How to Fix Guardians

[CheckS]

<DIV>Remove all +Defense buffs from the game...All classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Replace them with +Mitigation or +AGI buffs, as appropriate.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Increase damage output of mobs slightly to offset these new buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Leave all other combat mechanics alone.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This prevents guardians (or anyone) from soloing group mobs unless they are grey.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by CheckSix on <span class=date_text>03-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:20 PM</span>

[SageMarrow]

what about paladins...

[Kryog]

<P>I haven't seen anyone who can solo blue group mobs yet.   I've done green grouped mobs (or mob), but never blue.   Duetting with my wife templar I can do blues however, low blues.   Anyway, Guardian's are fine, they just need some tweaking with their abilities.   Put us at about 50/50 (50% mitigation, 50% avoidance) and leave us be.   We're fine as we are right now.   Mainly because we're so vanilla.</P> <P> </P>

[Snikey]

heh just make mob special attacks effected by mitigation more.

[Cod]

brawler type tanks will still be less defensive tanks no matter what is done so therefore there dream of being chosen to ma raids is a pipe dream unless the devs choose to make a special raid mob just for them.

[moorie27]

<P>I solo Blue/white ^^ mobs all the time when im bored waiting for a group...or if they are named and drop loot.</P> <P>Im a 42SK Ogre and I just kite them using Dreadful Wrath and chaining HO's.</P> <P>The exp isnt any slower than grouping really but it seems to take an age to bring em down. timed a blue ^^ nightblood at just over 2 mins last night.</P> <P>Hard thing is finding the room to kite them without getting adds thats all.</P> <P>Does kiting count as solo ? heheheh i dont know <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P> </P> <P>Ogrim Ironhand 42SK Ogre.</P>

[TheLivingPlu]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kryogen wrote:<BR> <P>I haven't seen anyone who can solo blue group mobs yet.   I've done green grouped mobs (or mob), but never blue.   Duetting with my wife templar I can do blues however, low blues.   Anyway, Guardian's are fine, they just need some tweaking with their abilities.   Put us at about 50/50 (50% mitigation, 50% avoidance) and leave us be.   We're fine as we are right now.   Mainly because we're so vanilla.</P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I would guess that you must play a race that does not benefit from a +5 defence racial trait, as a Barbarian I have this trait and can solo blue group mobs. That +5 defence can make a world of difference! :smileywink:

[Ashtaro]

<P>What I'd like to see is have shield factor be converted from avoidance to mitigation.  HOWEVER, make shields have a % chance to resist stuns (obviously the better shield the better %).  This would lower our avoidance, and increase our mitigation (which makes more sense), and prevent us from being stunned so much because we get hit more.</P> <P>The end result would be we get hit more, for less damage, but not wind up being stunned all the time.</P>

[OgApostrap]

<DIV>I dont see why a monk couldn't mt some raid mobs, aren't alot of them giants? Giants have low agi, I can if i try really hard solo a blue ++ giant on my monk... Love their low agi compared to me sitting at 126 at 30.</DIV>

[Morriz]

44 Guardian, Dark Elf race, can solo blue^^'s. You just need to throw up all your buffs (specifically the +Defense) and go for it. You can't solo ANY Blue^^'s but learn how to pick em and it's easy. I wouldn't spend to much time trying anyway, nor would I be overly concerned if I were another class. The exp stinks. My monk can solo green^^'s too. GF's Shaman can solo blue^^'s and because of the class's spell she could probably solo White^^'s if she wanted to spend half an hour meleeing them to death <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />. Preventing class's from soloing group mobs isn't something they should try to fix with a broad patch, it's different for all the classes that do it. It's all about making the mob unable to hit you. I still have yet to see people solo group mobs for exp, the exp per kill looks nice but the exp per hour is utter crap. <div></div>

[Bewts]

There are two sweeping problems with the relationship between guardians and all other fighter types. The first is in regards to Guardians specifically.  Their Shields add avoidance when equipped.  The problem is that shields don't 'avoid' the blow, but it softens it enough that it doesn't hurt the shield bearer.  Applying a modifier to avoidance when you equip a shield is what makes a guardian unbalanced in regards to avoidance.  The bonus that all shield bearers recieve to avoidance needs to be applied to mitigation, not avoidance because you still take the blow with the shield 'avoiding' it but only because you soften the blow with that piece of iron between you and the mob which would either provide you with a stinger on your forearm or not affect you in the slightest if your mitigation was high enough. The second problem is with +defense.  Essentially it is applied across the board to avoidance and is basically a constant modifier amongst all fighter archetypes.  This creates a problem when one class can raise their defense and therefore raise their avoidance at the same ratio as all other fighters.  This makes it unbalanced for the classes that can raise their +defense significantly.  Specifically it applies to Guardians who recieve the most stackable +defense modifiers.  The only solution I have been able to come up with is that the +defense needs to be applied to the proper combat calcuation instead of across the board to avoidance percentages.  In essence, a Guardian who raises their defense recieves bonuses to Mitigation, not Avoidance.  Monks would recieve bonuses to Avoidance and then Paladins and ShadowKnights would recieve a balance of both worlds. Just pulling numbers out here to prove a point, but here it goes: Guardians have "4" Mitigation over "4" Avoidance (per +1 Defense)  Think of it as a fraction of 4/4 if you will. Monks have a "1" Mitigation over a "4" Avoidance (per +1 Defense)  Again this is a fraction of 1/4 if you will. To balance the Monks and the Guardians, the devs gave Monks a pretend shield which essentially was a +Avoidance modifier to make them avoid more attacks.  I believe it was at 20% more avoidance or in that ballpark. So now if you do some basic math you see a guardian in regards to taking damage is a 4/4 and a monk is a 1/4 with a streamlined 20% bonus to avoidance.  This is not differnt but equal as Sony intendeds it to be.  The reason the Guardians have the "4" modifier to their avoidance is because of the shield bonus to avoidance aka the Block skill is being applied to avoidance.  As I have already described, Guardians shields do not avoid attacks but soften the blow to the point where the damage is absorbed ala <i>Mitigation</i>. So now we have the issue of resolving the bonus to avoidance that Block provides when you don your shields.  Essentially by taking the avoidance bonus that the Block skill gives and applying it to mitigation instead where you apply 20% modifier to absorb a larger amount of damage you will not nerf a Guardian class but instead re-apply the bonus to the proper part of the original 4/4 = 1/(4 + 20%) equation which would then be properly adjusted to (4 + 20%)/1 = 1/(4+20%) thereby balancing the theoretical equation to properly make a guardian a mitigation king and a monk an avoidance king or in simpler terms: being different but equal. This is my theoretical solution the problem between guardians and monks.  I have not applied the theory to Paladins and Shadowknights, but I presume the equation would be very similar to the properly balanced one above yet on a smaller scale where the heals, wards and more buffs for direct mitigation etc would properly balance the SK/PAL vs Guardian vs Monk equations to make them all different but equal. In case you don't understand, I am NOT calling for a nerf on guardians, nor a increase of monk abilities but instead a proper re-distribution of applied modifiers to their proper categories.  You wouldn't lose anything being a guardian, but instead have it applied elsewhere.  Your tanking abilities would not be compromised but instead you would take less damge but get hit more often which is what is intended (I believe its what is intended but with all the beta changes we have endure who really knows anymore).  I'm open to hearing about holes in my theory as of course it is JUST a theory. <div></div>

[Morriz]

I would definitely say the +avoidance modifier from shields is not what the problem is. I receive 7.5% more avoidance from my T5 rare shield. We get most of our avoidance not from shields but from our base resistance, parry and block. Perhaps base avoidance for Fighter sublcasses should be adjusted down and the Deflection skill increased (resulting in Brawler sublcasses with higher overall avoidance). After seeing Noah's parses, this shouldn't be an overly large increase. It comes down to, people want a reason to play their class. Yes being a hybrid is a reason to play a class, SageMarrow espouses this daily. He likes to tank, he likes to do DPS too. <div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Morrizar wrote:<BR><BR>It comes down to, people want a reason to play their class. Yes being a hybrid is a reason to play a class, SageMarrow espouses this daily. He likes to tank, he likes to do DPS too.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, some people do enjoy being a hybrid.  But some do not.  It isn't fun for *me* to be worse at everything I can do.  Worse than scouts at DPS, worse than scouts/mages at utility, worse at tanking than plate tanks.</P> <P>Especially when we were told from the beginning that our class choice wouldn't inhibit our ability to fill the primary role of the archetype we chose.<BR></P>

[Kince Stouthea]

<P>Gage my one concern with your arguments is that you consitantly try to compair yourself to two seperate class tree's. </P> <P>Your not a scout class so stop trying to make it sound like you should be doing scouts dps. You CAN tank and still have dps thats higher then most in the Warrior tree. Your class was never ment to do more or even equall amounts of damage as that of a scout. If that were the case you would hear scouts complaining about how they cant tank like a monk. Try and stick a scout in the position of a tank and see what hapens...</P> <P>Time to get off your high horse and play with the rest of us.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kince Stoutheart wrote:<BR> <P>Gage my one concern with your arguments is that you consitantly try to compair yourself to two seperate class tree's.</P> <P>Your not a scout class so stop trying to make it sound like you should be doing scouts dps. You CAN tank and still have dps thats higher then most in the Warrior tree. Your class was never ment to do more or even equall amounts of damage as that of a scout. If that were the case you would hear scouts complaining about how they cant tank like a monk. Try and stick a scout in the position of a tank and see what hapens...</P> <P>Time to get off your high horse and play with the rest of us.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>*sigh*</P> <P>I do NOT want to be doing scout DPS.  I'm one of the biggest supporters of either an increase in their DPS or a decrease in ours.</P> <P>Melee DPS is THEIR job.  NOT OURS.</P> <P>That just proves that you don't "read my posts".</P> <P>Let me explain to you why I compare our DPS to scouts:</P> <P>Group desirability.</P> <P>If a group is looking for melee dps and a any scout is available, they get chosen.  I do NOT have a problem with that.  That is by design... BUT it does work as leverage for me against all these [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] plate tanks who keep trying to convince the monk/bruiser class that our DPS is desirable for groups.</P> <P>It isn't.  By design.</P> <P>DPS = mage/scout/fighter/priest in all scenarios.</P> <P>By design of the archetypes two entire archetypes are better DPS (one caster / one melee).</P> <P>As of right now they are still balancing the damage done, but the numerous damage changes made so far goes to show that SoE is certainly going to align the classes by that simple structure they've stressed since late beta.</P> <P>So therefore we really have no DPS leg to stand on.  Our only DPS advantage is against 5 other fighters (and non-rampaging zerkers).</P> <P>Therefore we can't really fill two spots for a group, unless one is considered offtanking, which any fighter can do, and most groups do not need.</P> <P>So we need to be balanced as tanks, period.  Our DPS advantage is archetype level, for archetype balance BUT our archetype role is tanking, not dealing damage.</P> <P>Therefore the advantage in our DPS should correlate to the tanking ability of the fighter subclasses, but right now it doesn't.</P> <P>The difference in damage done between the fighter subclasses is not relative to the differences in tanking ability.</P> <P>So, again, the reason I bring up DPS so much is because we are designed to be worse at dealing melee damage than seven other subclasses, and worse at dealing damage overall than thirteen.</P> <P>We should be balanced as tanks (as all SoE statments and pathes thus far reinforce) and not by our damage dealing capability.</P> <P>Oh and its YOU'RE not YOUR.  Thanks.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>03-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:28 AM</span>

[Noah]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kince Stoutheart wrote:<BR> <P>Gage my one concern with your arguments is that you consitantly try to compair yourself to two seperate class tree's.</P> <P>Your not a scout class so stop trying to make it sound like you should be doing scouts dps. You CAN tank and still have dps thats higher then most in the Warrior tree. Your class was never ment to do more or even equall amounts of damage as that of a scout. If that were the case you would hear scouts complaining about how they cant tank like a monk. Try and stick a scout in the position of a tank and see what hapens...</P> <P>Time to get off your high horse and play with the rest of us.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>*sigh*</P> <P>I do NOT want to be doing scout DPS.  I'm one of the biggest supporters of either an increase in their DPS or a decrease in ours.</P> <P>Melee DPS is THEIR job.  NOT OURS.</P> <P>That just proves that you don't "read my posts".</P> <P>Let me explain to you why I compare our DPS to scouts:</P> <P>Group desirability.</P> <P>If a group is looking for melee dps and a any scout is available, they get chosen.  I do NOT have a problem with that.  That is by design... BUT it does work as leverage for me against all these [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] plate tanks who keep trying to convince the monk/bruiser class that our DPS is desirable for groups.</P> <P>It isn't.  By design.</P> <P>DPS = mage/scout/fighter/priest in all scenarios.</P> <P>By design of the archetypes two entire archetypes are better DPS (one caster / one melee).</P> <P>As of right now they are still balancing the damage done, but the numerous damage changes made so far goes to show that SoE is certainly going to align the classes by that simple structure they've stressed since late beta.</P> <P>So therefore we really have no DPS leg to stand on.  Our only DPS advantage is against 5 other fighters (and non-rampaging zerkers).</P> <P>Therefore we can't really fill two spots for a group, unless one is considered offtanking, which any fighter can do, and most groups do not need.</P> <P>So we need to be balanced as tanks, period.  Our DPS advantage is archetype level, for archetype balance BUT our archetype role is tanking, not dealing damage.</P> <P>Therefore the advantage in our DPS should correlate to the tanking ability of the fighter subclasses, but right now it doesn't.</P> <P>The difference in damage done between the fighter subclasses is not relative to the differences in tanking ability.</P> <P>So, again, the reason I bring up DPS so much is because we are designed to be worse at dealing melee damage than seven other subclasses, and worse at dealing damage overall than thirteen.</P> <P>We should be balanced as tanks (as all SoE statments and pathes thus far reinforce) and not by our damage dealing capability.</P> <P>Oh and its YOU'RE not YOUR.  Thanks.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>03-28-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>11:28 AM</SPAN><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Deleted my entire post because you just upset my cat Gage.</FONT><BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>

[Bardweiser]

<DIV>Level 29 Half-elf Guardian</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can solo solo MOBs up to yellow, but any group MOBs that could give me exp (even green) are tough to handle solo (since the group MOB patch).</DIV>

[CheckS]

<P>The problem (which I am currently taking advantage of) is that I was soloing white ^^ mobs. Two weeks ago SOE capped my defense buffs to +20, I think, which now only lets me solo blue ^^ mobs.</P> <P>By soloing, I mean standing toe to toe, running out of power and then just meleeing until the mob dies because the mob can't hit me.</P> <P>It's still a problem because now I have buffs which I don't bother using, so they've essentially taken some of my abilities away.</P> <P>I DO like the suggestion that +Defense increases mitigation and leaves the hit/no-hit decision alone. No need to increase the damage output of the mobs that way!</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Belce]

<P>Gage,</P> <P>How do you reply to the other part of the arche type system and that not all sub classes are equal in all situations?  That is fundmentaly the difference between sub classes is it not, or why not have just  fighter class and others? </P> <P>Personally, I think the reason why monks can't tank epic encounters is due more to their groupmates thinking that monks can't do it than anything else.  The old way is what we know and use. </P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

The differences are in play style, flavor and differences in the way things are done, not what is done.

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<div></div> <div></div><p>Group desirability.</p> <p>If a group is looking for melee dps and a any scout is available, they get chosen.  I do NOT have a problem with that.  That is by design... BUT it does work as leverage for me against all these [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] plate tanks who keep trying to convince the monk/bruiser class that our DPS is desirable for groups.</p><div></div><p><span class="date_text"></span><span class="time_text"></span></p><hr></blockquote> I guess im playing a different game then. Ive never seen a group asking for DPS turn down a Brawler that answers.  Not sure if Guardians get turned down cause honestly I doubt many would answer a call for DPS... See thats the difference i think...its all about perception.   Ive also never seen groups asking for Guardians or groups asking for Templars...Instead all I see are /ooc Group needs TANK....Group needs HEALER....Group needs DPS. </span><div></div>