Do the new AAs make up for what Guardians lack?

[mastersard]

<div>Are AAs the answer we're looking for to make our class "fun" again?</div><div> </div><div>And if not, will class betrayal+AAs do the trick?</div>

[Moontayle]

<div></div><p>I think the answer to your question lies in another question: What do you feel is missing that these AAs might compensate for?</p><p>I'm perfectly happy with my Guardian just the way he is. I don't like some of what the others classes have to offer but that doesn't diminish the way I feel about the Guardian. The AAs available simply serve to increase my enjoyment of the Guardian in a way that I perceive it to be. Going the Strength Line will compliment my already good tanking and aggro skills with increased DPS. It's all good baby...</p>

[Sir_Halbarad]

AA's can make you tank better, do more dps or a bit of both.That means a 70 Guard with 50 AA tanks better than a 70 Tank with 0 AA.When all have 50 AA, you are back where we are now <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />An even field where SKILL and FRIENDS matters the most, then CA's, equipment and the shiny toys.<div></div>

[Junaru]

I think the Warrior AA's shows that SOE is somewhat aware of the Guardian problems. No doubt the AA's reflect some of the problems your class has. But needed to buy AA's to fix your class should never be the answer.With that said, as of right now I think the Warrior AA's seem the best balanced across all 5 trees and give you alot no matter which one(s) you pick. But this is all subject to change since lastnight I thought the Brawler AA's sucked and this morning (they changed them) they aren't so bad.<div></div>

[mastersard]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:I think the Warrior AA's shows that SOE is somewhat aware of the Guardian problems. No doubt the AA's reflect some of the problems your class has. But needed to buy AA's to fix your class should never be the answer.<div></div><hr></blockquote>that's what i'm thinking.  Why do i have to but the Xpack AND do AAs to be fun and viable as a class?

[Crim001]

<div></div><p>Let's say that a bruiser or zerk decides to go the str line (whichever one has the added aggro effect) and a guard does as well. Doesn't really solve much does it? In order for it to level out the guards, it means that the other classes have to improve areas that don't directly effect tanking to much.</p><p>Doubt I'm even gonna get KoS, so I guess this doesn't effect me too much.</p>

[Junaru]

Brawlers don't have any aggro AA..<div></div>

[Crim001]

<div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:Brawlers don't have any aggro AA..<div></div><hr></blockquote>I didn't check out any of the other classes, just making a general comparison.....</div>

[Ri]

<div></div>Brawlers don't really need extra aggro AAs considering the DPS they can pull out compared. I feel it kinda a low blow that they get the best defence skills in their main tree, defence, deflection, and migration in their str, stam, and agility tree. While we are sitting back getting parry in our intellegence tree, migration is good for us though.

[Gungo]

<div></div><p>Gaurdians and zerkers share the same AA lines so if you feel bezerkers are superior to guards atm then that will not change when both have 50aa's since they both can have the same type of aa's.</p><p>imho aa's are not that game changing which is good. a gaurd w 0 aa's will not be that far off from a gaurd with 0 aa's. But i still feel gaurds do lack a decent offensive stance.</p>

[Crim001]

<div></div><font color="#ccff00"></font><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote:<div></div><p>Gaurdians and zerkers share the same AA lines so if you feel bezerkers are superior to guards atm then that will not change when both have 50aa's since they both can have the same type of aa's.</p><p><font color="#ccff00">Did someone state that zerks were superior? Besides, as soon as they allow the betrayal, I'm sure a good number of guards will be zerkers.</font></p><p>imho aa's are not that game changing which is good. a gaurd w 0 aa's will not be that far off from a gaurd with 0 aa's.</p><p><font color="#ccff00">Typo? And yes they will, increased proc rates for hate will make quite a difference as long as we aren't debuffed to heavily. </font></p><p>But i still feel gaurds do lack a decent offensive stance.</p><font color="#ccff00">And is it me or is a better offensive stance about the only thing that anyone who isn't a guard said that we need an improvement in?</font><hr></blockquote>

[Gungo]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Crim001 wrote:<div></div><font color="#ccff00"></font><blockquote><hr>Gungo wrote:<div></div><p>Gaurdians and zerkers share the same AA lines so if you feel bezerkers are superior to guards atm then that will not change when both have 50aa's since they both can have the same type of aa's.</p><p><font color="#ccff00">Did someone state that zerks were superior? Besides, as soon as they allow the betrayal, I'm sure a good number of guards will be zerkers. </font>Reading comprehension is good to learn BTW. I said IF you feel bezerkers are superior to gaurds at the moment. Then your feelings on gaurds "lacking" will not change.</p><p><font color="#ccff00"></font> </p><p>imho aa's are not that game changing which is good. a gaurd w <font color="#ff3300">5</font>0 aa's will not be that far off from a gaurd with 0 aa's.</p><p><font color="#ccff00">Typo? And yes they will, increased proc rates for hate will make quite a difference as long as we aren't debuffed to heavily. </font>Sorry yes it was a typo. i meant to say a gaurd w 0 aa's will not be far off from a guard with 50 aa's. Did you test the AA's in beta? i I thought not. Truth is the new aa's are quite weak compared to aa's in eq1. They are not game changing. wil they help a lil yes. BUT the difference between 2 guards w and w/o AA's will hardly ever make a guard w/o AA's obsolete.</p><p>But i still feel gaurds do lack a decent offensive stance.</p><p><font color="#ccff00">And is it me or is a better offensive stance about the only thing that anyone who isn't a guard said that we need an improvement in? </font>Does this post have a point or is it another of your trolling posts we can all throw into the trash? You said once before i judge you on one post. The truth is it is the many ignorant posts like these you write that i end up judging you on. You do not post constructively instead you banter and whine in your posts derailing topics and attacking posters. hence you end up seeming childish.</p><p>Actually many guards have stated the mantra guards DPS sucks. Many have said guards are the best Raid tank. Many have stated guards are a slightly better tank but the gap in tanking and DPS is not comparable. Most fighter subclasses do comparable DPS in their class except for the warriors archtype. monks and bruisers do comparable dps. Paladins and shadowknights do comparable dps. Zerkers do way mroe dps then guards. Guards solo inefficiently not because they tank poorly or lack protection skills, but because it takes them 3x as long to solo because they lack dps. Guards fail to stack well in raids or groups because of a weak secondary skill (protection) and lack of DPS to group. Guards have the smallest gap between offensive stance and defensive stance. Parses and actual gameplay show an increase of ~80dps between master 1 offensive and master 1 defensive. What does all this spell a weak and broken offensive stance. </p><p>But then again this has all changed and their is no more archtypes or subclasses. Just 6 individual subclasses now. either or the fact remains guards lack DPS to solo efficeintly and stack in raids/groups due to a weak and underutilized offensive stance.</p><p></p><hr></blockquote><hr></blockquote>

[Junaru]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>Riya wrote:<div></div>Brawlers don't really need extra aggro AAs considering the DPS they can pull out compared. I feel it kinda a low blow that they get the best defence skills in their main tree, defence, deflection, and migration in their str, stam, and agility tree. While we are sitting back getting parry in our intellegence tree, migration is good for us though.<hr></blockquote>Not true. Against single target this is true but against group mobs a Brawler has a hard time holding aggro. So yes I would have liked to have seen a Brawler AA that gives extra group hate for any Monk or Brusier that want down the MT tree. For those who went down the DPS tree, well to bad for you but give the "tank" Brawler a little hand against group mobs.</span></div>

[Noah]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:I think the Warrior AA's shows that SOE is somewhat aware of the Guardian problems. No doubt the AA's reflect some of the problems your class has. But needed to buy AA's to fix your class should never be the answer.<div></div><hr></blockquote>that's what i'm thinking.  Why do i have to but the Xpack AND do AAs to be fun and viable as a class?<hr></blockquote><p>"fun" is a matter of opinion.   This is why you can use the other slots to make another character.  It is your choice to play a Guardian or something else.</p><p>As far as AAs go - they definately open up an "offensive" door that was not there so much beforehand.  Procs, dps increase, double attacks, ripostes, haste - all could create a rather offensive Guardian but at the same time tank as well as we do now.  Its your "choice".</p>

[Barsh Barshmor]

<div>I view the AA's as flavor for classes and not much more than that.</div><div> </div><div>Compare Gaurds vs. Zerkers now ... give 50 AA to each ... if they spend them in teh exact same way then its comparative to the way we are now. The difference is seen only when the points are spent in different places, but of course thats all dependent on the player, which is what AA is all about, flavor.</div><div> </div><div>i like the way guards are now, and i view AA as a way to compliment my certain style of play, improving my character where I want to be improved.</div><div> </div><div>If you want a better tanking guard, go for tank AA. If you want a better DPS Guard, go for DPS AA.</div><div> </div><div>All depenent on the player and their playstyle.</div>

[Gaige]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:<div><span><blockquote><hr>Riya wrote:<div></div>Brawlers don't really need extra aggro AAs considering the DPS they can pull out compared. I feel it kinda a low blow that they get the best defence skills in their main tree, defence, deflection, and migration in their str, stam, and agility tree. While we are sitting back getting parry in our intellegence tree, migration is good for us though.<hr></blockquote>Not true. Against single target this is true but against group mobs a Brawler has a hard time holding aggro. So yes I would have liked to have seen a Brawler AA that gives extra group hate for any Monk or Brusier that want down the MT tree. For those who went down the DPS tree, well to bad for you but give the "tank" Brawler a little hand against group mobs.</span><hr></div></blockquote>Yeah our group aggro can be a bit messy at times.  Dragonbreath oringally hate a hate increasing component tied to it, but it was changed unfortunately.

[mastersard]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Noah wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:I think the Warrior AA's shows that SOE is somewhat aware of the Guardian problems. No doubt the AA's reflect some of the problems your class has. But needed to buy AA's to fix your class should never be the answer.<div></div><hr></blockquote>that's what i'm thinking.  Why do i have to but the Xpack AND do AAs to be fun and viable as a class?<hr></blockquote><p>"fun" is a matter of opinion.   This is why you can use the other slots to make another character.  It is your choice to play a Guardian or something else.</p><p>As far as AAs go - they definately open up an "offensive" door that was not there so much beforehand.  Procs, dps increase, double attacks, ripostes, haste - all could create a rather offensive Guardian but at the same time tank as well as we do now.  Its your "choice".</p><hr></blockquote><p>If you are a MT Guardian, then yes, you're prolly having fun.  Grats.</p><p>But guess what?  I'm not.  I never intended to be.  I dont see that in my future with EQ2.  Most Guardians will never step in front of a raid mob.  So what else is there for Guardians?  Certainly not a "fun" role.</p><p>If Guardians are going to only be "fun" or "enjoyable" as a tank in a raid, then shouldn't they be the very best at it?  I mean, hands down, no contest, printed on the front of th box, "If you want to tank raid content roll a Guardian" best tank in the game for raids.</p><p>SOE not going to do that for us?  Then level the playing field for all classes who are intended to tank.  DPS, Utility, Survivability, all of it.  Anything less makes LU13 a lie.</p>

[Renti]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Noah wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:I think the Warrior AA's shows that SOE is somewhat aware of the Guardian problems. No doubt the AA's reflect some of the problems your class has. But needed to buy AA's to fix your class should never be the answer.<div></div><hr></blockquote>that's what i'm thinking.  Why do i have to but the Xpack AND do AAs to be fun and viable as a class?<hr></blockquote><p>"fun" is a matter of opinion.   This is why you can use the other slots to make another character.  It is your choice to play a Guardian or something else.</p><p>As far as AAs go - they definately open up an "offensive" door that was not there so much beforehand.  Procs, dps increase, double attacks, ripostes, haste - all could create a rather offensive Guardian but at the same time tank as well as we do now.  Its your "choice".</p><hr></blockquote><p>If you are a MT Guardian, then yes, you're prolly having fun.  Grats.</p><p>But guess what?  I'm not.  I never intended to be.  I dont see that in my future with EQ2.  Most Guardians will never step in front of a raid mob.  So what else is there for Guardians?  Certainly not a "fun" role.</p><p>If Guardians are going to only be "fun" or "enjoyable" as a tank in a raid, then shouldn't they be the very best at it?  I mean, hands down, no contest, printed on the front of th box, "If you want to tank raid content roll a Guardian" best tank in the game for raids.</p><p>SOE not going to do that for us?  Then level the playing field for all classes who are intended to tank.  DPS, Utility, Survivability, all of it.  Anything less makes LU13 a lie.</p><hr></blockquote>Couldn't of said it better.</span></div>

[JNewby]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:<div><span><blockquote><hr>Riya wrote:<div></div>Brawlers don't really need extra aggro AAs considering the DPS they can pull out compared. I feel it kinda a low blow that they get the best defence skills in their main tree, defence, deflection, and migration in their str, stam, and agility tree. While we are sitting back getting parry in our intellegence tree, migration is good for us though.<hr></blockquote>Not true. Against single target this is true but against group mobs a Brawler has a hard time holding aggro. So yes I would have liked to have seen a Brawler AA that gives extra group hate for any Monk or Brusier that want down the MT tree. For those who went down the DPS tree, well to bad for you but give the "tank" Brawler a little hand against group mobs.</span></div><hr></blockquote><p>how many aoe taunts to brawlers get? I know guards only get 2.. which if a warlock or zerker or ranger is aorund is not enoguh hate</p><p>I think groups are hard for every tank to hold...</p>

[JNewby]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Noah wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>mastersardis wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:I think the Warrior AA's shows that SOE is somewhat aware of the Guardian problems. No doubt the AA's reflect some of the problems your class has. But needed to buy AA's to fix your class should never be the answer.<div></div><hr></blockquote>that's what i'm thinking.  Why do i have to but the Xpack AND do AAs to be fun and viable as a class?<hr></blockquote><p>"fun" is a matter of opinion.   This is why you can use the other slots to make another character.  It is your choice to play a Guardian or something else.</p><p>As far as AAs go - they definately open up an "offensive" door that was not there so much beforehand.  Procs, dps increase, double attacks, ripostes, haste - all could create a rather offensive Guardian but at the same time tank as well as we do now.  Its your "choice".</p><hr></blockquote><p>If you are a MT Guardian, then yes, you're prolly having fun.  Grats.</p><p>But guess what?  I'm not.  I never intended to be.  I dont see that in my future with EQ2.  Most Guardians will never step in front of a raid mob.  So what else is there for Guardians?  Certainly not a "fun" role.</p><p>If Guardians are going to only be "fun" or "enjoyable" as a tank in a raid, then shouldn't they be the very best at it?  I mean, hands down, no contest, printed on the front of th box, "If you want to tank raid content roll a Guardian" best tank in the game for raids.</p><p>SOE not going to do that for us?  Then level the playing field for all classes who are intended to tank.  DPS, Utility, Survivability, all of it.  Anything less makes LU13 a lie.</p><hr></blockquote><p>if you arent going to tank on raids you should not role a guardian.. cause if your not u are not useful on raids and its a boroing class outside of raid tanking <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I made a dirge first then... decided to raid tank so I made  a guardian.. once I am done raid tanking I wont be playing my guard anymore <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p> </p>

[mastersard]

<div></div><hr><blockquote><p>JNewby wrote:</p><p>if you arent going to tank on raids you should not role a guardian..</p></blockquote><p></p><hr>This was the Guardian's argument pre LU13.  "If you want to tank, roll a Guardian."  I must have read it 10k times.<p>And yet, all fighters are <em>supposed</em> to tank equally, now.  So why not make all the other stuff equal too?  Solo, group, utility, DPS....</p>

[Gaige]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>JNewby wrote:<div></div><p>if you arent going to tank on raids you should not role a guardian.. cause if your not u are not useful on raids and its a boroing class outside of raid tanking <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I made a dirge first then... decided to raid tank so I made  a guardian.. once I am done raid tanking I wont be playing my guard anymore <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><hr></blockquote><p>That's the stupidest thing I've ever read in my entire life.  Congratulations.</p><p>Oh and welcome back JNewby, haven't seen you posting in here in awhile.</p><p>With all this clamor about being different, and choice, and uniqueness and diversity... you're telling me and every other player of EQ2 that if we want to raid tank we HAVE TO BE A GUARDIAN.</p><p>Wow.</p><p>Back to the only need four classes arguement I see.</p>

[JNewby]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>JNewby wrote:<div></div><p>if you arent going to tank on raids you should not role a guardian.. cause if your not u are not useful on raids and its a boroing class outside of raid tanking <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I made a dirge first then... decided to raid tank so I made  a guardian.. once I am done raid tanking I wont be playing my guard anymore <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><hr></blockquote><p>That's the stupidest thing I've ever read in my entire life.  Congratulations.</p><p>Oh and welcome back JNewby, haven't seen you posting in here in awhile.</p><p>With all this clamor about being different, and choice, and uniqueness and diversity... you're telling me and every other player of EQ2 that if we want to raid tank we HAVE TO BE A GUARDIAN.</p><p>Wow.</p><p>Back to the only need four classes arguement I see.</p><hr></blockquote><p>nah only need 1 tank can be a guard.. if you read what I said correctly I stated that you wont really be to welcome on raids as a guard if you are not MT... bruisers and such though are still welcome... I also stated that playing a guardian and not being MT on raids is not so fun either... so I only rolled my guard to MT on raids.. period or else I would have kept playing my dirge...</p><p>please next time read it correctly</p><p> </p>