All these other fighters are crazy

[Wasuna]

<DIV>Guardian are asking for DPS and utility to be increased in some manner so that we can fill a role other than being the MT. All the other fighters are screaming and yelling about this. I think this is just crazy. I'm personally asking for something that would allow me to NOT be the main tank and they yell at the suggestions.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Other fighters, if Guardians get some form of change like this it means we can be moved out of the main tank role for other to take the slot.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not asking to be made a DPS machine and I do not want utility that makes everybody green with envy. I just want to be able to change roles like other fighters so I don't have to fight for the main tank role just to be included.</DIV>

[Pry]

<P>Guardians can tank the best 1/2 of 1% of all of the content in the game.  Therefore, they are "working as intended" to some people. </P> <P>Forget the solo game, casual game, quest game, grouping game, or small raids with your buddies, instances, etc. etc. etc.  Forget nerfed gear, nerfed taunts, abilities that force you into a secondary role and forces you to group because of this and your ability to solo has been defunct.</P> <P>The argument is that Guardians aren't broken because they can tank 1/2 of 1% of content in the game the best. </P> <P>But in any other role, they are the clearly inferior tank.   That reason alone is why they need to revert it back to pre-LU13 and fix problems with specific classes without nerfing other ones to do it. </P> <P>I swear someone's taking the glue.</P>

[mastersard]

<P>Here's how to get Guardians Fixed:</P> <P>1) Go to Fan Fair</P> <P>2) Kiss Dev [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]</P> <P>3) Go to the forums and post...alot.</P>

[Gungo]

<P>I don't know what you think wasuna, but i actually agree with you. IMHO your offensive stance needs work. </P> <P>Your offensive stance should be made to do decent dps at least comparable to a zerker in defensive stance.</P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>ideas to achieve that?</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>Add haste back to off stance</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text>or maybe a dot proc or debuff proc.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=time_text> < actually thats a decent idea a debuff proc would make having an extra guard on raids in off stance useful.</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>01-03-2006</span> <span class=time_text>04:34 PM</span>

[Macross_JR]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote:<div></div> <div></div> <p>I don't know what you think wasuna, but i actually agree with you. IMHO your offensive stance needs work. </p> <p>Your offensive stance should be made to do decent dps at least comparable to a zerker in defensive stance.</p> <p><span class="time_text">ideas to achieve that?</span></p> <p><span class="time_text">Add haste back to off stance</span></p> <p><span class="time_text">or maybe a dot proc or debuff proc.</span></p> <p><span class="time_text"> < actually thats a decent idea a debuff proc would make having an extra guard on raids in off stance useful.</span></p><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class="date_text">01-03-2006</span> <span class="time_text">04:34 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>I'm sorry but I don't think a debuff proc would be all that great, I mean it would be like oh wow another ability that other classes can do better.  Now an offensive proc would be nice to actually help our dps.</span><div></div>

[uux]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote: <p>I don't know what you think wasuna, but i actually agree with you. IMHO your offensive stance needs work. </p> <p>Your offensive stance should be made to do decent dps at least comparable to a zerker in defensive stance.</p> <p><span class="time_text"> </span></p></blockquote> <p><span class="time_text">I'm not sure what that even means.  You want the AoE damage of a zerker and to keep all your other taunts and buffs?  See, I'll agree guardian DPS is pretty weak. But should you be the equivalent to a zerker in DPS?  That DPS is how a zerker holds aggro.  That DPS comes from class defining skills.  Many of our attacks are quite similar if you eliminate the class defining ones.  If you're simply assuming the zerker defensive stance does some kind of damage,  or adds anything to offense, you're wrong.   It has penalties associated with it.   The DPS comes  from somewhere else when the zerker is in defensive stance and you really need to look at the entire skill set to make a comparison.  You'll see what zerkers gave up for that DPS. </span></p> <blockquote> <p><span class="time_text">Add haste back to off stance </span></p> <p><span class="time_text"> </span></p> </blockquote> <p><span class="time_text"></span>That's actually reasonable without being overpowered.  I'd say about a 10% increase (at adept 3) would put your autoattack on par with a zerker's against a single target if all equipment and stats were equal, and the only buffs up were the offensive stance.  Add a DPS increase as well (increased weapon damage) and maybe slightly more haste to offset a few other differences in the classes and put your autoattack higher than a zerker.  A zerker has buffs that will keep them ahead of you still (and rightly so, going berserk is the whole point of a zerker), and the actual zerker proc on the offensive stance hits multiple targets.  Now, this increased damage however, has increased hate with it. <span class="time_text"></span></p> <blockquote> <p><span class="time_text">or maybe a dot proc or debuff proc. </span></p> <p><span class="time_text"> </span></p> </blockquote> <p><span class="time_text"></span>A proc can become quite powerful very fast.   The zerker proc is a 10% chance for a melee attack to do an AoE encounter based melee hit (limit of 3 targets).  The damage at master 1 with capped str is about the same as decent 2h weapon.  This is also a T5 skill.  I suppose it'll only get better with the next expansion.  Now, almost every combat art the berserker gets is melee based.  I'm sure guardians follow the same pattern.  Any combat art in my arsenal can trigger it as well as autoattack (similar to Reinforcement used with Tremor or Goading Assault).  It actually contributes quite a bit of damage.  I could see a proc on the guardian stance helping quite a bit, but also being tricky to get just right. <span class="time_text"></span></p> </span><div></div>

[Gaige]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mastersardis wrote:<BR> <P>Here's how to get Guardians Fixed:</P> <P>1) Go to Fan Fair</P> <P>2) Kiss Dev [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]</P> <P>3) Go to the forums and post...alot.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Not just Fan Faire.. you must go to the Community Summit too.  Its much more elite.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and kissing butt doesn't work in and of itself, but I hear buying the devs lots of alcholic drinks works.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/sarcasm</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Please blame your woes on something legitimate, other than fan faire, the devs and my post count.<BR></DIV>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote: <DIV></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mastersardis wrote: <P>Here's how to get Guardians Fixed:</P> <P>1) Go to Fan Fair</P> <P>2) Kiss Dev [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]</P> <P>3) Go to the forums and post...alot.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Not just Fan Faire.. you must go to the Community Summit too.  Its much more elite.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and kissing butt doesn't work in and of itself, but I hear buying the devs lots of alcholic drinks works.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/sarcasm</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Please blame your woes on something legitimate, other than fan faire, the devs and my post count.</DIV><hr></blockquote>Why do you come here? Thats a serious question by the way. Really trying to figure out your motivations now. The devs have already stated nothing is gonna change. And you know nothing you say will help, in fact lets face it, you fuel the debate.Its over. Youre happy. Every fighter can now tank, and tank equally. Nothing that we or you will change that. So why are you here? Cos someone insulted you? And? So what? You go to the guardian forum and basically insult them non stop for months (wether that was your intention or not)... of course your going to get some back. And I can guarantee that if the nerf stick ever hits monks there will be one of two lame [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] guardians who will troll your boards for revenge. But whats the point? Whats it to achieve?<p>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <span class=date_text>01-04-2006</span> <span class=time_text>03:37 AM</span>

[JuJut]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR>And I can guarantee that if the nerf stick ever hits monks there will be one of two lame [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] guardians who will troll your boards for revenge. But whats the point? Whats it to achieve? <P>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <SPAN class=date_text>01-04-2006</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:37 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>They've already been there and done that. Prior to LU 13 the Monk forum had plenty of Guardians telling us that if we wanted to tank we should've created a Guardian.<BR>

[mastersard]

Which was true.  And yet, you (monks) persuaded SOE to make the LU13 changes.  So where's the differance.  If we complain long enough, or leave the game in great enough numbers, SOE will listen.

[JuJut]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mastersardis wrote:<BR>Which was true.  And yet, you (monks) persuaded SOE to make the LU13 changes.  So where's the differance.  If we complain long enough, or leave the game in great enough numbers, SOE will listen. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>No it wasn't true, it was trolling. The archetype system was described well before the launch of the game and it specifically stated that all members of an archetype were intended to fulfill the basic function of an archetype equally well. For fighters it was tanking. There was many a thread discussing avoidance tanking and mitigation tanking during development. I know because I was there. The archetype system was broken before LU 13 and that update was an attempt to fix it. The prime benficiaries of the broken system before LU 13 were Guardians and Templars. Its not surprising that they're the most bitter about the balancing of the system. You can hatch all the conspiracy theories you want about monks or even a single monk with an obscene post count being responsible for your woes. Their own internal data showed where and how the system was broken.</P> <P>Where's the difference? Non-guardians and non-templars wanted the system described and advertised implemented. Apparently you want the broken system reinstated. By all means complain (within the forum guidelines) and vote with your pocketbook. I wouldn't pay to play a game I didn't enjoy and neither should you.<BR></P>

[mastersard]

<P>Make no mistake: I enjoy the game.  I enjoy playing a berserker, which is every bit the tank the guardian needs to be.  However, 1 full year's worth of my free time went in to leveling my Guardian.  And now that time is all but wasted.  Why?  Because all fighters need to tank the same?  Nope.  Because a few vocal people wanted it that way <EM>after</EM> they played the game into their mid-levels.</P> <P>The guardian was nerfed for the sake of an archtype system that SOE is now getting rid of, 2 months after LU13.  Why?  Because you can't balance subclasses at the archtype level, and you can't balance Mit tanks vs Avoid tanks in the current system.  The archtype system keeps SOE from making leather wearers into DPS classes.  Once that happens, then plate wearers can be made the "best tanks."  I would not be surprised to see crusaders made more of a DSP/Tank hybrid, too.</P> <P>Imagine how happy we will all be in Feb, when we all log in to see what our classes have been changed to...</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mastersardis wrote:<BR> <P>The guardian was nerfed for the sake of an archtype system that SOE is now getting rid of, 2 months after LU13.  Why?  Because you can't balance subclasses at the archtype level, and you can't balance Mit tanks vs Avoid tanks in the current system.  The archtype system keeps SOE from making leather wearers into DPS classes.  Once that happens, then plate wearers can be made the "best tanks."  I would not be surprised to see crusaders made more of a DSP/Tank hybrid, too.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That's a pretty big leap of faith you're making.  Contributing the death of the archetype system and the way classes are balanced to the restructuring of the newbiew pre lvl20 game to be more flavored.</P> <P>Have fun with that.<BR></P>

[Wasuna]

<DIV>If you don't want us to be the only tank then you have to allow Guardians a secondary role. There are no other choices and all this discussion is just white wash to make people feel OK about the way things are.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <UL> <LI>Guardians are equal tanks.</LI> <LI>Guardians have no other role that they can be effective or desired in compared to the other fighter classes.</LI></UL>

[Gungo]

<P>Back on topic</P> <P>Why can't a guardian in offensive stance do the same damage as a bezerker in defensive stance</P> <P>What that means i was asked. Is that means to me in DPS ranking is  </P> <P>1) Guardian in defensive stance </P> <P>2) zerker in defensive stance</P> <P>3) guardian in offensive stance</P> <P>4 Zerker in offensive stance</P> <P>Many guard and zerkers share similar skill lines.  Under this rankign guards will be able to solo/ and small group easier. This is not asking for a zeker nerf its asking for gaurds to do more DPS. (In other words buff guards) Zerker currently do great DPS for DEFENSIVE stance. there is no compeling reason why a guard in OFFENSIVE stance can't do equal or slightly better dps to a zerker in DEFENSIVE stance. If they did up guard dps in Offensive stance Zerker would still do more DPS in Offesnive stance.</P>

[JuJut]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mastersardis wrote:<BR> <P>Make no mistake: I enjoy the game.  I enjoy playing a berserker, which is every bit the tank the guardian needs to be.  However, 1 full year's worth of my free time went in to leveling my Guardian.  And now that time is all but wasted.  </P> <P><EM>You and I clearly have very different ideas about what constitutes a waste of time. At various times I've played Asheron's Call, EverQuest, Dark Age of Camelot, Anarchy Online, Star Wars Galaxies, Asheron's Call II, EverQuest 2, World of Warcraft and a short stint in Guild Wars. According your definition They were all a monumental waste of time because I'm no longer playing them. To me they were not a waste of time but a good investment of entertainment money because I enjoyed playing them while I played and left when I no longer enjoyed them. You seem to have enjoyed playing a guardian and now enjoy playing a berserker. IMO your misery is self inflicted.</EM></P> <P>Why?  Because all fighters need to tank the same?  Nope.  Because a few vocal people wanted it that way <EM>after</EM> they played the game into their mid-levels.</P> <P><EM>Nope, you were right the first time, all fighters have to fulfill the basic function (tanking) equally well.</EM></P> <P>The guardian was nerfed for the sake of an archtype system that SOE is now getting rid of, 2 months after LU13.  </P> <P><EM>I missed that anouncement, provide a link to back up your claim. What I saw was earlier entry into the subclasses.</EM></P> <P>Why?  Because you can't balance subclasses at the archtype level, and you can't balance Mit tanks vs Avoid tanks in the current system.  </P> <P><EM>If your opinion is correct then Vanguard SoH has some nightmares ahead. They don't call them archetypes, with regard to fighters they distinguish between offensive and defensive but each category has several entries. I'm glad I won't be playing because I can see all the kvetching between the variants of defensive fighters. Then again maybe you're wrong and balancing can occur.</EM></P> <P>The archtype system keeps SOE from making leather wearers into DPS classes. </P> <P><EM>Thank goodness, another plus for the archetype system whatever it may be called.</EM></P> <P>Once that happens, then plate wearers can be made the "best tanks."  I would not be surprised to see crusaders made more of a DSP/Tank hybrid, too.</P> <P><EM>Time will tell.</EM></P> <P>Imagine how happy we will all be in Feb, when we all log in to see what our classes have been changed to...</P> <P><EM>I anticipate being happy in February. Dunno if you will or not but if you're happy now I suspect you will be then too.</EM></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[JuJut]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wasuna wrote:<BR> <DIV>If you don't want us to be the only tank then you have to allow Guardians a secondary role. <BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>I'm fine with that. I think guardians should excel in defensive group buffs among all the fighters. How's that sound? Like all the fighter subclasses some other archetype will fill the secondary role better than a guardian but since thats true for all the fighter subclasses its equitable.<BR>

[a6eaq]

<DIV>Wasuma you are correct.  If all fighters tank equally, but there is a gap in any other aspect, then the classes are by definition, not balanced.  The funny thing is that Gaige has agreed that our DPS is too low and needs attention.  I do not agree with him on many things he says, but he has stated we need some attention.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>However, there are a few others that troll our forums and do indeed call others morons/stupid/mentally challenged and attack any idea of improving our DPS or utility so that we can have a secondary role in a group like they do.  They do not want us to have a secondary role at all.  The reason these individuals flame our boards and derail our threads is because they are bitter about how we were so far ahead of them in the beginning and fear us ever getting any improvements to our class.  They ARE those kids that got shoved into lockers in High School, beat down by the uber jock of the school on a daily basis, and were relicated to looking their Daddy's hidden stash of girly mags to even see a naked girl.  They were so traumatized by the horrific time they had as teenagers that they go into attack mode at any sign of us even remotely recovering from our nerfed status.  After all, they would still get shoved into lockers f this game where real life and the only chance they feel they have of ever getting to feel big and bad is too troll and bait, roll and bait.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Those individuals are truly troubled souls in need of some serious self esteem.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gungo, I have no idea why your idea of matching us more to a Zerker couldn't help.  They are the exact opposite of us.  It might help if we had some real numbers to actually look at though.  It would be interesting to see, at least it would be interesting to me.  </DIV><p>Message Edited by a6eaq on <span class=date_text>01-05-2006</span> <span class=time_text>06:43 AM</span>

[Tueffelhun]

<DIV>BAH ye all be drinkin' thee Dwarven ale too much! *hiccupp*</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I took a Paladin to level 52 and loved him until SOE decided to change the entire Paladin class with their massive revamp of combat changes...what did I do? I started a Guardian and now have him at level 50 and enjoy every minute of it. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If they even for an instant think of nuking the Guardian classes (I love the fight for MT in a group and duel for that spot often...have yet to not be MT btw) my head shall surely begin to spin and I will go into some karate style fit (like a bad version of Matrix + the Excorsist!) and destroy my PC and no longer be able to play this game. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Make up your stinkin' mind and stick to it please! Don't let us chose a specific character/class because of what you have told us that class is about, then wait until we have invested time and effort into in, then pull the rug out from under us by totally revamping them. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Looking through these posts and getting a bit more active/vocal I am begining to understand [Removed for Content] SOE keeps making these ridiculously idiotic game changes...it's because a handful of very vocal individuals are here on the boards "making waves" while the rest of us are out uber twinking our alts and rolling mobs for their loot. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>OK here is an idea, how about having a voting option for these changes when we all log-on? How about maybe even doing this BEFORE you make changes and tiff everyone off? Do the same thing as you did on EQ1 and ask the darn question and get ALL THE ANSWERS! Do not please for an instant think that these boards and their few that come on them are accounting for any decent section of the viewpoint of your players/subscribers!  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SAVE THE GAME FOR ALL OF US! Not just the few on these boards. Solicit our opinions and fix the game as NEEDED not WANTED!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>THANK YOU!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Danan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> a6eaq wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gungo, I have no idea why you idea of matching us more to a Zerker couldn't help.  They are the exact opposite of us.  It might help if we had some real numbers to actually look at though.  It would be interesting to see, at least it would be interesting to me.  </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Maybe he did that because they share the same class. It always seemed odd to me that when comparing DPS for Guardians they run for brawlers when they clearly share more with Berserkers.</DIV>

[uux]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote:<div></div> <p>Back on topic</p> <p>Why can't a guardian in offensive stance do the same damage as a bezerker in defensive stance</p> <p>What that means i was asked. Is that means to me in DPS ranking is  </p> <p>1) Guardian in defensive stance </p> <p>2) zerker in defensive stance</p> <p>3) guardian in offensive stance</p> <p>4 Zerker in offensive stance</p> <p>Many guard and zerkers share similar skill lines.  Under this rankign guards will be able to solo/ and small group easier. This is not asking for a zeker nerf its asking for gaurds to do more DPS. (In other words buff guards) Zerker currently do great DPS for DEFENSIVE stance. there is no compeling reason why a guard in OFFENSIVE stance can't do equal or slightly better dps to a zerker in DEFENSIVE stance. If they did up guard dps in Offensive stance Zerker would still do more DPS in Offesnive stance.</p><hr></blockquote> The defensive stance of a zerker has a negative effect on crushing/piercing/slashing skills and an attack speed decrease.  Without the offensive stance up, they lose a 10% chance to proc an encounter AoE to 3 targets.  All things being equal, and no other buffs up, a guardian in their offensive stance should already do more autoattack damage than a berserker in their defensive stance.  The really big difference in damage comes from the combat art selections as the subclasses advanced in level, not in the stances.  The berserker autoattack is raised even further by a buff that can trigger a 'berserk' proc.  Adding the same proc to the guardian offensive stance would still keep the berserker ahead in autoattack DPS due to this buff.  Berserkers have a group version of this.  Anyone in the berserker's group can go 'berserk'.  Guardians got a defensive group buff, berserkers got this as an offensive group buff.  They went in completely different directions.  Just look at how Hold the Line advanced.  A berserker's has an offensive component.  Now, certain attacks are already very similar.  Goading Assault vs Stunning Howl.  Tremor vs Slaughter.  Different secondary effects, similar damage output.  Quite a few are like this actually.  I guess this is where the two classes find somewhat of a middle ground.  You really need to look at everything to compare the two.  To bring guardians within 5-7% of a berserker would require quite the overhaul.</span><div></div>

[Nibbl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> MrDizzi wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> mastersardis wrote:<BR> <P>Here's how to get Guardians Fixed:</P> <P>1) Go to Fan Fair</P> <P>2) Kiss Dev [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]</P> <P>3) Go to the forums and post...alot.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Not just Fan Faire.. you must go to the Community Summit too.  Its much more elite.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and kissing butt doesn't work in and of itself, but I hear buying the devs lots of alcholic drinks works.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>/sarcasm</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Please blame your woes on something legitimate, other than fan faire, the devs and my post count.<BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Why do you come here? Thats a serious question by the way. Really trying to figure out your motivations now. The devs have already stated nothing is gonna change. And you know nothing you say will help, in fact lets face it, you fuel the debate.<BR><BR>Its over. Youre happy. Every fighter can now tank, and tank equally. Nothing that we or you will change that. So why are you here? Cos someone insulted you? And? So what? You go to the guardian forum and basically insult them non stop for <STRIKE>months</STRIKE> <FONT size=4><FONT color=#ff0000>over a year</FONT> </FONT>(wether that was your intention or not)... of course your going to get some back. And I can guarantee that if the nerf stick ever hits monks there will be one of two lame [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] guardians who will troll your boards for revenge. But whats the point? Whats it to achieve? <P>Message Edited by MrDizzi on <SPAN class=date_text>01-04-2006</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:37 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Thought I would correct that <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR>

[Hend]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>JuJutsu wrote:</P> <P>The archetype system was described well before the launch of the game and it specifically stated that all members of an archetype were intended to fulfill the basic function of an archetype equally well. For fighters it was tanking. There was many a thread discussing avoidance tanking and mitigation tanking during development. I know because I was there. The archetype system was broken before LU 13 and that update was an attempt to fix it. The prime benficiaries of the broken system before LU 13 were Guardians and Templars. Its not surprising that they're the most bitter about the balancing of the system. You can hatch all the conspiracy theories you want about monks or even a single monk with an obscene post count being responsible for your woes. Their own internal data showed where and how the system was broken.</P> <P>Where's the difference? Non-guardians and non-templars wanted the system described and advertised implemented. Apparently you want the broken system reinstated. By all means complain (within the forum guidelines) and vote with your pocketbook. I wouldn't pay to play a game I didn't enjoy and neither should you.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Oh no, not this old nonsense again! :smileysad:</P> <P>How come, if SOE always intended all fighters to tank equally well, they managed to design the subclasses so far from what they intended? Do you seriously think they said:</P> <P>"Let's make all the fighter subclasses equally good at tanking, and then give 5 of them some additional strong points. The guardian we leave for those hardcore players who want only to tank and who will only be disappointed if they can do anything else well."</P> <P>And do you honestly believe it was only because of some design mistakes on the detail level that guardians happened to come out as the best tank against difficult mobs? Was it really a coincidence that the fighter subclass with no other strong points came out better at tanking than the rest? Why was it not one of the other fighter subclasses? Coincidence?</P> <P>No way. There may well have been people in the SOE design team who thought that equal tanking among fighters was an overall and reasonable design goal, but they sure didn't make much impact on the actual implementation of the game before LU13.</P> <P>You seem to think that non-fighters were cheated until LU13 because they didn't get the "system described and advertised". What about the rest of us who made our choice based on what the printed manual said and how the game worked rather than on what was aledgedly said by some SOE representatives in various places? Were we not in good faith when we gave up just about everything else to become the best tanks in the game? Did it not seem like a fair and sensible trade-off? And was it not a fair assumption on our part that things would essentially stay that way?</P> <P>Vork, 56 guardian<BR></P>

[Terron]

<div></div><span> <blockquote><hr>JuJutsu wrote: <p>Where's the difference? Non-guardians and non-templars wanted the system described and advertised implemented. Apparently you want the broken system reinstated. By all means complain (within the forum guidelines) and vote with your pocketbook. I wouldn't pay to play a game I didn't enjoy and neither should you. </p> <div></div> <hr></blockquote>  There was not <b>one </b>system described and the system as it used to be is not the only broken one. You say it was described that all fighters would be able to tank equally, and I believe you though I did not see that myself and would not have understood it at that time. Part of the description of the game I did see was the description of guardians in the manual which said they would be able to wear better armour and defend themselves and others better than other fighters. It did not mention tanking, since someone like me (then) who was new to MMORPGs would not understand the use of such jargon. But to some someone who does understand the jargon like me (now) it does imply that guardians will be better tanks, since defending the group raid is what the tank role ia about. Those two descriptions are in conflict. If (when) guardians had the significantly better defense they are described as having, and their aggro control was sufficient they would be the best tank. If they had the better defense and their aggro control was not sufficient they not be able to tank at all, let alone equally.  It may well be that the former was true before LU13, I only started playing the week after. Perhaps the system was broken before in not matching the description, but then it is still broken as it still does not match the description. You may well have had a legimate complaint that your chosen class sufferred from the earlier brokeness. Guardians do have a legimate complaint now as they suffer from the current brokeness.. There is much about EQ2 I enjoy. but since around level 25 or so I found that my chosen class does not match how it was described and that it limiting what I can do, limiting my enjoyment. I don't mind that other fighters can tank equally well, but I mind my inferiority in other roles. Soloing gives very little xp or treasure. In a group when not tanking I contribute so little that I feel uncomfortable. I understand that giving the defensive advantage that was described would cause problems, and that it is difficult to come up with something that would work. If is clear though that some increase in DPS to speed up soloing needs to be part of the solution. The previous increase when we were given our offensive stances helped, but more is needed. I've said before 25% less than a berserker when fighting a single opponent  would probably be enough. </span><div></div>

[a6eaq]

Dananeb wrote: <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> a6eaq wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gungo, I have no idea why your idea of matching us more to a Zerker couldn't help.  They are the exact opposite of us.  It might help if we had some real numbers to actually look at though.  It would be interesting to see, at least it would be interesting to me.  </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Maybe he did that because they share the same class. It always seemed odd to me that when comparing DPS for Guardians they run for brawlers when they clearly share more with Berserkers. <HR> </DIV></DIV> <P>I posted that because I am kinda curious to see how the numbers really would work out.  I have not played a Zerker so I can not make an educated guess of how it would help/change us. It was really kind of a request for someone to post the numbers if anyone has anything along those lines.</P> <P>As far as why do we try and compare our lack of DPS to that of a brawler it really kind of simple.</P> <P>    First, it was the Brawlers that begged for their tanking to be equal to ours.  They got their wish, they are equal to us in tanking as per MG.  So, now that the tanking is equal but our DPS and utility is nowhere near equal.  So, many Gaurdians are ow requesting that our DPS and utility be made more equal to theirs.  The real reason is to give us something other than tanking to do in a group.  We have no real role to fill other than tanking in a group.  After all, who invites us to intercept damage meant for the MT?</P> <P>Second, we ask for our DPS/utility to be made closer to that of the Brawlers because of the same type of arguement they used to get what they got in LU-13.  If they have an advantage over us in any area of game play, then they are the preferred tanks.  If utility and DPS are better than ours, then they will get more group invites than we do.  In essence, if they are better than us in any are, there idea of balance is flawed and there is no balance.  All aspects of our classes must be balanced for there to truly be balance.</P> <P>Those are the two primary reasons we ask to be made equal to a Brawler.</P>

[mastersard]

<P>So many of us are on the same page.  I totally agree with the above post.</P> <P>Equal tanking must bring about equal DPS and Utility.  Without it, LU13, and all arguments that led to it, and support it, are a lie.</P>

[Gungo]

<P>i tend to disagree a bit here. To me warriors still have alot of positives over brawlers. Better taunting (arguable by some but at least on paper you do add more hate, if they up your Dps a bit it would be far superior, better defensive buffs, and they are still the preferred tank. </P> <P>Imho raid desirabilty warriors and brawlers are close. If anything is off its the guaridan group desirabilty and soloability. Which imho is easier to fix by upgrading DPS. (which in turn will also make additional guards in raids mroe desirable). Why do i compare guardians to zerkers? i compare guaridans to zerkers becuase it keeps most other factors constant. In other words many combat arts and spells are similar. W/o the need to do a complete overhaul by upgrading the gaurdians Offensive stance to be equal or slightly better dps then a Zerker in defensive stance would balance guards alot more compared to other fighters. In soloability and grouping. Either or in 6 weeks the game will have a new expansion and the whole class balance issue will change again as new spells, gear, AA's get implemented.</P>

[Danan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> a6eaq wrote:<BR> <P>I posted that because I am kinda curious to see how the numbers really would work out.  I have not played a Zerker so I can not make an educated guess of how it would help/change us. It was really kind of a request for someone to post the numbers if anyone has anything along those lines.</P> <P>As far as why do we try and compare our lack of DPS to that of a brawler it really kind of simple.</P> <P>    First, it was the Brawlers that begged for their tanking to be equal to ours.  They got their wish, they are equal to us in tanking as per MG.  So, now that the tanking is equal but our DPS and utility is nowhere near equal.  So, many Gaurdians are ow requesting that our DPS and utility be made more equal to theirs.  The real reason is to give us something other than tanking to do in a group.  We have no real role to fill other than tanking in a group.  After all, who invites us to intercept damage meant for the MT?</P> <P>Second, we ask for our DPS/utility to be made closer to that of the Brawlers because of the same type of arguement they used to get what they got in LU-13.  If they have an advantage over us in any area of game play, then they are the preferred tanks.  If utility and DPS are better than ours, then they will get more group invites than we do.  In essence, if they are better than us in any are, there idea of balance is flawed and there is no balance.  All aspects of our classes must be balanced for there to truly be balance.</P> <P>Those are the two primary reasons we ask to be made equal to a Brawler.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>As what has been stated many times, Brawlers was told by Guardians that they would never become tanks like they were back then. And the fact that the combat system back then was horribly broken, in the favor of Guardians only brought more fire to the flame war. Now Berserkers never really did enter this debate but kept silent, fact was that their dps rivalled that of brawlers as their tanking was very close to that of Guardians.</P> <P>But honestly is the fact that Brawlers argued back then really reason for you to get the same dps after a huge remake of the combat system?</P> <P>Makes very little sense to me.<BR></P>

[uux]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote:<p>i tend to disagree a bit here. To me warriors still have alot of positives over brawlers. Better taunting (arguable by some but at least on paper you do add more hate, if they up your Dps a bit it would be far superior, better defensive buffs, and they are still the preferred tank. </p> <p>Imho raid desirabilty warriors and brawlers are close. If anything is off its the guaridan group desirabilty and soloability. Which imho is easier to fix by upgrading DPS. (which in turn will also make additional guards in raids mroe desirable). Why do i compare guardians to zerkers? i compare guaridans to zerkers becuase it keeps most other factors constant. In other words many combat arts and spells are similar. W/o the need to do a complete overhaul by upgrading the gaurdians Offensive stance to be equal or slightly better dps then a Zerker in defensive stance would balance guards alot more compared to other fighters. In soloability and grouping. Either or in 6 weeks the game will have a new expansion and the whole class balance issue will change again as new spells, gear, AA's get implemented.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> So, you want your one stance to have ALL the offensive abilities in the berserker's arsenal plus a nerf to berserkers so that they cannot use those abilities when in defensive stance?  /shrug.  I tried to give you information on berserkers.  The DPS while in defensive stance has nothing to do with that stance.  The guardian offensive stance would have to be extremely overpowered to still compete.  It more and more sounds like you'd rather be a berserker. Look, you can compare how the two classes evolved.  It's a general overview and doesn't provide exact details, but you can make a basic comparison.  In the very least it gives you the combat art names so you can look them up in something like eq2idb for a more detailed view. Berserker: http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/classes/index.vm?classId=4 Guardian: http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/classes/index.vm?classId=3 Defense and protection is the guardians specialty.  Offense is the berserkers.  It's one thing to question the usefulness of your class specialty, but it's another to say you should gain the specialty of other classes in addition to your own. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by uux on <span class=date_text>01-05-2006</span> <span class=time_text>09:46 PM</span>

[Drulak]

<div></div><p>I want to clarify a few things.  WE ARE NOT EQUAL TANKS .Ok , if a brawler class is tanking against a white con mob or lesshe will out shine a guard everytime.  he will hold aggro better thana Guard and he will add more dps , and hence help group kill mob quicker.So in this case the two fighter archetypes are not equal tanks ,the brawler is a better tank.</p><p>against an orange or red con mob , the guardian should hold the aggro better ashis aggro generating proc ability is when hit and not when he hits (as per monk)so he should hold aggro better.  Therefore the guardian will be the better tank.</p><p>I hope what just these two examples has illustrated , is that all fighter archetypesare not EQUAL tanks , but more so balanced tanks as each has a situation where he willbe the best tank.</p><p>So everyone that has campaigned to be equal , and is currently happy , doesn't realisethat they have what we always wanted.  Better situational tanking.  I guess the problempre LU13 , was that in every situation the guard was the best tank.  this was compenstaedfor by extra dps and utility in the other fighters.  What was wrong though , was thatthe balance wasn't right.  Now that the balance has been tipped the brawler way , theyare more than content that everything is equal , well it is not , it is just balancedtowards the brawlers.  What needed to happen was for situational tanking to be altered ,But what did happen was the guardians abilities were altered . That is why we notice thebig change and call it a nerf.</p><p>What has happened now though , is that because the fighter archetypes have beenbalanced around the one of 3 roles a fighter can do - TANK , albeit the main role ,the dev's have forgotten that first and foremost the fighter class is a fighter and nota tank.  So the Fighter does infact have 3 roles. Tank / dps / and utility.</p><p>Guards were the best tank , pre LU13 , but all fighters were equal , now this isnot the case.</p><p>So in certain situations , where the brawler is the best tank - white or lowercon single heroic/epic mobs - the brawler is not just a better tank , he is by farthe better fighter.</p><p>he is the better tank , has much better DPS and has better utility.</p><p>This is what is inherently wrong with current system .</p><p>Make fighters EQUAL  ,  balance the tanking ability with DPS and Utilityand all will be happy. </p><p>So if a brawler is 5% a better tank against low con mobs , warriors would be 5%better dps against low con mobs</p><p>If a Guardian is 5% better tank against orange mobs , then a brawler would do 5%better dps.</p><p>and as well as this , utility needs to be handed out to guardians.  And not justgroup defensive buffs , we need some utility which is useful to us ,not all brawler utility is group help utility , so why should ours be.</p>

[Terron]

<span><blockquote><hr>uux wrote:<span>So, you want your one stance to have ALL the offensive abilities in the berserker's arsenal plus a nerf to berserkers so that they cannot use those abilities when in defensive stance?  /shrug.  I tried to give you information on berserkers.  The DPS while in defensive stance has nothing to do with that stance.  The guardian offensive stance would have to be extremely overpowered to still compete.  It more and more sounds like you'd rather be a berserker.<font color="#ffff00">I largely agree with that.</font>Look, you can compare how the two classes evolved.  It's a general overview and doesn't provide exact details, but you can make a basic comparison.  In the very least it gives you the combat art names so you can look them up in something like eq2idb for a more detailed view.Berserker:http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/classes/index.vm?classId=4Guardian:http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/classes/index.vm?classId=3<font color="#ffff00">OK I will do it. See below.</font>Defense and protection is the guardians specialty.  Offense is the berserkers.  It's one thing to question the usefulness of your class specialty, but it's another to say you should gain the specialty of other classes in addition to your own.<font color="#ffff00">Many people perceived tanking to be guardians speciality, and all other fighter are now supposed have it addition to their own. In many situations they are better at defining and protecting a group than guardian are.  Defense and protection is current <font color="#ff3300">not</font> the guardian's speciality. Most of us wish it were, though many of use recognise that it would be incompatible with us tanking 'equally' with other fighters.</font></span><p>Message Edited by uux on <span class="date_text">01-05-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:46 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Level 20 Blood Rage vs Sentinel - A class defining ability for the Berserker, useful in almost all encounters vs an ability that can not be used solo, and is rarely (if ever) useful in groups forGuardians. I believe this used to be balanced by Guardians getting access to better armour at this level, but now Berserkers get the same armour1-0 to berserkers.Level 21 Furious Onslaught  vs Bury - An improved AoE attack with knockdown vs an improved AoE attack with no special effect.              Blood Rage vs Allay - A useful defense ability usefull for most situations vs a protectective ability   mainly useful for the hate reduction2-0 to berserkersLevel 22  Enrage vs Shouting Cry - Encounter taunt that can be used when stifled vs encouter taunt that can be used when stifled.               Stance:Fury vs Slam - Attack buff with AoE proc vs high damge CA (on a 1 minute timer)2.5 - 0.5 to berserkersLevel 23 Bloodlust vs Guardian's Call - Buff to group's strength vs buff to group's attacking skills3-1 to berserkersLevel 24 Raging Strike vs Taunting Challenge - Attack that does increased hate vs attack that does increased hate              Battle Chant vs Call of Command - Group offensive boost vs group defensive boost. Since most of the time only the main tank will be defending whilst the former is useful for any mellee DPS group, I think the former seems more useful.4-1 to berserkers.Level 25 Maul vs Ruin - Attack with debuff vs attack with debuff and DoT4-2 to berserkers.Level 26 Havoc vs Battle Cry - Temporary group mitigation boost vs temporary group mitigation boost             Stifled Rage vs True Strike - Defensive stance vs attack CA - Don't know enough about the former to call this, so will assume it is as useful as the latter.</span><span>4.5-2.5 to berserkers</span><span>Level 27 Press vs Bull Rush - Shield attack with knockdown vs shiedl attack with knockdown              Wall of Fury vs Wall of Flesh - Increased defense and proc on attackers at the cost of reduced attacks vs similar5 - 3 to bersekersLevel 28 Viscious Blow vs Maim - Attack with DoT and debuff vs similar              Barrage vs Iron Will - AoE attack vs stamina boost5.5-3.5Level 29 Coup de Grace vs Shatter - Attack vs attack              Provoking defense vs goading defense - Generate hate in attackers for root (slow?) vs similar6-4 to berserkers.So berserkers are head throughout T3.For attacking abilities - 11-8 to berserkersFor defensive abilities - 5-5 draw  </span><div></div>

[Drulak]

<div></div><p>Pjackson is so right , it is no good stating that the uniqueness of the guard is defensiveness and thats what we are good at , because that was removed with LU13.</p><p>We are no longer the almighty defensive warrior , so please we need something else.  You cannot state that we cannot have offensive abilities added , because then we will be like zerkers , cos zerkers now tank as well as guards ,  so why can't we be offensive like zerkers.</p><p>In the ideal world guards would be better tanks than zerkers whilst zerkers where more offensive.  but since everyone cried BROKEN , when that was the case , we now are not great tanks , so we need to be more offensive.</p><p>Can't have cake and eat it too <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Terron]

<div></div><div></div>I don't want the same offenisve abilites as a berserker, or even ones that are as good.Berserkers should have better offensive overal and guardians should not infringe on their speciality of AoE attacks.But the difference against a single mob should not be so great.I think should be able to solo a single mob almost as well (75%) as a berserker.I know that comparison of the T3 abilities is very crude. I was not being very seious when I did it. But there are a few things that stand out as wrong.Berserkers level 20 art is far superior to the guardians, blood rage vs sentinelBerserkers get a CA that gives them better solo defense before guardians do - blood rage at 21 vs call of command att 24.It might be better if Sentinel and Call of Command were swapped. Call of Command seems more of a class defining skill for guardians - better defense for self and others, and though probably still weaker than Blood Rage it does share the characteristic of being useful in most fights.  Sentinel needs to be made more useful anyway. Increasing its level would give an excuse. Perhaps the addition of a chance that if the guardian would be killed by the damage he will instead remain alive though on 1% of his HP.<div></div><p>Message Edited by pjackson on <span class="date_text">01-06-2006</span><span class="time_text">07:03 AM</span></p><p>Message Edited by pjackson on <span class="date_text">01-06-2006</span><span class="time_text">07:23 AM</span></p>

[aislynn00]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>JuJutsu wrote:<blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<p>Why?  Because you can't balance subclasses at the archtype level, and you can't balance Mit tanks vs Avoid tanks in the current system. </p><p><em>If your opinion is correct then Vanguard SoH has some nightmares ahead. They don't call them archetypes, with regard to fighters they distinguish between offensive and defensive but each category has several entries. I'm glad I won't be playing because I can see all the kvetching between the variants of defensive fighters. Then again maybe you're wrong and balancing can occur.</em></p><p>The archtype system keeps SOE from making leather wearers into DPS classes. </p><p><em>Thank goodness, another plus for the archetype system whatever it may be called.</em></p><hr></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote dir="ltr"><p></p><hr></blockquote><p>The brawler equivalents in Vanguard aren't tanks; they are melee-based damage dealers (i.e., "offensive fighters".)  In other words, Sigil don't have to balance mitigation vs avoidance; they can--and have--gone right ahead and made mitigation clearly superior to avoidance. </p><p>And thank heaven for that.  No ruining of suspension of disbelief courtesy of pyjamas-wearing tanks.</p>

[uux]

<div></div><span><blockquote>pjackson wrote:Many people perceived tanking to be guardians speciality, and all other fighter are now supposed have it addition to their own. In many situations they are better at defining and protecting a group than guardian are.  Defense and protection is current <font color="#ff3300">not</font> the guardian's speciality. Most of us wish it were, though many of use recognise that it would be incompatible with us tanking 'equally' with other fighters.<span></span></blockquote><span></span>It's not that TANKING is your specialty, it's DEFENSE that is your specialty.  When you have your defensive buffs up, it does not make your defense EQUAL to other fighters, you far surpass them in the same way that a zerker's offensive surpasses that of a guardian.  Does it make a guardian a better tank?  Not necessarily.  It makes them different.  Guardians take hits better.  As you looked at the list of berserker skills, did you find any that protected or intercepted damage for the group?  Did you find any that substatially raised the group defense?  No.  The main issue is that your discarding those abilities and stating they're useless.  Sure, when applied to DPS, those defensive skills aren't going to kill a mob.  On the flip side, those offensive skills a berserker gets aren't going to let them take a big hit and keep them standing as long.<span></span><blockquote><span>Level 21 Furious Onslaught  vs Bury - An improved AoE attack with knockdown vs an improved AoE attack with no special effect.              Blood Rage vs Allay - A useful defense ability usefull for most situations vs a protectective ability   mainly useful for the hate reduction2-0 to berserkers</span></blockquote><span></span>The description of Blood Rage makes it sound better than it is.  The hp regen usually isn't even enough to offset one single autoattack from a mob.  Berserkers used to have buffs that increased HP (not stamina).  It's a decent way to give them some extra health still without having an effect on stamina or the size of the overall health pool.<span></span><blockquote><span>Level 22  Enrage vs Shouting Cry - Encounter taunt that can be used when stifled vs encouter taunt that can be used when stifled.               Stance:Fury vs Slam - Attack buff with AoE proc vs high damge CA (on a 1 minute timer)2.5 - 0.5 to berserkers</span></blockquote><span></span>Fury is the berserker's offensive stance.  If you're rating by offensive usage, the berserker would get the full point here.  Overtime, and on multiple mobs, I don't think the guardian attack could even compare.  The proc from the stance can be triggered by any melee attack, including melee combat arts.<span></span><blockquote><span>Level 26 Havoc vs Battle Cry - Temporary group mitigation boost vs temporary group mitigation boost             Stifled Rage vs True Strike - Defensive stance vs attack CA - Don't know enough about the former to call this, so will assume it is as useful as the latter.</span><span>4.5-2.5 to berserkers</span></blockquote><span></span>Stifled Rage isn't a stance.  Just a short 36 second buff to defense in exchange for an attack speed penalty.  If a guardian's defense is regarded as useless, then consider the berserker's the same.<span></span><blockquote><span></span><span>Level 27 Press vs Bull Rush - Shield attack with knockdown vs shiedl attack with knockdown              Wall of Fury vs Wall of Flesh - Increased defense and proc on attackers at the cost of reduced attacks vs similar5 - 3 to bersekersLevel 28 Viscious Blow vs Maim - Attack with DoT and debuff vs similar              Barrage vs Iron Will - AoE attack vs stamina boost5.5-3.5</span></blockquote><span></span>Barrage has gone through several revisions.  It started off as hitting 2 targets in front of the berserker.  With the revamp, it was increased to 5.  As of the AoE changes in LU#16 it was increased to 8 (at the same time nerfing some other zerker abilities).  At higher levels, I would consider this a high damage attack.<span></span><blockquote><span>Level 29 Coup de Grace vs Shatter - Attack vs attack              Provoking defense vs goading defense - Generate hate in attackers for root (slow?) vs similar6-4 to berserkers.</span></blockquote><span></span>Provoking Defense also adds a counter attack with the hate.  Useful when solo as well as tanking.<span></span></span><span><span></span><span></span><blockquote><span></span><hr></blockquote></span><div></div><p>Message Edited by uux on <span class="date_text">01-06-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:13 AM</span></p>

[uux]

<span><blockquote>pjackson wrote:<div></div><div></div>Berserkers level 20 art is far superior to the guardians, blood rage vs sentinelBerserkers get a CA that gives them better solo defense before guardians do - blood rage at 21 vs call of command att 24.It might be better if Sentinel and Call of Command were swapped. Call of Command seems more of a class defining skill for guardians - better defense for self and others, and though probably still weaker than Blood Rage it does share the characteristic of being useful in most fights.  Sentinel needs to be made more useful anyway. Increasing its level would give an excuse. Perhaps the addition of a chance that if the guardian would be killed by the damage he will instead remain alive though on 1% of his HP.</blockquote>Call of Command should allow the guardian to take less damage.  Blood Rage allows the berserker to offset some of that damage.  In a few more levels, guardians get the stamina boost also allowing them to take a bigger hit.  Berserkers will eventually get (at level 33) a group version that stacks with Blood Rage.  The main issue with the hp regen is that if you have a healer around, it's almost useless.  A healer will have usually healed you before the 6 second tick arrives.  The cap on in combat hp regen was recently lowered.  It's so easy to hit the cap with other classes around that this skill becomes useless.  Who wants extra hp regen when you're already capped?</span><div></div>

[Terron]

<div></div><div></div>Thanks uux for the extra info about the berserkers abilities.I knew there would be problems with the comparisons since the lists were so simple, but thought it would be fun to do.I am aware that the description of abilities frequently is highly exagerated.I used defensive ability to abilities that help defend yourself. Abilities for protecting others I referred to as protective.I was rating by general apparent usefulness.  I would still award level 21 to berserkers due to the knockdown on Furious Assault. Level 22 goes to them as well, which is disappointing as Slam is a major part of a guardian's offense. It is on a one minute time, but our fights go on so long that using it several times against all but the weakest opponents. Level 26 now goes to guardians. Level 28 goes to berserkers, and so does level 29.  The score at level 29 is now 7-3, which is more in keeping with my experience of around that level.The only ability that I consider close to useless is Sentinel. I found uses for all the others, though some are limited.If would be nice guardians defense did far surpass berserkers, but if it did then would be hit much less often, so would take much less damage so would be much the better tank, which I don't think we are.As it is certainly in the level twenties it made no noticable a difference whether I used them or not.  Perhaps it was because I was almost always fighting greens, as that was before we got an offensive stance, and blues and higher were too dangerous. I haven't tested them recently.When soloing offense is the best form of defense. A 10% improvement in DPS would both reduce the damage you would expect to take by 9% and reduce the chance of adds. A 10% reduction in damage taken would do only that. Berserkers DPS superity is greater than a guardians superior reduction in damage taken so against the sort of creatures a guardian can solo a berserkers defense is greater, against those a berserker can solo but a guardian can not it is obviously greater, and against other it is equal.Since regarding defense alone we are roughly 'equal' as tanks, but much inferior soloing compared to berserkers. I find it hard to consider defense our speciality.If you know of a way to make my defense far superior to a berserkers please let me know how. I would be delighted if it were possible.<div></div><p>Message Edited by pjackson on <span class="date_text">01-06-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:17 AM</span></p><p>Message Edited by pjackson on <span class="date_text">01-06-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:18 AM</span></p>

[Rah]

<div></div><blockquote><p></p><hr><p>aislynn00 wrote:</p><p>And thank heaven for that.  No ruining of suspension of disbelief courtesy of pyjamas-wearing tanks.</p><hr></blockquote><p>I just have to know do there pajamas look cool and can I be a tiger if I play one of these pajama tanks?</p><p>Rahge</p>

[Danan]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>pjackson wrote:<span>Level 20 Blood Rage vs Sentinel - A class defining ability for the Berserker, useful in almost all encounters vs an ability that can not be used solo, and is rarely (if ever) useful in groups forGuardians. I believe this used to be balanced by Guardians getting access to better armour at this level, but now Berserkers get the same armour1-0 to berserkers.Level 21 Furious Onslaught  vs Bury - An improved AoE attack with knockdown vs an improved AoE attack with no special effect.              Blood Rage vs Allay - A useful defense ability usefull for most situations vs a protectective ability   mainly useful for the hate reduction2-0 to berserkersLevel 22  Enrage vs Shouting Cry - Encounter taunt that can be used when stifled vs encouter taunt that can be used when stifled.               Stance:Fury vs Slam - Attack buff with AoE proc vs high damge CA (on a 1 minute timer)2.5 - 0.5 to berserkersLevel 23 Bloodlust vs Guardian's Call - Buff to group's strength vs buff to group's attacking skills3-1 to berserkersLevel 24 Raging Strike vs Taunting Challenge - Attack that does increased hate vs attack that does increased hate              Battle Chant vs Call of Command - Group offensive boost vs group defensive boost. Since most of the time only the main tank will be defending whilst the former is useful for any mellee DPS group, I think the former seems more useful.4-1 to berserkers.Level 25 Maul vs Ruin - Attack with debuff vs attack with debuff and DoT4-2 to berserkers.Level 26 Havoc vs Battle Cry - Temporary group mitigation boost vs temporary group mitigation boost             Stifled Rage vs True Strike - Defensive stance vs attack CA - Don't know enough about the former to call this, so will assume it is as useful as the latter.</span><span>4.5-2.5 to berserkers</span><span>Level 27 Press vs Bull Rush - Shield attack with knockdown vs shiedl attack with knockdown              Wall of Fury vs Wall of Flesh - Increased defense and proc on attackers at the cost of reduced attacks vs similar5 - 3 to bersekersLevel 28 Viscious Blow vs Maim - Attack with DoT and debuff vs similar              Barrage vs Iron Will - AoE attack vs stamina boost5.5-3.5Level 29 Coup de Grace vs Shatter - Attack vs attack              Provoking defense vs goading defense - Generate hate in attackers for root (slow?) vs similar6-4 to berserkers.So berserkers are head throughout T3.For attacking abilities - 11-8 to berserkersFor defensive abilities - 5-5 draw  </span><div></div><hr></blockquote>Skill tiers last for 14 levels, if you add the last few levels up and untill 34 you will turn the defensive advantage slightly towards the Guardian.

[Sirrion77]

Guardian is the classes that is the most dependent on items.a 60 guardian in treasurer and a 60 guardian in fabled is a world of difference, good luck on balancing the class for both of them at the same time.In raid with all buffs and debuffs, i can get into the first 6 dps quite often.In group, they fill safer with a guardian than other classes i noticed, well i do when i play defiler =0Sirriun60 Guardian<div></div>

[fre'do]

<div></div>so u are asking for more damage? and we are the crazy ones...u are the best defensive tank in the game yes defensive tank...if u want damage then play a different class u cannot have everything in one class then we wont need any other class...me persoanlly would rather let guardian tank over any of my tanks...since yall have lots of hitpoints way more then any class...u wont see me complain about a class..i might ask questions about the class but i jump in and have fun...my favorite classes are tanks...i am tryin my first plate tank and i love the shadowknight...thinkin about makin a guardian so i can laugh at yall for complaining.   but for me it will be different because i never knew before patch 13 so i have nothing to compare too...yes i was a monk before and after cu13 and to me the only difference is that we are fighting to be called a tank....i will go in as a guardian knowin i wont do damage but i will tank a punishment and enjoy it.  my job is to make sure the scouts and mages kill the creatures and the cleric stay alive to heal me...i am not there to kill everything just to make sure they live.  that is why i tank...it is helpful to be able to heal or stealth if need be. or do more damage...but u have to realize that all tanks are different and u have to see what they do best and do them.

[Wli]

<div></div><p>Wow !!! Another non-guardian ...</p><p>Hey, hello there, welcome to the kitchen !!!</p><p> </p><p>I am a Corcer.</p>

[uux]

<span><span><blockquote>pjackson wrote:I was rating by general apparent usefulness.  I would still award level 21 to berserkers due to the knockdown on Furious Assault. Level 22 goes to them as well, which is disappointing as Slam is a major part of a guardian's offense. It is on a one minute time, but our fights go on so long that using it several times against all but the weakest opponents. Level 26 now goes to guardians. Level 28 goes to berserkers, and so does level 29.  The score at level 29 is now 7-3, which is more in keeping with my experience of around that level.</blockquote>The knockdown on Furious Assault is possibly superior at that level.  As the skill advances, the knockdown effect still sticks with it.  Along the road, berserkers get an encounter AoE attack with a stun effect.  Now, the guardians get an enouncter AoE with a taunt.  So guardians have their AoE and encounter AoE + taunt.  Zerkers have their AoE + knockback and encounter AoE + stun.  Could it be the stun and knockback generate the same hate as the two guardian skills?  The secondary effects are also useful to prevent a zerker from being damaged.  Does this make up for the lack of being able to raise the defense and parry skills?  Possibly.  Just remember the secondary effects are temporary and not long term.  The comparison can become quite complicated as more skills are involved.  In the end, if the berserker is able to take less or equal damage as a guardian, then I'll agree the DPS is insanely imbalanced.  They also weigh your protection abilities into the equation even if they have limited purpose.<blockquote>When soloing offense is the best form of defense. A 10% improvement in DPS would both reduce the damage you would expect to take by 9% and reduce the chance of adds. A 10% reduction in damage taken would do only that. Berserkers DPS superity is greater than a guardians superior reduction in damage taken so against the sort of creatures a guardian can solo a berserkers defense is greater, against those a berserker can solo but a guardian can not it is obviously greater, and against other it is equal.</blockquote>I think that's a great argument.  On the other hand, I've watched a shadowknight solo a mob I had a very tough time with.  They definately took more damage, but their other abilities made that encounter more suited to them.  It's exactly that, situational.  For solo encounters, a berserker probably is better suited.  On the other end of the scale, a guardian would be better suited for raids.  A berserker's offense isn't going to demolish that epic monster fast enough to prevent damage.  Forget the stuns and interrupts.  They don't work.  On mobs with insane riposte rates DPS can actually be counter productive. (i realize even raids can be situational)I'm not in disagreement that guardians could use a DPS boost.  You already know they're not changing the class.  Tweaks and fixes are still possible though.  Look at your offensive stance.  The strength bonus on it sounds good.  All your melee combat arts and autoattack would do slightly more damage.  Wait a sec, what if your strength is capped?  Well then all you have from it is the defensive penalty and the offensive skill boost.   Is the offensive skill boost even helping to add more DPS?  A proc or haste and dps increase would definately help there.  All it needs is for someone to play with some numbers and prove it's not very effective.</span></span><div></div>

[Pry]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>fre'do wrote:<div></div>so u are asking for more damage? and we are the crazy ones...<font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> are the best defensive tank in the game yes defensive tank...if <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> want damage then play a different class <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> cannot have everything in one class then we wont need any other class...me persoanlly would rather let guardian tank over any of my tanks...since yall have lots of hitpoints way more then any class...<font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> wont see me complain about a class..i might ask questions about the class but i jump in and have fun...my favorite classes are tanks...i am tryin my first plate tank and i love the shadowknight...thinkin about makin a guardian so i can laugh at yall for complaining.   but for me it will be different because i never knew before patch 13 so i have nothing to compare too...yes i was a monk before and after cu13 and to me the only difference is that we are fighting to be called a tank....i will go in as a guardian knowin i wont do damage but i will tank a punishment and enjoy it.  my job is to make sure the scouts and mages kill the creatures and the cleric stay alive to heal me...i am not there to kill everything just to make sure they live.  that is why i tank...it is helpful to be able to heal or stealth if need be. or do more damage...but <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> have to realize that all tanks are different and <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> have to see what they do best and do them.<hr></blockquote><p>I didn't really read any of this gibberish, but what I did notice was that you could type out words like complaining, difference , and punishment, but couldn't type the word "you".  What are you, some kind of idiot savant?</p><p>I highlighted all the "U"s so <strong>you</strong> can see how annoying it is.  I swear cell phone typing is wrecking the English language.</p><p>P.S.  Is it straining your hands to press the shift key?  When referring to yourself in the first person, it's I, not i. </p><p>Signed,</p><p>Grammar [Removed for Content].</p>

[Vandileir]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Prynn wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>fre'do wrote:<div></div>so <strong><font color="#ffff00">u</font></strong> are asking for more damage? and we are the crazy ones...<font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> are the best defensive tank in the game yes defensive tank...if <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> want damage then play a different class <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> cannot have everything in one class then we wont need any other class...me persoanlly would rather let guardian tank over any of my tanks...since yall have lots of hitpoints way more then any class...<font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> wont see me complain about a class..i might ask questions about the class but i jump in and have fun...my favorite classes are tanks...i am tryin my first plate tank and i love the shadowknight...thinkin about makin a guardian so i can laugh at yall for complaining.   but for me it will be different because i never knew before patch 13 so i have nothing to compare too...yes i was a monk before and after cu13 and to me the only difference is that we are fighting to be called a tank....i will go in as a guardian knowin i wont do damage but i will tank a punishment and enjoy it.  my job is to make sure the scouts and mages kill the creatures and the cleric stay alive to heal me...i am not there to kill everything just to make sure they live.  that is why i tank...it is helpful to be able to heal or stealth if need be. or do more damage...but <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> have to realize that all tanks are different and <font color="#ff0000"><strong>u</strong></font> have to see what they do best and do them.<hr></blockquote><p>I didn't really read any of this gibberish, but what I did notice was that you could type out words like complaining, difference , and punishment, but couldn't type the word "you".  What are you, some kind of idiot savant?</p><p>I highlighted all the "U"s so <strong>you</strong> can see how annoying it is.  I swear cell phone typing is wrecking the English language.</p><p>P.S.  Is it straining your hands to press the shift key?  When referring to yourself in the first person, it's I, not i. </p><p>Signed,</p><p>Grammar [Removed for Content].</p><hr></blockquote>You missed a "u" right in the opening line. Didnt get past my dull witted DPS seeking, Equality seeking eyes

[fre'do]

<div></div>thanks for opening my eyes up...and thanks for the laughs...i will continue to come this forum to have a good laugh.

[JuJut]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>aislynn00 wrote:<blockquote><hr>JuJutsu wrote:<blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<p>Why?  Because you can't balance subclasses at the archtype level, and you can't balance Mit tanks vs Avoid tanks in the current system. </p><p><em>If your opinion is correct then Vanguard SoH has some nightmares ahead. They don't call them archetypes, with regard to fighters they distinguish between offensive and defensive but each category has several entries. I'm glad I won't be playing because I can see all the kvetching between the variants of defensive fighters. Then again maybe you're wrong and balancing can occur.</em></p><p>The archtype system keeps SOE from making leather wearers into DPS classes. </p><p><em>Thank goodness, another plus for the archetype system whatever it may be called.</em></p><hr></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote dir="ltr"><hr></blockquote><p>The brawler equivalents in Vanguard aren't tanks; they are melee-based damage dealers (i.e., "offensive fighters".)  In other words, Sigil don't have to balance mitigation vs avoidance; they can--and have--gone right ahead and made mitigation clearly superior to avoidance. </p><p>And thank heaven for that.  No ruining of suspension of disbelief courtesy of pyjamas-wearing tanks.</p><hr></blockquote></span>Setting aside silly commentary about pyjamas, do you think that mitigation versus avoidance is the only issue in balancing classes within a category? Just looking at the archetype of protective fighters we have 4 entries. As I said above I see lots of whining <b>within</b> the category of defensive fighters My guess is that the same guardians whining about bruisers here will pick warriors in SoH and start whining about paladins there.<b>Protective Fighters</b>Dread KnightInquisitorPaladinWarrior</div>

[mastersard]

<div></div><div></div><p>Part of the problem is that Avoid cannot be ballanced with Mit tanks, yes. </p><p>But a <em>major</em> part of the problem is that this is an <em>offensive</em> based game.  Kill the mobs <em>fast</em>.  You need DPS!.  The defensive tank will allways slow down the flow of XP.  This could easily be fixed by making all fighters DPS about the same in <em>offensive</em> stance as well as <em>defensive</em> stance, and have all fighters Tank about the same in both stances as well.</p><p>True definsive spec is really only needed when fighting high orange/red XP mobs, or in a raid scenario.  Regular XP is best gained by steady, fast paced pulls of white and yellow mobs.</p><p>Message Edited by mastersardis on <span class="date_text">01-07-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:56 PM</span></p>

[Gaige]

<div></div>I am absolutely positive that when Vanguard goes live Warriors there will complain that the other 3 tank classes can tank as well as them.

[Salgo]

<div></div><div>Gaige I have to disagree with you on this. If Vanguard makes it known up-front what is expected of each sub-class then we will all make decisions based on those expectations. However, if any game were to change the role of any sub-class entirely after 18 months, then yes I would expect some uproar. I don't see why that would come to a surprise to some. /shrugs</div>

[Gaige]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Salgore wrote:<div></div><div>Gaige I have to disagree with you on this. If Vanguard makes it known up-front what is expected of each sub-class then we will all make decisions based on those expectations. However, if any game were to change the role of any sub-class entirely after 18 months, then yes I would expect some uproar. I don't see why that would come to a surprise to some. /shrugs<hr></div></blockquote>Considering EQ2 did in fact do that up front, and we have what we have here, I doubt it.

[Salgo]

<div></div>/sigh whatever Gaige

[Gaige]

<div></div>Are you saying they didn't talk about the archetype system and the mit/avoid balance prior to release?

[Grumpy_Warrior_01]

<div></div><p>If by "they" you mean Moorgard, sure he wrote plenty which anyone can view at <a target="_blank" href="http://eqii.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=33">http://eqii.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=33</a></p><p>And sure enough, he can be quoted several times as specifically saying a monk would "tank" every bit as well as a warrior, a full year before the software was released.  he can also be quoted regarding the indirect pvp system, the archetype system, the role of tradeskillers in the new game, locked combat, teleportation and boat rides... you name it.  A load of info about a lot of issues, not just monks and tanking.  Everybody needs to make a bookmark of that forum, it's an interesting read even when you're not defusing trolls.</p><p>Now here's the larger question.  Take a poll of 3-400,000 eq2 players and just ask how many of them had a clue where to look on the internet for Moorgard's ruminations, or felt that they needed to, in order to roll correctly once the game came out?</p><p> </p>

[uzhiel feathered serpe]

<div></div><div>Guardians are not equal tanks. You DO have an advantage, whether you admit it or not. You DO take less spike damage than other tanks. You DO have more hit points than any other tank. You DO have more mitigation than any other tank.</div><div> </div><div>In terms of PURE tanking, the Guardian is the better tank.</div><div> </div><div>Now, if you want to talk about utility, then you have a point, bu im sick and tired of guardians saying they tank equally to every other tank, or confusing tanking with utility.</div><div> </div><div>I will agree than your DPS could use a boost, and so could your utility....but your DPS should NEVER be on par with the rest of the other tanks. DPS takes place of aggro. Other tanks dont have hate generating stances, and bruisers and monks have crap for AE taunts.</div><div> </div><div>If guardians and paladins tank the same, then how come Guards tank 95% of raid encounters? In most situations the Gaurdian is the preferred tank. Heals and wards do NOTHING for tanking whatsoever. Neither does EVAC, FD, etc. These are UTILITY skills that are used when NOT tanking.</div><div> </div><div>Tanking has 2 main components, which are aggro and damage taking. The Guardian has a lock on these skills. Why? because amends cannot be cast raid wide, and is totally dependent on the person. If a wizard is getting resisted, or a scout is not doing his job amends is worthless. It is totally dependent on the person that has it, not like your aggro stance, which is a MUCH better aggro generator in terms of steady aggro.</div><div> </div><div>You people need to take a step back and breathe. That stuff about 90 days without a Guardian fix? guess what, the other tanks spent almost a WHOLE YEAR, taking second fiddle to Guardians in tanking.</div><div> </div><div>You people will never have the utility and DPS of other tanks because other tanks don't tank as well as guardians do. This is reality. Get used to it.</div><div> </div><div>Argue for what you CAN get, not for what you're not GOING to get.</div>

[EasternKing]

<div></div><p>Can some one please tell me where guardians get </p><p>MORE HITPOINTS</p><p>MORE MITIGATION </p><p>TAKE LESS SPIKE DAMAGE</p><p>????</p><p>last time i checked we get same hp per point of stam as all other plate tanks, we wear the same plate armour as other plate tanks amd so if we getting same basic stat bonus's and mitigation WHERE are we getting more ?</p><p>QUOTE " guardians are not equal but better" WHAT A LOAD OF BULL[expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] </p><p>i have seen any other plate tank in equivalent gear tank the same [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] i can tank</p><p>QUOTE "in terms of PURE tanking the guardian is the better tank" AGAIN WHAT A LOAD OF BULL[expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]</p><p>All tanks are now PURE tanks the other 5members of our tanking family tank just as well EXCEPT they got to keep all the other fun [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] they can do at the same time be it be good utility or excellent dps.</p><p>QUOTE ' if paladins tank equal to guardians how come guardians tank 95% of raid encounters" why ? any number of reasons why usually the following reasons :</p><p>1 the guild is used to the player playing that tank</p><p>2 the player playing the MT usually has a lot more knowlage of raid tanking than the other tanks</p><p>3 if a guard isnt MT then there is 0 reasons to have one in your raid, so guilds will usually in combination of the above factors leave there friend and usally the RL in his role rather than exclude him /  her</p><p>in changing tanking BUT not changing us to bring our utillity and dps in line with other tanks SOE have made it so that the guard is either MT or not in the raid as all other tanks are preferable over a guard taking up extra tanks slots due to the fact all other tanks bring so much more to a raid if there not MAIN TANKING</p><p>so what do you want ? because we havent been brought in line we either MT OR WE DONT COME ALONG this is not the fault of the guardians who play this game this is a lack of foresight on soe's part,</p><p>All you other tanks wanted to do what guards did pre lu13 and now you can but we cannot fill the roles other tanks did pre lu 13 and that is the problem and that is why post after post goes up asking for guards to be brought into line with other tanks dps utility</p><p>we were a one trick pony and unqiue now all all the other ponys learnt our tricks but we didnt get anything new</p>

[Drulak]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<div></div><div>Guardians are not equal tanks. You DO have an advantage, whether you admit it or not. You DO take less spike damage than other tanks. You DO have more hit points than any other tank. You DO have more mitigation than any other tank.</div><div> </div><div>In terms of PURE tanking, the Guardian is the better tank.</div><div> </div><div>Now, if you want to talk about utility, then you have a point, bu im sick and tired of guardians saying they tank equally to every other tank, or confusing tanking with utility.</div><div> </div><div>I will agree than your DPS could use a boost, and so could your utility....but your DPS should NEVER be on par with the rest of the other tanks. DPS takes place of aggro. Other tanks dont have hate generating stances, and bruisers and monks have crap for AE taunts.</div><div> </div><div>If guardians and paladins tank the same, then how come Guards tank 95% of raid encounters? In most situations the Gaurdian is the preferred tank. Heals and wards do NOTHING for tanking whatsoever. Neither does EVAC, FD, etc. These are UTILITY skills that are used when NOT tanking.</div><div> </div><div>Tanking has 2 main components, which are aggro and damage taking. The Guardian has a lock on these skills. Why? because amends cannot be cast raid wide, and is totally dependent on the person. If a wizard is getting resisted, or a scout is not doing his job amends is worthless. It is totally dependent on the person that has it, not like your aggro stance, which is a MUCH better aggro generator in terms of steady aggro.</div><div> </div><div>You people need to take a step back and breathe. That stuff about 90 days without a Guardian fix? guess what, the other tanks spent almost a WHOLE YEAR, taking second fiddle to Guardians in tanking.</div><div> </div><div>You people will never have the utility and DPS of other tanks because other tanks don't tank as well as guardians do. This is reality. Get used to it.</div><div> </div><div>Argue for what you CAN get, not for what you're not GOING to get.</div><hr></blockquote><p>I am glad that you look at 1% of the game content and then state we are better tanks.</p><p>OK i'll give you that we are best tanks at raiding - so we have 1% of the game , other fighters get the other 99%</p><p>That seems fair doesn't it ?   Oh and with all your moaning about raids , i bet you have MT more raids than my Guardian has ?</p><p> </p>

[Macross_JR]

<span><blockquote><hr>uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:<div></div><div>Guardians are not equal tanks. You DO have an advantage, whether you admit it or not. You DO take less spike damage than other tanks. You DO have more hit points than any other tank. You DO have more mitigation than any other tank.</div><div> </div><div>In terms of PURE tanking, the Guardian is the better tank.</div><div> </div><div>Now, if you want to talk about utility, then you have a point, bu im sick and tired of guardians saying they tank equally to every other tank, or confusing tanking with utility.</div><div> </div><div>I will agree than your DPS could use a boost, and so could your utility....but your DPS should NEVER be on par with the rest of the other tanks. DPS takes place of aggro. Other tanks dont have hate generating stances, and bruisers and monks have crap for AE taunts.</div><div> </div><div>If guardians and paladins tank the same, then how come Guards tank 95% of raid encounters? In most situations the Gaurdian is the preferred tank. Heals and wards do NOTHING for tanking whatsoever. Neither does EVAC, FD, etc. These are UTILITY skills that are used when NOT tanking.</div><div> </div><div>Tanking has 2 main components, which are aggro and damage taking. The Guardian has a lock on these skills. Why? because amends cannot be cast raid wide, and is totally dependent on the person. If a wizard is getting resisted, or a scout is not doing his job amends is worthless. It is totally dependent on the person that has it, not like your aggro stance, which is a MUCH better aggro generator in terms of steady aggro.</div><div> </div><div>You people need to take a step back and breathe. That stuff about 90 days without a Guardian fix? guess what, the other tanks spent almost a WHOLE YEAR, taking second fiddle to Guardians in tanking.</div><div> </div><div>You people will never have the utility and DPS of other tanks because other tanks don't tank as well as guardians do. This is reality. Get used to it.</div><div> </div><div>Argue for what you CAN get, not for what you're not GOING to get.</div><hr></blockquote>I'm sorry you lost all credibility with this post.  Also Guardians are not the only class that gets a hate proc stance, do your research before you post.</span><div></div>