The Great Tank Lie

[MrDiz]

For some time, while most guardians were just playing the game, a number of people including our friend Gaige have been trying to convince the Everquest2 community at large that no other fighter was capable of tanking because of guardians 'best tank' status. Even though this is an obvious lie to anyone who actually played the the game this lie has gained momentum. In fact whenever the 'nerf guardian' crowd face any opposition their one and only argument seems to be this Great Tank Lie. In fact Gaiges oft implied equation "Best tank = only tank" has become something of a mantra for them.So I want to pull this argument into the forefront of our discussion here. We all know berzerkers, SKs and paladin made great tanks. Many of us who play other characters beyond the guardian actually often prefer these other tanks in many situations. Small groups and your hybrids are often king of the fighters.Gaiges equation is easily proven wrong. If anyone before lu13 was able to tank on a regular basis and they were not a guardian, then Gaiges equation is a lie. So here goes:My main is a templar and I have been tanked for by a vaiety of fighters. In fact on most of my serious raids our MT was a paladin. A further fact is that in fact during my non raiding everquest life (99% of the game really) I do not remember grouping with a guardian, and If i did I did not even notice it. My regular tanks were a berzerker and some paladins.<p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:21 AM</span>

[Kasar]

When playing my warden, I preferred paladin or bezerker tanks.  I hadn't had a monk tank since about February when their avoidance got nerfed, but that wasn't because I wouldn't have, they just didn't seem interested. The most complaints I heard about paladins not being able to hold aggro, etc. came from the paladins themselves, I suspected it was something similar with the other classes.  The worst tank I recall was a guardian.  Not sure it was tanking, when a warden can peel a mob using chill and cold snap, well...

[Gaige]

LoL.

[Grumpy_Warrior_01]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR>For some time, while most guardians were just playing the game, a number of people including our friend Gaige have been trying to convince the Everquest2 community at large that no other fighter was capable of tanking because of guardians 'best tank' status. Even though this is an obvious lie to anyone who actually played the the game this lie has gained momentum. In fact whenever the 'nerf guardian' crowd face any opposition their one and only argument seems to be this Great Tank Lie. In fact Gaiges oft implied equation "Best tank = only tank" has become something of a mantra for them.<BR><BR>So I want to pull this argument into the forefront of our discussion here. We all know berzerkers, SKs and paladin made great tanks. Many of us who play other characters beyond the guardian actually often prefer these other tanks in many situations. Small groups and your hybrids are often king of the fighters.<BR><BR>Gaiges equation is easily proven wrong. If anyone before lu13 was able to tank on a regular basis and they were not a guardian, then Gaiges equation is a lie. So here goes:<BR><BR>My main is a templar and I have been tanked for by a vaiety of fighters. In fact on most of my serious raids our MT was a paladin. A further fact is that in fact during my non raiding everquest life (99% of the game really) I do not remember grouping with a guardian, and If i did I did not even notice it. My regular tanks were a berzerker and some paladins. <P>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <SPAN class=date_text>10-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:21 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The answer here is pretty simple, really.  If there is a guardian in the group, he/she should be the tank.  If the group is not so blessed, then another fighter class within the group should be the tank.  And if Gaige is in the group, then something's gone horribly wrong and you should disband immediately and reform elsewhere.</P> <P>:smileywink: Not a flame, just kidding.</P> <P>And PS:  While I agree that non-guardians generally always have been superior to guardians for one-grouping and small-grouping, the other Big Tank Lie that gets Gaige's thong in a wad (but is perpetuated by other fighter classes including guardians), is that they will never "get picked" to tank if there's another class in the game that is perceived as being able to tank better.  This is a lie because it sustains a myth that there are all these tankless groups out there in search of just the right fighter, and every fighter that hasn't been "picked" for the night is sitting on the sidelines keeping the bench warm with a big LFG floating above his head for hours.  In my experience, waiting around for some miscellaneous robe to send you a tell is not the only way to get a group.  Another way is to start a group yourself (I do it all the time) and just dont add any other fighters if that's your choice.  Problem solved, you're the tank.</P> <P>I appreciate your statement, MrDizzi, because it points up an important difference that's very often blurred when some of these chronic posters make their arguments.  Being the <STRONG>best class at tanking</STRONG> is not the same as being the <STRONG>best tank </STRONG>overall.  I say the guardians should be the best class <STRONG><EM>at tanking</EM></STRONG>, but I will readily admit that several of the other fighter classs are better <STRONG><EM>tanks</EM></STRONG> overall, and that fact wouldn't bother me if the first part were still true.</P> <P> </P>

[Benima]

<P>No [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]z ... Most grps in my server dont use Warriors as tank anymore . ..</P> <P> </P>

[bink]

I think most people have it right, even if you ignore what guardians are saying. Most people think that all warriors should be able to tank, but if there's a guardian available in the group, he would be the preferred and most suited tank. This is logical too, both within the original description of the guardian (which may or may not be relied upon), the expected role of the guardian and the roleplay model as executed by SOE thusfar, up until LU13 in any case.In fact, the only people who question the role of the guardian are a handful of people of other fighter types. If they wanted to become the master tank, they should have become Guardians. If they chose dps and fancy abilities instead, they'll have to make do with just being a tank.<div></div>

[Dagsxx]

<P>Another "Let's blame Gaige thread".</P> <P>You all cannot accept the fact, you aren't the only tank anymore.</P> <P>If Guardians had their way, the archtype system would be. Guardian, fighters, mages, scouts, and priests.</P>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Dagsxx wrote:<p>Another "Let's blame Gaige thread".</p> <p>You all cannot accept the fact, you aren't the only tank anymore.</p> <p>If Guardians had their way, the archtype system would be. Guardian, fighters, mages, scouts, and priests.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> Barbarian Guardian, lesser Guardians, Fighters, mages, scouts, priests, ..............bards and monks. =P </span><div></div>

[Nemi]

<DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Now the Great Lie that Guardians spout is that all they needed to change was buff stacking - WRONG. Buff stacking was only 1 of MANY problems with the game. DPS heirarchy, spell damage, healing potential, ward inefficiencies, mob damage, CA damage, combat engine and tables.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Considering the game was trivial pre-LU13 then yes there were 'viable' tanks for XP grinding. Heck, mobs 10 levels above you could barely hit you once you were buffed and the mob debuffed.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>They game was trivial and boring and contained absolutely no challenge. They changed that system. The problem then became that avoidance was much harder to balance than Mitigation. Mitigation is constant whilst Avoidance is inherently streaky. It is a very fine balance to achieve a viable avoidance tank, given the RNG, you can go a whole fight without getting hit (omg now I'm uber) or if you are unlucky you can get hit 3 rapid and be dropped like a rock.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Mobs were tuned pre-LU13 so that only mitigation tanks could be efficient against them. Their auto attack and CA damage was massive and without mitigation impossible to sustain. As such, those tanks with the most mitigation and hps were supreme with the rest coming in distant second with brawlers not even rating.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Melee combat out damaged mages and scouts which made whole archetypes pretty much second rate.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians had a number of issues that needed changing to make the other 5 subclasses able to compete in a pickup group:</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Guardians had the highest HPs</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Guardians could wear the most mitigating armour</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Guardians had self buffs that improved avoidance and hps</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>In 1 subclass, you had a fighter that had the best mitigation, hps and nearly maxed avoidance. After LU13 all fighters have comparable tanking ability but that left Guardians with a lot of ineffectual utility and a pretty abysmal DPS.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Honestly, I believe Guardians need a refocus of expertise. Melee debuffers with targetable Wards instead of intervene line should be their forte. Guardians are defensive tanks, although I believe the defense should not be tanking ability (otherwise you trivialise or penalise the other subclasses) but instead viable group defense.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Increased AoE taunts</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Targetable Wards instead of Intervene</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Mob debuffs</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Indirect DPS advantage and useful group/raid defense utility.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Tomanak]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Guardians had the highest HPs</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>2) <STRONG>Guardians could wear the most mitigating armour</STRONG></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Guardians had self buffs that improved avoidance and hps</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>In 1 subclass, you had a fighter that had the best mitigation, hps and nearly maxed avoidance. After LU13 all fighters have comparable tanking ability but that left Guardians with a lot of ineffectual utility and a pretty abysmal DPS.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Honestly, I believe Guardians need a refocus of expertise. Melee debuffers with targetable Wards instead of intervene line should be their forte. Guardians are defensive tanks, although I believe the defense should not be tanking ability (otherwise you trivialise or penalise the other subclasses) but instead viable group defense.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Increased AoE taunts</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Targetable Wards instead of Intervene</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Mob debuffs</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Indirect DPS advantage and useful group/raid defense utility.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Guardians could wear the most mitigating armor? Im assuming you are referring to heavy armor? Unless Im wrong, so could Shadow Knights, Paladins and Zerkers..so thats a non issue. </P> <P>More Hitpoints? Perhaps, but unlike EVERY other fighter class we had no self heals or wards. </P> <P>Id agree on more AoE taunts. Wards??? I can hear the paladins howling now. Mob Debuffs?? I signed on to be a MEATSHIELD, not a buffer/debuffer. If I wanted to be a debuffer Id have picked a caster class. </P> <P>As of LU 13, all Tanking has been equalized. DPS has not. How is this fair? Everyone else tanks the same as I do but has higher DPS. So what was the tradeoff for the other fighter classes for thier increased ability to MT? Nothing from what I can see. They just got stronger while we got weaker..yeah thats the way to balance things...<BR></P>

[sylvo]

<font color="#ff0000">Nemi,</font><font color="#ff0000"> </font><font color="#ff0000"> </font><font color="#ff0000">your post doesn't address the OP.</font><font color="#ff0000"> </font><font color="#ff0000">I certainly didn't find the game trivial and boring pre LU13 and neither did my guildmates.</font> <div><font color="#ffff00">1) Guardians had the highest HPs - <font color="#ff0000">Yeah I'll give you that.</font></font></div> <font color="#ffff00"> 2) Guardians could wear the most mitigating armour - <font color="#ff0000">We could wear the same armour as the paladins, sk's, beserkers, templars, inquisitors .... I fail to see what point your making here ?</font><font color="#ff0000"> </font> </font> <div><font color="#ffff00">3) Guardians had self buffs that improved avoidance and hps - <font color="#ff0000">So did other classes. Almost all of our buffs were group wide except for one sta buff.</font><font color="#ff0000"> </font> <font color="#ff0000">Because Guardians had the highest base HP we were best placed to take advantage of the buff stacking problems, if a beserker or whoever was a barbarian or ogre and chose the +defense racial bonus they could get higher avoidance than me but I still had considerably more HP (mainly because thats how I focussed my character.).</font></font> </div> <div></div>

[Suite]

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2></FONT> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Until LU13, my main was my templar, who is still level 51. Preferred tanks in our guild are guardians or zerkers. Yes, sometimes the paladins tank, but generally we have had better results with the guardians and zerkers. Being a good aligned guild, we don't have many evil tank types so I'm going with good classes only.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>In terms of group play, again in most groups our main tank is a guardian or zerker. Yes, other classes have tanked for me as a healer. In general, in any group with more than one fighter type, we look at each fighter's mitigation, health pool, and power pool to determine who will make the better tank. We ask whether their taunts and abilities are adept 1 or adept 3 and will nearly always go with a tank who is decent enough to upgrade to adept 3 on all or most of his or her abilities, especially taunts. A tank is only as good as his ability to get and keep aggro and take damage; if the group is balanced, the rest of us do enough damage to keep things going.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Just my two cents' worth,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Suite, troubador of Blackburrow</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Tizzy, guardian of Blackburrow</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>Eliana, templar of Blackburrow</FONT></DIV>

[Starwind]

<div></div>Oi.<p>Message Edited by Starwind87 on <span class=date_text>10-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:23 PM</span>

[MrDiz]

nemi, what on earth does your post have to do with this threads subject? Stop hijacking threads with mindless waffle. The topic is the Great Tank Lie that you guys keep telling. Either present your proof that pre lu13 NO other tanks except guardians could tank or gracefully back out before you embarass yourself more <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[MrDiz]

<DIV>Suite you have a guardian called Tizzy and your main is a templar? How wierd a coincidence is that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> We seem to be having parallel existances on different servers. Im on Neriak.</DIV>

[ShinigamiD]

<P>pre LU13</P> <P>I log in my paladin... I get an XP group as the tank<BR>I log in my monk... I get an XP group as the tank<BR>I log in my guardian... I get an XP group as the tank</P> <P>Hrmmmmm, I thought pre-LU13 only guardians could tank and get groups as the main tank?  </P>

[Thanous]

Ok, Visitors to this board, (aka people who don't play guardians), can I make a few conduct points? Please, do not get stuck on what we used to do.  We don't any more.  We are not uber tank anymore.  We are not the only tank any more.  We get it.  Quit beating the dead horse.  It is getting all squishy and gross. Please, try not to tell us what we should be, or what we should want to be.  I think that you would have a bad taste in your mouth if we came over to your class boards and told you what the character you play should do.  Ideas are welcome, but don't tell us what our role is.  Moorgard has already done that for us.  Don't feed the whiners.  Don't make fun of them.  Please do your best to ignore them.  Your board has unproductive posts too I'm sure. With all of that said now to the main topic of the thread.... Other fighter classes COULD tank before the combat revamp.  We were very very good at it, but that's not to say that every fighter besides us was bad.  Maybe not as good, but not all of them were bad.  Some needed some help (which they got).  Just as we are not as bad as we make it out to be sometimes.  I do think that we are too dependent upon equipment now vs how avoidance tanks are.  That's just part of playing the class though.  We do need some improvements still, but it isn't as if we are completely helpless.  So to recap... To say that there was only one tank before the revamp would be wrong.  I agree with you there.  (Some classes did need some help though, and Guardians were a bit overpowered as were many other classes). To say that Guardians are bad now is too simplistic.  We do need some tweeks to be brought into line in usefulness and maybe some equipment tweeks, but we are not as bad as it sounds sometimes on this board either. <div></div>

[Danan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sylvore wrote:<BR><FONT color=#ff0000>Nemi,</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000><BR></FONT><FONT color=#ff0000><BR></FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>your post doesn't address the OP.</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000><BR></FONT><U><FONT color=#ff0000>I certainly didn't find the game trivial and boring pre LU13 and neither did my guildmates.</FONT><BR></U><BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Guardians had the highest HPs - <FONT color=#ff0000>Yeah I'll give you that.</FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT color=#ffff00><BR>2) Guardians could wear the most mitigating armour - <FONT color=#ff0000>We could wear the same armour as the paladins, sk's, beserkers, templars, inquisitors .... I fail to see what point your making here ?</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000><BR></FONT><BR></FONT> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Guardians had self buffs that improved avoidance and hps - <FONT color=#ff0000>So did other classes. Almost all of our buffs were group wide except for one sta buff.</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000><BR></FONT><BR><FONT color=#ff0000>Because Guardians had the highest base HP we were best placed to take advantage of the buff stacking problems, if a beserker or whoever was a barbarian or ogre and chose the +defense racial bonus they could get higher avoidance than me but I still had considerably more HP (mainly because thats how I focussed my character.).</FONT></FONT><BR><BR></DIV> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>You did not find it trivial because encounters was tuned to your strenght, do i need to tell you that brawlers in the MT group before LU 13 was one shotted by Wrath, Have a look at<A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=7&message.id=6801" target=_blank> this </A>thread.<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All the changes that was done to raid encounters was done because mainly Guardians made them trivial, the end result became that they could only be tanked by Guardians.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And it is not the fact that others could wear the same armor as you or that others could buff hp almost as well as you, or even that they could buff avoidance through defense. It was the fact that Guardians could do all these things and that made them the "best" in their field (tanking) leaving the other tanks in the dust.</DIV>

[Thanous]

<span><blockquote><hr>Dananeb wrote: <blockquote> <hr> sylvore wrote:<font color="#ff0000">Nemi,</font><font color="#ff0000"></font><font color="#ff0000"></font><font color="#ff0000">your post doesn't address the OP.</font><font color="#ff0000"></font><u><font color="#ff0000">I certainly didn't find the game trivial and boring pre LU13 and neither did my guildmates.</font></u> <div><font color="#ffff00">1) Guardians had the highest HPs - <font color="#ff0000">Yeah I'll give you that.</font></font></div><font color="#ffff00">2) Guardians could wear the most mitigating armour - <font color="#ff0000">We could wear the same armour as the paladins, sk's, beserkers, templars, inquisitors .... I fail to see what point your making here ?</font><font color="#ff0000"></font></font> <div><font color="#ffff00">3) Guardians had self buffs that improved avoidance and hps - <font color="#ff0000">So did other classes. Almost all of our buffs were group wide except for one sta buff.</font><font color="#ff0000"></font><font color="#ff0000">Because Guardians had the highest base HP we were best placed to take advantage of the buff stacking problems, if a beserker or whoever was a barbarian or ogre and chose the +defense racial bonus they could get higher avoidance than me but I still had considerably more HP (mainly because thats how I focussed my character.).</font></font></div> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote>You did not find it trivial because encounters was tuned to your strenght, do i need to tell you that brawlers in the MT group before LU 13 was one shotted by Wrath, Have a look at<a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=7&message.id=6801" target="_blank"> this </a>thread. <div> </div> <div>All the changes that was done to raid encounters was done because mainly Guardians made them trivial, the end result became that they could only be tanked by Guardians.</div> <div> </div> <div>And it is not the fact that others could wear the same armor as you or that others could buff hp almost as well as you, or even that they could buff avoidance through defense. It was the fact that Guardians could do all these things and that made them the "best" in their field (tanking) leaving the other tanks in the dust.</div><hr></blockquote>What good is this arguement doing anyone?  Dead horse people. </span><div></div>

[EvilIguana9]

The crux of the one tank argument was that the guardian was the best choice in pretty much every circumstance.  That doesn't mean a higher level paladin couldn't tank better, or a zerker with better gear, or a brawler who really knows his class.  It means that when all things are equal except class, the preferred tank was the guardian.  Basically the situation was such that everyone would have been happier had the guy they just invited rolled a guardian rather than what he was currently.  If you are having trouble understanding this concept then you lack basic logical reasoning abilities.  <div></div>

[MrDiz]

Yes it is dead, but it hasnt been laid to rest. They are still telling this lie as if it were believable and they say it so much its become conventional wisdom for them. We need to make it conventionalt wisdom that best tank does not means only tank, and it never ever did.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Best tank does not equal only tank? Seriously?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ok lets reason this out. Lets assume Guardians are given boosts to make them 'best tank' as understood by tanks and players.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Scenario 1.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>/ooc Level 50 Guardian LFG</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>/ooc Level 50 Monk LFG</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>/ooc Level 50 Paladin LFG</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Who does the group invite?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Scenario 2.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Epic x 4 Contested Spawn - 12hr lock out on failure.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>/gu Hey just reached level 50 monky guys! Wouldn't mind tanking this one.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>/gu Lo guys! Your resident 50 Guardian just logged on, what we doing?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Who does the raid go with as MT?</FONT></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>we look at each fighter's mitigation, health pool, and power pool to determine who will make the better tank.</FONT> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Which is yet another stigma avoidance tanks have to deal with.</P> <P>Nemi's point was that pre LU13 <EM>only</EM> guardians could get high mitigation, with super high HP and super high avoidance.  The trifecta.</P> <P>Other fighters could get high mitigation <EM>or</EM> high HP<EM> or </EM>high avoidance; but they couldn't get all three.</P> <P>Guardians were an avoidance tank pre LU13, but they could control the spikes better than other fighters because they had the highest HP and the best mitigation.</P> <P>Sure SK's could wear heavy, but their avoidance sucked as did thier HPs, etc etc.</P> <P>Oh and not all classes have HP buffs, thank you.  Monks have never been able to effect stamina/HP be it self or group.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Thanous wrote:<BR>I think that you would have a bad taste in your mouth if we came over to your class boards and told you what the character you play should do. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You're right, we would.  I mean its only been almost a year that guardians and other players have been telling us we're DPS, we should be in the scout archetype, etc etc.</P> <P>As for MrDizzi and this thread, I'll just reiterate my previous statement: LoL.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>10-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:48 PM</span>

[Timzil]

<P>**REMOVED FLAME BAIT**</P><p>Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on <span class=date_text>10-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:17 PM</span>

[Nibbl]

My comments in <FONT color=#ff0000><STRONG>RED</STRONG></FONT><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Now the Great Lie that Guardians spout is that all they needed to change was buff stacking - WRONG. Buff stacking was only 1 of MANY problems with the game. DPS heirarchy, spell damage, healing potential, ward inefficiencies, mob damage, CA damage, combat engine and tables.  </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>(but those other areas werent problems with gards, everyone could take advantage of it)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Considering the game was trivial pre-LU13 then yes there were 'viable' tanks for XP grinding. Heck, mobs 10 levels above you could barely hit you once you were buffed and the mob debuffed. </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000> (using other classes and buff stacking, yes, otherwise not true.  Buff stacking was fixed prior to LU 13, btw)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>They game was trivial and boring and contained absolutely no challenge. They changed that system. The problem then became that avoidance was much harder to balance than Mitigation. Mitigation is constant whilst Avoidance is inherently streaky. It is a very fine balance to achieve a viable avoidance tank, given the RNG, you can go a whole fight without getting hit (omg now I'm uber) or if you are unlucky you can get hit 3 rapid and be dropped like a rock. </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000> (avoidance is king, did most of Living Tombs the other night with a level 53 ranger tanking.  Did many of the named mobs as well.  The ranger held aggro with a warlock and necro in the group too.  Not sure how a ranger's advoidance compares to brawlers, but it sure makes them effective tanks).</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Mobs were tuned pre-LU13 so that only mitigation tanks could be efficient against them. Their auto attack and CA damage was massive and without mitigation impossible to sustain. As such, those tanks with the most mitigation and hps were supreme with the rest coming in distant second with brawlers not even rating.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Melee combat out damaged mages and scouts which made whole archetypes pretty much second rate. </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>(yes that needed to be fixed)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians had a number of issues <FONT color=#ff0000>(like what, give examples please)</FONT> that needed changing to make the other 5 subclasses able to compete in a pickup group: </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>( what they did is remove or reduce many of our class defining utility skills.  Now gards have average mitigation, low dps, and very little utiltiy.  Guess we went from top to bottom)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Guardians had the highest HPs (</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>True, but with buff stacking, which was fixed prior to LU13)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Guardians could wear the most mitigating armour </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>(Not true, all plate tanks can wear the same armor)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Guardians had self buffs that improved avoidance and hps (</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>Yes, but not unique to gards)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>In 1 subclass, you had a fighter that had the best mitigation, hps and nearly maxed avoidance <FONT color=#ff0000>(only with buff stacking from specific other classes, not a ture statment)</FONT>. After LU13 all fighters have comparable tanking ability but that left Guardians with a lot of ineffectual utility and a pretty abysmal DPS.</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000> (any class with good avoidance is better then plate fighters right now, except high end content where a fighter is still required.  But for small group content many scouts can tank and hold aggro with no problems, and provide great utiltiy at the same time.  I would say LU13 failed in many areas and still requires adjustments.)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Honestly, I believe Guardians need a refocus of expertise. Melee debuffers with targetable Wards instead of intervene line should be their forte. Guardians are defensive tanks, although I believe the defense should not be tanking ability (otherwise you trivialise or penalise the other subclasses) but instead viable group defense.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Increased AoE taunts</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000> (I think gards taunts are fine, not the problem with the class.  Only thing I would change is remove the self root on them)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Targetable Wards instead of Intervene </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>(no thanks, sounds like a caster not a gard)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Mob debuffs </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>(that is a priest or mage role, not a warrior)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Indirect DPS advantage and useful group/raid defense utility.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Timzilla wrote:<BR><BR>One of the top 6807 stupidest things ever posted on Internet. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Such keen insight!~<BR>

[Thanous]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Thanous wrote:I think that you would have a bad taste in your mouth if we came over to your class boards and told you what the character you play should do.  <hr> </blockquote> <p>You're right, we would.  I mean its only been almost a year that <b>guardians and other players</b> have been telling us we're DPS, we should be in the scout archetype, etc etc.</p> <div></div><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class="date_text">10-24-2005</span> <span class="time_text">01:48 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>It was a universal misconception and there were some clouding factors too that gave people that notion.  Don't hold it against Guardains please.  You're fixed now except for perception.  (Ouch, almost sounded like Moorgard there!  LOL)</span><div></div>

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Timzilla wrote:<BR><BR>One of the top 6807 stupidest things ever posted on Internet. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>The funny thing is most of the stupid stuff posted in this forum doesn't come from Gaige, it actually comes from guardians...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And yeah the best way to get Gaige to not post here is to point your finger at him and blame him for the current tank balances or just flat out say its Gaige's fault for the combat changes, maybe if you didn't mention his name in every other thread he'd actually leave you alone.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Of course if you did indeed stop that (and the poorly constructed brawlers > guards threads) I'd be bored out of my mind.</DIV>

[Neimhidh]

<DIV>please keep up crazy threads like this, It's a great source of entertainment while I am at work</DIV>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> EvilIguana966 wrote:<BR>The crux of the one tank argument was that the guardian was the best choice in pretty much every circumstance.  That doesn't mean a higher level paladin couldn't tank better, or a zerker with better gear, or a brawler who really knows his class.  It means that when all things are equal except class, the preferred tank was the guardian.  Basically the situation was such that everyone would have been happier had the guy they just invited rolled a guardian rather than what he was currently.  <BR><BR>If you are having trouble understanding this concept then you lack basic logical reasoning abilities.  <BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>And now we have brawlers in treasured/handcrafted outtanking guardians in full legendary/fabled..................I guess that's what you call equal eh?

[MrDiz]

Nemi it doesnt matter who might be the first choice for a certain raid (especially as usually it wouldnt be a guardian unless you were pretty clueless). What matters is for many raids, many groups, many trios and many duos there were many tanks that were not guardians. I do not remember any tanks in my guild ever having problems getting groups. We did more raiding with a paladin MT than the guardian MT too. Therefore regardless of who might be the first choice on a specific raid you might have in mind the simple FACT of the matter is many non guardians could tank. ergo. Best tank does not stop other fighters tanking. Youre entire argument is built upon this premice, and therefore, a lie.

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR>And now we have brawlers in treasured/handcrafted outtanking guardians in full legendary/fabled..................I guess that's what you call equal eh?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Ha Ha.  Maybe against a lvl 60 mob with t5 fully fabled, sure.  t5 fully fabled is worthless past 55 pretty much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But a lvl 60 monk in handcrafted/treasured outtanking a lvl 60 guardian in full cobalt or full t6 fabled?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>YEAH RIGHT.</DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <P>Youre entire argument is built upon this premice, and therefore, a lie.</P> <HR> <P>No.  You wouldn't know the entire arguement since you yourself have stated numerous times you didn't pay attention to the forums pre LU13.  Anyway my arguement was:</P> <P>1) Guardians avoided too much.</P> <P>2) Combat in general was broken.</P> <P>3) The fighter archetype was broken because true interchangeability didn't exist.  There was not one single mob in the game a guardian couldn't tank or one single encounter/scenario where guardians weren't the best choice.  However there were numerous scenarios where only a guardian could tank.  Therefore guardians were always the *best* choice.  So in any situation where a monk could be a successful group tank, a guardian could as well - and they could do it better.  Interchangeability sure.  However there were many situations where a monk COULD NOT be changed out for a guardian and be successful.  At all.  This held true throughout the archetype.</P> <P>The simple fact was that guardians were required for a lot of content pre LU13 because they trivialized them so much due to the tanking trifecta that encounters were designed and beefed up to be so ridiculously hard to combat the broken guardian that they were out of any other fighter's league.</P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>10-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:02 PM</span>

[Neimhidh]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> Nemi it doesnt matter who might be the first choice for a certain raid (especially as usually it wouldnt be a guardian unless you were pretty clueless). What matters is for many raids, many groups, many trios and many duos there were many tanks that were not guardians. I do not remember any tanks in my guild ever having problems getting groups. We did more raiding with a paladin MT than the guardian MT too. Therefore regardless of who might be the first choice on a specific raid you might have in mind the simple FACT of the matter is many non guardians could tank. ergo. Best tank does not stop other fighters tanking. Youre entire argument is built upon this premice, and therefore, a lie.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>yeah, sometimes in duos you would have scouts tanking, etc.  When you can't find anyone to group with, you make do with what you have.  When you had a choice of tanks pre 13, you always chose the guardian because they always had best hp, mitigation, and HP.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>By your definition, any class "could" tank, wizards "could" tank.  So you might as well say guardians weren't "the tank" because you could just get a wizard to tank.  But in reality, all of the other classes were so far behind the guardian that the guardian being the best tank ment the guardian was the only tank.</DIV>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#ffcccc size=2>we look at each fighter's mitigation, health pool, and power pool to determine who will make the better tank.</FONT> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Which is yet another stigma avoidance tanks have to deal with.</P> <P>Nemi's point was that pre LU13 <EM>only</EM> guardians could get high mitigation, with super high HP and super high avoidance.  The trifecta.</P> <P>Other fighters could get high mitigation <EM>or</EM> high HP<EM> or </EM>high avoidance; but they couldn't get all three.</P> <P>Guardians were an avoidance tank pre LU13, but they could control the spikes better than other fighters because they had the highest HP and the best mitigation.</P> <P>Sure SK's could wear heavy, but their avoidance sucked as did thier HPs, etc etc.</P> <P>Oh and not all classes have HP buffs, thank you.  Monks have never been able to effect stamina/HP be it self or group.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Thanous wrote:<BR>I think that you would have a bad taste in your mouth if we came over to your class boards and told you what the character you play should do. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You're right, we would.  I mean its only been almost a year that guardians and other players have been telling us we're DPS, we should be in the scout archetype, etc etc.</P> <P>As for MrDizzi and this thread, I'll just reiterate my previous statement: LoL.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>10-24-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>01:48 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Tanking</STRONG></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The last major update included a significant change to the way agility affected damage <B>avoidance</B>. Similar to the bonus given by strength shown above, agility had a major impact on how likely a character was to <B>avoid</B> an attack.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>For example, if a monk or bruiser could be buffed such that his agility was 200 points higher than the opponent's to-hit stats, they would <B>avoid</B> all but 4% of the enemy's damage output. A plate tank with a shield also had 96% <B>avoidance</B>, and a scout with no shield had 90% <B>avoidance</B>.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Even an AGI advantage of 100 points allowed light and heavy armor tanks to <B>avoid</B> all but 14% and 15% of enemy damage output, while scouts <B>avoided</B> 77% of the damage. Since this stat advantage was easily reachable with typical buffs and debuffs, tanking was trivialized in many encounters.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The change we implemented was to raise the stats of NPCs that are level 30 and higher while decreasing the bonus given by agility. Higher-level encounters were no longer as trivial to tank, especially for scouts (who are not meant to be tanking heroic and epic content anyway).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>After further parsing and analysis, we have decided that further delineation is needed between a fighter's ability to tank versus a scout's ability. As part of Live Update #3, we are improving heavy armor to mitigate 11% more damage and light armor to mitigate 35% more damage. In addition to making fighters tank better overall, this should address concerns raised by bruisers and monks. Light armor tanks still depend on deflection, but with increased mitigation their tanking ability should be less prone to streaks of damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>First gaige crap, now straight from Moorgard. All tanks could gain 100% avoidance and sorry bub but all plate tanks wore the same armor and had the same mitigation, all guardians had was a bit higher hps.</DIV></DIV>

[MrDiz]

<DIV>Neimhidh : "When you can't find anyone to group with, you make do with what you have.  When you had a choice of tanks pre 13, you always chose the guardian because they always had best hp, mitigation, and HP.  "</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wrong. This is total rubbish and im pretty sure you know it.Im not talking about making do with a tank. Im saying in most places and for most things guardian is the least favourite tank. Im saying for a lot, if not most of th everquest 2 encounters ive had I would prefer a berzerker or a paladin to tank for me. For endgame raid I would choose guardian. So thats 1% of my gaming. But the same is true of all archetypes. Id prefer a ranger to a swashbuckler for pure dps. But id prefer a swashy for group invis. Id prefer a wizard for pure damage, but id prefer an enchanter for areas with add problems.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You might have always chosen a guardian, but thats becuase you really dont know the game very well.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Neimhidh : "But in reality, all of the other classes were so far behind the guardian that the guardian being the best tank ment the guardian was the only tank."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wrong. And a lie. Even in situations where a guardian was the best tank, a paladin was just fine. Same way as when I was in a small group id prefer a berzerker, but a guardian would do ok.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You guys have not played everqyest very much. you may have been here for 10 months, but you havnt played because the game you describe isnt the one the rest of us play. Paladins, SKs, berzerkers and guardians all made great tanks. Depending on the situation each one had its niche. In a large raid where you had all your bases covered then of course the pure tank was your first choice. This didnt mean other fighters didnt and coudlnt tank. They did. So the Gaige Equation is a lie. Pure simple and pretty much indisputable. There has never been only one viable tank. Never. Not once. Not ever.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You may not have been viable either because brawlers needed some love, or because you really dont know the game, or both. But many non-guardians were great tanks.</DIV>

[Gaige]

4 tanks able to tank all scenarios still isn't 6.  Besides, there were encounters, like Spirits of the Lost, Darathar, Lord Nagalik and Kra'thuk which required a guardian; not to mention Icy Digs.

[JNewby]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR>LoL. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Sony I demand u change the name of that god aweful potion.. I need to use a real one to tank with.. atm I am gonna have to use AGI potions.... and make me a stinking monk</P> <P> </P>

[Greyto]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR>4 tanks able to tank all scenarios still isn't 6.  Besides, there were encounters, like Spirits of the Lost, Darathar, Lord Nagalik and Kra'thuk which required a guardian; not to mention Icy Digs. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>doesn't matter <A href="http://www.mmorpgchart.com/" target=_blank>http://www.mmorpgchart.com/</A> think those numbers are going up or down?</P> <P>Word on the grape vine is someone's guild is looking to move to you know where when it comes out. hmm Giage, guess what class is not a tank in that game...</P> <P>So far no real discussion on what IS being done. Just a lot of the same people coming here to defend their position on why Guardians were nerfed and a lot of crap about how we need to deal with it.</P> <P>I am not looking for anything to be handed to me or hoping class X gets nerfed. I started a character based on what the manual said, stayed with it based on what he could do in game. That character is gone left in its place is a shallow shadow of what it used to be.</P> <P>Many guardians have come here and expressed their dismay.</P> <P>I am in "I don't give a [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]" mode.</P> <P>If you're going to fix guardians then do it.</P> <P>Take a good look at that chart gentlemen, the fat lady has entered the room and I do believe that's a Baroque (as in my class) I hear in the background.</P> <P>EDIT: a good portion of this post was left on the cutting room floor for fear some would have found it to inflammatory and it would have been deleted, along with my access to these forums.<BR> </P> <p>Message Edited by Greytoon on <span class=date_text>10-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:59 PM</span>

[Grumm]

<DIV>so, let me get this right,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>from what I keep seeing people say here, I think it finally sank in.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>since Nov 09 2004 the guardian class I been playing has been broken,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>them being Broken was allowing "only" guardians to tank,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now we know  every combat change, (example, Zalak1,zalak2,zalak,3) during the pre LU13 was done</DIV> <DIV>because, well, guardians were broken so they needed  to fix it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Then they made the other raid zones harder and harder (because the guardians were broken) to fix the broken guardians. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now The 5 other tank classes were always working fine So there was no need to even look at them,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> but the guardian being broken was the reason the guardian "had" to tank and caused all the problems in the game related to one class tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ok,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>for 10 months they did everything possible to fix the "Broken" guardian.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> till finally they find the "fix" the guardian needed, this Fix for the Guardian is a full combat revamp. that changes every class,mob,raid,group and NPC in the game.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all cause the "guardian" was broken.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Ahhhh... </DIV> <DIV>now I understand,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>that makes perfect sense <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Nibbl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR>4 tanks able to tank all scenarios still isn't 6.  Besides, there were encounters, like Spirits of the Lost, Darathar, Lord Nagalik and Kra'thuk which required a guardian; not to mention Icy Digs. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Must of missed SoE post where they stated all fighters will tank all content equally!</DIV>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR>And now we have brawlers in treasured/handcrafted outtanking guardians in full legendary/fabled..................I guess that's what you call equal eh?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Ha Ha.  Maybe against a lvl 60 mob with t5 fully fabled, sure.  t5 fully fabled is worthless past 55 pretty much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But a lvl 60 monk in handcrafted/treasured outtanking a lvl 60 guardian in full cobalt or full t6 fabled?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>YEAH RIGHT.</DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <P>Youre entire argument is built upon this premice, and therefore, a lie.</P> <HR> <P>No.  You wouldn't know the entire arguement since you yourself have stated numerous times you didn't pay attention to the forums pre LU13.  Anyway my arguement was:</P> <P>1) Guardians avoided too much.</P> <P>2) Combat in general was broken.</P> <P>3) The fighter archetype was broken because true interchangeability didn't exist.  There was not one single mob in the game a guardian couldn't tank or one single encounter/scenario where guardians weren't the best choice.  However there were numerous scenarios where only a guardian could tank.  Therefore guardians were always the *best* choice.  So in any situation where a monk could be a successful group tank, a guardian could as well - and they could do it better.  Interchangeability sure.  However there were many situations where a monk COULD NOT be changed out for a guardian and be successful.  At all.  This held true throughout the archetype.</P> <P>The simple fact was that guardians were required for a lot of content pre LU13 because they trivialized them so much due to the tanking trifecta that encounters were designed and beefed up to be so ridiculously hard to combat the broken guardian that they were out of any other fighter's league.</P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>10-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:02 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Any level any tier, it's how it is. Brawlers dont lose much avoidance naked, and it's your avoidance that allows you to tank how you do. A guardian HAS to HAVE legendary to tank even anywhere close in the ballpark to a brawler, and still a brawler will take less damage, do more damage and hold aggro better.I come here and i state facts that can be backed up with numbers and all you do is spew opinion and LOL crapola.</P> <P>I already disputed and proved that ANY fighter could tank any raid pre DoF already and i used a post written by one of your old guild members to do so, i can find more if needed.</P> <P>Basically before Gaige was in FoH  he was a sucky monk without a good guild and didnt know squat about raiding or tanking, then after joining a good guild that could raid he still lacked the ability to observe and learn how to tank. Noah stated it himself in other threads that Bruisers,Monks, or Guardians could tank any mob his crew raided in his raid setup.</P>

[Aethane]

<DIV>Actually they never once said all content, they said some would do better in some situations than others due to strengths possessed by their class. I can back this up with posts Moorgard himself made. And i am sorry 4-5 encounters isnt alot of content, seriously if all there were was 5-6 encounters i couldnt tank i would give a crap less about it and just let who could tank it tank it, cry me a river.</DIV>

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>I find it ironic that Guardians are arguing that having a best tank does not equal only tank. Yet Guardians are up in arms that although they can tank fine, there is someone out there who is better (in their minds).</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So the problem isn't that there is a better tank, it's that the better tank isn't Guardian.</FONT></P> <P> </P>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I find it ironic that Guardians are arguing that having a best tank does not equal only tank. Yet Guardians are up in arms that although they can tank fine, there is someone out there who is better (in their minds).</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So the problem isn't that there is a better tank, it's that the better tank isn't Guardian.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Ask the why and you will have your answer, we give up everything for it. Lowest fighter dps, no useful utility, take more damage than brawlers etc.... We are THE worst tank of all now. Yet supposedly most defensive lol, riiiiiiiight. A brawler in defense stance does more dps than i can in full offense. It goes on and  on and on like this.</DIV>

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ah but take off the blinkers. Most defensive does not equal best tank. It means your buffs are defensive in flavour. You have the most utility that affects group defensive abilities.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians can:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Buff the groups defense score</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Buff the groups HPs</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Shield allies from harm</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) Shield allies from aggro from encounters and out of encounter mobs</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hence you are the best defensive tank. Doesn't make you the best at tanking.</FONT></P>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ah but take off the blinkers. Most defensive does not equal best tank. It means your buffs are defensive in flavour. You have the most utility that affects group defensive abilities.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians can:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Buff the groups defense score</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Buff the groups HPs</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Shield allies from harm</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) Shield allies from aggro from encounters and out of encounter mobs</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hence you are the best defensive tank. Doesn't make you the best at tanking.</FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Lol, ok tell me what good that will ever do if the tank has aggro nobody is getting hit anyway, like i said useless. You sir have no clue how our skills work at all. Trust me if i ever used these skills other than when the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] has hit the fan and i've already screwed up i wouldnt call them useless. I probably use these so called utility skills you speak of 3-4 times a month if that. Now a skill like feign death, thats useful, you can FD if you are going to wipe and come back and rez the healer and all is well and you can move on, raids, reg xp groups etc... very useful utility. Oh and brawlers have better protections skills than we have so ya know. <p>Message Edited by Aethane on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:18 AM</span>

[Aethane]

But since you are a monk nemi, i am sure you know all this already. Bah, just another gaige wannabe, all smoke and no substance.

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Lol, ok tell me what good that will ever do if the tank has aggro nobody is getting hit anyway, like i said useless. </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>But the tank doesn't always have aggro does he? Thats the point. The game isn't trivial anymore. Tanks DO lose aggro. I know as a monk I often lose aggro vs group mobs and the group gets beat on for a while. </FONT></P> <P>You sir have no clue how our skills work at all. Trust me if i ever used these skills other than when the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] has hit the fan and i've already screwed up i wouldnt call them useless.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>See above. There are times its needed. If you don't lose aggro, excellent, your aggro skills are far better than mine. Already your group is safer than mine. If you do lose it, you have skills there to protect the group better than I do.</FONT></P> <P> I probably use these so called utility skills you speak of 3-4 times a month if that. Now a skill like feign death, thats useful, you can FD if you are going to wipe and come back and rez the healer and all is well and you can move on,</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>It is FAR easier to regroup and invis/move to where the shards are than it is to FD. Think about this. I'm the tank, if I FD then I'm alive and the group is dead...how many players will appreciate that. Never mind the fact its hard as hell to res a healer, rebuff and res everyone else before wandering aggro wipes out your party again. </FONT></P> <P> raids, reg xp groups etc... very useful utility. Oh and brawlers have better protections skills than we have so ya know. </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Last time I looked I couldn't buff defense or group hps. Last time I looked you had better AoE aggro tools. Last time I looked you had better intervene lines.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Message Edited by Aethane on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:18 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>The point is Pre-LU13 you never had to use this utility becuase</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Reactive heal aggro made your ability to keep aggro trivial</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Mobs were trivial in combat</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>What you really want is:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) To be the best tank such that you don't need to act like the 5 other subclasses and use utility</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Your role in the game hasn't changed, its always been there. Unfortunately the game was broken and all you had to do was pull a mob and go make coffee till it was dead, rinse repeat.</FONT></P> <P><BR></P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:4 tanks able to tank all scenarios still isn't 6. <hr></blockquote>Now we find a reference point we can agree on. YES I agree that 4 isnt 6. But it isnt 1 either. If we can agree on that what do we get:1) Brawlers could not tank.2) It wasnt the fault of guardians because 3 other fighters tanked in spite of guardians.Im not arguing that monks should be nerfed so they cannot tank. If all lu13 had done was to make monks tank as well as a paladin guardians would never have even broke stride. We dont mind who else tanks. We just want to tank slightly better. I know you dont like that, but at least admit thats what we want. We dont want to be the only tank and even when we were the best tank we were not the only tank. Saying otherwise is a lie.

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<P><FONT color=#ffff00>I find it ironic that Guardians are arguing that having a best tank does not equal only tank. Yet Guardians are up in arms that although they can tank fine, there is someone out there who is better (in their minds).</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So the problem isn't that there is a better tank, it's that the better tank isn't Guardian.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <hr></blockquote>By jove i think shes got it!! Alleluyah. We have a breakthrough <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />YES! Thats exactly it Nemi. We dont mind the fact that there is a best tank. We mind that it is not us. We feel it should be the pure tank. Now I dont mind arguing that fact with you if you like, as long as you stop trying to convince the forums that we were the only tank.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Noone is lying. Its opinion.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You believe best does not equal only. II believe it does mean only. As soon as you use the word best, that conjures up a whole host of imagery.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Players will inherently seek out the 'best' given the chance. Thats why this game succeeds after all. If it's widely known that Guardians are the 'best' then Guardians will be the first choice for tank for a group/raid. This causes a problem when you have 5 other subclasses looking for that spot too. My own playing experience proved it to me. Many times I was invited to a group and then told we need to wait for a 'real tank'. Did Paladins/Berserkers get the spot? Yes. Did they ever get the spot above a Guardian? No. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>That simple fact shows that as long as you have a 'best' tank then you eliminate competition and the only time you get to do your job is when there happens to be no Guardians around. What invariably happens then is that once Sony has decreed that Guardians are the prime tank, people reroll Guardians because they want to tank. More Guardians equal less groups for other subclasses. Its a spiral downward.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Think I'm talking nonsense? It happened in Everquest. Knights in that game only got to tank after PoP because they could gain and hold aggro without a care, coupled with high HPs and the Complete Heal problem, Warriors were relegated to pity spots. What happened? Tons of new SKs and Paladins were created and power levelled.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Noone knows this better than Sony and it was one of the reasons EQ2 appealed to lots of players, because it claimed to move away from holy trinities and to a system where every class was viable - be you Brawler, Crusader or Warrior.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Competition is good. Ask to compete, not to exceed.</FONT></P>

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><BR>By jove i think shes got it!! Alleluyah. We have a breakthrough <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR><BR>YES! Thats exactly it Nemi. We dont mind the fact that there is a best tank. We mind that it is not us. We feel it should be the pure tank. Now I dont mind arguing that fact with you if you like, as long as you stop trying to convince the forums that we were the only tank.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Glad you can admit to being selfish.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Problem is you aren't a pure tank. Your a subclass of the fighter tree. Last time I looked you could do damage (DPS), you could tank (absorb damage), you could group buff (utility).</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Strangely enough, every other Fighter does the same thing, DPS, Tank and Utility.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You are a defensive subclass of the Warrior class. That means you wear heavy armour, carry a sword and shield, avoid some, mitigate the rest and buff your groups defensive stats and protect your group with your superior group aggro control and single target intervene lines.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You are not made to break the Fighter archetype mold. You obey the same rules as the rest of us.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Ichabo]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote: <blockquote> <hr></blockquote><p><font color="#ffff00">... and all you had to do was pull a mob and go make coffee till it was dead, rinse repeat.</font></p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> That statement alone proofes that you have absolutley no clue how the game was played as a guardian pre LU13. You are just jumping the Gaige campain here without any 1st hand knowledge of the class at all. I'm not going into the "all fighters must be equal tanks" BS since I disagree with it and think there is no need for 6 fighter subclasses if all are equal tanks (you know the job description artgument which was later on pulverised by some stupid statement of Moorgard who claimed these descriptions don't mean anything at all exept maybe fooling costumers). But I would realy like to see you self proclaimed experts in guardian affairs step away from that stupid "God Mode" "Pull agro and get a coffe" and "Tanking as a guardian was trivial" statements, since none of them are true or based on any fact. Pre LU13 you needed skill to be a good tank like you need skill to be a good tank now. Only that now guardians got the shaft since we lack any usefull utility and DPS and our taunts are resistet by everything dark yellow and above. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by IchabodC on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:20 AM</span>

[Nemi]

<P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> IchabodC wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Tanking for an exp group was trivial for every class at one point preLU13, heck at one point Scouts could do it. My point remains that during all the changes, the outright leader was always a Guardian. No matter what was tweaked or changed, Guardians were the best. I don't want to go back to that. You do. Hence we argue.</FONT></P> <P>Only that now guardians got the shaft since we lack any usefull utility and DPS and our taunts are resistet by everything dark yellow and above.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Do you see Guardians asking for DPS and utility? No. Can you see the problem? Taunts resisted affect everyone, and Guardians less than monks. You have an taunt that fires when you get hit. We have a 30 second AoE taunt. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians aren't useless, if I find myself in a group with a Guardian without a messer, I'm happy to let them tank as they do it better.</FONT><BR></P></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Message Edited by IchabodC on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:20 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR><BR> <P>Basically before Gaige was in FoH  he was a sucky monk without a good guild and didnt know squat about raiding or tanking, then after joining a good guild that could raid he still lacked the ability to observe and learn how to tank. Noah stated it himself in other threads that Bruisers,Monks, or Guardians could tank any mob his crew raided in his raid setup.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I didn't realize you knew and/or played with me.  Interesting.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greytoon wrote:<BR> <P>Word on the grape vine is someone's guild is looking to move to you know where when it comes out. hmm Giage, guess what class is not a tank in that game... <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>What people decide to do with their time and money is their choice, I will always play EQ2 regardless of the tag I wear.<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:45 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> IchabodC wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR>But I would realy like to see you self proclaimed experts in guardian affairs step away from that stupid "God Mode" "Pull agro and get a coffe" and "Tanking as a guardian was trivial" statements, since none of them are true or based on any fact. </SPAN> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Noah has said as much, on these forums, himself.  When he made his posts complaining about the lack of challenge he quit clearly made statements about tanking raids afk. </P> <P>He even tanked raids naked.</P> <P>You're simply wrong.<BR></P>

[Ichabo]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote: <blockquote> <hr><span> </span> <hr> </blockquote> <p>Noah has said as much, on these forums, himself.  When he made his posts complaining about the lack of challenge he quit clearly made statements about tanking raids afk. </p> <p>He even tanked raids naked.</p> <p>You're simply wrong.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>Raidbuffed like that even you could have tanked these raids naked I guess. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> (and any other fighter as well) I don't want to argue about the fact that we did have an advantage, what angrys me is that you guys seem to think it enabled us to tank everything afk because that is not the case (and most of us guards are not the uberequiped RAID MT Guards that have every single spell on Master 1 or Adept3 that complained about a lack of challenge) I also have no problem with you tanking equaly (even if I think we do not need 6 fighter subclasses then), but If you tank equaly then at least give me equal (or close to equal) DPS and some usefull utility, because the complete intervene line (or however it is named, I am uncertain because the is no reason at all to place this CAs on the hotkey bars since they are totaly useless) is a usless joke (a bad one). </span><div></div>

[Drulak]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> IchabodC wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR>But I would realy like to see you self proclaimed experts in guardian affairs step away from that stupid "God Mode" "Pull agro and get a coffe" and "Tanking as a guardian was trivial" statements, since none of them are true or based on any fact. </SPAN> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Noah has said as much, on these forums, himself.  When he made his posts complaining about the lack of challenge he quit clearly made statements about tanking raids afk. </P> <P>He even tanked raids naked.</P> <P>You're simply wrong.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You always have the same crap argument ,  raids raids raids , excuse me Monky but pre LU13 MOST guardians did not I will repeat it as you have not heard or do not listen DID NOT raid.  we were never god mode charachters . That is final , i have now played a monk to 24th level and you are having an absolute giraffe talking god mode crap. My monk will kill a green heroic quicker than my guard can kill a green solo mob. So don't give me the god mode chat.</P> <P>Pre LU13 a few of the very top raiding Guards were better than any other to tank raids , That is fact.  The Guardian class was better - is a LIE.  What needing altering was the raid set up , what got altered was the Guardian class. NOW we have a total imbalance , but because it favours Monks , there is no cry anymore for equality for fighters.</P> <P>Post LU13 there is a much bigger imbalance than there was pre LU13 and that is for solo and grp encounters.</P> <P>I am not talking from hearsay , or my friends guildmate knew a toon who could do this.  I am talking from fact as in i have played a guard and a monk.<BR></P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Noone is lying. Its opinion.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You believe best does not equal only. II believe it does mean only.</blockquote>Nemi it is not just my opinion that other fighters were tanks before the update. Its a well documented well known absolute FACT. Other fighters tanked, and tanked well. That argument is dead.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Mantra mantra mantra</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians were the only class because they were the best class - SoE agreed with this and decided to undertake a HUGE combat revamp. Games companies tend not to do this unless there is SERIOUS and MAJOR flaws with the game.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Go on, ignore 10 months of changes and tell me that during the 2nd week of May on Tuesday, it was possible for ALL tanks to be viable.</FONT></P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Mantra mantra mantra</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians were the only class because they were the best class - SoE agreed with this and decided to undertake a HUGE combat revamp. Games companies tend not to do this unless there is SERIOUS and MAJOR flaws with the game.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Go on, ignore 10 months of changes and tell me that during the 2nd week of May on Tuesday, it was possible for ALL tanks to be viable.</FONT></P> <hr></blockquote>I dont need to ignore 10 months of changes. The changes prove my point perfectly. It was perfectly viable for 10 months for warriors and crusader to all tank. This proves your lie to be that. You can argue you should be the best tank for reason X, Y and Z, and ill deal with those. But if you say that guardians needed to be nerfed because they actually prevented anyone else from tanking and tanking well, well thats just a lie and will be treated as such.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>[Removed for Content]</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Is that it? You think I wanted Guardians to be nerfed? Get a grip. I wanted all Fighters to tank equally, just like SoE promised. I argue with you because you want a return to Guardians being better than everyone.</FONT></P>

[Drulak]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>[Removed for Content]</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Is that it? You think I wanted Guardians to be nerfed? Get a grip. I wanted all Fighters to tank equally, just like SoE promised. I argue with you because you want a return to Guardians being better than everyone.</FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>No Nemi , we want what you want - all fighter classes to be equal. Pre Lu13 , it was about right , yes guards were the best pure tank but had no utility , so other classes could tank and make up for the pure tank skill of the guard with their utility skill.</P> <P>Post LU13 all classes tank equally (according to soe) but now add on the monk/bruiser etc utility and they are now better MT's. Because they can tank equally with Guards , but have extra DPS can FD self invis etc etc . So equality is not there now.</P>

[Galeo1]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><BR>By jove i think shes got it!! Alleluyah. We have a breakthrough <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR><BR>YES! Thats exactly it Nemi. We dont mind the fact that there is a best tank. We mind that it is not us. We feel it should be the pure tank. Now I dont mind arguing that fact with you if you like, as long as you stop trying to convince the forums that we were the only tank.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Glad you can admit to being selfish.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Problem is you aren't a pure tank. Your a subclass of the fighter tree. Last time I looked you could do damage (DPS), you could tank (absorb damage), you could group buff (utility).</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Strangely enough, every other Fighter does the same thing, DPS, Tank and Utility.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You are a defensive subclass of the Warrior class. That means you wear heavy armour, carry a sword and shield, avoid some, mitigate the rest and buff your groups defensive stats and protect your group with your superior group aggro control and single target intervene lines.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You are not made to break the Fighter archetype mold. You obey the same rules as the rest of us.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>This post pretty much sums up all arguments since LU13 went live.</P> <P> </P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<P><FONT color=#ffff00>[Removed for Content]</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Is that it? You think I wanted Guardians to be nerfed? Get a grip. I wanted all Fighters to tank equally, just like SoE promised. I argue with you because you want a return to Guardians being better than everyone.</FONT></P> <hr></blockquote>Yes, you wanted them to be nerfed. Making guardians not the best tank was a nerf. And SoE never promised you anything other than you should be able to tank. And you argue with me in spite of the fact that I want guardians to be returned to being about equal with every other fighter because it would nerf your superiority. We all know that Nemi. Youre on the wrong board to pull that argument off <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Guardians were not better than other fighters. In many ways they were the worst fighters. I would have ranked berzekers as the best all round fighter class. Then I would have had paladins I think. Being the best tank doesnt make the best fighter. Fighters main role is tanking, but your out of touch with the game if you think its the only role. Even now after all the updates thats still true. And it will be true until EQ2 fades. Sony cannot have 6 fighters all balanced in all things. Its a basic impossibility unless all 6 fighters are identical. They will be better at some things and worse at others. Like all classes. Like in all games.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>First I have no problems in my position in the game. For 10 months I was the redheaded stepchild of EQ2 - it sucked and I wouldn't wish it on anyone (well except the arrogant dumbnuts that told me I was a DPS class and I should reroll a Guardian if I wanted to tank for 10 months). I want equality in tanking (our main role as Fighters) and variety and flavour in everything else.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I don't see it as impossible to have balance with 6 fighters - I see a Fighters role as 3 spheres</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Tanking</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) DPS</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Utility</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Tanking is holding aggro and absorbing the mobs DPS (both mitigation and avoidance) - You already have two varieties there.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>DPS is both indirect (mob debuffs for the group to do extra DPS) and direct (your own DPS) - Include stun and stifles.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Utility is group buffs (Haste, DPS, Defense, Offense, HPs, Saves, Wards, Intervene, Shielding)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Tanking can be equal and variety can be achieved with DPS and Utility.</FONT></P>

[Drulak]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>First I have no problems in my position in the game. For 10 months I was the redheaded stepchild of EQ2 - it sucked and I wouldn't wish it on anyone (well except the arrogant dumbnuts that told me I was a DPS class and I should reroll a Guardian if I wanted to tank for 10 months). I want equality in tanking (our main role as Fighters) and variety and flavour in everything else.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I don't see it as impossible to have balance with 6 fighters - I see a Fighters role as 3 spheres</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Tanking</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) DPS</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Utility</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Tanking is holding aggro and absorbing the mobs DPS (both mitigation and avoidance) - You already have two varieties there.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>DPS is both indirect (mob debuffs for the group to do extra DPS) and direct (your own DPS) - Include stun and stifles.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Utility is group buffs (Haste, DPS, Defense, Offense, HPs, Saves, Wards, Intervene, Shielding)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Tanking can be equal and variety can be achieved with DPS and Utility.</FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>hehe you are killing your own argument.  Yes fighters can be balanced with 1 , 2 and 3 . Before LU13  Guards were the best at 1 but worst at 2 and 3. This made the fighters equal over all , but not equal tanks.  NOW non guards want the equal tanking , but to be better at everything else == No balance at all.</P> <P>Since LU13 Guards are the same at 1 and worst at 2 and 3 . So if we go with your argument that all fighters should be equal - then guards need to have tanking ability or dps or utility raised.</P> <P> </P>

[Nemi]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Drulak wrote:<BR> <P><BR>hehe you are killing your own argument.  Yes fighters can be balanced with 1 , 2 and 3 . Before LU13  Guards were the best at 1 but worst at 2 and 3. This made the fighters equal over all , but not equal tanks. </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Perhaps you could say that but the problem was Fighters were taking Mage and Scout positions in the game. That was broken. Fighters Tank, that their role.</FONT></P> <P> NOW non guards want the equal tanking , but to be better at everything else == No balance at all.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Do they? I see lots of people agreeing that Guardians DPS and utility needs looked at, I see lots of people arguing that Guardians should not be made best tanks...I don't see anyone asking to be equal at tanking and better in utility and dps.</FONT></P> <P>Since LU13 Guards are the same at 1 and worst at 2 and 3 . So if we go with your argument that all fighters should be equal - then guards need to have<STRIKE> tanking</STRIKE> <STRIKE>ability or </STRIKE>dps or utility raised. <FONT color=#ffff00>Fixed</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Exactly, have a cookie!! Now if you can just convince the rest of the Guardians that want to be best tank I think you'll find SoE will listen to you and give you some lovin'.</FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV><p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:24 PM</span>

[Yrield]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>MrDizzi wrote:<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<p><font color="#ffff00">[Removed for Content]</font></p><p><font color="#ffff00">Is that it? You think I wanted Guardians to be nerfed? Get a grip. I wanted all Fighters to tank equally, just like SoE promised. I argue with you because you want a return to Guardians being better than everyone.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Yes, you wanted them to be nerfed. Making guardians not the best tank was a nerf. And SoE never promised you anything other than you should be able to tank. And you argue with me in spite of the fact that I want guardians to be returned to being about equal with every other fighter because it would nerf your superiority<b>.</b> We all know that Nemi. Youre on the wrong board to pull that argument off <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Guardians were not better than other fighters. In many ways they were the worst fighters. I would have ranked berzekers as the best all round fighter class. Then I would have had paladins I think. Being the best tank doesnt make the best fighter. Fighters main role is tanking, but your out of touch with the game if you think its the only role. Even now after all the updates thats still true. And it will be true until EQ2 fades. Sony cannot have 6 fighters all balanced in all things. Its a basic impossibility unless all 6 fighters are identical. They will be better at some things and worse at others. Like all classes. Like in all games.<hr></blockquote>Moorgard wrote:"</span><span class="postbody"><i>You're still thinking in terms of EQ class names. That's going to cause you all kinds of unnecessary grief. An EQ2 warrior is not the same as a warrior in EQ. Different beasts, same name. (This illustrates how using classic roleplay titles in new games is both a blessing and a curse.) If you were talking about EQ and said that a monk or paladin shouldn't tank as well as a warrior because then there would be no reason for a warrior to exist, you'd be absolutely right. But that's not the case here.In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role in a group as well as any other. They use different styles and skills to accomplish their purpose, but the core ability will always be there. If you need a tank for your party, then any flavor will do, be it monk, paladin, guar--Oops, better stop there for now.</i> "source <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eqii.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=63196&highlight=#63196">here</a>Moorgard wrote:"</span><span class="postbody"> <i>Is this distinction enough for you? That's a matter of personal taste. Fighters take damage, deal damage, and hold a mob's attention. Every Fighter is charged with that responsibility, and must do it as well as any other. Some will use spells, some will use arts; some will use avoidance, some will use mitigation; some will wear heavy armor that makes them look like a walking tank, others will wear much lighter armor</i>."<a target="_blank" href="http://www.eqii.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=126607&highlight=#126607">source</a>Moorgard wrote:"</span> <span class="genmed"><b>MV wrote:</b></span>If they allow Paladins to rez and in theory paladins can tank as good as warriors and monks don't you think this would be too much of an advantage?<span class="postbody"><i>Nope. Because all sub-classes get some kind of crossover secondary ability from another archetype. This doesn't make any one kind of fighter preferable in all situations, but rather adds versatility to the group.A skittish priest may want the security of grouping with another class that can rez. However, there will be sub-classes from each archetype that can rez. And there may be some other secondary skill that benefits the group more in a certain situation than having another person who can rez.The idea is to add diversity and flavor, not to lock any one sub-class into always being the preferred one</i> ."<a target="_blank" href="http://www.eqii.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=221886&highlight=#221886">source</a>I think its enough, have a nice day <span>:smileyvery-happy:</span></span><div></div>

[Neimhidh]

So the REAL "great tank lie" = Guardians need to tank better than the other classes because that is their primary role.

[Edyil]

<P>Monks couldnt tank heroic mobs pre-CU.  As a matter of fact, I quit my monk for about 4 months until they announced the (then) up and coming changes.  The FACT is that having a monk attempt to tank post-Agi nerf and pre-CU was very dangerous and it was ALWAYS a power drain on the entire group.  Buffed Templars tanked much better than monks at the time using self heals for agro generation.</P> <P>I do appreciate this thread though.  Some really funny fantasy in here.</P> <P>ROFL</P>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Neimhidh wrote:<div></div>So the REAL "great tank lie" = Guardians need to tank better than the other classes because that is their primary role.<hr></blockquote> Although I dont agree with anyone being better than anyone else there is some justification in Guardians feeling they should be the best.  Not because its our primary role...but rather because SOE screwed up and made it our ONLY role.  A role that there is only 1 slot for in a group. When you can only do one thing you naturally feel you should do it better than anyone else that tries to do it btu can also do other things. I think thats fundamentally where all this stubborness from Guardians is comming from.  If we could do something else half way decent becides tank we might not be so inclined to think we should be able to do it better than you. SOE came up with the Archetype idea...after a year of testing/revamping etc they found a way to fit design Brawlers and Crusadors to fit into that system....HOWEVER they forgot and left Gaurds as though they belonged in a non-archetype system. </span><div></div>

[MrDiz]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>Moorgard wrote:<BR>In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role in a group as well as any other. They use different styles and skills to accomplish their purpose, but the core ability will always be there. If you need a tank for your party, then any flavor will do, be it monk, paladin, guar--<BR><BR>"The idea is to add diversity and flavor, not to lock any one sub-class into always being the preferred one."</BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>No sub-class was always the preffered one. Never was. Berzerkers were preferred for small groups as were pallys, monks preffered for soloing etc etc. Guards were preffered for big raids. See? They all fulfill there role equally in different ways and in differenet circumstances. It doesnt matter if god on high says they should all be equally desirable in every single situation, it wont and cant ever happen. Its not possible. It cannot be done. Unless every class achieves the task the same way the result will always be different in different situations. If a small group needs a tank and has no healing who is the best choice? Paladin of course. No way you can balance it to make a guardian as good an option as pally. No way. You cant do it unless you make all classes identical. Its wishy washy airy fairy thinking to beleive otherwise.</P> <P> Thats the core dilema here. You base the entire tanking eq2 experience on wanting to be the main tank for a raid and seemed to miss ALL the many many times you were the preffered tank. It begs the question that if the only pary of EQ2 you really care about is the raid part, why did u take a fighter that excelled more at the other parts? They are all equally desirable in different ways. At least they were before lu13.</P><p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:52 AM</span>

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>No sub-class was always the preffered one. Never was. Berzerkers were preferred for small groups as were pallys, monks preffered for soloing etc etc. Guards were preffered for big raids. See? </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Do you actually stop to think what you're posting? How can monks fulfil their role if they are preferred for soloing? I didn't see anythingin Moorgards post about raids, or size of groups. He categorically stated no-one class was to be preferred. Therefore ALL can do it.</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>08:52 AM</SPAN><BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Skr]

Heh, raid mobs should only be tanked by guardians. Doesnt mean other classes cant tank it, it all depends on if everyone wants the added challenge. But preference is and always will be the dominating factor as thats the nature of the game. If other classes want to tank raid mobs then maybe they should have been a guardian, but oh wait, they want the self heals, high dps, feign death, wards, etc etc. No wonder they didnt want to be a guardian. It boggles me that other classes would even complain about being unequal as tanks to guardians. It also boggles me that some say they have suffered for a year in not getting to tank. Well, im pretty sure after 3 months after release it was pretty easy to determine that guardians were desired as raid tanks. This left 9 months to change your class and start over as a guardian. If that was why you picked a monk was to tank, then I dont see how or why you would continue to play one unless you were happy with the class. I know that If I started off as a guardian and the whole time monks were tanking id probably start over as a monk. Im also pretty sure that no one chose a monk because they wanted to be a raid tank. If you did then you obviously you were naive in believing they would all take turns on epic mobs and we would all hold hands with our 15 tank raids and take turns every night. Most people chose their class for specific reasons, and guardians role has always been to tank for as far back as I can ever remember. In the 5+ years I played eqlive, guardian was always the raid tank. Sure, we can sit here and argue that this is eq2, and that supposedly the devs said all tanks would be equal blah blah blah, but we all know exactly what they meant by that. 95% knew since day 1 that guardian would end up being the most desired tank. The other 5% knew a couple months later. Changing all this now was really not a good move. It seems more people enjoyed the game and accepted it before, but this now is just totally unacceptable. I dont see that its become more enjoyable either. Give us self heals, feign death, high dps and wards and well see how much the other classes enjoy their undefined roles as well. <div></div>

[MrDiz]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR><BR>Do you actually stop to think what you're posting? How can monks fulfil their role if they are preferred for soloing? I didn't see anythingin Moorgards post about raids, or size of groups. He categorically stated no-one class was to be preferred. Therefore ALL can do it. <P>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>08:52 AM</SPAN><BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <BR> <P><BR>Always think before posting. Always. What I meant, and well you know it, is that guards might be best tanks (and preffered) for raids, and pallys best tank (and preffered) in small groups, but that certain classes will be better at soloing and therefore preffered by people who like to solo rather than preffered by groups who need them. Soloers are people too remember. They have prefferences, and I can tell you guaridan is not one of them <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P><i> "I didn't see anythingin Moorgards post about raids, or size of groups. He categorically stated no-one class was to be preferred. Therefore ALL can do it"</i></P> <P> Yeah exactly, which proves my point perfectly. You didnt see him say anything about groups or sizes. Nothing about everyone being equal at raids. Or equal at soloing. He simply took tanking as a whole, taking all situations as a collection, and said they should be equally desirable. Which before lu13 they were. You cannot say any single fighter was more desirable than another because it would not be true unless you specified "in a full raid with required classes present". Because if you look at tanking and a fighters desirability across the full range of eq2 encounters, they are WERE all pretty well balanced for desirability. </P> <P>Had any class been more desirable as a complete class, they would have been the majority.</P>

[Neimhidh]

<DIV>Moorgard wrote:<BR>In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role in a group as well as any other.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>hmm can fulfill their MAIN ROLE IN A GROUP AS WELL AS ANY OTHER</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>what is the brawlers main role?  oh they are a tank.  so there should never be a BEST tank on raids.  Soloing does not come into play, it's the group role which should be equal.</DIV>

[RafaelSmith]

Ive played MMOs for some time now and realize that there is a certain "personality trait" that draw people towards wanting to play  a "tank" class.  At its core those of use that enjoy being MT do so because we like being the star, the leader, the "hero"...call it what you want.  That is the flaw in EQ2's design.  If any "tank" class is perceived as being the star then the others because they also want to be the star are gonna complain and feel underpowered.   Is it selfish for players to think this way...im not entirely sure...its part of what draws people to being a tank. If you have a group with 3 equal level/geared fighters of different varieties it matters not if they are equal..they each wanna be the star/MT otherwise they wouldnt be there. Truth is that pre-LU13 there was only a very very small % of encounters that Guards had a overwelming advantage in.   Everything else the fighters were essentially equal...but being fighters...wanting to be the star, etc the non-guards felt underpowerd because there existed encounters where they could not be the top dog.  Over time this all got exxagerrated and the perception that Gaurds were the only, the best tank all the time became what everyone accepted as fact.   Most of the  brawlers, etc that were passed over as MT  were passed over simply because of false perception...had nothing to do with them being able to MT or not. Not sure what the reality is post revamp but I do know that Guardian is no longer the best choice for MT..in fact in most cases its the worse.  Player perception may very well be flawed again and Warriors will continue to be preferred simply because that is what players are used to and expect. Either way the fighter classes still are not balanced....given the nature of players that choose to be a tank...true balance will only work on paper and in theory.   I know a Bruiser is a better tank than me...but still when I group with one...I expect to be the MT as does the rest of the group...and ironically most of the time so does the bruiser.  We automatically think of the bruiser as dmg, OT, etc.  I doubt seriously that mode of thinking will ever change. People look at a Warrior and think one thing...Tank...nothing else.  People look at a Brawler or a Crusador and probably think a few things...including tank. <div></div>

[JudyJudy]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>What I meant, and well you know it, is that guards might be best tanks (and preffered) for raids, and pallys best tank (and preffered) in small groups, but that certain classes will be better at soloing <FONT color=#ff0000><U>and therefore preffered by people who like to solo rather than preffered by groups who need them.</U></FONT></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><EM>My friend, this is where your argument is a bit flawed.  You have to keep in mind that many individuals do not have this mindset upon character creation.  There are those who choose their race, class and starting city based on what interests them in terms of roleplay, visual aspects and overall enjoyment - not who is the best tank when grouped, who is the best solo'er, who can count their fingers faster during a battle, etc...  </EM></P> <P><EM>Remember, there are those that prefer to roll their character based on what they like or what seems to interest them the most, then grow into the role that was created for them - then determine what role they wish to fulfill based on their capabilites.</EM></P> <P><EM>As a monk, when our guild leader (who is a guardian) asks me to step up and MT for the group, I do -  If I'm asked to DPS, I do - If I need to make a call for the survival of the group, I make it.</EM></P> <P><EM>I knew nothing of my class, but the basic description that was given to all of us prior to my character creation.  I preferred the martial artist for my flavor, then grew into the roles that were given to me.  If the roles should change via the Devs?  I'll adapt because I enjoy my monk toon.  I have no alts, mind you - so take my information how you will.</EM></P> <P><EM>I'll end by saying that I truly hope you guardians get some lovin from SOE.  You all know what you need, I'll not dispute the mechanics of your class, as I do not know it - but I'll say this:  You all deserve to have the enjoyment from playing your toon as those of us who are.</EM></P>

[Grumm]

<DIV> <DIV><EM>Moorgard said:</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM> </DIV> <DIV><EM>Even after the combat changes, the guardian is still generally the safest choice to tank because they provide the greatest sense of security. A skillfully played guardian can help their party handle adversity better than any other type of fighter. If things go wrong for the bruiser or monk, they have a good chance to be able to save their own lives, but are far less likely to be able to help their group or raid recover from a bad situation and get things back on track than a guardian.</EM></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>End it,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The real truth is that there is still and always will be a order of best to worse as long as long as we remain different.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if they give us equal DPS and fix our taunts, even though we are "the same" just do it "different" (confused myself with that one) the guardians will back on top again, because, well, why shouldnt we? <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if suddenly they do another patch and make all fighters the same, the decide to  just change the name and color of armor, well, guardians will still be main tank 90% of the time cause were etched into everyones head as a pure Tank and its what most people(other then fighters) are used to.</DIV> <DIV>JMO</DIV></DIV>

[Greyform]

<DIV>Curious, why do you guys even bother responding to Nemi, or Gaige. one is just a cheap imitation of the other and neither of them will ever change their opinion regardless of how many posts you make or how often you try to explain your point.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would/will ignore both of them regardless how much they cut and paste or quote/misquote others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>From what I can see their ego's need your input far more then any of us need theirs. Ignore them like you would any other irritating distraction.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know this may seem like flame bait but it is not, I really do not see why you guys waste so much energy on these two. What exactly is their purpose here? Seems to me like it is distract from any positive with their negativity. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Let them post what ever they want just keep on posting where you think we are as a class and let it go. These are not the ones who make any decisions on what we as guardians will be in the future of this game, and they are not worth your efforts to try and convince.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They are powerless therefore treat them as such.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Greyform Darkward. </DIV>

[ReviloTX]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Tanking can be equal and variety can be achieved with DPS and Utility.</FONT></P> <P><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> <P>The problem with this is that guardians utility is designed to make us (and possibly our group members) better tanks.  So if you say we have to have the same tanking ability, then your saying our utility should be useless.</P> <P><BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE>

[ReviloTX]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Neimhidh wrote:<BR> <DIV>Moorgard wrote:<BR>In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role in a group as well as any other.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>hmm can fulfill their MAIN ROLE IN A GROUP AS WELL AS ANY OTHER</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>what is the brawlers main role?  oh they are a tank.  so there should never be a BEST tank on raids.  Soloing does not come into play, it's the group role which should be equal.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Your logic is about as good as my wifes.  </P> <P>I've already demonstrated how one tank could tank better (even if it's only slightly better) and another tank could still fulfill his role AS TANK equally, so I won't do it again.  But it is possible, so your argument is flawed.</P> <P>Not only that, but you jump from MG's post about groups to making an assumption about raids and soloing.  He never addressed those, but let me tell you what I think.  If class A is better than class B at soloing, and class A and B are equally desireable for a group, then class B should be more desireable than class A for raiding.  It's a balance.  With the balance of DPS/Utility/Tanking ability you also have to consider the balance of solo/group/raid.  </P>

[ReviloTX]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greyform wrote:<BR> <DIV>Curious, why do you guys even bother responding to Nemi, or Gaige. one is just a cheap imitation of the other and neither of them will ever change their opinion regardless of how many posts you make or how often you try to explain your point.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would/will ignore both of them regardless how much they cut and paste or quote/misquote others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I personally don't think we should ignore them.  I think we should counter their arguments with reason to prove they are wrong.  This gives the dev's our perspective and makes them think about it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greyform wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They are powerless therefore treat them as such.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I would disagree.  What exactly do you think provoked them to do LU13 to begin with?  If nobody was complaining about it I highly doubt they would have changed it.<BR></DIV>

[MrDiz]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Neimhidh wrote:<BR> <DIV>Moorgard wrote:<BR>In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role in a group as well as any other.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>hmm can fulfill their MAIN ROLE IN A GROUP AS WELL AS ANY OTHER</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>what is the brawlers main role?  oh they are a tank.  so there should never be a BEST tank on raids.  Soloing does not come into play, it's the group role which should be equal.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>But thats impossible so lets not enter nevernever land here. Its next to impossible to make 2 classes equally preferable in any one situation (eg. endgame raids), to do so for 6 classes is insane. To then make them all equally prefferable across every possible type of encounter out there? Yeah right... "In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role in a group as well as any other" He doesnt mention if its fulfilling the role in the same type of group on the same kind of encounter. Which is good cos that would classify him as insane <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </P> <P>Human nature: We will find the best tank/group make up for the hardest raid contect out there eventually. We just will. And we will [Removed for Content] out the fighter of that class so he is so far ahead of the rest he will be best tank for all the easier raids too. Thats how this sort of game works itself. Ideas to the contrary and wishful thinking. History is against you on this.</P><p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:33 AM</span>

[Grumm]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000><STRONG>I personally don't think we should ignore them.  I think we should counter their arguments with reason to prove they are wrong.  This gives the dev's our perspective and makes them think about it.</STRONG></FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR><BR> </DIV> <DIV>Totally agree, </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>the only reason im here.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Grumm]

<P>also,</P> <P> </P> <P>I dont know why its so hard to understand, </P> <P>All fighters tank Equal, so be it, </P> <P>now people choose the "Best" tank, not from there tanking ability, but the Utility bonus, thus creating a "Best" list again.</P> <P>now its broken again.</P> <P>there is no ballance as long as they all have utility differences.</P> <P>Example:</P> <P>2 hour fight down to Sol eye, 6 people one a tank, EXP group, all tanks tank the same, so no best class to go right?, wrong, if it was me, best choice, Sk or monk, feigh death + feather = no 2 hour fight back down for CR if accidental wipe.</P> <P>whos now the best tank in all groups?</P> <P>He with the best toys wins period.</P> <P>welcome to pre LU13 with a new leader.</P> <P>whos broken now?</P> <P>if were going to keep swaping the best tanking spot with patches and fixes trying to ballance this dumb issue out, lets at least have a  monthly patch announced  rotation so I can have my turn <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[Greyform]

<P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> ReviloTX wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greyform wrote:<BR> <DIV>Curious, why do you guys even bother responding to Nemi, or Gaige. one is just a cheap imitation of the other and neither of them will ever change their opinion regardless of how many posts you make or how often you try to explain your point.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would/will ignore both of them regardless how much they cut and paste or quote/misquote others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I personally don't think we should ignore them.  I think we should counter their arguments with reason to prove they are wrong.  This gives the dev's our perspective and makes them think about it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greyform wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They are powerless therefore treat them as such.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I would disagree.  What exactly do you think provoked them to do LU13 to begin with?  If nobody was complaining about it I highly doubt they would have changed it.<BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I think your right in as much as we need to make our points, but we sure do not need to explain anything to any player.</P> <P>Why do I think there were changes? there needed to be some changes. Buff stacking was a problem, not that it was exclusive to guardians. Guardians were just able to make the best use of them.</P> <P>The other problem was we really did not have a lot of representation when most of the complaining was being done. I know I never even visited these boards until after my class was broken. I had no idea that there was a movement by anyone to have us nerfed.</P> <P>BUT we were not nerfed by Gaige or any other player. we were nerfed by SOE EQ2 game developers. If you believe any debate involving someone other then a game developer will change anything I'm sorry, that is the wrong tree you're barking up.</P> <P>This point counter point gibberish going on now only clouds the matter.</P> <P>State your case, Shield factor is meaningless. Mitigation still has damage spikes instead of the steady decrease in HP we should be seeing. Tuants get resisted far to many times. If I am even in tanking why is my DPS the lowest? Why do I have so many intercept buffs? I almost never get to use them and they are redundant. Why does one of my intercept buffs actualy increase group damage?</P> <P>None of those things need to be debated with any player in the game THEY CAN'T ANSWER OR FIX THEM. </P> <P>These are game issues that need a response from  a game developer not a monk or a paladin, or any other player who wants to instigate a debate to increase their own self worth. </P> <P>Maybe there needs to be a separate forum where players can bash and cut and paste and red ink yellow ink reply until their fingers are numb.</P> <P>Me I would rather we have meaningful dialog with people who can actually do something about the situation.</P> <P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P> <P> </P>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Greyform wrote:<div></div><p>Me I would rather we have meaningful dialog with people who can actually do something about the situation.</p> <blockquote> </blockquote> <hr></blockquote> I agree...but sadly I dont think SOE sees things that way.. In fact I think they prefer we all carry on meaningless debates with eachother while they keep on cashing in the checks. Their attempts at communication about game issues although geniun on the surface in reality is nothing more than the normal political stuff a company like SOE must do. If they really wanted or cared what we thought there would be a much better and controlled method for them and us to communicate. They may very well be "hearing" us but they sure dont seem to be "listening" to us. </span><div></div>

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greyform wrote:<BR> <P>Why do I think there were changes? there needed to be some changes. Buff stacking was a problem, not that it was exclusive to guardians. Guardians were just able to make the best use of them.</P> <P>The other problem was we really did not have a lot of representation when most of the complaining was being done. I know I never even visited these boards until after my class was broken. I had no idea that there was a movement by anyone to have us nerfed.</P> <P>State your case, Shield factor is meaningless. Mitigation still has damage spikes instead of the steady decrease in HP we should be seeing. Tuants get resisted far to many times. If I am even in tanking why is my DPS the lowest? Why do I have so many intercept buffs? I almost never get to use them and they are redundant. Why does one of my intercept buffs actualy increase group damage?</P> <P>None of those things need to be debated with any player in the game THEY CAN'T ANSWER OR FIX THEM.</P> <P>These are game issues that need a response from  a game developer not a monk or a paladin, or any other player who wants to instigate a debate to increase their own self worth. </P> <P>Maybe there needs to be a separate forum where players can bash and cut and paste and red ink yellow ink reply until their fingers are numb.</P> <P>Me I would rather we have meaningful dialog with people who can actually do something about the situation.</P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Every time a dev comes in here and posts in regards to guardian issues nothing is accomplished because they always end up going off on how its our job to "protect the group" and continue to say we have the most options to do this, but they fail to realize we protect the group by holding aggro, not by popping protection buffs like sentry and guardian sphere (which I couldn't sell a master version of for 25gold). </P> <P>Of course if their name is brought up in every other thread well then they have the right to come in here and defend themselves, which is what Gaige does, if someone brought up your name in the monk forum you would do the same thing.</P> <P>In regards to issues related to guardians, yes shield factor should mean something, yes its [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] that taunts are resisted and that shouldn't determine a successful or failure of a raid (they should instead just generate less hate on higher color con mobs) on a more positive note at least we can use some of our taunts while we're stunned, and yes our protection buffs should mitigate damage based on our mitigation and not the casters (or none at all).  Our job is to tank, that it we're not dps we shouldn't have it, we shouldn't have fancy little utility spells like evac, group invis, or rez, that doesn't go with the purpose of our class.  Guardians are basically meatshields, thats it. If you want to be dps your looking in the wrong place.</P> <P> </P>

[BostonFNO]

<FONT color=#ff9900></FONT><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Grummpy wrote:<BR> <P>also,</P> <P> </P> <P>I dont know why its so hard to understand, </P> <P>All fighters tank Equal, so be it, </P> <P>now people choose the "Best" tank, not from there tanking ability, but the Utility bonus, thus creating a "Best" list again.</P> <P>now its broken again.</P> <P>there is no ballance as long as they all have utility differences.</P> <P>Example:</P> <P>2 hour fight down to Sol eye, 6 people one a tank, EXP group, all tanks tank the same, so no best class to go right?, wrong, if it was me, best choice, Sk or monk, feigh death + feather = no 2 hour fight back down for CR if accidental wipe.</P> <P>whos now the best tank in all groups?</P> <P>He with the best toys wins period.</P> <P>welcome to pre LU13 with a new leader.</P> <P>whos broken now?</P> <P>if were going to keep swaping the best tanking spot with patches and fixes trying to ballance this dumb issue out, lets at least have a  monthly patch announced  rotation so I can have my turn <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ff9900>Good post. </FONT></P>

[Allaanon]

<P>Guardians sacrifice dps and utility to be a better tank.  We now sacrifice dps and utility for nothing.  </P> <P>We do not want dps and utility, or we would of been another class.</P> <P>I think every Guardian on these boards just needs to continually post the above until people get it through their heads.  That is the argument, the only argument and the end of the story.  If they didn't want a class to be like that, they shouldn't of made it.  </P> <P>Nuff said.</P>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Lol, ok tell me what good that will ever do if the tank has aggro nobody is getting hit anyway, like i said useless. </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>But the tank doesn't always have aggro does he? Thats the point. The game isn't trivial anymore. Tanks DO lose aggro. I know as a monk I often lose aggro vs group mobs and the group gets beat on for a while. </FONT></P> <P>You sir have no clue how our skills work at all. Trust me if i ever used these skills other than when the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] has hit the fan and i've already screwed up i wouldnt call them useless.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>See above. There are times its needed. If you don't lose aggro, excellent, your aggro skills are far better than mine. Already your group is safer than mine. If you do lose it, you have skills there to protect the group better than I do.</FONT></P> <P> I probably use these so called utility skills you speak of 3-4 times a month if that. Now a skill like feign death, thats useful, you can FD if you are going to wipe and come back and rez the healer and all is well and you can move on,</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>It is FAR easier to regroup and invis/move to where the shards are than it is to FD. Think about this. I'm the tank, if I FD then I'm alive and the group is dead...how many players will appreciate that. Never mind the fact its hard as hell to res a healer, rebuff and res everyone else before wandering aggro wipes out your party again. </FONT></P> <P> raids, reg xp groups etc... very useful utility. Oh and brawlers have better protections skills than we have so ya know. </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Last time I looked I couldn't buff defense or group hps. Last time I looked you had better AoE aggro tools. Last time I looked you had better intervene lines.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Message Edited by Aethane on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:18 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>The point is Pre-LU13 you never had to use this utility becuase</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Reactive heal aggro made your ability to keep aggro trivial </FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>( This is a blatant lie, i lost aggro plenty to overzealous mages and scouts, guardian taunts were not all powerful and reactive heals didnt prevent us from getting aggro, try again)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Mobs were trivial in combat </FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>( trivial to whom? groups of mine were wiped plenty due to adds etc....another lie, we were not invulnerable)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>What you really want is:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) To be the best tank such that you don't need to act like the 5 other subclasses and use utility </FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>(what i really want is to be at least equal to all other fighters and i would like a slight edge in tanking, right now i do less dps, have useless utility, and take more damage than any other fighter)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Your role in the game hasn't changed, its always been there. Unfortunately the game was broken and all you had to do was pull a mob and go make coffee till it was dead, rinse repeat. </FONT><FONT color=#ffffff>( my role has changed because people dont even want to group with us anymore, you just admitted to being a complete [Removed for Content] by stating i could pull and go make coffee, pre DoF i had more buttons to cycle thru then i do now to hold aggro and i still did lose aggro from time to time, in fact guardians then as now had more problems with aggro control than any other fighter type in my opinion, we could just take a beating better, all other fighters had us beat hands down in any other department such as dps, taunting, aggro control, utility)</FONT></P> <P><BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Noone is lying. Its opinion.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You believe best does not equal only. II believe it does mean only. As soon as you use the word best, that conjures up a whole host of imagery.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Players will inherently seek out the 'best' given the chance. Thats why this game succeeds after all. If it's widely known that Guardians are the 'best' then Guardians will be the first choice for tank for a group/raid. This causes a problem when you have 5 other subclasses looking for that spot too. My own playing experience proved it to me. Many times I was invited to a group and then told we need to wait for a 'real tank'. Did Paladins/Berserkers get the spot? Yes. Did they ever get the spot above a Guardian? No. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>That simple fact shows that as long as you have a 'best' tank then you eliminate competition and the only time you get to do your job is when there happens to be no Guardians around. What invariably happens then is that once Sony has decreed that Guardians are the prime tank, people reroll Guardians because they want to tank. More Guardians equal less groups for other subclasses. Its a spiral downward.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Think I'm talking nonsense? It happened in Everquest. Knights in that game only got to tank after PoP because they could gain and hold aggro without a care, coupled with high HPs and the Complete Heal problem, Warriors were relegated to pity spots. What happened? Tons of new SKs and Paladins were created and power levelled.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Noone knows this better than Sony and it was one of the reasons EQ2 appealed to lots of players, because it claimed to move away from holy trinities and to a system where every class was viable - be you Brawler, Crusader or Warrior.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Competition is good. Ask to compete, not to exceed.</FONT></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Explain to me how all these other fighter types including yourself got to lvl 50 pre DoF since guardians were the only tank? I know that's a flat out lie, but then thats the name of this thread.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>Moorgard wrote:<BR>In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role<FONT color=#ffff00><FONT size=4> in a group</FONT> </FONT>as well as any other. They use different styles and skills to accomplish their purpose, but the core ability will always be there. If you need a tank for your party, then any flavor will do, be it monk, paladin, guar--<BR><BR>"The idea is to add diversity and flavor, not to lock any one sub-class into always being the preferred one."</BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>No sub-class was always the preffered one. Never was. Berzerkers were preferred for small groups as were pallys, <FONT color=#ffff00><FONT size=4>monks preffered for soloing</FONT> </FONT>etc etc. Guards were preffered for big raids. See?</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>MG has stated many times that all classes can solo efficiently, but some will be better than others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just face it: You're wrong.  All those quotes from MG PRE-RELEASE AND PRE-BETA prove that you are WRONG.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The huge combat revamp proves you were wrong also.  I like how you want it to stay broken because "it was that way for 10 months."  Who cares how long it was broken, it still needed to be fixed and I'm glad they fixed it.</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> MrDizzi wrote: <P>But thats impossible so lets not enter nevernever land here.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>How does it feel to be oblivious?  Honestly, you are the one in nevernever land.  You've seen statements from developers, the makers of this game.  They referenced all your comparisons to other games and called them invalid.  They described the system as it would work and that they would strive for class role equality.</P> <P>After 10 months of the game being live and utilizing what you called a true fantasy RPG system you know what they did?  THEY CHANGED THE WHOLE ENTIRE GAME.</P> <P>Because it wasn't what they wanted.</P> <P>Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe you and EQ2 have ideal conflicts, and it just may not be the game for you?<BR></P> <DIV> </DIV>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> MrDizzi wrote: <P>But thats impossible so lets not enter nevernever land here.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>How does it feel to be oblivious?  Honestly, you are the one in nevernever land.  You've seen statements from developers, the makers of this game.  They referenced all your comparisons to other games and called them invalid.  They described the system as it would work and that they would strive for class role equality.</P> <P>After 10 months of the game being live and utilizing what you called a true fantasy RPG system you know what they did?  THEY CHANGED THE WHOLE ENTIRE GAME.</P> <P>Because it wasn't what they wanted.</P> <P>Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe you and EQ2 have ideal conflicts, and it just may not be the game for you?<BR></P> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>And most likely when another game comes out like *cough* vanguard *cough* you will be sitting all alone in your little sandbox.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR>And most likely when another game comes out like *cough* vanguard *cough* you will be sitting all alone in your little sandbox. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Good.  Vanguard is decent, but not my thing.  I enjoy EQ2.  However I doubt I'll be alone, but I suppose doomsayer's are in every MMO.</P> <P>RUN!!~` <BR></P>

[Ironmeow]

<DIV>why are people complaining i always see guardians as the MT. unless the monk is like 5 levels higher and that is just common sense</DIV>

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ironmeow wrote:<BR> <DIV>why are people complaining i always see guardians as the MT. unless the monk is like 5 levels higher and that is just common sense</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>People who play guardians are like NFL receivers, when they do what they're supposed to they gloat and think they're the greatest thing in the world when its really the people around them that make them look good.  Guardians are still the preffered tank in raids thats what a majority of the people here want so I don't see why there's so much complaining, yes taunt resists are annoying but you have two ae taunts and multiple ways of getting aggro in a group, a monk has one AE taunt if that's resisted guess what your in a worse scenario.  The only class I've seen tank remotely close to a guardian is a berserker, but they still take more damage, I'd be more worried about them.</DIV>

[Creppie]

If you think Vanguard wont have it's own set of problems, bugs, and imbalances then you are just setting yourself up for disapointment.  All these types of games do.<div></div>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Creppie wrote:<BR>If you think Vanguard wont have it's own set of problems, bugs, and imbalances then you are just setting yourself up for disapointment.  All these types of games do.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>OMG no way!!  Vanguard will be the greatest MMO ever.  It will have no bugs, balance issues or exploits.  Everything they do will be perfect and everyone who plays it will love it.</P> <P>They will have more than enough content and awesome loot!!!</P> <P>Brad's vision is awesome, Brad made EQ1 which we all know never had bugs, balance issues, content problems, loot itemization fiascos etc etc.</P> <P>VANGUARD IS GOD'S GIFT TO TRUE MMO FANS!!</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00 size=5>HURRY AND PRE-ORDER TODAY!!~</FONT></P> <P>(Message was paid for by sarcasm, not Sigil).<BR></P>

[Gungo]

<DIV>People who play guardians are like NFL receivers, when they do what they're supposed to they gloat and think they're the greatest thing in the world when its really the people around them that make them look good.  </DIV> <DIV>__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So you are saying gaurds have Terrel Owens syndrome? Interesting anyway same stuff different day Instead of just arguing about why you should be the bestest tank ever. why don't you guys come up with some constructive ideas to make yourself wanted mroe in groups, solo a bit better, etc. Because really it seems alot fo gaurds and in denial when they claim they tank worse then other fighters because seriously there is no proof, No parses, nothing showing this. If anything guards are still slightly better tanks since they are still the preferred raid tank. </DIV> <DIV>I</DIV> <P>Edit: note on vangaurd. it will have tons of bugs, (eq1 was bug heaven when it first came out). But i do see alot of thing sbeing beter and worse. Hopefully as most of his staff is veteran MMORPG developers they will not make mistakes new developers will have in the making of vangaurd. Alterantively alot of thier ideas seem to be nothing truly inventive, or far reaching. In fact it seems very traditional. IF you are a die hard eq1 raid type fan then vanguard is your game it seems and i do suppose there will be a gaurdian type class in vanguard where they will be the best tank no matter what and many gaurds will be happy there. EQ2 seems to me has taken alot of inventive ideas compared to any other game to date... climbing, movable objects, breakable walls, explosives, arena combat most of these in its current form in eq2 have not been seen in any other game and truly shows me the EQ2 engine is a very flexible system. </P><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:27 PM</span>

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So you are saying gaurds have Terrel Owens syndrome? Interesting anyway same stuff different day Instead of just arguing about why you should be the bestest tank ever. why don't you guys come up with some constructive ideas to make yourself wanted mroe in groups, solo a bit better, etc. Because really it seems alot fo gaurds and in denial when they claim they tank worse then other fighters because seriously there is no proof, No parses, nothing showing this. If anything guards are still slightly better tanks since they are still the preferred raid tank. </DIV> <DIV>I</DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:19 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I don't believe I've ever said guardians should be the bestest tank ever (feel free to prove me wrong).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've never had problems finding groups, or soloing for that matter.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Gungo]

<P>sorry shizzirri i didn't mean to imply my message to you. I was just using your football qoute to make a terrel owens joke =). The rest of the post just has to do with the uselessness of this thread and how its really mostly rants w/o much constructive feedback. </P> <P>but to repeat i didn't mena to reply that you meant for guards to be the best, i have read your posts and it seems you don't. But there are many guards who still do.</P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>Moorgard wrote:<BR>In our game, any member of an archetype can fulfill their main role<FONT color=#ffff00><FONT size=4> in a group</FONT> </FONT>as well as any other. They use different styles and skills to accomplish their purpose, but the core ability will always be there. If you need a tank for your party, then any flavor will do, be it monk, paladin, guar--<BR><BR>"The idea is to add diversity and flavor, not to lock any one sub-class into always being the preferred one."</BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>No sub-class was always the preffered one. Never was. Berzerkers were preferred for small groups as were pallys, <FONT color=#ffff00><FONT size=4>monks preffered for soloing</FONT> </FONT>etc etc. Guards were preffered for big raids. See?</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>MG has stated many times that all classes can solo efficiently, but some will be better than others.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just face it: You're wrong.  All those quotes from MG PRE-RELEASE AND PRE-BETA prove that you are WRONG.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The huge combat revamp proves you were wrong also.  I like how you want it to stay broken because "it was that way for 10 months."  Who cares how long it was broken, it still needed to be fixed and I'm glad they fixed it.</DIV><hr></blockquote> How can all classes tank equally well and not solo equally well? And the game wasnt broken. Thats another lie. It functioned well and had many many happy customers. Face it, youre wrong. All the comments from MG prove youre wrong. He said equally preffered, and perform their role equally well, but not ever once stated IN ALL SITUATIONS. Even you have to admit there is no way a monk, a pally and a guard will tank equally well in ALL situations. One will have an advantage on one encounter, another in another encounter. Thats how it was pre lu 13 too. You just didnt know it because you didnt play much. You focused on ONE encounter and one only. Raids.

[Shizzirri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> <P>sorry shizzirri i didn't mean to imply my message to you. I was just using your football qoute to make a terrel owens joke =). The rest of the post just has to do with the uselessness of this thread and how its really mostly rants w/o much constructive feedback. </P> <P>but to repeat i didn't mena to reply that you meant for guards to be the best, i have read your posts and it seems you don't. But there are many guards who still do.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Nah that's actually what I was referring to, and yeah there's still tons of guards who think that way

[ReviloTX]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Allaanon wrote:<BR> <P>Guardians sacrifice dps and utility to be a better tank.  We now sacrifice dps and utility for nothing.  </P> <P>We do not want dps and utility, or we would of been another class.</P> <P>I think every Guardian on these boards just needs to continually post the above until people get it through their heads.  That is the argument, the only argument and the end of the story.  If they didn't want a class to be like that, they shouldn't of made it.  </P> <P>Nuff said.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Quite a nice summary and exactly how I feel about it.  Well done.

[MrDiz]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR>Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe you and EQ2 have ideal conflicts, and it just may not be the game for you?<BR> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>No, why would I? My templar is fine and my swashy is a great little solo and grouper now <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Thanks for the concern tho. Oh ill leave the second warriors get heals or can evac or some bizarre thief like utility. But if the 'utility' they get is 'tankish' then to me its tanking not utility so im happy <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Id leave if they removed the pure classes. But thats because im a fantasy gamer. Id leave if they got rid of wizards or elves and dwarves. Some things a game like this needs for me. EQ2 is built on EQ1 even if its a new game. EQ1 is built on the D&D forumula even if its slightly different. If they radically change the forumla to some mortal combat 3 / final fantasy 8 one? Yeah ill leave. But they havnt done that yet. Guards are still pure tanks. Crap ones, but in genre at least. </P> <P>But i think they changed the game because they had a one sided view from certain vocal entities. I think they will change the game again if more vocal entities keep at them. Power of the people and all that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>But i think they changed the game because they had a one sided view from certain vocal entities. I think they will change the game again if more vocal entities keep at them. Power of the people and all that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You're wrong.</P> <P>They changed the game because it wasn't what they intended to make.<BR></P>

[Krooner]

<DIV>Gaige Wrote.</DIV> <DIV> <P>You're wrong.</P> <P>They changed the game because it wasn't what they intended to make.</P> <P>OR.</P> <P>They changed the game because they couldnt pull off their own vision.</P> <P>And now we are left with a waterded down version.. especially for Guardians.</P> <P> </P></DIV>

[Gaige]

No, because they changed the game to be more inline with their original vision.

[Krooner]

<P>Either way you slice it SOE failed to implement their own idea and changed the game so drastically that made the efforts of many customers meaningless and all we get in return is.</P> <P>Take some time to relearn your class... and be happy that your the unsung hero.</P> <P> </P>

[Suite]

<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>MrDizzi... you are scaring me:</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><IMG src="http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/2523/tizzy038ec.jpg"></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>And I have a gnome named... Mazzi.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>Have we...</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>.... met before?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>...</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>Suite</FONT></DIV>

[Greyto]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>But i think they changed the game because they had a one sided view from certain vocal entities. I think they will change the game again if more vocal entities keep at them. Power of the people and all that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You're wrong.</P> <P>They changed the game because it wasn't what they intended to make.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>LOL so what you're saying here Gaige is they made a game they did not mean to make, and then marketed and sold it as a complete game?</P> <P>come on man I really thought you were smarter then that, hmmmm then I have been wrong before.</P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>But i think they changed the game because they had a one sided view from certain vocal entities. I think they will change the game again if more vocal entities keep at them. Power of the people and all that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You're wrong.</P> <P>They changed the game because it wasn't what they intended to make.<BR></P> <hr></blockquote> Let me see if I got this straight.... they made a game and put it into beta and they didnt realise it wasnt the game they designed. And instead of stopping the beta and making what they wanted, they took the monster they had and released it, knowing it was fundamentally broken. And decided that they would for the next 10 months remake the game into what they originally thought, and totally throw away the old 'broken' game and its totally incorrect concept of character structure. Not just the combat system, but the very character and feel of the game, radically replaced with the new one. And then they admitted it to their customers? The most viscious unforgiving self centered customer base in the history of consumerism. And they came clean with us? Told us we had been playing a game that wadidnt even pass the fundamental functionality testing of "Is it what we wanted to make?". And they charged us.. Call me skeptical, but do you think they are that dumb?

[Ichabo]

<span><blockquote><hr>MrDizzi wrote:<blockquote><hr></blockquote>Call me skeptical, but do you think they are that dumb?<hr></blockquote> You know after all I have seen in this game the last 10 month the answer could easiely be "YES". <span>:smileyhappy:</span></span><div></div>

[Greyto]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> IchabodC wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Call me skeptical, but do you think they are that dumb?<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You know after all I have seen in this game the last 10 month the answer could easiely be "YES". <SPAN>:smileyhappy:</SPAN><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>won't find me tanking this one for them <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> hmm better get a bruiser in here to take on that monster. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>EDIT:  typo cause it bugged me that much</DIV><p>Message Edited by Greytoon on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:25 PM</span>

[Screamin' 1]

<span><blockquote><hr>ReviloTX wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Allaanon wrote: <div></div> <p>Guardians sacrifice dps and utility to be a better tank.  We now sacrifice dps and utility for nothing.  </p> <p>We do not want dps and utility, or we would of been another class.</p> <p>I think every Guardian on these boards just needs to continually post the above until people get it through their heads.  That is the argument, the only argument and the end of the story.  If they didn't want a class to be like that, they shouldn't of made it.  </p> <p>Nuff said.</p> <hr> </blockquote>Quite a nice summary and exactly how I feel about it.  Well done. <div></div><hr></blockquote>Same here. I think most Guards feel the same. Of course, we will be lost in the noise of those who want to disrupt this line of reasoning. I hope SOE looks at the numbers, and not the highly repetitive noise in these forums. Here's something interesting: I hit level 50 on Oct 1.     I was the 90th to do so on Highkeep. I hit level 51 on Oct 19th. (Power Leveling at its best!)   I was the 42nd to do so on Highkeep. 48 other level 50 guardians, who made level 50 before me, did not play enough to get to level 51 in 18 days or more. </span><div></div>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Screamin' 103 wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> ReviloTX wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Allaanon wrote:<BR> <P>Guardians sacrifice dps and utility to be a better tank.  We now sacrifice dps and utility for nothing.  </P> <P>We do not want dps and utility, or we would of been another class.</P> <P>I think every Guardian on these boards just needs to continually post the above until people get it through their heads.  That is the argument, the only argument and the end of the story.  If they didn't want a class to be like that, they shouldn't of made it.  </P> <P>Nuff said.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Quite a nice summary and exactly how I feel about it.  Well done. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Same here. I think most Guards feel the same. <BR><BR>Of course, we will be lost in the noise of those who want to disrupt this line of reasoning. I hope SOE looks at the numbers, and not the highly repetitive noise in these forums.<BR><BR>Here's something interesting:<BR><BR>I hit level 50 on Oct 1.  <BR>   I was the 90th to do so on Highkeep.<BR><BR>I hit level 51 on Oct 19th. (Power Leveling at its best!) <BR>  I was the 42nd to do so on Highkeep.<BR><BR>48 other level 50 guardians, who made level 50 before me, did not play enough to get to level 51 in 18 days or more.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Yeah i was 66th on my server to hit lvl 50 as a guardian. but ya know there was only one tank cause we were the best lol. If there was only 66 tanks on my server i think alot of people would have quit playing.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Let me see if I got this straight.... they made a game and put it into beta and they didnt realise it wasnt the game they designed. <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I think it had the fundamentals of the design, but some major flaws.  Beta can't/won't catch everything.  Its simply not possible.  I hate that entire "beta" arguement as MMOs are ever changing and you'll never catch all the bugs despite how long/big your beta is.  This is evidenced by how MMOs work even after retail release.</P> <P>That said:  No, I don't think they intentionally released a design that wasn't inline with their vision.  I think they tried a new system, unlike EQ1 and did a pretty good job of it in beta and at launch.  However, as MMOs go, bugs and balance issues were found throughout the live release that needed to be addressed.  As so often happens fixing this led to breaking that, and having to tweak this etc etc for 10 months.  Which eventually led to a game and a system that was very far from their original design and intent.  </P> <P>The opinion of SOE and many of its players was that that system was broken.  Hopelessly so.  So a massive effort was undertaken to change it.  Through these changes they have once again gotten the game back to what their intended design was <EM>while learning from their past mistakes.</EM></P> <P>It happened in SWG and it happened here.  Games change.  Especially MMOs.  I for one appreciate the fact that the EQ2 team isn't scared to do what is necessary to keep the game on track.<BR></P>

[Danan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Screamin' 103 wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>I hit level 50 on Oct 1.  <BR>   I was the 90th to do so on Highkeep.<BR><BR>I hit level 51 on Oct 19th. (Power Leveling at its best!) <BR>  I was the 42nd to do so on Highkeep.<BR><BR>48 other level 50 guardians, who made level 50 before me, did not play enough to get to level 51 in 18 days or more.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Or maybe they had already quit, many people have left or started playing another as their main over the past 10 months<BR>

[Nibbl]

<P></P> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Edyil wrote:<BR> <P>Monks couldnt tank heroic mobs pre-CU.  As a matter of fact, I quit my monk for about 4 months until they announced the (then) up and coming changes.  The FACT is that having a monk attempt to tank post-Agi nerf and pre-CU was very dangerous and it was ALWAYS a power drain on the entire group.  Buffed Templars tanked much better than monks at the time using self heals for agro generation.</P> <P>I do appreciate this thread though.  Some really funny fantasy in here.</P> <P>ROFL</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Have a monk in my guild that tanked heroic content all the time prior to LU 13 and he did it with no problems.<p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:58 AM</span>

[Nibbl]

<P></P> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Allaanon wrote:<BR> <P>Guardians sacrifice dps and utility to be a better tank.  We now sacrifice dps and utility for nothing. </P> <P>We do not want dps and utility, or we would of been another class.</P> <P>I think every Guardian on these boards just needs to continually post the above until people get it through their heads.  That is the argument, the only argument and the end of the story.  If they didn't want a class to be like that, they shouldn't of made it. </P> <P>Nuff said.</P> <P><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> <P>SoE and non-gards dont seem to understand that.</P> <P> </P> <P>Anyway you dont even need a fighter for non-epic content, been using a ranger to tank all the DoF zones.  Only use my alt neco anyways (guess my main now), my gard is perm retired regardless of what happens to the class.   But I will defend gards after the huge nerf they took on LU 13, the revamp didnt balance anything among fighters.  It was more balanced pre LU 13 with only a few buff stacking problems.</P> <P><BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:54 AM</span>

[Drulak]

<P>So Gaige what you are saying is that SOE wanted a game that meant certain fighjter classes were much better than other ones ? That was their Vision.  Because they took a game where one Fighter Archetype was a better Tank at once situation (certain raids)  and made all fighters equal tanks and left out dps and utility for one of the archetypes.</P> <P>This is a fixed system ? this is the Vision that SOE started with ?? or is this the Vision of Gaige the Monk ?</P> <P>I never read any pre release information saying Guardian would tank as well as all other fighters but be fuubar at everything else . I read all the information and from what i read , if you wanted to Tank and only tank , then pick a guard , if you wanted to tank and have utility pick one of the others. Thats what i read , so if their Vision was different , why write that in their Documentation.</P> <P>I see what has obviously happened was that SOE's Vision was so obscurred that they never even told their own people about it , so when they wrote the documentation , they wrote the wrong information down. Silly SOE.</P> <P>(PS Gaige , i have started a Monk now , so knowing my luck when i hit 50 , Monks will be nerfed to death - then we see how you like it <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I will have been there before , so will be water off my back by then<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:I for one appreciate the fact that the EQ2 team isn't scared to do what is necessary to keep the game on track.<div></div><hr></blockquote>Because you got what you wanted. Its easy to be impressed with someone when they give you exactly what you wanted. We forgive those who hold power over us when they give us what we want, regardless of what they do to others. True of real world, true in a virtual world. If they announce tomorrow it was all a mistake and the game will be better if monks are a healer instead, my guess if your admiration would dim somewhat <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Your arguments are weak MrDizzi.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Make monks a healer? Of course we'd be upset, they'd be going against EVERYTHING that has been said, published and implied since the game was announced.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>The BIG difference here is, the combat revamp was EXACTLY what the Devs have stated the game was designed for - Every subclass being able to fulfil the archetype role. Not once was it EVER stated that Guardians would be the best tank, nor was it implied and in fact it was categorically stated that there would NEVER be a preferred choice for all occasions. You fail to accept this and hence you get your pants in a twist over it.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Do Guardians have issues? Maybe - They tank no better or worse than I can. No parses or data has been shown to validate the claims Guardians are lame ducks. SoE seems to think your class is where its supposed to be generally. They have hinted at some small changes but I doubt your wish of 'best pure' tank is ever going to materialise.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>And if it did, I'd be at the front of the crowd lobbying SoE to stay true to the Archetype system and promises they made.</FONT></P> <P></P>

[Drulak]

<P></P> <P>Nemi , i see that you have major issues with Mr Dizzi , but you are damming yourself down with these silly rants. He was joking about making you a healer , don't then turn it into a fact and bash him with it jeez.</P> <P>As for they have done what they said, its all lies , where did they dsay before hand that guards would be far inferior to the other fighter archetypes. I guarantee you that if i had read that i would not have made my guard. I read everything i could and as i wanted to be tank , from all the info SOE gave me , it made it clear that the Best choice to be tank would be Guardian. No where did it say Guard would be the only tank (which has never been the case in eq2 anyhoo) , but it did make it clear to anyome who read all of the information , that the best tank (not best fighter - best tank) was to be the Guardian.</P> <P>What has since happened is that NON Guardians have misplaced the work Tank with the word Fighter ans stated that as Guards were better tanks , they were better fighters and cried for the nerf bat. Now all classes are equal tanks , which means totally unequal fighters.</P> <P>FIGHTER = Tank + DPS + Utility</P> <P>PRE LU13 - all fighters were about on par when you add up the 3 fighter Characteristics pre LU13 - Now the Fighter classes are not on a par.</P> <P> </P> <P> As mr dizzi said , you guys are happy because you got what you wanted . There is no argument against it , because it is true.</P> <P>There has been no fighter archetype balancing , just a switch so that slightly underpar tankers are now vastly superior fighters.</P> <P> </P> <P></P><p>Message Edited by Drulak on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:22 PM</span>

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>In what way am I superior to a Guardian?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Mend? You have more HPs than me</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>FD? Pointless for tanking but yeah I'll give you this one.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Self Safefall? Again pointless for tanking</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Self Invis? You have Group Defense Buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>DPS? You have group HP buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So you tank the same (actually better since you have more HPs and Mitigation is better against higher mobs) as me, I out DPS you but you can buff the groups hps, defense, shield your group members and have better aggro control.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>And if your utility is so useless you won't mind me asking for Monks to have better AoE aggro utility will you? Or HP buff, surely you think the Defense buff is crap right? Ok, I'll gladly take that to. Intervene line pointless? Heck with my aggro skills, I'll take that as well.</FONT></P> <P></P>

[MrDiz]

Nemi baby, lighten up <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />I could post the sky is blue and you would rant me out. It doesnt matter what issue, what post, what topic, you have the same old rant. "Youre a guardian and you want to rule the world and youre upset cos you cant. So nah nah nah nah nah! <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />"I was just pointing out that of course Gaige is happy with them, they did what he wanted. Id be happy with them too <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Sheeesh. Unwind little missy, youre gonna blow a gasket.

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<p><font color="#ffff00">In what way am I superior to a Guardian?</font></p><p><font color="#ffff00">Mend? You have more HPs than me</font></p><p><font color="#ffff00">FD? Pointless for tanking but yeah I'll give you this one.</font></p></blockquote>Blessed are the patient.<p><font color="#ffff00">Self Safefall? Again pointless for tanking</font></p>Pointless for DPS and healing too. So why have it? If it doesnt help you tank its not needed right? I really am trying to figure out why you chose monk. You are the most single minded "Must tank.... must tank" person Ive met. What was it about monks you liked so much?<p><font color="#ffff00">Self Invis? You have Group Defense Buff</font></p>You also have flying kicks tho.<p><font color="#ffff00">DPS? You have group HP buff</font></p>But you have so many punch attacks, and self buffs.<p><font color="#ffff00">So you tank the same (actually better since you have more HPs and Mitigation is better against higher mobs) as me, I out DPS you but you can buff the groups hps, defense, shield your group members and have better aggro control.</font></p>No you tank better because YOU have more hps. And you out dps us AND can taunt without needing to be hit.<p><font color="#ffff00">And if your utility is so useless you won't mind me asking for Monks to have better AoE aggro utility will you? Or HP buff, surely you think the Defense buff is crap right? Ok, I'll gladly take that to. Intervene line pointless? Heck with my aggro skills, I'll take that as well.</font></p><p></p><hr>Sure. Have it all. Think its in the next expansion along with templars healing and wizards nukes <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Thats what you want when all said and done: it all.PS this was not a serious reply. I simply did what you do. Replied to each point with some meaningless comparison between unrelated abilities. You say we can group buff, i say you can dps AND invis, which is two abilities for my one. Its a bad argument style but its what you do <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Just pointing that out before you cut and paste and target each argument. Youre not even worth a real argument and im done with you <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> You live to flame and nothing else./ignore nemi<p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:57 AM</span>

[Drulak]

<P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>In what way am I superior to a Guardian?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Mend? You have more HPs than me</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>FD? Pointless for tanking but yeah I'll give you this one.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Self Safefall? Again pointless for tanking</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Self Invis? You have Group Defense Buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>DPS? You have group HP buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So you tank the same (actually better since you have more HPs and Mitigation is better against higher mobs) as me, I out DPS you but you can buff the groups hps, defense, shield your group members and have better aggro control.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>And if your utility is so useless you won't mind me asking for Monks to have better AoE aggro utility will you? Or HP buff, surely you think the Defense buff is crap right? Ok, I'll gladly take that to. Intervene line pointless? Heck with my aggro skills, I'll take that as well.</FONT></P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ok what you seem to have not realised is that NOW Monks are EQUAL Tanks to Guardians . This is a pre utility thing.</P> <P>So FD may be no good for tanking , but that is irrelevant , because you tank the same as guards BEFORE you look at FD , so it is a Bonus.</P> <P>DPS - Do not try and equalise a HP buff with dps.  That is the weakest of weak arguments i have ever heard.  A bonus of a hundred odd HP is the same as being able to kill a mob 3 times(or whatever it is) as quickly - hmmm what warped world is that the truth in.</P> <P>I play both a Monk and a Guard , and believe me , the Guard has NO Utility , if you want the buffs / aggro skills hehehehehehehehe , you can have them , they are USELESS.</P> <P>Seriously , before you come in here rant rant ranting , start a guard play it for a few weeks , then come back and tell me that the Monk is equal to the Guard. Plesae do this.<BR></P> <P>Oh and in terms of buffs , my guard has 4 Buffs that he has set on perma use , My monk has 3. So not a huge difference there anyway.</P><p>Message Edited by Drulak on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:58 PM</span>

[EvilIguana9]

So many stupid people. <font color="#ff0000"><font size="5">NOBODY IS SAYING THAT GUARDIANS DO NOT REQUIRE FIXES.  WE ARE SAYING THAT THOSE FIXES SHOULD NOT EVER RESULT IN THE GUARDIAN BEING THE BEST TANK IN EVERY SITUATION.  GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULLS THAT WE WANT GUARDIANS TO BE ON EVEN FOOTING WITH THE REST OF THE TANK CLASSES.  THAT SPECIFICALLY MEANS WORKING ON THINGS THE GUARDIAN CAN DO TO HELP THE GROUP BESIDES RAW TANK POWER. <font color="#ffffff"><font size="3"> </font></font></font></font><font size="5"><font color="#ff0000"></font></font><p></p>

[Nemi]

<P></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>What I love about Guardians is they selectively ignore vast swathes of gameplay in an effort to push for being the best. Guardians like MrDizzi and friends will choose to ignore Guardian utility, make wild claims that Monks are uber and play with smoke and mirrors to get them back on top of the pile. Who cares if it breaks the game, EQ2 is only a time filler until Vanguard comes out right?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians love to point out Monks have DPS and Tanking. You're right, but you know what? Guardians have lower DPS, tanking and lots of defensive buffs that make grouping with a Guardian safer. What? You don't like being the 'safest' tank in the game - What did you expect by picking the defensive tank in a game that promoted equality in group roles?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You have utility, you might not like it but it's always been there. If you all like FD, Safefall and Invis so much, why don't you roll up a Monk? Not my fault you picked a boring class to play.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hey I understand some of you are [Removed for Content] that your 'best' 'pure' tank got nerfed down to just 1 of 6 but it was coming for a long time and was needed. Sorry.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Maybe Vanguard will be the game you want - I hear it's made for people that want to be uber.</FONT></P> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:44 PM</span>

[MrDiz]

You tank equally, you DPS more and you have utility and you ignore all argument to the contrary. You have been defeated in the forum. Accept it and move on <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR>You tank equally, you DPS more and you have utility and you ignore all argument to the contrary. You have been defeated in the forum. Accept it and move on <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Spouting drivel does not constitute argument. Your argument is akin to stating Black is White, pointless to argue against but fun to point out the stupidity of it and laugh at the author :smileyvery-happy:</FONT> <P></P>

[MrDiz]

You already admitted your a liar on a different post. Bye bye.

[Nemi]

<P></P> <P></P> <HR> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR>Bye bye.<FONT color=#ffff00><BR></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You going somewhere? Take care, I'm sure Vanguard has what you want.</FONT></P><p>Message Edited by Nemi on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:09 PM</span>

[MrDiz]

MrDizzi wrote:"Name one encounter that was impossible without a guardian, and ill bet anything that we did it with a paladin Did we have to work a little harder? Probably."Nemi wrote:"2 out of 6 aint good enough I'm afraid. 6 out of 6 is needed."Nemi ALSO wrote:"I'll state it for you again just to refute your claims. Best tank = Only tank"The two statements are mututally exclusive. And seeing as this post is purely about that lie, I think we have our point made. Monks could not tank and needed to be boosted. But guardians being best tank did not stop other tanks from tanking. Period. End of discussion.

[Nemi]

<FONT color=#ffff00>Anyone with a brain reading that would realise I'm taking your point and disputing it - YOUR POINT. My point was Guardians were the only tank PreLU13, yours was there were 2 - At least we agree it was broken and not 6.</FONT> <P></P>

[MrDiz]

Name one type of encounter that could not be done without a guardian. If best tank = only tank you should be able to name a host of examples for us. But you wont <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Starwind]

<P></P> <P></P> <P>I think Nemi and Gaige need to just sit down and shut it. I don't even play a Guardian, as I'm going to make my Troll a Berzerker instead, and I still see how trivial and lame their arguments are.</P> <P> </P> <P>I played EverQuest Online Adventures for years. When I finally left to come here, there was a -huge- argument over the three tank classes (Technically 6, since at level 55 they could get one of two available "Master Classes" for your class. Guess what the defensive Warrior "Master Class" was? That's right, Guardian.): Paladins, Shadowknights, and Warriors, because so many people swore up and down that Warriors could outtank the other two all the time in every situation. And, as seems to be the case here aswell, it was a flat out LIE on the other classes part. There were maybe a handful of Raid encounters where a Warrior was the only class that could effectively tank the Mob, and only because they had a bit higher HP and got a huge wisdom modified armor buff at higher levels.</P> <P> </P> <P>But yet the argument raged on, and on, and on. What the other classes didn't seem to get was that they had special things that made them useful that the Warriors didn't. Shadowknights had huge lifetaps and tons of stat tap abilities (ones that lower the Mobs stats, and boost the Sk's), plus they were the solo kinds; they could solo things much higher level than them, or solo-grind blues all day without stopping. Paladins also had unique things, being the only tank class that could heal themselves -and- others, plus being the only class with group resist buffs, and being great damage dealers (for a tank) against undeads.</P> <P> </P> <P>Warriors couldn't heal themselves at all unless they chose a specific "path" ability to do so, and even then it was a one time heal/hp buff with a 5 minute recast. Warriors had very power innefficient buffs that weren't very great in the first place, they did the most melee damage of the tanks because they could duel-wield, but had no magical abilities like Sk lifetaps and Pally undead procs. They were just tanks, plain and simple.</P> <P> </P> <P>Apperantly, that's what Guardians used to be for this game. Just plain tanks, no really useful group buffs, not very good damage, but they could take one hell of a beating.</P> <P> </P> <P>Fortunately for Warriors in EQOA, the Dev team there had the foresight to know that gimping Warriors to make the other classes happy, or uber-buffing paladins and Sk's to make them happy would just cause more problems than it fixed. The EQOA Dev team also seemed to realise that true balance is -NEVER- going to be achieved. You'll always have that one group of lamers (Gaige, Nemi) who look at the other classes and go "Hey, I don't have this and he does! Nerf him!". The EQ2 Dev team didn't seem to be privvy to that little piece of information.</P> <P> </P> <P>And you want to know the sad thing? When EQ2 launched it stole a good half of EQOA's Dev team. I guess you guys got the stupid half, and we got to keep the good guys.</P> <P> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Starwind87 on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:54 AM</span>

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Excellent insight, unfortunately</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>EQOA is not EQ2</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>kkthx</FONT></P> <P></P>

[Starwind]

<P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Excellent insight, unfortunately</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>EQOA is not EQ2</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>kkthx</FONT></P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Same gaming universe. Same company. Same devs. Same scenario.</P> <P>To quote the worst quote, ever. You are the weakest link, goodbye.<BR></P>

[Nemi]

<P></P> <P><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Starwind87 wrote:<BR> <P></P><BR> <P>Same gaming universe. Same company. Same devs. Same scenario.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Bzzzt. Different GAME! Sorry you lose.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR></P>

[Starwind]

<P></P> <P>Whatever you say, spanky. Just refer to the quote in my signature when you start to wonder why everyone thinks that you and Gaige are wrong.</P> <P> </P> <P>"You called down the Thunder, now reap the Whirlwind."</P> <P> </P> <P>Which means (since you're obviously -very- slow on the uptake), you got what you asked for. So you now deserve any negatives that come your way. I'd go as far as to say that I'd be pleased to see whatever classes you play nerfed into oblivion, not because they're overpowered, but because you play them and you called for the same thing to happen to other peoples classes. But of course, that would'nt be fair since most people that play your class aren't like you two, I'd hope.</P> <P> </P> <P>So you'll just have to settle for everyone on the forums, and probably some of the people in the game, thinking that you're "Dee Dee Dee." So you can stop typing now. No one cares, since you've typed the same thing over and over repeatedly. And I'm already sick of your s***, and I've only been here for a month. I can only guess how tired of your lame, half-[Removed for Content] arguments the other people here are. Especially the Guardians you cried about to get nerfed.</P> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by Starwind87 on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:38 AM</span>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<P></P> <P><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Starwind87 wrote:<BR> <P></P><BR> <P>Same gaming universe. Same company. Same devs. Same scenario.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Bzzzt. Different GAME! Sorry you lose.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR></P><hr></blockquote> Name a single encounter type that could not be done without a gaurdian.

[Nemi]

<P>"You called down the Thunder, now reap the Whirlwind."</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>WWF fan? Go break wind where someone cares. Call me names all you want, perhaps your dad will cancel your subscription for using naughty words.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Raijinn]

Folks lets not get on the wrong path here and start flaming everyone. I'd like for this discussion to continue but please no flaming. Thanks! <P></P>

[Wasuna]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raijinn Thunderguard wrote:<BR>Folks lets not get on the wrong path here and start flaming everyone. I'd like for this discussion to continue but please no flaming. Thanks! <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>If you or any developer provided some communication on what is being looked at or what will be fixed with Guardians then we wouldn't have to speculate and get into arguments with other classes. Your silence is responsible for this. <P></P>

[Starwind]

<P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>WWF fan? Go break wind where someone cares. Call me names all you want, perhaps your dad will cancel your subscription for using naughty words.</FONT></P> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Actually that quote was around long before the WWF, son. And I actually started using it after hearing it in Starcraft, not the WWF.</P> <P> </P> <P>So don't patronize me, and if I'm not mistaken, I didn't really call you anything offensive. Unless you consider lamer, or stupid offensive. Atleast now I know that you really are incompetant. You're just one of those that picks out a specific part of a good post, just to try and take focus off of what the person was actually saying because you can't come up with a legitimate response.</P> <P> </P> <P>Again. I don't really care what you think. Actually I'm pretty sure alot of people don't care what you think anymore. You've dug that hole yourself, now you can just sit there in it.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[Starwind]

<P></P> <P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raijinn Thunderguard wrote:<BR>Folks lets not get on the wrong path here and start flaming everyone. I'd like for this discussion to continue but please no flaming. Thanks! <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I'm trying not to. But it's hard when you deal with people that don't listen, and try to "fight dirty" to prove their "point."</P> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by Starwind87 on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:23 AM</span>

[Dart]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Creppie wrote:<BR>If you think Vanguard wont have it's own set of problems, bugs, and imbalances then you are just setting yourself up for disapointment.  All these types of games do.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>OMG no way!!  Vanguard will be the greatest MMO ever.  It will have no bugs, balance issues or exploits.  Everything they do will be perfect and everyone who plays it will love it.</P> <P>They will have more than enough content and awesome loot!!!</P> <P>Brad's vision is awesome, Brad made EQ1 which we all know never had bugs, balance issues, content problems, loot itemization fiascos etc etc.</P> <P>VANGUARD IS GOD'S GIFT TO TRUE MMO FANS!!</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00 size=5>HURRY AND PRE-ORDER TODAY!!~</FONT></P> <P>(Message was paid for by sarcasm, not Sigil).<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Once again you are here providing 0 contribution, only derailing the thread. Your on a roll Gaige. Tell me, if they nerf monks instead of fixing guardians, will you still have the same praise for the SOE dev team? Oh and dont mind Nemi, he/she has had plenty of hate for the guardian class since day one. Just do a search on Nemi's posts. Nemi has always lumped all guardians into a nice little " I want to be the onlu tank choice" group. Everyonce ina  while he/she will retract their statement, but its the tone that spews all the hate not matter waht the message is.</P> <P> You two are uber at derailing threads for your own agenda, miss quoting folks, picking topics that you want to address and not addressing topics that you were spacficially asked about where you are called out on.</P> <P>Thanks so much you two for your valued contribution to the guardian forum /sarcasm back off </P> <P></P>

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>Shucks, such a high opinion of me. :smileywink:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I keep my posting to those threads containing EQ1 Warrior holdover Guardians flexing their e-[expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] trying to make them uber. Thanks for reading over my back catalogue tho.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P></P>

[Nemi]

<P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Name a single encounter type that could not be done without a gaurdian.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Spirits of the Lost, Darathar, Lord Nagalik and Kra'thuk , Icy Digs. What do I win?</FONT><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P></P>

[Krooner]

<P></P> <P>Nemi Wrote:</P> <HR> <P></P> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Name a single encounter type that could not be done without a gaurdian.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Spirits of the Lost, Darathar, Lord Nagalik and Kra'thuk , Icy Digs. What do I win?</FONT><BR></P> <P></P> <P></P> <HR> <P> </P> <P>Gee I know guilds that did those with SK's and Pally's.... sooooo</P> <P>Buzzzzzz you lose.</P> <P> </P>

[Ruben]

<P></P> <P>Of all the characters I have a guardian is not one.</P> <P> </P> <P>I Raid MT'd for 5 years in EQ1 and didnt want to do so constantly here thus I created all the other fighter classes. Honestly think that guardians should be the best tank period, its their one and only call to glory. It requires a special person to be a raid MT, and they should be rewarded for suffering through the slow thankless path they chose.</P> <P> </P> <P>The problem is that EQ2 never should have lumped monks/brawlers into the fighter/tank class, they are light tanks and shouldnt even be close to a guardian in tanking ability. Brawlers are dps machines even after the revamp and to give them the ability to tank as well as a guardian is unfair to the guardian class who doesnt come close to the dps they generate.</P> <P> </P> <P>My paladin has always been able to MT in groups without problems, same for my zerker and monk but honestly when it comes to raiding there are alot more important roles that these should do than being the MT.</P> <P> </P> <P>People rolled brawlers for the cool look and dps then whined that they wanted to tank like a guardian and SoE listened and gave them that, forgetting in the process to compensate the guardian class with enough to make them equal to the brawler.</P> <P> </P> <P>I truly do hope that the guardians are giving something to help them but what do you do for someone who rolled a character to tank the best because that is what they had going for them. Dps, more utility or the ability to tank a bit better.</P> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by RubenBlades on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:09 PM</span>

[Greyform]

<P></P> <P>Mrdizzi, why do you waste so much time debating with certain people? don't you see that all you are doing is giving them a reason to continue posting here?</P> <P>If you would simply ignore this troll it would go away, please quit replying to that person. Seriously you have proven your point and that person has made their intentions clear. You are only inflating this persons weak ego by replying, do you think anyone in the real world cares what this person is thinking? I doubt it seriously or they would not be here so much making an [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] of themselves in an attempt to gain some type of approval by their peers. </P>

[MrDiz]

<P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Name a single encounter type that could not be done without a gaurdian.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Spirits of the Lost, Darathar, Lord Nagalik and Kra'thuk , Icy Digs. What do I win?</FONT><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>SKS, Berzerkers and Paladins COULD AND HAVE tanked those encounters. Do you actually ever play the game? Cos at the moment you really dont seem to have much idea what went on pre lu 13 <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> You certainly didnt raid much.<p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:33 AM</span>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Greyform wrote:<P></P> <P>Mrdizzi, why do you waste so much time debating with certain people? don't you see that all you are doing is giving them a reason to continue posting here?</P> <P>If you would simply ignore this troll it would go away,</P><hr></blockquote> Thats true, but it achieves two things. 1) It exposes the fact that they cannot defend the Gaige Equation directly. They can keep repeating the mantra "best tank yada yada", but they cant realistically deny its falsehood. When they do (eg. saying a pally cant main tank a raid) its usually so glaringly wrong (eg.. we did it with a paladin or berzerker) that they emphasise the enormity of the lie. 2) It keeps the thread at the top, and reminds people that it is in fact a lie. That may be obvious to us, but its been chanted so much that often that the Gaige Equation has become conventional wisdom. We need people (non-guardians especially) to be reminded that this [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]umption has been challenged and successfully proven to be a lie. And we need to remind them until it becomes conventional wisdom instead. Nemis posts, whilst factually irrelavant, help demonstrate the absurdity of such claims. Bascially, she is useful to us right now <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Wasuna]

<P></P>Maybe Raijinn should read this a second time. I specificaly like the comment he made in the text that I changed the color of.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RubenBlades wrote:<BR> <P></P> <P>Of all the characters I have a guardian is not one.</P> <P>I Raid MT'd for 5 years in EQ1 and didnt want to do so constantly here thus I created all the other fighter classes. Honestly think that guardians should be the best tank period, its their one and only call to glory. It requires a special person to be a raid MT, and they should be rewarded for suffering through the slow thankless path they chose.</P> <P>The problem is that EQ2 never should have lumped monks/brawlers into the fighter/tank class, they are light tanks and shouldnt even be close to a guardian in tanking ability. Brawlers are dps machines even after the revamp and to give them the ability to tank as well as a guardian is unfair to the guardian class who doesnt come close to the dps they generate.</P> <P>My paladin has always been able to MT in groups without problems, same for my zerker and monk but honestly <FONT color=#ff9900>when it comes to raiding there are alot more important roles that these should do than being the MT.</FONT></P> <P>People rolled brawlers for the cool look and dps then whined that they wanted to tank like a guardian and SoE listened and gave them that, forgetting in the process to compensate the guardian class with enough to make them equal to the brawler.</P> <P>I truly do hope that the guardians are giving something to help them but what do you do for someone who rolled a character to tank the best because that is what they had going for them. Dps, more utility or the ability to tank a bit better.</P> <P>Message Edited by RubenBlades on <SPAN class=date_text>10-26-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>01:09 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>A Guardian has nothing that adds to a raid that that should be doing other than Main tank.</P>

[Creppie]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greyform wrote:<BR> <P></P> <P>Mrdizzi, why do you waste so much time debating with certain people? don't you see that all you are doing is giving them a reason to continue posting here?</P> <P>If you would simply ignore this troll it would go away,</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Thats true, but it achieves two things. 1) It exposes the fact that they cannot defend the Gaige Equation directly. They can keep repeating the mantra "best tank yada yada", but they cant realistically deny its falsehood. When they do (eg. saying a pally cant main tank a raid) its usually so glaringly wrong (eg.. we did it with a paladin or berzerker) that they emphasise the enormity of the lie. 2) It keeps the thread at the top, and reminds people that it is in fact a lie. That may be obvious to us, but its been chanted so much that often that the Gaige Equation has become conventional wisdom. We need people (non-guardians especially) to be reminded that this [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]umption has been challenged and successfully proven to be a lie. And we need to remind them until it becomes conventional wisdom instead. Nemis posts, whilst factually irrelavant, help demonstrate the absurdity of such claims. Bascially, she is useful to us right now <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>As I recall, the original claim was that there were encounters that brawlers couldn't do.  Icydigs being one of them.  Using the fact that  a Paladin or SK tanked these encounters as proof that everything was ok, just isn't valid.   Using your logic, if guardians could have one shotted epics then everything would still have been fine because... Hey my guild Paladin tanked it too.</P> <P> </P> <P></P>

[Krooner]

<P>Creppie</P> <P>Heres is from Dizz's first post</P> <P>"For some time, while most guardians were just playing the game, a number of people including our friend Gaige have been trying to convince the Everquest2 community at large that <FONT color=#ff0033><U>no other fighter was capable of tanking because of guardians 'best tank' status. "</U></FONT></P> <P>The FACT of the matter IS that other Fighters COULD and DID MT the very mobs pointed out by a few ill informed individuals.</P> <P> </P>

[Creppie]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Warbird1 wrote:<BR> <P>Creppie</P> <P>Heres is from Dizz's first post</P> <P>"For some time, while most guardians were just playing the game, a number of people including our friend Gaige have been trying to convince the Everquest2 community at large that <FONT color=#ff0033><U>no other fighter was capable of tanking because of guardians 'best tank' status. "</U></FONT></P> <P>The FACT of the matter IS that other Fighters COULD and DID MT the very mobs pointed out by a few ill informed individuals.</P> <P> </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=24476#M24476I" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=3&message.id=24476#M24476I</A> </P> <P>I believe that was where this idea came from.  I do not  remember seeing a post saying only guardians could tanks a particular encounter.  But if you can find that link where he does say that then please post it.  </P> <P>The point he was making was that guardians were so far and above the best choice for all those encounters that you rarely saw another "Plate" class doing them.</P> <P></P>

[Krooner]

<P></P> <P>I think were talking about two different topics.</P> <P>But to cut to the chase the guardian forum is rife with other fighters saying they COULDNT MT a mob when they clearly could as supported by other threads.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P></P>

[Starwind]

<p></p><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote: Please tell me if you are going to come here and immediately come at me you are better equipped than this. Please. <p> </p> <p>Let me explain something to you. Just because its based on another game DOES make it TOTALLY less true for this game.</p> <p> </p> <p>Period.</p> <p></p> <p></p><hr></blockquote>Yet again the thickness of your empty head gets into the way of you learning something. Now listen up. It's the exact same Devs doing it. The same company. An offspin of the same game. It's the exact same scenario, so the basic lesson to be learned still applies. You don't change a class because the classes that are immediately competeing with it complain. And if you do, you don't nerf them into the ground like they did to Guardians. And finally, if a class sacrifices it's damage dealing, utility, healing, and everything else for defense; they should be the best at taking damage. No matter what you seem to think. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck. It's a f***ing duck.

[Gaige]

<P>/rofl</P> <P> </P> <P>You just don't get it.  This company and some of these devs worked on EQ1, yet this isn't EQ1.  Some of these devs worked on Planetside, yet this isn't Planetside.  Some of these devs worked on SWG and this certainly isn't SWG.</P> <P> </P> <P>You're just wrong.  Get over the old and stale arguement.  Its been covered over and over by numerous devs since over a year before launch.  SOE is doing things with EQ2 they didn't do with the other EQ games, mainly the archetype system.  Since you're new here I'll forgive your ignorance.  I will not forgive you trying to debate with me when you should be learning about the game.</P> <P> </P> <P></P>

[Starwind]

If you'd actually have some reading comprehension you'd realize the main flaw in what you keep saying. I never said it was the same game. I keep saying the scenario is the same, and that the same thing applies. The archetype system and what they said before the game launched has nothing to do with it. What it's about is that people don't appreciate their class being changed, let alone the entire combat system, just because some people like you complain more loudly than others. "Class balancing" is always expected. But overkill, undue nerfs cause resentment. And like a few others have said to you, if everything was so broken before LU13, how/why did you level your monk? If everyone thought that Guardians were the only capable tank, like you seem to be spouting, why didn't you reroll a guard as soon as you realized it? <p></p>

[EvilIguana9]

The question should not be "Can another class do it?"   Obviously with enough gear, levels, and support, a wizard could main tank a raid.  Sure it would have to be grey to them but they can still do it RIGHT? The question you should ask is "Why would I want anyone else besides class X?"  If class Y has to play better than class X to be equal to class X then the game is not balanced.  <p></p>

[Morrolan V]

<P>Wow.  Quite a thread.</P> <P> </P> <P>Let me summarize:</P> <P> </P> <P>1. There is a debate over the tanking ability of the various fighter classes pre-LU13.  Some think guardians were always preferred, others argue otherwise.  Some think that only guardians could tank end-game content, others argue otherwise.</P> <P> </P> <P>2. Many Guardians now feel that they are underpowered in sum relative to other fighter classes because (1) the tanking abilities of fighters are more equal than pre-LU13 and (2) guardians' DPS and utility are less than the some or all other fighter classes.</P> <P> </P> <P>It seems to me that issue 1 is completely irrelevant.  We all leveled characters for months in the pre-LU13 world, only to have the whole combat system turned inside out.  There are all kinds of things we can say about people's settled expectations and the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of completely revamping a game that far into it.  But it was done.  It's not going away.  We have to live with it.  I believe it made the game better as a whole.  But there are definitely parts that are broken.</P> <P> </P> <P>Which leads me to issue 2.  Let me disclaim this by saying that I play a monk (currently 54th level) so I do not have direct experience of how it is to play a guardian.  I do, however, group several nights a weeks with a guardian (currently 55th level) and we talk about this stuff a lot.  A couple of points: (1) there are SOME ways that a guardian has better tanking ability than my monk -- in particular, aggro control on multiple MoBs -- I have to work very hard to keep aggro on multiple MoB heroic encounters, the guardian does it much more easily and conisistently; (2) that said, in general, I can tank about as well as he can, and in all the situations he can (talking group content, not raids here); (3) I have an advantage in utility (particularly FD and invis) and in DPS. </P> <P> </P> <P>Conclusion?  It seems to me that guardians do have a legitimate beef about their DPS potential and utility relative to other fighters.  But I certainly don't think guardians are completely gimped.  </P> <P> </P> <P>Final point - raid tanking.  I was excited when I saw the different resistence buffs on fighter defensive stances and other abilities.  What I hoped when I saw that was that there would be raid content in the new world that would require (or at least be most efficient with) different tanks.  E.g. Rahotep has a huge divine nuke - paladins have a divine resist buff - maybe the paladin should tank him.  My guild is just now getting to the point where we can start to take on T6 epics, so I don't really know if this is true, but I would love it if it were.  Nothing against guardians at all, I just think it's a lot more interesting to have variety - including variety in the main tank - on raids.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P></P>

[Styk]

<P>This thread turned into another " waaaa mommy i hate SoE for making other fighter classes up to par with us on tanking waaaaa " Im soooo sorry that SoE took yall off your Godly pedistal .......... Im so sorry that they made taunting harder for tanks.... But ill put you up on some game thou... A Guard is still our raid MT ( 2 of them are as a matter of fact ) Yes they aren't  invincible now like they were before but we learned to adapt ...... maybe yall should too...</P> <P>Stop asking for things like " I want guards to be like before LU 13" because you will NEVER GET IT , Ask for something meaningful for your class like your Niche to be fixed and working correctly.... ( Protection skills , etc etc ) Only thing i can agree is that they need to remove resists from taunts.... </P>

[Greyto]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Styker wrote:<BR> <P>This thread turned into another " waaaa mommy i hate SoE for making other fighter classes up to par with us on tanking waaaaa " Im soooo sorry that SoE took yall off your Godly pedistal .......... Im so sorry that they made taunting harder for tanks.... But ill put you up on some game thou... A Guard is still our raid MT ( 2 of them are as a matter of fact ) Yes they aren't  invincible now like they were before but we learned to adapt ...... maybe yall should too...</P> <P>Stop asking for things like " I want guards to be like before LU 13" because you will NEVER GET IT , Ask for something meaningful for your class like your Niche to be fixed and working correctly.... ( Protection skills , etc etc ) Only thing i can agree is that they need to remove resists from taunts.... </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>it's y'all </P> <P>OK?  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P></P>

[PsyKr]

<P>You All LIE!</P> <P>Guardians aren't Tanks, they are healers... aren't they??<BR><BR>Why Gaige gettin all the flames in here? I Want my share!! As a guildie of MrDizzi I must say, .. .. well I really don't know what to say but hey! All tanks can tank equally now, Not sure what your problem is.</P> <P>Maybe you THINK that you have been nerfed because now all the other fighters are on an equal palying field???</P>

[Grumpy_Warrior_01]

I like pie. <P></P>

[Coredor]

<P>The problem with this is that SOE was never clear what they meant by the archetype system. They said tank equally sometime, sometimes they said all could tank, and sometimes they said guardians were defensive tanks which would seem to mean they could take a better job tanking tougher mobs.  From past experiences and with some of hte literature it made sense that guardians would be the most defensive tanks.  To reinforce this they made the game that way, and it is difficult to believe that they were that far off and left it that way for 9 months.</P> <P>A few people had preconceived notions perhaps on the archetype statement and created their class thinking tanking was completely equal. I'll admit that. However most people when they created their characters both guards and non-guards made the assumption that they were the best defensive tanks both in theory and in practice. They then proceeded to completely change the class. To add insult to injury they only balanced tanking abilities and left other roles such as dps and utility where other classes had advantages alone.</P> <P>The lesson from this is that they need to be very clear about class roles and if they can't fix it immediately, they need to say the game isn't working right as opposed to making vague, general statements about balancing at some future date. If they think LU 13 isnt' functioning they should also state their intentions now. Brawler types are becoming more popular and if they are the most popular tanks and get slammed in 9 months SOE is going to have to try to appease a very angry and what I would think larger brawler community. No one likes nerfs much less dramatic ones, and if they're going to do it the parties involved should know as quickly as possible and their intentions should be very clear.</P> <P>Any way guards just sound like the most defensive tanks, and SOE reinforced that assumption clearly for the first 9 months of the game. That should be clear to everyone.</P> <P></P>

[Nibbl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aethane wrote:<BR>And now we have brawlers in treasured/handcrafted outtanking guardians in full legendary/fabled..................I guess that's what you call equal eh?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Ha Ha.  Maybe against a lvl 60 mob with t5 fully fabled, sure.  t5 fully fabled is worthless past 55 pretty much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But a lvl 60 monk in handcrafted/treasured outtanking a lvl 60 guardian in full cobalt or full t6 fabled?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>YEAH RIGHT.</DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <P>Youre entire argument is built upon this premice, and therefore, a lie.</P> <HR> <P>No.  You wouldn't know the entire arguement since you yourself have stated numerous times you didn't pay attention to the forums pre LU13.  Anyway my arguement was:</P> <P>1) Guardians avoided too much.</P> <P>2) Combat in general was broken <FONT color=#ff0000>(still is)</FONT></P> <P>3) The fighter archetype was broken because true interchangeability didn't exist<FONT color=#ff0000> (never will, unless you make all the fighters the same in all aspects, there will never be complete and equal balance without redifining all the classes into one</FONT>).  There was not one single mob in the game a guardian couldn't tank or one single encounter/scenario where guardians weren't the best choice<FONT color=#ff0000> (small group play and soloing, not ture).</FONT>  However there were numerous scenarios where only a guardian could tank <FONT color=#ff0000>(which ones? please tell us).</FONT>  Therefore guardians were always the *best* choice <FONT color=#ff0000>(opinion not based on facts).</FONT>  So in any situation where a monk could be a successful group tank, a guardian could as well - and they could do it better.  Interchangeability sure.  However there were many situations where a monk COULD NOT be changed out for a guardian and be successful <FONT color=#ff0000>(many situations? guess your talking about epic mobs, which makes up a very low percentage of the game content.  "many" lol )</FONT> .  At all.  This held true throughout the archetype.</P> <P>The simple fact was that guardians were required for a lot of content pre LU13 because they trivialized them so much due to the tanking trifecta that encounters were designed and beefed up to be so ridiculously hard to combat the broken guardian that they were out of any other fighter's league <FONT color=#ff0000 size=3>(wasnt unique to guardians)</FONT>.</P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>10-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:02 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P></P>

[bink]

<p></p><blockquote><font color="#66ff66">hey gaige every time i talk to guardians on different servers and i mention your name they get disgusted. Go back to your monk forums, truth be told no one wants to hear your opinion so yes you can stop typing them over and over again.</font></blockquote><font color="#ffffff">I do agree with this. If he is tired of typing his opinion over and over, he should stop. As he said, we can search for it if we cared.</font><p></p><p>Message Edited by binkzz on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:45 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<P><3</P> <P> </P> <P></P>

[Polaj]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P><3</P> <P> </P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Enjoying yourself? <P></P>

[MrDiz]

Gaige i have 2 small points id like to add here:1) Just because EQ2 is a new game doesnt excuse anything. EQ2 is a game. EQ2 may not be EQ1. But its based upon it. As EQ1 was based upon classic d&d style rpgs. People who assume it should be identical to EQ1 are missing the point of "New and Better". Likewise people who assume it has no similarites and therefore will suffer similar pitfalls if they do certain things have their heads buried in the sand.2) You still havnt admitted that your equation is a lie, neither have you dealt directly with the issue on this thread. If no other fighter could tank pre lu13 how is it so many of them did?

[Drulak]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Drulak wrote:<BR> <P>(PS Gaige , i have started a Monk now , so knowing my luck when i hit 50 , Monks will be nerfed to death - then we see how you like it <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I will have been there before , so will be water off my back by then<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>We've already been nerfed, a few times.  Oh, and we spent months unable to perform our role.  So its already water off my back too.  I hope we do get nerfed honestly, so people like you will quit playing monks.  I can't stand FOTM players.<BR> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Your Holier than thou attitude really makes me laugh sometimes Gaige , if only you were not such ag ignorant poster.   FOTM players - hmm lets look at this , i was more than happy with my Guardian Until months and months of campaigning and Lies spread by yourself got my beloved class nerfed to hell.</P> <P>I would not be a monk if you had not done this. So Now i have rolled a monk , as the guardian is a totally boring and useless class to play now , but i still wanted to play EQ2 - so FOTM - i think not , more a need to play a class that wasn't Borked.</P> <P>I hope you get nerfed to and guards get fixed , so that i can play my initial choice in tank again. But that won't happen while you continue to lie to the developers.<BR></P> <P></P>

[Nemi]

<P></P> <P><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR>Gaige i have 2 small points id like to add here:<BR><BR>1) Just because EQ2 is a new game doesnt excuse anything.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yes it does.</FONT></P> <P>EQ2 is a game. EQ2 may not be EQ1. But its based upon it. As EQ1 was based upon classic d&d style rpgs.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I believe it was actually based on Diku Mud. D&D and EQ share a fantasy setting, thats about it otherwise they are quite different.</FONT></P> <P>People who assume it should be identical to EQ1 are missing the point of "New and Better". Likewise people who assume it has no similarites and therefore will suffer similar pitfalls if they do certain things have their heads buried in the sand.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>EQ2 has stated from the beginning it was aimed at a different market to EQ1 (one reason they didn't close down EQ1 when EQ2 came out). EQ2 has stated from the beginning they have set the game in the same lore and background, but at that point the similarities end. The simple fact of Monks being Fighters and not Scouts would support the this declaration.</FONT><BR><BR>2) You still havnt admitted that your equation is a lie, neither have you dealt directly with the issue on this thread. If no other fighter could tank pre lu13 how is it so many of them did?<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I have already stated what encounters required a Guardian and that noone but Guardians have tanked it on my server. You have yet to prove this 'lie' you believe. A simple link to a monk/bruiser/paladin/shadowknight/berseker tanking all of these encounters will do it.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You can't tho, because it didn't happen and even if it did, having Guardians tank 99% of raids and 2 of the other 5 subclasses tanking 1% still leads to a broken game.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P>

[Grumpy_Warrior_01]

Confound it!  Where did I put that ledger?  It must be around here somewhere. <P></P>

[MrDiz]

1) That doesnt mean comparisons cant be made between other games or that if they do the opinion is automatically wrong. Only fools thing there are no lessons to be learned from history.2) We have proved it a thousand times over Nemi. Non Guardians raided and tanked for raids before lu13. They tanked for groups before LU13. They tanked for trios and duos before lu13. Non guardians TANKED all the time. Every minute of every hour that the servers were up there were lots of NON-guardians out there tanking a variety of situations. To say otherwise isnt just lying, its idiocy in face of what everyone who has ever actually played the game has seen and experienced.Perhaps there is going to be one day an encounter that one of the tanks cannot tank. Maybe Nagafen will only be doable by a lvl 100 guardian. Does that mean noone else is a viable tank? Does that one encounter define the entire game for you? The one encounter that is 0.001 % of the content of eq2? I could probably find certain encounters where a guardian could not solo something a monk could. Did it mean a guardian could not solo at all?The Gaige Equation is a lie. You know it. We know it. Sony knows it now. Each reply you bump this post with reinforces the utter stupidity of the 'no one else could possibly tank' argument <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Drulak wrote:<BR><BR> <P>I would not be a monk if you had not done this. So Now i have rolled a monk , as the guardian is a totally boring and useless class to play now , but i still wanted to play EQ2 - so FOTM - i think not , more a need to play a class that wasn't Borked.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Guardians have always been boring class to play. They never had fun skills or unique abilities, so why all of a sudden are people complaining? Oh thats right, because PreLU13 they were supreme.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Its not the class thats the problem, its the players that chose the class purely because they thought they were going to be uber, when uber was never part of this game design.</FONT></P> <P>I hope you get nerfed to and guards get fixed , so that i can play my initial choice in tank again. But that won't happen while you continue to lie to the developers.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Will they make changes to a Guardian? Hope so. Will they make them supreme? No.</FONT><BR></P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P></P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:Its not the class thats the problem, its the players that chose the class purely because they thought they were going to be uber,<hr></blockquote>Ive met very few 'uber' minded guardians in game. On the contrary the ones with the DPS parsers and spamming the guil chat with how uber their gear is are usually the more DPS oriented fighters. I have never seen a guardian say "I deserve to be uber!". Ive never seen them demand no other fighters be allowed to tank. Ive never seen them even complain about the fact that other classes could solo or dps etc. They didnt want it all (like you). They picked a pure and simple class. Focused. And yet you come here and insult their character and personality. You come to their boards for whatever agenda you have and insult, flame and otherwise annoy the guardian communty this board services. And you do so by blatantly lying and name calling (No I havnt forgotten the 'Mr Drivel' comment).I know this board isnt supposed to be personal, but youre an unpleasant small minded little person Nemi. Please leave our forum, because you really are not welcome.

[RafaelSmith]

<p></p><span><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<p></p> Oh, and we spent months unable to perform our role.  <p></p><hr></blockquote> Arrg,  your such a egocentric, hypocritical dip[expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] its beyond annoying. "Unable to perform your role?"  Thats BS and you know it. That has about as much validity as a Guardian claiming they cant perform their role today. Pre and Post LU13 ALL FIGHTERS COULD/CAN PEFORM THEIR ROLE.  Some better than others.   The only thing that changed is who that "some" is. </span><p></p><p>Message Edited by RafaelSmith on <span class=date_text>10-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:37 AM</span>

[Dart]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Styker wrote:<BR> <P>This thread turned into another " waaaa mommy i hate SoE for making other fighter classes up to par with us on tanking waaaaa " Im soooo sorry that SoE took yall off your Godly pedistal .......... Im so sorry that they made taunting harder for tanks.... But ill put you up on some game thou... A Guard is still our raid MT ( 2 of them are as a matter of fact ) Yes they aren't  invincible now like they were before but we learned to adapt ...... maybe yall should too...</P> <P>Stop asking for things like " I want guards to be like before LU 13" because you will NEVER GET IT , Ask for something meaningful for your class like your Niche to be fixed and working correctly.... ( Protection skills , etc etc ) Only thing i can agree is that they need to remove resists from taunts.... </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>If you would even stop and read a small snipit of the these posts by guardians, you might realize that they are not asking to be reverted back to Pre LU13. I am not going to go into detail what the problems are, but you might consider not taking the lazy approach by using selective reading and drawing baseless conclusions. Ignorance is bliss eh?</P> <P> </P> <P>Cleft notes for the reading impared:</P> <P>Fix utility line to work or have some function more than .01% of the time, is a common theme here</P> <P>If tanks are to be equal, then I think it is only fair that DPS is equal too. </P> <P> </P> <P>Please post why you think either of the two above items should not be address, other wise [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn], move on and find some other board to troll, kk thnx</P> <P></P>

[Nemi]

<P></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Darton wrote:<BR><BR> <P><BR>If you would even stop and read a small snipit of the these posts by guardians, you might realize that they are not asking to be reverted back to Pre LU13. I am not going to go into detail what the problems are, but you might consider not taking the lazy approach by using selective reading and drawing baseless conclusions. Ignorance is bliss eh?</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>True, but MrDizzi and friends are asking for exactly that. He wants Guardians to be the 'best' and 'pure' tank. He doesn't want utility fixed, he doesn't want DPS adjusted. He just wants to be the best tank.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P>Cleft notes for the reading impared:</P> <P>Fix utility line to work or have some function more than .01% of the time, is a common theme here</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Agreed. There are not sufficient danger points during normal grinding that make the Guardian's utility line particularly valuable. However, on a raid they are extremely valuable which will guarantee a Guardian in the MT group (if they are not MT).</FONT></P> <P>If tanks are to be equal, then I think it is only fair that DPS is equal too.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Agreed in principle but you have to also weight that against group utility. Tanking should be equal and then DPS+Utility should be equal, not necessarily identical like Tanking.</FONT></P> <P>Please post why you think either of the two above items should not be address, other wise [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn], move on and find some other board to troll, kk thnx</P> <P></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>If you bothered to read Gaige's post or most other monks, we're not arguing to keep Guardians down, we're arguing against those that want to return Guardians to the N#1 spot with everyone else a distant second.</FONT></P> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR></P>

[Nemi]

<P></P> <P><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR><BR><BR>Ive met very few 'uber' minded guardians in game.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You're a hoot MrDizzi. I'm talking about YOU and friends. You are the guys that are hung up on being uber. You cannot accept 5 subclasses being equal to you in tanking.</FONT></P> <P>On the contrary the ones with the DPS parsers and spamming the guil chat with how uber their gear is are usually the more DPS oriented fighters. I have never seen a guardian say "I deserve to be uber!".</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Strange, I swore I had an argument in another thread with you where you stated you wanted to be the best and was [Removed for Content] off because your not? Shall I link it?</FONT></P> <P>Ive never seen them demand no other fighters be allowed to tank. Ive never seen them even complain about the fact that other classes could solo or dps etc. They didnt want it all (like you).</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ooh that old switch the argument to me routine eh? Not falling for that one.</FONT></P> <P>They picked a pure and simple class.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So what is so simple about Guardians that Monks are complex? What exactly is so tricky and different tanking with a monk than a Guardian? Nothing.</FONT></P> <P>And yet you come here and insult their character and personality. You come to their boards for whatever agenda you have and insult, flame and otherwise annoy the guardian communty this board services. And you do so by blatantly lying and name calling (No I havnt forgotten the 'Mr Drivel' comment).</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Excellent, you do spout drivel. You're doing it now. Am I rude to you? Yep, because you argue for something that is blatantly against the vision and direction of this game. You seek to put yourself above 5 other subclasses. You do this with full knowledge you're only hanging around till Vangaurd comes out. So you want to break the archetype system for your selfish pursuit.</FONT><BR><BR>I know this board isnt supposed to be personal, but youre an unpleasant small minded little person Nemi. Please leave our forum, because you really are not welcome.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You say I insult character and personality - Pot calling the kettle black eh? If you can't handle me arguing against your selfish desires to put Guardians above everyone else, tough. Hey, if you change your argument from wanting to be the best and instead actually ask for utility and dps to be balanced then I'll support you. Until then I'm your opponent. Get used to it.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR></P>

[Starwind]

<P></P> <P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></P>Ive never seen them demand no other fighters be allowed to tank. Ive never seen them even complain about the fact that other classes could solo or dps etc. They didnt want it all (like you). <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Ooh that old switch the argument to me routine eh? Not falling for that one.</FONT></P> <P>They picked a pure and simple class.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So what is so simple about Guardians that Monks are complex? What exactly is so tricky and different tanking with a monk than a Guardian? Nothing.</FONT></P> <P>And yet you come here and insult their character and personality. You come to their boards for whatever agenda you have and insult, flame and otherwise annoy the guardian communty this board services. And you do so by blatantly lying and name calling (No I havnt forgotten the 'Mr Drivel' comment).</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Excellent, you do spout drivel. You're doing it now. Am I rude to you? Yep, because you argue for something that is blatantly against the vision and direction of this game. You seek to put yourself above 5 other subclasses. You do this with full knowledge you're only hanging around till Vangaurd comes out. So you want to break the archetype system for your selfish pursuit.</FONT><BR><BR>I know this board isnt supposed to be personal, but youre an unpleasant small minded little person Nemi. Please leave our forum, because you really are not welcome.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You say I insult character and personality - Pot calling the kettle black eh? If you can't handle me arguing against your selfish desires to put Guardians above everyone else, tough. Hey, if you change your argument from wanting to be the best and instead actually ask for utility and dps to be balanced then I'll support you. Until then I'm your opponent. Get used to it.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>1.) You do come here asking for it all. Guardians could tank. Plain and simple, they held aggro and took damage. You did that too, but not as well because you can deal damage and have utility. Now you take damage as equally well as they do, yet you don't want to lose your damage or utility to be able to.</P> <P> </P> <P>2.) Monks serve more than one function in this game, from what I hear. They can solo, tank, and do DPS in a group. Guardians just tank.</P> <P> </P> <P>3.) <sarcasm> I'm oh so sure that you're privvy to "The Vision" of this game. I'm sure the developers inform you of everything they do, and exactly why they did it. </sarcasm>  Actually no, you probably don't have the foggiest idea of what their vision for this game is. They probably don't even know what their vision for the game is, because it's not a sole developer working on it. It's an entire team of Dev's who no doubt all have varying opinions on what is right or wrong to do in a certain situation, or what should or shouldn't be added.</P> <P> </P> <P>And, he's breaking the archetype system for his selfish pursuit, eh? What do you call what you and Gaige did before LU13? Everyone else but a few people like you, who probably had no idea how to play their characters, were happy with the game. Yet you whined and cried and screamed for the nerf bat, so when the combat update hit, you utterly destroyed a class.</P> <P> </P> <P>4.) As I quoted earlier, son. "You called down the Thunder, now reap the Whirlwind." Or in other tearms, you reap what you sowe, or you've made your bed, now lie in it.</P> <P> </P> <P>You've brought any of their hostility or bitterness on yourselves, because you two were the ones yelling the loudest for what happened.</P> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by Starwind87 on <span class=date_text>10-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:49 PM</span>

[MrDiz]

Nemi, please keep bumping my post <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Nemi]

<P></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Starwind87 wrote:<BR> <P></P> <P></P><BR> <P><BR>1.) You do come here asking for it all. Guardians could tank. Plain and simple, they held aggro and took damage. You did that too, but not as well because you can deal damage and have utility. Now you take damage as equally well as they do, yet you don't want to lose your damage or utility to be able to.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I don't come here asking for anything. I come here to stop people like MrDrivel starting campaigns to put Guardians supreme above every other subclass. He doesn't want balance, he doesn't want utility fixed, he doesn't want DPS fixed. He simply wants to be the 'best' and 'pure' tank which isn't going ot happen.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P>2.) Monks serve more than one function in this game, from what I hear. They can solo, tank, and do DPS in a group. Guardians just tank.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You hear wrong. Our function is tanking, if we're not doing that we're a third rate DPS class only slightly better than Guardians. Do Monks DPS need to go down? Perhaps, or perhaps Guardians need to come up.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P>3.)  I'm oh so sure that you're privvy to "The Vision" of this game. I'm sure the developers inform you of everything they do, and exactly why they did it.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You know they do. They tell you as well. It's in the FAQ's stickied. Its in the patch notes. Its in all the multitude of posts regarding the Combat Revamp and why they did it.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P>Actually no, you probably don't have the foggiest idea of what their vision for this game is. They probably don't even know what their vision for the game is, because it's not a sole developer working on it. It's an entire team of Dev's who no doubt all have varying opinions on what is right or wrong to do in a certain situation, or what should or shouldn't be added.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Do the details matter when we're talking about fundamentals? The fundamentals is what MrDizzi and I are arguing about. He believes Guardians should be ranked above everyone else in the archetype role. I believe they should be ranked equal. That does not mean I don't think Guardians are fine as is: Utility and DPS is something for Guardians to ask for, want tanking ability above everyone else is breaking the archetype.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P>And, he's breaking the archetype system for his selfish pursuit, eh? What do you call what you and Gaige did before LU13?</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Monks couldn't tank. We demanded SoE fulfil what they promised and allowed Monks to tank on an even footing with plates. That's all we did. We never asked for Guardians to be nerfed, we asked for Monks to be equal. SoE did the rest.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P>Everyone else but a few people like you, who probably had no idea how to play their characters, were happy with the game. Yet you whined and cried and screamed for the nerf bat, so when the combat update hit, you utterly destroyed a class.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Nonsense, don't bite into MrDrivels rhetorical. Search my posts. I never asked for a Guardian nerf. Last time I looked I wasn't on the payroll for SoE as a programmer, so I don't see how you attribute the Guardian problems post revamp to me. I asked for balance tanking and we got it. It's not my fault Guardians chose to ignore the revamp.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>All Guardians posted was 'We don't want utility, we don't want DPS' - Well guess what? SoE listened.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P>4.) As I quoted earlier, son. "You called down the Thunder, now reap the Whirlwind." Or in other tearms, you reap what you sowe, or you've made your bed, now lie in it.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Well to be meteorogically correct. Whirlwinds do not come from thunder. So your quote is assinine at best. My bed is comfortable, its Guardians that are whining. I'd be happy to extend a helping hand if they ask for Utility or DPS instead of tanking ability.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P>You've brought any of their hostility or bitterness on yourselves, because you two were the ones yelling the loudest for what happened.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Those who are hostile or bitter are the ones that fail to accept the archetype system, and frankly I could care less about them - They would only kill this game if they got their way. I'm sure Vanguard will be a better fit for them.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <P>Message Edited by Starwind87 on <SPAN class=date_text>10-27-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>12:49 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>

[Nemi]

<FONT color=#ffff00>Np. The more people realise how idiotic you are the better.</FONT> <P></P>

[MrDiz]

<P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Np. The more people realise how idiotic you are the better.</FONT> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Tell me Nemi, which of these encounter types was impossible lu13 without a guardian tanking: </P> <P> </P> <P>1) Raids </P> <P> </P> <P>2) Nameds</P> <P> </P> <P> 3) Exp groups </P> <P> </P> <P>4) Quest groups </P> <P> </P> <P>5) Trios</P> <P> </P> <P> 6) Duos </P> <P> </P> <P>7) All of the above because guardian was the only viable tank (The Gaige Equation)</P><p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:37 AM</span>