Guardian identity

[FamilyManFir]

Edit: After having been informed of just how many mobs 30+ have stun and/or stifle abilites I am withdrawing this suggestion. I'll leave it up for anybody who wants to look at it. Severely lowering Guardians' (or any plate tanks') Avoidance looks like it may very well [Removed for Content] the class and that's not what I want to see happen.<hr>If, as SOE apparently wants, all Fighters tank equally well, just why exactly should anyone play a Guardian? Every other subclass has an identity and some moderate specialization.<UL><LI>The Berserker is the Reckless Warrior and the King of Aggro.</LI><LI>The Monk is the Martial Artist and the King of Avoidance.</LI><LI>The Bruiser is the Rough-and-Tumble Boxer and the King of DPS (for Fighters, anyway <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />).</LI><LI>The Paladin is the Knight In Shiny Armor and the only (?) Fighter with heals.</LI><LI>The Shadow Knight is the Dark, Demonic, Anti-Paladin with Lifetaps to suck out life and soul.</LI><LI>The Guardian is ... well, he is ... I mean, he's ...</LI>Just what is he (or she), anyway?</UL>Guardians can't be the Best Tank, I'm sorry. That's unbalancing and game-breaking, just like having a Best Healer. So what can Guardians be and what can Guardians have?For my money, the Guardian ought to be the King of Mitigation and the Protector of Others.It makes some poetic sense, after all. The Guardian is, to me, the epitome of the Hardy Soldier, able to wear the heaviest of armor and use any weapon or shield with skill. Moreover, just from the name, a Guardian should <i>Guard</i> others.So if SOE gave Guardians buffs for Mitigation instead of Defense and altered some group-buffs to give nice benefits for others <i>but not Guardians themselves</i> (that could easily make them Best Tank again, no-no) then you'd have a very interesting dynamic.Think about it. Consider a Guardian vs. a Monk in this scenario. Both would dissipate damage equally well, one through Mitigation and one through Avoidance. However, the Monk would (and does) have the weakness of susceptibility to the RNG. A bad run of luck and the Monk would be in danger of his/her life if not dead.The Guardian wouldn't care about the RNG very much, but s/he <i>would</i> have a weakness - a low Avoidance. Thus the Guardian would be subject to a lot of special effects that the Monk wouldn't; more mob CAs would get through that would include stuns, stifles, and extra damage. Heck, against mobs that use stuns and stifles a lot the Guardian would be struggling to use her/his buffs and taunts.How's that for give-and-take?A Monk would have his or her current utility that Guardians keep pointing out, but Guardians would have their own utility - the Guardian protective buffs that would affect others but not themselves. They wouldn't be useful all the time, but when your group faces the mobs that Barrage, or AOE Spell (including raid mobs - I hear that those often have devastating AOE attacks) the party would be <i>very</i> happy to have those buffs from the Guardian, whether the Guardian was MT or not.I rather doubt that SOE will pick up on this, or implement it. But I liked the idea so much that I had to post it. What do you think?<p>Message Edited by FamilyManFirst on <span class=date_text>04-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:30 PM</span>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>in a raid situation only a few things matter, and the MT's dps isnt on that list. Basically its a generic issue because brawlers are the only ones that cant tank reliably in a raid situation, but at the same time - to some extent - brawlers actually can.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Heavy armor makes any tank outside of brawlers a decent-good tank based on their gear. Now when it comes down to a guardian being OVERPOWERED... maybe. but thats not what the tanking debate is founded upon. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Its about guardians being the best tanks.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>consider this, if they take a significant portion of a guardians avoidance, then you just put paladins on the table as the best raid tank. Did you forget about GreenDragonKnights post about how guardians suck = and that he could heal himself for 250k HP over the course of the fight?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Which yet again brings me back to my point that the system is screwed and that they will be nerfing and boosting till no end since they didnt think these things out when they gave the classes the skills and abilities that they did.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text>ive heard stories of shadowknights as guild raid MT's, we have even had jez the bruiser... the two least likely of the six. So all that can honestly be alleviated from the equation of who can or cannot.  Which leaves one end result, </SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text>guardians being the best tank...</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text>Which within the current setup is unavoidable. IMO if they nerf defense they just run a course of making tanking in raids impossible for brawler types and those that cant have Maximum effectiveness from buff stacking and such. while a paladinz heals would suffice for the defensive lack, a shadowknights lifetaps would not, and a bruiser/monks avoidance wouldnt be enough to carry them against the mobs in question and not over power them against normal encounters due to scaling issues - both up and down...</SPAN></DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:10 PM</span>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  No guardian wants to be relagated to a buff class anymore then a monk. No thanks.</P> <P>  Guardians should not be the BEST tank, they should be the best DEFENSIVE tank.</P>

[seudai]

<div></div>Agreed.  Who would invite someone to thier group just to get a few defense and sta buffs.  A mage is going to die in a few hits anyways regardless.  They will invite more DPS and more people who can buff thier dps.  Please quit posting on how you think you can fix guardians issues, espically when alot of you dont even play a guardian.  Let Sony do thier thing and quit crying about it. <div></div><p>Message Edited by seudainx on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:52 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P> No guardian wants to be relagated to a buff class anymore then a monk. No thanks.</P> <P> <FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians should not be the BEST tank, they should be the best DEFENSIVE tank.</FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>LoL, because that's different.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> seudainx wrote:<BR> Agreed.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Who would invite someone to thier group just to get a few defense and sta buffs.</FONT>  A mage is going to die in a few hits anyways regardless.  They will invite more DPS and more people who can buff thier dps.  Please quit posting on how you think you can fix guardians issues, espically when alot of you dont even play a guardian.  Let Sony do thier thing and quit crying about it.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Funny, plenty of classes rely on their buffs to get invites.  Of course its not a good enough reason for you, or me, for that matter.<BR>

[ugl]

<P>Are these fuggin monks bold or what?   Now, after they have (in their minds) made themselves the #1 offensive , and equally defensive tanks, theyre rewriting our class as buff [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]es...</P> <P>No.  Sorry.  If you are going to tank equally to a guardian, YOU are going to DPS equal to a guardian.   Period.  Anything less is unacceptable.   </P> <P>You guys just fricken amaze me...</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Any class that takes a punch as well as a guardian is also going to have to give a punch the same as a guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This includes zerkers, monks, brawlers, SK, and any other fighter.    You will be coming off with that DPS fellas...   No way around it.</DIV><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:04 AM</span>

[Gaige]

Doubtful, I imagine they'll raise scout DPS.  The DPS difference seems to scale with the variety/usefullness of the taunts for the classes.  /shrug

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P> No guardian wants to be relagated to a buff class anymore then a monk. No thanks.</P> <P> <FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians should not be the BEST tank, they should be the best DEFENSIVE tank.</FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>LoL, because that's different.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>  It is different. You and many other monks say "we should all be able to accomplish the same things, but in a different way." <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> So a guardian should be able to do it with defense. A bruiser with offense. A paladin with heals etc etc</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Heck if I said class xxx should not be the best tank, they should be the best OFFENSIVE tank, are you going to say that is the same thing too?</DIV><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:12 AM</span>

[ugl]

<P>So I do not have to trype it again, here is a copy/paste the [Removed for Content] elected to ignore on the last thread.</P> <P> </P> <DIV>Ha Ha!  Really?  That always gets thrown in my face about raids.  "NO MATTER WHAT SOE DOES YOU'LL NEVER BE CHOSEN FOR RAID MT BECAUSE OF YOUR LOWER HP AND LESS MITIGATION!!"  "EVASION IS TOO STREAKY, IN THE END GUARDIANS ARE BEST BECAUSE OF BLAH BLAH BLAH".</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So let me get this straight.  They don't mean jack anything or they are the difference between a raid tank and a non-raid tank?  Don't you guardians preach all day about how you chose the class for defense instead of DPS?  Now you are telling me that it doesn't matter?  Which is it, make up your minds already.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>You got a learning disablity or something.  They make a difference right NOW becaue you cannot tank equal to a guardian.  But, if you could tank equal to a guardian, they would NOT give us a perk.  Because they are abilities that make us tank batter.  IF we are EQUAL at tanking, then they would NOT be a advantage.   </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also, DPS = taunts.  The better taunts the lower DPS (guardians) the better DPS the lower taunts (bruiser).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>Where do you pull this crap out of?  I think we know, straight outa your [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].   Since your disability continues to shine through, I will break it down for you.   DPS and TANKING gives you two roles for getting groups.  The role of TANK, and the role of DPS.   Even if yer BS was true, how many people or going to get invited to a group for a slot other then a tank, because they got taunts?   Weak, weak arguments.   But, you repeat them over and over.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We aren't going to tank like you.  We are going to evade.  You are going to mitigate.  Difference.  Just our tanking ability for the group/raid will be on par with yours (so will every other fighter, thus archetype balance).  The *way* we do it is different, the *style* we have is different, the *job* done is the same.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>If you are going to TANK equally, we are going to have to have equal DPS.   Thats just the way it is, otherwise it will be a unbalance.  But you know that.  So why do we got to repeat it to you over and over?  Because your a troll?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>You can have safe fall and FD for all I care, and mend is worthless.  Want our invis too?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>Yes, we do.  and you can enjoy your sentinal line of spells.  Your really going to like them I think.   </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Neg.  We are going to tank equally, that isn't unbalancing.  You will however taunt better, that's the DPS trade-off.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>DPS is not a trade off for taunting.   Glad it is in Gauges world.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No, I didn't play a monk in beta, I got to like 19.6 before beta ended.  I got in at the end, from some fileshack contest.  I don't know how I saw "super fighter" written on anything, since I was only a 19 brawler who mostly solo'd.  There we go with your DPS envy.  I thought guardians didn't care about it?  Which is it?  Besides quit acting like its a huge difference, it isn't.  I did?  I wasn't even a monk, and my only beta experience with a monk was a dev twinked lvl 50 from Gnomercy, who killed some lvl 14 klicknik mites for me so I could see the animation.  I did ask him about the end game though and he said "I dunno if we can tank end game stuff, my guild uses a guardian."  Go figure eh, high end EQ1 testing guild. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The agility nerf was mainly a repercussion against scouts, although it hurt us.  The devs were quick to patch in mitigation for us to make sure we could still tank.  Oh yeah, and your 11% increase was because agility affected you too, smart guy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>HAHAHAHA.  You are so right.  I'm sitting here saying my class should be the only raid MT because... oh wait, that's not me, that's your class.  You want to ensure you get the only raid MT spot so that you always get guild/raid/group invites.  It'd be a nice niche wouldn't it?  I mean a raid w/o a guardian failing because only guardians can MT raid stuff?   That's what you want, you just try to hide it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>The only reason you cannot tank raid mobs is because you dont have a guild, or you stink at tanking.   Sorry, Brawlers, Paladins, SKs have all shown they can tank raid mobs.   </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for me being superman, yup.  That's why I fight so hard for equality among all the subclasses in an archetype, because I want to be the best.  Oh wait, if I get what I want, which is true interchangeability and balance, then all fighters would be superman, cuz we'd all be just as effective at doing our job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>Yes, apparantly, Moorguard is going to make you better able at tanking.  Enjoy losing your spot as a DPS class, becauce your DPS is going to have to become equivilant of a guardians.   That means, in a nutshell, your going to now compete with all other fighters for one group spot.  You are going to LOSE you DPS spot.   So, enjoy your LFG tag, cause you are all going to be wearing it alot.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Quit assuming guys, its clear you don't know anything about me.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>We know plenty about you.  Mainly, your a troll.  But also, your a immature troll with plenty of free time on his hands.  You also a troll thats wants to be the super fighter class.  Its not going to happen.  Yea, we are going to tank equally, as well as do everything else equally.   You better hope you can solo well, because competition for the tank spot is crowded right now.  And even though you tank equally, perception is still going to kill you.  Your about to lose your spot at DPS at raids and groups.   But, least you can compete for that coveted tank slot.   Enjoy your LFG tag. </FONT></DIV></DIV>

[ugl]

<DIV>And here is a rebuttel for the DPS offsets taunting gauge seems to liek to throw out.   Ill just keep copying and pasting them on all the threads these [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] keep spamming...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <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></DIV>

[ugl]

<P>On the bright side, this post by the screaming monk posse does show that they fully understand the situation.</P> <P> </P> <P>If monks can tank equal to a guardian and fill DPS slots, the classes will not be remotely balanced.    </P>

[Gaige]

<DIV>You are wrong about DPS for taunts.  That is the trade off.  The class with the worst DPS has the best taunts (guardian), the class with the best DPS (bruiser) has the worst taunts.  All the rest of us fall in the middle.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Berzerkers are hard to classify, because of their skills that generate aggro.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote: <P>  It is different. You and many other monks say "we should all be able to accomplish the same things, but in a different way." </P> <DIV> So a guardian should be able to do it with defense. A bruiser with offense. A paladin with heals etc etc</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Heck if I said class xxx should not be the best tank, they should be the best OFFENSIVE tank, are you going to say that is the same thing too?</DIV> <P>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <SPAN class=date_text>04-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:12 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Can the best offensive tank still tank the same stuff as the best defensive tank, or against hard mobs is the best offensive tank regulated to a buff bot / damage dealing role?</P> <P>Honestly.<BR></P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <DIV>You are wrong about DPS for taunts.  That is the trade off.  The class with the worst DPS has the best taunts (guardian), the class with the best DPS (bruiser) has the worst taunts.  All the rest of us fall in the middle.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Berzerkers are hard to classify, because of their skills that generate aggro.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>No, the class with the best DEFENSE has the WORST DPS, the class with the BEST offense has the worst DEFENSE.   That is how it stands now.  </P> <P>It will never fly.  Your going to lose your offense if you gain equal defense.   And all your well thought out one liners will not change that.   </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <DIV>You are wrong about DPS for taunts.  That is the trade off.  The class with the worst DPS has the best taunts (guardian), the class with the best DPS (bruiser) has the worst taunts.  All the rest of us fall in the middle.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Berzerkers are hard to classify, because of their skills that generate aggro.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>No, the class with the best DEFENSE has the WORST DPS, the class with the BEST offense has the worst DEFENSE.   That is how it stands now. </P> <P>It will never fly.  Your going to lose your offense if you gain equal defense.   And all your well thought out one liners will not change that.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I presume you work for SoE?</P> <P>How about this... I'll bet you that they raise scouts damage, and leave ours as is, and still balance the tanking ability of the archetype.</P> <P>DPS is traded for taunts, if it was trading for defense, we'd be scouts.</P> <P>While some fighters are more defensively oriented than others, we are all tanks. </P> <P>If its:</P> <P>Tanking ----------------------- Damage</P> <P>Then you are either a tank, or eventually a scout, or even worse so half [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] at both you are nothing.</P> <P>If its:</P> <P>Taunting ------------------------- Damage</P> <P>Then you are either a good damage sponge (ie meatshield) or you contribute damage to keep its attention; both attributes of a tank.<BR></P>

[ugl]

<DIV>Do you work for SOE?   And yes, I will take that bet.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>DPS gets you group slots.  Taunting does not.   That is why they are not equal.   But, you ignore that point, dont you?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> If you have the greateroffense and equal defense, you are not balanced.  Are you?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gaige]

<P>DPS should get you group slots if you are a MAGE subclass or a SCOUT subclass.</P> <P>NOT IF YOU ARE A FIGHTER.</P> <P>But you don't get that point, do you?</P> <P>Listen, its not hard to understand:</P> <P>IF we are trading defense for damage THEN PUT US IN THE SCOUT ARCHETYPE.</P> <P>Because if we are getting groups to do melee damage, THEN WE ARE SCOUTS.</P> <P>That is why your arguement is wrong.</P> <P>Who gives up tanking ability for melee damage and utility?  Scouts.</P> <P>Who gives up tanking ability for caster damage and utility? Mages.</P> <P>Who gives up tanking abiliyt for healing power and utility? Priests.</P> <P>Fighters can NOT give up tanking ability for damage, or else we are half [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] scouts.  We won't tank as good as "real" fighters and we won't damage as good as scouts, then, we'd be worthless.</P> <P>SoE feels the same, its evident by their changes:</P> <P>Scouts could tank ----> agility nerf -----> scouts can't tank.</P> <P>Priests can't all heal effectively ----> upcoming priest rebalance</P> <P>Agility hurt monk tanking ----> increase in light armor mitigation</P> <P>So please show me where they are increasing our damage, or introducing patches that take away from our defense and tanking ability?</P> <P>Please show me a dev statement that says other than "all fighters are tanks" and "brawlers have a role in our game: they are tanks".</P> <P>You're wrong man, its easy to see.</P>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<p>DPS should get you group slots if you are a MAGE subclass or a SCOUT subclass.</p> <p>NOT IF YOU ARE A FIGHTER.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> How can you have played to level 50 and be so blind as to how they game works? arrg I was gonna type out yet another long winded post but i give up... Your an idiot thats all there is too it...and arguing with an idiot is a futile effort. </span><div></div>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote: <P>  It is different. You and many other monks say "we should all be able to accomplish the same things, but in a different way." </P> <DIV> So a guardian should be able to do it with defense. A bruiser with offense. A paladin with heals etc etc</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Heck if I said class xxx should not be the best tank, they should be the best OFFENSIVE tank, are you going to say that is the same thing too?</DIV> <P>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <SPAN class=date_text>04-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:12 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Can the best offensive tank still tank the same stuff as the best defensive tank, or against hard mobs is the best offensive tank regulated to a buff bot / damage dealing role?</P> <P>Honestly.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>  I don't know. Seems to me the best independent tank (in terms of independent HP total aka healing) can raid MT. IE read paladin forums.</P> <P>  Seems to me the highest DPS fighter (best offensive tank) can raid MT. IE Jez.</P> <DIV>  Can the highest DPS (most offensive plate version) raid MT. Yea, read the post about zerkers here.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Can SKs MT, I don't know, but I bet an SK somewhere has. Plus, from what I have read SKs need a bone tossed to them anways.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  We know guardians can as best defensive plate tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Can monks? Not sure, none of you wanna try I guess, you want to just say you cannot. No way can a bruiser do it and the defensive brethen of a bruiser cannot. Of course, no try = no win, so your argument is perfectly valid, of course if all the paladins never tried they could use the same argument, as could any class.</DIV>

[FamilyManFir]

LOL, I didn't really mean to start yet another bickering session between the vocal Monks and the vocal Guardians but I guess it was inevitable.<blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote:<P> No guardian wants to be relagated to a buff class anymore then a monk. No thanks.</P><hr></blockquote>Yet isn't that where Monks are now? In raids at least? Regular play 1-50 appears sort-of balanced, although I personally think that there's still room for improvement, but maybe that's just me.My suggestion above wasn't meant to relegate Guardians to a buff class, it was to open a buff slot to Guardians while keeping the MT slot available too.<blockquote><hr><P> Guardians should not be the BEST tank, they should be the best DEFENSIVE tank.</P> <hr></blockquote>English, there is no such thing. Best Defense = Best Tank, pure and simple. The only time that won't be true is if the class with the best defense can't hold aggro, and all Fighters can do that, albeit some need to do more work to do so.BTW, FWIW for those reading my posts, I play a Berserker. I played a Monk up to 21 but I quit when they destroyed the class with the Agi nerf. If they ever, in my evaluation, get Monks back where they belong in the Fighter Archetype I may resume my Monk but it'll be awhile; I'm having fun with my Berserker.

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>English, there is no such thing. Best Defense = Best Tank</FONT>, pure and simple. The only time that won't be true is if the class with the best defense can't hold aggro, and all Fighters can do that, albeit some need to do more work to do so.<BR><BR>BTW, FWIW for those reading my posts, I play a Berserker. I played a Monk up to 21 but I quit when they destroyed the class with the Agi nerf. If they ever, in my evaluation, get Monks back where they belong in the Fighter Archetype I may resume my Monk but it'll be awhile; I'm having fun with my Berserker.<BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> Really, that's an amazing, yet incorrect, assumption. Paladins provide excellent tanks, many would argue better then a guardian in the paladin forums.</P> <P> A guardian is better at defense. His DPS tanking is below every other class (whether the margin is large or small). Paladins can heal, which gives them exponentially more HPs then a guardian. So all a guardian really has in his corner, is mitigation and defensive abilities. Oh, but zerkers have the SAME BASE mitigation. Now all a guardian has are defensive abilities.</P> <P>  Stop coming here saying Best Defense = Best Tank. That is NOT TRUE. If monks can avoid at 99% after the buff stacking fix but still cannot take a beating like a guardian because of his defensive abilities is the guardian still the best? No, but he is still the BEST DEFENSIVE TANK.</P> <P> If monks are in a buff role now, that is out of perception that they cannot tank, there is no proof they can't. And every day Jez does it, the more and more those arguments just fall through the cracks.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:26 PM</span>

[ugl]

Why can a bruiser tank it and a monk cannot?   You tell me?

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>uglak wrote:Why can a bruiser tank it and a monk cannot? You tell me? <hr></blockquote>LOL, I have no idea. It'll be a long time before my Monk is that high a level, if ever. Maybe Gage can comment.

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR>Why can a bruiser tank it and a monk cannot?   You tell me? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Its a simple answer, because they havent had a chance because the people with the mentaility that Guardians are the only raid tanks lead other people to believe the same thing when in acual fact any Fighter class can tank any part of the game.</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>04-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:49 PM</span>

[English Da Gua]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>Its simple answer, because they havent had a chance because the people with the metaility that Guardians are the only raids tank lead other people to believe the same thing when in acual fact any Fighter class can tank any part of the game.</BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> AND THE TRUTH....SHALL SET YOU FREE!!!</DIV>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE> AND THE TRUTH....SHALL SET YOU FREE!!!</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>AMEN Brother, AMEN.</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>

[Raea]

<DIV>Jez is a bruiser right?  The more offensive type of brawler...  In that case I really don't see why a monk can't tank the same [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raeani wrote:<BR> <DIV>Jez is a bruiser right?  The more offensive type of brawler...  In that case I really don't see why a monk can't tank the same [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Wow, how did you ever come to that conclusion?  It couldn't have been the other 16 people in this very thread that said the same thing?  Such keen insight!<BR>

[Margen]

<P>Shadow Knight here, like looking at the other tank forms to see thier problems and perceptions.  Maybe its perception or maybe its reality but there is a problem with tanking balance from what I've seen in the game.  On my server seems like the vast majority of tanks are Guardian's, and I've meet numerous people that state they consider you all the "True" tank.  </P> <P>As for raids yes I can tank at my level (only midlevel at this time, so can not speak on high level raids), but fortanutly I belong to a guild that doesn't min/max, most of the tanks get a chance to MT as long as they play their class well.  </P> <P>But, as a Shadow Knight, I see major problems and to be blunt it doesn't help when some of the Guaridians on this form make statements that they should be the first tank of choice.  For instance when on one of the other threads a person stated that Guairdians should always be the MT and the other tank classes should be dps or off tanks ... Kind of makes you grind your teeth if you play another tank class.  </P> <P>I personnaly do not want to see us go back to what we saw in eqlive when I left where only warriors could tank raid mobs, unless a pally or SK was so over equiped it was redicoulas.  I played a pally in EQlive and we really where not needed on raids.  Specially after warriors got taunt improvements, they could fill both MT and off tank duties, leaving the other two classes in a bind.</P> <P>Now this perception of mine might be partially due to me being a SK, right now we have some major problems (not saying a broken class, but we have some issues), things like under powered lifetaps, wards that last one hit, aggro generation problems, and skill set that sucks power like a hoover.  While Sk can produce descent dps, its not like we are going to take the place of beserker or monk/bruiser for that position.</P> <P>One other thing from an outsider perception, might be easier to read these postions, if everyone tried to breath deeply before typing.   The personnel attacks and screams don't make it easy to get through these sometimes <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 28th Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Margen wrote:<BR> <P>Shadow Knight here, like looking at the other tank forms to see thier problems and perceptions.  Maybe its perception or maybe its reality but there is a problem with tanking balance from what I've seen in the game.  <FONT color=#ffff00>On my server seems like the vast majority of tanks are Guardian's, and I've meet numerous people that state they consider you all the "True" tank.  </FONT></P> <P>As for raids yes I can tank at my level (only midlevel at this time, so can not speak on high level raids), but fortanutly I belong to a guild that doesn't min/max, most of the tanks get a chance to MT as long as they play their class well.  </P> <P>But, as a Shadow Knight, I see major problems and to be blunt it doesn't help when some of the Guaridians on this form make statements that they should be the first tank of choice.  For instance when on one of the other threads a person stated that Guairdians should always be the MT and the other tank classes should be dps or off tanks ... Kind of makes you grind your teeth if you play another tank class.  </P> <P>I personnaly do not want to see us go back to what we saw in eqlive when I left where only warriors could tank raid mobs, unless a pally or SK was so over equiped it was redicoulas.  I played a pally in EQlive and we really where not needed on raids.  Specially after warriors got taunt improvements, they could fill both MT and off tank duties, leaving the other two classes in a bind.</P> <P>Now this perception of mine might be partially due to me being a SK, right now we have some major problems (not saying a broken class, but we have some issues), things like under powered lifetaps, wards that last one hit, aggro generation problems, and skill set that sucks power like a hoover.  While Sk can produce descent dps, its not like we are going to take the place of beserker or monk/bruiser for that position.</P> <P>One other thing from an outsider perception, might be easier to read these postions, if everyone tried to breath deeply before typing.   The personnel attacks and screams don't make it easy to get through these sometimes <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 28th Troll Shadow Knight</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>  And that is the fault of the guardians? It is not our fault, as has been said twenty three million times, that the perception of "others" is that we are the best tank.</P> <P>  Sks need some improvments, we all know that. But you can all tank, at any level. And the OT vs MT debate is more so from the fact that if a zerker MTs he loses x amount of DPS. When a guardian MTs he loses y amount of DPS. </P> <P> X > Y</P> <P>   That is why many want a guardian to MT, because he loses less offense while MTing vs a DPS role, AND because of his lack of DPS (whether small or large) he is given better defensive abilities.</P> <P>  As is, every fighter will be getting a nerf here shortly with the buff stacking and def changes, so the best thing we can all do is simply wait and see what happens. I am sure in the end we will all be balanced, although I use that term loosely as it seems a lot think balance is "equal MTing ability on a raid" and that is not balance gamewide for fighters.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:02 PM</span>

[MoonglumHMV]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>English Da Guard wrote</P> <P> And that is the fault of the guardians? It is not our fault, as has been said twenty three million times, that the perception of "others" is that we are the best tank.</P> <P> Sks need some improvments, we all know that. But you can all tank, at any level. And the OT vs MT debate is more so from the fact that if a zerker MTs he loses x amount of DPS. When a guardian MTs he loses y amount of DPS.</P> <P> X > Y</P> <P>  That is why many want a guardian to MT, because he loses less offense while MTing vs a DPS role, AND because of his lack of DPS (whether small or large) he is given better defensive abilities.</P> <P> As is, every fighter will be getting a nerf here shortly with the buff stacking and def changes, <FONT color=#ffff00>so the best thing we can all do is simply wait and see what happens</FONT>. <FONT color=#66ff00>I am sure in the end we will all be balanced, although I use that term loosely as it seems a lot think balance is "equal MTing ability on a raid" and that is not balance gamewide for fighters</FONT>.</P> <P>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <SPAN class=date_text>04-03-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>05:02 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>On the first point, actually the worst thing we can do is to just sit back and see what SOE does to the fighter archtype.  We need to have intelegent discussion (not the nerf this, blame them, you're stupid, I'm right so end of story that every thread turns into on the topic), becuase believe it or not, the Devs do get their attention called to the forums, whether directly or from quotes from the Mods or whatever.  If we can bring to their attention even one thing that they might have overlooked it's more than worth it.</P> <P>The second point, amen brother.  The game needs to be balanced gamewide.  If the game is balanced by the raid MOB that will screw up the normal game (i.e. 1-50) to no end.  The changes they make, if they truely balance them, WILL balance things for every situation, while against the high end MOB's the smaller diffrences between the classes will grow bigger, they shouldn't grow big enough to either guarantee an easy victory or certain defeat.<BR></P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>FamilyManFirst wrote:</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>English, there is no such thing. Best Defense = Best Tank</FONT>, pure and simple. The only time that won't be true is if the class with the best defense can't hold aggro, and all Fighters can do that, albeit some need to do more work to do so.</P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> Really, that's an amazing, yet incorrect, assumption. Paladins provide excellent tanks, many would argue better then a guardian in the paladin forums.</P> <P> A guardian is better at defense. His DPS tanking is below every other class (whether the margin is large or small). Paladins can heal, which gives them exponentially more HPs then a guardian. So all a guardian really has in his corner, is mitigation and defensive abilities. Oh, but zerkers have the SAME BASE mitigation. Now all a guardian has are defensive abilities.</P> <P> Stop coming here saying Best Defense = Best Tank. That is NOT TRUE. If monks can avoid at 99% after the buff stacking fix but still cannot take a beating like a guardian because of his defensive abilities is the guardian still the best? No, but he is still the BEST DEFENSIVE TANK.</P> <P> If monks are in a buff role now, that is out of perception that they cannot tank, there is no proof they can't. And every day Jez does it, the more and more those arguments just fall through the cracks.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:26 PM</span><hr></blockquote>Under normal circumstances you are quite correct. A Tank with less-than-best defenses can still solo, small-group, quest, and adventure and have a good time. In many cases their alternate abilities (that are traded for fewer defenses) are highly valued by the groups they're in.The circumstances where you are incorrect is with min/maxers. Min/maxers will look for the absolute best defenses for the Tank, the absolute best healing for the Priests, and the absolute best DPS for their DPS slots. As I understand it, XP groups tend to work this way (I'm not sure since I don't play that way). Moreover, in most raid situations, mix/max tends to be the primary attitude of players. It's understandable, since raids generally are designed to be particularly tough.That seems to me to be why there's all this outcry about Guardians being overpowered. Since they have the best defenses they are, by a wide margin, THE preferred tank for raids, and, to a much smaller degree, the preferred tank for other groups as well.<hr><hr>Back to the original topic of this post, however, I am withdrawing this suggestion I made (I'll leave the original post up, although I'll add a postscript). I had a courteous and informative PM with someone who didn't want to dive into the fray but was willing to give me some info. According to his guesstimate, 100% of all melee mobs 30+ have some form of stun/stifle ability.Yikes.Now, even if he is incorrect by 30%, a 70% ratio of melee mobs with stun/stifle is far too high to severely lower plate tanks' Avoidance without gimping them. That's the last thing I want. I advocate equivalency, not super Fighter classes or [Removed for Content] Fighter classes.I also offer an apology, English, as you made this very point in <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=10349#M10349" target=_blank>one of our debates</a> on this topic (the Taunt vs. DPS vs. Tanking thread). I doubted your statement that a "majority" of mobs use stun/stifle, although I did request elaboration, and I tried to do so politely. You didn't answer, but this other person did, and that number is just too high.Dang. The idea had such nice symmetry too. Oh, well.

[English Da Gua]

<P>  Don't worry bro, these are the types of discussions I rather enjoy and that are constructive.</P> <P>   And just wanted to say, yes min / max will always go a certain route for success, but not everyone min / maxes and that is why it is so hard to balance things because we live in an EQ2 environment that is not black and white :smileyindifferent:</P> <P>  Anyways, it was a good attempt at an idea, and only reason I did not answer you in the other thread is because I truly did not know the % of mobs with that ability and didn't wanna state something without some sort of proof.</P> <P>   Keep up the ideas man, it only adds to the flavor of the game :smileyhappy:</P>

[Margen]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Margen wrote:<BR> <P>Shadow Knight here, like looking at the other tank forms to see thier problems and perceptions.  Maybe its perception or maybe its reality but there is a problem with tanking balance from what I've seen in the game.  <FONT color=#ffff00>On my server seems like the vast majority of tanks are Guardian's, and I've meet numerous people that state they consider you all the "True" tank.  </FONT></P> <P>As for raids yes I can tank at my level (only midlevel at this time, so can not speak on high level raids), but fortanutly I belong to a guild that doesn't min/max, most of the tanks get a chance to MT as long as they play their class well.  </P> <P>But, as a Shadow Knight, I see major problems and to be blunt it doesn't help when some of the Guaridians on this form make statements that they should be the first tank of choice.  For instance when on one of the other threads a person stated that Guairdians should always be the MT and the other tank classes should be dps or off tanks ... Kind of makes you grind your teeth if you play another tank class.  </P> <P>I personnaly do not want to see us go back to what we saw in eqlive when I left where only warriors could tank raid mobs, unless a pally or SK was so over equiped it was redicoulas.  I played a pally in EQlive and we really where not needed on raids.  Specially after warriors got taunt improvements, they could fill both MT and off tank duties, leaving the other two classes in a bind.</P> <P>Now this perception of mine might be partially due to me being a SK, right now we have some major problems (not saying a broken class, but we have some issues), things like under powered lifetaps, wards that last one hit, aggro generation problems, and skill set that sucks power like a hoover.  While Sk can produce descent dps, its not like we are going to take the place of beserker or monk/bruiser for that position.</P> <P>One other thing from an outsider perception, might be easier to read these postions, if everyone tried to breath deeply before typing.   The personnel attacks and screams don't make it easy to get through these sometimes <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 28th Troll Shadow Knight</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>  And that is the fault of the guardians? It is not our fault, as has been said twenty three million times, that the perception of "others" is that we are the best tank.</P> <P>  Sks need some improvments, we all know that. But you can all tank, at any level. And the OT vs MT debate is more so from the fact that if a zerker MTs he loses x amount of DPS. When a guardian MTs he loses y amount of DPS. </P> <P> X > Y</P> <P>   That is why many want a guardian to MT, because he loses less offense while MTing vs a DPS role, AND because of his lack of DPS (whether small or large) he is given better defensive abilities.</P> <P>  As is, every fighter will be getting a nerf here shortly with the buff stacking and def changes, so the best thing we can all do is simply wait and see what happens. I am sure in the end we will all be balanced, although I use that term loosely as it seems a lot think balance is "equal MTing ability on a raid" and that is not balance gamewide for fighters.</P> <P>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <SPAN class=date_text>04-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>05:02 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>English</DIV> <DIV>I never said that the perceptions where the fault of the guardian class, although I do see SOME guardian posters trying to reenforce this perception with the statements about guardians should always be the MT, with no guardians reputing these statements ( not directed at you personnaly, don't remember you making such a statement, and I am to lazy to go back through 20 page post to pull the names).  Or you get statements like well if you want to be a raid tank you should of rolled a guardian. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was just trying to make a point on the problems with tank balance as I see it.  And I am willing to bet money that Sony will be upping the MOBs dps in future expansions significantly, where the other tank classes will start running into problems staying standing on raid mobs.  At this time yes, we can tank through out the game, but I worry about the future.  And its not like our "Utility" will be that sought after in raid enviroment.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My point is only that ALL tanks should be wanted in raids/groups.  Can SK tank yeah, but your highend guild is not going to pick a SK for that job, because other classes will do the job alot better (namely Guardians and possibly pallys).  Just my perception on things.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>V/R</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Blackoath 29th Troll Shadow Knight</DIV>

[adrian]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<div></div> <div>You are wrong about DPS for taunts.  That is the trade off.  The class with the worst DPS has the best taunts (guardian), the class with the best DPS (bruiser) has the worst taunts.  All the rest of us fall in the middle.</div> <div> </div> <div>Berzerkers are hard to classify, because of their skills that generate aggro.</div><hr></blockquote> Nice logic for a group environment, but explain it to me in solo terms. If Guardians must have less DPS because of their taunts, not because of their DEF. Taunting in a solo encounter is nice way to pull up a HO, but I hardly see it as a trade off for DPS. If you are saying that Guardian taunts are our main weapon, then you are saying that Guardians must be a gimped class that can only group for monks to be balanced. You don't want equality, you just want what balance there is to be shifted in your favour, plain and simple. I have zippo DPS, and for solo work, I rely entirely on my DEF to get by. Common sense (I know that could be a tough concept to wrap your head around) doesn't play a big part in your suggestions. You seem to be focused on lvl 50 raid mobs as your solo view of what each class should be.  Frankly, I think you have a pretty narrow view on the larger game, and how people play their characters.  You have an opinion.. congratulations, we are all really happy for you. You would have to admit that just maybe you have a slightly biased opinion, as does everyone when it comes to their own class. The difference though, is that you seem to harbour a fair ammount of bitterness towards every other class for what you don't have. You tell Guardians to accept their lack of DPS, and then have "episodes" when others mention that you should accept the lackings in the monk class. It just seems that you don't want to find a comon ground, and since nothing that is said in here makes one scrap of difference to the direction of the game, you are only interested in creating some sort of cute lil bad boy reputation. It's just a game. Play your class, enjoy it, and find another place to moan about how uber you should be - noone here can make monks better, and noone here can make Guardians worse. Exactly what you are trying to achieve with your little tantrums is really  beyond me. You are increasing awareness of the issues monks are facing, you are just creating a bitterness that for some reason you seem to live for. </span><div></div>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  I know Margen, but what do you want me to say, everyone is entitled to their own opinions on who the best MT is. I mean if I shot down everyone's opinions with numbers and facts the monks would have nothing to post :smileywink:</P> <P>   In all seriousness the root of the problem is being looked into, not much more we can do but discuss things.</P> <P>  And you cannot compare SKs effectiveness, they need some work done to make them a little better, mainly better lifetaps.</P> <P>   Thing is, high end guilds typically min / max. No matter how much you try and balance, one fighter will always be 0.000001% better in some way and that alone will make that 'perception' of xxx class is best MT return. You can never remove that from game, just not possible unless you make every class identical.</P>

[Blade Park]

<P>SOE should just make 3 characters then maybe some of you will be happy... Who needs all the others anyways right?</P> <P>(Guardian) = TANK: Don't die while holding agro.</P> <P>(Wizard) = DPS: Cause maximum damage possible.</P> <P>(Cleric) = HEALER: Heal tank</P> <P>While they're at it, they should just make the tank and the healer look like rectangles and make the wizard a little square that we can bounce back and forth on the screen!</P> <P>If you're in a group with mages and healers and you have no tank, a monk would be a great tank. In fact, any fighter would make a great tank, so why is there more than one? It would probably get a little boring if there were only 3 classes. As for a monk falling under the scout class, maybe they should. They are probably right on the border of offence/defence but I'd be willing to bet that a monk would make a better tank then any scout, therefore they ended up in the fighter class.</P> <P>My choices above reflect MY PERSONAL OPINION of the best and specialized main classes. Does this mean that I require a Cleric? Of course not! A druid would be great too and guess what, they get more buffs! They might not heal as effeciently as a cleric but if they can do the job, then great! A Beserker for my MT? Sure! They will dish out more damage and the fight will end sooner. A Bard? What the hell is a Bard? I'm not too sure but I do know that when there's a bard in your group, things seem alot easier than they actually should be. Bards Rock!</P> <P>Out of my alts I have a Wizard and a Necro... what good is the Necro? Sure there are some that claim and may have proven <EM>(I really don't care right now)</EM> that their Necro hands out more DPS than a Wizard but that's not the point. They are both DPS. The Wizard is <EM>(supposed to be)</EM> more powerfull so why even pick the Necro? The Guardian is a better tank so why even pick the Beserker?</P> <P><STRONG>It's all for diversity. If you want to be the best in a class and have no extras, choose one of the three I listed. If you want to be who you want to be, DO IT!    ...do it!    ...do it!</STRONG></P>

[Subtlekni]

<span><span><blockquote><hr>Blade Parker wrote:<div></div> <p>My choices above reflect MY PERSONAL OPINION of the best and specialized main classes. Does this mean that I require a Cleric? Of course not! A druid would be great too and guess what, they get more buffs! They might not heal as effeciently as a cleric but if they can do the job, then great! A Beserker for my MT? Sure! They will dish out more damage and the fight will end sooner. A Bard? What the hell is a Bard? I'm not too sure but I do know that when there's a bard in your group, things seem alot easier than they actually should be. Bards Rock!</p><p><strong>It's all for diversity. If you want to be the best in a class and have no extras, choose one of the three I listed. If you want to be who you want to be, DO IT!    ...do it!    ...do it!</strong></p><hr></blockquote>Gonna have to disagree a tiny bit here.  First off, group with a warden before they fix the bug with stacking regens. One thing to say: OMG.   Shamans are getting shafted hard right now as far as keeping Guardians up. It's true. Wish I could fix them.   Warden + templer is much more effective than templer + templer even when regen stacking is fixed. The problem seems to be fighter type + fighter type being typically less than fighter type + scout for a group choice. But yeah, I will agree that this 'balancing' of classes is just gonna result in classes that are exactly the same with no difference. And who really wants that?</span></span><div></div>

[Mig]

Berserkers have the best taunts and agro generation Gage. Not guardians.

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Migyb wrote:<BR>Berserkers have the best taunts and agro generation Gage. Not guardians.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>He knows that.  He just doesn't like to let the facts stand in the way of his arguments.

[Blade Park]

<P>Yeah my post was meant to be general.. I'd hate to waste too much time researching every buff, AC, %'s etc and comparing every detail when they will change with an update. I think I got my point across and you summed it up quite nicely...</P> <P> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Subtleknife wrote:<BR><SPAN><SPAN><BR>I will agree that this 'balancing' of classes is just gonna result in classes that are exactly the same with no difference. And who really wants that?<BR></SPAN><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P>

[Gaige]

<P>Which is why I said they are hard to classify due to their CAs that add hate.</P> <P>But if you look at the other five fighters that isn't the case, and the DPS/taunt relationship is evident.</P>

[Mig]

<blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<P>Which is why I said they are hard to classify due to their CAs that add hate.</P> <P>But if you look at the other five fighters that isn't the case, and the DPS/taunt relationship is evident.</P> <hr></blockquote>I will classify them for you:1)See? Easy!