Heavy armor question

[cr0wangel]

<DIV>A question is in my mind since I started to play this game, maybe there is something I don't understand, but it disappoint me to see a fighter with better defense and wearing medium armor, since I wear this heavy armor and it slows me down...it's about agility and skills I guess.  I really thought I would have a better AC because of heavy armor, but it seems others classes have something in compensation since they can't wear the heavy armor. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am not sure if you understand my point, but I would like to know why the classes who can't wear the heavy armor have skills to boost defense in compensation? They should have something in compensation since they can't wear the armor. But if they need AC, give them armor no? It seem all fighters have a similar defense (with good items of course), we just have different ways to get our defense. what is better, AC from mitigation or AC from avoidance (agilty)?</DIV>

[Tagright]

I don't really understand your point and I don't agree with what I think is your your premise. To the extent you are suggesting that the medium armor classes are as capable as the heavy armor classes of serving as the MT of a group because their mitigation bonus to defense makes up for their lower AC, you are incorrect. This is not to say medium armor classes are incapable of MTing in certain situations, they are just not able to do so as efficiently and effectively as the heavy armor classes. To the extent that you suggest that a medium and heavy class will have the same AC (I think you mean defense) at the same level, this has not been my experience. In my experience, the defense skill of heavy armor classes exceeds that of medium armor classes at the same level, even with the avoidance bonuses. And . . . what do you mean when you say your armor slows you down? I have never observed my armor to havea significant impact on my weight. Are you carrying wooden strong boxes? Do you have rocks in your pockets?Now for your question. You say: "I would like to know why the classes who can't wear the heavy armor have skills to boost defense in compensation? They should have something in compensation since they can't wear the armor. But if they need AC, give them armor no?" First, medium armor classes have increased avoidance to make up for their lower AC so they do not die too quickly if things go wrong and they end up taking hits. It is not a sufficient bonus to defense to let them tank level-appropriate mobs for a lengthy amount of time. Second, if SOE gave them armor to make up for the lack of AC in their armor (a borderline [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] suggestion on your part, I must add), they'd be tanks and then the whiners would start calling for nerfs to lower their dps.

[cr0wangel]

<P>Tagright my post had mistakes, I wanted to edit it, but it was bugged...</P> <P> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <HR> <P>Tagright wrote:<BR>I don't really understand your point and I don't agree with what I think is your your premise.<BR><BR>To the extent you are suggesting that the medium armor classes are as capable as the heavy armor classes of serving as the MT of a group because their mitigation bonus to defense makes up for their lower AC, you are incorrect. This is not to say medium armor classes are incapable of MTing in certain situations, they are just not able to do so as efficiently and effectively as the heavy armor classes.</P> <P><FONT color=#66cc00>I have good armor and items (orange and up to date) I am level 35, I know how to use my buffs and skills. My friend, bruiser 35, have a similar AC and he wears medium armor. He has less health, but he can actually tank. My equipment is good, so I really don't know what is wrong...(and yes I have skills upgraded)</FONT></P> <P><BR><BR>To the extent that you suggest that a medium and heavy class will have the same AC (I think you mean defense) at the same level, this has not been my experience. In my experience, the defense skill of heavy armor classes exceeds that of medium armor classes at the same level, even with the avoidance bonuses.</P> <P><FONT color=#66cc00>As I said, my friend bruiser 35, have a similar AC / defense. My equipement is good, I will come back with some numbers.</FONT></P> <P><BR><BR>And . . . what do you mean when you say your armor slows you down? I have never observed my armor to havea significant impact on my weight. Are you carrying wooden strong boxes? Do you have rocks in your pockets?</P> <P><FONT color=#66cc00>Impact on my weight, not really. But heavy armor reduce speed for sure. When I wear my full set of armor, I don't run as fast as the others. I am sure of this. My character is slow when following a group. Exemple: traveling in the steppes, I follow the group, but always fall behind because I am slower. And I am not overweighted, I have no boxes. The armor reduce speed.</FONT></P> <P><BR><BR>Now for your question. You say: "I would like to know why the classes who can't wear the heavy armor have skills to boost defense in compensation? They should have something in compensation since they can't wear the armor. But if they need AC, give them armor no?" First, medium armor classes have increased avoidance to make up for their lower AC so they do not die too quickly if things go wrong and they end up taking hits. It is not a sufficient bonus to defense to let them tank level-appropriate mobs for a lengthy amount of time. Second, if SOE gave them armor to make up for the lack of AC in their armor (a borderline [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] suggestion on your part, I must add), they'd be tanks and then the whiners would start calling for nerfs to lower their dps.</P> <P><FONT color=#66cc00>I am not asking SOE to give them heavy armor. I saw fighter classes with medium armor tanking very often. So what is the point of the heavy armor, if you can tank with medium armor + agility?  You are level 40 (in your signature), you really never saw any bruiser / monk tanking?</FONT></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <p>Message Edited by cr0wangel on <span class=date_text>03-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:31 AM</span>

[Asgaa]

<DIV>You're comparing a bruiser to a berserker... Bruisers are a fighter subtype.  They are supposed to be able to tank even when restricted to light armor.  They have avoidance where we have mitigation.  Generally we still tank better than they do because we take hits better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As far as armor slowing you down?  Maybe it's your connection.  As long as you're not over your carrying capacity, you move the same naked as you would wearing a sherman tank.</DIV>

[cr0wangel]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Asgaard wrote:<BR> <DIV>You're comparing a bruiser to a berserker... Bruisers are a fighter subtype.  They are supposed to be able to tank even when restricted to light armor.  They have avoidance where we have mitigation.  Generally we still tank better than they do because we take hits better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66cc00>So what is the best avoidance or mitigation? Better to soak it or avoid it ?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As far as armor slowing you down?  Maybe it's your connection.  As long as you're not over your carrying capacity, you move the same naked as you would wearing a sherman tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66cc00>This is not my connexion, I usually don't have lag. I should really run as fast naked or in heavy armor? I will ask others fighters. If I follow my friend necromancer so no heavy armor (without any speed buff or anything) I will fall behind and loose him (ie I stop to follow him because he got too far away). If I goes naked, I can follow him. So I figured heavy armor reduce my movement.</FONT></DIV> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Asgaa]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> cr0wangel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Asgaard wrote:<BR> <DIV>You're comparing a bruiser to a berserker... Bruisers are a fighter subtype.  They are supposed to be able to tank even when restricted to light armor.  They have avoidance where we have mitigation.  Generally we still tank better than they do because we take hits better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66cc00>So what is the best avoidance or mitigation? Better to soak it or avoid it ?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>For XP tanking it's fairly irrelevant unless you're fighting well above your level.  For tanking very hard mobs, mitigation is generally preferred by healers.  When avoidance based tanks get hit, they get hit alot harder which cause damage spikes that are hard to heal at times.  When tanking raid mobs, those spikes will absolutely kill you.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As far as armor slowing you down?  Maybe it's your connection.  As long as you're not over your carrying capacity, you move the same naked as you would wearing a sherman tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#66cc00>This is not my connexion, I usually don't have lag. I should really run as fast naked or in heavy armor? I will ask others fighters. If I follow my friend necromancer so no heavy armor (without any speed buff or anything) I will fall behind and loose him (ie I stop to follow him because he got too far away). If I goes naked, I can follow him. So I figured heavy armor reduce my movement.</FONT></DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffff66>I follow my sister, who plays a monk, all the time and I am in vanguard... and I'm a gnome.  I never have a problem keeping up.</FONT></P> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Dulbec]

<BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> cr0wangel wrote:<BR> <DIV>I am not sure if you understand my point, but I would like to know why the classes who can't wear the heavy armor have skills to boost defense in compensation? They should have something in compensation since they can't wear the armor. But if they need AC, give them armor no? It seem all fighters have a similar defense (with good items of course), we just have different ways to get our defense. what is better, AC from mitigation or AC from avoidance (agilty)?</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Defense numbers were changed about two months ago to reflect not only the AC numbers from armor, but other skills like avoidance, parry, riposte, and block.  Prior to the patch, brawlers were scorned as tanks because group members would take one look at their defense number and laugh, not realizing that brawler tanking did not rely only on worn armor class.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The patch was put in to give brawlers at least a leg to stand on when saying they were, in actuality, a tanking class (as is Sony's stated intent).  As for which is better, AC from mitigation or AC from avoidance, I don't think anyone but Sony knows exactly how the new defense number is calculated, but most agree that brawlers are susceptible to streakier damage whereas plate tanks, and guardians and zerkers especially, tend to have the most steady and predictable tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Most people like the reliability and predictability of warrior tanking and for that reason (and others) people tend to agree that warriors are better tanks than brawlers.  However, in theory, brawlers with the same defense number as a warrior of the same level should perform comparably using avoidance instead of mitigation.</DIV>