Taunt vs. DPS vs. Tanking

[FamilyManFir]

Spun off from <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=10137#M10137" target=_blank>this thread</a>.<blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:I <I>really</I> want to stay focused on the numbers, but I'll answer you briefly.<B><I>In my opinion</I></B> <FONT color=#ffff00>Monks trade DPS for Taunts</FONT>, not for "Tanking" (dispersing damage, via Mitigation or Avoidance). Therefore, the difference in DPS would relate to the extra Taunt line that Guardians get (the Taunting Blow line) as well as the Hold the Line CA. Since that extra Taunt line would, arguably, give Guardians a 15-33% advantage in aggro management (depending on how often the blow landed), a 16.7-25% improvement in DPS would seem like a reasonable tradeoff, particularly if half or so of that DPS difference included special effects from CAs that helped to generate hate.However, that's only true if, apples to apples, Monks' DPS and Guardians' DPS isn't wildly different. I've heard people claim that the difference is small and other people claim that the difference is huge. I want numbers to support those arguments. The numbers here are, so far, interesting, but not yet conclusive. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> Here is the problem, DPS = hate BUT it also equals a mob dying faster. So if a mob dies faster and they can still hold aggro why, as everyone asks, have a guardian?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> In a group a monk can hold aggro fine but DPS higher which = faster kills, more experience and more chest drops. Monk > Guardian.</DIV><hr></blockquote>You have a point, but it's only valid if the mob dies <i>significantly</i> faster.Remember that most of the DPS in a group comes from the Rogues and the Mages (or it will, once Rogues, Enchanters and Conjurers get their DPS boosted). When Rogues and Mages are putting out 300 DPS, a DPS difference between Guardians and Mages of 20 or 30, if that's what it turns out to be, looks pretty small. If a fight lasts 35 seconds with a Guardian MT and 30 seconds with a Monk MT is the typical group going to care? I don't think so.<blockquote><hr><DIV>On a raid, as Jez has showed, his greater DPS but lack of taunts has no bearing on his ability to keep aggro. So in the end if you put monks on par with a guardian in terms of raid tanking, there is no need to have a guardian ever (unless you want his buffs, which after the Defense patch probably won't stack anyway). You have then made an entire class equal to another in terms of tanking with less DPS. Monk > Guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> PS - Perhaps they make guardian buffs add to mitigation of the group etc, but even so you would never have more then one guardian on a raid since you only need one to buff the MT. Offtanking is trivial so do not go there, and anyways, you would want a monk OTing since he would kill the mobs faster anwyays. Again, monk > guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> You just cannot put guardians and monks on par with tanking, while monks have an edge in DPS just because guardians have an additional taunt line. Only way this works is if you make holding aggro for a monk much more difficult.</DIV><hr></blockquote>A good player will be able to hold aggro no matter which subclass they play, true. However, Monks do have to work at it more, it can cost them more Power, and it <i>can</i> be a disadvantage. See <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=6&message.id=14199" target=_blank>this thread</a>.Also, I repeat my above argument. In a raid any DPS difference between Fighters is probably trivial (I'm still looking, in the other post, for hard numbers to support or defeat this argument). I would think that a raid leader wouldn't want a pair of <i>any</i> Fighter subclass in the main group; it's much more effective to mix the subclasses to benefit from the different buffs.I would point out, also, that as things stand right now, in a raid <i>there's no need to have a Monk ever</i>, exactly the situation you're decrying for Guardians. I would think that if Monks and Guardians are equalized in "tanking" that you could build a raid around <i>either</i> a Monk or Guardian depending on whether you wanted higher DPS and higher Avoidance or better aggro management and beter Mitigation.One more thing that needs to be considered is that, even with equal "tanking," i.e. damage dissipation, there's always higher risk associated with allowing a Monk to tank. If that RNG takes a disliking to the Monk you may wipe, whereas a Guardian would grunt and keep going. Any raid planner is going to take a hard look at whether they want to take the equal "tanking" and higher DPS against the chance of a bad run on the RNG.I think it just makes sense, given SOE's Archetype design, that they would have decided to create a Taunt - DPS tradeoff rather than a Tank - DPS tradeoff for the Fighter Archetype. Otherwise they run into an imbalance that hugely favors Guardians, and that's what they <i>don't</i> want.

[English Da Gua]

<P>  I agree for the most part.</P> <P>   Problem is monks are not here for balance, certain monks want to be THE raid MT of choice. No matter what you do, as you have said, due to bad rolls, AE etc, mitigation will always be chosen in a min / max raid over avoidance.</P> <P>   All that needs to be done is give monks their increase in avoidance and guardians a decrease while upping our mitigation. Problem solved.</P> <P>   Except now monks will come back here because guardians still will be chosen to tank raid mobs over them for the above reasons.</P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote:<P>Problem is monks are not here for balance, certain monks want to be THE raid MT of choice. No matter what you do, as you have said, due to bad rolls, AE etc, mitigation will always be chosen in a min / max raid over avoidance.</P><hr></blockquote>That could be. It may be that Monks will have to fight to be recognised as raid-capable, even as they have to fight to be recognised as Tank-capable. However, my understanding is that right now, Monks are <i>not</i> raid-capable, or perhaps Guardians are raid-overpowered (thus making them the preferred raid tank over all other Fighter subclasses). I don't know personally because I'm not that high level yet. However, I'm still very interested in the numbers people are posting in the other thread.If someone wants to continue to debate DPS vs. Taunt against DPS vs. Tank, hop in here!

[Gaige]

<P>I think at the moment its that guardians are raid-overpowered.</P> <P>While people point at Jez, and I'm proud of Jez, those same people say that any class with high enough defense can tank.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>I do know that 450+ defense with the highest HP and mitigation in the game AND avoiding at close to 100% is overpowered, no matter who it is.</P>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>I think at the moment its that guardians are raid-overpowered.</P> <P>While people point at Jez, and I'm proud of Jez, those same people say that any class with high enough defense can tank.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>I do know that 450+ defense with the highest HP and mitigation in the game AND avoiding at close to 100% is overpowered, no matter who it is.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> 1) I agree with first statement somewhat...on to point 2</P> <P> 2) Then it is a buff issue NOT a guardian issue</P> <P> 3) The avoiding is overpowered, agreed. Therefore, reduce our avoidance and leave monks as is. With the upcoming buff changes (depending of course on what they are) things should be close enough with subtle differences (aka DPS vs taunts vs Defense)</P>

[Damonious Ba]

comparing guardian taunting capacities to palas, zerkers or SKs you should come to 1 result. guards are especially great at regaining agro due to the amount of taunts and their strength. coming to holding agro all classes are quite easily capable to hold aggro, but as soon as they loose agro it takes far too long for them to regain it.coming to monks. id say its clear to prefer a plate covered tank, not only because of the mitigation, but also because of Max HP. But since defense is gonna be "adjusted" anyway, i guess that should be discussed after LiveUpdate 7 anyway.

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>I think at the moment its that guardians are raid-overpowered.</P> <P>While people point at Jez, and I'm proud of Jez, those same people say that any class with high enough defense can tank.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>I do know that 450+ defense with the highest HP and mitigation in the game AND avoiding at close to 100% is overpowered, no matter who it is.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> 1) I agree with first statement somewhat...on to point 2</P> <P> 2) Then it is a buff issue NOT a guardian issue</P> <P> 3) The avoiding is overpowered, agreed. Therefore, reduce our avoidance and leave monks as is. With the upcoming buff changes (depending of course on what they are) things should be close enough with subtle differences (aka DPS vs taunts vs Defense)</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Exactally, its not about Guardians be overpowered, its all about buff stacking making them over powered. You put any fighter in a MT postion on a raid and the out come will be 100% the same for the simple fact what a Guardian gets from buff stacking the chosen MT will also get it, but Guardians have some self utility that add fuel to the fire.</P> <P>Once buff stacking from a raid and group perspective has be altered and fixed, Guardians or anyones self utility buffs in the form of specializations and race traditions still should stack, because this is the reason people play what they play, because they like the gameplay style of that sub class. If i couldnt use my class or race specific triats or specials because a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] Bard has some crapiola on me, whats the purpose in having those class and race specific traits in the first place?</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:21 PM</span>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV> I agree for the most part. <P>   Problem is monks are not here for balance, certain monks want to be THE raid MT of choice. No matter what you do, as you have said, due to bad rolls, AE etc, mitigation will always be chosen in a min / max raid over avoidance.</P> <P>   All that needs to be done is give monks their increase in avoidance and guardians a decrease while upping our mitigation. Problem solved.</P> <P>   Except now monks will come back here because guardians still will be chosen to tank raid mobs over them for the above reasons.</P> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____</P> <P>which is precisely why i suggested building the class around that damage out put in some way or the killspeed/damagtaken ratio. While most just look at it as a dps increase. It would only be a dps increase WHiLE tanking. Which wouldnt be that big of a deal and balance out the inherent risk with avoidance tanking and lack of aggro control.</P> <P>Simply becase as long as a guardian has the most mitigation and the most HP and aggro control. They will always be the best tank in a raid situation. Simply because on a side note, DPS means nothing coming out of a MT in a raid. A 30 min+ fight doesnt anything as far as dps is concerned. Unless it were to the magnitude that the class could output WHILE <EM>not </EM>tanking.</P> <P>Sort of the way that a paladin can heal that amount of HP while tanking in a raid to compensate for what the class lacks in mitigation/aggro control.  Which i dont see as a problem at all and also which in essence does equate to equal but different.</P> <P>But to say that brawlers will ever be on par with guardians, both in stigma and in reality, at any point without being the exact same class minus the aggro control is the only approach that i see incoming without another 'different but equal" direction totally. </P></DIV>

[Belce]

<P>Does your raid group need a brigand, a dirge, a necro, a shadow knight/paladin, a wizard, a berzerker, a fury, a mystic, a whatever?</P> <P>The only real reason for having a raid group of 24 include more than 4 subclasses is to make buff/debuff stacking work better for you. </P> <P> </P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>^^^^^</P> <P>precisely... simply about buff stacking, but i dont have one doubt that it cannot be done with certain classes pure abilities without the buff stacking either...</P> <P>Someone needs to try a single target raid with a guardian,  10 wizards/warlocks, and 11 templar/inquis, 1 dirge and 1 troub.</P> <P>and i bet they get the raid done in the same exact efficiency for the most part...minus the buff stacking...saying as those are the only truly <EM>NECCESSARY</EM> classes on a raid... if we are min/max of what is available in each archetype that is useful on a raid.</P> <P> </P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>I've found DPS when OOP to be rare. Occasionally a fight will go longer than you expect, you'll get an add that takes a while to kill, or you'll make a bad judgement call and pull before you're quite ready but a large majority of DPS is a combination of "base" DPS and CA DPS. While I haven't done a long raid fight, I'd expect any serious raid leader to include an Enchanter or some other who can keep Power flowing.</p><p><font color="#66ccff">We are talking about raids here arent we? Or are we talking about single group fights that last 1 min where of course certain class's Combat Arts are going too surpass RAW melee DPS for the simple fact, you can spam Combat Arts to generate a big number.</font></p><hr></blockquote>I believe we're talking about all situations. However, as I said, in a raid I would <i>expect</i> an Enchanter or Summoner to be included in each group to keep the Power flowing. Otherwise, I don't care what class you are, you're going to run out of Power before the battle's over and be reduced to basic melee, which will probably lose you the battle. I repeat, I believe that OOP fighting is rare. How often do <i>you</i> wind up fighting OOP, in or out of raids?<blockquote><hr><p>Increasing DPS by 50% is not doubling it. It's increasing it by half-again, i.e. 100 DPS to 150 DPS. Increasing DPS by 100% is doubling it.</p><p><font color="#66ccff">Enchanters, Bards have haste spells and haste songs. Monks have self haste, as do Scouts, Berserkers and all of these stack and you can get over 100% haste constantly.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Yes, but that's not what you said in the post I replied to. You stated, "When you are hasted, you are increasing your RAW melee damage out put by 50%, so you are doubling it." That, to me, implied that Monks can self-haste enough to double their DPS, which is incorrect. <i>Guardians</i> can get haste stacks that can give them 100% haste, yes? They just can't contribute to it themselves.<blockquote><hr><p>Ahem, Monks' and Guardians' "raw" or "base" damage is the <b>same</b>, Aonein, all things being equal. A Monk with a staff hits for the same damage and at the same speed as a Guardian. Indeed, when you factor in Strength a Guardian will typically hit harder than a Monk as Guardians' gear typically favors Strength more than Monks' gear. It's only when you factor in Monks' self-haste buffs that the "base" damage changes in favor of Monks, although I don't know how much.</p><p><font color="#66ccff">You also need to factor in that Agility also affects you succes to hit ratio, seeing monks have a huge amount of Agility there succes to hit is the highest of all Archtypes. That in itself can create a higher DPS value reguardless of if someone hits for the same damage or not. Acually no ones gear favours the Stats they acually require, all items have the same stats for different class's. So basically, a Monk can hit 9 times out of 10 and a Guardian might only hit 6 times out of 10. Family i hate to break this too you, but a Monks raw DPS which is generated by Auto Attack isnt the same as a Guardian because of Self Haste, do you think Guardians get self haste or something and Combat Arts that do over 300 damage upon execution?</font></p><hr></blockquote>1) Yes, you are correct, I forgot to factor in the Monks' (typically) higher Agility. Figure that makes up for Guardians' (typically) higher Strength, so in that regard they're even: the Guardian hits harder, the Monk hits more often. Factor in the Monks' self-haste buff and the Monk gets a higher base DPS - as it should be, as I've said, in trade for fewer Taunts.2) I've played a Monk to 21 and a Berserker to 26 (so far) and you're darn tootin' that each class's stuff is geared toward them. Heavy armor favors Strength while light armor favors Agility; most swords and 2h weapons favor Strength while Monks' more exotic weapons favor Agility. Sure there are other stats that are tossed in there; after all, Templars and Inquisitors wear heavy armor too and Rogues and Mystics wear light armor, so their stats are in there. However, <b>I</b> have found that the gear I wear favors my class's prime stat.<blockquote><hr>Looking at CAs a majority of Monks' offensive CAs have their own special effects that build hate. Since I don't have a Guardian I can't compare the damage of Monks' and Guardians' CAs at equivalent proficiency and level; does anyone want to post what the effects and damage of offensive CAs of Guardians do when they con white? I imagine we could get Gage and other high-level Monks to post similar data for Monks' CAs.<p><font color="#66ccff">There already is Screen shots of monks arts floating around on the monk forums, but since the monk forums has the most posts of any class, have fun finding that.</font></p><hr></blockquote>I don't expect finding the info on Monk CAs will be too difficult but I have no idea about Guardian CAs. Are there screenshots or writeups in the Guardian forum?<blockquote><hr>Also, Aonein, a Monk does not achieve his DPS in a vacuum. It costs the Monk Power, and plenty of it, to achieve the kind of DPS numbers people like to throw around. A Monk can't sustain that kind of DPS without running OOP either. I don't mind comparing <i>sustainable</i> DPS between Monks and Guardians but let's make sure we're comparing apples to apples, hmmm?<p><font color="#66ccff">Ummm Banditman supplyed enough parses to prove that a Monks DPS is constant, not everyone spams Combat Arts, if you asked a Guardian that you wanted 120 DPS out of him, you would be waiting for his power to regen after every single fight, where a Monk can rely on Self haste, a few high damage Combat Arts and DoT's and he can constantly.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Banditman also supplied info claiming a Guardian doing 120 DPS <b>constantly</b>, without waiting for recharge, albeit against lower-level mobs. Moreover, I wouldn't <i>expect</i> a Guardian to do 120 DPS (when not tanking) against the same mobs that Banditman's Monk friend displayed 120 DPS fighting. I wouldn't be surprised by a DPS of 90 or 100 against those same mobs, sustained, though. However, that's just speculation.<blockquote><hr>Quiet Purity (or, what QP is <i>supposed</i> to be) is quite similar to Tides of War (or, at least, what ToW is <i>supposed</i> to be).<ul><li>Quiet Purity (Adept III) buffs group DPS by 9%, increases offensive skills of the group by 10, and is supposed to increase the mental Mitigation of the Monk by 267 (it's currently bugged to increase mental Mitigation of the group).</li></ul><p><font color="#66ccff">According to this screen shot, Quoite Purity is made to buff the entire group :</font></p><p><a target="_blank" href="http://eq2images.station.sony.com/000/000/587/535.jpg">http://eq2images.station.sony.com/000/000/587/535.jpg</a></p><p><font color="#66ccff">A 9% increase to damage output is a huge bonus to a melee based group, im always inviting Monks to my groups for there group buffs, and if they ask me too tank i say sure no problem, if the healers as me to go back to tanking, then thats not my fault, i have no problem letting Monks tank because being a Berserker i can be a somewhat of a poor mans DPS, not as good tank as a Guard and not as good DPS as a Monk.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Look at the top description of the spell there, Aonein. "Increases the offense of the group and increases the mental resistance of the monk." It's bugged just like Tides of War was bugged, they just haven't gotten around to correcting it yet. Yes, that 9% DPS increase may be too powerful for QP, particularly comparing it to other subclasses buffs at this level, but as I said, if SOE decides that's true, just change the 9% increase to Monk-only and it's fine. It's arguable as to whether it's overpowering or not.<blockquote><hr><ul><li>Tides of War (Adept III) is supposed to increase offensive skills of the group by 10 (currently it's bugged to only affect the Berserker), hastes the Berserker, and casts Berserk on the Berserker.</li></ul><p><font color="#66ccff">Tides of War doesnt put the Berserker in a Berserk state, thats Bloodlust which is replaced with Tides of War.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Aonein, I took that info from <a target="_blank" href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=4&message.id=9225#M9225">your own post</a>:<div><strong><u>Tides of War Adept 3 :</u></strong></div><div></div><div>Description : Increases the offense of the <strong><u>group</u></strong> and increases the attack speed of the berserker.</div><ul><li>Increase Attack Speed of the caster by 47%</li><li>Increase Crushing, Piercing and Slashing of <strong><u>caster</u></strong> by 10</li><li>Casts Berserk on caster. On succesful attack this sepll has a 10% chance to :<ul><li>Increase Damage Per Second of target by 5%</li><li>Increase Attack Speed of target by 43%</li></ul></li></ul>I didn't say that ToW puts the Berserker in a Berserk state, I said it casts Berserk on the Berserker; that's different, it gives you a <i>chance</i> to Berserk.<blockquote><hr><ul><li>For that matter, the Guardian's Call to Battle increases offensive skills of the group by <b>12</b> and increases the Parry skill of the Guardian. Paladins and SKs get similar buffs at the same level (Call to Glory and Insatiable Hunger).</li></ul><p><font color="#66ccff">Thats correct, but as you can see, there more defensive based then offensive based.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Increasing all of the <i>offensive</i> skills of the party by <strong>12</strong> is defensive based?? Riiight. The Monk's QP is just as defensive, it buffs mental Mitigation while CoB buffs Parry.<blockquote><hr><p>Perhaps QP is a tad overpowered by granting the group <i>both</i> 10 offensive skill points and 9% DPS increase, but that's arguable. If so it's easily fixed: just add the 9% DPS to the Monk.</p><p><font color="#66ccff">Its made like that because a monk makes a superiour Off tank, so in a Melee based group, a Monk is a great addition to it, ethier in the form of Tanking or Off Tanking, ethier way, there going to add value to the group in ethier DPS or Tank.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Baloney. No Fighter class is "designed to be" a superior Offtank; I challenge you to find a single post from a dev or rep stating that. <b>All</b> Fighters are designed to tank. Period.<blockquote><hr>Finally, I'm not yet convinced that "base" DPS is such a large portion of overall DPS nor that haste has such a large effect on DPS. I'm willing to be convinced but only by parsed numbers, not by arguments.<p><font color="#66ccff">There is no difference between Base and Raw melee DPS generated by Auto Attack. Base / Raw would be a Monk a Guardian with the <strong><u>same</u></strong> weapons at the <strong><u>same</u></strong> level with the <strong><u>same</u></strong> STR and unbuffed, <strong><u>BUT</u></strong> this still wouldnt even be even because the simple fact is, Monks get a higher Agility count there fore making there succes to hit higher then a Guardian which in tunr will increase there DPS. Raw melee DPS generated by auto attack is taking into</font></p><hr></blockquote>A Monk's (typically) superior Agility matches a Guardian's (typically) superior Strength; the Monk hits more often, the Guardian hits harder. If you really believe that auto-attack damage is such a large component of DPS then prove it: parse some battles and post them. Until then I'll settle for <a target="_blank" href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=18&message.id=1748&query.id=0#M1748">this post</a> by Banditman. He's analyzing mob's CAs but I'll consider it good, if indirect, evidence of our own abilites until someone comes along with direct tests to prove otherwise. Here's a quote from the end: "The most stunning fact, for me personally, was the illustration of how much damage is actually coming from those Special Attacks and Combat Arts. I would certainly never have expected to see 60 percent damage coming from those." If, as I expect, this holds true for characters as well as mobs then haste would have a more limited effect on DPS than you claim.Finally, you still haven't really addressed my opinion: that when comparing Guardians to Monks, Monks gain DPS in exchange for fewer Taunts. Their "tanking" (damage dissipation) ability should be equal, albeit accomplished differently. It's a fact: Monks get fewer Taunts than Guardians. If not DPS, what <b>do</b> they get in exchange? Don't bother trying to answer, "Utility," the utility that Monks get is negligible and matched by Guardians.

[-Aonein-]

<DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> <P></P> <P>FamilyManFirst wrote:</P> <P><BR>I believe we're talking about all situations. However, as I said, in a raid I would <I>expect</I> an Enchanter or Summoner to be included in each group to keep the Power flowing. Otherwise, I don't care what class you are, you're going to run out of Power before the battle's over and be reduced to basic melee, which will probably lose you the battle. I repeat, I believe that OOP fighting is rare. How often do <I>you</I> wind up fighting OOP, in or out of raids?</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>All the time in named fights due to AoE's doing direct damage or DoT's, there is also AoE that drian power, all the time when a group moves fast through dungeons burning mobs down fast, and all the time on raids due to AoE nukes, PB AoE nukes / dots.<BR></FONT></P> <P>Yes, but that's not what you said in the post I replied to. You stated, "When you are hasted, you are increasing your RAW melee damage out put by 50%, so you are doubling it." That, to me, implied that Monks can self-haste enough to double their DPS, which is incorrect. <I>Guardians</I> can get haste stacks that can give them 100% haste, yes? They just can't contribute to it themselves.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>You do roughly 50 - 75% more damage out put then a Guardian now, when self hasted, you do 100% + more damage then a Guardian with haste is what i meant to say.</FONT></P> <P><BR>1) Yes, you are correct, I forgot to factor in the Monks' (typically) higher Agility. Figure that makes up for Guardians' (typically) higher Strength, so in that regard they're even: the Guardian hits harder, the Monk hits more often. Factor in the Monks' self-haste buff and the Monk gets a higher base DPS - as it should be, as I've said, in trade for fewer Taunts.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>No Monks and Guardians come from the Fighter tree, we both need Strength, Monks can get the same amount of STR a Guardian can, there is no difference between a Monk and Guardian reguarding STR, just run around and inspect people, you can see it for yourself.</FONT></P> <P>2) I've played a Monk to 21 and a Berserker to 26 (so far) and you're darn tootin' that each class's stuff is geared toward them. Heavy armor favors Strength while light armor favors Agility; most swords and 2h weapons favor Strength while Monks' more exotic weapons favor Agility. Sure there are other stats that are tossed in there; after all, Templars and Inquisitors wear heavy armor too and Rogues and Mystics wear light armor, so their stats are in there. However, <B>I</B> have found that the gear I wear favors my class's prime stat.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>See that clearly shows you havent a vague clue what you are even remotely talking about Familyman. Now alot of Swords and Weapons add Agility and so do most of the Plate armor we wear, where i would rather them add STR and STA and just a hint of agility so that we can still hit mobs that have a high avoidance ratio instead of so much INT and WIS on them, in other words, be a bit more class specific giving us a wider choice off armor, but everyone needs agility so i dont mind Agility being on a wepaon cause it takes up 1 or 2 slots max. Yes, stats on gear is generic, you pointed that out yourself in the paragraph above, but my point was Familyman, that it would be nice if SoE got a bit more class specific instead of so generic with itemization so stats better suit our class's instead of some stats being totally useless for certain class's. It would be great if Heavy did favour STR and Light favoured Agility but i think you will see that there is more agility on Very Light armor then there is Light armor.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>To top it off Familyman, you have a lvl 21 monk and a level 26 Berserker, you have only just been born, those class you are playing are still useing some of the Generic skills you get when you chose your subclass in other words, you cant even make a <STRONG><U>REAL</U></STRONG> comparison, again showing that you have got no idea what your talking about, you've got no real experience with lvl 30, 40 or 50 content and your trying to make sense out of it and trying to add your peice of the pie without even having a taste.</FONT></P> <P>Banditman also supplied info claiming a Guardian doing 120 DPS <B>constantly</B>, without waiting for recharge, albeit against lower-level mobs. Moreover, I wouldn't <I>expect</I> a Guardian to do 120 DPS (when not tanking) against the same mobs that Banditman's Monk friend displayed 120 DPS fighting. I wouldn't be surprised by a DPS of 90 or 100 against those same mobs, sustained, though. However, that's just speculation.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>This is the problem, for some odd ball reason, Monks think that Guardians doing 100 - 120 DPS is whats going to keep them feeling <STRONG><U>comfortable</U></STRONG> in a group when they know there just wasting space if they were playing from a DPS point of view, why they cant see this and keep trying to justifie that Guardians do damage is beyond me. I have a idea, im going to invite a Enchanter for DPS, straight out Melee DPS, or a Wizard for straight out melee DPS, no casting, no nuking, i just want them to do DPS in a auto attack format, because by your reasoning, if it can do DPS reguardless of how much then it has a place in a group. You see, people have this thing called a concence, they know people are going to be in tells with one another bagging out the Guardian who is trying to play a DPS role or they will be doing it in Guild chat, its a fact of like that when someone is a waste of space, people will complain, not to thier face, but behind there backs. And thats enough for anyone to say, " ok, im going to head off, you guys can find a real DPS person to take my spot ", its called being made feel uncomfortable.</FONT></P> <P><BR>Look at the top description of the spell there, Aonein. "Increases the offense of the group and increases the mental resistance of the monk." It's bugged just like Tides of War was bugged, they just haven't gotten around to correcting it yet. Yes, that 9% DPS increase may be too powerful for QP, particularly comparing it to other subclasses buffs at this level, but as I said, if SOE decides that's true, just change the 9% increase to Monk-only and it's fine. It's arguable as to whether it's overpowering or not.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>There is alot of Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells that dont match there Top and Bottom descriptions Familyman, i dont know if its a spelling error or if they decided to change the way the Art / Spell worked and forgot to change the description, but seeing as in LU#6 is due out soon , and no mention of a fix for certain spells that have a spelling error at the top, then id more likely say thats the way there intended to be and fixing spelling errors is the bottom of there list at the moment.</FONT><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <UL><BR> <LI>For that matter, the Guardian's Call to Battle increases offensive skills of the group by <B>12</B> and increases the Parry skill of the Guardian. Paladins and SKs get similar buffs at the same level (Call to Glory and Insatiable Hunger).</LI></UL> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Thats correct, but as you can see, there more defensive based then offensive based.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Increasing all of the <I>offensive</I> skills of the party by <STRONG>12</STRONG> is defensive based?? Riiight. The Monk's QP is just as defensive, it buffs mental Mitigation while CoB buffs Parry.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Your almost as good as Gage at throwing things out of context, here let me edermucate you. See how you said " and increases the <STRONG><U>Parry skill</U></STRONG> of the Guardian ", now i want you to ask the group you join with your lvl 50 friends next time, if Call of Battle stacks with for example...... Quoite of Purity or in a Berserkers case, Bloodlust, i think you will be sorely dissapointed with what you find out Familyman, and no they dont stack, meaning if someone else has there offensive buff up, then Call of Battle isnt going to stack, all he is going to get out of the buff is a extra bonus to Parry skill <STRONG><U>IF</U></STRONG> it stacks with there other Parry skill buffs which i doubt it does seeing none of a Berserkers Parry skill buffs stack either, but im going out on a limb there and just assuming that cause we are both from the Warrior tree.<BR></FONT><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <P><BR>Perhaps QP is a tad overpowered by granting the group <I>both</I> 10 offensive skill points and 9% DPS increase, but that's arguable. If so it's easily fixed: just add the 9% DPS to the Monk.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Its made like that because a monk makes a superiour Off tank, so in a Melee based group, a Monk is a great addition to it, ethier in the form of Tanking or Off Tanking, ethier way, there going to add value to the group in ethier DPS or Tank.<BR></FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Baloney. No Fighter class is "designed to be" a superior Offtank; I challenge you to find a single post from a dev or rep stating that. <B>All</B> Fighters are designed to tank. Period.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Familyman, you have a lvl 21 Monk, you havent a clue at what a monk is capable of doing and you have not a single solitary idea on what there buffs are and how they effect themselves and there group, you didnt even know what Quite Purity was till i started posting about it and you think what it does is over powering. I dont need a dev to hold my hand and skip down the street with me or tuck me into bed at night, i use my own common sense and from what they tell me about themselves, they tell me there buffs are more suited for a off tank postion rather then a tanking postion, but they also tell me that they <STRONG><U>can</U></STRONG> tank, and do strong DPS with in the fighter archtype. But again you like most of the other monks missed the fact that its acually a good thing that you can Tank when you want to and if you dont feel like tanking today you can join a group and do DPS plus assist the main tank. Sorry if thats what you dont like Familyman but once you lvl upto around lvl 35, where a class really starts to show its ture colours, then you are going to contuine to dabble in numbers and *THINK* you know what you are talking about.</FONT></P> <P><BR>A Monk's (typically) superior Agility matches a Guardian's (typically) superior Strength; the Monk hits more often, the Guardian hits harder. If you really believe that auto-attack damage is such a large component of DPS then prove it: parse some battles and post them. Until then I'll settle for <A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=18&message.id=1748&query.id=0#M1748" target=_blank><FONT color=#c8c1b5>this post</FONT></A> by Banditman. He's analyzing mob's CAs but I'll consider it good, if indirect, evidence of our own abilites until someone comes along with direct tests to prove otherwise. Here's a quote from the end: "The most stunning fact, for me personally, was the illustration of how much damage is actually coming from those Special Attacks and Combat Arts. I would certainly never have expected to see 60 percent damage coming from those." If, as I expect, this holds true for characters as well as mobs then haste would have a more limited effect on DPS than you claim.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>He is talking about fights that last 40 seconds Faimlyman, of course Combat Arts, Abilites and Spells are going to be playing a huge role in a 40second - 1min fight, but what you dont seem to grasp is, just because <STRONG><U>you</U></STRONG> ( Monks )get 300 + direct damage arts and more then one, doesnt mean every class gets them let alone 4 or 5 that can be spammed in a 40 second - 1min fight generating huge numbers in reguards to how much damage is acually being done with Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells. And no ill say this again, so you understand it, a Guardian and Monk can get neck and neck STR, so they hit for the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> damage if the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> level, with the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> weapons and the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> strength, but a monk hits more due to being a clean and efficent counter attacker which in another term means he is a more direct and accurate fighter landing more hits, easier.<BR></FONT><BR>Finally, you still haven't really addressed my opinion: that when comparing Guardians to Monks, Monks gain DPS in exchange for fewer Taunts.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Thats why your lvl 21 and have no idea what a high level monk is capable of.</FONT></P> <P> Their "tanking" (damage dissipation) ability should be equal, albeit accomplished differently. It's a fact: Monks get fewer Taunts than Guardians. If not DPS, what <B>do</B> they get in exchange? Don't bother trying to answer, "Utility," the utility that Monks get is negligible and matched by Guardians.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>In one word, to not hurt your head too much, </FONT><FONT size=4><FONT color=#66ccff size=5><STRONG><U>DEFLECTION.</U></STRONG></FONT><BR></FONT></P> <P> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You see Familyman what you are failing to see is, with *<STRONG><U>Deflection*</U></STRONG> and a higher agility count, you are mechanically designed to avoid what damage a Plate class takes, you like to use big words, then what a Guardian soaks up with his "damage dissipation" with mitigation, you Deflect, Avoid and Parry with avoidance, there one in the same, just different ways at tanking. But when you do get hit it makes up for all these miss's and deflections and parrys and because of your lower Mitigation, it hurts. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I cannot believe you are trying to compare whats going on by trying to use a <U><STRONG>lvl</STRONG> <STRONG>21</STRONG></U> Monk and a <STRONG><U>lvl 26</U></STRONG> Berserker to fight your argument, thats just insane. If you had a lvl 50 Monk or Berserker, id acually take you serious.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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></DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:51 PM</span>

[Nemi]

What level he is has absolutely no bearing on his opinions on how class balance SHOULD work. It would be different if he was talking about actual CAs and comparing them. He states categorically that he's basing his info from another source, one being your own post.High level != high intelligence.Guardians seem to be hung up on being obsolete. If that was the case then the classes WOULDNT BE BALANCED!Balance is achieved when ANY fighter is capable of tanking ANY mob and succeed. It might require different tactics with a Monk over a Guardian. Shamans and druids as main healers rather than clerics. As has been stated a thousand times, it should be situational.Healer is a shaman? Let the monk tank.Healer is a cleric? Let the guardian tank.Healer is a cleric but there is only a monk LFG? Sure, it will still work but not as efficiently. Same with shamans and warriors.Guardians go on and on about monk DPS. Guess what? We're going to be nerfed shortly and then where will your arguments be? Class balance need not be achieved soley within the archetype. Fighters require healers to be effective, there is another way to achieve balance.Bottom line is that there should be no SINGLE subclass that excels in everything: HP, Mitigation, Avoidance, Taunt.<p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:23 PM</span>

[Styk]

The only question i have is why do yall insist that you have more Agro over Berserkers? I mean seriously i want that tested because to this day i have never had a Guardian,Paladin,SK out agro me... Maybe someone should start a thread comparing agro abilities and put them to the test , i really want to see the outcome. <div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV>LOL funny you say that Styker cause if Monks get there DPS taken away in a bid for class balance to be able to tank like a Guardian ( WHICH WE ALL KNOW THEY CAN ALREADY FOR THE UMPTENTH TIME ), then how will they hold agro? Next thing you know it will be a mad debate on why they dont get the same Taunts, and then it will be why they dont get the same debuffs and then it will be why they dont get as much HP and then......... NO AND THEN. NO AND THEN. NO AND THEN.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[Nemi]

I don't subscribe to the DPS = Taunt argument. Personally I think autoattack adds very little to aggro. Our taunts will be fine.

[-Aonein-]

<P>Think what you like Nemi, here is a simple test, next time your tanking, dont use any attacks what so ever, just use taunts, like you would normally, and see how long you hold agro for. So your another one of these people who dont think sticking a bat or sword into a mobs isnt going to [Removed for Content] it off? If i smashed you in the head with a bat of axe would you be happy abaou it?</P> <P>Like i said, run the simple yet very effective test, we you are tanking for a full group next, time, dont use any DPS, Combat Arts, Abilities, Spells or buffs, no tricks, just use your taunts like you normally would, and see what happens. Then try hold agro with just taunts and no combat arts, abilities or spells, group buffs, no tricks, after you have done all that add in combat arts, and tell me DPS doesnt generate agro.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[ugl]

<P>DPS is in no way equal to taunting.</P> <P>In a group, there are 6 slots, which all players must compete to get.   Most players ideal group is 1 tank, 1 or 2 healers, and 3 or 4 dps.  </P> <P>Guardians compete for that one tank slot in a group.   They are never invited for a DPS role.  Despite the monks trying to prove that their is not a desparity in DPS between a guardian and monk, we all know that their is.</P> <P>Monks right now, ARE invited for that DPS role, and also get invited for the tank role. That is up to 5 slots they can fill.   This is a huge disparity.     Guardians only get groups for the tank role.  That is ONE slot that they can fill.   Having a xtra taunt is in no way ever going to get them any other slot besides the tank slot.</P> <P>Now, the DPS fighters want to be equal at tanking with a guardian, and Moorguard is apparantly going to give it to them. </P> <P>That makes getting that tank slot even harder for a guardian, as every other fighter will now tank equally.   But, IF the DPS fighters still kept their DPS....    Taunt is in no way equal to DPS, as DPS gives you a greater advantage at filling those DPS group slots.   Taunting does NOT.   DPS also give3s you a better ability at being invited to raids, as there are many slots available for DPS, but only 1 or two for tanking.     </P> <P>We have all read gauges posts saying he will give up that DPS in order to be equal at tanking.  We have read familyman trying in vain to get "proof" that guardians and monks are almost equal at DPS right now.  Any parces that show the contrary are dismissed as not good evidense.     Did you really believe gauge when he said he doesnt care if his DPS is thrown out?   No, we didnt.   And now we see them wanting to have their cake and eat it too.   If they are equal at tanking, their DPS will also have to be equal.   This will also be effecting Zerkers, bruisers, and any other class that will be equal at tanking to a guardian.   Are you going to tell us a zerkers DPS is also a trade off for taunting?  When they have the best aggro control for the fighter class?</P> <P>Nope fellas, being equal at tanking and having the ability to fill those multiple DPS slots would be a huge unbalance.    Your going to have to give it up.   You cannot have it both ways.    You want to be equal at competing for that one tank slot, your also going to have to be equal at competing for those 4 DPS slots.   Nothing less would be acceptable for class balance.   Of course, you know this.   Although you cliam to be for class balance, anyone else notice the balance scales keep tipping in the DPS classes favor?</P> <P>You cannot have it all.   Think theyre going to give you heals so you can get fill those two healing spots too??  You want equal ability at getting that one coveted tank spot, your also going to have to have equal ability at getting those 4 DPS slots.   That is balance.   </P> <P>I believe Moorguard has also said that the disparity between scouts and fighters IS going to be adjusted.   The nerf bat swings both ways, all in the name of balance.   You wanted equal tanking, your going to get it, and all that comes with it.</P> <P>Fact of the matter is, there is alot of competition RIGHT NOW for that 1 group tank spot, and that one MT spot on raids.   When the tanking field is equalized, the competition is going to be even tuffer.  Alot of LFG tags are going to be on the fighter archtype.   </P> <P> </P> <P>Two things come to mind.</P> <P>1) be careful what you ask for, becuase you just might get it.</P> <P>2)  Come on in boys, the water is warm...</P> <P>    </P>

[Nemi]

Sigh,Do you intentionally try and find the most awkward way to interpret anything a monk says?Of course autoattack creates aggro, I meant that the difference in DPS between monk and guardian using autoattack is not significant to affect our taunting ability.Once monk DPS is reduced, I don't believe there will be a significant hit to our taunting abilities.

[Nemi]

<blockquote><hr>uglak wrote:<P>Monks right now, ARE invited for that DPS role, and also get invited for the tank role. That is up to 5 slots they can fill.   This is a huge disparity</P></blockquote>Well to answer your points:1) Yes Monks DPS is too high, and yes we will have it reduced when the DPS rebalance goes through. I welcome it, a fighter should never compare to a scout for DPS.2) If you want to get picky, I don't believe there is a HUGE disparity AT PRESENT. Guardians at the moment have superior HPs, Mitigation and excellent avoidance. That makes them hands down Tanks. Monks don't compete with Guardians for MT roles at the moment. Tell me the last time you saw a monk getting picked to tank over a guardian that was LFG. Thats right, never. Monks are DPS atm, we shouldn't be and soon we won't be.

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:   <P> </P> <P>Two things come to mind.</P> <P>1) be careful what you ask for, becuase you just might get it.</P> <P>2)  Come on in boys, the water is warm...</P> <P>    </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Did you fart in the water again Uglak?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[ugl]

<P>And yes, before we go there , I am sure the DPS fighters are going to argue that taunting is equal to DPS.    We will consider the source on such arguments.</P> <P>Also keep in mind, we have never complained about the disparity of DPS between guardians and zerkers/brawlers.   We did not ask for nerfs.    But your not going to get your cake and eat it too.   For balance, you cannot have one equal and the other lopsided.   </P> <P>And yea, they can throw you another taunt if they want to.   Whatever floats your boat.   But if you want in the guardians world with equal tanking, your going to also have to take the down side, which is crappy DPS.  Anything less in not balanced.</P>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR>Sigh,<BR><BR>Do you intentionally try and find the most awkward way to interpret anything a monk says?<BR><BR>Of course autoattack creates aggro, I meant that the difference in DPS between monk and guardian using autoattack is not significant to affect our taunting ability.<BR><BR>Once monk DPS is reduced, I don't believe there will be a significant hit to our taunting abilities.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Moorgard already posted on the Priest forum that there will be adjustments to the Hate is generated in LU#7.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>Monks right now, ARE invited for that DPS role, and also get invited for the tank role. That is up to 5 slots they can fill.   This is a huge disparity</P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Well to answer your points:<BR><BR>1) Yes Monks DPS is too high, and yes we will have it reduced when the DPS rebalance goes through. I welcome it, a fighter should never compare to a scout for DPS.<BR><BR>2) If you want to get picky, I don't believe there is a HUGE disparity AT PRESENT. Guardians at the moment have superior HPs, Mitigation and excellent avoidance. That makes them hands down Tanks. Monks don't compete with Guardians for MT roles at the moment. Tell me the last time you saw a monk getting picked to tank over a guardian that was LFG. Thats right, never. Monks are DPS atm, we shouldn't be and soon we won't be.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Good, then we are on the same sheet of music.      If there is going to be no disparity between tanking ability, then there should also be no disparity between DPS.    Welcome to our world.   Just squeeze in, make your buddy smile.   Its kinda of cramped in here already.  :smileyhappy:  <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:07 AM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>And yes, before we go there , I am sure the DPS fighters are going to argue that taunting is equal to DPS.    We will consider the source on such arguments.</P> <P>Also keep in mind, we have never complained about the disparity of DPS between guardians and zerkers/brawlers.   We did not ask for nerfs.    But your not going to get your cake and eat it too.   For balance, you cannot have one equal and the other lopsided.   </P> <P>And yea, they can throw you another taunt if they want to.   Whatever floats your boat.   But if you want in the guardians world with equal tanking, your going to also have to take the down side, which is crappy DPS.  Anything less in not balanced.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Let me make it clear to you Uglak that i dont think Berserkers have a problem with what they get, i know im happy where i am, and i dont want anything in reguards to what another class gets, ive played these games for too long to know that diversity is better then the same. We ( Berserkers ) are just caught up in the middle cause thats where we are, we are in the middle, we dont tank as good as a Guardian and we dont do DPS like a Monk and yes we are good at holding agro because of Beserk, it generates more agro then people think. I've not once said that Guardians are over powered but i have constantly said that buff stacking is way over powering, for <STRONG><U>ANYONE</U></STRONG>, not just Guardians.</P> <P>Constant damage done by ethier Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells is a form of Taunt on its own because you are constantly causing damage to the mob, its just not a reliable way of taunting, but it helps to maintain it, with out it, you cant hold agro for squat.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>And yes, before we go there , I am sure the DPS fighters are going to argue that taunting is equal to DPS.    We will consider the source on such arguments.</P> <P>Also keep in mind, we have never complained about the disparity of DPS between guardians and zerkers/brawlers.   We did not ask for nerfs.    But your not going to get your cake and eat it too.   For balance, you cannot have one equal and the other lopsided.   </P> <P>And yea, they can throw you another taunt if they want to.   Whatever floats your boat.   But if you want in the guardians world with equal tanking, your going to also have to take the down side, which is crappy DPS.  Anything less in not balanced.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Let me make it clear to you Uglak that i dont think Berserkers have a problem with what they get, i know im happy where i am, and i dont want anything in reguards to what another class gets, ive played these games for too long to know that diversity is better then the same. We ( Berserkers ) are just caught up in the middle cause thats where we are, we are in the middle, we dont tank as good as a Guardian and we dont do DPS like a Monk and yes we are good at holding agro because of Beserk, it generates more agro then people think. I've not once said that Guardians are over powered but i have constantly said that buff stacking is way over powering, for <STRONG><U>ANYONE</U></STRONG>, not just Guardians.</P> <P>Constant damage done by ethier Combat Arts, Abilities and Spells is a form of Taunt on its own because you are constantly causing damage to the mob, its just not a reliable way of taunting, but it helps to maintain it, with out it, you cant hold agro for squat.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Aye, guardians were happy with their place too, and I am sorry the zerkers are going to be pulled into this.  (as every figher is going to be effected)   I also did not want any nerfs.  But, the "screaming monk clan" has gotten their way, and , like it or not, thats going to effect all fighters.    </P> <P>I realize DPS helps you maintain aggro.   BUT, DPS is not a way to balance taunting ability.   Well, you read my post above as to why it is not.  DPS allows you more "group/raid slots", while taunting does not.   And I am sure you understand my position on it.   But, we do not make the game, we just play it.   If the devs see this "everything equal" archtype system as the way its going to be, well...   Not a whole lot we can do about it.      </P> <DIV>Sad thing is, I do not think their are many fighters that are going to be happy with these changes.   There a small, loud crowd wanting it.   But I think most brawlers/zerkers/guardians/paladins etc.  are quite happy for the most part with their class now.   I know those in my guild seem to like their classes alot.   But, the  "loud crowd" have been pushing this junk down everyones throats since the agility nerf.   And, by and large, the paladins, SKs, Guardians and zerkers, monks and bruisers have just let them have their way.   And, looks like SOE has decided to lsiten to them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I think most fighters are pretty much content with the way things are now.  But, the Devs have spoken, and the change is going to be pretty drastic to all of us.   The vocal minority has won.  For better or for worse.</DIV><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:36 AM</span>

[Noah]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P>which is precisely why i suggested building the class around that damage out put in some way or the killspeed/damagtaken ratio. While most just look at it as a dps increase. It would only be a dps increase WHiLE tanking. Which wouldnt be that big of a deal and balance out the inherent risk with avoidance tanking and lack of aggro control.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>What an awesome idea bro.  A while back I was thinking about this as well.  Instead of increasing mitigations/avoidances or nerfing anyone, <STRONG>Monks/Bruisers should get a HUGE self bonus to riposte</STRONG> (or maybe some buff that lasts 10 mins).  In a tank situation the DPS would increase purely from riposte - holding better agro - hitting ALL mobs attacking - hitting for max damage (incase you didnt know riposte is unmitigated damage).  Taking this route might [Removed for Content] off the other DPS classes but remember this would only be when the monk/bruiser is MTanking.  Ever try to hit a ninja?  Usually what happens is they block and immediately slap you in the face.</FONT></P> <P>Simply becase as long as a guardian has the most mitigation and the most HP and aggro control. They will always be the best tank in a raid situation. Simply because on a side note, DPS means nothing coming out of a MT in a raid. A 30 min+ fight doesnt anything as far as dps is concerned. Unless it were to the magnitude that the class could output WHILE <EM>not </EM>tanking.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>I have been testing agro lately on raids.  I can keep agro using a few taunts but the rest of the raid is on eggshells when it comes to using skills.  Most of the DPS can take the agro from me if they want.  Now last few raids we blitz'd the mob hoping it is dead before I run out of power to Hard Taunt (Hard taunt being using every skill possible to keep agro).  This was pretty fun since once I had locked the agro everyone went nuts on the dps charts (250-300+).  Even I was sitting at 80dps!  DPS on the MTank effects the agro. </FONT></P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>One of the few times Sage has posted and I liked one of his ideas ;p<BR>

[Nemi]

I'm happy with my tanking at the moment, it could do with some tweaks. Due to the scaling of mob damage, at the raid end of the scale, its totally skewed towards HPs and Mitigation.What I'm not happy about is the level of Heavy Armour class avoidance. Forgetting buff stacking for a moment and assuming that it's fixed, you have as rough figures:Monk 75% avoidanceGuardian 60-65%?10-15% avoidance does not make up for the lack of Mitigation and HPs. And yes, I've left out DPS as it will be reduced.I don't mind that random pickup groups will pick Guardians over Monks 99% of the time. Thats a personal choice, however, I want my guild groups to be just as successful with me tanking as a Guardian. To achieve that, Guardians need avoidance reduced or monks need more HPs.EDIT: Sage's Parry / Riposte idea has merits. I don't see how it would be balance tho. If a group with a monk tank can drop mobs significantly faster than with a Guardian, I don't see that as balanced.You basically have a tank + dps class in one role, essentially a 7 man group.<p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:03 PM</span>

[Noah]

<HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <BR>I don't expect finding the info on Monk CAs will be too difficult but I have no idea about Guardian CAs. Are there screenshots or writeups in the Guardian forum?<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <BR>Also, Aonein, a Monk does not achieve his DPS in a vacuum. It costs the Monk Power, and plenty of it, to achieve the kind of DPS numbers people like to throw around. A Monk can't sustain that kind of DPS without running OOP either. I don't mind comparing <I>sustainable</I> DPS between Monks and Guardians but let's make sure we're comparing apples to apples, hmmm? <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Ummm Banditman supplyed enough parses to prove that a Monks DPS is constant, not everyone spams Combat Arts, if you asked a Guardian that you wanted 120 DPS out of him, you would be waiting for his power to regen after every single fight, where a Monk can rely on Self haste, a few high damage Combat Arts and DoT's and he can constantly.<BR></FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Banditman also supplied info claiming a Guardian doing 120 DPS <B>constantly</B>, without waiting for recharge, albeit against lower-level mobs. Moreover, I wouldn't <I>expect</I> a Guardian to do 120 DPS (when not tanking) against the same mobs that Banditman's Monk friend displayed 120 DPS fighting. I wouldn't be surprised by a DPS of 90 or 100 against those same mobs, sustained, though. However, that's just speculation.<BR><BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Guardian DPS sustained is about 60 +/- vs an even color group mob (at 50th and tanking).  While not focusing on pure agro, sustained can hit around 80 dps (with maybe some down time) but that can vary due to the weapon/ regen you have.  If you look at the guardian arts vs the monk ones - of course the "bang for your buck" on dps favors the monk - Dmg/power.  Guardians arts for dps are pathetic really.  At 50 you have 3 - 5 arts that will increase your dps.  The other ones will decrease your dps due to the cast time and damage done.  Kinda sad.  I am pretty sure that is why our no damage taunts are the most *effective* threat/power ratio and have more to use.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> DemosthenesEQ2 wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P>which is precisely why i suggested building the class around that damage out put in some way or the killspeed/damagtaken ratio. While most just look at it as a dps increase. It would only be a dps increase WHiLE tanking. Which wouldnt be that big of a deal and balance out the inherent risk with avoidance tanking and lack of aggro control.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>What an awesome idea bro.  A while back I was thinking about this as well.  Instead of increasing mitigations/avoidances or nerfing anyone, <STRONG>Monks/Bruisers should get a HUGE self bonus to riposte</STRONG> (or maybe some buff that lasts 10 mins).  In a tank situation the DPS would increase purely from riposte - holding better agro - hitting ALL mobs attacking - hitting for max damage (incase you didnt know riposte is unmitigated damage).  Taking this route might [Removed for Content] off the other DPS classes but remember this would only be when the monk/bruiser is MTanking.  Ever try to hit a ninja?  Usually what happens is they block and immediately slap you in the face.</FONT></P> <P>Simply becase as long as a guardian has the most mitigation and the most HP and aggro control. They will always be the best tank in a raid situation. Simply because on a side note, DPS means nothing coming out of a MT in a raid. A 30 min+ fight doesnt anything as far as dps is concerned. Unless it were to the magnitude that the class could output WHILE <EM>not </EM>tanking.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>I have been testing agro lately on raids.  I can keep agro using a few taunts but the rest of the raid is on eggshells when it comes to using skills.  Most of the DPS can take the agro from me if they want.  Now last few raids we blitz'd the mob hoping it is dead before I run out of power to Hard Taunt (Hard taunt being using every skill possible to keep agro).  This was pretty fun since once I had locked the agro everyone went nuts on the dps charts (250-300+).  Even I was sitting at 80dps!  DPS on the MTank effects the agro. </FONT></P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>One of the few times Sage has posted and I liked one of his ideas ;p<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I think its a great idea as well seeing as :</P> <P><EM>Monks are disciplined combatants who specialize in the martial arts. Their natural agility allows them to avoid thier enemys blows and strike back with clean, efficient counter attacks.</EM></P> <P>It only makes sense that they would get a skill like this. Im surprised the Monks hated the idea.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[Nemi]

So let me get this straight.You don't like the thought of monks having better tanking skills than they do at present, right?BUTYou admit that Monks can tank content 1 to 50 and some raid content...AND you don't mind if that all stays the same and we get a rather large DPS increase while we're tanking.I don't get it.

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR>So let me get this straight.<BR><BR>You don't like the thought of monks having better tanking skills than they do at present, right?<BR><BR>BUT<BR><BR>You admit that Monks can tank content 1 to 50 and some raid content...AND you don't mind if that all stays the same and we get a rather large DPS increase while we're tanking.<BR><BR>I don't get it.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Neither do I.

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> DemosthenesEQ2 wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P>which is precisely why i suggested building the class around that damage out put in some way or the killspeed/damagtaken ratio. While most just look at it as a dps increase. It would only be a dps increase WHiLE tanking. Which wouldnt be that big of a deal and balance out the inherent risk with avoidance tanking and lack of aggro control.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>What an awesome idea bro.  A while back I was thinking about this as well.  Instead of increasing mitigations/avoidances or nerfing anyone, <STRONG>Monks/Bruisers should get a HUGE self bonus to riposte</STRONG> (or maybe some buff that lasts 10 mins).  In a tank situation the DPS would increase purely from riposte - holding better agro - hitting ALL mobs attacking - hitting for max damage (incase you didnt know riposte is unmitigated damage).  Taking this route might [Removed for Content] off the other DPS classes but remember this would only be when the monk/bruiser is MTanking.  Ever try to hit a ninja?  Usually what happens is they block and immediately slap you in the face.</FONT></P> <P>Simply becase as long as a guardian has the most mitigation and the most HP and aggro control. They will always be the best tank in a raid situation. Simply because on a side note, DPS means nothing coming out of a MT in a raid. A 30 min+ fight doesnt anything as far as dps is concerned. Unless it were to the magnitude that the class could output WHILE <EM>not </EM>tanking.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>I have been testing agro lately on raids.  I can keep agro using a few taunts but the rest of the raid is on eggshells when it comes to using skills.  Most of the DPS can take the agro from me if they want.  Now last few raids we blitz'd the mob hoping it is dead before I run out of power to Hard Taunt (Hard taunt being using every skill possible to keep agro).  This was pretty fun since once I had locked the agro everyone went nuts on the dps charts (250-300+).  Even I was sitting at 80dps!  DPS on the MTank effects the agro. </FONT></P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>One of the few times Sage has posted and I liked one of his ideas ;p<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I think its a great idea as well seeing as :</P> <P><EM>Monks are disciplined combatants who specialize in the martial arts. Their natural agility allows them to avoid thier enemys blows and strike back with clean, efficient counter attacks.</EM></P> <P>It only makes sense that they would get a skill like this. Im surprised the Monks hated the idea.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I think it's an overstatement to say that Monks hated it.  The post he made in our forum suggested cutting the combat art reuse time in half, along with a couterattack on every successful block/parry/reposite, and like Noah said...that would probably [Removed for Content] off the DPS classes even more than just the couter attack buff suggested here.  I would be all for it.  It should have always been balanced in a way that total DPS for both incoming and outgoing (i.e. DPS given and DPS taken) should be equal...if one class has higher DPS given by say 10% then they should also have that same 10% back in DPS taken.  On the same note, if one class has lower DPS given they should have lower DPS taken.  Therein lies the balancing issues...what % better can one subclass be than the other and still maintain the archtype balance by being able to fill the main role of the given archtype and not infringe on another archtype.</P> <P>On a side note, I've said in the past that equal tanking does not mean equal results.  It can't...it's impossible for it to be balanced if avoidance and mitigation 'block' damage the same.  Avoidance should be streaky while mitigation should be extremely steady.  Avoidance should scale down more than mitigation when fighting higher level creatures.  A 500 lb suit of armor should mitigate the same amount of damage no matter what hits you, although vs higher level MOBs that hit harder it will scale down in the % of the total damage.  Fighting a creature of a higher level than you with avoidance you should get hit more.  Its supposed to be a MOB that, if you look at it this way, is a better fighter than you, has more experience in battle, etc...of course it should hit you more...it's seen all the moves before.</P>

[-Aonein-]

<P>You missed the point or you dont fully understand what the problem really is. The problem is, everyone with the right group can get 100% avoidance, EVERYONE, not just Guardians, and thats what the problem is, buff stacking, its exploiting in a sense, cause its a known problem, but people use it. By fixing it so class's dont avoid as much as a Monk but giving a Monk a large Riposte which can only be used when tanking, not a increase in DPS, but a skill that would be unquie to Monks due to flavour and style, people would then call upon a monk for a Tanking role more often seeing as Monks think that there not called upon for tanking and that it only revolves around Guardians ( which we know is BS ).</P> <P>But do you want to know the real reason why you dont get it? Its because we are happy, even if they reduce avoidance, im sure Guardians will still be happy because they know they will have to increase our ( Plate class's ) mitigation in the process OR decrease mob damage output, so ethier way, its a lose win situation for a Plate Class.</P> <P>Where on the other hand, its a win lose situation for a Monk because there is the possibility there will be a nerf to Brawler DPS to pull them into line with the rest of the Fighter archtype in a bid to balance the system out, which will put Scouts ahead of the Fighter archtype by a bigger disparity then there is now, seeing the Brawler archtype is the only class that can get close to a Scout on a constant basis. Why do you think there hasnt been a single mention about the Scout damage evaulation? But you have Gage and friends to thank for that, and i can tell you now, after the Agility nerf, and now a <STRONG><U>possible</U></STRONG> nerf to your DPS which is why Familyman is threating cause he knows there is a <STRONG><U>possibility</U></STRONG> ( bare in mind im saying a possible one, not 100% sure there is going to be one ) for one in the works and he is grasping for straws trying to figure out a way to try and make it look like that Guardians are basically on par with Monks in DPS.</P> <P>Now ill give you my honest opion, if there was a class that i could play with high DPS and i could tank, mitigation style, i would play it, but since there isnt suppose to be any such thing, i play a Beserker because its the closet thing to DPS + Mitigation Tank i can get, and thats the style and flavour of game play i like, i like to not be able to tank, not as good as a Guard for some extra offense. Thats why you dont get it Nemi, because we are happy doing what we do, we never cryed out for it all, and most importantly, we never expected it all because of a marketing ploy.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>On a side note, I've said in the past that equal tanking does not mean equal results.  It can't...it's impossible for it to be balanced if avoidance and mitigation 'block' damage the same.  Avoidance should be streaky while mitigation should be extremely steady.  Avoidance should scale down more than mitigation when fighting higher level creatures.  A 500 lb suit of armor should mitigate the same amount of damage no matter what hits you, although vs higher level MOBs that hit harder it will scale down in the % of the total damage.  Fighting a creature of a higher level than you with avoidance you should get hit more.  Its supposed to be a MOB that, if you look at it this way, is a better fighter than you, has more experience in battle, etc...of course it should hit you more...it's seen all the moves before.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Thats very ture, but keep in mind that a even con mob is suppose to be a good fight for a group of 3, not a tough fight for a group of 3. Once you start getting into Orange and Red con mobs, thats when you would expect the tough fights, not so much tough in the sense that it requires all your power to beat it during a fight ethier if its just a trash mob for example, but tough in a the sense it poses a challenge, they pose a challenge now, but i feel its a tad easy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR>Sigh,<BR><BR>Do you intentionally try and find the most awkward way to interpret anything a monk says?<BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Of course autoattack creates aggro, I meant that the difference in DPS between monk and guardian using autoattack is not significant to affect our taunting ability.<BR></FONT><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Once monk DPS is reduced, I don't believe there will be a significant hit to our taunting abilities.<BR></FONT> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>   I think the issue is between total DPS, not auto attacking and going afk. You have offensive oriented CAs,  where as we have some, but if you look at casting time and reuse time, they are not geared toward offense like monks.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   On the last statement, maybe I missed it, this is possible. Is it that monk DPS is being reduced or scout damage and mage damage is being increased, widening the DPS gap? </DIV>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>On a side note, I've said in the past that equal tanking does not mean equal results.  It can't...it's impossible for it to be balanced if avoidance and mitigation 'block' damage the same.  Avoidance should be streaky while mitigation should be extremely steady.  Avoidance should scale down more than mitigation when fighting higher level creatures.  A 500 lb suit of armor should mitigate the same amount of damage no matter what hits you, although vs higher level MOBs that hit harder it will scale down in the % of the total damage.  Fighting a creature of a higher level than you with avoidance you should get hit more.  Its supposed to be a MOB that, if you look at it this way, is a better fighter than you, has more experience in battle, etc...of course it should hit you more...it's seen all the moves before.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Thats very ture, but keep in mind that a even con mob is suppose to be a good fight for a group of 3, not a tough fight for a group of 3. Once you start getting into Orange and Red con mobs, thats when you would expect the tough fights, not so much tough in the sense that it requires all your power to beat it during a fight ethier if its just a trash mob for example, but tough in a the sense it poses a challenge, they pose a challenge now, but i feel its a tad easy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>That is true...I would be asking if the other guys were AFK or something if an even con MOB came close to killing one of us <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  But the way the game is right now, even con MOBs are what they are using as a basis for mitigation/avoidance/attack/defense/etc...so that is kind of where we need to look as well.</P> <P>I do agree with you a couple of posts up.  The issue right now is buff stacking...there should not be (unless you are like 40+ levels above the MOB) that 100% avoidance or 100% mitigation should be achieveable...I'd even go so far as to say that 95% would probably be too much.  Once you can get that high, you've just achieved 'god mode' whereas you cannot be hit or you cannot be damaged.  </P>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR>Sigh,<BR><BR>Do you intentionally try and find the most awkward way to interpret anything a monk says?<BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Of course autoattack creates aggro, I meant that the difference in DPS between monk and guardian using autoattack is not significant to affect our taunting ability.<BR></FONT><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Once monk DPS is reduced, I don't believe there will be a significant hit to our taunting abilities.<BR></FONT> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>   I think the issue is between total DPS, not auto attacking and going afk. You have offensive oriented CAs,  where as we have some, but if you look at casting time and reuse time, they are not geared toward offense like monks.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   <FONT color=#66cc00>On the last statement, maybe I missed it, this is possible. Is it that monk DPS is being reduced or scout damage and mage damage is being increased, widening the DPS gap?</FONT> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Another thing that needs to be kept in mind is when comparing DPS between the subclasses you need to compare apples to apples, so guardian DPS while tanking needs to be compared to monk DPS while tanking, not while off tanking or (forgive me Gage <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) DPS'ing.  All of the fighter classes will take a hit on DPS when tanking.</P> <P>On your last statement, I can't quite tell what you are asking, so if I give you info you know already, please forgive me.  Moorgard stated...oh...a couple weeks back that "Scout damage was being evaluated to make sure it was in line with the fighter classes" or something to that effect...I'm sure you'll have all kinds of direct quotes coming shortly, I'm just too lazy <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[Timzil]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR>Balance is achieved when ANY fighter is capable of tanking ANY mob and succeed. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>That's not balance, that's blandness. Balance is when the reward for a given effort is more or less equal. The reward in this case is the status as the preferred epic encounter tank. An effortless and multi-purpose class, such as monk,  shouldn't have the skills to displace the single purpose guardian that had to work at it to get to the pinacle of his single purpose.</DIV>

[English Da Gua]

<DIV> Well, Nemi said Monk DPS was being reduced. I knew that they are giving scouts and mages an increase in DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  But an increase to scout and mage DPS is not = to a decrease in monk DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  That was my question, I just did not know if perhaps Moorgard had posted somewhere that monks had a DPS decrease coming, I had not seen one, was more curiosity then anything else.</DIV>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <DIV> Well, Nemi said Monk DPS was being reduced. I knew that they are giving scouts and mages an increase in DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  But an increase to scout and mage DPS is not = to a decrease in monk DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  That was my question, I just did not know if perhaps Moorgard had posted somewhere that monks had a DPS decrease coming, I had not seen one, was more curiosity then anything else.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Ok...then you are, as far as I'm aware, up to date so to speak.  I don't believe that anyone has stated whether it will be a scout increase or a fighter decrease or even anything at all.  That last word I remember from Moorgard was the "being evaluated" statement I mentioned...if there had been a more recent one I don't remember it.<p>Message Edited by MoonglumHMV on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:30 AM</span>

[Banditman]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>DemosthenesEQ2 wrote:</P> <P><BR>Banditman also supplied info claiming a Guardian doing 120 DPS <B>constantly</B>, without waiting for recharge, albeit against lower-level mobs. Moreover, I wouldn't <I>expect</I> a Guardian to do 120 DPS (when not tanking) against the same mobs that Banditman's Monk friend displayed 120 DPS fighting. I wouldn't be surprised by a DPS of 90 or 100 against those same mobs, sustained, though. However, that's just speculation.<BR><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Guardian DPS sustained is about 60 +/- vs an even color group mob (at 50th and tanking).  While not focusing on pure agro, sustained can hit around 80 dps (with maybe some down time) but that can vary due to the weapon/ regen you have.  If you look at the guardian arts vs the monk ones - of course the "bang for your buck" on dps favors the monk - Dmg/power.  Guardians arts for dps are pathetic really.  At 50 you have 3 - 5 arts that will increase your dps.  The other ones will decrease your dps due to the cast time and damage done.  Kinda sad.  I am pretty sure that is why our no damage taunts are the most *effective* threat/power ratio and have more to use.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>We also had an Illusionist with us, keeping the high level Breeze and Haste on ALL of us constantly.  This cannot be discounted when looking at that 110 - 120 DPS number.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[Nemi]

<p>I'm sorry I just don't agree on so many levels:</p><p></p><hr>An effortless and multi-purpose class, such as monk<hr><p>Multi-purpose class? What are you smoking. We're a Fighter class made to Tank. Our DPS atm is high, it WILL BE reduced. What other purpose do we serve?</p><p>Effortless? As in it takes less effort to press our auto-attack key and taunt CAs than it does yours?</p><p></p><hr>The reward in this case is the status as the preferred epic encounter tank<hr><p>Why should one subclass be preferred over 5 others? Personal preference is one thing, it should not be hard coded into the game. Any subclass should be able to do the job, albeit with different strartegies for healing.</p><p></p><hr>to displace the single purpose guardian<hr><p>There is the crux of the problem. Guardians see themselves as the ONLY subclass that should be able to tank certain combat. If you cannot see the imbalance there, then you're blind.</p><div><hr>that had to work at it to get to the pinacle of his single purpose.<hr></div><div> </div><div>That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Its not hard to get to 50, its not a particularly difficult game. Choosing a subclass should not give you automatic rights within the game to certain mobs.</div><div> </div><div>A Fighter is a fighter, regardless of subclass. Guardians are the defensive variant of the heavy armour class. Paladins are the defensive variant of the spellcasting class. Monks are the defensive variant of the Brawler class. I remember picking Fighter, having 3 choices and then 2 choices. I don't remember a popup box anywhere stating at level 9.</div><div> </div><div>SHOULD YOU WANT TO BE THE BEST TANK AND HAVE EXCLUSIVE CONTENT, PICK WARRIOR NOW</div><div> </div><div>And then at 19 I don't see any popup box saying</div><div> </div><div>TO CONTINUE THE ROAD TO UBERDOM AND PRIVILEGED TANKING ACCESS, PICK GUARDIAN NOW</div>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A Fighter is a fighter, regardless of subclass. Guardians are the defensive variant of the heavy armour class. Paladins are the defensive variant of the spellcasting class. Monks are the defensive variant of the Brawler class. I remember picking Fighter, having 3 choices and then 2 choices. I don't remember a popup box anywhere stating at level 9.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SHOULD YOU WANT TO BE THE BEST TANK AND HAVE EXCLUSIVE CONTENT, PICK WARRIOR NOW</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And then at 19 I don't see any popup box saying</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>TO CONTINUE THE ROAD TO UBERDOM AND PRIVILEGED TANKING ACCESS, PICK GUARDIAN NOW</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>   I have been told by my guildies that at level 3 no box pops up that says, "Should you want to be required for every raid and 95% of every group please choose priest now."<BR> <p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:00 AM</span>

[Nemi]

Funny, by level 9 they are already Priests.EDIT: This argument rages on because people come from EQ1 with their preconcieved notion of War+Clr combo. This is not the same game and is not based on the same principles.<p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:51 PM</span>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  /sigh whatever, I play a tank, never played a priest type. But I edited it for you. My comment is as ridiculous as yours is saying choose xxx or yyy because they are always going to be raid MT, that was the point.</P> <P>   And the more Jez does things the more the monk argument falls into oblivion. Heck, as Gage himself has said a monk is the more defensive version where as the bruiser is more offensive, so if the subclass with less defense can tank perhaps it isn't the class, maybe it is the player / raid / MT group.</P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>   And another thing, the notions that people have from EQ1 are what hold monks back. Besides buff stacking (which is being addressed) and the fact monks don't avoid as much as they should, everything else is rather equal. Fact still stands, once monks can avoid at the proper rate, whatever that may be, mitigation and HP will STILL be taken over avoidance. The whole crux of your argument is that you guys cannot tank raid mobs, when in fact you can.</SPAN> <P><SPAN class=time_text>   If you read between the lines you guys are really mad that you are NOT chosen to tank, not that you CANNOT tank. There is a difference, and in the end if they up our mitigation and up your avoidance (while decreasing ours) you still won't be chosen when a plate tank is present. What then? More Hps for monks?</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:04 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> -Aonein- wrote: <DIV> <DIV>You see Familyman what you are failing to see is, with *<STRONG><U>Deflection*</U></STRONG> and a higher agility count, you are mechanically designed to avoid what damage a Plate class takes, you like to use big words, then what a Guardian soaks up with his "damage dissipation" with mitigation, you Deflect, Avoid and Parry with avoidance, there one in the same, just different ways at tanking. But when you do get hit it makes up for all these miss's and deflections and parrys and because of your lower Mitigation, it hurts. <DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Deflection is our block, genius. </P> <P>You get block (and every other plate fighter does) and we get deflection.  Thanks</P> <P>As for higher agility, Noah's is higher than mine unbuffed, smart guy.</P> <P>So your statement "monks can get the same str" is true but so is "guardians can get the same agi".</P> <P>Not everything is a one way street like you think.<BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Timzilla wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR>Balance is achieved when ANY fighter is capable of tanking ANY mob and succeed. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>That's not balance, that's blandness. Balance is when the reward for a given effort is more or less equal. The reward in this case is the status as the preferred epic encounter tank. An effortless and multi-purpose class, such as monk,  shouldn't have the skills to displace the single purpose guardian that had to work at it to get to the pinacle of his single purpose.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>HAHAHAHAHA!<BR>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> -Aonein- wrote: <DIV> <DIV>You see Familyman what you are failing to see is, with *<STRONG><U>Deflection*</U></STRONG> and a higher agility count, you are mechanically designed to avoid what damage a Plate class takes, you like to use big words, then what a Guardian soaks up with his "damage dissipation" with mitigation, you Deflect, Avoid and Parry with avoidance, there one in the same, just different ways at tanking. But when you do get hit it makes up for all these miss's and deflections and parrys and because of your lower Mitigation, it hurts. <DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Deflection is our block, genius. </P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>And you get too keep dual wield OR 2 hand wep with a higher chance to block then what a 800+ sheild factor shiled offers for a Warrior, or a 700+ shield factor shiled offers a Sk or Pallie because Deflection is like around 30% of your Avoidance number.</FONT></P> <P>You get block (and every other plate fighter does) and we get deflection.  Thanks</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>At the sacrafice of a weapon to don a shield which of course a 800 + shield factor ( tower shield ) is no where near as good as your 30% or so Deflection skill, which according to you is just a Block skill.</FONT></P> <P>As for higher agility, Noah's is higher than mine unbuffed, smart guy.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Because they went all out Agility through triats and itemization, which after the avoidance nerf they will wish they went something else like STA for example to get it over 200 for the HP bonus.</FONT></P> <P>So your statement "monks can get the same str" is true but so is "guardians can get the same agi".</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Only if they sacrafice STR / STA to obtain a high Agility count where a monk can get a even mix of STR and Agility. But i never said thats a Monks fault, thats SoE's fault for poor stats distribution of itemization where they could easily give Plate class a wider variety to chose from to better fit the class requirements.</FONT></P> <P>Not everything is a one way street like you think.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>I like to J walk acually.<BR></FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[Gaige]

<P>It just isn't true about str/agi/sta.</P> <P>Any class has to sacrifice to get a lot of one (unless they have lots of master chest stuff).</P> <P>But now with the hex dolls its even easier.</P> <P>I'm pretty positive Noah is like 130+~ in str/sta/agi unbuffed.</P> <P>When I get my hex dolls tomorrow I should be 130~ unbuffed.</P> <P>If you remember we used to be able to use bucklers and round shields, but they changed it because our class has innate deflection.  But it is essentially just our "block".</P> <P> </P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>It's a fact: Monks get fewer Taunts than Guardians. If not DPS, what <b>do</b> they get in exchange? Don't bother trying to answer, "Utility," the utility that Monks get is negligible and matched by Guardians.</p><font color="#66ccff">In one word, to not hurt your head too much, </font><font size="4"><font size="5" color="#66ccff"><strong><u>DEFLECTION.</u></strong></font></font><hr>You see Familyman what you are failing to see is, with *<strong><u>Deflection*</u></strong> and a higher agility count, you are mechanically designed to avoid what damage a Plate class takes, you like to use big words, then what a Guardian soaks up with his "damage dissipation" with mitigation, you Deflect, Avoid and Parry with avoidance, there one in the same, just different ways at tanking. But when you do get hit it makes up for all these miss's and deflections and parrys and because of your lower Mitigation, it hurts.<div></div><div>I cannot believe you are trying to compare whats going on by trying to use a <u><strong>lvl</strong> <strong>21</strong></u> Monk and a <strong><u>lvl 26</u></strong> Berserker to fight your argument, thats just insane. If you had a lvl 50 Monk or Berserker, id acually take you serious.</div><div></div><div>Taemek Frozenberg 46th Berserker16th OutfitterEverfrost ServerEnlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )70th Stone Fist of The Celestial FistFive Rings on Luclin Server</div><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class="date_text">04-01-2005</span><span class="time_text">10:51 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>1) No, Monks don't get <font size="4"><strong>"<u>DEFLECTION</u>"</strong></font> in exchange for DPS, they get Deflection in exchange for reduced Mitigation. Try again.How am I failing to see anything? Yes, indeed, a Monk is designed to dissipate damage by Avoidance while (supposedly) a plate tank is designed to dissipate it through Mitigation. The two methods should dissipate the same amount of damage on average. This results in equivalent "tanking." The problem seems to be that Guardians are dissipating damage by <i>both</i> Avoidance and Mitigation, while Monks are only getting Avoidance.2) Ah, I see, Aonein, you can't refute the argument so you attack the source instead. Nice going.What, I can't read? Why the heck do you think I'm soliciting numbers from others? I'm <i>not</i> trying to use a 21 Monk and a 26 Berserker to fight my argument, save where their experiences matter in spite of their level. Don't be so condescending, it only damages your own credibility.I repeat my question: Monks get fewer Taunts than Guardians, so what are they getting in return?

[Styk]

I for one doubt they will decrease brawler dps, the trend it seems is they are boosting scout dps to widen the gap. What i do want to see thou is a shift in mitigation / avoidance... I still believe that Shield/Block should be moved over to Mitigation since monks cant equip them and from what gage has said "Deflection is there from of Block" Also correct buff stacking period.... i really dont think we should have ever been able to Avoid like a monk .... hopefully if SoE does this right we will be mitigating more then avoiding after there defense realignment <div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR>I repeat my question: Monks get fewer Taunts than Guardians, so what are they getting in return?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Wings so they can fly and a Volvo.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote: <P>Any class has to sacrifice to get a lot of one (unless they have lots of master chest stuff).</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>At the current time they do, but part of the problem due to high agility is because alot of plate class items have high amounts of agility on them, some of the master chest Plate BP's have 15 agility, id rather 15 STA, you yourself should know how hard it is too increase stamina, its even harder to reach 200 STA to recieve the HP bonus, and that goes for Plate class as well, where any fighter cna basically get 200 STR or 200 Agility, again, a SoE flaw due to the distrubution of generic stats across the same class type armor.</FONT></P> <P>If you remember we used to be able to use bucklers and round shields, but they changed it because our class has innate deflection.  But it is essentially just our "block".</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Aye i remember, and i understand how Deflection works, but thats how you get your increased ability to do DPS, because you can do the dual weild OR 2 hand weapon damage with out sacraficing one hand for a shield for a chance to block, you have it built in, so you can do the damage and Block when it lands as a Block, where a plate class cant do that, and yes we all know that we dont do as much DPS when tanking. Just monks have that ability to be able to do more DPS cause they dont need a shield, also better stats with Dual weild.</FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>There is one problem Gage, im going to copy / paste cause its 4am here and wife will kill me if she wakes up :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>*snip*</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Even if they reduce avoidance, im sure Guardians will still be happy because they know they will have to increase our ( Plate class's ) mitigation in the process OR decrease mob damage output, so ethier way, its a lose win situation for a Plate Class.</DIV> <DIV> <P>Where on the other hand, its a win lose situation for a Monk because there is the possibility there will be a nerf to Brawler DPS to pull them into line with the rest of the Fighter archtype in a bid to balance the system out, which will put Scouts ahead of the Fighter archtype by a bigger disparity then there is now, seeing the Brawler archtype is the only class that can get close to a Scout on a constant basis. Why do you think there hasnt been a single mention about the Scout damage evaulation? But you have Gage and friends to thank for that, and i can tell you now, after the Agility nerf, and now a <STRONG><U>possible</U></STRONG> nerf to your DPS which is why Familyman is threating cause he knows there is a <STRONG><U>possibility</U></STRONG> ( bare in mind im saying a possible one, not 100% sure there is going to be one ) for one in the works and he is grasping for straws trying to figure out a way to try and make it look like that Guardians are basically on par with Monks in DPS.</P> <P>Now ill give you my honest opion, if there was a class that i could play with high DPS and i could tank, mitigation style, i would play it, but since there isnt suppose to be any such thing, i play a Beserker because its the closet thing to DPS + Mitigation Tank i can get, and thats the style and flavour of game play i like, i like to not be able to tank, not as good as a Guard for some extra offense. </P> <P>*snip*</P> <P>Now im going to call a truse gage, im acually tired of repeating myself to so many people trying to get people to see that we <STRONG><U>can all</U></STRONG> Tank, even monks and bruisers, but what people fail to see is that what works for a Guardian based group wont work for a Monk based group and the same for a Berserker based group and a Paladin based group and so on, thats how the archtype system keeps it fair and balanced, we get the flavour and play style we look for with in each archtype and everyone can fill those roles in a diverse way making sure everyone has a postion in a group OR raid depending on the formation required. This mentaility has been created because a Guardian or a few Guardians were the first to tank high end raid material, making it look they were the prime choice, and because people had a plan of attack already, they werent willing to revise new ways to let other tanks in on the action, so now that other guilds and players have improvised new raid formats and diverse ways to take on raid and group named encounters with out the need for a Guardian MT, the archtype theroy is holding ture to its word and every char is able to do the job there meant to do equally but in a different style and format.</P> <P>The LU#6 is due out in 2 weeks ( if all goes well ) and there is a massive list for fixed Combat Arts, Abilties and Spells, and im stoked that there looking into and have a plan of attack for fixing them and there also starting to introduce new Live events, which is a new thing to hit EQ2, so fun is in the air again, so im just going to kick back, relax, play some EQ2 for once instead of trolling the boards, and try to get the next 2 weeks to fly by so i can look forward to playing a decent class again, decent class for me that is, because after all, in the end, its all about fun, not who can tank and who cant, and who does more DPS and who cant, to be honest, i really coulnt give a s**t if monks did 800 DPS, id still enjoy my Berserker and no i wouldnt complain cause this is the path i chose.</P> <P>I've played too many of these games to count, and trust me, diverse is more fun then the same.</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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></DIV>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <UL><BR> <LI>For that matter, the Guardian's Call to Battle increases offensive skills of the group by <B>12</B> and increases the Parry skill of the Guardian. Paladins and SKs get similar buffs at the same level (Call to Glory and Insatiable Hunger).</LI></UL> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Thats correct, but as you can see, there more defensive based then offensive based.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Increasing all of the <I>offensive</I> skills of the party by <STRONG>12</STRONG> is defensive based?? Riiight. The Monk's QP is just as defensive, it buffs mental Mitigation while CoB buffs Parry.<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Just so you know Familyman, Call to Battle is a <STRONG><U>pure</U></STRONG> Mitigation buff, it raises Parry skill and increase Offensive Mitigation, not increase offensive capabilites. So you can wipe that off your Guardian utility list. Its great for the Guardian himself, but unless you got multiple adds and the group is being attacked, then its not much use to a group.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[SageMarrow]

<P>Its really funny and unfortunate to see this fight raise on. The monks are losing miserably and the mitigation tanks are doing a great job keeping them OUT of the loop.</P> <P>As another poster said, this isnt about who CANT do what, its really become about the fact that you will NEVER be <STRONG><EM><U>preffered </U></EM></STRONG>on a raid as the MT, so in a blind attempt at becoming <STRONG><EM><U>preffered</U></EM></STRONG>  you all have become geared towards being avoidance based guardians, which cant and wont happen...but either way.</P> <P>Its so apparent, does jez tanking raid mobs mean nothing? So what if they nerf guardian avoidance because its tied to thier defense skill...AND? what will that mean? it wont mean anything, they will just get more mitigation to balance the transfer...making stuff even MORE predictable and manageable by reactives and regens.</P> <P>we arent going to get more avoidance, that means we will be walking around with 80+ avoidance unbuffed at all times with 35% mitigation... Now THAT will bleed into unbalanced since it applies to a mob of EQUAL level.</P> <P>While a few of you will forsake the dps willingly to become a lightly armored punching bag, think about what you are saying. I know for a fact that if paladins heals get nerfed because everyone "wants" to tank like a guardian they will be thouroughly [Removed for Content], and as broken as shadowknights tend to be, im sure they would be [Removed for Content] as well if they were nerfed of thier dps capability and lifetaps so that they too could be guardians.</P> <P>Is it too hard to believe that people wanted to tank like a guardian then they wouldve played one? While other classes can make this argument, brawlers dont even have a leg to stand on. look at it this way"</P> <P>Guardian: Pure defensive capability on all ends, Mit Avoidance Hp</P> <P>Berserker: Alot of defensive capabilty, situational dps, innate aggro control</P> <P>Paladin: Mediocre Dps, Mediocre innate defensive capability, Maximum Hp potential on an independant basis.</P> <P>Shadowknights: Decent Dps, mediocre innate defensive capability, Mediocre Hp potential on an independant basis.</P> <P>That pretty much sums it up for everything in heavy armor, and for the most part they are totally balanced considering that all combat arts and abilities are functioning properly.</P> <P>What needs to be understood is that brawlers will never fit into that equation as far as Tanking is concerned. Just because we cant wear heavy armor. Thats the only thing that makes the big ye old difference, and what throws us to the RNG and avoidance tanking. And even without the heavy armor a brawler type has been tanking raid material. So wheres the problem? Because no matter what they do that equation wont change. They arent trying to destroy the classes, just *balance* them by some known factors.</P> <P>So if you want to be balanced, strive to be balanced along the lines that you are already given, maybe the idea i suggested - heck who knows - but the direction proposed thus far is pointless.</P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Maez wrote:I have a 42 guardian. A good friend has a 40 monk....(3) Utility spells: Monks again. Safefall is nice, as is invisibilty and feign death. This led to my friend wandering all over Zek at level 30, whereas I dared not venture too far out without planning on a big fight. <hr></blockquote>This is a common argument, but I don't think it holds water under examination. Consider the 3 vaunted Monk utilities:1) Safe fall. Nice, but about on par with the fluff spells. When is this ability actually <i>useful</i>? The only circumstance I can think of is the named mobs that use spells to throw you around. How many are there? 2? 3? Not much actual utility there.2) Wind Walk (invisibility). Now this is a nice utility ... except for some reason that only God and the devs know, it's only given to the Monk for <i>one tier</i>. Monks get it at 24 and it's usefull through Tier 4, but that's about it. Your friend wandered all around Zek at 30, but I'll bet he's not wandering all around Feerott or Everfrost at 40! If Monks got an upgrade to this at 38 then it would, indeed, be a significant utility, but they don't.3) Feign Death. Yup, this is absolutely a nice utility spell. I'll grant you that one right out. However, it looks to me more like this is the tradeoff that Monks get for lower Health. Monks are already subject to the whim of the RNG; a string of bad rolls will either put the Monk in dire jeopardy or kill him/her off. Yet Monks have less Health than the other Fighter subclasses (save the Bruiser, of course), so the string of bad rolls that will put the Monk in jeopardy is even shorter. I think it more than fair that they have FD to, <i>sometimes</i>, prevent a total wipe when that happens - if they're fast enough and if it works.Really, when you look at it, the Monk's vaunted Utility is rather ephemeral, temporary, and granted in exchange for other weaknesses. It shouldn't have any bearing on their "tankability" (ability to dissipate damage, whether through Mitigation or Avoidance).

[Timzil]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P>I'm sorry I just don't agree on so many levels:</P> <P></P> <HR> An effortless and multi-purpose class, such as monk <HR> <P>Multi-purpose class? What are you smoking. We're a Fighter class made to Tank. Our DPS atm is high, it WILL BE reduced. What other purpose do we serve?</P> <P>Effortless? As in it takes less effort to press our auto-attack key and taunt CAs than it does yours?</P> <P></P> <HR> The reward in this case is the status as the preferred epic encounter tank <HR> <P>Why should one subclass be preferred over 5 others? Personal preference is one thing, it should not be hard coded into the game. Any subclass should be able to do the job, albeit with different strartegies for healing.</P> <P></P> <HR> to displace the single purpose guardian <HR> <P>There is the crux of the problem. Guardians see themselves as the ONLY subclass that should be able to tank certain combat. If you cannot see the imbalance there, then you're blind.</P> <DIV> <HR> that had to work at it to get to the pinacle of his single purpose. <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Its not hard to get to 50, its not a particularly difficult game. Choosing a subclass should not give you automatic rights within the game to certain mobs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A Fighter is a fighter, regardless of subclass. Guardians are the defensive variant of the heavy armour class. Paladins are the defensive variant of the spellcasting class. Monks are the defensive variant of the Brawler class. I remember picking Fighter, having 3 choices and then 2 choices. I don't remember a popup box anywhere stating at level 9.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SHOULD YOU WANT TO BE THE BEST TANK AND HAVE EXCLUSIVE CONTENT, PICK WARRIOR NOW</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And then at 19 I don't see any popup box saying</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>TO CONTINUE THE ROAD TO UBERDOM AND PRIVILEGED TANKING ACCESS, PICK GUARDIAN NOW</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I doubt that you don't know these answers. Nonetheless:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Effortless class is Monk because he can join any exp group that has a healer and there are a lot of healers. The monk can either dps or mt. No group, no problem since the monk dps and tanking ability will allow him to solo at a decent pace. Guardian, on the other hand, can only join an exp group that doesn't have a tank and there are a lot of tanks. If he must solo, he'll do it at a slower pace since he lacks the dps to kill quickly. No, the game is not hard at any level, but there is a grind and monks are among the gimme classes when it comes to the grind.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monks are mulit-purpose because they can fill either a dps, tank or both role.  Guardians have one purpose and that is to tank, which is defined by code not the players.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I had the pop-up box btw. Only, the question just wasn't fed to me by the game engine. I looked at the fighter classes and picked from the obvious choices of primary dps/secondary tank, primary tank/secondary dps and soloability mixes. I thunk, well I can take the fast track of a dps tank and climb the ranks quickly to the end game, or I can take the pure tank and slog my way up to be an epic encounter tank. I have a decent work ethic when it comes to game commitments and my guild could use a backup epic encounter tank so I chose the later. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've already had my artisan [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed by SOE when they destroyed any real reason for his existance just as he dinged 50. That was 40 days or so "played" down the tubes. I don't need yet another effort wiped out by them removing the only real reason for a guardians existance.<BR></DIV>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:I don't subscribe to the DPS = Taunt argument. Personally I think autoattack adds very little to aggro. Our taunts will be fine.<hr></blockquote>Well, there's no question, Nemi, that DPS adds to aggro. How much is unclear and I can't think of any way to measure it.However, don't forget that Monks' DPS comes with lots of special effects from CAs that <i>do</i> significantly add to aggro.

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>uglak wrote:<P>In a group, there are 6 slots, which all players must compete to get. Most players ideal group is 1 tank, 1 or 2 healers, and 3 or 4 dps. </P> <P>Guardians compete for that one tank slot in a group. They are never invited for a DPS role. Despite the monks trying to prove that their is not a desparity in DPS between a guardian and monk, we all know that their is.</P> <P>Monks right now, ARE invited for that DPS role, and also get invited for the tank role. That is up to 5 slots they can fill. This is a huge disparity. Guardians only get groups for the tank role. That is ONE slot that they can fill. Having a xtra taunt is in no way ever going to get them any other slot besides the tank slot.</P><hr></blockquote><b><i>In my opinion</i></b>, Uglak, Monks and Bruisers should <i>not</i> be competing for those DPS slots. Those are for Mages and Rogues, not Monks or Bruisers. If properly balancing Guardians, Monks, Bruisers, and Rogues means that Monks compete for 1 slot in raids, so be it. That's the way it should be.OTOH, aren't there other slots in a raid for Fighters in general (I wouldn't know; you tell me). It seems to me that all Fighters get buffs that would significantly benefit the MT in a raid, even Guardians. If Guardians don't, but other Fighter subclasses do, then I would call for an improvement in Guardian buffs to make them useful in that role.Common groups are not nearly as picky, in my limited experience anyway. Perhaps hardcore XP groups are, but I don't group with them, so I wouldn't know.I believe that Monks and Bruisers get a higher DPS than Guardians in order to help them keep aggro, but the disparity in DPS should not be that huge. I'm trying to find out if it is or is not, based on hard numbers. So far I haven't seen any numbers in the other post that compare apples to apples so I can't say with authority just what the difference is.

[Banditman]

<P>Certainly there is an EASY way to measure how much aggro damage does.</P> <P>You need a light hitter (Scout class with a single very gray weapon) and a Guard.</P> <P>Find a greenie solo con mob, must be the aggro sort, so that it can be engaged in combat without any action being taken on it.</P> <P>Once engaged, Guardian should hit it with ONE taunt.  The amount of "Threat" is now available in the CA description.  Guardian should NOT attack AT ALL.</P> <P>After the Guard has taunted once, the Scout with the gray weapon hits auto attack.  Scout uses NO CA's AT ALL.  Watch the damage scroll up.  As soon as the mob turns on the Scout, the Scout turns OFF his auto attack.</P> <P>Add up the damage it took to turn the mob.  Divide the amount of "Threat" from the Guard taunt by the number of HP of damage the Scout did.  This will give you a Threat per HP of Damage number.</P> <P>Once you have that number, you can apply it to a lot of things.  Might be interesting to find out what that number is.</P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>DemosthenesEQ2 wrote:<P><FONT color=#ff0000>Guardian DPS sustained is about 60 +/- vs an even color group mob (at 50th and tanking). While not focusing on pure agro, sustained can hit around 80 dps (with maybe some down time) but that can vary due to the weapon/ regen you have.</FONT></P>Thanks, Noah. I presume that that's non-hasted?

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>In a group, there are 6 slots, which all players must compete to get. Most players ideal group is 1 tank, 1 or 2 healers, and 3 or 4 dps.</P> <P>Guardians compete for that one tank slot in a group. They are never invited for a DPS role. Despite the monks trying to prove that their is not a desparity in DPS between a guardian and monk, we all know that their is.</P> <P>Monks right now, ARE invited for that DPS role, and also get invited for the tank role. That is up to 5 slots they can fill. This is a huge disparity. Guardians only get groups for the tank role. That is ONE slot that they can fill. Having a xtra taunt is in no way ever going to get them any other slot besides the tank slot.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><BR><B><I>In my opinion</I></B>, Uglak, Monks and Bruisers should <I>not</I> be competing for those DPS slots. Those are for Mages and Rogues, not Monks or Bruisers. If properly balancing Guardians, Monks, Bruisers, and Rogues means that Monks compete for 1 slot in raids, so be it. That's the way it should be.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>You realise that is going to be alot of players competing for a very limited amount of spots, dont you?  But, yes, if we are going to be equal at tanking, then no fighters should be able to fill a DPS slot.   I agree.</FONT><BR><BR>OTOH, aren't there other slots in a raid for Fighters in general (I wouldn't know; you tell me). It seems to me that all Fighters get buffs that would significantly benefit the MT in a raid, even Guardians. If Guardians don't, but other Fighter subclasses do, then I would call for an improvement in Guardian buffs to make them useful in that role.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Not really.   For most buffs to help the MT, you have to be in the MT group.   Your going to want a healer with a defensive buff in the MT group.  Because, they can heal.  Also, bards are the king of buffs.   A tank is not going to be working his way in this group, unless he gets a buff like shrug off, which was nerfed hard.</FONT></P> <P>Common groups are not nearly as picky, in my limited experience anyway. Perhaps hardcore XP groups are, but I don't group with them, so I wouldn't know.<BR><BR>I believe that Monks and Bruisers get a higher DPS than Guardians in order to help them keep aggro, but the disparity in DPS should not be that huge. I'm trying to find out if it is or is not, based on hard numbers. So far I haven't seen any numbers in the other post that compare apples to apples so I can't say with authority just what the difference is.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>No.  right now, zerkers and brawlers do ALOT more damage then a guardian.    We do not have to prove it.  SOE can prove it, they will have the numbers you seek.  That is all that matters.   IF your    tanking ability will be equal to a guardian, your DPS will be equal to a guardian, then we are on the shame sheet of music.   As far as holding aggro goes, they can just add hate effects to your weak DPS attack, if that is a problem.   If there is a disparity between DPS on fighters IE) there defense is equal, but there offense is not, then it is unbalanced.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>So, I think we agree.   (Exceopt with the need for the change altogether, I feel the classes are balanced now.  But, any fighter who has his defense abilities adjusted to be equal to a guardian, also needs to have his offensive abilities equal to a guardian.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Gaige]

<P>Our defense won't be equal, even if we can tank equally.</P> <P>You get: better mitigation, more HP.</P> <P>We get: avoidance and the RNG, less HP, less mit.</P> <P>Therefore the DPS difference is more than fair, even when tanking is working equally.</P> <P>For proof, reference the 1 to 50 game now.</P> <P>Do monks out DPS guardians?  Yup.</P> <P>Can monks tank the same stuff 1 to 50 as guardians?  Yup.</P> <P>So while there are still balance issues (per SoE) and broken abilites (per SoE) and buff stacking issues (per SoE) and defense is not working as intended (per SoE) when all is said and done, we shouldn't have to give up DPS, because of what we trade to get it.</P> <P>But on the same token, we should never be able to take a scout/mage's spot in group.</P> <P>We should be invited to offtank, but that spot (if needed) should be able to be filled by any tanks, yes including the totally poor 0 utility no damage doing, only main tank capable guardian.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>It isn't my fault that guardians have a complex when it comes to being main tank or nothing.  That's something you guys made up on your own.  If its true that you can't fill an offtank role adequately GET IT FIXED.</P> <P>Do not sit here and cry because you feel entitled to be the only main tank in the game.</P> <P>Don't lie to yourselves either, if you are the best, you might as well be the only.  </P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Our defense won't be equal, even if we can tank equally.</P> <P> </P> <P>I<FONT color=#ffff33> think we can stop reading your post right there.  </FONT><FONT color=#ffff33>  Can you explain the difference between defense and tanking?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Some on now, concentrate gauge...  Think hard on it.   Tell me whats wrong with what you just typed.  You can do it....</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>But do you want to know the real reason why you dont get it? Its because we are happy, even if they reduce avoidance, im sure Guardians will still be happy because they know they will have to increase our ( Plate class's ) mitigation in the process OR decrease mob damage output, so ethier way, its a lose win situation for a Plate Class.</p><hr></blockquote>What you don't see, Aonein, is that shifting plate tanks' damage dissipation from Avoidance to Mitigation will grant plate tanks a weakness. They'll be taking more hits, including hits from CAs with extra effects, like stun, stifle, and extra damage. If Avoidance is shifted far enough down plate tanks will be struggling at times to get their CAs off when fighting some mobs.As it should be.<blockquote><hr><p>Where on the other hand, its a win lose situation for a Monk because there is the possibility there will be a nerf to Brawler DPS to pull them into line with the rest of the Fighter archtype in a bid to balance the system out, which will put Scouts ahead of the Fighter archtype by a bigger disparity then there is now, seeing the Brawler archtype is the only class that can get close to a Scout on a constant basis.</p><hr></blockquote>Good. I hope they do this. That's the way it should be. Monks and Bruisers should not be competing for high DPS slots; that's Mage and Rogue territory. Monks and Bruisers should have high DPS <i>for Fighters</i> but they should not be in league with Mages or Rogues.<blockquote><hr>... which is why Familyman is threating cause he knows there is a <strong><u>possibility</u></strong> ( bare in mind im saying a possible one, not 100% sure there is going to be one ) for one in the works and he is grasping for straws trying to figure out a way to try and make it look like that Guardians are basically on par with Monks in DPS.<hr></blockquote>Baloney. You decided to pigeonhole me so you're quite sure what I'm "trying to do." I'm <i>trying</i> to get some solid, factual, apples-to-apples numbers of how Monks and Guardians compare. I expect to find that Monks do more damage than Guardians, but I want to know <i>how much</i> more. Some people seem to think that Monks do 300+ DPS while Guardians do 30 DPS. Others seem to think that Monks do 100 DPS while Guardians do 99 DPS. Neither of those is likely; I want to know what the actual variance is.My problem is that few Guardians DPS and few want to. Getting comparable numbers between Guardians and Monks around here is like pulling teeth.

[ugl]

<P>This is fun.</P> <P> </P> <P></P> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Do monks out DPS guardians?  Yup.</P> <P>Can monks tank the same stuff 1 to 50 as guardians?  Yup.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>Can monks tank 1 to 50 stuff equally as a guardian now gauge?   NO</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>After the tanking is made equal, will monks be able to tank equally to guardians gauge?  YES</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>Think hard now...  You CAN comprehende if you try...   </FONT></DIV>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:<P>We also had an Illusionist with us, keeping the high level Breeze and Haste on ALL of us constantly. This cannot be discounted when looking at that 110 - 120 DPS number.</P> <P><BR> </P> <hr></blockquote>I know, Banditman, I know, but some people here aren't interested in hard facts and apples-to-apples comparisons.Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Illusionist Breezing and Hasting your party in both situations?They're still not equivalent because one case was against relatively low-level mobs and one case was against relatively higher-level mobs, but I thought the Breeze and Haste were constant?

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> uglak wrote: <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Can monks tank 1 to 50 stuff equally as a guardian now gauge?   NO</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sure we can.  It's close enough.  /shrug.  I admit that defense is overpowered at the moment, and agility was when I did it, but its still possible.  Not counting raid mobs, a monk MT'ing a group can kill anything in the game, just like a guardian.</P> <P>50++ named?  Yup. </P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>If by equally you mean as mana efficient, or as fast, etc etc, then nah, probably not.  But that doesn't equate to equality to me, equality to me is being able to do it with a good chance of success.<BR></P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR>I repeat my question: Monks get fewer Taunts than Guardians, so what are they getting in return?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Wings so they can fly and a Volvo.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><hr></blockquote>Boy, you really can't answer, can you? First you avoid the question by attacking the source, now you avoid it with flippancy.Okay, let me answer it for you. Monks have fewer Taunts, so they get more CA attacks with special effects on them to generate hate that way. Those extra CAs naturally increase the Monk's DPS over Guardians, which contributes its own, small amount to aggro as well. Or, more simply, Monks trade off Taunts for DPS.

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<DIV>Just so you know Familyman, Call to Battle is a <STRONG><U>pure</U></STRONG> Mitigation buff, it raises Parry skill and increase Offensive Mitigation, not increase offensive capabilites. So you can wipe that off your Guardian utility list. Its great for the Guardian himself, but unless you got multiple adds and the group is being attacked, then its not much use to a group.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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><hr></blockquote>Aonein, where <i>do</i> you get this stuff? I got my info from <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=9042#M9042" target=_blank>this post</a>. According to that person, and one other person on that thread, Call to Battle <b>buffs the party's offensive skills and buffs the Guardians's Parry skill</b>. It has nothing to do with Mitigation whatsoever.I'll cut you a little slack for it being 4AM where you are, but yeesh, man, check your facts before you post.

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> uglak wrote: <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Can monks tank 1 to 50 stuff equally as a guardian now gauge?   NO</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sure we can.  It's close enough.  /shrug.  I admit that defense is overpowered at the moment, and agility was when I did it, but its still possible.  Not counting raid mobs, a monk MT'ing a group can kill anything in the game, just like a guardian.</P> <P>50++ named?  Yup. </P> <P>/shrug</P> <P><FONT color=#ffcc00>If by equally you mean as mana efficient, or as fast, etc etc, then nah, probably not.  But that doesn't equate to equality to me, equality to me is being able to do it with a good chance of success.<BR></FONT></P> <DIV><FONT color=#ffcc00></FONT></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>   But others have gage. That being the case please explain to me, based on your own logic, how it is not equal. Perhaps the people doing it have better gear, spell lvls etc, but so what. A level 50 guardian wearing feysteel and having all app4 spells would be no different.</P> <P>   And FamilyMan...you said "They'll be taking more hits, including hits from CAs with extra effects, like stun, stifle, and extra damage. If Avoidance is shifted far enough down plate tanks will be struggling at times to get their CAs off when fighting some mobs." Here is the problem. If this in fact turns out to be the case, then guardians are gimped THROUGHOUT the level ranges (1-50), where it is already fairly equal. Not only raid mobs stun, and if you go and make it so a guardian is stunned a significant part of the fights vs higher level mobs / named during the grind 1-50, then that unbalances that part of the game, and you are back at square one, so that won't work.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:54 PM</span>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote:<P> And FamilyMan...you said "They'll be taking more hits, including hits from CAs with extra effects, like stun, stifle, and extra damage. If Avoidance is shifted far enough down plate tanks will be struggling at times to get their CAs off when fighting some mobs." Here is the problem. If this in fact turns out to be the case, then guardians are gimped THROUGHOUT the level ranges (1-50), where it is already fairly equal. Not only raid mobs stun, and if you go and make it so a guardian is stunned a significant part of the fights vs higher level mobs / named during the grind 1-50, then that unbalances that part of the game, and you are back at square one, so that won't work.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:54 PM</span><hr></blockquote><b><i>In my opionion</i></b>, not at all. That's the tradeoff Guardians get for having high Mitigation. It's similar to the tradeoff that Monks get for high Avoidance/low Mitigation: they're subject to bad runs of the RNG.It forces groups to think and plan. Got a Guardian? Great! good Tank, lots of Health and Mitigation, but watch out for those stun and stifle mobs. If you see the dizzy animation around his head you might want to back off the DPS for a tick or two to make sure you don't pull aggro. Got a Monk? Great! good Tank, doesn't get hit a lot, but watch out for damage spikes. The healer had better keep on his toes, and watch out for those hard-hitting mobs, they're murder on a Monk.Give and take, English. The Guardian can't <i>always</i> be best, that's what we have now and that's unbalanced.

[jrezzy]

<P>Man I am so sick of the monks whining, Dude just shut up. Play your class thats what you are and enjoy it. If you got so much to cry about then GO do something diffrenet. i.e. maybe a diffrent game ?  You picked it, now play it, have fun with it, now deal with it and enjoy what you have. If you can't deal with it then reroll to something new. Or to solve the problem SoE should just remove monk types from Everquest 2. Problem solved ........</P> <P>Everquest 1: Monks always crying</P> <P>Everquest 2: Monks still doing the same /sigh</P>

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> jrezzy wrote:<BR> <P>Man I am so sick of the monks whining, Dude just shut up. Play your class thats what you are and enjoy it. If you got so much to cry about then GO do something diffrenet. i.e. <FONT color=#ffff00>maybe a diffrent game</FONT> ?  <FONT color=#ffff00>You picked it, now play it, have fun with it, now deal with it and enjoy what you have</FONT>. If you can't deal with it then <FONT color=#ffff00>reroll to something new.</FONT> Or to <FONT color=#ffff00>solve the problem SoE should just remove monk types from Everquest 2. Problem solved ........</FONT></P> <P>Everquest 1: Monks always crying</P> <P>Everquest 2: Monks still doing the same /sigh<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I do play other games.  I have a 60 rogue in WoW on spinebreaker and a DJK in SWG although I don't play it much.  I also have a 50 energy/energy blaster in CoH and I picked up Matrix Online today.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I have a 26 troub, a 17 enchanter and a 9 priest (working on templar) <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Well, I guess that's better than asking for another class to get nerfed :smileyindifferent:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I don't cry, I just post my opinion.  /shrug<BR></DIV>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P>And FamilyMan...you said "They'll be taking more hits, including hits from CAs with extra effects, like stun, stifle, and extra damage. If Avoidance is shifted far enough down plate tanks will be struggling at times to get their CAs off when fighting some mobs." Here is the problem. If this in fact turns out to be the case, then guardians are gimped THROUGHOUT the level ranges (1-50), where it is already fairly equal. Not only raid mobs stun, and if you go and make it so a guardian is stunned a significant part of the fights vs higher level mobs / named during the grind 1-50, then that unbalances that part of the game, and you are back at square one, so that won't work.</P> <P>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <SPAN class=date_text>04-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:54 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><FONT color=#ffff00><B><I>In my opionion</I></B>, not at all. That's the tradeoff Guardians get for having high Mitigation. It's similar to the tradeoff that Monks get for high Avoidance/low Mitigation: they're subject to bad runs of the RNG.<BR></FONT><BR>It forces groups to think and plan. Got a Guardian? Great! good Tank, lots of Health and Mitigation, but watch out for those stun and stifle mobs. If you see the dizzy animation around his head you might want to back off the DPS for a tick or two to make sure you don't pull aggro. Got a Monk? Great! good Tank, doesn't get hit a lot, but watch out for damage spikes. The healer had better keep on his toes, and watch out for those hard-hitting mobs, they're murder on a Monk.<BR><BR>Give and take, English. The Guardian can't <I>always</I> be best, that's what we have now and that's unbalanced.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>  The run of bad rolls is CHANCE. It may or may not happen. Mitigation is constant, which means EVERY fight with a mob that stuns and stifles a guardian is gimped.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Some fights a monk would be gimped, and by some it would be the minority... on average. If a monk has 75% avoidance, he gets hit on average 1 in 4. Sometimes 4 out of 4 and sometimes 0 out of 4. BUT, the average is still 1 out of 4 hits. So, yes a bad roll can occur but it isn't a guarantee.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So now you have a gimped guardian 100% of the time vs any mob which can stifle or stun (which is a large % of the mobs in the game). But you want to say that is the trade off huh? 100% gimped vs a majority of mobs compared to A CHANCE (average shows 25%) of being gimped vs a minority?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   Give and take is not the same as bending over and taking it. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  And you say guardians can't always be the best...why is it EVERY other fighter class can tank just fine 1-50 (most BETTER then guardians) and most (those who have tried) can raid MT and succeed. The best would mean the guardian is all around the best tank and this is not true. The game is not just raiding, but even if it is, Gage himself has said equality is everyone having THE CHANCE AT SUCCESS..well I hate to break it to you EVERYONE HAS A CHANCE AT SUCCESS, every bloody class is out there doing it, except monks, and I think monks don't try to MT a raid because if they won all this spam I have to read every day becomes null and void.</DIV>

[Banditman]

<P>Wanna trade Guard avoidance for greater mitigation?  Fine.  Do it.</P> <P>Stuns and stifles become a problem for the Guards?  Yea, I can see that.  It would definitely [Removed for Content] them since their ability to hold aggro is based almost completely on their ability to cast CA's.  Give Guards wearing a shield stun/stifle immunity.</P> <P>Problem solved.</P> <P> </P> <P>But Guards will STILL be the preferred MT for raids simply because of mitigation.  A raid doesn't want to base their chances of success on the RNG.  They want to go in and execute a plan based on a consistent situation, not on the chance they could get screwed by the RNG.</P> <P>Look, all of the Fighters have the ABILITY to tank in 99% of the content.  There might be, or might not be, a problem in the small portion of content that falls under Epic Raid.  It is certainly debateable, and it's probably a lot closer to balanced than anyone on either "side" would like to admit.</P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote:<DIV> The run of bad rolls is CHANCE. It may or may not happen. Mitigation is constant, which means EVERY fight with a mob that stuns and stifles a guardian is gimped.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Some fights a monk would be gimped, and by some it would be the minority... on average. If a monk has 75% avoidance, he gets hit on average 1 in 4. Sometimes 4 out of 4 and sometimes 0 out of 4. BUT, the average is still 1 out of 4 hits. So, yes a bad roll can occur but it isn't a guarantee.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> So now you have a gimped guardian 100% of the time vs any mob which can stifle or stun (which is a large % of the mobs in the game). But you want to say that is the trade off huh? 100% gimped vs a majority of mobs compared to A CHANCE (average shows 25%) of being gimped vs a minority?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Give and take is not the same as bending over and taking it. </DIV><hr></blockquote>Well, of course the run of bad rolls is a chance. OTOH, the risk would be higher vs. certain mobs, those that hit the hardest. If it took, say, a run of 5 hits to put a Monk in jeopardy most of the time, the hardest-hitting mobs would put a Monk in jeopardy after a run of 3 hits. A group might want to consider changing out Tanks vs. those mobs.However, the reverse would be true for Guardians vs. stun or stifle mobs. Now I must confess, I have no idea how frequent those mobs are from 27 - 50. Are they really that common? If so, that would indeed be unbalancing, but I want an honest evaluaton. How common are stun/stifle mobs?

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<DIV>I do play other games. I have a 60 rogue in WoW on spinebreaker and a DJK in SWG although I don't play it much. I also have a 50 energy/energy blaster in CoH and I picked up Matrix Online today.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I have a 26 troub, a 17 enchanter and a 9 priest (working on templar) <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Well, I guess that's better than asking for another class to get nerfed :smileyindifferent:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I don't cry, I just post my opinion. /shrug</DIV><hr></blockquote>Egad, Gage, and you still post so frequently here? LOL, where do you find the <i>time</i>.I'd say, "Get a life," but I understand that, "Reality is for those who can't handle SciFi/Fantasy!" <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[English Da Gua]

<P>  You have to remember the odds of a monk getting hit 3 consecutive times is 1 in 64 (with 75% avoidance) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</P> <P>  You realize that means a monk HAS THE CHANCE to die based on purely bad rolls (assuming 3 HITS to kill) once every 64 HITS. 64 HITS (that means CONNECTING BLOWS). Now if he, on average, only gets hit 1 in 4, that further increases that number to 1 CHANCE every 256 attacks.</P> <P>  During everyday grouping, where (if it is 1 in 5) he has a CHANCE to die 1 time in 3125 hits. Yet he avoids 3 out of 4 again. So now he has that same chance of a bad roll 1 out of 12,500 attacks... </P> <P>  Now what I can tell you, is that if I was to get hit 75+% of the time, I would be getting stunned / stifled / dotted (all the negatives of specials) FAR MORE OFTEN then once every 3125 hits. In fact, I would be willing to say, due to the fact specials hit much more often, that I would be stunned well over 1000 times.</P> <P>   Now we all feel 1-50 is balanced.</P> <P>   Taking that into account, a monk has the CHANCE for 1 out of every 256 attacks to die..raid fails probably. How often does a guardian lose aggro and a raid fails? I promise you if in the course of a fight I am stunned and stifled and I lose aggro for a period (typical stun of say 10 seconds) the raid will fail more often then 1 out of every 256 times.</P> <P>   But thats ...balanced.</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR>Egad, Gage, and you still post so frequently here? LOL, where do you find the <I>time</I>.<BR><BR>I'd say, "Get a life," but I understand that, "Reality is for those who can't handle SciFi/Fantasy!" <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I work nights, doing IT/NA for a nuclear power plant, and I work 4 10s.  This is a fairly new job for me, but I enjoy it.  I used to be in retail and it was lackluster.  I almost took a job with Blizzard so I would actually get paid to play, but I decided against it for a few reasons.</P> <P>I'm single, I don't drink/smoke, and I don't dance.</P> <P>So except in the summer when there are decent sets at Huntington or San Clemente, or on the rare occassion I feel like boarding at Mt. High, I don't do much other than sit online or watch dvd's.  Or most the time, both <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>My job is fairly easy and a whole lot of being there in case something happens.  Most the time, nothing happens.   Thus, a lot of MMOs happen <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR>Egad, Gage, and you still post so frequently here? LOL, where do you find the <I>time</I>.<BR><BR>I'd say, "Get a life," but I understand that, "Reality is for those who can't handle SciFi/Fantasy!" <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I work nights, doing IT/NA for a nuclear power plant, and I work 4 10s.  This is a fairly new job for me, but I enjoy it.  I used to be in retail and it was lackluster.  I almost took a job with Blizzard so I would actually get paid to play, but I decided against it for a few reasons.</P> <P>I'm single, I don't drink/smoke, and I don't dance.</P> <P>So except in the summer when there are decent sets at Huntington or San Clemente, or on the rare occassion I feel like boarding at Mt. High, I don't do much other than sit online or watch dvd's.  Or most the time, both <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>My job is fairly easy and a whole lot of being there in case something happens.  Most the time, nothing happens.   Thus, a lot of MMOs happen <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Translation:  He smokes dope, is 20 years old, and lives in his moms basement.</DIV>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote:<P> You have to remember the odds of a monk getting hit 3 consecutive times is 1 in 64 (with 75% avoidance) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</P> <P> You realize that means a monk HAS THE CHANCE to die based on purely bad rolls (assuming 3 HITS to kill) once every 64 HITS. 64 HITS (that means CONNECTING BLOWS). Now if he, on average, only gets hit 1 in 4, that further increases that number to 1 CHANCE every 256 attacks.</P> <P> During everyday grouping, where (if it is 1 in 5) he has a CHANCE to die 1 time in 3125 hits. Yet he avoids 3 out of 4 again. So now he has that same chance of a bad roll 1 out of 12,500 attacks... </P> <P> Now what I can tell you, is that if I was to get hit 75+% of the time, I would be getting stunned / stifled / dotted (all the negatives of specials) FAR MORE OFTEN then once every 3125 hits. In fact, I would be willing to say, due to the fact specials hit much more often, that I would be stunned well over 1000 times.</P> <P> Now we all feel 1-50 is balanced.</P> <P> Taking that into account, a monk has the CHANCE for 1 out of every 256 attacks to die..raid fails probably. How often does a guardian lose aggro and a raid fails? I promise you if in the course of a fight I am stunned and stifled and I lose aggro for a period (typical stun of say 10 seconds) the raid will fail more often then 1 out of every 256 times.</P> <P> But thats ...balanced.</P> <P> </P><hr></blockquote>English, you're calculating wrong.Given a 75% avoidance (or a 1/4 chance of being hit) the odds of a Monk getting hit 3 consecutive times is (1/4)*(1/4)*(1/4), or one time every 64 <b>attacks</b>, not every 64 <b>hits</b>.Every time the Monk is attacked there is a 1/4 chance he'd be hit. Every time he's hit (1 time in 4) there's a 1/4 chance he'll be hit again (1/4 * 1/4, or 1/16). Every time he's hit twice in a row (1 time in 16, now) there's a 1/4 chance he'll be hit a third time (1/16 * 1/4, or 1/64).Period. I don't know why you keep multiplying out. Basically, with a 75% chance of avoidance vs. non-Heroic white-con mobs, the Monk has a 1/64 chance every attack of being hit 3 times in a row. If a mob can kill the Monk in 3 hits, that's a Monk-death every 64 hits (on average) when facing that mob. This, of course, pays no attention whatsoever to any healers involved, etc.Moreover the chance increases by a large degree when you look at yellow- or particularly orange-con. If a Monk's Avoidance vs. orange-con Heroic mobs goes down to 50%, which wouldn't surprise me given how Defense is currently scaled, then the odds of the Monk getting hit by the mob 3 times in a row are 1 in 8.All of which is pointless since these numbers ignore every other member of the party. However, if your point was that a 75% Avoidance translates to being-hit-3-times-in-a-row as something like 1 time in 12,500, or even 1 time in 256 ... wrong.

[English Da Gua]

 Aye that is correct, my bad. I never was good at probability anyway. Although that is probably obvious :smileytongue: <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  All in all though, if after the changes come through monks raid MTing is not a trivial thing for them, or guardians do it better (relative term) they will want more, that is what enrages me atm. EVERYONE, monks included, know they can raid tank, yet they still want more. That is the one thing that cannot be disputed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   No one here disagrees that a monk should avoid more, BUT, if they are given more avoidance without the ability to MT as well as a guardian on raids they won't be happy. And they shouldn't be able to. The final frontier of these games in terms of tanking has always been mitigation because it is constant. I think monks are more mad that avoidance isn't a constant then anything else.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  If some monk dies due to bad rolls they will be back up in arms about it /sigh. The whole thing is just spam all over this board. I guess I should thank them though, it gives me something to do while my broken provy uses up this vitality.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text>  The argument does still stand though, if you lower our avoidance so much that we get hit with everything, and because we rely on the ability to use our CAs and not DPS as aggro, we can't raid anymore. That alone is an imbalance, and if you guys are really interested in balance then that line of thought is not gonna work.</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:10 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <BR> <DIV>Translation:  He smokes dope, is 20 years old, and lives in his moms basement.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I'm 28, don't do any drugs, and own my own house, but thanks for the insult <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>Besides, houses in Cali don't have basements <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:20 PM</span>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR>  Aye that is correct, my bad. I never was good at probability anyway. Although that is probably obvious :smileytongue: <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> All in all though, if after the changes come through monks raid MTing is not a trivial thing for them, or guardians do it better (relative term) they will want more, that is what enrages me atm. EVERYONE, monks included, know they can raid tank, yet they still want more. That is the one thing that cannot be disputed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  No one here disagrees that a monk should avoid more, BUT, if they are given more avoidance without the ability to MT as well as a guardian on raids they won't be happy. And they shouldn't be able to. The final frontier of these games in terms of tanking has always been mitigation because it is constant. I think monks are more mad that avoidance isn't a constant then anything else.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> If some monk dies due to bad rolls they will be back up in arms about it /sigh. The whole thing is just spam all over this board. I guess I should thank them though, it gives me something to do while my broken provy uses up this vitality.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text> <FONT color=#ffff00>The argument does still stand though, if you lower our avoidance so much that we get hit with everything, and because we rely on the ability to use our CAs and not DPS as aggro, we can't raid anymore. That alone is an imbalance, and if you guys are really interested in balance then that line of thought is not gonna work.</FONT></SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <SPAN class=date_text>04-01-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>05:10 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Couldn't it be as simple as making some of the guardian abilities usable while stunned/stiffled?  I agree that that would be imbalancing if you were stunned/DOT'ed/stiffled all the time...But also let me ask you this question...are you in the group that thinks that some of your misses now are due to total mitigation (mitigating to 0 damage)? </DIV>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  I am unsure of that as I do not know how the coding works. I would ASSUME <<<< that if I was mitigating damage to zero I would be required to have 100% mitigation (or so), and I am no where near that.</P> <P>   That being the case, again, I would ASSUME <<<< that the misses I receive are due to avoiding. And, as I have said before, guardians do avoid to much (if in fact the misses are misses and not mitigating damage to zero) and avoidance tanks do not avoid enough.</P> <P>  And on to your first point, sorry to answer out of order...but that would require every taunt we have to be able to be used while stunned / stiffled. But then we would have NO DPS since we have ONE attack, which is less then 100 damage that we can use while stunned / stifled. Since we would more then likely be stunned / stifled a fair amount of the time (at least while the mob has power) the DPS margin would be huge in regards to avoidance tanks, and we are again, back to page one.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:04 PM</span>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P>  I am unsure of that as I do not know how the coding works. I would ASSUME <<<< that if I was mitigating damage to zero I would be required to have 100% mitigation, and I am no where near that.</P> <P>  That being the case, again, I would ASSUME <<<< that the misses I receive are due to avoiding. And, as I have said before, guardians do avoid to much (if in fact the misses are misses and not mitigating damage to zero) and avoidance tanks do not avoid enough.</P> <P> And on to your first point, sorry to answer out of order...but that would require every taunt we have to be able to be used while stunned / stiffled. But then we would have NO DPS since we have ONE attack, which is less then 100 damage that we can use while stunned / stifled. Since we would more then likely be stunned / stifled a fair amount of the time (at least while the mob has power) the DPS margin would be huge in regards to avoidance tanks, and we are again, back to page one.</P> <P>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <SPAN class=date_text>04-01-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>06:37 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>That's how I assume it works as well...I just wanted to make sure of where you were coming from...I would think that those that think that some misses are 0 damage hits would have a hard time with this point as an increase in mitigation would only serve to increse those supposed 0 damage hits, thereby not making you stunned/stiffled as much as those hits wouldn't land...again, not what I think, just speculating on the others position...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That is very true, too...that would effect your DPS...didn't look at it from that angle <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  Without making up new CA's (like one that dispelled negitive effects and then made you immune to them for X amount of time or something)  I'm not sure what could be done to fix this scenario.  I'll have to think about it...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is the kind of discussion needed on this stuff...one in which ideas are bounced around, not what happens after about page 3 of every other post on this and related topics.  Like I said before on other posts...we should be discussing this as allies, not combatants...MOST of what effects one subclass will have either a similar effect on the others or will have some negitive effect that some might not see unless it's discussed....</DIV>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  I guess my question is, if a hit actually connects, but PHYSICAL damage is mitigated to zero, on a special wouldn't the detrimental effects, ie stun / stifle, still hit?</P> <P>  After reading the last patch notes which said if a certain aspect like root failed / was broken on a spell, but it had a fear component the fear portion would still be in effect. I would assume, like the wizard spell increase, that this would also be in tact on mobs.</P>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>FamilyManFirst wrote:</P> <P><BR>What you don't see, Aonein, is that shifting plate tanks' damage dissipation from Avoidance to Mitigation will grant plate tanks a weakness. They'll be taking more hits, including hits from CAs with extra effects, like stun, stifle, and extra damage. If Avoidance is shifted far enough down plate tanks will be struggling at times to get their CAs off when fighting some mobs.<BR><BR>As it should be.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>I dont think its going to as bas as you make it out to be Familyman, mobs dont have a certain percent to stun every single hit on every single mob, its more then likely tied into certain mobs, stifle is going to effect anyone because its in a spell form so avoidance would of never helped anyway, even now, that comes down to spell mitigation and to top it off there improving Templars / Inquisitor healing powers to compenstate for the extra damage we will be taking. Read :</FONT></P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=39033#M39033" target=_blank><STRONG><FONT color=#c8c1b5>Here</FONT></STRONG></A></P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=38949#M38949" target=_blank><STRONG><FONT color=#c8c1b5>Here</FONT></STRONG></A></P> <P><BR>My problem is that few Guardians DPS and few want to. Getting comparable numbers between Guardians and Monks around here is like pulling teeth.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Guardians dont DPS because they waste a spot trying to do it when they can just leave, make a group of there own and tank in it and put there class utility to 100% use instead of standing there with their thumbs up there a_ss. And ill say this again, if you need a computer to generate something that can be seen with the human eye, then you turely are blind Familyman.<BR></FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>04-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:00 PM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffffff>I also suggested ages ago here on the Guardian boards about a Plate class only buff that uses concentration that makes us immune to frontal stun attacks or a stun with in a 180 degree radius from the front, if we are attacked from out of the 180 degree radius then we run the chance of being stuned.</FONT></P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[SageMarrow]

<P>okay then just let guardians duel wield tower shields and boost thier taunts, 1 for avoidance and 1 for mitigation increase. </P> <P>Meat shield... get it?</P>

[-Aonein-]

<P>:smileyvery-happy:</P> <P>Taemek Frozenberg 46th 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>

[Banditman]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <BR><BR> <DIV>That's how I assume it works as well...I just wanted to make sure of where you were coming from...I would think that those that think that some misses are 0 damage hits would have a hard time with this point as an increase in mitigation would only serve to increse those supposed 0 damage hits, thereby not making you stunned/stiffled as much as those hits wouldn't land...again, not what I think, just speculating on the others position...</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>This is exactly what is happening.  You can show the effect by debuffing a mob's Strength.  You would expect doing that would decrease the average value of their hits.  It doesn't.  It makes it appear that the mobs miss more often.  The upshot is that those additional "misses" are actually zero damage hits.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It "appears" that there is a damage "floor" based upon mitigation and that if a hit falls below a certain amount of damage it is reported by the game as a "miss".</DIV>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MoonglumHMV wrote:<BR> <BR><BR> <DIV>That's how I assume it works as well...I just wanted to make sure of where you were coming from...I would think that those that think that some misses are 0 damage hits would have a hard time with this point as an increase in mitigation would only serve to increse those supposed 0 damage hits, thereby not making you stunned/stiffled as much as those hits wouldn't land...again, not what I think, just speculating on the others position...</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>This is exactly what is happening.  You can show the effect by debuffing a mob's Strength.  You would expect doing that would decrease the average value of their hits.  It doesn't.  It makes it appear that the mobs miss more often.  The upshot is that those additional "misses" are actually zero damage hits.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It "appears" that there is a damage "floor" based upon mitigation and that if a hit falls below a certain amount of damage it is reported by the game as a "miss".</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>So let me see if I understand what you are describing.  Mob X hits for 150-250 damage, 200 damage on average.  Player Y has 50% mitigation, or 100 damge average.  So you debuff the str of Mob X so their damage range is 75-125, 100 damage on average, that hits that come in the 75-100 portion of the range come through as misses rather than being mitigated 50% down to 37.5 - 50 damage?</P> <P>Did I kind of get what you are saying?<BR></P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<P><FONT color=#66ccff>Guardians dont DPS because they waste a spot trying to do it when they can just leave, make a group of there own and tank in it and put there class utility to 100% use instead of standing there with their thumbs up there a_ss. And ill say this again, if you need a computer to generate something that can be seen with the human eye, then you turely are blind Familyman.</FONT></P><hr></blockquote>The human eye is biased, Aonein. It sees what it wants to see. Numbers, when used carefully, don't lie. They can be made to deceive (as someone said, there are lies, d*** lies, and statistics) but they can also be used to reveal.A Guardian chooses his class because he want to tank. He tanks a lot and likes it and doesn't really want to DPS. While he's tanking and soloing he observes that the enemy Health bar goes down slowly when he hits, so he thinks, "My DPS sucks, but that's okay, I'm a tank." Maybe somewhere along the way he fires up CombatStats and sees that, sure enough, his DPS <i>does</i> suck (while tanking, of course) so he becomes even more firmly entrenched in the idea that Guardian DPS is lousy. Then, when someone (like me) comes along to challenge his view he angrily reports that his DPS is miserable.He's never tried to DPS, never tested himself DPS-wise. Yet he reports with assurance that his DPS is quite poor. How does he know? Why, it's obvious, the challenger must be blind!I try to be the opposite kind of person. I do have my biases, yes, but I try to be aware of them. I certainly am willing to be convinced, but only by solid, empirical evidence. Moreover, I am quite aware of some common pitfalls, like comparing tanking DPS to non-tanking DPS, and I'll call them out whenever I see them. I have yet to see numbers that truly compare Guardian DPS to Monk DPS in equivalent situations. So far I've seen several variables that must be accounted for: level of mob, tanking or not, sustained DPS (over 10 or more fights, say) vs. burst DPS, hasted vs. non-hasted, group-buffed vs. self-buffed vs. non-buffed. If you ignore these you can come up with comparisons that show anything, including Guardian DPS that outdoes Monk DPS!There are none so blind than those that will not see, Aonein, and you seem unwilling even to look.

[SageMarrow]

<P>FAMILY MAN STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</P> <P>a warrior type cannot DPS well. Neither guardians nor zerkers/ Not because they cant, not because they dont want too, but because if they do they will pull aggro. They dont have combat arts like we do, every single combat art they have is tied to a taunt and a debuff. ALL OF THEM HAVE TAUNTS BUILT IN.</P> <P>If a guardian is doing dps in the way of getting a good parse on a mob, that means using everything available to your class to achieve maximum dps capability. Just like a warlock type, a guardian will pull aggro spamming everything they have over the course of a fight in order to get a GOOD parse. Same goes for zerkers even more so. </P> <P>Thats fine that CONCEPTUALLY they do good dps, but they have low damage combat arts that have taunts and slows built into them. Where as monks have upwards of 6, 150-300+ damage combat arts with stifles and stuns. That dont build nearly as much hate and can be used freely once aggro has been established, because they dont directly pull aggro.</P> <P>Its like getting a good parse on a high level warlock...YOU CANT. cause they cant throw everything they have at thier disposal as to achieve a good parse number.</P> <P>Why do you think the DPS VS TAUNTS argument matters so much?  Because dps is not a substitute for a direct taunt spell. And i have seen personally that it takes ALL of my combat arts in a <EM>flanking</EM> position to achieve the task of pulling aggro from a guardians taunt spell. I just about can not at all from a berserker on that same token.</P> <P>So think about what im saying family man, for the most part they have to pace themselves when using CA's which slows down thier dps capability to merely auto attacks for 60+% of thier dps. Even when thier combat arts do land, they dont have even 1 that does more than 200dmg. While zerkers have a few that are situational or group fight based, but as you can see those are being made into DD's as well.</P> <P>so please please drop the dps arguement....monks do more pure <EM><U><STRONG>unthreatening</STRONG></U></EM> dps than guardians and zerkers.</P> <P>Maybe SOE can put a punching bag/mob into the game with infinate HP and no attack damage so we can do all out parses, but until then, and as long as mobs are the punching bags with hate list and such, it will be the way it is..</P> <P>sorry if you cant comprehend my post.</P>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR>The human eye is biased, Aonein. It sees what it wants to see. Numbers, when used carefully, don't lie. They can be made to deceive (as someone said, there are lies, d*** lies, and statistics) but they can also be used to reveal.<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Nice try Familyman, but i can use a parser to recreate the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> numbers over and over and over and over and over again, thats the problem. So parsed data is just a recreation of the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> thing. Now when you are in a normal group who doesnt fight the same level mobs with the same style to try and prove who has the most DPS, so you are fighting different level mobs, all the time, moving around, mobs are dieing faster then others, you get adds here and there, and play normally instead of parsing and recreating the same number over and over, thats where the difference is Familyman.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><U>ANYONE</U></STRONG> can recreate the same thing over and over again, i can get a Monk to recreate over 200 DPS every fight, i can get a Guardian to recreate 120 + DPS every fight, i can get a Wizard to recreate over 300 DPS every fight, i can get a Assassin to recreate over 250 DPS every fight, but what am i proving? All im proving is the DPS output on that one type of mob, in that group formation, its called being <STRONG><U>decieved</U></STRONG>. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Its about who can do it more effciently and constantly, not periodically. Guardians do not do DPS efficiently and constantly, end of story.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 47th 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>04-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:55 PM</span>

[Chanliang]

<span><blockquote><hr>What you don't see, Aonein, is that shifting plate tanks' damage dissipation from Avoidance to Mitigation will grant plate tanks a weakness. They'll be taking more hits, including hits from CAs with extra effects, like stun, stifle, and extra damage. If Avoidance is shifted far enough down plate tanks will be struggling at times to get their CAs off when fighting some mobs.<hr></blockquote> This will be definetly the problem. I have level 35 mystic selfbuffed I have about same mitigation as any T4 heavy armor user (which dont have too many rare armor pieces) but avoidance is 10-20% lower. I can't "tank" that well due the fact that I'm constanlty stunned, stifled, spells interrupted and of course getting damage. If not adjusted right heavy armor tanks will be having loads of problems post patch. </span><div></div>

[Nemi]

<blockquote><hr>SageMarrow wrote:<P>FAMILY MAN STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</P> <P>a warrior type cannot DPS well. Neither guardians nor zerkers/ Not because they cant, not because they dont want too, but because if they do they will pull aggro. They dont have combat arts like we do, every single combat art they have is tied to a taunt and a debuff. ALL OF THEM HAVE TAUNTS BUILT IN.</P> <hr></blockquote>Um I have to disagree, here are the Guardian offense skills 20 to 50.Lvl 21: BuryAoE attack that also has DoT to target MoBLvl 22: SlamHigh damage extra attackLvl 25: RuinDebuff MoB offense and deals slashing DoTLvl 26: True StrikeExtra attack that ignore ACLvl28.6: MaimDeals slashing DoT and lowers enemy attack speedLvl 29: ShatterExtra attack that decreases slashing resistancelvl 30: Desperate FlurrySelf hasteLvl31.6: BatterPower DoT and small chance to stifleLvl 33: InvadeExtra high damage single enemy attacklvl 35: ToppleAoE attack and slows any mob hitLvl 36: CrushHigh damage extra attacklvl 38: Call of ProtectionLaunches high damage attacklvl 39: Ferocious ChargeExtra attack the debuffs MoB defense, slashing DoT and chance to stifleLvl 40: RetaliateHigh damage staggering attackLvl 40: Unerring StrikeExtra attack that ignores target ACLvl 42: CleaveDeals slashing DoT, debuffs attack speed and debuffs MoB powerLvl 43: OverwhelmExtra high damage attackLvl 46: AnchorSlows target attack speed, movement and buffs A/CLvl 47: SwampExtra attack that decreases offense of enemyLvl 49: TremorMulti-enemy attack that stuns opponents and decreases offenseLvl 50: BlastHigh damage extra attackNot one has a taunt in it. Debuffs yes, but I never seem to have problem holding aggro from Enchanters, Assasins, Mystics, Necros with their debuffs. Your talking out your [Removed for Content] again Sage.Guardians can offtank, can buff the group/MT and can DPS. That they choose not to is their problem.

[SageMarrow]

<P>ok, but you forgot one CRUCIAL part of that post Nemi,</P> <P> </P> <DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Thats fine that CONCEPTUALLY they do good dps, but they have low damage combat arts that have taunts and slows built into them. Where as monks have upwards of 6, 150-300+ damage combat arts with stifles and stuns. That dont build nearly as much hate and can be used freely once aggro has been established, because they dont directly pull aggro.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </P> <P>Their combat arts dont do nearly as much damage as ours do. (Brawlers). at level 40+ a monk doesnt have one combat art that reads out at less than 150 damage. (maybe one). but its an interruption spell or something like that.</P> <P>All of a guardians spells if you read that list are ones that make it for the mob HARDER to hit the guardian effectively. Stuns, slows, debuffs on resistances. </P> <P>That kind of crap, they got 1 high damage attack line that from what i have seen isnt that high damage.</P> <P>So the fact still remains the same, a stun, stifle, or any debuff for that matter is a "taunt" just like a bruiser or monks skill sets. Ours do more damage and have the effect to boot. I dont know about mr monk, but i have 8 combat arts on my bar as a bruiser and it takes ALL at once to pull aggro off a guardian.</P> <P>but this is about the dps issue. Just as another poster wrote in another thread: If you dont pull aggro as a warrior type you arent doing good dps...lol, thats about the bottom line. </P> <P>and i will be honest in saying that i may be splitting hairs betwen zerkers and guards a bit, and i apologize for that. But the underlying math still remains since zerkers as a whole dont have an issue with guardians tanking ability, monks do.</P> <P>And it would be nice if a guardian type would give a spec on how much that *high damage attack* actually does. That much should clear the waters a bit since i know the others dont do nearly as much.</P></DIV>

[Nemi]

I didn't forget anything Sage, I merely corrected the half-truths your spreading that Guardians cannot go 'DPS' mode. Guardians are quite capable of unleashing their combat arts, and debuffs are NOT taunts. While a debuff creates aggro, it is no where near the magnitude of taunts.Is the DPS of a Guardian lower than a Monk? Yes, I'm not disputing that. I'm correcting you when you spread half-truths. Guardians have a very respectable utility line in offense/defense boosts for group and DPS. SoE designed all Fighters to have a role outside of MT for the simple fact there is only 1 spot in the group for that. That is why all Fighters have group buffs and defensive buffs to cast on the MT when they are offtanking, and that includes Guardians.If you're asking me should a Guardian tank over a Monk, I'd turn that around and ask you if you have Shm or Clr healing you.

[Nemi]

Its very hard to pull aggro off a Guardian tanking because...he's built up the initial aggro. Conversely, its hard to pull aggro from a Monk when he's tanking. Can it be done? Yes but not with combat arts alone, it requires taunts. The only exception to this would be Mages/Scouts and they get -aggro spells to counter this.

[TheMeatShie]

I am pretty confident in my assertion that Guardians do not DPS as well as monks... the second someone shows me parses that arent skewed showing otherwise i will change my theory. As far as the idea that taunts are a direct tradeoff for DPS, i chuckle.  Do you really think the development team, when thinking up and balancing combat arts, said "ok, monks have x skill that does y dps, so lets give Guardians z skill that does b taunt" .... um i HIGHLY doubt it.. remember, alot of these devs are the same people that brough us eq1... and um for a long time warriors had crap aggro and crap dps... How i could see them setting down balancing would be along the archetype system.... You decide you want to be a fighter.... would you rather pick one of the crusader types (ie spells, horse, knight roleplay perspective) which in turn you become a plate tank, but also get nice bells/whistles like heals/lay hands or Harm Touch/wards... or maybe a monk/bruiser (ie martial arts, feign, kung fu roleplay) which for this you would have good offensive skills, but also helpful other combat arts, one specializing in more offense based, the other more defense based, but both lighter armor DPS breed fighters... or maybe a Guardian/Berzerker, Guardians going purse defensive and sacrificing offensive skills for that, berzerkers going towards offensive type combat arts sacrificing defensive type arts. For every choice you make, you are trading off something else... Ie i chose a Guardian, i dont get self invis, a horse, feign death, harm touch, or lay hands... but in giving up picking from one of these sets of skills and going pure defensive, my best ability lies in soaking up damage.  I think when you looked at your class types when you created a character, it was pretty clear if you had even played everquest1 to level 20 how alot of the classes would pan out.  For those of you who had not played everquest1, please point out the part of your class description that says anyone in the archetype fighter is going to be a raid tank.... because i know every class atm tanks fine for groups, no? And from what i have read none of the fighter classes are actually reporting encounters that they are fully unable to tank because of the in place system... ofcourse maybe that will change when fighters lose the ability to buff avoidance to the redonkulously bug'd numbers you see now.. so [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] is my point? Maybe that the development team went with many classes, and not just 4, to add flavor to the game... and that you cant just balance that array of classes without balancing a large array of skills/abilities... <div></div>

[Nemi]

Correct, you are better at soaking damage, I'm better at avoiding it. Who is best tank? Thats right, we should be equal.

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<DIV>Nice try Familyman, but i can use a parser to recreate the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> numbers over and over and over and over and over again, thats the problem. So parsed data is just a recreation of the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> thing. Now when you are in a normal group who doesnt fight the same level mobs with the same style to try and prove who has the most DPS, so you are fighting different level mobs, all the time, moving around, mobs are dieing faster then others, you get adds here and there, and play normally instead of parsing and recreating the same number over and over, thats where the difference is Familyman.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><U>ANYONE</U></STRONG> can recreate the same thing over and over again, i can get a Monk to recreate over 200 DPS every fight, i can get a Guardian to recreate 120 + DPS every fight, i can get a Wizard to recreate over 300 DPS every fight, i can get a Assassin to recreate over 250 DPS every fight, but what am i proving? All im proving is the DPS output on that one type of mob, in that group formation, its called being <STRONG><U>decieved</U></STRONG>. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Its about who can do it more effciently and constantly, not periodically. Guardians do not do DPS efficiently and constantly, end of story.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 47th Berserker16th OutfitterEverfrost ServerEnlightened Aonein Amillion ( retired )70th Stone Fist of The Celestial FistFive Rings on Luclin Server</DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>04-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:55 PM</span><hr></blockquote>Precisely, Aonein, you've got it down to a T. When you want to prove your point you've got to supply <i>detail</i> about how you got your numbers so that a) others can recreate them and b) others can see that you're not skewing the results or comparing apples to oranges.Anyone can parse data to show a Monk doing over 200 DPS; I want to see what a Monk does <i>regularly</i>, over time. Banditman's post, in the other thread, was an excellent source for that. He also qualified his parses, explaining that the party was hasted and Breezed, both of which affect the numbers.Anyone can parse data to show a Guardian doing 120 DPS or more; for that matter, anyone can parse data showing a Guardian doing 10 DPS. I want to see what a Guardian does <i>regularly</i>, over time. I want to know, approximately, what the DPS difference is between Monks and Guardians, in equivalent situations. Is it a 10% difference? Is it a 30% difference? Is it an 80% difference? Which, and how did you come up with your conclusions, so others (including me) can repeat the methods if they wish?It's easy to say, "Guardians do not do DPS efficiently and constantly." I think you're wrong. I say, "Guardians do less DPS than Monks but not significantly less." There, now we've both got nice, broad, unproven statements. I'd like to prove <i>or disprove</i> mine. I'd like you to prove yours. You're under no obligation to do so, but until you do I'll keep posting and asking for numbers.

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <DIV>Nice try Familyman, but i can use a parser to recreate the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> numbers over and over and over and over and over again, thats the problem. So parsed data is just a recreation of the <STRONG><U>same</U></STRONG> thing. Now when you are in a normal group who doesnt fight the same level mobs with the same style to try and prove who has the most DPS, so you are fighting different level mobs, all the time, moving around, mobs are dieing faster then others, you get adds here and there, and play normally instead of parsing and recreating the same number over and over, thats where the difference is Familyman.</DIV> <DIV><STRONG><U>ANYONE</U></STRONG> can recreate the same thing over and over again, i can get a Monk to recreate over 200 DPS every fight, i can get a Guardian to recreate 120 + DPS every fight, i can get a Wizard to recreate over 300 DPS every fight, i can get a Assassin to recreate over 250 DPS every fight, but what am i proving? All im proving is the DPS output on that one type of mob, in that group formation, its called being <STRONG><U>decieved</U></STRONG>. </DIV> <DIV>Its about who can do it more effciently and constantly, not periodically. Guardians do not do DPS efficiently and constantly, end of story.</DIV> <DIV>Taemek Frozenberg 47th 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>04-05-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:55 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Precisely, Aonein, you've got it down to a T. When you want to prove your point you've got to supply <I>detail</I> about how you got your numbers so that a) others can recreate them and b) others can see that you're not skewing the results or comparing apples to oranges.<BR><BR>Anyone can parse data to show a Monk doing over 200 DPS; I want to see what a Monk does <I>regularly</I>, over time. Banditman's post, in the other thread, was an excellent source for that. He also qualified his parses, explaining that the party was hasted and Breezed, both of which affect the numbers.<BR><BR>Anyone can parse data to show a Guardian doing 120 DPS or more; for that matter, anyone can parse data showing a Guardian doing 10 DPS. I want to see what a Guardian does <I>regularly</I>, over time. I want to know, approximately, what the DPS difference is between Monks and Guardians, in equivalent situations. Is it a 10% difference? Is it a 30% difference? Is it an 80% difference? Which, and how did you come up with your conclusions, so others (including me) can repeat the methods if they wish?<BR><BR>It's easy to say, "Guardians do not do DPS efficiently and constantly." I think you're wrong. I say, "Guardians do less DPS than Monks but not significantly less." There, now we've both got nice, broad, unproven statements. I'd like to prove <I>or disprove</I> mine. I'd like you to prove yours. You're under no obligation to do so, but until you do I'll keep posting and asking for numbers.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Hi.   I am a level 20 wizard.   I know conventional wisdom  says that Wizards do alot more DPS then enchanters.  I have also looked at the damage amounts on both our spells.   But, I still believe that I am right, and that Enchanters do almost the same damage as wizards.   I know when grouped, it sure looks like that mobs dies alot faster with wizards then with enchanters.  But, the eye can be deceiving.</P> <P>Until someone can post controlled parses, with tools only a developer would have, I will continue to post ms unsubstantiated BS as if it were fact, because you cannot prove me wrong.</P> <P>Enchanters do almost as much damage as wizards, and there is nothing you can do about it.   *covers ears*  lalalala</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<P>Nemi look at this, currently, when Noah did his numbers on damage taken he got really close numbers between the two classes. Its not about equal or not equal. </P> <P>Look at this and tell me if it makes sense with healing ability intertwined:</P> <P>Guardian taking damage:</P> <P>50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 = out of 400 HP, easily healed and consistent</P> <P>Monk taking damage:</P> <P>0 0 0 0 200 200 0 0 = 400 HP, a dead monk and players scrambling to get things together.</P> <P>So in reality we are equal already, the problem is not equality even after the avoidance mitigatoin hoopladigity.</P> <P>That can happen, but its a chance. Over the course of a 30 minute fight its highly likely as well for 2 high damage attacks to land in succession.</P> <P>Also keep in mind that guardian in the above equation in a real game situation has about 1500 more HP...which widens the gap even more.</P> <P>Does that make sense?  </P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>TheMeatShield wrote:I am pretty confident in my assertion that Guardians do not DPS as well as monks... the second someone shows me parses that arent skewed showing otherwise i will change my theory.<hr></blockquote>Oh, I think it's unquestioned that Guardians do not DPS as well as Monks. My question is, <i>by what margin</i>. If Monks typically do 100% more DPS than Guardians, or in other words twice as much, then that's huge. If Monks do 50% more DPS than Guardians, or in other words half-again as much, then that's significant.However, what if Monks only do 15% - 20% more DPS than Guardians? Is that really such a tremendous amount? Wouldn't that be a decent trade for one fewer line of Taunts, particularly if that DPS difference came primarily from CAs that included hate-generating special effects?I'll be right up front: <b>I don't know</b> what the typical DPS difference is between Monks and Guardians. Numbers to do comparisons with are hard to come by, both because there are so many variables to account for and because few Guardians are interested in doing DPS for apples-to-apples comparisons. It might actually be more valuable to compare the DPS of Guardians tanking with the DPS of Monks tanking, but again, the situations have to be equivalent to have valid numbers to compare.<blockquote><hr>TheMeatShield wrote:As far as the idea that taunts are a direct tradeoff for DPS, i chuckle. Do you really think the development team, when thinking up and balancing combat arts, said "ok, monks have x skill that does y dps, so lets give Guardians z skill that does b taunt" .... um i HIGHLY doubt it.. remember, alot of these devs are the same people that brough us eq1... and um for a long time warriors had crap aggro and crap dps... How i could see them setting down balancing would be along the archetype system.... You decide you want to be a fighter.... would you rather pick one of the crusader types (ie spells, horse, knight roleplay perspective) which in turn you become a plate tank, but also get nice bells/whistles like heals/lay hands or Harm Touch/wards... or maybe a monk/bruiser (ie martial arts, feign, kung fu roleplay) which for this you would have good offensive skills, but also helpful other combat arts, one specializing in more offense based, the other more defense based, but both lighter armor DPS breed fighters... or maybe a Guardian/Berzerker, Guardians going purse defensive and sacrificing offensive skills for that, berzerkers going towards offensive type combat arts sacrificing defensive type arts. For every choice you make, you are trading off something else... Ie i chose a Guardian, i dont get self invis, a horse, feign death, harm touch, or lay hands... but in giving up picking from one of these sets of skills and going pure defensive, my best ability lies in soaking up damage. I think when you looked at your class types when you created a character, it was pretty clear if you had even played everquest1 to level 20 how alot of the classes would pan out. For those of you who had not played everquest1, please point out the part of your class description that says anyone in the archetype fighter is going to be a raid tank.... because i know every class atm tanks fine for groups, no? And from what i have read none of the fighter classes are actually reporting encounters that they are fully unable to tank because of the in place system... ofcourse maybe that will change when fighters lose the ability to buff avoidance to the redonkulously bug'd numbers you see now.. so [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] is my point? Maybe that the development team went with many classes, and not just 4, to add flavor to the game... and that you cant just balance that array of classes without balancing a large array of skills/abilities... <div></div><hr></blockquote>I have to disagree with you a bit here. I think that the Fighter Archetype is one of two with some rigid requirements. The other Archetype is the Priest. If any Priest subclass heals better than the other subclasses then that subclass will be highly favored, possibly required for groups. If any Priest subclass heals more poorly than the others it will be highly disfavored; you can see it now with the Fury subclass. The devs are planning some rebalancing with LU#7, partly to address this issue.The Fighter Archetype has similar stringent requirements. The primary job of the Fighter is to dissipate damage. They also must be able to gain and keep aggro, but that's not such a big deal so long as all Fighters can do it. Berserkers are the aggro masters and it doesn't overbalance them as The Most Favored Fighter. However, any Fighter subclass that dissipates damage, whether through Mitigation or Avoidance, better than the other subclasses becomes the highly favored, possibly required Fighter in groups, particularly in raids or min/max groups (such as XP groups). Thus, the variation between Fighter sub-classes in damage dissipation can't be too great.Therefore, I believe that the devs had to look elsewhere for variation and balance. They couldn't vary damage dissipation much so, instead, they varied other things, including Taunts. They gave all Fighter subclasses two lines of Taunts but they gave the Warrior class an extra line. Brawlers got DPS skills instead and Crusaders got healing/draining skills instead.Just my opinion.

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>uglak wrote:Hi. I am a level 20 wizard. I know conventional wisdom says that Wizards do alot more DPS then enchanters. I have also looked at the damage amounts on both our spells. But, I still believe that I am right, and that Enchanters do almost the same damage as wizards. I know when grouped, it sure looks like that mobs dies alot faster with wizards then with enchanters. But, the eye can be deceiving.<p>Until someone can post controlled parses, with tools only a developer would have, I will continue to post ms unsubstantiated BS as if it were fact, because you cannot prove me wrong.</p><p>Enchanters do almost as much damage as wizards, and there is nothing you can do about it. *covers ears* lalalala</p><div></div><div></div><div></div><hr></blockquote>Hmm, let's see.1) Attacking the source instead of the argument.2) Misstating the premise of the argument into something absurd so that you can knock it down. I believe that's called a Straw Man fallacy in logic.3) Insulting the source of the argument.Way to go, Uglak, that'll build you some credibility!

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>Nemi look at this, currently, when <FONT color=#ffff00>Noah did his numbers on damage taken he got really close numbers between the two classes</FONT>. Its not about equal or not equal. </P> <P>Look at this and tell me if it makes sense with healing ability intertwined:</P> <P>Guardian taking damage:</P> <P>50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 = out of 400 HP, easily healed and consistent</P> <P>Monk taking damage:</P> <P>0 0 0 0 200 200 0 0 = 400 HP, a dead monk and players scrambling to get things together.</P> <P>So in reality we are equal already, the problem is not equality even after the avoidance mitigatoin hoopladigity.</P> <P>That can happen, but its a chance. Over the course of a 30 minute fight its highly likely as well for 2 high damage attacks to land in succession.</P> <P>Also keep in mind that guardian in the above equation in a real game situation has about 1500 more HP...which widens the gap even more.</P> <P>Does that make sense?  </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Sage, you do realize that Noah was just putting numbers into an equation, not an actualy in game test, right?<BR>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>uglak wrote: <blockquote>Hi.   I am a level 20 wizard.   I know conventional wisdom  says that Wizards do alot more DPS then enchanters.  I have also looked at the damage amounts on both our spells.   But, I still believe that I am right, and that Enchanters do almost the same damage as wizards.   I know when grouped, it sure looks like that mobs dies alot faster with wizards then with enchanters.  But, the eye can be deceiving.</blockquote> <p>Until someone can post controlled parses, with tools only a developer would have, I will continue to post ms unsubstantiated BS as if it were fact, because you cannot prove me wrong.</p> <p>Enchanters do almost as much damage as wizards, and there is nothing you can do about it.   *covers ears*  lalalala</p> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote>You are grossly, incomprehensibly and incontrovertibly WRONG. Enchanters do LESS damage than a PRIEST. Read that again. Enchanters < Priest for DPS. I have the parses to prove it!  There is another thread here in the Guardian forums where I was showing some DPS comparisions for a group I had.  My Priest and an Illusionist were both present in this group and through the course of these fights you can see us both going neck in neck for DPS, with my Priest coming out ever so slightly ahead at the end of the night for overall DPS. Wizards do a SICK amount of damage.  So much so they are forced to control themselves to avoid pulling aggro. If you want to have ANYONE buy that you better back it up with some numbers, because I already HAVE the numbers and Enchanter DPS is currently VERY weak.</span><div></div>

[Nemi]

Well of those 2 200 hits, you have a Ward there to take them, after that you have reactive heals. Failing that if your making a comment about Raid mobs, then yes: Raid mobs are imbalanced towards Mitigation tanks < This will change.

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:You are grossly, incomprehensibly and incontrovertibly WRONG. Enchanters do LESS damage than a PRIEST. Read that again. Enchanters < Priest for DPS. I have the parses to prove it! There is another thread here in the Guardian forums where I was showing some DPS comparisions for a group I had. My Priest and an Illusionist were both present in this group and through the course of these fights you can see us both going neck in neck for DPS, with my Priest coming out ever so slightly ahead at the end of the night for overall DPS. Wizards do a SICK amount of damage. So much so they are forced to control themselves to avoid pulling aggro. If you want to have ANYONE buy that you better back it up with some numbers, because I already HAVE the numbers and Enchanter DPS is currently VERY weak.</span><div></div><hr></blockquote>LOL, Banditman, that was satire, yes? It actually almost sounds plausible, except you don't usually shout like that. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Banditman]

Go look at the numbers man. I am of the opinion that Enchanters DPS *should* be higher than Priest DPS - by a good margin.  The fact that it is NOT is a big problem. By dude - anyone who claims that Enchanter damage is anywhere NEAR the damage of a Wizard . . . I want some of what they are smokin', cuz I haven't had anything nearly that good since I was in college. <div></div>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR>Hi. I am a level 20 wizard. I know conventional wisdom says that Wizards do alot more DPS then enchanters. I have also looked at the damage amounts on both our spells. But, I still believe that I am right, and that Enchanters do almost the same damage as wizards. I know when grouped, it sure looks like that mobs dies alot faster with wizards then with enchanters. But, the eye can be deceiving. <P>Until someone can post controlled parses, with tools only a developer would have, I will continue to post ms unsubstantiated BS as if it were fact, because you cannot prove me wrong.</P> <P>Enchanters do almost as much damage as wizards, and there is nothing you can do about it. *covers ears* lalalala</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Hmm, let's see.<BR><BR>1) Attacking the source instead of the argument.<BR><BR>2) Misstating the premise of the argument into something absurd so that you can knock it down. I believe that's called a Straw Man fallacy in logic.<BR><BR>3) Insulting the source of the argument.<BR><BR>Way to go, Uglak, that'll build you some credibility!<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I am attacking your argument.   I am saying the EXACT same thing you are saying, using different classes of a different Archtype.   Funny you do not see that.     I do not see the insult you blame me for.     But yea, you trying to say guardians do the same dps as a monk is comparable to me saying enchanters do the same DPS as the wizard.   </P> <P>I fail to see the insult, except that your argument is wrong.</P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>Hi.   I am a level 20 wizard.   I know conventional wisdom  says that Wizards do alot more DPS then enchanters.  I have also looked at the damage amounts on both our spells.   But, I still believe that I am right, and that Enchanters do almost the same damage as wizards.   I know when grouped, it sure looks like that mobs dies alot faster with wizards then with enchanters.  But, the eye can be deceiving.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Until someone can post controlled parses, with tools only a developer would have, I will continue to post ms unsubstantiated BS as if it were fact, because you cannot prove me wrong.</P> <P>Enchanters do almost as much damage as wizards, and there is nothing you can do about it.   *covers ears*  lalalala</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>You are grossly, incomprehensibly and incontrovertibly WRONG.<BR><BR>Enchanters do LESS damage than a PRIEST.<BR><BR>Read that again.<BR><BR>Enchanters < Priest for DPS.<BR><BR>I have the parses to prove it!  There is another thread here in the Guardian forums where I was showing some DPS comparisions for a group I had.  My Priest and an Illusionist were both present in this group and through the course of these fights you can see us both going neck in neck for DPS, with my Priest coming out ever so slightly ahead at the end of the night for overall DPS.<BR><BR>Wizards do a SICK amount of damage.  So much so they are forced to control themselves to avoid pulling aggro.<BR><BR>If you want to have ANYONE buy that you better back it up with some numbers, because I already HAVE the numbers and Enchanter DPS is currently VERY weak.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>/sigh</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I give up fellas.   Its obvious this conversation is not going to go anywhere.</DIV><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:25 PM</span>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>uglak wrote:I am attacking your argument. I am saying the EXACT same thing you are saying, using different classes of a different Archtype. Funny you do not see that. I do not see the insult you blame me for. But yea, you trying to say guardians do the same dps as a monk is comparable to me saying enchanters do the same DPS as the wizard.<p>I fail to see the insult, except that your argument is wrong.</p><div></div><hr></blockquote>This is what I saw. If it's not what you meant I apologize:<blockquote><hr>Hi. I am a level 20 wizard.<hr></blockquote>You attacked the source, implying that no level 20 character would have any clue about how the class worked. True, they may have inexperience that will affect their argument, but just because they're level 20 doesn't mean that they're stupid.<blockquote><hr>I know conventional wisdom says that Wizards do a lot more DPS then enchanters. I have also looked at the damage amounts on both our spells. But, I still believe that I am right, and that Enchanters do almost the same damage as wizards.<hr></blockquote>You're misstating the premise, even by analogy. Perhaps you believe that I've been claiming that Monk and Guardian DPS are the same. If so, then I apologize for being unclear. I don't believe that they are the same at all, but I'm not convinced that they are as hugely different as many seem to claim. I've gotten the impression that many feel that Monk DPS is twice what Guardian DPS is. I suspect that Monk DPS is closer to 15% - 25% higher, but I'm not sure. I'm looking for numbers to prove or disprove my hypothesis, and getting attacked for even <i>thinking</i> that Guardian DPS might be so high.<blockquote><hr>Until someone can post controlled parses, with tools only a developer would have, I will continue to post ms unsubstantiated BS as if it were fact, because you cannot prove me wrong.Enchanters do almost as much damage as wizards, and there is nothing you can do about it. *covers ears* lalalala<hr></blockquote>I percieved insults: 1) That I would post BS as if it were fact. I try to label my opinions as such. I only claim facts when I have tested or experienced something myself, or when I find a source that I trust and can point others to, to evaluate that source's trustworthiness themselves. 2) Implied is that I will ignore any evidence that runs counter to my ideas. I have never done so, indeed I have reversed myself when proven wrong. Go read the Guardian Identity thread. However, if anyone posts evidence that runs counter to my ideas I will most certainly scrutinize them to see if the evidence is skewed.

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:Go look at the numbers man. I am of the opinion that Enchanters DPS *should* be higher than Priest DPS - by a good margin. The fact that it is NOT is a big problem. By dude - anyone who claims that Enchanter damage is anywhere NEAR the damage of a Wizard . . . I want some of what they are smokin', cuz I haven't had anything nearly that good since I was in college. <div></div><hr></blockquote>Um, Banditman, he was being sarcastic. He was trying to counter my argument with analogy. IMHO he did it badly, but that's what he was trying to do.

[TheMeatShie]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:Correct, you are better at soaking damage, I'm better at avoiding it. Who is best tank? Thats right, we should be equal.<hr></blockquote>Lets consider this whole "Guardians mitigate, Monks Avoid" on a roleplay perspective... You swing a blade at the chest of a Guardian wearing an Ebon Vanguard Cuirass wielding a five foot tower shield, and although your hit connects, due to the 2 inches of armor that it doesnt go through, you dont actually cut the Guardian - as far as the system is concerned, its a miss.  You land the same power swing on a Monk and strike him in the chest, that Gi he is wearing does not protect his chest from the entire blow.  Now monks wear light armor, so they are able to flat out dodge the attacks more, but since Guardians are standing there with a five foot tower shield behind 2inches of armor, alot of the hits that do land are as good as misses.  Wow almost seems like avoidance can be the same if you think roleplay. Now, lets consider this from a game system perspective... i dont think anyone argues that mitigation isnt more effective against high damaging mobs, and a large portion of the curve against medium damage mobs.  It is less spikey, when your taking mass amounts of hits you have less chance of those hits hitting for full, keeping the damage more spread out over an average amount, and making it easier for priest classes to keep you healed due to recast of spells.  Now if they tried as hard as they could to make avoidance vs mitigation for these two classes balanced, Guardian would keep an edge... i just dont see any other system they could use where avoidance vs mitigation was balanced between the two and it was any different, because when they design future raid content around the idea of this "superior mitigation" that you are wanting them to give guardians in lue of more monk avoidance, that will make them that much harder for any other class to tank... Remember GoD?  Remember knights saying that the mitigation of defensive was so powerful that a VT warrior could tank the trials with more chance to succeed than a PoT knight? Not necissarily that VT warrior would get hit less, but cutting the mitigation of the mob by x%'s is making it to where that spikey damage isnt spikey... What im trying to show you is balancing avoidance tanking vs mitigation tanking is very near impossible, and by trying to fill the role of an "avoidance raid tank" you will really screw yourself over in the end... seriously, if they balanced that, you would dps just like us too ') you would lose feign, your CA's would be decreased, lose invis, well lets just say you would be a Guardian with a different avatar =P</span> <div></div><p>Message Edited by TheMeatShield on <span class=date_text>04-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:09 PM</span>

[TheMeatShie]

<span><blockquote><hr>FamilyManFirst wrote:I have to disagree with you a bit here. I think that the Fighter Archetype is one of two with some rigid requirements. The other Archetype is the Priest. If any Priest subclass heals better than the other subclasses then that subclass will be highly favored, possibly required for groups. If any Priest subclass heals more poorly than the others it will be highly disfavored; you can see it now with the Fury subclass. The devs are planning some rebalancing with LU#7, partly to address this issue.The Fighter Archetype has similar stringent requirements. The primary job of the Fighter is to dissipate damage. They also must be able to gain and keep aggro, but that's not such a big deal so long as all Fighters can do it. Berserkers are the aggro masters and it doesn't overbalance them as The Most Favored Fighter. However, any Fighter subclass that dissipates damage, whether through Mitigation or Avoidance, better than the other subclasses becomes the highly favored, possibly required Fighter in groups, particularly in raids or min/max groups (such as XP groups). Thus, the variation between Fighter sub-classes in damage dissipation can't be too great.Therefore, I believe that the devs had to look elsewhere for variation and balance. They couldn't vary damage dissipation much so, instead, they varied other things, including Taunts. They gave all Fighter subclasses two lines of Taunts but they gave the Warrior class an extra line. Brawlers got DPS skills instead and Crusaders got healing/draining skills instead.Just my opinion.<hr></blockquote>I dont think comparing an issue like DPS vs Taunts or Avoidance vs Mitigation does the system any justice though... That was like Druids comparing heals to Clerics in eq1... Yeah, at raids druids fell into priest category alot, and Clerics had better heals.  Did this make druids less of a class than clerics?  I dont believe so, considering you still needed their buffs, they brough heals to a raid that still helped tremendously (think wood), and i havent met a cleric to this day that i have seen Quad Kite in plane of fire. The same goes for necros.... when a raid is clearing trash to get to bosses, a wizards dps will almost always surpass that of a necro ... But can wizard charm kite, maintain pets, or regen the mana of a necro? My point is there are alot of ways to balance classes, due to being a game with so much depth and situations.  I think the best thing for any class isnt to try to be 2nd to any in a role, it is to try to define a role for themselves... in eq1 monks played the roles of pullers for a long time, i dont see that nearly as prevalent in eq2.  Alot of people here ADMIT that avoidance isnt as good as mitigation when it comes to tanking raid mobs.  The sad fact is, if one class has even a slight edge on tanking a raid mob, the guild fighting that mob is going to want the person with that edge tanking it, because it makes the success chance better.  With so many factors to consider, it is almost impossible to balance it to where no class has an edge in tanking raid mobs without totally revamping the Guardian class - we are the purest defensive plate tank in the game and our skills/abilities have been balanced around the idea that we are trading offensive arts and helpful utility for that defense. </span><div></div>

[Nemi]

TheMeatShield:If you want to think roleplay, how does this do?7ft tall muscled Guardian is full Ebon Amor swings his sword at the Monk. The Monk dodges the blade swings and dances around the slow moving plater wearer. The Guardian manages to land a hit, but the Monk *Deflects* the blade and pulls some Kung Fu/Matrix dodge and instead of cleaving the Monk in two, the Blade just nicks through the armour and causes a gash. The Monk then counterattacks under the helm of the Knight, into the throat/windpipe instantly killing him.See, Monks are uber and Guardians suck.Don't try to bring roleplay/real life into an argument about class balance.

[TheMeatShie]

<div></div>Nemi, were not talking "lets make up an uber story and be superman" .... were talking showing a reason why a guardian wearing full plate can have as good avoidance as a monk.. See many people that ive read posts recently are of the thought that avoidance is dodging a blow... avoidance is avoiding damage from a blow IMHO... My roleplay perspective on it isnt to say "ooh neener neener i killed you" ... it was to express the idea that not all avoidance is dodging, and if that is the case then monks are not the "masters of avoidance" now are they? There is a big difference between making up a "roleplay" scenario to try to say something is superior to another, and making up a "roleplay" scenario to point out something that would be alot harder to point out with technical writing... So im sorry if you dont realize that this game is, um... a roleplay game? and um, "true balance" doesnt exist in it, because "balance" is a word used to describe players feeling that the helpful skills they get are good tradeoffs for the helpful skills other classes get... <div></div><p>Message Edited by TheMeatShield on <span class=date_text>04-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:06 AM</span>

[Nemi]

You're creating a roleplay environment to further your argument. My point is that I can create a roleplay environment that furthers my cause. End result, nothing is added.I can equally say that Monks, being of focused will and one with their body and environment, can channel the Ki (body energy) to use their hands and body to *Deflect* the swing of a sword. Thus a Monks mitigation can be as equally high as a fully clad Warrior.Plenty of lore exists of Monks using force of will to absorb blows that would kill a normal being. Turning their skin as strong as iron using Ki.So I can equally argue on your basis that Monk mitigation should be as high as an Ebon clad Warrior.<p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>04-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:09 PM</span>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>well you guys gotta keep in mind, this is EQ2, you arent some super hero, or a hero at all for that matter, you are just an angry mobb of adventurers/bounty hunters that makes a living by doing a job....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so when it comes to raid time, you are just an even larger angry mob come to do a bigger job..LOL. You are not some fantastical monk of lore, nor are you some fantasy based knight in shining armor either....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>guardians walk around in dingy armor and monks dont walk around with thier **SOULGLOW** aura either...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>you are the last dragon, you possess the power of the GLOW!!!!!!! - Quote the last dragon, Bruce Leroy, </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>WHOS THE BADDEST??? = <FONT size=5>SHOW-NUFF!!!!:smileyvery-happy:</FONT></DIV>

[TheMeatShie]

Nothing is added but the thought behind the arguement... which is the only thing i was trying to convey.  I used a roleplay environment to convey that, i could have just as easily said "Guardians are avoidance tanks just as much as monks are" ... but then, without all those pretty words and colors, would it have made as much sense? no... so, it added something.. Realize that when you talk about class balance, its a SUBJECTIVE matter... you can use all the obejctive numbers for your assertions that you want, in the end, balance is SUBJECTIVE... <div></div>

[SageMarrow]

<P>most definately, subjective meaning that the situation a given class was designed for is also the situation that he will be put in most often.</P>

[TheMeatShie]

Subjective in the fact that when you are comparing classes in a game with as many diverse abilities as everquest2, you are comparing apples to oranges.  The effectiveness of something is as much an opinion as anything else, because it is impossible to totally objectively compare two different gray things. Like compare lifetaps and heals... which is more powerful?  Some may say the added offense of a lifetap is a trade off for the extra recovery abilities a heal gives..  some may argue the exact opposite, and use the much lesser number of healing/damage on a lifetap as an objective number vs the objective number on a heal... My point is even using these numbers that are very so much factual, the end result is a subjective arguement, because the belief itself is an opinion. And i am also of the mind that the more people whine about how weak their class is, the more people in game that read the forums will look down upon the powers of that given class... The more people that play a class preach how [Removed for Content] they are, the more others will start to believe it. The truth is, for years the exact same arguements went on with eq1.  The single topic debate was different, but there were always people who said "omgz that class is so much more powerful"... were they right? /shrug opinion... but for every person that whined about their class, i knew many people in game that had strong characters in the same class, played them well, and didnt see those problems. <div></div>

[Nemi]

Sigh,No-one is whining that their class sux, noone is saying their class is [Removed for Content].If you cannot compare two classes given that they are designed to do the same job then you lack a fundamental human trait of reasoning.You have an electric lawnmower, I have a petrol lawn mower. By your argument it is impossible to compare them.

[TheMeatShie]

no, you can easily compare, the impossiblity comes in when you try to use words like "better", for these words are "opinions" that come from data that is "subjective" It is the human traits that make these things opinions... <div></div>

[Nemi]

<blockquote><hr>TheMeatShield wrote:no, you can easily compare, the impossiblity comes in when you try to use words like "better", for these words are "opinions" that come from data that is "subjective" It is the human traits that make these things opinions... <div></div><hr></blockquote>An opinion is a mindset lacking facts.I can factually prove a petrol lawnmower will handle a given situation better than the electric mower. Therefore I can state which is better in that situation. That applies to Everquest 2 and Tank classes vs raid mobs.

[TheMeatShie]

<div></div>If your petrol lawnmower can mow my lawn faster than my lawnmower, does it mean that it is a better lawnmower? Does it mean i should convert my lawnmower to work like a petrol lawnmower? Or would there be tradeoffs, like say pollution, that would make the decision between the two become an opinion? <div></div><p>Message Edited by TheMeatShield on <span class=date_text>04-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:58 AM</span>