Current fighter archetype tanking balance

[Sixmai]

<div></div>This post is my compiled knowledge of the current state of each subclass of the fighter archetype. First i will make a comparison of the capacity to reduce damage of the two current fighter types : pyjama and plate tanks. Since the revamp made many radical changes altering the balance between the two ways of tanking. Here is actual mitigation and avoidance in <b>legendary </b>equipment (not spells) from the three fighter classes (<u>numbers provided by guildies and myself</u>) : <u>Guardian </u>: <font color="#ff3300">~</font><font color="#ff3300">47</font><font color="#ff3300">% </font>mitigation<font color="#ccff00"> </font><font color="#ccff00">~</font><font color="#ccff00">45</font><font color="#ff3300"><font color="#ccff00">%</font> </font>avoidance (with defensive stance up and group defense buff, only permanent buff, <b>all adept3</b>). <i>Without the defense group buff, avoidance drop to <font color="#ccff00">~</font><font color="#ccff00">42</font><font color="#ff3300"><font color="#ccff00">%</font>.</font></i> <u>Bruiser </u>: <font color="#ff3300">~</font><font color="#ff3300">37</font><font color="#ccff00"><font color="#ff3300">%</font> </font>mitigation <font color="#ccff00">~</font><font color="#ccff00">66</font><font color="#ccff00">% </font>avoidance (with defensive stance up, <b>adept1</b>).<i> Monk is likely to share these numbers. These numbers should be even better with an adept3 defensive stance.</i> <u> Paladin :</u>  <font color="#ff3300">~45%</font> mitigation<font color="#ccff00"> </font><font color="#ccff00">~39%</font> avoidance (with defensive stance up, <b>adept1</b>). <i>At adept 3 it should be : <font color="#ff3300">47%</font> mitigation, <font color="#ccff00">42%</font> avoidance (like it is for a Guardian with only the defensive stance up). Berserker and Shadowknight should share these numbers.</i> Now we can calculate the most basic combat situation and see how each class fare : Guardian receive <font color="#ffff00">~29%</font> of incoming <b>physical </b>damage. (calculation : <font color="#ccff00">0.55</font> <font color="#ccff00">attack not avoided</font> * <font color="#ff3300">0.53</font><font color="#ff3300"> damage from attack not reduced by mitigation</font> = <font color="#ffff00">0.29</font> <font color="#ffff00">damage</font>, ie <font color="#ffff00">29%</font>). Bruiser receive <font color="#ffff00">~21.5%</font> of incoming <b>physical </b>damage. (calculation<font color="#ccff00"> 0.34</font> * <font color="#ff3300">0.63</font> = <font color="#ffff00">0.215</font>). Paladin receive  <font color="#ffff00">~33.5%</font><font color="#ffff00"> </font>of incoming <b>physical </b>damage (calculation<font color="#ccff00"> 0.61</font> * <font color="#ff3300">0.55</font> = <font color="#ffff00">0.335</font>). <u>Conclusion </u>: pyjama fighter are<u> far better </u>than plate ones to reduce incoming damage. The Paladin (and any Berserker / Shadowknight) takes <b>55%</b> more damage (<font color="#ffff00">33.5</font> is 155% of <font color="#ffff00">21.5</font>) while having same quality gear and buff, the Guardian has two defensive buff of better quality -adept3- and same quality gear but takes <b>35%</b> more damage. Paladin receive <b>15%</b> more damage than the Guardian who has higher quality and class defining buff. <b>I do not take into account the temporary mitigation buffs Guardian and Bruiser receive. Because they are temporary buff, and because the Bruiser got the best as the calculation below will show, so it would actually only make Guardian look worst to take them into account, and Paladin even worst, and it's not necessary for the points i wish to make on this post.</b> <i>Here is proof : Guardians have two short duration mitigation buffs :  Anchor ~600 for 30s every 180s and Commanding Presence ~400 for 30s every 90. So on average it's the equivalent of : 600 * 30/180 + 400 * 30/90 = 233 all time mitigation buff. Bruisers get one short mitigation buff (not couting his emergency 600pt which stun him mitigation buff) : Strapping Spirit gives ~600 mitigation for 180s every 360s. So average it's the equivalent of 600 * 180/360 = 300 all time mitigation buff. </i> <u><b>So with the revamp, pyjama fighter is already the king at tanking, by the old rules. </b></u> But the revamp changed the way tanking is done. I see these points having huge impact in the difference between pyjama fighters and plate ones : 1. Magical damage from melee. 2. Avoidance Radius. 3. Combined Magical damage from melee with Avoidance Radius. 4. Buffing. 5. Tanking with multiple tank. 6. Cost of equipment. <b><u> 1. Magical damage from melee.</u></b> This is an incredible imbalance between the two fighter types. Basically, <u>physical mitigation means nothing</u> against many new mobs in DOF, their autoattack as well as their combat abilities is mitigated by magical resistance. Making the plate advantage in mitigation obsolete. With this design change, the plate armor is a <b>liability</b>, since it reduce the only unaffected parameter which is avoidance. With this change the pyjama fighter is clearly the best choice as a MT, since he will never be nacked while going against an opponent doing magical damage. He will always keep his avoidance advantage, <u>while the plate fighter is a liability, since he fight naked</u>. In the situation where both have good magical resistance, the pyjama is the clearly the winner, <u>since the physical mitigation advantage of the plate tank is gone</u>. Both fighter types mitigate equally but the pyjama one keep his <b>huge avoidance bonus</b>. Here is two numerical examples showing this : <i>Mob attacking with cold resistance. First time the Bruiser (could be a Monk) and Paladin (could be Berserker or Shadowknight) are at 15% cold resistance. Second time they equip better and get both 50% cold resistance.</i> <i>(<font color="#ccff00">100% - % avoidance</font>) * (<font color="#6666ff">100% - % cold resistance</font>) = <font color="#ffff00">% of damage taken</font>. Bruiser : <font color="#ccff00">0.34</font> *<font color="#6666ff"> .85 </font>= 0.29 => <font color="#ffff00">29%</font> Paladin : <font color="#ccff00">0.61</font> * <font color="#6666ff">.85 </font>= 0.52 => <font color="#ffff00">52%</font> Bruiser : <font color="#ccff00">0.34</font> * <font color="#6666ff">0.5 </font>= 0.17 =><font color="#ffff00"> 17%</font> Paladin : <font color="#ccff00">0.61</font> *<font color="#6666ff"> 0.5</font> = 0.305 => <font color="#ffff00">30.5%</font></i> These number are very disturbing, if both unprepared to the fight, the plate fighter takes <b>80%</b> (52 is 180% of 29) more damage than the pyjama type. If both are prepared, the plate fighter still takes<b> 80%</b> (30,5 is 180% of 17) more damage. We can also notice that if the plate fighter was prepared but not the pyjama one, they receive close to the same amount -plate receiving<b> 5%</b> more damage-. <u>This means there is no reason at all to let the plate fighter tank, even unprepared, the pyjama fighter will do better anyways.</u> <b><u>2. Avoidance Radius.</u></b> Brawler now parry/block 360°,<u> rest of fighter only do so in the frontal arc</u>, both avoid 360°. Let's assume the frontal arc is 120°, even if it's not sure that it is that wide, it would give the following rule : When the mob is in front, the avoidance of plate fighter isn't affected, but when the mob is not in front it drops to base chance of avoidance, which is <b>17%</b> for a plate tank, and <b>22%</b> for the guardian (with group defense buff at adept3). <u>This means being a plate fighter, you are a [Removed for Content] when fighting group encounter, compared to pyjama fighters. </u> This is perfectly illustrated by the following example : <i>The Bruiser receive ~21.5% of incoming physical damage. (calculation 0.34 * 0.63 = 0.215). Doesn't matter if he is surrounded. (Calculations come from the beginning of the post). The Paladin avoidance of attack would be when equally surrounded by mobs : <font color="#ffffff">(</font><font color="#ffffff">100% - % avoidance</font><font color="#ffffff">) * 120° / 360° + (</font><font color="#ffffff">100% - % base chance to avoid</font><font color="#ffffff">) * 240° / 360° = </font><font color="#ffffff">% of attack not avoided</font><font color="#ffffff">. </font><font color="#ffffff"> </font><font color="#ffffff">(</font><font color="#ffffff">0.61/3 + 0.83 *2 / 3</font><font color="#ffffff"> ) = 0.755 = </font><font color="#ffffff">75.5%. </font> This mean the received physical damage would be : (<font color="#ccff00">% of not avoided attack</font>) * (<font color="#ff6600"><font color="#ff3300">100% - % mitigation</font><font color="#ffffff">)</font></font> = <font color="#ffff00">% of damage taken.</font> <font color="#ccff00">0.755</font> * <font color="#ff3300">0.55</font> = <font color="#ffff00">41.5%.</font></i> When completly surrounded, the damage received by the plate fighter is going from 33.5% to 41.5%, while the pyjama fighter stays at 21,5%. This means the plate fighter damage is upped by <b>25%</b> in this situation, and compared to the pyjama fighter, they receive <b>93%</b> (41,5 is 193% of 21,5) more damage. <b><u>3. Combinaison of these two imbalance.</u></b> I will make it short, number are going to be absurd enough : <i>A Paladin and a Bruiser are surrounded by cold hitting mobs, both have 50% cold resistance : Bruiser takes <font color="#ffff00"> 17%</font> of damage. (calculations above : 1. and 2.) Paladin takes<font color="#ccff00"> 0.755</font> * <font color="#ff3300">0.5 </font>= <font color="#ffff00">38%</font>. </i> The Paladin is receiving <b>120%</b> more damage than the Bruiser (38 is 220% of 17). The damage received bye the paladin is<u> going up</u> while the bruiser damage is <u>decreasing</u>. <u><b>4. Buffing.</b></u> There is an imbalance also in the buffing area. Pyjama fighter get the best hp per stamina points, <u>and since the cap of 350 is easy to max out</u>, they have the <b>larger hp pool of fighters</b>. Other fighters like Guardian who receive stamina buff is actually getting a band aid since in a raid situation, the cap would have been hit without his buff, meaning this advantage is <u>lost</u> due to the cap. Avoidance contrarily to mitigation cannot be buffed equally between plate fighter and pyjama ones, first because avoidance of plate <u>is limited to the front arc</u>, second because deflection is a Brawler only skill. This is one more unique advantage to Brawler that set them above others. Now let's consider the debuffing that mob can do : _Mitigation can be reduced. _Magical resistance can be reduced. _Defense can be reduced. _Parry can be reduced. _Can Deflection be reduced ??? Guess not. This once again gives the pyjama fighter an advantage. <b><u>5. Tanking with multiple tanks.</u></b> The intercept / avoid for other abilities have been fixed with the revamp. Pyjama fighter having the best avoidance, they offer the best avoidance bonus to others, <u>since you can only get one on the MT</u>, they make the best offtank for this reason. Pyjama being hit the less, interception coming from friendly raid tank is going to work better on them, giving the healer more time to catch up on the healing : <i>a plate fighter being hit every 2 seconds receive 3 interceide on him to help the healer catch up, it gives healers 6 seconds of free time. a pyjama fighter being hit every 4 seconds receive 3 interceide on him, it gives 12 seconds of free time to healers.</i> Also, having the less physical mitigation, the interceide on them actually reduce damage done to the raid. <b><u>6. Costs of equipment.</u></b> No need to explain, everyone know that pyjama is cheap. At all lvl pyjama get most of his bonus from his class rather than by stuffing himself well, it's an easier investment than the plate fighter. <b>Conclusion :</b> Here is my understanding of the new fighter archetype : <u>Bottom </u>: <i>Guardian, the class has the worst damage,  get negative effect (root) for the ability they need to get the job done. And they get no <b>distinct advantage perceptible</b> <b>by the players</b> over any other fighter. The class is actually a <b>complete [Removed for Content]</b>.</i> <u>Medium</u> : <i>Berserker and Shadowknight, these subclasses get the AOE damage and help the group dps : debuff for the SK and buff for the Berserk. They get the worst tanking utility (<u>slighty behind Guardian</u>) and are actually screwed since they don't get the best damage of the fighter archetype for this sacrifice.</i> <u>Above average</u> :<i> Paladin : while they have <u>less</u> in defensive stats than the Guardian, the effect is <b>hardly felt while playing</b>, contrarily to the effect of their heals/ward which is <b>huge</b>. They tank better than Guardian due to this, their aggro is better too and they have an<u> inherent advantage versus magical damage</u> (wisdom buff and healing) that <u>no other plate fighter can equal</u>. They also get slitghly better damage than Guardian and a bonus against undead beings.</i> <u>Top of the cream</u> :<i> Monk and Bruiser, the brawler class has the best damage, unrivaled by other fighters and <u>capable of reaching scouts and mages dps</u>. They get the best defense<b> in every situation</b>, getting ridiculously better than plate fighter in some <u>common situations</u>. They have the more out of jail cards in case they get in trouble : FD, mend, cure, huge mitigation boost, and they seem designed to be the new MT in raid.</i> <b>The current state of superfighter like Monk and Bruiser is the prime example that this revamp is a fiasco, since it was suppose to get rid of exploits in the combat system while diversifying fighters, and the result actually is a big imbalance between subclasses, where before the revamp subclasses were better balanced. In the current state of things  i see no other way to deal with it than nerf Brawler defense below plate fighter and upgrade Guardian defense on physical damage to make it the complementary tank to Paladin. Thanks for reading.</b> PS : sorry for bad english, it's not my native language.

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>HOLY [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]!!!! Now thats a post that took some time.  Hard numbers and calculations to show how gimped Plate wearers are atm...I love it, Im sure Gunga and Gaige will come in and say tho that everything proved there is wrong, and blah blah blah...lets hope SOE takes a moment to look at this post..</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Fafnir]

<P>Top of the class!  I hope SOE reads posts like this one.</P>

[Gungo]

<P>naw actually excellent post, but i do have one question </P> <P>what does defense actual do? The actually skill/buff</P> <P>It not just avodiance like gaurdians presume and it does add to tanking and gaurdians do have the most defense.</P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>also i may be wrong but brawler do not get the most hp per sta. We get the highest Base hp pool which imho will never grow where as the guardian buff will when upgraded. I may be wrong in this i got to check it out.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>also whether or not deflection cna be debuffed i dont know. the only deflection buff bruiser get is thier defensive stance. there is no known exsisting buff that can buff deflection  further for bruisers. furthermore if a mob debuffs parry, defense etc it still negatively effect us as well so there is not really an imbalance in that regard.</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>09-22-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:29 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:30 PM</span>

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>HAHA no one knows, an imaginary feature thats supposed to make us FEEL better about being out tanked by guys in cloth armor....</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[WAPCE]

Excellent post, unfortunately, part of your Paladin conclusion is flawed. Heals and wards take 3 seconds to cast, are constantly interrupted in any group situation, and are not viable form of aggro generation. They're never going to make up for the significant HP and avoidance advantage that Guardians have on them when choosing a tank (though the <B>extensive</B> misinformation in that Guardian vs. Paladin thread was great for a laugh).

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>Thats the same time it takes Guards to cast their Miti buffs, and most tuants, so I would imagine that they can be compared equally.  Plus those buffs and tuants can be interrupted as well, Also are you saying that pallies heals and stuns and such dont gain hate??? Cuz that would be news to me!!</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Gungo]

<P>So although that post is very well done w/o knowing what defense actually adds we don't have the entire picture of those hard numbers to be entirely correct.</P> <P>also cna you provide the names of the 3 tested individuals i would like to look up there profiles to see that they are all in the same <STRONG>Legendary </STRONG>equipment.</P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>Finally your post is well done but adding more mitigation is not the answer it has already been theorized  that at 60 w full cobalt armour a warrior will hit the mitgation cap. why do i say this well if your number are correct at 60 a brawler would just end up gettign full fabled and still become the best tank because he will not only catch up to you when you it the cap on mititgation, but surpass u with his utility. If anything the bonus to avoid on all armour other then HA needs to be adjusted. This will not only prevent scouts and other classes from tanking as well as they do but balance your numbers more. That picture to me shows that crusaders and guardians are farily balanced goign by your numbers the guard has more in both mitit and avoid but the crusader has utility to help them as well. Finally i still would like to see utility added to guardians to help them solo/group more.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:50 PM</span>

[Raahl]

<DIV>Wow that's a lot to digest.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The truth comes out about who's the top tanker.  Hope the developers look at this.</DIV>

[Gungo]

raahl look at the issues i have brought up and tell me they will not be a concern later?

[Raahl]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR>raahl look at the issues i have brought up and tell me they will not be a concern later? <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I'm not hear to debate perceived issues.   His post was better than any of the posts that I have seen on the issue.  From anybody.   </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I didn't check his math, but it seems right.   I'll let the developers digest it and they can post if they want.</DIV>

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>Easy to fix, raise the level cap, or make mitigation matter more.  Either way would work, Im sure the intelligent people over in developement can work something out.</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Gungo]

they can't raise the cap because it will trivilize encounters again. It will also trivilize the encounters if every point of mitigation decreases the amount of damge recieved more then what it does at 80%. If his numbers are correct the best solution is to lower very light, light, and medium armour avodiance. Thsi will solve 2 issues brought up on this board. 1 the claim that bralwers are better tanks and 2 the claim that scouts can tank comparably. That all depends on if his initial numbers are correct. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if they lowered avodiance based on his numbers on all armour except plate by ~10% then his numbers will come out comparable again. But then again what am i saying give guards a shield w mitigation on it. I will see you at 60 when i am full fabled and still tanking bettter then gaurds. I heard the new t6 leather armour has soem nice mitigation on it.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:11 PM</span>

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>They could raise the mitigation cap drastically and still not trivilize encounters, ESPECIALLY when ALL EPIC encounters do some type of damage other then Trauma...  And to your other point, I dont want other classes nerfed so we are good tanks by comparison again.  Are you actually in a RAIDING guild?? cuz you keep saying Guards are Raid tanking this and that, and I have yet to find any proof of any guilds raiding T6 Mobs yet, and No guilds on my servers are even ABLE to kill a t5 contested grp4 atm.  Mostly because those mobs are boosted outa the stratosphere...least they fixed angler tho!!!</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Gungo]

news flash all t5 contested are being retuned in live update #14

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>GREAT!! I cant wait to raid them again, BUT you missed my point saying that Guilds are not useing GUARDS to tank raids, cuz no guilds are RAIDING atm, and plus GUARDS SUCK!!!!</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Gungo]

My guild raided yesterday so far we killed a t6 x3, 2 different t6 x2, angler, and drayek since the combat revamp came out. although raidign hasnt been a main concern sinc epeopel trying to level up. I did hit terrorantula to see hwat aoe or spells he casts. she htit me for 26k peircing =p.

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>Meathooks and Broog dont count as "raids" haha they are stupid easy...And did you try anything hard?  Zalek / MoTM / Any contesteds?? And did a Guardian tank them?? That would be a good comparrison.</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Gungo]

<P>Zalak, kdal  is still easy and no we havent tried anything else but then again you missed the point where i said t5 content is still being retuned and updated on live update 14.. wait we did try asphyxia lol use to be an easy raid were 2 healers can be half afk and heal. Now it double shoted our gaurd w 4-5k auto atks. His spell damage wasnt bad at 3k but autoatk damage at 4-5 k is rediculous. </P> <P> i also find it funny how you claim the t6 content that is killable is to easy when that is the only content a lvl 50 is able to kill atm. When people hit 60 terrorantual will be yellow and hopefully wont do 26k peircer hits.</P> <P>They will retune riad content to fit the class so yes lowering avodiance on L, VL and M armour is prolly the best solution.</P> <DIV>if they lowered avodiance based on his numbers on all armour except plate by ~10% then his numbers will come out comparable again. But then again what am i saying give guards a shield w mitigation on it. I will see you at 60 when i am full fabled and still tanking bettter then gaurds. I heard the new t6 leather armour has soem nice mitigation on it.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:38 PM</span>

[TanRaistlyn]

<DIV>No your missing my point, Im saying that Guards are NOT the best tank and you keep saying they are, the fact that you are raiding anything proves nothing to either side of the argument.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Covenant</DIV>

[Gungo]

<DIV> <P>They will retune riad content to fit the class so yes lowering avodiance on L, VL and M armour is prolly the best solution.</P> <DIV>if they lowered avodiance based on his numbers on all armour except plate by ~10% then his numbers will come out comparable again. But then again what am i saying give guards a shield w mitigation on it. I will see you at 60 when i am full fabled and still tanking bettter then gaurds. I heard the new t6 leather armour has soem nice mitigation on it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>think you ar emissing this point that i am editing in after u read my post. so i will add it again</DIV></DIV>

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>Ah your right Im not rereading ur edited posts, my fault.  But again I hate seeing another class get nerfed so that Guards can tank comparabley again.  I suppose scaling the epic mobs every which way can solve most problems, but then we can start the I got nerfed [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] fest that will ensue.</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Skorpeo1]

<DIV>Fantastic post Sixmains, alot of time and effort put in there.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>To all the non-plate tanks who wish to discredit his post:  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sixmains put alot of effort into writting this and you want to pick holes in it and disprove it.  Rather than coming here with one or two liners saying 'what about this' and 'have you thought of that' , Why dont you go to similar effort and post figures etc that prove brawlers/plate wearers ARE balanced.  You obviously believe that we are balanced so it shouldnt be too hard for you, and Im sure that everyone her would love to see it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You obviously have the time to sit down and write it.  If you do your argument will recieve more bonafide analysis than the responses you get here on the Guardian Board.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Skorpeo</DIV>

[Gungo]

<DIV>HAHA what holes am i picking i said it was a good post and i said that if his numbers are correct they need to nerf light, verylight, and medium armour avoidance. I don't mind them giving gaurds mitigation on shields or removing the root from htl.  MY only debate here is that if you increase gaurd mtitgation now to compensate for the current tanking inadequacy you will only see problems later when gaurds hit the buff cap at 80% and bralwers catch up again thus falling right back into this same debate. contrary to what gaurds may think i don't want to be the best and if someoen shows me i am i am right there by you asking to nerf my class to be inline. as i am doing now. My only constant gripe and point is by increasing gaurds tanking if they make it far better then other fighters will reduce the need for other tanks and currently i liek being able to tank like i origianlly choose at lvl 10 and 20 somewhere after i hit lvl 35 things changed and i was delegated to be dps. </DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>covenant wrote:</DIV> <DIV> <P>Ah your right Im not rereading ur edited posts, my fault.  But again I hate seeing another class get nerfed so that Guards can tank comparabley again.  I suppose scaling the epic mobs every which way can solve most problems, but then we can start the I got nerfed [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] fest that will ensue.</P></DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>really though when have you not seen SOE not fix something by nerfing. I rather they do it now and be done with all this combat revamp B.S. then wait 2 months from now and here gaurdians complain yet again brawlers are the best tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Skorpeo1]

<DIV>Alot of Brawler types come to the guardian boards to try and tell us that everything is balanced and ok when it clearly is not.  The majority of guardians dont want to see anyones class nerfed, they just want to be able to do thier intended job.  Guardians used to be on top, now brawlers are.  Hey, we all know its unfair, so let the guardians have their gripe on their board.  Will SOE ever strike a balance?  who knows, but until then posts like sixmains make an interesting debate. </DIV>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

This has got the be the best post ive EVER seen in the Guard forum. Kudos to the OP for compiling this data. As a Paladin who has regularly argued with some guards who are misinformed about how UBER palys are, at least there is one Guard who is objective. Thanks a bunch and keep up the good work.

[Greyform]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR>My guild raided yesterday so far we killed a t6 x3, 2 different t6 x2, angler, and drayek since the combat revamp came out. although raidign hasnt been a main concern sinc epeopel trying to level up. I did hit terrorantula to see hwat aoe or spells he casts. she htit me for 26k peircing =p. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>LOL I really wanted to go do that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> just to see how hard that spider hit 64 epic 4up group X4 going to be one fun as hell fight some day.</DIV>

[Greyform]

fantastic post by the OP thank you for putting so much time and effort into it for us.

[Nazo]

Very Good Job indeed...

[Sixmai]

It's very easy to understand of avoidance works nowadays. Overall avoidance is calculated by 4 Factors : <u>Base :</u> this is dependant of armor type, Defense skill raise it, with +12 defense i get a 5% increase. <u>Block : </u>this is dependant of shield, brawler have an innate shield. Unaffacted by any skill that i know of. <u>Parry :</u> this is increased by Parry skill obvsiously. <u>Deflection :</u> this is increased by Deflection skills, only Pyjama tanks get it. <i>To calculate your overall avoidance you have to mutliply  (100% - %Base) * (100% - %Block) * (100% -Parry) * (100% -Deflection) = % of attack going through your avoidance. So you take 100% - this result and you get your overall avoidance shown by hovering the mouse over it in the personna window.</i> <b><u>However, brawler get to use the Base / Block / Parry / Deflection on 360°. While other fighter can only use Base if the attack doesn't come from the front.</u></b> <u>Brawler class defense is in position to be nerfed, you just have to see them soloing heroic encounter to understand that they are out of balance. Buffing class fighter to their level would only make more class out of balance. </u> In fact i have another solution to the problem, but it would need to <u>drop the stupid argument that pyjama fighter need to avoid more and plate tank to take the hits</u>. If they have reduced the mitigation value, it's to allow player to still receive a bonus from it even in group play. It would be stupid to see tank fighter always capped at 80% against blue and such, since brawler won't and then would be better overall (capped at 80% mitigation and 80% avoidance). What i propose is to keep the so and so current mitigation for plate tank and give Guard a class specific physical mitigation bonus to compensate their lack of dps / heal. Since physical mitigation is not anymore the most common damage tank take, it would not be abusive to get a 5->10% (depending of quality) permanent trauma mitigation advantage on the Anchor line (which would still root us in order to get it, with the same toggleability as the Maddening defense taunt buff), while keeping the temporary group buff we get with Commanding Presence (since it's shared with berserker and it would be used in offtanking position). Ok enough of the Guardian, my main idea is to <b>drop the idea avoidance of plate tank should suck</b>. Currently Brawler are <u>better in every combat situation because of the avoidance gap between them and plate fighter.</u> What we should see is  : -<b>against solo enemy</b>, plate tank should have the advantage, by having good avoidance due to shield and better mitigation (<i>it's only slightly better since brawler / monk have nice mitigation buff</i>). -<b>against group enemy</b>, brawler would take the advantage. -<b>against magical melee damage</b>,<b> </b> the upped avoidance of plate tank would reduce the unacceptable gap there is currently. So the solution is for me : Make it so common quality shield make plate tank equals to Brawler avoidance with apprentice skills. Legendary quality shield should put plate tank equal in frontal avoidance to Brawler with legendary skills (ie adept3).  Fabled shield should put plate tank at equal avoidance to brawler with master skill. Finally to distinguish between kite and tower shield, one being alot larger than the other, you should make Block value effective on kite for 120° frontal radius, and Tower shield for the 180° frontal radius. This will put brawler overall defensive capacity under plate tank, but not by much, especialy with their 'out of jail' tricks. And they can keep a good dps which is what alot brawler chose the class to begin with. PS : sorry for bad english, it's not my native language.

[Ifung]

<P><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>Bravo, best post on the subject so far. </FONT></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>This explains things in crystal, thank you for taking the trouble to make this post!</FONT></SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></P>

[Knightrid]

<DIV>Very good post here.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would like to comment on the little section regarding mobs that do a magic damage type.  I've been fighting in Silent City quite a bit, and all the spectres in there do disease damage as their melee attacks.  I went out and bought a bunch of disease resist gear (got myself up to about 3900 self buffed now) in order to mitigate the damage.  Only problem is that I still get hit quite frequently and am outtanked by a brawler with no resist gear.  It's honestly pretty disheartening when a brawler a level lower than you can take out a named ^^ (the Strategist if anyone knows the mob), and you and a healer have a hard time duoing it with twice the disease resist.  The brawlers have more dps (I"m fine with this, it's how it should be), take less damage (so, so wrong), and can heal themselves and FD when they get in trouble.  Basically they do better dmg, tank better, and have more utility than a guardian (or berserker for that matter).  This issue needs to be looked into as the classes are still horribly unbalanced.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Editing because I didn't see the rediculous bruiser mitigation buff.  600 mit for 180s is just plain wrong.  Very few fights in this game (save maybe epic targets) go any longer than 3 minutes.  This easily allows the bruiser to throw up his mit buff right before the fight and tank like a madman for 3 minutes on any named or whatever he may be fighting.  A guardian has 1 minute worth if he spreads his buffs out, 30 secs at +400 (CP), then 30 secs at +500 (Anchor), but then he's out of buffs and has to tank for 30 seconds with no mit buffs before he can throw up CP again.  All this time the brawler has his nice little buff up and is cruising...</DIV> <DIV>Please look into the issue.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Heisenberg 55 Guardian</DIV> <DIV>Iniquity-Oasis</DIV><p>Message Edited by Knightrider on <span class=date_text>09-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:09 AM</span>

[Corv]

    Overall a great post, but one minor correction.  Physical mitigation and avoidance are applied to trauma damage only.  Your mitigation *and* avoidance versus other types of damage (e.g. poison, heat, etc.) are both based on your resistance to that type of damage.  Brawlers' avoidance is as useless against non-trauma based mobs as our mitigation is.  The only thing that matters is your resist versus that damage type.      On a related note... Am I the only one that thinks it's absolutely silly that when we head out into Sinking Sands to play with yard-trash Spectres that swing massive scythes at us, we can tank better by doffing all our wonderful fabled plate and putting on whatever treasured crap we've found with good disease resist, even if it's freakin cloth armor!?   A mechanic that makes this little sense is broken, in my opinion.  While non-trauma based damage is an interesting addition to spice up the game when used *sparingly* in contexts that make sense, it's been horrendously abused in DoF.   And where are the mobs that hit for heat damage anyways?   It's a freakin desert out there, and poison and disease are all we see. <div></div>

[Sixmai]

I don't agree with what you wrote. In DOF we have mob hitting with melee attack who do 'magical resistance' type of damage (ie poison, disease). You are mistaking some of their CAs like the nuke of Shadowknight like creature, which are indeed cast, and the regular autoattack of mobs. Against cast, avoidance doesn't matter we agree. I'm talking of melee attacks doing for example poison type damage, they are checked against your avoidance and then against your magical resistance (poison type on this example). You just have to go to sinking sand and test it against some of the lizard.

[Sixmai]

I meaned go to shifting sand and go to the twin tears. I met a rogue lizard type with poison autoattack (he never did any casting and never did trauma dommage) there, and he's far from the only one mob i encountered doing it.

[Gladesman]

<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Thanks a lot for this post. I hope the devs are reading and picking this up. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2>If all these calculations are correct I assume there <U>will</U> be an adjustment to make guards the best tanks again (even if just marginally better), but I do sincerely hope that the devs will also look at the numerous other posts in this forum with suggestions on how to make the guardian class more "rounded" like all the other fighter classes seem to be after the revamp. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Because even with better tanking abilities than other <STRIKE>fighters</STRIKE> tanks the guardian class is still not very desirable to group or play with as we still lack the DPS and utility other <STRIKE>fighters</STRIKE> tanks currently add to the game <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></FONT></DIV>

[blueduckie]

<P>BTW gungo - defense adds to avoidance makes very  little difference tho now. It used to be huge. Now it is way nerfed. I am reaching 318 max self buffed defense vs mobs and cant tell any difference with defense buffs on or not. On green mobs i can cause they miss so much so i assume it is defense working. I dont know if it works on blues. But it is stricly adding avoidance. Doesnt work on mobs well at all now tho. Seriously is 99% useless buff. Rather we get another hp or mitigation group buff from it.</P>

[Gungo]

<DIV> <DIV>Very good post here.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would like to comment on the little section regarding mobs that do a magic damage type.  I've been fighting in Silent City quite a bit, and all the spectres in there do disease damage as their melee attacks.  I went out and bought a bunch of disease resist gear (got myself up to about 3900 self buffed now) in order to mitigate the damage.  Only problem is that I still get hit quite frequently and am outtanked by a brawler with no resist gear.  It's honestly pretty disheartening when a brawler a level lower than you can take out a named ^^ (the Strategist if anyone knows the mob), and you and a healer have a hard time duoing it with twice the disease resist.  The brawlers have more dps (I"m fine with this, it's how it should be), take less damage (so, so wrong), and can heal themselves and FD when they get in trouble.  Basically they do better dmg, tank better, and have more utility than a guardian (or berserker for that matter).  This issue needs to be looked into as the classes are still horribly unbalanced.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Editing because I didn't see the rediculous bruiser mitigation buff.  600 mit for 180s is just plain wrong.  Very few fights in this game (save maybe epic targets) go any longer than 3 minutes.  This easily allows the bruiser to throw up his mit buff right before the fight and tank like a madman for 3 minutes on any named or whatever he may be fighting.  A guardian has 1 minute worth if he spreads his buffs out, 30 secs at +400 (CP), then 30 secs at +500 (Anchor), but then he's out of buffs and has to tank for 30 seconds with no mit buffs before he can throw up CP again.  All this time the brawler has his nice little buff up and is cruising...</DIV> <DIV>Please look into the issue.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Heisenberg 55 Guardian</DIV> <DIV>Iniquity-Oasis</DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>only problem i have with this thread is that although we get a 600 mitit 3 min buff its cost is 130hp (at my % of health) every 6 secs or 1300 a min or 3900 total dam. Basically its quite useless soloing. Situational grouping, and useful on MTing a hard named. also it has a reuse of 3 min after it fades so its not like i can recast it permantly. othe rthen that If his numbers are correct i agree Very light, light, and medium armour avodiance bonus needs to be lowered and adjusted by at least 10%.</DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:44 AM</span>

[Korwyn]

<P>Wow a great post!!!!  I hope the Dev's take a look and actually do something!!!!!!</P> <P> </P> <P>Cormac 50 Guardian </P>

[Gungo]

<DIV>Defense is NOT an avodiance buff</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>pre-revamp adding 5 defense was like adding an additional level to you character. Mobs would hit a lil less harder and a lil less often etc a mob that was hittign you like he was orange con with enuff defense would hit you like he was a yellow etc. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now no one has a clue what defense adds or the variable. It may be that 20 defense = 1 character lvl. no one knows. but that fact is defense does more then add avoidance. How much and what effect it has now is the question alot of people are asking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The same can be said for alot of the other base skills like +peircing +disruption +fist  etc. they may help you hit a bit more accuratly and often and increase your dam per hit but the actual effect of +5 to a skill is not quantifiable in the persona window. So basically looking we are studing half an equation when you only consider avoidance and mitigation. And guards has the most in the Defense skill..</DIV> <P>Don't get me wrong here i don't think the effect of Defense makes up for all the issues sixman has came up with. I do beilieve though it does skew his numbers a bit. My solution is reduce all armour but heavy armour base avodiance by ~10% this will reduce scouts from having higher avodiance then guardians and make brawlers in line in regards to sixmans numbers.</P><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>09-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:51 AM</span>

[RafaelSmith]

Great post. Wish I had the time to gather data like that cause i think thats what is needed to get our point across. But all I know is that compared to the other fighters at my level, gear level, play level I take a distant backseat in the so called fighter archetype. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <div></div>

[lazlo1]

Very nice post! This puts some real numbers to what guardians have been seeing. I hope the devs do something about this. Guardians are the most defense fighter, thats what I picked and that not what I have now. Guards MUST take less damage than other fighters in normal settings. If this is not true we are broken.  Brawlers get DPS to offset this, Crusaders get spells to offset this. We give up DPS and utility to tank better, pretty easy to understand. Special attacks from certian mobs should make other subtypes shine. Againt melee damage guards should be ahead, maybe not by much but by a noticable amount. As far as solutions thats a tuff one. I would guess slight 2-3% boost in plate mit and avd, combined with a slight 2-3% nerf in mit and avd for other armor. That would be a 8-12 % swing about how much it seems outa line. <div></div>

[kono]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote: <P><SPAN class=time_text>also i may be wrong but brawler do not get the most hp per sta. We get the highest Base hp pool which imho will never grow where as the guardian buff will when upgraded. I may be wrong in this i got to check it out.</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Regarding HP per class, I did some testing at the end of DoF beta to examine the differences between each.  The following are naked ogres, buffed to level 50.  I added jewelry to increase stamina.  The 'adj.hp' column indicates the HP of the ogre at that sta, minus any raw +HP given by the jewelry.</P> <P> </P> <P>race    class   level   sta     adj.hp<BR><BR>ogre    grd/bzk 50      32      2381<BR>ogre    grd/bzk 50      42      2427<BR>ogre    grd/bzk 50      52      2474<BR><SPAN><B>Warrior</B></SPAN> HP per sta: 4.65<BR><SPAN><B>Warrior</B></SPAN> HP at 0 sta: 2232<BR><BR>ogre    pal/sk  50      31      2300<BR>ogre    pal/sk  50      41      2345<BR>ogre    pal/sk  50      51      2390<BR><SPAN><B>Crusader</B></SPAN> HP per sta: 4.50<BR><SPAN><B>Crusader</B></SPAN> HP at 0 sta: 2160<BR><BR>ogre    bru/mnk 50      33      2462<BR>ogre    bru/mnk 50      43      2510<BR>ogre    bru/mnk 50      53      2558<BR><SPAN><B>Brawler</B></SPAN> HP per sta: 4.80<BR><SPAN><B>Brawler</B></SPAN> HP at 0 sta: 2304<BR></P> <DIV>So as you can see, Brawlers not only have a higher base HP, but also earn more HP per point of stamina.  At level 60, a naked Brawler with 420 stamina should have 4320 HP, a Warrior would have 4185, and finally, 4050 HP for the Crusaders.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>najena.konk</DIV><BR>

[Gungo]

Yeah i wasn't positive since i never tested it myself, although the patch notes only mentioned a higher base pool which is why i wasn't positive. hence i said i wasn't sure but thanks for the clarification.

[Lyrus]

<div></div><div></div><hr>pre-revamp adding 5 defense was like adding an additional level to you character. Mobs would hit a lil less harder and a lil less often etc a mob that was hittign you like he was orange con with enuff defense would hit you like he was a yellow etc.<hr>Incorrect Gungo, adding defense is strictly adding avoidance. In the old system, you are correct though, that adding 5 defense raised your avoidance check to be 1 level higher, which in turn meant that you got hit less often (avoidance), but defense has never, and as far as I know, will never increase mitigation, which makes your statement about getting hit for less false. As a side note, avoidance scales with defense, while mitigation is always a flat number, unaffected by anything other than mitigation debuffs, it scales in level, but at a linear progression, whereas in the old system with avoidance, once you effectively greyed out a mob with defense stacking, your avoidance jumps exponentially.  Also, with avoidance capped for heavy armor wearers, defense makes very little difference. This in turn is one of the major sparks behind the outcry on the forums, that what defined our class (our high defense), has now been effectively nullified leaving us with nothing interesting.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Lyrus-D on <span class=date_text>09-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:37 AM</span>

[Poochymama]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sixmains wrote:<BR> This post is my compiled knowledge of the current state of each subclass of the fighter archetype.<BR><BR>First i will make a comparison of the capacity to reduce damage of the two current fighter types : pyjama and plate tanks. Since the revamp made many radical changes altering the balance between the two ways of tanking.<BR><BR>Here is actual mitigation and avoidance in <B>legendary </B>equipment (not spells) from the three fighter classes (<U>numbers provided by guildies and myself</U>) :<BR><BR><U>Guardian </U>: <FONT color=#ff3300>~</FONT><FONT color=#ff3300>47</FONT><FONT color=#ff3300>% </FONT>mitigation<FONT color=#ccff00> </FONT><FONT color=#ccff00>~</FONT><FONT color=#ccff00>45</FONT><FONT color=#ff3300><FONT color=#ccff00>%</FONT> </FONT>avoidance (with defensive stance up and group defense buff, only permanent buff, <B>all adept3</B>). <I>Without the defense group buff, avoidance drop to <FONT color=#ccff00>~</FONT><FONT color=#ccff00>42</FONT><FONT color=#ff3300><FONT color=#ccff00>%</FONT>.</FONT></I><BR><BR><U>Bruiser </U>: <FONT color=#ff3300>~</FONT><FONT color=#ff3300>37</FONT><FONT color=#ccff00><FONT color=#ff3300>%</FONT> </FONT>mitigation <FONT color=#ccff00>~</FONT><FONT color=#ccff00>66</FONT><FONT color=#ccff00>% </FONT>avoidance (with defensive stance up, <B>adept1</B>).<I> Monk is likely to share these numbers. These numbers should be even better with an adept3 defensive stance.</I><BR><U><BR>Paladin :</U>  <FONT color=#ff3300>~45%</FONT> mitigation<FONT color=#ccff00> </FONT><FONT color=#ccff00>~39%</FONT> avoidance (with defensive stance up, <B>adept1</B>). <I>At adept 3 it should be : <FONT color=#ff3300>47%</FONT> mitigation, <FONT color=#ccff00>42%</FONT> avoidance (like it is for a Guardian with only the defensive stance up).<BR>Berserker and Shadowknight should share these numbers.</I><BR><BR><BR>Now we can calculate the most basic combat situation and see how each class fare : <BR><BR>Guardian receive <FONT color=#ffff00>~29%</FONT> of incoming <B>physical </B>damage. (calculation : <FONT color=#ccff00>0.55</FONT> <FONT color=#ccff00>attack not avoided</FONT> * <FONT color=#ff3300>0.53</FONT><FONT color=#ff3300> damage from attack not reduced by mitigation</FONT> = <FONT color=#ffff00>0.29</FONT> <FONT color=#ffff00>damage</FONT>, ie <FONT color=#ffff00>29%</FONT>).<BR><BR>Bruiser receive <FONT color=#ffff00>~21.5%</FONT> of incoming <B>physical </B>damage. (calculation<FONT color=#ccff00> 0.34</FONT> * <FONT color=#ff3300>0.63</FONT> = <FONT color=#ffff00>0.215</FONT>).<BR><BR>Paladin receive  <FONT color=#ffff00>~33.5%</FONT><FONT color=#ffff00> </FONT>of incoming <B>physical </B>damage (calculation<FONT color=#ccff00> 0.61</FONT> * <FONT color=#ff3300>0.55</FONT> = <FONT color=#ffff00>0.335</FONT>).<BR><BR><BR><U>Conclusion </U>: pyjama fighter are<U> far better </U>than plate ones to reduce incoming damage. The Paladin (and any Berserker / Shadowknight) takes <B>55%</B> more damage (<FONT color=#ffff00>33.5</FONT> is 155% of <FONT color=#ffff00>21.5</FONT>) while having same quality gear and buff, the Guardian has two defensive buff of better quality -adept3- and same quality gear but takes <B>35%</B> more damage. Paladin receive <B>15%</B> more damage than the Guardian who has higher quality and class defining buff.<BR><BR><BR><B>I do not take into account the temporary mitigation buffs Guardian and Bruiser receive. Because they are temporary buff, and because the Bruiser got the best as the calculation below will show, so it would actually only make Guardian look worst to take them into account, and Paladin even worst, and it's not necessary for the points i wish to make on this post.</B><BR><BR><I>Here is proof :<BR><BR>Guardians have two short duration mitigation buffs :  Anchor ~600 for 30s every 180s and Commanding Presence ~400 for 30s every 90. So on average it's the equivalent of : 600 * 30/180 + 400 * 30/90 = 233 all time mitigation buff.<BR><BR>Bruisers get one short mitigation buff (not couting his emergency 600pt which stun him mitigation buff) : Strapping Spirit gives ~600 mitigation for 180s every 360s. So average it's the equivalent of 600 * 180/360 = 300 all time mitigation buff.<BR><BR><BR></I><BR><U><B>So with the revamp, pyjama fighter is already the king at tanking, by the old rules.<BR><BR></B></U><BR>But the revamp changed the way tanking is done. I see these points having huge impact in the difference between pyjama fighters and plate ones :<BR><BR>1. Magical damage from melee.<BR><BR>2. Avoidance Radius.<BR><BR>3. Combined Magical damage from melee with Avoidance Radius.<BR><BR>4. Buffing.<BR><BR>5. Tanking with multiple tank.<BR><BR>6. Cost of equipment.<BR><BR><BR><B><U><BR>1. Magical damage from melee.</U></B><BR><BR>This is an incredible imbalance between the two fighter types. Basically, <U>physical mitigation means nothing</U> against many new mobs in DOF, their autoattack as well as their combat abilities is mitigated by magical resistance. Making the plate advantage in mitigation obsolete.<BR><BR>With this design change, the plate armor is a <B>liability</B>, since it reduce the only unaffected parameter which is avoidance. <BR><BR>With this change the pyjama fighter is clearly the best choice as a MT, since he will never be nacked while going against an opponent doing magical damage. He will always keep his avoidance advantage, <U>while the plate fighter is a liability, since he fight naked</U>.<BR><BR>In the situation where both have good magical resistance, the pyjama is the clearly the winner, <U>since the physical mitigation advantage of the plate tank is gone</U>. Both fighter types mitigate equally but the pyjama one keep his <B>huge avoidance bonus</B>.<BR><BR>Here is two numerical examples showing this : <BR><BR><I>Mob attacking with cold resistance. First time the Bruiser (could be a Monk) and Paladin (could be Berserker or Shadowknight) are at 15% cold resistance. Second time they equip better and get both 50% cold resistance.</I><BR><BR><I>(<FONT color=#ccff00>100% - % avoidance</FONT>) * (<FONT color=#6666ff>100% - % cold resistance</FONT>) = <FONT color=#ffff00>% of damage taken</FONT>.<BR>Bruiser :<BR><FONT color=#ccff00>0.34</FONT> *<FONT color=#6666ff> .85 </FONT>= 0.29 => <FONT color=#ffff00>29%</FONT><BR>Paladin :<BR><FONT color=#ccff00>0.61</FONT> * <FONT color=#6666ff>.85 </FONT>= 0.52 => <FONT color=#ffff00>52%</FONT><BR>Bruiser : <BR><FONT color=#ccff00>0.34</FONT> * <FONT color=#6666ff>0.5 </FONT>= 0.17 =><FONT color=#ffff00> 17%</FONT><BR>Paladin :<BR><FONT color=#ccff00>0.61</FONT> *<FONT color=#6666ff> 0.5</FONT> = 0.305 => <FONT color=#ffff00>30.5%</FONT></I><BR><BR>These number are very disturbing, if both unprepared to the fight, the plate fighter takes <B>80%</B> (52 is 180% of 29) more damage than the pyjama type. If both are prepared, the plate fighter still takes<B> 80%</B> (30,5 is 180% of 17) more damage. <BR>We can also notice that if the plate fighter was prepared but not the pyjama one, they receive close to the same amount -plate receiving<B> 5%</B> more damage-. <U>This means there is no reason at all to let the plate fighter tank, even unprepared, the pyjama fighter will do better anyways.</U><BR><BR><BR><BR><B><U>2. Avoidance Radius.</U></B><BR><BR>Brawler now parry/block 360°,<U> rest of fighter only do so in the frontal arc</U>, both avoid 360°. Let's assume the frontal arc is 120°, even if it's not sure that it is that wide, it would give the following rule : <BR><BR>When the mob is in front, the avoidance of plate fighter isn't affected, but when the mob is not in front it drops to base chance of avoidance, which is <B>17%</B> for a plate tank, and <B>22%</B> for the guardian (with group defense buff at adept3).<BR><BR><U>This means being a plate fighter, you are a [Removed for Content] when fighting group encounter, compared to pyjama fighters.<BR></U><BR><BR>This is perfectly illustrated by the following example : <BR><BR><I>The Bruiser receive ~21.5% of incoming physical damage. (calculation 0.34 * 0.63 = 0.215). Doesn't matter if he is surrounded. (Calculations come from the beginning of the post).<BR><BR>The Paladin avoidance of attack would be when equally surrounded by mobs : <BR><FONT color=#ffffff>(</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>100% - % avoidance</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>) * 120° / 360° + (</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>100% - % base chance to avoid</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>) * 240° / 360° = </FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>% of attack not avoided</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>. </FONT><FONT color=#ffffff><BR></FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>(</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>0.61/3 + 0.83 *2 / 3</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff> ) = 0.755 = </FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>75.5%. </FONT><BR><BR>This mean the received physical damage would be : <BR>(<FONT color=#ccff00>% of not avoided attack</FONT>) * (<FONT color=#ff6600><FONT color=#ff3300>100% - % mitigation</FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>)</FONT></FONT> = <FONT color=#ffff00>% of damage taken.</FONT><BR><FONT color=#ccff00>0.755</FONT> * <FONT color=#ff3300>0.55</FONT> = <FONT color=#ffff00>41.5%.</FONT></I><BR><BR>When completly surrounded, the damage received by the plate fighter is going from 33.5% to 41.5%, while the pyjama fighter stays at 21,5%. This means the plate fighter damage is upped by <B>25%</B> in this situation, and compared to the pyjama fighter, they receive <B>93%</B> (41,5 is 193% of 21,5) more damage.<BR><BR><BR><BR><B><U>3. Combinaison of these two imbalance.</U></B><BR><BR>I will make it short, number are going to be absurd enough : <BR><BR><I>A Paladin and a Bruiser are surrounded by cold hitting mobs, both have 50% cold resistance :<BR><BR>Bruiser takes <FONT color=#ffff00> 17%</FONT> of damage. (calculations above : 1. and 2.)<BR><BR>Paladin takes<FONT color=#ccff00> 0.755</FONT> * <FONT color=#ff3300>0.5 </FONT>= <FONT color=#ffff00>38%</FONT>.<BR></I><BR>The Paladin is receiving <B>120%</B> more damage than the Bruiser (38 is 220% of 17). The damage received bye the paladin is<U> going up</U> while the bruiser damage is <U>decreasing</U>.<BR><BR><BR><BR><U><B>4. Buffing.</B></U><BR><BR>There is an imbalance also in the buffing area. <BR><BR>Pyjama fighter get the best hp per stamina points, <U>and since the cap of 350 is easy to max out</U>, they have the <B>larger hp pool of fighters</B>. Other fighters like Guardian who receive stamina buff is actually getting a band aid since in a raid situation, the cap would have been hit without his buff, meaning this advantage is <U>lost</U> due to the cap.<BR><BR>Avoidance contrarily to mitigation cannot be buffed equally between plate fighter and pyjama ones, first because avoidance of plate <U>is limited to the front arc</U>, second because deflection is a Brawler only skill. This is one more unique advantage to Brawler that set them above others.<BR><BR>Now let's consider the debuffing that mob can do : <BR>_Mitigation can be reduced.<BR>_Magical resistance can be reduced.<BR>_Defense can be reduced.<BR>_Parry can be reduced.<BR>_Can Deflection be reduced ??? Guess not.<BR><BR>This once again gives the pyjama fighter an advantage.<BR><BR><BR><BR><B><U>5. Tanking with multiple tanks.</U></B><BR><BR>The intercept / avoid for other abilities have been fixed with the revamp. <BR><BR>Pyjama fighter having the best avoidance, they offer the best avoidance bonus to others, <U>since you can only get one on the MT</U>, they make the best offtank for this reason.<BR><BR>Pyjama being hit the less, interception coming from friendly raid tank is going to work better on them, giving the healer more time to catch up on the healing : <BR><BR><I>a plate fighter being hit every 2 seconds receive 3 interceide on him to help the healer catch up, it gives healers 6 seconds of free time. <BR>a pyjama fighter being hit every 4 seconds receive 3 interceide on him, it gives 12 seconds of free time to healers.</I><BR><BR>Also, having the less physical mitigation, the interceide on them actually reduce damage done to the raid.<BR><BR><BR><BR><B><U>6. Costs of equipment.</U></B><BR><BR>No need to explain, everyone know that pyjama is cheap. At all lvl pyjama get most of his bonus from his class rather than by stuffing himself well, it's an easier investment than the plate fighter.<BR><BR><BR><B>Conclusion :</B><BR><BR><BR>Here is my understanding of the new fighter archetype : <BR><BR><U>Bottom </U>: <I>Guardian, the class has the worst damage,  get negative effect (root) for the ability they need to get the job done. And they get no <B>distinct advantage perceptible</B> <B>by the players</B> over any other fighter. The class is actually a <B>complete [Removed for Content]</B>.</I><BR><BR><U>Medium</U> : <I>Berserker and Shadowknight, these subclasses get the AOE damage and help the group dps : debuff for the SK and buff for the Berserk. They get the worst tanking utility (<U>slighty behind Guardian</U>) and are actually screwed since they don't get the best damage of the fighter archetype for this sacrifice.</I><BR><BR><U>Above average</U> :<I> Paladin : while they have <U>less</U> in defensive stats than the Guardian, the effect is <B>hardly felt while playing</B>, contrarily to the effect of their heals/ward which is <B>huge</B>. They tank better than Guardian due to this, their aggro is better too and they have an<U> inherent advantage versus magical damage</U> (wisdom buff and healing) that <U>no other plate fighter can equal</U>. They also get slitghly better damage than Guardian and a bonus against undead beings.</I><BR><BR><U>Top of the cream</U> :<I> Monk and Bruiser, the brawler class has the best damage, unrivaled by other fighters and <U>capable of reaching scouts and mages dps</U>. They get the best defense<B> in every situation</B>, getting ridiculously better than plate fighter in some <U>common situations</U>. They have the more out of jail cards in case they get in trouble : FD, mend, cure, huge mitigation boost, and they seem designed to be the new MT in raid.</I><BR><BR><BR><B>The current state of superfighter like Monk and Bruiser is the prime example that this revamp is a fiasco, since it was suppose to get rid of exploits in the combat system while diversifying fighters, and the result actually is a big imbalance between subclasses, where before the revamp subclasses were better balanced.<BR><BR>In the current state of things  i see no other way to deal with it than nerf Brawler defense below plate fighter and upgrade Guardian defense on physical damage to make it the complementary tank to Paladin. Thanks for reading.</B><BR><BR><BR>PS : sorry for bad english, it's not my native language.<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I agree with you but I think berserkers should be grouped with guardians in their tanking ways since we are both warriors.</P> <P>And also you listed that berserkers get buffs which we dont. Guardian buffs out right own our "BUFF" in every single way.</P>

[Corv]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Sixmains wrote:I don't agree with what you wrote. In DOF we have mob hitting with melee attack who do 'magical resistance' type of damage (ie poison, disease). You are mistaking some of their CAs like the nuke of Shadowknight like creature, which are indeed cast, and the regular autoattack of mobs. Against cast, avoidance doesn't matter we agree. I'm talking of melee attacks doing for example poison type damage, they are checked against your avoidance and then against your magical resistance (poison type on this example). You just have to go to sinking sand and test it against some of the lizard. <hr></blockquote>I know what you were talking about.  Parse a mage with 10% avoidance vs. a monk with 70% avoidance who both have the same disease resist.  They should avoid disease-based auto-attack precisely the same ammount.  If you find evidence to the contrary please post it here because I'd be very interested to see it.  </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Corvan on <span class=date_text>09-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:26 PM</span>

[FrostDragon]

<DIV>Very nice post from the OP and I like the subpost by OP about ideas for sheilds.    A change to sheids would be a great way without DEV changing the classes again.  making a tower sheild mean something again.</DIV>

[Gungo]

<P>Corvan it he is saying avodiance is not the issue the brawler would avoid the attacks more, sixman is saying mitigation on that attack is based on disease ressit. not physical trauma mitgation. </P> <P>so if 2 classes had the same avoidance but 1 class had higher AC and the othe rhigher disease resist the class with higher disease resists would take less damage.</P>

[Gungo]

<DIV> <HR> pre-revamp adding 5 defense was like adding an additional level to you character. Mobs would hit a lil less harder and a lil less often etc a mob that was hittign you like he was orange con with enuff defense would hit you like he was a yellow etc.<BR> <HR> <BR>Incorrect Gungo, adding defense is strictly adding avoidance. In the old system, you are correct though, that adding 5 defense raised your avoidance check to be 1 level higher, which in turn meant that you got hit less often (avoidance), but defense has never, and as far as I know, will never increase mitigation, which makes your statement about getting hit for less false. As a side note, avoidance scales with defense, while mitigation is always a flat number, unaffected by anything other than mitigation debuffs, it scales in level, but at a linear progression, whereas in the old system with avoidance, once you effectively greyed out a mob with defense stacking, your avoidance jumps exponentially.  Also, with avoidance capped for heavy armor wearers, defense makes very little difference. This in turn is one of the major sparks behind the outcry on the forums, that what defined our class (our high defense), has now been effectively nullified leaving us with nothing interesting.<BR> <P>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________</P> <P> </P> <P>lyrus that post you qouted is directly talking about the effect of defene pre revamp. And you are wrong in effect increasing your level would reduce how hard a high lvl mob hit you. Same reason why the con color of the mob makes a major difference on the damage you take. PRE-REVAMP you could be lvl 49 w +5 defense and take the same damge per hit a lvl 50 w no defense would. I never said defense added mtigation I said the mob would hit you for less damage. which it did and i presume still does. DEFENSE IS NOT AN AVOIDANCE BUFF. thats liek saying +fist is a damage buff which it is not. Yes i would do more damage with +fist skill but i also hit more often. Both the fist skill and defense skill was proven to do that PRE-REVAMP. At the moent i said no one know what the effect Defense has per point on tanking other then the side effect of more avoidance on the persona screen.</P></DIV>

[Corv]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote:<p>Corvan it he is saying avodiance is not the issue the brawler would avoid the attacks more, sixman is saying mitigation on that attack is based on disease ressit. not physical trauma mitgation. </p> <p>so if 2 classes had the same avoidance but 1 class had higher AC and the othe rhigher disease resist the class with higher disease resists would take less damage.</p> <hr></blockquote>Close.   Mitigation *and* avoidance are both applied to trauma only.  Your mitigation *and* avoidance of non-trauma damage is based entirely upon your resist vs that type of damage.  So say we have three players fighting a mob with disease based auto-attack: </span> <ul> <li><span>Player1: 80% avoidance & 30% mitigation vs. Trauma, 1000 disease resist</span></li> <li><span>Player2: 40% avoidance & 70% mitigation vs. Trauma, 1000 disease resist</span></li> <li><span>Player3: 20% avoidance & 10% mitigation vs. Trauma, 2000 disease resist</span></li> </ul> <span>Player1 and Player2 will both avoid and mitigate the damage by exactly the same ammount.  Player3 will avoid more and mitigate more than either Player1 or Player2.  Go jack up a mage's disease resist and fight some spectres in SS.  He will avoid more than a brawler with lower disease resist and mitigate more than a warrior with lower disease resist.  </span><span>This is why a scout, priest or mage, given high enough resists, can tank certain mobs better than a Guardian or Monk.  Yes, it makes very little sense, but that's how the system works at present.  </span><div></div>

[Gungo]

<DIV>Ok bud I'll take your word for it havne ttested it out myself. I was just trying to point out what he was saying but i get your point seems odd, but cool. Would be pretty cool on the occasional mob or named but on the majority of dof mobs seems a bit harsh.</DIV>

[BlackW]

<P>SOE went too far in buffing Monks and Bruisers, thus setting them up for a major nerf.   I do not support a major monk/bruiser nerf nor should any of you.   I support fighter subclass balance not nerfing or excessively buffing or nerfing any fighter subclass.   is time that the fighter subclasses stopped sniping at each other and started working together.   Advocating the nerf of another fighter subclass or an extreme buff of your own will get you nowhere.   What we need is balance, not more excessive nerfs or buffs.</P> <P>I am a high level armorer (my alt is) and what Sixmains says about plate armor being a disadvantage for plate armor fighters is true.   Our armor is even more important to us than it was before the combat changes.  Our avoidance is determined largely by our mitigation now and we cannot survive without the resists and stats on our plate armor.   Unfortunately SOE excessively nerfed plate armor in DoF/Combat Changes, especially handcrafted armor.    This is a stealth nerf to all plate armor fighters.   A major revamp is needed in all plate armor, especially in teir6.   The stats on tier6 handcrafted plate armor are so bad that we cant sell it.  Legendary is no longer legendary but adequate.    Fabled is more like legendary used to be.  The first thing that SOE can do is help plate armor fighters by buffing our armor.   I would suggest an across-the-board buff of at least 5% (at all tiers from level 20-60) to all stats on plate (especially handcrafted and legendary) armor just for starters.   Such a buff will benefit all plate armor fighters equally and will not nerf monks or bruisers.</P> <P>I think that SOE nearly got it right with the fighter subclasses but a final rebalancing is needed.  If they do not rebalance, we will not be seeing many gaurdians (or any plate armor fighter) at raids in the near future.   I think monks and bruisers are cool but I for one am not interested in playing a monk or bruiser.</P>

[Manyak]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Corvan wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>Close.   Mitigation *and* avoidance are both applied to trauma only.  Your mitigation *and* avoidance of non-trauma damage is based entirely upon your resist vs that type of damage.  <BR><BR>So say we have three players fighting a mob with disease based auto-attack:<BR></SPAN> <UL> <LI><SPAN>Player1: 80% avoidance & 30% mitigation vs. Trauma, 1000 disease resist</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN>Player2: 40% avoidance & 70% mitigation vs. Trauma, 1000 disease resist</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN>Player3: 20% avoidance & 10% mitigation vs. Trauma, 2000 disease resist</SPAN></LI></UL><SPAN>Player1 and Player2 will both avoid and mitigate the damage by exactly the same ammount.  Player3 will avoid more and mitigate more than either Player1 or Player2.  Go jack up a mage's disease resist and fight some spectres in SS.  He will avoid more than a brawler with lower disease resist and mitigate more than a warrior with lower disease resist.  </SPAN><SPAN>This is why a scout, priest or mage, given high enough resists, can tank certain mobs better than a Guardian or Monk.  Yes, it makes very little sense, but that's how the system works at present.  <BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>There are 2 types of attacks that can be dealt from mobs: one is the autoattack, the other is nukes. With nukes, this would be true. Avoidance doesnt come into play, just the resist. If resists are high, then when the nuke is cast by the mob, the tank will either resist the spell entirely, or take less damage with higher resists. With the autoattack, no matter what the disease resistance is, avoidance is applied first. So with the old school trauma autoattack, the hit would be checked against avoidance to see if it hits, then agaist mitigation to see how much damage it would do if it does hit. With a disease based autoattack, the attack is first put through avoidance, and then the disease resist value is used in place of the regular mitigation value.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Consider the following situation:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Player 1: lvl 51 Naked Warlock, Self Buffed (notice the NAKED part)</DIV> <DIV>35% Avoidance</DIV> <DIV>600 Mitigation</DIV> <DIV>30% Poison Resist (Approx. 1500)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Player 2: lvl 51 Guardian, Full ebon armor with Cobalt Leggings and full set of Jewlery (mix of fabled, legendary, and treasured), Self Buffed</DIV> <DIV>48% Avoidance</DIV> <DIV>2400 Mitigation</DIV> <DIV>26% Poison Resist (approx 1300)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>These are actual stats from players, rounded off just so the numbers look nice. Either way, if what ur saying is true, then wearing armor doesnt make a difference at ALL. Just get someone with the right buffs for any mob and u dont gotta worry bout nuthin. Doubt that. Go try it and see for yourself. That extra avoidance on the guardian from the AGI on his armor will make a difference. He will take less hits, but take bigger ones (since lower resist).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Either way, if u ask me i think thats just scary. Having a naked toon able to tank comparably to one in full plate armor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But anyway, back to the main subject. We know that brawler types have higher avoidance than plate types, damage mitigation is capped earlier than avoidance, and that DoF mobs (including epic ones) have different types of autoattacks. So, using just pure logic, its obvious that pajama type tanks are better than plate tanks in every way. When doing regular XP grouping, whatever tank you have doesnt really matter since all the mobs under orange are [Removed for Content] anyway, and all the orange ones have been made near impossible. Not only that, but once we all hit 60, most people arent even gonna be grouping anymore...just raiding for the most part. And we all know that in a raid, we try to get the best buffs on the tank as possible, according to the damage dealt by a mob.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now in the original post, its proven that pajama tanks will take less damage than plate tanks when solo buffed against trauma-autoattack mobs. Now if you think about it, it makes even MORE of a difference when the mob does some other kind of damage with autoattack. Lets say the mob has a mental based autoattack (dunno if there are any that use mental autos, but just gonna use as an example). Best buff combo would be a fury, illusionist/coercer, and troubador. Together, they give a nice chunk of mental resist to the group. Then, given that the autoattack is checked VS avoidance before the mental resist, the pajama tank (who would have a higher avoidance) would be able to tank the mob MUCH better than a plate tank, especially since his mental mitigation would be buffed just about the same as a plate tank. This COMPLETELY cancels out the advantage a plate tank has with mitigation....whether its capped or not. Even WITH mitigation a plate tank takes more damage than a pajama tank on tauma mobs, now when u make the mitigation equal on both tanks (cuz of the diff types of damage), this makes that extra avoidance of pajamas SO much better its rediculous. Its like saying, why the hell even have plate classes in the game at all.....theres a much better tank than a gaurd, and theres a much better DPS than a zerker. A dirge is a beter rezzer than a pally (whos heals arent that important in raids anyway), and SKs can replaced by pretty much anything. Pallys and SKs were sometimes useful for the extra mittigation they give the MT, but now with other types of attacks that mit is useless.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Based on all this, plate wearers are gimped so bad that they are pretty close to useless. That armor only gives a slight bonus over being naked when it comes to certain mobs....and when it come to the rest of the mobs, a monk/bruiser is a better tank anyway. That kills the whole idea of guards. And, with the near-uselessness of mitigation now, the extra bonus from pallys and SKs is near-useless as well, and their other utilities can be done by other classes anyway. The main problem isnt really the value of mit-vs-avoidance. Yes, it makes a big difference, but other class's buffs can outweigh it in a raid. The real problem is the way mitigation is applied in the game. Also, with all the extra health that monks and bruisers get over the traditional guard tank, the few times that that person in a pajama get hit big, there will still be alot more HP left to give healers time to react than when a guard gets hit big. Old jobs were much better: Guard was MT, Zerker was DPS/HP buff, Pally/SK were support, monks were DPS, and bruiseres were DPS / occasional OT. It worked fine. Each class had its own distinct job. Now, the monks and bruisers have the job of all the other classes, and do each job better than any one of them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now heres a thaught....if all tanks should tank equally well (which ISNT the case, but was the idea the devs had), then why not do the same thing with al the other classes? have mages all nuke the same....scouts all DPS the same...and healers all heal the same. Then we could just play the game with 4 diff classes - fighter, mage, priest, and scout. But of course, in that case everything would just be too easy, and the game wouldnt even be nearly as fun anymore. Actualy, with this update, alot of stuff has been taken away so badly that classes dont have the individuality they had before. Everyone is pretty interchangable in almost everything. Not just tanks. As an illusionist i lost my job of keeping everyone breezed and giving mages more mana. Of course, all these illu complains dont belong in this board so i wont go on with that. But either way, it comes down to the fact that every single class in this game has been gimped to lose their individual jobs that make them different from any other class.....all except the monks and bruisers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>----editted for a REALLY bad grammar correction</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>------------------------</DIV> <DIV>Manyak - 52 Illusionist - Faydark Server</DIV><p>Message Edited by DaMutation on <span class=date_text>09-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:14 PM</span>

[Rochir]

<P>Oh my.   I just opened my persona screen while I was unequipping my armor (full pristine ebon) and equipping my tradeskill clothing which is like being naked where it is equipped.   The result was very interesting:</P> <P>Avoidance with greaves, curiass and gauntlets equipped - 22.2%</P> <P>Avoidance without greaves, curiass or gauntlets - 26.4%</P> <P>LOL!   4.2% higher avoidance while half naked!</P> <P>Now that is just silly <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[Meridious]

<div></div><font color="#ff9900"></font><font color="#ff9900">I'd have to agree with most of what I have seen in the posts.</font><hr>SOE went too far in buffing Monks and Bruisers, thus setting them up for a major nerf.<hr><font color="#ff9900">T</font><font color="#ff9900">he </font><font color="#ff9900"><u><b>WORST NERFS</b></u></font><font color="#ff9900"> are the </font><font color="#ff9900"><u><b>REVERSE nerfs</b></u></font><font color="#ff9900"> that Devs use to reverse an OVERVERF previously implemented. Hell, there is a term for it but I forget what it is.</font><font color="#ff9900"></font><font color="#ff9900"></font><font color="#ff9900">They are the suckiest of all. Nothing worse than being accidentally overpowered. The nerf that they hit with to correct it more often than not will go way off the deep end. Can anyone say, EQ1?   <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></font><font color="#ff9900"></font><font color="#ff9900"></font><font color="#ff9900">For those classes let's hope that SOE can take some deep breaths and steps back prior to patching the "big fix."</font><font color="#ff9900"></font><font color="#ff9900"></font>

[Manyak]

<DIV>aye nerfs are bad. it was much nicer before. actually, its gotta so bad IMO im ready to leave the game cuz of it.</DIV>

[Rochir]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> DaMutation wrote:<BR> <BR> <DIV>There are 2 types of attacks that can be dealt from mobs: one is the autoattack, the other is nukes. With nukes, this would be true. Avoidance doesnt come into play, just the resist. If resists are high, then when the nuke is cast by the mob, the tank will either resist the spell entirely, or take less damage with higher resists. With the autoattack, no matter what the disease resistance is, avoidance is applied first. So with the old school trauma autoattack, the hit would be checked against avoidance to see if it hits, then agaist mitigation to see how much damage it would do if it does hit. With a disease based autoattack, the attack is first put through avoidance, and then the disease resist value is used in place of the regular mitigation value.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Consider the following situation:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Player 1: lvl 51 Naked Warlock, Self Buffed (notice the NAKED part)</DIV> <DIV>35% Avoidance</DIV> <DIV>600 Mitigation</DIV> <DIV>30% Poison Resist (Approx. 1500)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Player 2: lvl 51 Guardian, Full ebon armor with Cobalt Leggings and full set of Jewlery (mix of fabled, legendary, and treasured), Self Buffed</DIV> <DIV>48% Avoidance</DIV> <DIV>2400 Mitigation</DIV> <DIV>26% Poison Resist (approx 1300)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>These are actual stats from players, rounded off just so the numbers look nice. Either way, if what ur saying is true, then wearing armor doesnt make a difference at ALL. Just get someone with the right buffs for any mob and u dont gotta worry bout nuthin. Doubt that. Go try it and see for yourself. That extra avoidance on the guardian from the AGI on his armor will make a difference. He will take less hits, but take bigger ones (since lower resist).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Either way, if u ask me i think thats just scary. Having a naked toon able to tank comparably to one in full plate armor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But anyway, back to the main subject. We know that brawler types have higher avoidance than plate types, damage mitigation is capped earlier than avoidance, and that DoF mobs (including epic ones) have different types of autoattacks. So, using just pure logic, its obvious that pajama type tanks are better than plate tanks in every way. When doing regular XP grouping, whatever tank you have doesnt really matter since all the mobs under orange are [Removed for Content] anyway, and all the orange ones have been made near impossible. Not only that, but once we all hit 60, most people arent even gonna be grouping anymore...just raiding for the most part. And we all know that in a raid, we try to get the best buffs on the tank as possible, according to the damage dealt by a mob.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now in the original post, its proven that pajama tanks will take less damage than plate tanks when solo buffed against trauma-autoattack mobs. Now if you think about it, it makes even MORE of a difference when the mob does some other kind of damage with autoattack. Lets say the mob has a mental based autoattack (dunno if there are any that use mental autos, but just gonna use as an example). Best buff combo would be a fury, illusionist/coercer, and troubador. Together, they give a nice chunk of mental resist to the group. Then, given that the autoattack is checked VS avoidance before the mental resist, the pajama tank (who would have a higher avoidance) would be able to tank the mob MUCH better than a plate tank, especially since his mental mitigation would be buffed just about the same as a plate tank. This COMPLETELY cancels out the advantage a plate tank has with mitigation....whether its capped or not. Even WITH mitigation a plate tank takes more damage than a pajama tank on tauma mobs, now when u make the mitigation equal on both tanks (cuz of the diff types of damage), this makes that extra avoidance of pajamas SO much better its rediculous. Its like saying, why the hell even have plate classes in the game at all.....theres a much better tank than a gaurd, and theres a much better DPS than a zerker. A dirge is a beter rezzer than a pally (whos heals arent that important in raids anyway), and SKs can replaced by pretty much anything. Pallys and SKs were sometimes useful for the extra mittigation they give the MT, but now with other types of attacks that mit is useless.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Based on all this, plate wearers are gimped so bad that they are pretty close to useless. That armor only gives a slight bonus over being naked when it comes to certain mobs....and when it come to the rest of the mobs, a monk/bruiser is a better tank anyway. That kills the whole idea of guards. And, with the near-uselessness of mitigation now, the extra bonus from pallys and SKs is near-useless as well, and their other utilities can be done by other classes anyway. The main problem isnt really the value of mit-vs-avoidance. Yes, it makes a big difference, but other class's buffs can outweigh it in a raid. The real problem is the way mitigation is applied in the game. Also, with all the extra health that monks and bruisers get over the traditional guard tank, the few times that that person in a pajama get hit big, there will still be alot more HP left to give healers time to react than when a guard gets hit big. Old jobs were much better: Guard was MT, Zerker was DPS/HP buff, Pally/SK were support, monks were DPS, and bruiseres were DPS / occasional OT. It worked fine. Each class had its own distinct job. Now, the monks and bruisers have the job of all the other classes, and do each job better than any one of them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now heres a thaught....if all tanks should tank equally well (which ISNT the case, but was the idea the devs had), then why not do the same thing with al the other classes? have mages all nuke the same....scouts all DPS the same...and healers all heal the same. Then we could just play the game with 4 diff classes - fighter, mage, priest, and scout. But of course, in that case everything would just be too easy, and the game wouldnt even be nearly as fun anymore. Actualy, with this update, alot of stuff has been taken away so badly that classes dont have the individuality they had before. Everyone is pretty interchangable in almost everything. Not just tanks. As an illusionist i lost my job of keeping everyone breezed and giving mages more mana. Of course, all these illu complains dont belong in this board so i wont go on with that. But either way, it comes down to the fact that every single class in this game has been gimped to lose their individual jobs that make them different from any other class.....all except the monks and bruisers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>----editted for a REALLY bad grammar correction</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>------------------------</DIV> <DIV>Manyak - 52 Illusionist - Faydark Server</DIV> <P>Message Edited by DaMutation on <SPAN class=date_text>09-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:14 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>The old days are gone and they are not coming back.   Maybe that is for the best.   There is something funny going on with our avoidance and mitigation.   It seems that the heavier our armor, the lower our avoidance.   I still think the problem is a much needed armor buff as we are now so dependent on our armor for everything, mitigation, resists, stats.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was wondering something, are we better off wearing chain, leather or even cloth armor than plate?   Would the increased avoidance offset the loss in mitigation etc.?    If that were true, something is seriously messed up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am an armorer, I could make myself a full suit of chain mail and see if it works better than plate does now <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><p>Message Edited by Rochir on <span class=date_text>09-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:32 PM</span>

[TanRaistlyn]

<DIV>Great post Damutation, other classes are starting to see our problems finally and bringing them up so something can be done. Us guardians appreciate it greatly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Covenant</DIV>

[Rochir]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TanRaistlyn wrote:<BR> <DIV>Great post Damutation, other classes are starting to see our problems finally and bringing them up so something can be done. Us guardians appreciate it greatly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Covenant</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>The top gaurdian in my guild has quit EQ2 and is playing WoW.

[Feaw]

<DIV>Im sorry but no matter how well put together the OP is its still has a lot of assumptions in it.   Also we have to remember what SOE has said about the class rolls.    I still here people expecting to have a class that does it all.  I have a 50 pally and I dont come to the same conclusions as the OP sorry.    It seems I can do what what SOE says Im supposed to do and so can the guardians and SKs I have grouped with.  </DIV>

[Manyak]

<DIV>Actually Rochir i have had scouts tell me that when they solo they replace their chainmail with leather for the added avoidance. But not exactly sure of the diff between plate and chain. Either way i think i will be trying putting leather armor on a guardian to see how it works out. I have a feeling itll still be worse than monks/bruisers though, since they have skills that increase their avoidance and mit on themselves. But well just have to see about that.</DIV>

[Pry]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Feawin wrote:<BR> <DIV>Im sorry but no matter how well put together the OP is its still has a lot of assumptions in it.   Also we have to remember what SOE has said about the class rolls.    I still here people expecting to have a class that does it all.  I have a 50 pally and I dont come to the same conclusions as the OP sorry.    It seems I can do what what SOE says Im supposed to do and so can the guardians and SKs I have grouped with.  </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT face=Verdana>What you hear is people saying that the ONE and ONLY ability that a Guardian has, the ability to Tank, has been taken away.  Now whether your belief is that it is because other classes can do it now which has sullied the line between classes, or that you have been nerfed beyond your capacity to do it well is rather academic.  The reality is that those other classes can tank AND they have abilities to provide support roles  (such as heal or FD) AND can mitigate/avoid damage better while Guardians have no such abilities.  The people who come on here and say that Guardians have "protectorate" abilities are either Moorguard (who hasn't leveled a guardian from 1 to 50 in his life), or people who play other classes who don't want to get nerfed.   The truth is that the protectorate abilites aren't any different than what any other class can have by generating huge amounts of aggro and overly mitigating and avoiding damage.  The only difference is that they don't need spells to do it, and theirs is better.   </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>And honestly, I don't know a Guardian who wants a support role.  We played Guardian because we were good at tanking, which in turn gave us good options for groups (what SOE wants).  If I wanted to play something that had a support role, then I would have played something else, period.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>I don't know how I can express it any simpler than that.  IMHO, should they want 6 different classes to tank as well as each other, they should have either taken away those abilities from those classes and given them to scouts OR given Guardians something to even the playing field, such as increasing the cap for guardians on Stamina, or Strength, or have using a Tower Shield mean something significant, and unique to guardians.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>You don't play a Guardian of course so you don't really understand.  You are probably happier than a pig in ca-ca that you are getting more groups, that people want you to tank more, that your guild can use you if they so desire as MA.   The worst fear is that SOE would say "You know, the combat changes aren't fair" because that would mean that there is a chance that what you are now will be lesser.  That's truly the only reason to argue it.  However, I think what is being said (mostly) here is that the bait and switch tactics are a load of horse dung.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>In conclusion, we should be able to if we so desire, change our class to something else without having to re-roll.  Because the class is a near shell of what it once was, it's not fun to play and the end that many imagined when they started playing ended up somewhere that they weren't promised.  I think this is a fair and reasonable solution to the problem, since SOE's offical answer is "You can protect" (which we really can't do all that well), and don't seem to want to do anything about it.  It's clear that Guardians aren't wanted (or needed) in the game, so why not just get rid of them and compensate us for the hours and hours we spent on our toons.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Guardians couldn't do it all.  We couldn't LOH, or do DPS, or feign, safe fall, lifetap, or cast spells.  All we could do is don heavy armor and stand as a shield for our group, and since that's no longer a valid premise, Guardians are worthless compared to what they once were because anyone (even a Necro pet) can do it now.  I hope this clears it up for you anyway.  </FONT></P><p>Message Edited by Prynn on <span class=date_text>09-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:07 PM</span>

[Manyak]

<DIV>great post Prynn....it pretty much sums it all up</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>----------------------</DIV> <DIV>Manyak - 52 Illusionist - Faydark Server</DIV>

[Greyform]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Prynn wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Feawin wrote:<BR> <DIV>Im sorry but no matter how well put together the OP is its still has a lot of assumptions in it.   Also we have to remember what SOE has said about the class rolls.    I still here people expecting to have a class that does it all.  I have a 50 pally and I dont come to the same conclusions as the OP sorry.    It seems I can do what what SOE says Im supposed to do and so can the guardians and SKs I have grouped with.  </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT face=Verdana>What you hear is people saying that the ONE and ONLY ability that a Guardian has, the ability to Tank, has been taken away.  Now whether your belief is that it is because other classes can do it now which has sullied the line between classes, or that you have been nerfed beyond your capacity to do it well is rather academic.  The reality is that those other classes can tank AND they have abilities to provide support roles  (such as heal or FD) AND can mitigate/avoid damage better while Guardians have no such abilities.  The people who come on here and say that Guardians have "protectorate" abilities are either Moorguard (who hasn't leveled a guardian from 1 to 50 in his life), or people who play other classes who don't want to get nerfed.   The truth is that the protectorate abilites aren't any different than what any other class can have by generating huge amounts of aggro and overly mitigating and avoiding damage.  The only difference is that they don't need spells to do it, and theirs is better.   </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>And honestly, I don't know a Guardian who wants a support role.  We played Guardian because we were good at tanking, which in turn gave us good options for groups (what SOE wants).  If I wanted to play something that had a support role, then I would have played something else, period.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>I don't know how I can express it any simpler than that.  IMHO, should they want 6 different classes to tank as well as each other, they should have either taken away those abilities from those classes and given them to scouts OR given Guardians something to even the playing field, such as increasing the cap for guardians on Stamina, or Strength, or have using a Tower Shield mean something significant, and unique to guardians.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>You don't play a Guardian of course so you don't really understand.  You are probably happier than a pig in ca-ca that you are getting more groups, that people want you to tank more, that your guild can use you if they so desire as MA.   The worst fear is that SOE would say "You know, the combat changes aren't fair" because that would mean that there is a chance that what you are now will be lesser.  That's truly the only reason to argue it.  However, I think what is being said (mostly) here is that the bait and switch tactics are a load of horse dung.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>In conclusion, we should be able to if we so desire, change our class to something else without having to re-roll.  Because the class is a near shell of what it once was, it's not fun to play and the end that many imagined when they started playing ended up somewhere that they weren't promised.  I think this is a fair and reasonable solution to the problem, since SOE's offical answer is "You can protect" (which we really can't do all that well), and don't seem to want to do anything about it.  It's clear that Guardians aren't wanted (or needed) in the game, so why not just get rid of them and compensate us for the hours and hours we spent on our toons.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Guardians couldn't do it all.  We couldn't LOH, or do DPS, or feign, safe fall, lifetap, or cast spells.  All we could do is don heavy armor and stand as a shield for our group, and since that's no longer a valid premise, Guardians are worthless compared to what they once were because anyone (even a Necro pet) can do it now.  I hope this clears it up for you anyway.  </FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Prynn on <SPAN class=date_text>09-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>09:07 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>This is exactly the problem, I just don't see why MG refuses to see this.</P> <P>I am like 10% from dinging 50 and don't even feel like logging in because I don't want to waste anymore time on a game I may just have to walk away from. it truly saddens me.</P> <P> </P>

[Sixmai]

Actually under the new system, a Guardian should keep sets of very light / light armor with high magic resistance, so if they encounter a mob using only magical resistance type of damage, they can upgrade their avoidance. It won't reach the avoidance of Brawler, so you are still a [Removed for Content] in comparison. This is a prime example of failed design which is all the revamp is about. They won't be able to fix and bring equality in tanking unless by making pyjama tank subpar at it, because they have too much situational advantage. Anyway monks should be subpar at tanking, able to do the job but subpar anyways, since their class is all about the damage from a design point a view. On another subject : Now i may have an explanation to the observation Corvan made. Maybe the miss you have seen is when having high magical resistance on a caster is due to the way mitigation work on attack compared to the way it works on magical damage. On magical damage, resistance is a hard static reduction, ie you get 200 poison damage, a 50% resistance will always put it a 100 pt. On attack,  mitigation is not a hard static number, you can mitigate most of the attack, or all the attack, there is some randomness in it. Maybe your mage was completly absorbing hits, and on the log it's recorded as a miss. But sowing a 44% mitigation means you"ll absorb 44% of the damage received, despite the randomness. To the poster saying i made alot of assumption in my post, please explain yourself or shut up, there is only one place where my post could be wrong : it is taking the mitigation and avoidance shown in personna windows as true. If they are not true, then i'll be glad the dev could correct it and we'll see if my calculations still hold true, but atm noone can say they are false.

[Tilane]

<DIV>nice post and all , but i dont see much of this in real practice ...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>sure i can tank as a monk , but when we get to named mobs i am a downer fast if we dont have 2 healers , gaurdians still tank the best from actual group fights ive been in </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>also they seem to keep agro allot better then me on groups , making life easier on everyone </DIV>

[Korwyn]

<DIV>Great post Prynn!!  You pretty much summed up how I feel.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was in a group last night with a Nec ,Monk, Wizard,  Fury and a Ranger,  on pull the monk (65% of the time)or nec pet would always get agro even when I did the pulling and I would spend the rest of the fight trying to regain agro...till I finally gave up and sad crap it is not worth it heck the monk took no more damage than I did!!  HE even  told the healer that even if he did take some not to heal him as he would just heal himself. (Nice!! if I was smart I would have leveled a Monk, but I do not have the energy or desire to level another character in EQ2...I will save it for Vanguard or D&D online when they come out)  I quit EQ2 and only came back because of the expansion...then they do this...</DIV> <DIV>I have spent the last weeks since the nerf playing with friends and leveled to 50 from 48 that frankly was the only thing that kept me playing...now that I am 50 I have no real desire to log in.  The only thing that gets me in now is when my friends call and ask me to...I really am sad about the whole thing.  I just can hope that they do something.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Cormac 50 Guardian</DIV>

[EvilIguana9]

Fighters tank.  That is their job.  When one of them tanks the BEST the others serve no purpose.  Why choose a paladin when you could have a priest unless the job is to be the tank.  Why choose a berserker when you could get a scout.  Thus anyone asking to be the best tank in all situations is either ignorant or just selfish.  The game was sold to us with the ideal that all fighters would be able to fulfill the tank role equally overall.  If you picked the guardian to be the best class you are a [Removed for Content].  I'm sorry but that is the truth.  Just because guardians were the best for a while doesn't mean they should stay that way.  Now <i>brawlers</i> are the best tanks, AND the best dps of the fighters.  Those are two seperate issues but they are both important.  All fighters should be equal tanks because tanking is what they do.  They should achieve parity through different channels and they should have unique situations where their abilities exceed those of the other fighter classes.  All fighters should have seperate but equal non-tanking utility as well.  Personally I think we should all have equal mitigation and avoidance.  That's the only way we will see any balance.  It's easy to justify that from a roleplaying perspective as well.  Brawlers have higher natural mitigation and avoidance because their training lets them willfully harden their bodies against attack, but their gear will not add as much defense.  Fighters and criusaders have less natural defense but since they wear plate their gear will add a great deal to that ability.  Plate armor adds to avoidance in reality as well, since blows that would have harmed a unarmored person slide harmlessly off of the metal surface.  Since monks use their bodies to parry blows they logically take hits directly to their skin that would be damaging if not for their supernatural ability to shrug off the damage.  Just give up and make all tanks avoid and mitigate equally. It makes sense from both balance and roleplaying standards. <div></div>

[Dwergux]

Great post. One remark though, don't overestimate the power of paladin heals / wards. Mobs stun alot so heals and wards get interupted alot. Also heals and wards take a long time to cast(meaning no time for other skills if they are needed (like stuns, taunts, etc), no damage output while they are being casted (no autoatacks when casting) and they can be interupted alot). Using heals and wards is also very power consuming, taking power away from damage skills and taunts. So bottom line is Paladins and Guardians tank about equal, But guardians are too much of a one trick monkey (ie very little support when they aren't the MT) compared to all other fighters. <div></div>

[Pry]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> EvilIguana966 wrote:<BR>Fighters tank.  That is their job.  When one of them tanks the BEST the others serve no purpose.  Why choose a paladin when you could have a priest unless the job is to be the tank.  Why choose a berserker when you could get a scout.  Thus anyone asking to be the best tank in all situations is either ignorant or just selfish.  The game was sold to us with the ideal that all fighters would be able to fulfill the tank role equally overall.  If you picked the guardian to be the best class you are a [Removed for Content].  I'm sorry but that is the truth.  Just because guardians were the best for a while doesn't mean they should stay that way.  Now <I>brawlers</I> are the best tanks, AND the best dps of the fighters.  Those are two seperate issues but they are both important.  All fighters should be equal tanks because tanking is what they do.  They should achieve parity through different channels and they should have unique situations where their abilities exceed those of the other fighter classes.  All fighters should have seperate but equal non-tanking utility as well. <BR><BR>Personally I think we should all have equal mitigation and avoidance.  That's the only way we will see any balance.  It's easy to justify that from a roleplaying perspective as well.  Brawlers have higher natural mitigation and avoidance because their training lets them willfully harden their bodies against attack, but their gear will not add as much defense.  Fighters and criusaders have less natural defense but since they wear plate their gear will add a great deal to that ability.  Plate armor adds to avoidance in reality as well, since blows that would have harmed a unarmored person slide harmlessly off of the metal surface.  Since monks use their bodies to parry blows they logically take hits directly to their skin that would be damaging if not for their supernatural ability to shrug off the damage. <BR><BR>Just give up and make all tanks avoid and mitigate equally. It makes sense from both balance and roleplaying standards.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT face=Verdana>Okay.  Well I would like to take the opportunity, if you will permit me, to humor you for a second. </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Let's say that everything you said is true.</FONT></P> <OL> <LI><FONT face=Verdana>All fighters should tank.</FONT></LI> <LI><FONT face=Verdana>Some fighters should heal.</FONT></LI> <LI><FONT face=Verdana>Some fighters should feign death.</FONT></LI> <LI><FONT face=Verdana>Some fighters should lifetap.</FONT></LI> <LI><FONT face=Verdana>Some fighters should have DPS.</FONT></LI></OL> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Now, given that all 6 fighter archtypes fit into group 1, and that 5 of 6 archtypes fit into one of the next groups (or in some cases 2 in the next groups) the next question should clearly be "Where do Guardians fit?"  My Guardian, for example, can't heal, nor can feign, nor lifetap and doesn't have DPS.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Let's get a bit more granular as it pertains to you and I.  You are a 49 Paladin, and I am a 50 Guardian.  Let's see what you can do and what I can do and compare them side by side:</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>A Paladin can:</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff0000>Tank</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Rez</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Get a horse</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Heal</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>LOH</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Ward</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Stun</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Do DPS</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff0000>Shield Allies from Attack</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>A Guardian can:</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff0000>Tank</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Stifle</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffcc00>Shield Allies from Attack</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffcc00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ffcc00>*Abilities in Gold don't work</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff0000>*Abilities in Red are shared abilities</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Oh wait, we were told that the Guardian's class defining ability was to shield a GROUP from attack, rather than an individual.  That would be wonderful, except it doesn't work, and you have it (in an individual form) which certainly does work.  Ahh, I am starting to get a handle on this class balancing thing!  Let's go further shall we?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Let me ask you, if your impression was that you were going to tank, then why did you play a Paladin?  Because I am sure that in your thought process you were thinking:  "Hey, this will be cool, I can tank like a Guardian and Heal, and LOH, and get a horse, and Stun and...and...wow!"  And when you logged on and were playing secondary roles a lot of the time simply because you couldn't tank like a Guardian BUT you had all of those cool abilities, at what point did you say "I wish I played a Guardian, because if I did I might be able to Tank?"  And how many people (and I can dig up literally 1000's of posts on the topic) complained that they couldn't tank like a Guardian could, and therefore their class was useless.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>It sounds like to me the only thing that you (and others) think is good about your classes is your ability to Tank.  Because if SOE were to take one of those...wow 9+ class defining abilities from you and give them to all fighters instead my oh my how the Paladin board would be filled with screams of Nerfdom!  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>What they did is they took away something...One thing...from Guardians and gave them to other classes.  Only problem is that the only thing we had to give, the ability to Tank, is now spread across many classes.  So all I am saying is that if we go back to the original logic, and ALL classes are to tank the same, then what is the Paladin class (for example) going to give to, say Guardians in return...you know for balance (that's what you want, right?)  I think I will choose Heal from Paladins, Lifetap from SK's, and feign death from Brawlers/Monks, and then and ONLY then do we have a fair combat system.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>But like I said, we can't have that.  Gaige's post count would go to 12,000 much more quickly, Celebrities will start playing Guardians, SOE developers will actually have to start playing the Guardian class, cats and dogs would start sleeping together, the whole thing would be an even bigger mess.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana>No guardian is really asking for nerfs to other classes.  I know that is why you, a 49 paladin posts here, because of the fear of the Nerf Bat, and nobody (even us) wants that.  All we are asking for is a class defining ability.  I think that class defining ability doesn't exist at this point, because as soon as one is given 5 other classes will be screaming about it.  And since our ability to provide "Situational Tanking" has been stripped, the class is useless.  Therefore like I said, let me re-roll into another class and abandon Guardians altogehter. </FONT> </DIV>

[EvilIguana9]

I chose paladin because I liked the lore of the class, I like being front and center in the fight, and I ALWAYS play paladins as my main character.  I do not want to be overpowered or underpowered.  Paladins are supposed to be equal to guardians in tanking ability.  That doesn't mean we will have the same base mitigation and avoidance.  We have spells that are supposed to close that gap.  One's ability to tank is more than just the flat mitigation/avoid values.  Guardians don't need to out tank anyone, what they need is more non-tanking utility.  A paladins heals/wards double as utility when not tanking.  There is a multitude of things that guardians could have added to make them better balanced.  Personally I've always thought of warriors in general as being a bit over paladins in damage potential.  After all you guys do get dual weapons.  That's one avenue to improve.  If you wanted to draw on D&D for inspiration look at all the things fighters can do, called shot to the arms and legs, knockdowns, power attack, expertise, etc.  Now paladins can choose a lot of those feats too, but the fighter gets feats at twice the rate of the paladin meaning they can do a lot of cool tricks.  Paladins in D&D don't have the combat endurance that fighters do because many of their special abilities have a limited number of uses per day.  So there are things that can be done to make things more even.  You just have to think outside the box. <div></div>

[Fafnir]

<P>SOE's whole approach to this is stupid.  The approach as designed before this "revamp" was better.</P> <P>Only 1 player tanks per group.  Only 1 or 2 tanks per raid.</P> <P>The game needs is a standout tank and other tanks with higher DPS/utility to add to the group.  The non tanking fighters then bring more to the group than the [Removed for Content] dps.  The group goes with either a utility tank if that works best for what you are doing (e.g. xp plough) or the standout best tank if that is what is needed (e.g. raiding, hard named).</P>

[Fafnir]

<P>By the way, it would be great if SOE could acknowledge this comprehensive and insightful post.</P> <P>This guy should get a medal, and the lead developer job at SOE.</P>

[Fafnir]

<P>Avoidance tanking is guaranteed to be unbalancing often.  It was evident in EQ1 (monk tanking in Velious) and it is evident every time they try to "balance" the fighter archtype.</P> <P>Mitigation tanking should be the baseline for every fight.  The brawler class should be a tanking capable but mostly DPS oriented class, like EQ1.</P> <P>I'm surprised SOE hasn't woken up to its flight of fancy.</P>

[hyks]

<DIV><img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <P>Message Edited by hyksos on <SPAN class=date_text>09-25-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>10:15 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by hyksos on <span class=date_text>09-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:15 PM</span>

[hyks]

<DIV> <P><SPAN>Agree Prynn. i have quit and i wasnt just a reg Guardian i raid everything in game and was fully fabled. i spent hrs upon hrs lvling amd gearing my toon, for what to be nerfed to the worse tanking class in game.... canceled my account two days ago and not coming back, its sad to cus i will miss all my friends. however, like i have said in previous post Vanguard will be coming out in 1 yr and ill be playing it. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN>kinda funny why does SOE have the forums if they dont listen to their customers!!! do they not understand that what forums are for (customer feedback).  gonna [Removed for Content] when thers not enough ppl on servers and they have to combine em like eq1. </SPAN></P></DIV>

[Pry]

<P><FONT face=Verdana>I only find it ironic that Moorgard, someone who would be on Mobhunter complaining about the combat changes right now if he weren't an SOE employee, is actually a contributor to it...and defends it!  Funny how salary and ego changes your perspective, eh?</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>If EQ2 was a U.S. state it would be Montana - pretty but empty.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>What's next on the SOE agenda?  Replace loot with tickets that you can use to buy merchandise like in the arcade?  You know, 20,000 tickets buys a comb, 30,000 buys a small stuffed animal.  1 Ticket per kill!  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Then you can start charging per ticket!  $1 US for every 500 tickets!  You want to kill EQ2, I am just trying to give you suggestions to help speed it along. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></FONT> </P>

[CyndeeAnne]

<DIV>Thanks for excellent post. It is very very well done and I enjoyed it very much.</DIV>

[CyndeeAnne]

I agree

[JuJut]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sixmains wrote:<BR>Anyway monks should be subpar at tanking, able to do the job but subpar anyways, since their class is all about the damage from a design point a view.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>The designers of the game have had a different view since before the game launched.<BR>

[Rochir]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JuJutsu wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sixmains wrote:<BR>Anyway monks should be subpar at tanking, able to do the job but subpar anyways, since their class is all about the damage from a design point a view.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>The designers of the game have had a different view since before the game launched.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You will never get what you want by advocating the nerf of another class or subclass.   Focus on what is needed to make gauridans better, not what is needed to make monks/bruisers worse.   Be pro-gaurdian, not anti-brawler <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Gaige]

<DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tilane wrote:<BR> <DIV>nice post and all , but i dont see much of this in real practice ...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>sure i can tank as a monk , but when we get to named mobs i am a downer fast if we dont have 2 healers , gaurdians still tank the best from actual group fights ive been in </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>also they seem to keep agro allot better then me on groups , making life easier on everyone <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I almost always tank with a single healer (mostly furies as I prefer them, but mystics are nice too).  I've camped the named in the war room for hours and various other named in various zones since DoF came out tanking with my monk with a single healer.</P> <P>If you use dragon advance and actually taunt, I doubt you'll ever lose aggro on a single mob, and rarely on group pulls.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Fafnir wrote:<BR> <P>The brawler class should be a tanking capable but mostly DPS oriented class, like EQ1.</P> <P>I'm surprised SOE hasn't woken up to its flight of fancy. <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I'm pretty sure the combat changes prove its an intended design and not a "flight of fancy".  Maybe you should wake up to the fact is isn't EQ1.  If you want to see monks be primarily DPS, go play that <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>09-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:27 AM</span>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Rochir wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> JuJutsu wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Sixmains wrote:Anyway monks should be subpar at tanking, able to do the job but subpar anyways, since their class is all about the damage from a design point a view. <hr> </blockquote>The designers of the game have had a different view since before the game launched. <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>You will never get what you want by advocating the nerf of another class or subclass.   Focus on what is needed to make gauridans better, not what is needed to make monks/bruisers worse.   Be pro-gaurdian, not anti-brawler <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><hr></blockquote> Why not? Seems to have worked for them =P </span><div></div>

[Namil]

<DIV>Quoted from the book that came with this game: "Guardians can don the heaviest armors to protect themselves in combat and aid in the defense of their allies. They stand firm against any threat and bear the brunt of attacks while felling opponents with any of a variety of weapons"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You took away " Guardians can don the heaviest of armors" then you made Tower shields block the same as Kite shields. A shield that is less then half the size of a tower shield. But we could still hold agro and do our job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now you have made it a challenge to say the least for us to hold agro, taking it to the point that if we do not choose the cookie cutter master 2's for agro management we have major issues holding agro. You have lowered our avoidance, our mitigation and our DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You say that group buffs were taken into account in the blance, Buff that do not provide any noticable damage or defense in combat. Guardians by your definition at the onset of the game should not have been and were not buff bots for gruups. We never wanted these kinds of buffs and what tank would. Leave the buffs to the buffing classes, bards, enchanters and the like. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>At the release of this game you gave us a GI Joe or Jane and then upon revamp took it away and gave us a Barbie or Ken. You wonder why we are PO'ed? you wonder why we dont agree? Because you gave us one thing then turned around and made us something totally different.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We are not asking to be the best or to be on top, many have asked for some slight changes to put us back into the roles that you set for us origonally. Many more have provided you with numbers and facts and still it seems we are brushed asside with our concerns.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The fact remains we have changed into what many no longer wish to have. If our facts, concerns or ideas are not going to be acted upon then I have to agree with a previous poster that we should have the choice to switch classes because none of us based on what was before wish to be a Barbie or Ken. We want our GI Joe or Jane back.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the statement on wether or not Moorguard playes a Bruiser. If true thats great if not doesnt matter. My challenge is for Moorguard to play a Guardian from 1-60 solo no cheats, no free money, no super buffs and then come back and tells us someone didnt mess up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We love this game but this kind of a change upsets us and for good reason. You say balance? You dont see my Guardian taking out even con ^^^ mobs solo, Until all classes can then there is no real balance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Namilla, 51 guardian, Jesters</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Krooner]

<P>Namilla's post gave  me a wicked idea.</P> <P> </P> <P>To truely understand and follow the classes why not have one dev for each class.  </P> <P>He plays the class just like the rest of us.  No cheating the toon up to 50 for 5 minutes of testing. </P> <P> Play the class, play it as we do.  </P> <P>That way when you devs all huddle around the coffee pot in the morning you might head off hot issues before they happen.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Namilla wrote:<div>Quoted from the book that came with this game: "Guardians can don the heaviest armors to protect themselves in combat and aid in the defense of their allies. They stand firm against any threat and bear the brunt of attacks while felling opponents with any of a variety of weapons"</div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote> "Guardians can don the heaviest of armors"  should read "Guardians can don the heaviest of armors that cleric and crusadors can also use" "..To protect themselves in combat and aid in the defnse of their allies" should read "..to protect themselves in combat and aid in the defense of their allies because as a fighter they cant do their primary job". "..</span><span>They stand firm against any threat and bear the brunt of attacks.."  should read "..</span><span>They stand firm against any threat and bear the brunt of attacks for a few seconds". "..</span><span>while felling opponents with any of a variety of weapons"  should read "..</span><span>while felling opponents with any of a variety of weapons but not actually hurting them" </span><div></div>

[Baldaena]

<P>my 2 cents :</P> <P>if gardian = brawler(or monk), l should have the same incomming dammage</P> <P>so I should  have (1-Avoidance[Bruiser])(1-Mitigation|Bruiser]) = (1-Avoidance[Gardian])(1-Mitigation[Gardien])</P> <P>With :<BR>Avoidance[Bruiser] = A1<BR>Avoidance[Gardian]) = A2</P> <P>Mitigation|Bruiser] =M1<BR>Mitigation|Gardian] = M2</P> <P>with : "A1 = A2+dA" and "M1 = M2+dM" (dA et dM are the différences between Bruiser&Guardian numbers) </P> <P>So if Bruiser = Gardian, I should have : </P> <P>(1-A1)(1-M1) = (1-A2) (1-M2)</P> <P>with A1= A2+dA and M1= M2+dM</P> <P>I have (after some transformations) : dM ( dA - (1-A1 ))  =  dA ( 1 - M1 )</P> <P>And finally : dM = (1-M1) / (1 - (1-A1)/dA)</P> <P>with M1' = 1-M1 and A1' = 1-A1, </P> <P> I find : <FONT color=#ff3300><STRONG>dM = M1' /(1-A1'/dA)</STRONG></FONT></P> <P><U><STRONG>so 1% of mitigation <> 1% of avoidance</STRONG> </U>(dM <>dA)</P> <P>If I want to calculte the 'ideal' mitigation of sixmains'gardian vs sixmains'bruiser :</P> <P>M1 = 0,37 (M1' = 0,63)<BR>A1 = 0,66 (A1' = 0,33)<BR>A2 = 0,45 (with 30s buff!)  ==> dA = A2 - A1 = - 0,21</P> <P>So if the gardian want to have exactly the same incomming dammage with 45% of avoidance, he would have : 37% + dM of mitigation </P> <P>with dM = 0,63 / (1+0,34/0,21) = 0.24 = 24 % </P> <P>So if my guardian want to have the same incomming dammage of a bruiser with 37% mitigation and 66% avoidance, he should have 45% of avoidance AND<STRONG> 61% of mitigation</STRONG>.... (and not 47%)</P> <P>Hope it will help</P> <P><EM>Sorry for bad english, it's not my native language.</EM></P> <P>Baldaena - Storms</P> <P>Message Edited by Baldaena on <SPAN class=date_text>09-26-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:20 PM</SPAN></P> <P>Message Edited by Baldaena on <SPAN class=date_text>09-26-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:22 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Baldaena on <span class=date_text>09-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:27 PM</span>

[Rochir]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rochir wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> JuJutsu wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sixmains wrote:<BR>Anyway monks should be subpar at tanking, able to do the job but subpar anyways, since their class is all about the damage from a design point a view.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>The designers of the game have had a different view since before the game launched.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You will never get what you want by advocating the nerf of another class or subclass.   Focus on what is needed to make gauridans better, not what is needed to make monks/bruisers worse.   Be pro-gaurdian, not anti-brawler <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Why not? Seems to have worked for them =P<BR><BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Brawlers wanted to be better tanks, now they are.   Maybe they are too good.   I am not sure they are.   I think the first thing that needs to be done is to address the issue of plate armor stats and effectiveness against ALL types of mobs.   We need armor that is good enough to offset the loss in avoidance due to wearing plate armor (the increased weight).   The weight of our armor now affects our avoidance by lowering it.  I dont think the stats on plate armor (and possibly chain armor for scouts) is sufficient to offset the increased weight.   What we have now is a situation where for its weight, leather armor may be the best armor in the game when the avoidance boost it provides is taken into account.   That is not as it should be.   Brawlers should have the best avoidance of the fighter subclasses but not the best armor.   Clearly plate armor should be the best armor in the game when it comes to mitigation, resistances and stats with chain armor a close second.   Both plate and chain armor should be better armor than leather and cloth armor in every respect except for avoidance.  Plate armor loses too much of its effectiveness vs named, heroic and epic mobs.    If brawlers do not lose all of their avoidance vs named, heroic and epic mobs then plate (and chain) armor should not lose all of its effectiveness against them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It is just plain silly that it is more effective for plate and chain armor wearers to equip leather or cloth armor when fighting certain types of mobs or when soloing.   In many situations it is easier gaurdians to solo without their armor than with it.  This needs to be fixed as it affects all plate armor fighters including Gaurdians, Paladins and Berzkerers.   <SPAN class=time_text>To put it as plainly as I can, plate (and chain) armor should be more effective armor in every situation against every mob than any other armor type for the subclasses that can equip it.   We should not have to carry multiple suits of armor and swap out armor to fight certain mobs.  Fixing this problem wiill help balance the fighter subclasses without nerfing any of the subclasses.</SPAN></DIV><p>Message Edited by Rochir on <span class=date_text>09-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:50 PM</span>

[Krooner]

<P>Just a thought here but maybe what we need is a after mitigation modifier for armor types.</P> <P>Such as:</P> <P>Plate Armor   High +% to crushing slashing and piercing damage</P> <P>Chain Armor: Medium +% to crushing and slashing, less to piercing </P> <P>leather Armor:  Low +% to Slashing</P> <P>Cloth: No change.</P> <DIV>Not suggesting this as final numbers just opening the framework for debate.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Warbird1 on <span class=date_text>09-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:55 PM</span>

[TanRaistlyn]

<P>Unfortunetly we dont even have that option.  Even naked our avoidance doesnt go up, it goes down, even if we decked out in chain or leather we still wouldnt have avoidance to match bruisers/monks.  The plate classes are nerfed in avoidance regardless of what armor we are wearing, so we cant even don leather armor for the time being, till they fix the mitigation values to be usefull...we just sit and whine and grumble about how useless we are till there comes a fix.</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P>

[Fafnir]

<P>Gaige wrote:</P> <P>I'm pretty sure the combat changes prove its an intended design and not a "flight of fancy".  Maybe you should wake up to the fact is isn't EQ1.  If you want to see monks be primarily DPS, go play that <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif" width=16 border=0></P> <P> </P> <P>Sure, I recognise it.  But only in your ignorance not having played EQ1 do you not realise that agility/avoidance based tanking is a dumb philosophy.  It is a knife edge - too much and it breaks all encounters, too little and you get smacked way too hard.</P> <P>Mitigation is the answer.  Some folks learnt that during EQ1.  But I guess they moved to the Dev Team at Vanguard.</P>

[Screamin' 1]

<span><blockquote><hr>RafaelSmith wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Rochir wrote: <div>You will never get what you want by advocating the nerf of another class or subclass.   Focus on what is needed to make gauridans better, not what is needed to make monks/bruisers worse.   Be pro-gaurdian, not anti-brawler <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><hr></blockquote> Why not? Seems to have worked for them =P </span><div></div><hr></blockquote> LOL. Nice response! But, let's give it a shot and see what we can come up with. Three ways to be pro-guardian are to (a) ask for more damage or (b) ask for more mitigation or (c) ask for better taunts. Let's hold off on (a), (c) should happen regardless, for all tanks classes, so that leaves (b). If we make it so Guardians can mitigate enough to offset the lack of avoidance and 360 degree parry/block etc... and can lessen damage by the same amount as other tank classes, they will still have less DPS and other skills (like play dead). So, let's just give us a wee bit more 'damage lessening' ability. Ah, but then they become the primary sought after tank again, and that is against the law, so it won't happen. So, the only option is (a) , give us tons of damage. That will help us fill the role we have been used to playing for 10 months. Or, slightly more seriosuly, how about this. Heavy armor can really hurt a mob when a mob swings and hits it. If a mob were to take part of the damage that is mitigated, it would up our DPS  (it makes some sense, if I punch someone wearing armor, the armor mitigates the damage, back into my fist) Ok, back to reality. It is a sad state right now. SOE designed Guardians to be the defenders of a group. That is their function. SOE did this very well. But, to keep almost everyone who wants to be a tank  from deciding to be a guardian, they promised that every tank could tank equally well, and would, logically, be equally desirable as a main tank. Now, it is obvious that you cannot have it both ways.. If a guardian's primary purpose is to defend the group and take damage, unless they do this better than other classes, they are useless. If every other tank class is Guardian + <insert other cool abilities here> then that makes Guardians surplus tanks. But, if Guardians are better at taking damage, they will be the choice for main tank, and we cannot have that either.  There was a possible resolution mentioned by an astute poster in this thread (I think it was here) that suggested plate classes be better at lessening crushing damage. I did not read the whole post, so I apologize if I repeat anything. I think this could be extended to cold/heat (that armor is a great insulator (-; ) so some tanks would work better against certain mobs. Monks, with their improved power of concentration and meditation, might mitigate mental and poison damage, crusaders magic and disease. Of course, we would need a good balance of mobs with these types of damage, and it would have to be easier to see what type they do. But, getting this solution to balance well could prove to be very difficult. </span><div></div>

[Sixmai]

Problem with upping only the plate armor is two fold : _ Brawler would still be able to kill non green heroic mobs. And what's the point of the revamp if it's not to make encounter more meaningful ? Really this is the basis of the nerf to come, something has to be reduced about them. Maybe it'll be the damage but who knows. _ Caps are in place, with such a high mitigation of 61% for every plate fighter, any temporary buff would put us at cap value (be it porcupine or another). It is not an option,  hitting the cap should be a very rare occurance, ie : multiple temporary mitigation buffs + oh buffing mitigation. Anyway even 61% would put plate fighter at equality vs Brawler only in the simplier combat situations, there is still new design changes (radius of parry / block, and magical attacks)  which would make avoidance the supreme way of tanking. For me it's a trade off situation if they have to be better than plate fighter against group and magical melee mobs, then they have to be worse than us against normal trauma melee mobs. And then we can talk about the balance between plate figthers.

[EvilIguana9]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Screamin' 103 wrote:<span>It is a sad state right now. SOE designed Guardians to be the defenders of a group. That is their function. SOE did this very well. But, to keep almost everyone who wants to be a tank  from deciding to be a guardian, they promised that every tank could tank equally well, and would, logically, be equally desirable as a main tank. Now, it is obvious that you cannot have it both ways.. If a guardian's primary purpose is to defend the group and take damage, unless they do this better than other classes, they are useless. If every other tank class is Guardian + then that makes Guardians surplus tanks. But, if Guardians are better at taking damage, they will be the choice for main tank, and we cannot have that either. </span><div></div><hr></blockquote>You sir, win my [Removed for Content] of the moment award, for deducing that in order for a class to be balanced they have to be better than all the other classes.  Allow me to restate the goal of the archetype system:  All members of a given archetype should be EQUALLY desirable in groups.  Some situations will make a specific fighter preferred over the others, but these situations will be balanced so that all fighters have their time to shine.  If the guardian is the best tank, there is no reason to ever opt for a different fighter.  The same is true for monks, for bruisers, paladins, SKs and berserkers. Stop being stupid and use your brain.</span><div></div>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>EvilIguana966 wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Screamin' 103 wrote:<span>It is a sad state right now. SOE designed Guardians to be the defenders of a group. That is their function. SOE did this very well. But, to keep almost everyone who wants to be a tank  from deciding to be a guardian, they promised that every tank could tank equally well, and would, logically, be equally desirable as a main tank. Now, it is obvious that you cannot have it both ways.. If a guardian's primary purpose is to defend the group and take damage, unless they do this better than other classes, they are useless. If every other tank class is Guardian + then that makes Guardians surplus tanks. But, if Guardians are better at taking damage, they will be the choice for main tank, and we cannot have that either. </span><hr></blockquote>You sir, win my [Removed for Content] of the moment award, for deducing that in order for a class to be balanced they have to be better than all the other classes.  Allow me to restate the goal of the archetype system:  All members of a given archetype should be EQUALLY desirable in groups.  Some situations will make a specific fighter preferred over the others, but these situations will be balanced so that all fighters have their time to shine.  If the guardian is the best tank, there is no reason to ever opt for a different fighter.  The same is true for monks, for bruisers, paladins, SKs and berserkers. Stop being stupid and use your brain.</span><hr></blockquote> Agreed but the problem today is that what you describe is not the case... -Any other fighter type is a far better choice for group ...(i,e "</span><span><span>desirable in groups") than Guardian. -there are no situtations currently where Guardian gets "their time to shine". I agree I shouldnt be the best or only tank but that shouldnt mean i have to accept being the worst all the time. </span></span><div></div>

[Dark_Keebl]

<P>great OP ...</P> <P>the problem is brawlers are far superior in every aspect to every other fighter class .. and there doesnt seem to be any comment from SOE regarding this except that its working as intended, and if this is the case then i don't blame the multitudes of gaurds/zerkers/sk's/pallies that are leaving the game.</P> <P>maybe they will fix it but they probably wont .. </P> <P>/rerolls a bruiser</P>

[Raidi Sovin'faile]

<DIV>I've read the OP, and a few others that were worth reading in this thread, and I have a couple comments.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The original post assumes that mitigation and avoidance always work at an equal level. What it doesn't take into account is if mitigation is weighted more in the equation. Running numbers is fine, but in practice, I would sacrifice avoidance for mitigation (which I have.. used lower Agi giving equipment because it has more mitigation).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The problem is all in timing. If we had an infinite hp pool, and infinite time, then overall mitigation and avoidance would be on an equal footing. However, what we have is a limited HP pool, and a healer that heals you when you get low. This means that having a higher mitigation is superior than avoiding hits, since avoidance CAN and WILL let two hits in in a row, and with lower mitigation, the healers can't catch up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Anyone who has played games of chance, dice rolling, or PnP D&D can tell you that it's always far better to go with the sure thing. Better to have a constant 5, rather than a chance at 1-10. It puts control in the hands of the PLAYERS, instead of random chance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>To put it bluntly, what would you rather have... a tank that you know how much damage will be coming in (roughly) per hit, so you can accomodate? Or a tank that may get hit three times in a row for lots of damage, just because luck was against him, and no healing could save him? Sure it may not happen every time, but since we are talking about a limited HP pool, it's not an infrequent occurance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Second issue is this crap I keep hearing about "Bruisers can solo better, therefore they are better DPS and Tanks". This is blatantly untrue. We are better soloers because we have an array of crowd control that favors soloing. Sorcerers cry about how Summoners are better soloer's too... that doesn't mean they are better at the DPS role, and they know it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This can be a semi-valid complaint, as it's true that non-brawler Fighters are not as good at soloing. However, it DOES NOT take from your role in a group, and there are LOTS of classes that are vastly superior are soloing than others... it's not a localised issue with Bruisers. Talk to any priest.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A Bruiser that can fear, mez and stun, and has massive poison resistance, taking down a heroic spider will not mean he can tank better than fighters, and out DPS assassins. It means he can take down a specific creature scenario better. Pit him against a non-poison caster.. pit him against something high enough level that he misses his stuns/mez on.. he's not so hot anymore.</DIV> <DIV>Pit him against anything non-DoF... he's not so hot. As a 50 Bruiser I got creamed by the named lizard on the Lavastorm beach, even though he was 8 levels lower.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not saying everything is perfectly in balance. Maybe mitigation needs a little upping on plate armor... I don't have a plate tank that I play, so I can't outright say that you guys are fine. But I can tell you from my perspective and in my experience.... avoidance isn't the hot stuff you all make it out to be. To an extent, I'd be willing to trade avoidance for mitigation at a 2-1 ratio... it cannot be weighted them the same in the equation.</DIV>

[Teche]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Prynn wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Feawin wrote:<BR> <DIV>Im sorry but no matter how well put together the OP is its still has a lot of assumptions in it.   Also we have to remember what SOE has said about the class rolls.    I still here people expecting to have a class that does it all.  I have a 50 pally and I dont come to the same conclusions as the OP sorry.    It seems I can do what what SOE says Im supposed to do and so can the guardians and SKs I have grouped with.  </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT face=Verdana>What you hear is people saying that the ONE and ONLY ability that a Guardian has, the ability to Tank, has been taken away.  Now whether your belief is that it is because other classes can do it now which has sullied the line between classes, or that you have been nerfed beyond your capacity to do it well is rather academic.  The reality is that those other classes can tank AND they have abilities to provide support roles  (such as heal or FD) AND can mitigate/avoid damage better while Guardians have no such abilities.  The people who come on here and say that Guardians have "protectorate" abilities are either Moorguard (who hasn't leveled a guardian from 1 to 50 in his life), or people who play other classes who don't want to get nerfed.   The truth is that the protectorate abilites aren't any different than what any other class can have by generating huge amounts of aggro and overly mitigating and avoiding damage.  The only difference is that they don't need spells to do it, and theirs is better.   </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>And honestly, I don't know a Guardian who wants a support role.  We played Guardian because we were good at tanking, which in turn gave us good options for groups (what SOE wants).  If I wanted to play something that had a support role, then I would have played something else, period.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>I don't know how I can express it any simpler than that.  IMHO, should they want 6 different classes to tank as well as each other, they should have either taken away those abilities from those classes and given them to scouts OR given Guardians something to even the playing field, such as increasing the cap for guardians on Stamina, or Strength, or have using a Tower Shield mean something significant, and unique to guardians.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>You don't play a Guardian of course so you don't really understand.  You are probably happier than a pig in ca-ca that you are getting more groups, that people want you to tank more, that your guild can use you if they so desire as MA.   The worst fear is that SOE would say "You know, the combat changes aren't fair" because that would mean that there is a chance that what you are now will be lesser.  That's truly the only reason to argue it.  However, I think what is being said (mostly) here is that the bait and switch tactics are a load of horse dung.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>In conclusion, we should be able to if we so desire, change our class to something else without having to re-roll.  Because the class is a near shell of what it once was, it's not fun to play and the end that many imagined when they started playing ended up somewhere that they weren't promised.  I think this is a fair and reasonable solution to the problem, since SOE's offical answer is "You can protect" (which we really can't do all that well), and don't seem to want to do anything about it.  It's clear that Guardians aren't wanted (or needed) in the game, so why not just get rid of them and compensate us for the hours and hours we spent on our toons.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Guardians couldn't do it all.  We couldn't LOH, or do DPS, or feign, safe fall, lifetap, or cast spells.  All we could do is don heavy armor and stand as a shield for our group, and since that's no longer a valid premise, Guardians are worthless compared to what they once were because anyone (even a Necro pet) can do it now.  I hope this clears it up for you anyway.  </FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Prynn on <SPAN class=date_text>09-24-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>09:07 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><SPAN>Pretty good post except for the whole woe is me self pity crap near the end. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>What most guardians don’t know or realize or chose to ignore, is that a strong majority of brawlers did not want any part of the SEO "No Tank Left behind" program.  Yes there were a couple of vocal Brawlers on this board who had some tank fetish and thought it would make them cool to be able to tank RAID mobs but most wanted nothing to do with it. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>We have always been able to solo crap you could not, we have always been great group tanks, we have always done more DPS,  now someone got the bright Idea to make us Viable tanks yet still do the most DPS of all the thanks.  </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>What could possibly go wrong???   Yes that’s sarcasm incase you missed it.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>So now you have to share your pie and suddenly you realize what we have been telling SOE since they announced there plans to make avoidance based tanks viable for raid mobs, and that’s that it wont work without stripping every single tank class of any shred of diversity we have remaining.  Soon there will be no difference in any tank other than we wear leather and you are tin cans.</SPAN></P> <P>I never wanted to tank as well as tin cans,  I should not tank as well, I should do more dps and I will still be a better solo'er cuz I have the skills that make it so.</P> <P>"No Tank Left Behind"   FTL</P>

[Ildarus]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Teche wrote: <P><SPAN>Pretty good post except for the whole woe is me self pity crap near the end. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>What most guardians don’t know or realize or chose to ignore, is that a strong majority of brawlers did not want any part of the SEO "No Tank Left behind" program.  Yes there were a couple of vocal Brawlers on this board who had some tank fetish and thought it would make them cool to be able to tank RAID mobs but most wanted nothing to do with it. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>We have always been able to solo crap you could not, we have always been great group tanks, we have always done more DPS,  now someone got the bright Idea to make us Viable tanks yet still do the most DPS of all the thanks.  </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>What could possibly go wrong???   Yes that’s sarcasm incase you missed it.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>So now you have to share your pie and suddenly you realize what we have been telling SOE since they announced there plans to make avoidance based tanks viable for raid mobs, and that’s that it wont work without stripping every single tank class of any shred of diversity we have remaining.  Soon there will be no difference in any tank other than we wear leather and you are tin cans.</SPAN></P> <P>I never wanted to tank as well as tin cans,  I should not tank as well, I should do more dps and I will still be a better solo'er cuz I have the skills that make it so.</P> <P>"No Tank Left Behind"   FTL</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Amen brother. I have said something similar to this in other threads.</P> <P>I have a Monk and a Bruiser. I created these becuase they represented a great class to solo with because of their DPS and utility. If I wanted to be a group or raid tank I would have created a warrior. </P> <P>This idea that just because level 1-9 we are all fighters that we should all be able to tank a raid is pure rubbish. When you make that class choice at level 10  you become a different class. You may have started out as a fighter, but at season 10 you choose to specialize in a field related to fighting. Specializing in something does not mean we all do the same thing with a different look. It means Brawlers choose to avoid getting hit period and become masters of there body and Mind and able to do things, such as Wind Walk, that other fighters cannot do. In return for this they have to where light armor and have less, or used to have, less taunts. When I read the class descriptions I took it that Brawlers are better soloers than the other two and that is what I chose. </P> <P>I am sorry that a few people have complained enough that they increased our taunts and made changes to our defensive stances so we can become viable tanks, but that is not the choice of the majority. The right people have the dev's ear. One of them is Moorgard who plays a Bruiser and the other posts in the boards way to much according to his forum title.:smileywink:</P>

[Raidi Sovin'faile]

<FONT color=#ffff00>The right people have the dev's ear.</FONT> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Or, you know.. maybe it's just how they intended the game to work all along. You know... like they said since early creation? Like they've said every single time it's come up?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Nah... it's gotta be because some people posted on a forum. Oh, and one person who is (was) PR plays a Bruiser. Riiight. Cuz you know, no other developer plays this game, and none of them play anything other than Bruisers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Come off it. Do you realize how silly this sounds?</DIV><p>Message Edited by Raidi Sovin'faile on <span class=date_text>09-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:47 PM</span>

[Pry]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raidi Sovin'faile wrote:<BR> <FONT color=#ffff00>The right people have the dev's ear.</FONT> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Or, you know.. maybe it's just how they intended the game to work all along. You know... like they said since early creation? Like they've said every single time it's come up?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Nah... it's gotta be because some people posted on a forum. Oh, and one person who is (was) PR plays a Bruiser. Riiight. Cuz you know, no other developer plays this game, and none of them play anything other than Bruisers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Come off it. Do you realize how silly this sounds?</DIV> <P>Message Edited by Raidi Sovin'faile on <SPAN class=date_text>09-28-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:47 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT face=Verdana>They intended it to work like this all along, yet they let it continue a different way for a whole year and didn't implement it from the beginning.   Interesting.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>I guess the World of Warcraft pressure was greater than we originally thought.</FONT>  </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote: <P><SPAN>Agreed but the problem today is that what you describe is not the case...<BR><BR>-Any other fighter type is a far better choice for group ...(i,e "</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>desirable in groups") than Guardian.<BR><BR>-there are no situtations currently where Guardian gets "their time to shine".<BR><BR>I agree I shouldnt be the best or only tank but that shouldnt mean i have to accept being the worst all the time.</SPAN></SPAN></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Now, if this is true, it does need to be fixed.</P> <P>BUT</P> <P>Remember pre-update?  The inverse was true.  There was *no* scenario at all where a guardian wasn't the best tank over the other 5 fighters.  Guardians were ALWAYS preferred.<BR></P>

[ShinigamiD]

For raid tanking perhaps, Gaige, but most definately *not* for XP groups.  And contrary to what you uber twits in FoH think, the whole game isn't about raiding.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Ildarus wrote: <P>The right people have the dev's ear. One of them is Moorgard who plays a Bruiser and the other posts in the boards way to much according to his forum title.:smileywink:<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>It amazes me that people really think stuff like this post is true.  /rofl</DIV>

[Landiin]

/gasp

[Syndic]

It's also not just about balance, it's about making the class fun to play.  Frankly logging in to a gimped fighter is not a fun prospect atm.  I think 1 thing that needs to be done is to make mitigation mean more, currently upping your mitigation by 500 has a negligable effect.  That still wont make the class fun though. Actually the un-fun part comes from trying to let people know is that we can still tank, we maybe [Removed for Content] but we can get by in a pinch. Surely hope Sony get around to fixing this soon. <div></div>

[Raidi Sovin'faile]

<FONT color=#ffff00> trying to let people know is that we can still tank</FONT> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And yet there are still lots of folks out there who will say "okay, now we just need a tank" with a monk or bruiser in the group. I'm afraid the only people who think warriors can't tank are disillusioned folks that are comparing pre and post CU info, and those that read these boards and buy into all the "sky is falling" attitude.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Most people playing the game don't read the boards, and don't care. They still go by the old attitudes from before. Most people that see any problem with the tank staying alive are looking at the healer's newly "attached timers". That has, by far, been a much greater impact on tank survival than anything else. Every class feels inferior right now (yes, even my Brawler got wailed on by things he could kill fine before)... it's not just warriors, and people aren't kicking them from their MT roles as far as I've experienced.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Raidi Sovin'faile on <span class=date_text>09-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:34 AM</span>

[Urglu]

<DIV>Good point Raidi, the nerf in healing is definitely not discussed enough.  I can't tell you how many times I've been screaming at my monitor to get a heal (while furiously throwing up emergency buffs), only to realize later that my healers simply can't push out the heals they used to be able to. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Across the board there seems to be a shift to buffs having more of an impact than before.  This, IMO, is very unfortunate.  I don't want my group's success to depend more on which combination of buffs I have on me than everyone's ability to work together when the s* hits the fan.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the Guard class, the problem is that we really have no niche. Tanking has been equalized, or at least that is the goal, so there's no point pushing for an edge there. The protection line is not much of a line, all the tanks have intercept, and quite frankly taking a hit for a mage or healer never really does much other than delay death one hit. Honestly the only effective use I have found for these abilities is in a very tough fight when another tank has agro.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I play with a Serker guildie a lot, and now he tanks (in Def Stance) about as well as I do, but his DPS alone rips agro away from me if I don't spam taunts (even with MD on), which means I'm OOP in a hurry.  My Bruiser has so many stuns I can stop a mob cold over and over.  Well I don't need to repeat old arguments....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I just don't know what it is we're supposed to do well.  The protect skills are minimal and still fairly ineffective even when used in the most opportune situations. Our groups Def and HP buffs are like a raindrop in the ocean as far as impact on a fight. I don't see any agro gaining edge for our class over the other tanks as a whole. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not sure what can be done to give us a niche again without screwing up the balance of the tanks, but hopefully something.  I have been tinkering with the thought of a short range, short duration, group invulnerability buff line which stuns/stifles the Guardian.  Essentially turning Guardian Sphere into a line, and then making it do something other than kill the Guardian.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If done so it isn't too powerful I think it serves a number of purposes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) It gives purpose to the name Guardian again.</DIV> <DIV>2) It avoids the problem with the Protect line, because it lasts more than one hit, and doesn't leave the Guard worse off than if he used Rescue or Reinforcement.</DIV> <DIV>3) It is hard to abuse as the caster is stunned and it doesn't last too long.</DIV> <DIV>4) It provides short term emergency protection for the group from non-melee attacks as well as melee. (Call of Protection isn't helping anyone when the mob is smacking people with Divine Nukes).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I really don't see a ton of utility in such an ability when you have agro and the mob(s) is just hitting you.  Even if things get rough, the emergency buffs we have serve a better purpose there.  Using this ability is almost like a short distance evac for the group as far as effectiveness, it gives everyone 10-15 seconds to either get things under control (without the Guard being able to taunt to grab agro), kill everything, or get the heck out of there. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Whatever they do, I think we need a niche again.</DIV>

[Korwyn]

<P>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</P> <DIV>Good point Raidi, the nerf in healing is definitely not discussed enough.  I can't tell you how many times I've been screaming at my monitor to get a heal (while furiously throwing up emergency buffs), only to realize later that my healers simply can't push out the heals they used to be able to. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Across the board there seems to be a shift to buffs having more of an impact than before.  This, IMO, is very unfortunate.  I don't want my group's success to depend more on which combination of buffs I have on me than everyone's ability to work together when the s* hits the fan.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for the Guard class, the problem is that we really have no niche. Tanking has been equalized, or at least that is the goal, so there's no point pushing for an edge there. The protection line is not much of a line, all the tanks have intercept, and quite frankly taking a hit for a mage or healer never really does much other than delay death one hit. Honestly the only effective use I have found for these abilities is in a very tough fight when another tank has agro.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I play with a Serker guildie a lot, and now he tanks (in Def Stance) about as well as I do, but his DPS alone rips agro away from me if I don't spam taunts (even with MD on), which means I'm OOP in a hurry.  My Bruiser has so many stuns I can stop a mob cold over and over.  Well I don't need to repeat old arguments....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I just don't know what it is we're supposed to do well.  The protect skills are minimal and still fairly ineffective even when used in the most opportune situations. Our groups Def and HP buffs are like a raindrop in the ocean as far as impact on a fight. I don't see any agro gaining edge for our class over the other tanks as a whole. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not sure what can be done to give us a niche again without screwing up the balance of the tanks, but hopefully something.  I have been tinkering with the thought of a short range, short duration, group invulnerability buff line which stuns/stifles the Guardian.  Essentially turning Guardian Sphere into a line, and then making it do something other than kill the Guardian.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If done so it isn't too powerful I think it serves a number of purposes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1) It gives purpose to the name Guardian again.</DIV> <DIV>2) It avoids the problem with the Protect line, because it lasts more than one hit, and doesn't leave the Guard worse off than if he used Rescue or Reinforcement.</DIV> <DIV>3) It is hard to abuse as the caster is stunned and it doesn't last too long.</DIV> <DIV>4) It provides short term emergency protection for the group from non-melee attacks as well as melee. (Call of Protection isn't helping anyone when the mob is smacking people with Divine Nukes).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I really don't see a ton of utility in such an ability when you have agro and the mob(s) is just hitting you.  Even if things get rough, the emergency buffs we have serve a better purpose there.  Using this ability is almost like a short distance evac for the group as far as effectiveness, it gives everyone 10-15 seconds to either get things under control (without the Guard being able to taunt to grab agro), kill everything, or get the heck out of there. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Whatever they do, I think we need a niche again.</DIV> <DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Great post!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Cormac 50 Guardian</DIV>

[Moralpanic]

<span><blockquote><hr>Raidi Sovin'faile wrote:<div></div><font color="#ffff00"></font> <div>And yet there are still lots of folks out there who will say "okay, now we just need a tank" with a monk or bruiser in the group.</div><hr></blockquote> It's only been a couple of weeks since the changes... give it some more time, and you're going to see the change, not everybody reads these forums.  Why should anybody choose a fighter these days when a brawler has the same mitigation, MORE avoidance, and does MORE damage?  Because we can unreliably intercept hits?  Umm well so can brawlers. </span><div></div>

[JNewby]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote: <P><SPAN>Agreed but the problem today is that what you describe is not the case...<BR><BR>-Any other fighter type is a far better choice for group ...(i,e "</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>desirable in groups") than Guardian.<BR><BR>-there are no situtations currently where Guardian gets "their time to shine".<BR><BR>I agree I shouldnt be the best or only tank but that shouldnt mean i have to accept being the worst all the time.</SPAN></SPAN></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Now, if this is true, it does need to be fixed.</P> <P>BUT</P> <P>Remember pre-update?  The inverse was true.  There was *no* scenario at all where a guardian wasn't the best tank over the other 5 fighters.  Guardians were ALWAYS preferred.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>yeah we were always the best tank... but we could never be a fill in for dps or sub par healer...

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Moralpanic wrote:<SPAN><BR><BR>Why should anybody choose a fighter these days when a brawler</SPAN> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Brawlers are fighters <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Landiin]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Moralpanic wrote:<span>Why should anybody choose a fighter these days when a brawler</span> <hr> </blockquote> <div>Brawlers are fighters <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><hr></blockquote>I beleave thats "GOD MODE"<span>:smileysurprised:</span></span><div></div>

[Margen]

<DIV>Ok saying gimped fighter is a bit bogus dealing with Guradians.  Tonight finished my BBC quest, tanked through first two named mobs as a 47 Shadow Knight, then for the final Mob Gynok Moltar a 47 ^^^, well a 45 Guardian joined us at that time and him and the healer said he would tank (even though I had more hp's).  I didn't raise a stink just switched to offensive stance and let him tank.  Did dps and cast intercede and my Reactive Lifetap, the healer was 42 Fury. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>His hp's never went below 80pct and he only lost aggro for like 2 secs to 48 warlock, gained it right back.  Mob was down in less then a minute, no deaths or even a heavy workout really.  Maybe Guardians need some love, but saying they are gimped seems bogus.  He held aggro fine (I lose aggro to warlock all the time, thank god rescue is on 5 min timer), and he never was in any danger.  If I had tank and even with my Lifetaps, its likely I would have been below 80pct at sometime (though could have tanked mob fine).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardians still have tools to tank with from what I saw and they are still the prefered.  Maybe they need some utility but saying gimped seems over the top.</DIV>