Combat Changes on Test

[Moontayle]

<DIV> <P><STRONG>This is currently on the Test Server as far as changes go. </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG></STRONG> </P> <P><STRONG></STRONG></P> <HR> <P></P> <P><STRONG>Avoidance</STRONG></P> <P>- Your likelihood of avoiding an attack is now based on two primary factors:<BR><SPAN>  </SPAN>- The con color of the attacker.<BR><SPAN>  </SPAN>- The type of armor you are wearing. The heavier your armor, the lower your chances of avoiding an attack.<BR>  - Increasing your Defense skill gives you a better chance of avoiding attacks, but there is now a cap on how much it can be buffed or debuffed.<BR>  - Increasing your Agility improves your base chance of avoiding an attack, but it will not improve your likelihood of parrying, deflecting, or blocking with a shield.<BR>  - There is now a cap on the effectiveness of Deflection buffs and debuffs.<BR>  - Mages and Priests no longer receive the Parry skill. It temporarily still shows in the Skills window, but these archetypes will no longer have any chance to parry.<BR>  - There is no longer any way to buff the Parry skill over your current skill cap, and there is a limit on how far it can be debuffed.<BR>  - Shields now have the following base chances to Block: Tower (20%), Kite (19%), Round (5%), Buckler (3%). Your chances to Block scale up or down based on the con of your opponent. Shield buffs no longer have any effect.</P> <P><STRONG>Mitigation<BR></STRONG>- The base mitigation values of armor have been adjusted as follows: Heavy (35%), Medium (25%), Light (20%), Very Light (10%).<BR>- Mitigation values scale up or down based on the con color of your attacker.<BR>- There is now a cap on how much mitigation can be buffed or debuffed.</P> <P><STRONG>Damage<BR></STRONG>- Melee damage bonuses are now calculated based on the attacker's strength versus the defender's agility.<BR>- The damage output of both players and NPCs should now increase more smoothly rather than receiving a sharp boost at levels 10 and 20.</P> <P></P> <HR> <P></P> <P>I'm willing to take this in stride if it works like they want it to. Having a base 20% with a Tower shield will be good, and the 19% at Kite shield won't hurt too much if the stats are better, so that gives us more variety if we're willing to part with that 1%. Scaling mitigation and avoidance based on opponents level already happened so that's no big deal.</P> <P>However, the Parry thing worries me. Guardian's Call and Call to Battle both buff Parry so what is going to happen to those two skills?</P> <P>So essentially it looks good on paper. Now to see what it's like in the field.</P></DIV>

[Thornow]

What happened to never surrender???? LoL

[IvarIronhea]

<P>Some of my concerns: </P> <P>Parry cannot be buffed - what happens to our parry buffs?</P> <P>Defense is capped - will this limit our character growth and group desirability? That is, why bother raising a defense buff skill or have more than a certain amount of defense buffing in a group?</P> <P>Less dodging with heavy armor - am I going to be effectively silenced(via crushing blow) in an encounter with more than one NPC? Not this will make it very hard to cast the aggro inducing buffs and group taunts due to cast duraiton.</P> <P> </P> <P>These are things that popped into my head while reading that, its really pretty vague right now so hard to determine the totality of the changes yet. Are there any higher level guards/serkers on test who can check this out?</P>

[English Da Gua]

<DIV>  I am sure they are taking a look at a guardians ability to avoid / be stunned.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  What people tend to miss is that a guardian, as well as any plate tank, will be rendered 100% useless if his avoidance is so low that he can't avoid a large amount of attacks. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   If this is not taken care of, either through spell additions or inherent stun avoidance abilities, you will see many guardians quit, as it will not equate to balance, but a totally useless class.</DIV>

[Kryog]

Well our class really has only one use anyway - meat shield. I can do away with parry buffs.   I just don't want my mitigation to fall too much and/or my avoidance to severely be crippled (dodge, block, parry, and riposte).  I have a feeling that SOE is doing a knee-jerk reaction and effectively debuffing everyone TOO much in order to compensate for the fact that people are winning fights that they feel shouldn't be winnable.   Example:  Vindication doing Venekor with 15 people.   I'm fairly sure a Group x 4 mob should require 4 groups, especially if its 53rd+ and such.  But I digress. I've always contended that we should remain right around 50% / 50%.  Looks like we're pushing 40/50 or so with these updates, but I won't know until this goes live.  Would like to see someone on test comment. <div></div>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <DIV>  I am sure they are taking a look at a guardians ability to avoid / be stunned.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  What people tend to miss is that a guardian, as well as any plate tank, will be rendered 100% useless if his avoidance is so low that he can't avoid a large amount of attacks. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   If this is not taken care of, either through spell additions or inherent stun avoidance abilities, you will see many guardians quit, as it will not equate to balance, but a totally useless class.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>You have more faith then I do.  But I hope your right. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>If the defense is capped, does that mean that any other tank class will have the same amount of defense as a guardian, if they have a warder/troub with them?  Would that make a troub/warden defense buffs worthless when theyre grouped with a guard?</P> <DIV>IE> Will a gnome zerker/paladin/monk grouped with a troub/warden have the same defense as a ogre guard grouped with a troub/warden?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Depending on the cap, this could make alot of our defense buffs/racial traits etc. worthless in raids.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But, guess we do not know for sure until we see that cap...  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I bet the bards are nervouse...</DIV><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:53 AM</span>

[Rolsda]

<P>Lets see what happens guys with the patch. no point speculating till we either get some hard data from test or wait till patch.</P> <P>If they nerf us to much, all we have to do is shout as loud as the other classes that already have and get it changed :smileywink:</P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>it seems like they are down scaling everything, mob damage spikes and all.</P> <P>They are also boosting preist heals, so something tells me this is the tip of the ice berg and we will be getting some changes to taunts and such when the preist balancing ensues..</P>

[ugl]

<P>Caps are never a good thing from past experience.   Why upgrade armor if you already have the cap?  Why raise stats if you can reach the cap?   Why have x class in your group if you can reach the cap?  Why have x buff if y buff already made you reach the cap?  What good is X fable loot if your already at the cap?</P> <P>It limits your character building, group building, etc.   Caps are generally a band aid fix to a deeper problem.   They limit your options/strategies etc. for both group make up and your character make up.</P> <P>Of course, we do not really know where these caps are and how far its going to be taken..</P> <P>Did that just say that all heavy armor will have the same mitigation?   As in, Ebon not gonna help much over fulginate?  </P>

[Boli32]

Now lets all bow our heads and pray for the lost fighters... the crusaders who got stuck between the brawlers and the guardians and were subsequently crushed to death. Guradians needed to be adjusted... we all knew it was coming - you'll avoid less but mitigate more just like moorguard promised... and just like he promised Pallys the gimped guardians will no longer be able to cast a single spell in comabt and hang up our holy boots in shame at the inability to farm greys. <div></div>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>uglak wrote:<p> </p><p>Did that just say that all heavy armor will have the same mitigation?   As in, Ebon not gonna help much over fulginate?  </p><hr></blockquote> Thats the first question I had when I read the patch notes...ok maybe not the real first question i had was..."Do Mages really need a nerf in tanking..." =P It said "BASE" mitigation of HA will be 35%.  What does BASE mean...for that matter what does the mitigation value on the armor pieces themselves mean?  Is everything based around "average/common" gear for a particular tier...i.e A full set of fulginate will equal 35% mitigation...so Ebon and better drops will increase that somewhat? Why oh why do they need to complicate things even more?</span><div></div>

[Geothe]

<P>Personally.</P> <P>I think there should be more of a difference between kite and tower shields.  Like 20% for Kite, 25% for tower, or something along those lines.  1% seems rather idiotic.</P> <P>Also, losing the +parry buffs are going to hurt... but, maybe they will replace the +parry with +mitigation or something like that.</P> <P> </P> <P>If any of you guys have high level Guards on test.. now would be a great time to share the actual affects. hehe</P>

[bigmak20]

A tower shield only has a 1% benefit to kite?  Please.  That makes no sense at all.  I'll start carrying a kite just because it's easier to see around.  The tower is 3 times the size.  Common sense says 1% is nuts. I'm concerned about this cap thing.  I build my toons to max the skill for the class.  I've read a rating of "200" in any one -- Str, Wis, Agi, etc, is the cap?   Is this true?  My L38 Templar is at 202 Wis right now -- is it capped?  I was looking forward to getting my Guardian to 200 Str; he's already 110 at L23.  I can clearly see if it's capped; once I hit T4 I'll won't bother upgrade squat since I'll be at the cap. <b>But the original thought -- Tower shield should be AT LEAST 5% better then kite; I think 10 to 15% better would be appropriate based on size alone.  That's the whole point for having that huge thing.  ESPECIALLY is we're expected to take more hits with the nerfs -- we need that big thing with a SIGNIFICANT defense/block buff -- or there is NO POINT in being a Guardian.</b> Make everyone a Mage.  No one needs armor or shields.  We'll talk our way thru fights.  Oh; that's better; no fighting we'll negotiate settlements with MoBs.

[AsheM]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>Caps are never a good thing from past experience.   Why upgrade armor if you already have the cap?  Why raise stats if you can reach the cap?   Why have x class in your group if you can reach the cap?  Why have x buff if y buff already made you reach the cap?  What good is X fable loot if your already at the cap?<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>These were pretty much my thoughts.  That and the fact that you can no longer buff parry.  I certainly didn't see any adjustments under Guardian Ability changes that addressed our parry buffs.</P> <P>These update notes scare me. </P>

[Arsen]

Having Shields and Armor have a set % of mitigation/avoidance just sounds wierd.  Gear obviously differs in quality and this should have some impact on its performance.  They need to explain how the quality of gear affects combat before we can understand how things will end up. The other thing - no parry buffs, caps on defense and mitigation values, etc.  This obviously is scary for Guardian's because these are what define the class.  What happens to our Parry buffs - I see no indication in the patch notes that these will be changed to be something useful, do we just end up with an entire line of broken combat arts?  Will our defense and mitigation buffs actually be useful now?  If a normal group can buff any fighter's tanking abilities to their cap and they are equal that of a guardian, it makes us probably the least desirable tank.  We sacrifice a lot of utility, DPS, etc for those defensive abilities.  If any tank can obtain that level of defensive effectiveness on top of their other advantages, there is no reason for the Guardian class to exist at all. I'm not ready to scream about the sky falling since I think this is just the tip of the iceberg for the changes coming, but these changes definitely will cause a lot of issues with the Guardian class if not addressed.<div></div>

[Stra]

They are killing the game. Caps make bards and Dirges useless now. The monks like Gage have finally gotten their wish. Guardians are going to be spending 70% of their time stunned and stifled. They havent reduced the chance of mobs to stun and stifle you and when you get in combat with these new things, guess what? You get hit tripple the number of times and that is statistically tripple the chance to stun you. <div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Strast wrote:<BR>They are killing the game. <BR><BR>Caps make bards and Dirges useless now. <BR><BR>The monks like Gage have finally gotten their wish. <BR><BR>Guardians are going to be spending 70% of their time stunned and stifled. They havent reduced the chance of mobs to stun and stifle you and when you get in combat with these new things, guess what? You get hit tripple the number of times and that is statistically tripple the chance to stun you.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Oh please.  People trivializing encounters is what brought on these changes.  Not me.<BR>

[Arsen]

On a side note - what is the current parry rate for tower shields against an even con monster? I'd venture to say that it is nowhere near 20% even with buffs.  Seems like the parry skill and sheild type are actually gaining a lot of importance with this change.  Warriors being able to dodge 1/5 attacks simply based on their shield type is pretty significant. Also, it has been mentioned, the 19% for kite shields is probably a typo.  Maybe not, but 10 or 15% would seem to make more sense.  We'll see - we are still missing a lot of info about the chnages.<div></div>

[Grond]

<DIV>I will have to actually play once this is live to tell if it is good or bad.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A few points/questions</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1.  What were the previous mitigation numbers?  I could only find one note where Heavy was increased by 11 %, and light was increased by 35 % from the previous numbers.  I'd hope that this would mean someone who previously had 10 % mitigation with heavy armor would have 11.1 % mitigation, but can't be sure.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2.  What is the new cap?  I know I can personally raise my defense by 30+ with my own abilities.  Will my buffs be trivialized, because a support class with a different tank class that doesn't have our Def buffs can put them over the cap.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>3.  So my defense stance is now going to be worthless?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>4.  Why can't we have things scale based on your level?  For example if I'm 50 with the defense of a 52 I get the full defense bonus, however, if I have the defense of a 54 I only really have the defense of a 53 as far as effectiveness goes.  Maybe if I had the defense of a level 60 it would only work as well as if I was a 55 with no buffs.  You make everything else scale like this (even if you should be rewarded for breaking hard to reach thresholds), why not add Defense to the list instead of capping it out?  We could always just cap all skills at 255 (just some generic number).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>5.  What if I wear 5 pieces of heavy armor and 2 pieces of very light armor?  How does that chance my avoidence?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm tired and just finished a term paper so I might not be all there, but there it is.  Just discuss or something ;p =/</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Grondax Ix'Thania of the Shard</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Member of Genesis on Highkeep</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Level 50 Guardian / Level 50 Woodworker</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Server First Discovery for the Prismatic Longsword</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>World First Discovery for the Pristine Conditioned Imbued Short Bow</DIV>

[Venomo]

<DIV>whats going to be the point of a guardian? we chose to give up damage output for superiour damage avoidance and mitigation right? with caps on skills, caps on mitigation and 1% better block with kite shield? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What a pile of ****, we have nothing that differentiates our class at the moment as it is. Raise the defensive ability caps over other classes as we are SUPPOSED to be a defensive orientated class, all we are now is a zerker with crap dps...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Meat shields need love too <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Sunrayn]

No point in getting upset or worried about how guardians will perform until we actually see some data.  I am taking a wait and see attitude.  *If* things go to hell in a handbasket with these changes, well, my guard is also a craftsman  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[kr8ztwin]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Venomous wrote:<BR> <DIV>whats going to be the point of a guardian? we chose to give up damage output for superiour damage avoidance and mitigation right? with caps on skills, caps on mitigation and 1% better block with kite shield? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What a pile of ****, we have nothing that differentiates our class at the moment as it is. Raise the defensive ability caps over other classes as we are SUPPOSED to be a defensive orientated class, all we are now is a zerker with crap dps...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Meat shields need love too <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>hrm that is something to think on.  With a def cap and no buffing parry....that means (potentially) any zerker can reach the abilities of a guard.  Can a zerker wear a Tower shield as well?  I haven't checked on that. 

[Banditman]

Yes, they can. So now, we're Zerkers with no DPS. <div></div>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> kr8ztwin wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Venomous wrote:<BR> <DIV>whats going to be the point of a guardian? we chose to give up damage output for superiour damage avoidance and mitigation right? with caps on skills, caps on mitigation and 1% better block with kite shield? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What a pile of ****, we have nothing that differentiates our class at the moment as it is. Raise the defensive ability caps over other classes as we are SUPPOSED to be a defensive orientated class, all we are now is a zerker with crap dps...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Meat shields need love too <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>hrm that is something to think on.  With a def cap and no buffing parry....that means (potentially) any zerker can reach the abilities of a guard.  Can a zerker wear a Tower shield as well?  I haven't checked on that.  <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually, on paper, it looks like with all these caps, anyone that can hit the cap will tank equally.  Even a scout?</P> <P>Depending on where the cap is, anyone with the equipment/buffs from whatever class will be able to hit the caps.  If you can hit the caps, you are equal.</P> <P>The guardian will have a advantage in groups without classes that have heavy buffs, as we can buff ourselves.    I wonder if we can buff ourselves to the defense cap?</P> <P>The guardian advantage was getting defense higher then any other class.   That advantage appears to be gone, as potantially anyone can hit the cap with the right buffs/equipment. </P> <P>But, who knows without seeing whats going on with where the caps are?</P> <P>Its not just the guardian class, there are alot of classes with buffs, etc.  Characters tuned to be STR or AGI or whatever, etc.</P> <P>I dont know, I must say, with their track record on patches so far and lack of testing...   Well, I think there is a very good chance theyre going to bust things up so bad it will take months to get it all straightened out...<BR></P> <P>If the combat system is so broken after all the beta and 6 months live, all the changes to how AC functions and  is displayed, agility nerfs, broken skills, etc.   After all this time and testing, they feel its so broken that it must be totally revamped..</P> <P> How is it going to fair when they throw this "revamp" out on live,  after a couple weeks on that so called test server?</P> <P>I do not want to cry the sky is falling and dwell too much on it, with so little available information that we have.  </P> <P> But, ermm..  dunno...</P> <P> </P> <P>If this thing goes live and everything is hunky dory, (the game as a whole, not just the guardian class) it will definatley be a miracle, heh.   </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:46 PM</span>

[Arsen]

The new Uber raid tank template... Guardians in light armor with Tower Shields.  If our mitigation buffs let us hit the caps without having heavy armor, then you can still get all the avoidance of the monks by wearing light armor.  Our buffs should also still make us the hitpoint king. My prediction, Gage will be even more jealous <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><div></div>

[Banditman]

Ok, now that would be hilarious. <div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Arsenal wrote:<BR>The new Uber raid tank template...<BR><BR>Guardians in light armor with Tower Shields.  If our mitigation buffs let us hit the caps without having heavy armor, then you can still get all the avoidance of the monks by wearing light armor.  Our buffs should also still make us the hitpoint king.<BR><BR>My prediction, Gage will be even more jealous <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>All they have to do to is ensure that your buffs do *not* let you hit the cap while wearing light armor.<BR>

[Arsen]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote: All they have to do to is ensure that your buffs do *not* let you hit the cap while wearing light armor. <div></div><hr></blockquote> Well, to be more precise, they should not cap mitigation values at an absolute number, but at a number that is in addition to your base armor numbers.  If they use one abolute number for all armor types, then especially in a raid situation where you should be able to hit the caps (relatively) easily, then you would want to reduce your armor type for the increased avoidance.  Same goes for avoidance of course, but that one seems like it might be trickier because it had more variables.  If they leave the caps at absolute values where a good raid group would be able to hit both the mitigation and avoidance caps with a given fighter class - that is kind of silly and it will basically create the same situation that we have now. The devil is all in the details though - Moorgard's post is so vague that it raises more questions than it answers. Plus, and I don't know how they manage to always due this, but EVERY single class in the game will read that post and think they are being nerfed.  They need to better explain the changes that are occuring in the new system as compared to the way it works in the old system so that people understand their motivations and have a better appreciation for the results.  Ie.  I think they are buffing shield effectiveness overall, but it is hard to tell for sure and since they are obliterating everyone's parry buffs, most people see it as a nerf. </span><div></div>

[Margen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>Personally.</P> <P>I think there should be more of a difference between kite and tower shields.  Like 20% for Kite, 25% for tower, or something along those lines.  1% seems rather idiotic.</P> <P>Also, losing the +parry buffs are going to hurt... but, maybe they will replace the +parry with +mitigation or something like that.</P> <P> </P> <P>If any of you guys have high level Guards on test.. now would be a great time to share the actual affects. hehe</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>If that happens then the Pally/SK will be in serious trouble due to the fact WE CAN NOT USE TOWERS.</P> <P>V/R </P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Margen wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>Personally.</P> <P>I think there should be more of a difference between kite and tower shields.  Like 20% for Kite, 25% for tower, or something along those lines.  1% seems rather idiotic.</P> <P>Also, losing the +parry buffs are going to hurt... but, maybe they will replace the +parry with +mitigation or something like that.</P> <P> </P> <P>If any of you guys have high level Guards on test.. now would be a great time to share the actual affects. hehe</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>If that happens then the Pally/SK will be in serious trouble due to the fact WE CAN NOT USE TOWERS.</P> <P>V/R </P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>  That is the whole point of different classes. We cannot heal yet you want things to be the basically the same. This is the same kind of talk that gets everyone upset. Balance is a variable that takes EVERYTHING into account. Tower shields should give more then 1%, because, as it is now, everyone that doesn't have a Tower Shield of Woe should just use the SBS kite shield since it is only ~100 less AC then the other shields and procs a stun that is far more useful.</P> <P>   Try to look at the whole picture instead of just these selfish views that only affect your class. The day a shield smaller then another by greater then 1% in size only loses 1% effectiveness is the day when 2 + 2 = 5.</P>

[Tami]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Margen wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>Personally.</P> <P>I think there should be more of a difference between kite and tower shields.  Like 20% for Kite, 25% for tower, or something along those lines.  1% seems rather idiotic.</P> <P>Also, losing the +parry buffs are going to hurt... but, maybe they will replace the +parry with +mitigation or something like that.</P> <P> </P> <P>If any of you guys have high level Guards on test.. now would be a great time to share the actual affects. hehe</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>If that happens then the Pally/SK will be in serious trouble due to the fact WE CAN NOT USE TOWERS.</P> <P>V/R </P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>  That is the whole point of different classes. We cannot heal yet you want things to be the basically the same. This is the same kind of talk that gets everyone upset. Balance is a variable that takes EVERYTHING into account. Tower shields should give more then 1%, because, as it is now, everyone that doesn't have a Tower Shield of Woe should just use the SBS kite shield since it is only ~100 less AC then the other shields and procs a stun that is far more useful.</P> <P>   Try to look at the whole picture instead of just these selfish views that only affect your class. The day a shield smaller then another by greater then 1% in size only loses 1% effectiveness is the day when 2 + 2 = 5.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The problem is there is such a difference between the avoidance/mitigation of an SK and a guardian.  Would you really trade your mitigation for:</P> <P>1) A adept 1, 43 hp Life Tap?</P> <P>2) A  600 Ward available every 18 seconds, that does not factor mitigation and lasts less then a swipe against mobs?</P> <P>3) Wards that do not stack (1k hit on example above would slam 400 hp directly to us unmitigated and ignores the next in line?)</P> <P>4) Following on with #3 Ward Bleed ... 3k hit from an Epic mobs slamming into a 600hp rune causing 2400 unmitigated damage to yourself or well not using the ward and only having 1k damage?  Dont know, but do think id be happy to give up my ward (as dont use)</P> <P>5) Limited to only 2 taunts, that do 1/2 the hate warriors have.</P> <P>Please look at the issues other classes are having before you make general statements.  SK's are in a very difficult position with the number of broken spells and issues.  All our spells, plus wards, do not make up the DPS/Mitigation difference between our classes.  We play SK's because we like the style, but that does not mean there are not issues that need to be addressed and balance to occur.</P> <P>We dont want the same mitigation guardians have, we just want the level of tanking ability though the use of our spells, wards, higher (hopefully patch will eventually adress) dodge, and life taps that acutually give back more then 1/2% of a mobs single hit.</P> <P> </P>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  You cannot bring SKs into the statement. The entire community, Devs and all, know full well SKs are totally broke in comparison to paladins. I had a long conversation with a guild SK last night, and I understand your problems, and I hope they get fixed, as I feel SKs need a lot of love right now.</P> <P>  The only reason I made a general statement is because I was answering an already general statement, that, all things considered, was totally baseless in nature. The stated argument was not looking at the specifics in full, while also considering what paladins have, and SKs should have, available to them. I can't answer a general statement with specifics as I do like to actually play the game and not just post all day.</P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>yeah we all know the plight of the good ole SK's...</P> <P>we usually omit them from these debates...</P>

[SomeDudeCRO]

Relax!  You don't know what these changes mean until they are live, or if you play on test. My interpretation, it's not a nerf but a realistic adjustment to un-trivialize raid content.  Whining without actually knowing what the changes will actually mean in practice is the epitome of stupidity. <div></div>

[Nazo]

1% difference between Kite and Tower is absurd. Come on SoE I am not carrying that barndoor for no reason. This is something that needs a tweak..

[-Aonein-]

<P>They should be making BASE Avoidance and Mitigation values per class, not per type of armor class because, now they are just doing EXACTALLY what they did in EQ1 in reguards to Mitigation ( AC ) and Avoidance. They capped everyones AC number so that each and every class had a different effect after they hit there cap for example, for a Warrior every 100 AC points on a peice of armor gave them 5 AC to the total number after they hit thier Cap, for a Monks every 100 ac it returned 0.01% after they hit thier cap, and it was the same for every single class having a different effect. For a Beastlord there was no discovered cap even though they wore the same light armor a Monk did. So for EQ2, instead of having 35% base mitigation for ALL heavy armor class, make the Warrior line a Base of 35%, and the rest full in line with a mixture of avoidance and mitigation. </P> <P>Having a Cap on a mitigation tanks for mitigation is wrong, having a cap on avoidance on a heavy armor class tanks is the right way to go while leaving thier mitigation uncapped.</P> <P>Having a Cap on avoidance tanks is wrong, having a cap on mitgation on light armor class tanks is the right way to go while leaving thier avoidance uncapped.</P> <P>If there going to Cap skills and numbers, they need to do it PER class, not per armor class, they are going to be <STRONG><U>FOREVER</U></STRONG> balancing things at this rate reguardless of the archtype system, this is one that needs to effect everyone differently per subclass, not the same across the archtype system because you wear that type of armor.</P> <P>Do you guys hear that.........sounds like circus music, sounds like the circus is almost in town.</P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>04-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:15 PM</span>

[Grond]

I wonder what the base block for Brawler Sub-Classes is.

[CherobylJ]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>If there going to Cap skills and numbers, they need to do it PER class, not per armor class, they are going to be <STRONG><U>FOREVER</U></STRONG> balancing things at this rate reguardless of the archtype system, this is one that needs to effect everyone differently per subclass, not the same across the archtype system because you wear that type of armor.</P> <P>Do you guys hear that.........sounds like circus music, sounds like the circus is almost in town.</P> <P>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <SPAN class=date_text>04-15-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:15 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yet I bet this will be on test less than 1 week.  This change shoudl be on test for 1 month and shaken/tweaked to death. <BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>it may be just me, but within the confines of the changes they are implementing i dont see them being able to deviate much from that point...</P> <P>only thing they can do is what? Add more block to the tower shield or reduce the kite? Increase or decrease the base mitigations in relation to the caps?</P> <P>i dont really see it being changed too drastically to be of any real noticeable effect or some BIG change from what has already been proposed.</P> <P>So maybe they can debug it into forever, but shaking it around and tweaking it will only do more harm IMO</P>

[Subtlekni]

<P>If they want to be realistic, which I'm sure they don't, and don't get me started on my whole feelings about realism in video games......</P> <P>If they want to be realistic then yes, we should 'dodge' less in heavy armor, but we should also get hit for 0 effect + 0 special effect more. Not mitigation, but ignorance.   At the same time str + agility + int + reaction time lets you turn your armor at that very last milisec to make that mace glance off rather than connect square.  This all has to be weighed against balance though.  </P> <P>I know how much time I spend stunned/stiffled etc in fights.  I have fairly good avoidance.  I know that if my time spent stunned/stiffled etc goes up, it will drastically change the mobs that I currently fight in exp groups. Can't comment on raids, because realistically I'm just not at that place in the game, but can comment on exp groups.</P> <P>Just my 2 cp.</P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SomeDudeCRO wrote:<BR>Relax!  You don't know what these changes mean until they are live, or if you play on test.<BR><BR>My interpretation, it's not a nerf but a realistic adjustment to un-trivialize raid content.  Whining without actually knowing what the changes will actually mean in practice is the epitome of stupidity.<BR><BR><BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Yea, I think I seen a post by you on the monk boards speculating that after these changes your class could possible be the new FOTM class...</P> <P>Then you come here and tell the guards thats specualtive whining is stupidity?</P>

[Banditman]

Defense is basically mitigation + avoidance.  Both facets must be fixed in order to balance. Here is what I think is a simple fix for mitigation: Base + Armor + Buffs = Mitigation. Base: Each Class should have a base amount of mitigation.  Naked, a Warrior should have more mitigation than a Mage, simply because he knows how to move and turn and take blows to lessen their overall effect. This value should be level based and have no cap on it, except for what the level of the player is. The general scaling should be:  Warrior > Crusader > Brawler > Scout > Priest > Mage. Armor: Everyone wears armor, all armor is different.  Everyone should carefully select their armor based on the mitigation it provides to them.  This piece of the puzzle is well known and should be left the (*@# alone.  Rare crafted and Epic armor SHOULD provide a greater benefit to the wearer than common crafted. There should be no cap on this as it would remove the incentive to aquire the more rare armors. Buffs: There are a lot of buffs that affect mitigation in the game.  Priests have them, some Scouts have them, Warriors have them. If something is going to be "capped", this is the portion that should be capped.  Even then, it should be a soft cap, or even better, a curve where more and more buffed mitigation adds less and less true mitigation. Mitigation: There should be NO overall cap on mitigation, and by soft capping or curving buffs you'd eliminate the need. Here is a simple fix for avoidance - Base + Armor + Buffs + Shield = Avoidance Base: Once again, this base should vary by Class.  Brawlers should avoid more than anyone else at this level, and at this base level Brawlers need to greatly outshine the other classes. This should be based upon the level of the player, and capped only by the level of the player. In general, the tree should be:  Brawler > Warrior > Crusader > Scout > Priest > Mage Armor: This should DEFINITELY affect avoidance!  A Brawler in Light Armor should certainly avoid significantly more than a Guardian in Plate Armor at this level.  Chain should fall somewhere in between. This particular factor might be complex in that a Warrior "could" choose to wear a combination of light, medium and heavy armor.  Therefore, each piece of armor should have its own positive or negative effect on avoidance, with the largest effects coming from the Chest and Leg slots. The general tree should be:  VLA > Light > Medium > Heavy Buffs: The difficult thing with buffs is that for the most part they don't directly add avoidance . . . they add AGI which is a factor of avoidance. Buffs should be soft capped or curved so that the more of them you get, the less effective they are. Shields: Should definitely add to avoidance.  Smaller shields yield less blocks overall.  Sure, they are lighter and easier to manuever, but lets face it, if a Warrior drops down behind that big old Tower, its gonna be pretty bloody hard to miss the sheild. Shields need to state what they add to avoidance instead of the current cryptic "Shield Factor". Avoidance: Should now need no cap because it would artificially cap itself with the soft cap / curve on buffs.  It should never be impossible for a mob to hit a player of equal level, that's poor design. <div></div>

[Troodon]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote:<blockquote><hr>Margen wrote:<blockquote><hr>Geothe wrote:<p>Personally.</p><p>I think there should be more of a difference between kite and tower shields.  Like 20% for Kite, 25% for tower, or something along those lines.  1% seems rather idiotic.</p><p>Also, losing the +parry buffs are going to hurt... but, maybe they will replace the +parry with +mitigation or something like that.</p><p>If any of you guys have high level Guards on test.. now would be a great time to share the actual affects. hehe</p><hr></blockquote><p>If that happens then the Pally/SK will be in serious trouble due to the fact WE CAN NOT USE TOWERS.</p><p>V/R</p><p>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</p><hr></blockquote><p> That is the whole point of different classes. We cannot heal yet you want things to be the basically the same. This is the same kind of talk that gets everyone upset. Balance is a variable that takes EVERYTHING into account. Tower shields should give more then 1%, because, as it is now, everyone that doesn't have a Tower Shield of Woe should just use the SBS kite shield since it is only ~100 less AC then the other shields and procs a stun that is far more useful.</p><p>  Try to look at the whole picture instead of just these selfish views that only affect your class. The day a shield smaller then another by greater then 1% in size only loses 1% effectiveness is the day when 2 + 2 = 5.</p><hr></blockquote></span><p>I really cant see why you guys are so <span>enamored</span> with a Paladins heals, when off tanking they are really nice to have access to, but consider the tanking situation – you know that thing we're all supposed to be able to do? What happens when a caster gets hit: they get <span>interrupted</span>! I can only get a reasonable chance of getting a heal off while tanking if I use a stun first and even then its not <span>guaranteed.</span></p><p>Crusaders are 75% Meat Shield and 25% Caster, supposedly that should add up to 100% tank, yeah right. With these changes our problems are going to be exacerbated, it looks like we're going to be interrupted more frequently.</p><p>Yes every Fighter has problems with interruption, but we have much more limited selection of direct taunts and are highly reliant on buff/heal hate generation for bread and butter Hate management. If we cant cast them reliably then we're going to have our ability to maintain aggro castrated.</p><p>As Boli pointed out, Crusaders are caught in the cross fire of these changes, unless SoE handle things remarkably well we're going to find <span>ourselves</span> in the position Brawlers were: sidelined but for willing <span>guild mates</span>, generosity to the [Removed for Content] and when the Warrior/Brawler MT goes link dead.</p><div></div><p>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <span class="date_text">04-15-2005</span> <span class="time_text">04:57 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <span class=date_text>04-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:58 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>Defense is basically mitigation + avoidance.  Both facets must be fixed in order to balance.<BR><BR>Here is what I think is a simple fix for mitigation:<BR><BR>Base + Armor + Buffs = Mitigation.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Base:<BR><BR>Each Class should have a base amount of mitigation.  Naked, a Warrior should have more mitigation than a Mage, simply because he knows how to move and turn and take blows to lessen their overall effect.<BR><BR>This value should be level based and have no cap on it, except for what the level of the player is.<BR><BR>The general scaling should be:  Warrior > Crusader > Brawler > Scout > Priest > Mage.<BR><BR><BR>Armor:<BR><BR>Everyone wears armor, all armor is different.  Everyone should carefully select their armor based on the mitigation it provides to them.  This piece of the puzzle is well known and should be left the (*@# alone.  Rare crafted and Epic armor SHOULD provide a greater benefit to the wearer than common crafted.<BR><BR>There should be no cap on this as it would remove the incentive to aquire the more rare armors.<BR><BR><BR>Buffs:<BR><BR>There are a lot of buffs that affect mitigation in the game.  Priests have them, some Scouts have them, Warriors have them.<BR><BR>If something is going to be "capped", this is the portion that should be capped.  Even then, it should be a soft cap, or even better, a curve where more and more buffed mitigation adds less and less true mitigation.<BR><BR><BR>Mitigation:<BR><BR>There should be NO overall cap on mitigation, and by soft capping or curving buffs you'd eliminate the need.<BR><BR><BR>Here is a simple fix for avoidance -<BR><BR>Base + Armor + Buffs + Shield = Avoidance<BR><BR><BR>Base:<BR><BR>Once again, this base should vary by Class.  Brawlers should avoid more than anyone else at this level, and at this base level Brawlers need to greatly outshine the other classes.<BR><BR>This should be based upon the level of the player, and capped only by the level of the player.<BR><BR>In general, the tree should be:  Brawler > Warrior > Crusader > Scout > Priest > Mage<BR><BR><BR>Armor:<BR><BR>This should DEFINITELY affect avoidance!  A Brawler in Light Armor should certainly avoid significantly more than a Guardian in Plate Armor at this level.  Chain should fall somewhere in between.<BR><BR>This particular factor might be complex in that a Warrior "could" choose to wear a combination of light, medium and heavy armor.  Therefore, each piece of armor should have its own positive or negative effect on avoidance, with the largest effects coming from the Chest and Leg slots.<BR><BR>The general tree should be:  VLA > Light > Medium > Heavy<BR><BR><BR>Buffs:<BR><BR>The difficult thing with buffs is that for the most part they don't directly add avoidance . . . they add AGI which is a factor of avoidance.<BR><BR>Buffs should be soft capped or curved so that the more of them you get, the less effective they are.<BR><BR><BR>Shields:<BR><BR>Should definitely add to avoidance.  Smaller shields yield less blocks overall.  Sure, they are lighter and easier to manuever, but lets face it, if a Warrior drops down behind that big old Tower, its gonna be pretty bloody hard to miss the sheild.<BR><BR>Shields need to state what they add to avoidance instead of the current cryptic "Shield Factor".<BR><BR><BR>Avoidance:<BR><BR>Should now need no cap because it would artificially cap itself with the soft cap / curve on buffs.  It should never be impossible for a mob to hit a player of equal level, that's poor design.<BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I see your suggestions improving what they have now.</P> <P> </P> <P>As for me, I wish they throw out all this overcomplicated, hard to balance , not very well thought out BS and go back to whats worked in almost all fantasy games for the last 30 years.</P> <P>Armor class </P> <P> </P> <P>I have yet to see any advantage, fun factor, or anything else with this con color/avoidence/mitigation/shield factor/vs color of the mob crap</P> <P>It has not made the game one bit better as far as I can see.  Scrap it, and get back to the KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID system thats worked fine in everyone game since basic dungeons and dragons.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:43 AM</span>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TroodonIE wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Margen wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>Personally.</P> <P>I think there should be more of a difference between kite and tower shields.  Like 20% for Kite, 25% for tower, or something along those lines.  1% seems rather idiotic.</P> <P>Also, losing the +parry buffs are going to hurt... but, maybe they will replace the +parry with +mitigation or something like that.</P> <P> </P> <P>If any of you guys have high level Guards on test.. now would be a great time to share the actual affects. hehe</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>If that happens then the Pally/SK will be in serious trouble due to the fact WE CAN NOT USE TOWERS.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> That is the whole point of different classes. We cannot heal yet you want things to be the basically the same. This is the same kind of talk that gets everyone upset. Balance is a variable that takes EVERYTHING into account. Tower shields should give more then 1%, because, as it is now, everyone that doesn't have a Tower Shield of Woe should just use the SBS kite shield since it is only ~100 less AC then the other shields and procs a stun that is far more useful.</P> <P>  Try to look at the whole picture instead of just these selfish views that only affect your class. The day a shield smaller then another by greater then 1% in size only loses 1% effectiveness is the day when 2 + 2 = 5.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></SPAN> <P>I really cant see why you guys are so <SPAN>enamored</SPAN> with a Paladins heals, when off tanking they are really nice to have access to, but consider the tanking situation – you know that thing we're all supposed to be able to do? What happens when a caster gets hit: they get <SPAN>interrupted</SPAN>! I can only get a reasonable chance of getting a heal off while tanking if I use a stun first and even then its not <SPAN>guaranteed.</SPAN></P> <P>Crusaders are 75% Meat Shield and 25% Caster, supposedly that should add up to 100% tank, yeah right. With these changes our problems are going to be exacerbated, it looks like we're going to be interrupted more frequently.</P> <P>Yes every Fighter has problems with interruption, but we have much more limited selection of direct taunts and are highly reliant on buff/heal hate generation for bread and butter Hate management. If we cant cast them reliably then we're going to have our ability to maintain aggro castrated.</P> <P>As Boli pointed out, Crusaders are caught in the cross fire of these changes, unless SoE handle things remarkably well we're going to find <SPAN>ourselves</SPAN> in the position Brawlers were: sidelined but for willing <SPAN>guild mates</SPAN>, generosity to the [Removed for Content] and when the Warrior/Brawler MT goes link dead.</P> <P>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <SPAN class=date_text>04-15-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:57 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <SPAN class=date_text>04-15-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:58 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>   Perhaps the post that was put here about a month ago saying Paladins can tank as good if not better then guardians was the post that sparked the situation. In that post the paladin was parsed at healing 250k damage over the course of the fight. That sure sounds like a lot closer ratio tthen 75 / 25.</P> <P>   We can only comment on posts by paladins and those that let them MT. We base things on those numbers, and if that paladin healed for 250k in damage, I think that alone speaks for their tanking ability and true abilities.</P>

[Margen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Margen wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Geothe wrote:<BR> <P>Personally.</P> <P>I think there should be more of a difference between kite and tower shields.  Like 20% for Kite, 25% for tower, or something along those lines.  1% seems rather idiotic.</P> <P>Also, losing the +parry buffs are going to hurt... but, maybe they will replace the +parry with +mitigation or something like that.</P> <P> </P> <P>If any of you guys have high level Guards on test.. now would be a great time to share the actual affects. hehe</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>If that happens then the Pally/SK will be in serious trouble due to the fact WE CAN NOT USE TOWERS.</P> <P>V/R </P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>  That is the whole point of different classes. We cannot heal yet you want things to be the basically the same. This is the same kind of talk that gets everyone upset. Balance is a variable that takes EVERYTHING into account. Tower shields should give more then 1%, because, as it is now, everyone that doesn't have a Tower Shield of Woe should just use the SBS kite shield since it is only ~100 less AC then the other shields and procs a stun that is far more useful.</P> <P>   Try to look at the whole picture instead of just these selfish views that only affect your class. The day a shield smaller then another by greater then 1% in size only loses 1% effectiveness is the day when 2 + 2 = 5.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>HEAL, what heal you mean a lifetap that doesn't cover a single hit ... oh yeah that makes up for increased blocking and mitigation ... NOT.  So we should go back to EQ1 where their is only one true tank.   No thanks ... you call me selfish, but YOU want to own tanking.  Might want to look in the mirror on that one.   And I am not the one calling for nerfs YOU are.  </P> <P>I don't appricate the personnel attack.  And I don't give diddly if you use a Tower or a Kite, BUT I do care that I don't fall so far behind the bloody tanking Hierchy that my character becomes irrelevent.  </P> <P>Oh thanks for the one star, take it as a badge of honor seeing the post from the guardians on this board.   How about YOU give up something, you out mitigate us and you out taunt us and you use power more efficently then we do.   Oh that right, your suppose to be GOD tank.  </P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[Banditman]

<div></div>Had you just read a little farther you might have noticed this: <span><blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote: <p>  You cannot bring SKs into the statement. The entire community, Devs and all, know full well SKs are totally broke in comparison to paladins. I had a long conversation with a guild SK last night, and I understand your problems, and I hope they get fixed, as I feel SKs need a lot of love right now.</p> <p>  The only reason I made a general statement is because I was answering an already general statement, that, all things considered, was totally baseless in nature. The stated argument was not looking at the specifics in full, while also considering what paladins have, and SKs should have, available to them. I can't answer a general statement with specifics as I do like to actually play the game and not just post all day.</p> <hr></blockquote>Or maybe you would have seen this little gem: </span><span><blockquote><hr>SageMarrow wrote:<p>yeah we all know the plight of the good ole SK's...</p> <p>we usually omit them from these debates...</p> <hr></blockquote></span> <span> As opposed to just whipping out the flame thrower at first opportunity, perhaps reading the entire thread would be wise. All you are doing is alienating people who currently feel your pain.</span> <div></div><p>Message Edited by Banditman on <span class=date_text>04-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:53 PM</span>

[Margen]

<DIV>Being called selfious when I attacked no one does that, I appoligize on responding to fast. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But I don't like the tone that I see right now.  Considering with this new update our defensive spells are also getting nerfed (knights stance etc.) to fall 10pct behind in blocking will be devistating to Shadow Knights.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>V/R</DIV> <DIV>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</DIV>

[Banditman]

All I can say is what others here have already said . . . Shadowknights need a lot of love. You should expect to be equal to, but different from, Paladins.  You are not.  You need to be there. <div></div>

[English Da Gua]

<P>   Your statement also mentioned "Pally's" who in now way should be given a shield that is 1% less effective then a guardian's shield. Although I admit the range slot is an issue, it in now way makes up for the amount of heals that Paladins gets.</P> <P>   Your statement was selfish in nature, and where did I call for a nerf?? Reading comprehension is your friend.</P> <P>   In no way should a paladin be given the ability to use a shield that rivals the AC of a tower shield and is also only 1% less in effectiveness at the base level. As for SKs, once fixed, they should also not be given this opportunity. </P> <P>   Many people just toss out these ideas without looking at the whole picture, which is what you did. You can be upset for me calling your post selfish, but it was. It in no way looked at the entire picture and was in no way anything more then a focus on the "me" aspect of the game.</P> <P>   I have always been at the forefront of balance, and have never tried to make guardians the end all be all. But, therein lies my flaw. Perhaps I should change my ways to focus on the "me" aspect. Who knows. What I do know is that as they begin to balance classes, they need to do so while taking into account everything. Some people call it "fluff", but just because certain abilities are less effective at level 50 does not change the fact you had that so called "fluff" from 1-50.</P> <P>   Balance with these upcoming changes is something that will hurt all fighters, but to keep everyone on a level playing field and still make everyone different will take more then a wholesale change to all sub classes and a 1% difference in shields. Unless, once SKs are fixed, you plan on giving guardians heals or lifetaps that bridge the gap. Of course, it is possible you feel the 1% shield difference and lack of a range slot item somehow equate to balance when a paladin can heal for what another post parsed at 250k in a raid....</P> <P>    Again, balance is in reference to all things a class has, at all levels, not only those things you feel are useful to you at x time (the "me" syndrome).</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:48 PM</span>

[Belce]

<P>If this change hurts all fighters, then we are still in the same place with regards to them.  I think that in standard groups we can loose something and still be just as effective.  We might have need for a different approach to be successful, but we still will be.  Think about it, if we all take a step back, where are we in regards to the others? </P> <P>What makes guardians good isn't our damage mitigation, but our ability to maintain group agro and this hasn't been changed with these changes to defense for everyone. </P>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  They way buffs stacks is what I was referring to... and it does hurt all fighters. Do you not see that? I probably wasn't clear on what I meant.</P> <P>  I am not saying it is a bad thing, I think it is a good thing. None the less, it does damage the effectiveness of fighters overall. </P> <P>  Again, I am not saying that is a bad thing. The way they are changing avoidance and mitigation is a positive step, no doubt. Should have clarified what I meant by hurting all fighters. The shield issue is one of the only ones I have, as I won't use any tower shield excluding the shield of woe over a SBS since it is 752 SF where as a Cedar tower is 840. I would rather have the stun proc unless after patch that small difference ends up being a huge decrease in damage. </P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:19 PM</span>

[Zodi]

<P>May I add something to this equation:</P> <P> On the orignal post it says that now defense skill and others have a cap. Here is my concern with that, I swtiched from a nice troll-guardian to a race with the defense skill bonus. The reason I did this to ensure I can get the highest possible defense I can get to a little bit of an edge. Here is my question is this new comin gup change is going to make defense skill cap and make it the same as troll?</P> <P>In that case I think it is pretty screwed up. Please elaborate?</P> <P> </P> <P>Avathos-30-troll-guardian</P> <P>Thanos-27-human-guardian</P> <P> </P> <P>THANK YOU</P>

[Troodon]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>English Da Guard wrote:<blockquote><hr>TroodonIE wrote:<div>I really cant see why you guys are so <span>enamored</span> with a Paladins heals, when off tanking they are really nice to have access to, but consider the tanking situation – you know that thing we're all supposed to be able to do? What happens when a caster gets hit: they get <span>interrupted</span>! I can only get a reasonable chance of getting a heal off while tanking if I use a stun first and even then its not <span>guaranteed.</span></div><span></span><p>Crusaders are 75% Meat Shield and 25% Caster, supposedly that should add up to 100% tank, yeah right. With these changes our problems are going to be exacerbated, it looks like we're going to be interrupted more frequently.</p><p>Yes every Fighter has problems with interruption, but we have much more limited selection of direct taunts and are highly reliant on buff/heal hate generation for bread and butter Hate management. If we cant cast them reliably then we're going to have our ability to maintain aggro castrated.</p><p>As Boli pointed out, Crusaders are caught in the cross fire of these changes, unless SoE handle things remarkably well we're going to find <span>ourselves</span> in the position Brawlers were: sidelined but for willing <span>guild mates</span>, generosity to the [Removed for Content] and when the Warrior/Brawler MT goes link dead.</p><p>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <span class="date_text">04-15-2005</span><span class="time_text">04:57 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <span class="date_text">04-15-2005</span><span class="time_text">04:58 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>  Perhaps the post that was put here about a month ago saying Paladins can tank as good if not better then guardians was the post that sparked the situation. In that post the paladin was parsed at healing 250k damage over the course of the fight. That sure sounds like a lot closer ratio tthen 75 / 25.</p><p>  We can only comment on posts by paladins and those that let them MT. We base things on those numbers, and if that paladin healed for 250k in damage, I think that alone speaks for their tanking ability and true abilities.</p><hr></blockquote>In thread after thread you allude to this 250K figure, are you citing this: </span><a target="_blank" href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=14&message.id=3318#M3318"><span class="navbar_text">Darathar healing stats</span></a> ?If so you neglecting to mention "<i>(he did nothing but spam heal, they have a heal which is midway between our arch and minor heal)</i>" So are you basing your argument for Pally tanking on a non tanking Pally that just sat there tapping the same button endlessly?<p>Whatever, such a figure is <span>meaningless</span> anyway without some indication of the time period it was achieved in i.e. heal per second.Part of the problem of these arguments is that they're based on as much <span>hand waving</span> (if not more) as facts. Theres only one group of people with access to the real statistics and SoE seem to be rather cagey about giving them out.In concept a Paladin's heals should counter our disadvantages relative to a Guardian, but lets take a look at our heals (for reference Im a level 39 Paladin in very good gear and the numbers were obtained while self buffed):</p><p>"Lay on Hands" line -  A paladin's instant heal which can be cast on anyone. No power cost, but its on a 30 minute timer. It can heal me about 33% of my hitpoints, but preferentially its better to reserve its use for someone else unless the situation really is dire.</p><p>"Penitent Sacrement" line - A paladin's true self heal: healing about 21% of my hit points @ 3% of my power. Requires a reagent to cast, though they're obtainable via a buff we have so while in theory there is a finite amount of times we can cast this, in general the reagent isnt that much of an issue. One problem with this spell is though the first version of it only takes 1 second to cast, the second and final version takes 3 seconds! Recast time is 5 minutes.</p><p>"Blessed Aid" line - A paladin's general heal, using it on myself it heals about 19% of my hitpoints @ 8% of my power, its on a 5 second recast timer and takes 2 seconds to cast.</p><p>Please note the power costs and particularly the cast times. When tanking, how often do you get hit in 2 or 3 seconds? With the reballancing of Mitigation and Avoidance that number is going to go up and down with it our ability to heal (let alone if we get caught up in the Priest ballancing which wouldnt be unsurprising).</p><p>These heals are really nice to have should you be off tanking, but as I hope Ive demonstrated, when tanking their use become problematic.<span class="navbar_text"></span></p><a target="_blank" href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=14&message.id=3318#M3318"></a><div></div>

[Ragrax]

<DIV> <P><SPAN><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffcc>I really cannot believe that the difference between kite shields and tower shields should be 1 percent point only. This means that in 100 attacks of a mob vs the player the guardian blocks 1 time more than a paladin (and we have the same mitigation) although the paladin surely can heal quite a few times in that time. This is just rediculous and sounds like the devs are making fun of the guardians if you ask me. Make it 25% tower, 20% kite or something plz and noone can really complain.</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#ffffcc></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </P></DIV>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TroodonIE wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TroodonIE wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>I really cant see why you guys are so <SPAN>enamored</SPAN> with a Paladins heals, when off tanking they are really nice to have access to, but consider the tanking situation – you know that thing we're all supposed to be able to do? What happens when a caster gets hit: they get <SPAN>interrupted</SPAN>! I can only get a reasonable chance of getting a heal off while tanking if I use a stun first and even then its not <SPAN>guaranteed.</SPAN></DIV><SPAN></SPAN> <P>Crusaders are 75% Meat Shield and 25% Caster, supposedly that should add up to 100% tank, yeah right. With these changes our problems are going to be exacerbated, it looks like we're going to be interrupted more frequently.</P> <P>Yes every Fighter has problems with interruption, but we have much more limited selection of direct taunts and are highly reliant on buff/heal hate generation for bread and butter Hate management. If we cant cast them reliably then we're going to have our ability to maintain aggro castrated.</P> <P>As Boli pointed out, Crusaders are caught in the cross fire of these changes, unless SoE handle things remarkably well we're going to find <SPAN>ourselves</SPAN> in the position Brawlers were: sidelined but for willing <SPAN>guild mates</SPAN>, generosity to the [Removed for Content] and when the Warrior/Brawler MT goes link dead.</P> <P>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <SPAN class=date_text>04-15-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>04:57 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by TroodonIE on <SPAN class=date_text>04-15-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>04:58 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>  Perhaps the post that was put here about a month ago saying Paladins can tank as good if not better then guardians was the post that sparked the situation. In that post the paladin was parsed at healing 250k damage over the course of the fight. That sure sounds like a lot closer ratio tthen 75 / 25.</P> <P>  We can only comment on posts by paladins and those that let them MT. We base things on those numbers, and if that paladin healed for 250k in damage, I think that alone speaks for their tanking ability and true abilities.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>In thread after thread you allude to this 250K figure, are you citing this: </SPAN><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=14&message.id=3318#M3318" target=_blank><SPAN class=navbar_text>Darathar healing stats</SPAN></A> ?<BR><BR>If so you neglecting to mention "<I>(he did nothing but spam heal, they have a heal which is midway between our arch and minor heal)</I>" So are you basing your argument for Pally tanking on a non tanking Pally that just sat there tapping the same button endlessly?<BR> <P>Whatever, such a figure is <SPAN>meaningless</SPAN> anyway without some indication of the time period it was achieved in i.e. heal per second.<BR><BR>Part of the problem of these arguments is that they're based on as much <SPAN>hand waving</SPAN> (if not more) as facts. Theres only one group of people with access to the real statistics and SoE seem to be rather cagey about giving them out.<BR><BR>In concept a Paladin's heals should counter our disadvantages relative to a Guardian, but lets take a look at our heals (for reference Im a level 39 Paladin in very good gear and the numbers were obtained while self buffed):<BR></P> <P>"Lay on Hands" line -  A paladin's instant heal which can be cast on anyone. No power cost, but its on a 30 minute timer. It can heal me about 33% of my hitpoints, but preferentially its better to reserve its use for someone else unless the situation really is dire.<BR></P> <P>"Penitent Sacrement" line - A paladin's true self heal: healing about 21% of my hit points @ 3% of my power. Requires a reagent to cast, though they're obtainable via a buff we have so while in theory there is a finite amount of times we can cast this, in general the reagent isnt that much of an issue. One problem with this spell is though the first version of it only takes 1 second to cast, the second and final version takes 3 seconds! Recast time is 5 minutes.<BR></P> <P>"Blessed Aid" line - A paladin's general heal, using it on myself it heals about 19% of my hitpoints @ 8% of my power, its on a 5 second recast timer and takes 2 seconds to cast.<BR></P> <P>Please note the power costs and particularly the cast times. When tanking, how often do you get hit in 2 or 3 seconds? With the reballancing of Mitigation and Avoidance that number is going to go up and down with it our ability to heal (let alone if we get caught up in the Priest ballancing which wouldnt be unsurprising).<BR></P> <P>These heals are really nice to have should you be off tanking, but as I hope Ive demonstrated, when tanking their use become problematic.<SPAN class=navbar_text></SPAN></P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=14&message.id=3318#M3318" target=_blank></A> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>   Actually no that was not the post I was referring to. There is a thread here which I will have to dig up and find that may have used that information, but it did nothing but state what each class did in terms of healing and MTing. I can only base things on what was wrote, obviously.</P> <P>    The fact still remains, if we focus on the original comment I made, that in terms of giving paladins the use of a shield which, as of right now, is within 78 AC of the best shield that 80%+ of guardians can use, is lacking in foresight and concept.</P> <P>    Cedar tower shield = 840 SF.    SBS = 752 SF at 50 (I think, unless the 752 which is located on it is a +50 number)</P> <P>    Regardless, within 100 AC or so is a shield that is a kite version that also has a better proc then any tower shield available atm. Why, unless that 100 AC turns out to be major in this patch in terms of damage mitigation, would any guardian MTing use anything but the SBS?</P> <P>    The original focus before this tangent was made was that tower shields should have a greater base effectiveness then 1% over kite shields. I said, that all things considered, after they change how buffs and defense stack, there is no way a tower shield vs a kite shield should net a 1% difference. I then went on to say that yes paladins are missing a range slot item...but that in no way equates to giving a class basically the same rundown as another, wherein they can do other things, such as heal for 250k damage. Who really cares if the paladin sat there mashing a button, a guardian cannot heal PERIOD.</P> <P>    The focus of this is on balance, so coming here saying "he did xxx or yyy" changes nothing, the fact is HE HEALED FOR 250K + DAMAGE!!!!!!!!! That was the argument. We are talking about balance between classes. Paladins can already wear the same armor, which means they have a similar (please note) mitigation. After the defense nerfs, guardians will only be ahead in terms of mitigation. But this amount is offset by a paladins ability to heal (the whole reason I brought up the healing of 250k). We are speaking of balance. </P> <P>     No one is talking about specifically MTing, balance encompasses more then MTing, although some of you like to neglect that 'trivial' bit of information. Surely in your 50 levels of playing you have been an OT at one time or another, or soloed at one time or another. That being the case, balance takes into account these situations.</P> <P>    Since balance does not just mean MTing, of course a paladins ability to heal, whether in an OT role or a clerical role, matters. The fact is he can do this, where as a guardian cannot. Therefore, to refer back to the shield discussion, since we all want balance...please explain how you figure a kite and tower shield should be within 1% base effectiveness?</P> <P>    All these changes work out for the best, the only issue I have is wielding a huge shield when I my as well just use my kite shield version of the SBS since it is far better for MTing.  All in all this patch is lovely, it ups difficulty drastically (hopefully) while giving avoidance tanks and mitigation tanks more appropriate roles in their true archtype.</P> <P>    But, in no way should a kite shield be within 1% effectiveness of a tower shield, based on the items out now, which is all any of us have to go on. Please do not say "well in the future" because in the future there will be better kite shields too etc etc etc....</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:11 AM</span>

[ugl]

<P>Just so you know, right now, the SBS give OVER100 hitpoints to me, 12 strength and a stun proc... where the cedar gives me a whopping +0.6% avoidence.</P> <P>So, right now, kite shields are greater then towers....  Unless there some fabled tower shield or something, which would be moot becuase most players wouldnt have them anyways.....  </P> <P>this is BEFORE this change btw...</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So I am not sure where peeps keep pulling out this tower shield advantage guardians have...</DIV><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:04 AM</span>

[TheMeatShie]

I currently play an Iksar Guardian... we take alot of fighter stat hits to be scaley as opposed to fat and drooley <span>:smileywink:</span> but we have high base agility.  My concern is, if base agility for Vanguard tanks is nerfed, will my agility that i start base higher and have spent racial attributes on be that much more useless?  If the higher agility i have that i gave up 3% more hp for on top of more base stamina to gain isnt worth as much - you just nerfed my RACE. I can see how increasing shield avoidance, then decreasing plate tank avoidance and upping light armor avoidance can be beneficial to many of the light armor tanks at the moment.  Hopefully they will balance this in a way that the formula takes into advantage those of us who gave up HP for avoidance. Then again i guess out of combat regeneration makes me balanced <span>:smileysurprised:</span> Go go new iksar regen, ie EQ2's Healing Will <div></div>

[SageMarrow]

<P>i know what it looks like is in the end they are taking the front of the equation and adding it to the end of the equation. </P> <P>So the group functionality wont be dependant on the MT and his gear anymore, but instead it will be on the group healers back to keep stuff together.</P> <P>Just thought about that - since we will be getting hit alot more often, all we will be now is the Meat Shield and the healer will have say so on what goes down in the group cause he is the [Removed for Content] life line....</P> <P>I want to see how this plays out..</P>

[Tami]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>Just thought about that - since we will be getting hit alot more often, all we will be now is the Meat Shield and the healer will have say so on what goes down in the group cause he is the [Removed for Content] life line....<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I suggest, again just a suggestion, that you not post stuff like that )</P> <P>The dynamics of EQ2 are such, right now, that the tank of the group is the be all-end all .. and goes forward like that into raid.  At least perception wise.  Let me go into more detail:</P> <P>EQ1:</P> <P>1) A FD class, Bard, Ranger (Harmo) would pull the mobs .. this would give them some 'perceived' group funtion and critical to that ground/raid.</P> <P>2) A Chanter would help deal with CC, should the pull be bad, deal with adds, etc (#1 being good, and a smart group can elminate this percieved part of the trinity though not fully)</P> <P>3) A Chanter/Shammy would handle slowing/haste .. critical to the outcome of beating that engagement</P> <P>4) A Healer would buff/heal .. critical compoent.</P> <P>5) SK/Warrior/Pally would tank .. being that meat shield protecting the group and taking the hits</P> <P>While this bread the holy trinity (though there were work arrounds) it did give alot of dynamics to all the members and different roles.</P> <P>EQ2:</P> <P>1) Tank pulls (no real dynamic here)</P> <P>2) Tank taunts</P> <P>3) Tank acts as meat shield</P> <P>4) Buff Classes buff .. but is there really the dynamic there?  Do they really make up a groups change to win/lose (key here is group)</P> <P>5) Debuff Classes ... again, see #4</P> <P>6) CC /shrug ... anyone really cc stuff that much .. there is no real dynamic in this</P> <P>7) Healers heal .. /shrug same as before</P> <P>The dynamic of the game is so focused on the 'Heavy Tank' + priest.  Dont be supprised if SoE wakes up and starts adding/changing things to give more dynamic roles to those that are current just 'DPS drones' currently (and honestly i would like to see that even being the 'heavy tank')<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Tamian on <SPAN class=date_text>04-16-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:18 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Tamian on <span class=date_text>04-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:19 PM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tamian wrote:<BR> <P align=left>The dynamic of the game is so focused on the 'Heavy Tank' + priest.  Dont be supprised if SoE wakes up and starts adding/changing things to give more dynamic roles to those that are current just 'DPS drones' currently (and honestly i would like to see that even being the 'heavy tank')</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Its focused that way because people are lazy and wont try or devise other ways which is the reason for the archtype system, for all class's to fit together in a Diverse way, im not sure how many times ive said this but i might make a Macro for it, what works for a Warrior isnt going to work for a Brawler. Its really not that complex to understand. I dont understand why people keep on persisting that the game revolves around Heavy Armor + Cleric notion. <STRONG><U>IT DOESNT, IT NEVER DID. </U></STRONG></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All i can say is, unless they give us some sort of Stun resist Combat Art for Heavy Class only because of the sheer amount of hits we will be taking in, then i will be very very dissapointed, unless they change the chance to stun on the mobs, ethier way, if i find myself more then 60% of the time interupted or stunned during a fight and no chance at resisting a Stun attack besides a pure Miss, Block or Parry, then i wont be tanking thats for sure. Keep in mind Parry wont be able to be increased anymore past its Hard Cap unless they make combat arts increase the hard cap, Avoidance with a Shield is down too 36 - 38% from 63%, Avoidance without a Shield is sitting at around 22 - 24%, while Mitigation has gone from 53% down to 44%, so until people run a serious serious amount of parses in reguards to attackers str vs defenders agility, then we wont know how well we are going to come out of this.</DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>04-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:56 AM</span>

[Margen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tamian wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>Just thought about that - since we will be getting hit alot more often, all we will be now is the Meat Shield and the healer will have say so on what goes down in the group cause he is the [Removed for Content] life line....<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I suggest, again just a suggestion, that you not post stuff like that )</P> <P>The dynamics of EQ2 are such, right now, that the tank of the group is the be all-end all .. and goes forward like that into raid.  At least perception wise.  Let me go into more detail:</P> <P>EQ1:</P> <P>1) A FD class, Bard, Ranger (Harmo) would pull the mobs .. this would give them some 'perceived' group funtion and critical to that ground/raid.</P> <P>2) A Chanter would help deal with CC, should the pull be bad, deal with adds, etc (#1 being good, and a smart group can elminate this percieved part of the trinity though not fully)</P> <P>3) A Chanter/Shammy would handle slowing/haste .. critical to the outcome of beating that engagement</P> <P>4) A Healer would buff/heal .. critical compoent.</P> <P>5) SK/Warrior/Pally would tank .. being that meat shield protecting the group and taking the hits</P> <P>While this bread the holy trinity (though there were work arrounds) it did give alot of dynamics to all the members and different roles.</P> <P>EQ2:</P> <P>1) Tank pulls (no real dynamic here)</P> <P>2) Tank taunts</P> <P>3) Tank acts as meat shield</P> <P>4) Buff Classes buff .. but is there really the dynamic there?  Do they really make up a groups change to win/lose (key here is group)</P> <P>5) Debuff Classes ... again, see #4</P> <P>6) CC /shrug ... anyone really cc stuff that much .. there is no real dynamic in this</P> <P>7) Healers heal .. /shrug same as before</P> <P>The dynamic of the game is so focused on the 'Heavy Tank' + priest.  Dont be supprised if SoE wakes up and starts adding/changing things to give more dynamic roles to those that are current just 'DPS drones' currently (and honestly i would like to see that even being the 'heavy tank')<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Tamian on <SPAN class=date_text>04-16-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:18 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Tamian on <SPAN class=date_text>04-16-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:19 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>While some of your point are well made, one correction, Shadow Knights and pallys did not MT on raids, unless they where so over equiped for the content it was sick.  We could not take the damage.  For a while we filled the off tanking role, but once warriors got there aggro increase they end up taking that postition too.  Shadow Knights could be used as pullers if no monk was available, and Paladins would act as a back rezzer and top off healer, maybe a poor mans cc with root, but not that often.  I hope sony doesn't go that direction again, but I fear they might.</P> <P>As for improving the raid dignamics, agreed that would be nice.  Give all the classes/sub-classes important roles.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV> <P>Gage Wrote a long time ago:</P> <P>All that really matters is taking damage, doing damage and being healed.  Everything else is fluff.</P> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___</P> <P>This is the most true statement in a game like this, and it shows. While it is an unfortunate set of circumstances that its true.. its true none the less.</P> <P>Nothing else really matters - and until they break the classes into *ROLES* in groups = its always going to be that way. The best tank will tank, the best healer will heal, the best dps package will fill the gaps.</P> <P>Its going to always be this way - Nothing else matters in between. We play around those facts, and we play in spite of those facts, but that doesnt make it any less of a reality.  A warden will never be a Templar in healing capability - only thing you can do is make work arounds that are SUPPOSED to achieve balance. But they wont ever really. </P> <P>I know some will disagree- but keep in mind that i said - we work around these things - and we ignore them to boost our gameplay experience - and we *BS* each other into arguments to achieve some sort of *clout* for **your** class. </P> <P>But the reality never changed in spite of those things...</P></DIV>

[Troodon]

<span>There a <b>two</b> fundemental aspects to the role of the Fighter keeping a mobs attention (hate management) and what you do with that ire once its focused upon you (mitigation/avoidance). From the perspective of a Paladin, though I disagree with your view English I can see where he's comming from. The general perception of Paladins seems to be Guardian's lite with heals. From a guadians perspective its "wow heals, what could I do if I had access to those!" From a Paladin's perspective (at least this one) its "Bah, guardian lite". We can debate endlessly on the value of heals relative to the tradeoffs Paladins make to get them, after all there arent just gaping holes in the Guardian's ability tree when we get heal (theres a lot of interesting looking abilities we dont get). I see the heals as in part a compensation for reduced hitpoints, loss of dual wield, yada yada yada... Where I am really worried about a Paladin's ability/desireability as a tank: our direct aggro management is pretty limited, as every Figher should, we can use our buffs to boost hate, but from my admitedly partisan perspective I see Crusaders having to run to keep up while others walk when it comes to hate management. But anyway, Ive said my piece. Thank you for taking the time to debate with me English, even if we dont agree on things.</span><div></div>

[English Da Gua]

<DIV>   Ya totally, I like to have conversations with people about this, helps you to learn about other classes and what they are dealing with. If everyone agreed with me I do not know what I would do :smileytongue:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   I am not saying that heals are the end all be all that make paladins better, just different, but my original sentiment was in regards to the shield issue. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  As it stands, my view of a paladins heals were always in reference to him having less mitigation, defense buffs, and HPs. I was not fully aware of the paladins plight in reagrds to aggro management. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   And on a side note, guardians have some interesting fluff type abilities, but I think I speak for the overwhelming majority when I say all but one, possibly two of them are worthless.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   Anyway, I certainly hope the aggro issues your class has are fixed and changed as needed, so we are all on a pretty level playing field. But, with that fix, I do hope they lower the base effectiveness of kite shields or grant an increase in tower shields base %.</DIV><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:14 PM</span>

[Tami]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Margen wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tamian wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>Just thought about that - since we will be getting hit alot more often, all we will be now is the Meat Shield and the healer will have say so on what goes down in the group cause he is the [Removed for Content] life line....<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I suggest, again just a suggestion, that you not post stuff like that )</P> <P>The dynamics of EQ2 are such, right now, that the tank of the group is the be all-end all .. and goes forward like that into raid.  At least perception wise.  Let me go into more detail:</P> <P>EQ1:</P> <P>1) A FD class, Bard, Ranger (Harmo) would pull the mobs .. this would give them some 'perceived' group funtion and critical to that ground/raid.</P> <P>2) A Chanter would help deal with CC, should the pull be bad, deal with adds, etc (#1 being good, and a smart group can elminate this percieved part of the trinity though not fully)</P> <P>3) A Chanter/Shammy would handle slowing/haste .. critical to the outcome of beating that engagement</P> <P>4) A Healer would buff/heal .. critical compoent.</P> <P>5) SK/Warrior/Pally would tank .. being that meat shield protecting the group and taking the hits</P> <P>While this bread the holy trinity (though there were work arrounds) it did give alot of dynamics to all the members and different roles.</P> <P>EQ2:</P> <P>1) Tank pulls (no real dynamic here)</P> <P>2) Tank taunts</P> <P>3) Tank acts as meat shield</P> <P>4) Buff Classes buff .. but is there really the dynamic there?  Do they really make up a groups change to win/lose (key here is group)</P> <P>5) Debuff Classes ... again, see #4</P> <P>6) CC /shrug ... anyone really cc stuff that much .. there is no real dynamic in this</P> <P>7) Healers heal .. /shrug same as before</P> <P>The dynamic of the game is so focused on the 'Heavy Tank' + priest.  Dont be supprised if SoE wakes up and starts adding/changing things to give more dynamic roles to those that are current just 'DPS drones' currently (and honestly i would like to see that even being the 'heavy tank')<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Tamian on <SPAN class=date_text>04-16-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>12:18 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Tamian on <SPAN class=date_text>04-16-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>12:19 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>While some of your point are well made, one correction, Shadow Knights and pallys did not MT on raids, unless they where so over equiped for the content it was sick.  We could not take the damage.  For a while we filled the off tanking role, but once warriors got there aggro increase they end up taking that postition too.  Shadow Knights could be used as pullers if no monk was available, and Paladins would act as a back rezzer and top off healer, maybe a poor mans cc with root, but not that often.  I hope sony doesn't go that direction again, but I fear they might.</P> <P>As for improving the raid dignamics, agreed that would be nice.  Give all the classes/sub-classes important roles.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 30th Troll Shadow Knight</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>My post was more focused on groups then raids.. but as far as EQ1 and SK/Pallies they had a role on Raids and that was MA/SA and CC.  Further, for about 20pct of the names pre-time it was more effective to use a SK (mostly in our case) or Pally then a Warrior to ensure agro (mini AHR/TZ come to mind as examples).  Snap agro was fundamental to this ..</P> <P>However, the core point is that there really is a limited 'role' persepctive in EQ2 versus that which existed in EQ1.   In EQ2 everyones perception is 'Tank->Healer' (Raids being Guard->Templar/Warden) .. and I think that drives alot of everyones issue.  Class/Arch route was good fundamentally as is the locked group method .. each by itself is a fantastic implemenation .. but as you start to piece all this together (plus a bit of bad marketing and broad statements) there are some fundamental issues with it.</P> <P>If Mobs worked like in EQ1, and they would realize how avoidance impacts them as much as helps, monks would not be *$%#&!ing as much (hey everyone does, but least would give a role) .. Chanters would have a good feeling as to a spell line they really dont use now, but is factored into their balancing (atm lots of them asking for wizard level nukes, wonder why?).. etc .. you see where im going with this?</P> <P>Sometimes the best balance is not exact blance but balance in 'need' and 'roles'.  Crusaders/Monks will always be 'percieved' as secondary dps drones in EQ2 when comes to having a part in Raids ... no knockback/snap agro use .. no pulling ..</P> <P>Again, my take ..</P><p>Message Edited by Tamian on <span class=date_text>04-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:16 PM</span>

[Eelyen]

<DIV>Yall have no idea how bad the changes are on test.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm a 44th Guardian.  Before the changes...I probably averaged around 54% unbuffed mitigation and could easily get that 70+ in a group.  And probably around 45 avoidance, I don't remember exactly.  But it could be buffed to 70+ with a shield.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now my base stats are 40 Mitigation and 37.3 avoidance (with tower shield), 21.3 avoidance without shield.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Basically first thing I did to test was go without the shield and engaged a level 27 5 mob encounter.  The fight ended with me out of power and at 35% health.  Take note how far below me the encounter was.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In a group against blue mobs I still tanked just fine, but I did have 2 templars to cover me when we got mutli mob groups.  Single mobs with double up arrows aren't any harder to tank honestly with a good healer.  The multi-mob groups are a bit tougher especially when you get more then 1 group and dont' have alot of dps.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you like to duo alot with a healer, you'll have a FAR tougher time.  We had a 46 guardian and 46 templar in my guild that couldn't take down a level 42 double up with 3 adds.  Only got him to 50%.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also, back to my avoidance, the highest I could buff it, was 40.9%.  Yes...thats about 2.9% was the highest buffs could push it.  Thats its...buffs are completely worthless now.  My own buffs pushed it to 40.3%.  The bard got it to 40.9%.  Any other classes were a waste.  Mitigation buffed up to about 54.6% with templar and self buffs.  But it wouldn't go beyond that.  Not even Hero's Armor added ANY mitigation.  It's a worthless HO now in a group.  Don't think I could get my parry any higher then 4 points above my base.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If we had any other melee class in the group.  Their buffs for mitigation or avoidance would of been absolutely useless and not needed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I haven't even tested tanking on yellow mobs yet.  But from another post I read someone tested the % changes in cons.  And it seems yellow mobs basically halve your avoidance.  Sorry Monks!!!  Mitigation is still king, and you were nerfed on that too.  Gage, you got more to post about now.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text>Also, Guardians.  You might want to start putting together your own set of light armor.  Cause avoidance does go up with lighter armor.  So, you'll probably need it for some situations <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P>Oh and btw, the new fixes to Vengeful Strike and such line of our taunts.  Does really help out alot <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  They actually increase threat now instead of threat priority.  </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>Oh and if you want to know what a 44 Templars base Avoidance is now.  It's 6%.</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Eelyen on <span class=date_text>04-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:55 AM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <DIV>Yall have no idea how bad the changes are on test.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm a 44th Guardian.  Before the changes...I probably averaged around 54% unbuffed mitigation and could easily get that 70+ in a group.  And probably around 45 avoidance, I don't remember exactly.  But it could be buffed to 70+ with a shield.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now my base stats are 40 Mitigation and 37.3 avoidance (with tower shield), 21.3 avoidance without shield.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Basically first thing I did to test was go without the shield and engaged a level 27 5 mob encounter.  The fight ended with me out of power and at 35% health.  Take note how far below me the encounter was.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In a group against blue mobs I still tanked just fine, but I did have 2 templars to cover me when we got mutli mob groups.  Single mobs with double up arrows aren't any harder to tank honestly with a good healer.  The multi-mob groups are a bit tougher especially when you get more then 1 group and dont' have alot of dps.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you like to duo alot with a healer, you'll have a FAR tougher time.  We had a 46 guardian and 46 templar in my guild that couldn't take down a level 42 double up with 3 adds.  Only got him to 50%.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also, back to my avoidance, the highest I could buff it, was 40.9%.  Yes...thats about 2.9% was the highest buffs could push it.  Thats its...buffs are completely worthless now.  My own buffs pushed it to 40.3%.  The bard got it to 40.9%.  Any other classes were a waste.  Mitigation buffed up to about 54.6% with templar and self buffs.  But it wouldn't go beyond that.  Not even Hero's Armor added ANY mitigation.  It's a worthless HO now in a group.  Don't think I could get my parry any higher then 4 points above my base.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If we had any other melee class in the group.  Their buffs for mitigation or avoidance would of been absolutely useless and not needed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I haven't even tested tanking on yellow mobs yet.  But from another post I read someone tested the % changes in cons.  And it seems yellow mobs basically halve your avoidance.  Sorry Monks!!!  Mitigation is still king, and you were nerfed on that too.  Gage, you got more to post about now.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text>Also, Guardians.  You might want to start putting together your own set of light armor.  Cause avoidance does go up with lighter armor.  So, you'll probably need it for some situations <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P>Oh and btw, the new fixes to Vengeful Strike and such line of our taunts.  Does really help out alot <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  They actually increase threat now instead of threat priority.  </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>Oh and if you want to know what a 44 Templars base Avoidance is now.  It's 6%.</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Eelyen on <SPAN class=date_text>04-17-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:55 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sure we know what we are talking about, i posted close to the same stats you posted about 4 posts above yours.</P> <P>This is exactally what i was afraid of. To be honest SoE, if you dont fix this and it makes my game time <STRONG><U>less</U></STRONG> fun for me and my wife because we duo alot because of living in Australia and having barely anyone to group with in our timezone because you will not open a Asain pacific time zone Server or hell a Aussie server even, im sure there would be enough, PLUS the fact of the amount of CORE changes you have already made to the game which now im willing to bet you wish you didnt make some of those and have basically backed yourselves into a corner and trying to whip out some balance miracle in the name of game balance. If and when this change goes to live or if i keep reading such posts like above which there is more then one post like it on numerous forums, then i will pack up 3 accounts that are all on Station Access and quit game. I hate people that use this tactic SoE and its the first time in over 4 years of being a customer with SoE that i have personally used it. </P> <P>Reason im using it is because the game is nothing like what you :</P> <OL> <LI>Advertised it to be.</LI> <LI>Your community feedback to the people is a pathectic joke, its never correct, you think you know something about your own game and it just keeps proving you dont know a thing OR know what <STRONG><U>The People</U></STRONG> want " EQ2, your in our world now ", what more can i say. Im sure if Moorgard was to read back over past posts he would be kicking himself. He recently made a post that says we all take what he says out of context and that we basically treat it like its law, let me fill you in Moorgard, your our Community Rep, thats why we take it as rock solid information because you are suppose to GIVE us rock solid information, thats how you keep customers, not by [Removed for Content] down there backs and telling them its raining.</LI> <LI>The game is a mere shadow of what it was when it was first released and i challenge SoE to show us the graph that they would have in there offices with the number of customers that they have pulled in from Live release to NOW with all the ups and down periods that they have occured since then in reguards to new subscriptions, canceled subscriptions and people who contuined to play AFTER the 30 day trial.</LI> <LI>The only reason your bringing out PvP into the game is because you know that the " Other " game is starting to beat you on sales simply due to the <STRONG><U>fun</U></STRONG> factor that PvP inside a PvE enviroment provides, you ( SoE ) with the help of a producer letter by Mr John Smedley himself some time ago even stated that you guys are playing the " Other " game and having a ball of a time, i mean who on earth goes and tells there paying customers that there playing the " Other " game and enjoying it? Thats like me going and getting advice on a Ferrai or Porchse, so it comes time to buy a Porshce and you being the salesmen tell me its the best car in the world only to watch you drive out on your way home to work in a Ferrai, what a crock of BS, now i head on over to the Ferrai dealership and they tell me what you pay for is what you get and i watch him drive off in a Ferrai, so in a attempt to keep people here OR give other people some sort of interesting notion to find out where or what you will do with it to try and keep people here.</LI> <LI>For the trolls out there, i only starting feeling this way after LU#5 hit, before that i loved the game, it could of used some serious Buff stacking and Combat Arts, Abilities and Spell fixs for EVERY class, but apart from that, it was pretty decent and it could of held my attention for a very very serious long time, and i mean LONG time, but since LU#5, you have killed that SoE, and im sure with the lack of respect you treat alot of other people who once loved it are feeling the same way.</LI></OL> <P>Please try not to take offense from this as ive just had enough of all the BS SoE talk for the last 4 years and empty promises, those who have played or play any other SoE game will know exactally what im talking about, here is a example, they have only <STRONG><U>now</U></STRONG> just decided to do a full class revision on EQ1 after we basically cryed out for it in a very NEEDING way, not a wah wah cry cry way, for some flavour and fun back in the game for the last 3+ years, why? Its simple, because there losing people drastically and merging servers together to keep game worlds populated in a bid to keep the game interesting enough to ethier keep people there or invite new ones. Now if they only did this BEFORE they decided to race for the finish line with the " Other " game, then they would of kept alot MORE players, and try and give me the BS of EQ2 is a totally new team of people, if so why are people starting to be announced as being on the EQ2 team that were orginally on the EQ1 team? If you ask me they have always been there and are only just now being introduced as being promoted in a sense to EQ2 team, more [Removed for Content] on my shoulders while i hear the " its only rain ".</P> <P>Ok let me roll this rant up, if i see or read anymore posts like this where people are having trouble killing lvl 27 mobs at lvl 45 ( which by the way im lvl 48 ) SoE and it gets closer and closer to the LU#8 release date with no soild evidence from YOU ( SoE ) i will be hitting cancel, trust me, if you value what customers want which you keep saying you do, then i ( speaking from a hyperthectically point of view ) would be reading and probing this ENTIRE forum for a better insight of what YOUR players want, not what you want because its quite clear with the amount of core changes and patchs that you guys clearly dont even know what your looking for. </P> <P>Let me ask this, is this EQ2 where it is based around Small to large group play in the vicinty of 3 - 6 players? or are we heading for EQ1 style with a new game engine, fancy graphics, a new storyline and the need for a FULL group of specific players to be able to do anything worth a pinch of salt?</P> <P>Again i apologize for the rant, but if SoE care, maybe i have pointed out something which they may have overlooked which i seriously doubt anyway because its very rarely that a <STRONG><U>customer</U></STRONG> ever be right in SoE's eyes, before anyone replys with, not all games suit everyone, let me make it clear again, i was having the best time in my gaming life upto the point of when LU#5 went in, the fixs to Combat Arts, Abilites and Spells with LU#6 sparked my interests again, but seeing more and more of these posts every day, im starting to wonder what fricken game im even playing anymore. Well not the best time in my gaming life, but i was having fun none the less.</P> <P>Like i said SoE, you dont [Removed for Content] down peoples backs and tell them its raining and for the record, EQ2, your world is turning to <STRONG><U>S.H.I.T. </U></STRONG></P></DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>04-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:09 AM</span>

[Tami]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>The only reason your bringing out PvP into the game is because you know that the " Other " game is starting to beat you on sales simply due to the <STRONG><U>fun</U></STRONG> factor that PvP inside a PvE enviroment provides, you ( SoE ) with the help of a producer letter by Mr John Smedley himself some time ago even stated that you guys are playing the " Other " game and having a ball of a time, i mean who on earth goes and tells there paying customers that there playing the " Other " game and enjoying it? Thats like me going and getting advice on a Ferrai or Porchse, so it comes time to buy a Porshce and you being the salesmen tell me its the best car in the world only to watch you drive out on your way home to work in a Ferrai, what a crock of BS, now i head on over to the Ferrai dealership and they tell me what you pay for is what you get and i watch him drive off in a Ferrai, so in a attempt to keep people here OR give other people some sort of interesting notion to find out where or what you will do with it to try and keep people here.</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <P>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <SPAN class=date_text>04-17-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:09 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Im not sure your asking or not for PvP, and will respond as if you are.   I ask you to step back and consider all the issues currently with Classes, PvE, etc and then really ask yourself if now is the time to add PvP.  I ask you to step back and see what impact that will have with the current state of the game .. and if you really stop and think .. I belive you will reallize this is not the appropriate time for it to occur, even /duel ...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Can you imagine the uproar from scouts the first time they ganked by a fighter .. they have no chance against fighters .. their best 'range' shots are from the sides and behind.  I wont even go into the Fear and Root issues that would beging huge uproars in the mage community .. and priests, well we would end up with the same other-vs-number of priest issues we had with EQ1.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Im all for adding arena's and /duel down the road, but right now there needs to be alot of work on classes and PvE side to make this game survive, PvP wont save it .. and if done right now . will kill it even more.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[SageMarrow]

Tamian how did you get that out of that post? That was a generalized post about how and why SOE is doing the things they are. And how it is strictly in the light of marketing competition.

[-Aonein-]

Tamian, what SageMarrow said is my reply, and thanks for pointing that out Sage.

[Tami]

<DIV>Well first sentance kind of states that ...  you underlined 'fun' which does somewhat change the context of the first part of your statement .. and thus why I started off the post as I did. :smileyhappy:  (Quoting "Im not sure your asking or not for PvP, and will respond as if you are. ")</DIV><p>Message Edited by Tamian on <span class=date_text>04-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:19 PM</span>

[Fafnir]

<P>I can't see these changes as being good for guardians.</P> <P>Caps generally favour generalists whereas guardians are a specialist defensive class.</P> <P>It looks like guardians will be a poor man's berserker and it may be that crusaders become superior to both.  It remains to be seen whether they will break avoidance but from EQ1 experience the best place for avoidance based tanks (monks/bruisers) is as a dps class since you can "break" encounters with too much avoidance (which is what is forcing this change - it was just that all classes had too much avoidance).</P> <P> </P>

[Timzil]

<DIV>I don't care if SOE changes my abilities, but if they decrease my capabilities then I am gone. EQ2 doesn't have all that much going for it to suffer any loss of content. This change seems to threaten the small group/duo content, but we'll see.</DIV>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Fafnir wrote:<BR> <P>I can't see these changes as being good for guardians.</P> <P>Caps generally favour generalists whereas guardians are a specialist defensive class.</P> <P>It looks like guardians will be a poor man's berserker and it may be that crusaders become superior to both.  It remains to be seen whether they will break avoidance but from EQ1 experience the best place for avoidance based tanks (monks/bruisers) is as a dps class since you can "break" encounters with too much avoidance (which is what is forcing this change - it was just that all classes had too much avoidance)</P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Well Judging from more tests tonight.  A Berserker of Equal Level as a Guardian can cap at the same level of Mitigation and Avoidance as a guardian, as Bersekers can use Tower shields to my surprise tonight (where did I miss that?). </P> <P>So basically the only difference between a Berserker and a Guardian at this point is the fact that Bersekers have superior DPS and aggro capabilities.  And that Guardians can increase their mitigation very slightly towards types of physical damage.</P> <P>I still have to do more tests to see how it plays out.  We have a parser in our group that parses avoidance and dps and the like.  I have a very hard time holding aggro off the berserkers.  I"m always out of power.</P> <P>But I would have to say, with the way things are right now.  Guardians are virtually Berserkers with 25-50% less dps and aggro. </P> <P><STRONG>Now don't get me wrong, this is just some perception from my tests so far.  There are supposed to be more changes coming.  Hopefully it will be to fix this lame avoidance and mitigation bs they put in 3 days ago.  So I'm not going to tell you to scream out and whine just yet.  I'm just trying to keep you informed of what I'm seeing on my daily groups.</STRONG></P> <P>We did try to take on a Epic x2 level 45 mob ^^^, with 5 adds (Some with down arrows).  We decided to use the 50 berserker in our group to tank it.  This is when I learned beserkers could use tower shields.  Since the mob was 5 levels below Badkore.  We figured, that he would get better avoidance then I would at level 44 obviously.   We had a 45 Templar and a 39 Warden for heals.  With a 41 Berserker and a 41 Troubador as other dps besides me.  So we pulled and engaged it, and got the adds down in under 1 minute I think.  But badkore (50 berserker) was getting so pounded, that the warden was oom and the templar was at ~30% mana when we got all the adds down.   And badkore went down shortly after, then the bard...then it came after me (I was the add assist).  But the warden evac'd us.   Going to try it again when I hit 45 (need 5%) tomorrow probably and see how it goes.</P> <P>Blue mobs are still usually not a problem in a group.  Although I have to admit, we did test the avoidance of the nightbloods in Rivervale.  And basically they were missing me around 37-40% of the time on average.  About what my avoidance was.  Although all the Lamia's in the zone were only missing me about 8% of the time, and they were blue.  So one time when I got about 3-4 of them on me with 2 nightbloods.  I was getting spanked and only avoiding about 1 hit out of every 10 hits.  I got killed and the group evac'd.  </P> <P>Later in the evening we were in the Drafling tower.  White cons were not really a problem.  I was able to effectively tank 3 double up arrow mobs with the templar and warden as my healers.  But when we got 3 yellow double up arrow mobs, it was a different story and I was getting spanked.  Although yellow mobs were still not that hard fighting 1 group at a time.  Maybe 2 groups.  3 gets rather rough.  Didn't get alot of chance to test it, but initially it didn't seem too bad.  Just gotta be careful about those 3 group pulls.</P> <P>Here's to looking forward to a patch on Monday hopefully!</P></BLOCKQUOTE><p>Message Edited by Eelyen on <span class=date_text>04-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:31 AM</span>

[Boli32]

OK, according to Guardians Pallys = Guardians with Heals... but lets just look at the facts. FACT: Warriors have better taunts than Crusaders There are allways threads on ther Paldin board on how to MT if a beserker is in the group... as without EVEN TRYING he will pull the agro off a paladin. Guardians are not as bad in this reguard but it has been shown many times if is almost impossible for a Paladin to pull the hate off a guardian, whereas the reverse is it is effortlessly simple. FACT: Warriors have a much greater range of weapons than Crusaders. Including a ranged slot, the ability to choose ANY weapon on the broker, with no restrictions, this is a greater advantage than you realise - unrestricted access to weapons... and 9/10 a tower shield has better stats than a kite. Just read the guardian board how many times do you see a thread on whether it is viable to dual wield over using a shield to get increased dps. If you brought up that same issue on the Crusader boards (although we only have access to 2H weapons) you are bascilaly told to stop dreaming and get yourself a sheild unless you are farming greens/greys. FACT: Guadians have more Health than Paladins. FACT: Guardians have more Mitigation than Paladins. FACT: half of a Crusaders abilities are spells and subject to interupts/resists and fizziles. FACT: Paladins have heals Yes, we have heals, with a several seconds casting time, and several second downtime, tanking anything greater than a blue as a MT it not even worth trying to heal and better to continue to spam our Inferior taunts to have any hope of holding the mobs attention. FACT: A Paladins best abilty to keep agro uses up 2 concentration slots. Redemption... cast this buff on a SINGLE damage dealer and have up to 33% of their hate transfered to you - this means of course we loose our self buff and the same buff on the healer making course our ability to MT imparied again. Its a great buff... but only useful if one damage dealer really stands out - and you can afford the loss of our self buffs we should NOT have to make a choice between ability to absorb damage and maintaining agro. The point is that is how it stands NOW, with the proposed changes Crusaders will end up being hit more often (for less damage supposedly), and elsewhere in the thread someone had noted that crusader SHOULD NOT get as much avoidance as warriors. So after the proposed changes Crusaders can hope not to be able to ever cast a spell in combat again reliably... with that in mind lets review our skill list At lvl 34 Divine Attack - Oath Strike Divine Attack - Blazing Faith Crushing Attack - Vengence Divine Attack - Holy Sunder (but only with a 2H weapon so not able to use whlist tanking) Crushing Attack - Blinding Bash (Shield bash) Divine Wrath - AoE attack (Assault upgrade) - never use Noble Tome (Single Taunt) Blnding Light (Group Taunt) ... and that's it... all the rest of our abilities are spells. The Divine attacks also have a chance to be resisted as well... that is in addition to being Parried blocked and generally miss (something Oath Strike is notorius for). and just take a look at our taunt list... 2 underpowered taunts. The FACT is in order to tank effectivily Paladins HAVE to be able to avoid hits, this new system is already a smack in the face and if our avoidance is reduced to below that of warriors (as sugested by anotehr poster) then in tanking ability. <u> Avoidance:</u>   Brawler > Warrior > Crusader <u>Mitigation:</u>   Warrior > Crusader > Brawler <u>Heals</u>   (you kidding we can no longer cast spells in combat - not aplicable as MT) <u>Overall </u>  Guardaian > Monk  >  Beserker > Bruiser > Paladin > Shadowknight What we want is: <u>Avoidance</u>   Brawler > Crusader > Warrior <u>Mitigation </u>  Warrior > Crusader > Brawler <u>Heals </u>  Crusaders: Ocasional heals to supliment our tanking ability <u>Overall</u>   (Guardaian / Monk / Paladin) > (Beserker/Bruiser/Shadowknight) where a warrior relys on their ability to absorb damage a brawler relys on their ability to avoid damage a crusader relys on their ability to deal with the damage once dealt (in heals) A Beserker/Bruiser/Shadowknight have traded pure tanking ability for additional damage. Paladins should not be BELOW any such classes when you calculate the best tank for the job after all who woud take a paladin to be MT when you can gte a better tank who does more dps. Paladins arn't asking to be uber or to tank better than guardians we just want to be considered to be a worthy tank, and acceptance in a role which we were designed for. Also Shadow knights, they are already broken... this change is not going to help them any more.<div></div>

[Eelyen]

<DIV>I think you are biasing your disadvantages on Crusaders a little too much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I group with a Paladin as well in my groups on test.  And they tank just fine and do not require a shield to tank.  Actually went through permafrost with a paladin tanking the whole time using a BBC as weapon.  And honestly I prefer using 2H weapons for when I needed dps.  But due to this change, you need a shield regardless to tank. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>With this new change, Paladin = SK = Berserker = Guardian on Mitigation and Avoidance...least number wise.  Agreed, with Tower shield guardian/berserker can get that 1% extra.  But I have yet to check if that effects the cap or not.  And honestly 1% really means jack.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>DPS wise it's Berkerker > SK > Paladin > Guardian...least thats my guess <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  I haven't really tested SK/Pally dps yet <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Ragrax]

<DIV>First off, a well written post I think. But are you sure that the following is really a fact?<BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>boli wrote:<BR></P> <P>FACT: Guardians have more Mitigation than Paladins.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I cannot remember a dev saying something like this. We can buff defense higher for the whole group (affecting avoidance), but that is all afaik. If guardians mitigate significantly better than paladins I understand your point quite well, but I don't think this is the case (and I think for single group content the paladin is already equally good as a guardian if not better because they have a viable second role as offtank).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Best regards<BR></DIV>

[Boli32]

Just on a pure numbers game.. guardians have allways had that extra edge in terms of mitigation of damage, I have never met a comprable guardian with lower mitigation score than my own. It may not be as large a difference as the health / avoidance scores but it is still allways a difference. and I quite agree as things stand now I love being a paladin... I think we work better than guardians in small groups and fast fights sense because of our flexibility. What I was trying to illustrate was that Paladins does NOT equal Guardian + Templar, sure we can heal but we are no means the equal of any priest and sure we can tank but we are no means the equal of a guardian or monk... but TOGETHER we make an equal (of a tank). Crusaders need a higher innate avoidance than warriors JUST so we can actually use our abilities - This isn't about stiffles or stuns we get that as well, but the fact half of our abilities are spells. you just can't trivilise our role and say: "Well you get heals" the fact of the matter is we NEED heals -  its how we work, removing our ability to use them effectivly removes us from our archytyple role of tank. <div></div>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>boli wrote:<BR>OK, according to Guardians Pallys = Guardians with Heals... but lets just look at the facts.<BR><BR><BR>FACT: Warriors have better taunts than Crusaders<BR><BR>There are allways threads on ther Paldin board on how to MT if a beserker is in the group... as without EVEN TRYING he will pull the agro off a paladin. Guardians are not as bad in this reguard but it has been shown many times if is almost impossible for a Paladin to pull the hate off a guardian, whereas the reverse is it is effortlessly simple.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Zerkers can pull aggro off guardians as well.  they do it all the time.   Not sure about a paladin pulling hate off a guardian, but, zerkers can do it in a heartbeat if they try.   Also note, we must use a very low level AE taunt on raid mobs. Guards and Paladins use buffs to hold aggro.</FONT><BR><BR><BR>FACT: Warriors have a much greater range of weapons than Crusaders.<BR><BR>Including a ranged slot, the ability to choose ANY weapon on the broker, with no restrictions, this is a greater advantage than you realise - unrestricted access to weapons... and 9/10 a tower shield has better stats than a kite.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>SBS is greater then any tower shield that can be feasably obtained.   Anyone at 40+ can get the SBS.  If you know of a better Tower shield, please let us know.   </FONT></P> <P>Just read the guardian board how many times do you see a thread on whether it is viable to dual wield over using a shield to get increased dps. If you brought up that same issue on the Crusader boards (although we only have access to 2H weapons) you are bascilaly told to stop dreaming and get yourself a sheild unless you are farming greens/greys.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Most guardians use sword and board on anything over blue mobs.   Not sure what the above paragraph is supposed to prove.   </FONT><BR><BR>FACT: Guadians have more Health than Paladins.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Even when you add in your heals?</FONT><BR>FACT: Guardians have more Mitigation than Paladins.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>NO, this is wrong.  We have the exact same mitigation.</FONT><BR></P> <P>FACT: half of a Crusaders abilities are spells and subject to interupts/resists and fizziles.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Join the club.  they interrupt everything we got as well.</FONT><BR><BR>FACT: Paladins have heals</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>I agree with this.</FONT><BR><BR>Yes, we have heals, with a several seconds casting time, and several second downtime, tanking anything greater than a blue as a MT it not even worth trying to heal and better to continue to spam our Inferior taunts to have any hope of holding the mobs attention.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Looked like that paladin tanking x4 epics was somehow healing himself fairly well.</FONT><BR><BR>FACT: A Paladins best abilty to keep agro uses up 2 concentration slots.<BR><BR>Redemption... cast this buff on a SINGLE damage dealer and have up to 33% of their hate transfered to you - this means of course we loose our self buff and the same buff on the healer making course our ability to MT imparied again. Its a great buff... but only useful if one damage dealer really stands out - and you can afford the loss of our self buffs we should NOT have to make a choice between ability to absorb damage and maintaining agro.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Sounds like a nice ability.   Wish guardians had something similer.</FONT><BR><BR><BR>The point is that is how it stands NOW, with the proposed changes Crusaders will end up being hit more often (for less damage supposedly), and elsewhere in the thread someone had noted that crusader SHOULD NOT get as much avoidance as warriors. So after the proposed changes Crusaders can hope not to be able to ever cast a spell in combat again reliably... with that in mind lets review our skill list</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Yep, the changes could very well hurt Guards badly too.   In fact, not looking good for any of the tank classes.   Not sure how your trying to say the changes somehow hurt you ore then us.</FONT><BR><BR>At lvl 34<BR><BR>Divine Attack - Oath Strike<BR>Divine Attack - Blazing Faith<BR>Crushing Attack - Vengence<BR>Divine Attack - Holy Sunder (but only with a 2H weapon so not able to use whlist tanking)<BR>Crushing Attack - Blinding Bash (Shield bash)<BR>Divine Wrath - AoE attack (Assault upgrade) - never use<BR>Noble Tome (Single Taunt)<BR>Blnding Light (Group Taunt)<BR><BR>... and that's it... all the rest of our abilities are spells. The Divine attacks also have a chance to be resisted as well... that is in addition to being Parried blocked and generally miss (something Oath Strike is notorius for). and just take a look at our taunt list... 2 underpowered taunts.<BR><BR>The FACT is in order to tank effectivily Paladins HAVE to be able to avoid hits, this new system is already a smack in the face and if our avoidance is reduced to below that of warriors (as sugested by anotehr poster) then in tanking ability.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Yep, fact is guardians  have to have avoidence too to tank effectively.  /shrug</FONT><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><U><BR>Avoidance:</U><BR>  Brawler > Warrior > Crusader</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>When defense is capped, Warriors and crusaders will be able to avoid jsut as much as guardians.   Not sure where your getting this from?</FONT></P> <P><BR><U>Mitigation:</U><BR>  Warrior > Crusader > Brawler</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Again, warrior=crusader in mitigation.   We wear the same armor.   Not sure where you percieve this invisible mitigation bonus you think guardians have.</FONT></P> <P><U>Heals</U><BR>  (you kidding we can no longer cast spells in combat - not aplicable as MT)<BR><U>Overall<BR></U> Guardaian > Monk  >  Beserker > Bruiser > Paladin > Shadowknight<BR><BR>What we want is:<BR><BR><U>Avoidance</U><BR>  Brawler > Crusader > Warrior<BR><U>Mitigation<BR></U> Warrior > Crusader > Brawler<BR><U>Heals<BR></U> Crusaders: Ocasional heals to supliment our tanking ability<BR><U>Overall</U><BR>  (Guardaian / Monk / Paladin) > (Beserker/Bruiser/Shadowknight)<BR><BR>where<BR>a warrior relys on their ability to absorb damage<BR>a brawler relys on their ability to avoid damage<BR>a crusader relys on their ability to deal with the damage once dealt (in heals)<BR><BR><BR>A Beserker/Bruiser/Shadowknight have traded pure tanking ability for additional damage. Paladins should not be BELOW any such classes when you calculate the best tank for the job after all who woud take a paladin to be MT when you can gte a better tank who does more dps.<BR><BR>Paladins arn't asking to be uber or to tank better than guardians we just want to be considered to be a worthy tank, and acceptance in a role which we were designed for.<BR><BR>Also Shadow knights, they are already broken... this change is not going to help them any more.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>I think many of your facts are just plain wrong.  You seem to perhaps have the grass is greener syndrome. </FONT></DIV>

[Arsen]

Warriors have the exact same mitigation capabilties as Crusaders in terms of armor.  Guardians do get a mitigation buff, but it is not really very significant - it wouldn't suprise me if Paladins got better mititgation buffs.  Equipment-wise, the only advantage Warriors have is that they get tower shields, which is avoidance. <div></div>

[Boli32]

<font color="#ffff33">Zerkers can pull aggro off guardians as well.  they do it all the time.   Not sure about a paladin pulling hate off a guardian, but, zerkers can do it in a heartbeat if they try.   Also note, we must use a very low level AE taunt on raid mobs. Guards and Paladins use buffs to hold aggro. <font color="#ffffff">So, this proves: Berserkers have good agro skills, the fact of the matter is you have more and better taunts than us. We do indeed use heals / buff to help maintain agro as well. </font></font><font color="#ffff33"> SBS is greater then any tower shield that can be feasably obtained.   Anyone at 40+ can get the SBS.  If you know of a better Tower shield, please let us know.  </font><font color="#ffff33"><font color="#ffffff">Which you can also use - as I said 9/10  tower shields > kite shields I never said ALL tower shields are better. </font></font><font color="#ffff33">Most guardians use sword and board on anything over blue mobs.   Not sure what the above paragraph is supposed to prove. <font color="#ffffff">Many also use dual wieling for increased hate, I've met a few, even for the yellow/orange con mobs.</font> </font><font color="#ffff33"> Even when you add in your heals? <font color="#ffffff">Heals don't help when you can't cast them. </font></font><font color="#ffff33">NO, this is wrong.  We have the exact same mitigation <font color="#ffffff"> </font><font color="#ffffff">You have self mitigation buffs... we do not. the difference is small, but you still have higher mitigation.</font> </font><font color="#ffff33"><font color="#ffffff"> </font></font><font color="#ffff33">Join the club.  they interrupt everything we got as well.</font> Do half of your abilities have a chance to fizzle and be resisted as well? <font color="#ffff33">Looked like that paladin tanking x4 epics was somehow healing himself fairly well. <font color="#ffffff">The same mob that a guardian decided to strip off his armour to see what happened kind of mob?</font> </font><font color="#ffff33">Sounds like a nice ability.   Wish guardians had something similer. <font color="#ffffff">Takes up two concentration slots which </font></font>means you loose two of your buffs. <font color="#ffff33">Yep, the changes could very well hurt Guards badly too.   In fact, not looking good for any of the tank classes.   Not sure how your trying to say the changes somehow hurt you ore then us. <font color="#ffffff">Yes, they will hurt us more, we rely heaviliy on spell casting in agro manament, tanking (healing) and damage as a whole. More so than the other two  tank classes. </font></font><font color="#ffff33">Yep, fact is guardians  have to have avoidence too to tank effectively.  /shrug <font color="#ffffff"> </font><font color="#ffffff">All tanks can;t work with 0% avoidance, I was illustrating that Crusaders already have te lowest avoidance of all the tank classes Being hit more often (for less damage) will hurt us more than it will hurt you (see above) </font></font><font color="#ffff33">When defense is capped, Warriors and crusaders will be able to avoid jsut as much as guardians.   Not sure where your getting this from? <font color="#ffffff"> </font><font color="#ffffff">Reduced avoidance hurt cursaders more than it hurts warriors </font></font><font color="#ffff33">Again, warrior=crusader in mitigation.   We wear the same armor.   Not sure where you percieve this invisible mitigation bonus you think guardians have. </font>30.6 - Dig In : Decreases offense and slows movement but increases defense and mitigation Difference may be small... but it is there <font color="#ffff33"><font color="#ffffff"> </font></font><font color="#ffff33">I think many of your facts are just plain wrong.  You seem to perhaps have the grass is greener syndrome. <font color="#ffffff"> </font><font color="#ffffff">The fact is I love being my Paladin, just when half of your abilities are spellls  any decrease in avoidance affects us more than it affects you -as I said previously in the effort to balance Brawlers and Warriors, Crusaders are getting crushed in the middle.</font> </font><font color="#ffff33"><font color="#ffffff"> </font> </font><div></div>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><FONT color=#ffff33>.<BR><FONT color=#ffffff><BR></FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>The fact is I love being my Paladin, just when half of your abilities are spellls  any decrease in avoidance affects us more than it affects you -as I said previously in the effort to balance Brawlers and Warriors, Crusaders are getting crushed in the middle.</FONT><BR></FONT><FONT color=#ffff33><FONT color=#ffffff> </FONT><BR></FONT> <P><BR><FONT color=#ffff33>Glad you love your paladin.   I agree , they are equally as well balanced as a guardian or zerker, nice class with few complaints.   I do not see how a cap in avoidence hurts you more then guardians.  Since it WAS the guardians advantage by buffing up the defense.  When its capped, paladins and guardians will have = avoidence.  IE> guardians defense buff advantage is over.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>So yea, doubt you will find many guards hailing the coming changes as good for us.  We hate them too.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33> If your goal is that you want SOE to give ya the  tower shield or the ability to duel wield, I dont think most guardians will give a crap.  Go for it.    They would be considered by most a very weak advantage,  as most guards use Kite shields and rarely duel wield.     </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>No one here is asking for these purposed combat changes.   So, still not sure why your posting this sort of stuff here?   What, want em to add some kind of bonus nerf to a guardians when the combat changes go live?  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>  May as well toss us another nerf in there, heh..      /shrug  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>We do not like the changes anymore then you do.   But, we got about as much say so in the changes as you do, which is nil.   </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[RafaelSmith]

Anyone else see the irony...the one archetype that is the most balanced and fun out of them all is the one that is being drastically nerfed?  Dont give me any BS about raids, etc...the truth is and everyone knows it that all 6 Fighters can tank 99.9% of the game and have fun doing it.  By comparision we have Shamans not coming close to the healing power of Clerics or even Druids. We have Enchanters still trying to figure out what the hell their purpose is while they get 2 shotted by solo mobs. We have Scouts trying to figure out..."am I DPS or am a speed buff?" <div></div>

[Boli32]

<font color="#ffff33">If your goal is that you want SOE to give ya the  tower shield or the ability to duel wield, I dont think most guardians will give a crap.  Go for it.    They would be considered by most a very weak advantage,  as most guards use Kite shields and rarely duel wield.    <font color="#ffffff">The only opportunity I would ask for is the ability to use my abilities, with them we are balanced... without them we are gimped. I just hope tha with the coming changed Crusader will actually be able to cast spells and tank at the same time (to the same degree as it is now)... its not much to ask the use of our own abilities.</font> </font><div></div>

[Tami]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR>Anyone else see the irony...the one archetype that is the most balanced and fun out of them all is the one that is being drastically nerfed?  Dont give me any BS about raids, etc...the truth is and everyone knows it that all 6 Fighters can tank 99.9% of the game and have fun doing it.  <BR><BR>By comparision we have Shamans not coming close to the healing power of Clerics or even Druids.<BR><BR>We have Enchanters still trying to figure out what the hell their purpose is while they get 2 shotted by solo mobs.<BR><BR>We have Scouts trying to figure out..."am I DPS or am a speed buff?"<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>The real irony is that you have the gaul to post this when the SK's are just as badly broken as those you mention -AND- if take the time to read most the posts made by many of the same on this thread you would see that we have been very vocal about the same issues you listed.<BR>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> boli wrote:<BR><FONT color=#ffff33>If your goal is that you want SOE to give ya the  tower shield or the ability to duel wield, I dont think most guardians will give a crap.  Go for it.    They would be considered by most a very weak advantage,  as most guards use Kite shields and rarely duel wield.    <BR><BR><FONT color=#ffffff>The only opportunity I would ask for is the ability to use my abilities, with them we are balanced... without them we are gimped. I just hope tha with the coming changed Crusader will actually be able to cast spells and tank at the same time (to the same degree as it is now)... its not much to ask the use of our own abilities.</FONT><BR></FONT> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Yes, right now, the fighters looked pretty balanced.   I think your asking in the wrong place.  I have  Sks, paladins, zerkers, casters, healers, scouts etc. on my friends list and in guild.   All of them are very unhappy with these upcoming changes.  </P> <P> Rather then waste our time speculating on which crappy tank class will be the crappiest, we should probably focus our attention elsewhere.</P> <P> On the bright side,since the zones have been revamped (made much easier), leveling is easier, etc. All this at the same time as the purposed combat changes. (coincidense?). </P> <P>Lets just say that the game is becoming very "alternate friendly".     Maybe we should focus on a "power leveling a rotunga bruiser to 50 in record time" guide.    :smileyhappy:</P> <p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>04-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:46 AM</span>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> boli wrote:<BR><FONT color=#ffff33>If your goal is that you want SOE to give ya the  tower shield or the ability to duel wield, I dont think most guardians will give a crap.  Go for it.    They would be considered by most a very weak advantage,  as most guards use Kite shields and rarely duel wield.    <BR><BR><FONT color=#ffffff>The only opportunity I would ask for is the ability to use my abilities, with them we are balanced... without them we are gimped. I just hope tha with the coming changed Crusader will actually be able to cast spells and tank at the same time (to the same degree as it is now)... its not much to ask the use of our own abilities.</FONT><BR></FONT> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The only reason Guardians have like 3% more mitigation from our sellf buff is because that is our class abilities.  You have heals, wards, etc.  We have a small mitigation buff.  Very Very Very small in the scheme of things.  </P> <P>Guardians have no secondary role then to tank.  </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote: <P>Guardians have no secondary role then to tank. <BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Not true.<BR>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Eelyen wrote: <p>Guardians have no secondary role then to tank. </p> <hr> </blockquote>Not true. <div></div><hr></blockquote> Oh god here we go again.  I have parsed every group situation ive been in thus far and I have NEVER NEVER done more DPS than mages or scouts....Dont come here and tell me the role of my class is anything other than to TANK.  Go flop around on the ground somewhere and *$%#&!. </span><div></div>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote: <P>Guardians have no secondary role then to tank. <BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Not true.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Oh god here we go again.  I have parsed every group situation ive been in thus far and I have NEVER NEVER done more DPS than mages or scouts....Dont come here and tell me the role of my class is anything other than to TANK.  Go flop around on the ground somewhere and *$%#&!.<BR><BR><BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Don't feed the troll.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote: <P>Guardians have no secondary role then to tank. <BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Not true.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Oh god here we go again.  I have parsed every group situation ive been in thus far and I have NEVER NEVER done more DPS than mages or scouts....Dont come here and tell me the role of my class is anything other than to TANK.  Go flop around on the ground somewhere and *$%#&!.</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Listen:  I don't give a crap if your DPS is lower, its supposed to be.  Every class gets utility that other classes don't, and specifically fighters have utilities and abilities that allow them to be offtank.</P> <P>IF anything is broken its that:</P> <P>A) Your utilities don't work.</P> <P>B) There aren't enough encounters that require MT/MA.</P> <P>But don't sit there and talk about how you can only tank, boo hoo.</P> <P>Sorry, whatever.  There are five other classes that need to be aligned to tank also, and no one class should be MT or worthless, that's stupid.</P> <P>I can't even believe guardians would want that anyway, it makes it that much harder for your class to compete.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gage-Mikel wrote: <p>Sorry, whatever.  There are five other classes that need to be aligned to tank also, and no one class should be MT or worthless, that's stupid.</p> <p>I can't even believe guardians would want that anyway, it makes it that much harder for your class to compete. </p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> Ok whatever...I dont want to be more DPS than others...I accept the fact that im not a DPS class...DPS was the last thing I cared about when i chose Guardian.  Offtank is NOT a secondary role...its just a variotion of the Tank role... So even when we are nerfed like you want us...we are still just tanks. Why I find myself arguing with someone who's got their head so far up their *$%#&! they can barely breath is beyond me. </span><div></div>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote: <P>Guardians have no secondary role then to tank. <BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Not true.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Oh god here we go again.  I have parsed every group situation ive been in thus far and I have NEVER NEVER done more DPS than mages or scouts....Dont come here and tell me the role of my class is anything other than to TANK.  Go flop around on the ground somewhere and *$%#&!.</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Listen:  I don't give a crap if your DPS is lower, its supposed to be.  Every class gets utility that other classes don't, and specifically fighters have utilities and abilities that allow them to be offtank.</P> <P>IF anything is broken its that:</P> <P>A) Your utilities don't work.</P> <P>B) There aren't enough encounters that require MT/MA.</P> <P>But don't sit there and talk about how you can only tank, boo hoo.</P> <P>Sorry, whatever.  There are five other classes that need to be aligned to tank also, and no one class should be MT or worthless, that's stupid.</P> <P>I can't even believe guardians would want that anyway, it makes it that much harder for your class to compete.</P> <P><BR> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Hi!</P> <P>If I have 2 Guardians on a Raid.  Guess what the other guardian is going to be doing? </P> <P>Yes, Offtanking.</P> <P>Guardians are tanks and tanks alone.  But since we lack any other secondary role.  This patch completely obliterates the class virtually.  </P> <P>And remember, you yourself agreed with me when I pointed that we lack a secondary role to you before.  If you hadn't noticed all tank classes could already tank 99.9% of the encounters in the game.  You should talk to more raiders often.  And yes I know you hang out with a raiding guild some.  But obviously their view on the situation skews your view for the 350k other people playing this game.</P> <DIV>So I'm going to spell out to you why this patch is obliterating guardians.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>With the current adjustments in place, Guardians, Berserkers, Paladins, and Shadow Knights at equal levels all hit the exact same Mitigation and Avoidance CAP regardless of how good their armor is.</STRONG>  It's still the exact same cap.  Making them virtually identical damage absorbing machines except the fact that Guardians have some more hp at equal levels.  And if thats supposed to balance the guardian class when raid mobs are hitting for <STRONG>4000+</STRONG> damage.  Then I guess I don't know what I'm talking about.</DIV> <P>They should just Merge the 4 Plate tanks into 1 *$%#&! class and get it over with.</P> <P>Plus they need to merge Monks and Bruiser into 1 avoidance class.  Cause their caps are identical as well. <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Eelyen on <span class=date_text>04-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:10 PM</span>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Eelyen wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <div></div>  <div><strong>With the current adjustments in place, Guardians, Berserkers, Paladins, and Shadow Knights at equal levels all hit the exact same Mitigation and Avoidance CAP regardless of how good their armor is.</strong>  It's still the exact same cap.  Making them virtually identical damage absorbing machines except the fact that Guardians have some more hp at equal levels.  And if thats supposed to balance the guardian class when raid mobs are hitting for <strong>4000+</strong> damage.  Then I guess I don't know what I'm talking about.</div> <p>They should just Merge the 4 Plate tanks into 1 *$%#&! class and get it over with.</p> <p>Plus they need to merge Monks and Bruiser into 1 avoidance class.  Cause their caps are identical as well. </p><p><span class="time_text"></span> </p><p>Message Edited by Eelyen on <span class="date_text">04-18-2005</span> <span class="time_text">02:10 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote> I think this is perhaps the one thing that has annoyed me the most thus far in this game..  With the exception of a few stats here and there the 4 plate tanks are virtually identical from a tanking perspective...We look the same, mitigate the same, etc. I think in the back of my mind I realize the proposed changes will just blur that line even more and in fact make us absolutely identical.  All along I had hoped they would make the various classes within an archetype equal yet different...I now I see it will just end up equal/clones, etc.  Not much fun in knowing you are no different and off nothing unique compared to the 5 other branches of your archetype.  And considering I offer nothing of extra value...im left feeling obsolete. I know having played other SOE games i realize thinking that they would fix rather than break was somewhat foolish of me.</span><div></div>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>Just for the record Bols,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Holding aggro is a simple task if you know what you are doing. Im using level 20 on down taunts as a bruiser at level 41 and holding aggro off of level 48+ wiz/warlocks. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So until they take the aggro building off of fighter buffs,  and such. Aggro holding really shouldnt be a factor. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>At level 41, im using shout and slurred insult to hold aggro. It sucks - but it works.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/shrug</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So in most cases holding aggro isnt as much of a commodity as is being able to take the hits once you get the aggro under control...</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN>Ok whatever...I dont want to be more DPS than others...<FONT color=#ffff00>I accept the fact that im not a DPS class</FONT>...DPS was the last thing I cared about when i chose Guardian.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Offtank is NOT a secondary role...its just a variotion of the Tank role</FONT>... So even when we are nerfed like you want us...we are still just tanks.<BR><BR>Why I find myself arguing with someone who's got their head so far up their *$%#&! they can barely breath is beyond me.</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>So do I.</P> <P>Really?  Well monks are told to "do DPS" and when I state we aren't a DPS class I get told that doing so is "being the offtank".</P> <P>Looks like a case of wanting to be the best tank at all costs.  That's not very nice.</P> <P><BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <P>Hi!</P> <P>If I have 2 Guardians on a Raid.  Guess what the other guardian is going to be doing? </P> <P>Yes, Offtanking.</P> <P>Guardians are tanks and tanks alone.  But since we lack any other secondary role.  This patch completely obliterates the class virtually.  </P> <P>And remember, you yourself agreed with me when I pointed that we lack a secondary role to you before.  If you hadn't noticed all tank classes could already tank 99.9% of the encounters in the game.  You should talk to more raiders often.  And yes I know you hang out with a raiding guild some.  But obviously their view on the situation skews your view for the 350k other people playing this game.</P> <DIV>So I'm going to spell out to you why this patch is obliterating guardians.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>With the current adjustments in place, Guardians, Berserkers, Paladins, and Shadow Knights at equal levels all hit the exact same Mitigation and Avoidance CAP regardless of how good their armor is.</STRONG>  It's still the exact same cap.  Making them virtually identical damage absorbing machines except the fact that Guardians have some more hp at equal levels.  And if thats supposed to balance the guardian class when raid mobs are hitting for <STRONG>4000+</STRONG> damage.  Then I guess I don't know what I'm talking about.</DIV> <P>They should just Merge the 4 Plate tanks into 1 *$%#&! class and get it over with.</P> <P>Plus they need to merge Monks and Bruiser into 1 avoidance class.  Cause their caps are identical as well. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Then the answer is simple:  You make SoE fix your abilities and give you a secondary role, like the rest of the fighter tree has.  The answer is not to nerf the tanking ability of five other subclasses because you feel that your class can "only MT."</P> <P>This is the single stupidest arguement from guardians, and its why I post so much.</P> <P>Guardian: I'm only a tank.</P> <P>Non-Guardian: Why is that?</P> <P>Guardian: My DPS is too low and my abilities don't work.</P> <P>Non-Guardian: So get them fixed and/or increased.</P> <P>Guardian: No, I picked a guardian to tank, I don't need that other stuff, its "useless".</P> <P>Other Tank: Well I picked my class to tank to, and I get told by you all the time that I should be doing other things, because of my utility and damage.</P> <P>Guardian: Well yes, of course.  That's because by not getting myself fixed and ensuring I tank better than you, everyone will see that I can "only" tank, and therefore I get to be the only viable MT (especially for raids in the game).</P> <P>Sorry, but as I've said I'm not buying it.</P> <P>If you can't contribute as an "offtank" or some sort of utility (and you do contribute damage, it just isn't as good ~ which coincidentally should be made up for with utility <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />) then get your class fixed.  Quit trying to support a broken system just so you can be the best.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>04-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:37 PM</span>

[Margen]

<P> </P> <P>Sagemarrow wrote:</P> <DIV>Just for the record Bols,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Holding aggro is a simple task if you know what you are doing. Im using level 20 on down taunts as a bruiser at level 41 and holding aggro off of level 48+ wiz/warlocks. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So until they take the aggro building off of fighter buffs,  and such. Aggro holding really shouldnt be a factor. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>At level 41, im using shout and slurred insult to hold aggro. It sucks - but it works.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/shrug</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So in most cases holding aggro isnt as much of a commodity as is being able to take the hits once you get the aggro under control...</DIV> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________</P> <P>The problem for the Shadow Knight community though is for us to have a chance to maintain aggro, we have to burn up a lot of power with recyling taunts, shield bashing, buffing and debuffing, specially if with a nuke happy wiz/warlock or some of the scout classes.  On single mobs we usally can keep aggro ... though if we lose it we have a heck of time getting it back.  Multiple mobs, its more problimatic.  But after the fight we usally have to med up to get power back up, and group has to wait for us to be ready again.</P> <P>In comparison with Guardians and Zerkers, they from my experiance when grouping with them maintain aggro easier and use a lot less power, so group goes back to killing faster.  Admit I usally tank if with a monk/bruiser due to the fact they can produce more dps then me if not tanking, so can't compare power consumption to maintain aggro.  But they use less power then we do in dps role and produce more damage.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 31st Troll Shadow Knight</P> <P>Message Edited by Margen on <SPAN class=date_text>04-18-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:39 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Margen on <span class=date_text>04-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:42 PM</span>

[Ashgaarl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <P>This is exactally what i was afraid of. To be honest SoE, if you dont fix this and it makes my game time <STRONG><U>less</U></STRONG> fun for me and my wife because we duo alot because of living in Australia and having barely anyone to group with in our timezone because you will not open a Asain pacific time zone Server or hell a Aussie server even, im sure there would be enough, PLUS the fact of the amount of CORE changes you have already made to the game which now im willing to bet you wish you didnt make some of those and have basically backed yourselves into a corner and trying to whip out some balance miracle in the name of game balance. If and when this change goes to live or if i keep reading such posts like above which there is more then one post like it on numerous forums, then i will pack up 3 accounts that are all on Station Access and quit game. I hate people that use this tactic SoE and its the first time in over 4 years of being a customer with SoE that i have personally used it. </P> <P>Reason im using it is because the game is nothing like what you :</P> <OL> <LI>Advertised it to be.</LI> <LI>Your community feedback to the people is a pathectic joke, its never correct, you think you know something about your own game and it just keeps proving you dont know a thing OR know what <STRONG><U>The People</U></STRONG> want " EQ2, your in our world now ", what more can i say. Im sure if Moorgard was to read back over past posts he would be kicking himself. He recently made a post that says we all take what he says out of context and that we basically treat it like its law, let me fill you in Moorgard, your our Community Rep, thats why we take it as rock solid information because you are suppose to GIVE us rock solid information, thats how you keep customers, not by [Removed for Content] down there backs and telling them its raining.</LI> <LI>The game is a mere shadow of what it was when it was first released and i challenge SoE to show us the graph that they would have in there offices with the number of customers that they have pulled in from Live release to NOW with all the ups and down periods that they have occured since then in reguards to new subscriptions, canceled subscriptions and people who contuined to play AFTER the 30 day trial.</LI> <LI>The only reason your bringing out PvP into the game is because you know that the " Other " game is starting to beat you on sales simply due to the <STRONG><U>fun</U></STRONG> factor that PvP inside a PvE enviroment provides, you ( SoE ) with the help of a producer letter by Mr John Smedley himself some time ago even stated that you guys are playing the " Other " game and having a ball of a time, i mean who on earth goes and tells there paying customers that there playing the " Other " game and enjoying it? Thats like me going and getting advice on a Ferrai or Porchse, so it comes time to buy a Porshce and you being the salesmen tell me its the best car in the world only to watch you drive out on your way home to work in a Ferrai, what a crock of BS, now i head on over to the Ferrai dealership and they tell me what you pay for is what you get and i watch him drive off in a Ferrai, so in a attempt to keep people here OR give other people some sort of interesting notion to find out where or what you will do with it to try and keep people here.</LI> <LI>For the trolls out there, i only starting feeling this way after LU#5 hit, before that i loved the game, it could of used some serious Buff stacking and Combat Arts, Abilities and Spell fixs for EVERY class, but apart from that, it was pretty decent and it could of held my attention for a very very serious long time, and i mean LONG time, but since LU#5, you have killed that SoE, and im sure with the lack of respect you treat alot of other people who once loved it are feeling the same way.</LI></OL> <P>Please try not to take offense from this as ive just had enough of all the BS SoE talk for the last 4 years and empty promises, those who have played or play any other SoE game will know exactally what im talking about, here is a example, they have only <STRONG><U>now</U></STRONG> just decided to do a full class revision on EQ1 after we basically cryed out for it in a very NEEDING way, not a wah wah cry cry way, for some flavour and fun back in the game for the last 3+ years, why? Its simple, because there losing people drastically and merging servers together to keep game worlds populated in a bid to keep the game interesting enough to ethier keep people there or invite new ones. Now if they only did this BEFORE they decided to race for the finish line with the " Other " game, then they would of kept alot MORE players, and try and give me the BS of EQ2 is a totally new team of people, if so why are people starting to be announced as being on the EQ2 team that were orginally on the EQ1 team? If you ask me they have always been there and are only just now being introduced as being promoted in a sense to EQ2 team, more [Removed for Content] on my shoulders while i hear the " its only rain ".</P> <P>Ok let me roll this rant up, if i see or read anymore posts like this where people are having trouble killing lvl 27 mobs at lvl 45 ( which by the way im lvl 48 ) SoE and it gets closer and closer to the LU#8 release date with no soild evidence from YOU ( SoE ) i will be hitting cancel, trust me, if you value what customers want which you keep saying you do, then i ( speaking from a hyperthectically point of view ) would be reading and probing this ENTIRE forum for a better insight of what YOUR players want, not what you want because its quite clear with the amount of core changes and patchs that you guys clearly dont even know what your looking for. </P> <P>Let me ask this, is this EQ2 where it is based around Small to large group play in the vicinty of 3 - 6 players? or are we heading for EQ1 style with a new game engine, fancy graphics, a new storyline and the need for a FULL group of specific players to be able to do anything worth a pinch of salt?</P> <P>Again i apologize for the rant, but if SoE care, maybe i have pointed out something which they may have overlooked which i seriously doubt anyway because its very rarely that a <STRONG><U>customer</U></STRONG> ever be right in SoE's eyes, before anyone replys with, not all games suit everyone, let me make it clear again, i was having the best time in my gaming life upto the point of when LU#5 went in, the fixs to Combat Arts, Abilites and Spells with LU#6 sparked my interests again, but seeing more and more of these posts every day, im starting to wonder what fricken game im even playing anymore. Well not the best time in my gaming life, but i was having fun none the less.</P> <P>Like i said SoE, you dont [Removed for Content] down peoples backs and tell them its raining and for the record, EQ2, your world is turning to <STRONG><U>S.H.I.T. </U></STRONG></P></DIV> <P>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <SPAN class=date_text>04-18-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:09 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Hear hear! I've been a SOE customer since 03/99 (well, started with Verant) and I know EXACTLY how you feel. I almost packed my bags twice already due to general gameplay nerfs (in my personal opinion).</P> <P>My experience with EQ2 has been far far worse than it ever was playing EQ - hardly any information is given, Server Status pages are static and hardly ever updated (LOL), ALOT of downtime (really shouldn't be needed to flip servers daily - I don't believe I registered for beta testing when I decided to give SOE 18$ a month?).</P> <P>I too read the material before EQ2 came out, decision was easy - I wanted to be THE Tank (played offtanking class in EQ) in EQ2, and from what I could gather, Guardian was "the" tank class. Ofcourse there was alot of exciting "utility tanks" aswell, but I reckoned I would have a go at the Main Tank (raid) role. Reading all of this makes me wish I stuck with a fun utility tank class since it seems they now get the advantages the Guardian once had (soon). I actually thought of the Berserker class - but I went for the one of the two Warrior classes that seemed like the most probable MT. Berserker without the DPS? I would hate that.</P> <P>If everyone is so focused on making everyone equal, then please return to the Fighter, Thief, Cleric and Wizard system - was ALOT easier to play then :smileytongue:</P> <P>"Why is he still playing??" some will think - well, been in love with Norrath since 99 - hard to let it slide. All my RL friends are already playing "the other game" which I can't stand (muppetshow on acid IMHO), I still have alot of guildies from EQ playing so still some reason to stick around. Take away my capabilities as a Guardian and I quit - I am level 48 now and I have put far too much work into this already to start over - so think about the consequences of your actions. This game started out soooo promising and it has been just about all downhill from there...</P> <P>With D&D beta unleashed (yes - started playing pen & pencil games 18 years ago - D&D was my first) you risk loosing even more of your remaining customers (considering the severe loss to "the other game") - so please - more *correct* info, think more about the consequences of what you unleash BEFORE you do so, and please please stop making everyone the same - takes the fun out of everything (didnt work for communism either)...<BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>HELLL YEAH!!!!.</P> <P>DIDNT WORK FOR COMMUNISM EITHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.</P> <P>HOOORAHHH!</P> <P>(i enjoyed that ashgaarl, thank you.)</P>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Then the answer is simple:  You make SoE fix your abilities and give you a secondary role, like the rest of the fighter tree has.  The answer is not to nerf the tanking ability of five other subclasses because you feel that your class can "only MT."</P> <P>This is the single stupidest arguement from guardians, and its why I post so much.</P> <P>Guardian: I'm only a tank.</P> <P>Non-Guardian: Why is that?</P> <P>Guardian: My DPS is too low and my abilities don't work.</P> <P>Non-Guardian: So get them fixed and/or increased.</P> <P>Guardian: No, I picked a guardian to tank, I don't need that other stuff, its "useless".</P> <P>Other Tank: Well I picked my class to tank to, and I get told by you all the time that I should be doing other things, because of my utility and damage.</P> <P>Guardian: Well yes, of course.  That's because by not getting myself fixed and ensuring I tank better than you, everyone will see that I can "only" tank, and therefore I get to be the only viable MT (especially for raids in the game).</P> <P>Sorry, but as I've said I'm not buying it.</P> <P>If you can't contribute as an "offtank" or some sort of utility (and you do contribute damage, it just isn't as good ~ which coincidentally should be made up for with utility <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />) then get your class fixed.  Quit trying to support a broken system just so you can be the best.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>04-18-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:37 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually, Guardian abilities aren't really broken.  This patch made the buffs virtually useless though.</P> <P>A guardian is a guardian, we are there to take punishment.  I don't want a secondary role.  Period, I want to tank, only tank, and nothing but tank.<BR></P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I don't tell other classes to do things besides tank.  They tank just fine.  Hell I utilize whatever is best in the situation.  Whoever knows the zone the best between myself, the berserker, or Paladin.  They get to pull and tank.  Doesn't bug me.  We all tanked just fine and had no issues with each other.  The paladin was actually proud of what he could do for a group with his abilities.  The berserkers were happy doing damage and rarely tanking.  I just knew most of the zones the best and enjoyed tanking and thats what I did best and the group knew it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i still haven't seen this huge disparity you keep calling between tanks.  From what I understand monks were tanking epic 4 encounters just fine.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text>The people who learn to utilize their abilities instead of wanting to be the exact same are the best players.  And I wouldn't want to group with any other kind.  I'm glad I"m not stuck with anyone else.</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Eelyen on <SPAN class=date_text>04-18-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:58 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Eelyen on <span class=date_text>04-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:59 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <P>I don't want a secondary role.  Period, I want to tank, only tank, and nothing but tank.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Good, neither do I.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR>

[Recliner Muggaru]

<DIV>Look at it like this. ITS A WHOLE NEW GAME NOW !!! Did ya know Matrix is out now, hmmm I might just go out and get that game. Wonder if WOW has made this many changes. By the way MAKE UP YOUR MIND. These changes are getting OLD.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<P>Matrix is a lot like CoH, so if you like that you might like it.  Its kind of boring, has a few bugs, etc.  The story and live events are awesome, and dueling is fun.</P> <P>At best its decent, but offers nowhere near the depth as EQ2.</P>

[English Da Gua]

<DIV>  Gage calls out guardians saying we are selfish because we want to tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Most guardians are fine in an OT role, it is actually a nice change.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Gage wants to be the MT in his guild.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Gage chose the wrong class.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Gage is not chosen MT because he is in a min / max guild, or because his guild does not have the resources or creativeness to beat an encounter with a monk MT since they require a strategy other then the typical plate class setup.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   Jez (bruiser, offensive brethen of the monk) tanks raid mobs fine, because that guild is willing to fail and try new things to find out what strategy they need to use to win. Also, Jez may just have more skilled people in that guild or the resources to set up the groups / strategy needed to win.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So ... Gage wants to MT (A) he wants it to be trivial it seems since he / his guild can't figure it out (B) and guardians are selfish in his view because they want to MT (C).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So we know A is true. It seems B is true since the OFFENSIVE (less defensive) brethen of the monk can tank raid mobs fine. And anyone who reads the forums knows C is true.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So tell me, if A is true then C must apply to Gage also, except in reference to monks, at least monks like Gage. No fallacy here. Dang glad I took that logic class.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So if we are selfish you are in the same boat. At least don't try to use the smoke and mirror tactics. Come out and say it. I have to at least give the guardians credit for admitting to it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <DIV>  Gage calls out guardians saying we are selfish because we want to tank.  <FONT color=#ffff00>No, I call out guardians who deny utility/dps and say its MT or nothing.  Guardians who say their skills are "worthless" and then cite those skills when someone tells them they can offtank.  Guardians who try to drive home the fact that all they can do is tank or be a meangingless class while reinforcing that deficiency.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Most guardians are fine in an OT role, it is actually a nice change.  <FONT color=#ffff00>News to me.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Gage wants to be the MT in his guild.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Since I'm not guilded... lol.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Gage chose the wrong class.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Is that possible?  I mean I picked someone from the fighter archetype.  /shrug</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Gage is not chosen MT because he is in a min / max guild, or because his guild does not have the resources or creativeness to beat an encounter with a monk MT since they require a strategy other then the typical plate class setup.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Or, because he isn't guilded.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   Jez (bruiser, offensive brethen of the monk) tanks raid mobs fine, because that guild is willing to fail and try new things to find out what strategy they need to use to win. Also, Jez may just have more skilled people in that guild or the resources to set up the groups / strategy needed to win.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Yes, Jez is a good guy, I speak to him a lot.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So ... Gage wants to MT (A) he wants it to be trivial it seems since he / his guild can't figure it out (B) and guardians are selfish in his view because they want to MT (C).  <FONT color=#ffff00>Yes I want to MT, no I don't want it to be trivial (in fact I have tanked, and have no guild).  Guardians are selfish because they cite lack of utility/dps as their reason for only being MT and when told to get more utility or higher damage they say "no they don't want it" thereby artificially creating not only the stigma but an actually lack of ability to do anything but MT, which is what they want to do anyway.  It'd be like Shaq only wanting to dunk and then refusing to work on any shot besides dunking.  I mean, hello, of course that's all he is going to be good at.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So we know A is true. It seems B is true since the OFFENSIVE (less defensive) brethen of the monk can tank raid mobs fine. And anyone who reads the forums knows C is true.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Yes, A is true.  Yes, because Jez = all bruisers :smileyindifferent:  Guardians aren't selfish if they want to MT, because all fighters should want to.  They are selfish when they refuse to get/utilize their skills that enable them to offtank, and often push the mentality of every one of those skills being worthless onto other players in an attempt to cement their role as MT; not only perceived but actual.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So tell me, if A is true then C must apply to Gage also, except in reference to monks, at least monks like Gage. No fallacy here. Dang glad I took that logic class.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Nah, not really.  I've never asked for monks to be given a tank role despite of other classes.  I'd have no problem sharing it.  Guardians are the ones who want exclusive rights to the spot.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   So if we are selfish you are in the same boat. At least don't try to use the smoke and mirror tactics. Come out and say it. I have to at least give the guardians credit for admitting to it.  <FONT color=#ffff00>I have, everyone who is anyone knows I want to MT.  I just don't want to do it at the expense of others.</FONT> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Nemi]

<DIV>I'm a monk and I'm MT fine for my guild - Probably because we have no templars/inquisitiors in the guild :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My argument is with Guardians who believe that they should be NUMBER 1 above all else. That they believe (wrongly) that SoE designed their class with ONLY tanking in mind.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All fighters are given group buffs and are given protection and offtanking buffs - I only wish Guardians would realise it.</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<P>well keep in mind that no gaurdian has said that they even give a hot diggity dam about tanking 1-50...</P> <P>This is about 3 mobs that are hard as hell to tank... nothing more nothing less. Thats the only time that you see that *guardian required* label.</P> <P>Even looking at the changes on test, the reflection is still the same, with them being the better raid tank OVERALL. Not AT ALL, just OVERALL.</P> <P>now if you think that is unfair, then sue me, sue english, sue SOE. But thats the little beacon when Best among equals shines through folks.</P> <P>If you put Shaq daddy deisel, Micheal AIR jordan, and Larry Bird side by side, we all know who the best among equals is. And if we were picking players for our teams, we know who would be the first to go, Micheal jordan = Guardian.</P> <P>Thats what you are seeing now = and that is what you will continue to see.</P>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  Well Gage, if you are not guilded then you really have NO reason to be in any conversation that involves balance among raid mobs. How can you possibly give advice / ideas / information on a topic you have no experience with.</P> <P>   That's like a virgin giving you sex advice.</P> <P>   Now if you have done some raid pick up groups or raids with friends, maybe it is possible, like I said, you just didn't have the resources or tactics available to defeat said enoucnter. And jez does not need to equal all bruisers. If one can do it they all can. You can say it is based on gear, but so what. A 50 guardian in feysteel won't be nearly as good an MT as a guardian in master gear huh...</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P> Well Gage, if you are not guilded then you really have NO reason to be in any conversation that involves balance among raid mobs. How can you possibly give advice / ideas / information on a topic you have no experience with.</P> <P>  That's like a virgin giving you sex advice.</P> <P>  Now if you have done some raid pick up groups or raids with friends, maybe it is possible, like I said, you just didn't have the resources or tactics available to defeat said enoucnter. And jez does not need to equal all bruisers. If one can do it they all can. You can say it is based on gear, but so what. A 50 guardian in feysteel won't be nearly as good an MT as a guardian in master gear huh...<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I actually raid with a guild I'm friends with when they need people <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>But its okay, you can say whatever you need to make yourself feel better.<BR></P>

[English Da Gua]

<P>  Well then don't answer questions about guild raiding with "I'm not in a guild" then come back and say "I raid with a guild I'm friends with." What the *$%#&!, either you raid or you don't.  You do whatever you can to avoid answering the question</P> <P>   IF you raid, then everything I said in the first post applies, so take your 'cute' little answers like "Im not guilded" away from the post and answer the questions.</P> <P>   Being that you raid... either the guild you are not really in but raid with (like it makes a difference) lacks the resources (classes and #'s) to succeed with a monk MT or lacks the creativeness /  skill to win said encounters with a monk MT. </P> <P>   And feel better...about what?? I, unlike you, actually did research on the game, my class and the company that makes the game to determine what class best suited me. You did not. The PR people said all fighters will fill their roles in "most" situations. You do. There are, like Sage said, maybe<<< 2 or 3 mobs you cannot MT.</P> <P>   You fit the description the PR people made. You wanted to be the end all be all MT. You choose your class poorly for what you truly wanted to accomplish.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P> Well then don't answer questions about guild raiding with "I'm not in a guild" then come back and say "I raid with a guild I'm friends with." What the *$%#&!, either you raid or you don't.  You do whatever you can to avoid answering the question</P> <P>  IF you raid, then everything I said in the first post applies, so take your 'cute' little answers like "Im not guilded" away from the post and answer the questions.</P> <P>  Being that you raid... either the guild you are not really in but raid with (like it makes a difference) lacks the resources (classes and #'s) to succeed with a monk MT or lacks the creativeness /  skill to win said encounters with a monk MT.</P> <P>  And feel better...about what?? I, unlike you, actually did research on the game, my class and the company that makes the game to determine what class best suited me. You did not. The PR people said all fighters will fill their roles in "most" situations. You do. There are, like Sage said, maybe<<< 2 or 3 mobs you cannot MT.</P> <P>  You fit the description the PR people made. You wanted to be the end all be all MT. You choose your class poorly for what you truly wanted to accomplish.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Well, that's opinion, not fact.</P> <P>All I'm saying is to quit hiding behind "we can only MT" because it isn't true.<BR></P>

[English Da Gua]

 Well, I totally agree with that ...:smileyindifferent:

[Deadjest]

<P>    I am curious here, I have been reading the posts and have noticed a trend by some posters that seem to be trying to go back to the old EQ broken ways where only one tank is prime tank, it broke the game there but since it was the only game around people stayed but since we have options now, if that primitive line of thinking in a multi tank system happens here, the same thing will happen BUT people have a place to go.   Yes some people will stay but that wont matter, if enough dont stay the few are out of luck when the game shuts down.</P> <P>  So my question is.</P> <P>  How many here want to push for top dog tank.</P> <P>  How many here want a tank balanced system.</P> <P>  And if the two above are both answered to a decent degree, why not just go to the fighter fourm and make two seperate posts and post on them.</P> <P>  <STRONG>Tanks for Supremacy </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG>  Tanks for Balance</STRONG></P> <P>  And just take it from there, that way you wont have to argue you opinions.   After all, if you check out the posts you can already see trends where some tanks out right disreguard negitives on some tanks and over push small positives to boost of other tanks as reason to why they should be top dog.</P> <P>  </P> <P> </P>

[Boli32]

<u>Tank should balance. No tank should be the be all and end all tank for ALL situations.</u> (Guardaian / Monk / Paladin) > (Beserker / Bruiser / Shadowknight) where   a warrior relys on their ability to absorb more damage    a brawler relys on their ability to avoid more damage   and a crusader trades off getting hit more than a monk (but not too much as to make spell casting impossible) and cannot take as much less raw punishment as a guardian but balances this with spell casting abilities such as heals. Beserkers, Bruisers and Shadowknights work in the same way as their mirrors but trade some tanking ability for increased damage. I did have more but I started to rant - those are my thoughts on the matter however. <div></div>

[Raahl]

<P>Enlighten us oh Monk sage on what our class can or cannot do.  :smileytongue:</P> <P>/sarcasm off.</P> <P>DPS is a joke for guardians.  For the most part Guardians could care less about DPS, or our lack of DPS.  </P> <P>Utility?  Mediocre group buffs.   Most Guardians could also care less about utility.   My buffs are not used because of their utility, but because they generate a lot of hate and help me retain aggro.  Which is not right to me, our taunts should outweigh buffs in aggro generation.</P> <P>What guardians are all about is being a mitigation tank.  We should mitigate damage better than any other class.    And currently we are not.</P> <P>I will not comment on what the other fighter classes can or cannot do.    Simply because I have never played one.</P> <P>As far as the upcoming changes, I'll wait to pass judgement till I experience them first hand.   Looking at the info, I think priest and mages are gonna be very unhappy.  No parrying!  Think of the interupts!  owie.</P>

[Dracoviol]

boli thats absolutely false.  While the brawlers rely on avoiding dmg more, all the plate tanks count on superior mitigation its just they do it well against differant dmg sources.  There base mitigation and avoidance are the same.  As far as trading dps for def thats a poor mans argument.  Why you ask? because defense scales with the mob along with your heals(do to more healers) but dps is fixed.  In other words i mitigate and avoid roughly the same % wise on epic encounter as a solo encounter. Dps how ever lowers in % and becomes less important.  So you have choice: give 600dps to the so called greater dps tanks on epics or balance it in a realistic fashion.  I believe the devs chose a realistic fashion.  Unfortanely the combat system was messed at inception and we cant even get a working model for a month before the change or nerf something. <div></div>

[RafaelSmith]

Ok let me get this straight...all this game breaking class imbalance that exists is due to 3-4 Raid Mobs? How exactly is that going against the original vision of EQ2?  I must have a completely different idea of what the word "MOST" means. =P I mean if virtually all other content in the game can be and is being tanked by all fighter types, healed by all healer types, etc what exactly is broken besides those 3-4 mobs? I admit I am looking at this from a specific point of view...I dont raid, i only group with at most 3-4 friends...At this "level" of gameplay there is NO inbalance among fighters...fighters fight, healers heal, nukers nuke, scouts DPS(and yes they DPS more than me =P).  I could be Monk, I could be a Zerker, etc and it wouldnt make a *$%#&! bit of difference to my group..  Nothing we do is trivialized...its fun and chanllenging. All i see from these proposed changes is a severe lessoning of what we as a group can accomplish... which in the end equals less fun and more frustration.  Call me selfish i guess.  But no more selfish than someone that wants the entire game changed because they have trouble tanking 3-4 mobs in the game. <div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR>Ok let me get this straight...all this game breaking class imbalance that exists is due to 3-4 Raid Mobs?<BR><BR>How exactly is that going against the original vision of EQ2?  I must have a completely different idea of what the word "MOST" means. =P<BR><BR>I mean if virtually all other content in the game can be and is being tanked by all fighter types, healed by all healer types, etc what exactly is broken besides those 3-4 mobs?<BR><BR>I admit I am looking at this from a specific point of view...I dont raid, i only group with at most 3-4 friends...At this "level" of gameplay there is NO inbalance among fighters...fighters fight, healers heal, nukers nuke, scouts DPS(and yes they DPS more than me =P).  I could be Monk, I could be a Zerker, etc and it wouldnt make a *$%#&! bit of difference to my group..  Nothing we do is trivialized...its fun and chanllenging.<BR><BR>All i see from these proposed changes is a severe lessoning of what we as a group can accomplish... which in the end equals less fun and more frustration.  Call me selfish i guess.  But no more selfish than someone that wants the entire game changed because they have trouble tanking 3-4 mobs in the game.<BR><BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>EverBrawler, your in our world now. :smileywink:

[AsheM]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <P>I don't want a secondary role.  Period, I want to tank, only tank, and nothing but tank.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Good, neither do I.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P>Then why didn't you pick a Guardian?  Moronic.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> AsheMan wrote:<BR> <P>Then why didn't you pick a Guardian?  Moronic.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Because I don't like them?<BR>

[Boli32]

<blockquote><font color="#ffff00"> boli thats absolutely false.  While the brawlers rely on avoiding dmg more, all the plate tanks count on superior mitigation its just they do it well against differant dmg sources.  There base mitigation and avoidance are the same.  As far as trading dps for def thats a poor mans argument.  Why you ask? because defense scales with the mob along with your heals(do to more healers) but dps is fixed.  In other words i mitigate and avoid roughly the same % wise on epic encounter as a solo encounter. Dps how ever lowers in % and becomes less important.  So you have choice: give 600dps to the so called greater dps tanks on epics or balance it in a realistic fashion.  I believe the devs chose a realistic fashion.  Unfortanely the combat system was messed at inception and we cant even get a working model for a month before the change or nerf something. </font></blockquote> I know its false... its an idealised solution - as it stands now Beserkers are better than Paladins, Brawlers have worrying damage spikes and Guardians are the best choice hands down for raid mobs. ... and as for the "dps tanks" do trade dps for tanking ability... that remains true - while a guardian gets aditional arts that IMPROVE his tanking prowess a Beserker gets abilities that improve his DPS... that is true across the board. You can't honestly say that a beserker doesn't do more damage than a guardian or a Guardian doesn't tank better than a  Beserker. and whlie this may not be as important in "raid mobs" - in experiance groups it could make all the difference. It certianly will be interesting to see as the combat changes progress on the combat server. <div></div>

[Eelyen]

<P>Wait Gage, you aren't guilded.  And you say that you were a fine tank for a group up to 50?</P> <P>Yet you raid with some other guild and because they don't choose you to tank, you think your class sucks on tanking and that guardians only want to be MTs?</P> <P>Well, you really need to do more research.  Cause you are way off.</P> <P>I like tanking, and I don't care about offtanking either.  As I've stated time and again I group with other tanks.  And they get to tank as well.  It's a nice break for me.</P> <P>Monks have been tanking in other guilds on other servers, but just because you aren't the MT for whatever guild you raid with, you think that monks lack the ability to tank?</P> <P>Geez, I don't know why I even debate it with you if thats the case.</P>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> AsheMan wrote:<BR> <P>Then why didn't you pick a Guardian?  Moronic.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Because I don't like them?<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Then why do you talk to them so much?

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Eelyen wrote:<p>Wait Gage, you aren't guilded.  And you say that you were a fine tank for a group up to 50?</p> <p>Yet you raid with some other guild and because they don't choose you to tank, you think your class sucks on tanking and that guardians only want to be MTs?</p> <p>Well, you really need to do more research.  Cause you are way off.</p> <p>I like tanking, and I don't care about offtanking either.  As I've stated time and again I group with other tanks.  And they get to tank as well.  It's a nice break for me.</p> <p>Monks have been tanking in other guilds on other servers, but just because you aren't the MT for whatever guild you raid with, you think that monks lack the ability to tank?</p> <p>Geez, I don't know why I even debate it with you if thats the case.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> There is probably a very good reason why he isnt MT and I doubt it has anything to do with him being a Monk =P </span><div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>There is probably a very good reason why he isnt MT and I doubt it has anything to do with him being a Monk =P</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yup, its because their setup, strat and the way combat works now favors a guardian.  Since I just fill in for them here and there it doesn't make sense to try to come up with an adequate way for me to tank.  Especially since I don't get dkp and lack super uber equipment.</P> <P>Contrary to popular opinion I like to win, and as of right now with the friends I raid with, that's easier with a guardian MT.  In fact I'm not even MA, a SK is.</P> <P>But anyway.</P> <P>The reason I say I can tank to 50 is because I did, about 95% of the time.  Although it was in pickup groups.  I've been guilded a few times but haven't found a fit I like yet, so a lot of my time currently is devoted to Matrix Online.<BR></P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>well just as an FYI, if you want me to be perfectly honest...</P> <P>In some/alot of cases i tank better than alot of guardians my level and have MUCH better stats. While on the other hand i do MUCH better dps in an offtank/dps role.</P> <P>Does that make sense? I tank just as well as a gaurdian in core content fully grouped, and still can put out nearly 200dps at level 41 while in dps mode.</P> <P>So i must be missing a piece of this equation where gaurdians ACTUALLY tank better in situations 1-50... </P> <P>So with that being said, bruisers tank too well and do too much dps as well???? </P> <P>so in all reality this is about 3-4 raid mobs?... come on now</P>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>There is probably a very good reason why he isnt MT and I doubt it has anything to do with him being a Monk =P</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yup, its because their setup, strat and the way combat works now favors a guardian.  Since I just fill in for them here and there it doesn't make sense to try to come up with an adequate way for me to tank.  Especially since I don't get dkp and lack super uber equipment.</P> <P>Contrary to popular opinion I like to win, and as of right now with the friends I raid with, that's easier with a guardian MT.  In fact I'm not even MA, a SK is.</P> <P>But anyway.</P> <P>The reason I say I can tank to 50 is because I did, about 95% of the time.  Although it was in pickup groups.  I've been guilded a few times but haven't found a fit I like yet, so a lot of my time currently is devoted to Matrix Online.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>btw Gage, just so you know.  Light Armor users probably have 13% better avoidance (including parry) then Plate tanks with the current changes  <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </P> <P>I have about 20% avoidance without a shield and around 38% with a shield.  Monks without a shield should have around 33% avoidance.  Under the current changes.  Not sure cause I don't see any high level monks on test.  But it's currently based off armor, not the class.</P> <P> </P>

[Deadjest]

<P>    Ok lets try somthing a tad different here.</P> <P>    I just came from reading the discription for <STRONG>Fighters</STRONG> and it was pretty plain that all class's under the fighter discription were ment for the same role but from a different style of in you face tanking.  Noone were shown in the light as a lesser or greater tank but at the for front of the battle.   If anything, only the Crusader was described as the Armored Juggernought, but that is neither here nor there for this post.</P> <P>   I find it interesting that anyone would be supporting any system where any tank is top dog when it is cleary shown that all class's under the discription of <STRONG>Fighter </STRONG>are <STRONG> </STRONG>front line tanks.   Anything else is not a tank and under a seperate discription and have their own place in the EQ2 setting.</P> <P>   So here is the setting.</P> <P>   1)</P> <P>   IF  ( I know pretty big IF ) tanks were balanced, how would it be done?</P> <P>   Should it be all tanks balanced the same per mob in the end result?</P> <P>   Should tanks be balanced according to Tank style vs Mob style, and leave tanks +/- but not left out tanking said mobs?</P> <P>   2)</P> <P>   If tanks are to be balanced should it be Tank vs Tank as a whole?</P> <P>  Or should tanks be broken down and more balanced on each part of what makes a tank.</P> <P>  Tanking vs Tanking </P> <P>  Dps vs Dps </P> <P>  Utility vs utility</P> <P>  Interested in your response here.   </P> <P>  </P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>RafaelSmith wrote:Ok let me get this straight...all this game breaking class imbalance that exists is due to 3-4 Raid Mobs?<hr></blockquote>Actually, according to Moorgard, this imbalance was up and down the range of levels, allowing anyone to become invulnerable through high Avoidance with the right group combo. Mind you, I take anything Moor says with a grain of salt these days, but that's the official SOE statement.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Eelyen wrote: <P>btw Gage, just so you know.  Light Armor users probably have 13% better avoidance (including parry) then Plate tanks with the current changes  <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>I have about 20% avoidance without a shield and around 38% with a shield.  Monks without a shield should have around 33% avoidance.  Under the current changes.  Not sure cause I don't see any high level monks on test.  But it's currently based off armor, not the class.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Yeah I know.  But apparantly all the changes haven't been made yet.  /shrug<BR>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR>Ok let me get this straight...all this game breaking class imbalance that exists is due to 3-4 Raid Mobs?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Actually, according to Moorgard, this imbalance was up and down the range of levels, allowing anyone to become invulnerable through high Avoidance with the right group combo. Mind you, I take anything Moor says with a grain of salt these days, but that's the official SOE statement.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Yep, load of crap too. I'm a level 43 guardian. I'll give an example where i can prove the whole buff stacking = trivialized content is bogus. I went into cove of decay the other night to begin the manastone heritage quest. Was fighting the named skeleton, of course he started nuking me hard but not too bad, was able to drain his power. This was a lvl 30 ^^^ raid mob. Grey to me. By all rights should be trivial and not able to hurt me much. WRONG! After i drained all of it's power and i had it down to 20% I died. Yep a mob 13 levels below me killed me. This happened on live not on test. I also had a monk friend helping me and he died as well. I've never ever seen anything that was unable to hurt me. Hell enough greens could kill me. I wouldn't ever dream of taking on a bunch of white cons unless i had a full group and I've never seen a single time in all the time up to level 43 that a mob could never hit me because of buffs. So basically the whole line of crap that people are spouting that equal con raid mobs = trivial i call BS on. If a GREY mob 12 levels under me can kill me i really do not think something that is level 50 or higher is going to miss all that much.

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>There is probably a very good reason why he isnt MT and I doubt it has anything to do with him being a Monk =P</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yup, its because their setup, strat and the way combat works now favors a guardian.  Since I just fill in for them here and there it doesn't make sense to try to come up with an adequate way for me to tank.  Especially since I don't get dkp and lack super uber equipment.</P> <P>Contrary to popular opinion I like to win, and as of right now with the friends I raid with, that's easier with a guardian MT.  In fact I'm not even MA, a SK is.</P> <P>But anyway.</P> <P>The reason I say I can tank to 50 is because I did, about 95% of the time.  Although it was in pickup groups.  I've been guilded a few times but haven't found a fit I like yet, so a lot of my time currently is devoted to Matrix Online.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>LOL!! He admits it, his whole crusade to ruin the game for all plate tanks is because he can't find a guild willing to let him be their MT on their raids. Best part is it's not even a guardian they are using it's an sk! [Removed for Content]!</P> <P>What you need Gage is more friends not nerfs to plate tanks and all your dreams will come true! lol!!!!!</P> <P>Find a guild willing to let you be the MAIN TANK and willing to create a raid setup that will allow you to win. This is good advice.</P> <P>And btw no guild is going to allow some monk that isnt even in their guild to push their MT aside and be forced to create a raid setup designed for a monk just cause you want to tank.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff3333>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Moorg ard PLEASE READ the above!!!!!!!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffffff>All the trifling crap all these months from gage has been simply because he is guildless and cannot find a pickup raid willing to let his weak self tank over their MT. And to top it all off their MT isn't even a guardian!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!</FONT></P> <P>So to satisfy Mr. Gage Crybabytank we must be willing to be nerfed to a zerker with crap dps and weak buffs? Man that reallly takes the cake! Equal but different my white behind!!!!!!</P> <P>More like Equal but inferior.</P> <P>Oh and if this does go live and I do turn out to be a zerker with crap dps, I will cancel my account. Hate to use that old threat but that's a promise. I haven't been playing as much lately anyway so that will just be the nail in the coffin so to speak.</P>

[Margen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> boli wrote:<BR><U>Tank should balance. No tank should be the be all and end all tank for ALL situations.</U><BR><BR><BR>(Guardaian / Monk / Paladin) > (Beserker / Bruiser / Shadowknight)<BR><BR>where<BR>  a warrior relys on their ability to absorb more damage<BR>   a brawler relys on their ability to avoid more damage<BR>  and a crusader trades off getting hit more than a monk (but not too much as to make spell casting impossible) and cannot take as much less raw punishment as a guardian but balances this with spell casting abilities such as heals.<BR><BR>Beserkers, Bruisers and Shadowknights work in the same way as their mirrors but trade some tanking ability for increased damage.<BR><BR>I did have more but I started to rant - those are my thoughts on the matter however.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Then they better upgrade my DPS greatly, cause I don't compare to zerkers and bruisers.  And SK taunt ability is also a problem.   Strange that guardians are the best in absorbing damage and 2nd best in maintaining aggro, as for dps yes SK's do better dps the Guardians, but If I am tanking I am working to maintian aggro (which is quite a bit more difficult for SK then guardians), not doing dps.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 31st Troll Shadow Knight<BR></P>

[Margen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> AsheMan wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <P>I don't want a secondary role.  Period, I want to tank, only tank, and nothing but tank.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Good, neither do I.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P>Then why didn't you pick a Guardian?  Moronic.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>That type of attitude is what causes the other "TANK" classes to grind their teeth.</P> <P>Blackoath 31st Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Aethane wrote: <P>LOL!! He admits it, his whole crusade to ruin the game for all plate tanks is because he can't find a guild willing to let him be their MT on their raids. Best part is it's not even a guardian they are using it's an sk! [Removed for Content]!  <FONT color=#ffff00>Can you read?  I said guardian was MT, sk was MA.</FONT></P> <P>What you need Gage is more friends not nerfs to plate tanks and all your dreams will come true! lol!!!!!  <FONT color=#ffff00>Yes, I know <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></FONT></P> <P>Find a guild willing to let you be the MAIN TANK and willing to create a raid setup that will allow you to win. This is good advice.  <FONT color=#ffff00>No.  I shouldn't have to devise some ultra uber setup and strat to be able to tank, it should be interchangeable among the fighter classes.</FONT></P> <P>And btw no guild is going to allow some monk that isnt even in their guild to push their MT aside and be forced to create a raid setup designed for a monk just cause you want to tank.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Which is why I haven't even mentioned to them my desire to MT.  But you can assume all you want big guy.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff3333>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Moorg ard PLEASE READ the above!!!!!!!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffffff>All the trifling crap all these months from gage has been simply because he is guildless and cannot find a pickup raid willing to let his weak self tank over their MT. And to top it all off their MT isn't even a guardian!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!  </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>*sigh* You can't read.  For one I have been guilded, a few times, throughout my playing time.  For two, they do use a guardian MT, Captain Smart Guy.</FONT></P> <P>So to satisfy Mr. Gage Crybabytank we must be willing to be nerfed to a zerker with crap dps and weak buffs? Man that reallly takes the cake! Equal but different my white behind!!!!!!  <FONT color=#ffff00>Wow, that's maturity!</FONT></P> <P>More like Equal but inferior.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Like we all are now, when compared to guardians?</FONT></P> <P>Oh and if this does go live and I do turn out to be a zerker with crap dps, I will cancel my account. Hate to use that old threat but that's a promise. I haven't been playing as much lately anyway so that will just be the nail in the coffin so to speak.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Who cares, people quit.  Goodbye.</FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[English Da Gua]

<P> While I usually feel you have good points and sometimes I just play devil's advocate with you, I have to disagree with one point you made.</P> <P>   Gage : <FONT color=#ffff00>No.  I shouldn't have to devise some ultra uber setup and strat to be able to tank, it should be interchangeable among the fighter classes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>  </FONT>In my opinion, you should. Now it shouldn't require something unattainable, like all master gear, but I think the strategy aspect should be significantly different as the two classes use totally different forms of defense (at least they should after patch). </P> <P>   One should be the more typical EQ1 setup while one should be more of the ward + avoidance type setup. I think it should be interchangeable at some level, true. But I do not think the same raid setup should work for both.</P> <P>  If by interchangeable you mean both should be able to win with above average gear, a new non exploiting strategy, and a few changes in healer type etc, then I agree. But the same raid setup for a mitigation tank should not neccessarily work for an avoidance tank.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:11 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P> While I usually feel you have good points and sometimes I just play devil's advocate with you, I have to disagree with one point you made.</P> <P>  Gage : <FONT color=#ffff00>No.  I shouldn't have to devise some ultra uber setup and strat to be able to tank, it should be interchangeable among the fighter classes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00> </FONT>In my opinion, you should. Now it shouldn't require something unattainable, like all master gear, but I think the strategy aspect should be significantly different as the two classes use totally different forms of defense (at least they should after patch).</P> <P>  One should be the more typical EQ1 setup while one should be more of the ward + avoidance type setup. I think it should be interchangeable at some level, true. But I do not think the same raid setup should work for both.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff9900>  If by interchangeable you mean both should be able to win with above average gear, a new non exploiting strategy, and a few changes in healer type etc, then I agree. But the same raid setup for a mitigation tank should not neccessarily work for an avoidance tank.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That is what I meant, and thanks for pointing out my subpar wording.</P> <P>While I realize scenarios and therefore setups will differ, especially regarding healer and MT group setups, what I meant was that it shouldn't take some .01% type of thing to be attainable.</P> <P>That's all.<BR></P>

[Boli32]

<blockquote> <p><font color="#ffff00">Then they better upgrade my DPS greatly, cause I don't compare to zerkers and bruisers.  And SK taunt ability is also a problem.   Strange that guardians are the best in absorbing damage and 2nd best in maintaining aggro, as for dps yes SK's do better dps the Guardians, but If I am tanking I am working to maintian aggro (which is quite a bit more difficult for SK then guardians), not doing dps.</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff00">V/R</font></p> <font color="#ffff00">Blackoath 31st Troll Shadow Knight</font> </blockquote> <font color="#ffff00"><font color="#ffffff"> </font><font color="#ffffff">Crusaders taunts in general are well below par... all two of them. </font></font><div></div>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Aethane wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR>Ok let me get this straight...all this game breaking class imbalance that exists is due to 3-4 Raid Mobs?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Actually, according to Moorgard, this imbalance was up and down the range of levels, allowing anyone to become invulnerable through high Avoidance with the right group combo. Mind you, I take anything Moor says with a grain of salt these days, but that's the official SOE statement.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Yep, load of crap too. I'm a level 43 guardian. I'll give an example where i can prove the whole buff stacking = trivialized content is bogus. I went into cove of decay the other night to begin the manastone heritage quest. Was fighting the named skeleton, of course he started nuking me hard but not too bad, was able to drain his power. This was a lvl 30 ^^^ raid mob. Grey to me. By all rights should be trivial and not able to hurt me much. WRONG! After i drained all of it's power and i had it down to 20% I died. Yep a mob 13 levels below me killed me. This happened on live not on test. I also had a monk friend helping me and he died as well. I've never ever seen anything that was unable to hurt me. Hell enough greens could kill me. I wouldn't ever dream of taking on a bunch of white cons unless i had a full group and I've never seen a single time in all the time up to level 43 that a mob could never hit me because of buffs. So basically the whole line of crap that people are spouting that equal con raid mobs = trivial i call BS on. If a GREY mob 12 levels under me can kill me i really do not think something that is level 50 or higher is going to miss all that much. <hr></blockquote>Well, Aethane, while you have a point, your example doesn't really match up against Moorgard's statment. It's pretty clear that the problem SOE was seeing was with buff stacking in groups, not soloing. Compare your experience with the Guardian who, in a group, drained a non-gray raid mob down to zero power and then took off his armor and "tanked naked."Mind you, I'm not sure I'm happy with their solution. Caps seem to me to be stopgap solutions to mechanics that were badly designed to begin with.

[Tami]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <P> While I usually feel you have good points and sometimes I just play devil's advocate with you, I have to disagree with one point you made.</P> <P>  Gage : <FONT color=#ffff00>No.  I shouldn't have to devise some ultra uber setup and strat to be able to tank, it should be interchangeable among the fighter classes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00> </FONT>In my opinion, you should. Now it shouldn't require something unattainable, like all master gear, but I think the strategy aspect should be significantly different as the two classes use totally different forms of defense (at least they should after patch).</P> <P>  One should be the more typical EQ1 setup while one should be more of the ward + avoidance type setup. I think it should be interchangeable at some level, true. But I do not think the same raid setup should work for both.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff9900>  If by interchangeable you mean both should be able to win with above average gear, a new non exploiting strategy, and a few changes in healer type etc, then I agree. But the same raid setup for a mitigation tank should not neccessarily work for an avoidance tank.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That is what I meant, and thanks for pointing out my subpar wording.</P> <P>While I realize scenarios and therefore setups will differ, especially regarding healer and MT group setups, what I meant was that it shouldn't take some .01% type of thing to be attainable.</P> <P>That's all.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The faster you understand the difference between Mitigation and Avoidance and how that plays with healing, the faster you will understand that no matter what they do you will never be able to MT raid mobs.  Simply put, over the course of the fight you will take the same amount of damage as a mitigation based class -HOWEVER- it will come in huge spikes.  Being that these same mobs we are refering to hit like semi's you can see the reason, I hope, that attempting to heal spike damage is near impossible and not worth placing the raid in jeapordy.</P> <P>What does need to happen is major changes to classes and the engagment system to open 'roles' to them.  That does not mean the MT role, but be it pulling, mezing (real impact), debuffing etc.  Lots of classes need roles, not just monks.</P> <P> </P> <p>Message Edited by Tamian on <span class=date_text>04-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:16 PM</span>

[Nazo]

<DIV>Honestly did any of you  believe when SoE said Tanks will be balanced ? Come on now you have 2 wild ends of the spectrum with Mitigation and Avoidance. Did anyone seriously expect it to work ?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SoE has really dug its own grave with this and now they will rattle,shake and tweak combat till nothing works anymore [Removed for Content] off everyone including the classes they are trying to fix.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My sympathy to all the people who play a Brawler Tank because they believed what SoE said. I didn't therefore chose what I felt the "purest" tank class. A class that cannot do anything else but tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Untill SoE tells its customers the truth that balancing at Archetype level won't work and they are letting go of this absurd concept :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) Combat changes will allways be coming with the next LU but actually will never come</DIV> <DIV>2) There will be flavor of the month tank classes because of violent changes</DIV> <DIV>3) All melee DPS classes will be violently revised with each patch</DIV> <DIV>4) All buffs and buff stacking will keep changing from week to week</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What will happen in the end ? NOTHING</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My personal opinion is that Tanks are balanced for XP groups from level 1-50. My comment is based on grouping and testing various classes from Guardian to Monk as MT in guild XP groups with different healers. We tested evey combination from level 42 Monk against level 51 mobs in SolRo to I dont know you name it. If any class is not happy and is claiming they cannot be MT in an xp group from level 1 to 50 then my answer will be "learn to play" Sure some minor tweaks are needed but there is nothing "horribly" wrong. Now from a raid point of view things maybe a tad different. If SoE falls into the trap and tries to make everything "absolutely" equal read above what will happen.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Nazowa on <span class=date_text>04-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:24 AM</span>

[Oakwood]

<P>I hate to feed the troll, but this is the Gage story, presented in the form of a logical argument</P> <P>Premises</P> <UL> <LI>I want to tank</LI> <LI>Most, but not all, main tanks are plate classes, usually guardians</LI> <LI>I think I don't like guardians, although I cannot be sure, as I have never played one to significant level</LI> <LI>I want to play a monk</LI> <LI>Other monks/brawlers are successfull main tanks</LI> <LI>I am not able to convince any guild I like that I have the skills of a monk tank</LI> <LI>I do not want to put forth the effort to becomed skilled as a monk tank as those other successfull monk tanks have</LI></UL> <P>Conclusion</P> <UL> <LI>Plate tanks need to be nerfed in order to make unskilled monks look like better tanks by comparison</LI></UL> <P> </P> <P>I would propose this additional premise</P> <UL> <LI>As long as I continue to avoid learning the skills used by existing successfull monk tanks, I will never be a main tank</LI></UL> <P>Which leads us to this conclusion</P> <UL> <LI>I  shoult quit wasting time flaming and trolling on the boards, and learn how to play a monk tank.  Others have done it, therefore I can do it if I am willing to put forth the effort.  Once I have done that, I can convince a guild I like to allow me in, work my way up the ranks to earn dkp and get dressed out as a main raid tank, and take my rightfully earned place a main tank for my guild.</LI></UL> <P>Either way, no matter how much they nerf everyone else, you still won't be a main tank, since even if monks were the uncontested best tanking class, those monks who spend the effort to learn the skills of tanking will still take that place instead of you.  On the other hand, that will at least get you off our boards, and you can flame up the monk and bruiser boards for the unfair way sony is still requiring you to know how to play your class to be successfull.</P>

[Smear]

<P>What Brawlers, Warriors and Crusaders can or can't do right now is now a moot point. The combat changes on test are an attempt to rebalance everything.  In case there is someone who hasn't realized yet:</P> <P><FONT size=5>There will be more changes to come to fully balance the new combat system.</FONT></P><FONT size=2>Sure everyone on test says things are kinda borked right now, and we can all agree that caps are a bad thing, but SoE are approaching things the right way.  Anyone who has ever done any meaningful scientific or programming work can tell you that if you are going to change something to observe the results, you change things bit by bit or your data has little meaning. <P>If I were to approach a complete rebalance, I'd get it working without absurd buff stacking first.  Then, once confident with that, I'd remove the caps and tweak the system so that buffs don't wreck the balance.</P> <P>Again goes with the 'reduction' in Scout DPS.  Once the auto-attacking is working to an intended degree, I'd rebalance Combat Arts (where most of the DPS should be coming from anyways).  I beleive it was stated that CAs are getting adjusted as well down the road.</P> <P>Realistically, you need a strong foundation to construct something on top of it.  These first sets of combat changes are that foundation.</P> <P>So argue all you want about the way things are now; in fact, take your time, live it up, enjoy it while it lasts.  These arguements will not hold after all the changes have fallen into place.</P> <P>Message Edited by Smeared on <SPAN class=date_text>04-20-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>03:00 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Smeared on <SPAN class=date_text>04-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:00 PM</SPAN></P></FONT><p>Message Edited by Smeared on <span class=date_text>04-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:06 PM</span>

[SageMarrow]

umm thats all fine and dandy, but thats what the [Removed for Content]-k beta is for....

[Smear]

<DIV>Find me an MMO that didn't (and will never) have any signifigant changes after beta.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Some problems take a much larger player base, and much more time than a beta test to find.  Tank balancing was one of those problems.  This wasn't apparent in beta, because it only reared its ugly head after the agility 'nerf'.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>On a side note... does anyone else think that the biggest problem with Brawlers are not the Brawlers themselves, but Shaman?  Wards are supposed to be our (I play a Monk) biggest assest, yet the Shaman community has repeatedly shown that Wards are nothing more than a power sink that disappear too quickly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>With the priest rebalance, Wards probably will have a huge upgrade.  Once they're fixed, Monks might get the biggest benefit from them.</DIV>

[Eelyen]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Aethane wrote: <P>LOL!! He admits it, his whole crusade to ruin the game for all plate tanks is because he can't find a guild willing to let him be their MT on their raids. Best part is it's not even a guardian they are using it's an sk! [Removed for Content]!  <FONT color=#ffff00>Can you read?  I said guardian was MT, sk was MA.</FONT></P> <P>What you need Gage is more friends not nerfs to plate tanks and all your dreams will come true! lol!!!!!  <FONT color=#ffff00>Yes, I know <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></FONT></P> <P>Find a guild willing to let you be the MAIN TANK and willing to create a raid setup that will allow you to win. This is good advice.  <FONT color=#ffff00>No.  I shouldn't have to devise some ultra uber setup and strat to be able to tank, it should be interchangeable among the fighter classes.</FONT></P> <P>And btw no guild is going to allow some monk that isnt even in their guild to push their MT aside and be forced to create a raid setup designed for a monk just cause you want to tank.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Which is why I haven't even mentioned to them my desire to MT.  But you can assume all you want big guy.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff3333>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Moorg ard PLEASE READ the above!!!!!!!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffffff>All the trifling crap all these months from gage has been simply because he is guildless and cannot find a pickup raid willing to let his weak self tank over their MT. And to top it all off their MT isn't even a guardian!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!  </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>*sigh* You can't read.  For one I have been guilded, a few times, throughout my playing time.  For two, they do use a guardian MT, Captain Smart Guy.</FONT></P> <P>So to satisfy Mr. Gage Crybabytank we must be willing to be nerfed to a zerker with crap dps and weak buffs? Man that reallly takes the cake! Equal but different my white behind!!!!!!  <FONT color=#ffff00>Wow, that's maturity!</FONT></P> <P>More like Equal but inferior.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Like we all are now, when compared to guardians?</FONT></P> <P>Oh and if this does go live and I do turn out to be a zerker with crap dps, I will cancel my account. Hate to use that old threat but that's a promise. I haven't been playing as much lately anyway so that will just be the nail in the coffin so to speak.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Who cares, people quit.  Goodbye.</FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Gage...you are telling us that you have never even ASKED to main tank?  Yet you are telling the entire EQ2 world that Guardians are superior in tanking and the balance is broken when you haven't even attempted to MT?</P> <P>Seriously...come on.</P>

[Eelyen]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Smeared wrote:<BR> <P>What Brawlers, Warriors and Crusaders can or can't do right now is now a moot point. The combat changes on test are an attempt to rebalance everything.  In case there is someone who hasn't realized yet:</P> <P><FONT size=5>There will be more changes to come to fully balance the new combat system.</FONT></P><FONT size=2>Sure everyone on test says things are kinda borked right now, and we can all agree that caps are a bad thing, but SoE are approaching things the right way.  Anyone who has ever done any meaningful scientific or programming work can tell you that if you are going to change something to observe the results, you change things bit by bit or your data has little meaning. <P>If I were to approach a complete rebalance, I'd get it working without absurd buff stacking first.  Then, once confident with that, I'd remove the caps and tweak the system so that buffs don't wreck the balance.</P> <P>Again goes with the 'reduction' in Scout DPS.  Once the auto-attacking is working to an intended degree, I'd rebalance Combat Arts (where most of the DPS should be coming from anyways).  I beleive it was stated that CAs are getting adjusted as well down the road.</P> <P>Realistically, you need a strong foundation to construct something on top of it.  These first sets of combat changes are that foundation.</P> <P>So argue all you want about the way things are now; in fact, take your time, live it up, enjoy it while it lasts.  These arguements will not hold after all the changes have fallen into place.</P> <P>Message Edited by Smeared on <SPAN class=date_text>04-20-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>03:00 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Smeared on <SPAN class=date_text>04-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:00 PM</SPAN></P></FONT> <P>Message Edited by Smeared on <SPAN class=date_text>04-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:06 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I'm actaully a programmer.  But I can still say in it's current form the combat changes suck.  And the only reason most of the people on test are still playing cause we're waiting for them to add the next part to see what it's like.  What sucks though is there is this Guardian/Templar duo husband/wife thing, in my guild, that are level 46.  They've been duoing all the way to 46 for the most part and working on 50.  They can't even play as a duo right now due to the changes.  It totally blows.  It's like that for alot of people</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So sure the testers are a bit [Removed for Content] atm with the current system.   It effects the higher level players alot more then it does the lower level ones.  </DIV><p>Message Edited by Eelyen on <span class=date_text>04-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:38 PM</span>

[Smear]

<DIV>Eelyen:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I whole heartedly agree.  In their current state, these changes suck, a lot.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But so does a car with no wheels.  That doesn't mean that the car won't work properly once it's finished.  These changes won't hit live until they're finished, but SoE is correctly building it up one step at a time, rather than smooooshing everything together.</DIV>

[Eelyen]

<P>Yea, just blows for all the testers right now cause we're playing on a broken system.</P> <P>Although, 6 of us took on coldtooth yesterday to test it out and beat him still.  Although he was quite green <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV> <DIV>Find me an MMO that didn't (and will never) have any signifigant changes after beta.</DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>okay so lets get this straight, find me 1 game = just 1 game. that has done this post beta.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1.) total economic reshift post beta w/ attunement</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2.) total economic reshift x2 with tradeskilling interdependancies.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>3.) total economic reshift x3 because several artisans dont/still dont have a definate purpose in game to be of worth.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>4.) total economic shift x4 because of offline selling.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>5.) ALMOST total economic shift by making all quested items no trade.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6.) total combat shift because of agility nerf.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>7.) total combat shift because of avoidance and mitigation numbers being undeterminable by even the developers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>8.) total combat shift because of buff stacking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>9.) total combat shift with capping of avoidance and mitigation. (pending)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ ________________________________________________</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>while it may not have happened in that order- all these things are verifiable changes that say that these things were not even remotely anticiapated or even thought out long enough to prevent in the first place.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>THATS JUST TOOOOOO MANY!!!!!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So dont give me that about *every game will have changes* that many changes doesnt say anything but disorganized and poorly thought out in the first place.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Especially now with misplaced nerfs on already broken classes and all out nerfs instead of fixes. I swear i will send the game developer a 100$ that takes a NO NERF stand. Things can be adjusted, fixed, toned down, made situational, given chances to fail miserably, all these things. Rampage could have been given a 30 second stifle upon a miss, viola - </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But the point remains = dont give me that mistakes happen approach. Its not valid at a certain point of extremes.</DIV></DIV>

[Margen]

<P>In Sony's defense (god I can't believe I said that), achieving some form of tank balance IMHO has to be the hardest part of setting up a game of this complexity.  Just hope they don't do what they did in EQlive and go, well there really is only one 'true" tank, the others are "utility" tanks :smileysad: .  If that happens your going to have a lot of ticked off characters.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 31st Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[English Da Gua]

<DIV>  Every tank on a raid is a Utility tank except the MT (unless an OT role is required, which any tank fills fine now) but most encounters boil down to one encounter all on MT anyway....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Best post I saw was over in test, talking about situational supieriority. I totally agree. Tweak encounters to favor certain tanks, classes, healers, DPS damage ie casting or melee etc. Make it viable without the right setup, but far more difficult. Strategy should play a part in this game, and right now it really doesn't.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Take the behemoth in zek instance. Make each hit he lands destroy 2 points of armor.  That way you are forced to use an avoidance tank or multiple tanks. I mean that is just an idea, not really a great one, but just trying to get my point across about situational tanking.</DIV><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:01 PM</span>

[Margen]

<P>I understand that there can only be one MT, my point was that the other tanks should have the ability to fill in as MT, and not "only" be able to fill that utility role, as was the case in EQlive.  And I think Guardians should be able to do more if they are not filling raid MT role, giving them some flexiabilty.  Just don't want to see where you have to have a Guardian to raid, or Shadow Knight, Paladin etc. .  My view is that if any of the tank classes are in raid they provide a important role if they are not MT and any can step in to fill MT role if needed and that it remain so for how ever long this game last.</P> <P>Sorry if I wasn't clear.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 31st Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[Smear]

<DIV>SageMarrow wrote:<BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <DIV>Find me an MMO that didn't (and will never) have any signifigant changes after beta.</DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>okay so lets get this straight, find me 1 game = just 1 game. that has done this post beta.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1.) total economic reshift post beta w/ attunement</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2.) total economic reshift x2 with tradeskilling interdependancies.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>3.) total economic reshift x3 because several artisans dont/still dont have a definate purpose in game to be of worth.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>4.) total economic shift x4 because of offline selling.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>5.) ALMOST total economic shift by making all quested items no trade.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>6.) total combat shift because of agility nerf.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>7.) total combat shift because of avoidance and mitigation numbers being undeterminable by even the developers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>8.) total combat shift because of buff stacking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>9.) total combat shift with capping of avoidance and mitigation. (pending)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ ________________________________________________</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>while it may not have happened in that order- all these things are verifiable changes that say that these things were not even remotely anticiapated or even thought out long enough to prevent in the first place.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>THATS JUST TOOOOOO MANY!!!!!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So dont give me that about *every game will have changes* that many changes doesnt say anything but disorganized and poorly thought out in the first place.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Especially now with misplaced nerfs on already broken classes and all out nerfs instead of fixes. I swear i will send the game developer a 100$ that takes a NO NERF stand. Things can be adjusted, fixed, toned down, made situational, given chances to fail miserably, all these things. Rampage could have been given a 30 second stifle upon a miss, viola -</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But the point remains = dont give me that mistakes happen approach. Its not valid at a certain point of extremes.</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Most of these changes (the TS especially) were in response to player demand.  I'm a tank in my spare time, but I've spent more time crafting then killing, so let's ignore anything about Tradeskilling in a discussion about combat.  I really don't think you want to get into that with me.</P> <P>SoE aren't mind readers.  In a perfect world, everyone who would ever play EQ2 would have been in the beta, and it wouldn't have gone live until every single one of those players got what they wanted.  C'mon, how likely is that?  Second, changes HAVE to be made to keep the game enjoyable at all levels.  If the system is borked for 1-50, then 50-60 will carry over that borkedness and add in new borking.</P> <P>The BIGGEST selling point of an MMO *ARE* the changes.</P> <P>New Content, System Maintenence, New Features, Engine Balancing, Whistles, Bells, and a Dog and Pony Show.</P> <P>SoE could have left the game as is, made a bundle, and let the devs work on other projects.  Instead, they are spending time and money trying to improve the game so that it can remain as a viable source of entertainment for years to come.  SoE wants the game to be fun and challenging (contrary to popular belief) so that they can keep subscriptions.</P> <P>If the game is fun, challenging and balanced, everyone wins.  So why wouldn't they work as hard as they can to achieve that?</P>

[English Da Gua]

<DIV>   That is a common misconception though. The other day a guild guardian was not MT and he asked what is he supposed to do, DPS??</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   That had me laughing so hard. Guardians can DPS, just fine actually. Parse it. Pull out a 2 hander and go to town.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>   Now, do we do AS MUCH DPS as other fighter classes, no. But we can DPS, just fine, and we add a lot to any raid in a non MT role. Most misconceptions are from guardians who have no clue how to do anything but MT.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  As I have said before while arguing with Gage, it has never been an issue with me to OT or MT. I do not care who MTs, as I understand my class enough to know I can add something to a raid if not MT. Don't get it twisted, I feel guardians are fine. I think monks could probably tank as well with the resources, but right now, I think once avoidance is fixed, the only fighter who will need some love (If SoE gets this fix right....) will be Sks.</DIV><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:08 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> English Da Guard wrote:<BR> <DIV>   That is a common misconception though. The other day a guild guardian was not MT and he asked what is he supposed to do, DPS??</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  <FONT color=#ffff00> That had me laughing so hard. Guardians can DPS, just fine actually. Parse it. Pull out a 2 hander and go to town.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>   Now, do we do AS MUCH DPS as other fighter classes, no. But we can DPS, just fine, and we add a lot to any raid in a non MT role. Most misconceptions are from guardians who have no clue how to do anything but MT.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  As I have said before while arguing with Gage, it has never been an issue with me to OT or MT. I do not care who MTs, as I understand my class enough to know I can add something to a raid if not MT. Don't get it twisted, I feel guardians are fine. I think monks could probably tank as well with the resources, but right now, I think once avoidance is fixed, the only fighter who will need some love (If SoE gets this fix right....) will be Sks. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>This is one of your best posts ever English.  Honestly.</P> <P>I agree with you also, I hope SKs get some love out of this whole rebalancing ordeal.<BR></P>

[Margen]

<P>won't get argument on SK needing loving, we have a long list of problems.  It seems that we both want the same end result, some balance within tanking community.  Arguments result on how to achieve that result.  Don't get me wrong I like playing a Shadow Knight, I find the concept cool, I like some of our abilities, and I think we have a lot of potianal.  I just see us right now as bringing up the rear in the tanking community due to broken spells, aggro genration problems, power problems, underpowered lifetaps etc.  Doesn't mean we can't be up there with rest of community in future, just how I see us sitting right now.</P> <P>Guess I did fall prey to the threads here where Guardians kept saying we MUST MT, its all we do.  I've grouped with Guardians when I was MTing due to either equipment differences, level differnces, or if they just didn't want to tank that night.  They provided some nice buffs, descent dps, off tanking on adds etc. and they did fine.   Guess I was caught in the moment.</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath 31st Troll Shadow Knight</P>

[SageMarrow]

<P>hmm, heres an idea, how about they make dps armor dependant as well, maybe not very realistic, but might work.</P> <P>So that when a guardian goes to a raid as non MT= he can take off the armor and get a dps boost in a lighter armor fit... And it would leave brawlers where we are relatively speaking and effect for the most part exclusively Warriors (berserkers and Guardians),</P> <P>Major shot in the dark...but hey</P>

[Rhaam]

<DIV><BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR> <DIV><BR><BR> <DIV>__________________________________________________ _______________________________________________</DIV><BR><BR> <DIV>while it may not have happened in that order- all these things are verifiable changes that say that these things were not even remotely anticiapated or even thought out long enough to prevent in the first place.</DIV><BR><BR><BR> <DIV>THATS JUST TOOOOOO MANY!!!!!!<BR><BR></DIV><BR> <DIV><BR> <HR> <BR><BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR> <DIV>Heh what amuses me about this is half the whining in EQ1 was by people who thought change was taking too long. It took forever to get the warrior snap agro issue resolved. Like 2+ years. SoE is kinda screwed aren't they? If they don't change anything we complain about it and if they change too much we complain louder that it isn't the same game anymore. I haven't liked all of the changes, (most of the ideas behind them are sound I think SoE lacks a little sometimes in the implementation department imo), but I sure am glad as hell they're making them.</DIV><BR><BR> <DIV>Anyways in the end a lot of this "They're going to ruin tanking" stuff is all a wash. From 5 years of playing EQ I saw every big new change appear like it was going to break the game or ruin something and it just never really happened. In the end the nerfs just kept on rollin and everyone kept on playing a *$%#&! fun game. Balance is an ongoing process not really an end state in MMO's. The changes do look kind of worrying now but by the time they hit it won't be such a big deal IMHO.</DIV>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR>umm thats all fine and dandy, but thats what the [Removed for Content]-k beta is for.... <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Exactally, and sorry, im not paying for Live material so they can beta test what should already have been beta tested. And no they cant keep using the, this is a ever changing world BS argument, because thats simply BS. No game has this sort of huge and very direct core changes with in the first 6 months of release. Very sloppy SoE. Thinking of quitting myself, rolling up 3 accounts and maybe ill come back in a year or so and see how your going, unless you pull a rabbit out your hat.

[SageMarrow]

<DIV> <DIV>Heh what amuses me about this is half the whining in EQ1 was by people who thought change was taking too long. It took forever to get the warrior snap agro issue resolved. Like 2+ years. SoE is kinda screwed aren't they? If they don't change anything we complain about it and if they change too much we complain louder that it isn't the same game anymore. I haven't liked all of the changes, (most of the ideas behind them are sound I think SoE lacks a little sometimes in the implementation department imo), but I sure am glad as hell they're making them.</DIV><BR><BR> <DIV>Anyways in the end a lot of this "They're going to ruin tanking" stuff is all a wash. From 5 years of playing EQ I saw every big new change appear like it was going to break the game or ruin something and it just never really happened. In the end the nerfs just kept on rollin and everyone kept on playing a *$%#&! fun game. Balance is an ongoing process not really an end state in MMO's. The changes do look kind of worrying now but by the time they hit it won't be such a big deal IMHO.</DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>Okay... </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>now do you honestly believe that players would stick around if DDO and vanguard were out? Really? Do you? </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>If players had 4 choices of a desirable MMO, no one would be upset that SOE is up to thier old tricks... They would just move to one of the othe 4 corners of MMO land that befitted them more. I know that i would. I wouldnt waste time playing an dealing with crap thats totally unacceptable from a *paying customer* POV.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>And for the record its not about the changes being made all at once. Or the fact that they are being made back to back to back. I dont mind the over hauls and the changes as long as they are for the best = IN AN APPARENT WAY. But im a firm believer in the fact if it aint broke dont fix it.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>But whether or not that is too much or not doesnt matter when a skill like Rampage makes it into production, for 6 months, you just NERF the s-hit out of it? No of course not... Thats just stupid. Those are the types of changes that i dont agree with and just seem totally stupid to me.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>And on the same note, things like Attunement, were common sense in a game dependant on tradeskilling and adventurer interdependancy. So how do you make a *mistake* like that 5 months into release and post beta?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>So understand what im saying here - i dont have a problem with changes being made but i have a serious problem with "knee Jerk reactions", Nerfs, and changing things that are not broken under the assumption that its what needs to happen when its reallllllyyyyyy not.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>If you dont know = then ask. Dont just shoot yourself in the foot in an attempt to aim. And that is all that SOE has been good at in the past 2 years between SWG and Eq2 now.  </FONT></DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>04-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:25 PM</span>

[TheMeatShie]

The problem with this sytem is they initially balanced Guardians to be the biggest, heaviest armor tank.  Remember when only guardians could wear vanguard? With all these changes to make everyone cookie cutter equal, i dont see any bone being thrown to guardians.  If you are going to make everything even in the raid situations that a large majority of Guardians picked the guardian class to be ahead in, you should problably at least give them some more balanced abilities compared to the other classes, dont you think?? Because, lets be totally honest, the extra mitigation on warrior buffs are not a big difference in xp groups.  It isnt until you get a raid group setup that will cap a guardians DEF well over the bell dropoff that makes them avoid like sick. The problem is, instead of actually fixing the damage system in place to scale with this correctly, they would rather just tweak everyone's avoidance/mitigation on more of a grey lvl so that everyone takes damage the same and they can band-aid patch a broken system. And the idea that SOE is slowly but surely fine tuning this game into a masterpiece is absurd... I have a bachelors in computer science, and i have to say, if i was contracted to develop a program  for a company, even a MMORPG, if i didnt go through the correct development process and spit it out early without beta'ing it and testiing it to the point that it worked, i doubt i would ever get more work from that company again... to be truthful if they worded the requirements right i would problably get sued. What we have here is a major problem in how they coded damage vs avoidance to be mitigated... they made it to where at a certain point the dropoff of a mobs damage potential is ridiculous.  So, now they will toss a patch fix on it so that nobody can get to that dropoff point, and at the same time giving all plate tanks equal defense in raid situations.  All without even trying to rebalance the system they change. /golf clap <div></div>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>All plate tanks should have the same def rating..why not? Guards already have more mitigation that crusaders, why should it be conpounded by self def buffs? My heals balance me against your +hit point buffs and your mitigations buffs. It does not balance me against your +def buffs. Thats where guards need to be adjusted. </P> <P>Because ill put it to you this way. </P> <P>You tank A_mob_01 and your mitigations allows you to keep taunting and fighting, without taking as much damage as a Crusader/ Monk</P> <P>I tank A_mob_01 and when I start to take damage I heal myself...heals are expensive. So I have to heal myself with the power I could use for taunting. At the end of the fight, to achieve the same result I have expended alot more power than a guard, just so I can do my job and tank.</P> <P>+defs need to be looked at and evened out.</P> <P>Im not saying you guys need to be nerfed. I'm saying that all tanks should have the same +def buffs. </P> <P>*Also, im reading alot of posts about people who said they picked guardian because they were supposed to be the "best" tank.  No where in any literature did it state that when I picked a Paly/ SK/ Monk, I would play second fiddle in a raid. I cannot find anywhere where it said a specific tank was supposed to be the best tank. I didnt see anywhere where it stated that I Guards would have super advantage when it came to raid mobs. </P> <P>I started playing this game as soon as It came out. Many of us tanks didnt find out the gap between guards and other tanks until we started raiding..by then many of us had invested ALOT of time in our chars and alot of were already lvl 50. If SoE intended for Guards to be the preferred RAID tank it should have been stated from the beggining. </P><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>04-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:33 AM</span>

[Banditman]

That's a fairly weak arguement. Heals in and of themselves serve as taunts.  Ask any Priest about it. <div></div>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>We are not healers. Our heals do not work as taunts. Your arguement is pretty weak in and of itself. My heals *might* cause aggro..but for you to suggest that I could somehow use them as taunts is incorrect. </P> <P>Imagine that scenario for a sec. My taunts costs at the most 40 power..my heals costs +140.  </P> <P>Ask any Paladin out there. If I have to use my LOH spell something has gone TERRIBLY wrong in the fight.</P> <P>Like I said, our heals and wards were designed to balance us against a Guards higher mitigation and hit points. They were NOT designed to compensate for the extra 3 lvls of DEF that Guards get over other plate classes.</P><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>04-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:29 PM</span>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<BR> <P>We are not healers. <FONT color=#ffff00>Our heals do not work as taunts. Your arguement is pretty weak in and of itself. My heals *might* cause aggro</FONT>..but for you to suggest that I could somehow use them as taunts is incorrect. </P> <P>Imagine that scenario for a sec. My taunts costs at the most 40 power..my heals costs +140.  </P> <P>Ask any Paladin out there. If I have to use my LOH spell something has gone TERRIBLY wrong in the fight.</P> <P>Like I said, our heals and wards were designed to balance us against a Guards higher mitigation and hit points. They were NOT designed to compensate for the extra 3 lvls of DEF that Guards get over other plate classes.</P> <P>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <SPAN class=date_text>04-21-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:29 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>  He said your heals in and of themselves serve as taunts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  You said the above highlighted area.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Umm, if something produces hate, it would "serve as a taunt." </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>  Just like guardians buffs are used to produce hate, ie "serve as a taunt."</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text>  It matters not how much hate, the fact is they do produce hate and can therefore be used to maintain aggro.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:39 PM</span>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<DIV>Bah..I did not one star you, English. I happen to think your arguments are very good. I have points and you have points. Lets not one star people, guys..were trying to have a discussion here. :smileysad:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>that being said, please listen to what im saying. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My heals and wards costs me +140 each time I use them, thats 140 per heal and 140 per ward.  How much do your stances, taunts, and aggro skills cost you? do the math. I will be OOP ALOT sooner than you. I effectively tank 3 lvls lower than guards, have less mitigation, have less hit points, and have fewer aggro skills.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Where is the balance? </DIV><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>04-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:46 PM</span>

[TheMeatShie]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <p>All plate tanks should have the same def rating..why not? Guards already have more mitigation that crusaders, why should it be conpounded by self def buffs? My heals balance me against your +hit point buffs and your mitigations buffs. It does not balance me against your +def buffs. Thats where guards need to be adjusted. </p> <p>Because ill put it to you this way. </p> <p>You tank A_mob_01 and your mitigations allows you to keep taunting and fighting, without taking as much damage as a Crusader/ Monk</p> <p>I tank A_mob_01 and when I start to take damage I heal myself...heals are expensive. So I have to heal myself with the power I could use for taunting. At the end of the fight, to achieve the same result I have expended alot more power than a guard, just so I can do my job and tank.</p> <p>+defs need to be looked at and evened out.</p> <p>Im not saying you guys need to be nerfed. I'm saying that all tanks should have the same +def buffs. </p> <p>*Also, im reading alot of posts about people who said they picked guardian because they were supposed to be the "best" tank.  No where in any literature did it state that when I picked a Paly/ SK/ Monk, I would play second fiddle in a raid. I cannot find anywhere where it said a specific tank was supposed to be the best tank. I didnt see anywhere where it stated that I Guards would have super advantage when it came to raid mobs. </p> <p>I started playing this game as soon as It came out. Many of us tanks didnt find out the gap between guards and other tanks until we started raiding..by then many of us had invested ALOT of time in our chars and alot of were already lvl 50. If SoE intended for Guards to be the preferred RAID tank it should have been stated from the beggining. </p><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class="date_text">04-21-2005</span> <span class="time_text">10:33 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote>     Guardian mitigation/defense buffs are the only things that give them a +defense balance ahead of other tanks, a base gap as far as i have seen doesnt existing on live.  The +defense skills and mitigation/parry buffs of small aptitude are the gain, and when the +DEF has a cap on it, that becomes less of a gain.     I would assert that in many situations the heals you are casting will be more beneficial than the mitigation bonuses of a Guardian.  And heals also generate aggro, so your not casting a heal in lue of generating aggro.  If you are better in some situations, and i am better in others - but we can BOTH tank in both situations, id call that pretty close to balance. Dont get me wrong, i think the system that is live right now is very screwed - but i think the entire system of a mob attacking and the benefits of the defense skills can be balanced out in a way that doesnt come down to having a cap.  And if it does, i think the mitigation buffs of Guardians need to be looked at and tuned for those changes, which to this point i have not seen addressed in posts from test. Another aspect of the changes that can cause a big problem is the idea of special attack stuns, etc.  I think armor type should be a factor in the chance of certain melee oriented special attacks landing... Ie to where maybe a special attack can still land, but the effect component (ie stun) has its own chance to land based on armor type.  To a point maybe this already exists, but - if it doesnt, then all plate tanks are going to take a hard hit on this, Guardians holding aggro and knights trying to get spells off. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by TheMeatShield on <span class=date_text>04-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:58 PM</span>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>OUCH!! trust me! I find the idea of a cap on anything is disgusting. i hope they dont cap the def buffs. All im asking is for plate tanks to have the ability to buff to the same lvls.</P> <P>Crusaders are caught in the middle of this. Monks will eventually get fixed so avoidance works....but where does that leave crusaders? We wont have the avoidance of monks and bruisers, but we will also not have the mitigation/ def buffs that guards get.</P> <P>I'd like to think that that would put us in the middle. With our avoidance not quite as low as guards, but not quite as high as monks and bruisers, but I have no faith in SoE.</P> <P>I guarantee you they will lower our avoidance to the same lvl as guards, but we will not have as much mitigation and hit points as guards. This scares me. I really, really hope that SoE puts us in the middle, if they cant give us the same +def buffs as guards.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[English Da Gua]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<BR> <DIV>Bah..I did not one star you, English. I happen to think your arguments are very good. I have points and you have points. Lets not one star people, guys..were trying to have a discussion here. :smileysad:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>that being said, please listen to what im saying. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My heals and wards costs me +140 each time I use them, thats 140 per heal and 140 per ward.  How much do your stances, taunts, and aggro skills cost you? do the math. I will be OOP ALOT sooner than you. I effectively tank 3 lvls lower than guards, have less mitigation, have less hit points, and have fewer aggro skills.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Where is the balance? </DIV> <P>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <SPAN class=date_text>04-21-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:46 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>   Hehe don't worry man, if people making good arguments cared about the ratings, Gage and others who bring up good points would never post :smileytongue:</P> <P>   Please understand I am not saying they work as well or efficient as taunts, I am just saying they do, in effect, act as a taunt in that they generate hate.</P> <P>   I see your points saying your heals make up for our higher mitigation through buffs and stances etc. And I agree.</P> <P>   I also think that the problem more or less is not how high you can get your defense, it is more how the defense skill in itself works. A cap is fine with me, if they tweak how our buffs work / stack. The only issue I see with caps is that if another class can reach them through the buffs after patch, a guardian will lose more since he is a pure class and can reach the cap easier.</P> <P>   They have already said they will change mob damage to be more in line since we will be getting hit more. What I do not understand is why put a cap on parry and the like when the real issue is defense. Put a cap on defense so that we all tank at the same level. I still think guardians should be better in mitigation through our buffs and we should parry slightly (slightly) better as well. </P> <P>   I guess I just have not seen any rational reasoning for changing parry to be maxed at 250.</P> <P>   Paladins should have less mitigation and HPs due to their heals and wards. They should not be 3 levels inferior as the MT due to how defense buffs stack. As for aggro, I cannot really comment being that I have never played a paladin.</P><p>Message Edited by English Da Guard on <span class=date_text>04-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:01 PM</span>

[FamilyManFir]

I would be surprised, English, if they didn't do a round of CA changing before they pushed this to live. Since they don't appear to want Parry buffed at all they're going to have to change some Parry buffs to something else or have a whole bunch of CAs for lots of subclasses (and not just Fighters, either) rendered useless. I wouldn't be surprised to see some other Guardian defense-skill buffs changed to mitigation-buffs too, although that's pure speculation.

[benn]

<DIV>Well, i wrote a long post, clicked on submit and had to recognize, that i got logged out while writing, whyever, and the letters i typed are dancing somewhere in the nirvana now. The result is, that i'm even more annoyed than before...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>These people, who complain about everything, are making me sick...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It's their "achievement" that the game became what it is and what it will be soon.. and that is already a little bit crap and will be total bu**shi* soon. ( sorry )</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"I'm a Pally and why am i not the best raid tank?" - Because you have chosen this pally to solo better than other classes, because you can heal yourself and because your funspell is a horse which others have to buy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"I'm a Monk and why am i not a better tank than a Guardian?" - Learn how to play. You can tank as well as other classes, but you cannot wear heavy armor and you don't have that much hitpoints because you deal much more dps!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"I'm a SK and my class it total crap.." - You're right and i cannot understand why SoE still isn't fixing it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"I want more solo content and i think crafters should be able to do everything on their own." - Don't buy a MMORPG, play offline.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For sure, there are always some things which have to be balanced, but it cannot be that there's always somebody complaining about whatever they find. You can think, that the only reason, why they bought this game is, to complain and complain and complain...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The result of this actual case will be that tank classes will be totally nerfed. It won't care anymore which class you have chosen so why not reducing the choice to one class? The in Monk style berserking Guardian on a Paladin horse! Great...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Next time Coercers and Illus complain, because their only function in raids are their mana buffs... OK! No problem... give Fire Comet to the Coercer and Amazon Distortion to the Illus and they will be Wizards and Warlocks...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Think about what your saying, think about yourself and your character, think about his abilities, think about necessary fixes and then start discussion without whining about it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This game is great, it can be great in the future... but not if SoE has to fix thousands of things because you are complaining without thinking about it. If you continue there will be more and more inbalance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Banditman]

We did Mjolni with a SK tanking.  It was no problem. We did Ar'ticae with a Paladin tanking.  It was no problem. Are these the toughest encounters out there?  No, they aren't.  But these are definitely very challenging encounters for a guild just beginning the move toward Prismatic. Crusaders who say they cannot tank Epic encounters simply haven't found the right setup of equipment / support.  It's probably true of Brawlers as well, but I don't know because we've never done it. Do Crusaders have to do things differently in Epic encounters?  Probably, but isn't that what Class differentiation is all about ? <div></div>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>Please do not give me examples. I guarantee you that there are less than 100 Palies in the whole game that have better gear than I. My gear is almost half Master/ Fabled type items, the rest is legendary</P> <P>I already have my prismatic. In fact, 95% of my guild has already finished the quest. We have killed every mob in the game, pre-patch, post-patch, etc.</P> <P>I know what palys cant or can do. Can we tank raids? yes, we can. Im not saying we cannot. What I am saying is that you are comparing apples and oranges.</P> <P>There are differences in the tanks. What you call class differentiation I call class inbalances, because there is. Maybe 1 brawler in 5000 could tank Darathar. Guards have advatanges in tanking that have nothing to do with class differention. What you are saying is that its ok to make 1 UBER tank and 5 other tanks, and call it class differentiation. Its wrong and needs to be fixed to balance the tanks more closely.</P><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>04-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:32 AM</span>

[SageMarrow]

<P>but uza, people keep saying that but SOE made this mess. Not us. Not the guardians either. Basically all that says it that they never intended the archetype system to work to that extent in the first place.</P> <P>How do you make a defensive tank? period? does that even make sense?</P> <P>We all know that every other fighter out dps' the guardian. We already know that guardian utility wavers somewhere between useless and *okay*.</P> <P>So like i said, SOE did that- what were they thinking? i dont know = but the obvious is right in front of you. Because to balance the gaurdian class in line with the other tanks would be to basically make the guardian a dps capable warrior with defensive buffs...</P> <P>thats the beginning of that square of 4 classes we talked about a few months back. Same but different but still the same.</P> <P>Now dont get me wrong, i dont like the idea of omni tank amidst the others... But realistically speaking i dont see it changing.</P>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<P>I agree, sage. I'ts not your guys's fault. This is just another example of SoE screwing the pooch. I dont want you guys nerfed. I think nerfs are cop-outs. On all my posts on tanks I alsmot always put in my *dont nerf* caveat.</P> <P>I know we are playing with the cards we were dealt. I just want a little more balance in tanks. If that means raising the other tanks to be on par with guards when it comes to tanking then thats what should be. </P> <P>Im not saying you guys should lose your miti, or your hit points. I agree that my heals and DPS should give me a bit less AC and hits. Thats understood. I also agree that guards , as defensive tanks, should have more hits and miti. thats logical.</P> <P>But as things stand now, not matter how well im buffed, no matter how good my gear is, thats a guard will ALWAYS tank 3 lvls above me. We all know just how big of a diff 3 lvls is in this game. For a paly, thats no insurmountable, but its a big disadvantage. For a brawler or a monk, its almost impossible. The sheer amount of healing and buffing to allow an evasion tank to MT a raid mob is obscene. </P> <P>The +def buffs need to be looked at, there is no question about this. Evasion tanks have less AC, less hitpoints, less def buffs, less aggro skils, and in some rare cases, even less evasion that plate tanks, when buffed. </P> <P>As for crusaders, we dot need as much help, but the def buffs should be accross the board. </P> <P>Bruisers/monks give up AC and hits for DPS. Why should they have less +def buffs?</P> <P>Crusaders are plate tanks. We should have the exact same def buffs as guards. If that means having less AC and hit points, and more evasion to equal it out, then so be it.</P> <P>* BTW, this is my personal opinion. I cannot speak for all Palys or Eva tanks. :smileywink:</P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on <span class=date_text>04-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:58 AM</span>

[Rhaam]

<P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____</P><P><FONT color=#ffff33>         Okay... </FONT></P><BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>now do you honestly believe that players would stick around if DDO and vanguard were out? Really? Do you? </FONT></DIV><DIV>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <SPAN class=date_text>04-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>09:25 PM</SPAN></DIV><DIV><HR></DIV><DIV>Yep. Without a doubt. Send me your email adress so in a couple years I can shoot ya an I told ya so =P Reminds me of EQ1. Every time a new MMO went into launch there were cries that it would kill EQ. For 6 [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] years the same thing. Oh this is it. EQ's dead for sure I gurantee it. Nobody is going to put up with SoE any longer. I mean how could they? And guess what? It never happened. Despite EQ2 and WoW (not to forget AC, DAoC etc etc) the original is still played daily by a crapload of people. In the end a small amount of people actually hit that cancel button due to SoE. MMORPG's are simply a medium. It's not the game that makes this fun. It's who we get to play the game with. From all the time I spent playing EQ1 the thing I look back on is the friendships I made through the game. Not what phat lewtz I got or how badass my toon became, or how class balance was set up. <HR>SageMarrow wrote:<FONT color=#ffff33>So understand what im saying here - i dont have a problem with changes being made but i have a serious problem with "knee Jerk reactions", Nerfs, and changing things that are not broken under the assumption that its what needs to happen when its reallllllyyyyyy not.</FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>If you dont know = then ask. Dont just shoot yourself in the foot in an attempt to aim. And that is all that SOE has been good at in the past 2 years between SWG and Eq2 now.  </FONT></DIV></DIV><P>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <SPAN class=date_text>04-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>09:25 PM</SPAN><HR>2 years? Please. SoE has been doing this since the launch of EQ. You just probably weren't around to see it. And blizzard is currently doing it with WoW. Yet WoW is incredibly popular. Sense a pattern? I mean you'd think when your open beta tests are plagued by lag and server instability you might delay launch. No way. Or your class balance is in absolute shambles. Still nope. And that's the point. This behavior exists and continues across every MMORPG because the game isn't what keeps you there. It's what gets you there for the first month. The people keep you. So hit that cancel button already. Vanguards calling you. This one will be better. Oh and I hear it really is going to kill EQ2 *wink wink*</BLOCKQUOTE>

[SageMarrow]

<P>these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.</P> <P>Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting. </P> <P>NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL.. </P> <P>I will be waiting with my I told you so.</P> <P>Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....</P> <P>you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.  <FONT color=#ffff00>But here you are, playing EQ2 and proving his point.</FONT></P> <P>Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting.</P> <P>NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL..</P> <P>I will be waiting with my I told you so.</P> <P>Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....  <FONT color=#ffff00>Assumption.</FONT></P> <P>you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You have no idea if Vanguard will even be good, at all.</P> <P>You've said yourself that you thought EQ2 was going to be amazing and everything, pre-release <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[Tami]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.</P> <P>Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting. </P> <P>NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL.. </P> <P>I will be waiting with my I told you so.</P> <P>Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....</P> <P>you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Life is a visious circle, and I tend to agree .. the 'next gen' games are going to go back to more of an EQ1 style as they are seeing how, as much as people [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed, its still a strong and desired genre.</P> <P>What EQ2 got right (before you pan these, see the 'what got wrong part'):</P> <P>1) Instancing </P> <P>2) Mob engagement locking</P> <P>3) Class diversity.</P> <P>4) Graphics/Game engine</P> <P>5) Raid size</P> <P>What EQ2 got wrong:</P> <P>1) Instancing has so many promises, and while EQ2 did (IMO) get the concept and engine right, they failed in content.  Fundamentally Instancing and Mob Locking is there to control the 'balancing' part of engagments that EQ1 became so bad in ... i.e. its the anti-zerg 'code'.  Instead of creating instanced zones on the scale of 'NToV/Fire/etc' they created LDoN all over again with just a bigger 'end' mob .. very disapointing.</P> <P>There was so much they could have done, and maybe with the expansion will trend toward this, but its excecution right now is a joke.</P> <P>2) Im not sure how everyone else feels, but 100+ person guilds and 72 person raids just blow.  24 Person raids and thus a smaller, tigther, guild size is really fantastic.  But instead of taking advantage of that, they put in little to no content to support that environment .. really a disapointment, and ties into #1.</P> <P>3) Class diversity had so much potentential, but instead of taking advantage of that they went and screwed it up with Marketing (claiming tanks are tanks) and with constant postings of 'mage->scout->fighter->priest' bs ... instead of leveraging different tiers (see my other posts in this regard) and building true 'roles' into the game.  See #4</P> <P>4) As with Mob Linking and Instancing, the engagment system in general had some real promise.  The first two of those three being focused on anti-zerging and the later to truely balance the event to the group/raid.  But with its design/execution they ended up creating a 'Plate Figther->Priest' environment with (and read posts, you can see the undertone) 'drones' filling the rest of the spot.  The utility of the rest of the group really is mimimal and is strictly there for DPS ... this was not the case in EQ1 where slows/heals/mezing/pulling/etc all came into play and the focus was on really on soley 2 people.</P> <P>5) #4 continues, in my mind, with so much potential to build in stratigic design but they blew it here as well.  Sure some thought needs to go into each raid, but /shrug its mundane overall.  There rarely is need to worry about respawns, rare to worry about over pulls, rare to worry about power, if slow doesnt stick 'oh well, next time', etc .. again this is really mimimized, and I could go on and on, but in general its really fustrating how they blew it here.</P> <P>6) Risk/Reward .. hell, i wont get into this .. everyone understands how risk/reward in EQ2 had so much potential and went down the tubes.</P> <P>Anyways .. just a few of my thoughts .. and yeah, I tend to agree we will see MMO's start to circle arround and get away from catering they way EQ2 has.  Solo play is important but it shouldnt be so focused on that it destorys the game (come on, especially a frikin MMO), instancing and engagment locking has alot of 'tuning/anti-zerg/strat' capablities but its implementation has to change, and so on</P> <P>Added: No, no one knows if Vanguard will be any good .. but we can hope a game company, run by gamers, get it right over what is currently perceived as sales/marketing driven decisions.</P> <P>Added again: Read this post (<A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=Newbie&message.id=122401" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=Newbie&message.id=122401</A>) .. and if are the same type of player I am you really will get tossed off your seat and see just the type of player EQ2 seems to be focused on.  Thats not bad, but is not what was sold to us (IMO) and is not whats going to breed longevity and popularity that EQ1 has/had.</P><p>Message Edited by Tamian on <span class=date_text>04-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:13 AM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tamian wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.</P> <P>Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting. </P> <P>NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL.. </P> <P>I will be waiting with my I told you so.</P> <P>Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....</P> <P>you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Life is a visious circle, and I tend to agree .. the 'next gen' games are going to go back to more of an EQ1 style as they are seeing how, as much as people [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed, its still a strong and desired genre.</P> <P>What EQ2 got right (before you pan these, see the 'what got wrong part'):</P> <P>1) Instancing </P> <P>2) Mob engagement locking</P> <P>3) Class diversity.</P> <P>4) Graphics/Game engine</P> <P>5) Raid size</P> <P>What EQ2 got wrong:</P> <P>1) Instancing has so many promises, and while EQ2 did (IMO) get the concept and engine right, they failed in content.  Fundamentally Instancing and Mob Locking is there to control the 'balancing' part of engagments that EQ1 became so bad in ... i.e. its the anti-zerg 'code'.  Instead of creating instanced zones on the scale of 'NToV/Fire/etc' they created LDoN all over again with just a bigger 'end' mob .. very disapointing.</P> <P>There was so much they could have done, and maybe with the expansion will trend toward this, but its excecution right now is a joke.</P> <P>2) Im not sure how everyone else feels, but 100+ person guilds and 72 person raids just blow.  24 Person raids and thus a smaller, tigther, guild size is really fantastic.  But instead of taking advantage of that, they put in little to no content to support that environment .. really a disapointment, and ties into #1.</P> <P>3) Class diversity had so much potentential, but instead of taking advantage of that they went and screwed it up with Marketing (claiming tanks are tanks) and with constant postings of 'mage->scout->fighter->priest' bs ... instead of leveraging different tiers (see my other posts in this regard) and building true 'roles' into the game.  See #4</P> <P>4) As with Mob Linking and Instancing, the engagment system in general had some real promise.  The first two of those three being focused on anti-zerging and the later to truely balance the event to the group/raid.  But with its design/execution they ended up creating a 'Plate Figther->Priest' environment with (and read posts, you can see the undertone) 'drones' filling the rest of the spot.  The utility of the rest of the group really is mimimal and is strictly there for DPS ... this was not the case in EQ1 where slows/heals/mezing/pulling/etc all came into play and the focus was on really on soley 2 people.</P> <P>5) #4 continues, in my mind, with so much potential to build in stratigic design but they blew it here as well.  Sure some thought needs to go into each raid, but /shrug its mundane overall.  There rarely is need to worry about respawns, rare to worry about over pulls, rare to worry about power, if slow doesnt stick 'oh well, next time', etc .. again this is really mimimized, and I could go on and on, but in general its really fustrating how they blew it here.</P> <P>6) Risk/Reward .. hell, i wont get into this .. everyone understands how risk/reward in EQ2 had so much potential and went down the tubes.</P> <P>Anyways .. just a few of my thoughts .. and yeah, I tend to agree we will see MMO's start to circle arround and get away from catering they way EQ2 has.  Solo play is important but it shouldnt be so focused on that it destorys the game (come on, especially a frikin MMO), instancing and engagment locking has alot of 'tuning/anti-zerg/strat' capablities but its implementation has to change, and so on</P> <P>Added: No, no one knows if Vanguard will be any good .. but we can hope a game company, run by gamers, get it right over what is currently perceived as sales/marketing driven decisions.</P> <P>Added again: Read this post (<A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=Newbie&message.id=122401" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=Newbie&message.id=122401</A>) .. and if are the same type of player I am you really will get tossed off your seat and see just the type of player EQ2 seems to be focused on.  Thats not bad, but is not what was sold to us (IMO) and is not whats going to breed longevity and popularity that EQ1 has/had.</P> <P>Message Edited by Tamian on <SPAN class=date_text>04-23-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>08:13 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Wow, nice post.  <BR>

[SageMarrow]

<P>Gage, Tamians post is my reply...</P> <P>We all know of your fanboism at times where this game is concerend. But in true reply to what you said. I have also said MANY times that this game is primarily filler until something better comes along. And i dont see what i am looking for in that *other game* and when it comes along. I will wave bon voyage to EQ2...</P> <P>Tamian said it better than any one else:</P> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33> No, no one knows if Vanguard will be any good .. but we can hope a game company, run by gamers, get it right over what is currently perceived as sales/marketing driven decisions.</FONT></DIV>

[Ibis]

I want to have tamian's baby! <div></div>

[Tami]

Thank you for the feedback Sage<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ibishi wrote:<BR>I want to have tamian's baby!<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>And /blush Ibishi</DIV>

[Fafnir]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tamian wrote: <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>What Tamian wrote is the best summary of EQ2 that I've seen.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Good job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now if only it would change for the better, not the worse.  SOE is blowing it even further with all of this make everyone the same cr8p.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Corv]

<div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Tamian wrote: <p>What EQ2 got wrong:</p> <p>1) Instancing has so many promises, and while EQ2 did (IMO) get the concept and engine right, they failed in content.  Fundamentally Instancing and Mob Locking is there to control the 'balancing' part of engagments that EQ1 became so bad in ... i.e. its the anti-zerg 'code'.  Instead of creating instanced zones on the scale of 'NToV/Fire/etc' they created LDoN all over again with just a bigger 'end' mob .. very disapointing.</p> <p>There was so much they could have done, and maybe with the expansion will trend toward this, but its excecution right now is a joke. </p> <p><font color="#ffff00">They definately used instancing better that WoW did.  In WoW, all dungeons are single group/raid instances and all outdoor areas are non-instanced.  On a crowded server during primetime almost nothing can be accomplished in an outdoor zone, and dungeons completely lack the human element of unpredictability.  There are no trains (not even the watered down EQ2 variety), no competition for spawns, no inter-group encounters, etc..   That being said, the current content of EQ2 closely matches pre-Kunark EQ1.  There are some big mobs inside of dungeons where single groups can play like Naggy and Vox of old, but not much in the way of raid zones.  (There wasn't a single raid zone prior to Kunark in EQ1.)  Given how much EQ2 has inherited from EQ1, is it any surprise that their zone-release plans are following suit?  Why spend time making raid zones prior to release when it will be months before there will be guilds ready to handle them?  If they stick to the pattern established by EQ1, we'll see at least one major raid-zone in the first expansion that will take months to crack, and quite probably several in the following expansion.</font>    </p> <p>2) Im not sure how everyone else feels, but 100+ person guilds and 72 person raids just blow.  24 Person raids and thus a smaller, tigther, guild size is really fantastic.  But instead of taking advantage of that, they put in little to no content to support that environment .. really a disapointment, and ties into #1. <span></span><font color="#ffff00">Although it certainly is a lot easier to get 24 people together for a raid and also to keep them organized, I think the major reason for raid size limits is simply a matter of graphical lag.  EQ2's engine just can't handle that many players with current hardware.  I'd expect this cap to go up in a few years, judging by how EQ1 raid content gradually required more and more people.  As I said above, I don't think it's wise to judge EQ2's endgame by what is currently in the game.  People were going stir-crazy farming just Naggy and Vox until Kunark arrived and Veeshan's Peak came along, as well as all the levelling and questing required just to get in there.</font>  </p> <p>3) Class diversity had so much potentential, but instead of taking advantage of that they went and screwed it up with Marketing (claiming tanks are tanks) and with constant postings of 'mage->scout->fighter->priest' bs ... instead of leveraging different tiers (see my other posts in this regard) and building true 'roles' into the game.  See #4 </p> <p><font color="#ffff00">The old EQ1 class roles are mostly still there, although hybrids aren't as watered down as they used to be and pure classes no longer have the same advantages.  Monk pulling is gone, as I understand it is also gone from EQ1, but enchanters are still a credible crowd control class, albeit pale shadows of their former selves.  (CC in WoW is a joke.  The best CC class can turn one mob at a time into sheep!)  The problem isn't the classes though.  It's the content.   (see below)</font> </p> <p>4) As with Mob Linking and Instancing, the engagment system in general had some real promise.  The first two of those three being focused on anti-zerging and the later to truely balance the event to the group/raid.  But with its design/execution they ended up creating a 'Plate Figther->Priest' environment with (and read posts, you can see the undertone) 'drones' filling the rest of the spot.  The utility of the rest of the group really is mimimal and is strictly there for DPS ... this was not the case in EQ1 where slows/heals/mezing/pulling/etc all came into play and the focus was on really on soley 2 people. </p> <p><span><font color="#ffff00">The encounter system, combined with a gross underuse of social aggro, have made it very difficult to pull more than one encounter at a time unless you're deliberately trying to do so.   A muliple mob encounter in EQ2 is really just one mob split into 4 chunks, and as such, poses roughtly the same challenge as a single mob.  In EQ1 multiple mob pulls were the norm in most challenging places, even with a monk FD-splitting.   This is why Enchanters were practically manditory in many places.  People whined about that to no end of course, so in EQ2 enchanters need only worry about CC on those *very* occasional bad pulls, and on multiple mob encounters tough enough to actually make a dent in the tanks armor.   </font><font color="#ffff00">Personally I think they should have fleshed out CC as a necessary group role and made it a part of the mage archtype, but instead they chose to marginalize it.   However, it's the way encounters and zones are designed that does this.</font><font color="#ffff00">   It is not impossible that this will change in the future because it's merely a matter of designing zones where pulling is not so trivial.</font> </span></p> <p>5) #4 continues, in my mind, with so much potential to build in stratigic design but they blew it here as well.  Sure some thought needs to go into each raid, but /shrug its mundane overall.  There rarely is need to worry about respawns, rare to worry about over pulls, rare to worry about power, if slow doesnt stick 'oh well, next time', etc .. again this is really mimimized, and I could go on and on, but in general its really fustrating how they blew it here. </p> <p><font color="#ffff00">I know a pattern is forming here, but I really do expect zone design to get a whole lot more complex and interesting with each expansion that comes out.  Hopefully we'll see some really high quality raid zones.  It wouldn't do to judge EQ1 by Naggy and Vox raids alone after all.  (For reference, the fire giants guarding Naggy's lair were all on a loonnng spawn timer (something like 24hrs) so you didn't have to worry about respawn back then either.)</font> </p> <hr></blockquote> Personally, I think the single biggest problem that's keeping EQ2's subscribership down is its inefficient, bloated engine!   Back when I played WoW I was using a 3-year old machine, and it ran *smoother* than EQ2 does on a machine I built just last month!  Much smoother.  That 3-year old PC didn't start to chug until there were well over 100 players on screen. </span>  EQ2's engine is so poorly written that it will probably never run as smooth no matter how much brute power is thrown at it.  Sony really needs to work on optimizing the engine, reducing the complexity of certain areas in zones and cities, and perhaps they should even release some low-poly models that don't look like they came out an elephant's [Removed for Content]!  One of the best things they could do would be to include an option that dynamically turns eye-candy down/off to maintain a constant framerate, and then turns it back up when load isn't so heavy.  This isn't wishful thinking either.  *I* could write the code for this feature in my sleep.   I honestly have no clue why it hasn't already been done.   The inablity to maintain a constant, smooth framerate on bleeding edge hardware due to the lack of dynamic eye-candy adjustments will perpetuate the notion that EQ2's engine is a bloated hog that requires a bleeding-edge machine to run.   Sony needs to stop worrying about future-proofing their engine and start worrying about making it work well on *today*'s hardware at the very least, if not last years as well! <div></div><p>Message Edited by Corvan on <span class=date_text>04-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:51 AM</span>

[Banditman]

Unreal 2 is not exactly the most friendly engine for many moving objects at once. That's why the FPS limit their number of players. <div></div>

[Dart]

<DIV><SPAN class=time_text> <DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> <DIV><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2>Y<SPAN class=679095318-26042005>es lets have all tanks ... tank equally. And I want a 500 HP heal and wards. I want FD, I want invis, I want mend, I want safe fall, I want Lifetaps.. See a trend? </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005>IMHO the problem lies in the game design. They sold the guardian as a def tank, so you want to have all tanks tank equally...? <SPAN class=982015820-26042005>M</SPAN>aking all tanks <SPAN class=982015820-26042005>'</SPAN><SPAN class=982015820-26042005>tank </SPAN>equally<SPAN class=982015820-26042005>'</SPAN> in my opinion will only make things worse as the Guardian will still come out ahead with more hps/AC because they sacrificed casting spells, and all the other stuff that goes with the other tank classes.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005>What SOE needs to do is make Content match up to the different types of 'tank' classes accordingly, making the flavor of tank situational. Example SK's could be immune to some Undead boss effects, making them the 'preferred tank' for that encounter, this would create demand for all types of tanks in guilds, yet it wouldn't eliminate any one tank from tanking any one mob.. Its been posted by many other people here, and I think its the only solution to this dilemma. You can change <SPAN class=982015820-26042005>this</SPAN> for t<SPAN class=982015820-26042005>h</SPAN>at all day long (code wise)<SPAN class=982015820-26042005>,</SPAN> yet they will still drop the ball somewhere and have to fix the fix that fixed the fix... That's a Microsoft patch phrase /cackle. </SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005>Look I understand peoples frustration, but you have to realize if they make all tanks 'tank' equally, then the guard has 0 purpose<SPAN class=982015820-26042005>, other than Higher HPs for tanking</SPAN>. We bring defensive buffs to the table, and a broken line of protection (which needs to be fixed). So now they cap Defense, and a paladin or sk or Monk can meet that cap, same as the guardian. If this <SPAN class=982015820-26042005>should </SPAN>happen<SPAN class=982015820-26042005>, then</SPAN> what does the guardian bring to the table<SPAN class=982015820-26042005>, besides more HP's</SPAN>?</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005>So again IMHO I think they need to address the tank issue via content, as we all know all tank classes can tank group content 1-50 with 0 problem, most raid encounters can be tanked by all tanks, there is a small % of raid content we are talking about that some folks feel they cant tank as non guardians. The answer would be ADD content that is specifically designed to be tanked by the different flavors of the tanks that SOE sold us. Short of that they will still face this problem years down the road. Much like the spiders were in PoA in EQlive, the best tanks for those were SK's or palys because of the casting agro they could generate, where as a War relied on taunts alone. Making the hybrid tanks a better choice (at least in my guild we did) there were other encounters that we specifically designated as paly or SK tank only because of the factors that came into play for that encounter.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005>Second thing is to add utility other than <SPAN class=982015820-26042005>just </SPAN>Deff buffs or a broken line of intercept (One thing you have to realize about the protection line, it is rarely used, provides very little functionality atm in the game, mostly due to ineffectiveness). If people are doing their respective roles its not even needed, its the rare occasion that a nuker gets agro from over nuking, or the healer gets agro from healing. </SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005>Cliff notes: </SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005>Bring content that requires all types of tanks to 'tank' it.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=679095318-26042005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=679095318-26042005><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2>Give guards a better utility line <SPAN class=982015820-26042005>so </SPAN>if SOE plans on <SPAN class=982015820-26042005>maling all tanks "tank equally' but to be honest if they vanilla everything down to the point of 4 main classes, this game will lose allot of appeal for me atleast.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by Darton on <span class=date_text>04-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:15 PM</span>

[SilvanE]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tamian wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <P>these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.</P> <P>Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting. </P> <P>NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL.. </P> <P>I will be waiting with my I told you so.</P> <P>Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....</P> <P>you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Life is a visious circle, and I tend to agree .. the 'next gen' games are going to go back to more of an EQ1 style as they are seeing how, as much as people [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed, its still a strong and desired genre.</P> <P>What EQ2 got right (before you pan these, see the 'what got wrong part'):</P> <P>1) Instancing </P> <P>2) Mob engagement locking</P> <P>3) Class diversity.</P> <P>4) Graphics/Game engine</P> <P>5) Raid size</P> <P>.....<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Best post ive seen on EQ2...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>First time I walked into baskin & robins ice cream I thought it was the greatest place on earth. So many flavors to choose from and they all tasted soo good but each in its own way. Could have been done with the classes in EQ2 without too much effort. They had the right idea just couldnt get it done in time for production. What we ended up with was McDonalds soft cones with the same two basic flavors and the option for a little hard chocolate on top.</DIV><p>Message Edited by SilvanEQ2 on <span class=date_text>04-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:41 PM</span>

[deathhascome]

<P>I 100% agree with Darton i have a 50 guard on mm and my bro has a 50 pali, wife has a 50 fury and said thing is for 1 she cleaned both of us up in dueling after the change. Then we got that fun out of the way and hit a named mob in ls wife and i duo'd him sat and owned him np took 5 of us 2 tries after patch hmm something wrong here. i lost a k of hps and more mit and avoid than i could count. So i asked my bro what they do to you samew thing nerf'd the smeg out of him. </P> <P> </P> <P>i believe the buff stacking may have been an issue np remove it but i don't think our hps and mit should have been touched. me and my bro duo alot together and we tank raids together also granted he can not take the damage i can but for a ma there is no one better he can heal he can tank and he would have most of the dps, it is my job to tank all i have is mad hps and def i am not a dps class and any guard whos says they are needs to play a differant toon because they gimped theirs.</P> <P> </P> <P>I have lost over 1500 mit and well over 2k hps raid buffed, then you add in res suck now so mobs that hit for 1k to 1500 are now doing 2 to 3 times that hmm raid of 20 healers 2 dps and 2 tanks and 3 hours to do 5 min mob.</P> <P> </P> <P>just my 2cp worth i have an alt to run but my main is now worthless all the time and sweet invested flushed down the toliet</P> <P> </P> <P>ty soe, </P> <P> </P> <P>maybe we will get lucky and they will unjack the palis and guards and sk's because imho they are the true tanks who has every heard of a monk with more hps than a guardian /pali they have way better avoid they need more avoid not hps.</P> <P> </P> <P>LMB 50 guardian of the cross (MM)</P> <P>ps please do not get angry at me for not mentioning much about sk's, i do not know many and do not know the class as well but pretty sure you got jacked like the pali's did</P>