THE answer to balance fighters/guardians.

[Allaanon]

<DIV><FONT size=5><STRONG>Problem:</STRONG></FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>By balancing the 'tanking' abilities of all classes it has diminished the usefullnes of Guardians and to some extent other fighter classes.  All classes should have equal tanking ability, be needed/wanted in groups and raids, have some solo ability, and keep the original feel of the class as the playerbase signed up for.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=5><STRONG>Solution:</STRONG></FONT></DIV> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV> <DIV>Change the way npc dmg is assigned on a per npc basis.  To make this a very high quality change, do it in a 'real world' aspect.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Introducing "3 Way Damage".</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I will simplify the numbers down on this and hopefully you can grasp the concept and see how it would be played out over the entire world.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Each NPC has its normal attack. This attack is melee based and checks mitigation and avoidance.  For this example, our test npc takes 1 minute to kill and normal attacks every 2 seconds (30 attacks).  His max dmg normal attack is 100, and his minimum is 50. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Warrior Type Tank</STRONG></DIV> <DIV>Avoids 10%, but takes less per hit.</DIV> <DIV>Hit: 27</DIV> <DIV>Avg Hit: 60</DIV> <DIV>Damage Taken: 1620</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Crusader Type Tank</STRONG></DIV> <DIV>Avoids 20% but takes a average per hit.</DIV> <DIV>Hit: 24</DIV> <DIV>Avg Hit: 67.5</DIV> <DIV>Damage Taken: 1620</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Monk Type Tank</STRONG></DIV> <DIV>Avoids 30% but takes more per hit.</DIV> <DIV>Hit: 21</DIV> <DIV>Avg Hit: 77</DIV> <DIV>Damage Taken: 1617</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now I know my numbers are not perfect up there and some percentages need to be tweaked, etc.  But the general idea is that Warrior classes mitigate more normal attack dmg, monks avoid more attack dmg and crusaders have a touch of both so that all classes are equally able to take normal attack damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now the the interesting part.  Each's mobs special attack is now assigned to one of 3 category's... lets call them Magical, Heavy and Normal. Each mobs special attack for this test does 500 maximum damage and 250 minimum damage.  They attack every 10 seconds for 6 special attacks in our fight.  Each class has an attack that they are better suited for.  The crusaders handle magical attacks, guardians normal and monks the heavy attacks.  To take this into a roleplaying/game aspect... the large giant swinging his club is a heavy attack and the monk easily avoids the brunt of the blow, taking 250 while the guardian takes it straight in the gut for 500.  The fire breathing dragon is blocked by the crusaders magical shield and does 250 while the monks burned for 500.  That mean looking lean wolf coming at you is better taken by the guardian at 250 while the others struggle at 500. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Each class now has the same tanking ability.  Each class is now better in some situations and worse in others giving everyone a shot at MT.  The game has just reached a new level and strats are more important per mob. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Your thoughts?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>------------------------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A few other quick points.  Yes, guardians will still need some other kind of abilities outside of this system.  However, let us continue to be who we like and don't up our DPS.  Continue along the lines of protecting that monk when he's the MT by shielding him, etc.  Continuing that does not change our class or style, adds to the game and is not overpowered.  Also our ability to taunt needs to be looked at in this situation because we still lack the damage.  That however can be fixed fairly easily through the spells we have.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bannen</DIV> <DIV>Guardian of Permafrost</DIV> <DIV>The Inner Circle</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Allaanon on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:26 AM</span>

[Frostborne]

It could never be 100% mitigation, you realize that don't you?  A 100% mitigation would mean the a Guardian would take 0 damage.  Just like 100% avoidance would mean you would never be hit. <div></div>

[Allaanon]

Bah, dont argue that little point about a system that can work.  100% mitigation does not mean you mitigate 100% of the blow as you can see in my stats, but you mitigate the maximum amount that CAN be mitigated. 

[Gaige]

<P>You get 100% mit and 10% avoid while we get 25% mit and 30% avoid.  </P> <P>Um, no.</P> <P>Besides, as the previous poster said, you can't get 100% mit.</P>

[Raahl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>You get 100% mit and 10% avoid while we get 25% mit and 30% avoid.  </P> <P>Um, no.</P> <P>Besides, as the previous poster said, you can't get 100% mit.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>LOL, I noticed that also.    Hey I like it!  But then again, I'm a guardian.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Allaanon]

<DIV>Do you not see how the numbers match up Gaige?  You fully avoid 6 more attacks making your damage way lower. I take those attacks but my average is less.  Please take this as a general idea and dont get hung up on the fact that I called it 100%.  As you can see, I am not taking 0 dmg every swing or even the minimum dmg.  Guardians just take less per hit, but get hit more.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Put whatever number you like in there for the percents on the mitigation.  Just imagine only 15 dmg can actually be mitigated.</DIV>

[Allaanon]

<DIV>There, the mitigation percentages are gone for you to more easily comprehend the concept without getting hung up.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We are all taking what is basically equal dmg, just taking it differently.</DIV>

[Frostborne]

<span>Trust me, it's not that I don't have an understanding of what you're saying.  I've posted on this subject before and have a very good grasp of mathematics and statistics. The problem with avoidance is that it's blind.  It avoids everything.  Therefore damage is reduced for greater variety of mobs. Not only that avoidance is an independant variable.  That means just because you have 70% avoidance, doesn't mean you will not be hit every single time.  You very well could be.  Statistically it's not probable, but you could be.  Just as it's likely you will avoid every time with 20% avoidance.  Doesn't mean you can't, it just means you have less of a probability to do so.  Mitigation however, is constant, and if you are mitigating 80 percent of the damage if you are dealt 10 damage, you will always take 2.  That's set.   Here's the problem with mitigation however,  Damage is also variable.  Damage can be at it's minimum or it's maximum every hit, and is very random.  Therefore as a plate tank even if you are mitigating alot, it means that you are having to mitigate over a far greater range of numbers than an avoidance based tank would.  This is what causes problems for alot of healers and is people call the damage spikes. <blockquote><hr>Allaanon wrote:<div>There, the mitigation percentages are gone for you to more easily comprehend the concept without getting hung up.  </div> <div> </div> <div>We are all taking what is basically equal dmg, just taking it differently.</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Allaanon]

<DIV>You make good points, but none that cannot be changed to actually work well for everyone.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Yes, having 30% avoidance does not mean you will always evade 3/10 every fight, but over the long haul you will. We both understand that. The long haul is what we are looking at, making each fighter able to tank the same on average.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, on average a monk would get hit 20% less but take 22.2% more damage per hit to be equal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Warrior - 100 swings</DIV> <DIV>Hit 90 times * 77.8 = 7002</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monk - 100 swings</DIV> <DIV>Hit 70 times * 100 = 7000</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>Warrior - 500 swings</DIV> <DIV>Hit 450 times * 77.8 = 35010</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monk - 500 swings</DIV> <DIV>Hit 350 times * 100 = 35000</DIV></DIV>

[Allaanon]

<DIV>We haven't really discussed the second part, the important part, of this post yet.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Making each fighter 'more' valuable in certain situations. This is the aspect that I feel is most important.  Everyone wants to tank, but if we are all equal tankers have equal dps and equal utility... no real reason to have more than 1 fighter class.  We need some diversity while still allowing everyone to tank equally.  Wizards do dmg, scouts do dmg... but they do it differently.  Having this system would allow us to be equal at tanking, but still different.</DIV>

[Frostborne]

<span>That's the problem, aside from tanking, not much is left.  Stat bonuses, movement, transportation, invisibility, healing, etc. are all provided by other classes.  Does a Guardian really want all that? Not really.  They aren't really unique and won't really make sense with our class.   Maybe some sort of magical mitigation buffing across all the varying types.  Something that makes sense with tanking.  Sadly, they really pigeon holed the class into the MT role, and since they took that away, they didn't leave us with much else, and anything else just seems wierd.  Should a Guardian be allowing evacing groups?  Casting group invis?  Not to me.  Most of what I would want would probably would end up scewing the class toward tanking.<blockquote><hr>Allaanon wrote:<div>We haven't really discussed the second part, the important part, of this post yet.  </div> <div> </div> <div>Making each fighter 'more' valuable in certain situations. This is the aspect that I feel is most important.  Everyone wants to tank, but if we are all equal tankers have equal dps and equal utility... no real reason to have more than 1 fighter class.  We need some diversity while still allowing everyone to tank equally.  Wizards do dmg, scouts do dmg... but they do it differently.  Having this system would allow us to be equal at tanking, but still different.</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Corv]

<span><blockquote><hr>Allaanon wrote:<div>We haven't really discussed the second part, the important part, of this post yet.  </div> <div> </div> <div>Making each fighter 'more' valuable in certain situations. This is the aspect that I feel is most important.  Everyone wants to tank, but if we are all equal tankers have equal dps and equal utility... no real reason to have more than 1 fighter class.  We need some diversity while still allowing everyone to tank equally.  Wizards do dmg, scouts do dmg... but they do it differently.  Having this system would allow us to be equal at tanking, but still different.</div><hr></blockquote>This is something they've tried to do and will probably get better at doing with the existing system.  Introducing a new, radically different one would lead to months upon months of clusterf*ckage, regardless of how simple it looks on paper.  I'm not sure I want to go through that as a *player*, so imagine how the dev's feel about it!  How does this help Guardians anyways, other than making the cues on when to switch tanks in a raid more obvious?  Assuming that all types of tanks were equally valuable in different situations, Guardians would still be a purely defensive tank class that has no defensive edge over hybrid tanks and offensive tanks.  Guardians would just be more obviously situational.  Put simply, you've come up with another way to accomplish what we've already got, and that isn't cutting it.  The need for a devensive edge or "</span>other kind(s) of abilities outside of this system" remain unsolved problems in your new system, just as they are the primary problems in the current one.  Put some work in on those fronts before you show up at SOE's door with a powerpoint presentation. ;p <div></div>

[Frostborne]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><span> Here's my first one.... Slide one:  (My Guardian)  (Mah Goob-bain)   (Bad Guy) <span></span></span><span><span></span><span><span>:manmad:</span></span><font color="#ffff00">------></font> </span><span><span>:robotmad:  (More DPS) Slide two:                 (my revamped Uber tower shield) <span></span><span>:mansurprised:  <font color="#cc3300">))> </font><font color="#cc3300"> </font><span>:robotsad:</span>  (More mitigation)</span> </span>       <font color="#cc3300">))></font> There's a starting point. <blockquote><hr>Corvan wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Allaanon wrote:<div>We haven't really discussed the second part, the important part, of this post yet.  </div> <div> </div> <div>Making each fighter 'more' valuable in certain situations. This is the aspect that I feel is most important.  Everyone wants to tank, but if we are all equal tankers have equal dps and equal utility... no real reason to have more than 1 fighter class.  We need some diversity while still allowing everyone to tank equally.  Wizards do dmg, scouts do dmg... but they do it differently.  Having this system would allow us to be equal at tanking, but still different.</div><hr></blockquote>This is something they've tried to do and will probably get better at doing with the existing system.  Introducing a new, radically different one would lead to months upon months of clusterf*ckage, regardless of how simple it looks on paper.  I'm not sure I want to go through that as a *player*, so imagine how the dev's feel about it!  How does this help Guardians anyways, other than making the cues on when to switch tanks in a raid more obvious?  Assuming that all types of tanks were equally valuable in different situations, Guardians would still be a purely defensive tank class that has no defensive edge over hybrid tanks and offensive tanks.  Guardians would just be more obviously situational.  Put simply, you've come up with another way to accomplish what we've already got, and that isn't cutting it.  The need for a devensive edge or "</span>other kind(s) of abilities outside of this system" remain unsolved problems in your new system, just as they are the primary problems in the current one.  Put some work in on those fronts before you show up at SOE's door with a powerpoint presentation. ;p <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">04:34 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by Frostborne on <span class=date_text>10-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:35 PM</span>

[Allaanon]

<DIV>The abilities you speak of are already there, they just need to make them a little more valuable.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monks are tanks augmented with high dps.</DIV> <DIV>Crusaders are tanks augmented with spell lines to increase dps/utility.</DIV> <DIV>Guardians are tanks that... thats the problem.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, the Guardian community would like to still be a tank and be a meatshield.  That is what we signed up for.  We have abilities that allow us to shield other players and take dmg for them.  Continue along those lines and make them better.  So next time someone says the above 3 lines, the last one reads...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardians are tanks that also effectively shield other players from taking dmg.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It fits, its already there and it matches what most guardians thought we were getting into.</DIV>

[Frostborne]

Well yes and no.  By my understanding of how it will be....won't matter what tank you pick, whether they wear plate or not, they will be equally as effective.<span><blockquote><hr>Allaanon wrote:<div>The abilities you speak of are already there, they just need to make them a little more valuable.</div> <div> </div> <div>Monks are tanks augmented with high dps.</div> <div>Crusaders are tanks augmented with spell lines to increase dps/utility.</div> <div>Guardians are tanks that... thats the problem.</div> <div> </div> <div>So, the Guardian community would like to still be a tank and be a meatshield.  That is what we signed up for.  We have abilities that allow us to shield other players and take dmg for them.  Continue along those lines and make them better.  So next time someone says the above 3 lines, the last one reads...</div> <div> </div> <div>Guardians are tanks that also effectively shield other players from taking dmg.</div> <div> </div> <div>It fits, its already there and it matches what most guardians thought we were getting into.</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Troupez]

<blockquote><hr>Allaanon wrote:<DIV>The abilities you speak of are already there, they just need to make them a little more valuable.</div> <DIV> </div> <DIV>Monks are tanks augmented with high dps.</div> <DIV>Crusaders are tanks augmented with spell lines to increase dps/utility.</div> <DIV>Guardians are tanks that... thats the problem.</div> <DIV> </div> <DIV>So, the Guardian community would like to still be a tank and be a meatshield. That is what we signed up for. We have abilities that allow us to shield other players and take dmg for them. Continue along those lines and make them better. So next time someone says the above 3 lines, the last one reads...</div> <DIV> </div> <DIV>Guardians are tanks that also effectively shield other players from taking dmg.</div> <DIV> </div> <DIV>It fits, its already there and it matches what most guardians thought we were getting into.</div><hr></blockquote> I agree with what you are saying about Brawlers and Crusaders being augmented with higher dps and stuff. The problem with increasing our guardian skills is this: The average group looks for one tank. Once they find that tank they don't say "Hey, lets try and find another tank that will put a guarding spell that causes him to take 100% dmg and the MT take 35% of the dmg. What they want is more dps or a class that can add something positive to the group. Being at the bottom of the dps pool that leaves us SoL. But I'll say it again....I don't want more dps, I want more defense.