Just another beating a dead horse thread

[Thanous]

<p></p><b>Thread is hopelessly off topic at this point.  I have started a new thread.  Mods, please feel free to delete or lock this thread.</b> Seems that our nitch is to be a group saving tank.  To have some special tools to make us more idiot proof then other tanks.We've just about beaten the dead horse enough on general improvements that need to be made to our class, and I'm interested to hear ideas that are specificly tailored to the Vision (TM) of what makes us special as a fighter class.What are some ideas towards that end?What about...An Evac?  So that we do not replace scouts in this ability, it could take the guardian's health down by 50% at app 1, and have that percentage decrease with spell upgrades.  Could kill the guardian, but save the group if things go wrong (why would you evac when the main tank is still up?  Might still be limited use, but an idea..)What about some crowd control?  Something that when a pull goes bad, and more comes then the group can handle, the guardian can exhibit some sort of crowd control.  Maybe something that will root the guardian in place (a favorite it seems), kill the guardian's DPS, greatly reduce the encounter's DPS, and just about turn us into a taunting post.  Not doing much (if any damage), but just standing there, taking hits at a greatly reduced rate, taunting our butts off, and hoping that our group has enough power to kill what has been brought to camp without someone else getting agro.These ideas are really out there.  I know that.  I doubt they will gain traction, but I want to see something more useful then our current special abilities (which only damages the group more).So, what ideas do you all have?<div></div><p>Message Edited by Thanous on <span class="date_text">10-26-2005</span><span class="time_text">10:30 AM</span></p><p>Message Edited by Thanous on <span class=date_text>10-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:30 AM</span>

[Zy]

How about some taunts that work, and the ability to mitigate damage as well as some other classes "avoid it" <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That would be a group saving ability.....</DIV>

[Thanous]

<span><blockquote><hr>Zykx wrote:How about some taunts that work, and the ability to mitigate damage as well as some other classes "avoid it" <div> </div> <div>That would be a group saving ability.....</div><hr></blockquote>No, those are basics and general.  Things everyone should have. I'm talking special to us.</span><div></div>

[MrDiz]

How bout they leave the guardian alone. We are warriors nor healer/scout hybrids. Id rather they left us in nerf hell than hybridize us.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>MrDizzi,</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Last time I checked the progression went:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Level 3 Fighter</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Level 10, Brawler, Crusader, Warrior</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Level 20, Berserker, Bruiser, Guardian, Monk, Paladin, Shadowknight</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You seem to think Guardian is an Archetype of its own. Perhaps this is where your misguided attempts to redesign the Fighter tree comes from, because you think you are not part of it?</FONT> </P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<P><FONT color=#ffff00>MrDizzi,</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Last time I checked the progression went:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Level 3 Fighter</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Level 10, Brawler, Crusader, Warrior</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Level 20, Berserker, Bruiser, Guardian, Monk, Paladin, Shadowknight</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You seem to think Guardian is an Archetype of its own. Perhaps this is where your misguided attempts to redesign the Fighter tree comes from, because you think you are not part of it?</FONT> </P> <hr></blockquote>Errr ... what? I dont want any redesign of the fighter. What are you talking about? Im not the on wanting to change things.

[Nemi]

<FONT color=#ffff00>You are not a pure tank, nor would you become a hyrbid. You are a Fighter like the rest of us, with DPS and Utility. There are no hybrids in this game: There are Fighters, Mages, Priests and Scouts.</FONT>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<FONT color=#ffff00>You are not a pure tank, nor would you become a hyrbid. You are a Fighter like the rest of us, with DPS and Utility. There are no hybrids in this game: There are Fighters, Mages, Priests and Scouts.</FONT> <hr></blockquote>Dont be silly. Of course guardians are a pure tank. And of course there are hybrids. They always have been since the game went live. The OP asked what utilities should be 'added' to the guardian. My answer is none. I dont want guardians redesigned to have evac and group invis.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Dont be silly. Of course guardians are a pure tank. And of course there are hybrids. They always have been since the game went live. The OP asked what utilities should be 'added' to the guardian. My answer is none. I dont want guardians redesigned to have evac and group invis.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You don't always get what you want...</P> <P>Although I doubt you get group invis, no fighter has it.  Plus SK's have evac, doubtful you'll get that.  Maybe they should give you runspeed buffs!<BR></P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Dont be silly. Of course guardians are a pure tank. And of course there are hybrids. They always have been since the game went live. The OP asked what utilities should be 'added' to the guardian. My answer is none. I dont want guardians redesigned to have evac and group invis.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You don't always get what you want...</P> <P>Although I doubt you get group invis, no fighter has it.  Plus SK's have evac, doubtful you'll get that.  Maybe they should give you runspeed buffs!<BR></P> <hr></blockquote>Runnspeed buffs <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> How bout breeze?

[Ichabo]

I would like a realy mean haste buff that has a long or permanent duration. This in combination with HTL Spells would increase the (group) agro management  a little and also get our DPS up a little. <div></div>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>IchabodC wrote:I would like a realy mean haste buff that has a long or permanent duration. This in combination with HTL Spells would increase the (group) agro management  a little and also get our DPS up a little. <div></div><hr></blockquote>You mean combat haste buff? But thats offensive, ergo berzerker. Plus a combat buff that increases DPS isnt really utility <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Im not against a dps boost on principle, but I wonder how to balance berzerkers/guardians. Zerks really need to always be out dpsin a guard or something is just wierd.As for utility: Still no thanks. We didnt have any for 10 months. It obvious Sony never intended for us to have utility. And why would they? If they did there would be no pure tank. No pure tank and you pretty much have no old fashioned 'warrior'. And EQ2 is a fantasy rpg. Warrior, Wizard, Dwarf, Elf.... the formula is one Sony would be foolish to break unless they really dont think the fantasy part of thir game is what attracts most customers.

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR><BR><BR>Dont be silly. Of course guardians are a pure tank. And of course there are hybrids. They always have been since the game went live. The OP asked what utilities should be 'added' to the guardian. My answer is none. I dont want guardians redesigned to have evac and group invis.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>No again you mix your terms. There are no hybrids in this game, hybrid is a term from EQ1, to mean part tank, part something else.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Sks were hybrids, Paladins were hybrids.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>In EQ2 both of these are Fighters and tanks.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You like to use terminology that is very specific and try to paint it as broad meaning, 'pure' 'best'. These words a very specific and a great propaganda tool. Get it into normal circulation while telling everyone it doesn't really mean anything, then you can always later say, well everyone knew we were the 'best' and 'pure' whats all the fuss?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Instead of 'pure' you should say Physical. All Fighters do the same job, therefore there is no 'pure' only flavour</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Warriors - Physical</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Crusaders - Faith</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Brawlers - Martial Artist</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[aislynn00]

<DIV> <DIV> <DIV>Nothing saves the group like rock-solid aggro, and besides, Moorgard himself stated in his infamous "unsung hero" post that guardians were supposed to have "supreme aggro control".  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Therefore: Implement the below suggestions, and I would consider guardians balanced relative to all fighters except bruisers (but the need for a nerf in that regard is another matter entirely):</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Since we can't rely on DPS to generate a steady flow of hate, make all guardian taunts 100% irresistible.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Considering we have lower avoidance than brawlers, we spend more time stunned and stifled; to compensate, make our single-target taunts castable while stunned and/or stifled.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lower the casting time of the Taunting Assault line to 0.5 seconds.  In its current form, it is simply too slow to be used effectively as a means of generating hate vs AE damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Our reactive hate proc buffs are great, when they work.  However, some classes are able to slow the attack speed of mobs while damage spells--single-target-, encounter-, and AE-based alike--often have stun and stifle components, meaning mobs won't hit the tank nearly as frequently as would otherwise be the case.  That, in turn, along with resisted hate procs and warded incoming attacks, leads to drastically reduced hate generation, and all too frequently, aggro loss.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Therefore, I propose that the reactive taunt procs on the Maddening Defense line be changed into a periodic AE taunt: every 3 seconds, the buff would simply trigger an AE taunt, thus generating aggro on everything within range, no matter whether it is attacking the guardian, staring into space, or swinging at someone else.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>Remove the root component on Maddening Defense and don't replace it with any kind of drawback.  I can't stress this enough.</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sentry Watch touches on a good idea but never follows through on it.  Rather than kicking in only once someone dies, which makes it of very limited use, the taunt part should be triggered every time someone is attacked, no matter the damage dealt.  Furthermore, the hate generated by Sentry Watch is laughably low; make it 1000 hate at Adept I, and we would have a truly useful protection spell.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Add a reactive hate proc to the Sentry line--say, 50% chance of 500 hate at Adept I per attack on the protected group member.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Add a 10% - 25% hate multiplier on Vigilance, so it increases the guardian's hate gain every time he attacks, buffs, taunts, etc.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Add a guaranteed reactive hate proc to Guardian Sphere; make it 500 hate at Adept I.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Double the mitigation on Anchor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lower the reuse timer on Call of Protection to 30 seconds.  If our reactive hate proc buffs aren't turned into periodic AE hate generation buffs as proposed, instead let Call of Protection generate 1000 hate at Adept I vs all engaged encounters every time it is used.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There.  Utility fixed and the guardian class balanced with monks, et al.  Bruisers still need to be whacked hard with the nerf bat, though.</DIV></DIV></DIV>

[MrDiz]

I dont mix my terms Nemi, you do. Your obviously not a fantasy RPGer so let me clue you in: Hybrids are classes that mix abilites from others. Paladins for example are classic mixes of fighter and cleric (templar). They are not just a classis typical fighter, they are also a healer/caster. ie. Hybrid. Whatever class system they use nothing can change that absolute fact. They are not just fighters , they are casters/healers. That is unarguable unless you are trying to say youv'e never seen a paladin cast spells? Im not talking about Combat Arts in general. Monks flying kicks are not casting. Im talking spells. Wiggle your fingers, pray to a god and something miraculous happens.Guardians do not and have NEVER been casters, utility or any other mix. They are the typical fantasy warrior. The tank. That is what they have always been since live, and I imagine in beta too.Its a formula that may well be older than the majority of EQ2s players. Now maybe its time for a chage? Well not 10 months into a games life its not. You cant simply remove an entire class, especially one that is a fundamental foundation of rpgs. And hybridizing guardian is the same as removing it and making a whole new class. You change the whole 'story' so far. You totally alter guardians game play. And you remove one of the expected givens in fantasy.Plus I would be reluctant to put effort into any of my toons knowing they may disapear in the next expansion.No Utility for guardians. No spell for guardians. Leave them alone!

[Nemi]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR>I dont mix my terms Nemi, you do. Your obviously not a fantasy RPGer so let me clue you in:</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>No please don't. This is Everquest 2. Not D&D, AD&D, Runecraft or any other RPG you care to mention. Its a PC game with a 'fantasy' setting.</FONT></P> <P> Paladins for example are classic mixes of fighter and cleric (templar). They are not just a classis typical fighter, they are also a healer/caster. ie. Hybrid.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Semantics again, but with your argument of 'pure' you impy other classes are less that Guardian. Now while in pen and paper games this may be true, in Everquest 2 all FIghters are TANKS with flavour. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Paladins are not healers, they are tanks. Shadowknights are not mages, they are tanks.</FONT></P> <P>Whatever class system they use nothing can change that absolute fact. They are not just fighters , they are casters/healers. That is unarguable unless you are trying to say youv'e never seen a paladin cast spells? Im not talking about Combat Arts in general. Monks flying kicks are not casting. Im talking spells. Wiggle your fingers, pray to a god and something miraculous happens.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>That does not make them hybrids in my eyes. Hybrids do two jobs, like multiclassing in D&D, but do neither as good as a 'pure' class. That does not exist in EQ2. Fighters tank, that is their role in a group. Yes the flavour may be 'hybrid' in your eyes, but they are all pure tanks.</FONT><BR><BR>Guardians do not and have NEVER been casters, utility or any other mix. They are the typical fantasy warrior. The tank. That is what they have always been since live, and I imagine in beta too.<BR><BR>Its a formula that may well be older than the majority of EQ2s players. Now maybe its time for a chage? Well not 10 months into a games life its not. You cant simply remove an entire class, especially one that is a fundamental foundation of rpgs. And hybridizing guardian is the same as removing it and making a whole new class. You change the whole 'story' so far. You totally alter guardians game play. And you remove one of the expected givens in fantasy.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Melodramatic much? There are plenty of utility to give Guardians that does not break with their flavour of run of the mill Fighter. That does not make them Hybrid. You choose to ignore that tho.</FONT></P> <P><BR>No Utility for guardians. No spell for guardians. Leave them alone!<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Too late you already have it.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote: <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR>I dont mix my terms Nemi, you do. Your obviously not a fantasy RPGer so let me clue you in:</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>No please don't. This is Everquest 2. Not D&D, AD&D, Runecraft or any other RPG you care to mention. Its a PC game with a 'fantasy' setting.</FONT></P> <P> Paladins for example are classic mixes of fighter and cleric (templar). They are not just a classis typical fighter, they are also a healer/caster. ie. Hybrid.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Semantics again, but with your argument of 'pure' you impy other classes are less that Guardian. Now while in pen and paper games this may be true, in Everquest 2 all FIghters are TANKS with flavour. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Paladins are not healers, they are tanks. Shadowknights are not mages, they are tanks.</FONT></P> <P>Whatever class system they use nothing can change that absolute fact. They are not just fighters , they are casters/healers. That is unarguable unless you are trying to say youv'e never seen a paladin cast spells? Im not talking about Combat Arts in general. Monks flying kicks are not casting. Im talking spells. Wiggle your fingers, pray to a god and something miraculous happens.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>That does not make them hybrids in my eyes. Hybrids do two jobs, like multiclassing in D&D, but do neither as good as a 'pure' class. That does not exist in EQ2. Fighters tank, that is their role in a group. Yes the flavour may be 'hybrid' in your eyes, but they are all pure tanks.</FONT><BR><BR>Guardians do not and have NEVER been casters, utility or any other mix. They are the typical fantasy warrior. The tank. That is what they have always been since live, and I imagine in beta too.<BR><BR>Its a formula that may well be older than the majority of EQ2s players. Now maybe its time for a chage? Well not 10 months into a games life its not. You cant simply remove an entire class, especially one that is a fundamental foundation of rpgs. And hybridizing guardian is the same as removing it and making a whole new class. You change the whole 'story' so far. You totally alter guardians game play. And you remove one of the expected givens in fantasy.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Melodramatic much? There are plenty of utility to give Guardians that does not break with their flavour of run of the mill Fighter. That does not make them Hybrid. You choose to ignore that tho.</FONT></P> <P><BR>No Utility for guardians. No spell for guardians. Leave them alone!<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Too late you already have it.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV><hr></blockquote>Really? When did it go in and what is it?

[Drulak]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR>I dont mix my terms Nemi, you do. Your obviously not a fantasy RPGer so let me clue you in:</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>No please don't. This is Everquest 2. Not D&D, AD&D, Runecraft or any other RPG you care to mention. Its a PC game with a 'fantasy' setting.</FONT></P> <P> Paladins for example are classic mixes of fighter and cleric (templar). They are not just a classis typical fighter, they are also a healer/caster. ie. Hybrid.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Semantics again, but with your argument of 'pure' you impy other classes are less that Guardian. Now while in pen and paper games this may be true, in Everquest 2 all FIghters are TANKS with flavour. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Paladins are not healers, they are tanks. Shadowknights are not mages, they are tanks.</FONT></P> <P>Whatever class system they use nothing can change that absolute fact. They are not just fighters , they are casters/healers. That is unarguable unless you are trying to say youv'e never seen a paladin cast spells? Im not talking about Combat Arts in general. Monks flying kicks are not casting. Im talking spells. Wiggle your fingers, pray to a god and something miraculous happens.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>That does not make them hybrids in my eyes. Hybrids do two jobs, like multiclassing in D&D, but do neither as good as a 'pure' class. That does not exist in EQ2. Fighters tank, that is their role in a group. Yes the flavour may be 'hybrid' in your eyes, but they are all pure tanks.</FONT><BR><BR>Guardians do not and have NEVER been casters, utility or any other mix. They are the typical fantasy warrior. The tank. That is what they have always been since live, and I imagine in beta too.<BR><BR>Its a formula that may well be older than the majority of EQ2s players. Now maybe its time for a chage? Well not 10 months into a games life its not. You cant simply remove an entire class, especially one that is a fundamental foundation of rpgs. And hybridizing guardian is the same as removing it and making a whole new class. You change the whole 'story' so far. You totally alter guardians game play. And you remove one of the expected givens in fantasy.<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Melodramatic much? There are plenty of utility to give Guardians that does not break with their flavour of run of the mill Fighter. That does not make them Hybrid. You choose to ignore that tho.</FONT></P> <P><BR>No Utility for guardians. No spell for guardians. Leave them alone!<BR></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Too late you already have it.</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>nemi i think you are arguing at crossed purposes here.  Mr dizzi is not saying no other fighter bar guardian is a tank and also he is correct that paladina for instance are a hybrid in terms of physical damage and magical healing.  This does not mean that a paladin is not a tank.  You are talking EQ and he is talking RPG.</P> <P>Yes this is a game , but it does get its base from the RPG world.  regardless , the argument is irrelevant as he is saying do not give guards utility and you are saying , guards are not the only tanks.</P> <P>We know we are not the only tanks , that has been made more than clear recently , BUT we do not as yet have any utility - and if we do i would like you to tell me what they are , so i can search my knowledge book and dig them out <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>Anyhoo , you are both right from your own perspectives , just pointing out that you two are arguing for no reason.</P> <P>Oh and on topic now , Guardian need some utility now or else we will become extinct.  Not because others now tank as good as we do , but becuase we are sooo boring a class to play now.  I am not saying give us casting utility , but FD , mend etc are not casting spells , but abilities .</P> <P>So we could have , armour repair - head bash etc etc :0</P> <P><BR> </P>

[MrDiz]

Nemi Nemi Nemi. Little slow this year? Of course the hybirds are also tanks. They are tanks AND casters. Hence the term: Hybrid. A Paladin is a tank that can heal. An SK is a tank that can life leech. this is the simplest of concepts and its pretty much a fact on the ground, not an opinion. These classes can cast spells IN GAME. Live. Now.

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Drulak wrote:<BR> <P>nemi i think you are arguing at crossed purposes here. </blockquote>She knows that. She is trying to hijack the thread. Guardians dont have utility. They never had utility. They should not get utility. They are nothing but tank. I dont care if we have to remain nerfed, we are not a hybrid and never should be one.And yes im talking RPG. The word hybrid in rpgs mean a mix of 2 or more classes/schools/roles depending on the system. Basically classes that dont focus purely on one field.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>I disgaree with your terminology MrDizzi - pure and best have connotations that don't work well in an archetype system like EQ2.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>However to your point about utility, let me dig for a moment, </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>Starting with highest and working back</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Unyiel</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>ding Vigilance (60) - Shields allies</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Tower of Stone (5<img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> - Utility to decrease damage whilst using shield</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Steely Conviction (56) - Stamina buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Wall of Might (55) - Roots opponent</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Sentry Watch (55) - Prevents death of ally</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Commanding Aura (54) - Buffs group resistance to peircing, slashing, crushing</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Call of Defense (52) - Buffs the groups defense score</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Call to War (51) - Buffs the groups offensive skills</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Guardian Sphere (50) - Shields the entire group</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Assuage (49) - Buffs the target with an additional avoidance check</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Return to Battle (47) - Buffs the groups hitpoints</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So your 'pure' tank with no utility can:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Buff the groups HPs</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Buff the groups defense</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Buff the groups offense</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) Shield the entire group</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>5) Buff a group member with an additional avoidance check</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>6) Prevent the death of a group member</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>7) Buff your stamina</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00><img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Shield an ally</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hell of a lot of utility for a class that purports to have none.</FONT></P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<P><FONT color=#ffff00>I disgaree with your terminology MrDizzi - pure and best have connotations that don't work well in an archetype system like EQ2.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>However to your point about utility, let me dig for a moment, </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>Starting with highest and working back</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Unyiel</FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>ding Vigilance (60) - Shields allies</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Tower of Stone (5<img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> - Utility to decrease damage whilst using shield</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Steely Conviction (56) - Stamina buff</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Wall of Might (55) - Roots opponent</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Sentry Watch (55) - Prevents death of ally</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Commanding Aura (54) - Buffs group resistance to peircing, slashing, crushing</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Call of Defense (52) - Buffs the groups defense score</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Call to War (51) - Buffs the groups offensive skills</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Guardian Sphere (50) - Shields the entire group</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Assuage (49) - Buffs the target with an additional avoidance check</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Return to Battle (47) - Buffs the groups hitpoints</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>So your 'pure' tank with no utility can:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) Buff the groups HPs</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Buff the groups defense</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Buff the groups offense</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) Shield the entire group</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>5) Buff a group member with an additional avoidance check</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>6) Prevent the death of a group member</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>7) Buff your stamina</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00><img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Shield an ally</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Hell of a lot of utility for a class that purports to have none.</FONT></P><hr></blockquote>Ahh I see where your going with this. Its a semantics argument. Well ok that I can deal with.Well firstly all those buffs cannot be considered utility as they are absolutely required for us to tank even close to as well as a monk. They are part of us being a TANK. No part of us being a utility class. Utility is like feign death, safefall, sneak, disarm traps, tracking etc.. Likewise i dont classify your flying kicks etc as utility. They are dps.So that leaves guardian sphere and intercept line. Plus the one ca we have that helps reduce hate on someone in group. Now thats an interesting line of thought, because if you actually made them do something useful, we might have a winner here. For me, those are not utility either. Those are still tanking abilities. I add them into my evaluation of how good a tank a guardian is. Currently they add next to nothing.But its interesting, if they made them do something worth while, i would classify that as us tanking better, but you would classify it as utility. We might actually both be happy <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:23 AM</span>

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR><BR>Ahh I see where your going with this. Its a semantics argument. Well ok that I can deal with.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>I'm using your meanings. Pure tank and traditional fighters have no magical 'buff' spells that I know of. They hit things and get hit. Now a Guardian can do lots more than that, utility if you will. Your words, not mine.</FONT><BR><BR>Well firstly all those buffs cannot be considered utility as they are absolutely required for us to tank even close to as well as a monk.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Lol really?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Your Group HP buff = 1 of our DPS attacks</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Your Group Defensive buff = Our invis spell</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>You buff yourself and your group, better than a Monk can do. We get to do an extra attack and can invis. I'll grant the extra attack is useful when in a group, but then when I'm tanking I don't use all my CA arts, especially one that requires each hit to land for the next to hit. To many ripostes, parries, dodges and blocks for it to be useful.</FONT></P> <P>They are part of us being a TANK. No part of us being a utility class. Utility is like feign death, safefall, sneak, disarm traps, tracking etc.. Likewise i dont classify your flying kicks etc as utility. They are dps.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Safefall is a skill, not a combat art therefore not really comparable to any discussion. Feigh Death is not group utility, it is self utility, useful for getting around. We give up an entire combat art line for it, I think thats penalty enough without it crossing into tanking arguments</FONT><BR><BR>So that leaves guardian sphere and intercept line. Plus the one ca we have that helps reduce hate on someone in group. Now thats an interesting line of thought, because if you actually made them do something useful, we might have a winner here. For me, those are not utility either. Those are still tanking abilities.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Call it what you will. Tanking is armour and taking damage and aggro. Everything else is utility. You are not a pure tank, you have tons of 'spells' that 'traditional' fantasy fighters do not have.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Again I state, you have plenty of Utility, as much as the other Tanks out there. Too bad its not what you want - Its GROUP defensive utility. Not 'make be uber' utility.<BR></FONT><BR>But its interesting, if they made them do something worth while, i would classify that as us tanking better, but you would classify it as utility. We might actually both be happy <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>We have a winner, ask for your utility to be improved, not your direct tanking.</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>05:23 AM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[MrDiz]

No Nemi, whatever else ill accept that isnt one of them. Guardians CAs are not spells. They used CA system to represent boths skills and spells to make it more generic. I have a CA that stuns using a shield, a templar has a stun that uses magic. One is a skill the other a spell. But that I suppose is semantics and not important. What is important is its not utility. Utility is something that doesnt affect combat directly. Invis, Speed buffs, teleportation etc. Buffs like call of defence affect combat are part of tanking. If not then a guardian should be able to tank without those buffs as well as a monk. Monks dont need safe fall to tank. They dont need feign death to tank. If those buffs are utlity then we dont need them to tank and our tanking without them should equal yours.

[Veshtan]

Nemi...just one question...why do you dislike Guardians so much that you are unwilling to admit (like Gaige is willing to admit) that we need some utility and DPS upgrades and or tweaks?

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Veshtan wrote:Nemi...just one question...why do you dislike Guardians so much that you are unwilling to admit (like Gaige is willing to admit) that we need some utility and DPS upgrades and or tweaks? <hr></blockquote>Actually in her defence thats exactly what she has asked for.

[Nemi]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Veshtan wrote:<BR>Nemi...just one question...why do you dislike Guardians so much that you are unwilling to admit (like Gaige is willing to admit) that we need some utility and DPS upgrades and or tweaks? <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Check my post history, I'm all for Guardians getting utility and Dps increases, I'm against MrDizzi's attempt to define the Guardian as the 'pure' 'best' tank. That is a path I don't want to see the game going down. We have the archetype system, have had it from day 1. SoE has released a combat revamp to address the tanking disparity. MrDizzi and others would have us return the Guardian heyday of PreLU13.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I've made lots of suggestions on what can be done for Guardians, but was told to can it because I'm not a Guardian, fair enough I'll just continue to fight against those Guardians that want to turn Guardians into 'best' and 'pure' tanks.</FONT><BR></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV>

[Veshtan]

<P>My apologies, Nemi :smileysad:</P> <P>I just read what was listed here and several other posts and they paint a picture of you stating our utility is fine as is, as is our DPS.  That is probably because of the heated arguments you and Dizzi constantly have :smileywink:</P> <P>You and i would be on the same page, then.  I have already given in that SOE is not going to make us back into what we once were, so i want more DPS and i want our entire utility line scrapped and re-made, with all new spells giving us abilites that are useful all the time, not just 1% of the time when things go wrong.</P>

[Ladicav]

<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I've made lots of suggestions on what can be done for Guardians, but was told to can it because I'm not a Guardian, fair enough I'll just continue to fight against those Guardians that want to turn Guardians into 'best' and 'pure' tanks.</FONT><BR></P> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You shouldn't be surprised if you are told to can it. You come across as being deliberately confrontational at times. Sometimes I read your responses to peoples opinions, you seem to do so just for the sake of being confrontational. Just because certain peoples views do not match yours, does not make you right and them wrong, however compelled within yourself to think you are.</P> <P> I wouldn't place much credence in going to see a marriage counsellor, who has never been married, or someone claiming to be an airplane pilot who has only ever flown computer simulations, and so I place the same weight on the views of someone who suddenly has become an expert in the needs of the guardian, who doesn't play one.</P> <P>For the record, I do not want the guardian to be the best tank in the game, and that is coming from a guardian.</P>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote: I'm against MrDizzi's attempt to define the Guardian as the 'pure' 'best' tank. That is a path I don't want to see the game going down. </blockquote>Too late its been this way in live for almost a year, it was this way in beta for the whole time and im willing to bet it was this way in design years before the game was even ready to be tested. The basic warrior with no spells/utilities is so built into the fantasy mentality I doubt it occured to anyone not to have a pure tank in a fantasy game. Until now.Catch 22 for Sony now. They allowed themselves to get bullied into a corner. Now the only way to balance guards is to give them self heals, DPS and some utility which will basically be a totally different class (the armorer monk) OR revamp the tank of tanks <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> They cant do either without causing either monks to leave or all the hardcore fantasy fans to start fading away.My advice is to leave them nerfed for now. Add some dps to keep us quiet (quieter), and then start subtly letting the monks know that your 'vision' is to keep customers. balance the abilites of each class rather than some percieved role for them. A fighter may be a tank but he is many other things. You cant simply remove all non tanking abilites from all fighter classes so claiming they are all tanks and nothing but tanks is silly. Not everyone is happy playing a pure tank. Many people want characters that mix abilites or roles. Why are paladins so popular otherwise?The archetype sytem is fine but remember the root of the word. Some characters will stick fast and hard to the archetypes basic. Some will diversify. Thats the strong point of these type of games.I repeat: Dont do anything silly like giving evac or other utility stuff to Guardians. For gods sake dont give them heals and dont be insane enough to make them dps as well as a berzerker. Nerfed with an identity is favourable to carbon copy repetition.

[Nemi]

<P><FONT color=#ffff00>My apologies for that thread I can see how it can be taken to mean I don't think you have issues. The point of the thread was to show MrDizzi that Guardians are not 'pure' tanks and actually have utility - albeit under utilised and weak.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I believe the focus SoE intended for Guardians was that with a Guardian tanking, your group is safe. I believe Fighters are meant to lose aggro, or at the very least, struggle to maintain it - after all that's what stops the game being trivial isn't it? I know I certainly do against group mobs as a monk.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I'll recap some of the suggestions I had:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) AoE rescue line - giving Guardians a definite edge</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Instead of Intervene where the target still takes % of the damage (and is inefficient as the % is greater than 100 between Guardian and Target) the Guardians get:</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>A Group regenerating Ward - It would stop 1 or 2 hits and slowly regenerate</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Berserkers are direct damage dealing Warriors. Therefore the logical conclusion is the Guardians combat arts should:</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>a) Do more damage whilst,</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>b) Debuffing the mob's resistance to slashing/crushing and piercing (thereby increasing the damage done by the Guardian and group)</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) Introduce a % stun/knockback resist to Hold the Line</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I would also like to see an 'all or nothing approach to group taunts'. Either it succeeds with all mobs, or fails with all mobs. That way you can recast it, instead of currently maybe aggroing 1 out of 5 and having to wait to recast your AOE taunt.</FONT></P>

[Nemi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ladicav wrote:<BR><BR><BR> <P>You shouldn't be surprised if you are told to can it. You come across as being deliberately confrontational at times. Sometimes I read your responses to peoples opinions, you seem to do so just for the sake of being confrontational. Just because certain peoples views do not match yours, does not make you right and them wrong, however compelled within yourself to think you are.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yes I admit I have little patience for those who want to make Guardians superior tanks to the other 5 subclasses. I'm tired of hearing them whine for something that SoE have specifically gone through a long, hard, troublesome combat revamp to address. </FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P> I wouldn't place much credence in going to see a marriage counsellor, who has never been married, or someone claiming to be an airplane pilot who has only ever flown computer simulations, and so I place the same weight on the views of someone who suddenly has become an expert in the needs of the guardian, who doesn't play one.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Which is why I respected those views and stopped posting ideas. However, you don't play this game in isolation, whilst I might not understand all the nuances of the Guardian class, any intelligent and reasonable person can understand the Archetype system and flavour of the classes given the skills and lore. It therefore stands to reason that you can suggest ideas.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>What I wouldn't do is start to take Combat Arts and tell you what needed to be changed for them. I might suggest new lines and agree with the views of other Guardians (i.e remove root from HTL or add knockback/stun resist).</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>For the record, I do not want the guardian to be the best tank in the game, and that is coming from a guardian.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Great, then I wish you all the best for your subclass, I know how it feels to be ignored by SoE.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Veshtan]

<DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff00><BR> </FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>My apologies for that thread I can see how it can be taken to mean I don't think you have issues. The point of the thread was to show MrDizzi that Guardians are not 'pure' tanks and actually have utility - albeit under utilised and weak.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I believe the focus SoE intended for Guardians was that with a Guardian tanking, your group is safe. I believe Fighters are meant to lose aggro, or at the very least, struggle to maintain it - after all that's what stops the game being trivial isn't it? I know I certainly do against group mobs as a monk.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I'll recap some of the suggestions I had:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) AoE rescue line - giving Guardians a definite edge </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>I like this idea, it would give us something other fighters don't have, making us a little more unique, while still only being situational.  Yes, i don't like those used only 1% of the time utilities, and this is one of those, but it would be nice to have.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Instead of Intervene where the target still takes % of the damage (and is inefficient as the % is greater than 100 between Guardian and Target) the Guardians get:</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>A Group regenerating Ward - It would stop 1 or 2 hits and slowly regenerate </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>This, Nemi, is an amazing idea, and i wish i had seen the thread you posted it in.  I don't know about the viability of the regenerating part of it, but it would help us out in some small part for soloing, while once again adding to over-all group safety. (My wife is a wizard, i know she'd love it when she manages to steal aggro from me)</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Berserkers are direct damage dealing Warriors. Therefore the logical conclusion is the Guardians combat arts should:</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>a) Do more damage whilst, </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>Yes! More damage, not too much, but yes.  Perhaps reduce those stupid 1 minute re-cast timers on our high damage combat skills</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>b) Debuffing the mob's resistance to slashing/crushing and piercing (thereby increasing the damage done by the Guardian and group) </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>We had these on a lot of our combat skills before LU13, i really don't understand why they got rid of them, and i wish they'd bring them back.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) Introduce a % stun/knockback resist to Hold the Line </FONT><FONT color=#ff0000>Stun, yes, knockback , no.  I don't want to chase them all over the place everytime knockback goes off :smileytongue:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I would also like to see an 'all or nothing approach to group taunts'. Either it succeeds with all mobs, or fails with all mobs. That way you can recast it, instead of currently maybe aggroing 1 out of 5 and having to wait to recast your AOE taunt.</FONT></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P></DIV>

[Wabit]

<DIV>to the OP...  useful utility...  give me the ability to summon a mendor for myself and group/raid...  its about the most useful thing i can think of since we're wiping raids on resisted taunts on the pull</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wabit</DIV>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote: <P><FONT color=#ffff00>My apologies for that thread I can see how it can be taken to mean I don't think you have issues. The point of the thread was to show MrDizzi that Guardians are not 'pure' tanks and actually have utility - albeit under utilised and weak.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I believe the focus SoE intended for Guardians was that with a Guardian tanking, your group is safe. I believe Fighters are meant to lose aggro, or at the very least, struggle to maintain it - after all that's what stops the game being trivial isn't it? I know I certainly do against group mobs as a monk.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I'll recap some of the suggestions I had:</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) AoE rescue line - giving Guardians a definite edge</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Instead of Intervene where the target still takes % of the damage (and is inefficient as the % is greater than 100 between Guardian and Target) the Guardians get:</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>A Group regenerating Ward - It would stop 1 or 2 hits and slowly regenerate</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Berserkers are direct damage dealing Warriors. Therefore the logical conclusion is the Guardians combat arts should:</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>a) Do more damage whilst,</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>b) Debuffing the mob's resistance to slashing/crushing and piercing (thereby increasing the damage done by the Guardian and group)</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) Introduce a % stun/knockback resist to Hold the Line</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I would also like to see an 'all or nothing approach to group taunts'. Either it succeeds with all mobs, or fails with all mobs. That way you can recast it, instead of currently maybe aggroing 1 out of 5 and having to wait to recast your AOE taunt.</FONT></P> <hr></blockquote> I like options 1 and 4 ... although to me that boosts our tanking not utility <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Point 3 I wasnt sure I liked. Point 2 I didnt like. Way too much like healing. I know you want us to all be hybrids, but I want to stay pure. Option 1 and 4 feel still like pure tanking so those Im open to. Still feel like a non-caster with those options.

[Nemi]

<DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Whatever floats your boat. I'm not a Guardian but I'd back suggestions for utility increase instead of damage absorbtion. The key to all ideas is that they cannot trivialise the game.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>I doubt you could have AoE rescue and Group Ward. Then aggro control is trivialised, noone in the group is in danger. Currently in the game there is no known trivialising CA (well except perhaps Amends, I here that can be exploited for constant aggro).</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[MrDiz]

<P>I swear I must have missed a memo on content being trivial cos I count the money ive spent on repair bills. I think on our server only one or two guilds got enough fabled gear and the right mix of classes to make most the raids even doable, let alone trivial. Tooks us weeks to [Removed for Content] out the MT and get our tactics together to make even Drayek raid controllable (and it was never trivial).</P> <P>And the idea that MT could go afk in a prismatics raid, or Vox? All i can say is exploit alert!</P> <p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:08 AM</span>

[Timzil]

I'd like the same group ability that every other fighter has. That is the ability to kill the mob before it kills you. That's the only thing that counts in these dumbed down games. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Spudge, PH for a 57 Guardian</DIV>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Drulak wrote:<BR> <P>BUT we do not as yet have any utility - and if we do i would like you to tell me what they are , so i can search my knowledge book and dig them out <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Intervene, call to arms, guardian's call, call to battle (group offensive buff + self defense buff), rallying cry, battle cry, commanding presence (group defense + sta + hp buff), stand firm, never surrender, viligance, battle tactics, do or die, return to battle, sentinel, safeguard, sentry, allay, call of command, call of protection, iron will, iron conviction, guardian sphere.</P> <P>LoL and that's just to level 50.</P> <P>From 51 to 60 you get:</P> <P>Call to war, call of defense, commanding aura, sentry watch, unyielding vengeance.</P> <P>Yeah, no utility :smileyindifferent:<BR></P>

[Allaanon]

<DIV>Just fix us thanks.  You made the game, and we played your game.  We won't continue to if you just make us ditch what we've been working towards.</DIV>

[Gungo]

<DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Berserkers are direct damage dealing Warriors. Therefore the logical conclusion is the Guardians combat arts should:</FONT></P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>a) Do more damage whilst,</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>b) Debuffing the mob's resistance to slashing/crushing and piercing (thereby increasing the damage done by the Guardian and group)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>__________________________________________________ _________________________________________________</FONT></P> <P>This utility can be gaurdian themed if role played well for instance a debuff that lowers the mobs peircing/crushing/slash skill cna be named Disarm and have an animation of the guard parrying. A skill that lowers the NPC resistance to slash peirce or crushing can be called "Armour Break" allowing the gaurd to use his knowledge of armours to weaken the opponents armour with strategic blows. </P> <P>a Group ward can be conferred as the gaurdian using his shield to block hits on the group. </P> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:16 PM</span>

[MrDiz]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Drulak wrote:<BR> <P>BUT we do not as yet have any utility - and if we do i would like you to tell me what they are , so i can search my knowledge book and dig them out <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Intervene, call to arms, guardian's call, call to battle (group offensive buff + self defense buff), rallying cry, battle cry, commanding presence (group defense + sta + hp buff), stand firm, never surrender, viligance, battle tactics, do or die, return to battle, sentinel, safeguard, sentry, allay, call of command, call of protection, iron will, iron conviction, guardian sphere.</P> <P>LoL and that's just to level 50.</P> <P>From 51 to 60 you get:</P> <P>Call to war, call of defense, commanding aura, sentry watch, unyielding vengeance.</P> <P>Yeah, no utility :smileyindifferent:<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>You wanna increase the 'utilities' like Call of Defence? Be my guest <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I also have a mitigation 'utilitly' buff that lasts 30 secs and retimers on 3mins. Maybe change that to "until cancelled"? Hell that list of 'utilities' you gave? You wanna improve my "Stand Firm" line of 'utilities"? Oh yeah!! They can give me some lovin in that department and ill forget all about this silly tanking thing <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <br></P> <P>All this time its a definition problem. I though utilities were non combat things like feign death, safefall, evac and water breathing. Didnt know you meant that guardians needed those 'utility' buffs u listed enhancing. I misjudged you. My apologies. <br></P> <P>BTW are guardians the only ones that have an intercept CA now? Used to be a lvl 6 fighter CA. Not that they are useful. I mean 'guardian shield'? Yeah right <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Ive used it once. When I was doing my new job: making our SK feel good about himself by buffing him and hitting autofollow. You know why? I was bored. Know how many people noticed? I was too bored to ask.</P><p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:17 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<DIV>Oh I see, you thought buffing the groups defense, offense and HP was vital to your tanking?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So I guess my group haste is a tank ability, not utility.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So my only true utility is safefall, FD and invis, right?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Heal = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avoidance buff = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mit buffs = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>CAs = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>STR/WIS buff = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Self-haste = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wow, so we don't really have utility either.  Nice.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So now when you guys argue about balance they only have to balance you against my safefall, fd and invis.  </DIV><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:22 PM</span>

[Aethane]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV>Oh I see, you thought buffing the groups defense, offense and HP was vital to your tanking?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So I guess my group haste is a tank ability, not utility.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So my only true utility is safefall, FD and invis, right?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Heal = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avoidance buff = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mit buffs = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>CAs = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>STR/WIS buff = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Self-haste = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wow, so we don't really have utility either.  Nice.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So now when you guys argue about balance they only have to balance you against my safefall, fd and invis.  </DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>10-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:22 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I vote we take those fun skills away from you, then let you live a day or two that way. That's what it is like being a guardian, cept we take more damage, do less damage than you.

[Allaanon]

<P>I applaud Nemi for coming in here and actually tossing up some good ideas.  I may not agree with all of them but they have some merit.</P> <P>If I cannot be defined as 'pure tank' or 'best tank' because that is not their vision, then so be it.  But leave me as a 'Guardian'.  Give me actual effective spells that 'guard'. The AoE rescue line is a decent idea, not adding 'too much' dps but having abilities to decrease the npc's dps significantly would fit in.  In general, if I am not the main tank in a certain group or raid, I am responsible for making the main tank take less damage through protecting him or protecting others in the group/raid from out of control mobs.</P> <P>Gaige... I appreciate you coming here and voicing your concerns as well.  However, they are completely negative in tone.  95% of your posts are directly picking on someone, twisting their words, etc.  Can we please try to keep things productive?  I don't really mean this as a slam, but it's a large waste of time and only hinders us having any kind of meaningful discussion with/for devs.</P>

[Gungo]

<P>I'll probably end up playing a guard more often as well, but these are the ideas/changes i would like seen done.</P> <P></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT></P><FONT color=#ffff00>1) AoE rescue line - (magic resist based) like old rescue ~900-1000hate and 1 agro position usable once every 5 min. Magic based if guards current AOE taunt is mental based. That gives guards 2 resist types for taunts.</FONT> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>2) Change intervene lines for guards to equal 100% or less total damage taken. Change Guardian sphere into </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>A Group regenerating Ward - It would stop 1 or 2 hits and slowly regenerate. ~2,500. (althought guards should have an entire line dedicated to a group ward for all levels)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>3) Remove shield damage from "Tower of Stone", (If they want also add a new Tower of stone type line that has a % chance to block AOE's on group but damages shields 10-20% based on quality of spell.)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>4) </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>Do more damage by possibly reducing timers on some combat arts, adding a small hate gain to peel lost agro on combat arts and adding a</FONT><FONT color=#ffff00> Debuf to the mob's resistance to slashing/crushing and piercing (thereby increasing the damage done by the Guardian and group)</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>5) Introduce a % stun resist to Hold the Line, Remove root from hold the line. Allow HTL to proc thru wards.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>6) increase the effectiveness of offensive stance by adding a small % to proc a stun or stifle as well as increased offensive damage.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I would also like to see an 'all or nothing approach to group taunts'. Either it succeeds with all mobs, or fails with all mobs. That way you can recast it, instead of currently maybe aggroing 1 out of 5 and having to wait to recast your AOE taunt.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Finally SoE should explain what shield factor actual does since they revamped it so much. If shield factor effects avodiance then it would give a logical comparison between sheilds tiers/types. If both kite and tower give a base 10% block, shield factor should add to avodiance or at minimal spell resist or mitgation therefor a shield with a shield factor of 700 should give a set increase and a shiedl factor of 900 a higher increase. Even if it is minimal any sort of comparison and upgrade will be recommended.</FONT></P> <DIV>Alot of the above was posted by nemi for a bit and other gaurds and non gaurds. Those sort of utility will help gaurds solo a ton better, group alot better, and increase thier tanking while also allowing for a more skillful playing.</DIV>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote: <DIV>Oh I see, you thought buffing the groups defense, offense and HP was vital to your tanking?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So I guess my group haste is a tank ability, not utility.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So my only true utility is safefall, FD and invis, right?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Heal = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Avoidance buff = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mit buffs = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>CAs = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>STR/WIS buff = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Self-haste = help tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wow, so we don't really have utility either.  Nice.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So now when you guys argue about balance they only have to balance you against my safefall, fd and invis.  </DIV><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:22 PM</span><hr></blockquote> Yes pretty much. Apart from the healing. Thats not tank. Thats heal imo. But the rest, yeah there your tanking abilities for me. The things that are out of balance are you get some utility (safefall, fd and invis - and i never mentioned others btw), your heal, and your dps. For me the utility is the least of my concerns. Its like 2 or 3%. The heal is another 3 or 4%. And the DPS is like 10-15%. With your tanking being 100% of a guards I balance u at 115% - 122% as effective all round as a guard. Looks like we just not communicating what we think of as tank / utility / heal etc <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Now they cant give us heal and utility (by my definition), and I really cant see them giving us more dps than u, so we need some 'defensive utility' (which i call tanking) to balance us. Now your happy cos its 'utility' and im happy cos its helping me defend the group (which i call tanking)...... is that about it?

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Yes pretty much. Apart from the healing. Thats not tank. Thats heal imo. But the rest, yeah there your tanking abilities for me. The things that are out of balance are you get some utility (safefall, fd and invis - and i never mentioned others btw), your heal, and your dps. For me the utility is the least of my concerns. Its like 2 or 3%. The heal is another 3 or 4%. And the DPS is like 10-15%. With your tanking being 100% of a guards I balance u at 115% - 122% as effective all round as a guard. Looks like we just not communicating what we think of as tank / utility / heal etc <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Now they cant give us heal and utility (by my definition), and I really cant see them giving us more dps than u, so we need some 'defensive utility' (which i call tanking) to balance us. Now your happy cos its 'utility' and im happy cos its helping me defend the group (which i call tanking)...... is that about it?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Healing helps my tanking.  Are you telling me you can tank w/o being healed?  No.  So healing = helps tanking.  Kthx.<BR>

[Krooner]

<DIV>Gaige wrote.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Healing helps my tanking.  Are you telling me you can tank w/o being healed?  No.  So healing = helps tanking.  Kthx.<BR></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hmmmm Ahh I see.  So if 5 classes hae a heal or health regen buff and one doesnt.... Doesnt that creat an unfair advantage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>YES IT DOES... <Shakes Head up and down></DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Shizzirri]

<P>Wow monks can heal themselves every 3 minutes, big advantage there.</P> <P>Oh well at least we can still make our hearts explode..</P> <P>But to make it fair guardians should have a CH they can use every ten seconds that way healers can focus on other things...like dps...</P> <P>Fix taunts and I'll be happy</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Warbird1 wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hmmmm Ahh I see.  So if 5 classes hae a heal or health regen buff and one doesnt.... Doesnt that creat an unfair advantage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>YES IT DOES... <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>No it doesn't.<BR>

[Krooner]

<P>Ok so if 5 classes clearly have an advantage in healing themselves... why would it break the game having one that just doesnt take as much damage equal in effect you the other 5's ability to heal ?</P> <P> </P>

[Thanous]

Gaige, My original intent for this thread was ideas to make the Guardian subclass more unique and useful for it's intended role in groups.  To that end, what would we like to see besides sentinel, allay, and such. However, this thread got off track too quickly for anyone to actualy post any good ideas and is now just another contest between those who don't want to be nerfed, and those who have hard feelings. <div></div>

[Krooner]

<DIV>Thanous.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was about to bring it back on topic.</DIV> <DIV>If we cant have heals then give us the ability to absorb 1000 HP's of damage via a self ward.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Warbird1 on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:27 PM</span>

[Thanous]

How does the self ward help us save the group when it gets in too deep?  Our stated purpose and nitche is to have abilities that help Guardians prevent the group from a wipe.  A self ward is not a group minded spell to me. <div></div>

[Ichabo]

<span><blockquote><hr>Thanous wrote:How does the self ward help us save the group when it gets in too deep?  Our stated purpose and nitche is to have abilities that help Guardians prevent the group from a wipe.  A self ward is not a group minded spell to me. <div></div><hr></blockquote> Well if you could use such a ward you would probably not die, the mobs would not run amok and your group lives. So, its a group saving buff. <span>:smileywink:</span></span><div></div>

[MrDiz]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR><BR>Yes pretty much. Apart from the healing. Thats not tank. Thats heal imo. But the rest, yeah there your tanking abilities for me. The things that are out of balance are you get some utility (safefall, fd and invis - and i never mentioned others btw), your heal, and your dps. For me the utility is the least of my concerns. Its like 2 or 3%. The heal is another 3 or 4%. And the DPS is like 10-15%. With your tanking being 100% of a guards I balance u at 115% - 122% as effective all round as a guard. Looks like we just not communicating what we think of as tank / utility / heal etc <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Now they cant give us heal and utility (by my definition), and I really cant see them giving us more dps than u, so we need some 'defensive utility' (which i call tanking) to balance us. Now your happy cos its 'utility' and im happy cos its helping me defend the group (which i call tanking)...... is that about it?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Healing helps my tanking.  Are you telling me you can tank w/o being healed?  No.  So healing = helps tanking.  Kthx.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>It depends on what im tanking for. But yeah usually i need a healer, and yes I will admit it I need a healer more than you ...... sorry whats your point? Healing helps tanking yes. But it isnt tanking, and it isnt utility. Its healing. Like DPS is DPS even though technically you could say it helps tanking cos the thing wont hit you for as long.</P> <P><BR>Where are you going with this argument? For a second I thought we were getting somewhere with the 'defensive utility' line of thought. Gonna try to connect with you again to see if your actually here to communicate or not.</P> <P><BR>There are some basic roles in rpg games: Tanks, DPS, Healer, Crowd Control and Non-Combat Utility. Crowd contol was pretty new with the advent of EQ1. And utility is a very small item as it is rare a group says "Hey we need a utility guy!". Hence the core triumvate of tank/healer/dps.</P> <P><BR>Now going with the new reality now of all fighters are tanks. Thats their primary role. Therefore they must be equal at that is your stance on this. However all fighters have some crossover into other roles. Now monks have a DPS advantage for sure. Some fighters also crossover into the healer role. For monks its self only giving a fairly substantial solo advantage. Neither have crowd control that I know of. Monks also crossover into the non-combat utility giving some slight and useful, but not overly unbalancing, advantages. In short: equal tank, nice dps advantage, nice but non critical utility advantage and a substantial solo advantage due to a small yet worthwhile heal. You also seem to agree that guardians need 'something' to balance this out</P> <P><BR>What you seem to be suggesting is that there should be some combat utility. And that this type of utility is what we should get to balance your heal/dps/utility(non combat) advantage. In our case a defensive combat utility. A line of intercepts that actually did something worth while. Or one of your other suggestions. Some utility that is 'defensive'.</P> <P><BR>And you are not worried that giving us the 'defensive' utility advantage might make people want us more when 'defensive' is what they need. They will pick the offensive tanks when they need fast exp, little down time or are on a timed part of a quest etc. But then pick the defensive tank for things that all that matters is you stay alive and keep the party alive for the one encounter.</P><p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>10-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:48 PM</span>

[Gaige]

I have no problem with certain fighters being the best tank in certain situations, as long as those situations are still possible without them.

[Greyto]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR>I have no problem with certain fighters being the best tank in certain situations, as long as those situations are still possible without them. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>well as long as we cleared that with you Gaige I guess we should all feel better.</P> <P> </P>

[Ladicav]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ladicav wrote:<BR><BR><BR> <P>You shouldn't be surprised if you are told to can it. You come across as being deliberately confrontational at times. Sometimes I read your responses to peoples opinions, you seem to do so just for the sake of being confrontational. Just because certain peoples views do not match yours, does not make you right and them wrong, however compelled within yourself to think you are.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Yes I admit I have little patience for those who want to make Guardians superior tanks to the other 5 subclasses. I'm tired of hearing them whine for something that SoE have specifically gone through a long, hard, troublesome combat revamp to address. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>SOE have gone through a Long Hard Troublesome combat revamp? Are you playing the same EQ2 as me? I do not see it. Reducing everyones avoidance, mitigation and increasing the power of mobs does not a revamp make. It screwed up a number of classes, it totally botched raiding for many weeks and it has caused many players to just become dissillusioned with what was released. I do not think they worked neither long nor hard nor had a real true think tank about what should have been done. They just made sweeping changes, without regard to how it would affect gameplay and the way it turned out, none if it even looked like it was even play tested extensively. Only NOW are they making some moves to try and fix what they did to various classes and trying to wind back the power of mobs, especially raid encounters. What the game needed was well thought out, properly implemented tweaks. However, if you want to convince yourself that the game needed the trainwreck that was LU13 on release, go ahead, but I for one, will not agree with you.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P> I wouldn't place much credence in going to see a marriage counsellor, who has never been married, or someone claiming to be an airplane pilot who has only ever flown computer simulations, and so I place the same weight on the views of someone who suddenly has become an expert in the needs of the guardian, who doesn't play one.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Which is why I respected those views and stopped posting ideas. However, you don't play this game in isolation, whilst I might not understand all the nuances of the Guardian class, any intelligent and reasonable person can understand the Archetype system and flavour of the classes given the skills and lore. It therefore stands to reason that you can suggest ideas.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Well, it's the nuances that are the issue. How much mitigation is good for a Guardian without being overpowering, compared to how much avoidance? Should AOE taunts only work on those mobs that do not resist it? A lot of these things you can only quantify by "feeling" the class. Then you have to compare those findings to what is written in SOEs description of the class and see if they stand up. If they don't, then the SOE description of what the class is meant to be, is not accurate, and at the end of the day, that's why you start that particular class, because you believe that what the information SOE put forwards is what you are buying into. I respect as an observer you can comment on the more obvious things. When it gets down to nitty gritty details, I want a person that has lived it and felt things by seat of the pants. I cannot go over to the monk boards and complain they have too much avoidance, because the truth is, I do not really know if they do or not. Maybe their avoidance is what it is meant to be, and it is mitigation that is warped, which then makes it seem that avoidance based tanks seem to take less damage in a single target encounter, or whatever.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>What I wouldn't do is start to take Combat Arts and tell you what needed to be changed for them. I might suggest new lines and agree with the views of other Guardians (i.e remove root from HTL or add knockback/stun resist).</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>Well any support is welcomed. And I feel many Guardians are looking for ways to make the class more like a Guardian again. Many really do not want to be the only tank once more, and to be honest I'm sympathetic towards what other defensive tank type classes were facing, but robbing Peter to pay Paul type changes just do not cut it, and I think that is where a lot of the anger and passion about what has happened to Guardians stems from.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#66ccff>It could have been done so much better, but instead we got the dogs breakfast that is currently in play, and the insult is, we PAY to be treated this way.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>For the record, I do not want the guardian to be the best tank in the game, and that is coming from a guardian.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Great, then I wish you all the best for your subclass, I know how it feels to be ignored by SoE.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>