guards vs monk [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

Nazo

08-28-2005, 09:48 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gage-Mikel wrote:</P> <P>We'll see. /shrug. I'll still play, if they nerfed guards I imagine you'd cry like a baby and leave big guy.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You mean if they nerfed us further I guess ?</FONT></P> <P>But its okay. Its not live yet, I feedback to MG daily, so I can only hope they listen. </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>LOL</FONT></P> <P>If not I'll find a way to enjoy my class. I always have.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>That is all matters when the dust settles. You cannot deny that playing field has been leveled a lot compared to live. Is it enough to satisy you folks I dunno I guess only time will tell. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Is Combat Revamp close to its aim ?</FONT></P> <UL> <LI><FONT color=#ffff00>One of the stated goals was to stop heroics being soloed yet I see some classes soloing 3 up arrow heroics non-stop. Probably even easier then live because of the decrease in mob HPs.</FONT></LI> <LI><FONT color=#ffff00>Fighters won't be DPS ? Most definetly a success :smileyvery-happy: Only problem is in their effort to nerf Fighter DPS it looks like SoE hit some scouts as well. I gave scouts as example since I know you are a big supporter of Scouts with your posts saying "If you want to do more damage with Fighter then go and roll a scout" but any melee damage changes for the combat engine also hurts scouts it looks like. Hope SoE can fix them before release.</FONT></LI> <LI><FONT color=#ffff00>Different sub-classes of Fighters are more equal when it comes to Tanking ? I am not in a raid force in Beta but looking at CA's and stats I would say playing field is a lot more level then it is in live at the moment.</FONT></LI></UL> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So all in all I would say Combat Revamp didn't do anything but closed the tanking gap between Guardians and other fighters. Did it help Fighter's in general a most emphatic NO. <U>A lot of people asked for and agreed with SoE for the Fighter Nerf under the disguise of asking for game balance in the hopes that they will get much better at tanking during the process of getting their DPS nerfed.</U> From your post doesn't sound it happened.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>It is still early though. I haven't seen any Epic Encounters in DoF. Maybe there are some that will require non-Guardian Tanks ? Class specific resists were certainly a move in the correct direction. A 1200 extra resist though would mean people will swap around a couple of pieces of gear. </FONT></P><FONT color=#ffff00> <P><BR></P></FONT> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Message Edited by Nazowa on <SPAN class=date_text>08-27-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:51 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Nazowa on <span class=date_text>08-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:55 PM</span>

Gaige

08-28-2005, 11:13 AM

<P>Melee dps (including scouts) is way messed up on beta, confirmed by MG today. They have people working on it so it still remains to be seen how melee dps is going to be in the end.</P> <P>Tanking though, well /shrug. It is what it is I assume.</P> <P>I still thoroughly enjoy most of the new system, and I like it tenfold over live.</P>

Nazo

08-28-2005, 12:04 PM

<P>Glad to hear. </P> <P>Things would have gone much smoother if Combat Revamp was done seperately. Now Combat Revamp changes are also getting mixed up with level 50-60 abilities for the classes. People who are getting the short end of the stick in DoF are blaming it on the Combat Revamp as well. Of course we cannot expect SoE to mess with cash flow and postpone DoF just a little bit so that combat Revamp changes can be seen by players in their current environment for more accurate analysis.</P>

Shizzirri

08-28-2005, 12:32 PM

<P>Trying to speak from a realistic perspective, we're all fighters and you'd think we could do a little more damage with our melee weapons than what they're currently set at in beta (17-51 on a prisimatic longsword) isn't that a little harsh, priests shouldn't be out dp'sing fighters should they?</P> <P> </P>

Moorgard

08-29-2005, 10:17 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <P>Trying to speak from a realistic perspective, we're all fighters and you'd think we could do a little more damage with our melee weapons than what they're currently set at in beta (17-51 on a prisimatic longsword) isn't that a little harsh, priests shouldn't be out dp'sing fighters should they?</P> <P> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>No, they shouldn't. We're looking at the numbers and parses, believe me. Something got out of whack, and the mechanics guys are working on it now.</DIV>

pera

08-29-2005, 10:44 PM

Ok Just for my own clearification on this subject the tiering of classes vs dps should be as follows: 1.) Mages a.) Sorc b.) Summ c.) Enchanters 2.) Scouts a.) Rogue b.) Predator c.) Bard 3.) Fighters a.) Brawler b.) Crusader c.) Warrior 4.) Priests a.) Druid b.) Shaman c.) Cleric I know its not this cut and dry but I'm guessing the break down on dps should be somewhere in the ball park ? Please correct me if I'm wrong <div></div>

Cecil_Stri

08-29-2005, 10:58 PM

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> perano wrote:<BR>Ok Just for my own clearification on this subject the tiering of classes vs dps should be as follows:<BR><BR>1.) Mages<BR> a.) Sorc<BR> b.) Summ<BR> c.) Enchanters<BR><BR>2.) Scouts<BR> a.) Rogue<BR> b.) Predator<BR> c.) Bard<BR><BR>3.) Fighters<BR> a.) Brawler<BR> b.) Crusader<BR> c.) Warrior<BR><BR>4.) Priests<BR> a.) Druid<BR> b.) Shaman<BR> c.) Cleric<BR><BR>I know its not this cut and dry but I'm guessing the break down on dps should be somewhere in the ball park ? Please correct me if I'm wrong<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Preds above rogues.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And fighter dps isn't broken down by subclass. Goes</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruisers/monk</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Shadow knight/zerker</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guard/paly</DIV>

Pins

08-29-2005, 11:03 PM

<blockquote><hr>perano wrote:Ok Just for my own clearification on this subject the tiering of classes vs dps should be as follows: 1.) Mages a.) Sorc b.) Summ c.) Enchanters 2.) Scouts a.) Rogue b.) Predator c.) Bard 3.) Fighters a.) Brawler b.) Crusader c.) Warrior 4.) Priests a.) Druid b.) Shaman c.) Cleric I know its not this cut and dry but I'm guessing the break down on dps should be somewhere in the ball park ? Please correct me if I'm wrong <div></div><hr></blockquote>WrongAs posted by MG a while ago, in order.Tier 1:SorcsPredatorsTier 2:Summoners w/ Scout/Mage PetRoguesTier 3:Summoners w/ Fighter PetEnchantersBardsBrawlersTier 4:CrusadersWarriorsTier 5:Priests

crit

08-29-2005, 11:04 PM

<div></div>Eh... Monkees are only good for flinging poo and playing with themselves. Thats why I play a Bruiser... even with just legendary equipment and no masters against an Established Raider Guild Monk with about Half Fabled gear and a prismatic weapons, I can out damage them roughly half the time. Especially now with the new Fire Fist line of stances... For those unaware... the new Magmatic Fists stance is in Beta. I grabbed it a Master 2 from training option. It has me currently hitting a 10% proc for 750-1250 heat dmg barefisted.... (note: to get the best damage from all the Fire Fist stances you have to fight barehanded the dmg drops to 25% if using a weapon) So lets do the math... barehanded say roughly 2 secs between swings...dual wield. Hmmm, One average proc every 10 seconds? +75-125 dps at no extra power cost (just 3 concentration)? I can live with that. Numa - Tired of trying to keep up with his level as the GMs buff it every few days on Beta... 50 Kerra Bruiser Lucan D'Lere <div></div><p>Message Edited by critas on <span class=date_text>08-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:18 PM</span>

merdo

08-29-2005, 11:06 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> perano wrote:<BR>Ok Just for my own clearification on this subject the tiering of classes vs dps should be as follows:<BR><BR>1.) Mages<BR> a.) Sorc<BR> b.) Summ<BR> c.) Enchanters<BR><BR>2.) Scouts<BR> a.) Rogue<BR> b.) Predator<BR> c.) Bard<BR><BR>3.) Fighters<BR> a.) Brawler<BR> b.) Crusader<BR> c.) Warrior<BR><BR>4.) Priests<BR> a.) Druid<BR> b.) Shaman<BR> c.) Cleric<BR><BR>I know its not this cut and dry but I'm guessing the break down on dps should be somewhere in the ball park ? Please correct me if I'm wrong<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>should be more like imho</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sorc DPS usless if they dont</DIV> <DIV>Predator DPS usless if they dont</DIV> <DIV>Summ DPS/utility<BR>Rogue dps/utilty</DIV> <DIV>Bard utility/dps<BR>Druid Heal (more fury then warden) but when grouped with any other priest are just spot healers need DPS in groups</DIV> <DIV>Enchanters Utility/dps</DIV> <DIV>Brawler DPS/(really beable to tank)</DIV> <DIV>Shaman heal/utility/dps</DIV> <DIV>Crusader tank/heal/utility (no dps)</DIV> <DIV>Warrior tank mitigation useless if they dont</DIV> <DIV>Cleric usless if they dont reactive (and alot dont lol and they wonder where does all my power go)</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by merdorf on <span class=date_text>08-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:08 PM</span>

Kyralis

08-29-2005, 11:19 PM

Posted by Moorgard at some point. (Copy of a quoting of Moorgard, however, so Moorgard pleas don't kill me if it's not right!) <p><span><font color="#ffffff" size="2">First group: </font></span></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Wizard/Warlock </span></font></font></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Assassin/Ranger</span></font></font></p> <p><span><font color="#ffffff" size="2">Second group: </font></span></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Conjurer/Necromancer (using damage pet) </span></font></font></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Brigand/Swashbuckler</span></font></font></p> <p><span><font color="#ffffff" size="2">Third group: </font></span></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Coercer/Illusionist, Conjurer/Necromancer (using tank pet) </span></font></font></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Troubador/Dirge </span></font></font></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Bruiser/Monk </span></font></font></p> <p><span><font color="#ffffff" size="2">Fourth group: </font></span></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Berserker/Shadowknight </span></font></font></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Paladin/Guardian</span></font></font></p> <p><span><font color="#ffffff" size="2">Fifth group: </font></span></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Fury/Warden </span></font></font></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Defiler/Mystic </span></font></font></p> <p><font size="2"><font color="#ffffff"><span><span>·<span> </span></span></span><span>Inquisitor/Templar</span></font></font></p> <div></div>

Nazo

08-30-2005, 01:18 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <P>Trying to speak from a realistic perspective, we're all fighters and you'd think we could do a little more damage with our melee weapons than what they're currently set at in beta (17-51 on a prisimatic longsword) isn't that a little harsh, priests shouldn't be out dp'sing fighters should they?</P> <P> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>No, they shouldn't. We're looking at the numbers and parses, believe me. Something got out of whack, and the mechanics guys are working on it now.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>wohoooooooo ! First shock was my HP in Beta then came my melee hits ! My wife says all blood drained from my face for like hours :smileyvery-happy:

Kalyp

08-30-2005, 01:53 AM

Ok yeah, lets make Monks tanks since that's what they were in the first game! Yeah right. Come on Sony. Quit reversing classes on us! <div></div>

Sonnyjim_Grumblestump

08-30-2005, 03:00 AM

<span><blockquote><hr>Kalyper wrote:Ok yeah, lets make Monks tanks since that's what they were in the first game! Yeah right. Come on Sony. Quit reversing classes on us! <div></div><hr></blockquote>Kalyper, I'm not sure if your prescription ran out or something, but SOE has ALWAYS said monks are tanks. That would be why they are on the fighter class afterall.. </span><div></div>

merdo

08-30-2005, 03:35 AM

-Aonein-

08-30-2005, 04:49 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sonnyjim_Grumblestump wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kalyper wrote:<BR>Ok yeah, lets make Monks tanks since that's what they were in the first game! Yeah right. Come on Sony. Quit reversing classes on us!<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Kalyper, I'm not sure if your prescription ran out or something, but SOE has ALWAYS said monks are tanks. That would be why they are on the fighter class afterall.. <BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>He is refering to EQlive and no monks were never a Tank class in EQlive, the moment they started to out tank real plate class's they got the shaft ( nerfed ) back in 1999 in a big way which then took them 3 years to decide to tell the Monk community that they were sorry and it was a mistake but never fully rectified the problem.</P> <P>They could with high end equipment, but no where even remotely close as good as a Ranger even let alone a Real plate class.</P> <P>Monks sure did evolve over the 500 years, they went from being DPS to Tank.</P> <P>Maybe they found there center while training with the Ashen Hand.</P>

Moorgard

08-30-2005, 09:54 AM

Exill/Gaige - Please check your stats again after tomorrow's beta update and post new pics. We have a few changes going in that will affect fighter numbers. It would be helpful for you to mouse over your avoidance score so we can see the various factors of your avoidance as well. If the armor you're wearing has any defensive bonuses (i.e. +parry, +physical mitigation), that would be good to know.

Gaige

08-30-2005, 10:04 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR>Exill/Gaige - Please check your stats again after tomorrow's beta update and post new pics. We have a few changes going in that will affect fighter numbers. It would be helpful for you to mouse over your avoidance score so we can see the various factors of your avoidance as well. If the armor you're wearing has any defensive bonuses (i.e. +parry, +physical mitigation), that would be good to know.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Aight MG I'll do that soon as the update is posted.<BR>

Shakir10

08-30-2005, 04:16 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR>Exill/Gaige - Please check your stats again after tomorrow's beta update and post new pics. We have a few changes going in that will affect fighter numbers. It would be helpful for you to mouse over your avoidance score so we can see the various factors of your avoidance as well. If the armor you're wearing has any defensive bonuses (i.e. +parry, +physical mitigation), that would be good to know.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>:smileyvery-happy: HAHAHA Does this mean that the devs reallly are doing this change for Gage? Make sure you check with Gage that he is happy with his numbers MG, so that you guys get this all correct for him to be a guardian in leather.

Nemi

08-30-2005, 05:12 PM

<P>I have to say, if this is the long awaited combat revamp tank balancing, then I'm mightily disappointed.</P> <P>I left EQ2 due to the unassailable position Guardians had, after all the promise of 'All subclasses can fulfill their archetype role' and 'no more holy trinities'. Both of which, SoE couldn't have hit further from the mark. I took up the offer of a 7day free trial hoping things have changed, but to see massive difference between monk HPs/Mitigation for only 7% avoidance....</P> <P>What an utter waste of time.</P> <P>40mins of my life wasted downloading the latest patch. Perhaps the Devs should redo the marketing campaign :-</P> <P>"Calling all EQ1 players, come to EQ2; We have added better graphics to your favourite game!"</P> <P> </P>

Mistwaver

08-30-2005, 07:31 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>WinterAnarth wrote:<div>Woah... I hope Monks have nice dps cause with about 800 less hp, 1400 less mitigation and only 7% more avoid I can't see a monk tanking after the changes... I guess they somehow see that as the tanks being "balanced" or something...</div> <div> </div> <div>And it looks like Agi is basically useless for adding avoid... 20 agi for a .1% avoid buff? I hope it's just due to the heavy armor.</div><hr></blockquote>Ding, ding. ding! I get my butt kicked by white solo cons unless I use defensive stance because of the low health, low mitigation, and low avoidance. When I originally read about the combat revamp, I read that monks and bruisers were going to be avoidance tanks, they certainly are not avoidance tanks, not by a long shot. Yet I can get on a Conjurer and solo yellow ^^^ MOBs. Go figure...</span><div></div>

Mistwaver

08-30-2005, 07:37 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>Shakir1065 wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Moorgard wrote:Exill/Gaige - Please check your stats again after tomorrow's beta update and post new pics. We have a few changes going in that will affect fighter numbers. It would be helpful for you to mouse over your avoidance score so we can see the various factors of your avoidance as well. If the armor you're wearing has any defensive bonuses (i.e. +parry, +physical mitigation), that would be good to know. <hr> </blockquote>:smileyvery-happy: HAHAHA Does this mean that the devs reallly are doing this change for Gage? Make sure you check with Gage that he is happy with his numbers MG, so that you guys get this all correct for him to be a guardian in leather. <div></div><hr></blockquote>Monks don't want to be a "Guardian" in leather, Monks want to be... a Monk. Someone who can AVOID combat blows, not mitigate it. They can't mitigate OR avoid them worth a crap right now. Which means as it stands Monks will remain to hold a spot for DPS in raids.</span><div></div>

Gungo

08-30-2005, 07:46 PM

<DIV> <P>I know its been rehashed several times and many tanks complain about it, but there seems to be no true reasoning imho why tanking should be changed to include more then the Guardian at raids. It’s a fatal misconception derived from EQ1 and several other MMORPG that there needs to be a “BEST” MT. No matter how it was percieved at release or how it has turned out, or even the fact it was stated all fighters are tanks, it is utimately about enjoying the game for all classes. <SPAN> </SPAN>People choose the fighter class to be able to take a hit and in some circumstances do a lil damage as well. Now looking further ahead and seeing that raiding is the issue atm w tanking we can see how due to min/maxing that gaurds are the ultimate and sometimes only choice. That needs to be changed. Simply because it is to linear and limiting to have a guard as the only choice. All raids do atm is gear up their guard in full fabled place healers at max range, while dps tears down the mob. No change, no uncertainty, and many times plain boring for the majority of the raid. This has more to do with tanking, but ultimately tanking does play a part. For one all hps should stay the same I don’t see a reason why their should be discrepancies (but that may be my personal opinion, and limited vision).</P> <P>I feel it would be more dynamic if raid guilds had to worry about equipping all their chars and not just 1 guard in full fabled.</P> <P>Crusader should have an innate stun/stifle resist greater then all other fighter classes. It makes sense since this is the fighter class dedicated to casting while in combat. Their heals/lifetaps is what bridges them as a superior tank. A raid mob that would have a ton of stunning atks would render a guard useless since he should simply not be able to maintain agro.</P> <P>Brawlers should have a dramatic increase in avoidance at least 15-20% more then other classes in fact maybe even a hard cap 10% higher then others. There is an atk for brawlers called crushing fury/hundred hand slap that does a chain of eight consencutive atks. If any atk misses the rest of the remaining atks miss. So lets say they introduce a raid mob that swings for 1,000-1,200 each hit for 8 chances (unmitigated). A guard would have less of a chance compared to a brawler to avoid the dps from this mob. In effect this introduces “spike” dam to plate tanks and allows brawlers their role in tanking. I am not proposing any class be the best tank. But there should be defined roles for all classes. Giving other classes oppurtunites would change the dynamic of encounters and ultimately increases the set of tactics needed to take out raid mobs. Increasing opportunity and tactics needed in raids leads to a greater enjoyment of accomplishment. This leading to a better enjoyment of the game for all. I don’t see a problem having crusaders tank 25% of all raids, brawlers 25%, warriors 50%. Maybe even raids should include the use of multiple tanks. How dynamic and entertaining would that be?</P> <P>Genrally I would like to see Crusaders tanking casters, Warrior tanking Dragon type heavy hitters, brawlers tanking swarm mobs and other monk/scout types. If implemented correctly Guard mitigation doesn’t need to be nerfed and Guard defensive buffs will still be needed in raids for the mt.</P> <P> </P></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>08-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:18 AM</span>

Exill

08-30-2005, 08:14 PM

Mobs that can hit for 8 million damage in 1 shot ? Wow. <div></div>

Shizzirri

08-30-2005, 09:04 PM

<DIV>I love it Moorguard is addressing Gaige and co in the guardian forum about monk mitigation and avoidance, gotta love that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Esar

08-30-2005, 09:25 PM

<DIV>i'll say this again, If i wanted to tank i would have chosen guardian. I cant believe how 1 monk can make 5000 posts and have the dev change the class what he wanted to. I'm incredibly disappointed. I just laughed at the post when moorgard posted to gaige. Sigh i guess i'll be quitting when vanguard comes out, monks = drag tanks in leathers who will never tank as well as guardians and at the same time wont be able to dps. And yes I play on beta so dont tell me to not judge before i see the changes in because i've seen the changes. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Esar 50 monk (aka wanna-be guardian, lol)</DIV>

Gaige

08-31-2005, 12:10 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <DIV>I love it Moorguard is addressing Gaige and co in the guardian forum about monk mitigation and avoidance, gotta love that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>C'mon Kat, read his post. He addressed Exill and I both, because we were the ones who posted comparison screenshots.</P> <P>This thread is titled guard vs monk (started by a guard) and the proposed pic comparison also came from a guardian.</P> <P>Obviously the pics showed some discrepancies that SOE is trying to address, so to keep the comparison the same, he simply asked the same two ppl to post comparison shots after the display changes are made.</P> <P>As for all the other people acting like I alone made these changes come about, lets be real. Do you really think I have that much pull?<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>08-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:10 PM</span>

Whitemane

08-31-2005, 01:13 AM

<DIV>As for all the other people acting like I alone made these changes come about, lets be real. Do you really think I have that much pull?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>----------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No but they will "Blame" you anyways. You're simply more accessible/visible than SOE devs =D.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>-- Gemma 50 Templar Legion</DIV>

TunaBoo

08-31-2005, 01:24 AM

Here is me today.. level 50 in full fabled and defense buffs on. 62.7 mita, and 57.2 avoidance thanks to the shield nerf. (and like 2500 hp under live) <img src="http://www.thetunaman.com/eq2/betabuffed.jpg"> <div></div>

Gaige

08-31-2005, 01:29 AM

<P>Pics, as requested:</P> <P>Persona:</P> <P><IMG src="http://img271.imageshack.us/img271/8387/persona2wm.jpg"></P> <P>Detailed avoidance info:</P> <P><IMG src="http://img271.imageshack.us/img271/8452/persona21vk.jpg"></P> <P>My gloves have +45 to crushing on them, and my ACGF offers +8 to parry. This was taken totally unbuffed with ACGF and two +12 agi dolls equipped. Once again I'm using max power food.</P>

TunaBoo

08-31-2005, 01:36 AM

Opps let me do unbuffed. No food, think I had 1 sta doll equipped, and my shield gives +4 parry <img src="http://www.thetunaman.com/eq2/betaunbuffed.jpg"> My gear is a lot more fabled then gaiges so can't really compare directly... but meh hard to compare exactly <div></div>

SkySava

08-31-2005, 01:55 AM

<HR> <BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Tier 3:<BR>Summoners w/ Fighter Pet<BR>Enchanters<BR><FONT color=#33cc00>Bards<BR></FONT>Brawlers<BR><BR>Tier 4:<BR>Crusaders<BR><FONT color=#33cc00>Warriors<BR></FONT><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Oh what a sad day it is when a singer can do more damage then a dedicated fighter. A sure sign EQ2 is a out of whack when it comes to how things SHOULD be instead of how things fit within their mechanics. </DIV>

Gaige

08-31-2005, 02:04 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>TunaBoo wrote:</P> <P>My gear is a lot more fabled then gaiges so can't really compare directly... but meh hard to compare exactly<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Yeah you and Exill both have more fabled. Exill and I have the same agility I think. Either way its still worth looking at. Thanks for posting it Tuna.<BR>

Nazo

08-31-2005, 02:16 AM

Tuna screen shots before or after Shield Nerf ?

Gaige

08-31-2005, 02:19 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nazowa wrote:<BR>Tuna screen shots before or after Shield Nerf ? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>After.<BR>

TunaBoo

08-31-2005, 02:24 AM

after, thats with a fabled tower <div></div>

Airog

08-31-2005, 02:40 AM

<DIV>Gungo's views are his own and in no way are they the views of A O D or it's affiliates. Haha! Gungo is my guilds officer, had to give him a hard time.</DIV> <DIV>That being said. By mechanics, Monks are not, and SHOULD NOT be as good of RAID tanks as Guards/Crusaders. The only way to truly balance the fighters (if you are doing avoidance tanks and mitigation tanks) would be to make it so in the long run they take the same damage, one just mitigates more, the other avoids more (as from what I see and read that is what is supposed to happen) if that is the way it gets structured (as I believe most monks who want to tank have said they want it) there is NO WAY you would EVER pick a Monk over a Guardian because of spike damage. As it is spike damage is usually the only thing that kills a Guardian (or healers running oop). With Monks haveing so much less MIT, they couldn't take a spike damage half as well as Guards. At the same time, A monk would be insanely better tank for gorups, as monks should and from what I read do more DPS then guards. Lets face it, Guards are good for ONE thing. Raid tanking. THAT IS IT. All these other fighters are better, immensly better, then Guards in almost all other aspects (utility, DPS). Now, I have been told that Guards DPS more then some other fighters (paladins come to mind), but comeon, even if we do more damage, they have IMMENSE utility. Heals, rezzes. Some of the best rezzers in game atm. (Can't speak for Beta). Ok, make a few encounters were crusaders should tank, take off even more DPS, screw their utility and make them garabage for raids that Guards tank (which is most of the raids). Hello? W*T*F? You do realize, if they give all fighters the same ability to tank, then utility and DPS will be stripped, and we all won't be worth S*H*I*T. Except the Tank, and MA. Just place holders. As it is, Monks/Bruisers do good DPS, Pallies have great utility and SK's have decent DPS and utility. From what I have seen Zerkers have fine DPS too. (Very little utility, but 900HP atm aint bad). And none of these are anywhere near as *useless* as they would be if you all got your way and they made all fighters with the same ability to tank.</DIV> <DIV>Hm, well, these are my points of view, feel free to correct me, as I have an open mind and am up for civil discussions of this topic.</DIV> <DIV>Airoliz of Innothule, Guardian of the 50th season and Alchemist of the 50th season.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>P.S. If we get nerfed I am blameing you Gaige!! Haha, J/K!</DIV>

Gaige

08-31-2005, 03:53 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Airoguy wrote: <DIV>there is NO WAY you would EVER pick a Monk over a Guardian because of spike damage. As it is spike damage is usually the only thing that kills a Guardian (or healers running oop). With Monks haveing so much less MIT, they couldn't take a spike damage half as well as Guards.</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You always have to consider that if guardians avoidance is decreased to a lvl comparable to our mitigation, that you guys would also take spike damage. Not so much from one huge hit, but from 8 or 10 huge hits in a row, since you would'nt be avoiding near as much as you do now.</P> <P>That is my main gripe. If you guys get 60% mit unbuffed and I get 30% mit unbuffed (twice as much) then the same should be true for avoidance. As it stands even with today's changes I only have a 12% or so lead on avoidance while suffering from less than half the mitigation.</P> <P>This makes us more spikey by default.</P> <P>Mitigation is the best sure, its less spikey, sure. But it also needs to be that you guys rely on mitigation. Currently you rely on avoidance and then use your superior mitigation to make things all out of wack.</P> <P>I may avoid 8 out of 10 hits, then get hit for 3500.</P> <P>A guardian is going to avoid 6 out of 10 hits, and then get hit for 1800.</P> <P>That, is what's broken.</P> <P>I don't care if I'm streaky because of avoidance, but you guys should be getting hit 8 times out of 10 or so. </P> <P>You're mitigation tanks, after all.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>08-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:55 PM</span>

Esar

08-31-2005, 04:29 AM

<DIV>-nt-</DIV><p>Message Edited by Esar on <span class=date_text>08-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:44 PM</span>

Airog

08-31-2005, 04:30 AM

Yeah, we should get hit MUCH more, and mitigate MUCH more. I see this happeneing to an extent. But monks should avaoid more, and Guards mitigate more then they currently seem to have on Beta.

Exill

08-31-2005, 08:40 AM

If our Mitigation to Avoidance ratio is the same as monks Avoidance to Mitigation ratio then our DPS should be the same, shouldn't it? I was always under the impression that Brawlers, Crusaders, and even Berserkers sacrificed some defense for extra dps capabilities. PS: I will post updated screenshots after I get off work in a few hours. <div></div>

08-31-2005, 10:09 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Exill wrote:<BR>If our Mitigation to Avoidance ratio is the same as monks Avoidance to Mitigation ratio then our DPS should be the same, shouldn't it? I was always under the impression that Brawlers, Crusaders, and even Berserkers sacrificed some defense for extra dps capabilities.<BR><BR><BR>PS: I will post updated screenshots after I get off work in a few hours.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You forgot self heals, self cures, invis, FD, fear, group FD, self wards, self wis buffs of crazy amounts (buffs every resist), self haste, group haste, a offensive <STRONG>and</STRONG> defensive stance combined, I'm sure I'm forgetting lots, those are just the ones off the top of my head. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>When we get all that we can work on the hybrid abilities, its just not right a paladin can heal themselves over and over, w t f? And group mana taps, I want those.</DIV>

Gaige

08-31-2005, 12:02 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Exill wrote:<BR>If our Mitigation to Avoidance ratio is the same as monks Avoidance to Mitigation ratio then our DPS should be the same, shouldn't it? I was always under the impression that Brawlers, Crusaders, and even Berserkers sacrificed some defense for extra dps capabilities.<BR><BR>PS: I will post updated screenshots after I get off work in a few hours.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, I'll sacrifice some defense for higher DPS. But not all of it.</P> <P>You guys already get over twice as much mitigation and more HP.</P> <P>You don't need to be only 10% lower avoidance. You need to have about half of our avoidance.<BR></P>

Sir_Halbarad

08-31-2005, 01:14 PM

If we get half of monk's avoidance... will you get rid of all your neat spells? like invis, fd, mend? And only have a few buffs and a few attacks? Yes? <div></div>

Nemi

08-31-2005, 01:50 PM

<P>Not the old utlility line again by Guardians is it?</P> <P>Look, Monks are fighters and unless a skill or ability allows us to TANK better, then its a moot point in comparisons. I'm all for Guardians having as many trinkets and toys as they want, you can have all the toys and shiny's Monks have, I don't care.</P> <P>Invis does not help our job as a tank</P> <P>FD does not help our job as a tank</P> <P>Heal does not help our job as a tank</P> <P>Silent Fist Kata does not help our job as a tank</P> <P>Tanking is about damage avoidance, damage mitigation, damage absorption and taunting</P> <P>Therefore all that is relevant is avoidance, mitigation, hps and +aggro powers and the repsective relationship between all 4.</P> <P> </P>

Nazo

08-31-2005, 02:33 PM

This argument is getting cheap and tiring. You total abilities and spell book defines you whether they are related to tanking or not. Next you will argue that 30% Heal on 2 minute timer doesnt help your tanking yeah sure... <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This game is played for fun and all those frills you get with your class = more fun more diversity. Am I jaleous of those abilities sure I am but I know they come at a cost. You however dont realize that everything comes at a cost. IF you want to play a bland no frills one trick pony char like mine you are more then wellcome to the Guardian class.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lets see how far you will be able to coerce Game Designers and Developers...</DIV><p>Message Edited by Nazowa on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:36 AM</span>

Sir_Halbarad

08-31-2005, 02:57 PM

<div></div>Dear Nemi, To me it seems Monks will get boosts with the combat revamp. Everywhere. Guardians get nerfs. Everywhere. Maybe our ability to hold aggro is increased, but that's about it. That isn't something we needed badly. Monks were better soloers before, were good group tanks and added dps to groups if they wanted. Now they become even better soloers, better group tanks, maybe their dps gets decreased, but not in comparison to other fighter classes. And they become Raid Tanks. /shrug Monks have better dps Monks have more utility Monks have same tanking ability (even for Raids) Tell me where a Guardian has an advantage? That's not a cheap, old argument, it is a question of class balance which is out of balance if that is how it ends. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Sir_Halbarad on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:00 AM</span>

Exill

08-31-2005, 03:12 PM

The screenshots below are of my <u>unbuffed</u> stats before and after the patch on 08/30/05. Before 0830 Patch: <img src="http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/5694/avoidance4qr.jpg"> After 0830 Patch: <img src="http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/7411/guardian08305ra.jpg"> <b>Loss of 222 hp</b>. Most likely due to: - Brawlers/Monks/Bruisers now have slightly higher base health and slightly lower base power than Warriors/Guardians/Berserkers. <b> Loss of 3.3% avoidance</b>. Most likely due to: - The base avoidance on tower and kite shields has been reduced from 20% to 15%. Other minimal changes like loss 6agi, 10power, 3mitigation. Most likely due to: Exillx got leveled to 60 and Exillxx was the closest thing I had to Exillx from the original screenshots. The only difference is one ring. One thing that I did notice then when comparing myself to Tunabash is that even though I have substantially more stamina the difference in HP is very minimal. Tunabash has 4149hp with 182sta and I have 4291hp with 242sta. This could be because of difference in the amount of HP on gear etc but it just seems like such a large difference in stamina for such a minimal difference in hp. With Tier6 here don't you think its time to raise the soft caps? Otherwise stats like stamina and agi become almost meaningless and the only things that matter on an item would be mitigation, hp, and power. PS: If you look at Tunabash's last screenshot you can see him naked imitating Mr. T <div></div>

Shakir10

08-31-2005, 04:02 PM

<P>Sounds like Gage is trying to walk a very fine line with his monkey community and the guardians. hehe, He wants the Guardian mit to avoidance ratio to be the same as the monk avoidance to mit ration, both opposite eachother of course. But he also wants to keep his DPS. </P> <P>Exill is right Gage. If you really want it that ballanced, then you know you would have to give up all your DPS... and well, your ability to FD< lots of your cool buffs you guys get for just streight mitigation buffs,</P> <P>Oh bah, Why don't you just go roll a Guardian if you want to be a guardian so bad Gage? Honestly it seems like htat is what your trying to do to the monk class. Every monk I know wants to do DPS, not tank end game raid mobs. I would say your one of the extreme few monks I know on these boards and in game who wants to be a guardian in leather. You really should have roled a Guardian or a Pal if you wanted to be an end game raid tank.</P> <P>(Pal of course after the revamp)</P> <P>It wams my heart to see you talking yourself into a corner. </P>

Nemi

08-31-2005, 04:16 PM

Exill

08-31-2005, 06:30 PM

Interesting thought: Where does it say that Guardians are 'required' to use a shield? Gaige is using a 2 handed weapon so shouldn't his stats be compared with a Guardian using a 2 handed weapon as well? Compare Gaige's stats to the screenshot below. Now Gaige has 21.7% more avoidance then I do, and I have 26.6% more mitigation then Gaige does. Also note that there may be a difference in amount of Fabled gear between Gaige and I. <img src="http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/4455/exillnoshield8rs.jpg"> It was just an idea, correct me if I am wrong. <div></div>

Nemi

08-31-2005, 06:53 PM

<P>It's a valid thought but flawed.</P> <P>For the simple reason that Guardians have the choice to use a shield and therefore add 15-20% avoidance and make themselves a better tank.</P> <P>If on the other hand, if monks had a skill where they could halve their DPS and add 20% mitigation, then we'd be talking apples vs apples.</P> <P> </P> <p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:54 PM</span>

JuJut

08-31-2005, 06:56 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shakir1065 wrote:<BR> <P>Every monk I know wants to do DPS, not tank end game raid mobs. I would say your one of the extreme few monks I know on these boards and in game who wants to be a guardian in leather. You really should have roled a Guardian or a Pal if you wanted to be an end game raid tank.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>You should get out more and meet more monks if you think he's the only monk worried about balance in the fighter archetype.<BR>

zabor

08-31-2005, 07:13 PM

monks won't do dps after the revamp (due to scouts complaining), and our stifle is no more. Our buffs? 10% group haste, laughable. Our only valid role will be tank, because we can't do anything else. Guardians do have very nice group buffs when not tanking, so they will have a place on raids. A monk not tanking? practically useless.

Moski

08-31-2005, 07:14 PM

<img src="http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/3595/faneliaunbuffed2lv.jpg" height="676" width="378"> Just wanted to throw in my Char, lvl 50 Bruiser. Image is from today, after the "HP base increase" of brawlers. I am wearing only Fabled Gear (with only bracers are rate t5 crafted, belt and earring are Heritage Items). The Screenshot is with absolutly no buffs.

SkarlSpeedbu

08-31-2005, 07:34 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shakir1065 wrote:<BR> <P>Sounds like Gage is trying to walk a very fine line with his monkey community and the guardians. hehe, He wants the Guardian mit to avoidance ratio to be the same as the monk avoidance to mit ration, both opposite eachother of course. But he also wants to keep his DPS.</P> <P>Exill is right Gage. If you really want it that ballanced, then you know you would have to give up all your DPS... and well, your ability to FD< lots of your cool buffs you guys get for just streight mitigation buffs,</P> <P>Oh bah, Why don't you just go roll a Guardian if you want to be a guardian so bad Gage? Honestly it seems like htat is what your trying to do to the monk class. Every monk I know wants to do DPS, not tank end game raid mobs. I would say your one of the extreme few monks I know on these boards and in game who wants to be a guardian in leather. You really should have roled a Guardian or a Pal if you wanted to be an end game raid tank.</P> <P>(Pal of course after the revamp)</P> <P>It wams my heart to see you talking yourself into a corner.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I am another monk player that want some tanking equity. I took your advice, I made a new toon, a guardian to be precise. I have a 46 monk and a 47 guard. I would hope that I am as objective as they come because I do like both characters. I do still believe in the archetype equality. I still think that the tanks should tank well, but differently. If you say guards need some fun spells, I agree. If you say guards need utility spells, I agree. But, I don't think that a majority of monks want to be dps, because they would make scouts, just as I have made a guard because I wanted to tank, heh. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>P.S. the guard was a breeze to level btw as compared to the monk IMO, worked so much better with a templar. He was easier to duo with and group with. Now I am only speaking pre CCs </DIV>

GilfalasElaandrin

08-31-2005, 07:41 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>He is refering to EQlive and no monks were never a Tank class in EQlive, the moment they started to out tank real plate class's they got the shaft ( nerfed ) back in 1999 in a big way which then took them 3 years to decide to tell the Monk community that they were sorry and it was a mistake but never fully rectified the problem.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Actually as a minor correction, EQ live LAUNCHED in 1999. Monks were not altered negatively for tanking until after Planes of Power had been out a while and Plane of Time level equipment was exacerbating the issue, which was around 2003. Middle to late last year (2004) is when the partial roll backs of the defense reduction went in.<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> But as a previous poster said, monks and brawlers in EQ ARE tank classes so everyone stop complaining that they are tanking. They are SUPPOSED to be tanking.</DIV>

Ragrax

08-31-2005, 08:24 PM

<P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>I agree that monks / bruisers are tanks in eq2. It has been officially said for a very long time. But it has never been said (correct me if I am wrong) that they are also equal raid boss MTs as guardians. If this would be untrue, why ever play a low dps, low utility guardian?</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>For instance SKs and pallys were also officially tanks in eq1 just like the warriors, but they did not tank the raid BOSSES in high end content besides very few exceptions (one mob in potime comes to mind). Besides their utility they had usually places as offtanks. There is not much offtanking in eq2 unfortunately, but this is not the guardians fault (maybe some monk should start a crusade for changing the raid encounters to make more than 1 or 2 tanks necessary or to change that like every second raid encounter has meanwhile turned into a ranged fight).</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>In eq2 brawlers are probably the best tanks for xp groups already since they do the best dps in the fighter archetype (xp groups usually fight not so hard mobs and never mobs that hit for like 5+k). I would also bet that the top monks / bruisers have already tanked icy dig successfully, which is the hardest single group quest in game.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <DIV><FONT size=2>Btw, in eq1 I played a SK and not a warrior, so I know the other side also from my own experience.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

kerra

08-31-2005, 08:51 PM

<P>Hey Gaige & Exill,</P> <P>Where are those pics?</P>

TorqeD

08-31-2005, 08:51 PM

Teehee Well pre-revamp i feel alittle guilty because i'm outdamaging most monks in my guild. With the exception of warlocks and berzerkers i've been the highest DPSer. So i knew this was coming, but you know i didn't think they would give us the nerf bat so hard. But oh well. I'll still figure out a way to be uber again. It's just a matter of time

Gungo

08-31-2005, 09:00 PM

<DIV> <P>What are you guys talking about obviously Guards are the most defensive tank so they should be the raid tank, and the only fighters needed on raid, obviously the templar is the suppose to be the best healer so raids shouldn't use other healers, and of course warlocks are suppose to be the best dam/dps so there should be no need for other dps. all other classes can do an adequte job in groups. this revamp is obviously just here to stop whining and has nothing to do with balance.</P> <P>now if u don't get that was sarcasm i feel sorry for ya. the fact is no brawler believes scouts/caster should do less dps then us. And if scouts and casters do more dam then brawlers, where does that leave us 3rd rate dps and 3rd rate tanks. we don't have any real utility. The combat revamp is here to set up our intended role of avoidance tanking and yes that includes raid mobs. no one healer type can do all raids alone, no one caster is best at all raids for dps, and so shall it be no one fighter should be the best in all raids. If you dont see that is causing a problem then i feel sorry for you as you are surely blinded by your own ego.</P> <P>Variety leads to more tactics/strategies required. Which in turn leads to a greater sense of acomplishment. Which will ultimately lead to a better enjoyment of the game for all.</P> <P></P> <DIV>Gungo Ninescullz lvl 50 bruiser<BR>Officer of A.O.D.----innothule</DIV></DIV>

Nemi

08-31-2005, 09:01 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ragrax wrote:<BR> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>I agree that monks / bruisers are tanks in eq2. It has been officially said for a very long time. But it has never been said (correct me if I am wrong) that they are also equal raid boss MTs as guardians. If this would be untrue, why ever play a low dps, low utility guardian?</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>That is where your assumptions let you down. It hasn't been stated ANYWHERE that Guardians are the preferred raid tanks. The fact that they are is irrelevant. Tanks were promised to be equal, no-where was it stated that raids would be treated differently or that Guardians would be the only tanks able to perform this role.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>This is what upsets every other class than Guardians. The developers should have been straight with us all from the beginning and said, </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>"Hey...you can tank, but really it's hopeless. If you want to MT play a Guardian."</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>If they said that, then Monks/Bruisers/Paladins/SKs and Berserkers would have no right to moan..but they didn't so we have every right to complain.</FONT></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

Dfoley3

08-31-2005, 09:50 PM

<DIV>Sorry dev tracker lead me here, i thought id give some insight at the situation thats obviously missing.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) When tanking monks use 2handers (mainly the acgf) for the + parry making us better thanks, while gaurds use shields for +avoidance. Monks cant use shields, we are stuck with a 3% inate round shield or something stupid, so tech, gaige IS wearing a shield in his pic, so comparing it to a guard, it should be a guard wearing his shield.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2) Increasing the monk hp base over a guard makes sense. As avoidance tanks we take far more dmg when we do get hit so to balance it, we should have a higher base. Not to mention monks get no + hp buffs, we get no + mitgation or self avoidance buffs like guards (minus our generic tank stance that all monks get)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>3) 3rd, dont use gaiges stats as he has very few fabled, and comparing it to a fully fabled guardian is scewing the comparison. Look at a fully fabled bruiser that posted her stats (sorry if i missed the gender).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Guard</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>4149 hp</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>182 sta</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>2782 mitg</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>54.3% avoid</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Bruiser</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>4201</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>176 sta</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>1707 mit</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>68.2% avoid</FONT></P></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Very simply u see that the bruiser has 6 less sta but about 52 more hp. And thats give or take a piece of fabled but its a much more fair comparison.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Clearly guards have 13.9% less avoidance then an avoidance tank. Raw mitgation value (not percent mitigation) of a guard is 60% higher then that of a bruiser. (ie 2782 is 1.6 * 1707).... My issue is simple, guards are avoiding way to much or brawlers are mitigating way to little. Brawlers shouldnt hold only 14% avoidance over a guard when guards are 60% more mitigation then brawlers (be nice to compare the actual % mitigations)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now add on to this that guards can self buff hp and mitigation, and brawers cant self buff hp or avoidance and its a very clear disparity. Brawlers get the generic + mitigation that all fighters get with def stance, but they lack unique buffs that add avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Moorgrad posted that +deflection skill is gonna be the top way to increase a brawlers deflection, but in game atm, there is 1 item i know of with + deflection, and its a lvl 30 fighting baton. (baton of bladewarding) other then that we get + defense with stance (same as guards) and + 15 deflection with stance (only buff in game for brawlers to add to our "unique avoidance skill" Where as there are countless items in game to raise the mitigation of mitigation tanks. </DIV>

Shizzirri

08-31-2005, 10:12 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ragrax wrote:<BR> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>I agree that monks / bruisers are tanks in eq2. It has been officially said for a very long time. But it has never been said (correct me if I am wrong) that they are also equal raid boss MTs as guardians. If this would be untrue, why ever play a low dps, low utility guardian?</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>That is where your assumptions let you down. It hasn't been stated ANYWHERE that Guardians are the preferred raid tanks. The fact that they are is irrelevant. Tanks were promised to be equal, no-where was it stated that raids would be treated differently or that Guardians would be the only tanks able to perform this role.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>This is what upsets every other class than Guardians. The developers should have been straight with us all from the beginning and said, </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>"Hey...you can tank, but really it's hopeless. If you want to MT play a Guardian."</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>If they said that, then Monks/Bruisers/Paladins/SKs and Berserkers would have no right to moan..but they didn't so we have every right to complain.</FONT></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Common sense is all it took for me to figure this one out, well that and 4 years of dissappointment with the SK class on EQ1, and monks weren't even considered tanks there so consider yourself lucky...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mitigation on raid is king, he who can get his the highest will tank, avoidance means nothing on an orange triple up mob that hits for 3k.</DIV>

JNewby

08-31-2005, 10:14 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dfoley323 wrote:<BR> <DIV>Sorry dev tracker lead me here, i thought id give some insight at the situation thats obviously missing.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) When tanking monks use 2handers (mainly the acgf) for the + parry making us better thanks, while gaurds use shields for +avoidance. Monks cant use shields, we are stuck with a 3% inate round shield or something stupid, so tech, gaige IS wearing a shield in his pic, so comparing it to a guard, it should be a guard wearing his shield.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2) Increasing the monk hp base over a guard makes sense. As avoidance tanks we take far more dmg when we do get hit so to balance it, we should have a higher base. Not to mention monks get no + hp buffs, we get no + mitgation or self avoidance buffs like guards (minus our generic tank stance that all monks get)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>3) 3rd, dont use gaiges stats as he has very few fabled, and comparing it to a fully fabled guardian is scewing the comparison. Look at a fully fabled bruiser that posted her stats (sorry if i missed the gender).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Guard</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>4149 hp</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>182 sta</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>2782 mitg</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>54.3% avoid</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3></FONT> </P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>Bruiser</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>4201</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>176 sta</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>1707 mit</FONT></P> <P><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#ffffff size=3>68.2% avoid</FONT></P></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Very simply u see that the bruiser has 6 less sta but about 52 more hp. And thats give or take a piece of fabled but its a much more fair comparison.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Clearly guards have 13.9% less avoidance then an avoidance tank. Raw mitgation value (not percent mitigation) of a guard is 60% higher then that of a bruiser. (ie 2782 is 1.6 * 1707).... My issue is simple, guards are avoiding way to much or brawlers are mitigating way to little. Brawlers shouldnt hold only 14% avoidance over a guard when guards are 60% more mitigation then brawlers (be nice to compare the actual % mitigations)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now add on to this that guards can self buff hp and mitigation, and brawers cant self buff hp or avoidance and its a very clear disparity. Brawlers get the generic + mitigation that all fighters get with def stance, but they lack unique buffs that add avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Moorgrad posted that +deflection skill is gonna be the top way to increase a brawlers deflection, but in game atm, there is 1 item i know of with + deflection, and its a lvl 30 fighting baton. (baton of bladewarding) other then that we get + defense with stance (same as guards) and + 15 deflection with stance (only buff in game for brawlers to add to our "unique avoidance skill" Where as there are countless items in game to raise the mitigation of mitigation tanks. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>that is [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] weak and you know it... get rid of all you heals no fien death no 2 hander... to avoid wear a shield like t rest of us.. oh yeah and bring your dps down by about another 200% then... you can have yer life buff...

08-31-2005, 10:19 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P>What are you guys talking about obviously Guards are the most defensive tank so they should be the raid tank, and the only fighters needed on raid, obviously the templar is the suppose to be the best healer so raids shouldn't use other healers, and of course warlocks are suppose to be the best dam/dps so there should be no need for other dps. all other classes can do an adequte job in groups. this revamp is obviously just here to stop whining and has nothing to do with balance.</P> <P>now if u don't get that was sarcasm i feel sorry for ya. the fact is no brawler believes scouts/caster should do less dps then us. And if scouts and casters do more dam then brawlers, where does that leave us 3rd rate dps and 3rd rate tanks. we don't have any real utility. The combat revamp is here to set up our intended role of avoidance tanking and yes that includes raid mobs. no one healer type can do all raids alone, no one caster is best at all raids for dps, and so shall it be no one fighter should be the best in all raids. If you dont see that is causing a problem then i feel sorry for you as you are surely blinded by your own ego.</P> <P>Variety leads to more tactics/strategies required. Which in turn leads to a greater sense of acomplishment. Which will ultimately lead to a better enjoyment of the game for all.</P> <P></P> <DIV>Gungo Ninescullz lvl 50 bruiser<BR>Officer of A.O.D.----innothule</DIV></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You fail to realize there's only 1-2 tanks needed on any raid, you need quite a few more healers and dps than that, correct? Why would anyone take 6-8 tanks in to a raid? At the moment fighters get in to raids with their dps and utility, take those 2 away for tanking balance and what happens? A lot of fighters sitting out is what happens.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You cant be 100% tank 180% dps and 140% utility, thats not balance... In you own words, "If you dont see that is causing a problem then i feel sorry for you as you are surely blinded by your own ego."</DIV>

Dfoley3

08-31-2005, 10:45 PM

<DIV>>>that is [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] weak and you know it... get rid of all you heals no fien death no 2 hander... to avoid wear a shield like t rest of us.. oh yeah and bring your dps down by about another 200% then... you can have yer life buff... <<</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all of our heals? </DIV> <DIV>Monks have 1 heal on a 3 min timer that can be interupted, stifled, and costs power, no where near as powerful as eq1 mend</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruisers to get a bit of an advantage with a 90 sec self only heal for a much larger %</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Feign death? ur kidding right. Fail rate on FD is obscene, not to mention brawlers receive 0 mitigation and avoidance and resists while fd. I mean sure its utility for when solo runing places, but atm its no where near useful for droping agro because if the target stays engaged / locked the secnd a brawler stands they return to their hate position instantly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Our dps is the crap spend 5 seconds looking at a different fighter board other then a guards and youll see that a monks top atk went from 900 dmg adept 3 to 300 dmg master 1. Thats a pretty big dps cut.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Not sure what ur point is about 2 handers, monks get no shield so its pretty obvious to use a weapon that gets less repostes per set time. (Thx mostly to its slower delay, fewer hits per given time etc)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the rest, how about u try being a dps in a raid before u claim u have none. Guards on live do plenty of dps and rivle other dps classes. Guardians have all the ability to do dps, its their mindset of "if im not main tank im useless in a raid" thats currently hurting them the most. </DIV>

Gaige

08-31-2005, 11:56 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nazowa wrote:<BR> This argument is getting cheap and tiring. You total abilities and spell book defines you whether they are related to tanking or not. Next you will argue that 30% Heal on 2 minute timer doesnt help your tanking yeah sure... <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>It actually varies between 26 and 31% at master I and it has a 3 minute recast timer. It also dispells 86 lvls of poison and disease at Master I level.</P> <P>If you are going to complain about the spell, please cite it correctly. Thank you.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shakir1065 wrote:<BR> <P>Sounds like Gage is trying to walk a very fine line with his monkey community and the guardians. hehe, He wants the Guardian mit to avoidance ratio to be the same as the monk avoidance to mit ration, both opposite eachother of course. But he also wants to keep his DPS. <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I have stated and continue to state that I will give up all the DPS I need to in order get the avoidance/defense I need AS LONG AS I'M STILL THE SECOND BEST DPS'ING FIGHTER, BEHIND BRUISERS.</P> <P>Also, with all this talk of utility, you know how many group buffs I have at 50, and at 60? Two. TWO.</P> <P>My heal is targetable every 3 mins, I give you that.</P> <P>But at 50 I have a group DPS buff, which on beta at 50 and 60 becomes group haste.</P> <P>That's it.</P> <P>Everything else I have contributes only to me, except my avoidance buff, which all fighters get.</P> <P>So to say that you guys don't have any utility when you have more group buffs (or should) that affect group defense - just like zerkers affect group offense - is absurd.</P> <P>Besides you guys want to be the *best* tanks (which I don't agree with) so you should sacrifice everything for it. Read some of my old posts. If you guys are unhappy with your DPS (it went up I believe) or your utility - then ask for more.</P> <P>You won't though. You'll talk about ours, you'll talk about your lack of utility, but its just a smokescreen. So that you guys can say "but that's fine with me, screw DPS and utility I'm a TANK".</P> <P>Oh yeah, well so am I... supposedly.</P> <P>Anyway, I've heard it all before. I should roll a guardian, I should be happy sucking at everything, being good at nothing because I made the "wrong" class choice, yadda yadda.</P> <P>I don't care if you guys are the best raid tanks on the planet... just quit doing it with avoidance. If you want twice my mitigation, higher defense and more HP then fine. But quit avoiding so much. If YOU guys wanted to avoid you should've rolled brawlers.</P> <P>Right?</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> <P></P> <P>Exill wrote:<BR>Interesting thought:<BR><BR>Where does it say that Guardians are 'required' to use a shield?<BR><BR>Gaige is using a 2 handed weapon so shouldn't his stats be compared with a Guardian using a 2 handed weapon as well?<BR><BR>Compare Gaige's stats to the screenshot below. Now Gaige has 21.7% more avoidance then I do, and I have 26.6% more mitigation then Gaige does.</P> <P>Also note that there may be a difference in amount of Fabled gear between Gaige and I.<BR><BR>It was just an idea, correct me if I am wrong. <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ah yes, the age old discussion going on in the beta forums.</P> <P>This idea is wrong.</P> <P>How many raids have you tanked with a two hander, honestly? Any?</P> <P>EVERY raid I've tanked and every group I've tanked in has been with a two hander. (Well, some of my xp grind was dual wield, but I got riposted a lot and now I have ACGF).</P> <P>You aren't comparing apples to apples because you want to compare defensive numbers (mit/avoidance) while you are setup in offensive equipment.</P> <P>The only way this becomes valid is if you start going out and tanking raids sans shield.</P> <P>But you won't.</P> <P>So why skew the numbers in my favor when all it will be is an illusion.</P> <P>OH LOOK, HE HAS 30% MORE AVOIDANCE.</P> <P>Oh okay, everything is fixed.</P> <P>(muwah ha ha)</P> <P>Equips shield, has 9% less avoidance, continues to be best raid tank in the game.</P> <P>Nice try, but I wasn't born yesterday.</P> <P>You do have more fabled gear though, very nice. I'm pretty slack. Officers hate me anyway, I never win! <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Common sense is all it took for me to figure this one out, well that and 4 years of dissappointment with the SK class on EQ1, and monks weren't even considered tanks there so consider yourself lucky...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mitigation on raid is king, he who can get his the highest will tank, avoidance means nothing on an orange triple up mob that hits for 3k.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>1) I hope your common sense can tell the other what, 50 thousand end game raiding fighters what to do after the revamp if its unsuccessful. I mean since anyone with common sense who wants to end game raid knows the only fighter class to choose is guardian. I'm still figuring out what the other 5 are in the game for. OH SNAP. That's right, grouping. I'm so silly. I'll just cancel my subscription between lvl grind expansion releases then, since the rest of the time my guild will be raiding and I made the wrong fighter choice. Man I hate making WRONG choices because of my lack of common sense, when this is supposed to be a game. Where were you when I was rolling up the WRONG toon to raid with.</P> <P>2) Mitigation isn't king. It never has been since release. What the hell are you on? Mitigation acts as the buffer that seperates the spikes taken by all the AVOIDANCE tanks in this game. YOU are an avoidance tank, Noah is an avoidance tank, and Tuna is an avoidance tank. You know what seperates us as avoidance tanks? You guys have more mit than I, so you take less damage spikes when hit. Which isn't near often enough. Don't lie to yourself, mitigation is a backup tool used by the 6 avoidance classes in this game. The end. This game has never been about mitigation. </P> <P>A TRUE mitigation tank would have like 70% unbuffed mit and 5 or 10% unbuffed avoidance. Sure you can mitigate the hell out of incoming damage, but you ARE GONNA GET HIT A TON.</P> <P>That isn't EQ2 and we all know it. In EQ2 a guardian wears 500lbs of heavy armor and dodges, ducks, and jumps out of the way, getting hit maybe 30% of the time, THEN they use their huge heavy armor and massive HP to lessen the hit.</P> <P>In EQ2 a monk wears leather, trains their body to be able to dodge blows, gets hit maybe 20% of the time, and then dies.</P> <P>That's the game we're all playing Kat, there are no mitigation tanks in EQ2.</P> <P>So just remember that when you think avoidance means nothing on orange +++ x4s. Because if you didn't have all the avoidance you did, you would be dead too, right next to me.</P> <P>As for "mitigation being king" even though it isn't, doesn't mean if it was it always will be. Unless you are the dev designing raids in this game (I'm pretty sure its Roger) then anything can change. Why not have some variety in raid mobs. The current ones bore me, don't they bore you?</P><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:23 PM</span>

Shizzirri

09-01-2005, 12:30 AM

<P>Most guardian dps I have comes from damage shields other classes cast on me and haste buffs other classes cast on me, not from actual guardian spells, I don't use our haste buff when I tank because it drains power. We use the same weapons that you do (other than a few class specific monk items) but you can use the same big 2 handers (crush ones at least). Maybe we should find a parser that can parse buffs to the caster and see how much of that "uber" guardian dps is from those proc buffs and damage shields we get. As for situations where I'm not maintanking, I have a RGF, which yes a monk can equip (/cough nerf) and I do parse much lower using my haste buff and attacks, again I still get proc buffs, etc that raise it, but actual guardian dps still sucks, but do I care no because I'm not dps I'm a tank and yes if we're the worst tank we should have crap dps but don't look at parsers for your arguments that we can run up there with the high damage classes because that information isn't accurate.</P> <P>And any guardian who lives by the idea of them being useless if they're not the main tank is an idiot...</P> <P> </P>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 12:31 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dfoley323 wrote:<BR> <DIV>>>that is [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] weak and you know it... get rid of all you heals no fien death no 2 hander... to avoid wear a shield like t rest of us.. oh yeah and bring your dps down by about another 200% then... you can have yer life buff... <<</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all of our heals? </DIV> <DIV>Monks have 1 heal on a 3 min timer that can be interupted, stifled, and costs power, no where near as powerful as eq1 mend</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruisers to get a bit of an advantage with a 90 sec self only heal for a much larger %</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Feign death? ur kidding right. Fail rate on FD is obscene, not to mention brawlers receive 0 mitigation and avoidance and resists while fd. I mean sure its utility for when solo runing places, but atm its no where near useful for droping agro because if the target stays engaged / locked the secnd a brawler stands they return to their hate position instantly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Our dps is the crap spend 5 seconds looking at a different fighter board other then a guards and youll see that a monks top atk went from 900 dmg adept 3 to 300 dmg master 1. Thats a pretty big dps cut.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Not sure what ur point is about 2 handers, monks get no shield so its pretty obvious to use a weapon that gets less repostes per set time. (Thx mostly to its slower delay, fewer hits per given time etc)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the rest, how about u try being a dps in a raid before u claim u have none. Guards on live do plenty of dps and rivle other dps classes. Guardians have all the ability to do dps, its their mindset of "if im not main tank im useless in a raid" thats currently hurting them the most. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>first of all yer mixing live and beta stats on beta fein death is better on beta monks dps suck on live it is good... heal may not be great but guess waht it is better then wht I have.. and yes on live servers I do dps and I do it quite well... I can self buff about 100% haste and crank about 200 dps as aguard... but I was not talking about live servers I m tlaking about beta... and in beta our dps sucks and we can no longer effectivly buff life.. all of our defense is out the window and we haev these uselss dmg soaking spells that we can cast on others... effectivly if we dont tank we dont raid...

JNewby

09-01-2005, 12:40 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE>I have stated and continue to state that I will give up all the DPS I need to in order get the avoidance/defense I need AS LONG AS I'M STILL THE SECOND BEST DPS'ING FIGHTER, BEHIND BRUISERS.</BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Also, with all this talk of utility, you know how many group buffs I have at 50, and at 60? Two. TWO.</P> <P>My heal is targetable every 3 mins, I give you that.</P> <P>But at 50 I have a group DPS buff, which on beta at 50 and 60 becomes group haste.</P> <P>That's it.</P> <P>Everything else I have contributes only to me, except my avoidance buff, which all fighters get.</P> <P>So to say that you guys don't have any utility when you have more group buffs (or should) that affect group defense - just like zerkers affect group offense - is absurd.</P> <P>Besides you guys want to be the *best* tanks (which I don't agree with) so you should sacrifice everything for it. Read some of my old posts. If you guys are unhappy with your DPS (it went up I believe) or your utility - then ask for more.</P> <P>You won't though. You'll talk about ours, you'll talk about your lack of utility, but its just a smokescreen. So that you guys can say "but that's fine with me, screw DPS and utility I'm a TANK".</P> <P>Oh yeah, well so am I... supposedly.</P> <P>Anyway, I've heard it all before. I should roll a guardian, I should be happy sucking at everything, being good at nothing because I made the "wrong" class choice, yadda yadda.</P> <P>I don't care if you guys are the best raid tanks on the planet... just quit doing it with avoidance. If you want twice my mitigation, higher defense and more HP then fine. But quit avoiding so much. If YOU guys wanted to avoid you should've rolled brawlers.</P> <P>in amount of Fabled gear between Gaige and I.<BR><BR>It was just an idea, correct me if I am wrong. </P> <HR> <P></P> <P> </P> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>08-31-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:23 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>ok so you wwant to be the best/2nd best and and 2nd best dps?? wow.. that isnt much... on live servers they are called zerkers...</P> <P>monks are tanks but guards are only tanks... on live servers yes we buff life of group.... that is it... on beta we do nothing no utility and no dmg... we cant even buff ourselfs correctly anymore....</P> <P>and we do sacrifice everything to be the best tanks... guards do nothing but take dmg... I dont know what else we have to give up... hell take all the stupid attacks we have they are useless and I dont use them anyhow... they arent even on the hot bar when I raid.... take stupid intervene and whatever dmg soaking spell not on hotbarr anyway... what is on the hotbar is all the spells they are removing</P> <P>and now brawlers have higher hps then guards... hrm that doesnt seem right... and also gaige avoidance is a big part of tanking regardless of class... I am sure u would be happy to see guards with no avoidance</P> <P><BR> </P>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 12:46 AM

<P>A TRUE mitigation tank would have like 70% unbuffed mit and 5 or 10% unbuffed avoidance. Sure you can mitigate the hell out of incoming damage, but you ARE GONNA GET HIT A TON.</P> <DIV>hrm then monks would haev 5 10% mitigation.. its all kinda stupid.. guardians are tank monks are dps/utility/tanks if all 6 fighter classes can tank gaige u will be benched alot when they ahev a tank for the raid already... as guardians are in alot of guilds cause only 1 is needed... have fun with that....</DIV>

Gaige

09-01-2005, 12:53 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <P>Most guardian dps I have comes from damage shields other classes cast on me and haste buffs other classes cast on me, not from actual guardian spells, I don't use our haste buff when I tank because it drains power. We use the same weapons that you do (other than a few class specific monk items) but you can use the same big 2 handers (crush ones at least). Maybe we should find a parser that can parse buffs to the caster and see how much of that "uber" guardian dps is from those proc buffs and damage shields we get. As for situations where I'm not maintanking, I have a RGF, which yes a monk can equip (/cough nerf) and I do parse much lower using my haste buff and attacks, again I still get proc buffs, etc that raise it, but actual guardian dps still sucks, but do I care no because I'm not dps I'm a tank and yes if we're the worst tank we should have crap dps but don't look at parsers for your arguments that we can run up there with the high damage classes because that information isn't accurate.</P> <P>And any guardian who lives by the idea of them being useless if they're not the main tank is an idiot...<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Hello, we aren't talking about your DPS while tanking vs ours while offtanking. We are talking about yours while offtanking vs ours while offtanking. On live you guys can do 200 to 250 easy with the right equipment and spells upgraded. Too bad Sigon quit, but I'll dig up his thread where he says as much when people called me liars when I said guards can do over 200 dps in raids while not tanking.</P> <P>Unlike your guild perhaps, FoH has a lot of guardians and usually only Noah tanks, so I see parses and have first hand experience with guardian dps in a non-tank roll.</P> <P>FYI monks dps drops considerably when they are tanking, if they know what they are doing.</P> <P>HAHAHA you want them to nerf our ability to equip flails. What possible reason can you have for that? That is the monks best 2h tank weapon. Wow you really are out of your mind.</P> <P>Ah yes and you used the tried and true "I DON'T CARE ABOUT MY DPS, I'M A TANK". If you don't care, quit bringing it up. The end. Obviously a ton of you do care since you can't stop talking about it and comparing it.</P> <P>Also, on beta monk/bruiser DPS is substantially lower. So you can't call us a "high dps" class anymore, since we aren't. We are tanks. Sure we should outdamage you though. But you don't care, remember.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> JNewby wrote: <P></P> <P>ok so you wwant to be the best/2nd best and and 2nd best dps?? wow.. that isnt much... on live servers they are called zerkers... <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Learn to read and quit putting words in my mouth. I never said 2nd best this, and 2nd best that. Ever. Reading comprehension is your friend.</P> <P>I said we should be the second best damage of the fighter classes. Because we should. If you have a problem with that, drive to SOE HQ in SD and tell them.</P> <P>As far as tanking I think it should go guards/pallys/zerkers/sks/monks/bruisers.</P> <P>But I don't think the differences should be very big, since on beta the damage differences aren't.</P> <P>As for your tired, old and inaccurate BUT WE ARE TANKS AND ONLY TANKS, monks are DPS (not) UTILITY (a little) and tanks yeah right, its old, tired and a lie. Quit saying it.</P> <P>If you don't have utility, ask for it, if your dps is too low, comment about it.</P> <P>Don't whine to me.</P> <P>QUIT saying waaaah I have no utility and no dps in an attempt to say stuff is balanced when the next word you breath is BUT I DON'T CARE I'M A TANK.</P> <P>Make up your fickle minds.</P><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:59 PM</span>

Gungo

09-01-2005, 12:56 AM

<DIV>Time outs suck, anyway i had a nice long post w details on class specific buffs and group buffs in raid and raid utilites. But to sum things up, raid utility and fighter stacking is a seperate issue. </DIV> <DIV>The fact that all classes should excell in thier intended role under certain conditions is the current issue. Sometimes we have a fury in MT group for mitigation, sometimes a warden for heat/cold resists, sometimes a Mystic for poisen, </DIV> <DIV>why then do gaurds need to tank every raid? we are avoidance tanks so we should just be happy to do an adequate job in groups? I dont think so.</DIV> <DIV>i am not saying i want to tank every raid. I am saying there needs to be a point where i can tank my raid type better then a guard. The only utility i have is fake death in raids and that is failry useless in aoe fights, /camp is far mroe effective. </DIV> <DIV>i have dps and its being nerfed as it should be no one believes i should out dps scouts/casters. </DIV> <DIV>so what am i again 8th rate dps and 3rd rate tank w no utility? </DIV> <DIV>no where was it stated gaurds are the "MT", but it has been stated all fighters will be able to to do thier intended roles and that is tanking. </DIV> <DIV>I just want a peice of Pie. Don't worry if you are nice i will leave you a peice of the pie too.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:08 PM</span>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:01 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <P>Most guardian dps I have comes from damage shields other classes cast on me and haste buffs other classes cast on me, not from actual guardian spells, I don't use our haste buff when I tank because it drains power. We use the same weapons that you do (other than a few class specific monk items) but you can use the same big 2 handers (crush ones at least). Maybe we should find a parser that can parse buffs to the caster and see how much of that "uber" guardian dps is from those proc buffs and damage shields we get. As for situations where I'm not maintanking, I have a RGF, which yes a monk can equip (/cough nerf) and I do parse much lower using my haste buff and attacks, again I still get proc buffs, etc that raise it, but actual guardian dps still sucks, but do I care no because I'm not dps I'm a tank and yes if we're the worst tank we should have crap dps but don't look at parsers for your arguments that we can run up there with the high damage classes because that information isn't accurate.</P> <P>And any guardian who lives by the idea of them being useless if they're not the main tank is an idiot...<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Hello, we aren't talking about your DPS while tanking vs ours while offtanking. We are talking about yours while offtanking vs ours while offtanking. On live you guys can do 200 to 250 easy with the right equipment and spells upgraded. Too bad Sigon quit, but I'll dig up his thread where he says as much when people called me liars when I said guards can do over 200 dps in raids while not tanking.</P> <P>Unlike your guild perhaps, FoH has a lot of guardians and usually only Noah tanks, so I see parses and have first hand experience with guardian dps in a non-tank roll.</P> <P>FYI monks dps drops considerably when they are tanking, if they know what they are doing.</P> <P>HAHAHA you want them to nerf our ability to equip flails. What possible reason can you have for that? That is the monks best 2h tank weapon. Wow you really are out of your mind.</P> <P>Ah yes and you used the tried and true "I DON'T CARE ABOUT MY DPS, I'M A TANK". If you don't care, quit bringing it up. The end. Obviously a ton of you do care since you can't stop talking about it and comparing it.</P> <P>Also, on beta monk/bruiser DPS is substantially lower. So you can't call us a "high dps" class anymore, since we aren't. We are tanks. Sure we should outdamage you though. But you don't care, remember.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> JNewby wrote: <P></P> <P>ok so you wwant to be the best/2nd best and and 2nd best dps?? wow.. that isnt much... on live servers they are called zerkers... <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Learn to read and quit putting words in my mouth. I never said 2nd best this, and 2nd best that. Ever. Reading comprehension is your friend.</P> <P>I said we should be the second best damage of the fighter classes. Because we should. If you have a problem with that, drive to SOE HQ in SD and tell them.</P> <P>As far as tanking I think it should go guards/pallys/zerkers/sks/monks/bruisers.</P> <P>But I don't think the differences should be very big, since on beta the damage differences aren't.</P> <P>As for your tired, old and inaccurate BUT WE ARE TANKS AND ONLY TANKS, monks are DPS (not) UTILITY (a little) and tanks yeah right, its old, tired and a lie. Quit saying it.</P> <P>If you don't have utility, ask for it, if your dps is too low, comment about it.</P> <P>Don't whine to me.</P> <P>QUIT saying waaaah I have no utility and no dps in an attempt to say stuff is balanced when the next word you breath is BUT I DON'T CARE I'M A TANK.</P> <P>Make up your fickle minds.</P> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>08-31-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:59 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>yeah take away yer flails like they took awa are shields... and haha I would attribute monks lower dps all to you gaige... I am sure all brawlers on the bench are gonna love ya...

mastalynx

09-01-2005, 01:04 AM

I dont like that guys comparison, saying guards have 60% more mitigation. Both classes have that same 1k mitigation buff now and we will receive the same raid buffs, so in reality we probably only will have 20% more mitigation or less fully raid buffed.

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:05 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV>Time outs suck, anywya i had a nice long post w details on class specific buffs and group buffs in raid and raid utilites. But to sum things up, raid utility and fighter stacking is a seperate issue. The fact that all classes should excell in thier intended role under certain conditions is the current issue. sometimes we have a fury in MT group for mitigation, sometimes a warden for heat/cold resists, sometimes a Mystic for poisen, why then do gaurds need to tank every raid? we are avoidance tanks and should just be happy to do an adequate job in groups. i am not saying i want to tank every raid. I am saying there needs to be a point where i can. the only utility i have is fake death in raids and that is failry useless in aoe fights, /camp is far mroe effective. i have dps and its being nerfed as it should be no one believes i should out dps scouts/casters. so what am i again 3rd rate dps 3rd rate tank? i dont think so. no where was it stated gaurds are the "MT", but it has been stated all fighters will be able to to do thier intended roles and that is tanking. i just want a peice of my role</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>as stated b4 in this world alot of tnaks will be bench warmers... jsut cause a healer isnt in main tank goru doesnt mean they arent very useful... however with these updates only MT will be useful.. where as in live servers fighters can fill multiple roles.. so fine let everyone raid tank.. but then yer just not going to be asked on riads where u are not needed to tank... right now guardians have to make their own raid guild jsut so they can be useful on riads.. or get really lucky and get in good with a guild thta needs a guard.. other then that bench warmers...

Gaige

09-01-2005, 01:08 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> JNewby wrote: <P>yeah take away yer flails like they took awa are shields... and haha I would attribute monks lower dps all to you gaige... I am sure all brawlers on the bench are gonna love ya...</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>They didn't take away your shield, they lowered its effectiveness. Thereby allowing you to choose from any kite shield or tower shield you want and losing nothing.</P> <P>Wow, now I'm the cause of all the combat changes, guardian nerfs and LOWER monk damage.</P> <P>Yeah it was all me, of course. It couldn't have been that archetype balance thing they are working on or the numerous scout complaint threads, could it?</P> <P>I don't care who loves me really. Just because I'm a brawler and a monk doesn't mean I agree with everyone who plays the class, or that they agree with me. I speak my opinion, not the opinon of brawlers universally.<BR></P>

TunaBoo

09-01-2005, 01:09 AM

BEFORE these changes.. 1 sta under 200 gave u like 12.5 hp. Now, 1 sta under 200 is like 4ish.. same as post 200. They took off the softcap and just totally nerfed Sta. Sta is really sad now. /can get more sta if I put my other sta doll on, or change out some gear. <div></div>

Shizzirri

09-01-2005, 01:14 AM

<FONT color=#ffff00></FONT><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Common sense is all it took for me to figure this one out, well that and 4 years of dissappointment with the SK class on EQ1, and monks weren't even considered tanks there so consider yourself lucky...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mitigation on raid is king, he who can get his the highest will tank, avoidance means nothing on an orange triple up mob that hits for 3k.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>1) I hope your common sense can tell the other what, 50 thousand end game raiding fighters what to do after the revamp if its unsuccessful. I mean since anyone with common sense who wants to end game raid knows the only fighter class to choose is guardian. I'm still figuring out what the other 5 are in the game for. OH SNAP. That's right, grouping. I'm so silly. I'll just cancel my subscription between lvl grind expansion releases then, since the rest of the time my guild will be raiding and I made the wrong fighter choice. Man I hate making WRONG choices because of my lack of common sense, when this is supposed to be a game. Where were you when I was rolling up the WRONG toon to raid with. </P> <P>2) Mitigation isn't king. It never has been since release. What the hell are you on? Mitigation acts as the buffer that seperates the spikes taken by all the AVOIDANCE tanks in this game. YOU are an avoidance tank, Noah is an avoidance tank, and Tuna is an avoidance tank. You know what seperates us as avoidance tanks? You guys have more mit than I, so you take less damage spikes when hit. Which isn't near often enough. Don't lie to yourself, mitigation is a backup tool used by the 6 avoidance classes in this game. The end. This game has never been about mitigation. <FONT color=#ffff00>Well let's see maybe we should ask Noah, Tuna, or Drakem how many attacks they actually avoid when tanking darathar or the krathuk, its not much, I mean our shield blocks occasionally, every once in a while we parry, and every now and then my pallie's shield buff blocks an attack (well there's one use for another fighter class, buff [Removed for Content]). We should have more mit than you we wear plate you wear leather there's a considerable difference there.</FONT></P> <P>A TRUE mitigation tank would have like 70% unbuffed mit and 5 or 10% unbuffed avoidance. Sure you can mitigate the hell out of incoming damage, but you ARE GONNA GET HIT A TON. <FONT color=#ffff00>So is this what you want out of guardians? I mean seriously this wouldn't bother me</FONT></P> <P>That isn't EQ2 and we all know it. In EQ2 a guardian wears 500lbs of heavy armor and dodges, ducks, and jumps out of the way, getting hit maybe 30% of the time, THEN they use their huge heavy armor and massive HP to lessen the hit. <FONT color=#ffff00>Seriously if you want to throw weight into the picture let's do that and also consider the amount of bags/boxes you have on you, the weight of your anceint combine flail, in all honestly that should be a factor to and if that's the case then even monks should suffer, personally I'm up for the challenge. Hey I just live by the rules sony makes for me, should they change well they are, if it doesn't work well there's always vanguard around the corner...</FONT></P> <P>In EQ2 a monk wears leather, trains their body to be able to dodge blows, gets hit maybe 20% of the time, and then dies. </P> <P>That's the game we're all playing Kat, there are no mitigation tanks in EQ2.</P> <P>So just remember that when you think avoidance means nothing on orange +++ x4s. Because if you didn't have all the avoidance you did, you would be dead too, right next to me. <FONT color=#ffff00>Again last time I checked with defense tokens, with my defensive buffs, etc, the amount of times most orange mobs (contested) miss me is very minimal and that's the way it should be a level 50 tank should not be able to run circles around a level 57 dragon, and I get mauled by contested with almost 100% fabled. </FONT></P> <P>As for "mitigation being king" even though it isn't, doesn't mean if it was it always will be. Unless you are the dev designing raids in this game (I'm pretty sure its Roger) then anything can change. Why not have some variety in raid mobs. The current ones bore me, don't they bore you? <FONT color=#ffff00>Personally the only raids that bore me are the instance runs, the reason they are boring is because we've done them a million times, over and over, contested mobs are fun but we just started getting those and I'm sure even they will get boring after a while maybe its time we lobby to change them all again?</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>08-31-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:23 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Sadly no matter what they do there will be a large amount of upset fighters, you can't please everyone, life sucks then another game comes out and you move on.<BR>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:14 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> JNewby wrote: <P>yeah take away yer flails like they took awa are shields... and haha I would attribute monks lower dps all to you gaige... I am sure all brawlers on the bench are gonna love ya...</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>They didn't take away your shield, they lowered its effectiveness. Thereby allowing you to choose from any kite shield or tower shield you want and losing nothing.</P> <P>Wow, now I'm the cause of all the combat changes, guardian nerfs and LOWER monk damage.</P> <P>Yeah it was all me, of course. It couldn't have been that archetype balance thing they are working on or the numerous scout complaint threads, could it?</P> <P>I don't care who loves me really. Just because I'm a brawler and a monk doesn't mean I agree with everyone who plays the class, or that they agree with me. I speak my opinion, not the opinon of brawlers universally.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>yeah well they have nerfed tower shields to all hell... yeah they are prtty much usless.. but only weill be used cuase its better then an empty slot...</P> <P>and the reason I say you have alot of infulence is cause one you post all the time.. and 2 I have seen posts where moorgard tells u spefic info and says gaige try this out blah blah we changed... seems like u have had some influence</P>

Gaige

09-01-2005, 01:21 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR> <P>and the reason I say you have alot of infulence is cause one you post all the time.. and 2 I have seen posts where moorgard tells u spefic info and says gaige try this out blah blah we changed... seems like u have had some influence<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Plenty of people post a lot. I've never seen a post by MG saying what you state. I did see one in this thread earlier where he asked Exill and myself to repost our persona pics after yesterday's changes.</P> <P>But then I suppose you can say that Exill has some influence as well, right?<BR></P>

Gaige

09-01-2005, 01:23 AM

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Shizzirri wrote: <P><FONT color=#ffff00>(well there's one use for another fighter class, buff [Removed for Content]). We should have more mit than you we wear plate you wear leather there's a considerable difference there.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Good point. Monks are tanking awesome in beta with a guardian buffing them. Its quite amazing. I really love your new spell that allows you to intercept some of my damage and use your mitigation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My superior avoidance + your protection and mitigation helping me out = win.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>See, you'll always have a use <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></DIV>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:24 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR> <P>and the reason I say you have alot of infulence is cause one you post all the time.. and 2 I have seen posts where moorgard tells u spefic info and says gaige try this out blah blah we changed... seems like u have had some influence<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Plenty of people post a lot. I've never seen a post by MG saying what you state. I did see one in this thread earlier where he asked Exill and myself to repost our persona pics after yesterday's changes.</P> <P>But then I suppose you can say that Exill has some influence as well, right?<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I dont know havent seem him post to much... but as it is looking he doesnt have to much pull

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:27 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Shizzirri wrote: <P><FONT color=#ffff00>(well there's one use for another fighter class, buff [Removed for Content]). We should have more mit than you we wear plate you wear leather there's a considerable difference there.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Good point. Monks are tanking awesome in beta with a guardian buffing them. Its quite amazing. I really love your new spell that allows you to intercept some of my damage and use your mitigation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My superior avoidance + your protection and mitigation helping me out = win.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>See, you'll always have a use <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>that wont happen... also our dmg soaking spells suck and I will never use them.. and our mit buffs suck now as along with all our other group buffs</DIV>

Gungo

09-01-2005, 01:29 AM

<DIV>"as stated b4 in this world alot of tnaks will be bench warmers... jsut cause a healer isnt in main tank goru doesnt mean they arent very useful... however with these updates only MT will be useful.. where as in live servers fighters can fill multiple roles.. so fine let everyone raid tank.. but then yer just not going to be asked on riads where u are not needed to tank... right now guardians have to make their own raid guild jsut so they can be useful on riads.. or get really lucky and get in good with a guild thta needs a guard.. other then that bench warmers... "</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Yeah my original post covered most of that, the point is there is no current utility for brawlers or warriors on beta and neither class stacks well. That still doesnt solve the original dilemma of all fighters being able to tank better under certain conditions. the whole healer example i gave was to show that they can excel under certain conditions. thats all i want</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Fighter utility and stacking is a seperate issue. crusader have thier mitigation buff to others, rezz or fake death, heals or lifetaps. warriors get slightly better then crusader dps or should when the melee dps mess is fixed on beta, and they should get a buff to others that helps their defense/ blockrate, hell they can add a counteratk to it too. and brawlers has fake death, slightly better then warrior dps, and a buff to give others more avoidance. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>optimally crusaders shoudl tank 25% (casters), bralwers 25% (swarm mobs, monk/scout types), and warriros 50% (dragon type heavy hitters). Not saying you need that fighter for that raid but in there type of raid those fighters would do substantially better.</DIV>

Gaige

09-01-2005, 01:30 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>that wont happen... also our dmg soaking spells suck and I will never use them.. and our mit buffs suck now as along with all our other group buffs <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Your choice. Just remember you said "I will never use them" "these suck along with" instead of trying to get them fixed or using them in a situation that works.</P> <P>It seems like you guys are at fault for your lack of utility, eh?</P> <P>I have lots of spells I don't use either. Maybe I should start complaining about my utility sucking.<BR></P>

Moorgard

09-01-2005, 01:37 AM

<DIV>I realize there's a natural desire to see some sort of parity between mitigation and avoidance numbers for the various types of tanks, but it isn't that simple. As I'm growing more fond of saying lately, numbers don't tell the whole story. It's tough to say that X mitigation is worth Y avoidance, because the two traits behave differently in combat. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The mitigation percentage you see is based on a no-arrow solo opponent of your level; your mitigation against another kind of opponent can vary significantly. That's why it's beneficial for a tank to add mitigation even if your display indicates you're at the cap. While you may be at cap against a white-con no-arrow opponent, you're not capped against a yellow-con ^^^ heroic. For wont of a better term, mitigation is mitigated by both the target's level and tier.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avoidance, on the other hand, is based on level alone. If you have 70% avoidance, it's 70% against an opponent of your level. That doesn't change based on the tier of your opponent; you avoid about the same against a no-arrow opponent as you do against a ^^^. (Special mobs, such as named and epics, have innate to-hit bonuses given to them, but even in that case higher avoidance still provides an advantage.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thus you get hit harder and more often by opponents that are higher level than you are. In contrast, a higher tier (that is, more arrows) opponent of the same level will hit you harder, but not more often.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So like I said, comparing the numbers in your persona window don't tell the whole story. Parsing is prone to similar errors in interpretation. Trying to prove that ClassA is a better tank than ClassB by parsing fights against green ^^^ opponents isn't going to guarantee how those classes will perform against orange-con epic fights. If you want to show performance against a specific kind of opponent, you need to parse against that type of opponent.</DIV>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:41 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>that wont happen... also our dmg soaking spells suck and I will never use them.. and our mit buffs suck now as along with all our other group buffs <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Your choice. Just remember you said "I will never use them" "these suck along with" instead of trying to get them fixed or using them in a situation that works.</P> <P>It seems like you guys are at fault for your lack of utility, eh?</P> <P>I have lots of spells I don't use either. Maybe I should start complaining about my utility sucking.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>if I wanted utility I woudl have and did take a dirge... I wanted to tnak so I took a guardian... not so I could soak dmg from healers or other tanks for that matter.. in addition right now the line doesnt work right... if it does doesnt matter cause when yer tanking... it doesnt help to soak dmg from people that arent getting hit... its a dead line and no guard uses them

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:44 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <DIV>I realize there's a natural desire to see some sort of parity between mitigation and avoidance numbers for the various types of tanks, but it isn't that simple. As I'm growing more fond of saying lately, numbers don't tell the whole story. It's tough to say that X mitigation is worth Y avoidance, because the two traits behave differently in combat. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The mitigation percentage you see is based on a no-arrow solo opponent of your level; your mitigation against another kind of opponent can vary significantly. That's why it's beneficial for a tank to add mitigation even if your display indicates you're at the cap. While you may be at cap against a white-con no-arrow opponent, you're not capped against a yellow-con ^^^ heroic. For wont of a better term, mitigation is mitigated by both the target's level and tier.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avoidance, on the other hand, is based on level alone. If you have 70% avoidance, it's 70% against an opponent of your level. That doesn't change based on the tier of your opponent; you avoid about the same against a no-arrow opponent as you do against a ^^^. (Special mobs, such as named and epics, have innate to-hit bonuses given to them, but even in that case higher avoidance still provides an advantage.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thus you get hit harder and more often by opponents that are higher level than you are. In contrast, a higher tier (that is, more arrows) opponent of the same level will hit you harder, but not more often.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So like I said, comparing the numbers in your persona window don't tell the whole story. Parsing is prone to similar errors in interpretation. Trying to prove that ClassA is a better tank than ClassB by parsing fights against green ^^^ opponents isn't going to guarantee how those classes will perform against orange-con epic fights. If you want to show performance against a specific kind of opponent, you need to parse against that type of opponent.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>by that description seems mitigaion is nerfed compared to avoidance.. granted with both get avoidance.. but seems that mitigation is fairly low for any tank... that being for the only thing that matter and that is raids

Gaige

09-01-2005, 01:45 AM

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR><BR>if it does doesnt matter cause when yer tanking... it doesnt help to soak dmg from people that arent getting hit... its a dead line and no guard uses them <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>But what about when you aren't tanking and another fighter in your guild is! They do work on beta btw, and Noah has used them on me a few times.</DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> JNewby wrote: <P></P> <P>they can only be used if you are int he same group... and haveing to guardians ina gorup is pretty useless <BR> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE>There is that guardian mental block again. Since when did I say you should use it on another guardian? Use it on the monk tanking while you buff/dps.<BR><BR></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:48 PM</span>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 01:46 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR><BR>if it does doesnt matter cause when yer tanking... it doesnt help to soak dmg from people that arent getting hit... its a dead line and no guard uses them <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>But what about when you aren't tanking and another fighter in your guild is! They do work on beta btw, and Noah has used them on me a few times.<BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>they can only be used if you are int he same group... and haveing to guardians ina gorup is pretty useless

Shizzirri

09-01-2005, 02:21 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR><BR>if it does doesnt matter cause when yer tanking... it doesnt help to soak dmg from people that arent getting hit... its a dead line and no guard uses them <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>But what about when you aren't tanking and another fighter in your guild is! They do work on beta btw, and Noah has used them on me a few times.<BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>they can only be used if you are int he same group... and haveing to guardians ina gorup is pretty useless <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Not really, one guardian can "shield buff" the other one, of course they should mitigate the stupid things first that would be nice. Your better off committing suicide then trying to use guardian sphere.

TunaBoo

09-01-2005, 02:28 AM

Then why does mita scale with difficulty of a mob, but not avoidance? Seems like a flaw in programming logic. As a mob (of the same level) gets harder and harder.. it hits person X for more damage.. but at exactly the same accuracy? <div></div>

Gaige

09-01-2005, 02:30 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR><BR>of course they should mitigate the stupid things first that would be nice. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>They do use your mitigation on beta I believe.<BR>

Sixmai

09-01-2005, 02:33 AM

<DIV> <P>I just can't believe nobody pointed out the real important fact :</P> <P> </P> <P>two fabled out fighter classes (with an advantage to the Guardian) :</P> <P><FONT size=2></FONT> </P> <P>Guard 4149 hp / 182 sta</P> <P>2782 mitg / 5000 = 55,6% => let 44,4% go through</P> <P>54.3% avoid => 45,7% go through</P> <P>total damage going through his defense : 0,444 * 0,457 = 0,202 => <STRONG><U>20,2%</U></STRONG> go through</P> <P> </P> <P>Bruiser 4201hp / 176 sta</P> <P>1707 mit / 5000 = 34,1% => let 65,9%</P> <P>68.2% avoid => 31,8% go through</P> <P>total damage going through his defense : 0,659 * 0,318 = 0,209 =><STRONG> <U>20,9%</U></STRONG> go through.</P> <P> </P> <P>So we look like the two class are <U>equal when unbuffed</U>, but this is forgetting three facts :</P> <P>The Bruiser avoidance is 360°, the Guardian is only frontal.</P> <P>The Guard has to reduce his dps by using a shield.</P> <P>The Bruiser has more hp per stamina.</P> <P><STRONG>So currently unbuffed, the bruiser is a superior raw tank to the Guardian. </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG></STRONG> </P> <P>Self buffed the Gardien gain 3% avoidance, the brawler likely more since deflection give more than parry. </P> <P>Mitigation gains are the same on the defensive stance, but the Guardian has some temporary buff : Anchor ~600 for 30s every 180s and Commanding Presence ~400 for 30s every 90s => 133 + 100 mitigation overal = <5% overall (spells adept3).</P> <P>But what do the Bruiser get ? Strapping Spirit, at app1 it gives an all time 8% mitigation for 100hp every 6s, let's give it go like 12% at adept3. That's a serious imbalance when in a group, where the hp drain is negligeable.</P> <P>Hp wise, our stamina buff gives roughly 100hp and our group buff 450hp so we get an edge here.</P> <P><STRONG>So when self buffed, it looks like the Guardian is still inferior, even if having a larger health pool.</STRONG></P> <P> </P> <P>Now when raid buffed, the mitigation is alot easier to upgrade than avoidance ... Since parry and defense effect on avoidance is of ridiculously low amount -Tunabash gains 2,9% in avoidance when getting all defense/parry buffs up- <STRONG>you can draw your own conclusion on who will have the best raid defense, especially now that Moorgard said that avoidance number isn't scale down by the con of mobs, meaning it's scaled down way less against epic than mitigation is.</STRONG></P> <P> </P> <P>My take on this revamp is simple : my class, the guardian, was not the funniest before the revamp, yet i could be proud to have some distinct advantages over the rest of tanks. I speak of some advantage you can <STRONG>feel when playing, not when crunshing numbers on a forum</STRONG>.</P> <P>After the revamp, our advantage against the rest of the plate class is some low % on overall defense. <STRONG>This is not something you will be able to feel when playing. Beeing lucky with the random number generator will be more distinctive.</STRONG> Yet we retain our very tangible disadvantage versus the rest of the tanks in dps (we lack some good aoe / haste) / fun ability.</P> <P>So in conclusion, we'll be a class of the past, why would a new player take a Guardian ? Having the intellectual satisfaction of being ~2% more defensive is not good in a <U>game</U> where we should rather feel it.</P> <P>The only solution i see is to give us back our previous raw defensive advantages over others classes, that is what made our class distinct. A 10% hard defensive advantage is the minimum, especially since when raiding it will be scaled lower. In group that will make up for our lack of utility / dps, and when solo it will help against mob that will take us at least 50% more time to kill than the rest of tank class, by cutting the downtime.</P> <P>Ps : my english isn't perfect, it's not my native language.</P></DIV>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 02:39 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sixmains wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P>I just can't believe nobody pointed out the real important fact :</P> <P> </P> <P>two fabled out fighter classes (with an advantage to the Guardian) :</P> <P><FONT size=2></FONT> </P> <P>Guard 4149 hp / 182 sta</P> <P>2782 mitg / 5000 = 55,6% => let 44,4% go through</P> <P>54.3% avoid => 45,7% go through</P> <P>total damage going through his defense : 0,444 * 0,457 = 0,202 => <STRONG><U>20,2%</U></STRONG> go through</P> <P> </P> <P>Bruiser 4201hp / 176 sta</P> <P>1707 mit / 5000 = 34,1% => let 65,9%</P> <P>68.2% avoid => 31,8% go through</P> <P>total damage going through his defense : 0,659 * 0,318 = 0,209 =><STRONG> <U>20,9%</U></STRONG> go through.</P> <P> </P> <P>So we look like the two class are <U>equal when unbuffed</U>, but this is forgetting three facts :</P> <P>The Bruiser avoidance is 360°, the Guardian is only frontal.</P> <P>The Guard has to reduce his dps by using a shield.</P> <P>The Bruiser has more hp per stamina.</P> <P><STRONG>So currently unbuffed, the bruiser is a superior raw tank to the Guardian. </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG></STRONG> </P> <P>Self buffed the Gardien gain 3% avoidance, the brawler likely more since deflection give more than parry. </P> <P>Mitigation gains are the same on the defensive stance, but the Guardian has some temporary buff : Anchor ~600 for 30s every 180s and Commanding Presence ~400 for 30s every 90s => 133 + 100 mitigation overal = <5% overall (spells adept3).</P> <P>But what do the Bruiser get ? Strapping Spirit, at app1 it gives an all time 8% mitigation for 100hp every 6s, let's give it go like 12% at adept3. That's a serious imbalance when in a group, where the hp drain is negligeable.</P> <P>Hp wise, our stamina buff gives roughly 100hp and our group buff 450hp so we get an edge here.</P> <P><STRONG>So when self buffed, it looks like the Guardian is still inferior, even if having a larger health pool.</STRONG></P> <P> </P> <P>Now when raid buffed, the mitigation is alot easier to upgrade than avoidance ... Since parry and defense effect on avoidance is of ridiculously low amount -Tunabash gains 2,9% in avoidance when getting all defense/parry buffs up- <STRONG>you can draw your own conclusion on who will have the best raid defense, especially now that Moorgard said that avoidance number isn't scale down by the con of mobs, meaning it's scaled down way less against epic than mitigation is.</STRONG></P> <P> </P> <P>My take on this revamp is simple : my class, the guardian, was not the funniest before the revamp, yet i could be proud to have some distinct advantages over the rest of tanks. I speak of some advantage you can <STRONG>feel when playing, not when crunshing numbers on a forum</STRONG>.</P> <P>After the revamp, our advantage against the rest of the plate class is some low % on overall defense. <STRONG>This is not something you will be able to feel when playing. Beeing lucky with the random number generator will be more distinctive.</STRONG> Yet we retain our very tangible disadvantage versus the rest of the tanks in dps (we lack some good aoe / haste) / fun ability.</P> <P>So in conclusion, we'll be a class of the past, why would a new player take a Guardian ? Having the intellectual satisfaction of being ~2% more defensive is not good in a <U>game</U> where we should rather feel it.</P> <P>The only solution i see is to give us back our previous raw defensive advantages over others classes, that is what made our class distinct. A 10% hard defensive advantage is the minimum, especially since when raiding it will be scaled lower. In group that will make up for our lack of utility / dps, and when solo it will help against mob that will take us at least 50% more time to kill than the rest of tank class, by cutting the downtime.</P> <P>Ps : my english isn't perfect, it's not my native language.</P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>***** star all the way... while Iam depressed about how much guards suck now.. hopefully moorgard previews this post again.. I would like ot see some sort of fairness b4 expansion comes out

Gaige

09-01-2005, 03:01 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR>***** star all the way... while Iam depressed about how much guards suck now.. hopefully moorgard previews this post again.. I would like ot see some sort of fairness b4 expansion comes out <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>ROFL. That's priceless. I want to see fairness too.</P> <P>But where were you campaigning for tanking fairness the last 9 months when guardians were so much better than anyone else it wasn't funny.</P> <P>Oh, you only want fair when you are at a supposed disadvantage.</P> <P>That's peachy.<BR></P>

TunaBoo

09-01-2005, 03:04 AM

We WEREN'T so much better. We had best defense. Best taunts. Worst utility. Worst DPS. <div></div>

Gaige

09-01-2005, 03:07 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TunaBoo wrote:<BR>We WEREN'T so much better.<BR><BR>We had best defense. Best taunts. Worst utility. Worst DPS.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Oh, and here I was thinking we were talking about tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You ARE that much better at tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You guys were so good at tanking you were trivializing a ton of encounters.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for your taunts, imho I don't think you had the best taunts, I think broken reactives made it seem like you did.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>BTW utility and dps have nothing to do with this. If you want to compare your DPS compare it to DPS. Don't use it as a crutch for your tanking abilities.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The point is you were hand over fist better at every other class than tanking, so much so that it broke the game.</DIV>

-Aonein-

09-01-2005, 03:13 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> GilfalasElaandrin wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P>He is refering to EQlive and no monks were never a Tank class in EQlive, the moment they started to out tank real plate class's they got the shaft ( nerfed ) back in 1999 in a big way which then took them 3 years to decide to tell the Monk community that they were sorry and it was a mistake but never fully rectified the problem.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Actually as a minor correction, EQ live LAUNCHED in 1999. Monks were not altered negatively for tanking until after Planes of Power had been out a while and Plane of Time level equipment was exacerbating the issue, which was around 2003. Middle to late last year (2004) is when the partial roll backs of the defense reduction went in.<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> But as a previous poster said, monks and brawlers in EQ ARE tank classes so everyone stop complaining that they are tanking. They are SUPPOSED to be tanking.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Ummmm you couldnt be more wrong if you even tried. EQlive had been out since i believe 1998. I started playing late 1999, didnt like the game much and left and went back to playing UO and Diablo until alot of friends i had been online playing EQlive and had lvl 40+ characters and convinced me to start playing it again and thats when i didnt look back, i started playing again in late 2000 and PoPower was released December 2001.</P> <P>Monks were nerfed even before SoE took over when Verant was still in control and they were nerfed months before PoPower was even released, they were nerfed by Verant but SoE was in the middle of taking over Verant so id be more inclined to say that the Dev team from SoE had already stepped in by then cause when you use to log in you see a splash screen saying that Verant was being taken over by SoE.</P> <P>So as you can see, Plane of Time wasnt even around now and it has nothing what so ever to do with the nerfing of monks. Monks were nerfed because of there high end gear in Luclin was simply too good, even though the only people who could tank like a Warrior was high end raiding monks who got gear from Vex Thal and Ssra Temple. This wasnt gear that any man and his dog could get, these needed organized raids of 70 people or more back then which werent push over raids. So they nerfed monks innate abilites like Dodge, Block, Parry and soft capped our AC to back then it was 1100. Once PoPower was released we could increase that soft cap from 1100 to 1350, which after that pretty much made all AC pointless even though alot of high end raiding monks could get well above 1600 / 1700 AC by the time GoD was out. Beast Lords became better tanks then what Monks did because there was no soft cap found on there armor, which was exactally the same as a Monk due to being in the same armor class area which was DRU / BST / MNK.</P> <P>In 2003 i had been raiding solid for 2 years, every day for 6+ hours or more depending on the content we raided. By this time i had already been a part of the Monk community for 1 year and a half and it wasnt for another year after that they decided to give SOME of that nerf back to monks.</P> <P>I finally threw down my Monk guantlets after playing EQ a few times on release. While i still raided on EQlive i stopped playing it so much and started to lose intrest because Monks here were alot fo fun here, they could do everything a high end monk could do in EQ post nerf. Took me about a Month after live release of EQ2 to realise that monks here in EQ2 were grousely over powered and we would eventually see a rinse repeat of what SOE did to the monk class back in 2000. But this time its the opposite, there becoming stronger Tanks and losing all there DPS.</P> <P>The reason that the Fighter class in EQ2 is so hard to balance is because the disparity between Light Armor and Heavy Armor. The gap is too big with no intermediate class filling Chain Armor. On one end you have Plate on the other end you have Leather. You go from one extreme to the other in one giant leap, with no inbetween which is the reason for the Fighter class being so messed up at the current moment.</P> <P>In my honest opion, SoE should of made a Archtype called Brawler and the sub class branched from this, that way your could have a more balanced system and give Monks / Brusiers more of what they wanted for example a monk who wanted to tank put on Chain armor to make up for the dmg spikes he may take with out the need of increasing HP, if a Monk wanted to be hybrid and do a bit of Tanking and DPS he left Leather armor on from the increased Agility etc, if a Monk wanted to be just a pure melee expert and do nothing but stand in the back brusing kidneys he wore Very Light Armor for a increase to DPS. While at the same time thay could of broken away the Bard class from Scouts and made a Bard archtype also breaking that down into sub class. The game could of been a hell of alot more organized and balanced then it really is even with a arch type system instead of the choas its currently going through now.</P> <P>I susjested alot of this stuff before in older posts from awhile ago if you care to read back through my history.</P>

milg

09-01-2005, 03:42 AM

***** 5 Star Gaige im with you all the way Brawlers are getting the shaft and im trying to hold out hope while im playing beta but its looking grim for us <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> and even that Avoid doesnt scale its still rather pointless to even try to tank mobs because its a Luck based skill you either parry or deflect the attack of you get hit with it. Now Myself as a bruiser and as a necro in eq1 i pride my self on doing things that our Class wasnt made to do. like now on live ill Tank a mob if our tank in the group cant handle it ill take a stab at it sometimes it works sometimes it fails. now i liked being a DPS class but im not gona change the world but if we are forced to become a Paper Tank in this revamp we need the HP and we also need a bigger gap in our Luck based Avoid between Brawlers and Plate Tanks *still holding out hope* Malfu Pocket Fist fighter Permafrost <div></div>

-Aonein-

09-01-2005, 03:52 AM

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote: <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The mitigation percentage you see is based on a no-arrow solo opponent of your level; your mitigation against another kind of opponent can vary significantly. That's why it's beneficial for a tank to add mitigation even if your display indicates you're at the cap. While you may be at cap against a white-con no-arrow opponent, you're not capped against a yellow-con ^^^ heroic. For wont of a better term, mitigation is mitigated by both the target's level and tier.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avoidance, on the other hand, is based on level alone. If you have 70% avoidance, it's 70% against an opponent of your level. That doesn't change based on the tier of your opponent; you avoid about the same against a no-arrow opponent as you do against a ^^^. (Special mobs, such as named and epics, have innate to-hit bonuses given to them, but even in that case higher avoidance still provides an advantage.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Just wondering Moorgard if it was possible there could be a way for us as a whole not just Fighters, but all arch types to somehow get a reading on how much mitigation percent we have against mobs that are of a higher tier or lvl.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For example, im lvl 60 and have say 5000 mitigation total, now im capped against a solo no arrow normal lvl 60 mob at 80%. Say for example only 3700 mitigation total is used up to make the 80% cap ( hyperthectically ). Now this is fine, but how much of that mitigation number that is left over is acually coming into play on a <STRONG>^</STRONG> or <STRONG>^^</STRONG> and <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> con mobs and also how much again does it change in reguards to epic x2, x3 and x4 mobs. Also, how much different does our mitigation change per lvl as well?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The way the systems is in reguards to mitigation, all we know is that more is better but we really dont know how much our accual percent is against anything higher then a solo normal mob. Its mostly guessing games for the most part.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So say for example we have two mobs side by side, we have a normal lvl 60 mob no arrows, when i have him targted my mitigation at 5000 total is capped at 80%. Then next to him we have say for example a lvl 60 <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> heroic mob, now my mitigation total is still 5000, but now im at more or less say for example 72% mitigation behind the scenes in the mechanics. The way it is at the current moment is, when you target a mob that is higher then your lvl or a higher tier then solo normal, your mitigation percent value stays the same making it easy to mistake that yes you are capped at 80% on all mobs you fight reguardless of lvl and tier.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Is it possible to have the mitigation percent value change when targeting different tier / lvled mobs wether they be 1 tier higher or even 5 lvls higher? Then would it be possible to maybe get a reading somewhere near our HP / Power window of our current mitigation and avoidnace percent so this way we dont have to keep on opening the persona window to check our mitigation vs every single mob we come up against?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just some thoughts i was hoping to get a reply on if you havent already replied to such questions.</DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:57 AM</span>

ThramFalc

09-01-2005, 04:37 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <DIV>I realize there's a natural desire to see some sort of parity between mitigation and avoidance numbers for the various types of tanks, but it isn't that simple. As I'm growing more fond of saying lately, numbers don't tell the whole story. It's tough to say that X mitigation is worth Y avoidance, because the two traits behave differently in combat. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The mitigation percentage you see is based on a no-arrow solo opponent of your level; your mitigation against another kind of opponent can vary significantly. That's why it's beneficial for a tank to add mitigation even if your display indicates you're at the cap. While you may be at cap against a white-con no-arrow opponent, you're not capped against a yellow-con ^^^ heroic. For wont of a better term, mitigation is mitigated by both the target's level and tier.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avoidance, on the other hand, is based on level alone. If you have 70% avoidance, it's 70% against an opponent of your level. That doesn't change based on the tier of your opponent; you avoid about the same against a no-arrow opponent as you do against a ^^^. (Special mobs, such as named and epics, have innate to-hit bonuses given to them, but even in that case higher avoidance still provides an advantage.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thus you get hit harder and more often by opponents that are higher level than you are. In contrast, a higher tier (that is, more arrows) opponent of the same level will hit you harder, but not more often.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So like I said, comparing the numbers in your persona window don't tell the whole story. Parsing is prone to similar errors in interpretation. Trying to prove that ClassA is a better tank than ClassB by parsing fights against green ^^^ opponents isn't going to guarantee how those classes will perform against orange-con epic fights. If you want to show performance against a specific kind of opponent, you need to parse against that type of opponent.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>And why are the two systems different? Why does tier matter for mitigation but not avoidance? Seems to me that since a higher tiered npc hits harder, mitigation could hold steady for all tiers of the same level without unbalancing things (just like avoidance). On the flipside if avoidance was calculated in a simple manner like mitigation, then it would be easier to manage and all our avoidance buffs might actually do something...</P> <P>My advise is to rethink these systems and come up with something more cohesive... right now it appears we have two distinct systems and no one can figure them out. One of the systems (avoidance) is entirely broken (can't buff it by any noticible amount no matter what you do) so now would be a good time to work on this before things get any worse.<BR></P>

sliderhouserules

09-01-2005, 06:10 AM

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>Ummmm you couldnt be more wrong if you even tried. EQlive had been out since i believe 1998. I started playing late 1999, ...</p><div></div><hr></blockquote>If you're going to call somebody out on their facts, you should check your's:<a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everquest">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everquest</a><span><blockquote><hr><p><b><i>EverQuest</i></b> (<b>EQ</b>) is a 3D fantasy massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) released in <font size="4"><b>March 1999</b></font>.</p><hr></blockquote></span></span><div></div>

-Aonein-

09-01-2005, 06:46 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sliderhouserules wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <P><BR>Ummmm you couldnt be more wrong if you even tried. EQlive had been out since i believe 1998. I started playing late 1999, ...</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>If you're going to call somebody out on their facts, you should check your's:<BR><BR><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everquest" target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everquest</A><BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <P><B><I>EverQuest</I></B> (<B>EQ</B>) is a 3D fantasy massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) released in <FONT size=4><B>March 1999</B></FONT>.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></SPAN><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Thx for the correction, as you can see by what i said there i wasnt too sure if it was 1999 wasnt stating that as a fact it was 1998. </P> <P>I do remeber friends talking about it back then and had friends beta testing it, which is why i kept thinking 1998.</P>

JNewby

09-01-2005, 06:48 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR>***** star all the way... while Iam depressed about how much guards suck now.. hopefully moorgard previews this post again.. I would like ot see some sort of fairness b4 expansion comes out <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>ROFL. That's priceless. I want to see fairness too.</P> <P>But where were you campaigning for tanking fairness the last 9 months when guardians were so much better than anyone else it wasn't funny.</P> <P>Oh, you only want fair when you are at a supposed disadvantage.</P> <P>That's peachy.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I wsnt a tank then... dirge was my first toon.. and he sucked so I made a tank... umm yeh thanks

Nerj

09-01-2005, 09:06 AM

<DIV>Interesting Moorgard, </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Your statements prove that the ONLY viable TANK is a Guardian (High HP and mitigation Tanking). Since, the avoidance levels are capped (Brawler tanking) at level, while mitigation can be buffed, theoritcally through the roof. Plus, certain opponents will hit no matter what, again making mitigation much more important then avoidance. I think it already has been pointed out before then that the most successful RAIDING party will be those made of DPS Tiers 1, 4, and 5. Leaving pity spots for utillity people -- Enchanters and Bards. Just surprised that the DEVs have left remaining archclasses out in the cold on high end content.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It is also interesting to note that all fighter classes will NOT be able to Tank equally "as well".</DIV>

Moorgard

09-01-2005, 09:56 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nerjin wrote:<BR> <DIV>Your statements prove that the ONLY viable TANK is a Guardian (High HP and mitigation Tanking). Since, the avoidance levels are capped (Brawler tanking) at level, while mitigation can be buffed, theoritcally through the roof. Plus, certain opponents will hit no matter what, again making mitigation much more important then avoidance. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I'm not sure what you mean by "avoidance levels are capped at level." They aren't, at least not differently than mitigation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you have either avoidance or mitigation higher than their cap against a white con (that is, the max value that will display in your persona window), you still gain the benefits from going over the cap when facing higher-level opponents. To show this a little better we changed mitigation from a percentage to a numerical value, and we'll do something similar for avoidance. But to be clear, both mitigation and avoidance have caps in place, so you can't buff mitigation "through the roof."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You both avoid and mitigate less against opponents that are higher level than you, and more against opponents that are lower level than you.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>After reading my prior post again, though, I think I stated the details poorly. You don't lose mitigation itself as a mob increases in tier; if your mitigation is 50%, you will mitigate 50% of the damage of a white-con mob whether it has two down arrows or three up arrows. Since the three-up arrow is hitting harder, you end up taking more damage. But actually the same holds true for avoidance (you'll get hit harder by the three-up mob when it does hit you), so I didn't mean to imply that avoidance had some advantage that mitigation didn't.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All of which goes to show what a convoluted discussion this can be. :p Again, the point I really wanted to make is that displayed numbers don't tell the whole story; gameplay does. But results can vary greatly based on opponent, situation, gear, spells, and skill.</DIV>

Moski

09-01-2005, 10:43 AM

<DIV>My Guilmate and I did a comparison between Guardian and Bruiser.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>unbuffed and self buffed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i am to lazy to post it again so please take a look here:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Please notice, that both Chars using best gear and Skills availible to their class. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=comtest&message.id=5830" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=comtest&message.id=5830</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One of our Paladins did the comparison as well. I dont know the Paladin Skills in detail, but the devs should look into the Crusader Classes once more. The Paladin has lower HP and mitigation and avoidance cumulated a lower sum than Bruiser and guardian. </DIV>

Nazo

09-01-2005, 11:08 AM

<DIV>Moorgard 1st post</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>The mitigation percentage you see is based on a no-arrow solo opponent of your level; your mitigation against another kind of opponent can vary significantly. That's why it's beneficial for a tank to add mitigation even if your display indicates you're at the cap. While you may be at cap against a white-con no-arrow opponent, you're not capped against a yellow-con ^^^ heroic. <STRONG><U><FONT color=#ffff00>For wont of a better term, mitigation is mitigated by both the target's level and tier.</FONT></U></STRONG></DIV> <DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><U><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>Avoidance, on the other hand, is based on level alone.</FONT></STRONG></U> If you have 70% avoidance, it's 70% against an opponent of your level. That doesn't change based on the tier of your opponent; you avoid about the same against a no-arrow opponent as you do against a ^^^. (Special mobs, such as named and epics, have innate to-hit bonuses given to them, but even in that case higher avoidance still provides an advantage.)</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>All of which goes to show what a convoluted discussion this can be. <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif" width=16 border=0> Again, the point I really wanted to make is that displayed numbers don't tell the whole story; gameplay does. But results can vary greatly based on opponent, situation, gear, spells, and skill.</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Moorgard 2nd Post</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>After reading my prior post again, though, I think I stated the details poorly. You don't lose mitigation itself as a mob increases in tier; if your mitigation is 50%, you will mitigate 50% of the damage of a white-con mob whether it has two down arrows or three up arrows. Since the three-up arrow is hitting harder, you end up taking more damage. But actually the same holds true for avoidance (you'll get hit harder by the three-up mob when it does hit you), so I didn't mean to imply that avoidance had some advantage that mitigation didn't.</DIV></DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>erm was that an accidental slip of something that you shouldn't tell us ? There was no stating of details poorly or anything. If fact your first post was crystal clear and second post an unsuccessful attempt at a roundabout.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00><U><STRONG>This means Plate Tanks will be loosing any mitigation advantage they have compared to Brawlers against raid mobs whereas Brawlers will keep their Avoidance advantage all the way from solo mobs to raid mobs.</STRONG></U></FONT></DIV> <DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text><STRONG><U><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></U></STRONG></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>I think all Plate Fighter classes will be extremely interested to hear your clarification about this matter because it is a huge piece of information that you have given us in your first post. This will mean our armor will suddenly develop huge holes in it when fighting a Raid mob where as Avoidance tanks will keep all their benefits from their extra avoidance.</FONT></STRONG></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></STRONG></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></STRONG></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text><FONT color=#ffff00>Note : I fully understand the desire to make all Fighter classes happy but it shouldnt be at the cost of crippling the remaining 4/6 of the Fighters. If software is forcing you to use hidden gimmicks like this at one point it will eventually topple and we will end up like Monk Tanking Farce in EQ or Scout Invulnerability that happened before in EQ2.</FONT></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV> <P>I will this info in other Plate Tank class forums as well because I think this is something huge.</P><p>Message Edited by Nazowa on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:52 AM</span>

Nemi

09-01-2005, 12:50 PM

<DIV>Moorgard, I implore you to have the mitigation and avoidance %'s display re-worked so that it shows you what your values are against what the MOB you have targeted. This will allow for informed debate and will go a LONG way to reassuring the various tanking classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For instance (numbers hypothetical)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P align=left><STRONG><U>Monk</U></STRONG></P> <DIV><STRONG>Target is: </STRONG><FONT color=#999999>Grey con </FONT><STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 95% avoid 60%mit</DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#66ff00>Green con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 85% avoid 45%mit</DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#3300cc>Blue con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 75% avoid 40%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> White con - no arrow - <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 65% avoid 35%mit</DIV></DIV></DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> White con - ++ <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 65% avoid 35%mit (from your second post)</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ffff00>Yellow con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 50% avoid 28%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ff6600>Orange con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 40% avoid 20%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ff0000>Red con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 30% avoid 15%mit</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is what we need and I can't believe it is too difficult to implement. The game already has to calculate these numbers, so it is just a matter of displaying it?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can wholly understand tho that you probably DON'T WANT to display these numbers, as it is likely to show just how out of whack the game is.</DIV>

ShinigamiD

09-01-2005, 12:57 PM

<P>And don't forget that Monks now have a new skill, called Tsunami, which makes them INVULNERABLE to melee damage for 12 seconds, 100% riposte of all attacks from the front, 100% parry of all other attacks... 12 second duration, 3 minute recast...</P> <P>Bruisers get something similar.</P> <P>So, now monks can, properly buffed, mitigate nearly as well as a guardian, avoid more than a guardian, have all their DPS, all their utility abilities, a 'get out of death free' card in Feign Death, self-invis.... AND this.</P> <P>Where's the balance here? Wait, there is none, mitigation loses effectiveness against raid targets, avoidance doesn't...</P> <P>If this goes live, it's the death of the plate tank, hello brawlers as the only viable tank in groups, raids, and the best soloers of the fighters to boot.</P> <P>Nerf Monks</P>

milg

09-01-2005, 01:12 PM

<div></div><div></div><div></div>well a 12 second God mode is just enough time to get healed and in a 5 min fight brawlers are still going to get [Removed for Content] and im a bruiser and unless i missed this skill i dont think we get anything like that but i could be wrong havent hit beta in a few days... plate tanks will never have there seat in a Raid removed by brawlers so dont worry about us we will never be MT unless because our Defence is a skill based on Luck and for a Bruiser FD is fine when your soloing but in a Raid its pretty much a Free ticket for a Dead raid but dont worry the MT is fine cause he FDed <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <p>MalfuPermafrost</p><div></div><p> <span class="time_text"></span></p><p>Message Edited by milgin on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:13 AM</span>

Tilane

09-01-2005, 02:31 PM

<DIV>Moorgard , if i read your post well </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i see for us monks who have a lower mitigation , witch lowers by the tier of the mob we are still shafted </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>as to use an example from above </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if the Mob is white to us (using just number) we would have a 65% avoidance from solo to triple up mobs </DIV> <DIV>and a 38% mitgation </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>now as the lvl of the mob go's up say a red mob , we have a 30% avoidance left and a mitigation of maybe 10%</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>a plate tank would still have 20% avoidance and 50% mitigation left </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>and since you said epic mobs have bonus to hit , we might not have any avoidance left , thats the reason us monks dont avoid so well on epic encounters , no ?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if its anything like this me as a monk get hit for 10K and 9k gets trough a Plate user would get hit for 5K </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>maybe i read your post wrong , but to me </DIV>

-Aonein-

09-01-2005, 02:37 PM

<P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <DIV>Moorgard, I implore you to have the mitigation and avoidance %'s display re-worked so that it shows you what your values are against what the MOB you have targeted. This will allow for informed debate and will go a LONG way to reassuring the various tanking classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For instance (numbers hypothetical)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P align=left><STRONG><U>Monk</U></STRONG></P> <DIV><STRONG>Target is: </STRONG><FONT color=#999999>Grey con </FONT><STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 95% avoid 60%mit</DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#66ff00>Green con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 85% avoid 45%mit</DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#3300cc>Blue con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 75% avoid 40%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> White con - no arrow - <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 65% avoid 35%mit</DIV></DIV></DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> White con - ++ <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 65% avoid 35%mit (from your second post)</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ffff00>Yellow con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 50% avoid 28%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ff6600>Orange con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 40% avoid 20%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ff0000>Red con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 30% avoid 15%mit</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is what we need and I can't believe it is too difficult to implement. The game already has to calculate these numbers, so it is just a matter of displaying it?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can wholly understand tho that you probably DON'T WANT to display these numbers, as it is likely to show just how out of whack the game is.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P> <P>I suggested same thing further up and havent recieved no answer to my question.</P> <P>I think the guys / gals at SoE made a huge mistake putting Brawlers in the Fighter arch type and designed them to tank Moorgard there is no way that Tanking will ever be balanced between a mitigation tank and a avoidance based tank.</P> <P>Should of made 2 more arch types so there was 6, maybe even 7 arch types and spread it out from there. The entire combat system is a mess, with class's still being tweaked and changed and with no end to it in sight. There is 2 weeks to go and you have yet to find a solid base to stop changing and just run a good solid test.</P> <P>Still wondering and waiting to see if its possible to do Moorgard if you have time to reply to mine and Nemi's posts please.</P><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:45 PM</span>

Tilane

09-01-2005, 03:16 PM

<DIV>idd say have avoidance , behave like a small Mitigation on a near miss say its like rolling with a punch</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>you have a 30% avoidance left on a red mob from your total of 65%</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>have the rolls that fall in between 0-30% range be avoided like normal</DIV> <DIV>31-65 be a near miss that gets a mitigation + "near miss" mitigation bonus</DIV> <DIV>65+ acts the same as it does now </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i dunno , anything to lessen the spikes or splats , as it is now avoidance on its own doest work and wont work in any forseeing future </DIV>

MeridianR

09-01-2005, 03:43 PM

What I find amazing is that when a comparison thread or questions about Monks vs Guardians comes up, Moorgard jumps all over it...but when there are numerous posts asking what a Paladin's role will be, and asking why we give up so much for our good ole 'wards and heals', we get no response. How about either a post that specifies what the devs see as the roles of ALL classes, or someone goes over to the Paladin board and answer the questions that have been there for weeks now. As it stands now we have less: -- Dps then every other fighter except Guardians (and even that hasn't been proved, since our 2 major DPS moves from live have been moved to 60sec recast) -- HP then all other fighters -- Buffs that give any type of stamina (which we had) for the HP disparity (everyone else gets 4.75 HP per point of Stamina, to our 4.5HP), or group Defense -- Taunts then Guardians So what is a Paladin's major role now? From the looks at the revamp it seems it's going to be to secondary healer in a group. Sorry all for intruding, but we have been waiting for weeks for an answer <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <div></div>

Nemi

09-01-2005, 03:52 PM

<P>Given the avoidance and mitigations scores from the Bruiser and Guardian above, I did a little Excel magic wizardly stuff and came up with the following results:</P> <P><STRONG>Limitations</STRONG></P> <P>This test does not involve any special modifiers that would be attirbuted to combat arts. For example, most combat arts of MoBs have +accuracy to them, which is one of the contributing factors to the problems of avoidance tanks. However, given that, I ran the test from the info given.</P> <P><STRONG>Preamble</STRONG></P> <P>This is all very rough and dirty. Each test was done assuming 30 chances to hit. I have no idea whether a mob needs to roll to make a hit or not. I have assumed that every attempt is a possible hit and the only thing stopping a mob hitting you is your avoidance score. I ran the test 30 times (so a possible 900 hits) and came up with the following data assuming the mob doing 1000 unmitigated damage:</P> <P align=left>Guardian Mitigation: 55.6% | Guardian avoidance: 54.3% | Bruiser Mitigation: 34.1% | Bruiser Avoidance: 68.2%</P> <P align=left>Guardian Total damage taken: 175,380</P> <P align=left>Bruiser total damage taken: 179,248</P> <P align=left>Guardian maximum spike: 3,108</P> <P align=left>Bruiser maximum spike: 4,613</P> <P align=left>As can be seen, the results are very close with only the maximum spike damage being significantly higher (which is what always kills Brawlers). I then ran the data assuming a red con mob and have scaled the mitigation of both by 75% and the avoidance of both by 50%.</P> <P align=left>Now I realise these numbers are made up, but people are of the general consensus that your avoidance drops off more significantly than mitigation. This time the mob hits for 2000 damage and the adjusted mitigation and avoidance are:</P> <P align=left>Guardian Mitigation: 41.7% | Guardian avoidance: 27.2% | Bruiser Mitigation: 25.6% | Bruiser Avoidance: 34.1%</P> <P align=left>Guardian Total damage taken: 759,066</P> <P align=left>Bruiser total damage taken: 887,146</P> <P align=left>Guardian maximum spike: 11,660</P> <P align=left>Bruiser maximum spike: 14,885</P> <P align=left>As you can see. With a red mob, our damage taken has gone from being comparable to a Guardian to about 17% more and our spike damage is over 3000hps more. So what can we conclude?</P> <P>Tanking against even con no arrow mobs, the system is currently working ok, the spike damage could still use a little tweaking however it's workable.</P> <P><STRONG>BUT</STRONG></P> <P>As you move up the con system and avoidance trails off faster than mitigation, you start to see the discrepancy, with overall damage and spike damage ramping up.</P> <P><STRONG>What can we do?</STRONG></P> <P>We need both mitigation and avoidance to scale similarly as you go up against orange and red mobs. Perhaps as the previous poster suggested, have a range of 'glancing blows' whereby you JUST failed your avoidance test so the damage is deflected (mitigated) down before your armour absorbs the rest of it.</P> <P>Anyway, take it all with a pinch of salt. It's rough excel formula grinding without me really having all the formulae to consider.</P>

Sixmai

09-01-2005, 04:16 PM

Interesting that you forgot to make a test where only the mitigation is downgraded, as it is the case when fighting an even con epic / group mob like Moorgard has just stated. Scared to show the new discrespancy in tanking between leather and plate classes ? Btw try to run a test where the tank would be surrounded by a group of foe, you juste have to put avoidance of plate class to 0 for 66% of the mobs (120° frontal arc), would be interesting to see that too.

Mistwaver

09-01-2005, 04:19 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>Moorgard wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Nerjin wrote: <div>Your statements prove that the ONLY viable TANK is a Guardian (High HP and mitigation Tanking). Since, the avoidance levels are capped (Brawler tanking) at level, while mitigation can be buffed, theoritcally through the roof. Plus, certain opponents will hit no matter what, again making mitigation much more important then avoidance. <hr> </div></blockquote> <div>I'm not sure what you mean by "avoidance levels are capped at level." They aren't, at least not differently than mitigation.</div> <div> </div> <div>If you have either avoidance or mitigation higher than their cap against a white con (that is, the max value that will display in your persona window), you still gain the benefits from going over the cap when facing higher-level opponents. To show this a little better we changed mitigation from a percentage to a numerical value, and we'll do something similar for avoidance. But to be clear, both mitigation and avoidance have caps in place, so you can't buff mitigation "through the roof."</div> <div> </div> <div>You both avoid and mitigate less against opponents that are higher level than you, and more against opponents that are lower level than you.</div> <div> </div> <div>After reading my prior post again, though, I think I stated the details poorly. You don't lose mitigation itself as a mob increases in tier; if your mitigation is 50%, you will mitigate 50% of the damage of a white-con mob whether it has two down arrows or three up arrows. Since the three-up arrow is hitting harder, you end up taking more damage. But actually the same holds true for avoidance (you'll get hit harder by the three-up mob when it does hit you), so I didn't mean to imply that avoidance had some advantage that mitigation didn't.</div> <div> </div> <div>All of which goes to show what a convoluted discussion this can be. :p Again, the point I really wanted to make is that displayed numbers don't tell the whole story; gameplay does. But results can vary greatly based on opponent, situation, gear, spells, and skill.</div><hr></blockquote>Indeed gameplay tells the story. Gameplay told me something is wrong with the picture that I can solo 3-4 yellow con mobs at the same time on a level 50 Shadowknight, and barely able to take on one yellow con mob as a level 50 Monk, with both using Master II defensive stances, and betabuffed with equivelent gear. I hope the Monk change in yesterdays patch greatly increased their potential to tank, because as things stood two or three days ago, I would never picture a Monk being the main tank in a raid on an Epic x4 encounter. Monk is a fighter, just like Guardian, and as such should be able to tank just as good, just in a different form: through avoidance, instead of mitigation. I know this is the goal, but I have failed to see these kind of results, yet. The "no Guardian is available so we can't raid so and so target" situations are starting to get old, if you know what I mean. Why not do some in depth testing internally and bump the Monk/Bruiser avoidance through the roof and test it on an encounter. Then from there slowly reduce it down to where the effectiveness of a Monk/Bruiser tanking in this encounter would be equivelant through avoidance to a Guardian through mitigation? Even something like a heroic ^^^ would be good enough to try it on, so it wouldn't require 20 or so people. Surely there's a way to somehow balance it out so all of the different fighter classes are able to tank any encounter. </span><div></div>

Nemi

09-01-2005, 04:20 PM

<DIV>Mitigation isn't downgraded as per Moorgard's post.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>He corrected himself by saying that the mob damage goes UP as you go from vv - no arrow - ^ - ^^ and ^^^</DIV> <DIV>Therefore, the damage you will take will increase but only because the mob is doing more damage to start with. This is nothing unusual and is what is expected.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There is no secret advantage to avoidance...and if there were Guardians would benefit from it too.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Edit:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I could run a test for that but it goes beyond simple Excel spreadsheets. I admit it is not accurate for all cases and was just trying to point out the discrepancy of avoidance tailing off before mitigation and quantify the effects of damage spikes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:22 PM</span>

Sixmai

09-01-2005, 04:33 PM

You're right, i missed the clarification. Still there is some nice advantage to avoidance : avoiding stun / stifle and other effect linked to the hit. Avoidance and mitigation should'nt even out simply by this factor.

Kharadr

09-01-2005, 04:44 PM

<div></div>The system is perfectly clear if you think about it longer than 10 seconds (which most people apparently don't do). I also suggest that SOE either says nothing about mechanics or explain everything in explicit detail, because the way you're doing it now, Moorgard, clearly doesn't work. Better tanking within this thread is defined as "taking less dps from a mob". Avoidance tanks get hit less often but for more damage per hit. Mitigation tanks get hit more often but for less damage per hit. Moorgard states that a mitigation tank will mitigate less against a higher tier mob. He could also have said that a mitigation tank will mitigate MORE against a higher tier mob. What he means is that a higher tier mob hits harder on average than a lower tier mob. 50% of a higher hit is more, so in absolute terms you mitigate both less and more. With all due respect, it was a poorly thought-out statement (but we all only human, so /shrug). Raid mobs are higher tiered, meaning they hit harder. <b>Mitigation</b> tanks, while mitigating the same percentage of <b>DAMAGE</b> as vs solo mobs, will get hit harder (because the mob hits harder). In absolute terms, they soak up more damage. In efficiency terms, they soak up the exact same amount of damage. <b>Avoidance</b> tanks, while avoiding the same percentage of<b> HITS</b> as vs solo mobs, will get hit harder (because the mob hits harder). In absolute terms, they avoid more damage. In efficiency terms, they avoid the exact same amount of damage. Spikiness is a separate problem and has to do with the RNG. Spikiness is the reason why using direct heals on an avoidance tanks makes for short fingernails on the healer. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Kharadrim on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:46 PM</span>

Nazo

09-01-2005, 05:01 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kharadrim wrote:<BR> <P>The system is perfectly clear if you think about it longer than 10 seconds (which most people apparently don't do). I also suggest that SOE either says nothing about mechanics or explain everything in explicit detail, because the way you're doing it now, Moorgard, clearly doesn't work.<BR><BR>Better tanking within this thread is defined as "taking less dps from a mob".<BR>Avoidance tanks get hit less often but for more damage per hit.<BR>Mitigation tanks get hit more often but for less damage per hit.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Moorgard states that a mitigation tank will mitigate less against a higher tier mob. He could also have said that a mitigation tank will mitigate MORE against a higher tier mob. What he means is that a higher tier mob hits harder on average than a lower tier mob. 50% of a higher hit is more, so in absolute terms you mitigate both less and more. With all due respect, it was a poorly thought-out statement (but we all only human, so /shrug).</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff3300>Nope read again : it means Mitigation has a tier system based on type of Mob whereas Avoidance does not. The second post is just trying to cover up the slip made in original post.<BR></FONT><BR>Raid mobs are higher tiered, meaning they hit harder. <B>Mitigation</B> tanks, while mitigating the same percentage of <B>DAMAGE</B> as vs solo mobs, will get hit harder (because the mob hits harder). In absolute terms, they soak up more damage. In efficiency terms, they soak up the exact same amount of damage.<BR><B>Avoidance</B> tanks, while avoiding the same percentage of<B> HITS</B> as vs solo mobs, will get hit harder (because the mob hits harder). In absolute terms, they avoid more damage. In efficiency terms, they avoid the exact same amount of damage.<BR><BR>Message Edited by Kharadrim on <SPAN class=date_text>09-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:46 PM</SPAN><BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <BR>

Kharadr

09-01-2005, 05:48 PM

<div></div>That's because a higher tiered mob will hit harder, but not more often. The way that is done means there is no need for avoidance to work differently per tier, because it already has the desired effect: you receive more damage. It's not a slip up, it's the way avoidance works. It doesn't need differences per tier. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Kharadrim on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:51 PM</span>

Gungo

09-01-2005, 06:30 PM

<P>Sometimes i find it silly peopel using descriptions to justify roles such as the heavy armed guardian is obviusly better for tankign because he wears big metal plates, or the brawler who beats things down obviously means he is DPS.</P> <P>So lets be silly and totally off topic again in real life situations who would you think would win in a fight </P> <P>Ninja or a midevil knight i say ninja one clean strike in between the joints of the slow moving knight and down goes the knights.</P> <P>and those that claim romans used tower shields in combat are wrong tower shields were used to block ranged combat ( the initial scene in gladiator the movie shows this) such as arrows. True hand to hand combat such as gladiators used bucklers. </P> <P>Basically nothing in this post should be used to defend actual in game playing, because it has no relevence.</P>

Nerj

09-01-2005, 06:55 PM

CoebyWu

09-01-2005, 07:22 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nazowa wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ff3300>Nope read again : it means Mitigation has a tier system based on type of Mob whereas Avoidance does not. The second post is just trying to cover up the slip made in original post.<BR></FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I see. So you believe Moorgard slipped the truth in the first post, and is lying in his second post where he clarified?</P> <P>You sir need to read it again. His comment is this:</P> <P><EM>After reading my prior post again, though, I think I stated the details poorly. You don't lose mitigation itself as a mob increases in tier; if your mitigation is 50%, you will mitigate 50% of the damage of a white-con mob whether it has two down arrows or three up arrows. Since the three-up arrow is hitting harder, you end up taking more damage. But actually the same holds true for avoidance (you'll get hit harder by the three-up mob when it does hit you), so I didn't mean to imply that avoidance had some advantage that mitigation didn't.</EM></P> <P>There is no tier system for Mitigation. It is based on level, just like avoidance.</P>

Nazo

09-01-2005, 08:10 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> CoebyWu wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nazowa wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ff3300>Nope read again : it means Mitigation has a tier system based on type of Mob whereas Avoidance does not. The second post is just trying to cover up the slip made in original post.<BR></FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I see. So you believe Moorgard slipped the truth in the first post, and is lying in his second post where he clarified?</P> <P>You sir need to read it again. His comment is this:</P> <P><EM>After reading my prior post again, though, I think I stated the details poorly. You don't lose mitigation itself as a mob increases in tier; if your mitigation is 50%, you will mitigate 50% of the damage of a <U><FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>white-con mob whether it has two down arrows or three up arrows</STRONG></FONT></U>. Since the three-up arrow is hitting harder, you end up taking more damage. But actually the same holds true for avoidance (you'll get hit harder by the three-up mob when it does hit you), so I didn't mean to imply that avoidance had some advantage that mitigation didn't.</EM></P> <P>There is no tier system for Mitigation. It is based on level, just like avoidance.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Check the yellow text and reread it a couple of couple of times. Do you see anything about mob tiers there ? A mob can be solo with different arrows indicating difficulty then sure mitigation would be the same. How about different tiers ? Do you see anything about that here ? :smileywink: So no thanks the second post is an attempt...</P> <P>Read 1st one check the part I underlined and then read 2nd post. Is it possible to be so different in 2 posts ? If we see a post saying for example : </P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you have 50% mitigation that means you mitigate 50% of mele damage from a :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>level 50 solo mob</DIV> <DIV>level 50 group mob</DIV> <DIV>level 50 raid mob</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>then I am convinced because the example above is true for avoidance right ? I am not talking about special attacks or to-hit bonuses just plain old melee.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P>Message Edited by Nazowa on <SPAN class=date_text>09-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>09:19 AM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Nazowa on <SPAN class=date_text>09-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>09:22 AM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Nazowa on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:23 AM</span>

Kharadr

09-01-2005, 08:49 PM

Nazowa, I don't really understand your last post. What are you trying to say? What Moorgard said was that mob tiers don't change a mobs to-hit percentage. It only changes a mobs damage (it will make it hit harder). Since avoidance has nothing to do with damage (you either get hit for full or you don't get hit at all), avoidance does not go up and down between mob tiers. Mitigation on the other hand has everything to do with damage, obviously. The mobs max hit goes up, so the amount mitigated goes up too, since you mitigate a percentage (duh). Between mob tiers, you don't get hit more or less <b>often</b>, you get hit more or less<b> hard</b>. Avoidance deals with <b>often</b>, mitigation deals with<b> hard</b>. Moorgard made a mistake saying mitigation changes between mob tiers. What he should have said was "it appears that you mitigate more against higher tiered mobs, because the numbers go up. But the ratio of max-hit / min-hit / average-hit will NOT change." <div></div>

09-01-2005, 11:23 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MeridianR wrote:<BR>What I find amazing is that when a comparison thread or questions about Monks vs Guardians comes up, Moorgard jumps all over it...but when there are numerous posts asking what a Paladin's role will be, and asking why we give up so much for our good ole 'wards and heals', we get no response.<BR><BR>How about either a post that specifies what the devs see as the roles of ALL classes, or someone goes over to the Paladin board and answer the questions that have been there for weeks now.<BR><BR>As it stands now we have less:<BR><BR>-- Dps then every other fighter except Guardians (and even that hasn't been proved, since our 2 major DPS moves from live have been moved to 60sec recast)<BR>-- HP then all other fighters<BR>-- Buffs that give any type of stamina (which we had) for the HP disparity (everyone else gets 4.75 HP per point of Stamina, to our 4.5HP), or group Defense<BR>-- Taunts then Guardians<BR><BR>So what is a Paladin's major role now? From the looks at the revamp it seems it's going to be to secondary healer in a group.<BR><BR>Sorry all for intruding, but we have been waiting for weeks for an answer <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I wouldnt get to worked up about it, he doesnt answer any of the monks that wanted to be a dps class and not a full-time tank either, nor does anyone else. Dev's are players and they favor their class and believe in their opinions like everyone else, there's very, very few objective dev's and they're the ones that keep balance in check, Moorgard just doesnt hide his biased view from the public eye. Unfortunately hes now in a position that it matters, I respect Moorgard and his opinions, but he goes way to far on the favortism of monk issues and I hope it doesnt affect the game to much, no one wants to play Monkquest.

Gaige

09-01-2005, 11:27 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Paen wrote:<BR>Dev's are players and they favor their class <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Just consider that MG plays a bruiser, not a monk.<BR>

09-02-2005, 12:09 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Paen wrote:<BR>Dev's are players and they favor their class <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Just consider that MG plays a bruiser, not a monk.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Silly me, bruisers arent affected identically by monk changes, I like zoned out of reality there or something.<p>Message Edited by Paen on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:12 PM</span>

Gaige

09-02-2005, 12:23 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Paen wrote:<BR> <P>Silly me, bruisers arent affected identically by monk changes, I like zoned out of reality there or something.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>They aren't really. They have more innate mitigation than us, and almost all of their combat arts are different.<BR>

Airog

09-02-2005, 01:48 AM

Monks are as close to Bruisers as Guards to Zerkers...

ke'la

09-02-2005, 02:43 AM

How about someone on Beta do a real Test on tanking. Get atleast 1 (more is better) of each Fighter class have them all Decked out in Handcrafted Armor/Weopons/Jewery. Then set them against in order a Blue con MoB, an even con, a Yellow con, and a red con. Have the tanks do NOTHING in the fight(turn off auto attack) and time how long it takes the Tank to or get to say 10% life if you don't want the Debt/Iteam Decay. This will tell you how balanced the tanks are as player ablity the major variable will be takin' out of the mix.

Airog

09-02-2005, 02:44 AM

That would be nice.

Vellek

09-02-2005, 03:51 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <DIV>Moorgard, I implore you to have the mitigation and avoidance %'s display re-worked so that it shows you what your values are against what the MOB you have targeted. This will allow for informed debate and will go a LONG way to reassuring the various tanking classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For instance (numbers hypothetical)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P align=left><STRONG><U>Monk</U></STRONG></P> <DIV><STRONG>Target is: </STRONG><FONT color=#999999>Grey con </FONT><STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 95% avoid 60%mit</DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#66ff00>Green con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 85% avoid 45%mit</DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#3300cc>Blue con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 75% avoid 40%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> White con - no arrow - <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 65% avoid 35%mit</DIV></DIV></DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> White con - ++ <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 65% avoid 35%mit (from your second post)</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ffff00>Yellow con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 50% avoid 28%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ff6600>Orange con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 40% avoid 20%mit</DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Target is:</STRONG> <FONT color=#ff0000>Red con</FONT> <STRONG>Display shows</STRONG> 30% avoid 15%mit</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is what we need and I can't believe it is too difficult to implement. The game already has to calculate these numbers, so it is just a matter of displaying it?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can wholly understand tho that you probably DON'T WANT to display these numbers, as it is likely to show just how out of whack the game is.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Diablo used to have this. You could have a raw mitigation and avoidance number, and once you target a mob, your display could show a percentage in parenthesis for how well you mitigate and avoid attacks on that particular mob. </DIV>

Airog

09-02-2005, 03:52 AM

I never played Diablo.

Exill

09-02-2005, 04:46 AM

<div></div><div></div><div align="left"><b>Fighter Spectrum</b> </div> <i>Tank Ability</i> ---<font size="1">Guardian</font>--<font size="1">Berserker</font>--<font size="1">Paladin</font>--<font size="1">Shadowknight</font>--<font size="1">Monk</font>--<font size="1">Bruiser</font>--- <i>DPS Ability </i> Brawlers have the highest dps out of all the fighters and in return they have the lowest tanking ability. Just because they have the lowest tanking ability does not mean that they cannot tank. Every class in the fighter archtype can tank, it is just a matter of how well. The same goes for DPS. <i> </i> How (most) Brawlers want it to be: <i>Tank Ability</i> ---<font size="1">Guardian/Monk/Bruiser</font>--<font size="1">Berserker</font>--<font size="1">Paladin</font>--<font size="1">Shadowknight</font>--<font size="1">Monk</font>--<font size="1">Bruiser</font>--- <i>DPS Ability </i>Brawlers are trying to propose that they should have equal tanking ability as Guardians and yet still reign at the top of the dps ability. If Brawlers can tank as well as Guardians then Guardians should be able to DPS as well as Brawlers. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Exill on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:49 PM</span>

Airog

09-02-2005, 04:50 AM

-Aonein-

09-02-2005, 04:54 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moorgard wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nerjin wrote:<BR> <DIV>Your statements prove that the ONLY viable TANK is a Guardian (High HP and mitigation Tanking). Since, the avoidance levels are capped (Brawler tanking) at level, while mitigation can be buffed, theoritcally through the roof. Plus, certain opponents will hit no matter what, again making mitigation much more important then avoidance. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I'm not sure what you mean by "avoidance levels are capped at level." They aren't, at least not differently than mitigation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you have either avoidance or mitigation higher than their cap against a white con (that is, the max value that will display in your persona window), you still gain the benefits from going over the cap when facing higher-level opponents. To show this a little better we changed mitigation from a percentage to a numerical value, and we'll do something similar for avoidance. But to be clear, both mitigation and avoidance have caps in place, so you can't buff mitigation "through the roof."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You both avoid and mitigate less against opponents that are higher level than you, and more against opponents that are lower level than you.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>After reading my prior post again, though, I think I stated the details poorly. You don't lose mitigation itself as a mob increases in tier; if your mitigation is 50%, you will mitigate 50% of the damage of a white-con mob whether it has two down arrows or three up arrows. Since the three-up arrow is hitting harder, you end up taking more damage. But actually the same holds true for avoidance (you'll get hit harder by the three-up mob when it does hit you), so I didn't mean to imply that avoidance had some advantage that mitigation didn't.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All of which goes to show what a convoluted discussion this can be. :p Again, the point I really wanted to make is that displayed numbers don't tell the whole story; gameplay does. But results can vary greatly based on opponent, situation, gear, spells, and skill.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>This statement also proves that the only viable tank on higher lvl mobs or big damage dealing mobs is a Plate class still. Because if mitigation does not scale up or down and say for example i have 80% capped and im lvl 55, then fighting a lvl 62 raid boss mob who would do say 4k damage per hit ( hyperthectically ) is going to 2 shot a monk who only has 30% mitigation where as i have 80% capped mitigation vs a lvl 62 boss mob. It really wouldnt even matter what lvl the mob was, id still have more mitigation then a Brawler because it doesnt scale up or down so you say here. But yet in this post of Moorgards he cleary states that mitigation does in fact scale up and down :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Moorgard wrote :</P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff66>Mitigation</FONT></STRONG></P> <UL> <LI>The base mitigation values of armor against an opponent of your level have been adjusted as follows: Heavy (38%), Medium (30%), Light (22%), Very Light (16%).</LI> <LI><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>Mitigation scales <U><FONT size=3>up or down</FONT></U> based on the con color of your attacker. That is, you mitigate progressively more damage of blue, green, and grey opponents, and progressively less against yellow, orange, and red opponents.</FONT></STRONG></LI> <LI>Mitigation is now shown as a numerical value instead of a percentage. The percentage is still visible by mousing over the mitigation value on the Persona window.</LI> <LI><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>Spell and item effects can now have a greater effect on your overall mitigation. You can mitigate a maximum of 80% of any damage type. This cap is higher against opponents that con grey.</FONT></STRONG></LI> <LI>Armor quality (Handcrafted, Treasured, Legendary, Fabled, or Mythical) is more meaningful than it was before.</LI> <LI><SPAN>Mitigation values have been spread more evenly across armor slots. Chest and leg slots still provide slightly greater mitigation, though less than they did before. This should make it more beneficial to wear high-mitigation armor in every slot.</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN>The mitigation provided by accessories (ear, neck, ring, wrist, and belt) has been reduced by 50%.</SPAN></LI></UL><SPAN> <P></P> <HR> <P> </P></SPAN> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The system is flawed Moorgard because you know avoidance cannot be made as consistant as mitigation because that means you would then have to change everyones avoidance values and mitigation values to fall suit again.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This whole problem is because you have mixed Brawlers with Fighters. If you had given Brawlers there own arch type none of this would be happening and you could balance them out alot easier with out all the misconception. You could of just as easy made a Brawler arch type, those Brawlers who wanted to Tank sacraficed DPS in the form of STR to wear Chain and those who wanted to be more Offensively orientated could of worn leather for Higher AGI / STR, makign them hit more because of higher AGI and more dmg due to STR.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The whole entire combat system problem is with the arch type system, too many class stuffed into 4 arch types.</DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:56 AM</span>

Airog

09-02-2005, 05:08 AM

Thats true.

Gungo

09-02-2005, 07:10 AM

<DIV> <DIV align=left><B>Fighter Spectrum</B><BR></DIV><BR><I>Tank Ability</I> ---<FONT size=1>Guardian</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Berserker</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Paladin</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Monk</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Bruiser</FONT>--- <I>DPS Ability<BR><BR></I><BR>Brawlers have the highest dps out of all the fighters and in return they have the lowest tanking ability. Just because they have the lowest tanking ability does not mean that they cannot tank. Every class in the fighter archtype can tank, it is just a matter of how well. The same goes for DPS.<BR><I><BR></I><BR><BR>How (most) Brawlers want it to be:<BR><BR><I>Tank Ability</I> ---<FONT size=1>Guardian/Monk/Bruiser</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Berserker</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Paladin</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Monk</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Bruiser</FONT>--- <I>DPS Ability<BR><BR></I>Brawlers are trying to propose that they should have equal tanking ability as Guardians and yet still reign at the top of the dps ability. If Brawlers can tank as well as Guardians then Guardians should be able to DPS as well as Brawlers.<BR> <P>Message Edited by Exill on <SPAN class=date_text><FONT color=#756b56>09-01-2005</FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>05:49 PM</SPAN></P> <P> </P> <P>actually I want</P> <DIV align=left><BR><BR><I>Tank Ability</I> ---<FONT size=1>Guardian/Monk/Bruiser/Beserker/Paladin/shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Berserker</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Paladin</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Monk</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Bruiser</FONT>--- <I>DPS Ability</I></DIV><I></I></DIV> <P><I>No class shoudl ever give up their primary role in exchange for their secondary effects.. i am tired of explaining the same thing over and over read the thread on will guads still be main tank in gaurdian forums if u want to see how all tansk should tank.</I></P> <DIV align=left><BR></DIV>

09-02-2005, 07:11 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Paen wrote:<BR> <P>Silly me, bruisers arent affected identically by monk changes, I like zoned out of reality there or something.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>They aren't really. They have more innate mitigation than us, and almost all of their combat arts are different.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>If monks receive another avoidance, mitigation or HP buff to make them 'tank better', bruisers will too, just like they were grouped together for the previous HP change, avoidance change, and natural shield addition. Monks and Bruisers are both Brawlers and therefore grouped together from a balance standpoint where the basic fundamentals of the game are changed, its not all that hard to understand, really.</BLOCKQUOTE>

Exill

09-02-2005, 07:30 AM

<span><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote:<div> <p>actually I want</p> <div align="left"><i>Tank Ability</i> ---<font size="1">Guardian/Monk/Bruiser/Beserker/Paladin/shadowknight</font>--<font size="1">Berserker</font>--<font size="1">Paladin</font>--<font size="1">Shadowknight</font>--<font size="1">Monk</font>--<font size="1">Bruiser</font>--- <i>DPS Ability</i></div></div> <p><i>No class shoudl ever give up their primary role in exchange for their secondary effects.. i am tired of explaining the same thing over and over read the thread on will guads still be main tank in gaurdian forums if u want to see how all tansk should tank.</i></p> <div align="left"></div><hr></blockquote>LOL. You are not giving up your primary role. All fighters can tank. A brawler can tank better then a mage, scout or a priest, wanna know why? Because they bleong to the FIGHTER archtype. You cannot make all fighters tank equally and yet some do extremely more dps then others. Why would anyways play a Gaurdian when 5 other classes can Tank just as good but with better utility and dps? In the words of Gaige on the Beta forums: <i>"</i></span><i>the tanking difference should equate to the DPS difference"</i> This means if a Brawler does 4x the DPS of a Guardian, then the Guardian in return gets to tank 4x as well as the Brawler. What one class lacks in one area they will make it up in another area. If Brawlers lack in tanking then they will make it up in dps and utility. If Guardians lack in dps and utility then they will make it up in tanking. Gungo, you know why you are tired of explaining the same thing over and over? Because you are NOT convincing anyone. The statements you are trying to make are absurd. SoE is trying to balance the game not unbalance it. <div></div>

Gungo

09-02-2005, 08:18 AM

<DIV><SPAN>Exil wrote<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote: <DIV> <P>actually I want</P> <DIV align=left><BR><BR><I>Tank Ability</I> ---<FONT size=1>Guardian/Monk/Bruiser/Beserker/Paladin/shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Berserker</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Paladin</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Monk</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Bruiser</FONT>--- <I>DPS Ability</I></DIV></DIV> <P><I>No class shoudl ever give up their primary role in exchange for their secondary effects.. i am tired of explaining the same thing over and over read the thread on will guads still be main tank in gaurdian forums if u want to see how all tansk should tank.</I></P> <DIV align=left><BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>LOL. You are not giving up your primary role. All fighters can tank. A brawler can tank better then a mage, scout or a priest, wanna know why? Because they bleong to the FIGHTER archtype.<BR><BR>You cannot make all fighters tank equally and yet some do extremely more dps then others. Why would anyways play a Gaurdian when 5 other classes can Tank just as good but with better utility and dps?<BR><BR>In the words of Gaige on the Beta forums: <I>"</I></SPAN><I>the tanking difference should equate to the DPS difference"</I><BR>This means if a Brawler does 4x the DPS of a Guardian, then the Guardian in return gets to tank 4x as well as the Brawler.<BR><BR>What one class lacks in one area they will make it up in another area. If Brawlers lack in tanking then they will make it up in dps and utility. If Guardians lack in dps and utility then they will make it up in tanking.<BR><BR>Gungo, you know why you are tired of explaining the same thing over and over? Because you are NOT convincing anyone. The statements you are trying to make are absurd. SoE is trying to balance the game not unbalance it.<BR>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thats the probelm exil the game is unbalanced.. the reason because 1 fighter subclass tanks considerably better then other fighter subclasses. You are right what one class lack in one area they make up for in other areas. But i never signed up to giving up my ability to tank as well as others because i choose a differ class. A class is balanced at the archtyoe lvl, so all classes should perform ther primary role EQUALLY (thats the same), its our secondary efffects to balance eahc other out paladins choose heals etc, i choose more dps. NO where does it say dps relates to tanking. so why again should i trade my primary role to tank just as well as a gaurd for a few more dps. we are not goign to outdps scouts and casters we should only do more dps then the other fighter subclasses. what a gaurd lacks in dps then they SHOULD make up in Utility. No class should get a benefit that makes all other subclasses primary role obselete.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The statements i am making are only absurd to a bigot, who fails to see beyond his own throne. There are plenty of others who agree with me that alll subclasses should be able to perform thier primary role equally. Equally does nto mean i need 2x as many healers just to do the same job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Shizzirri

09-02-2005, 08:43 AM

<DIV>So what happens when by some miracle you get what you want I mean if they make monks tank should you lose most of that dps since your sacraficing it to move up your little spectrum?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bard's dont have good dp's and their scouts their more utility that add stats to the group enhancing their dp's they don't have true high damage attacks like a ranger, yet do you see bards whining in the assassin forum that they need more dps?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Some tanks are better than others at flat out tanking, monks can tank I have an alt, granted there not as good at guards they can still tank. You say in your post... "i choose more dps." Now do you really think that there going to allow the "best pure tank class" to have a higher tier of dps...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If that's the case sign me up for that class so I can play it and tank as good as I do now and parse twice as high...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and don't say that guardians parse high dps because that's parser inconsistancy from buffs from other classes which should techinically qualify as their buffs. </DIV>

Gungo

09-02-2005, 09:06 AM

<DIV>what powerful dps i am just askign for the highest dps in the fighter tree there are supposedly 8 other classes with higher direct dps then me. And Bards do higher dps them me as well its just that they add thier dps thru others. On test troubs add dps to casters, dirges to melee. so bard are able to perform thier primary role just as well as other scouts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>monks are tanks yes, but in raids we are not. so in effect they are denied thier primary role. I never said i wanted to be in a different tier of dps i am still confined to my archtype range of dps. i still will do less dps then scouts and casters. what i gaind in dps while trying to retain equal tanking i lost in utility. i got soem toys yes, but no real group buffs, no real self buffs (other then a few stances), i got a mend on a 1.5-3 min timer, and a fake death that is useless on raids with aoe's. what i don't have in utility i have in dps. maybe gaurds instead of complaining about other classes being equal should ask why don't guards have more utilty.</DIV>

Shizzirri

09-02-2005, 09:23 AM

<P>We do have utility what do you think our shield buffs, hitpoint buffs, group defense buffs are for? decoration?</P> <P>I still love it when you say you want the highest dps in the fighter tree, but yet you say your denied your primary role because you can't tank raids, you say in the first paragraph you want to have the highest tier of dps for fighters yet in the second paragraph you say you don't want to move up in the dps tree, however considering probably 2 fighter classes can out dps you (sk's and bruisers for the most part) would that be moving you up in the dps tree? Personally as a bruiser I wouldn't worry, our bruiser parses right on pace with the scouts on our raids, so since your main is a bruiser are you refering to them when you say monks or are you refering to monks? They are two completely different classes. And bruisers generally parse much higher than monks in dps.</P><p>Message Edited by Shizzirri on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:25 PM</span>

Gaige

09-02-2005, 09:31 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Paen wrote: <P>If monks receive another avoidance, mitigation or HP buff to make them 'tank better', bruisers will too, just like they were grouped together for the previous HP change, avoidance change, and natural shield addition. Monks and Bruisers are both Brawlers and therefore grouped together from a balance standpoint where the basic fundamentals of the game are changed, its not all that hard to understand, really.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Not counting my defensive stance, which does up my avoidance, I have exactly 0 hp buffs or mitigation buffs aside from the ones that all fighters get. Like the root mitigation spell.</P> <P>Now I have group fd, bruiser doesn't, I have riposte buff, bruiser doesn't, I have poison/disease cure heal, bruiser doesn't, bruiser has teleport punch, I do not, bruiser has kick me when I'm down, monk does not.</P> <P>Bruisers have higher mitigation than us, we have more deflection.</P> <P>Etc Etc.</P> <P>Sure BRAWLER changes will affect us both, but are quite different subclasses.<BR></P>

Gaige

09-02-2005, 09:36 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <DIV>So what happens when by some miracle you get what you want I mean if they make monks tank should you lose most of that dps since your sacraficing it to move up your little spectrum?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bard's dont have good dp's and their scouts their more utility that add stats to the group enhancing their dp's they don't have true high damage attacks like a ranger, yet do you see bards whining in the assassin forum that they need more dps?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Some tanks are better than others at flat out tanking, monks can tank I have an alt, granted there not as good at guards they can still tank. You say in your post... "i choose more dps." Now do you really think that there going to allow the "best pure tank class" to have a higher tier of dps...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If that's the case sign me up for that class so I can play it and tank as good as I do now and parse twice as high...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and don't say that guardians parse high dps because that's parser inconsistancy from buffs from other classes which should techinically qualify as their buffs. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You are forgetting the rest of the scale:</P> <P>Tank: Guard/Pally/Zerk/SK/Monk/Bruiser/Warden/Fury/Defiler/Shaman/Inquisitor/TemplarDirge/Troub/Brigand/Swashbuckler/Ranger/Assassin/Conjuror/Necromancer/Illusionist/Coercer/Wizard/Warlock</P> <P>Every class can do some DPS. Therefore its not as easy as saying guards are best tank and worst dps and monks are crappy tank and crappy dps, because there is what 17 other classes that can out dps monks?</P> <P>As for utility, every class gets utility. Just because you feel yours is worthless and you don't use it, doesn't mean its not there. It is.</P> <P>So when comparing things you need to compare apples to apples. </P> <P>Tanking to tanking, damage to damage, healing to healing, etc.</P> <P>If you are by far the best tanks, there is no need for the other fighters. Scouts can outdamage us, and have more/better utility.</P> <P>Delete the other 5 please is guardians feel the need to be the best.</P> <P>Thanks.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shizzirri wrote:<BR> <P>We do have utility what do you think our shield buffs, hitpoint buffs, group defense buffs are for? decoration?</P> <P>I still love it when you say you want the highest dps in the fighter tree, but yet you say your denied your primary role because you can't tank raids, you say in the first paragraph you want to have the highest tier of dps for fighters yet in the second paragraph you say you don't want to move up in the dps tree. <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>He doesn't.</P> <P>Fighter DPS should go guard/pally/zerker/sk/monk/bruiser. All of that DPS should be significantly lower than any scout or mage DPS. Period. So the Bruiser will be about middle of the road in DPS. That means TWELVE classes are better at doing damage than the bruiser.</P> <P>Tanking should go the opposite way bruiser/monk/sk/zerker/pally/guard but it should be close enough that all fighters can replace each other on all mobs adequately.</P> <P>Which means no getting one shot, no being unable to do it, no needing 20 healers when the guardian needs 2.</P> <P>That's how it should work.<BR></P><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:40 PM</span>

Gungo

09-02-2005, 09:42 AM

<DIV> <DIV>what powerful dps i am just askign for the highest dps in the fighter <STRONG>TREE</STRONG> there are supposedly 8 other classes with higher direct dps then me. And Bards do higher dps them me as well its just that they add thier dps thru others. On test troubs add dps to casters, dirges to melee. so bard are able to perform thier primary role just as well as other scouts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>monks are tanks yes, but in raids we are not. so in effect they are denied thier primary role. I never said i wanted to be in a different <STRONG>TIER</STRONG> of dps i am still confined to my archtype range of dps. i still will do less dps then scouts and casters. what i gaind in dps while trying to retain equal tanking i lost in utility. i got soem toys yes, but no real group buffs, no real self buffs (other then a few stances), i got a mend on a 1.5-3 min timer, and a fake death that is useless on raids with aoe's. what i don't have in utility i have in dps. maybe gaurds instead of complaining about other classes being equal should ask why don't guards have more utilty.</DIV> <P></P> <DIV>Gungo Ninescullz lvl 50 bruiser<BR>Officer of A.O.D.----innothule server<BR>over 900+ quests served</DIV><SPAN><SPAN class=date_text><FONT color=#756b56>09-01-2005</FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>10:06 PM</SPAN> </SPAN> <BR> <P><SPAN><BR></SPAN></P><IMG height=1 alt="" src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/p.gif" width=1 border=0><BR> <P>We do have utility what do you think our shield buffs, hitpoint buffs, group defense buffs are for? decoration?</P> <P>I still love it when you say you want the highest dps in the fighter tree, but yet you say your denied your primary role because you can't tank raids, <EM><STRONG>you say in the first paragraph you want to have the highest tier</STRONG></EM> of dps for fighters yet <STRONG><EM>in the second paragraph you say you don't want to move up in the dps tree</EM></STRONG>, however considering probably <STRONG><U>2 fighter classes can out dps you (sk's and bruisers</U> </STRONG>for the most part) would that be moving you up in the dps tree? Personally as a bruiser I wouldn't worry, our bruiser parses right on pace with the scouts on our raids, so since your main is a bruiser are you refering to them when you say monks or are you refering to monks? They are two completely different classes. And bruisers generally parse much higher than monks in dps.</P></DIV> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________</P> <P>(I had to copy both posts this way so u can see and read a lil clearer.)</P> <P>Nice i am glad a gaurd has finalyl stated he has utility, then he should have no problem with brawlers tankign equally since he has as much if nto mroe utility as brawler.</P> <P>First paragraph i said TREE as in the confines of my archtype maybe i wasn't clear enuff.</P> <P>Secodn paragraph i said TIER as in encrotching on other archtype roles</P> <P><U>THIRDLY I AM A BRUISER</U></P> <P>I see here that gaurds lack proper reading comprehension. I do hate making such generalized sterotypes =/</P> <P>I see here that you confused monks with my intention of Brawlers are tanks.. sorry if that confused you.. its late here</P> <P>DISCLAIMER - (I don't agree with gaige in that a fighter ability to tank should scale, in effect that will create imbalance)</P> <P>Of course i am an advocate for situational tanking</P> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:46 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-01-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:52 PM</span>

Airog

09-02-2005, 11:16 AM

GDI, I can reed just fin, Guno, and spelling is goood 2. I have taked very alot of hits to the head while tanking. What you want is head hit like me? That sounds goood you head get bashed like me head.

Ragrax

09-02-2005, 12:08 PM

<DIV> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>Almost incredible, but true, I almost agree with Gage on a thing, lol. At least partially <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />:</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <P><SPAN></P> <P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>[...]</BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Tanking should go the opposite way bruiser/monk/sk/zerker/pally/guard but it should be close enough that all fighters can replace each other on all mobs adequately.</P> <P>Which means no getting one shot, no being unable to do it, no needing 20 healers when the guardian needs 2.</P> <P>That's how it should work.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>09-01-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:40 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P> <P> </P> <P><BR></SPAN><SPAN><FONT color=#ffffff size=2> </FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>I would have to add though, that there have to be visible / feelable / significant differences in tanking with the different classes (and not like guardian is 0.2% better than a paladin, 1.3% better than a bruiser...). Otherwise the dps differences of the tank classes should not be significant either. Maybe 1 or 2 hardest mobs should exist in the game though where you need the most defensive class with almost best equipment to tank (or more lvls in the next expansion).</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>@gungo:</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>Sorry, but if you are mostly interested in the primary tanking role only and do not care about the other toys that your bruiser gets together with the nice dps, you should have the balls to reroll as a guardian. It is a pity that you obviously did not have mmorpg experience or informed yourself on the SOE boards, that you did not know at character creation that by picking the most offensive fighter you will be the least defensive and therefore not be tanking that much on raids (at least not the hardest mobs, the raid bosses).</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=2><FONT color=#ffffff>I also really like to do good dps (I almost rolled a scout) and I like things like FD, invis (god, I miss my old eq1 sk sometimes a lot), but I chose pure tanking ability at the character creation to be the most defensive tank to tank the big mobs.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT color=#ffffff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </P>

blueduckie

09-02-2005, 12:32 PM

<P>Gaige you are wrong. Our utility is not fine. We dont have skills like mend or heals. We dont have fd or evacs. We dont have lifetaps or high dps to kill things fast. We do not have any type of actual utility. We can protect others at the sake of killing ourself if it is a caster. That is not utility. Our utility is not fine. It still holds true IMO. If all fighters are to tank the same. Guardians dps should be same scale as bruiser and so should our utility. It is in no way like that.</P> <P>I do not want a heal or a fd but i want to do what the class is designed and tank well. I dont care if others can tank well but if I am not going to do dps or having good utility I sure expect to have an advantage in tanking.</P> <P>I still would like Moorgard to respond on why scouts and mages can have a tier on dps there main capacities but fighters and healers cant have it on there main roles. There is a reason there are sub classes to not be the same. I really dont understand why we have to give up our hp and other things to please a small base of players like Gaige who honestly dont know enough about Guardians to reasonably open his mouth.</P> <P>Gaige list our utility please. Unyielding Will? We have to die to set it off. There isnt anyhing. All clases get mitigation on stances now which IMO should remain guardian only as our advantage. Buffs are not utility tho because everyone gets them.</P> <P>List of Monk advantages as of current:</P> <P>Cure ailments with self heal / feign death / more hp / more dps / 360 avoidance / Long stiffle</P> <P>List of Guardian advantages</P> <P>Higher mitigation / more taunts</P> <P>Get realistic please if your gonna balance classes balance them dont feed us a bunch of bs.</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now someone above called shield buffs group buffs etc utility but you fool all fighters get group type buffs. Buffing avoidance etc are better than our defense buff after revamp. 1 hp buff when we have less hp than them is NOT utility. It is them making our hp bunch of bs. Give monk the hp buff and boost our natural HP IMO i wont care. Stop saying stupid crap is our utility when it is nothing special. All classes can protect also fyi ours are supposed to be the best but really arnt. The only one that has a benefit is vigilance since you can cast it on yourself to 5% of the time cut 5% of dmg taken the extra shiedl blocks is all that matters from it. So i dont see what your calling utility we most likely wont be able to protect ourselves after change not sure if any guardian on beta has tried or if skilsl changed so much wouldnt matter.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text>I have np with other classes tanking but if you are gonna give them benefits and expect guardians to [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] while our dps sucks and our utility sucks your full of it. </SPAN> <P><SPAN class=time_text>Now I am sure not all will agree this my opinion though. I am not out to be better than monks etc in all ways I think they should tank ok i think we should tank a lil better for the sacrifices we take to do that. Simple concept IMO dont see why its so hard mr moorgard</SPAN> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:40 AM</span>

Sir_Halbarad

09-02-2005, 02:10 PM

Anybody remember the fighter classes evolution? In Beta, all were fighter clones with different armor... The SOE said, we make them different and give them roles... Now, we have our roles... Agreed some Guardian (Warrior) benefits should be adressed and buff stacking is one of them And now SOE thinks... They are too different, let's make fighter clones with different armor... Expect a combat revamp before Expansion number 2 where fighter classes get different roles again <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Don't come with the "SOE promised all fighters can tank" argument. It was stated that every fighter will be able to tank for their <b>experience group...</b> <div></div>

Gaige

09-02-2005, 02:22 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <P>Gaige you are wrong. Our utility is not fine. We dont have skills like mend or heals. We dont have fd or evacs. We dont have lifetaps or high dps to kill things fast. We do not have any type of actual utility. We can protect others at the sake of killing ourself if it is a caster. That is not utility. Our utility is not fine. It still holds true IMO. If all fighters are to tank the same. Guardians dps should be same scale as bruiser and so should our utility. It is in no way like that.</P> <P>I do not want a heal or a fd but i want to do what the class is designed and tank well. I dont care if others can tank well but if I am not going to do dps or having good utility I sure expect to have an advantage in tanking.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Man I love when you guys do this... lol. It makes me laugh to myself irl. Its quite entertaining.</P> <P>In the first paragraph you go on and on about how you don't have utility, how you don't have FD, you don't have mend, you don't have high dps. You have 0 utility. You say your utility isn't fine. Then you say "hey if you want to tank like us, we need more dps and more utility, but its not like that".</P> <P>Then, in the second paragraph, the age old guardian comeback: "I DO NOT WANT A HEAL, I DO NOT WANT A FD". I just want to TANK BETTER THAN ALL OF YOU.</P> <P>So you openly complain about not having our utility and instead of asking for utility and/or increased damage what do you do? YOU SHOUT OUT THAT YOU DON'T WANT ANY OF THAT.</P> <P>Its like OMG FEEL SORRY FOR ME (is it working ~ yes, now I can continue to be the best tank). You guys are so amazingly childish saying [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] WE DON'T HAVE THIS, WE DON'T HAVE THAT, and then saying not having those things is why you should be the best tank.</P> <P>Quit ironic and shady, but at least it makes me laugh.</P> <P>Whether or not you want utility and/or damage you have some and you do some. The amounts can change if you feel the aren't adequate, because I assure you there can't be a best tank in this game. If you don't believe that by now there is no helping you anyway.</P> <P>Besides, if there was a best tank in this game but it wasn't you, you'd whine for eternity anyway.</P> <P>Thanks though, I love this arguement, it makes me laugh so much. /chuckle.</P> <P>No fair we dont' get fd, heal or dps!! But that's okay, we don't want it, just make us the best tanks!</P> <P>ROFL!</P> <P>Man. So priceless.<BR></P>

blueduckie

09-02-2005, 03:10 PM

<P>You know gaige here is your problem you just dont understand the concept of it. The reason i dont want those skills is same reason i didnt pick a monk. You say you shouldnt be a dps class because there are others in pecking order that will out dps you. Well it is clear they have a pecking order as should fighters in tanking.</P> <P>It is ridiculous that you want to tank the same as a Guardian and keep all that stuff. If a monk is gonna tank the same and have more hp get rid of there [Removed for Content] fd mend cure ailments and dps skills knocked down to us that is balancing. Dont just nerf us to being same tanking as all fighters with us getting a cucumber shoved up our [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] by people like moorgard and gaige to busy on his knees swalloing for him. I am so fed up with how guardians keep getting knocked down more and more with getting nothing back. You take our best dps skill and turn it into a complete weak offensive stance. Put haste on it you [Removed for Content] monkey developers. If Monks are gonna tank like us i want to dps like them. If you cant do things right at least make them even.</P> <P>Your so full of [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] on your posts gaige about how you want equality. You only want quality in tanking while your sorry [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] sits on more utility and more dps. You dont [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] about that you dont actually give 2 [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]s about anything but monks being put in god mode. Sugar coat it all you want but have looked at plenty of your posts Monks not only have more base hp now. They our out tanking guardians on beta and still out dpsing by 3-5x as much with guardian in offensive stance.</P> <P>So if you find that funny sure, but i sure as [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] dont. I didnt make a guardian to get [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed by some class wanting to tank equal and keep all the bonus's they originally had while not tanking as well. Put our tanking above them or put our dps up to them but quit cheating guardians of being a legitimate class. Your balancing has turned into more and more suckie suckie for the monks. Get off your knees and do this right ffs.</P>

Shakir10

09-02-2005, 03:52 PM

<DIV> <DIV>No worries, Vanguard comes out in what... about a year? Then we can leave for a game that isn't trying to get 6 different classes to fill the exact same role in a raid and let Gage play a guardian in leather all he wants, Maybe Gungo can join him and they can be the Blues brothers of leather tanks that whish they had chosen metal in the beginning.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh wait, but according to Gage, there shouldn't be roles... oh [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot], if he had his way, would there even be a Main Tank? hahaha</DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by Shakir1065 on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:55 AM</span>

Shizzirri

09-02-2005, 06:56 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR> <P>You know gaige here is your problem you just dont understand the concept of it. The reason i dont want those skills is same reason i didnt pick a monk. You say you shouldnt be a dps class because there are others in pecking order that will out dps you. Well it is clear they have a pecking order as should fighters in tanking.</P> <P>It is ridiculous that you want to tank the same as a Guardian and keep all that stuff. If a monk is gonna tank the same and have more hp get rid of there [Removed for Content] fd mend cure ailments and dps skills knocked down to us that is balancing. Dont just nerf us to being same tanking as all fighters with us getting a cucumber shoved up our [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] by people like moorgard and gaige to busy on his knees swalloing for him. I am so fed up with how guardians keep getting knocked down more and more with getting nothing back. You take our best dps skill and turn it into a complete weak offensive stance. Put haste on it you [Removed for Content] monkey developers. If Monks are gonna tank like us i want to dps like them. If you cant do things right at least make them even.</P> <P>Your so full of [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] on your posts gaige about how you want equality. You only want quality in tanking while your sorry [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] sits on more utility and more dps. You dont [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] about that you dont actually give 2 [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]s about anything but monks being put in god mode. Sugar coat it all you want but have looked at plenty of your posts Monks not only have more base hp now. They our out tanking guardians on beta and still out dpsing by 3-5x as much with guardian in offensive stance.</P> <P>So if you find that funny sure, but i sure as [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] dont. I didnt make a guardian to get [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed by some class wanting to tank equal and keep all the bonus's they originally had while not tanking as well. Put our tanking above them or put our dps up to them but quit cheating guardians of being a legitimate class. Your balancing has turned into more and more suckie suckie for the monks. Get off your knees and do this right ffs.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Monks aren't even remotely close to the top dps for fighters currently bruisers/zerkers/sk's all outdps them on our raids. If monks want to be the top tanks they need to have the worst dps, sorry that's how it goes. But yeah your not going to be the top tanks because avoidance alone won't get you past the big orange/red epic encounters because your mitigation isn't high enough, so what's next add 20% base mitigation to monks so it can come remotely close to guardians?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But the good news is laugh at least we can F'ing clone ourselves.</DIV>

Airog

09-02-2005, 08:43 PM

I want to know where people are getting this info from Beta, about who is doing more DPS, ect... Because after the first few Beta raids were parsed, guess who came out on top (I got my info from the Guardian channel) Monks, lol, believe it or not, Monks were parseing as high as anybody else on DPS, of course, that is not live yet, so we will just have to wait and see, but don't tell me that SK's/Bruisers/Zerkers are doing more DPS, unless you tell me how you know (or think) this. Of course you may be talking live, but I have heard that Monk DPS is better then all but maybe bruisers on live (could be wrong though) but live won't matter as of what, 10 days form now?

ravenhe

09-02-2005, 08:55 PM

<DIV>Dont we all hate when this forums blank all the stuff we wrote as soon as we push the post button :smileymad: Bah oh well to the issue at hand.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I rarely write in here because english is not my first language and sometimes my point dont get out clear cause of grammar or just cause is harder for me to explain myself in english however Gaige i will dedicate this one to you.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>To start with all fighters can TANK and you are full of BS if you say you never tanked in EQ2 however how well you do it depends on the focus of your subclass. Your monk actually is a breed of several things you have DPS, you can taunt enemies off your groupmates, you have invisibility (even if it is short lasting), you can heal , and also you can take most dmg than any pure DPS class ... </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Your Monk is actually an amazingly good soloing machine you have it all and to top it off you can do amazing XP over time with very nice mana efficiency. Also I think your versatility grants you the possibility of making a good small group with almost anything you can find. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>However you are a TANK with focus on DPS and because of this you should never Hold damage better than a TANK focused on DEFENSE or more DPS than a PURE DPS class thinking otherwise would indeed break balance and i also consider it rather absurd.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gaige when i picked my guardian I wanted to make the best tank for my guild I wanted to be the meatshield that would keep them safe and i only needed to read the skill list once to make my choice. Guardians suck at DPS i can solo a lot of stuff but i need 3-6 minutes to kill a mob that gives decent xp, we dont have offensive buffs, we dont have heals, we didnt get a free horsie like pallys did and we suck at mana efficiency however we can buff defense like nothing else, we can shield our groupmates from harm like no other, we can take hold ourself the best under a heavy beating. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Yes we lack utility and all those things but i got what I read in the skill list and im happy that was what I was expecting.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gaige what were you looking for when you picked your monk: are you a fan of the shaolins monks?, did you hate the idea to depend on groups to play?, did you think leather was more comfortable and that doing flying kicks was awesome?, or (write your reason here).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I believe your class had an amazing advantage over Guardians for 44-47 lvls and it blows that you get mad and rant everyday cause you want to tank EPICs as well as we do when thats actually the only benefit our class have over yours. Also another thing i dont get is why aim for the MT ... Gaige there is only ONE MT and 23 other spots to fill dont you feel you could contribute more filling one of those 23 spots than the MT one. I think i have been backup tank more times than the MT and i dont mind i can raise health, buff avoidance, and shield some dmg even though i wont do squat in DPS. There is a place for everyone in those 23 spots and i bet your monk could help more there than being the MT.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Of course though with that attitude i wont assure a place anywhere...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>LVL 50 guardian faydark </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Airog

09-02-2005, 09:35 PM

<DIV>Hm, I have a though, right now on raids, are there any USELESS classes? I mean, are there any classes that you just say, wow, what do we need him for? If all fighters were to have the same DPS/utility/tanking ability of a Guard, then that is what you would be saying after to fighters. Wow, a monk, a pally, AND a guard? sine this fight only requires an MA and MT, what do we need the 3rd one for? Well, maybe they could give all fighters more utility so that when not tanking they are still needed? I am talking BETA, as well as, what people are saying they want here, not live. Because what I am hearing from some people, is, oh, oh, lets make Monks/Pallys/Gaurd all the SAME! Then we can make Zerkers/SK's/Bruisers the same only, with 10more dps, and .5% less tanking ability! If scouts get 2x the DPS of fighters, and fighters utility is taken away so that they can tnak equally, then fighters are worhtless over 2 on a raid. So, the nagging question is, how do you purpose they make all fighters equal tanks AND not just takeing up raid space after 2? Utility? DPS? If you think about it, and you want to tank, tanks should have neither, they should just be able to taunt and get hit. (I am talking raid tanking through this whole post). Heck, as a Guardian I have always wished they would strip us of our buffs, and give us more Inate bonuses and maybe balance out what we are loseing through, I dunno, that classes that are meant to buff. I don't know about ya'll, but it seems plain wrong that Guardians get group buffs. But of course, if they make it so all fighters tank equally, then we need more group buffs, or better ones, or more utility... GDI, it is a big giant circle of destruction....</DIV>

-Aonein-

09-02-2005, 09:35 PM

<P>I cant believe this same debate has been going since the day they very posted about the new combat revamp changes they were thinking of doing 6 months ago.</P> <P>Im wondering, Gage do you have replys macro'd cause you get targted alot around here lol.:smileywink:</P>

Airog

09-02-2005, 09:38 PM

Hahaha! Yeah, that would be great, get 6 people to all macro their argument, and just see like, them going at it in the same order same argument for a 50 page post, haha...

Airog

09-02-2005, 09:39 PM

And what is up with you and names Taemek? Lol, it is Gaige, not Gage, and it is Gungo, not Gongo... or are you doing that on purpose?

JNewby

09-02-2005, 09:54 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV> <DIV align=left><B>Fighter Spectrum</B><BR></DIV><BR><I>Tank Ability</I> ---<FONT size=1>Guardian</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Berserker</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Paladin</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Monk</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Bruiser</FONT>--- <I>DPS Ability<BR><BR></I><BR>Brawlers have the highest dps out of all the fighters and in return they have the lowest tanking ability. Just because they have the lowest tanking ability does not mean that they cannot tank. Every class in the fighter archtype can tank, it is just a matter of how well. The same goes for DPS.<BR><I><BR></I><BR><BR>How (most) Brawlers want it to be:<BR><BR><I>Tank Ability</I> ---<FONT size=1>Guardian/Monk/Bruiser</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Berserker</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Paladin</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Monk</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Bruiser</FONT>--- <I>DPS Ability<BR><BR></I>Brawlers are trying to propose that they should have equal tanking ability as Guardians and yet still reign at the top of the dps ability. If Brawlers can tank as well as Guardians then Guardians should be able to DPS as well as Brawlers.<BR> <P>Message Edited by Exill on <SPAN class=date_text><FONT color=#756b56>09-01-2005</FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>05:49 PM</SPAN></P> <P> </P> <P>actually I want</P> <DIV align=left><BR><BR><I>Tank Ability</I> ---<FONT size=1>Guardian/Monk/Bruiser/Beserker/Paladin/shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Berserker</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Paladin</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Shadowknight</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Monk</FONT>--<FONT size=1>Bruiser</FONT>--- <I>DPS Ability</I></DIV><I></I></DIV> <P><I>No class shoudl ever give up their primary role in exchange for their secondary effects.. i am tired of explaining the same thing over and over read the thread on will guads still be main tank in gaurdian forums if u want to see how all tansk should tank.</I></P> <DIV align=left><BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>eh so you want to be the best dps and tanks?... guardians arent even on there so I guess they have 0 dps... hrm seems like they shoudl jsut random what class u are in your world and if yo get a guard zerk sk pally reroll to bruiser/monk sine in yer mind they shoudl be best tanks and dps<BR>

JNewby

09-02-2005, 10:02 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV>what powerful dps i am just askign for the highest dps in the fighter tree there are supposedly 8 other classes with higher direct dps then me. And Bards do higher dps them me as well its just that they add thier dps thru others. On test troubs add dps to casters, dirges to melee. so bard are able to perform thier primary role just as well as other scouts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>monks are tanks yes, but in raids we are not. so in effect they are denied thier primary role. I never said i wanted to be in a different tier of dps i am still confined to my archtype range of dps. i still will do less dps then scouts and casters. what i gaind in dps while trying to retain equal tanking i lost in utility. i got soem toys yes, but no real group buffs, no real self buffs (other then a few stances), i got a mend on a 1.5-3 min timer, and a fake death that is useless on raids with aoe's. what i don't have in utility i have in dps. maybe gaurds instead of complaining about other classes being equal should ask why don't guards have more utilty.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>guards dotn want utility that is why we became guards... so we could tank... not to dps not to buff... to tank... that is it... and when you read the bruiser arcatype I am sure you noticed that it was not suppost to be the most defensive tank... anyhow what I dont get is why you are saying u shoudl tank equally and do most dps.. that makes no sense

JNewby

09-02-2005, 10:06 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Guard/Pally/Zerk/SK/Monk/Bruiser/Warden/Fury/Defiler/Shaman/Inquisitor/TemplarDirge/Troub/Brigand/Swashbuckler/Ranger/Assassin/Conjuror/Necromancer/Illusionist/Coercer/Wizard/Warlock</BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Every class can do some DPS. Therefore its not as easy as saying guards are best tank and worst dps and monks are crappy tank and crappy dps, because there is what 17 other classes that can out dps monks?</P> <P>As for utility, every class gets utility. Just because you feel yours is worthless and you don't use it, doesn't mean its not there. It is.</P> <P>So when comparing things you need to compare apples to apples. </P> <P>Tanking to tanking, damage to damage, healing to healing, etc.</P> <P>If you are by far the best tanks, there is no need for the other fighters. Scouts can outdamage us, and have more/better utility.</P> <P>Delete the other 5 please is guardians feel the need to be</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P>I leveled my first toon from level 33 to about 48 using a bruiser as a tank.. and we had an awesome group... I did little dps but the bruiser made up for it plus I gave good buffs so he coudl tank better... that is what class is about... diversity... and besides that just proves that monk/bruiser can and do tank very well</P></BLOCKQUOTE>

Airog

09-02-2005, 10:20 PM

I don't remember anybody saying monks cannot group tank, becuase thay can fine, they want to raid tank (well, some of them do).

Gungo

09-02-2005, 10:25 PM

<DIV>eh so you want to be the best dps and tanks?... guardians arent even on there so I guess they have 0 dps... hrm seems like they shoudl jsut random what class u are in your world and if yo get a guard zerk sk pally reroll to bruiser/monk sine in yer mind they shoudl be best tanks and dps</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I already said i want to be equal tanks (for monks) and better dps in the fighter tree (best in regards to bruiser), never have i said i want to be the best tank</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>dps does not = tanking</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>dps is our seconadary ability it is our utility</DIV>

Airog

09-02-2005, 10:30 PM

I think the arguments have gotten really lost, like I said in my thread, people need to stop putting words in each others mouths. And people need to stop makeing generalizations. Not all Guards have bad reading comprehension. Just because we are a little slow in the head... Um, I froget what I was gonna say.

Gungo

09-02-2005, 10:59 PM

<P>I know air but thats the only way these gaurds cna defend my point by making it seem like i am askign to be the best at everything. </P> <P>I know generalizing again i am but just trying to sum up the thoughts</P> <P>guardians point: </P> <P>we don't have utility (when in fact u do)</P> <P>we dont want utility</P> <P>we want to be best raid tank</P> <P>Guardians beign the best raid tank is equal, other fighters don't need to raid tank they have other utilites</P> <P> </P> <P>My point:</P> <P>You do have utility (you may need more)</P> <P>thats your choice not to want utility, but you shoud have it so that gaurds don't pidgeon hole themselves</P> <P>But being the best raid tank all the time is unbalnced because no other tank cna perform thier archtype role anytime during raids</P> <P>brawlers other utility during raid is ? the highest fighter class dps so effectivly 9th best direct dps w no utility</P> <DIV> <DIV>added- tankign should be relatively the same, although the difference in tanking would come out in raids designed for each class. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Example- big nasty dragon, lets use a guard the monk might take to much of a spike dam hit and die.</DIV> <DIV>Example-MOTM type (swarm) raid- lets use a monk the gaurd takes way to much dam and dies from the 360 degrees of atks incoming</DIV> <DIV>Example- caster, lets use a paladin both the guard and monk are chained stuned and take way to much magic damage</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>how is that unfair?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>paladins while not tanking currently have some benefit in raids and they don't do alot of dps, but they are still useful</DIV> <DIV>Bruisers whose DPS is being nerfed belwo all scouts casters add a least a lil extra dps in raids</DIV> <DIV>Guards can shield others and absorb dam from thier group as well as be the premier defensive buffer, i do agree thoguh their dps should exceed equivalant crusaders, (and may need another useful tool when not tanking) Just becasue a class can't dps do substantial dps doesn tmena thier useless in raids.</DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:00 PM</span>

-Aonein-

09-02-2005, 11:27 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <P>I know air but thats the only way these gaurds cna defend my point by making it seem like i am askign to be the best at everything. </P> <P>I know generalizing again i am but just trying to sum up the thoughts</P> <P>guardians point: </P> <P>we don't have utility (when in fact u do)</P> <P>we dont want utility</P> <P>we want to be best raid tank</P> <P>Guardians beign the best raid tank is equal, other fighters don't need to raid tank they have other utilites</P> <P> </P> <P>My point:</P> <P>You do have utility (you may need more)</P> <P>thats your choice not to want utility, but you shoud have it so that gaurds don't pidgeon hole themselves</P> <P>But being the best raid tank all the time is unbalnced because no other tank cna perform thier archtype role anytime during raids</P> <P>brawlers other utility during raid is ? the highest fighter class dps so effectivly 9th best direct dps w no utility</P> <DIV> <DIV>added- tankign should be relatively the same, although the difference in tanking would come out in raids designed for each class. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Example- big nasty dragon, lets use a guard the monk might take to much of a spike dam hit and die.</DIV> <DIV>Example-MOTM type (swarm) raid- lets use a monk the gaurd takes way to much dam and dies from the 360 degrees of atks incoming</DIV> <DIV>Example- caster, lets use a paladin both the guard and monk are chained stuned and take way to much magic damage</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>how is that unfair?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>paladins while not tanking currently have some benefit in raids and they don't do alot of dps, but they are still useful</DIV> <DIV>Bruisers whose DPS is being nerfed belwo all scouts casters add a least a lil extra dps in raids</DIV> <DIV>Guards can shield others and absorb dam from thier group as well as be the premier defensive buffer, i do agree thoguh their dps should exceed equivalant crusaders, (and may need another useful tool when not tanking) Just becasue a class can't dps do substantial dps doesn tmena thier useless in raids.</DIV></DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-02-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:00 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Thats not called balance, thats called giving them a purpose, a niche which is exactally what is going on.</P> <P>What you need to start doing is refer to us, the Fighter Arch type and leave scouts and casters out of it cause your doing nothing at all by trying to relate your DPS to them because your in the Fighter Archtype.</P> <P>Your niche might just be swarm encounters, how do you know it isnt? Have you tryed that encounter on Beta? Have you spoken to any other Bruisers that has? Have you heard from anyone at all that has attempted that encounter on Test or Beta?</P> <P>The whole problem is Gungo is Brawlers dont belong in the Fighter archtype it doesnt mechanically fit. Its like trying to fit a Square into a Octagon hole, it doesnt fit. But SoE contuines to try and make it fit.</P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:28 AM</span>

Gaige

09-02-2005, 11:28 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Airoguy wrote:<BR>I want to know where people are getting this info from Beta, about who is doing more DPS, ect... Because after the first few Beta raids were parsed, guess who came out on top (I got my info from the Guardian channel) Monks, lol, believe it or not, Monks were parseing as high as anybody else on DPS, of course, that is not live yet, so we will just have to wait and see, but don't tell me that SK's/Bruisers/Zerkers are doing more DPS, unless you tell me how you know (or think) this. Of course you may be talking live, but I have heard that Monk DPS is better then all but maybe bruisers on live (could be wrong though) but live won't matter as of what, 10 days form now? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You are WRONG. For one melee was broken forever on beta. For two I've parsed and seen guildies parse plenty of beta raids (and other things) and I've NEVER been #1. Its normally Locks up front, then wizards then Illusionists (yes) and Coercers, then the scout classes, sometimes wardens, and then us. I was spamming non stop with lvl 60 master 1s and lvl 60 fabled weapons and barely breaking 100. Even after they fixed melee I STILL wasn't #1. There is no way a monk is going to be a scout/caster after revamp, no f'ing way at all. </P> <P>So all this proves is that you don't play beta and you talk to people who obviously don't know what they are talking about. Because I've PLAYED beta since day 1, through all the changes, and I can assure you no monk is going to lead damage on a raid unless he is the only one there.</P> <P>As for live I'm usually in the top 6 every raid. Warlock / Zerker / Monk, at least in my guild. I have better gear and a lot better spells than our 4 bruisers though, which is probably why.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Airoguy wrote:<BR>And what is up with you and names Taemek? Lol, it is Gaige, not Gage, and it is Gungo, not Gongo... or are you doing that on purpose? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually when I first played/posted my name was Gage. My forum name was also Gage. When I transferred to PF to join Fires of Heaven Gage was taken so I added the "I".</P> <P>AGAIN as for all of the "I don't want utility, I don't want DPS, I made a guardian to be the best tank". I don't CARE at ALL. SOE has made it very clear that all fighters are tanks (and not just group tanks). </P> <P>Put yourself in the other fighters shoes. Well OMG you can tank groups? Who cares so can you. You can SOLO!! Who cares so can you! (Sure maybe not as good, but you can. Besides I'm a raider, I don't solo).</P> <P>So since SOE has made it very clear we are all tanks, there can be no best. There can be niche bests, there can be bests vs this mob, but there can NOT be an overall, all the time, BEST. Because then you do not need the other 5. Why? Because sure we have utility and DPS but it doesn't mean squat. None of our utility is must have, and our DPS is easily replaced by 11 or 12 classes. </P> <P>So what SOE has to do (and what they are trying to do) is make the fighters tank as equally as they can, while probably giving each their niche. I do not want to tank as GOOD as a guardian. I want to NOT get ONE SHOT by mobs that guardians can tank.</P> <P>I don't care if I need more healing, use more mana, need a tighter strategy, etc etc.</P> <P>If a guardian can tank, I should be able to and be successful. My class choice shouldn't regulate what I can and can not tank before the fight even begins.</P> <P>Can a guardian be a "better" raid tank. Sure if that means they are easier to heal, more mana efficient, don't have to try as hard to keep aggro and offer easier strategies. I think we all know if that happens they'll be the premiere and go to raid tank anyway. I have no problem with that.</P> <P>As long as EVERY mob they can tank, ANY fighter can tank if they try. None of this getting one shot crap.</P> <P>If a guardian can tank Darathar so should a monk/bruiser/pally/sk/zerker.</P> <P>The end.<BR><BR></P> <P>Let me make it really easy to understand: Who is the best solo'ing fighter? Arguably what, the bruiser imho because of their 90 second heal and fear, and DPS right. Can every other fighter class solo? YES. Maybe not as fast. But they can. That is how raids should be.</P><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:39 PM</span>

Dfoley3

09-02-2005, 11:33 PM

The problem is 1) this is a guardian board, so of course all oppinions are bias to favor guards 2) as nice as tanking equality would be, its frankly impossible. For raiding, as is the only time an avoidance tank would be usefull is on a mob that has unmitigateable dmg and thus avoiding hits would be the only way to reduce dmg intake. That alone would cause more guardians to cry and whine that they picked a tank class and they cant even tank a mob because they cant mitigate it and thus other classes would be more benifical as a main tank (ironic eh?) 3)guardians need to wake up, u cant call invis or fd utility. not that genericly. For tanking id like this, 37-50... list any buff that adds any bonus to tanking. Then u can compare tank utility. Invis is not utility, not for monks with the high power cost upkeep. FD is utility but in no means is it tanking utility. Stonestance -adds 1000 ac for 30 sec, but stuns the monk for the 30 sec Winding Dragon - tank stance (identical to gaurds cept + mental resist and deflection) Dragon advance - 50% chance to proc agro (200 at master1 to a single target) Mend - 30% heal (mast1) on 3 min timer with self only nox cure Tsunami - 12 sec of 100% frontal reposte recast 3 min Skin like mountain - (not sure name but its lvl 40) adds 200 mitigation for 30 sec, roots monk constantly drains power 1 single target taunt 1 green group taunt rescue Thats the extent of our tank utility pony up on what 37-50 skills (in beta) yall have that have any bonus to tanking. Hp, sta, taunts, + mitigation, + parry etc, i know a lot of the "utility" is shared, all fighters have 1 single 1 green and recuse, all fighters get identical tank stances with dif resists. <div></div>

Gungo

09-02-2005, 11:35 PM

<DIV> <DIV>First no class should get an advantage over other classes in thier primary role saying gaurds lack utility so they shoul dbe better tanks is basically makiing all other fighters obsolete. </DIV> <DIV>We are playing semantics now and peopel will undoubtable argue one thing is better then another.</DIV> <DIV>But sure lets go thru the fluff u presume to be bralwer utility:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>feign death (great ability allows me to cheat death at times, situational usage though aoe mobs still kill me and /camp is mroe reliable in raids), </DIV> <DIV>Guard - shield buff (senitnal line)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser-Heal (single self heal on 1.5 min timer <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV>Guard- group HP buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser- dps buff</DIV> <DIV>Guard- group offensive buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- cure</DIV> <DIV>Guard - group mitigation buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- dps</DIV> <DIV>warrior- huge array of taunts</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>no i dont have group fake death, nor a lamborginih, nor life tap or wards or any other group buffs, where again is this massive utility i have over gaurds, whens the last time u asked a bruiser for thier buff?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Disclaimer- i did not include crusaders or other classes because this conversation is already convoluted and past the intial topic</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text>added- fighters need more utility but that utility should not be in the form or superior tanking. that utility shoudl come in the form of increased ranks in hold the line, or increase absorbtion of party dam, or shielding casters, a increase in dps above crusaders maybe. balanced should be made thru the secondary abilties of classes.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>call it a niche call it what ever you want, but at least give all fighters that niche that fits into thier archtype role.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>and whether u feel you should be alone in the fighter tree is nto the point, the game was designed w brawlers in the fighter tree alot of peopel choose to become fighters, soem just happen to choose avodiance over mitigation.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>My niche may be swarm fights you are right I haven't had the chance to tank that tpye raid yet. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>ADDED: i went thru both links you posted TAEM </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>1) the parse is dated before combat fixes as in beta comabt is still screwed up</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>2) i still dont agree with being a subpar tank because i have abit more dps. my increase dps makes up for the plethora of taunts and abilites you got. dps is the majority of my agro and its the majority of my utility. we both receive relatively the same amount of combat arts yours just happen to be group buffs and taunts while mine are atk arts. so where again should it balance. tankign should be balanced at the archtype lvl. brawler should not sacrifice thier ability to tank for any secondary ability.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>3) If they do acheive balance between tankign in the archtypes to be the same or relatively unnoticable i would liek them to include raids that benefit each class of fighter. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:03 PM</span>

Gungo

09-02-2005, 11:49 PM

<DIV>"2) as nice as tanking equality would be, its frankly impossible. For raiding, as is the only time an avoidance tank would be usefull is on a mob that has unmitigateable dmg and thus avoiding hits would be the only way to reduce dmg intake. That alone would cause more guardians to cry and whine that they picked a tank class and they cant even tank a mob because they cant mitigate it and thus other classes would be more benifical as a main tank (ironic eh?)"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I disagree situational tanking is easily accomplished in the design of the raid mob. I'll give three examples for brawler just off the top of my head i am sure a creatvie designer could make more.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) swarm mobs - Currently no other tank can avoid 360 degree, have an ecnounter that swarms the mt, have the AI create 50% of those mobs as scout types that try to flank/backstab have thier accuracy rate about mid range w/o blowing otu avodiance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2) Brawler mob- thsi mob will cast a npc version of the crushign flurry atk ever 10 secs, ( crushign flurry is a bruiser atk that has 8 consecutive atks if any of the inital atks miss the remaining atks will all miss if all 8 atks connect the mob gets a strength bonus that lasts for 30secs increasing its subsequent hits) thsi will create an artificial dam spiek on plate tanks since they will avodi less they will more liekly take alot mroe dam. whereas a avodiance tank will have a greater chance at avoiding the majoity of the hits.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>3) scout type - This mob liek you said has a atk that ignore a portion of the mititgation, scout type poisen procs etc</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>another type of mob i liek to see a mob that roots the tank, shadow steps, and mem blurs his agro</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR><BR> </DIV>

JNewby

09-03-2005, 12:01 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <P>I know air but thats the only way these gaurds cna defend my point by making it seem like i am askign to be the best at everything. </P> <P>I know generalizing again i am but just trying to sum up the thoughts</P> <P>guardians point: </P> <P>we don't have utility (when in fact u do)</P> <P>we dont want utility</P> <P>we want to be best raid tank</P> <P>Guardians beign the best raid tank is equal, other fighters don't need to raid tank they have other utilites</P> <P> </P> <P>My point:</P> <P>You do have utility (you may need more)</P> <P>thats your choice not to want utility, but you shoud have it so that gaurds don't pidgeon hole themselves</P> <P>But being the best raid tank all the time is unbalnced because no other tank cna perform thier archtype role anytime during raids</P> <P>brawlers other utility during raid is ? the highest fighter class dps so effectivly 9th best direct dps w no utility</P> <DIV> <DIV>added- tankign should be relatively the same, although the difference in tanking would come out in raids designed for each class. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Example- big nasty dragon, lets use a guard the monk might take to much of a spike dam hit and die.</DIV> <DIV>Example-MOTM type (swarm) raid- lets use a monk the gaurd takes way to much dam and dies from the 360 degrees of atks incoming</DIV> <DIV>Example- caster, lets use a paladin both the guard and monk are chained stuned and take way to much magic damage</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>how is that unfair?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>paladins while not tanking currently have some benefit in raids and they don't do alot of dps, but they are still useful</DIV> <DIV>Bruisers whose DPS is being nerfed belwo all scouts casters add a least a lil extra dps in raids</DIV> <DIV>Guards can shield others and absorb dam from thier group as well as be the premier defensive buffer, i do agree thoguh their dps should exceed equivalant crusaders, (and may need another useful tool when not tanking) Just becasue a class can't dps do substantial dps doesn tmena thier useless in raids.</DIV></DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-02-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:00 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>thats all fine and dandy but one guards chose a guard cause they could tnak the best... monks/bruisers chose thres cause they have fun spells do dps and can tank... in yer idea of each tank can tank certain things better... it makes being a guard no diff then being a monk/bruiser </P> <P> </P> <P>so in aaddition to the fact taht we chose a class that well I knew were raid tanks... and that is the only rteason I chose it... I really wanted to be a zerker... but I wantd to make a guild and MT for it... not only that but now every other tank class will be tnaking as much AND do more dmg and have more fun/usefull abilities.... again the main point is all guards do is tnak... I leveled up to 50 with no fun little spells no dmg and mostly boring gameplay.. but I did it... even now if we get feign death and such it wont be exciting... cuase we will have missed 50 levels of playing with such things... I dont want utility cause I didnt sign up for utility.. you however signed up for what you got.. and now you want the rules changed.. that is the problem... then to the age old point of hey then all fighetr types will only be allowed on ones they can tank... so we will be bench warmers... as it stands now every fighter class has a role</P> <P> </P>

JNewby

09-03-2005, 12:06 AM

You are WRONG. For one melee was broken forever on beta. For two I've parsed and seen guildies parse plenty of beta raids (and other things) and I've NEVER been #1. Its normally Locks up front, then wizards then Illusionists (yes) and Coercers, then the scout classes, sometimes wardens, and then us. I was spamming non stop with lvl 60 master 1s and lvl 60 fabled weapons and barely breaking 100. Even after they fixed melee I STILL wasn't #1. There is no way a monk is going to be a scout/caster after revamp, no f'ing way at all. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>now that is jsut stupid cause then scouts would have to talk about how can they tank... why is it monks dps the same and they cant tank... u cant tank and dps like them... I mean comone now</DIV>

Gungo

09-03-2005, 12:09 AM

<DIV>"in yer idea of each tank can tank certain things better... it makes being a guard no diff then being a monk/bruiser "</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>yup thats what i want</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The difference should be the flavor of the tank. </DIV> <DIV>You think monk types are cool and do a we bit more dam choose them</DIV> <DIV>You think knights are cool and like heals/lifetaps thats your choice</DIV> <DIV>You think guards are cool and like using shield spells cto defend people like a bodyguard, taking dam for the group keeping peopel alive, buffing fighters w some of the best tank spells again your choice</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>we all chose fighters. we all wanted to be tanks. you don't loose your ability to tank. But its like kindegarden again you need to share, because we all chose the same thing.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>you however signed up for what you got.. and now you want the rules changed..</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>wrogn i signed up to be a fighter that can tank... where did it say sorry guards are better i missed that memo... the rules are not beign changed buddy the game is being changed to meet the rules.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:12 PM</span>

JNewby

09-03-2005, 12:10 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Airoguy wrote:<BR>I want to know where people are getting this info from Beta, about who is doing more DPS, ect... Because after the first few Beta raids were parsed, guess who came out on top (I got my info from the Guardian channel) Monks, lol, believe it or not, Monks were parseing as high as anybody else on DPS, of course, that is not live yet, so we will just have to wait and see, but don't tell me that SK's/Bruisers/Zerkers are doing more DPS, unless you tell me how you know (or think) this. Of course you may be talking live, but I have heard that Monk DPS is better then all but maybe bruisers on live (could be wrong though) but live won't matter as of what, 10 days form now? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You are WRONG. For one melee was broken forever on beta. For two I've parsed and seen guildies parse plenty of beta raids (and other things) and I've NEVER been #1. Its normally Locks up front, then wizards then Illusionists (yes) and Coercers, then the scout classes, sometimes wardens, and then us. I was spamming non stop with lvl 60 master 1s and lvl 60 fabled weapons and barely breaking 100. Even after they fixed melee I STILL wasn't #1. There is no way a monk is going to be a scout/caster after revamp, no f'ing way at all. </P> <P>So all this proves is that you don't play beta and you talk to people who obviously don't know what they are talking about. Because I've PLAYED beta since day 1, through all the changes, and I can assure you no monk is going to lead damage on a raid unless he is the only one there.</P> <P>As for live I'm usually in the top 6 every raid. Warlock / Zerker / Monk, at least in my guild. I have better gear and a lot better spells than our 4 bruisers though, which is probably why.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Airoguy wrote:<BR>And what is up with you and names Taemek? Lol, it is Gaige, not Gage, and it is Gungo, not Gongo... or are you doing that on purpose? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually when I first played/posted my name was Gage. My forum name was also Gage. When I transferred to PF to join Fires of Heaven Gage was taken so I added the "I".</P> <P>AGAIN as for all of the "I don't want utility, I don't want DPS, I made a guardian to be the best tank". I don't CARE at ALL. SOE has made it very clear that all fighters are tanks (and not just group tanks). </P> <P>Put yourself in the other fighters shoes. Well OMG you can tank groups? Who cares so can you. You can SOLO!! Who cares so can you! (Sure maybe not as good, but you can. Besides I'm a raider, I don't solo).</P> <P>So since SOE has made it very clear we are all tanks, there can be no best. There can be niche bests, there can be bests vs this mob, but there can NOT be an overall, all the time, BEST. Because then you do not need the other 5. Why? Because sure we have utility and DPS but it doesn't mean squat. None of our utility is must have, and our DPS is easily replaced by 11 or 12 classes. </P> <P>So what SOE has to do (and what they are trying to do) is make the fighters tank as equally as they can, while probably giving each their niche. I do not want to tank as GOOD as a guardian. I want to NOT get ONE SHOT by mobs that guardians can tank.</P> <P>I don't care if I need more healing, use more mana, need a tighter strategy, etc etc.</P> <P>If a guardian can tank, I should be able to and be successful. My class choice shouldn't regulate what I can and can not tank before the fight even begins.</P> <P>Can a guardian be a "better" raid tank. Sure if that means they are easier to heal, more mana efficient, don't have to try as hard to keep aggro and offer easier strategies. I think we all know if that happens they'll be the premiere and go to raid tank anyway. I have no problem with that.</P> <P>As long as EVERY mob they can tank, ANY fighter can tank if they try. None of this getting one shot crap.</P> <P>If a guardian can tank Darathar so should a monk/bruiser/pally/sk/zerker.</P> <P>The end.<BR><BR></P> <P>Let me make it really easy to understand: Who is the best solo'ing fighter? Arguably what, the bruiser imho because of their 90 second heal and fear, and DPS right. Can every other fighter class solo? YES. Maybe not as fast. But they can. That is how raids should be.</P> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>09-02-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:39 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>they all can tnak it... they jsut have a higher chance of dieing is all... and again it goes abck to guards have nothing else.. and dont want anyhitng else... hell any class can tank like I said but the only reason it isnt tried is cuase there isw always a guard around

JNewby

09-03-2005, 12:13 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dfoley323 wrote:<BR>The problem is <BR><BR>1) this is a guardian board, so of course all oppinions are bias to favor guards<BR><BR>2) as nice as tanking equality would be, its frankly impossible. For raiding, as is the only time an avoidance tank would be usefull is on a mob that has unmitigateable dmg and thus avoiding hits would be the only way to reduce dmg intake. That alone would cause more guardians to cry and whine that they picked a tank class and they cant even tank a mob because they cant mitigate it and thus other classes would be more benifical as a main tank (ironic eh?)<BR><BR>3)guardians need to wake up, u cant call invis or fd utility. not that genericly. For tanking id like this, 37-50... list any buff that adds any bonus to tanking. Then u can compare tank utility. Invis is not utility, not for monks with the high power cost upkeep. FD is utility but in no means is it tanking utility. <BR><BR>Stonestance -adds 1000 ac for 30 sec, but stuns the monk for the 30 sec<BR>Winding Dragon - tank stance (identical to gaurds cept + mental resist and deflection)<BR>Dragon advance - 50% chance to proc agro (200 at master1 to a single target)<BR>Mend - 30% heal (mast1) on 3 min timer with self only nox cure <BR>Tsunami - 12 sec of 100% frontal reposte recast 3 min<BR>Skin like mountain - (not sure name but its lvl 40) adds 200 mitigation for 30 sec, roots monk constantly drains power<BR>1 single target taunt<BR>1 green group taunt<BR>rescue <BR><BR><BR>Thats the extent of our tank utility<BR>pony up on what 37-50 skills (in beta) yall have that have any bonus to tanking. Hp, sta, taunts, + mitigation, + parry etc, i know a lot of the "utility" is shared, all fighters have 1 single 1 green and recuse, all fighters get identical tank stances with dif resists.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>wow invis sint a utility eh?? hrm I wish someone would have told me that when I had to wait 2 times as long to get my prismatic while all scouts and mages were self invising down... and I had to sometimes fight with full group down or get a group invsier... <BR>

-Aonein-

09-03-2005, 12:15 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV>"2) as nice as tanking equality would be, its frankly impossible. For raiding, as is the only time an avoidance tank would be usefull is on a mob that has unmitigateable dmg and thus avoiding hits would be the only way to reduce dmg intake. That alone would cause more guardians to cry and whine that they picked a tank class and they cant even tank a mob because they cant mitigate it and thus other classes would be more benifical as a main tank (ironic eh?)"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I disagree situational tanking is easily accomplished in the design of the raid mob. I'll give three examples for brawler just off the top of my head i am sure a creatvie designer could make more.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) swarm mobs - Currently no other tank can avoid 360 degree, have an ecnounter that swarms the mt, have the AI create 50% of those mobs as scout types that try to flank/backstab have thier accuracy rate about mid range w/o blowing otu avodiance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>2) Brawler mob- thsi mob will cast a npc version of the crushign flurry atk ever 10 secs, ( crushign flurry is a bruiser atk that has 8 consecutive atks if any of the inital atks miss the remaining atks will all miss if all 8 atks connect the mob gets a strength bonus that lasts for 30secs increasing its subsequent hits) thsi will create an artificial dam spiek on plate tanks since they will avodi less they will more liekly take alot mroe dam. whereas a avodiance tank will have a greater chance at avoiding the majoity of the hits.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>3) scout type - This mob liek you said has a atk that ignore a portion of the mititgation, scout type poisen procs etc</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>another type of mob i liek to see a mob that roots the tank, shadow steps, and mem blurs his agro</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR><BR> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Over the next few years that this game expands now after the combat revamp goes through, the Fighter archtype is just going to have to get use to situational tanking in raid enviroments and sitting on the bench when there not needed. Its a stupid idea to be honest, but unless SoE increase the amount of people that you can take on a raid, thats how i see it with each and every class having a niche in some way or another on Test and Beta. I really hope this isnt the case and doesnt happen. Well i hope they increase the max amount of peopleo n a raid, but not make them situational.</P> <P>I understand your idea in reguards to #2, i understood it ages ago when you and Airo were talking about it, but thats just a situational mob Gungo, Guards will still be the most prefered MT of all apart from when Avoidance tanks or Paladins step in on a very select few raid boss mobs that are specially designed for them. </P> <P>But then you also have to ask, that what if they have a big hard hitting mob thats intended for a Guard to MT and then a swarm encounter pops out to attack the raid? Your going to find yourself needing both a Mitigation and Avoidance tank on the same raid.</P> <P>Or your fighting a Swarm raid encounter and a bunch of Magic / Divine caster mobs pop that require a Pallie to tank and then after he enguages those the big guy pops and requires a Guard to jump in and take him on. All this going on at all the same time.</P> <P>Thats how you make real raids. Situational is boring and not very well thought out to be honest, i hope SoE chose the later then the easy road.</P><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:17 AM</span>

JNewby

09-03-2005, 12:19 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV>"in yer idea of each tank can tank certain things better... it makes being a guard no diff then being a monk/bruiser "</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>yup thats what i want</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The difference should be the flavor of the tank. </DIV> <DIV>You think monk types are cool and do a we bit more dam choose them</DIV> <DIV>You think knights are cool and like heals/lifetaps thats your choice</DIV> <DIV>You think guards are cool and like using shield spells cto defend people like a bodyguard, taking dam for the group keeping peopel alive, buffing fighters w some of the best tank spells again your choice</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>we all chose fighters. we all wanted to be tanks. you don't loose your ability to tank. But its like kindegarden again you need to share, because we all chose the same thing.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>you however signed up for what you got.. and now you want the rules changed..</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>wrogn i signed up to be a fighter that can tank... where did it say sorry guards are better i missed that memo... the rules are not beign changed buddy the game is being changed to meet the rules.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-02-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:12 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>ok so still guards = boring less dmg and then same tanks... and no special spells ie heal and FD

Gungo

09-03-2005, 12:22 AM

<DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______--</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>feign death (great ability allows me to cheat death at times, situational usage though aoe mobs still kill me and /camp is mroe reliable in raids), </DIV> <DIV>Guard - shield buff (senitnal line)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser-Heal (single self heal on 1.5 min timer <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV>Guard- group HP buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser- dps buff</DIV> <DIV>Guard- group offensive buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- cure</DIV> <DIV>Guard - group mitigation buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- dps</DIV> <DIV>warrior- huge array of taunts</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>no i dont have group fake death, nor a lamborginih, nor life tap or wards or any other group buffs, where again is this massive utility i have over gaurds, whens the last time u asked a bruiser for thier buff?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Disclaimer- i did not include crusaders or other classes because this conversation is already convoluted and past the intial topic</DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Seems to me guards have something else. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>as well as being the best tank...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so once again all classes should be balanced by arch type .. all shoudl tank equally.. its their secondary effects that shoudl seperate themselves and be balanced by themselves... sacrifice of ones role should not be considered in secondary choices. You don't want more utility because you are unbalanced. gaurdians imho need utility because all archtypes need to tank as well as each other. </DIV></DIV>

dparker7

09-03-2005, 12:26 AM

So, why are there 2 subclasses in the Mage and Scout archtypes that arent primarily DPS (chanters and bards), but there cant be Fighter subclasses that arent primarily tanks?

Gungo

09-03-2005, 12:30 AM

<DIV>Over the next few years that this game expands now after the combat revamp goes through, the Fighter archtype is just going to have to get use to situational tanking in raid enviroments and sitting on the bench when there not needed. Its a stupid idea to be honest, but unless SoE increase the amount of people that you can take on a raid, thats how i see it with each and every class having a niche in some way or another on Test and Beta. I really hope this isnt the case and doesnt happen. Well i hope they increase the max amount of peopleo n a raid, but not make them situational. <P>I understand your idea in reguards to #2, i understood it ages ago when you and Airo were talking about it, but thats just a situational mob Gungo, Guards will still be the most prefered MT of all apart from when Avoidance tanks or Paladins step in on a very select few raid boss mobs that are specially designed for them. </P> <P>But then you also have to ask, that what if they have a big hard hitting mob thats intended for a Guard to MT and then a swarm encounter pops out to attack the raid? Your going to find yourself needing both a Mitigation and Avoidance tank on the same raid.</P> <P>Or your fighting a Swarm raid encounter and a bunch of Magic / Divine caster mobs pop that require a Pallie to tank and then after he enguages those the big guy pops and requires a Guard to jump in and take him on. All this going on at all the same time.</P> <P>Thats how you make real raids. Situational is boring and not very well thought out to be honest, i hope SoE chose the later then the easy road.</P> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________</P> <P>True Taem and that is what i want, i want the pally to tank the caster, the gaurd on the dragon, and the bruiser on the swarm mob. this will be balnced as all classes will be able to fulfill thier role and thsi can all happen on the same raid as well.</P> <P>and who when did i ever say the guard can't tank the swarm mob... he has the ability too there is no lock from him trying although he shoudl take considerably more dam then the bruiser, just as in live i take considerably mroe dam tankign thenn a gaurd.</P> <P>finally no one should sit on that bench that is where our secondary abilites coem in .. you see while that brawler is tanking the swarm mob the gaurd is also in the mt group w his hp buffs, his mtitgation buffs, and his defensive and shiled buffs on the brawler. ATM in beta guards are one of the best MT buffers so they are NEEDED on raids. and crusaders they have thier Miti buff, thier heals or power taps. so everyone has a need to be in raid. </P></DIV>

Gungo

09-03-2005, 12:36 AM

<DIV>djparker wrote:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, why are there 2 subclasses in the Mage and Scout archtypes that arent primarily DPS (chanters and bards), but there cant be Fighter subclasses that arent primarily tanks? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>actually i answered this already they do add a tremdous amount of dps just indirectly</DIV> <DIV>our illusionist is always in dps group for haste and power regen for combat arts, the dps they add to raid is huge.</DIV> <DIV>in fact on beta they removed a bit of their CC and gave them even more direct dam so illusionsist are currently parsing in the top tier of dps. this only further proves my point that classes should be balanced at the archtype lvl and should not give up thier primary ability for any secodnary abilites. Further more they made illusinist power gen a group buff increasing thier ability to stack. </DIV> <DIV>the same can be said for scouts as troubs are nwo the caster dps buffers and dirges the melee buffers</DIV>

Gaige

09-03-2005, 01:14 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> dparker713 wrote:<BR>So, why are there 2 subclasses in the Mage and Scout archtypes that arent primarily DPS (chanters and bards), but there cant be Fighter subclasses that arent primarily tanks? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Our Illusionist and Coercers are putting up 400+ dps on raid encounters, just behind Warlocks and Wizards. I'm not sure on troub/dirge numbers, but I'm sure they are doing okay as well.<BR>

blueduckie

09-03-2005, 01:45 AM

Gaige you are such a tool. Monks can tank raid content atm. Just because you cant tank all go hump a cactus. Your coments are lame, gungho also saying cant perform your primary role. It is bs what was with posting you tanking zalak. You arnt even fabled out. So i dont see what you are trying to make an excuse for. You think you should have alot more than you really should. Your primary role is tanking but near the bottom of the tanking chain. You should be able to tank most mobs but no reason to make all be able to tank all monks other abilities should be proof enough of why that should be. Chose to have higher 2ndary abilities than other fighters to lose a little of your primary role. That is exactly how every other arch type works. Reactives still own regens even after revamp. So dont wanna hear direct heals being evened out a healing balance. Your smokin crack or suckin on devs if you cant understand that. 2ndary effects in EVERY arch type draw a pecking order with primary role. Why should fighters be the exception. Oh i know why because monkeys like Moorgard play a brawler also. Forgot the developers are bias not only to a class but who puts out for them. Dont forget to do your daily PM to moorgard to make monks tank better gaige.

Gaige

09-03-2005, 02:00 AM

<P>Blue just thought I'd let you know I reported you, as making references to me doing sexual things with the devs is amazingly uncalled for. You should be banned. </P> <P>But anyway, I don't care what you think.</P> <P>Thanks.</P>

blueduckie

09-03-2005, 02:02 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV> <DIV>First no class should get an advantage over other classes in thier primary role saying gaurds lack utility so they shoul dbe better tanks is basically makiing all other fighters obsolete. </DIV> <DIV>We are playing semantics now and peopel will undoubtable argue one thing is better then another.</DIV> <DIV>But sure lets go thru the fluff u presume to be bralwer utility:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>feign death (great ability allows me to cheat death at times, situational usage though aoe mobs still kill me and /camp is mroe reliable in raids), </DIV> <DIV>Guard - shield buff (senitnal line)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser-Heal (single self heal on 1.5 min timer <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV>Guard- group HP buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser- dps buff</DIV> <DIV>Guard- group offensive buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- cure</DIV> <DIV>Guard - group mitigation buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- dps</DIV> <DIV>warrior- huge array of taunts</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The problem with that list Gun is those "shield buffs" as you put them do no good with them not mitigating off of us on dmg we take. How is that a help? A caster for example i have seen hit for 9k in 1 shot by angler. When we intercept 100% of that we take the dmg theyd take. 9k dmg. They git hit again and we intercept it we just took another 4-5k shot from regular melee. Oooo and dont forget your skill shrug off which is better than our "shield buffs" Our huge array of taunts isnt bad but when you do less dps it is needed so ill give the taunts and dps a fair angler. Your heal doesnt make up for a group hp buff tho. Perhaps if he had a self raw hp buff also id agree or if the buff gave guardian twice as much as rest of the group. They are nerfing our mitigation buff to almost being worthless. Last i looked i believe it was a last 30 seconds with 1.5 min recast. The way it is currently is fine. However they are nerfing it and that is what you dont understand. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The Main complaint gaige started out with was our hp / avoidance. So not only have they nerfed out hp to being a lower base than brawlers which is bs and negates are group hp buff. They are nerfing our mitigation on every buff except our stance which they are taking from our stance being the only one to add mit to all fighters getting mit on it. It isnt the complaint abotu what we have now. IMO nerf defense buffs make our hp buffs not stack give light armor etc a small mitigation buff raise hp by 5% on bruiser 6% on monk 7% on SK 8% on Paladin Zerker 9% Guardian 10% put the dps caps on and call it a day. However they couldnt make it simple. They had to complicate it. They could have eassily rescaled things but now they arnt just rescaling they are changing and having to add with out doing it right. There should be small advantages for each class in areas and it is my personal opinion guardian should have a small edge in tanking. When brawlers can already tank raid mobs should quit lieing and say you cant do your primary function and raid tank tho because that is a bunch of BS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P></DIV> <P><BR> </P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

blueduckie

09-03-2005, 02:05 AM

Meh could care less what you think gage you try to ruin a perfectly fine game with your lies. You try to justfiy things when they shift in monk favor. You dont care about equality or the game just yourself. It is obvious by the posts and quotes have seen on beta. The changes started out fine and have now shifted to crap. DoF is almost here and the revamp is no where near actually being worth anything now.

Gaige

09-03-2005, 02:05 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> blueduckie wrote: <P>The problem with that list Gun is those "shield buffs" as you put them do no good with them not mitigating off of us on dmg we take. How is that a help? A caster for example i have seen hit for 9k in 1 shot by angler. <FONT color=#ffff00>Pretty sure when we were testing Noah said those buffs and their upgrades do factor in his mitigation now. Even the one where he takes 100% of my intended damage I believe.</FONT></P> <P>When brawlers can already tank raid mobs should quit lieing and say you cant do your primary function and raid tank tho because that is a bunch of BS. <FONT color=#ffff00>Zalak isn't a 57+++ x4 contested now is he?</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

JNewby

09-03-2005, 02:06 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Blue just thought I'd let you know I reported you, as making references to me doing sexual things with the devs is amazingly uncalled for. You should be banned. </P> <P>But anyway, I don't care what you think.</P> <P>Thanks.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>bah how immature... I mean wha he said was immature as well.. but telling is same... anyhow yeah that sit

Shizzirri

09-03-2005, 02:07 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> blueduckie wrote:<BR>Gaige you are such a tool. Monks can tank raid content atm. Just because you cant tank all go hump a cactus. Your coments are lame, gungho also saying cant perform your primary role. It is bs what was with posting you tanking zalak. You arnt even fabled out. So i dont see what you are trying to make an excuse for. You think you should have alot more than you really should. Your primary role is tanking but near the bottom of the tanking chain. You should be able to tank most mobs but no reason to make all be able to tank all monks other abilities should be proof enough of why that should be. Chose to have higher 2ndary abilities than other fighters to lose a little of your primary role. That is exactly how every other arch type works. Reactives still own regens even after revamp. So dont wanna hear direct heals being evened out a healing balance. Your smokin crack or suckin on devs if you cant understand that. 2ndary effects in EVERY arch type draw a pecking order with primary role. Why should fighters be the exception. Oh i know why because monkeys like Moorgard play a brawler also. Forgot the developers are bias not only to a class but who puts out for them. Dont forget to do your daily PM to moorgard to make monks tank better gaige. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Does this mean that even guardians have to be fabled out to tank raids? If so I better tell the berserk krathuk and nagalik (and yes we've killed both) that next time so they ban me from the zone the minute I try to get in, cause both the MT's in my guild (myself and another) aren't 100% fabled either. And MG plays a bruiser not a monk there's a difference.<BR>

Gaige

09-03-2005, 02:08 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR><BR>bah how immature... I mean wha he said was immature as well.. but telling is same... anyhow yeah that sit <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sorry if I don't agree that posting on these forums should mean I allow myself to be sexually harassed (as well as the dev team) because my opinion is different than someone elses.</P> <P>In fact he did it earlier and I ignored it, but its quite obvious he doesn't have the maturity to have this debate w/o insulting me with his vulgar rants, so I made use of the button.</P> <P>That's what its there for, right?<BR></P>

JNewby

09-03-2005, 02:10 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JNewby wrote:<BR><BR>bah how immature... I mean wha he said was immature as well.. but telling is same... anyhow yeah that sit <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sorry if I don't agree that posting on these forums should mean I allow myself to be sexually harassed (as well as the dev team) because my opinion is different than someone elses.</P> <P>In fact he did it earlier and I ignored it, but its quite obvious he doesn't have the maturity to have this debate w/o insulting me with his vulgar rants, so I made use of the button.</P> <P>That's what its there for, right?<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I dont know I just ignore insults usually insteaad of trying to ban people... ultimatly he will look weaker for how he acts and u will gain ground on the forums... is all

Gungo

09-03-2005, 02:10 AM

<DIV>"Your coments are lame, gungho also saying cant perform your primary role. It is bs what was with posting you tanking zalak. You arnt even fabled out. "</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>where did i say i have personnaly tanked zalak?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Chose to have higher 2ndary abilities than other fighters to lose a little of your primary role."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>really your post is hard to follow, but if my secodnary abilites of dps amkes me lose my primary roll of tanking then gaurds secondary abilites to taunt or buff hp/miti greater then me should do the same to thier primary role, The point is that is wrong it has been stated all classes are balanced at thier archtype and all will perform equally. I shouldn't trade up my tanking for any abilites. and for classes to remain balanced then we all need to tank equally.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Reactives still own regens even after revamp. So dont wanna hear direct heals being evened out a healing balance." </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>and yet preists complain too, and the devs have stated the same for them they will be balnced at the archtype and they willl all heal equally (equal does not neccesarily mean the same )</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Nice namecalling and whiny post btw</DIV>

Gungo

09-03-2005, 02:35 AM

<DIV> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV> <DIV>First no class should get an advantage over other classes in thier primary role saying gaurds lack utility so they shoul dbe better tanks is basically makiing all other fighters obsolete. </DIV> <DIV>We are playing semantics now and peopel will undoubtable argue one thing is better then another.</DIV> <DIV>But sure lets go thru the fluff u presume to be bralwer utility:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>feign death (great ability allows me to cheat death at times, situational usage though aoe mobs still kill me and /camp is mroe reliable in raids), </DIV> <DIV>Guard - shield buff (senitnal line)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser-Heal (single self heal on 1.5 min timer <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV>Guard- group HP buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser- dps buff</DIV> <DIV>Guard- group offensive buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- cure</DIV> <DIV>Guard - group mitigation buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>bruiser- dps</DIV> <DIV>warrior- huge array of taunts</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The problem with that list Gun is those "shield buffs" as you put them do no good with them not mitigating off of us on dmg we take. How is that a help? A caster for example i have seen hit for 9k in 1 shot by angler. When we intercept 100% of that we take the dmg theyd take. 9k dmg. They git hit again and we intercept it we just took another 4-5k shot from regular melee. </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cc0000>Great and how useful is fake death when a mob is aoe'ing for 2k a tick. My ability has a chance to fail yours doesn't big help on tanking for both of us huh</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oooo and dont forget your skill shrug off which is better than our "shield buffs" </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cc0000>Really well don;t forget about your parry buff lien for others or group dam absorbtion. Last timesomeone asked for shrug off was in february before the nerf. </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Our huge array of taunts isnt bad but when you do less dps it is needed so ill give the taunts and dps a fair angler. </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#cc0000>Well at least we agree although i don't expect everyone too feel the same. its the flavor of the class i guess</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Your heal doesnt make up for a group hp buff tho. Perhaps if he had a self raw hp buff also id agree or if the buff gave guardian twice as much as rest of the group. <FONT color=#cc0000>Come now you honestly think a 1.5 min self-only heal for 30-40% is a better utility then a large group hp buff. which one would you rather have and it now costs power on beta</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They are nerfing our mitigation buff to almost being worthless. Last i looked i believe it was a last 30 seconds with 1.5 min recast. The way it is currently is fine. However they are nerfing it and that is what you dont understand. <FONT color=#cc0000>Well its still bettter then a cure self that has only so far removed the mezz from chests. (disclaimer i havent tested the new 50+ cure againts raid mobs in DoF)</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The Main complaint gaige started out with was our hp / avoidance. So not only have they nerfed out hp to being a lower base than brawlers which is bs and negates are group hp buff. <FONT color=#cc0000>although at 50 fully buffed you still have a decent hp buff lead on brawlers</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They are nerfing our mitigation on every buff except our stance which they are taking from our stance being the only one to add mit to all fighters getting mit on it. <FONT color=#cc0000>and yet i dont get any avodiance/defelction buffs at all except my stance</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It isnt the complaint abotu what we have now. IMO nerf defense buffs make our hp buffs not stack give light armor etc a small mitigation buff raise hp by 5% on bruiser 6% on monk 7% on SK 8% on Paladin Zerker 9% Guardian 10% put the dps caps on and call it a day. However they couldnt make it simple. They had to complicate it. They could have eassily rescaled things but now they arnt just rescaling they are changing and having to add with out doing it right. There should be small advantages for each class in areas and it is my personal opinion guardian should have a small edge in tanking. When brawlers can already tank raid mobs should quit lieing and say you cant do your primary function and raid tank tho because that is a bunch of BS. <FONT color=#cc0000>I didn't say we can't tank raid mobs (not all at least) i said we are at a huge and noticable disadvantage and we should not have that disadvantage. and once again i am all for situational tanking in raids.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV>

Airog

09-03-2005, 02:38 AM

Wow, gungo you are a fast typer.

ravenhe

09-03-2005, 03:34 AM

<DIV>Gungo and Gaige i will say this only once you say your skills are useless i wonder if you read them before you picked your class and if you did and think they are so stupid then for what reason you didnt roll a guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One look at your list of skill folks and you had enough to know that you would had never have as much taunts and guardians and that you wouldnt have heavy defense buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you didnt check that before you rolled your bruiser monk and found at lvl 50 that is not what you expected dont blame us, SOE, the cat the press the wrong button an accepted your toon in the wrong class. If that the case stop whining and reroll if you feel that unhappy although you should have done it long ago.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Otherwise if you did read the list of skill of all fighters and made your choice based on them, then stop whining and ranting and accept that nothing in that frigging list compare the guardian one comparing DEF buffs therefore you would never have as much mitigation and defense as we do ...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Accept what you did and stop bothering the people that are clear about the why they picked a guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Complaining about your current spells at lvl 50 is rather stupid imo</DIV>

Gaige

09-03-2005, 03:50 AM

<P>I don't think they are useless, I use them all the time. They don't help tanking much though.</P> <P>Its easy to say be happy with your choice when your the best class at your role, but try with the shoe on the other foot ;p</P>

ShinigamiD

09-03-2005, 03:56 AM

<DIV>Brawlers have the easiest time soloing of all the tanks, they deal the most DPS, are perfectly capable of tanking any group content in the game. With the revamp they become even more desirable for any XP content, more so than any plate tank. But you wouldn't know it from listening to Gaige whine and cry like the nerfherder he is.</DIV>

Gaige

09-03-2005, 04:05 AM

<P>/shrug</P> <P>I've been talking about raid content. Single group content has been fine since release.</P> <P>Also all fighters can solo and tank single group content anyway.</P>

Gungo

09-03-2005, 04:43 AM

<DIV> <DIV>Gungo and Gaige i will say this only once you say your skills are useless i wonder if you read them before you picked your class and if you did and think they are so stupid then for what reason you didnt roll a guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One look at your list of skill folks and you had enough to know that you would had never have as much taunts and guardians and that you wouldnt have heavy defense buffs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you didnt check that before you rolled your bruiser monk and found at lvl 50 that is not what you expected dont blame us, SOE, the cat the press the wrong button an accepted your toon in the wrong class. If that the case stop whining and reroll if you feel that unhappy although you should have done it long ago.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Otherwise if you did read the list of skill of all fighters and made your choice based on them, then stop whining and ranting and accept that nothing in that frigging list compare the guardian one comparing DEF buffs therefore you would never have as much mitigation and defense as we do ...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Accept what you did and stop bothering the people that are clear about the why they picked a guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Complaining about your current spells at lvl 50 is rather stupid imo</DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I never said i wanted ur defensive buffs... I will get them when you buff me when i maintank for raids </DIV></DIV>

dparker7

09-03-2005, 04:46 AM

Umm, taunts and self buffs are not utility. They are part of the primary role of tanking. Its impossible to seperate self buffs and mitigation and avoidance. Its also rather silly to call taunts utility. Agro management is part and parcel with tanking.

Gaige

09-03-2005, 04:51 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> dparker713 wrote:<BR>Umm, taunts and self buffs are not utility. <FONT color=#ffff00>They are part of the primary role of tanking.</FONT> Its impossible to seperate self buffs and mitigation and avoidance. Its also rather silly to call taunts utility. Agro management is part and parcel with tanking. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Then all tanks should get them, correct? That means your self/group buffs and taunts should be copied to every fighter and then SOE should give you some different utility to help you stand out.<BR>

Gungo

09-03-2005, 05:01 AM

<DIV>Umm, taunts and self buffs are not utility. They are part of the primary role of tanking. Its impossible to seperate self buffs and mitigation and avoidance. Its also rather silly to call taunts utility. Agro management is part and parcel with tanking. </DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i disagree as well taunting is utility like my dps is suppose to compensate for my lack of taunts as has been stated many times.</DIV> <DIV>taunts are utility and no 2 types of taunts are equal soem stun, some interupt, some can be cast thru stuns, some are encounter based aoe, and some aree pbaoe based. guards have the most variety in taunts i don't want tautns my dps compensates for my lack of taunts. i want equal tanking.</DIV>

-Aonein-

09-03-2005, 05:16 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gungo wrote:</P> <DIV> i <FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG><U>want</U></STRONG></FONT> equal tanking.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>What you want and what is good for the game is two different things.</P> <P>Your a Bruiser, top of the line DPS in the Fighter archtype.</P> <P>Like its been stated before many times, Damage potential is weighed against tanking ability.</P> <P>You would have ALOT of [Removed for Content] off Brawlers if you took away all there DPS so they could tank as good as a Guard.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:21 PM</span>

Gungo

09-03-2005, 05:32 AM

<DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gungo wrote:</P> <DIV> i <FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG><U>want</U></STRONG></FONT> equal tanking.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>What you want and what is good for the game is two different things.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>And what resume allows you to deam what is best for the game. OR did you mean "what i want and what is best for gaurds" those are 2 different things. Because i am sorry i don't think gaurds should play in God mode when tanking. My opinion whats best for the game is equality in tanking. </FONT></P> <P>Your a Bruiser, top of the line DPS.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Rehashing same crap i see. i guess i will too ... top of the line DPS in the fighter tree... don't worry you still have the best defensive buffs in game... your spot in raids is still safe... just maybe you won't be tanking all the time... why is that to hard to accept.</FONT></P> <P>Like its been stated before many times, Damage potential is weighed against tanking ability.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>what i gain in damage you have gained in superior taunts, and defensive buffs, such as group hp buffs, mtit buffs, sheilding buffs etc</FONT></P> <P>You would have ALOT of [Removed for Content] off Brawlers if you took away all there DPS so they could tank as good as a Guard.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>I didn't advocate bralwer to have gaurd DPS you did. And SoE did when they said fighters should have less DPS then scouts and casters (as it should be). They cna be [Removed for Content] about it that was thier choice.. they played a broken class that they enjoyed the benefit from it just liek you have been playing a broken class and are enjoying the benefit from it. They chose the fighter and passed up on the 2 other archtypes with superior dps. I chose a fighter and i am advocating my fighter archtype.</FONT><BR>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________</P> <P> </P></DIV>

-Aonein-

09-03-2005, 05:45 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>Gungo wrote:</P> <DIV> i <FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG><U>want</U></STRONG></FONT> equal tanking.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>What you want and what is good for the game is two different things.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>And what resume allows you to deam what is best for the game. OR did you mean "what i want and what is best for gaurds" those are 2 different things. Because i am sorry i don't think gaurds should play in God mode when tanking. My opinion whats best for the game is equality in tanking. </FONT></P> <P>Your a Bruiser, top of the line DPS.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Rehashing same crap i see. i guess i will too ... top of the line DPS in the fighter tree... don't worry you still have the best defensive buffs in game... your spot in raids is still safe... just maybe you won't be tanking all the time... why is that to hard to accept.</FONT></P> <P>Like its been stated before many times, Damage potential is weighed against tanking ability.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>what i gain in damage you have gained in superior taunts, and defensive buffs, such as group hp buffs, mtit buffs, sheilding buffs etc</FONT></P> <P>You would have ALOT of [Removed for Content] off Brawlers if you took away all there DPS so they could tank as good as a Guard.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>I didn't advocate bralwer to have gaurd DPS you did. And SoE did when they said fighters should have less DPS then scouts and casters (as it should be). They cna be [Removed for Content] about it that was thier choice.. they played a broken class that they enjoyed the benefit from it just liek you have been playing a broken class and are enjoying the benefit from it. They chose the fighter and passed up on the 2 other archtypes with superior dps. I chose a fighter and i am advocating my fighter archtype.</FONT><BR>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________</P> <P> </P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Ummm Gonzo, i play a Berserker, i dont tank, i buff the MT.........but all those buffs i get are getting taken away and ill get better defensive buffs to compensate after the revamp.</P> <P>I wont be able to tank as good as a Pallie or Guard but im happy with that cause what i lose in defensive i make up for in offense. But if the guild wanted me too i could tank a raid np, just not as effcient as a Guard / Pallie.</P> <P>Gungo reminds me of Familyman when he tried to pull the old " taunts for DPS " bs debate months and months ago, anyone remember that?</P> <P>You arent the first one to come up with a flawed notion of how it is or how it should be Gonzo.</P> <P>Damage potential is weighed against tanking ability. It really cant get anymore simple then that.</P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:47 PM</span>

Gungo

09-03-2005, 06:04 AM

<DIV>Ummm Gonzo, i play a Berserker, i dont tank, i buff the MT.........but all those buffs i get are getting taken away and ill get better defensive buffs to compensate after the revamp. <FONT color=#ffff66>Yeah i know but this discussion is in regards to gaurds and tanking so i may say u when in relation the comment is made to you but i am talking about tanking and the gaurd in equality... just tryign to help w your comprehension</FONT></DIV> <P>I wont be able to tank as good as a Pallie or Guard but im happy with that cause what i lose in defensive i make up for in offense. But if the guild wanted me too i could tank a raid np, just not as effcient as a Guard / Pallie. <FONT color=#ffff66>Never said you should bruisers and zerks and shadowknigthes all chose to be slightly mroe offensive then defesnive oriented but all three of thsoe shoudl tank equal and every monk, paladin, guard should tnak equal because they chose defesne during thier entire progression as a character.</FONT></P> <P>Gungo reminds me of Familyman when he tried to pull the old " taunts for DPS " bs debate months and months ago, anyone remember that?</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff66>I never claimed to come up with the idea, i liked familyman he was a smart guy.</FONT></P> <P>You arent the first one to come up with a flawed notion of how it is or how it should be Gonzo.<FONT color=#ffff33>< Taem is so clever He thought of this all by himself</FONT></P> <P>Damage ability is weighed against tanking ability. It really cant get anymore simple then that. <FONT color=#ffff33>And yet u fail to see it... no point in repeating myself again. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Taem obviously wears a helmet in the shower.</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-02-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:05 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:06 PM</span>

Jobeson

09-03-2005, 06:14 AM

<div></div>I am a lvl 50 monk on tox. I can tank groups just fine. I can tank adds on raids well enough if needed. I love being able to peel adds off of people fast where the mob is stunned stifled and I can heal the person under attack aswell as dps. I dont want to be a dam guardian. I didnt choose a monk to be tank and only a tank. for groups its fine. Not to be a raid tank for the hardest of mobs. We are losing our dps have no utility so being a tank is better than having nothing but I will always be against the decision to having monks and brawlers in general into being Raid tanks. We were ment to be the class that was half and half. Half dps half tank. Enough for group tanking and enough dps to make a difference on a raid. With all the upgrades to dps other classes are getting why are the fighters dps needing to be nerfed? If a bloody enchanter will be 400 dps (I know not forever but even if they are 200) why cant a monks keep their 200-250 dps. We are a half dps half tank class Not a guardian. I wonder if soe would create another lvl 50 fabled character lol seeing as the class I made isnt the class we will become. (btw only 5 fabled peices and not counting masters) I hope soe comes to their sences and doesnt screw all fighters into only tanking. it will end up only making palies SKs and everyone else. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Jobeson on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:17 PM</span>

ShinigamiD

09-03-2005, 06:33 AM

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV>Ummm Gonzo, i play a Berserker, i dont tank, i buff the MT.........but all those buffs i get are getting taken away and ill get better defensive buffs to compensate after the revamp. <FONT color=#ffff66>Yeah i know but this discussion is in regards to gaurds and tanking so i may say u when in relation the comment is made to you but i am talking about tanking and the gaurd in equality... just tryign to help w your comprehension</FONT></DIV> <P>I wont be able to tank as good as a Pallie or Guard but im happy with that cause what i lose in defensive i make up for in offense. But if the guild wanted me too i could tank a raid np, just not as effcient as a Guard / Pallie. <FONT color=#ffff66>Never said you should bruisers and zerks and shadowknigthes all chose to be slightly mroe offensive then defesnive oriented but all three of thsoe shoudl tank equal and every monk, paladin, guard should tnak equal because they chose defesne during thier entire progression as a character.</FONT></P> <P>Gungo reminds me of Familyman when he tried to pull the old " taunts for DPS " bs debate months and months ago, anyone remember that?</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff66>I never claimed to come up with the idea, i liked familyman he was a smart guy.</FONT></P> <P>You arent the first one to come up with a flawed notion of how it is or how it should be Gonzo.<FONT color=#ffff33>< Taem is so clever He thought of this all by himself</FONT></P> <P>Damage ability is weighed against tanking ability. It really cant get anymore simple then that. <FONT color=#ffff33>And yet u fail to see it... no point in repeating myself again. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff33>Taem obviously wears a helmet in the shower.</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-02-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:05 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-02-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:06 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Gungo, Gungo, Gungo... Show me a single dev post (and no, Gaige is not a dev) where you silly little fallacy that monks should tank the exact same as a guardian AND have superior DPS. Show me it, please.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh wait, you can't.... Taem is right here, the brawler ubertank fanboys are, as usual, dead wrong<BR></DIV>

-Aonein-

09-03-2005, 07:15 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff66></FONT></P>Gungo reminds me of Familyman when he tried to pull the old " taunts for DPS " bs debate months and months ago, anyone remember that?</DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff66>I never claimed to come up with the idea, i liked familyman he was a smart guy.</FONT></P> <P>You arent the first one to come up with a flawed notion of how it is or how it should be Gonzo.<FONT color=#ffff33>< Taem is so clever He thought of this all by himself</FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR> <DIV>No i didnt think of anything, im refering to you trying to push off that Guards get more Taunts then you do to balance why you have more DPS which is what Familyman came up with in march. This was debated about back at the start of the year and is what lead to this post :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <P>The round of changes currently on Test only deal with the defensive side of things. They won't go live without other changes that are coming.</P> <P>We're making some fundamental changes to the spell system that are in progress right now. We're also determining the relative damage potential of each class and will be adjusting spells and arts to meet that scale.</P> <DIV> <P>The round of changes currently on Test only deal with the defensive side of things. They won't go live without other changes that are coming.</P> <P>We're making some fundamental changes to the spell system that are in progress right now. We're also determining the relative damage potential of each class and will be adjusting spells and arts to meet that scale.</P> <DIV>With fighters, damage potential is weighed against tanking ability. The latter is defined not just by avoidance or mitigation, but by the kind of buffs and abilities they get. Guardians and Paladins get the most defensive-oriented abilities, both for themselves and their groupmates. As a result, they will have the lowest damage output. At the other end of the scale are Bruisers and Monks, with Berserkers and Shadowknights in the middle.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Keep in mind these differences are not wide chasms. A Guardian who upgrades all his damage arts could probably outdamage a Bruiser that puts little effort into upgrading his abilities. Likewise, a Monk who pays attention to gear and arts can be a better pure tank than an unskilled Paladin. The onus for maximizing the potential of a given character is on the player, because that's the one element of class balance that we have absolutely no control over.</DIV> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II </P></DIV> <P> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P></P> <P>But with Gonzo's logic, all of the Fighter archtype as in the entire thing should all tank equally well, that means everyone tank extacally the same and the only thing that is defining us as being different is our CA's / utility which is how we should scale....:smileyindifferent:</P> <P>Sorry Gonzo, here it is one last time so you can read it again, and again.</P> <P>" With fighters, damage potiental is weighed agianst tanking ability. "</P> <P>Like i said before, it does <STRONG><U>not</U></STRONG> say " With fighters, damage potiental is weighed against utility. " or no where does it say " With fighters, tanking ability is weighed against utility. "</P> <P>Now if it said those things we could say that yes, guards sacrafice DPS for Taunts, but sorry it doesnt say that, it says that Guards sacrafice DPS for getting the most defensive-oriented abilites, meaning they tank the best.</P> <P>I think you just need to sit back and learn that after the revamp Gonzo that your going to be a much better tank then you are now, just you wont be up there tanking the hardest encounter unless of course like Moorgard states here, your in a guild that has a Tank that has worse gear / CA quaility then you do and you can potientally tank better then him because of it.</P> <P>No class is even in a archtype Gonzo take a look at every single class board, at one end, one lot is better then the other lot at the other end and they all become better or worse depending on what there suited for. Take Scouts for example, Troubs / Dirges at one end for utility with a trade off in DPS with in scout class, while Assassins / Predators are at the top of the DPS while trading off utility. ( i think this is how it is for Scouts atm )</P> <P>And while im at it just to sink it home for you cause im just really tired of your same old crap with no facts or evidence to support you claim :</P> <P> </P> <P> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <P></P> <P>Moorgard wrote :</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nerjin wrote:<BR> <DIV>Your statements prove that the ONLY viable TANK is a Guardian (High HP and mitigation Tanking). Since, the avoidance levels are capped (Brawler tanking) at level, while mitigation can be buffed, theoritcally through the roof. Plus, certain opponents will hit no matter what, again making mitigation much more important then avoidance. <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P> <DIV>I'm not sure what you mean by "avoidance levels are capped at level." They aren't, at least not differently than mitigation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you have either avoidance or mitigation higher than their cap against a white con (that is, the max value that will display in your persona window), you still gain the benefits from going over the cap when facing higher-level opponents. To show this a little better we changed mitigation from a percentage to a numerical value, and we'll do something similar for avoidance. But to be clear, both mitigation and avoidance have caps in place, so you can't buff mitigation "through the roof."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You both avoid and mitigate less against opponents that are higher level than you, and more against opponents that are lower level than you.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>After reading my prior post again, though, I think I stated the details poorly. You don't lose mitigation itself as a mob increases in tier; if your mitigation is 50%, you will mitigate 50% of the damage of a white-con mob whether it has two down arrows or three up arrows. Since the three-up arrow is hitting harder, you end up taking more damage. But actually the same holds true for avoidance (you'll get hit harder by the three-up mob when it does hit you), so I didn't mean to imply that avoidance had some advantage that mitigation didn't.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All of which goes to show what a convoluted discussion this can be. <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif" width=16 border=0> Again, the point I really wanted to make is that displayed numbers don't tell the whole story; gameplay does. But results can vary greatly based on opponent, situation, gear, spells, and skill.</DIV> <P>===========================<BR>Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard<BR>Game Designer, EverQuest II </P> <P> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <P></P> <P> </P> <P>So why would you have a Brawler tank a <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> x4 mob with 30% mitigation when a Guard can do it with 80% mitigation? And why would you have a Brawler tank anything that was a higher lvl then them in a raid when there mitigation only gets worse?</P> <P>Yes yes i know, the spike damage theroy that makes a Guardian a Brawler or the we trade taunts for DPS, heard it all before.</P> <P>Damage potential is weighed against tanking ability. Get used to it, if you cant i suggest you roll a Guardian if DPS doesnt concern you, if thats what you not interested in and the only thing you still interested in is equal tanking across the line then your playing the wrong game because if they nerf my class because your class wants to be the best tank, then ill quit, simple as that and so will a hell of alot of others. If you want to talk crap abput taunts for DPS then ill throw this in there, dont Bruiser get some all mighty stun attacks that are tied into there CA's?</P> <P>Let me ask you this, does DPS concern you, i mean if you as a Bruiser had the chance to tank just as good as a Guard but do less DPS then you will again after the revamp ( thats right, not now in the games current state, im talking after the revamp when you get nerfed down to below scouts ) would you take it?</P> <P>Here it is one more time cause im done with ya Gonzo, ive supplied more data, dev posts and links to other posts proving that your claims about the Brusier class be unbalanced is all lies and BS and what have you shown us? Nothing, just a opion. Anyway Gonzo im done, when you can supply me of posts from Moorgard stating facts like " With fighters, damage potiental is weighed against utility. " or " With fighters, tanking ability is weighed against utility. " ill remove my helmet in the shower. Come on, show it too me, show me the post where it says Guardians are designed to trade DPS for Taunts and Brawlers are suppose to sacrafice Taunts for DPS.</P> <P>Good luck searching for those posts. </P> <P>" With fighters, damage potiental is weighed agianst tanking ability. "</P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>09-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:38 PM</span>

Exill

09-03-2005, 08:44 AM

<div></div><hr><p>The round of changes currently on Test only deal with the defensive side of things. They won't go live without other changes that are coming.</p><p>We're making some fundamental changes to the spell system that are in progress right now. We're also determining the relative damage potential of each class and will be adjusting spells and arts to meet that scale.</p><div><p>The round of changes currently on Test only deal with the defensive side of things. They won't go live without other changes that are coming.</p><p>We're making some fundamental changes to the spell system that are in progress right now. We're also determining the relative damage potential of each class and will be adjusting spells and arts to meet that scale.</p><div>With fighters, damage potential is weighed against tanking ability. The latter is defined not just by avoidance or mitigation, but by the kind of buffs and abilities they get. Guardians and Paladins get the most defensive-oriented abilities, both for themselves and their groupmates. As a result, they will have the lowest damage output. At the other end of the scale are Bruisers and Monks, with Berserkers and Shadowknights in the middle.</div><div> </div><div>Keep in mind these differences are not wide chasms. A Guardian who upgrades all his damage arts could probably outdamage a Bruiser that puts little effort into upgrading his abilities. Likewise, a Monk who pays attention to gear and arts can be a better pure tank than an unskilled Paladin. The onus for maximizing the potential of a given character is on the player, because that's the one element of class balance that we have absolutely no control over.</div><p>===========================Steve Danuser, a.k.a. MoorgardGame Designer, EverQuest II</p><hr><p><b>With fighters, damage potential is weighed against tanking ability.</b></p><p></p></div><div></div>

Airog

09-03-2005, 10:10 AM

<P>Gaige:</P> <P>"/shrug</P> <P>I've been talking about raid content. Single group content has been fine since release.</P> <P>Also all fighters can solo and tank single group content anyway."</P> <P>Ok, here is something that has come to my mind, correct me if I am wrong, but from a group exp standpoint, a Monk is a BETTER choice to tank, from a solo exp standpoint a monk is a BETTER choice to solo. At raids a Guardian is the BETTER choice to tank. Now you say, "Single group content has been fine since the release" If you TRULY want to be EQUAL to a Guardian in tanking, I have a GIGANTIC problem with that statement. That is showing you as being a one-minded me, me, me, type of person. That is a bad way to come off. And I know you may not care, but I have tried to be extremely nice, and open-minded, heck, if you go back and read some of my posts, I have called for equal damage over time with our two classes. But with that post, and more directly that statement, you have been nocked down a notch in my eyes. You really need to think about this right here Gaige, I am not flameing you, I am trying to have an honest civil discussion, please think about this.</P>

Airog

09-03-2005, 10:15 AM

<DIV>Gungo:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"I want equal tanking."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You want equal tanking or situational tanking? I hate to call you out since you are a guildmate, but you have said two conflicting things, please clearify for us, which is it? I could be wrong here, so please do correct me if I am takeing this the wrong way.</DIV>

Airog

09-03-2005, 10:18 AM

<P>Exill:</P> <P><STRONG>"With fighters, damage potential is weighed against tanking ability."</STRONG></P> <DIV>Wow, that seems kind of clear cut, and from reading all of Moorguards post it seems that Gungo and Gaige (and other particular fighters) are not getting what they want, I am not gloating (sp), and I remind you again, go back to my thread and see me calling for all fighters to take same damage over time. But, the point seems moot (sp) now. Seems pretty clear, however, with SOE, you never know what can change... =)</DIV>

blueduckie

09-03-2005, 10:32 AM

<P>Gungo on previous page you mentioned no arch type is going to suffer at there primary role. I was curious what a mage and scouts primary role is to you. To me it is dps. So why arnt predators rogues and bards being hit up on exact same dps with out any bonus's? Bards should do predator dps while keeping there buffs etc. That is how i look at the fighter thing. Whether or not you agree is up to you. I feel brawlers get alot more utility through special skills than any other fighter. You also said our parry skills we add. It is linked to our offensive skilll raising group buff btw. No others stack with it. As yours adds dps ours at adept 3 adds 5 parry. This is being changed in revamp. It will only add some to offensive skills.</P> <P>As for talking about our taunts we are losing some taunts for a pretty nice skill that can tant 50% of time off of being hit. I however think all fighters are getting that. Your dmg in revamp will do just as much as our taunts. So your dps for taunts i can find legite. I however dont find how nerfed down our buffs have become as anything to consider comparable to the buffs you all wil have on top of fd mend. So i do feel we need more utilty. Hell even a 2 min defen disc reuse 15 min would pretty cool. Cut 25% of dmg off on a seperate mitigation list than original cap is a set 25% off dmg mitigation picks up. It doesnt have to be like that but is a idea. However something utility based would be nice. It doesnt have to be over powering. I could care less if brawlers can tank all mobs. I think you all can tank enough as it is personally. I also think your so blinded by wanting to tank the same while using more dps as a excuse to our taunts when your dps doesnt make you useless when not tanking and ours does because it is that low if we make our toon and skill choices towards tanking. </P> <P>I still hold true. Developers havnt done anything to fix the game and DoF is just over a week away. We wil have a broken expansion and a broken revamp thrown on us just as SOE has always done releasing eq2 broken to being with. However broken eq2 is more fun that its vision of fixxed. Every brawler i know on lavastorm server is happy with there toon as it is. Whether guardians could use some tweaking i am fine with that but we are fun to play as it is. Everyone who is playing is having fun with there classes expect a very small minority. So they are now manipulating what they said to try and please the minority.</P> <P>It has nothing to do with not wanting you to tank or be able to tank it has to do with wanting guardians to be fun and enjoyable and able to do its primary role to best of its possibilites and every guardian i have talked to feels the toon is no fun. It isnt a matter of losing a little strength people feel over powers us. Its about losing almost everything while adding a taunt all classes get a form of. It is about making our stance nothing special but somthing all classes get thesame of just different resist. It is about losing alot of what made the class unique and fun from the hp advantage and so on. It isnt about being over powered it is abou being Unique. After the changes of current we are a broken class alot worse thanyou or gaige feel brawlers are broke atm. Because however we may be able to half [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] our primary role we wont be given the chance to in many groups except those who have there select groups. It will become the same effect as 24 on a raid lets drop tanks we only need 3(guessed number) fighters drop extra guardians there dps is the worst. We dont have anything to add to a raid except a hp buff that really is not very large. A offensive buff that isnt needed and tanking. Nothing else do we offer. We dont offer dps unless we try to be a 100% offensive dps guardian then we dont offer much dps but some. So that is my complaint. Could careless if brawlers come out well as much as wanting guardians to come out well and stop getting hit with the nerf bat by devs with each passing day.</P> <p>Message Edited by blueduckie on <span class=date_text>09-02-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:34 PM</span>

Shizzirri

09-03-2005, 10:40 AM

If you want equal tanking then why should sony even bother with 6 different fighter classes if they will all lead to the same performance tnaking wise? If one of these six equal classes has even one slight advantage over the other in a different area don't you think every person with the desire to play a fighter would pick that class? Equal tanking will never exist in EQ if you want to tank like a gaurdian that top tier dps you want will have to go away so the 6 classes can stay somewhat balanced.

Gaige

09-03-2005, 11:39 AM

I don't care about DPS, if I did I'd be a scout. Or a warlock.

Nemi

09-03-2005, 11:54 AM

<DIV>Another round of changes to Fighters per MG in Beta:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Attributes and Skills:</STRONG><BR>The effectiveness of Defense skill buffs and debuffs has been reduced, while the effectiveness of Parry buffs and debuffs has been increased. This results in Defense, Parry, and Deflection buffs and debuffs having the same overall effect on avoidance.<BR></DIV> <DIV>The con color of the target now has a more substantial impact on the attacker's chance to land attacks. High cons (high yellow, orange, and red) are harder to hit, while lower cons (low blue, green, and grey) are easier to hit.<BR></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Stances:</STRONG><BR>Fighter defensive stances now provide<STRONG> less</STRONG> physical damage mitigation and have greater offensive penalties. <FONT color=#ffff00>(Confirmed NOT a typo)<BR></FONT>Fighter offensive stances now provide an increased bonus to offense and steeper defensive penalties.<BR></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This makes the perma defensive stance obsolete now, no idea about Guardian stances but Monks lose 28 points in crushing (or 5.5 levels) and the mitigation is cut in half, I imagine Guardians are much the same.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Might be difficult now to actually hit mobs while in defensive stance, could make aggro holding harder. Dunno yet. Especially coupled with the change to 'To-hit' of mobs higher than you, I see DPS for fighters dropping a whole bunch to near nothing when tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Need to test and see</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>EDIT: Any chance Gaige you could post your new screenshot unbuffed and self buffed in MasterII defense stance, and we could ask Tuna or Exill to do the same?</DIV><p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>09-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:55 AM</span>

blueduckie

09-03-2005, 12:36 PM

<DIV>Whether you care or not about dps gaige you cant ignore the effect it has on the game. You try to and use it as an example to being turned into a guardian with fd mend etc. Your whole argument is you want to have equal tanking. I ask why if devs are even listenign to this arnt they giving equal dps to those casters and scouts. You ignore that because you have no answer to it. You have no answer to why fighter must be the odd ball of arch type to please the minority like yourself.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Dont really care what your argument is really because it is all refuted by that. You are asking for fighters to be 6 of the same class tanking. While saying you dont want to be a random dps class because then your nothing but a dps bot and no purpose. There is as much purpose and reason to that as having 6 classes that tank the same. You also say uou dont feel sorry for anyone who picked a class expecting to be the best. Why dont you tell that to all the assassins rangers wizards also who are dps cant dps currentyl might finalyl be able to out dmg classes even in there own subclass. Tanking is no different and it is a shame devs dont see that. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There was only 1 good point you ever had IMO gaige. That is if guardians_01-whatever log off and all you have on is a crsuader or brawler you cant raid anything. I agree you should still be able to raid. Do i think should be able to kill any mob. Only if you are geared up well. I think balancing should allow all fighters to tank mobs but make guardians have easiet job at it slightly where brawlers crusaders need a more gear to compensate but be able to do it. I consider that balancing to the tank class. Being able to perform your main role and doing it equally are 2 different things. Can your dps hold up fine with no predators and just roges as your scout dps. It sure can but it will be a little slower. As tanking crusaders brawlers should be able to fill in and get the job done but not to quite the same effectivness. When the balancing started that is how it was. Sadly they went from keeping most fightrs happy except about there dps orignally. To upsetting pretty much every class except brawlers. Good job devs you are really dropping the ball on what could have been a refreshing new to the game.</DIV>