A rallying cry

[landru]

Hey all, First I wanted to say "WOOT!" to all the guardians that are sticking through this, you are all true protectors to bare this load.  You have my honor and respect. We need to rally together if we want to see changes happen to our arch-type.  We can NOT continue to get derailed and sidetracked by petty differences and this constant in-fighting that seems to be going on here. YES! There are issues with the guardian class YES! There needs to be some attention to the guardians from the SOE team Guardians, We need to stop the volleys that happen back and forth between other classes.  It's not constructive, nor is it warranted because they didn't cause the change, SOE did.  SOE is the one that you need to get the attention of.  Continue with the constructive posts, continue with the information and statistics but don't brought down by the negative and non-constructive input by others.  It's not helping our case.   Currently I read these boards and watch as good threads get lost in non-constructive class bashing and in-fighting.  We need to be heard as a constructive group not a bunch of "loose ends" with scattered thoughts with the a few small nuggets of information.  Continue to build up the threads that are constructive and ignore the taunts from others.  We are guardians, we have learned to shuck the goading and taunts.  It's what we do in the game and it's what we NEED to do here. SOE, Please give us a sign that you understand that there is a problem here.  I'm not saying that you need to have a "Guardian Patch" nor am I saying that you need to return us to the way we were.  There have been some constructive threads going on here that cover the issues.  Some (If not most) have been derailed for one reason or another, but you have to go looking for it.  Is there a class leader for the guardian class? If not should there be one for each class that is the representative back to you? The guardians (among others) have been crying out for information and have been looking for a figurehead to represent their class back to you, SOE.  This would keep the information flowing BOTH ways and would allow for a "Yes, we are looking into it" to be relayed back to the community.  Currently your policy of "Silence, lock and delete" (which has happened to 2 of my posts now) hasn't been received well by the community at large.  I enjoy this game, and am willing to wait out this "transitions" to see if it gets better, but the lack of communication is disturbing.  It doesn't promote the feeling of customer service, nor does it help the morale of the game. Gaige, there are times that I agree with what you are saying, I took the time to look over the amount of posts you have made since the live update patch has gone live.  You now spend as much if not more time in the guardian forum that you do in any other.  I mean this with all due respect.  Please, stop, you are only inflaming the situation causing to do nothing more than slowing this process by causing division and/or dispersion of the issues with your "Good Intentions" and your "re-education" that you feel is necessary for the guardians that are left.  You have built up a sour taste in people's mouths and only inflame the situation.  I'm not saying that you are the wrong, just that you are not being tactful of your now ominous presence here on the guardian forum. With this all said, I would like to again thank all the guardians that are sticking through this "Transition" is going on here.  I also want to thank the fellow guardians and the people from other classes that are speaking on the guardians behalf in support of the issues that are currently present.  You all have my respect and appreciation. ~Gladius (Guardian)

[Pry]

<P><FONT face=Verdana>I want to start by saying I liked your post.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>That being said, I just wanted to comment on the idea of "Class Leaders".  I would hate this if it happened.  The worst thing possible would have someone who thinks they know what is the best for all Guardians and affect changes as such.  There is nobody on these boards who understands all aspects of both raiding and casual game, PvP vs. Non-PvP, etc. etc. etc.  I am opposed to having a class leader.</FONT></P>

[Macross_JR]

<span><blockquote><hr>Prynn wrote:<p><font face="Verdana">I want to start by saying I liked your post.</font></p> <p><font face="Verdana">That being said, I just wanted to comment on the idea of "Class Leaders".  I would hate this if it happened.  The worst thing possible would have someone who thinks they know what is the best for all Guardians and affect changes as such.  There is nobody on these boards who understands all aspects of both raiding and casual game, PvP vs. Non-PvP, etc. etc. etc.  I am opposed to having a class leader.</font></p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>That is where you are wrong on the class leader Prynn.  A good class leader listens to all and takes what the majority of the populace want.  Cause it is the majority that we are worried about, in all due respect.  The class leader system can work.  You just need to get a good one to be the go between.</span><div></div>

[Kriddle Kraddle]

Unfortunatly guardians ego's are way to big to have one single "leader", so I dont see this happening. The way to get things done it seems is to have good constructive posts and someone at SOE that agrees with you. I think wardens were fine as they were and are now overpowered but they gathered together made some posts and very few people argued with them. However as I said before guardians have huge ego's but that goes for all "tank" classes. They will all fight to be the best till the day they die.

[RafaelSmith]

Class leader is a bad idea...especially when it comes to Guardian...Guardians come in two very distinct varieties...the raid MT type and the rest of us.  No way one person could represent the needs of both. The last thing we Guardians need is some Furor wannabe having SOE's ear.  Besides we all know who currently represents Guardians to SOE =P <div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> landru wrote:<BR>Gaige, there are times that I agree with what you are saying, I took the time to look over the amount of posts you have made since the live update patch has gone live.  You now spend as much if not more time in the guardian forum that you do in any other.  I mean this with all due respect.  Please, stop, you are only inflaming the situation causing to do nothing more than slowing this process by causing division and/or dispersion of the issues with your "Good Intentions" and your "re-education" that you feel is necessary for the guardians that are left.  You have built up a sour taste in people's mouths and only inflame the situation.  I'm not saying that you are the wrong, just that you are not being tactful of your now ominous presence here on the guardian forum. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm here when I feel something needs to be said or my class defended.  I'm also here, surprisingly, when people like you bring me up in your thread.  As long as I follow the forum rules I can post wherever I want.  If SOE had a problem with other classes posting here, they'd lock it for just guardians.  I think you guys should worry about yourselves and your class, and spend way less time worrying about, talking and blaming me.<BR>

[Airog]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> landru wrote:<BR>Gaige, there are times that I agree with what you are saying, I took the time to look over the amount of posts you have made since the live update patch has gone live.  You now spend as much if not more time in the guardian forum that you do in any other.  I mean this with all due respect.  Please, stop, you are only inflaming the situation causing to do nothing more than slowing this process by causing division and/or dispersion of the issues with your "Good Intentions" and your "re-education" that you feel is necessary for the guardians that are left.  You have built up a sour taste in people's mouths and only inflame the situation.  I'm not saying that you are the wrong, just that you are not being tactful of your now ominous presence here on the guardian forum. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm here when I feel something needs to be said or my class defended.  I'm also here, surprisingly, when people like you bring me up in your thread.  <FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>As long as I follow the forum rules I can post wherever I want.</STRONG></FONT>  If SOE had a problem with other classes posting here, they'd lock it for just guardians.  <FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>I think you guys should worry about yourselves and your class,</STRONG></FONT> and spend way less time worrying about, talking and blaming me.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Hm, I would like several things clarified from you Gaige, if it is not too much trouble. The first highlighted section, seems to infer that you don't care about people's feelings or for the unspoken rules of posting. Seems like a disrespectful attitude for one to have, and if you do not have that attitude, you do convey it in this post, and many others. The second highlighted section seems quite odd, for haven't you been calling for a Guardian nerf for quite some time? So, we should worry about our class, and only our class, but it is ok for you to worry about other classes? Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong at all, thanks.<BR>

[Gaige]

<FONT color=#ffff00></FONT><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> Airoguy wrote: <P>Hm, I would like several things clarified from you Gaige, if it is not too much trouble. The first highlighted section, seems to infer that you don't care about people's feelings or for the unspoken rules of posting. Seems like a disrespectful attitude for one to have, and if you do not have that attitude, you do convey it in this post, and many others.  <FONT color=#ffff00>I'm not aware of any "unspoken rule of posting".  I care about people's feelings, but only when its legitimate.  I'm not disrepectful, if you want to see disrespect, look up the numerous posts by guardians asking me to quit, asking for others to get me to quit, wishing I'd delete my account, calling me names or attacking me personally.  They don't talk about balance issues, they talk about <EM>me.  </EM>As long as I follow the rules, I can post where I want.  So can any of you.</FONT></P> <P>The second highlighted section seems quite odd, for haven't you been calling for a Guardian nerf for quite some time? So, we should worry about our class, and only our class, but it is ok for you to worry about other classes? Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong at all, thanks.  <FONT color=#ffff00>I was calling for things to be fixed, and in respect to fighter balance the guardians were the most broken and the ones causing the most harm to other fighters ability to tank.  I also asked for defense to be changed, buff stacking to be fixed, my dps to be lowered and various other things.  You can worry about other classes all you want, just know I'll be here everytime you reference monks to make sure you are in fact using the correct references.  I didn't say not to worry about brawlers, I said not to worry about *me*.  Far too many posts attack me personally or bring my name up where it isn't even required.  That is what I was referring too.  I only respond to people when I need to, and I don't bring up names or blame needlessly.  During the months that I posted for fighter balance I didn't keep referencing Tuna as the reason monks were inferior tanks, for instance and flaming and name-calling him everytime I was disappointed.  I pointed out flaws in the system and the guardian class.  That is what you guys should do and quit worrying about me.</FONT></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[ReviloTX]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <FONT color=#ffff00></FONT><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I pointed out flaws in the system and the guardian class.  That is what you guys should do and quit worrying about me.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You pointed out "flaws" that pertained to your personal agenda.  I use the word in quotes because, in reality, they were not flaws but merely your interpretation of a flaw.  Unfortunately, you convinced the dev's that they were in fact flaws.  The reality is, the system is NOW flawed, and wasn't nearly as flawed before as it is now.  I've explained all this numerous times in many threads though, so go read them if you want details about what I'm talking about.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for us worrying about us, that's what most of us are trying to do.  Some don't, but hey don't speak for all of us when a few focus on the wrong thing.  The only reason monks/brawlers get brought up in my posts is to make a point about the current joke of the fighter archetype.  If you feel like you need to defend yourself in that situation, by all means go for it.  I'll be happy to point out any flaws in your argument.</DIV>

[Danan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> ReviloTX wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <FONT color=#ffff00></FONT><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I pointed out flaws in the system and the guardian class.  That is what you guys should do and quit worrying about me.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>You pointed out "flaws" that pertained to your personal agenda.  I use the word in quotes because, in reality, they were not flaws but merely your interpretation of a flaw.  Unfortunately, you convinced the dev's that they were in fact flaws.  The reality is, the system is NOW flawed, and wasn't nearly as flawed before as it is now.  I've explained all this numerous times in many threads though, so go read them if you want details about what I'm talking about.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for us worrying about us, that's what most of us are trying to do.  Some don't, but hey don't speak for all of us when a few focus on the wrong thing.  The only reason monks/brawlers get brought up in my posts is to make a point about the current joke of the fighter archetype.  If you feel like you need to defend yourself in that situation, by all means go for it.  I'll be happy to point out any flaws in your argument.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>So wait a second here. The fact that Gaige pointed out that Guardians avoided better than avoidance tanks wasn't a flaw but it was intended?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And now when avoidance tanks avoid and mitigation tanks mitigate its flawed?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You make me laugh!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Stop looking back on the way things were, instead try and see how you can fix the current flaws</DIV>

[ReviloTX]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dananeb wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>So wait a second here. The fact that Gaige pointed out that Guardians avoided better than avoidance tanks wasn't a flaw but it was intended?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And now when avoidance tanks avoid and mitigation tanks mitigate its flawed?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You make me laugh!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Stop looking back on the way things were, instead try and see how you can fix the current flaws</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You obviously haven't read all of my posts, as I have previously explained what I meant.  I didn't care to write the same thing for the 100th time again, but since you don't seem to want to do your research I'll try to summarize for you.</P> <P>The FLAW is the idea that all tanks "tank" the same.  Some fighters bring much more to a group than tanking ability (read: DPS and utility like self heals), while others bring very little other than tanking ability (read:  Guardians).  The goal was to make sure all fighters could fulfill the MT ROLE equally (read:  Role, not tanking ability).  Those that bring much more than tanking ability currently fulfill their role better than those that bring very little other than tanking ability(read:  Brawlers is a superior choice for MT over a guardian).  Hence, it's broke.<BR></P>

[Danan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> ReviloTX wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dananeb wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>So wait a second here. The fact that Gaige pointed out that Guardians avoided better than avoidance tanks wasn't a flaw but it was intended?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And now when avoidance tanks avoid and mitigation tanks mitigate its flawed?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You make me laugh!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Stop looking back on the way things were, instead try and see how you can fix the current flaws</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You obviously haven't read all of my posts, as I have previously explained what I meant.  I didn't care to write the same thing for the 100th time again, but since you don't seem to want to do your research I'll try to summarize for you.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You should not expect anyone to go back and read all your post to answer one of yours, if that was the case no one would ever reply to any of gaige's post :smileyvery-happy:</FONT></P> <P>The FLAW is the idea that all tanks "tank" the same.  Some fighters bring much more to a group than tanking ability (read: DPS and utility like self heals), while others bring very little other than tanking ability (read:  Guardians).  The goal was to make sure all fighters could fulfill the MT ROLE equally (read:  Role, not tanking ability).  Those that bring much more than tanking ability currently fulfill their role better than those that bring very little other than tanking ability(read:  Brawlers is a superior choice for MT over a guardian).  Hence, it's broke.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>This is what the Archetype system is based upon, all fighters fulfill the main role (tanking) the same but bring different utility to the group. If you only see yourself as MT at all times because you do the job better than any other fighter type, then that system is broken. as it is right now, brawlers are ideal tanks on single target mobs, while Warriors are ideal if there is more mobs in the encounter. Can Brawlers tank multi mob encounters, sure but its a lot harder to keep agro on all the mobs, Just as Warriors can tank single target mobs, but have to work harder to keep agro. Now in a situation where we ( brawlers and Warriors) are not tanking i will agree that the brawler is the better choice, why is that? we have many utilities that are usefull. These Utilities are what you miss, guess what, you need more utility, maybe a boost in dps. You would break the archetype system if you made one tank the best over the rest, we saw this before CU13.<BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dananeb wrote:<BR><BR>Now in a situation where we ( brawlers and Warriors) are not tanking i will agree that the brawler is the better choice, why is that? we have many utilities that are usefull. These Utilities are what you miss, guess what, you need more utility, maybe a boost in dps. You would break the archetype system if you made one tank the best over the rest, we saw this before CU13.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Exactly.  Guardians need increased utility and better dps. I agree.</P> <P>The "flaw" in the old archetype system was defense affected avoidance, letting guardians mitigate better, avoid better, and have more HP than any other tank.  </P> <P>Reactives were broken and gave hate to who they were cast on, making holding aggro a joke.</P> <P>You had guardians reaching 100% mit and 100% avoid with 10k+ HP because of the broken mechanics, which trivalized encounters.</P> <P>Sure other fighters could reach 100% avoid but *only* guardians could reach such high HP (due to stacking) and had such high mit.  Therefore their class was the most broken pre LU13 which made them the "best" tank by far.</P> <P>I also like that whole "equality filling the role" but "not equal tanks" since the role = tank we have to be equal tanks.  More dps, heals, FD etc etc are to be used when not fulling the role and as a boost to the role, but the role is tanking.  You can't equally fill the role of tank if you aren't an equal tank.  Anything else is a play on words to shift focus off what it should be on: balancing fighter utility and damage.<BR></P>

[TunaBoo]

idk at least a council of guardians could represent our case to SOE in a constructive manner.. and at least get some feedback from SOE. <div></div>

[Macross_JR]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Dananeb wrote:Now in a situation where we ( brawlers and Warriors) are not tanking i will agree that the brawler is the better choice, why is that? we have many utilities that are usefull. These Utilities are what you miss, guess what, you need more utility, maybe a boost in dps. You would break the archetype system if you made one tank the best over the rest, we saw this before CU13. <hr> </blockquote> <p>Exactly.  Guardians need increased utility and better dps. I agree.</p> <p>The "flaw" in the old archetype system was defense affected avoidance, letting guardians mitigate better, avoid better, and have more HP than any other tank.  </p> <p>Reactives were broken and gave hate to who they were cast on, making holding aggro a joke.</p> <p>You had guardians reaching 100% mit and 100% avoid with 10k+ HP because of the broken mechanics, which trivalized encounters.</p> <p>Sure other fighters could reach 100% avoid but *only* guardians could reach such high HP (due to stacking) and had such high mit.  Therefore their class was the most broken pre LU13 which made them the "best" tank by far.</p> <p>I also like that whole "equality filling the role" but "not equal tanks" since the role = tank we have to be equal tanks.  More dps, heals, FD etc etc are to be used when not fulling the role and as a boost to the role, but the role is tanking.  You can't equally fill the role of tank if you aren't an equal tank.  Anything else is a play on words to shift focus off what it should be on: balancing fighter utility and damage.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>Gaige I have said this before in some other posts about the defense adding to avoidance thing, and I will re-itterate it here.  What SOE should have done is made +Def add to Mitigation and left your +Deflection to add to Avoidance.  If they would have done that, I think things would have been ok, but now Guardians get hit way to much and for the casual player don't mitigate enough of it.  Where as an avoidance tank will get fewer times.  I have played with numerous Brawlers in my guild, some bruisers some monks.  I will say this first off, monks are not over powered.  The over powered Brawler class is the Bruisers.  Bruisers put monks to shame in tanking and dps'ing at the same time. Also Gaige,  the un-written rule on the forums is don't go to other class forums and start/continue flame wars.  How many Guardians do you honestly see posting on all the other tanks boards, I bet it is way less then the amount of other tanks posting on the Guardian forums.  Some Guardians do want to be the best tank.  I want it ballanced just like you Gaige, I want usful utility, more dps. As utility goes if they actually made our intercept line useful enough to use I'm sure that would be great.  What some Guardians would like is utility that doesn't cause damage to ourselves.  All tanks can make other tanks tank better, that use to be how it was.  Now with the +Def being not worth crap, Guardians can't even do that, while the other tanks can still make a very noticable difference in how other tanks tank.  To fix the DPS part I really think they need to put a haste componet on our offensive stance.  Not a huge one, maybe 10-15%. One last thing Gaige, defense never made us mitigate better, it only ever added to avoidance.</span><div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Macross_JR wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>One last thing Gaige, defense never made us mitigate better, it only ever added to avoidance.</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The wording I used was less than stellar.  What I meant was that with defense affecting avoidance that allowed guardians to excel at the tanking trifecta: mitigation, avoidance and HP.  They were the best in all 3.</P> <P>I realize defense didn't affect mitigation.<BR></P>

[Melr]

Ok I don't really post much as u can see, and in no way am I coming to Gaiges defense as a monk.  I do agree that Guardians really need "something" more to bring to a grp/raid aside from just fulfilling a tank spot.  But for the record, if I'm tanking for a grp or in any other function FD is absolutly useless due to the fact I'll be damned if I let my grp die before me.  Its a nice thing to have but serves no purpose in a tanking situation.  I really hope guardians get something that becomes there "niche" as other fighter classes get. 

[JNewby]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> landru wrote:<BR>Gaige, there are times that I agree with what you are saying, I took the time to look over the amount of posts you have made since the live update patch has gone live.  You now spend as much if not more time in the guardian forum that you do in any other.  I mean this with all due respect.  Please, stop, you are only inflaming the situation causing to do nothing more than slowing this process by causing division and/or dispersion of the issues with your "Good Intentions" and your "re-education" that you feel is necessary for the guardians that are left.  You have built up a sour taste in people's mouths and only inflame the situation.  I'm not saying that you are the wrong, just that you are not being tactful of your now ominous presence here on the guardian forum. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm here when I feel something needs to be said or my class defended.  I'm also here, surprisingly, when people like you bring me up in your thread.  As long as I follow the forum rules I can post wherever I want.  If SOE had a problem with other classes posting here, they'd lock it for just guardians.  I think you guys should worry about yourselves and your class, and spend way less time worrying about, talking and blaming me.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>not anything about your post gaige... but I grew a big ditaste for u on some website where you staed "I think the monk class is where is should be" that such a stupid statement... if I could have a class that could be the best dps and best tank and have best utility I think it would rock... but probably not whereit should be</P> <P> </P>

[JNewby]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dananeb wrote:<BR><BR>Now in a situation where we ( brawlers and Warriors) are not tanking i will agree that the brawler is the better choice, why is that? we have many utilities that are usefull. These Utilities are what you miss, guess what, you need more utility, maybe a boost in dps. You would break the archetype system if you made one tank the best over the rest, we saw this before CU13.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Exactly.  Guardians need increased utility and better dps. I agree.</P> <P>The "flaw" in the old archetype system was defense affected avoidance, letting guardians mitigate better, avoid better, and have more HP than any other tank.  </P> <P>Reactives were broken and gave hate to who they were cast on, making holding aggro a joke.</P> <P>You had guardians reaching 100% mit and 100% avoid with 10k+ HP because of the broken mechanics, which trivalized encounters.</P> <P>Sure other fighters could reach 100% avoid but *only* guardians could reach such high HP (due to stacking) and had such high mit.  Therefore their class was the most broken pre LU13 which made them the "best" tank by far.</P> <P>I also like that whole "equality filling the role" but "not equal tanks" since the role = tank we have to be equal tanks.  More dps, heals, FD etc etc are to be used when not fulling the role and as a boost to the role, but the role is tanking.  You can't equally fill the role of tank if you aren't an equal tank.  Anything else is a play on words to shift focus off what it should be on: balancing fighter utility and damage.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>no we dont need dps and no we dont need utiltiy... for the 100000 time gaige we took a tank taht was a tank not a hybrid monk that did dps and utility... and we took it for  a reason... if SOE gives me 1000 dps and the abilty to do what every other class does.. I will still complain cause we are tanks... so we shoudl be the best at it .(period) that is what we want adn that is what we took..plain and simple</P> <P> </P>

[ReviloTX]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dananeb wrote:<BR><BR>Now in a situation where we ( brawlers and Warriors) are not tanking i will agree that the brawler is the better choice, why is that? we have many utilities that are usefull. These Utilities are what you miss, guess what, you need more utility, maybe a boost in dps. You would break the archetype system if you made one tank the best over the rest, we saw this before CU13.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Exactly.  Guardians need increased utility and better dps. I agree.</P> <P>The "flaw" in the old archetype system was defense affected avoidance, letting guardians mitigate better, avoid better, and have more HP than any other tank. </P> <P>Reactives were broken and gave hate to who they were cast on, making holding aggro a joke.</P> <P>You had guardians reaching 100% mit and 100% avoid with 10k+ HP because of the broken mechanics, which trivalized encounters.</P> <P>Sure other fighters could reach 100% avoid but *only* guardians could reach such high HP (due to stacking) and had such high mit.  Therefore their class was the most broken pre LU13 which made them the "best" tank by far.</P> <P>I also like that whole "equality filling the role" but "not equal tanks" since the role = tank we have to be equal tanks.  More dps, heals, FD etc etc are to be used when not fulling the role and as a boost to the role, but the role is tanking.  You can't equally fill the role of tank if you aren't an equal tank.  Anything else is a play on words to shift focus off what it should be on: balancing fighter utility and damage.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>First of all, stop coming here and telling us what we need.  You don't play a guardian, you have NO CLUE what we need.  It makes me laugh and makes me want to punch someone all at the same time when another class comes into our forums and tells us what we need.  Dev's, ignore their posts, they don't play guardians and couldn't begin to know what we should ask for.</P> <P>Second, most of us don't want utility and DPS.  We never had it, we were never suppose to have it, and we still don't want it.  We want what we chose, the most defensive tank.</P> <P>Last, I wouldn't believe for a second if you said you never used your heal while you were tanking with a healer in the group.  If I had it I know I would.  <FONT color=#ffff00>So, that alone says that you can take more damage than us and still fulfill your role exactly the same.</FONT>  There, now I proved my point, utility CAN make up for a tanking ability gap.  It can go much further than that too, when talking about added DPS and other things like stuns/stifles that your utility allows you to do, but I'll leave it at that since I already proved my point.</P> <P>Saying that your utility and DPS is only used when your not tanking is assinine and makes you look like you have no clue how to play your class.</P> <P> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> ReviloTX wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Saying that your utility and DPS is only used when your not tanking is assinine and makes you look like you have no clue how to play your class.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I didn't say that.  I simply said that our tanking ability should be balanced against other fighters tanking ability, and our dps/utility balanced against other fighters dps utility.</P> <P>Period.<BR></P>

[landru]

<div></div><div></div><div></div>Ok, this thread is starting to get off topic again and this is the point of what I'm talking about.   To my fellow guardians, At this time I implore you to stop this petty bickering and stay on topic.  We need to unify our voice, we need to organize our thoughts and create constructive ideas while shielding ourselves from people that are attempting to blur the issues with rhetoric and the shell game of statistics.  THIS is how we make changes happen, THIS is how our class gets fixed and most importantly THIS is how the guardian class will be fun again. The class leader idea was just that, an idea.  It can work, if the person is level headed to and non-bias to PVP AND PVE.  What would be there mandate and primary responsibility would be to see that the Guardian class is kept to an acceptable level of play in all aspects and not fall behind the curve that has been set.  Play styles, solo, group, utility, dps, pve, pvp, roles and responsibilities would be the keystones that would be continued to be examined and investigated as well as conveying a singular voice back to the Testing, Development and Community leaders of Sony Online Entertainment.  This would ensure that our voice is heard with a concise and well-thought out project plan to get our class exciting again.   Gaige, like I said, you are blurring the issue with coming here and attempting to "defend yours/other class(es)" or "re-educate to the new system of things".  You bring up the comment that you want us to stop worrying, talking and/or blaming you.  I'm not blaming you for your intention.  Your intention is sound.  Your tact and reasoning to continue your actions is what I'm questioning.  Since this post was written to try to pull the guardians together you have successfully taken this thread in another direction by coming here and attempting to defend your own actions.  You are not here because I called you here with this thread.  You are here because you felt that it is necessary to continue to perpetuate this cycle of derailment because you feel that this is a personal attack.  This is not what I was attempting to accomplish.  I was stating that you just need to step back for a moment and re-evaluate what your purpose is to coming to the guardian boards.  Is it to be a help or a hindrance? You have now caused 12 out of 20 replies to either be you or people talking about you and your comments.  This is out of 20 total responses to this thread and now I'm sitting here writing yet another post directed at you that is still keeping this post off-topic.  This is NOT and I repeat NOT constructive and serves no purpose other than to fuel your own fire of personal glory.  You are not champion of your class or any other class in this game, but you feel that it's your moral obligation to come here and defend them.  You want to be a champion, go and PLAY EverQuest 2 and slay a might beast.  The guardians are not your dragon,  nor do we need to have someone here tilting again windmills because they feel that they can be a better champion than the people at Sony Online Entertainment.  At this time, I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes yet another thread that gets locked and/or deleted because of your tampering with the subject matter.  Do you really want to see guardians fixed or are you just attempting to get as much of the spotlight as possible while it's there for the taking?  You DO you have the right to post here, but SHOULD you if you are posting for the wrong reasons? You ARE obeying the rules and regulations that are in place for "Appropriate posting" that was set by Sony Online Entertainment, but are you truly here under the pretense to do what’s right to assist another class in getting the attention they deserve? I haven't said that you aren't welcome here; I haven't said that you aren't right.  I am saying are you really here for the right purpose. There are MANY other great ideas floating around this section of the board but we are getting bogged down with continued interruptions from outside as well as continued infighting.  This is what I want people to take notice of; this is why we are getting "no love".  We are NOT unified; we are getting distracted too easily by people with the best intentions.  We are getting distracted by the tsunami of numbers and statistics that are being thrown around and now we are drowning in our own frustration.  This is not how we affect change, this is how we stay at the current level we are without any potential to raise ourselves from the ashes.  We are guardians for Pete’s sake, we are KNOWN for coming back fighting.  We are renowned for our ability to resist these outside influences and stay focused on our objective.  Let’s keep it that way. ~Gladius (This message has been edited for grammer and continued refining of my points) Message Edited by landru on 10-20-2005 03:58 AM <p>Message Edited by landru on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">04:19 AM</span></p><p>Message Edited by landru on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">04:21 AM</span></p><p>Message Edited by landru on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">04:40 AM</span></p><p>Message Edited by landru on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:41 AM</span>

[Nemi]

<P>Until Guardians realise SoE isn't going to make you the undisputed TANK you're [Removed for Content] into the wind.</P> <P>They can make you the most 'defensive' tank, but thats not what you want. Defensive can simply imply you beef up the hps and defense of a group, thereby making them safer with you as tank. If you had a 5% bonus over tanking ability than every other tank would you be happy? I doubt it. You would be the most defensive and techinically the best tank, but thats not the issue is it? You want to be the clear and decisive tanks such that there is no competition when a Guardian is around.</P> <P>Thats not going to happen. This is why there is such a stink in the Guardian forums and quite frankly why SoE haven't given you love, because they know that while you all expect to be KINGS of tanking, any improvement they give will be judged in that light, and found failing.</P>

[Airog]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P>Until Guardians realise SoE isn't going to make you the undisputed TANK you're [Removed for Content] into the wind.</P> <P>They can make you the most 'defensive' tank, but thats not what you want. Defensive can simply imply you beef up the hps and defense of a group, thereby making them safer with you as tank. If you had a 5% bonus over tanking ability than every other tank would you be happy? I doubt it. You would be the most defensive and techinically the best tank, but thats not the issue is it? You want to be the clear and decisive tanks such that there is no competition when a Guardian is around.</P> <P>Thats not going to happen. This is why there is such a stink in the Guardian forums and quite frankly why SoE haven't given you love, because they know that while you all expect to be KINGS of tanking, any improvement they give will be judged in that light, and found failing.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I would probably accept a 5% increase over the second best tank, but then I would excpect 5% less DPS then them as well.

[Frostborne]

<span>Gaige that is the first thing you've said ever that I'll agree with, however the problem is it's just not the case right now in any class archeytpe. They are using this measure to judge the fighter class that they aren't applied to any other class, that's their prime purpose.  Do all mage archetypes do the exact same DPS?  No.  Do all scout types do the exact same DPS?  No.  Do all the priest classes provide the exact same healing ability?   No.  Have they even mentioned that they are attempted to make them equal on these fronts? No. So why is the fighter class being held to this standard?  Why if "tanking" is the main purpose that all fighters have to perform the same, is this standard not being applied anywhere else?  Every other class is specialed for certain roles, and now all of a sudden, the fighter class is being changed in ways no other class is.  Why is that? I agree, I think someone should be able to tank as well as a Monk, Bruiser, Guardian, whatever you pick, but then everything else has to be the same as well,  damage, utility, etc.  As a class right now, it's just not meeting that standard the developers set for themselves.  All tanks AREN'T tanking the same, Bruisers are in fact tanking much better than any other class is.  No class is damaging the same, Bruisers do far more damage than any other class out there.  Utility is not the same, as the Brawler class period, has far more utility in it than any of the other archetypes. But again, this "balancing" isn't being done anywhere else that I've heard, and I don't know why the developers have made it their mission to revamp the class a yeard into it.  Also what are ramifications a year into the game of trying to do what they are doing now?  I really don't think they are good at all, if you are going to [Removed for Content] off most of your customer base doing it. Lastly, if all the classes are the same, then what will be the roll of each in a group, and why would you want one over the other if  they all perform the same?  Is the defining factor of what character you pick for a group going to be their utility they bring to it?  That's it?  <blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> ReviloTX wrote: <div></div> <p>Saying that your utility and DPS is only used when your not tanking is assinine and makes you look like you have no clue how to play your class.</p> <hr> </blockquote> <p>I didn't say that.  I simply said that our tanking ability should be balanced against other fighters tanking ability, and our dps/utility balanced against other fighters dps utility.</p> <p>Period.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Neimhidh]

<DIV>This is how balance is achieved in DPS between guardians and monks: taunts=dps.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardians have great taunting so they have low DPS</DIV> <DIV>Brawlers have low taunts so they have higher DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>When I tank as a monk, I get more defense and less DPS, the side effect of this is as monks get more defensive, their taunting gets worse.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If I am tanking and I find I need more taunting, I have to boost my DPS, the effect of this is my defense gets worse and I take more damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So I have to balance between two modes:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Tank mode, low DPS, crappy taunting, better defense.</DIV> <DIV>Offensive mode, higher DPS, higher taunting, worse defense.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taunting and defense are opposed in monks, more of one=less of the other.  This is NOT true of guardians, when you become more defensive, your taunting does NOT suffer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Advantage to the guardian.</P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Neimhidh on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:09 AM</span>

[Pry]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Neimhidh wrote:<BR> <DIV>This is how balance is achieved in DPS between guardians and monks, taunts=dps.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardians have great taunting so they have low DPS</DIV> <DIV>Brawlers have low taunts so they have higher DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>When I tank as a monk, I get more defense and less DPS, the side effect of this is as monks get more defensive, their taunting gets worse.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If I am tanking and I find I need more taunting, I have to boost my DPS, the effect of this is my defense gets worse and I take more damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So I have to balance between two modes:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Tank mode, low DPS, crappy taunting, better defense.</DIV> <DIV>Offensive mode, higher DPS, higher taunting, worse defense.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Taunting and defense are opposed in monks, more of one=less of the other.  This is NOT true of guardians, when you become more defensive, your taunting does NOT suffer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Advantage to the guardian.</P> <P>Message Edited by Neimhidh on <SPAN class=date_text>10-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>11:09 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Ludicrious.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>First of all when Guardians take defensive stance their movement speed is reduced 18%, which quite frankly sucks.  And moreover, to keep aggro we have to use maddening defense which does what?  IT ROOTS YOU.  And the taunts are no better than any other classes taunts.  We have 1 or 2 more but more does not equal better and I think it's important that this is understood.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Brawlers don't have any restrictions on their movements.  And the DPS argument is silly really, because if DPS was the bane of keeping aggro every fighter would be in offensive stance thus rendering defensive stance more useless than it already is.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Another case of a Brawler spreading mis-information on the Guardian forums to avoid getting nerfed because their class is entirely overpowered.</FONT>  </P>

[Baldaena]

<P>Neimhidh,</P> <P>I don't know a lot of things about monk, but you have 3 stances (offensive, defensive and middle) ?</P> <P>What about your middle stance?</P> <P>And several of our taunts need to hit the mobs so we have the same problem</P> <P>Besides,  we have less taunt than you have dps skills... so one resist on our taunt (hit <U>or</U> taunt resist) is more dramatic for us (but I don't play monks).</P><p>Message Edited by Baldaena on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:22 AM</span>

[Neimhidh]

<DIV>And to boost mitigation, monks can either self root, self stun, or both.  Movement has nothing to do with it. so your misdirection towards movement fails.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The POINT is as a guardian becomes more defensive, they do not give up taunting ability.  </DIV> <DIV>As a monk becoming more defensive I lose taunting ability.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monk group taunting already sucks, and to be able to take more damage when tanking, our taunting falls into the toilet.  and the less taunting power u have, the worse you become at your job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What is the job of the tank?  To take damage AND to keep aggro.  These are opposing abilities in the brawler class, not yours.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So again, advantage to guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Frostborne]

<span>This no way makes us "balanced".  If you have balanced tanking ability, then there should be balanced DPS ability across the board as well.   Give us both taunts, I could care less, but don't make one class the damage dealing and the other taunting, that is situational, that is <b>specialization</b>, and as we know from how tanking was handled, it should be balanced in the same regard. Taunting is in no way equivalent in any way to DPS.   If that were the case, I could use the same argument to justify that Guardians being better tanks is equivalent to Monks/Bruisers having DPS.<blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <div></div> <div></div> <div>This is how balance is achieved in DPS between guardians and monks: taunts=dps.</div> <div> </div> <div>Guardians have great taunting so they have low DPS</div> <div>Brawlers have low taunts so they have higher DPS.</div> <div> </div> <div>When I tank as a monk, I get more defense and less DPS, the side effect of this is as monks get more defensive, their taunting gets worse.</div> <div> </div> <div>If I am tanking and I find I need more taunting, I have to boost my DPS, the effect of this is my defense gets worse and I take more damage.</div> <div> </div> <div>So I have to balance between two modes:</div> <div> </div> <div>Tank mode, low DPS, crappy taunting, better defense.</div> <div>Offensive mode, higher DPS, higher taunting, worse defense.</div> <div> </div> <div>Taunting and defense are opposed in monks, more of one=less of the other.  This is NOT true of guardians, when you become more defensive, your taunting does NOT suffer.</div> <div> </div> <p>Advantage to the guardian.</p> <p><span class="time_text"></span> </p> <p><span class="time_text"></span> </p><p>Message Edited by Neimhidh on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">11:09 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Baldaena wrote:<BR> <P>Neimhidh,</P> <P>I don't know a lot of things about monk, but you have 3 stances (offensive, defensive and middle) ?</P> <P>What about your middle stance?</P> <P>And several of our taunts need to hit the mobs so we have the same problem</P> <P>Besides,  we have less taunt than you have dps skills... so one resist on our taunt (hit <U>or</U> taunt resist) is more dramatic for us (but I don't play monks).</P> <P>Message Edited by Baldaena on <SPAN class=date_text>10-20-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>09:22 AM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Monks have to make sacrifices to tank, we either can absorb more damage, or we can hold more aggro.  The trick is to strike the right balance for any given encounter, which means constantly adjusting our stances and buffs.  Our middle stance is a way to go in between absorbing damage and generating aggro.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If I recall correctly, your taunt procs need the mobs to hit YOU.  The monk proc requires us to hit the mob. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>On higher cons, we all get hit more, your taunt procs more.</DIV> <DIV>On higher cons, we all hit the mob less, monk taunt procs less.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Advantage to guardians.</DIV>

[Pry]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Neimhidh wrote:<BR> <DIV>And to boost mitigation, monks can either self root, self stun, or both.  Movement has nothing to do with it. so your misdirection towards movement fails.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The POINT is as a guardian becomes more defensive, they do not give up taunting ability.  </DIV> <DIV>As a monk becoming more defensive I lose taunting ability.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monk group taunting already sucks, and to be able to take more damage when tanking, our taunting falls into the toilet.  and the less taunting power u have, the worse you become at your job.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What is the job of the tank?  To take damage AND to keep aggro.  These are opposing abilities in the brawler class, not yours.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So again, advantage to guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT face=Verdana>You don't give up taunting ability when you are defensive.  That made me laugh IRL. </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Everytime a Guardian posts on guardian issues that directly interfere with a brawlers ability to have /godmode the argument is "you are misdirecting what I am trying to say!"  Self root and self stun are TEMPORARY.  18% movement reduction is PERMANENT.  If you actually played a Guardian (which you don't) then you might understand why this is detrimental.  But you don't, so you are talking out of your tookus.  </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana>Advantages:  Brawler.  All of them.</FONT>  </P>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frostborne wrote:<BR><SPAN>This no way makes us "balanced".  If you have balanced tanking ability, then there should be balanced DPS ability across the board as well.   Give us both taunts, I could care less, but don't make one class the damage dealing and the other taunting, that is situational, that is <B>specialization</B>, and as we know from how tanking was handled, it should be balanced in the same regard.<BR>Taunting is in no way equivalent in any way to DPS.   If that were the case, I could use the same argument to justify that Guardians being better tanks is equivalent to Monks/Bruisers having DPS.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I don't mind guardians doing more DPS in the name of balance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But in the name of balance also make it so that when you use your abilities to become more defensive by increasing your mitigation or whatever, make it so your taunting falls in the toilet while you are doing it, just like brawlers.</DIV>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Prynn wrote:<BR><BR> <P><FONT face=Verdana>You don't give up taunting ability when you are defensive.  That made me laugh IRL. </FONT></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>That is outright wrong and ignorant.  when I am defensive, I hit less, my taunt buff procs LESS.  Less taunt procs=LESS TAUNT.</DIV>

[JudyJudy]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Prynn wrote:<BR><BR> <P><FONT face=Verdana>And the DPS argument is silly really, because if DPS was the bane of keeping aggro every fighter would be in offensive stance thus rendering defensive stance more useless than it already is.  </FONT></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><EM>Your arguement here is sound but a bit misinformative.  DPS is a huge factor for any fighter in terms of keeping agro, but even MORE important for monks - and I'll say it with two words:</EM></P> <P><EM>Dragon Advance Master II.</EM></P> <P><EM>The more we hit, the higher chance we get at proc'ing a single taunt.  If in the defensive stance, we will clearly hit less and will not maintain the hate necessary to keep certain mobs targetted on us.</EM></P> <P><EM>On a side note, I hate seeing brawlers (or any class for that matter) become the flavor of the month, as I have picked my class months ago and do not have any alts due to the fact of reaching class mastery and the fascination I have for my monk toon.  Seems like everyone is jumping on the brawler band-wagon which makes the class over-populated and less unique.  I have a certain pride for being a monk, and will weather the storms and stand tall during times like these when we really shine.</EM></P> <P><EM>I hope you guards get your time when you can shine, everyone deserves that.  Good luck to you.</EM></P> <P><BR></P>

[Frostborne]

<div></div>Again, your assuming an ideal situation.  Under what situation would you have to go defensive to sustain combat?  You don't.  We <b>HAVE</b> to go defensive if we are MT, you don't.  However we do give up taunting ability by being defensive since we are rooted: <ul> <li>How do we get agro if we are rooted in place, unable to move, and unable to target the mob or do damage when it moves out of range or our combat skills?</li> <li>If they mob is not hitting us our HTL is worthless, so that screaming mage running around or away from the group can't be saved by us, unless we use Rescue.</li> <li>Oh wait, rescue has been used and is on a 10 min timer, so if you don't have that your SOL.</li> <li>Our <b>one </b>group taunt is resisted a good 50 percent of the time, and all fighter classes get the basic group taunt, which still can be used at later levels.</li> <li>Damage is the best agro generator, next to casting group buffs.</li> <li>Our mitigation buffs only last 30 seconds, and only refresh ever 3 min, so for a majority of the fight, we aren't really mitigating much more than if we didn't have the buff.  What fight with a group of mobs that have a Bruiser lasts more than 3 min?</li> </ul> If you want to trade your DPS and attack skills damage for my 1 more advanced group taunt and the HTL, I will gladly trade you any day of the week, no questions  asked, with a smile on my face and a skip in my step.   Care to trade? <span><blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote:<div>And to boost mitigation, monks can either self root, self stun, or both.  Movement has nothing to do with it. so your misdirection towards movement fails.</div> <div> </div> <div>The POINT is as a guardian becomes more defensive, they do not give up taunting ability.  </div> <div>As a monk becoming more defensive I lose taunting ability.</div> <div> </div> <div>Monk group taunting already sucks, and to be able to take more damage when tanking, our taunting falls into the toilet.  and the less taunting power u have, the worse you become at your job.</div> <div> </div> <div>What is the job of the tank?  To take damage AND to keep aggro.  These are opposing abilities in the brawler class, not yours.</div> <div> </div> <div>So again, advantage to guardian.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Frostborne on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:47 PM</span>

[Frostborne]

<span>Why should I lose taunting ability when I gain mitigation with buffs?  Do you lose tauting by buffing avoidance?  I don't think so, <b>maybe </b>you do when you buff your mitigation, but not your avoidance.<blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Frostborne wrote:<span>This no way makes us "balanced".  If you have balanced tanking ability, then there should be balanced DPS ability across the board as well.   Give us both taunts, I could care less, but don't make one class the damage dealing and the other taunting, that is situational, that is <b>specialization</b>, and as we know from how tanking was handled, it should be balanced in the same regard.Taunting is in no way equivalent in any way to DPS.   If that were the case, I could use the same argument to justify that Guardians being better tanks is equivalent to Monks/Bruisers having DPS.</span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>I don't mind guardians doing more DPS in the name of balance.</div> <div> </div> <div>But in the name of balance also make it so that when you use your abilities to become more defensive by increasing your mitigation or whatever, make it so your taunting falls in the toilet while you are doing it, just like brawlers.</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frostborne wrote:<BR>Again, your assuming an ideal situation.  Under what situation would you have to go defensive to sustain combat?  You don't.  We <B>HAVE</B> to go defensive if we are MT, you don't.  However we do give up taunting ability by being defensive since we are rooted:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>hmm, an example.  I am in a group on the third floor of the clefts with an assasin, ranger, wizzie, necro and a templar.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>When I tried to be defensive, the others kept stealing aggro from me causing deaths/evacs.</DIV> <DIV>When I tried to generate more aggro,  I held aggro, but my defense fell and the templar had problems keeping me healed, causing deaths/evacs.</DIV>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frostborne wrote:<BR><SPAN>Why should I lose taunting ability when I gain mitigation with buffs?  Do you lose tauting by buffing avoidance?  I don't think so, <B>maybe </B>you do when you buff your mitigation, but not your avoidance.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>YES I do.  When put on my defensive stance to buff my avoidance, I lose a LOT of taunting.  I miss more, I swing slower, this equals LESS taunting.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Neimhidh on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:52 AM</span>

[Krooner]

<P><FONT size=4>To put things in Moorguards prospective.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=4>"Guardians are the defensive tank"</FONT></P> <DIV>That means that we train for defence and as such it is our ART.  We should have less negative effects when using defensive arts.</DIV> <DIV>Brawlers are OFFENSIVE tanks.  You do not train to the degree of the guardians so it is only reasonable that you suffer more effects on the same scale as our DPS drop when your in a defensive stance.</DIV> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>STOP TRYING TO HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO</STRONG></DIV>

[Frostborne]

<span>Why did you "have" to go defensive?  If the necro/wizard were doing their job they would have or should have been mezzing/rooting anything that moved off you, or could have at least have had the ranger/necro snare it and fear.  You shouldn't have to go into defensive stance ever, unless your about to die, which in that case you would just FD, while someone evaced. I'm not buying that it was necessary for you to go defensvie at all.  Sounds like the problem has nothing to do with your buffs, but your group. <blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Frostborne wrote:Again, your assuming an ideal situation.  Under what situation would you have to go defensive to sustain combat?  You don't.  We <b>HAVE</b> to go defensive if we are MT, you don't.  However we do give up taunting ability by being defensive since we are rooted: <blockquote> <hr> </blockquote></blockquote> <div>hmm, an example.  I am in a group on the third floor of the clefts with an assasin, ranger, wizzie, necro and a templar.</div> <div> </div> <div>When I tried to be defensive, the others kept stealing aggro from me causing deaths/evacs.</div> <div>When I tried to generate more aggro,  I held aggro, but my defense fell and the templar had problems keeping me healed, causing deaths/evacs.</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Neimhidh]

<P>What cake?  I think the classes are pretty balanced as is.  I will accept the weaknesses of the monk class, why can't you do the same with guardians?</P> <P> </P> <P>I know as a tank my lot in this game in groups targeting higher cons is to be changing out buffs on a constant basis trying to both keep aggro and not get beat down.  Just as I know it's my lot as a tank in this game to forever be changing targets every 5 seconds to have any hopes of keeping aggro on groups of mobs.</P>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frostborne wrote:<BR><SPAN>Why did you "have" to go defensive?  If the necro/wizard were doing their job they would have or should have been mezzing/rooting anything that moved off you, or could have at least have had the ranger/necro snare it and fear.  You shouldn't have to go into defensive stance ever, unless your about to die, which in that case you would just FD, while someone evaced. I'm not buying that it was necessary for you to go defensvie at all.  Sounds like the problem has nothing to do with your buffs, but your group.<BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>It had little to do with adds, it had to do with my group wanting to pull yellow/orange ^^^ mobs in very tight quarters.  Doable, just very challenging.</DIV>

[Krooner]

<P>Welll because at the moment there is no real weakness to the monk <STRONG>IMO.</STRONG></P> <P>And after reading a lot of the other forums there are a lot of monks that dont want to accept things.</P> <P>There are even more brawlers whinning that they need more mana or more mitigation.</P> <P> </P>

[Frostborne]

<span>Ok, I checked the spell line to make sure, and yes you do lose attack speed, but isn't that what your burst attacks are for?  Alot of one damage in one shot should allow you to pull the mob of your target, especially if the target is rooted, feared/snared.  Also if there was any trouble with the mob breaking off you and switching targets, you can mezz can you not?  I certainly know the Wizard can.  The Necro can mezz/stun/root, and stick the pet on the mob if he's using his tank pet, which would buy you time.  I'm still not seeing where you <b>should </b>have to use your defensive stance in order to gain mitigation in a group.  Maybe in a solo situation where you are trying to heal yourself and switch to defensive, but certainly not in a group. <blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Frostborne wrote:<span>Why should I lose taunting ability when I gain mitigation with buffs?  Do you lose tauting by buffing avoidance?  I don't think so, <b>maybe </b>you do when you buff your mitigation, but not your avoidance.</span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>YES I do.  When put on my defensive stance to buff my avoidance, I lose a LOT of taunting.  I miss more, I swing slower, this equals LESS taunting.</div> <p><span class="time_text"></span> </p><p>Message Edited by Neimhidh on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">11:52 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Baldaena]

<DIV><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/view_profile?user.id=4376" target=_blank><SPAN>Neimhidh</SPAN></A>,</DIV> <DIV>our defensive stance reduce :</DIV> <DIV>- our dps (no comment)</DIV> <DIV>- our hability to taunt (because several of our taunts are based on chance to hit and we have FEWER taunts than you have dps skills, if your dps skills is resisted, you can cast another one, we have to wait taunt's refresh... 2 solo(8/10sec), 2 encounters taunt(20/30sec)...)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And yes we have HTL, our reactive taunt... but I think that our defensive stance increase our avoidance and reduce the chance to be hit and so to proc HTL...(need to be confirmed, I'm not utterly sure for the avoidance) hooo but we have 0 avoidance in our back, even with defensive stance... so HTL have a lot of chance to proc... for no avoidance check in defensive stance (no 180° avoidance for guardians)... ok we are the uber tank :smileywink: )</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm sorry, but I think the defensive stance have the same goal for all fighters : reduce dps/taunting habilities and increase avoidance/mitigation...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Message Edited by Baldaena on <SPAN class=date_text>10-20-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>10:07 AM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Baldaena on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:07 AM</span>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Warbird1 wrote:<BR> <P>Welll because at the moment there is no real weakness to the monk <STRONG>IMO.</STRONG></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>So you wouldn't object if guardians taunts greyed out when you buffed your mitigation?  That's not a weakness?</DIV>

[Frostborne]

<span>If that were the case then you should have never<b> HAD </b>to go defensive in the first place at all.  They should have had all the mobs in the group locked down with roots/fears/stuns/mezzes, while you took them out one at a time.  I'll admit, you can't immediatly taunt an entire group onto you, but you shouldn't have to.  Even if you initially lead off with the crapy tier 1 group taunt, you should still have more hate on you from the mobs that are mezzed/rooted/feared than the mages, and priest would. <blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Frostborne wrote:<span>Why did you "have" to go defensive?  If the necro/wizard were doing their job they would have or should have been mezzing/rooting anything that moved off you, or could have at least have had the ranger/necro snare it and fear.  You shouldn't have to go into defensive stance ever, unless your about to die, which in that case you would just FD, while someone evaced. I'm not buying that it was necessary for you to go defensvie at all.  Sounds like the problem has nothing to do with your buffs, but your group.</span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>It had little to do with adds, it had to do with my group wanting to pull yellow/orange ^^^ mobs in very tight quarters.  Doable, just very challenging.</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Krooner]

<DIV>Your not listening.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>WE are the defensive tanks.  NO we dont get a penalty and nore should we have a penalty for ours.</DIV> <DIV>YOUR not a defensive tank.  Stop trying to be one.  If you have a problem being a offensive tank and suffering those penaties then take it up with MG.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Baldaena wrote:<BR> <DIV>I'm sorry, but I think the defensive stance have the same goal for all fighters : reduce dps/taunting habilities and increase avoidance/mitigation...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Would you rather have a taunt buff that procs when you get hit, so it procs on groups of mobs beating on you, or would you rather have a taunt buff that procs when you hit a single mob?  Monks are not uber, we have weaknesses.<BR>

[Frostborne]

<span>Do your skills grey out if you buff avoidance?  No.  It's not even the same argument.<blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Warbird1 wrote: <p>Welll because at the moment there is no real weakness to the monk <strong>IMO.</strong></p> <hr> </blockquote> <div>So you wouldn't object if guardians taunts greyed out when you buffed your mitigation?  That's not a weakness?</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Neimhidh]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frostborne wrote:<BR><SPAN>If that were the case then you should have never<B> HAD </B>to go defensive in the first place at all.  They should have had all the mobs in the group locked down with roots/fears/stuns/mezzes, while you took them out one at a time.  I'll admit, you can't immediatly taunt an entire group onto you, but you shouldn't have to.  Even if you initially lead off with the crapy tier 1 group taunt, you should still have more hate on you from the mobs that are mezzed/rooted/feared than the mages, and priest would.<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>It had little to do with adds, it had to do with my group wanting to pull yellow/orange ^^^ mobs in very tight quarters.  Doable, just very challenging.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Note that I said yellow/orange ^^^ mobs, these are single mobs.  Nothing to mez/root/tickle or whatever.  If I don't HAVE to go in defensive mode, than neither does a guardian.</DIV>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frostborne wrote:<BR><SPAN>Do your skills grey out if you buff avoidance?  No.  It's not even the same argument.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Of course it's the same argument, more defense=less taunting.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Krooner]

<P>Tell Ya what. </P> <P>You can have something similar to Maddening defense if we can have your DPS in our defensive stance... Deal?</P> <P> </P>

[Frostborne]

<span>We do if we want to last more than 2 hits.     That is why we have to.   We certainly aren't going to go into offensive, for what?  Our damage is crap, and we are there to tank.   If it's a triple con ^^^  then it should never have broken off you, and if it did, your mages should have almost immedialty had it locked down.  And yes, there is almost always someting usefull with mezz/root/fear. Need a break from the fight for mana?  Mezz/Root/Fear.  Need to heal a bit or give the healer time to get you back to full health?  Mezz/Root/Fear.  Need to wait for your skills to recharge before going back into the fight?  Mezz/Root/Fear. And to repeat, we have to go into defensive stance as an MT - you don't have to.  It would be a futile exercize to run up to a ^^^ group mob in offensive stance thinking I'm going to be standing for long.  Would would be to gain?   DPS?  Please. <blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote:<div> <blockquote> <hr> Frostborne wrote:<span>If that were the case then you should have never<b> HAD </b>to go defensive in the first place at all.  They should have had all the mobs in the group locked down with roots/fears/stuns/mezzes, while you took them out one at a time.  I'll admit, you can't immediatly taunt an entire group onto you, but you shouldn't have to.  Even if you initially lead off with the crapy tier 1 group taunt, you should still have more hate on you from the mobs that are mezzed/rooted/feared than the mages, and priest would. <blockquote> <blockquote> <div> </div></blockquote> <div>It had little to do with adds, it had to do with my group wanting to pull yellow/orange ^^^ mobs in very tight quarters.  Doable, just very challenging.</div> <hr> </blockquote></span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote>Note that I said yellow/orange ^^^ mobs, these are single mobs.  Nothing to mez/root/tickle or whatever.  If I don't HAVE to go in defensive mode, than neither does a guardian.</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Frostborne]

<span>No it isn't because you are comparing your defensive line to ours - which increases your avoidance not your mitigation.  Buffing your avoidance doesn't cause your skills to grey out.  You can still hit mobs that aren't on you - so no your skills aren't greyed out at all.<blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Frostborne wrote:<span>Do your skills grey out if you buff avoidance?  No.  It's not even the same argument.</span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>Of course it's the same argument, more defense=less taunting.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Herrtzog]

In an attempt to kill the highjackers and get back on topic:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>landru wrote:<BR>Hey all,<BR><BR>First I wanted to say "WOOT!" to all the guardians that are sticking through this, you are all true protectors to bare this load.  You have my honor and respect.<BR><BR>We need to rally together if we want to see changes happen to our arch-type.  We can NOT continue to get derailed and sidetracked by petty differences and this constant in-fighting that seems to be going on here.<BR><BR>YES! There are issues with the guardian class<BR>YES! There needs to be some attention to the guardians from the SOE team<BR><BR>Guardians, We need to stop the volleys that happen back and forth between other classes.  It's not constructive, nor is it warranted because they didn't cause the change, SOE did.  SOE is the one that you need to get the attention of.  Continue with the constructive posts, continue with the information and statistics but don't brought down by the negative and non-constructive input by others.  It's not helping our case....</P> <P><BR>~Gladius (Guardian)<BR><BR><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Opila Ehrenwache</DIV> <DIV>47 Guardian (and hanging)</DIV> <DIV>Hands of Prophets</DIV> <DIV>Highkeep</DIV><p>Message Edited by Herrtzog on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:59 AM</span>

[Baldaena]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Neimhidh wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Baldaena wrote:<BR> <DIV>I'm sorry, but I think the defensive stance have the same goal for all fighters : reduce dps/taunting habilities and increase avoidance/mitigation...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Would you rather have a taunt buff that procs when you get hit, so it procs on groups of mobs beating on you, or would you rather have a taunt buff that procs when you hit a single mob?  Monks are not uber, we have weaknesses.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>yes, I'm ready to give you my 'class defining taunt' if you give me : solo FD, group FD, cure, heal, stunS, magic damage, 180° avoidance, flying kick, ward, self wis buff (magic resist), better avoidance and your great dps  ?? Deal ?</P> <P>please, it's not the board for whining monk, fighter is defined by : abilities to absorb damages, agro ability, dps and utility, you CAN'T compare one aspect without the others...</P><p>Message Edited by Baldaena on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:56 PM</span>

[landru]

<div></div>Thank you Herrtzog for assisting in keeping this post on topic. It saddens me that the guardian community as well as others finds threads that are ment for pooling ideas and constructive thinking and turn them into a "He said, She Said" or bogging it down with down with a ton of threads that talk about nothing but other classes and how we compare. Enough already! Like I said before:<ul><li>YES! There are issues with the guardian class</li><li>YES! There needs to be some attention to the guardians from the SOE team</li><li>NO! We can not continue to be derailed and sidetracked by the vulcher's picking at the remains of our class.</li><li>NO! We can not continue to in-fighting</li></ul>Come on people! You can rally through this! Stay on topic! Generate some constructive ideas! You're killin us with getting sidetracked with "The grass is greener ..." rhetoric.  You are turning this forum board into a list of current flames and volleys between us and the people on a crusade to keep us down.  WE ARE GUARDIANS! Not children, we shouldn't be giving in to these attempts to disuade and derail. To assist in getting this thread back on topic I would like to post some of the better ideas that I've found from other guardians on this board.  Unfortunately the thread was derailed and sidetracked.Raahl wrote this thread below with an idea of generating constructive ideas and suggestions from the fellow guardians.  He has since had to put "Pleas" to people outside of the Guardian arch-type to not turn this thread into the same hijacked threads that all the others have sucummed to.  There are a lot of good ideas here from guardians but you have to sift through the rhetoric from the people that aren't interested in "Class Balance" or "Defending their Class" and more on keeping the current status quo.  I applaud you Raahl for starting this post and getting the ideas here as well as taking the time to watch your post and try your best to keep it from becoming hijacked.  Raijinn ThunderGuard even commented on how nicely written your post is. <blockquote></blockquote><blockquote><div><hr>Problems as I see them<blockquote><strong></strong><ol><li>Mitigation is either broken or we need more of it.  Mitigation tank damage over time total is more than avoidance tanks.</li><li>Non-physical damage is the bane of our class.  And more mobs are using these attacks, so more and more we are getting our behinds handed to us from these mobs.</li><li>The amount of time it takes to kill a mob around my level (non-heroic) takes a long time.  With a large number of times them doing more damage to me then I do to them.  Causing either death or me running home to my mother.</li><li>Our protection line, does what it's advertised.  It protects others.  However, it seldom gets used because the mobs are attacking us.   Plus they do more damage to us. </li><li>Equipment.  Rare harvested metals  Feysteel/Ebon/Etc are not dropping near enough.  A friend an I have spent a number of days (3-4) havesting for 2 hours each day and have yet to see a rare metal drop.  We have seen rare stone, wood, hides and roots, but no rare metal.</li><li>Maddening Defense Seems to be leaking power.  I fought a couple different mobs, only using MD and 1 single target taunt, and I kept losing power.  No other buffs were up except journeyman boots and shield imbue.  Autoattack was off.</li><li>Mitigations from armor becomes less effective as you level, making it more difficult to tank mobs of your level.</li></ol><p><strong><u>Possible solutions to the above issues</u></strong></p><ol><li>Add the Shield Factor on shields to the mitigation value.  This helps all mitigation tanks.</li><li>Perhaps raise the base resistances of the fighter types.  Or give some buff that sacrafices physical protection for non-physical protection.</li><li>Raise our DPS,  It does not have to be as high as a Brawler or Berserker.  But it needs to be more. </li><li>Change the protection line to block or parry the damage given to the entire group.  So 100% of the damage is blocked for x number of hits.  This allows us to protect the group with skill, instead of throwing ourselves on the enemy swords.</li><li>Increase the drop rate of rare metal.</li><li>Make sure that MD does not use power as it taunts.</li><li>Make the mitigation % from armor stay at the same % as a character gains levels.  Perhaps adding the new level to the players mitigation will help the % stay the same as they level.</li></ol></blockquote><hr></div></blockquote><div>Another good constructive thread is this one by Kain Hammersmith that got lost in unfortunately the in-fighting that us guardians have been prone to do as of late.  He's talking about shields and changing their benefits to suit the class the is the "Primary" user of them.  Again, I commend you Kain for your attempts and would urge you to continue to push forward with your ideas.  They are good ones.</div><blockquote></blockquote><div><blockquote><div><hr>I have a good idea imo about shields that would give shield types different bonuses.</div><div> </div><div>Tower shields: Buff STA, STR; that way it is more beneficial for warriors.</div><div> </div><div>Kite shields: Buff WIS, STA; that way the crusaders have an increase in their WIS for resists and power pools.</div><div> </div><div>Round shields: Buff AGI, STR; that way the scouts can increase their DPS.</div><div> </div><div>Bucklers: Buff WIS, STR; that way the priests can increase their power pools, and give them some added melee damage.</div><div> </div><div>This is just an idea, and certainly not a complete fix for Guardains, but it may help some. I personally find it pointless to use a tower shield that buffs WIS and INT when the SBS buffs STR and STA as a Kite shield. Just an idea.<hr></div></blockquote><div>Greylock is another example of great style of constructive threads.  Keeping to the "K.I.S" theory (Keep It Simple) has gotten a lot of Guardians posting their ideas.  There was a few attempts to sidetrack the thread and start the volleys but the majority withstood the assault like the true tanks you all are.  Greylock, you are to be commended as well as all the other people that posted with constructive, well thought out ideas that made this thread truely a diamond in the rough.<blockquote><div><div><hr>Lets start a clean thread that does the following.  State 4 and only 4 things you would like to see addressed.  Give no reason, no whining, no explanation or long story about why unless a Dev pops on the thread and asks for more info from you.  This has been tried before, but if you fellas don't keep the info simple to view then it will take even longer for them to address issues.  Lets not waste their time picking through posts.  That's stupid and ineffective.  Now, I will start, please follow this example for all of our sakes!!!!</div><div> </div><div>************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ***************************</div><div> </div><div>HOW TO ENHANCE THE GUARDIAN CLASS</div><div> </div><div>1.  Increase our Mitigation</div><div> </div><div>2.  Make shields count for something useful</div><div> </div><div>3.  Remove the root aspect of Maddening Defense.</div><div> </div><div>4.  Make taunts a little more powerful.</div><div> </div><div>-Naladar Greylock Lvl 48 Guardian, Crushbone<hr></div></div></blockquote>And this is only a taste of what's out there, people what to see our class get attention, people want to see these issues resolved. We need to continue with these threads brush off the others that would try to subvert our efforts.~Gladius</div></div><blockquote></blockquote><div></div><p>Message Edited by landru on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span><span class="time_text">12:32 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by landru on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:32 PM</span>

[Frostborne]

<span>Baldaena just an FYI, since I'm pretty sure your French, it's ability, not hability, though I've seen it used on the web, I'm not sure that it's proper - though I could be wrong. I agree too...I'll gladly trade any day what they have for what we have.  Any day.  I don't see a single one of them saying they would take it either, lol! <blockquote><hr>Baldaena wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Neimhidh wrote: <div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Baldaena wrote: <div></div> <div>I'm sorry, but I think the defensive stance have the same goal for all fighters : reduce dps/taunting habilities and increase avoidance/mitigation...</div> <div> </div> <p></p> <hr> </blockquote>Would you rather have a taunt buff that procs when you get hit, so it procs on groups of mobs beating on you, or would you rather have a taunt buff that procs when you hit a single mob?  Monks are not uber, we have weaknesses. <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <p>yes, I'm ready to give you my 'classe defining taunt' if you give me : solo FD, group FD, cure, heal, stunS, magic damage, 180° avoidance, flying kick, ward, self wis buff (magic resist), better avoidance and your great dps  ?? Deal ?</p> <p>please, it's not the board for whining monk, fighter is defined by : Habilities to absorb damages, agro hability, dps and utility, you CAN'T compare one aspect without the others...</p><p>Message Edited by Baldaena on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">11:39 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Frostborne]

<span>Not to be snide, we do it because first, it's a forum, that's what it's for.  Second, it's because there are already about 5 list threads and Raijin has already stickied one thread for making such suggestions.  So, having 5-6 people each coming up with list threads of the same thing over and over again, is just redundant.  I'd try posting under the one stickied at the top of the forum if that's how you feel. <blockquote><hr>landru wrote:<div></div>Thank you Herrtzog for assisting in keeping this post on topic. It saddens me that the guardian community as well as others finds threads that are ment for pooling ideas and constructive thinking and turn them into a "He said, She Said" or bogging it down with down with a ton of threads that talk about nothing but other classes and how we compare. Enough already! Like I said before:<ul><li>YES! There are issues with the guardian class</li><li>YES! There needs to be some attention to the guardians from the SOE team</li><li>NO! We can not continue to be derailed and sidetracked by the vulcher's picking at the remains of our class.</li><li>NO! We can not continue to in-fighting</li></ul>Come on people! You can rally through this! Stay on topic! Generate some constructive ideas! You're killin us with getting sidetracked with "The grass is greener ..." rhetoric.  You are turning this forum board into a list of current flames and volleys between us and the people on a crusade to keep us down.  WE ARE GUARDIANS! Not children, we shouldn't be giving in to these attempts to disuade and derail. To assist in getting this thread back on topic I would like to post some of the better ideas that I've found from other guardians on this board.  Unfortunately the thread was derailed and sidetracked.Raahl wrote this thread below with an idea of generating constructive ideas and suggestions from the fellow guardians.  He has since had to put "Pleas" to people outside of the Guardian arch-type to not turn this thread into the same hijacked threads that all the others have sucummed to.  There are a lot of good ideas here from guardians but you have to sift through the rhetoric from the people that aren't interested in "Class Balance" or "Defending their Class" and more on keeping the current status quo.  I applaud you Raahl for starting this post and getting the ideas here as well as taking the time to watch your post and try your best to keep it from becoming hijacked.  Raijinn ThunderGuard even commented on how nicely written your post is. <blockquote></blockquote><blockquote><div><hr>Problems as I see them<blockquote><strong></strong><ol><li>Mitigation is either broken or we need more of it.  Mitigation tank damage over time total is more than avoidance tanks.</li><li>Non-physical damage is the bane of our class.  And more mobs are using these attacks, so more and more we are getting our behinds handed to us from these mobs.</li><li>The amount of time it takes to kill a mob around my level (non-heroic) takes a long time.  With a large number of times them doing more damage to me then I do to them.  Causing either death or me running home to my mother.</li><li>Our protection line, does what it's advertised.  It protects others.  However, it seldom gets used because the mobs are attacking us.   Plus they do more damage to us. </li><li>Equipment.  Rare harvested metals  Feysteel/Ebon/Etc are not dropping near enough.  A friend an I have spent a number of days (3-4) havesting for 2 hours each day and have yet to see a rare metal drop.  We have seen rare stone, wood, hides and roots, but no rare metal.</li><li>Maddening Defense Seems to be leaking power.  I fought a couple different mobs, only using MD and 1 single target taunt, and I kept losing power.  No other buffs were up except journeyman boots and shield imbue.  Autoattack was off.</li><li>Mitigations from armor becomes less effective as you level, making it more difficult to tank mobs of your level.</li></ol><p><strong><u>Possible solutions to the above issues</u></strong></p><ol><li>Add the Shield Factor on shields to the mitigation value.  This helps all mitigation tanks.</li><li>Perhaps raise the base resistances of the fighter types.  Or give some buff that sacrafices physical protection for non-physical protection.</li><li>Raise our DPS,  It does not have to be as high as a Brawler or Berserker.  But it needs to be more. </li><li>Change the protection line to block or parry the damage given to the entire group.  So 100% of the damage is blocked for x number of hits.  This allows us to protect the group with skill, instead of throwing ourselves on the enemy swords.</li><li>Increase the drop rate of rare metal.</li><li>Make sure that MD does not use power as it taunts.</li><li>Make the mitigation % from armor stay at the same % as a character gains levels.  Perhaps adding the new level to the players mitigation will help the % stay the same as they level.</li></ol></blockquote><hr></div></blockquote><div>Another good constructive thread is this one by Kain Hammersmith that got lost in unfortunately the in-fighting that us guardians have been prone to do as of late.  He's talking about shields and changing their benefits to suit the class the is the "Primary" user of them.  Again, I commend you Kain for your attempts and would urge you to continue to push forward with your ideas.  They are good ones.</div><blockquote></blockquote><div><blockquote><div><hr>I have a good idea imo about shields that would give shield types different bonuses.</div><div> </div><div>Tower shields: Buff STA, STR; that way it is more beneficial for warriors.</div><div> </div><div>Kite shields: Buff WIS, STA; that way the crusaders have an increase in their WIS for resists and power pools.</div><div> </div><div>Round shields: Buff AGI, STR; that way the scouts can increase their DPS.</div><div> </div><div>Bucklers: Buff WIS, STR; that way the priests can increase their power pools, and give them some added melee damage.</div><div> </div><div>This is just an idea, and certainly not a complete fix for Guardains, but it may help some. I personally find it pointless to use a tower shield that buffs WIS and INT when the SBS buffs STR and STA as a Kite shield. Just an idea.<hr></div></blockquote><div>Greylock is another example of great style of constructive threads.  Keeping to the "K.I.S" theory (Keep It Simple) has gotten a lot of Guardians posting their ideas.  There was a few attempts to sidetrack the thread and start the volleys but the majority withstood the assault like the true tanks you all are.  Greylock, you are to be commended as well as all the other people that posted with constructive, well thought out ideas that made this thread truely a diamond in the rough.<blockquote><div><div><hr>Lets start a clean thread that does the following.  State 4 and only 4 things you would like to see addressed.  Give no reason, no whining, no explanation or long story about why unless a Dev pops on the thread and asks for more info from you.  This has been tried before, but if you fellas don't keep the info simple to view then it will take even longer for them to address issues.  Lets not waste their time picking through posts.  That's stupid and ineffective.  Now, I will start, please follow this example for all of our sakes!!!!</div><div> </div><div>************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ***************************</div><div> </div><div>HOW TO ENHANCE THE GUARDIAN CLASS</div><div> </div><div>1.  Increase our Mitigation</div><div> </div><div>2.  Make shields count for something useful</div><div> </div><div>3.  Remove the root aspect of Maddening Defense.</div><div> </div><div>4.  Make taunts a little more powerful.</div><div> </div><div>-Naladar Greylock Lvl 48 Guardian, Crushbone<hr></div></div></blockquote>And this is only a taste of what's out there, people what to see our class get attention, people want to see these issues resolved. We need to continue with these threads brush off the others that would try to subvert our efforts.~Gladius</div></div><blockquote></blockquote><div></div><p>Message Edited by landru on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span><span class="time_text">12:32 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by landru on <span class="date_text">10-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">12:32 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[landru]

This is a forum, this is where people come to discuss their likes and dislike, but the volleys are not constructive and most have degragated down to being flame wars and/or [Removed for Content] contests between other classes.  I don't take what you say as snide, it's an observation, you making this observation proves that people are listening.  I appreciate your input (even if you feel it was snide).  It will help to better tailor threads and create new constructive threads.  It's time to act on observations and rally togheter.  My attempt with this thread was to rally this class which I play for fun and continue building more stickied threads and continue to create new threads with constructive ideas while shucking off the volleys made from other people/classes that feel that they need to input non-constructive information and derail good ideas. This is a forum not an ultimate fighter ring.  <div></div>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> landru wrote:<BR>This is a forum, this is where people come to discuss their likes and dislike, but the volleys are not constructive and most have degragated down to being flame wars and/or [Removed for Content] contests between other classes.  <BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>This is why I police my sticky thread heavily.  It's not meant to be debated it's meant to show what issues we see and possible solutions.  Debates become exactly what you described above.</DIV>