Upcoming Combat changes.

[Raahl]

<DIV>Moorgard posted a few tidbits on the upcoming combat changes.  How exactly is this going to affect Guardians?  Who knows.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><U>Part 1</U></STRONG></DIV> <DIV><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=29576#M29576" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=29576#M29576</A></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> <P>Fighters are tanks. They don't all tank the same, and tanking isn't all they do, but that doesn't change the core role all fighters share. While some might envision a different approach, that role isn't going to go away just because some might prefer a different take on certain classes.</P> <P>The combat revamp isn't just a changing of balance numbers; it is a reevaluation of abilities. For fighters, this means some expanded spell lines, some shifting around of abilities from one subclass to another, and changes to the way defensive buffs work.</P> <P>Right now, guardians are far and away the best tank due to a combination of their buff stacking and the way defensive buffs are seen in combat rolls. Both those aspects are changing. Think of the guardian's abilities as being spread around a bit to the other fighter classes.</P> <P>In no particular order (other than pairing subclasses of the same class), here are a few (but not all) of the ways tanks will be distinguished from one another after the changes take effect. </P> <UL> <LI>Guardians will have the greatest capability to grant their defense to others. They also have a greater number of taunts.</LI> <LI>Berserkers will do more damage than guardians, especially when tanking. While they also have taunts, part of their taunting comes from the damage they do.</LI> <LI>Paladins have heals and a nice array of taunts.</LI> <LI>Shadowknights have lifetaps and higher damage than paladins.</LI> <LI>Monks excel in avoidance, and their ability to purge negative spell effects is being expanded.</LI> <LI>Bruisers mitigate a bit better and do more damage than monks, which again is the basis for part of their taunting ability.</LI></UL> <P>All fighters will have useful defensive and offensive stances that they can choose depending on their role in the group. Additionally, each fighter will gain a significant resistance to a particular type of damage, which should make different classes be desirable under certain situations.</P> <P>Again, this isn't about taking away tanking from guardians. I suspect after the revamp, in a lot of raid situations you'd still want a guardian as main tank. However, the changes should give more flexibility to other tank classes, and give situational advantages to each. Personally, I'm looking forward to that.</P> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II</P> <P></P> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><STRONG><U>Part 2 (Fighter Autoattack Damage reduced)</U></STRONG></P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=55737#M55737" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=55737#M55737</A></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P></P> <HR> <P>Fighter autoattack damage is going down a bit, while Scout autoattack damage is going up. The class-based damage multiplier will only affect autoattack damage, not spells and arts. Autoattack damage should be more meaningful under the new combat system.</P> <P>I know Berserkers in particular are concerned about doing less damage after the revamp. Berserker damage will shine when tanking, as they will continue to do a lot of reactive damage (i.e. going berserk when they get hit). Under these conditions they could outdamage Bruisers and Monks, though the Brawlers have higher raw damage than Berserkers in a non-tanking role.</P> <P>Again, there are no magic numbers. A lot of what determines the effectiveness of a class is based on situation, tactics, level range, gear, and quality of abilities. There aren't huge unconquerable chasms for those classes close to each other on the damage scale, which is why you haven't seen us say things like "This class will always do more damage than that class under every possible condition."</P> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II</P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><STRONG><U>Part 3 (Mob revamping)</U></STRONG></P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=30626#M30626" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=30626#M30626</A></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV>NPCs are getting their own type of revamp. They'll have a wider variety of spells and arts to choose from, and will use them more intelligently. They'll actually use their buffs, for instance. Startling, I know... <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><STRONG><U>Part 4 (Ability upgrades)</U></STRONG>  (Thanks Smakem Dahead)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=combat&message.id=55397#M55397" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=combat&message.id=55397#M55397</A></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV>Your upgrades will actually be upgrades instead of the way many spells are now. In other words, your investment should make you happier in that you will actually see an upgrade by going up in quality level.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Message Edited by Raahl on <SPAN class=date_text>07-20-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>07:33 AM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Raahl on <SPAN class=date_text>07-20-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>12:54 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Raahl on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:54 PM</span>

[Kilg_]

<div></div>So, it's going to take us twice as long to solo now. Good, I always felt spending 5 minutes killing a solo even con was too little... ought to buff their evasions so they can avoid more than 1000 power worth of combat arts. Oh well, atleast I can main tank raids -- oh wait, forget that, there are already 5 other Guardians on the waiting list before me. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Kilg_PF on <span class=date_text>07-13-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:44 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<P>Yea these changes particularly concern me when it comes to soloability.</P> <P> </P> <P>Oh and I have a bad feeling that Guardians have be replace by Barbarians as Raid MT's.  We now will be OT to the Beserkers and using out defensive buffs to support them.</P> <P> </P> <P>I could be wrong.  I just am very sceptical at the moment.</P>

[OgApostrap]

<DIV>It seems to me they are actually taking the guardians name into account.. and making them guard people... taunts to keep them off someone, and buffs to help someone take dmg better... Might a. make them offtanks.. or b. Make them best mt and offtank.. </DIV>

[McGuit]

<P>Just strikes me that we will be functioning as OTanks more often then not. Might be a real overused phrase but .... inc nerf bat. </P> <P>Knew I should have chosen Zerker.....</P> <P>Boki</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[TunaBoo]

Still will be maintanks.. no reason to let someone with worse taunts tank, even if our armor was equal. <div></div>

[a6eaq]

<HR> OgApostraphe wrote: <DIV> <DIV>It seems to me they are actually taking the guardians name into account.. and making them guard people... taunts to keep them off someone, and buffs to help someone take dmg better... Might a. make them offtanks.. or b. Make them best mt and offtank.. <HR> </DIV></DIV> <P> </P> <P>That is what I do know!  Our Zerker MT's 90% of the time and I (50 Kerra Guard) simply OT and mitigate her damage.  It works great most of the time, but it sounds as if this is going to happen a lot more.  Then soloing is obviously gonna suck, and 6 peep groups will want a Zerker and a back-up healer like a mystic vice a Guard.  Oh well... we shall see!</P>

[Aent]

<DIV> <DIV>So if you have a zerker in group they should be MT because they'll do more damage if they are taking the hits and mobs will die faster.  Their DPS as a whole is better than ours and "think of guardian abilities as being spread around a bit to the other fighter classes" so they'll be taking hits better.  Meanwhile, as guardians, our defense, dps and hp will drop but we get to grant our defense to others...  Go us.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Pallies have heals, rez (close to the best if not the best in game) and will be getting an upgrade to their tanking abilities.  SK's have lifetap, evac, DPS on the higher side and will be getting an upgrade to their tanking abilities.  (both get horses as their "fun" spell haha).  Bruisers and monks have nice DPS (at least one of them has mend and one the ability to purge negative spell effects) and will be getting an upgrade to their tanking abilities.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What do we get as guardians?  Even lower DPS (auto-attack nerf), same tanking abilities as everyone else, lotsa taunts (which means nothing due to the fact that all tank classes have to have the ability to draw agro or the game wouldn't work) and we get to grant our defense to others...  Seriously, what will guardians have that will make them "shine"?  Our ability to put a buff on someone else so they can MT in groups and raids?  Guardians are bland; there's nothing special about them except their ability to take hits... no heals, no lifetaps, no evac, no rez, no mend, no dps to write home about, etc...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They are taking away from guardians but in that post Moorg seems more concerned about reassuring zerkers that their DPS won't be nerfed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I guess they don't remember what happened when they nerfed Warriors in EQ1.  I know I should probably wait to see what they come up with before slamming them but after paying Sony to be a beta-tester in EQ2 for the last 10 months I have little faith in what they will come up with and Moorg's post didn't reassure me at all.</DIV></DIV>

[Nazo]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <P>Fighters are tanks. They don't all tank the same, and tanking isn't all they do, but that doesn't change the core role all fighters share. While some might envision a different approach, that role isn't going to go away just because some might prefer a different take on certain classes.</P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>People like me didnt believe for a second that you will be able to manage ARchetype thing so we chose purest class for the job. By not doing the necessary fixes for 9 months you led people to believe that the classes they are playing are actually viable. (Go to hell all those "but oh look at Fighter definition" people) You led them around the nose for 9 months and now you will make 90% of them redundant. EQ2 will be the first game where people leveled their Fighter twinks before their mains :smileyvery-happy:</FONT></STRONG></P> <P>The combat revamp isn't just a changing of balance numbers; it is a reevaluation of abilities. For fighters, this means some expanded spell lines, some shifting around of abilities from one subclass to another, and changes to the way defensive buffs work.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>i.e. Nerfing the Guardians  :smileyvery-happy:  (Please read Note 1)</STRONG></FONT></P> <P>Right now, guardians are far and away the best tank due to a combination of their buff stacking and the way defensive buffs are seen in combat rolls. Both those aspects are changing. Think of the guardian's abilities as being spread around a bit to the other fighter classes.</P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>i.e. Nerfing the Guardians  :smileyvery-happy:  (Please read Note 1)</FONT></STRONG></P> <P>In no particular order (other than pairing subclasses of the same class), here are a few (but not all) of the ways tanks will be distinguished from one another after the changes take effect. </P> <UL> <LI>Guardians will have the greatest capability to grant their defense to others.</LI></UL> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>         I am just assuming you mean our group buffs with this sentence and not the silly Intervene line. The whole intervene line is</FONT></STRONG><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>   the silliest most useless ability. If all you can show is Intervene line for this nerfing of Guardians I do not know why you even bothered. Just call it a nerf and be done with it. You cannot simply label Intervene as utility and degrade our other attributes based on that. </FONT></STRONG></P> <P>They also have a greater number of taunts.</P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>Will we be able to Snap Agro mobs like Berserkers can ? Having 38 taunts doesnt mean a thing. I doubt it but have you seen a Berserker in action when he is peeling a single mob from a group of 20 ?</FONT></STRONG></P> <P>Berserkers will do more damage than guardians, especially when tanking. While they also have taunts, part of their taunting comes from the damage they do.</P> <UL> <LI>Paladins have heals and a nice array of taunts.</LI> <LI>Shadowknights have lifetaps and higher damage than paladins.</LI></UL> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>Let me translate. This sentence means "You will get shafted for tanking ability compared to Paladins" </FONT></STRONG></P> <UL> <LI>Monks excel in avoidance, and their ability to purge negative spell effects is being expanded.</LI></UL> <P><FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>Now that is nice ! Cure the DoTs from VoX or Venekor ? I dont remember seeing that  in the list of "</STRONG>the core role all fighters share" </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>So a whole new skill set is being developed for our Monk brothers ? Or will you be giving them Priest abilities ?</STRONG></FONT></P> <UL> <LI>Bruisers mitigate a bit better and do more damage than monks, which again is the basis for part of their taunting ability.</LI></UL> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>Life will be great for you Bruisers while you are doing damage eating ripostes while tanking raid mobs :smileytongue: Of all the Fighter classes I think you were conned the worst about this loose DPS gain Tanking ability thing and my sympathy is with you. </FONT></STRONG></P> <P>All fighters will have useful defensive and offensive stances that they can choose depending on their role in the group. Additionally, each fighter will gain a significant resistance to a particular type of damage, which should make different classes be desirable under certain situations.</P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>This will be something like this ? Our metal plate armor will suddenly allow knives to pass through but will stop clubs ?? Will it be Paladins are Holy so they can take Divine damage better ? Is that all you guys were able to come up with after this smoke&mirror huge ultra Combat Revamp ?  :smileyvery-happy:</FONT></STRONG></P> <P>Again, this isn't about taking away tanking from guardians. I suspect after the revamp, in a lot of raid situations you'd still want a guarp with Guardian as main tank. However, the changes should give more flexibility to other tank classes, and give situational advantages to each. Personally, I'm looking forward to that.</P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>i.e. Nerfing the Guardians  :smileyvery-happy:  (Please read Note 1)</FONT></STRONG></P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></STRONG><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>Note 1 : For the welfare of the game and keeping other Fighter classes happy I can understand you guys chose to nerf Guardians. Sort of makes sense to be turned into scapegoats for the general good of the society. Next in line is Templars or Warlocks ?</STRONG></FONT></DIV> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>Some of the classes that will get the hardest by this change wont have anything to show in return. Guardians are being nerfed but what exactly is your class getting in return for loosing DPS ? If your answer is "Ability to Tank Raid Mobs" I congratulate you :smileywink:</FONT></STRONG></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P>

[Dagsxx]

<DIV>About time you guys were knocked down a notch.  Looks like Gage's plan worked out.  </DIV>

[AdiX__Styxx__]

<DIV>GAGE IS A glwriguhwfohw~grmbl</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I guess my guardian is retired now and i will proceed wiht the even more challenged coercer class who also have their share of problems!</DIV>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dagsxx wrote:<BR> <DIV>About time you guys were knocked down a notch.  Looks like Gage's plan worked out.  </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Funny looks like the monks/bruisers were taken down a notch too.  DPS nerf and they still won't be MT.  </P> <P>The defining ability of a Guardian is to tank and tank only.  We do not do DPS and we have little to no utility.  If Sony had added some more DPS and some Utility these changes would not have hurt so much.</P> <P>The biggest winner in the fighter type is the Beserkers.  </P> <P>Too little information.  If this is the good stuff, what is the bad stuff?</P>

[Nazo]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dagsxx wrote:<BR> <DIV>About time you guys were knocked down a notch.  Looks like Gage's plan worked out.  </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>erm will you be saying same thing when Guardians keep tanking raid mobs after combat revamp ? </P> <P>Poor guy will have to post 5000 more :smileyvery-happy:</P>

[blueduckie]

<P>I find these changes are going to make more disappointed in there selection than satisfied. Read some of the other boards and i feel SOE should rethink alot of these changes. I didnt read all 6 fighters boards just the ones i was curious on.</P> <P>Monks of course look at it as rock on i can cure ailments and prolly be able to tank more so they think it sounds awesome. I like the post of gaige tanking zalak with what he even called a non typical mt group with out any problems not much fabled gear which really anyone can mostly match the gear he used with out any fabled just go full augmented cedar bo staff etc. However tanked zalak np. Then on another thread see a monk saying now maybe we can tank more than just drayek and zalak.  Surpring the most  offensive fighter class wants to tank everything. From posts of tanking x4 raid mobs i dont see where there complaints where except with having guardian envy.</P> <P>Zerkers are kinda split but most i know picked it for the high dps with good weapon choices. Now they are going to have to mt to be able to do this and blatantly alot just do not want to have to do that. I dont even think it is that they want to do scout dps but want to be pinned around being a dps fighter as the lore of a zerker was. Just a crazy hack and slash toon.</P> <P>It kinda goes like this for classes tho.</P> <P>When you look at guardians it is obvious whoever chose a guardian chose it to tank. It is a clear cut and dry choice guardian was meant to be the most defensive. Now it is possible that wont be the case with out giving it to others. If our taunts are better will keep us in a mt role but [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]. If we can boost others more than ourselves that doesnt make much sense. As many others have said in game if i wanted to be a support class id of made a bard.</P> <P>When i read moorguard posts its basically saying guardians your spree of taking the least amount of dmg is over. However we cant just screw 1 of the highest played classes in game if not the highest overly to much so we will sugar coat it with taunts but your gonna take more dmg than others would if you just were a support class to them. It is easily possible i am reading it wrong and as others have posted our boosting is refering to our intervene lines which i wouldnt use until mitigation is added into it most likely.</P> <P>My point is though. How dumbied down do we need to be to satisfy really a monk / bruiser on raid tanking. To me that is where these actual changes come from. I could understand nerfing guardian avoidance some and making us not be able to make mobs as trivial for missing us or not letting us stack up so much hp for us to just totally own others in hp (except zerker can do same) However they couldnt make monks etc have chance to tank every raid mob with out putting us down to our tanking total dmg down to theres. All we will be now IMO are monks with better taunts that dont take the big spikes but more consistant dmg. I find it sad that these in the depth they sound to be are a result monks wanting all fighters to be able to do same thing.  Also at the end of the day this is what we will get getting, lower than monk dps for a little more aggro but i 100% guarentee monks will be able to hold raid mob aggro. Guarentee it! I guess moorguard has a boner for monks or gaige was on his knees a awful lot at fan faire.</P> <P>There is no saying exactly how it will be til the changes but if they expect guardians to be a support class they will probably lose so many guardians not down for that that they will be compacting servers just to have population right. Granted tho i will make best of what i can out of it but if they dont define roles better and keep pushing for this blur of all fighters should be tanks for any mob and tank the same thing they need to make it one class. Id love to be changed into a guardonkuiszerdin knight np just combine us all while you are at it.</P> <P>I also feel tunabash made a good post on it is possible 2 guardians in mt group will be they best for new change.</P> <P>personally as a guildleader if guardian is still best tank which should be or if guardian / zerker is best combo and guardian / guardian isnt will still have no room for monks. Even more so now. With combat skills dmg stacking now the skills will be less aggro with more of the class you have since only 1 persons debuff can be on it. You might as well load up dps groups around purely sorcerors / predators. And you should stack all your tanking around guardin / zerkers. Have your spread out priests chanters / bards for support and voila. No high demand just those guilds desperate for numbers or like to have crazy high guild numbers will want the other classes. Anyhoo perhaps im over exaggerated but this is my out take on what there doing. If 6 tanks gonna be slightly shifted but main role to tank guilds are only going to want the best of the best especially if progression raids are added. Also on our taunting i dont think we are actually going to be given new taunts IMO that referrence is solely protect working on raid mobs. So our taunt will be higher since we have so many i still feel zerker are gonna have that snap aggro like they do though.</P> <p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:58 AM</span>

[blueduckie]

<P>After reading it over a few more times i am more convicted these changes are gonna screw other tank classes over more than guardians. That last line by moorguard is tricky. It seems to me what he is saying is guardians still gonna be the best but the difference wont be so high so those other classes could tank it wont be as efficient but wont be as big of a difference as it is now. I also think his rhetoric on other classes is just to make people think they will have tank abilties but really wont be as good as guardian still granted the difference wont be very much off but any diff and taunting will be enough to make it a big deal. So monks / bruisers hope you all stay in guild you are in or have some mad cybering skills because guilds that dont just invite as many people as can arnt going to want you. They will want guardian / zerker / paladin in every tanking / offtanking slot and predators / sorcerors for dps. You gave up that role of being dps willingly congrats!</P>

[ugl]

<P>I guess everyone here that reads the "mutual forums" knows my position on the matter, so no sense going over it again here.</P> <P> </P> <P>While I will  find it amusing when brawlers become 2nd rate tanks and third rate DPS (relevant to the monks on these forums).</P> <P> I have guildies that play these fighter classes, some of which  are less then thrilled with the purposed changes. (they live and built their characters around DPS.   For them , I will feel sorry if sony fugs it up. (which they seem to do with  every little patch, much less a total revamp of the combat system.)</P> <P> </P> <P>/shrug   At this point, I am sure the devs are aware of our concerns.  The ball is in their court.   </P> <P>While some are predicting a slam dunk,   I predict they will get the whistle blowed at them for travelling.</P> <P>Guess we just hit our hunker down button and see what shakes out.</P>

[Gaige]

<P>Building a tank class around DPS because you expect SOE to change their minds is akin to building a druid class around DPS because you refuse to believe SOE put you in the priest archetype on purpose.</P> <P>People become let down and irritated because of their own ignorance and refusal to believe what is right in front of their faces.</P> <P>Its all about expectations I suppose.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> <P></P> <P>Raahl wrote:</P> <P>The defining ability of a Guardian is to tank and tank only.  We do not do DPS and we have little to no utility.  If Sony had added some more DPS and some Utility these changes would not have hurt so much. <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Should ask for that then.  With six tank classes in this game I'd imagine you'd want some ways to be useful when you aren't tanking, since it sounds like tanking is quickly going to become situational, as it should be in an archetype system.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>I imagine you guys will MT raids a lot still, but at least the other fighters won't get 1 shot trying to.</P> <P>Oh, and I always thought you guys protected and guarded people, you know watched out for your whole group/raid.</P> <P>At least I figured that was intended design, too bad your protect line is so broken <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:04 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Should ask for that then.  With six tank classes in this game I'd imagine you'd want some ways to be useful when you aren't tanking, since it sounds like tanking is quickly going to become situational, as it should be in an archetype system.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yea that's what I was trying to say in the thread in the other forum.   I guess it didn't come over well.  If all tanks can be close to equal in tanking ability then all tanks should be close to equal in DPS and Utility.  And that's not the way it is.</P> <P>The gap in utility is probably the smallest with the crusaders > brawlers > warriors.</P> <P>The gap in DPS is fairly large with brawlers > crusaders > warriors.  Beserkers might be at or above crusaders.  Not sure though.</P> <P>The gap in tanking ability is also fairly large with warriors > crusaders > brawlers.</P> <P>So as the gap in tanking ability is ruduced so should the gap in DPS</P> <P>In the end we all will be the same.  There won't be any real difference between the fighter classes.</P>

[Gaige]

<P>Honestly, played right and with the right gear, the DPS gap between fighters is small to non existant.</P> <P>The tanking and utility gap, I will conceed however.</P>

[Raahl]

BTW Gage, I have an alt that's a brawler (soon to be bruiser).  And I'm having fun with him.   I like that he's different than my Guardian.

[Arsen]

<DIV>I think the key thing here is that they will make it so that certain classes are better tanks for certain encounters.  They are going to give certain resist lines to certain tank types (presumably as self only buffs).  So for instance, Guardians may be best for melee encounters, SKs against walocks, Paladins for Wizzies, Zerkers against Healers, Monks against Enchanters... etc.  The specifics of course could be completely different, but you get the idea.  The most effective MT for a raid would not simply be ONE class.  And for some raids you could potentially be splitting the encounters into different monsters where you have multiple tanks playing an equally important role.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Honestly, played right and with the right gear, the DPS gap between fighters is small to non existant.</P> <P>The tanking and utility gap, I will conceed however.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I'm no where near able to do the damage of the scout classes.  Even wielding a 2-handed or dual wield.    Unless I'm missing something.   With some non-guardian classes doing the damage of the scout classes, the gap is still rather large.  Perhaps there are some upcoming skills that will increase my DPS, which is quite possible.

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Arsenal wrote:<BR> <DIV>I think the key thing here is that they will make it so that certain classes are better tanks for certain encounters.  They are going to give certain resist lines to certain tank types (presumably as self only buffs).  So for instance, Guardians may be best for melee encounters, SKs against walocks, Paladins for Wizzies, Zerkers against Healers, Monks against Enchanters... etc.  The specifics of course could be completely different, but you get the idea.  The most effective MT for a raid would not simply be ONE class.  And for some raids you could potentially be splitting the encounters into different monsters where you have multiple tanks playing an equally important role.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>We can home that's the way they are planning it.  We really need a lot more information before we can make much of a decision.</P> <P>Guess my mood is changing.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR>BTW Gage, I have an alt that's a brawler (soon to be bruiser).  And I'm having fun with him.   I like that he's different than my Guardian. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Cool, I gather its a fun class.  Never played one myself.<BR>

[Aent]

<DIV> <P><BR></P> <HR>           Gage-Mikel wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Should ask for that then.  With six tank classes in this game I'd imagine you'd want some ways to be useful when you aren't tanking, since it sounds like tanking is quickly going to become situational, as it should be in an archetype system.</P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I'd imagine that we'd want some ways to be useful when not tanking also.  Hmmm let's see... well there's tanking... um no, okay, well there's... hmmm...</P> <P>Do you actually think that a group would pick us up for our DPS if we asked for and got an upgrade?  You'd have to be an idiot to not pick up a "real" DPS class instead.  And quite the opposite, our DPS will be going down with the auto-attack nerf.  All this is besides the fact that I didn't chose to be a guardian for their stellar DPS.</P> <P>Why don't you go back to your boards and bask in the glory of you MT'ing that raid in CL and let us discuss this amongst ourselves.  Oh?  I thought monks couldn't tank raid targets.  Ah well, you proved them wrong didn't you.</P></DIV>

[ugl]

<P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Building a tank class around DPS because you expect SOE to change their minds is akin to building a druid class around DPS because you refuse to believe SOE put you in the priest archetype on purpose.</P> <P>People become let down and irritated because of their own ignorance and refusal to believe what is right in front of their faces.</P> <P>Its all about expectations I suppose.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <P> <P>Actually, as the game stands now, monks/bruisers ARE a DPS class...      So, maybe thats why they built them to be one?   Then toss in, all previous fantasy based games, including D and D and eq1, they are also a DPS class. <P>So, what is right infront of their faces is a DPS class.   Of course, all that is obvious, except to you and the "monk tank posse" that hangs out on these boards...</P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <DIV>I guess we will have to forgive the ones that were not able to see into the future, knowing that SOE was going to revamp  the entire game 8 months down the road, due to some whiny as monks, like yourself.</DIV> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:24 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aenthi wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P>Why don't you go back to your boards and bask in the glory of you MT'ing that raid in CL and let us discuss this amongst ourselves.  Oh?  I thought monks couldn't tank raid targets.  Ah well, you proved them wrong didn't you.<BR></P> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ha Ha, basking in the glory... hahahaha.</P> <P>I did it just to see how it'd go under this current combat system.  /shrug</P> <P>Noah tanks it a lot better, way easier on the healers.</P> <P>All of our DPS and auto attack DPS is going down by the way.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P> <P> <P>Actually, as the game stands now, monks/bruisers ARE a DPS class...      So, maybe thats why they built them to be one?   Then toss in, all previous fantasy based games, including D and D and eq1, they are also a DPS class. </P> <P>So, what is right infront of their faces is a DPS class.   Of course, all that is obvious, except to you and the "monk tank posse" that hangs out on these boards...</P> <DIV>I guess we will have to forgive the ones that did not able to see into the future that SOE was going to revamp the entire game 8 months down the road due to some whiny as monks, like yourself.</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Uglak you are so ignorant of the facts.</P> <P>SOE has said since release ALL FIGHTERS are tanks.  We have NEVER been an EQ2 DPS class.  I tanked to 50 in pickup groups.  I <EM>offtank</EM> in raids currently of course, but with this broken combat system and overpowered guardians, who wouldn't.</P> <P>Those people who REFUSED to take SOE at their word and see the class at face value are going to get nerfed.  That is their own fault for refusing to believe in the archetype system and refusing to read all the information available to them, that they rolled a tank class.</P> <P>I feel no sympathy for people who play this game with their eyes and ears shut screaming I'M DPS I'M DPS I'M DPS when the creators of the game have been trying to tell them otherwise for months.</P> <P>As for what monks/bruisers are in other games, that has no relevance to this game, now does it.<BR></P> <P><BR> </P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:27 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Uglak you are so ignorant of the facts.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Fact is, you cant tank jack crap.  But, you got good DPS, better then most scouts.  You are, right now, a DPS class.  Ask anyone in game.</FONT></P> <P>SOE has said since release ALL FIGHTERS are tanks.  We have NEVER been an EQ2 DPS class.  I tanked to 50 in pickup groups.  I <EM>offtank</EM> in raids currently of course, but with this broken combat system and overpowered guardians, who wouldn't.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hrmm, I guess everyone that doesnt play beta and read these boards (90% of the player base) didnt get the memo...</FONT></P> <P>Those people who REFUSED to take SOE at their word and see the class at face value are going to get nerfed.  That is their own fault for refusing to believe in the archetype system and refusing to read all the information available to them, that they rolled a tank class.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Word?  What word?   I think they took it as the game is, reality, that they are playing a DPS class.   </FONT></P> <P>I feel no sympathy for people who play this game with their eyes and ears shut screaming I'M DPS I'M DPS I'M DPS when the creators of the game have been trying to tell them otherwise for months.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hrrmmm, was their a pop up box when ya log in saying, we know right now your class is primarely a great DPS class, but, we give you our word, someday you will be a tank?   </FONT></P> <P>As for what monks/bruisers are in other games, that has no relevance to this game, now does it.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Well, when it comes to player expectations when they make a character on a new game, yes, it does.   When vanguard comes out, and I choose a warrior, I will expect that I will be a tank.  And if I choose a mage, I will expect that I will be DPS.   So why wouldnt someone coming to eq2 and choosing a monk not expect to be DPS?  Expecially if theyve played previous fantasy games...   I suppose if I picked a cleric, and healed for 8 months, then found out that the devs were changing me into a tank, based on what they said at launch, I wouldnt be a happy cleric.</FONT><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Uglak you are so ignorant of the facts.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Fact is, you cant tank jack crap.  But, you got good DPS, better then most scouts.  You are, right now, a DPS class.  Ask anyone in game.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>I can tank a lot of stuff actually.  So there you go.</FONT></P> <P>SOE has said since release ALL FIGHTERS are tanks.  We have NEVER been an EQ2 DPS class.  I tanked to 50 in pickup groups.  I <EM>offtank</EM> in raids currently of course, but with this broken combat system and overpowered guardians, who wouldn't.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hrmm, I guess everyone that doesnt play beta and read these boards (90% of the player base) didnt get the memo...</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Not my fault they chose to not educate themselves and then whine when things are fixed, now is it.</FONT></P> <P>Those people who REFUSED to take SOE at their word and see the class at face value are going to get nerfed.  That is their own fault for refusing to believe in the archetype system and refusing to read all the information available to them, that they rolled a tank class.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Word?  What word?   I think they took it as the game is, reality, that they are playing a DPS class.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Can all DPS classes tank x4?</FONT></P> <P>I feel no sympathy for people who play this game with their eyes and ears shut screaming I'M DPS I'M DPS I'M DPS when the creators of the game have been trying to tell them otherwise for months.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hrrmmm, was their a pop up box when ya log in saying, we know right now your class is primarely a great DPS class, but, we give you our word, someday you will be a tank?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>No, but then again I like to educate myself about the class I'm playing.</FONT></P> <P>As for what monks/bruisers are in other games, that has no relevance to this game, now does it.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Well, when it comes to player expectations when they make a character on a new game, yes, it does.   When vanguard comes out, and I choose a warrior, I will expect that I will be a tank.  And if I choose a mage, I will expect that I will be DPS.   So why wouldnt someone coming to eq2 and choosing a monk not expect to be DPS?  Expecially if theyve played previous fantasy games...   I suppose if I picked a cleric, and healed for 8 months, then found out that the devs were changing me into a tank, based on what they said at launch, I wouldnt be a happy cleric.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Ha Ha, really?  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>[expletive ninja'd by Faarbot], make sure you call up NC Soft and tell that to the Guild Wars team.  Monks over there are healers.</FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>I can tank a lot of stuff actually.  So there you go.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yep, hybrids can tank a little bit.  Not like a pure tank can though.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Not my fault they chose to not educate themselves and then whine when things are fixed, now is it.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>No, that would be SOE's fault.   If your going to change a cleric from a healer into a tank 8 months after the game is released, it is not very good customer service.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Can all DPS classes tank x4?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>No, not all dps classes.  But, all the hybrids can.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>No, but then again I like to educate myself about the class I'm playing.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ahh, so whenever you buy a new game, you make 5000 posts on their forums , beta test it, and read thread after thread?  Your truly a gamers gamer.  I am in awe of your knowledge of all things eq2.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Ha Ha, really?  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>[expletive ninja'd by Faarbot], make sure you call up NC Soft and tell that to the Guild Wars team.  Monks over there are healers.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Must be copying EQ2s model of turning everything upside down when it comes to traditional fantasy games.  I wonder if theyre going to make orcs a dragon race in eq3?</FONT></P> <P><BR> </P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Gaige]

<P>Uglak, don't you think that saying "changing a cleric into a tank" and making monks tank better are two different things?</P> <P>I mean we are fighters, who in this game are tanks.</P> <P>I don't see the stretch, or jump in logic.</P> <P>/shrug</P>

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Building a tank class around DPS because you expect SOE to change their minds is akin to building a druid class around DPS because you refuse to believe SOE put you in the priest archetype on purpose.</P> <P>People become let down and irritated because of their own ignorance and refusal to believe what is right in front of their faces.</P> <P>Its all about expectations I suppose.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <P> <P>Actually, as the game stands now, monks/bruisers ARE a DPS class...      So, maybe thats why they built them to be one?   Then toss in, all previous fantasy based games, including D and D and eq1, they are also a DPS class. <P>So, what is right infront of their faces is a DPS class.   Of course, all that is obvious, except to you and the "monk tank posse" that hangs out on these boards...</P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <DIV>I guess we will have to forgive the ones that were not able to see into the future, knowing that SOE was going to revamp  the entire game 8 months down the road, due to some whiny as monks, like yourself.</DIV> <P> </P> <P>Message Edited by uglak on <SPAN class=date_text>07-14-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:24 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Don't forget the hundreds of scouts whining on the boards just as much as this "monk posse" if not more than they are, I just love when I play my monk and some idiot goes off and says we need a tank even though my monk is in the group and can probably tank what we're killing better than most the other fighters we get

[TunaBoo]

I don't think monks ever tanked for crap in 5 years of EQ1... nor do I think they ever will in eq2.. so not worried. <div></div>

[Shizzirri]

Had a monk MT vex thal for us once was rather amusing

[Raahl]

<P>Gage/Uglak please don't attack each other.</P> <P>While I disagree with Gage on a number of points, I will not call him an idiot or anything similar.</P> <P>Gage - Your friend the Guardian is maximized to do DPS.  Compare his DPS to a similarly equiped Monk or even a Scout class.  You will probably see that his DPS is less.</P> <P>With that being said.</P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Here's my take on the fighter archtypes or how IMO they should be.</P> <P>Within the archtype of fighter there are subcategories or skill sets:  DPS, Utility and Defense.</P> <P>Brawlers are in the DPS group.  They excel at DPS and have moderate Utility and below average Defense.</P> <P>Crusaders are in the Utility group.  They excel at Utility and have moderate DPS and Defence.</P> <P>Warriors are in the Defense group.  They excel at Defense and have Moderate DPS and below average Utility.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TunaBoo wrote:<BR>I don't think monks ever tanked for crap in 5 years of EQ1... nor do I think they ever will in eq2.. so not worried.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Well, from what I hear its because warriors cried until monks mitigation got nerfed, because for awhile monks were tanking better than them.  Recently though they got their mitigation back, I read their forums off and on.</P> <P>But I'm glad you aren't worried <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Uglak, don't you think that saying "changing a cleric into a tank" and making monks tank better are two different things?</P> <P>I mean we are fighters, who in this game are tanks.</P> <P>I don't see the stretch, or jump in logic.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>You wouldn't... </P> <P> </P> <P>Again, in this game, they are DPS, and going to be made into tanks...</P> <p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:17 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I recant this post, too mean for my spirits today....</P> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:18 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>I recant this one too...   sorry again.   Dont mean to offend, I blame gage  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:20 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>Gage/Uglak please don't attack each other.</P> <P> </P> <P></P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Lol, not gonna happen...  :smileywink:</P></BLOCKQUOTE>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <P>Well, from what I hear its because warriors cried until monks mitigation got nerfed, because for awhile monks were tanking better than them.  Recently though they got their mitigation back, I read their forums off and on.</P> <P>But I'm glad you aren't worried <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Just so you know, monks could never tank for crap, until a certain expansion came out.    This expansion (luclin I think?, one with the dragon crap)  had some "uber gear"  that monks got, allowing them to tank on par with warriors, as well as keep their DPS.  It was not a class problem, it was a equipment problem.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The guild that shares your name, (imagine that), farmed the gear, then started showing up warriors...  Warriors got mad, monks got nerfed.  Sad thing was, 95% of the monks never had this gear in the first place.  Then, when pop came out, bards took over pulling, and monks lost that job too, and became rather useless.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Not sure whts happened since then however, as I quit that game.   It went into wow mode after brad left them anyway, with the exception of some nice raiding material.  (pop).   If its the same guys that run this game, wouldnt suprise me if monks are the MT now and warriors are tossing them a buff...  :smileyvery-happy:</DIV><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:14 PM</span>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>Gage/Uglak please don't attack each other.</P> <P> </P> <P></P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Lol, not gonna happen...  :smileywink:</P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>LOL.   :smileytongue:

[Erronn]

<P>I've carefully read what Uglak and Gaige have been squabbling about, and need to mention one thought. Although you are both throwing out your opinions about the way things should or shouldn't be, the fact is that SOE set up the archetypes from the very beginning, and there are numerous quotes available from the dev's about the fact that ALL fighters were designed to TANK, but the subclasses would do this differently from each other. Thus, monks/bruisers, being from the fighter class, would be primarily tanks, not primarily dps.</P> <P>It appears now in the game that their dps has swung too far towards the primarily-dps classes (like scouts), and thus need to be re-tuned. But from the very beginning, they were supposed to be tanks...avoidance-type tanks.</P> <P>Like has been stated, also, the same name for classes in different games don't mean the same thing...a monk in eq2 may be a tank, while a monk in eq1 is dps. The only thing they share is the name. If eq2 originally advertised the cleric as a dps class, then it doesn't matter what they were in eq1...</P> <P> </P> <P>Anyway, just wanted a third party clarification here for ya...</P> <P> </P> <P>Errokk</P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Erronn wrote:<BR> <P>I've carefully read what Uglak and Gaige have been squabbling about, and need to mention one thought. Although you are both throwing out your opinions about the way things should or shouldn't be, the fact is that SOE set up the archetypes from the very beginning, and there are numerous quotes available from the dev's about the fact that ALL fighters were designed to TANK, but the subclasses would do this differently from each other. Thus, monks/bruisers, being from the fighter class, would be primarily tanks, not primarily dps.</P> <P>It appears now in the game that their dps has swung too far towards the primarily-dps classes (like scouts), and thus need to be re-tuned. But from the very beginning, they were supposed to be tanks...avoidance-type tanks.</P> <P>Like has been stated, also, the same name for classes in different games don't mean the same thing...a monk in eq2 may be a tank, while a monk in eq1 is dps. The only thing they share is the name. If eq2 originally advertised the cleric as a dps class, then it doesn't matter what they were in eq1...</P> <P> </P> <P>Anyway, just wanted a third party clarification here for ya...</P> <P> </P> <P>Errokk</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Actually, the only place they were advertised as tanks was here on the boards.....</P> <P>If you read official info, it refers to them as "off tanks" that give a beating or some crap...</P> <DIV>Hence, a hybrid, that tanks a little and throws out DPS....   /shrug</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But, of course, we can take that official stance and whipe and flush with it now...</DIV>

[Yrield]

<span><blockquote><hr>Raahl wrote: <p>Gage/Uglak please don't attack each other.</p> <p>While I disagree with Gage on a number of points, I will not call him an idiot or anything similar.</p> <p>Gage - Your friend the Guardian is maximized to do DPS.  Compare his DPS to a similarly equiped Monk or even a Scout class.  You will probably see that his DPS is less.</p> <p>With that being said.</p> <hr> <p>Here's my take on the fighter archtypes or how IMO they should be.</p> <p>Within the archtype of fighter there are subcategories or skill sets:  DPS, Utility and Defense.</p> <p>Brawlers are in the DPS group.  They excel at DPS and have moderate Utility and below average Defense.</p> <p>Crusaders are in the Utility group.  They excel at Utility and have moderate DPS and Defence.</p> <p>Warriors are in the Defense group.  They excel at Defense and have Moderate DPS and below average Utility.</p> <hr></blockquote>Gage make a point and everyone around here seem like loving ignoring that point. The point is: Whatever you think or belive about how class should be, doesnt matter, because you are not in charge, you are not game designer or a devs. If you don't like the archtypes system you can always leave and go play an other game no one force you to play EQ2. Moorgard said: "</span> I suspect after the revamp, in a lot of raid situations you'd still want a guardian as main tank.". I really love this particular line, after the translation the final result is: " I suspect after the revamp, in a lot of raid situations, even if a guardian is not the best choice as MT, you'd still want a guardian as main tank, because you cant pass over the fact that EQ2 is not EQ1 with a new graphic engine.". I will give my opinion as well even if my opinion doesnt matter: I suspect after the revamp, a lot of raid leader who play a guardian won't give a chance to the monk to MT because they are scared to see how monk could tank well with the granted guardian defense. <span>:smileyvery-happy:</span> The devs just granted you one of the most powerful UTILITY in the game. Tank from 1 to 50, be a buff-bot in raid for a month or so, and come back here to tell Gage how cool the utility role is when you rolled a tank and tanked from 1 to 50 just to end up in a non-tanking role in raid. <div></div>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Yrieldom wrote:<BR><SPAN> <BLOCKQUOTE>Gage make a point and everyone around here seem like loving ignoring that point.<BR>The point is: Whatever you think or belive about how class should be, doesnt matter, because you are not in charge, you are not game designer or a devs.<BR><BR>If you don't like the archtypes system you can always leave and go play an other game no one force you to play EQ2.<BR><BR>Moorgard said: "</SPAN> I suspect after the revamp, in a lot of raid situations you'd still want a guardian as main tank.". I really love this particular line, after the translation the final result is: " I suspect after the revamp, in a lot of raid situations, even if a guardian is not the best choice as MT, you'd still want a guardian as main tank, because you cant pass over the fact that EQ2 is not EQ1 with a new graphic engine.".<BR><BR>I will give my opinion as well even if my opinion doesnt matter: I suspect after the revamp, a lot of raid leader who play a guardian won't give a chance to the monk to MT because they are scared to see how monk could tank well with the granted guardian defense. <SPAN>:smileyvery-happy:</SPAN><BR><BR>The devs just granted you one of the most powerful UTILITY in the game. Tank from 1 to 50, be a buff-bot in raid for a month or so, and come back here to tell Gage how cool the utility role is when you rolled a tank and tanked from 1 to 50 just to end up in a non-tanking role in raid.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>  Is this a insult, a taunt, or, err.. Can we get a translation here please?     </DIV> <DIV>Naah, forget it. </DIV> <DIV>Probably not saying much since it starts off saying gage has a good point...  :smileyhappy:</DIV>

[Gaige]

<DIV>I always make good points.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Its just hard for you to understand SOE runs this game and not you, I guess.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/shrug</DIV>

[Raahl]

<P>However SOE does ask for feedback and we are giving them our feedback.</P> <P>If they didn't want feedback then they should post upcoming changes and should just implement them.</P> <P>Perhaps Gage and others should just accept that SOE created Monks the way they are and get over it.   You cannot tank as well as Guardians.  Accept it or move to another game.</P> <P>We wouldn't see these sweeping changes if people would stop complaining about other classes.</P>

[Yrield]

<span><blockquote><hr>uglak wrote: <div>  Is this a insult, a taunt, or, err.. Can we get a translation here please?     </div> <div>Naah, forget it. </div> <div>Probably not saying much since it starts off saying gage has a good point...  :smileyhappy:</div><hr></blockquote>No insult, no troll What the point to insult peoples on internet anyways ? I have nothing again Rhaal or his opinion. But... Gage rolled a monk to tank, why ? Because in EQ2 monk are tank I never saw him asking in anyways to tank like a guardian or to be effective as a guardian All he want is to be able to fullfil hes core role as a fighter. To be a viable tank with the right group setup and the right buff. And he seem to understand that he cant tank like the other figthers (guard/pally/sk/zerker) because he have more DPS (if monk dont do 200% more dps than a guard, a guard should not tank 200% better than a monk). We can argue about the utility of both class here, but remember we are not the one who set the rules of the game. The final decision is the one of the raid leader, if the raid leader dont want a monk as MT, the monk won't tank, whatever SOE do wont change a thing about that. So I don't see why you make such a drama about the combat revamp... the game is dieing right now, slowly but surely... The combat revamp will either: a) save the game b) be the "coup de grace". Wait and See...</span><div></div>

[blueduckie]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Yrieldom wrote:<SPAN><BR><BR>Gage rolled a monk to tank, why ? Because in EQ2 monk are tank<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I dont read all of moorgard's post but id love to see a post where while game was being made or whatever any point where developers say all fighters should be able to tank everything. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I just do not buy into that in the current game play but perhaps was intention and we all are getting screwed on roles we chose. I can consider gear making lower tanks able to. A monk in full fabled perhaps should be able to tank drakathor if good healing should have that chance at being 1 rounded but should be doable. However i do not think it should just be handed to tanks being able to.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gaige picked a tank to tank and he has. He has tanked in groups hell he has tanked Zalak. He isnt even full fabled(in hardly any fabled at all). I have yet to see a monk or bruiser geared up around same quality of someone as tunabash or drakem(sp) I would love to see a decked out monk try to tank drakathor. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gaige didnt need a perfect mt group set up for zalak and you can say zalak is a pansy all you wants but with max possible defense every single possible defense buff minus the mystic which i think is +2 I still got whacked and actually worked on zalak and his adds the first times trying him recently and no i did not get hit by his harm touch. So yes defense helps but it doesnt trivialize it people still gotta heal and cover those big hits. Same with angler max defense buffs inquisitor skill debuff (master quality one lowers offensive skills by 15) and max defense includes master dirge song and troubador haste song that adds 4 defense and so on. Point is Guardian still took those 4k shots from his specials. I do not see why SOE is basing this revamp on almost  year old content. My lord its gonna be trivial when they are out that long. Is only 1 guild on my server who can even kill the new contested mobs the other guild that should be able to gets there [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] whooped thoroughly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The complaint i have is the info on which it was used to revamp. If a monk can tank the instance mobs what is the problem? Til i see results of a fabled geared monk tanking on drakathor or another big hitter just dont care for this whining. Also why is it our hp is so godly when you see all the monks working str and agi and Guardians working stamina. I mean get real we go solidly aiming for tanking. They dont. [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] is a monk that wants to tank using 2 str hex dolls for instead of sta for extra hp. What is a monk that wants to tank using a robe of invoker for instead of a higher mitigation bp. I mean come on. Lets get real here monks dont go the extra mile guardians have to tank. <STRONG>We dont deserve to be miles ahead of all tank classes but we deserve to be ahead in every situation no matter how little it is. </STRONG>Now i do not mean that just purely on class. I think a paladin in full fabled should rip a part a guardian in current armor of ebon in dmg taken. These changes just do not seem to be the fix they preached before that i had been excited about.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <DIV><STRONG>We dont deserve to be miles ahead of all tank classes but we deserve to be ahead in every situation no matter how little it is.</STRONG> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>I disagree.  I don't think you should be ahead in every situation, only some.  If you are a better tank all the time, in every situation, they should get rid of the other five fighter classes.<BR>

[blueduckie]

<DIV>By that opinion Gaige....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Scouts are a dps bard / rogue dont out dps predators or at least arnt supposed to be able to easily after revamp bards for sure wont and cant atm I do not have enough experience with rogues atm, so they should get rid of all the classes. No where does it say scout is a support class but is what a bard is.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mage are a dps also exact same as  above enchanters and summoners see ya later wizards warlocks can out dps you when you should all do exact same dps.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All priests are focused on healing all healers heals should heal for the exact same. Warden big heal atm totals for around 2400heal dmg at adept 3 inquisitor is around 1k isnt very fair and if you consider just initial healing then warden is around 1500 with the last 900 in regen there so any non warden(which has highest heals) is subpar and should be boosted to healing the EXACT same amount by your thinking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This isnt a game based on all being equal yo each subclass has its classes that excell at something. Debuffs are not the same buffs are not the same dps are not the same healing power is not the same so come on now Gaige get real on Logic here. Tanking has to be the same because you want it?  Because situational tanking puts everyone on par and that is lame compared to how everything else differs. Look at the mechanics of the game outside of fighter for once. Hell can even go further.  Priests are no where near equal on curing warden / templar own the others. If  fighter main role is to tank by the trend of all the other classes there should be a pecking order but that would be too logical.</DIV>

[blueduckie]

<P>I have another complaint about this revamp on satisfying suck monks. If this is to help other tanks classes so much and "not take anything away from guardians" in those SS's of you tanking Zalak gaige your mitigation is not bad your avoidance is not 100% because you just dont have all the defense buffs we do when we hit 100% and you arnt a +5 racial class. It takes alot more for me to show being 100% avoidance than other tanks in guild with trait. You just have to hit 290 defense at lvl 50 to show 100 avoidance.</P> <P>You said in post it is harder because you dont have self buffs guardians do to raise avoidance. We have 0.0000000000% self avoidang buffs. Call of Protection and Return to battle / braksans are our defensive buffs. Fortified stance defense is over written by CoP if no masters in those we raise defense 23 to entire group. I also look at your stats. You have 8300hp with group set up and 260 stamina? Takes me back to point monks dont try to be a mt. Why dont you have your stamina higher. Do you have stamina ring clicky, do you have x2 stamina hex dolls? As stamins gets higher it doesnt add as much hp but doesnt change raising your hp. Normally when i am fully buffed up in raid group my mitigation is around 75% I only have 1 fabled armor item and a fabled 1h. However i am in full ebon and ruby jewelry with necklace being fabled. Your gear quality is about same as me is what I am trying to say and your mitigation is not considerably lower and buffed up same your avoidance will be higher. I bet your avoidance was higher than noah's with buffs on. Next time do it again with same MT group and inspect noah and compare both. It will only show his mit number not % so you could also inspect him ss inspect yourself ss and that is comparing to a fabled guardian. I doubt his mitigation is more than 10-15% at total maxing his mit out which in scale of things being that is mitigation against lvl 50 mobs is not that big of a difference.</P> <P>So this is my complaint. Monks complain about hp but always want to work str agi. Where is your hp supposed to come from the sky? Monks are able to be set up in MT groups buffed fine to take probably any instance zone and I doubt a monk has ever even tried tanking drakathor in a mt group set up so until seeing a fabled monk who has set himself up toward MTing try drakathor i think is a bs revamp on the tanking end. Monks dont try to set up to tank. They want to go pure agi / str and whine about there hp not matching guardians. Who go entirely for stamina 90% of us do at least. </P> <DIV>The only problem is raid leaders not letting you tank when in alot of cases other tanks probably could. Myabe i say this to much but i feel strongly about it. Guardian should be the mt period for a new encounter to make it easiest. Doesnt mean required but to get it down should be dam near required. As mob becomes trivial and strat easy if rl wanna take chance set up the others to tank isnt much risk for a zerker or paladin to tank atm. I am just sick of your [Removed for Content] whining of things like our high hp when you have horrible stamina by your own choices. If you havnt looked at the post you should all the priests sitting at full power also. I guess he lost aggro or some died also. You can even look at the end he doesnt have any guardian defense buffs on. CoP Duststorm and Brak / Return all arnt on him on the 2nd SS and is tanking zalak with like 6800hp from buffs dropping. IMO if being vocal is what causes changes more guardians need to rise up and call people like gaige on this bs.</DIV><p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:50 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<DIV>Seeing that moorgard has stated that monks will be tanking more.  I decided to go ahead and ask for guardians to do damage on par with monks.  An average monk will outdamage an average guardian. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I started a post in the Races and Player Characters section.   I expect a monk to one star it soon, to make it not show up for regular posters.</DIV>

[Deadjest]

<P>I am curious about somthing.</P> <P>With a decent IQ and Reading Comprehension,   how does anyone misinterpet anyone listed under <STRONG>FIGHTER</STRONG> as being a non tank and a DPS class instead.</P> <P>I am not a Brawler but I do support that they should tank and tank good,  just differently.</P> <P>The idea of one Tank being Top Dog out of 6 Tanks for every situation drives my absolutly nuts on a logic level.</P> <P>I am a Shadow Knight, as far as I am concerned, Guardians should be the Top Dog at mitigating physical damage period, not by a large degree but by a degree with some Meaning.   There should be some mobs that a Guardian should be the Obvious Tank for the job.    Doesnt mean the other tanks can't tank it but they just are not on the lvl of the Guardian vs a nasty, heavily phisical mob.</P> <P>And Crusaders would be the obvious Tanks against certain types of magical mobs and combo mobs that do physical and magical dmg.   With Brawlers filling up yet another nich.</P> <P>However Sony ends up doing it, we will just have to wait and see, but based upon the advertisement on their web page, anyone under that listing of Fighter has only one main purpose, and that is Tanking, anything after that is secondary.</P> <P>Heck Crusaders are described as the Juggernaughts of fighters, you can't get any better then that and inspite of that, I still think Guardians should be Top Dogs when it comes to Mitigation, just not to the degree that anyone is left out of it, but that goes for any form of fighting to.</P> <P>Sorry, reading comprehension is a big rant with me.   I enjoy hanging with all the class's and the idea of a Top Dog at any of the basic 4 food groups of class's I find absurd and rather for those who are more simplistic rather then tatics minded and personal skill related.</P> <P>I have a ton of fun, working along side other Tanks and switching roles as needed and covering each other backs with our different strengths and abilities.</P> <P>My avg group that I hang with is Templar, Warlock, Bard, Guardian, Zerker and Shadow Knight.   We don't kill the fastest but, we have been a very tough group and have been hard to kill.</P> <P>I think people should get away from the old EQL thinking, and we should be watching our backs as Fighters, then trying to belittle each other, and trying to help each other get what is needed to make our class functional.</P> <P>When I left EQL for EQ2, I was just begaining to see support from Warriors and Paladins for the Shadow Knights, cause they to thought we had issues and needed a upgrade.  And I would easily throw in my support for any of my fellow Tanking Class's should they need it.   But people have to understand, Fighter is first and formost Tanking, anything else is secondary and that is where we should really be looking for our class defining features.</P>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Deadjester wrote:<BR> <P>I am curious about somthing.</P> <P>With a decent IQ and Reading Comprehension,   how does anyone misinterpet anyone listed under <STRONG>FIGHTER</STRONG> as being a non tank and a DPS class instead.</P> <P>I am not a Brawler but I do support that they should tank and tank good,  just differently.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Because whether Sony meant to or not.  The Brawler archtype is a DPS class.  They currently can outdamage scouts.  I'm thinking the initial idea was to have them as a fighter DPS class with limited tanking abilities.  There was such an outcry from some monks that they want to tank as well as the other fighter classes and Sony is caving in. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My little brawler takes more damage, more than my guardian.  But he kills things 10x faster than my guardian.  So it balanced out.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The scouts complain that the monks are doing too much damage without considering that the monks need to do that damage to make up for the lack of being able to tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Deadjester wrote:<BR> <P>I am curious about somthing.</P> <P>With a decent IQ and Reading Comprehension,   how does anyone misinterpet anyone listed under <STRONG>FIGHTER</STRONG> as being a non tank and a DPS class instead.</P> <P>I am not a Brawler but I do support that they should tank and tank good,  just differently.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Becuase for the last 8 months many fighter classes have been DPS classes?   <BR>

[blueduckie]

<DIV>I agree jester that it shouldnt be only 1 tank is able to tank mobs. However it isnt that way. The argument comes with what lvl should each tank be able to tank. Fighters being tankable is 1 thing but all being on par is another. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In current subclasses mage / scouts are dps classes</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In priest subclass is all about healing</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In fighter we can say is all about tanking</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There are clear pecking orders in mage / scout. Bards and Enchanters are support classes and sacrifice dps for it. Rogue have more group thnings like group invis etc so sacrifice a tiny bit of dps to predators. Wizards are pure nukes and can do highest dps for mage. Summoners sacrifice some dps having a pet that can tank and make soloing easier for them. That is a easy to see pecking order of there MAIN roles.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Priest it is same thing. Healing / debuffing / curing has a pecking order. All priests dont heal the same even tho this is there main role.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Fighters currently have a pecking order. Changes make it sound like there wont be one which is ridiculous. All classes can tank raid mobs but who said all should be able to tank all. You have to sacrifice something. Guardians have low dps and high tanking. Zerker dps being brought down will even them up more on par of not putting scouts to shame but there tanking is fine is just barely behind guardian. They could tank any mob in game atm too. Crusaders take more dmg so is harder but id argue a very well geared knight could mt any mob if not can MT majority. Some like Nagailk etc may be rough i am not 100% familliar with which mobs own the most because havnt fought them all yet. Monks can tank the lower of the mobs even geared around dps. Such as Zalak Angler Drayek and i bet any other instance mob they could as well. That is a pecking order and should be upheld. Monks do more dps than both crusaders / fighters cept zerker may be able to pump out more but that will be fixxed. It should be harder for other tanks to tank the hardest mobs. This revamp is more like handing fighters each a type of mob which i just feel is lame. I personally would find that annoying espeically on new content. What do you do guess and pick which tank is supposed to have highest beenfit by its name til finding out. It shouldnt be that way it should be you have your MT's to put out on new content each time and fill in rest spliting it up as you go. I know personally i dont want to tank every mob all the time when are others in my guild who can tank it also but when it comes to first kills aks any guild they will want those most trusted consistant tank each time til strat is clear. Once strat is clear is when you salck up experiment and have fun that is called trivializing content and is part of any game and always will be.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:28 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <DIV>I agree jester that it shouldnt be only 1 tank is able to tank mobs. However it isnt that way. The argument comes with what lvl should each tank be able to tank. Fighters being tankable is 1 thing but all being on par is another. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In current subclasses mage / scouts are dps classes</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In priest subclass is all about healing</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In fighter we can say is all about tanking</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There are clear pecking orders in mage / scout. Bards and Enchanters are support classes and sacrifice dps for it. Rogue have more group thnings like group invis etc so sacrifice a tiny bit of dps to predators. Wizards are pure nukes and can do highest dps for mage. Summoners sacrifice some dps having a pet that can tank and make soloing easier for them. That is a easy to see pecking order of there MAIN roles.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Priest it is same thing. Healing / debuffing / curing has a pecking order. All priests dont heal the same even tho this is there main role.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Fighters currently have a pecking order. Changes make it sound like there wont be one which is ridiculous. All classes can tank raid mobs but who said all should be able to tank all. You have to sacrifice something. Guardians have low dps and high tanking. Zerker dps being brought down will even them up more on par of not putting scouts to shame but there tanking is fine is just barely behind guardian. They could tank any mob in game atm too. Crusaders take more dmg so is harder but id argue a very well geared knight could mt any mob if not can MT majority. Some like Nagailk etc may be rough i am not 100% familliar with which mobs own the most because havnt fought them all yet. Monks can tank the lower of the mobs even geared around dps. Such as Zalak Angler Drayek and i bet any other instance mob they could as well. That is a pecking order and should be upheld. Monks do more dps than both crusaders / fighters cept zerker may be able to pump out more but that will be fixxed. It should be harder for other tanks to tank the hardest mobs. This revamp is more like handing fighters each a type of mob which i just feel is lame. I personally would find that annoying espeically on new content. What do you do guess and pick which tank is supposed to have highest beenfit by its name til finding out. It shouldnt be that way it should be you have your MT's to put out on new content each time and fill in rest spliting it up as you go. I know personally i dont want to tank every mob all the time when are others in my guild who can tank it also but when it comes to first kills aks any guild they will want those most trusted consistant tank each time til strat is clear. Once strat is clear is when you salck up experiment and have fun that is called trivializing content and is part of any game and always will be.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Message Edited by blueduckie on <SPAN class=date_text>07-15-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>08:28 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Very good post.   5 stars...

[Rodney]

<P>So after this revamp I can see a group (GROUP not RAID) going like this</P> <P>So with a zerker and guard in same group, the guard is ask to MT, the zerker says hey why you tossing all my SUPER D DUPER dps "especially when tanking" out the window  by NOT having me tank.  So the group leader says hmm your right you tank, we can have the guard buff you, oh wow am I lucky to get the mega guard buffs why dont we get a dps class and dump the guard we can kill faster.</P> <P>The real kicker is</P> <P>  "Guardians will have the greatest capability to grant their defense to others. They also have a greater number of taunts."  </P> <P>so a group is going to want us now, cause were a BUFF [Removed for Content]? </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <DIV>By that opinion Gaige....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If  fighter main role is to tank by the trend of all the other classes there should be a pecking order but that would be too logical.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>They are revamping priests, mages and scous too, by the way.</P> <P>On the contrary, if there is a pecking order and one tank is hands down better in every situation, that tank will *always* be used.  This is the case now.  Guardians tanks, the other 5 fighters try their best to act like scouts.</P> <P>That isn't fun, and it isn't working.  Hence the HUGE and SWEEPING changes to the game.</P> <P>Is it fun for guardians?  Sure.</P> <P>I'd imagine so, being the only real MT with no competition has to be fun.</P> <P>But I digress, the point is, having one subclass hands down better than the other five at the primary role = delete the other five.  Thanks.<BR></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <P>You have 8300hp with group set up and 260 stamina? Takes me back to point monks dont try to be a mt. Why dont you have your stamina higher. Do you have stamina ring clicky, do you have x2 stamina hex dolls? </P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I took every sta/+hp trait offered to me.  I do have two +12 stamina dolls and I was using a +stamina clicky ring (look at the icon in the pic).  I doubt you can find a monk in the game with more HP than me per stamina because of my traits.</P> <P>It was a bit lower in that pic because I was using ACGF for the heal instead of RGF, but I doubt you see many monks out there breaking 8k sir.<BR></P>

[Raahl]

<P>Gage what would you suggest be done about the guardians DPS and utility?  We clearly are at the bottom of the list when it comes to them?</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>Gage what would you suggest be done about the guardians DPS and utility?  We clearly are at the bottom of the list when it comes to them?<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Get more?  As far as DPS is concerned, since its traded for defense, I feel the gap between fighters DPS should be roughly equal to the gap in tanking ability.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>While I know guardians will say OMG GIVE ME ZERO DPS AND LET ME TANK LIKE GOD... that isn't what I'm saying.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm saying by having roughly the game gap (small) then when guardians are not the mt for an encounter they will provide adequate DPS plus whatever useful buffs they have.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Similiarly will work for all the fighter classes, to scale.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Instead of guardian tanks, other fighters try your best to act like scouts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm cool with my DPS being lowered no matter what anyway, because I have pretty good defense atm, and I will have the *best* avoidance after the revamp.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Besides, we can crush, scouts can't.  A few crush weak mobs out there, so I'll still be needed regardless.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If I'm not, I'll reroll, but I've been assured they won't ruin my class, or anyone else's for that matter.<BR></DIV>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Get more?  As far as DPS is concerned, since its traded for defense, I feel the gap between fighters DPS should be roughly equal to the gap in tanking ability.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Agreed.  :smileyhappy:<BR>

[Deadjest]

<P>Actualy some of your replys made no sense.</P> <P>The logical reply would be, that yes, Brawlers are a Tank class but they are not working correctly within the Fighter section and not Tanking as they should and their DPS scores are way beyond normal and are on par with the Scouts.</P> <P>Now unless you fell of the short bus, or took one to many hits to the head,  that should not have been hard issue.   What I found intersting in your replys is the fact you didnt follow with a logical conclusion but followed with what looked best for you and your class and  not the game.  </P> <P>Lets be honest,  from what I have read, either there is a IQ issue here or a perception issue.</P> <P>If you just out right believe,  that Guardians should be number one Tank, then just say it and we can agree to disagree.   </P> <P>For that is a opinion and nobody has the right to say nay to you.</P> <P>But for anyone to go out side of opinion and say that EQ2 went to all this work to put Brawlers in the Fighter section when they ment Scouts, well that is absurd and as thought out as two ton willy going on a diet of donuts and sugar bunz to loose weight.</P> <P>Fighter means only one thing, and that is Tanking.   If a member of the Fighters goes far past those bounds then the class itself needs to be reworked to be <STRONG>PUT BACK IN THOSE BOUNDRS</STRONG>, not told it somthing it was not ment to be.</P> <P>Brawlers were ment to be the DPS Class  of the Tanks but that is <STRONG>NOT</STRONG> the samthing as a <STRONG>DPS CLASS</STRONG>.   I know Jr High School students that would have figured this out.</P> <P>Further more, there is no logical reason to even build a game with more then one tank if it had Best Actor Award in all catagories, just no logical reason and so the logic is since we do have 6 Class's of Tanks, then YES they were all ment to be Tanks and the present <STRONG>SYSTEM</STRONG> <STRONG>FAILED</STRONG> in the attempts to make it work.</P> <P>Come on guys, this is not hard to comprehend.   I happen to think that gamers in general are a much smarter breed then the avg joe do to the fact we constantly are thinking on a tatical and stratagic lvl and have to keep our minds sharp to keep up with the eviroment and each other.</P> <P>If Brawlers need to be upped in tanking and brought back down in DPS to be within the Fighter Class's, then so be it.   If Guardians need upgraded in Utility and DPS a tad, then so be that to.   If other things need to be done to further seperate our Class's so we have a more distinct function from each other, then that is what we <STRONG>ALL</STRONG> should be working on.   Not this pettyness and lack of logical thinking we have now.   We are gamers, we should be better then that.</P>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Deadjester wrote:<BR> <P>Actualy some of your replys made no sense.</P> <P>The logical reply would be, that yes, Brawlers are a Tank class but they are not working correctly within the Fighter section and not Tanking as they should and their DPS scores are way beyond normal and are on par with the Scouts.</P> <P>Now unless you fell of the short bus, or took one to many hits to the head,  that should not have been hard issue.   What I found intersting in your replys is the fact you didnt follow with a logical conclusion but followed with what looked best for you and your class and  not the game.  </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Perhaps you should have stepped back before starting to insult people.  I make no assumtions on others mental state.  We are trying to discuss the changes and of course we are all bias towards our classes.  Just because you cannot follow someone's logic or disagree with someone does not make them less valid or less intelligent.  </FONT></P> <P>Lets be honest,  from what I have read, either there is a IQ issue here or a perception issue.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>And as I eluded to above.  Perhaps the IQ or perception issues are yours?</FONT></P> <P>If you just out right believe,  that Guardians should be number one Tank, then just say it and we can agree to disagree.   </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>My point is that tanking is the only thing guardians do really well.  Our Utility is low as is our DPS.  So we should either be the number one tank or get a boost in the other fields.</FONT></P> <P>For that is a opinion and nobody has the right to say nay to you.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>But you can always disagree with me.  </FONT></P> <P>But for anyone to go out side of opinion and say that EQ2 went to all this work to put Brawlers in the Fighter section when they ment Scouts, well that is absurd and as thought out as two ton willy going on a diet of donuts and sugar bunz to loose weight.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I didn't see anyone doing this?  Brawlers are the DPS archtype of fighters.  Would you agree with me on that?</FONT></P> <P>Fighter means only one thing, and that is Tanking.   If a member of the Fighters goes far past those bounds then the class itself needs to be reworked to be <STRONG>PUT BACK IN THOSE BOUNDRS</STRONG>, not told it somthing it was not ment to be.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Read my comments above about tanking is the only thing guardians do well.   Fighter may mean tanking but does crusader or brawler?  In the beginning each of us were equal.  As we chose a path we became different.  To me fighter = tank, Guardian = Tank of the tanks, Brawler = DPS of the tanks, Crusader = Utility of the tanks.  Each can do the others roles, just nowhere near as good.</FONT></P> <P>Brawlers were ment to be the DPS Class  of the Tanks but that is <STRONG>NOT</STRONG> the samthing as a <STRONG>DPS CLASS</STRONG>.   I know Jr High School students that would have figured this out.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I totally agree.  But we are discussing the Combat changes for the tanks and not everyone else.   So DPS Class = DPS tanking class.  At least it does for me.</FONT></P> <P>Further more, there is no logical reason to even build a game with more then one tank if it had Best Actor Award in all catagories, just no logical reason and so the logic is since we do have 6 Class's of Tanks, then YES they were all ment to be Tanks and the present <STRONG>SYSTEM</STRONG> <STRONG>FAILED</STRONG> in the attempts to make it work.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>In the end all the tank classes are the same.  It's just how we get there that's different.  Brawlers punch and kick things while dodging attacks, Warriors use weapons and heavy armor.    Hope that came out right? </FONT></P> <P>Come on guys, this is not hard to comprehend.   I happen to think that gamers in general are a much smarter breed then the avg joe do to the fact we constantly are thinking on a tatical and stratagic lvl and have to keep our minds sharp to keep up with the eviroment and each other.</P> <P>If Brawlers need to be upped in tanking and brought back down in DPS to be within the Fighter Class's, then so be it.   If Guardians need upgraded in Utility and DPS a tad, then so be that to.   If other things need to be done to further seperate our Class's so we have a more distinct function from each other, then that is what we <STRONG>ALL</STRONG> should be working on.   Not this pettyness and lack of logical thinking we have now.   We are gamers, we should be better then that.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>See my thread here on ideas for balancing fighters.</FONT>  </P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=30117" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=30117</A></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>See above comments.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Raahl on <span class=date_text>07-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:14 PM</span>

[Yrield]

Well you just need to understand the concept of an archetype system: archetype > subclass No Brawler is not the DPS archetype of fighter, Brawler is a class of the fighter archetype The archetype define your core role and your subclass define how you achieve it. see it as an equation: archtype > class > subclass Fighter > Brawler > monk = Tank > avoidance > advanced avoidance Fighter > Brawler > Bruiser = Tank > avoidance > dps Fighter > Warrior > Guardian = Tank > mitigation > passive defense Fighter > Warrior > Berserker = Tank > mitigation > active dps Fighter > Crusader > Shadows Knight = Tank > mitigation > passive dps Fighter > Crusader > Paladin = Tank > mitigation > active defense Monk Core role: Tank Core ability: avoidance perfectionement: advanced avoidance Guardian Core role: Tank Core ability: mitigation Perfectionement: passive defense In  an archetype system, the subclass do not determine the performance of the player, the player determine the performance of the subclass. So no i don't see any tragedy if a well played monk out-tank any average played plate tank. All bias towards our classes ? hmm no, i don't play a monk and i don't want to out-tank a monk because he's hard coded to be a lesser tank than me, its pointless and just smell like false glory. I say lets players skills be a decisive factor on every encounter. we shall see who is the "best" tank You don't have enough DPS ? Well maybe you should stop to build your STA and put some point into STR... If you want to be a one stat wonder, you will always be a fours stats [Removed for Content]. Its your decision. Utility ? after the revamp you get one of the most useful/powerful utility in the game...I  can rez, you can grant defense, fair enough. Why you rolled a guardian anyway ? because you belive mitigation+passive defense is the best way to achieve your core role, right ? That still hold true because you rolled the most appropriate subclass for your play style. I didn't wanted to be karate kid and I'm not a passive player, so i rolled a paladin; mitigation+active defense.<div></div>

[Deadjest]

<P>I do have issues with a line of thinking that goes outside of what was ment and easy to see if you review what Sony has written.</P> <P>No where does it say that Guardians were the tanks of tanks but it does say Crusaders are the Juggernaughts of tanks,  which I disagree with but it does say it.   You can't define a Tank any better then calling them Juggernaughts, that is as good as it gets.</P> <P>No where does it even hint at that Crusaders are the Utility of Tanks.</P> <P>No where does it say that Brawlers are a lesser Tank.</P> <P>What it does do is put us all under Fighter and shows us different routes of Tanking, period.</P> <P>If all you have is Tanking and your DPS is to low, then that is the issue, not the other Tanks and that is where the argument should be.   The problem with EQL was the War and its supreamcy in tanking which was a detrament to the game, which this game tried to get away from and didnt quite do it and is trying to now.</P> <P>The argument that Tanking is all we have is a very Very weak argument in the face of a game built upon diversity.    I have no respect for people who use that in light of how EQ2 was advertised befor and after launch.</P> <P>Guardians by their very nature should be the Top Mitigating tanks for physical damage, but not to the point of over power other tanks, and there should be mobs that each of us are the best at tanking.   That gives all a role equaly and puts more of the play into our hands instead of giving a artificaly inflated role which means you are purely gotten for your class and not your skill.  </P>

[blueduckie]

<DIV>What i disagree with your "logic" jester is you are hinting that brawlers cant tank now. That is not true by any means. If they had it so bad they wouldnt be able to hang on even mobs like Zalak. However they can and easily. Now gage you said doubt you will find many monks with hitting 8khp but why if they want to tank so bad. All hp benefits a guardian gets it can add to another fyi except our self stamina(which hints that we should be the top hp class when we get all these hp buffs) So our hp is not crazy excessive over another wanting to tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monks are the highest avoidance class period. Guardians can raise there high from defense buffs of all classes but so can every single other class. Self buffed my avoidance is still not as high as a monks.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One of the main problems with tanking is people just cant be happy with what they got and i dont think any Guardian here is saying we should be just way ahead of tank classes. However ever class has a defining pecking order and even with there "revamp" gaige as you pointed out there will still be a pecking order. Will be pretty much exact same as it is for those 3 subclasses just smoother play.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do not see why each fighter needs a situational benefit based on resists. That for 1 will be even more annoying for a guild. Not every guild has access to each type. So these situtational bonus if the top mobs get so rough you need that bonus for first kill that is going to hurt more than anything to guilds.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Alot of also is how contested mobs are. When racing to a mob you normally put best people out front which is what the guilds do. If raid leaders dont choose to mess around with other tanks on instance zones then I do not see how that is a game problem. By your comments jester you just make it sound like only guardians can tank and that is as untrue as can be.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Even in grouping enviroments ive seen bruisers avoid as much as i do. There is just alot of things i find untrue. If your opinion is all tanks should be exact same fine. I just dont see why fighter class should get the socialist treatment and not the other 3 because there revamp is not evening them out.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also I cant push this enough quit being under the false illusion these classes cant already tank. They just want to tank more which really is more a issue from there raid leaders than there abilities. Granted im not saying can tank all mobs in game but can sure tank plenty of them. Also could ever stop to think that perhaps the way they made raid content is the problem? No guardians asked for them to make mobs hit 5-6k from specials and so on. We didnt ask for them to make mobs stun so much. I do not see why if they wanted it different they didnt make mobs swing 4x as much but cut hits dmg into 3/4 cut stun time into 3/4 and voila all these jokesters could do probably all the raid mobs and the order of taken dmg would still be same. However soe makes it a class issue. I will not say guardians shouldnt have some things "fixxed" such as our hp line to stop stacking which would go for zerkers same. That is fine classes will find it equally hurts them as much because if a guardian isnt going to mt you still want them in your mt group and losing an extra 1k+ hp is a big hit. However. On avoidance i can see us being lowered some also. However it shouldnt be just us that gets smoothed out. They didnt mess up just on classes is the point but that is where they put the blame. You get even xp mobs that can pop you for 2-3k dmg from scout skills get wizard mobs that can pop you for like 5-7k the issue is more the mobs than the little treatment classes need. What do you expect from next expandion on mobs. Fools gonna be doing around 10k+ from specials that will be fun to watch on low mitigation classes. 1 shot wonders still? So unless i am misinformed and mobs being changed considerably this still isnt gonna help alot just gonna make classes feel they can tank more when really most likely gonna be exact same and others like brawlers are gonna lose there neat dps.</DIV><p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:03 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monks are the highest avoidance class period. Guardians can raise there high from defense buffs of all classes but so can every single other class. Self buffed my avoidance is still not as high as a monks.</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Listen:</P> <P>Monks and bruisers may be the highest unbuffed avoidance classes (against even con solo mobs) but we are 100% definately *not* the highest avoidance class period.</P> <P>I'll explain to you why:</P> <P>We get *one* skill that raises our defense, and that is spider stance, and it raises it by 15.  So I have the defense of a lvl 53 player.</P> <P>Defense in this game IS AVOIDANCE.  Shields ARE AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>So we have the guardian class who has the highest hp, and the equal to the best mitigation in the game.  They have buffs to raise their HP and to raise their mitigation.  THEY ALSO HAVE MORE BUFFS THAN ANY CLASS TO RAISE THEIR DEFENSE, thus raising their AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>They use the best shields in the game, also adding to... omg... THEIR AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>So what does this lead to?</P> <P>Guardians tanking the way monks/bruisers should: via avoidance.  In fact you guys are the best avoidance AND mit AND hp tanks in the game right now.  At the same time.</P> <P>You aren't tanking due to your HP, you aren't tanking due to your mitigation, you are tanking due to your avoidance (like a monk) and you are controlling your spikes better than us because of your HP and mitigation.</P> <P>So in actuality, in this broken combat system, you guys are the avoidance tanks, you guys are also the mitigation tanks, and you also are the HP tanks.</P> <P>If it weren't for the zerker class you'd have aggro rolled up too (and let me tell you, the broken reactives go a long way in making you guys uber aggro holders).</P> <P>So please do not go there with your weak arguement about us being the best avoiding class in the game, because at the moment we aren't, which is just one of the multitude of things that are broken.</P> <P>Thanks.<BR></P>

[Deadjest]

<P>I never said Brawlers could not tank, but the point is, there is no reason why any other tank should tank better for all occasions, there is no logic behind that based upon what we have here.  Other wise all we need is One Tank.   And others have been saying that Brawlers are a DPS Class instead of saying they are a DPS Tank, which is a Major Difference.</P> <P>Again it is logical to have situational Tanks when you have 6 different Types of Tanks.   Since Tanking does not stack and the DPS from a DPS Tank is not viable compared to a True DPS Class, the logical recourse is to once again, when you have 6 different types of tanks to have multipule situations were some tanks are better then other tanks depending on what is going on.</P> <P>Therefore Roles are now created, all tanks can now tank but some tanks are better at certain Tanking Roles then other Tanks and will be needed as the situation applies.  </P> <P>Next arugment will be, that in the revamp some tanks will now be able to add their buffs to other tanks but that still leaves out some tanks even after the revamp which means again you have to default to situational tanking.</P> <P>Now the arugment that people should just learn that some things are just better then other things and should just live with it and have fun.   That has the been the standard agrument from the have's to the have nots for a long time in our history and has not worked then and still does not work now.  That argument has no bases in logic.</P> <P>Also that argument is a double edge sword.   It was said that having situational tanking creates more problems with getting raids ready, etc, etc . . .  well the above argument can easily be applied to this situation to and you can basicly say, "Just get use to it and work around it."    Basicly, you wanted a challage and now you have one.</P> <P>Also the idea of one tank, tanking for a entire raid is as mental as you can get in RL or Fantasy and I suspect that gaming is going to get more complicated raid wise.   The idea of a lone soldier running around in Iraq with a Army of Medics behind him with a few USO Girls to cheer them on is mind boggling which is about what we have now.</P> <P>I am sorry, the bases for the idea of a Top Tank has no foundation in this system other then a personal view of "I Want to be Top Tank."  A Role by Class and not Merit.</P> <P>Next argument should be.   Well arnt you creating a role artaficaly for the other tanks.   The answer is Yes, you are.   But you are doing it in a manner that balances it with 6 tanks and since each will have a role built for it, its now even across the board.</P> <P>Also DPS tanks while in groups might have a advantage, it turns to a disadvantage in a raid,  where Tanking is the most important aspect and a DPS Tank becomes a weakness since his Tanking is weaker which cause more of a power drain over all on the healers and his minium DPS is now only 1/24 of the entire raid where his Tanking has a much larger effect at the end result.</P> <P>This may change in the future depending on what Sony has up its sleeves, I have been very good at seeing patterns and one is finely starting to emerg.  Sony has finely started to take a stance on a direction and I will be very intersted in the Revamp and it will not stop there, the Expansion will be the next telling blow for their system.   For I believe the Revamp is going to be in two parts with the Expansion being the second part with the Revamp setting up the stage for it.</P> <P>You have to understand, gamers are natural number crunchers.   Its just the way it is.   And the serious players are what takes the fun out of the game when it comes to "Just Play your Class and Have Fun"  do to the fact that they will constantly want get every edge they can that goes beyond the standard, lets have fun and it causes Class's to be left behind due to their cruching which is non fun related.   So the end result is you have to build a system that is anti to the number crunchers or build a system that only has 4 class.  That being One Tank, One Healer, One DPS, One Utility.</P> <P>So it comes down to, number crunchers vs a system with 24 class's and how to deal with that.</P>

[blueduckie]

<P>Here is where i think your argument is [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] Gaige. We dont tank raid mobs alone. We have 5 other people in our group to support our tanking. Our buffs are all group buffs. We have 1 mitigation and 1 stamina buff that is self only. </P> <P>Why cant another type set up a group of 5 people to tank...oh wait they can. Our shield is equivalent to the extra parry type skill brawlers get. Deflect or whatever it is. So dont whine about shields you get innate built in shields while using dps weapons. You seem to think guardians add avoidance to only themselves. We cant abuse defense on raid mobs ourself Gaige we have to put in bards warden etc just like any class would. A monk can abuse defense just as much. Monk Guardian Bard Warden Defiler or Mystic Templar. Again cry me a river gaige everything we do is group based even our mitigation buffs. Your avoidance is higher with same buffs which you can have you seem to neglect that issue.</P>

[ArcticZero]

<P>Wow I don't even know what to say to most of this. I have tried to hold back on the changes until they come out cause all of this fighting is just hot air till there is something that comes out for you to base you hate on. Now I do play a brusier and you know what I hate the fact they are taking my dps to make me "more" of a tank. I didn't sign up to be a meat puppet. I signed up to dodge hits and lay the smack down. </P> <P>I think there are utility issues that should be address and avoidance of plate tanks was the only concern I ever had with tanking. I have seen a zerker or even a guardian that can buff their avoidence rather high. I have seen self buffered zerkers with 60% avoidance and 70% mit. If they can avoid near as much as I can I want either the same level or mit. Well now that armor will play a roll in avoidence and having plate armor will ( and should) drop a classes avoidence( i hope by a lot) there is no reason for them to make me take hits better. </P> <P>I know my class and I know my roll. There are few things I have not been able to tank. I can't say that I was the best tank for the job all the time but I could do the job. In normal groups there is no reason to replace me on mobs that aren't conning well over myself. I think as a whole people are stupid. I do find it annoying to be told by group members that I am not a tank and to have to prove myself over and over to those to ignorant to learn what it is that each class can do. I never expected to be a raid tank and any brawler that did is either a liar or stupid. Just because someone can do a job doesn't mean they are the best at it. I think each class should have a role and no single class should be better in all aspects of the archtype then the rest, but I think there should be a few areas that each can excel. </P> <P>I'm not ready to set fire to soe but I have my concerns. </P>

[Smear]

<DIV>We get round shields built in, of who knows what quality.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You gets can wear Towers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Don't go singing praises of an ability you don't know anything about.</DIV>

[Athilna]

amazing how many ppl post on these threads who don't understand the basic premises put forward by SOE for eq2 class system all through alpha and beta. <i>All tanks are supposed to be able to tank equally effectively, if differently and with some pros and cons, in EQ2</i>.  In a group environment any one of the tank classes should be able to tank, and given a cometant set up/skill set, do it well.  By inference this applies to raids as well.  Right now Guardians are the best raid tanks full stop, have the weakest dps, and little utility and a fair chunk of that is due to a buff bug. Well its about to change. In my view Guardians should still be the best tank, with lowest dps and little utility other than the protection line, provided they are still generally the best tanks.  Problem - it means in a min max raid environment guardians are always the best tank unless SOE revisit the mix. My concern?  That SOEs solution to this 'problem' is likely to see guardians gutted as a class that is neither the best tank, but still has little dps and limited utility.  I sincerely hope SOE doesnt decide that the benefit they give to Guardians to compensate is a series of buffs we cast on others so they can tank, I need another class turned buff [Removed for Content] like a hole in my head 8p  Probably the best option I have seen is to enable a toggle ability that makes substantially improved dps at the cost of significant tanking ability.   <div></div>

[Yrield]

<span><blockquote><hr>blueduckie wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>Monks are the highest avoidance class period. Guardians can raise there high from defense buffs of all classes but so can every single other class. Self buffed my avoidance is still not as high as a monks.</div> <div> </div> <hr></blockquote> Hehe, that must be the funniest thing i've read today <span>:smileyvery-happy:</span> avoidance don't mean a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] in the current system ! See by yourself: Me solo VS a clay golem lvl45 in Cazic-Thule, slash 1hd+shield, auto-attack only, using heal we needed, no mitigation buff of any kind. Combat 1 without using  benediction (+11 defense) Mitigation: 52.9% avoidance: 63.9% Defense: 255 Damage inflicted: 14094 Damage Taken: 33041 25.7 DPS Combat 2 Using benediction Mitigation: 52.9% avoidance: 64.7% Defense: 266 Damage inflicted: 14104 Damage Taken: 3760 26.5 DPS Combat 3 Without benediction Mitigation: 52.9% avoidance: 63.9% Defense: 255 Damage inflicted: 14089 Damage Taken: 36063 25.0 DPS Combat 4 Using benediction Mitigation: 52.9% avoidance: 64.7% Defense: 266 Damage inflicted: 14078 Damage Taken: 9327 26.1 DPS Conclusion: Defense > avoidance Defense > ALL </span><div></div>

[blueduckie]

<DIV>Noah can get 100% avoidance way easier than I can, sir. (posted by gage in another thread)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is why i dislike these arguments gaige makes. He doesnt no what he is talking about. No class can boost teqnically easier than the other. It just takes buffs. Hit 290 defense and you hit 100% avoidance you will actually be over 100% avoidance</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardian Monk Warden Troubador Mystic Templar all walk into a bar.. err well they are grouped for raid. Max up defense buffs etc you have 100% avoidance on every single person in group wow. You scroll over avoidance window. Guardian is around 150ish i believe monk scrolls over window is around 180ish wow life is so unfair. No is just that you are misinformed on how things really are mr gaige.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardian avoidance is not the best. It can be great but brawlrers can be greater and our mitigation hp are the best (which should stay that way) Cut our avoidance some if got to but dont take more than that with out compensating with something.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If the monk deflect ability is like a round shield what is giving you 15-20% avoidance over guardians unbuffed. A guardian attaches a tower shield and gets 7.1% avoidance if unbuffed(cedar tower shield) It isnt agi because i inspect many monks and have more agi than them unbuffed and the own my avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is what leaves to the extreme of these changes and that is my whole complaint. Are many different and i would argue better changes to make at first and if more are needed take it step by step instead of such a big change that you better know is not gonna be smooth on release will be very buggy always happens.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now i dont like people who argue that this blows with out a reccomendation of changes so i will list some.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If guardians are so over powered because of our defensive buff. Cut call of protection in half and give every good class a counter part to this that doesnt stack which would lower total defense everyone has but make defense buffing balanced. If paladin guardian monk all have a +7-8 defense. If they like defense numbers add 7-8 defense on stance that stacks. The only difference then becomes guardian group hp buff. Change defense on it to 300ish physical mitigation on return and braksans around 275 with an extra 150 to crushing and make the hp line not stack. Give bruisers sk and zerkers +8 to all offensive skills instead of defense but have defense on there stance. It allows them to be more offensive which typically is the trend to evil side classes and i feel should stay that way.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Really the whole argument comes down to defense buffing just cap it or lower how much buffs do like power regen items where lowered "fix/nerf buffs" whatever and call it a day. Classes tank fine tho IMO just shift some defense to mitigation and it will be fine no need to cripple a class to please monks who dont even know how avoidance actually works...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I truely 100% make a challenge to every guild that can kill any mob. Take a well geared monk dont take one that isnt near the gear quality of a guardian it takes to tank the mobs. Try them out on mob by mob. working there way up from easy ones to harder ones so healers are in terned of what it takes to heal em etc. Work up to drakathor or the new contested mobs and post the results especailyl the parse. If like tunabash and parse fights can compare it to your own tanking. I think would be healthy testing for argument sake and doesnt really cost you much to try. Can do it for every single fighter just make sure gear is good and set up in best possible mt groups like guardians get. These changes come from untested results just from complaints so until tested i feel gaige arguments are weak. You kept up on zalak with 80% avoidance and 6800hp not sure how long buffs had been down but you finished it that way and a guardian tanked drakathor when buff change hit pretimed and was around 8-9k hp which a monk can buff up to. Unless noah is needed if you do test it gaige. Switch in a guardian who has braksans selected.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so that is my challenge to guilds who have ability to test this would be nice to see actual results before they change stuff and people will never get to see just how much seperation between classes there really are.</DIV>

[blueduckie]

<P>You are parsing a lvl 45 mob. Your avoidance is based on a lvl 50 mob unless you are lvl 45 but i think you are lvl 50. Of course defense matters it is what trivializes mobs but when it comes to a even con mob those avoidance numbers do matter. Parse a lvl 50 mob and you will see the small difference in dmg until your defense is so high it is bumping it down to being 6+ lvls lower than you.</P> <P>If that was meant to prove anything that was dumb because it only shows you can compare mobs that are low. </P> <DIV>"Conclusion:<BR>Defense > avoidance<BR>Defense > ALL"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Defense is avoidance it isnt greater than it that is what it is. Again [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] are you trying to prove? We already established months and months ago that defense is king the point is guardian buffs are group based we could be easily put in a group as a support class like a bard in current set up and alot have posted already that they do this with a zerker MTing. Also Monks do avoid more unless you are trying to compare a monk with 20-25 less defense because of group set up than a guardian than sure you have a valid point then but only then. But monks can be set up in mt groups guardians use also. Just replace conj or zerker with the monk.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I wont say guardians defense buffs shouldnt be lowered or spread out a little. What they should do is spread out a little and have guardian mitigation seperate the difference. We dont need higher defense than the others but others can currently match our defense on raids but we are walking around in vanguard and a barn door our mitigation should be considerably higher than a monk in leather and no shield but shouldnt be mmuch more than zerker / crusader if any at all which would make gear base mitigation on vnaguard classes. Warrior/Crusader avoidance should be same. It should be our hp that seperates us the most from them but doesnt have to be killer difference but a difference no matter how little it is would be nice seperating factor for having lowest dps. Such as using a bow over crusaders and stamina adding a little higher than they get would make sense considering they get spells to heal ward lifetap etc. Zerkers should get this as well but guardian should be a small fraction higher. Saying if each was in same group same buffs both had 400stamina guardian would have about 200more hp than the zerker. That isnt over powering especialyl since zerkers are gonna need to tank to run up there dps if changed like that which is fine because gives them incentive to be used as a tank and incentive never hurts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also quit using individual set ups for your basis then try to use it in reference of raid mobs. Guardians arnt soloing x4 raid mobs or not using others buffs. Some of you must be delusional thinking that tho. Also again we dont use self buffs we use group buffs for our defense boosting.</DIV><p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:30 AM</span>

[Yrield]

You dont get it.... defense is broken... the main reason of the combat revamp is... defense If you fix defense, you have to rework the whole combat mecanic, you can't hotfix defense. Check the parse again, in 2 combats with 266 defense (+0.8% avoidance) i get hit for 13 087 in 2 combats with 255 defense (-0.8% avoidance) i get hit for  69 104 Seem logic to you that i can avoid 56017 dmg with +0.8% avoidance ? (528% less damage taken) 255 def = lvl51, lvl51 vs lvl45 = mob is  green 266 def = lvl53.2, lvl53.2 vs lvl45 = mob is GRAY <div></div>

[blueduckie]

<P>With how the game is set up yes that does make sense. Should a mob 5 lvls lower hit the same as a mob 10 lvls lower? What should the difference be there are only 3 ways to have it. 1 you get hit the same but hope you have extra mitigation so it doesnt hit just as hard. 2 you avoid it like it is now. 3 you get hit the same and hp is entire difference of the game. 1 or 3 is the case is fine but will make soloing harder. You tell a mage to go solo a mob 10 lvls lower than him for a quest now and he can hang. You tell him in situation 1 or 3 and they are douched.</P> <P>If defense is the problem why cant they just cap it? If defense is the problem why have they started with split paw the trend to add defense to items? If defense is the problem why does everything need a change? If 1 thing is the problem you dont have to change everything. SOE disagrees with you on defense being the problem mr pally they are pinning the blame on guardians being over powered so nerfing us. When he clearly points out guardians in all his examples it is called a class nerf.</P> <p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:01 AM</span>

[Yrield]

Why they add item with +def in splitpaw ? because defense still exist after the revamp They don't nerf guardian... they change the way defense WORK....and fix your bugged buffs <span>:smileywink: So defense won't trivialise encounter anymore... </span><div></div>

[blueduckie]

<P>Let me add i dont mind anyone who disagrees with me mr pally everyone is welcome to there opinion and i enjoy posting mine on this issue and enjoy reading others. I have my opinions on it and from what i previously thought before this moorgard past was all positive now it isnt so positive for me. The things i imagined it being would be great and no i wasnt picturing guardians being gods. I was picturing a balacne of what was over powering things but no actual rerolling of charachters. Doing a 360 turn on classes and trying to end the diversity.</P> <P>However i dont see what your parse proves. If you where lvl 52 the dmg would be same way. That is all defense does is raise your avoidance quuality lvl with 6+ lvls above making huge avoidance yes i agree it is a problem. I have posted that before when i Duo'd coldtooth with a troubador at lvl 44 ended up around 50% health and i am not even a +5 defense race, i play a dark elf probably the worst bonus to tanking race. Also i had the troubador pull aggro during fight so i could dps more =D he took almost no dmg also. I agree that is a problem the trivialization mark should be big but not that big. That is what is hard about having 24 player raids tho and start off with the player and mob dps they started off with.</P> <P>Post more tho pls mr pally. If it is a problem how should it be fixxed since they cant just fix defense like you said. Do you agree with moorguard post? The fix is to nerf guardians and defense? Dont see what we have over anyone except our defense buffs, which are group buffs, if are "being fixxed" then what do we have. We already know buffing is being revamped so why do they need to change us more? Also i dont see predators and rogues whining about not being able to boost defense. Troubador can stack up defense and go untouched on heroics when other scouts cant. It is the same thing. The reason they dont whine is they do more dps than bards.</P> <p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:30 AM</span>

[Gaige]

Our "innate shield" is equivalent to a round shield, not a tower shield.

[Noah]

<DIV>No one really knows what the changes will be like.  When they do hit the Test Server, they (devs) have stated it will be a LONG beta period to make sure everything is working right.  In the end, a large portion of how good a person tanks does fall on the person behind the keyboard.  Taunt cycling, knowing when to rebuff, and the little tricks up your sleeve can make a large difference between two equally equipt/CA tanks.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Personally, as I have mentioned in the past, I would like to see Mitigation increased (via buffs - self and group) on Guardians but in turn avoidance decreased.  Focusing the Guardian to literally become a block of steel allowing him to truly take a beating and see hps decrease at a steady pace vs spike.  His cousin class, the monk, would show more spike damage... avoiding hits but when finally caught off guard - taking it hard on the chin.  Zerkers, with extra dps buffs (IE - procs, increased melee skill, haste) falling a bit towards the Guardian side but w/o some of the personal mitigation buffs... and bruisers with the same relation to monks.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Right now we get 2 personal buffs that in affect increase Defense (avoidance) and hps.  Making a switch from Defense increase to personal Mitigation increase would be a step in the right direction for us Guardians.  Giving the FIGHTER classes "personal" buffs that round out what the end class is suppose to be about could create the "variety" we are looking for.   Limit the amount of group buffs that occur allowing the gap between characters to be seen in the Fighter ranks.  Right now you can practically interchange Guardian and Zerker... dps and tanking... provided they are sharing the same buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know almost every person that selected "Guardian" at lvl 20 wants to tank.. and tank well.  Some even built their character with the notion of being a main tank on raids (I know I did).  I'm sure SoE/Devs know this and would not make that "dream" unable to happen with changing the class into some buff providing offtank w/ just utility.  The changes will come, and we will adjust for optimizing...and still come out as the choice for MTanking in the end (just IMO... im sure people will love/hate that statement).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Much love,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Nibbl]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TunaBoo wrote:<BR>I don't think monks ever tanked for crap in 5 years of EQ1... nor do I think they ever will in eq2.. so not worried.<BR> <BR> <HR> <FONT size=2></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Not true, monks in EQ I were some of the best tanks in the game for a long time because of their exceptional avoidance.... but the nerf came (around 2001/2002 timeframe), which made them slightly less capable at tanking then other fighter types, but it was a huge nerf from their perspective.</P> <P> </P> <P>Anyhow… Edit: (Rest of this directed at other posts, not yours TunaBoo)</P> <P>Brawlers, Crusaders, Warriors all = fighter, not tank. When I hear tank I think of a class that can stand toe to toe with a mob and absorb damage. Somehow Brawlers don’t fit in that category, they must avoid not absorb.</P> <P>Most fighters do an equal job on a very large percentage of the game content while in small groups of 3-6 (solo varies). IMHO a guardian is the worst fighter for small groups.  When I play my healer I would rather have a dps or utility based fighter so the mobs drop faster. A majority of these threads only look at one aspect of the game, raids. Raids make up what percentage of the content? Maybe 1%, from reading the forums people make it seem raids are 100% of the game content and the combat revamp should revolve around that aspect exclusively.  So guardians excel at raid mobs, so what!  The other fighter classes excel at small group encounters, which as I stated is majority of the game content.  I can not believe SoE is making these drastic changes just for raid content, shame on them!</P> <P>I do agree the current system has problems, but SoEs vision seems to blur the differences between fighters.  Then again its SoEs game they can redefine class roles if they want, however it would probably upset the customer base significantly if they did. Guardians should be the best defensive fighter through mitigation as well as aggro control with their taunts, the other subclasses should still have the extra utility functions which defines and separates them. Is one better then the other? Depends on personnel preference.  I choose a guardian for tanking and aggro control, I then rolled another fighter for dps and healing, a pally.  I dont want them EQUAL in tanking ability, because I know the utility functions will eventually get nerfed as a result.</P> <P>Also this mystical 200+ dps guardians supposedly have is a prime example of misinformation. MAYBE at level 50, with fabled procing weapons, imbued gear, speed buffs, and other associated raid buffs and no taunting, guardians might get to that number, MAYBE. The casual player who taunts and plays in small groups will be lucky to hit 75 dps, maybe 100 without taunting. Best I have done at level 46 is 72 dps, and hit that only once with no taunts and using HOs, usually I’m around 65. (BTW I have procing imbued weps and gear). Some people will try to say 200 dps is the norm, when its more like exceedingly rare or NEVER. Then again those people don’t play a guardian and should be ignored.</P> <P> </P> <P>Guardian 46<BR>Warden 46<BR>Necromancer 36<BR>Inquisitor 34<BR>Ranger 29<BR>Crusader 18<BR>Enchanter 18</P></DIV><p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>07-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:47 PM</span>

[Uumuuanu]

<DIV>Well this comes as a final blow in hanging up my guardian.  Honesly, it comes back to a question that people have posed MANY times in the past, why have 24 classes of character when in reality you only need 4.   If you can't have the diversity which was there with different tanks, Just make a TANK class and get rid of the 6 other wanna be tank classes that have been nerfed or buffed in different ways.  The same honestly  goes for every other archetype, why have 6 different healers, have one HEALER class.  As someone pointed out, templars and warlocks be wary, your next if its not already scheduled.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No offense against the other tanking subs but is this really necessary and WHY do you think it is.  Because you wanted to run around like a Bruce Lee wanna be in silk jammies and think you could take a mob hitting you with a sword??  Or because you wanted to have lots of voodoo or faith and that should make you better?  I for one just dont get it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Honestly I think I will be hanging up the shield (can we put it on our apartment walls as 'ancient tanking technology quested item') and going into the tradeskill zones to do armoring and make my money.   PLEASE don't nerf guardian HPs or well, I won't be able to do that either since you said you reduced the damage taken in TS and I still take the same amount. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Honestly I just don't get why this is necessary since we have been nerfed several times before and I still know monks that can be buffed to 100% avoidance after that was supposedly going to be fixed (I can go to 96% so I KNOW its possible to get to 100%). </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardians were NEVER anything special over the other classes, we never had evac (SK), we never had heals (paladin and monk self), we never has DPS (zerkers, monks),  we never had anything special other then taunts which alot of them don't even effect RAID mobs which we are supposed to be tanking.  (And don't any single one of you dare say oh but you had the intervene line, because I don't know anyone that uses that on a regular basis or for that matter at all.  )  So honesly what is there to take away from us?  Nerf our mitigation?  Uh, no because zerkers wear the same armor and get DPS.  Nerf our DPS, rofl what DPS?.  Nerf our HPs, sure nothing wrong with a cleric with more HP then a tank right?  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Anyway, before I get myself one starred to death,  thanks guys,  I needed a good reason to go play my alts, no I have one.  I think I am going to make a provisioner and not even choose to be an adventurer, since well, unless you put /mcdonalds in the game,  you cant really nerf the ability for food that much without leaving all reality behind.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[BlueScot]

<P>Apoq,  all I can say is CAN I GET AN AMEN BROTHER.   Swing and strike 3 for guardians.  Up next to bat, Templar and to finish the round Warlock.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Raahl]

<P>Don't totally give up yet.  We have yet to see what all the changes are.  Though I am very concerned about the upcoming changes.    </P> <P>If only we could get some clarifications from Moorgard.</P>

[MastikFantastik]

<P>I keep reading the same things over and over here, and in almost any thread that concerns comparing class to class.</P> <P>Most people forget that it's like comparing apples to oranges.  Yes they are both fruit and both roughly spherical in shape. But there is a lot of diffeerence there too, the thickness of the peel. </P> <P>I for one am getting tired of the debats that circular in nature on this board as well as others.  Can we all just have a proper discussion about what is going to happen or is wrong currently with out it devolving into a circular argument?</P> <P>As for the avoidance issue with guardians.  I had a friend of mine over and he plays a monk and looked at my avoidance and said man that's too high.  I agreed to some extent with his statement.  Guardians avoidance is anumber of things not pure avoidance.  We then talked about it to some length and came up with an interesting idea.  Splitting up the avoidance category into sub categories where you can see what is actually taking place.</P> <P>Something like.</P> <P>Avoidance --->Pure Avoidance (dodging)</P> <P>                --->Blocking (when using a sheild ONLY)</P> <P>                 --->Parrying</P> <P>As the conversation progressed we came up with some test numbers.  Not that they would /should be implemented just I know that I for one like to deal with a number not just theory.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Guardian</FONT>             <FONT color=#0033ff>Monk</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0033>PA = 20%</FONT>           <FONT color=#0000ff>PA = 60%</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0033>B  = 25%</FONT>            <FONT color=#0000ff>B = 0%</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0033>P = 10%</FONT>             <FONT color=#0000ff>P = 15%</FONT></P> <P>in this idea you see both unbuffed the guardian avoides <FONT color=#ff0033>55%</FONT> and the monk <FONT color=#0000ff>75%</FONT> and as you can see the guardian isn't dodging like a monk but still avoiding alot.   Just an idea really.  Anyway can we stop the circular debates and try to make some progress in giving the devs ideas on how we would go about fixing any problems.</P> <P>Also I would like to say that no matter what we say here or anywhere else it all comes down to the developers and what they have planned or want to do.  Sometimes changes are simple but other times they are horendous , from a code stand point.</P>

[chumm]

<DIV>Guardians are not broken and dont need any fixes under the combat revamp. Our defense is high, dps is low, buffs for solo and group are good, and we have no utility at all. These traits make us desirable in groups for the job of tanking (a funny term since a tank is an offensive weapon). We don't have any significant advantages in solo play either as our DPS is so low it takes many minutes to knock down mobs once our power is gone. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If Monks, Pal's, Sk's are having issues change them, not the Guardian. Why swing the bat at Guardians because of issues with the other classes? If these classes aren't desirable in group situations change them. Leave the Guardians alone. </DIV>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MastikFantastik wrote:<BR> <P>I keep reading the same things over and over here, and in almost any thread that concerns comparing class to class.</P> <P>Most people forget that it's like comparing apples to oranges.  Yes they are both fruit and both roughly spherical in shape. But there is a lot of diffeerence there too, the thickness of the peel. </P> <P>I for one am getting tired of the debats that circular in nature on this board as well as others.  Can we all just have a proper discussion about what is going to happen or is wrong currently with out it devolving into a circular argument?</P> <P>As for the avoidance issue with guardians.  I had a friend of mine over and he plays a monk and looked at my avoidance and said man that's too high.  I agreed to some extent with his statement.  Guardians avoidance is anumber of things not pure avoidance.  We then talked about it to some length and came up with an interesting idea.  Splitting up the avoidance category into sub categories where you can see what is actually taking place.</P> <P>Something like.</P> <P>Avoidance --->Pure Avoidance (dodging)</P> <P>                --->Blocking (when using a sheild ONLY)</P> <P>                 --->Parrying</P> <P>As the conversation progressed we came up with some test numbers.  Not that they would /should be implemented just I know that I for one like to deal with a number not just theory.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Guardian</FONT>             <FONT color=#0033ff>Monk</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0033>PA = 20%</FONT>           <FONT color=#0000ff>PA = 60%</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0033>B  = 25%</FONT>            <FONT color=#0000ff>B = 0%</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0033>P = 10%</FONT>             <FONT color=#0000ff>P = 15%</FONT></P> <P>in this idea you see both unbuffed the guardian avoides <FONT color=#ff0033>55%</FONT> and the monk <FONT color=#0000ff>75%</FONT> and as you can see the guardian isn't dodging like a monk but still avoiding alot.   Just an idea really.  Anyway can we stop the circular debates and try to make some progress in giving the devs ideas on how we would go about fixing any problems.</P> <P>Also I would like to say that no matter what we say here or anywhere else it all comes down to the developers and what they have planned or want to do.  Sometimes changes are simple but other times they are horendous , from a code stand point.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Now that's a great idea!  5 stars!  *****</P>

[Uumuuanu]

<P>You know, the more I read this forum the more annoyed I get at the entire fighter thing.  Honestly Sony designed it wrong from the very beginning,  talking DAY 0.   They decided they needed to have 6 subclasses for whatever reason, which was the first mistake honestly, but hey variety is the spice that keeps us all paying our monthly money.</P> <P>I see a bunch of pajama wearing monks complaining they cant tank.   So I look up the definition of tank, I don't see anything about silk jammies and bouncing around like Bruce Lee trying to mate with Jackie Chan, I see heavy plate armor with massive damage absorbing ability, keyword ABSORBING.   But then I look at the game and I see the true fundemental issue that was wrong to begin with,  all of the so called 'tank' classes have avoidance and can be buffed to basically 100% avoidance or there abouts (I think I lost a whopping 2% last I checked because someone didnt have an adept3 in the group).</P> <P>And I think,  a 'tank' is a vague word that is honestly causing the problem.  A 'fighter' of which all of the 'tanks' are a part of is about just that, FIGHTING.  We can't do hocus pocus, we can't heal, we well, we FIGHT.  Which shows several issues with the central game design,  scouts are fighting, it might be a knife fight instead of a fist fight, but its fighting.   Monks, well, yes in theory are great FIGHTERS (I got so [Removed for Content] off after reading this and my last post, I went to watch TV and it happened that Bulletproof Monk was on, oh the irony).  But if you notice, they never seem to get hit.  You watch TV, Movies, for that matter the ancient combat arts that came out of China, Tibet, and many other places, you see that thier entire thing is harmony, being one with the universe, seeing the punch thrown and AVOIDING it.  Thus, I believe that everyone would agree that monks/bruisers (not sure who came up with the good/bad of these two but whatever) are the AVOIDANCE fighters, NOT TANKS.</P> <P>Then you come to the opposite side of the universe and you find the 'TANKS' of the world.  Slow moving, massive, heavily armored hulking beasts capable of taking unrivaled damage and continuing on the fight.  I point this out in the military (Guardians = M1A1 times Infinity), the low budget TV shows where you find the huge hulking beast that people break 2x4s across thier chests and they keep coming after you, you find it well everywhere including the silver screen  (Fantastic 4,  Ben Grim aka The Thing was a TANK).   What is thier thing?  Well honesly they are impervious to physical damage.  They are a TANK.</P> <P>Then you have those poor things from the middle ages known as knights (no offense guys, but they were kinda sad honestly).   They wore plate armor, rode ponies,  attacked each other with pokers and swords and well, probably even threw dirt clods at each other if they thought it would help, but in the end, they came home with honor, whether good or bad (aka paladin or shadowknight).  This honor can loosely be translated into the different magics between shadow knights and paladins,  btw is a dirt clod kinda like a harm touch?</P> <P> </P> <P>Anyway, thus I have outline the true problem with the game design.    If you really want to fix the guardians, give us a MASSIVE amount (I mean in excess of 2x what any other has) of HPs.  Give us 10-15k unbuffed.  Give us armor that couldn't be penetrated by a cruise missle.  I know, I see the screaming of the other classes that this guardian has gone mad, but no I haven't.   For that matter make us nearly impervious to physical damage (I mean honestly you can't slash through plate armor even with a Ginsu or shoot through it with the best of arrows).   Perhaps give us 5-10x the mitigation against all damage types other then crushing.  Why you ask?  Simple, because we shouldn't be able to dance around like the pajama boys or the gymnastics scout masters.  We should stand there right in front of our group and take it like a man, and be designed to take it like a man (no offense lady guardians).   We are GUARDIANS, IE everyone stands behind us and knows that the mob is going to have to kill that giant beef steak tank before he can get to them.   That is a TANKING fighters.</P> <P>Berserkers, well, you are the crazy, kami-kaze guys that go insane and do wild amounts of damage for a short time when you get hurt, but while you are doing that, you have no clue about defense cause you aren't paying attention.  You might wear heavy armor, but it wont save you from getting splattered like a grape cause you were too insane to watch out for that giant hammer that just swatted you like a golf club swung by Tiger Woods.  You can tank but only because you hurt the mob SO MUCH during that short period of time that all it can do is defend itself, the second you stop that wild attacking, he smacks you like yesterdays newspaper to a fly.  You are effective the yang to the guardians yin.  You are the offensive where they are the defensive.</P> <P>You want to fix the monks, give them what they want.  Make them DAMNED hard to hit, maybe even 100% avoidance.  Fine.  You can't poke them, you cant shoot them (think matrix guys).  But hey,  they are fragile little things.  The first AE that hits them (since magic cannot be avoided only resisted) fries them into a quivering pile of goo because they dont have 8K HPs (sorry man), but that 8 armed crazy guy with 4 swords in each hand can't hit them cause they dance in a food processor for training.  You are the AVOIDANCE fighters.</P> <P> </P> <P>You want to make sure the knights are left out, no problem.  Leave them just as they are.  The pony riding calvery with all the hocus pocus they have, leave them in thier plate armor.  Leave them thier 40 speed horses.  Leave them with the over grown shield that makes them akward but saves thier butts.  Hey maybe even upgrade them from dirt clods (divine damage and HT) to rocks (some nasty divine damage and a really big HT).  Make it easier to tank on thier horses (hmm, idea, don't reduce thier speed on thier horse when in combat).  They are knights after all, with all thier honor (hocus pocus).   </P> <P>Who knows, maybe even make it easier for them to save the girl in the end as they pat the guardian on the back who just sat there and played with the dragon for an hour and didnt get hurt and all three classes walk away happily as the monk jokes,  "did you see those guys, they couldnt hit crap".</P> <P> </P> <P>But in the end,  this patch and probably every one of them after and before is simply trying to fix a fundemental problem in the design of the game, you cannot have 6 TANKING classes, you have 6 FIGHTING classes that need to be made the best at thier thing.</P> <P>If you take away avoidance and DPS from the guardians, put it back with mitigation and HPs.  If you take away mitigation from the monks, put it back with avoidance.  If you take away the pony and the lance away from the knight, put it back with a bigger harder dirt clod.</P> <P>Now, since I don't really care as I have retired officially from tanking (yes, I went on RAIDS over the weekend, but I turned down tanking to someone else),  go ahead and mess with guardians, and monks, and the knights,  I am going back to the forge and making the armor in which you will all still die in since the game is fundamentally bugged by design.  </P> <P> </P> <P>Go ahead and take YEARS if not forever to realize that there should not be 6 TANKING classes, but 6 unique varieties of FIGHTING.   I am aware that every other archetype has this problem as well, its a design issue that may never be resolved, I long ago accepted that.</P> <P> </P> <P>Here is the first thing that might HELP you in figuring out how to fix the entire problem.  Make sure you read the last one even if you skip the first three.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P>Tank per dictionary.com = An enclosed, heavily armored combat vehicle (aka massive damage absorbing)</P> <P>Monk per dictionary.com = devoted to a discipline (aka can't touch this cause I am to focused)</P> <P>Knight per dictionary.com = zealous upholder of a cause or principle (aka honor aka lots of cool hocus pocus aka nice dirt clods)</P> <P> </P> <P>FIGHTER per dictionary.com =  One who fights,  A pugnacious, unyielding, or determined person.  AKA 6 unique styles of combat for people that want to enjoy the game in different ways without all being a bunch of copy cat drones or being seen as unfair.</P> <P> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Uumuuanu on <span class=date_text>07-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:14 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<P>LOL!  I like your thinking Apoq.  :smileywink:  Though just a little overboard, but I like.</P> <P>Prepare to be flamed and have your IQ/sanity questioned.</P> <P> </P>

[Uumuuanu]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>LOL!  I like your thinking Apoq.  :smileywink:  Though just a little overboard, but I like.</P> <P>Prepare to be flamed and have your IQ/sanity questioned.</P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>My IQ is fine.   My sanity on the other hand has been nerfed beyond belief.  I fully expect to be thought of as insane, a fanatic or for that matter just one starrred to death (thanks for the counter measures whoever did that), but my point still stands that EVERY archetype is having these same issues and the only way to fix all of it is to do massive revamps that may not even be possible (can we say EQ3), so in the mean time,  I go back to my forge, lay down my shield, pray to the non-existant gods for enough HPs to survive the next failed counter, and think of my brethren who die every day due to failed design and bugs.  </P> <P>But hey, thats great cause alot of raid tanks want 2 sets of armor now~~  Cha CHING.  (Hmm, should they need it?)</P><p>Message Edited by Uumuuanu on <span class=date_text>07-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:47 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<P>I go and post in the character forum that I'm looking for info on the tanking rankings (similar to the DPS one) for the upcoming combat changes and almost immediatly get one starred.   And someone rants that it is only going to become a flame thread.  Sigh.</P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=30376" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=30376</A></P> <P> </P>

[Deadjest]

<P>Think I am going to save that one long [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] post and wait for a real nasty mob and give it to him to read, and as it sits there confused and scratching its head, I will slay it.</P> <P>Sad part is I may get some nasty  tells from Enc's as they want to know what I used to mezz it like that.</P>

[Vulking]

<P>All i can say is when these changes move forward and they give us the option to <FONT color=#ff0000><STRONG>/respec</STRONG></FONT>, <STRIKE>can i have the abil</STRIKE> <EM>scratch that</EM></P> <P> <FONT size=4>can I please have the option to <STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000>/re-class</FONT></STRONG></FONT></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Hammarus on <span class=date_text>07-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:27 PM</span>

[Nibbl]

<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2><FONT size=2> <P>First off, <FONT color=#ff0000>GREAT POST Uumuuanu, </FONT></FONT></FONT></FONT>I think you summed up class roles well.  Hmm, sounds like what SoE published about the classess in the Prima Guide.  Hope they stick to that mentality and goal during the revamp.<FONT size=2><FONT size=2><FONT size=2></P> <P>Don’t get discouraged yet <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P></FONT></FONT> <P>One thing I have wondered is how SoE will tie defense into the revamp, will it apply to mitigation or avoidance? Maybe defense will modify mitigation on heavy armor classes and avoidance for light armor classes? Will the guardian buffs raise mitigation after the revamp? Shouldn’t avoidance be based on agility stats?</P> <P>Anyway, I have a recommendation that I think will make EQ II better, which is slightly different spin then what I have seen on other threads.</P> <P>Here it goes...</P> <P>One thing I would definitely like to see is a "temporary copy" of characters over to test while the combat revamp code is being evaluated. I know people on test oppose copying characters, but I think its essential for something of this magnitude. Eventually this code will hit the live servers and everyone, not just the test community players, will have to deal with it. It is to everyone’s advantage to test it thoroughly prior to the revamp hitting live servers.</P> <P>Beta testing obviously failed to release a good combat system, so the beta testers and SoE messed this one up. Do you want a limited amount of testers determining the current and future fate of the game you play on? I don’t. If the only way I can help on test server is to create toons and level them from 1 to 50 then SoE obviously wants limited input and testing help.  I already playalot on the live servers, I just dont have the time to level all new characters on test, sorry.  <FONT size=2>I play EQ II mostly with RL friends, so moving to test permanently is not an option for me.</P></FONT> <P>Many bugs make it past the test servers onto live for various reasons. They are either missed by testers or SoE decided to release known problems and fix the code later.</P><FONT size=2> <P>Obviously the l</FONT>ive servers have a vested interest in the combat revamp, they should have ample opportunity to test without spending months leveling toons on a server community they have no intention on staying on.</P> <P>They already copy characters over on a case by case basis to test, SoEs policy is obviously not set in stone. </P> <P>Test community players state copying toons can exploit the system. This is an invalid argument.  The test community can create characters on live servers and exploit anything they find on test, just as people on live can create toons on test, find bugs and exploit them on live.</P> <P>More people testing means more bugs found and more input for the combat system. Its SoEs game but we are the CUSTOMER, without us there is no EQ II. If ANY majors issues exist when the combat revamp hits it will be like the Titanic, and I don’t want to be on that ride <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>... and look at how EQ I tests, they should be the standard. Not sure why SoE decided to recreate the wheel for EQ II testing.</P> <P>Wouldn’t you like to play your current toon on test, review the spell/skill changes and combat revamp, then provide feedback prior to it hitting live?  Wouldnt that make the game better for all?</FONT></P></DIV><p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>07-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:02 PM</span>

[Aven Elonis]

<P>Reading all this stuff, something occurred to me (ok, maybe a few things) <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>1. World of difference between tanking while leveling (solo, small groups, few raids) as compared tanking while at 50 (mostly 4x raids)</P> <P>2. In the end, everyone either gets to 50, drops, or starts at alt. For those at 50, the world becomes smaller and raids become interesting. (I raid 1 to 2 week, which works for me.)</P> <P>3. In raids, which I suggest is the primary content at this time for level 50s - the distribution of a raid group doesn't follow the 25% of each of the 4 main classes. In a 24 person groups, more then 4 fighers is pushing it, generally what/need 6 to 10 healers, balance DPS. I'm guessing the percentage of fighters in games is 25% or higher, but that percentage is certainly higher than the desired % of fighter types on a 4x Raid. I see this as a fundmental problem, which I doubt any combat fix is going to create.</P> <P>4. Seems to me that if is balanced the high end (which I think is the harder piece to do) then if should be easier to fix the low end of it.</P> <P>Of course all of the above is strictly my random thoughts. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>Aven Elonis, 50 Guardian, Tempest (Steamfont)</P> <P> </P>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Deadjester wrote:<BR> <P>Think I am going to save that one long [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] post and wait for a real nasty mob and give it to him to read, and as it sits there confused and scratching its head, I will slay it.</P> <P>Sad part is I may get some nasty  tells from Enc's as they want to know what I used to mezz it like that.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Now that was funny.  :smileytongue:

[Uumuuanu]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Deadjester wrote:<BR> <P>Think I am going to save that one long [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] post and wait for a real nasty mob and give it to him to read, and as it sits there confused and scratching its head, I will slay it.</P> <P>Sad part is I may get some nasty  tells from Enc's as they want to know what I used to mezz it like that.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>knowing my luck thats exactly whats going to happen to the people at sony, they will be left dazed and confused by it and it will be completely forgotten, but hey, at least then enchanters will have a new skill,  Apoq's mezzmerization~~

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> chummer wrote:<BR> <DIV>Guardians are not broken and dont need any fixes under the combat revamp. Our defense is high, dps is low, buffs for solo and group are good, and we have no utility at all. These traits make us desirable in groups for the job of tanking (a funny term since a tank is an offensive weapon). We don't have any significant advantages in solo play either as our DPS is so low it takes many minutes to knock down mobs once our power is gone. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If Monks, Pal's, Sk's are having issues change them, not the Guardian. Why swing the bat at Guardians because of issues with the other classes? If these classes aren't desirable in group situations change them. Leave the Guardians alone. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA...</P> <P>*takes breath*</P> <P>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!</P> <P>You're playing EQ2, right?</P> <P>So you think guardians getting 100% avoidance while having the most HP and tied for best mitigation, is intended?</P> <P>You think trivializing encounters and becoming unhittable, is SOE design?</P> <P>I think you forgot your /sarcasm tag.<BR></P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> chummer wrote:<BR> <DIV>Guardians are not broken and dont need any fixes under the combat revamp. Our defense is high, dps is low, buffs for solo and group are good, and we have no utility at all. These traits make us desirable in groups for the job of tanking (a funny term since a tank is an offensive weapon). We don't have any significant advantages in solo play either as our DPS is so low it takes many minutes to knock down mobs once our power is gone. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If Monks, Pal's, Sk's are having issues change them, not the Guardian. Why swing the bat at Guardians because of issues with the other classes? If these classes aren't desirable in group situations change them. Leave the Guardians alone. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA...</P> <P>*takes breath*</P> <P>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!</P> <P>You're playing EQ2, right?</P> <P>So you think guardians getting 100% avoidance while having the most HP and tied for best mitigation, is intended?</P> <P>You think trivializing encounters and becoming unhittable, is SOE design?</P> <P>I think you forgot your /sarcasm tag.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>One more time for the fuggin [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]....</P> <P> </P> <P>ITS NOT JUST GUARDIANS THAT CAN REACH 100% AVOIDANCE AND BECOME UNHITTABLE.  IT IS ANY CHARACTER THAT STACKS DEFENSIVE BUFFS ON THEMSELVES,  INCLUDING [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] MONKS.   THIS MEANS IT IS NOT GUARDIANS THAT ARE BROKEN, BUT BUFF STACKING THAT IS BROKEN.  </P> <P> </P> <P>Thanks</P>

[Malaka]

<P>Rather than looking at changing a class that the players seem to be happy with SOE should look at the other classes and ask what is needed to make them more desirable.  May people who chose to be a guardian did so with the expectation that they would be the best tanking class in the game I know I did, yes the other fighters would be able to tank but they would bring other skills and abilities that would be more fun that standing there and taking the hits.  Like many other guardians we did not expect that as a guardian we would have the exclusive roll of tanking big named mobs, in fact I expected that some encounters would better suit other fighter classes and these classes would bring other skills to a riad that I as a guardian did not have... Having said that as a guaridan I thought I would be first pick for the main mobs, I have sacrifised the diverse abilities and flavour that other fighter classes have because this is what I choose to do.</P> <P>From what I can see other classes have been very vocal and are unhappy with there class selection because they see guardians being called on to perform an important job on a raid and what a bit of the action.  A few points on that... </P> <P>All classes have a roll to perform on a raid and I have seem a range of classes save the day with the use of there unique abilites.  </P> <P>I have seem other fighter classes being MA on mobs.</P> <P>Guardians, stand there and take the hits... thats ALL we can do, we do it better than others that a fact (but not is all situations), that the way it works, we dont have FD we dont have Evac, we dont do good DPS we dont buff the hell ot of a party we dont do all the other diverse and exciting things that other classes so.. we just stand there and hit our taunt buttons....</P> <P>Now if these other fighter classes what the ability to stand there and take the hits like a guardian then I say let them, this does not need to be tied into a nurf of the guardian class.  The simple solution is to give you an ability that will give each class the mitigation, avoidance, hits... etc of a guardian AND take off ALL there other class abilites drop DPS to that of a guardian, stop all the other fun and raid saving abilities that these classes have for the duration of this buff... in fact turn them into a guardian for the duration... then see what they think of it.</P> <P>Oh while your at it let me as a guardian be able to turn myself into a killing machine that is a monk or give me evac etc....</P> <P>Why not even scrap all fighter sub classes and make us all the same.....</P> <P>Ok all these sound stupid ideas and they are, the classes are not all equal they were never intended to be, the problem is that the content has not yet been put into the game that allows the other fighter classes to excel in there chosen areas and that is where the problems lay, not that guardians can tank big named mobs but that the other classes dont feel they have a role on a raid, fix that and Im sure they would be happy but dont go and break one class to fix another.</P>

[Zodi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote <P>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA...</P> <P>*takes breath*</P> <P>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!</P> <P>You're playing EQ2, right?</P> <P>So you think guardians getting 100% avoidance while having the most HP and tied for best mitigation, is intended?</P> <P>You think trivializing encounters and becoming unhittable, is SOE design?</P> <P>I think you forgot your /sarcasm tag.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Cage:<BR> What exactly is your point? What are you trying to achieve?</P> <P>Do you want the monks to have the best avoidance in the game?</P> <P>Do you guardians to be nerfed?</P> <P>I trully dont understand what you are trying to achieve by attacking our class. IT is trully clear in your post that you are jelous of us.  If you want better stuff for your class. <FONT color=#ffff00>Why you just dont go to the monks subclass forums and post what you think the monks lack off</FONT>. I think itis pretty crappy to come to come to other class forums and just blast them with negative things and trying to get them nerfed. </P> <P>For me there is always an easy fix. If the monk class becomes the best TANK class in the game. Guess what?  I am making a DARN MONK or BRUISER.</P> <P>PLEASE SOE give CAGE a SUPER BRUISER JUICED UP CLASS and then before he can complain about the  race he pick  ensure that his race gets STR=100 AGI=100 STA=100 INT=100 WIS=100. This way there is no MISTAKES</P> <P>LOL</P> <P>Thanos<BR></P>

[Deadjest]

<P>As a SK that would like his fair share of the Raid Tanking Pie, I would really dislike if Guardians take to much of a hit.  The idea of constantly JUST balancing out DPS vs Tank Ability is overly simplified in its approch.</P> <P>There isnt a reason why Guardians can't have decent DPS and Utility if Tanks can all Tank now and have their own area of speciality in Tanking in the up and coming Revamp.</P> <P>The idea of DPS alone being a deciding factor as to the negitive effect in DPS is mind boggling.   So many things can be done, such as some mobs may have a standard defence but have a high mitigation which would make the Shawdow Knight excell at his DPS and vice versa where a mob might have High Magic Mitigation which would make the pure tanks excell at physical damage as the SK gets resisted more, etc, etc.</P> <P>I think the bottom line is, a Tank should always be a Tank no matter what and he specilizes on top of the standard tanking, and that should go for DPS to.   The only difference should be in the Tanks that are more offensive then tanks that are defensive, but don't make Defensive Tank mean lack of out put, just less then offensive.</P> <P>I think one of the big issues is DPS range among the Class's.   In EQL they were very massive in difference which cause mobs to be even more massive cause everyone wanted a Pure DPS Class in their group, it was basicly manaditory if you wanted to kill the mob and not eat lunch while doing it.</P> <P>Its one thing to make a class 10% better in DPS and the next class rank up 10% more etc, etc but when we end up with such massive ranges in DPS you make lower ranks to low.    Fighter means Tank in this game but it also has another side to it which is Offensive, which means Tanks need to put out decent DPS, just the other Class's sections need to put out more, but how much more should be carefuly watched so as not to make Obsolete Tanking DPS.</P> <P>I think one of the major problems is Auto Attack vs Combat Arts.</P> <P>Auto attack does not account as much as it should in fighting.   Accoss the board Auto Attack for weapons should be standard for everyone, weapon has a set dmg, and str effects that damage even more and agilty how often you hit with it.  What should hurt some class more then others is their attack rating which effects their damage outcome.</P> <P>Combat arts should be where all the extra damage should take place, if your out of power, that is when the people with massive str and agility show their differences.</P> <P>But it should be the Combat Arts that push the differences between the class's and how much should be the factor of how much DPS each class does to each other, not Auto Attack.   Auto Attack is left way to much behind in EQ2.</P> <P>For those who say, that is how it works now, yes I know, but I don't believe its balanced properly.  I have heard figures where only 35% of the damage is Auto Attack or less.   I think Auto Attack should be a standardized dmg across the board with the standard modifiers doing their job, and its the combat arts which take over from there.   So for a defensive tank that is doing lets say 50 DPS in Auto Attack, another Tank might be doing the same DPS in Auto Attack.   But when Combat Arts kick in, Defensive Tank might add another 50 DPS where a Offensive Tank might add in 65 DPS, and that would go for the Scouts to.  If a scout was doing Auto Attack of 50 DPS then when his Combat Arts kick in he might be doing a extra 150 DPS.</P> <P>What would seperate us would be our stats, if you have a Scout doing 50 DPS on auto attack after he adds in his mods, a Tank with all his extra strength might be actualy doing 65 DPS on Auto Attack.   So the Balance shifts back and forth, Offensively it HEAVILY favors the Scout as long as he has power for his Combat Arts, but when the power is down for both class, that is when the Tank shows his true strength, and its decent but not overpowering DPS nor even close to the scale of a powered up Tank and Scout.</P> <P>I am sure most of this is going on already but its the balance of it that I don't think is properly done.</P> <P>The idea of a Guardian having to do such low DPS when there other ways to compensate for their Defense I think is absurd.   With all the educated people working for this company you would think that somthing more then just the simple Tank vs DPS could be taken into account and that they would come up with somthint that would effect HOW the DPS is applied to a greater degree that what it does now.  The resistances are already in place for magical and physical damage, it just needs to be utilized more.   Some tanks are pure physical in nature, SKs use Poison and Disease, Paladins can use Divine and Magic, let brawlers do some of their attacks based on Mental since it is a Chi like effect, etc, etc and even more can be done to seperate how the DPS goes into effect.</P> <P>I could be way off base here, but my issue is as SK I want my fair share Tanking vs Groups and Raids.</P> <P>But more Importantly as a Player, I want a balanced system and laying the smack down on the Guardians in DPS when there are SO MANY THINGS that can be done instead to me is just crazy.   </P> <P>Its one thing to bring the Tanks up more on par with each other but in different ways, its another to drop them in illlogical ways when there are other avenues for exploration.</P> <P>Its one thing to drop a class here and there for game balance, its another to add Non Needed negitive effects on top of it.</P> <P> </P> <p>Message Edited by Deadjester on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:02 AM</span>

[Raahl]

<P>Gage - Please take your trolling to the monk boards.  :smileytongue:  Perhaps you need to start another flame thread and get it locked?</P> <P>We are here to discuss how the changes will affect Guardians.  From what I've seen.</P> <P>1. We will have less DPS.</P> <P>2. We will have no real added ability to tank.  (extra taunts don't count, we have little problems holding aggro) In other words, we stay the same.</P> <P> </P> <P>Is this what everyone else (guardians) is reading from the various developers posts?  Anything I'm missing?</P>

[Uumuuanu]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>Gage - Please take your trolling to the monk boards.  :smileytongue:  Perhaps you need to start another flame thread and get it locked?</P> <P>We are here to discuss how the changes will affect Guardians.  From what I've seen.</P> <P>1. We will have less DPS.</P> <P>2. We will have no real added ability to tank.  (extra taunts don't count, we have little problems holding aggro) In other words, we stay the same.</P> <P> </P> <P>Is this what everyone else (guardians) is reading from the various developers posts?  Anything I'm missing?</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>First of all, I agree, Gage go deal with your issues somewhere else, I think I speak for every guardian that has ever entered these forums, we are tired of hearing from you and seeing you.  Plain and simple, you are not welcome and you are not wanted here, go help resolve the issues with your own class and stay away from ours.</P> <P> </P> <P>Now to answer your question Raahl, no, I dont read into it that way.  I read into it that the other fighter classes think they need to tank as well or better (GAGE) then guardians.  </P> <P>You say we will have no added ability, no, we will have LESS ability to tank.  We will not be the same! We will be nerfed on avoidance, probably nerfed on HPs because people complain we have so many and possibly even nerfed on mitigation (non-existant gods help us).   Thats what I am reading into it.</P> <P>We will have Less DPS, if you can have less DPS from swinging at 10lb hammer at something.  Our only hope to be a tank will be the revamped buffs that we get, which sound more like they are designed to save other people, not ourselves.  </P> <P>Plain and simple this round of patches will make guardians effectively useless as the MT.  Expect Berserkers  and Paladins to take over our roles and pray to the non-existant gods that its not the monks. </P> <P>I already know several guilds that have converted to the idea of using a berserker as the MT, and I expect most of the others to do the same after this patch.</P> <P> </P> <P><STRONG>As someone pointed out before, can we just have a <FONT color=#ff0000>/reclass</FONT> and let Sony delete guardians instead of dragging us down into nothingness and letting everyone drag thier muddy feet over us before we are cast aside.</STRONG></P> <p>Message Edited by Uumuuanu on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:26 AM</span>

[BlueScot]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Uumuuanu wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR>First of all, I agree, Gage go deal with your issues somewhere else, I think I speak for every guardian that has ever entered these forums, we are tired of hearing from you and seeing you.  Plain and simple, you are not welcome and you are not wanted here, go help resolve the issues with your own class and stay away from ours.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P><STRONG>As someone pointed out before, can we just have a <FONT color=#ff0000>/reclass</FONT> and let Sony delete guardians instead of dragging us down into nothingness and letting everyone drag thier muddy feet over us before we are cast aside.</STRONG></P> <P>Message Edited by Uumuuanu on <SPAN class=date_text>07-19-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:26 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I second the going away notion, AMEN.  If you don't play the class you don't know enough about it to be commenting on it or trying to get it changed.</P> <P> </P> <P>As for deleting us, uh no please, but then again if we are useless we will delete ourselves and reroll something else, although I would stay away from healers and casters and for that matter scouts, so maybe just make a tradeskill alt or something.</P> <P>Eitherway I feel the pain of thousands of guardians crying out as they are cut down by the one mob that no one has ever been able to defeat in EQ,  the mythical NerfBat.<BR></P>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Uumuuanu wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Now to answer your question Raahl, no, I dont read into it that way.  I read into it that the other fighter classes think they need to tank as well or better (GAGE) then guardians.  </P> <P>You say we will have no added ability, no, we will have LESS ability to tank.  We will not be the same! We will be nerfed on avoidance, probably nerfed on HPs because people complain we have so many and possibly even nerfed on mitigation (non-existant gods help us).   Thats what I am reading into it.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Wow, I had forgotten about the avoidance nerf and HP nerfs coming.  Their nerfing mitigation?  I missed that.</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>We will have Less DPS, if you can have less DPS from swinging at 10lb hammer at something.  Our only hope to be a tank will be the revamped buffs that we get, which sound more like they are designed to save other people, not ourselves.  </P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yea Solo'ing is going to be a really big pain now.</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Plain and simple this round of patches will make guardians effectively useless as the MT.  Expect Berserkers  and Paladins to take over our roles and pray to the non-existant gods that its not the monks. </P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Not totally in this boat yet.  </FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I already know several guilds that have converted to the idea of using a berserker as the MT, and I expect most of the others to do the same after this patch.</P> <P> </P> <P><STRONG>As someone pointed out before, can we just have a <FONT color=#ff0000>/reclass</FONT> and let Sony delete guardians instead of dragging us down into nothingness and letting everyone drag thier muddy feet over us before we are cast aside.</STRONG></P> <P>Message Edited by Uumuuanu on <SPAN class=date_text>07-19-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:26 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Hmm So to sum it up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1. Less DPS</DIV> <DIV>2. Less tanking ability because of less hitpoints and less avoidance.  And god forbid less mitigation!</DIV> <DIV>3. Less soloability because of 1 and 2.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Raahl on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:24 AM</span>

[Raahl]

Potentially something that might make the Soloability issues not so bad is that the mobs are supposedly going through a revamp also.   Though I could find no real detail on what is planned for mobs.  So it could be bad or good.

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>ITS NOT JUST GUARDIANS THAT CAN REACH 100% AVOIDANCE AND BECOME UNHITTABLE.  IT IS ANY CHARACTER THAT STACKS DEFENSIVE BUFFS ON THEMSELVES,  INCLUDING [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] MONKS.   THIS MEANS IT IS NOT GUARDIANS THAT ARE BROKEN, BUT BUFF STACKING THAT IS BROKEN. </P> <P>Thanks</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Thank you captain obvious, I'm glad that you are aware that all the fighters can reach 100% avoidance pretty much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/clap</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, please direct me to the buff stacking issues that allow me to receive the HP and mitigation of the guardian class.  Since you guys are, in fact, receiving my avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh?  There is none?  So its not just a buffstacking issue at all?  OMG!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So hello sir, while I realize that buff stacking is broken, I also realize that guardians are broken because they are able to have HIGH HP, HIGH MITIGATION AND HIGH AVOIDANCE AT THE SAME TIME.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thank you, please drive through.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do not want to tank better than guardians, and the monk class never will, as we are what, potentially the second from the end in pure defense among the fighter class?  So everyone here that says that is just uninformed and flaming (go figure).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I mean hello, Noah is an officer in my guild, I'm not out campaigning to get his class ruined, that'd be stupid of me on all kinds of levels, especially since he is a really good friend of mine.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I just want the fighter classes fixed, period.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just as MG said you'll probably still be the preferred raid MT the majority of the time.  Just not all the time, and not at the expense of other fighters usefulness please.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>While I understand that people are happy with guardians, you are broken (for numerous reasons, not that I'm trying to say all of it is within the guardian class) and you need to be fixed for the good of the game.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It must be nice to be the absolute best tank in the game and to shuffle the other five fighters into the role of a scout, but its not intended, its not working, and its getting fixed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You can hate me all you want, its not going to change anything.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:51 PM</span>

[Rah]

<P>What we need for this forum is a /ignore. I honestly think that he is practicing his debating skills for a future in politics! He has shifted his argument so may times it is amazing!</P> <P>I second the notion that with a /revamp we should get a /reclass then we can all go to the monk forums as monks and agree with Gage on everything!</P> <P>Regardless of the revamp outcome I am sticking with my guardian. I stuck with my SK in EQ1 and In 2 I leanred my lesson and went with the fighter subclass advertised to be the best at defense. Unfortunatley my plan appears to have backfired and guardians will now become the knight class of EQ2.</P> <P>Hope is not a method, posting 9.7k rants on why another class is overpowered is!</P> <P>Rahge</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

9700?  That'd be a lot of rants.

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <P>What we need for this forum is a /ignore. I honestly think that he is practicing his debating skills for a future in politics! He has shifted his argument so may times it is amazing!</P> <P>I second the notion that with a /revamp we should get a /reclass then we can all go to the monk forums as monks and agree with Gage on everything!</P> <P>Regardless of the revamp outcome I am sticking with my guardian. I stuck with my SK in EQ1 and In 2 I leanred my lesson and went with the fighter subclass advertised to be the best at defense. Unfortunatley my plan appears to have backfired and guardians will now become the knight class of EQ2.</P> <P>Hope is not a method, posting 9.7k rants on why another class is overpowered is!</P> <P>Rahge</P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>We're all whining about combat changes that haven't even gone into effect yet.  You don't even know what's planned.  From what I understand guardians will still be the best defensive capable tanks, with the most taunts (that came from MG), and I'm sure we will still have the highest hp's even with the buff stacking nerf, and I can guarantee we will still have the highest mitigation, as for avoidance well it doesn't really make much difference when your tanking a level 56 mob does it, only time you dodge an attack is when your block goes off or someone's shield buff like the pally one for example.  </P> <P>By the way you can put his name on an ignore list if you click his profile if Gage drives you that crazy maybe you should try that instead of [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing about him posting in here so much.</P>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>ITS NOT JUST GUARDIANS THAT CAN REACH 100% AVOIDANCE AND BECOME UNHITTABLE.  IT IS ANY CHARACTER THAT STACKS DEFENSIVE BUFFS ON THEMSELVES,  INCLUDING [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] MONKS.   THIS MEANS IT IS NOT GUARDIANS THAT ARE BROKEN, BUT BUFF STACKING THAT IS BROKEN. </P> <P>Thanks</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Thank you captain obvious, I'm glad that you are aware that all the fighters can reach 100% avoidance pretty much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Why do you always bring it up the Gage.  Look Guardians can get 100% Avoidance just as easy as Monks.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>/sigh</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/clap</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, please direct me to the buff stacking issues that allow me to receive the HP and mitigation of the guardian class.  Since you guys are, in fact, receiving my avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Did you happen to notice that the HP buff stacking is going to be gone?  One of the previous updates they accidently put this in and quickly took it back out stating it was meant to be part of the bigger patch.   Mitigation?  Now you want to mitigate as well as a guardian?  Oh you are trolling again.  </FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh?  There is none?  So its not just a buffstacking issue at all?  OMG!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So hello sir, while I realize that buff stacking is broken, I also realize that guardians are broken because they are able to have HIGH HP, HIGH MITIGATION AND HIGH AVOIDANCE AT THE SAME TIME.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Ok so you admitted the high avoidance is not just a problem with guardians and seeing that the HP stacking is going away, what is your argument?  That we have high mitigation?  Is it really bothering you that much that you are not the choice MT?  You have to try and kill off the guardian class altogether?  Oh wait, you must be trolling again.    </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>I guess I could post that Monks get too much avoidance because they easily get 100% and that they do too much damage because they have the damage of a scout.   But why do that?  Avoidance will be fixed and Monks will be in the top 2 when it comes to avoidance.  Damage is also addressed,  You will be in the top 2-3 for DPS.</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <DIV>Thank you, please drive through.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Yes please do.  I don't come trolling in your threads!  Please do not come trolling in mine.  Thank you very much.</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do not want to tank better than guardians, and the monk class never will, as we are what, potentially the second from the end in pure defense among the fighter class?  So everyone here that says that is just uninformed and flaming (go figure).</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Yet you still come here?  Why come to the guardian forums?   Do us all a favor and go whine about the failings of the monk class somewhere else.  People are sick of hearing from you.</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I mean hello, Noah is an officer in my guild, I'm not out campaigning to get his class ruined, that'd be stupid of me on all kinds of levels, especially since he is a really good friend of mine.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>And I have monk friends that don't come to the forums and troll the guardian forum.  </FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I just want the fighter classes fixed, period.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Finally something we can agree on.  Though your idea of fixing might not be my idea of fixing. </FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just as MG said you'll probably still be the preferred raid MT the majority of the time.  Just not all the time, and not at the expense of other fighters usefulness please.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>We will probably still be the preferred raid MT?  Sounds like a maybe but no promises.  </FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>While I understand that people are happy with guardians, you are broken (for numerous reasons, not that I'm trying to say all of it is within the guardian class) and you need to be fixed for the good of the game.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>What level is your guardian again?  Just wondering.  There is very little broken with Guardians.  Maybe a few skills still messed up.    </FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It must be nice to be the absolute best tank in the game and to shuffle the other five fighters into the role of a scout, but its not intended, its not working, and its getting fixed.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Guess if the shoe fits.  Stop whining about the cards you were dealt.     Imagine that a class totally encased in metal being able to tank significantly better than a class in hides/leathers.</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You can hate me all you want, its not going to change anything.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Hate may be a strong word, but if it makes you feel better, sure.  :smileytongue:</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>07-19-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>12:51 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>In the end Gage, you will never be very welcome when you constantly troll and argue with people.  From the information gathered, these changes are nothing but a big fat nerf for us Guardians.   Are there issues with the system now?  Of course there are.    Coming here to complain about guardians gets you no points.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/sigh</DIV> <DIV>/rant off</DIV>

[Gaige]

<P>People that really know me, know that isn't what I'm doing.  I post my opinion because I can.  Just as you can.  Sure you don't post in the monk forums, but you can if you want to.  As long as you follow the forum rules.</P> <P>But anyway...</P> <P>Guardians have to get "nerfed" because you've been overpowered so long.  It sucks, but its true.  I assure you, when scouts could tank, there wasn't any shortage of fighters out there begging for agility to get nerfed.</P> <P>You can think that all I want is for monks to be a super class and for guardians to be useless, but of course you'd be wrong.</P> <P>I get a lot of pm's from people who either hate me and ask me to die irl, or thank me for posting the things I do, and saying the things they want to say.</P> <P>So whatever... I can't please everybody and I wouldn't try to if I could.</P> <P>The simple fact is that yes monks should avoid better than anyone else period, and guardians should hardly avoid at all.</P> <P>The same with mitigation, but reversed roles.</P> <P>As for "did you honestly think that you'd tank as good in hide/leathers as a guy enclosed in steel"?  Yes, because that's what SOE said.</P> <P>Besides, last I checked templars and inquisitors can wear the same armor that guardians can... should they be able to tank as well?</P> <P>What about paladins/sk/zerker?  All the same "fully enclosed in steel" armor as a guardian, yet you guys still tank better.</P> <P>Hell scouts get medium, so all off them should tank better than the monks/bruisers in hide/leather?</P> <P>Oh I see, so your problem is just with the monk/bruiser class, since by your armor statement you'd have no problem with a templar tanking as well... right?</P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:52 PM</span>

[Rah]

<DIV>We're all whining about combat changes that haven't even gone into effect yet.  You don't even know what's planned.  From what I understand guardians will still be the best defensive capable tanks, with the most taunts (that came from MG), and I'm sure we will still have the highest hp's even with the buff stacking nerf, and I can guarantee we will still have the highest mitigation, as for avoidance well it doesn't really make much difference when your tanking a level 56 mob does it, only time you dodge an attack is when your block goes off or someone's shield buff like the pally one for example.  <P><FONT color=#ffff66>By the way you can put his name on an ignore list if you click his profile if Gage drives you that crazy maybe you should try that instead of [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing about him posting in here so much.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P>Thanks best advice from you yet! Please note the number of posters above who also [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] comment on him posting so often here. It would seem I am the norm not the exception.</P> <P>Im glad you have such amazing insight into what will be, I only hope your right.</P> <P> </P> <P>Rahge</P> <P> </P></DIV>

[ugl]

<BR><BR> <P>Rather then reply to whiny  [Removed for Content] monks, retorting their idiotic statements,  I have decided to ignore them instead.  :smileyvery-happy:</P><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:54 PM</span>

[ugl]

<DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:53 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>Rather then reply to whiny  [Removed for Content] monks, retorting their idiotic statements,  I have decided to ignore them instead.  :smileyvery-happy:</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Thank goodness I don't make idiotic statements then <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  As for the ignore feature on these forums, all it does is ingore pm's from that user, I believe.<p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:10 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<DIV>Double post <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:10 PM</span>

[Raahl]

<STRONG></STRONG><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>People that really know me, know that isn't what I'm doing.  I post my opinion because I can.  Just as you can.  Sure you don't post in the monk forums, but you can if you want to.  As long as you follow the forum rules.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I only post my opinions on what I know.  Unlike you.  You know monks. Not guardians.</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>But anyway...</P> <P>Guardians have to get "nerfed" because you've been overpowered so long.  It sucks, but its true.  I assure you, when scouts could tank, there wasn't any shortage of fighters out there begging for agility to get nerfed.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Monks need nerfed because they have too much mitigation, do too much DPS and have too much utility.  They can also heal themselves.  Take that away too.   I didn't care about the Scouts AGI.  Did you holler for a nerf of them too?</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You can think that all I want is for monks to be a super class and for guardians to be useless, but of course you'd be wrong.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Your posts do not indicate this.  </FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I get a lot of pm's from people who either hate me and ask me to die irl, or thank me for posting the things I do, and saying the things they want to say.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Does this tell you something?    Not that I condone death threats.  Perhaps if you backed off a bit you wouldn't get those PM's.   </FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>So whatever... I can't please everybody and I wouldn't try to if I could.</P> <P>The simple fact is that yes monks should avoid better than anyone else period, and guardians should hardly avoid at all.</P> <P>The same with mitigation, but reversed roles.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Well that wasn't the way the game was made.  Monks have a fairly high Mitigation and a very high Avoidance.  So do Guardian, So you whine for a nerf to guardians avoidance. </FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>As for "did you honestly think that you'd tank as good in hide/leathers as a guy enclosed in steel"?  Yes, because that's what SOE said.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>From the official website: </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#3366ff>"Monks are disciplined combatants who specialize in martial arts.  Their natural agility allows them to avoid their enemy's blows and strike back with clean, efficient counterattacks."</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ok Monks Avoid.  Nothing about using armor, nothing about healing.  Nothing about protecting others.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#3366ff>"Guardians don heavy armor to protect themselves in combat and aid in the defense of their allies.  They will stand firm against any threat and lead their party to victory."</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ok Guardians wear heavy armor, shocker, to protect themselves in combat and aid in the defense of allies.  How do you protect others best?  Keeping aggro and being the MT perhaps?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>They stand firm against any threat and <STRONG>lead</STRONG> their party to victory.   Hmm how might we do that?  Keeping aggro and being the MT?</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Besides, last I checked templars and inquisitors can wear the same armor that guardians can... should they be able to tank as well?</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Perhaps the light vs. heavy armor was a poor example.  Keep the other classes out of our little fighter debate.  They don't figure into out discussion.</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>What about paladins/sk/zerker?  All the same "fully enclosed in steel" armor as a guardian, yet you guys still tank better.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yes they do wear the same armor.  Again my poor example shows again.  Paladins and SK's have little more DPS than Guardians and a bit more utility.  Beserkers are kind of a odd class with them being a high end tank with DPS.  </FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Hell scouts get medium, so all off them should tank better than the monks/bruisers in hide/leather?</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Again lets keep the other classes out of it.  If you asked me I think monks/brawler fit better in the scout category and <STRONG><U>prehaps</U></STRONG> the swashbuckler/Brigand fits more in the fighter class.</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Oh I see, so your problem is just with the monk/bruiser class, since by your armor statement you'd have no problem with a templar tanking as well... right?</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yet again a different class with different capabilities.  So your problem is with the Guardian class?  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>No my problem is with you Gage.  </FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>07-19-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:52 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Gaige]

<P>I'm glad you have a problem with me, join the line, your spot is in the back.  Most of my most vocal detractors have quit... will you follow in their footsteps?</P> <P>So anyway, about the lore/roleplaying flavor from SOE's site about the monk/guardian class... do you want MG's official post on that?</P> <P>Didn't think so <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>Its nice you think we should be scouts though, it'd be uber to get medium armor, evac and pathfinding, and the ability to use poison.</P> <P>But since you aren't a part of SOE, too bad!</P> <P>Go make your own game.</P>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <P>Its nice you think we should be scouts though, it'd be uber to get medium armor, evac and pathfinding, and the ability to use poison.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Gage, I'll choose to ignore your ranting and trolling.  Or at least try to, cause you have gotten really good at ranting and trolling.</P> <P>Seeing that you think that it would be nice to have the abilities of Scouts, why don't you go roll up one.  I'm sure you would be much more happy with one of those classes.<BR></P>

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <DIV>We're all whining about combat changes that haven't even gone into effect yet.  You don't even know what's planned.  From what I understand guardians will still be the best defensive capable tanks, with the most taunts (that came from MG), and I'm sure we will still have the highest hp's even with the buff stacking nerf, and I can guarantee we will still have the highest mitigation, as for avoidance well it doesn't really make much difference when your tanking a level 56 mob does it, only time you dodge an attack is when your block goes off or someone's shield buff like the pally one for example.  <P><FONT color=#ffff66>By the way you can put his name on an ignore list if you click his profile if Gage drives you that crazy maybe you should try that instead of [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing about him posting in here so much.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P>Thanks best advice from you yet! Please note the number of posters above who also [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] comment on him posting so often here. It would seem I am the norm not the exception.</P> <P>Im glad you have such amazing insight into what will be, I only hope your right.</P> <P> </P> <P>Rahge</P> <P> </P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Oh and heres some more scholarly advice for your little guardian I'm the king of the world ego... Why don't you go to the monk forum and [Removed for Content] and moan about how guardians are the only tank class even though there are six fighter classes and because you are a guardian that automatically makes everything that comes out of your mouth an infallable statement (if you don't know what this word means feel free to PM me).  </P> <P>Even better why not set up a password so only guardians can post in the guardian forum that way the forum will be Gage-free and all of you will be happy.</P> <P>And Gage, do realize your talking to guardians here.  A class of people whom believe they are the bread and butter of this game because of their over-rated ability to tank a mob, which the only reason why they can tank it in the first place is because the heal spells that are cast on them are that's right broken allowing them to hold even better aggro from the "you heal yourself" factor...</P> <P>Anyway nothing but love Rahge and thanks for the one star here's another one for you!!!</P> <P>Peace out</P>

[Deadjest]

<P>hehehe that statement could be used for anyones post here, that was a very double edge sword card to play and counter productive to ones own cause.</P> <P>But it was interesting, mostly you see people making odd posts that dont logical fit about ones class, not posts that slap itself with its own logic.</P> <P>Just when you think you wont be suprised.   BOO!   It happens! </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <P>And Gage, do realize your talking to guardians here.  A class of people whom believe they are the bread and butter of this game because of their over-rated ability to tank a mob, which the only reason why they can tank it in the first place is because the heal spells that are cast on them are that's right broken allowing them to hold even better aggro from the "you heal yourself" factor...</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yeah, its funny to see Noah topping the list of heal parses on our latest raids.  Its going to be interesting to see people change their style to deal with lack of aggro generation on the tanks behalf, and even more aggro generation on the templars behalf.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>Gage, I'll choose to ignore your ranting and trolling.  Or at least try to, cause you have gotten really good at ranting and trolling.</P> <P>Seeing that you think that it would be nice to have the abilities of Scouts, why don't you go roll up one.  I'm sure you would be much more happy with one of those classes.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You can choose to do whatever you want, but I think you'll have trouble.  You can't seem to stop responding to me can you?  Besides, I rarely if ever attack the poster, fling insults, etc.  I'm far from a troll, although I do rant at times.  All of my opinions are expressed in an intelligent manner, without attacking the person I disagree with.  Can't say the same for a lot of your guardian brethren...</P> <P>Oh, and obviously your sarcasm detector is broken.  If I wanted to be a scout, I would've, I had time in beta to play a few classes and I have a troub alt anyway, but obviously I'm a monk 4 lyfe, wewt.</P><p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:09 PM</span>

[DUNN]

<DIV>ACK!!! !!!   I forgot about the healer aggro fix.   Guess i won't get to tank.  I need more heals than anyone LOL. But wait a sec I like not tanking YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Deadjest]

<P>Bah, lets not go to far with claiming ones posts are always intelligent after what I read earlier. </P> <P>After reading that, I am still not done chuckling or drinking for that matter.</P> <P>WOOT food is ready and time for another drink</P>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <DIV>We're all whining about combat changes that haven't even gone into effect yet.  You don't even know what's planned.  From what I understand guardians will still be the best defensive capable tanks, with the most taunts (that came from MG), and I'm sure we will still have the highest hp's even with the buff stacking nerf, and I can guarantee we will still have the highest mitigation, as for avoidance well it doesn't really make much difference when your tanking a level 56 mob does it, only time you dodge an attack is when your block goes off or someone's shield buff like the pally one for example.  <P><FONT color=#ffff66>By the way you can put his name on an ignore list if you click his profile if Gage drives you that crazy maybe you should try that instead of [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing about him posting in here so much.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P>Thanks best advice from you yet! Please note the number of posters above who also [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] comment on him posting so often here. It would seem I am the norm not the exception.</P> <P>Im glad you have such amazing insight into what will be, I only hope your right.</P> <P> </P> <P>Rahge</P> <P> </P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Oh and heres some more scholarly advice for your little guardian I'm the king of the world ego... Why don't you go to the monk forum and [Removed for Content] and moan about how guardians are the only tank class even though there are six fighter classes and because you are a guardian that automatically makes everything that comes out of your mouth an infallable statement (if you don't know what this word means feel free to PM me).  </P> <P>Even better why not set up a password so only guardians can post in the guardian forum that way the forum will be Gage-free and all of you will be happy.</P> <P>And Gage, do realize your talking to guardians here.  A class of people whom believe they are the bread and butter of this game because of their over-rated ability to tank a mob, which the only reason why they can tank it in the first place is because the heal spells that are cast on them are that's right broken allowing them to hold even better aggro from the "you heal yourself" factor...</P> <P>Anyway nothing but love Rahge and thanks for the one star here's another one for you!!!</P> <P>Peace out</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Another member of the "hang on gages sack" club.   ;(

[Raahl]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Keep spinning Gage and Co.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> <P>Anyway back to the topic.</P> <P>I will restate how these combat changes appear to be going to affect guardians.  These changes may or may not have been needed.  </P> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack. </LI> <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</LI> <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs. </LI> <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2 and 3</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells.</LI> <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better.</LI></OL> <P>There are a lot of if's in the possible pros and pretty much all knowns for the cons.</P> <P>Any other other Pros or Cons?</P>

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote: <OL> <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</LI></OL> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm pretty sure ours is getting raised, not lowered.<BR></DIV>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote: <OL> <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</LI></OL> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm pretty sure ours is getting raised, not lowered.<BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Making the various class buffs that affect avoidance not stack affects everyone.    So say goodbye to 100% avoidance.  So the net total will be less than everyone can get now.</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>Making the various class buffs that affect avoidance not stack affects everyone.    So say goodbye to 100% avoidance.  So the net total will be less than everyone can get now.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Pretty sure you are wrong, since they are changing the way +defense works, besides we have innate avoidance in our deflection, and I'm pretty confident that after the changes we will be the highest avoidance class, by far.</P> <P>So don't forget that not only are the buffs changing, the mechanics behind them are changing as well.</P> <P>So while +defense won't affect avoidance anymore, that doesn't mean monks avoidance will be lowered, just because the avoidance has to be lowered on other classes.<BR></P>

[blueduckie]

<DIV>This is same ol guardian complaints as always but i just dont see why it is a guardian problem. How is it a CLASS problem when all but 2 possible mitigation buffs 0 defense buffs are GROUP buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It is a buffing issue not a class issue. You have a monk and guardian with 0 defense buffs on and the monk will avoid more. You add defense the same for each which is as easily doable in a mt group for 1 than the other if trying to max defense. Stacking hp buffs lalala cry me a river they are still group buffs which are being fixxed but still. It is as if you are dillusional thinking guardians are reaching 100% avoidance and 12k hp just by themselves. It takes a full raid group to do this and it can be set up for any fighter. Wont hit same hp as a guardian which they shouldnt and more than likely never will.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The problem is you get people like giage who wants tanking exact same with mit avoidance switched and dps no where near the same nor utility. Gaige there is no logical reason why a monk should get the same hp as a guardian with out losing mend fd and curing itself of ail,ents bs they try to add and dps brought down to paladin guardian. Those monk specific skills is what causes you hp. Your dmg is for your taunting your utility is for the hp such as mend  / fd specifically. This is how it should be.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>With these difference of skills tanking will never be the same. I kinda am starting to read the boosting defense of others the most etc is how it is now. Our group buffs do way more than anyone else for tanking and i kinda have a feeling it is possible his reference. I dont expect same bonus but i have a feeling our group buffs is what it is referred to. Also with the aggro revamp making it more smooth supposbly expect our aggro to surpass a bererkers or be equal to. Would also expect highest mit and highest hp but of course lower avoidance. I suspect our avoidance / mitigation difference will be mostly adjacent to that of a monk but i have a complaint about that. Can boost mitigation on gear alot more than avoidance. Seems unbalancing unless monk mitigation gets hit down some where in order for there mitigation to keep up with our avoidance need to be in dam good gear.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you are very skeered wouldnt be so worried they are making others more liable to tanking on raiding while trying to level out grouping and soloing also for all but i am really feeling the guardians will be the best at it just by a lot more of a lower marginal difference than it is now. It seems the whole point is to give a more consistant chance for others to tank. Wont know for sure til situational bonus but it kinda appears as a bogus plea that wont be anything defining more of a small bonus that wont change much. Will have to see for sure when it goes live but i cant see them screwing over the job we all made guardians for on 1 of the most played classes in the game.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <DIV>It is as if you are dillusional thinking guardians are reaching 100% avoidance and 12k hp just by themselves. It takes a full raid group to do this and it can be set up for any fighter. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Quit being so [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] hard headed.</P> <P>I never SAID THEY DO IT BY THEMSELVES.</P> <P>Just the fact they *can* do it while getting 100% mit (which monks can NOT do) and having the highest HP is broken and overpowered.</P> <P>Geez.</P> <P>A guardian can get 100% mit and 100% avoid, a monk can not, that is broken.  Thanks.<BR></P>

[blueduckie]

<DIV>Gage any class naked can hit 100% avoidance it takes a guardian fabled armor max mit buffs up and hero armor to hit 100% mit least it does me max i have on raid with rare made potions commanding pressense slates braksans fortified templar procs etc i hit 85% on raid those buffs and proc add around 15% mit. A monk could hit 90-100% mit also with max mit from potions etc and heros armor to on a raid.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Again 100 avoidance isnt crap and easy to get. Monks when scrolling over when in same group as guardian will see with same buffs on still have more avoidance numbers. Also you will notice that is to a lvl 50 mob not a lvl 54 or 58 mob. So i dont understand your reasoning on how 100% avoidance to a lvl 50 mob on a raid is such a big deal when the mobs are much higher.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It isnt that I am hard headed it is that you are just lack reasoning from lack of info on the class. You act like monks in no way reach near a guardian on avoidance and mit which just is not true you can reach higher avoidance because there is higher than 100 avoidance as it leaks over to the next level of mob. Same with mit but monks can stay with in 20- 25% mitgation of a guardian. Which if you would just for once pull your head out of your [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] and test it looking at the actual avoidance numbers youd see even with same buffs you have 20-25% more avoidance than us. We get hp over your mend / fd get over it. Revamp is ok if it holds true to that or even scales up our mit and lowers yours up and ups your avoidance soem lowering ours a little making gap about a 50% more mit on us 50% more avoidance on you sure. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The point you are missing is it is not guardians are over powered it is buffs. However they are trying to blame it on guardians because of misinformed people like you. That is the whole problem. If a monk is telling moorguard how much guardians are over monks is just dumb. Especially one who doesnt even know the mechanics of buff system until explained to you when caught wrong on your own monk forums. Your a fool you will always be a fool until you wake up to the facts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It isnt a class problem it is a content / buffing problem. Our hp is all we hold considerably high over you which is the main stat. However our hp is always gonna be above yours. Our hp buff stacking will go but it wont only hurt us will hurt any tank wanting to tank because you will still want guardian in your mt group we will still have our stamina buff and our more hp per sta.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If they added double attacks etc and cut mobs hits and special dmg down then possibly monks wouldnt be so dam screwed why dont they fix that? I am not opposed to buffs not stacking. I am not opposed to a defense nerf. I am opposed to us losing hp and mitigation status bonus we have over others because  of a whiny [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] monk. We give up alot that other classes get for those 2 things. If they dont make avoidance on charachters held for every lvl of mob btw and just scale mitigation on mobs. Then if mobs stay yellow - orange your avoidance wont do crap gaige because currently avoidance and defense buffs mean nothing on the high lvl contested mobs now the defense debuff will only make you a sad panda on being a "avoidance tank" granted i am sure soe has there idea invisioned in how to work this you just seem to expect alot more buffage to monks than you deserve. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For anyone who just hasnt gotten it yet here is what gaige appears to be asking for</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardian:</DIV> <DIV>Nerf hp</DIV> <DIV>Nerf avoidance</DIV> <DIV>Nerf defense buffs</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monks:</DIV> <DIV>Boost hp more to being same as guardian</DIV> <DIV>buff there avoidance</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Here would be the difference if this happened: A guardian would have advantage of mitigation opposed to there avoidance. This would mean if monks got boosted even higher they would have around 10% mitigation  and 90% avoidance because i have seen monks with 80% avoidance unbuffed and if boosted could estimate 10% We would have 90% mitigation and 10% avoidance(bring on the reactives out healing mob dmg $$)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is where it gets stupid. We have more taunts but they have more dmg for there taunts. They have mend for emergency heal with same hp as us. FD and adding in stronger curing of ailments for themselves.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In the world of gaige this is fair. In the world of eq2 and logical people this isnt. If they take our hp away and make mit / avoidance exact oppoisites we need to be getting something else out of the deal. This fortunately is 99% not likely to be how it turns out from soe. Excpect avoidance to drop soem but not crazy expect mitigation to be near same it is now. Expect our hp to still own all others but not as marginally high with fighters in diff groups liek it can now since losing around 2-3k hp from buffs. Expect our aggro to out aggro zerkers if aggro change goes as well as they explained it. I imagine we will have 40% less avoidance then monks on avg with 25-30% more mitigation than a monk possibly a little higher depending on how it turns out. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Break down: no one can say for sure but it doenst change the fact that you can try to interpert what the plan is. There plan is to please other fighters in not feeling as useless as tanks. Expect raid leaders not to buy into much and guardians still mting. Expect 10-25% of raids have a situational bonus where a type of fighter might have a 5-10% edge over all others. Where the other 75-90% guardians have the edge. The best way to make these changes work if it pans out this way is for raid leaders that have people like giage in them to either guild remove them or rotate tanking as you kill mobs or we will only get more whiny complaints for months and another combat revamp about how monks life isnt good enough yet.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:54 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <DIV>So i dont understand your reasoning on how 100% avoidance to a lvl 50 mob on a raid is such a big deal when the mobs are much higher.</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Because it isn't intended for the most defensive and highest mitigation and hp having plate tank class to avoid as well and or better than a monk.</P> <P>That's why is a big deal.<BR></P>

[blueduckie]

<P>We dont avoid as well or better monks just dont tank enough in a mt group for the parsings of hit / misses to be proven granted avoidance can go to high. Whoever posted on the monk forums</P> <P></P> <HR> <DIV> <P>Oh, on a side note, I do think it is rediculous that plate wearer's can get to 100% avoidance.  I also wish that buffing defense for Guardians would increase Mitigation rather then avoidance and that buffing deflection(I think that is what you monks use) would increase your avoidance.  The way I see it is plate wearing tanks should never be able to reach 100% avoidance and Brawlers should never be able to reach 100% Mitigation.</P> <P></P> <HR> <P>I agree with you as well. I would love for mitigation be a key stat. My biggest thing against your rampage gaige is you think all should be equal in hp and i dont agree with that in any way. We should have on avg of using percents 10% above brawlers 5% above crusaders 3% above zerkers. I dont think that is huge.</P> <P>You misread everything i think tho. Never said our avoidance was how it should be. Just get sick of your crying about how guardian avoidance is better when it isnt. It is our hp mitigation and how easily ANY class can boost avoidance that is the problem. It isnt just our class it is a game wide problem. I group with a inquisitor and she avoids as much as i do. What is sexy about the duo is she can even lower mobs abilities by 15 with master in skill. Now i bring that up because i love the power debuffs have. Just think defense buffing should be removed period and raising things like parry mitigation riposte deflect etc should be the way avoidance and mitigation is effected. Would love a 250 physical mit + 5 to shield blocking or something from our call of protection line. Just my 2 cents tho but things are not as drastic on guardians as you make it sound. Can argue a pansy nerdy wizard shouldnt avoid like bruce lee either but they can get as close to guardians on it.</P></DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <P>My biggest thing against your rampage gaige is you think all should be equal in hp and i dont agree with that in any way.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Please quote where I said that, because I do not think that at all.  I could care less about your HP or mitigation.</P> <P>Its the combination of your HP/mitigation/avoidance that is broken and irritating.</P> <P>You just REFUSE to listen.</P> <P>Guardians are the ONLY class that can COMBINE the high HP with the high mitigation AND AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>Sure a lot of classes can get up there with avoidance because its affected by agility, shields and the +defense skill.</P> <P>BUT ONLY YOUR CLASS CAN COMBINE 100% MITIGATION WITH HIGH HP AND 100% AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>Only guardians.</P> <P>Geez, read what I'm typing.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:19 AM</span>

[blueduckie]

<DIV>Not true. Zerkers have basically same hp mitigation and avoidance and since we have to use zerkers to reach our highest possible hp and vice versa for them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Crusaders could hit 100 mitigation and avoidance if geared well in right group and popped hero's armor and would have prolly 1000-1500 less hp i guestimate</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A brawler about 2-3k less hp if in good gear and 100 avoidance prolly 95ish mit, it is funny tho you use our 100 mitigation in process since unless the ultimate geared guardians can hit it with out it, Takes a once in 250ish ho's to get it since hero armor is mandatory for me and i am in full ebon / ruby with couple fabled pieces now and templar procs / slates invig threat and commanding pressence up. So your talking at the most extreme we can hit it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So your taking the extreme of our mitigation but refuse to look at your avoidance. Compare your unbuffed avoidance to a guardians then no matter what if each can hit 100% you will still have that same number difference over the guardian on current mob. If in same group. No matter what your avoidance will have that much on us still. You refuse to accept this because you cant get past 100% is not the cap.  Our mitigation is about same difference as avoidance is for the 2 currently. HP is our main advantage and mitigation + hp is our advantage on the lvl 56+ mobs because defense doesnt do crap to them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Granted with it like this a brawler couldnt tank the top mobs most likely doubt it has ever been tried but most likely would be a quick pounding. I think all figherts should have ways to hold themselves up against any mob but not having handed to them the chance to tank it all the way through. I also will have to scroll through posts perhaps it was another monk who said it how unfair it is our hp is higher that it should be same and you should avoid we should mitigate and you should get more dps / utility. What a lame person would think that as fair.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There is a difference in wanting your class able to tank on a more smooth consistancy and putting the reason why you cant do that in the wrong place. If guardians were nerfed today monks still couldnt tank any better in fact on raids if most likely you would tank worsev beause of what we can add to a others. So us being "over powered" is not the problem. Before they beefed up the mobs monks if tried with right group could have tanked any of the mobs cept for drakathor most likely. You had your dream ideal then more so than you do now. Because any class could pick up and hang on them but werent as effeicient as the guardian. Also any of them could have abused defense to make them /yawn melee as a guardian did. You point the blame at guardians more than the buffing issue. Here is what i mean by it the Guardian class alone does not hit 100 mit 100 avoidance and 12k hp or whatever the top can hit. Takes 5 other people to get a guardian there and a lucky Heroic Opp. Thus the combat revamp. So to say guardians are the issues that is untrue. Is the scaling of buffs / effects they added on them. To say it is unfair for guardians to have potential to such high hp mitigation avoidance ok but it really isnt as much higher above others as youd willingly admit except hp from buff stacking with a zerker is high atm but we know will be fixxed and i personally agree with.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am not nor have i said we should be miles ahead of you or we should avoid better. I just dont think a monk should be on par of tanking with a guardian would like a pecking order kept and could make for tank orders if aggro system works like it may. So i would personally like that to keep the lore of the classes</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They should have just made fighters crusaders /warriors tho and made a 5th subclass that lead to brawlers and beastlord type half melee half pet people. Would have had 2 with 4 2 with 6 choices no big deal IMO but cant go back on that =D</DIV><p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:29 AM</span>

[Drulak]

<P>Well i am a 48 guardian and i have 65% mitigation and 53% avoidance - so its not the guard with 100% / 100% - so please read what others are saying and see that maybe its  a BUFF issue and not a class issue.  (no fabled items , but practically full set of ebon , HQ items)</P> <P> </P> <P>Anyhoo back to what the thread is about - and if the nerfs happen as in moorguards post , i will not be happy as my Guard has mostly solo'd and basically these nerfs are going to hit the soloing guard the most.  It already takes an unbelieveably long time to kill heroic greys - now its going to take hours <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>Guardians are not overpowered , why not bring other classes up if they feel they are so hard done by , rather than always nerfing people down and you know what normally happens when SOE nerf , they over do it by about 80% - hehe - watch the OOC shouts for tanks , because everyone has switched to playing a healer <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <p>Message Edited by Drulak on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:06 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>   All of my opinions are expressed in an intelligent manner, </P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>ROFL....   That is the funniest post I ever seen him  make.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hey genius, monks are not supposed to have the hitpoints and mitigation of a guardian, you got DPS and FD.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And anyone can get 100% avoidence.   So why are you here screaming guardians are broken and need nerfed?   Must be your uber intelligence kicking in...</DIV>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <P>My biggest thing against your rampage gaige is you think all should be equal in hp and i dont agree with that in any way.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Please quote where I said that, because I do not think that at all.  I could care less about your HP or mitigation.</P> <P>Its the combination of your HP/mitigation/avoidance that is broken and irritating.</P> <P>You just REFUSE to listen.</P> <P>Guardians are the ONLY class that can COMBINE the high HP with the high mitigation AND AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>Sure a lot of classes can get up there with avoidance because its affected by agility, shields and the +defense skill.</P> <P>BUT ONLY YOUR CLASS CAN COMBINE 100% MITIGATION WITH HIGH HP AND 100% AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>Only guardians.</P> <P>Geez, read what I'm typing.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>07-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:19 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>We are reading what your typing, but it is stupid statements, so we do not understand why anyone one post such garbage. </P> <P>Again,  ANY CLASS can reach 100% avoidence do to buff stacki9ng from many different classes.  Guardians are supposed to have the highest hitpoint, (although its not nearly as large a margin as you make it out to be.)   And our mitigation is the same as any other platemail class.</P> <P>We read what your typing, but what your typing is ignorant of how the game works.   </P> <P> </P>

[ugl]

<FONT color=#ffff00></FONT><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <P>ITS NOT JUST GUARDIANS THAT CAN REACH 100% AVOIDANCE AND BECOME UNHITTABLE.  IT IS ANY CHARACTER THAT STACKS DEFENSIVE BUFFS ON THEMSELVES,  INCLUDING [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] MONKS.   THIS MEANS IT IS NOT GUARDIANS THAT ARE BROKEN, BUT BUFF STACKING THAT IS BROKEN. </P> <P>Thanks</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Thank you captain obvious, I'm glad that you are aware that all the fighters can reach 100% avoidance pretty much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/clap</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Wow, he finally understands something.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, please direct me to the buff stacking issues that allow me to receive the HP and mitigation of the guardian class.  Since you guys are, in fact, receiving my avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh?  There is none?  So its not just a buffstacking issue at all?  OMG!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Again, for the slow, monks should not have the same mitigation and hitpoints as a guardian, although your definatley close.  You got DPS and utility.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So hello sir, while I realize that buff stacking is broken, I also realize that guardians are broken because they are able to have HIGH HP, HIGH MITIGATION AND HIGH AVOIDANCE AT THE SAME TIME.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thank you, please drive through.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Highest hitpoints by a slight margin, same mitigation as other plate classes, and avoidence that any class can reach.    Yet you come to the conclusion that guardians are broken *boggle*</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I do not want to tank better than guardians, and the monk class never will, as we are what, potentially the second from the end in pure defense among the fighter class?  So everyone here that says that is just uninformed and flaming (go figure).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I mean hello, Noah is an officer in my guild, I'm not out campaigning to get his class ruined, that'd be stupid of me on all kinds of levels, especially since he is a really good friend of mine.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>LOL, the same Noah that thinks guardians are overpowered and cheers for their nerfs?  The same noah that invited a moronic, whiny [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] nerf the guardian monk to come join his guild?  The same Noah that claims to tank epic mobs naked, and yet we see posts from his guild excusing others of exploiting because FOH cant seem to kill contested mobs?   Naah, I am sure you wouldnt like to see his class nerfed.  LOL</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I just want the fighter classes fixed, period.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>You want a super monk, period.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just as MG said you'll probably still be the preferred raid MT the majority of the time.  Just not all the time, and not at the expense of other fighters usefulness please.</DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>MG says alot of stuff, which less then half is reality.  Didnt he tell you in beta that monks were tanks?  Hello, its 2005, and your still DPS.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>While I understand that people are happy with guardians, you are broken (for numerous reasons, not that I'm trying to say all of it is within the guardian class) and you need to be fixed for the good of the game.</DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>We are not broken.   We do not need to be fixed to pacify crybaby monks that want to tank zalak.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It must be nice to be the absolute best tank in the game and to shuffle the other five fighters into the role of a scout, but its not intended, its not working, and its getting fixed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>It must be nice to have FD, self heals, DPS of a scout, 10k hitpoints fully buffed and recieving upgrades in the next combat revamp.    </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You can hate me all you want, its not going to change anything.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>More like pity.  Your posts are dumb.  You cannot play a monk.  And you have 4k posts of whiny drivel.   Step out of your moms basement gage for something besides fanfaire.</FONT></DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <SPAN class=date_text>07-19-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:51 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>Making the various class buffs that affect avoidance not stack affects everyone.    So say goodbye to 100% avoidance.  So the net total will be less than everyone can get now.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Pretty sure you are wrong, since they are changing the way +defense works, besides we have innate avoidance in our deflection, and I'm pretty confident that after the changes we will be the highest avoidance class, by far.</P> <P>So don't forget that not only are the buffs changing, the mechanics behind them are changing as well.</P> <P>So while +defense won't affect avoidance anymore, that doesn't mean monks avoidance will be lowered, just because the avoidance has to be lowered on other classes.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>You have as much of a clue on what is going to be in the upcoming changes as anyone else.  Did I say anywhere that monks would not have high avoidance, if not the highest?  No.   Monks might get a buff in there base avoidance.  But without these avoidance buffs stacking your max avoidance is less.</P> <P>The day's of buff stacking avoidance to 100% are numbered.  I wouldn't put it past sony to cap avoidance and mitigation somewhere in the 90% range.  </P>

[Raahl]

<DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <DIV> A monk could hit 90-100% mit also with max mit from potions etc and heros armor to on a raid.</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Wow 100% mitigation monks.   I did not realize that mitigation was also messed up like avoidance. <BR></DIV> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack. </LI> <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</LI> <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs. </LI> <LI>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI> <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells.</LI> <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI></OL> <P>Any other other Pros or Cons?</P></DIV>

[Raahl]

<DIV>Little more info from Moorgard.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV>Moorgard wrote:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>NPCs are getting their own type of revamp. They'll have a wider variety of spells and arts to choose from, and will use them more intelligently. They'll actually use their buffs, for instance. Startling, I know... <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P>Whether this is good or bad, we do not know.  No further information was added. </P>

[Arpophyllum]

Gage, I count 27 posts by you in this thread so far. They are uniformly off topic and argumentative. This thread is about the upcoming combat changes and how Guards will deal with them. You've managed to de-rail yet <EM>another</EM> thread and turn it into a Gage v. Guardians rant.  <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You're getting what you want, Moorgard has stated that we're going to be nerfed. Yet you're still campaiging for it? It's like campaigning for someone who's already elected.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gage: "Vote for Gage!"</DIV> <DIV>Guardian: "I didn't vote for you, but you won, Gage. Now let me get on with my life."</DIV> <DIV>Gage: "Vote for Gage!"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Many of us disagree with you, but you can't seem to deal with that. Do you think that you can convert everyone to 'see the light' if you just post the same arguments a few more times? What are you trying to accomplish? You won! Go celebrate!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Many of us view the upcoming changes with some apprehension. We do not fully trust that SOE will achieve a balance. Some of us are daunted by changes that SOE has made in the past. They do seem to have a habit of going a bit far at times. We wonder where we will be after the changes. It's natural. Moorgard's reassurances that we will not lose our role of tanking are, to be frank, disconcerting.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You single-handedly are making the guardian forums less useful.</DIV>

[Rah]

<DIV> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>First off your previous scholarly advice only results in my not being able to view when Gage (and now you) have posted to a specific forum. As excited as I was at the prospect of not subjecting myself to a position that shifts as often as a politician caught in the act of illegal campaign financing, I am now crushed. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> . </FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>The rating post was put in place so you could rate a post. Consider yourself rated. If you manage to post something that I find useful you'll get a 5 from me! If you continue this don't pick on my idol mentality I will continue to rate those post with ones as well. Feel free in your anger to search for all my meager post and do the same, when your done go look in the mirror and tell yourself that you put me in my place. I promise I will fall into a state of depression and bother you, or your Idol Gage, no more!</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>I enjoy discrediting his post. Mind you not all are pointless, most smack of the ego you are accusing me off and all contain an explicit effort to have what he should of if he had quit whining and rolled a guardian, the ability to tank. In fact if you were to compare the number of post between us I think you would clearly see were the preponderance of whining occurs. Go take a look at his I tanked CL post on the monk forum (the forum for monks that I as a Guardian don't post in) and if you look in his pictures you can see that he charges for screenshots over his fame. Ego or humor your call.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc>Truth be told Gage can take credit for the hard look at the mechanics of tanking in EQ2, and that look caused me to respond to his post when they were not accurate and over time turned into the loathing responses that remind GUARDIANS that its there forum.<SPAN>  </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>I dont have the time or the energy to espouse <B>infallible</B> statements because I am a guardian. Class selection has no merit in what you post, sorry I am not sure who told you that or gave you that impression but its just not true. I am capable of erring. By the way I do know what that word means perhaps you should learn how to correctly spell it.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>Here is a clue to both of you a raid or a group fails or succeeds from its members as a whole, period! </FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>If you can see through your immediate response to flame this post try to quantify why guardians are "Over-rated" and if we are over-rated then why are you posting here about it and not out proving how over-rated we are?</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>Hugs</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P><SPAN><FONT color=#cccccc>Rahge</FONT></SPAN></DIV>

[Raahl]

<DIV>Anyway it seems like we have hammered down most of the potential pros and cons for these changes.  There may be more but we don't have the information on them.</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack. </LI> <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</LI> <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs. </LI> <LI>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI> <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells.</LI> <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI></OL></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[SmakenDah]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr> <p><strong><u><font size="4">Possible CONS</font></u></strong></p> <ol> <li>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack. </li><li>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</li><li>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs. </li><li>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs.</li><li>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</li><li>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</li> </ol> <p><strong><u><font size="4">Possible PROS</font></u></strong></p> <ol> <li>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells.</li><li>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better.</li><li>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</li> </ol> <p>Any other other Pros or Cons?</p> <hr></blockquote><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2">I'd like to add a couple of pros to that list:</font><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2"> </font><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2"> </font><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2">4. Stifle effects will now just be ignored allowing higher level taunts to actually land (this includes attack arts such as Retaliate)</font><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2"> </font><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2">5. Combat Arts with duration effects (debuffs/dots) will no longer prevent other Guardians from using their abilities for damage. (i.e. Overwhelm, Swamp, Ferocious Charge, Cleave, etc.) 6. Should be no need to maintain 4 different HP buffs (this was annoying) 7. (if we're lucky) Fix to protection line abilities 8. Mob AE ranges have been adjusted (not specific to Fighters, but it compensates for the lower HPs somewhat) I'll have to go digging, but I seem to remember Moorgard phrasing his wording around 'stances' to imply there would be an offensive and defensive stance? I'm not sure if I'm remembering right or if that was a general statement directed at specific fighters or not. </font></span><div></div><p>Message Edited by SmakenDahed on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:17 PM</span>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> SmakenDahed wrote: <P><SPAN><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2>I'd like to add a couple of pros to that list:</FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2><BR></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2><BR></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2>4. Stifle effects will now just be ignored allowing higher level taunts to actually land (this includes attack arts such as Retaliate)</FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2><BR></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2>5. Combat Arts with duration effects (debuffs/dots) will no longer prevent other Guardians from using their abilities for damage.<BR>6. Should be no need to maintain 4 different HP buffs (this was annoying)<BR>7. (if we're lucky) Fix to protection line abilities<BR>8. Mob AE ranges have been adjusted (not specific to Fighters, but it compensates for the lower HPs somewhat)</FONT></SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Smaken,    Where did you see these at?  Are there some posts that I am missing?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Number 8 was changed in LU12.  Which is it a good or bad thing?  Was it a reduced or increased?</DIV> <DIV>*** Epic Encounters ***</DIV> <DIV>- The area-of-effect range of large creatures now matches the range in which you can hit them.</DIV>

[SmakenDah]

<div></div><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2">My guild site is down and someone linked to a Moorgard post about the stifles being ignored instead of getting the "Target is too powerful" message - which is the way it should have been from the beginning (EQ1 did this - mobs would still take damage and suffer effects other than what they were immune to). The attacks that have duration side effects was in about the same posting. Instead of preventing you from using the damage aspect of the art, it will allow the damage to go through, but disregards the 'effect' so you can't stack debuffs. I'm a bit hazy on whether the effect timer gets reset, I seem to remember thinking that it wouldn't and I thought that was a bit lame. Obviously, both of the above changes would apply to more than just Guardians. EDIT: as for the mob AE - I'm not sure. Isn't U12 still on test? It sounds like a reduction - basically, the AE for most mobs isn't going to affect all players in the encounter. I've been on as my Guardian once in the last two weeks since Gaige has completely depressed me and made me start playing a Monk. <span>:smileysad:</span> Just kidding - RL has been keeping me busy. I was on Monday where we did MoM - cone was still long range, don't remember taking big damage from the robot's AEs so it might be in effect (or I wasn't paying attention - tired).</font><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2"></font><div></div><p>Message Edited by SmakenDahed on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:57 PM</span>

[Shizzirri]

<P><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffffff size=2>Off topic – Rahge thanks for the spelling error correction, really, I appreciate it.<SPAN>  </SPAN>Nice to see that MS office still is used around the country for things. <SPAN> </SPAN>Its spell checker is pretty nice but the grammar check tends to miss punctuation mistakes such as run on sentences, appropriate uses of an apostrophe, and even the dreaded comma.<SPAN>  </SPAN>You ever notice that?</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffffff size=2>On Topic – As far as being a “Gaige junkie” I must formally deny it, while he has several obvious issues with our guardian class; some of his points are valid.<SPAN>  </SPAN>The only reason why I somewhat agree with Gaige on his posts is because I’ve leveled a monk, while only to 35, I can tell you that comments like “Oh let’s wait for a real tank to come along” can get to you.<SPAN>  </SPAN>For example, we have six fighter classes and according to everquest2.com the definition of what a fighter does is: </FONT></P> <P><I><FONT face=Verdana><FONT color=#ffffff><FONT size=2>Fighters use brute strength and sturdy weapons to deal physical damage to their enemies. Always at the forefront of combat, fighters stand toe-to-toe with opponents while keeping their allies from harm. No matter the risk, fighters never back down from a challenge.</FONT></FONT></FONT></I></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana><FONT color=#ffffff><FONT size=2>Now my impression from this statement on, once again, the official Sony site is that all type of fighters should be able to stand toe-to-toe with an enemy, translation tanking.<SPAN>  </SPAN>In his posts he isn’t saying he wants to tank Darathar or Venekor, he just wants each variety of the fighter class to be more balanced, and like it or not guardians with their buffs in combination with other class buffs can create a combination of high avoidance, mitigation, and hit points that no other class can create, and while it may or not be the way Sony intended it to work it does make raids rather easy.<SPAN>  </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffffff size=2>And Gaige loves this one even more. <SPAN> </SPAN>Monks are able to use the Great Hammer line of weapons which in my opinion makes absolutely no sense.<SPAN>  </SPAN>I mean why should a class who prides itself on high avoidance be able to use a heavy weapon like a Royal Great Flail?<SPAN>  </SPAN>You’d think their avoidance would go down a bit from that now wouldn’t it?<SPAN>  </SPAN>If I’m wrong it's because I’m used to the little weight cap monks had where if they went over a certain number they’d start losing mitigation.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffffff size=2>EDIT - (forgot this) Again let me reemphasize the point I’ve been making in the 12,000 other threads about this topic…</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana><FONT color=#ffffff><FONT size=2>Guardians will still have the highest amount of hit points given a certain set of buffs or even unbuffed hit points.<SPAN>  </SPAN>Guardians will still be the best choice for tanking your big epic encounters because of their defensive buffs, which will still be the best in the game.<SPAN>  </SPAN>When it boils down to it, mitigation will still be king, let the monks have their high avoidance because what good does that high avoidance do against an orange mob? <SPAN> </SPAN>Not much, whereas a tank with 90% mitigation would be much more productive against a big triple up orange mob.<SPAN>  </SPAN>Put it this way while we won’t be avoiding as many attacks, we will only be getting hit for lets say about 200 points of damage and with the reactive heals and wards out there, that’s not taking damage.</FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffffff size=2></FONT></DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Shizzirri on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:52 PM</span>

[Mig]

<p>Shizzirri wrote: In his posts he isn’t saying he wants to tank Darathar or Venekor....</p><p></p><hr><p>Actually, yea he is saying that. He wants monks to be able to tank 100% of mobs. Not 90%, or 95%, or 99.9%. 100%.</p><p>I actually agree with him. But he should understand that:</p><p>Just because SOE said it at one point, doesn't make it true.</p><p>Just because you want it a certain way, doesn't mean it's going to happen.</p><div>People in elitist groups will fight the hardest to keep the status quo.</div><div> </div><div>That's what I learned from these message boards.</div><div> </div><p> </p>

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ROFL....   That is the funniest post I ever seen him  make.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hey genius, monks are not supposed to have the hitpoints and mitigation of a guardian, you got DPS and FD.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And anyone can get 100% avoidence.   So why are you here screaming guardians are broken and need nerfed?   Must be your uber intelligence kicking in...</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I swear to God half of you guys can't read, its a wonder you can post.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Didn't I, just state like two posts up that I'm aware most classes can get 100% avoidance?  Yes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Didn't I also state, that guardians are the only class who can do so AND also get 100% mitigation and have the advantage of the highest HP in the game?  Yes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh, and a scout class, another fighter class and a mage class have FD btw <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>While I realize its a buff and +defense skill issue, guardians are the most broken in regards to the issues because they should NEVER EVER NEVER come even remotely close to 100% avoidance, ever.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So since they can, while having 100% mitigation and the highest HP in the game, they are MT by default and are causing numerous amounts of trivialized encounters.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks.<BR></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gage-Mikel on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:51 PM</span>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SmakenDahed wrote:<BR> <FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2>My guild site is down and someone linked to a Moorgard post about the stifles being ignored instead of getting the "Target is too powerful" message - which is the way it should have been from the beginning (EQ1 did this - mobs would still take damage and suffer effects other than what they were immune to).<BR><BR>The attacks that have duration side effects was in about the same posting. Instead of preventing you from using the damage aspect of the art, it will allow the damage to go through, but disregards the 'effect' so you can't stack debuffs. I'm a bit hazy on whether the effect timer gets reset, I seem to remember thinking that it wouldn't and I thought that was a bit lame.<BR><BR>Obviously, both of the above changes would apply to more than just Guardians.<BR><BR>EDIT: as for the mob AE - I'm not sure. Isn't U12 still on test? It sounds like a reduction - basically, the AE for most mobs isn't going to affect all players in the encounter. I've been on as my Guardian once in the last two weeks since Gaige has completely depressed me and made me start playing a Monk. <SPAN>:smileysad:</SPAN> Just kidding - RL has been keeping me busy. I was on Monday where we did MoM - cone was still long range, don't remember taking big damage from the robot's AEs so it might be in effect (or I wasn't paying attention - tired).</FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2></FONT> <P>Message Edited by SmakenDahed on <SPAN class=date_text>07-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:57 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>LU 12 is on the live servers today.</P> <P>If you could get me the links to those quotes I'll include them in my original post.</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>uglak wrote:</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Again, for the slow, monks should not have the same mitigation and hitpoints as a guardian, although your definatley close.  You got DPS and utility.</FONT></P> <P>I'm very aware of this genius.  JUST AS YOU SHOULDN'T GET ANYWHERE CLOSE TO 100% AVOIDANCE.  Hell I doubt you should even get close to 50% avoidance, thanks.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Highest hitpoints by a slight margin, same mitigation as other plate classes, and avoidence that any class can reach.    Yet you come to the conclusion that guardians are broken *boggle*</FONT></P> <P>Yes, because the avoidance numbers you and other classes are reaching should be the realm of the monk/bruiser ONLY.  While other classes are taking advantage of these numerous broken combat issues, the guardian class is the most affected because of the HP AND MITIGATION NUMBERS THEY CAN REACH.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>LOL, the same Noah that thinks guardians are overpowered and cheers for their nerfs?  The same noah that invited a moronic, whiny [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] nerf the guardian monk to come join his guild?  The same Noah that claims to tank epic mobs naked, and yet we see posts from his guild excusing others of exploiting because FOH cant seem to kill contested mobs?   Naah, I am sure you wouldnt like to see his class nerfed.  LOL</FONT></P> <P>Jealous much?</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You want a super monk, period.</FONT></P> <P>The only way I'd ever even think of wanting that, is if it'd make you quit playing and posting <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  Say what you want, its really easy to see that I'm an advocate of balance.  /shrug</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>MG says alot of stuff, which less then half is reality.  Didnt he tell you in beta that monks were tanks?  Hello, its 2005, and your still DPS.</FONT></P> <P>No I'm not, I'm a tank with overpowered and broken damage capabilities, for which fixes are coming soon.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>We are not broken.   We do not need to be fixed to pacify crybaby monks that want to tank zalak.</FONT></P> <P>Yes you are, its fine to be in denial, I would be too if my class was untouchable in its primary role.  Oh, and I *can* already tank Zalak, sir.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>It must be nice to have FD, self heals, DPS of a scout, 10k hitpoints fully buffed and recieving upgrades in the next combat revamp.</FONT></P> <P>FD is cool, ask any of your brigand and SK friends.  Self heal is okay (ask your paladin and bruiser friends), the DPS I've been asking to get lowered for months, don't kid yourself, yeah 10k HP is cool, you should know <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  As for upgrades /shrug haven't seen the changes on test yet.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>More like pity.  Your posts are dumb.  You cannot play a monk.  And you have 4k posts of whiny drivel.   Step out of your moms basement gage for something besides fanfaire.</FONT></P> <P>Ever seen me play my monk?  No.  Oh you enjoy posting ignorant flaming accusations?  Thought so.  I have 4k posts of all kinds of stuff /shrug.  I don't live in the basement I live in the attic.  Aww, you're still jealous about FF.  Shouldn't be, its obvious why you weren't invited.</P> <HR> <BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[SmakenDah]

<font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2">Hmmm.. was searching for Moorgard posts saying what I mentioned above, found something not mentioned which was <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=combat&message.id=55397#M55397" target=_blank>spell upgrades</a> will actually be UPGRADES worthy of the effort/cost. It dawned on me that the thread where what I mentioned was said comes from Fan Faire feedback which I think Noah posted - someone else had a bunch of information in that thread as well. Looking for it now... Gaige, Guardians aren't the only tanks that can hit 100% avoidance... monks do it easier you know. I have yet to hit 100% mitigation so I don't believe you. Show me proof. Other tanks can hit 100% avoidance to you know. Monks can hit 100% avoidance. All Guardian buffs are group so the whole group can hit 100% avoidance. Not just Guardians can hit 100% avoidance. I've never hit 100% mitigation. It's easier to hit 100% avoidance - other classes can do that too - while 100% mitigation isn't easy for the normal player. 100% avoidance is easier, most classes can hit 100% avoidance. Annoying isn't it? I think we get the point - please use some other platform to hit 5k <span>:smileytongue: Talk about what sort of compensation a Guard can get for losing out on reaching 100% avoidance so easily on top have having reduced HPs and reduced DPS - be constructive rather than chanting the same old thing over and over. You've said it so many times now, if it's not sinking in leave it alone. BTW, other classes can reach 100% avoidance too you know.. </span></font><div></div>

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <P>You have as much of a clue on what is going to be in the upcoming changes as anyone else. </P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Oh I'm sorry, I must've been hallucinating when I spent time at FF talking to MG about how they planned to fix monk's tanking ability.  Sorry.<BR></DIV>

[Raahl]

<P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack. </LI> <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</LI> <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs. </LI> <LI>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI> <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells.</LI> <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI> <LI>Upgrades will actually be upgrades instead of the way many spells are now. (Affects everyone) </LI></OL> <DIV>There are a few possible pros and cons mentioned in other posts, I have not verified them yet so I will not add them yet.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If anyone finds the Moorgard posts on any of these, post the links here and I will add them to the list and to the original post.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Keep up the good work.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Raahl on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:51 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ROFL....   That is the funniest post I ever seen him  make.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hey genius, monks are not supposed to have the hitpoints and mitigation of a guardian, you got DPS and FD.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And anyone can get 100% avoidence.   So why are you here screaming guardians are broken and need nerfed?   Must be your uber intelligence kicking in...</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I swear to God half of you guys can't read, its a wonder you can post.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Didn't I, just state like two posts up that I'm aware most classes can get 100% avoidance?  Yes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>So, why is it broken when a guardian does, when anyone can?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Didn't I also state, that guardians are the only class who can do so AND also get 100% mitigation and have the advantage of the highest HP in the game?  Yes.</DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians are supposed to have the highest Hitpoints, and our mitigation is the same as all plate classes.  So?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh, and a scout class and another fighter class have FD btw <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Yes, you share DPS and FD with them.   Hybrid scout/fighter?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>While I realize its a buff and +defense skill issue, guardians are the most broken in regards to the issues because they should NEVER EVER NEVER come even remotely close to 100% avoidance, ever.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Ahhh, but, all the other classes that can also get 100% avoidence should?   Ok, good logic there.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So since they can, while having 100% mitigation and the highest HP in the game, they are MT by default and are causing numerous amounts of trivialized encounters.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Which encounters are they trivializing, be specific?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Nagalik? Krathuk?  Vox?    Ermm, oh, I know, theyre trivializing angler...   Is that the one your talking about?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Angler is trivial with anyone tanking that stacks buffs.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>So Whats your reasoning as to why guardians are broken again?   That they got higher hitpoints and mitigation then monks?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks.</DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE><FONT color=#ffff00>Your welcome.</FONT> <DIV><BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:50 PM</span>

[SmakenDah]

<div></div><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2"><a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=13231#M13231" target="_blank">Found it</a> It's Noah and others that were at the Fan Faire talking about what they heard from the devs. Probably doesn't carry as much weight as someone officially posting.</font> <span><blockquote><hr>DemosthenesEQ2 wrote:<div>I am still in a small haze from Vegas, but there were a few good points brought up that I wanted to share with you guys.  I wont remember everything (and there is no way I asked every question I should have) but here is what I have to report back on.</div> <div> </div> <div><font color="#ffff33">-Skills that are shared vs a mob will be useable.  Example, I use Cleave on a mob...another guardian now gets "bla bla to powerful" crap.  The damage of the attacks will soon affect the mob but the secondary effects will not stack (stifles, stuns, slows).  So rejoice you can use your skills even if another guardian is in a raid/group.  Coming "soon".</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font color="#ccff00">-Buff stacking will become limited.  Not sure what this means but I think the "HP" buffs will be adjusted to stacking will be limited.</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font color="#ffff00">-Skills are getting a total overhaul.  The HTL line may progress (it was talked about) beyond lvl 15. </font> <font color="#ccff00">Your gray skills will not be as useful as they are now... App1 vs Adept 3 will have a much larger difference.</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font color="#ff0000">-Protection lines will not be adjusted it seems.... IE - they are still crap.</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font color="#ffff00">-</font><font color="#ffff00">PROTECTION WILL AFFECT RAID CONTENT.  All skills will work on any mob actually... the 2ndary effects will just not work.</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font color="#ccff00">-</font><font color="#ccff00">Raid content will contain new challenges and 2ndary tanks will be needed.</font></div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>Some of these comments will hit all classes.  The spell/skill overhaul is being done slowly and carefully.  I don't expect them to have it out by Splitpaw but definately by the expansion (I'm going to say 6-8 weeks).  These changes will alter the game we play enormously and need to be done correctly.  I have faith in these guys after speaking with them for hours and hours about nearly everything in the game.  I suggest if you are bored... don't just get up and quit but stick around to see if these changes / expansion are good for you.  </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>There might have been more info given that I am just not remembering.  Perhaps when my BtA (blood to alcohol) level becomes more normal, I'll remember a few more things.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2"> Is one snippet - openning post actually. Here's another juicy morsel: </font></span><span><blockquote><hr>Oakwood wrote:<p>I was in all of the panels, and asked a few of the Guard questions (like the one about HTL).</p> <p><font color="#ccff00">Basically, then entire skill, spell, and combat system is getting a nearly total rewrite.</font>  Much of what we know now will need to be discarded and relearned.  <font color="#ccff00">One of the main things he is doing is reducing the number of multi-effect skills.  There will be one or two big buffs for each thing, rather than a bunch of small buffs that must be stacked in various combinations.  We also will not be able to stack defense buffs.  They will be upgrades of each other, and only the best one will count.</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff00">Also, dot and effect stacking on mobs will be useable.  Two guards can hit maim, or mangle.  The debuff portion will only efect the mob once, but the damage will hit from each character.  Dots will stack damage, only one of each dot per character but multiple characters can use the same dot.</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff00">Another nice thing is this new stacking will allow us to use abilities with stun/stifle against any mob.  If the mob is immune to stifle, the rest of the skill will still work (taunt for example) just the stifle part will be ignored.</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff00">He will be putting in some upgrades to HTL, this will be one of the differences between Guard and Zerker.  He didn't explain what that means, but thats what he said.  They also would not speak much about how/if/what changes will be made to the relative tanking ability of the various fighter classes.</font>  It is something they are looking at.  The impression I got is they themselves are not yet sure about what they are going to do on it.</p> <p><font color="#ff0000">About the intervene line, he was asked about it, the official answer is that intervene type spells are to be used in emergencies when you need to take a hit for someone, not to be kept up all the time, and you have to pay a price for the ability to take the damage off someone else.  I am pretty sure he has no idea why that doesn't work, but there wasn't time to try to go into greater detail on it (one hour panel, lots of questions)</font></p> <p><font color="#ccff00">On stats, wisdom will affect spell resists as much as agility affects melee avoidance.  Start thinking about wisdom gear.  And tell your spell casting friends to work on int.  Int will be to spell damage as str is to melee damage.</font>  </p> <p><font color="#ccff00">Fighters will be taking an across the board damage reduction.  Zerkers, monks and bruisers will no longer be able to outdamage assasins and wizards over the course of longer fights.  This hits us and crusaders as well, but since most guards see damage as a secondary task at best, not such the big deal (unless it has a major negative impact on aggro generation).</font></p> <p><font color="#ffff00">Wards will account for mitigation! :smileyvery-happy:</font></p> <p><font color="#ccff00"><font color="#ccff00">Cleric and Shaman heals will generate agro for the healer instead of the target (druids already work this way).</font> </font> <font color="#ffff00">We will need to watch aggro on them very closely until they have time to learn to manage heal agro.  Basically, if you can keep aggro off a druid, you are fine, if you can't, you are going to have troubles.</font></p> <p>Talked to Dymus for a long while about raids, he has some cool ideas, and wants to implement more involved raid content, as well as progressive content.  Expect to see several hour raids and multi day raids again, although probably not very soon.  Also, he is looking to add raid content that will require crafters, like the way you needed an alchemist for the plague event.</p> <p>All I can think of right now.  Will post more if I remember more.  </p> <hr></blockquote></span> <span><font color="#ff9900" face="Verdana" size="2">Again, not from official sources but a lot of what was said in there has actually been seen in game (accidentally) or from posts. I suspect it's subject to change but then most things are in a MMORPG. Hope that helps. Added some coloring to show what has been <font color="#ccff00">confirmed/implemented</font>, what is still <font color="#ffff00">officially unconfirmed</font>, and what <font color="#ff0000">really sucks if it's true</font>. </font></span><div></div><p>Message Edited by SmakenDahed on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:11 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>uglak wrote:</P> <P>Didn't I, just state like two posts up that I'm aware most classes can get 100% avoidance?  Yes.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So, why is it broken when a guardian does, when anyone can?</FONT></P> <P>Didn't I also state, that guardians are the only class who can do so AND also get 100% mitigation and have the advantage of the highest HP in the game?  Yes.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians are supposed to have the highest Hitpoints, and our mitigation is the same as all plate classes.  So?</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>/sigh</P> <P>You are so thick headed, hard headed and obtuse.  Or all three.  Who knows.  Are you really this unintelligent?  I'm curious.</P> <P>Guardians are mitigation tanks.  They are not avoidance tanks.  When the first combat changes were on test Noah had around 25% avoidance RAID buffed.</P> <P>Get the picture now?</P> <P>Sure the other classes getting 100% avoidance aren't supposed to either, but THEY DO NOT get the numerous advantages that guardians do, that make the fact that guardians can get 100% avoidance so overpowering.</P> <P>Geez.</P> <P>So while everyone is getting fixed, and avoidance numbers will be significantly lower after the revamp, the main class trivializing content due to the avoidance is the guardian BECAUSE of your amazing mitigation and HP (which yes you should/will/do have). </P> <P>So while I don't care if you have 100% mitigation unbuffed after the revamp (because of stuns/stifles/interrupts) and the highest HP out of all the classes, I *do* care a lot when you avoid like a monk.</P> <P>Because you aren't one.<BR></P>

[Raahl]

<P>Avoidance will be fixed, lets move on. <BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack. </LI> <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs.</LI> <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs. </LI> <LI>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI> <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells.</LI> <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better.</LI> <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad)</LI> <LI>Upgrades will actually be upgrades instead of the way many spells are now. (Affects everyone) </LI></OL></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>There are a few possible pros and cons mentioned in other posts, I have not verified them yet so I will not add them yet.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If anyone finds the Moorgard posts on any of these, post the links here and I will add them to the list and to the original post.</DIV><BR>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>uglak wrote:</P> <P>Didn't I, just state like two posts up that I'm aware most classes can get 100% avoidance?  Yes.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So, why is it broken when a guardian does, when anyone can?</FONT></P> <P>Didn't I also state, that guardians are the only class who can do so AND also get 100% mitigation and have the advantage of the highest HP in the game?  Yes.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians are supposed to have the highest Hitpoints, and our mitigation is the same as all plate classes.  So?</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>/sigh</P> <P>You are so thick headed, hard headed and obtuse.  Or all three.  Who knows.  Are you really this unintelligent?  I'm curious.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ermm, I guess, to answer at your level.  I know you are but what am I?</FONT></P> <P>Guardians are mitigation tanks.  They are not avoidance tanks.  When the first combat changes were on test Noah had around 25% avoidance RAID buffed.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Says who?   I guess we are what we are.   Who gives a rats [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] what noahs avoidence was ?</FONT></P> <P>Get the picture now?<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yea, I get the picture of you still whining.</FONT></P> <P>Sure the other classes getting 100% avoidance aren't supposed to either, but THEY DO NOT get the numerous advantages that guardians do, that make the fact that guardians can get 100% avoidance so overpowering.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>What numerous advantages are you talking about?   Monk level DPS?  FD?  Self heals?   Oh, maybe the same mitigation as every other plate class?   What are these numerous advantages Guardians got over other fighters?</FONT></P> <P>Geez.</P> <P>So while everyone is getting fixed, and avoidance numbers will be significantly lower after the revamp, the main class trivializing content due to the avoidance is the guardian BECAUSE of your amazing mitigation and HP (which yes you should/will/do have). </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Amazinging Mitigation and hitpoints?  Huh?  Ever heard of a zerker?  SK?  Hell, didnt you say your monk could have over 10k hitpoints?   Where is this amazing mitigation and hitpoints all the other classes dont have?  Oh, its in your head...</FONT></P> <P>So while I don't care if you have 100% mitigation unbuffed after the revamp (because of stuns/stifles/interrupts) and the highest HP out of all the classes, I *do* care a lot when you avoid like a monk.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You mean, Avoid like every other class in the game can avoid, right?</FONT></P> <P>Because you aren't one.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Nope, I think we failed the whine test.</FONT><BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR>Blah blah blah. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Ah well, its boring posting refutes to you anyway, as you barely can grasp ahold of the concept of balance.<BR>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SmakenDahed wrote:<BR> <FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=13231#M13231" target=_blank>Found it</A><BR><BR>It's Noah and others that were at the Fan Faire talking about what they heard from the devs. Probably doesn't carry as much weight as someone officially posting.</FONT><BR><SPAN><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff9900 size=2><BR></FONT></SPAN> <P>Message Edited by SmakenDahed on <SPAN class=date_text>07-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:11 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Yea I was looking for official posts, that way we can let everyone interpret them how they see fit.    Thanks for the info though.  I put the upgrade post in the original and added it to the pros.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Keeping with the theme.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack.  <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs. <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs.  <LI>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs. <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad) <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells. <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better. <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad) <LI>Upgrades will actually be upgrades instead of the way many spells are now. (Affects everyone) </LI></OL></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>There are a few possible pros and cons mentioned in other posts, I have not verified them yet so I will not add them yet.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If anyone finds the Moorgard posts on any of these, post the links here and I will add them to the list and to the original post.</DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by Raahl on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:17 PM</span>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>uglak wrote:</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Again, for the slow, monks should not have the same mitigation and hitpoints as a guardian, although your definatley close.  You got DPS and utility.</FONT></P> <P>I'm very aware of this genius.  JUST AS YOU SHOULDN'T GET ANYWHERE CLOSE TO 100% AVOIDANCE.  Hell I doubt you should even get close to 50% avoidance, thanks.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>But why the concern with jsut guardians getting 100% avoidence and not every other fricken class in the game?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Highest hitpoints by a slight margin, same mitigation as other plate classes, and avoidence that any class can reach.    Yet you come to the conclusion that guardians are broken *boggle*</FONT></P> <P>Yes, because the avoidance numbers you and other classes are reaching should be the realm of the monk/bruiser ONLY.  While other classes are taking advantage of these numerous broken combat issues, the guardian class is the most affected because of the HP AND MITIGATION NUMBERS THEY CAN REACH.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Again, our mitigation is pretty much on par with every other platemail class.  And our hitpoints are so close to that of alot of fighters the difference is marginal.   So what are you singling out guardians for in your whines?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>LOL, the same Noah that thinks guardians are overpowered and cheers for their nerfs?  The same noah that invited a moronic, whiny [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] nerf the guardian monk to come join his guild?  The same Noah that claims to tank epic mobs naked, and yet we see posts from his guild excusing others of exploiting because FOH cant seem to kill contested mobs?   Naah, I am sure you wouldnt like to see his class nerfed.  LOL</FONT></P> <P>Jealous much?</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>No, after reading the crybaby thread falsly accusing another guild of exploiting, and realising that your guild pretty much cant kill  much of any of the harder mobs in the game, I see why they attract whiners/losers like yourself.  Birds of a feather flock together...</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You want a super monk, period.</FONT></P> <P>The only way I'd ever even think of wanting that, is if it'd make you quit playing and posting <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  Say what you want, its really easy to see that I'm an advocate of balance.  /shrug</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>You are a advocate for making monks powerful, as has been shown many times.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>MG says alot of stuff, which less then half is reality.  Didnt he tell you in beta that monks were tanks?  Hello, its 2005, and your still DPS.</FONT></P> <P>No I'm not, I'm a tank with overpowered and broken damage capabilities, for which fixes are coming soon.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>Yes, I agree your DPS definatley needs to be fixed, it is overpowered.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>We are not broken.   We do not need to be fixed to pacify crybaby monks that want to tank zalak.</FONT></P> <P>Yes you are, its fine to be in denial, I would be too if my class was untouchable in its primary role.  Oh, and I *can* already tank Zalak, sir.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>So, which mob is it that you are crying about that you cannot tank specifically?  </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>It must be nice to have FD, self heals, DPS of a scout, 10k hitpoints fully buffed and recieving upgrades in the next combat revamp.</FONT></P> <P>FD is cool, ask any of your brigand and SK friends.  Self heal is okay (ask your paladin and bruiser friends), the DPS I've been asking to get lowered for months, don't kid yourself, yeah 10k HP is cool, you should know <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  As for upgrades /shrug haven't seen the changes on test yet.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>More like pity.  Your posts are dumb.  You cannot play a monk.  And you have 4k posts of whiny drivel.   Step out of your moms basement gage for something besides fanfaire.</FONT></P> <P>Ever seen me play my monk?  No.  Oh you enjoy posting ignorant flaming accusations?  Thought so.  I have 4k posts of all kinds of stuff /shrug.  I don't live in the basement I live in the attic.  Aww, you're still jealous about FF.  Shouldn't be, its obvious why you weren't invited.</P> <P><FONT color=#66ff00>What the hell is FF that I am jealous of? Final fantasy?   Fires of folley?    I am quite sure you suck at a monk, because, the monks ingame I know are proud of their class and are very good.  Since you seem to always be whining about how much your class sucks, I can only assume its because you cannot play it.   You have 4k posts of whines and BS.   You must live in a basement, as you surely dont have time to make a living inbetween playing games and posting 4k times.   But thats ok, your mom loves you I am sure.   But, could ya at least go mow the grass and take out the garbage once in awhile?</FONT></P> <HR> <BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gage-Mikel wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> uglak wrote:<BR>Blah blah blah. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Ah well, its boring posting refutes to you anyway, as you barely can grasp ahold of the concept of balance.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Translation: I cannot counter your arguments, and I am tired of looking like a whiny idiot on this thread.   NERF GUARDIANS!</P> <P>/cheer</P>

[Raahl]

<DIV>Trying to steer this back on topic, Yet again.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack.  <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs. <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs.  <LI>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs. <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad) <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells. <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better. <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad) <LI>Upgrades will actually be upgrades instead of the way many spells are now. (Affects everyone) </LI></OL></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>There are a few possible pros and cons mentioned in other posts, I have not verified them yet so I will not add them yet.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If anyone finds the Moorgard posts on any of these, post the links here and I will add them to the list and to the original post.</DIV></DIV>

[Rah]

<DIV> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>Shizzirri,</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc>The post started with the question of how the comments on the upcoming patches will affect guardians. That was the topic, not a question of if you were or are a Gaige junkie, if you have leveled a monk and had your feelings hurt because a group you were a member of wanted a guardian, your impression of a pre game class release definitions or the fact that monks look for ways to maximize DPS. <SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>The next time you decide to swing through on Gaige sack please precede your post with a Tarzan like yodel so I can at least skip through it and move on to one of more relevant information. By the way when you can find two english professors that agree on what the proper use of the language is Ill stop using words like infallible.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P><SPAN><FONT color=#cccccc>Rahge</FONT></SPAN></DIV>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rahge wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P></P> <P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc><SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></P><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#cccccc size=3>The next time you decide to swing through on Gaige sack please precede your post with a Tarzan like yodel </FONT><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT color=#cccccc></FONT></FONT></FONT></P><SPAN><FONT color=#cccccc>Rahge</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>LOL, now thats funny.  heh<BR>

[ugl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <DIV>Trying to steer this back on topic, Yet again.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible CONS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>Even less DPS (this affects all fighters).  Less damage via autoattack.  <LI>Less avoidance (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking various class buffs. <LI>Less hit points.  No more stacking hit point buffs.  <LI>Less mitigation (this affects all fighters).  No more stacking mitigation buffs. <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad) <LI>More difficult solo'ing because of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</LI></OL> <P><STRONG><U><FONT size=4>Possible PROS</FONT></U></STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>"Supposedly" more taunts.  So overall better at keeping aggro.  Especially If aggro is fixed for the various healing spells. <LI>If the mobs are adjusted correctly to match the new combat changes, our soloablility might be less affected by the nerfs.  Heck who knows it might get better. <LI>Mobs being adjusted to use a wider range of specials including buffing themselves.  (could be good or bad) <LI>Upgrades will actually be upgrades instead of the way many spells are now. (Affects everyone) </LI></OL></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>There are a few possible pros and cons mentioned in other posts, I have not verified them yet so I will not add them yet.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If anyone finds the Moorgard posts on any of these, post the links here and I will add them to the list and to the original post.</DIV></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Aye, overall, it looks like a across the board fighter nerf.   Guardians  tanking will be hard hit,  but, we must assume, will still be the best choice for MT in most raid situations. (from MG's post)</P> <P>Other fighters are also going to get the nerf bat, actually, harder then us.   Zerkers/brawlers/SKs DPS is going to go down hard it appears.   </P> <P>I think the "more taunts" may be to make up for the fact that reactive heals are going to start making aggro for the clerics instead of us.   ...     Hard to speculate on how it will all pan out until we actually get to play with it.   As I said before, I doubt SOE even has a clue as to how it will actually pan out.  they are notorius for pushing out broken/untested patches/fixes, changing the tide depending on public opinion, and appear to have missed the mark of their overall goals by a longshot the first time around.</P> <P> </P> <P>No wonder peeps are anxious over such a large scale change, when the small changes they make come out fugged up as often as not.</P> <p>Message Edited by uglak on <span class=date_text>07-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:01 PM</span>

[Faarwolf]

There has been altogether too much flaming and trolling in this thread.  While I like to leave good discussions open, doing nothing but flaming and making rude comments will get an otherwise useful thread locked.