from a particular archetype and know that they serve that role well.  They can choose the necromancer and know that at his core, he is a damage dealer and will suffice for that.</FONT></LI></UL> <P><FONT size=3></FONT> </P> <UL> <LI><FONT size=3>In the second case your subclass is where you define yourself.  Up until that point archetype and potentially even class selections were minor consequences, your final choice of subclass is what defines your role in all groups.  By choosing a particular subclass you have created not just a superficial customization of your character but have made a permanent and lasting choice about how your character is used in groups and where he/she fits in.  You might be a buff subclass, or a DPS subclass, or an main healer subclass, or a tank subclass.  Even within these generalizations there will be preferences for a particular role.  When a group goes to pick the damage dealer, they will be looking for a Wizard, or an Assassin.  They realize that a Necro could fill the role, but in their minds the necro is not on par with the usefulness of a Wizard for dealing damage.  The necro gets chosen less for the idealized, crystalized roles and instead becomes filler.  Since he is filler, he will not be chosen unless there is little choice.</FONT></LI></UL> <P><FONT size=3>So the problem is that in the latter case you create a conflict across subclasses within the same archetype for what role they fill.  If not every sub-class has a well defined role, I.E. a hybrid class that balances maybe both defense buffs and damage dealing, they will probably rarely be chosen.  The only scenario where someone would take a hybrid is when they already have some hybrids, and by continuing that trend they balance their defense and offense well.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3>Since people don't tend to like to ponder the complexities of what sort of support team a hybrid tank like a shadow knight will need, they will tend to leave the shadow knight to the support role instead of the tank role.  At that point you have taken a class that by all rights was built to tank and pigeon-holed him into a support role simply because you are unsure of how to form a group that could support him as main tank.</FONT></P> <DIV><FONT size=3>This is why the archetype system is the right choice.  It says that you will never make a subclass decision that will take you away from your primary archetypical role.  Instead you will just be customizing the "How" and not the "What" of your role.  When a group faces a decision between the Wizard or the Necro, they will know that largely it makes no difference and that's when the player him/herself is what weights the decision.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>The downside of the archetype system is that in any one archetype there can not be any major differences in how well a player does damage, or how well he heals etc.  As soon as the differences get too major and are exchanged for strengths or weaknesses in other areas, you start to lose touch with the archetype.  This means that no matter which subclass of priest I choose, I basically do the same thing as any other priest within a 10% +- margin of error.  When the error grows to something like 30% you start seeing a difference in oppinion as to where exactly that subclass fits into a group.  He starts to straddle possibly two archetypical roles and as such is less appreciated because he does nothing very well.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>I think less diversity between classes in terms of what they bring to the table does start to reduce the flavor of what choices you make, but at the same time, I think relegating any one class to a filler role is 10 times worse.  I hate to see people have to roll an alt simply because the subclass they chose just isn't generally useful based on the subclass selections the majority of other players have made.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>People should be chosen for groups based on who they are, and not what they are.  The archetype system makes this possible at the expense of a little diversity.</FONT><BR></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>People are just having a hard time accepting that the subclasses should generally perform on par with each other.  In time they will though, especially since all changes from SoE so far and planned reinforce that system as the primary component of this game.<BR><BR></P>

[Sunrayn]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT size=3>Since people don't tend to like to ponder the complexities of what sort of support team a hybrid tank like a shadow knight will need, they will tend to leave the shadow knight to the support role instead of the tank role.  At that point you have taken a class that by all rights was built to tank and pigeon-holed him into a support role simply because you are unsure of how to form a group that could support him as main tank.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3>-------</FONT></P> <DIV><FONT size=3>/smile  Now you are talking about changing human nature instead of your class.  I think you will have more luck with the second option.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>--------</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>The downside of the archetype system is that in any one archetype there can not be any major differences in how well a player does damage, or how well he heals etc.  As soon as the differences get too major and are exchanged for strengths or weaknesses in other areas, you start to lose touch with the archetype.  This means that no matter which subclass of priest I choose, I basically do the same thing as any other priest within a 10% +- margin of error.  When the error grows to something like 30% you start seeing a difference in oppinion as to where exactly that subclass fits into a group.  He starts to straddle possibly two archetypical roles and as such is less appreciated because he does nothing very well.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>I think less diversity between classes in terms of what they bring to the table does start to reduce the flavor of what choices you make, but at the same time, I think relegating any one class to a filler role is 10 times worse.  I hate to see people have to roll an alt simply because the subclass they chose just isn't generally useful based on the subclass selections the majority of other players have made.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3>--------</FONT></DIV> <DIV>The problem with your system is that it creates classes with absolutely no variety of skills, no weaknesses or strengths.  No variety in abilities takes away from the fun factor and makes it 'just a console game played online'  Remember playing Final Fantasy 7 and building all your characters stats and hp to the max thereby wiping out any advantages one 'class' had over another?  What fun was there playing at that point?</DIV> <DIV>--------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Demothis]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sunrayn wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>/shrug</P> <P>Depends on what the raid needs, but sure.  I see no reason why a fury can't be as good a healer as a templar.</P> <P><BR> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>But, there is a reason a fury cant be as good a 'main' healer as a templar or healer.  It is because a fury has other abilities that make him less of a healer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You keep saying that guardians have other abilities that make us other than main tank.  No, we have abilities that make 'us' better tanks.  Like healers have abilities that make them better healers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My wife plays a pally, since I gave up my shaman, guardian has become my main and my shaman is relegated to making WORTs and spells.  Yeah, sometimes I wish I could heal or ward or summon up a damm horse to ride around instead of waiting until I am rich enough to buy one, but, I cant.  What I can do though is tank.  I cant put out the damage to kill something, but I can sure as hell take the beating so others can, well, at least until LU.  That is what guardians were designed for.  If I wanted to do more damage or dual wield ( I know, we can but, I like having a huge board in my off hand) I would have made a monk.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Think of EQ as a game of trade offs.  No class can do everything, some classes can do a few things but not as well as the specialists, and a couple classes give up everything to do one thing better than all the others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Asking for changes to your class to make you better at something without giving up something in return is bad form.  Since you are asking for a change to make you more like a guardian (and that is exactly what you are asking for whether you believe it or not), then you have to give up something that really sets you apart from guardians.  Since you are asking for our number 1 ability, you should be prepared to give up a whole bunch of stuff.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>You bring up a good point on abilities here which brings around another point which I redirect both to you and to gage. The avoidance issue aside (which dose need to be fixed), are the abilities of both classes have diffrent advantages. To weed out variables remove both classes from group. Now compair them to fighting solo mobs that are fighters or scouts. Anybody will say the guardian has an easier time because they will based on the types of abilities they get. But no turn it around an say fighting casters, who can bypass the guardians def through spells, the monk in this situation has an advantage with thier abilities of built in stuns, higher dps to down them faster and casters dont hit as often.</P> <P>So to sumerize this point - is it a problem with class, or merely the content you are fighting.</P> <P>A second point this brought to mind is how well you abilities interact with other classes, aka tank type vs healer/buff types. As we know this is a MMO, playing with others is part of the game. The way the tanks types work guardians would mesh with a random healer type better then a monk who needs more spacific type of buffs and debuffs. And then again, what are you fighting, A Brawler would still have an easier time with casters of the guardian. Monks may require crowd controlers because the diffrences in tanking styles, but then mobs go down faster and swing less blows and throw less spells through the corse of the battle with the monk dps over mitagating the added blows. Utility spells can have some good side effects when used in specific situations. Its just easier to find the situations where the guardian holds the advantage. It is my opinion the guardian meshes better with a slaped together party.</P> <P>And to sumerize point 2, how compatable is your characters abilities with the team you have grouped with.</P> <P>In raid situations, scince all mobs club players like no ones buisness, yes the mit tanks have a huge advantage, again it is the content vs tank style issue.</P><p>Message Edited by Demothises on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:37 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Sunrayn wrote: <P>The problem with your system is that it creates classes with absolutely no variety of skills, no weaknesses or strengths.  No variety in abilities takes away from the fun factor and makes it 'just a console game played online'  Remember playing Final Fantasy 7 and building all your characters stats and hp to the max thereby wiping out any advantages one 'class' had over another?  What fun was there playing at that point?</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ah but you see, this isn't my system, nor was that my post.</P> <P>It's SoE's system.</P> <P>They are the one who came up with, implemented, and are balancing things by archetype, not I.</P> <P>There are certain flavor and style things that set the classes apart, like reactive heals versus regens, and avoidance versus mitigation, heavy armor versus light armor.</P> <P>But the differences between subclasses have to be minimal, so that they are closely tie in to their archetype and can perform the role on par.</P> <P>Whether or not you think the archetype system is fun, is opinion.  Some games have it, some don't.</P> <P>I for one enjoy it, so I play EQ2.</P> <P>/shrug<BR></P>

[Demothis]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gage-Mikel wrote:</P> <P>Ah but you see, this isn't my system, nor was that my post.</P> <P>It's SoE's system.</P> <P>They are the one who came up with, implemented, and are balancing things by archetype, not I.</P> <P>There are certain flavor and style things that set the classes apart, like reactive heals versus regens, and avoidance versus mitigation, heavy armor versus light armor.</P> <P>But the differences between subclasses have to be minimal, so that they are closely tie in to their archetype and can perform the role on par.</P> <P>Whether or not you think the archetype system is fun, is opinion.  Some games have it, some don't.</P> <P>I for one enjoy it, so I play EQ2.</P> <P>/shrug<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>And here is where the all fighters tank just as good logic fails and should fail. When you are a fighter and make the choisce to go brawler, warrior, or crusaider, each style has strengths and flaws assuming the programing is done right. 1 has avantages the other dose not and visa versa. and then again at the profesion level. These decisions lead down a road of numerous new abilities that the other choices did not have. Thus they cannot tank evenly vs the exact same mob. Now I agree with you that brawlers should have the highest avoidance, the monk slightly surpasing the bruiser. Cause as far as the numbers read, the tanks as is should be fairly balanced, but as things play out, we know they arn't.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But are you sure that the classes are not ballanced, or is it simply that the mobs where not designed with the diffrent syles in mind? Let me give an example, earlier in a previouse post I mentioned about adding (or could change some) content with avoidance tanks in mind. These types of mobs are disighne to bypass mitagation to a point thus making avoidance tanks more apt for them. This could be like ghosts for example, you could weaken them to a point, but then they could bypass a fair deal of mitigation making them more dangerouse for mit tanks, and avoidance tanks would be at an advantage. This would be a logical jump IMO being they are incorprial and solid armor will do little to help. Where as the hard hitting zombies would be a much bigger threat to the monks then the bruisers. The same could be said for shadowmen vs deamons.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There are other types of balancing methods incorperated in mobs w/o ever touching the players mechanincs, such as mobs that do little damage, but have a high percentage to proc (which spells dont care what armor you wear), these would be elemental types like water, air, and fire (aka energy based atacks for those who are D&D savy). Just an alternate way of looking at things.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Demothises wrote: <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>And here is where the all fighters tank just as good logic fails and should fail. When you are a fighter and make the choisce to go brawler, warrior, or crusaider, each style has strengths and flaws assuming the programing is done right. 1 has avantages the other dose not and visa versa. and then again at the profesion level. These decisions lead down a road of numerous new abilities that the other choices did not have. Thus they cannot tank evenly vs the exact same mob.</FONT> Now I agree with you that brawlers should have the highest avoidance, the monk slightly surpasing the bruiser. Cause as far as the numbers read, the tanks as is should be fairly balanced, but as things play out, we know they arn't.<BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That is only true to a certain extent, say +/- 10%.  In an archetype system you can't allow class/subclass choices to differentiate the classes by so much that one gets shifted away from the primary role, or begins to take on the role of a seperate archetype.</P> <P>There really can be no hybrid classes.</P> <P>Its either balance and design this game on subclass, where archetype/class do not matter, and give everyone different roles/abilites and make everyone unique...</P> <P>OR</P> <P>balance and design the game on archetype, where class/subclass really don't matter, and give everyone the same role and make the class/subclass roles mostly flavor and style.</P> <P>The second option is what EQ2 is built on, and how its being balanced.</P> <P>You can't say its an archetype system, say fighters are tank and in the same breath say "guardians are most defensive, have the best HP/mitigation, therefore they are the best tanks".  It doesn't work, and it breaks an entire tree.  If this is the case, then you make one fighter subclass, the guardian.  Because if you build one class to be most suitable for the "job" of the archetype and then shift the others away by means of utility and DPS, they really aren't fighters anymore, because they aren't built to tank.  Again the margin of tolerance is small, like around 10%.</P> <P>You can't do it with healers either.  Because if you say "ok, templars are the best healers, furies do the most damage and mystics have the best buffs" that isn't an archetype system, nor balance.  Its a class system and its not balanced.  What you have to say is "ok all priests instant heals do within ~10% of each other, varying by added effects and casting time/power" and "we'll give the different classes regens/reactives/wards" that way they are different and have flavor, and a different approach to play.</P> <P>Its one or the other, you can't balance both ways, and its this I think people have a hard time understanding.</P> <P>Also, please keep in mind whether or not you like the system or think its fun is a matter of opinion, and shouldn't skew discussions about how to balance it.<BR></P>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Gage, you seem to ethier ignore points that are purposely pointed out to you or fail to see them, this is how easy it works.</P> <P>Monks / Bruisers = Can tank 1 - 50, and can also tank raid material just like Jez the Bruiser has already gone and proved the entire monk class wrong and tanked group x4 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> lvl 54+ mobs. They can do whats called <STRONG><U>RAW</U></STRONG> DPS because of self haste so even when you do tank since you all seem to rely on burning power for taunts to hold agro, then you still have that advantage on a Guardian through the ability to be able to perform <STRONG><U>RAW</U></STRONG> DPS through Auto Attack because of Self Haste, and you have a massive advantage over a Guardian in a DPS role because of your combat arts doing a huge amount more damage then a Guardian + Self Haste. They have strong offensive damage arts. To top this all off, put a Monk in a group with for example 3 Scout class and because they also get 46% self haste, a monk has a group buff called Quoite Purity which increase Damage Per Second by 9% so you are increasing the groups Melee damage out put by 9%, now on the contary of your belief about a monk taking a Scouts spot on a raid Gage, you couldnt be anymore blind, when a Monk is a superiour offtank on a raid and if he isnt a offtank he can be put with a group of Scouts ( Rangers, Assassians since they all have 46% self haste buff ) and increase there damage out put by 9% which is extremely helpful on raids seeing melee auto attack damage is what does the brunt of the work on raids. Since raids go for so long it basically renders any damage caster useless because <STRONG><U>RAW MELEE DAMAGE</U></STRONG> in the form of auto attack is what previals on raids due to Damage Casters being Out Of Power from pumping healers with power from there power bar or from nuking themselves dry and then they have to cannabalise themselves full again, which requires them to hurt themselves in turn requires Healers to take there concentration of the MT or there groups just to heal a Caster. </P> <P>Now according to you Gage, Evil class's in this game = Offensive and Good class's = Defensive, so if this is the case and Jez the Bruiser is a Evil monk, then shouldnt monks be able to tank even better then Jez? But wait a sec, Jez has been tanking lvl 54+ group x4 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> mobs, but arent bruisers Ofensive and not Defensive?</P> <P>Once again Gage ill ask you this, when they do what ever there going to do and a Plate class still gets picked over a Monk to tank the high end raids even though you can tank them, now that is i might add, but what are you going to do when Plate class get picked over a monk for the ever so simple and logic reason, but Mitigation > Avoidance and Plate class's get more HP then a Brawler and while the game is still young Gage, this gap will only grow bigger with each expasion, the mobs will only get stronger Gage and Plate class's Mitigation will only grow, where as for monks, from screen shots i see, monks are getting upwards of 80% Avoidance and 40% Mitigation, unbuffed Gage and ungrouped, in other words with out the assistance of any other class. Put them in a group and there almost close to 100% avoidance and would be around 45 - 50% mitigation.</P> <P>So as you can see Gage, i think monks are going to be sorely dissapointed with where this next patch will acually go, seeing as 6 months into the game Monks can get 80% avoidance and 40% mitigation, that seems more unbalanced to me then a Guardian getting 100% avoidance from a variety of class stacking there buffs on him, which brings me all the way back to that not even being a Guardians fault Gage. </P> <P>So do everyone a favour, stop twisting peoples post to suit your arguments and ignoring the point at hand, do some more research on what damage Guardians skills do compared to yours before you even start to spew BS all over the table again, and maybe be prepared for not only a DPS nerf, but also avoidance nerf to you also seeing that im sure SoE didnt intend Monks / Bruisers to be able to get 80% Avoidance, 40 - 45% mitigation unbuffed 6 months into the game ethier Gage. So dont worry Gage, im sure Guardians wont be the only ones affected by the avoidance patch.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:47 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<P>I don't say they are.</P> <P>Its quite obvious you do NOT UNDERSTAND how the archetype system works.  That is obvious by your "the gap will widen in six months" statement.  Um, no sorry it won't.  The archetype system is forever, through all expansion and lvl cap increases.  Unless they decide to make this EQ1.</P> <P>Its only obvious by you trying to cling on how we are have other things besides tanking ability.</P> <P>Jez has tanked two x4s.  The angler (who was so easy they removed him from the game) and the CL instance.</P> <P>I've already congratulated him, we talk a lot via pm.</P> <P>You are unhappy with this game, you don't like how its different from EQ1, you said so yourself.</P> <P>Besides, as I said, you don't understand the archetype system.</P> <P>Oh, and zerkers get haste too.  Ours drains HP, I doubt many people use it when tanking <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:54 PM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV>Gage you couldnt be anymore wrong if you tried, and notice the way he steers around the point once again? No Gage i never said i was unhappy that this game was different from EQ1, again, no idea what your remotely talking about, and let me make myself a little more clear, im not unhappy with the game Gage, im unhappy that they wont fix Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells which since this isnt a PvP game, these arts and spells would act as a template in a PvE enviroment to better balance the archtype system. So let me ask this Gage, seeing as the avoidance problem is still here after they nerfed agility and it took them to discover the problem only recently because of spilting the AC value into Mitigation / Avoidance, do you think they would of had to nerf agility if they fixed Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells and stopped Buff stacking seeing as the problem is still here, maybe agility was never the problem in the first place?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>See Gage i have this problem understanding something, that problem is your guild is a lvl 30 guild, you are the only lvl 50 in it, now when you raid, you said you go along on <STRONG><U>OTHER</U></STRONG> guilds raids, what do you expect when you goto other peoples raids that you yourself have no control over? Do you expect them to tell there MT for the guild sorry, we have this loner monk who will tank this today?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gage i dont think im the only one who has noticed that i do understand the archtype system, problem is the Master of the Ostrich with his a_ss in the air and head in the sand is the one who doesnt understand it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You see Gage, there is a problem with <STRONG><U>EVERYONE</U></STRONG> avoiding too much, it makes Guardians look the worst cause there MT most of the time so the Avoidance buffs are stacked upon them in a raid situation, now look at it from a group perspective, with out a Troubador, a Guardian cant get over 70% avoidance, but wait whats this, a monk can get 80% avoidance and 40 - 45% mitigation unbuffed and ungrouped? Yet it takes a full group of people to raise a Guards avoidance to 65 - 70%. Once again Gage thinking that Guardians can buff themselves to 100% avoidance, when i cant remember how many posts ive read with descriptions on how much there defense buffs acually add to avoidance, none are over 1% thats for sure, funny thing is, im the one who doesnt understand the archtype system. Thats ironic coming from someone who cant tank group x4 ^^^ lvl 54+ raid mobs when Jez the Bruisers already proved him wrong and not too mention, he isnt even a Defensive Brawler, he is a offensive Brawler.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Again Gage, im almost 100% sure that SoE did not intend Monks / Bruisers to get there avoidance to 80% and mitigation to 40 - 45% unbuffed with in the first 6 months of the game, i think you will be very very sorely dissapointed with the avoidance patch, cause i have a feeling its going to effect the entire Fighter class, not just Guardians.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>03-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:23 PM</span>

[SageMarrow]

<P>aoenin - one simpe thing - </P> <P>While gage can scrap all the crap about the game being eq1 if its not balanced by the archetype system crud...</P> <P>unfortunately he is right - they are squarring up the classes. Thats what THEY think will work. Simply put. </P> <P>thats the way things will be. just the same way they are squaring the mage classes and preist. We are first in line. and they are gonna balance us by our [Removed for Content] job - tanking...</P> <P>so yeah, no matter what it takes, be it avoidance or mitigation increases - they will make brawlers tank better and on par with guardians - and paladins and shadowknights will follow. Guardians will be given more utility before they become ((better** tanks than the other tanks. </P> <P>Im not agreeing with it = im not saying that i like it = but the balance they are initiating says just that.</P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>now after reading your post. then yeah - lol - its another question as to how they will do it across the fighter board and if they will ever get it right - or just mess it up. ++as intended**</P> <P>while the fact that they will never probably get a good handle on avoidance will be the deciding factor.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <DIV>Gage you couldnt be anymore wrong if you tried, and notice the way he steers around the point once again? No Gage i never said i was unhappy that this game was different from EQ1, again, no idea what your remotely talking about, and let me make myself a little more clear, im not unhappy with the game Gage, im unhappy that they wont fix Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells which since this isnt a PvP game, these arts and spells would act as a template in a PvE enviroment to better balance the archtype system. So let me ask this Gage, seeing as the avoidance problem is still here after they nerfed agility and it took them to discover the problem only recently because of spilting the AC value into Mitigation / Avoidance, do you think they would of had to nerf agility if they fixed Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells and stopped Buff stacking seeing as the problem is still here, maybe agility was never the problem in the first place?  <FONT color=#ffff00>I always said that they've fixed the buff stacking and not ruined agility, although at the time we and others were amazingly overpowered.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>See Gage i have this problem understanding something, that problem is your guild is a lvl 30 guild, you are the only lvl 50 in it, now when you raid, you said you go along on <STRONG><U>OTHER</U></STRONG> guilds raids, what do you expect when you goto other peoples raids that you yourself have no control over? Do you expect them to tell there MT for the guild sorry, we have this loner monk who will tank this today?  <FONT color=#ffff00>I'm not in a guild, and since I'm tagging along, I do what they ask.  Which is usually offtank.  We normally use an SK tank with a guardian offtank as MA, and then I buff up her and control any aggro she loses.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gage i dont think im the only one who has noticed that i do understand the archtype system, problem is the Master of the Ostrich with his a_ss in the air and head in the sand is the one who doesnt understand it.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Ha Ha, sure.  Thats why your post reflects your understanding of it, right?  That's why you focus on DPS done for us, tanking ability for guardians, that's why you see the "gap" in classes widening in the future, right?  All because you understand that this game is balanced on the archetype level, not the class level.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You see Gage, there is a problem with <STRONG><U>EVERYONE</U></STRONG> avoiding too much, it makes Guardians look the worst cause there MT most of the time so the Avoidance buffs are stacked upon them in a raid situation, now look at it from a group perspective, with out a Troubador, a Guardian cant get over 70% avoidance, but wait whats this, a monk can get 80% avoidance and 40 - 45% mitigation unbuffed and ungrouped? Yet it takes a full group of people to raise a Guards avoidance to 65 - 70%. Once again Gage thinking that Guardians can buff themselves to 100% avoidance, when i cant remember how many posts ive read with descriptions on how much there defense buffs acually add to avoidance, none are over 1% thats for sure, funny thing is, im the one who doesnt understand the archtype system. Thats ironic coming from someone who cant tank group x4 ^^^ lvl 54+ raid mobs when Jez the Bruisers already proved him wrong and not too mention, he isnt even a Defensive Brawler, he is a offensive Brawler.  <FONT color=#ffff00>I never said I couldn't tank a x4 did I?  Quit putting words in my mouth.  I never said that guardians can self buff themselves to 100% either.  So quit making up stuff because you lack the ability to discuss this with me otherwise.  I've seen maybe one monk with 80% avoidance unbuffed.  78 and 80% isn't the same thing, most are in the 76% range.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Again Gage, im almost 100% sure that SoE did not intend Monks / Bruisers to get there avoidance to 80% and mitigation to 40 - 45% with in the first 6 months of the game, i think you will be very very sorely dissapointed with the avoidance patch, cause i have a feeling its going to effect the entire Fighter class, not just Guardians.  <FONT color=#ffff00>You are assuming.  How do you know?  They just raised our mitigation didn't they?  Besides that ranking is AGAINST SOLO MOBS OF THE TARGETS LEVEL.  It has nothing to do with anything else, period.  No one knows how it scales at all, so don't presume to know that you do.  Just because I'm at 75.6% avoidance and 1775 mitigation and Noah is at 64% avoidance and 2500 mitigation against solo mobs level 50, that doesn't imply anything in a group scenario.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Besides, IT SHOULD EFFECT THE ENTIRE FIGHTER ARCHETYPE, AND NOT JUST THE GUARDIAN CLASS, THAT'S CALLED ARCHETYPE BALANCE.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>I'm aware, I only talk about it all the time.</FONT></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[-Aonein-]

<P>But Sage cant they do that already, let me see Gage himself said he tanked all the way from lvl 1 - 50, Jez the Bruiser has already started to prove that they can tank raid material cause Gage gets pushed aside when he goes on OTHER peoples raids, which mind you they dont even have to take him seeing he isnt even in there guild, and if they cant get a group tanking, then they at least have <STRONG><U>RAW</U></STRONG> DPS in the form of self hasted auto attack plus stronger offensive combat arts of the entire Fighter Range.</P> <P>The thing im not understanding though Sage, is Monks are starting to get 80% avoidance and 40 - 45% mitigation unbuffed, even if they joined a group with out a Trobador, they can easily get 90+% avoidance depending on class's of course and around 50% mitigation. Funny thing is, i havent seen them say that it will affect Guardians anymore then it will Monks, so for all we know, Plate class's might get a increase to mitigation from the lose of avoidance and monks may just get a nerf in regaurds to them having 80% avoidance unbuffed which i might add is a amazing figure to obtain unbuffed and ungrouped, thats gotta be asking for a nerf.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>But Sage cant they do that already, let me see Gage himself said he tanked all the way from lvl 1 - 50, Jez the Bruiser has already started to prove that they can tank raid material cause Gage gets pushed aside when he goes on OTHER peoples raids, which mind you they dont even have to take him seeing he isnt even in there guild, and <FONT color=#ffff00>if they cant get a group tanking, then they at least have <STRONG><U>RAW</U></STRONG> DPS in the form of self hasted auto attack plus stronger offensive combat arts of the entire Fighter Range.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>1) Which by design has to be lower than scouts and should be relative to the difference in tanking.  For example: 10%.</P> <P>2)  80% is ideal, not normal, normal is around 75%.  I don't see why 75% against a same lvl solo mob is unbalancing for a class based on avoidance.<BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>and i feel the same way. i dont think its right or anything aonein, </P> <P>but its apparent that that is the direction they are going.  they are going to get them as close as humanly possible in tanking ability. so the classes can do thier jobs.</P> <P>thats how soe wants it to function, just look at the way they are balancing the priest and mages. scouts are already pretty balanced and im sure that bards will be getting thier dps increase as well. </P> <P>which im almost positive that brawlers arent far behind.</P>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Ha Ha, sure.  Thats why your post reflects your understanding of it, right?  That's why you focus on DPS done for us, tanking ability for guardians, that's why you see the "gap" in classes widening in the future, right?  All because you understand that this game is balanced on the archetype level, not the class level.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff>See Gage, thing you dont understand about me is, what Monks have here, is what we fought for on EQ1, Balance, not the abaility to tank raid mobs, or be number 1 tank across the board, all we wanted was balance. Now before you go twist this into a " this isnt EQ1 " BS argument, yes i know Gage, that is whats called *Example*. Seeing that Monks can Tank here from 1 - 50, plus tank raid material, plus play a DPS role with some minor group utility, already, <STRONG><U>now</U></STRONG>, before any adjustments is done, im happy to see that, its good to see that, ive no problem with it Gage, comming from a Monk who was only being was raid utility on EQ1 and not needed for anything but spilting high end raids and useless for groups, its very good to see what they made Monks able to do here, im happy to see it. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff>The gap im talking about is Mitigation + HP > Avoidance, something that since you have only ever played SWG, cant see what we are talking about, time will tell when mobs are cracking people in the head for 8k melee damage and have 200% attack ratings rendering your precious avoidance useless. The game has no built in AI Gage, all these fantasy MMORPG are just all the same, different look, untill they know how to make mobs use AI, nothing is going to change except storylines, game engines, play styles and graphics.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>I never said I couldn't tank a x4 did I?  Quit putting words in my mouth.  I never said that guardians can self buff themselves to 100% either.  So quit making up stuff because you lack the ability to discuss this with me otherwise.  I've seen maybe one monk with 80% avoidance unbuffed.  78 and 80% isn't the same thing, most are in the 76% range.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff>No you didnt say you could tank any group x4 mob, but i remember you backing Gangster about not being able to tank raid content untill he was burnt down by his own guild on his own forum. Up until that point you had his back. As for monks with 80% avoidance, i said there starting to get there Gage, never said you all have it. Plate class should be running around 20-25% avoidance, with 65 - 70% mitigation, Bralwers should be 20 - 25% mitigation with around 65- 70% avoidance, unbuffed.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>You are assuming.  How do you know?  They just raised our mitigation didn't they?  Besides that ranking is AGAINST SOLO MOBS OF THE TARGETS LEVEL.  It has nothing to do with anything else, period.  No one knows how it scales at all, so don't presume to know that you do.  Just because I'm at 75.6% avoidance and 1775 mitigation and Noah is at 64% avoidance and 2500 mitigation against solo mobs level 50, that doesn't imply anything in a group scenario.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff>It doesnt? So whats the point of displaying the numbers in the first place? Seeing as EQ2 is group oreintated, not raid oreintated. The numbers must be a measuring stick for measuring the size of my pe.... we wont go there.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Besides, IT SHOULD EFFECT THE ENTIRE FIGHTER ARCHETYPE, AND NOT JUST THE GUARDIAN CLASS, THAT'S CALLED ARCHETYPE BALANCE.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff>Oh so now you have gone from, " Guardians arent avoidance tanks, its going to change, get over it ", to " It should effect the entire Fighter class for equal balance ". Thats pretty funny Gage.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>I'm aware, I only talk about it all the time.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff>We know.</FONT></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server<BR></P>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>and i feel the same way. i dont think its right or anything aonein, </P> <P>but its apparent that that is the direction they are going.  they are going to get them as close as humanly possible in tanking ability. so the classes can do thier jobs.</P> <P>thats how soe wants it to function, just look at the way they are balancing the priest and mages. scouts are already pretty balanced and im sure that bards will be getting thier dps increase as well. </P> <P>which im almost positive that brawlers arent far behind.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Yeah i understand the direction there going, just seems that there blind to the people proving that it can already be done, all this avoidance hype is simply because of Buff Stacking , nothing else, im not sure how much more simple it can be fixed, by just making what ever higher level buff is cast, over write the lower level one, this in reguards to Defense / Avoidance / Agility.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker<BR>16th Outfitter<BR>Everfrost Server<BR><BR>Enlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )<BR>70th Stone Fist of The Celestial Fist<BR>Five Rings on Luclin Server</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#66ccff>Oh so now you have gone from, " Guardians arent avoidance tanks, its going to change, get over it ", to " It should effect the entire Fighter class for equal balance ". Thats pretty funny Gage.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>It will affect guardians more, as they have unbalanced avoidance, we do not.  The changing of the defensive buffs and how defense works will affect all of us.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>But my statement "guardains aren't avoidance tanks, its going to change, get over it" was in reference to plate tanks using avoidance first, mitigation second, in regards to being able to tank content, and that most certainly will change.</FONT></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:26 PM</span>

[Stra]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>But Sage cant they do that already, let me see Gage himself said he tanked all the way from lvl 1 - 50, Jez the Bruiser has already started to prove that they can tank raid material cause Gage gets pushed aside when he goes on OTHER peoples raids, which mind you they dont even have to take him seeing he isnt even in there guild, and if they cant get a group tanking, then they at least have <strong><u>RAW</u></strong> DPS in the form of self hasted auto attack plus stronger offensive combat arts of the entire Fighter Range.</p> <p>The thing im not understanding though Sage, is Monks are starting to get 80% avoidance and 40 - 45% mitigation unbuffed, even if they joined a group with out a Trobador, they can easily get 90+% avoidance depending on class's of course and around 50% mitigation. Funny thing is, i havent seen them say that it will affect Guardians anymore then it will Monks, so for all we know, Plate class's might get a increase to mitigation from the lose of avoidance and monks may just get a nerf in regaurds to them having 80% avoidance unbuffed which i might add is a amazing figure to obtain unbuffed and ungrouped, thats gotta be asking for a nerf.</p> <p>Taemek Frozenberg 45th Berserker16th OutfitterEverfrost ServerEnlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )70th Stone Fist of The Celestial FistFive Rings on Luclin Server</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>Excellent post. One thing that occurredto me from your posts is a quesiton of where the game is going with expansions? You have this percentage avoidance thing going and yet we are near 100% without even an expansion. The only possible way they can increase mob power without rendering them trivial is to make them hit much harder. So when expansion 2 comes out, we could be looking at mobs doing 6k per hit at raid level. How does that fit into Gage's little world? If that was the case, he might avoid 99% of the hits but in a raid fight with a hasted mob and his consorts, there will be several hundred hits attempted on the main tank. If Gage takes even one or 2 of those with his tiny mitigation, he is dead; healers will have literally no chance to save him; he will go from full life to dead in under a second. On the other hand, the plate tanks will take 2 or 3 of those hits but their mitigation will atenuate that 6k down to perhaps 500 or 1000. The healers will be able to keep up with that kind of damage. At about that time, gage will be back whining for an HP increase and mitigation increase in the monk. The reality is that it isnt <b>all of us</b> that dont understand the system, its Gage that doesnt understand it. In fact, Im starting to find that his views are even not commonly shared among brawlers themselves. Gage doesnt seem to grasp that there are 18 classes in this game. He seems to think that there are only 3. However, such a thing would be rediculous so I cant believe he actually thinks that. What I do believe is that he chose monk to get the DPS and utility and now he wants it <b>ALL</b>. That is far more believable and more than likely accurate. </span><div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Strast wrote: <P><SPAN>Excellent post. One thing that occurredto me from your posts is a quesiton of where the game is going with expansions? You have this percentage avoidance thing going and yet we are near 100% without even an expansion. The only possible way they can increase mob power without rendering them trivial is to make them hit much harder. So when expansion 2 comes out, we could be looking at mobs doing 6k per hit at raid level.<BR><BR>How does that fit into Gage's little world? If that was the case, he might avoid 99% of the hits but in a raid fight with a hasted mob and his consorts, there will be several hundred hits attempted on the main tank. If Gage takes even one or 2 of those with his tiny mitigation, he is dead; healers will have literally no chance to save him; he will go from full life to dead in under a second. On the other hand, the plate tanks will take 2 or 3 of those hits but their mitigation will atenuate that 6k down to perhaps 500 or 1000. The healers will be able to keep up with that kind of damage.<BR><BR>At about that time, gage will be back whining for an HP increase and mitigation increase in the monk.<BR><BR>The reality is that it isnt <B>all of us</B> that dont understand the system, its Gage that doesnt understand it. In fact, Im starting to find that his views are even not commonly shared among brawlers themselves. Gage doesnt seem to grasp that there are 18 classes in this game. He seems to think that there are only 3. However, such a thing would be rediculous so I cant believe he actually thinks that. What I do believe is that he chose monk to get the DPS and utility and now he wants it <B>ALL</B>. That is far more believable and more than likely accurate.</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Strast, you are silly.</P> <P>First off evasion is pretty much linear, since it compares the player to a solo mob of their level, ie: I at 50 have around 76% unbuffed and a monk at 20 will have around 75% unbuffed, it doesn't scale much as you level.  This is because its always being compared to a harder mob, thus when I'm level 100 it will probably still be around 75~80% unbuffed, since it'll be compared to a much harder mob.</P> <P>Moorgard already stated that the way the game works if they tweaked evasion would result in *everyone* dying within seconds because of how hard stuff hits, therefore they are going to be redoing the way mobs do damage; in order to make both evasion and mitigation more effective.  The game should be hard, not impossible.</P> <P>There are 24 classes in this game, but only 4 archetypes.  This game isn't about the subclasses, or the classes, its about the archetype.  Its balanced by archetype.  That is what you don't seem to grasp.  The subclass is substantially less important than the archetype.  Check out the info about the priest balancing, or the enchanter DPS increase, or the scout/fighter DPS rebalance.  All of these things serve to balance the classes *within* the archetype NOT to balance the subclasses against all of the others.</P> <P>What you believe doesn't matter to me.  I chose a monk because I wanted to be able to be a tiger.  The reason doesn't matter.  The truth is that this game isn't balanced by subclass and if it was then you could talk about DPS/utility and tacos all you want, its balanced by archetype.  So all of the things like DPS and utility (which every class gets anyway) will be held within a certain threshold of every other fighter subclass, to ensure that while they offer different flavors/style of play, they are never balanced too far away from the primary role of the archetype, which is far more important than individual subclass abilities.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:51 AM</span>

[Banditman]

<P>Brawlers have 2 roles they can fulfill - tanking and DPS.  Guards have only one.</P> <P>If you want to tank like a Guard and still have a DPS role as well, roll an alt.  I did.</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <P>Brawlers have 2 roles they can fulfill - tanking and DPS.  Guards have only one.</P> <P>If you want to tank like a Guard and still have a DPS role as well, roll an alt.  I did.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That isn't going to be true after the scout/fighter dps rebalance.</P> <P>Each archetype can fill one role well, and its how they are designed, and balanced.</P> <P>No archetype should be able to suitably do two archetype's job.</P> <P>Hence the mage rebalance (and continuation with the summoner/enchanter DPS increase) and the upcoming priest rebalance.</P> <P>DPS isn't our role, it's the scouts.<BR></P>

[Banditman]

<P>Wrong.</P> <P>Because of the way Brawlers were spec'ed out, they will always have a role as DPS.  They don't have all the taunts and aggro generation skills that a Warrior does, they generate a good portion of their aggro through DPS.  Take that away, and you completely [Removed for Content] their ability to hold aggro, and that completely [Removed for Content] their ability to tank.</P>

[Sunrayn]

<P>Gage, I really dont see what it is you are trying to accomplish anymore.  The fact is, other classes *are* tanking raid mobs.  Even *you*.  Every time someone brings up that fact, you gloss over it or completely ignore it, or say it isnt good enough.</P> <P>You seem to want: </P> <P>Guardians to be nerfed so that you are chosen as MT at every raid, or</P> <P>Monks defense to be raised to guardian level while at the same time keeping all your current abilities so you are chosen as MT at every raid. Or,</P> <P>You are practicing your debating skills in anticipation of running for President.</P> <P> </P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>i just posted this in another thread playing around but it seems to fit well right here. Guys, gage is right - thats the direction they are going with the balance. brawlers will be as good as guardians at both holding aggro and tanking after the balancing is done. Either way- heres the post - it was a joke more so - but still holds some validity.</P> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __</DIV> <DIV>There's a million good reasons to have more than one fighter in your group.  How about the shielding buffs we can cast on each other?  How about offtanking?  Back up tanking?  I mean there's a ton you have to work with.<BR><BR>EQ2 isn't about constructing the same old boring group with the same classes in it every single time.  You can be just as efficient without that perfect group as long as you group with people that know what they are doing.<BR>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>LOL, say that in about 2 months...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>brawlers will never replace scouts again.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>there will be 1 and only 1 MT in groups.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wizards/warlocks/conjurers/necros/coercer/illusionist WILL ALL put fighter dps to smithereens.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Scouts will out dps by FAR without trying...(as opposed to us keeping up when one is slacking.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Raids will be balanced 2 MT's 6 healers and 16 DPS....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So if ANY mage is available - count yourself out - if ANY scout is available - count yourself out - and unless you are in the ELITE top  2 tanks in your guild, or best buds with some guildies and its **buddy night**.... pack ur s-h-it- ur going home...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Welcome to the real world season 2.<IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __</DIV>

[Death4]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Demothises wrote: <P>So to sumerize this point - is it a problem with class, or <FONT color=#ff0000>merely the content you are fighting.</FONT><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gage, isn't this what you originally your problem was?  Raid content right?  But you're fine with level 50 grouping, right?  You just have a problem with raids and <U>only</U> raid content because <U>you</U> can't tank it?  I'm not being critical, being serious.  Why not post suggestions as to raid content (As has been done by many, many others but you) that <U>you</U> would like to see.  Granted, we're all aware of your problem with it, but not to the extent.  You also mention Heavy Armor avoidance.  What would <U>you</U> think a decent cap would be?  I'm curious as to what your actual opinions are instead of your one line statements of "Omg broked."</P></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR> <P>Wrong.</P> <P>Because of the way Brawlers were spec'ed out, they will always have a role as DPS.  They don't have all the taunts and aggro generation skills that a Warrior does, they generate a good portion of their aggro through DPS.  Take that away, and you completely [Removed for Content] their ability to hold aggro, and that completely [Removed for Content] their ability to tank.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Where did I say they were going to take our DPS away?  I didn't.</P> <P>They'll be raising scouts damage to enforce their role as melee dps, that's all.</P> <P>At the end the lowest scout DPS should be higher than the highest fighter DPS.</P> <P>As you said our DPS is for lack of taunts, not for replacing scouts.<BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Death40k wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Demothises wrote: <P>So to sumerize this point - is it a problem with class, or <FONT color=#ff0000>merely the content you are fighting.</FONT><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gage, isn't this what you originally your problem was?  Raid content right?  But you're fine with level 50 grouping, right?  You just have a problem with raids and <U>only</U> raid content because <U>you</U> can't tank it?  I'm not being critical, being serious.  Why not post suggestions as to raid content (As has been done by many, many others but you) that <U>you</U> would like to see.  Granted, we're all aware of your problem with it, but not to the extent.  You also mention Heavy Armor avoidance.  What would <U>you</U> think a decent cap would be?  I'm curious as to what your actual opinions are instead of your one line statements of "Omg broked."<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>My original concern was raid content yes, because I surpassed all of the other content before the agility nerf, and other monks said it seemed pretty balanced.</P> <P>Moorgard and SoE don't see it that way though.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>Their job, not mine.  I just want total archetype balance for everyone, so everybody has a chance and a reason to play, despite what class they like.</P> <P>As for how much heavy avoidance is enough, I don't know.  As the mobs work right now if they didn't have a lot even they would get plastered.  As Moorgard mentioned a whole lot of things are being looked into and changed.</P> <P>The way priests heal, the way taunts work, the amount of damage mobs do and how, how avoidance works and scales, how mitigation works and scales, how defense works and what it affects and also how it scales; not to mention individual buffs and abilities.</P> <P>That so many widespread changes are coming down the pipe that all go to reinforce the archetype system (avoidance, summoner dps, scout dps, priest healing, defense) shows that even they do not think things are balanced enough.</P> <P>*IF* the guardian class was supposed to be the best tank, they wouldn't change anything, because they are.  All the fighters can tank 1 to 50, some can fill a DPS role, some can heal rather well.  A lot of people view it as working as intended.</P> <P>However they don't, and you have to step back and ask yourself why.</P> <P>I understand the arguements about "a guardian won't be needed" but in a true balanced archetype none of the fighters would be needed *OR* not needed, as they would be similiar enough to substitute for each other.</P> <P>Right now its like tanking out Michael Jordan and putting in Greg Ostertagg, and when its balanced and working it should be like taking out Michael Jordan and putting in Shaquille O'Neal.  They don't play the same way, but they are both champions and capable of getting the job done.<BR></P>

[einar4]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote:<BR> I picked a guardian to take damage. <-- note the period. <BR><BR>I didnt want DPS skills, I didnt want divine magic or lay on hands. I wanted to be the uber damage sponge of my guild. But now it looks like the other tanking classes are having success in lobying for me to be cast into the same pit of irrelevancy that the EQ1 Warrior was thrown into. We can summarize it as follows: <BR><BR>Guardian: Tanks at 100% ... does nothign else <BR>Monk/Brawler: Tanks at say 75% ... also has devcent DPS attacks. <BR>Pally: Tanks at say 75% and has heals, bufs and Lay on Hands <BR>SK: Tanks at 75% and has damage spells decent DPS. <BR><BR>What these people are tryign to get changed is the above system to be the below system. <BR><BR>Guardian: Tanks at 100% ... does nothign else <BR>Monk/Brawler: Tanks at say 100% ... also has devcent DPS attacks. <BR>Pally: Tanks at say 100% and has heals, bufs and Lay on Hands <BR>SK: Tanks at 100% and has damage spells decent DPS. <BR><BR>What this means is that as a guardian we would be little more than gimped berzerkers. Everyone else can tank as well as us and yet can also use their DPS attacks and heals and divine magic. These people chose these classes knowing that they wouldnt tank as good as a guardian and now they want both worlds. <BR><BR>If we let this happen, if we dont make our voice heard, we are going to get nerfed so hard that the only option will be to reroll or leave the game. I remember being a level 55 EQ warrior and the utter pain it was to basically nto be able to play because I just wasnt needed. I dont want to go down that road again. Yet if we dont get out there and start countering the Brawler / Crusader / Berzzerker one star propaganda, that is exactly what will be happening. <BR><BR>If you are reading this SOE, let us tank. We chose guardians only to tank. We made enormous sacrificies just to tank. My aentire traits and traditions are aroudn tanking. Dont mess with us and render us irrelevant. <BR> <P>Message Edited by Strast on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:19 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> I got two things out of this post. <---- note the period</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> 1: this guy wants to play a class that is irreplacable in a group and wants no other subclass in the game to have tanking ability.  </DIV> <DIV> 2: he invents the "what people want" without any evidence or even a quote so that he can create this antagonistic "Mob of the Ignorant" to take arms against with his "Geometric Logic" in order  to further his point: mailnly that he wants to play a class that is the one and only fighter class that is capable of being a tank, regardless of what has already been stated endlessly by the designers.  All of the fighter classes can tank and are meant to tank at 100%, they simply do it with different strategies.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Next time you want to complain about something like this, just say "I don't want any other classes to be able to tank other than guardian"  don't invent "what people are saying" to make your point.  That works on Fox "news," but not anywhere that relies on veracity. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Stra]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>einar438 wrote:<div> I got two things out of this post. <---- note the period</div><div> </div><div> 1: this guy wants to play a class that is irreplacable in a group and wants no other subclass in the game to have tanking ability.<hr></div></blockquote><div>Then you need to work on your reading skills. Ive never said anything of the kind in any way possible. I have said that guardians should be the best at tanking because that is ALL THAT THEY DO. We dont get utility spels, invis, sneak, safe fall, feign death. Our DPS is laughable, we dont get lifetaps or heals or lay on hands or harm touch. ALL we can do is tank. We sacrificed all of those options to be nothing but tanks. You chose differently. Now you can either have all of that extra stuff, or you can do what we did, play a tank.The reality is that you and people like you simply want it all. You want your DPS or heals or harm touch and so on but you also want to tank like a guardian. You want to get the benefits without making the sacrifice. Its a classic "gimme gimme" attitude.  I cant solo worth a crap (it takes me forever to kill anything). I cant invis. If I get a mob on my butt I cant feign and have him go away. I cant harm touch a mob in a close fight to win, I cant use lay on hands if Im near death and the healer is OOM. All I can do is tank. Wihtout a DPS class and a Healer class with me, my options are severly limited.Either take the sacrifices or realize that you gave up uber-tanking to get that other stuff. Life is full of tradeoffs.</div><blockquote><div> <hr>2: he invents the "what people want" without any evidence or even a quote so that he can create this antagonistic "Mob of the Ignorant" to take arms against with his "Geometric Logic" in order  to further his point: mailnly that he wants to play a class that is the one and only fighter class that is capable of being a tank, regardless of what has already been stated endlessly by the designers.  All of the fighter classes can tank and are meant to tank at 100%, they simply do it with different strategies. <hr></div></blockquote><div>Throughout the course of this thread, which you apparently didnt read, it has become quite clear that the original post is right smack on target. There is a small subset of people that want it all. The reasonable people in this game know what the word "trade-offs" means. Some people like you and Gage-Mikel apparently dont.If you want to tank at 100%, fine. Give up your DPS or heals or SK harm touches and utility spells and other stuff. Go for it and welcome to the guardian class.Thats what it comes down to. Are you willing to give up your DPS spells? Are you willing to give up your heals, mends, Feign death and harm touches to become a 100% tank? If not then you are simply unreasonable and greedy.</div><blockquote><div><hr>Next time you want to complain about something like this, just say "I don't want any other classes to be able to tank other than guardian"  don't invent "what people are saying" to make your point.  That works on Fox "news," but not anywhere that relies on veracity.</div><div> </div><hr></blockquote>Dont invent things I didnt say. Gage already has the trademark on that kind of stuff and he might sue you. Those words in this quote are YOUR words, not mine. I and many many other people in this thread have expressed quite clearly our position on the matter. In 90% of situations, you can tank or I can tank. However, in that 10% of situations against raid epic mobs, Im going to be more mana efficient and more capable of surviving the encounter. I have given up a GREAT DEAL to tank that 10% more than you. Furthermore, in those other situations I will be more mana efficient. Does that mean you are useless? God no, you have other abilities that I dont posess and are very valuable.I know the strengths and weaknesses of almost all classes, why is it so difficult for you to manage and take advantage of? Would I always choose a scout over a monk? No way. The monk is a great second tank. If I have a healer, and three DPS types, Im going to give that last slot to a secondary tank for sure. Someone that can tank adds while I manage the main encounter. Somoene that can peel mobs off healers much faster than I, someone that knows their business.</span><div></div>

[Chanliang]

On what world you people are on? So far I've always seen groups MT+healer and rest whatever fills a slot. If you come by moronic group collecting only perfect set of professions put all on ignore and pass on.  On raids I've seen/heard you need good organizer, good MT, bunch of healers and as many raiders as needed to finish job. Not 1 mt, team of healers and 18 scout/mages for dps. That won't happen. So please get over this attitude  bwuaa *snifff* bwuaa nobody needs me cause I'm not FoTM uber bad [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] profession.  Cause 90% of times that won't happen. <div></div>