What do we have to give up to get the DPS we WANT sony?

[ThePhoni]

<DIV>Well if you have not seen it this: <STRONG><EM> </EM></STRONG><A href="http://eq2vault.ign.com/View.php?view=asksoe.Detail&category_select_id=43" target=_blank><STRONG><EM><FONT color=#c8c1b5>http://eq2vault.ign.com/View.php?view=asksoe.Detail&category_select_id=43</FONT></EM></STRONG></A> </DIV> <DIV>was just said by MG with reguards to the new combat revamp.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The point of this post is to explain to sony what i think we as bezerkers WANT.  Because I know the other 50 thousands posts on the topic were just overlooked by the SOE dev team. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As a bezerker I want to be able to beat mobs with large weapons.  * I want to be as deadly with a weapon as is possible*  I do not want to be able to assainate or whatever, and I understand from a balance perspective that I can not do as much damage as a DPS scout.  But I want to BE a bezker.  This means i have to be able to do GOOD DPS ( group 3 from the above link).  I want to be a big hulking barbarian that roars taunts, gets cleaved in half by that lion and only lives by the grace of the healer; AND that cleaves the lion in half in one swing.  To me bezerkers only real tanking ability should be their pile of hitpoints.   I really wish SOE would understand that I do not mind them balancing my class.  But I DO NOT want to be the class they are making me.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What I am willing to give up so you will finally give bezerkers the DPS we SHOULD have.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- heavy plate - I am a bezerker, I want to be hit and hit hard to MAKE ME BEZERK.  It would also be nice to see our rage trigger at a greater rate the more damage we take in a short period of time.  So that a hit for half of my life should almost always trigger rage OR 5 mobs combining to hit me for half my life should trigger rage.  But hits for 1-5% of my life.. bah i've had worse wounds from being in bed with my wife<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- shield-  I am a bezerker,  I don't need no stinking shield.  I would rather kill you with a HUGE axe or 2 huge axes instead of bothering to protect my body.  *as a bezerker I am willing to sacrifice my body IF i can do GREATER damage to my foe* </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- bow and arrow-(equitment slot) I am a bezerker, I don't want to hide in the trees shooting sticks at my foe.  I want to face him in mortal combat face to face in the open field of battle</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>-piercing weapons-  I am a bezerker, give me AXES, give me MACES.. i don't need a dagger.. or a rapier.. or a spear (unless it has a AXE on it) simply take away the piercing skill. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>-Defense buffs- I am a bezerker, give me more haste instead. Give me offensive buffs, give me HP buffs. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This has been my personal opinion on the bezerker subclass, take it as such.  If you agree or disagree please post.  Yes i am a "tank" class, yes I do want to tank, but not at the expense of my DPS.  I'm not here to guard anyone.  I am here to go bezerk and KILL things, and without GOOD DPS i can not BE a Bezerker.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Also if you can think of anything else that does not fit with the flavor of a bezerker that we could give up so we can have the DPS we want.  Please give an example and tell us why it fits.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Rhaam]

<P>I disagree myself. What you have in mind seems to be more the version of the historical beserker as well as the EQ1 variant. We're the more offensively tuned version of a <STRONG>warrior</STRONG>. I would like to be reflected as such (a decent tank with above par DPS as far as fighters go). </P><P>In the DPS race coming in middle of the pack just doesn't cut it (which SoE has stated time and time again that is were ALL fighters will end up at best). After the combat revamp we certainly won't be a first pick to fill a DPS slot of a group, so I'd rather be able to tank pretty well. </P><P>IMO monks and bruisers will be hit hard by this since they aren't the best tanks and certainly won't be the best at DPS. Being moderately good at a couple things isn't the way to go in an MMO.</P><p>Message Edited by Rhaaman on <span class=date_text>06-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:40 AM</span>

[Buggrit]

<DIV>your basically asking them to make us monks give up all the heavy armour so where stuck in light/medium while doing high dmg?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i'd prefer the tanking role i do well in</DIV>

[scl]

<font face="comic sans ms" size="2"> A slightly edited verse from the great man and true image of what a Zerker should be - Zakk Wylde! <P> <I> Where I go and where I rise, I couldn't give a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] Another kill, another beer, is all that I have planned The cage is broke, the tank is full, it's where the violence rules Drinkin' booze and raisin' hate, hell straight through and through </i> <P> By the way, the song is called Berserkers and to the OP - I agree 100% </font>

[Dherf]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Buggrit wrote:<BR> <DIV>your basically asking them to make us monks give up all the heavy armour so where stuck in light/medium while doing high dmg?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i'd prefer the tanking role i do well in</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Aye, we are warriors, and so we are tanks .... a very good tanks! that's our role.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Lethalweff]

<DIV>I agree with a lot of what Phoenix says, but I disagree with some main points.  As a zerker, I think we should be able to use every kind of weapoon and wear every kind of heavy armor.  I also believe that every tank should be able to use a bow and arrow.  But if they are going to stunt our DPS, then they need to adjust how we tank.  A guardian out DPSing a beserker scares me a lot.  Guardians and beserkers are two sides of the same coin, but we're the offensive version and guardians are the defensive.  Having a guardian capable of out damaging a beserker is just fundamentally wrong.  Another thing that has just never made sense to me is why guardians get more hit points.  If SOE is going to take away our DPS, they need to realize that berserkers, by definition, should have more stamina and hit points.</DIV>

[Adrenachro]

<DIV>I'm concerned about the combat changes from a slightly different perspective.  My concern is that we don't seem to be gaining any extra ability in tanking/taking damage.  These changes seem to be purely focused on damage dealing potential, which, for an offensive oriented class like us, only means losing utility.  Don't get me wrong, I love my Zerker, he is an immensely fun class to play.  But sometimes I feel that since only a Guardian can tank the high tier raid mobs (and raiding is the pinnacle of EQ2), I'm just a sub-par Guardian with a little more damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know that sounds like I'm selling the Berserker (well, the Berserker at present) a bit short.  We are definitely the second best tanks in the game, and we have wonderful group buffs.  But do any of you ever feel like you would give up some of that dps (and come on, it's not THAT great!) for the ability to tank like a Guardian?  Hey, if you are reading this and saying "Well maybe you should have rolled a Guardian then!", you have every right to think that.  I think that myself sometimes too.  But the thing that makes me STOP thinking that is that we are both Warriors.  There shouldn't be only -one- class in the game that can tank Vox, Darathar, etc... I think that Berserkers should be able to MT them, just with large negatives to our offense (effectively making us equivalent to a Guardian).  Why not?  We are from the same Warrior class, can anyone give me a reason as why NOT to have that equivalence?  I would be happy for a Guard to buff their offense for the sake of their defense, making them equivalent to Zerkers.  Sure, it blurs the lines a bit more between the sub-classes, but so what?  If people understand BEFORE they chose to be a Warrior that Warriors are the premier tank class in the game, then they should just deal with the fact that our DPS is low.   But what would counter that low DPS is the ability to tank any raid mob in the game.  That would make me feel like I play a class that really shines in something.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It seems we are 'almost-Guardians' with more damage.  However, with the looming combat changes, we will lose some of that damage.  I ask - where does that leave Berserkers then?  And furthermore, where does it leave Shadowknights, Monks and Bruisers?</DIV>

[Adrenachro]

<DIV>And... I KNOW the OP was talking about Berserkers doing good damage and with some/little tanking ability.  But if I was SOE I would say one thing to answer that request - look at the subclass that we are next to - Guardians.  We were NEVER going to be a high damage dealing class.  Yes, they made us pretty [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] crazy in the early days, and we still can do great dps by finding the right optimisations of weapons and skills despite the nerfs.  But let's be really really pragmatic about this - we are grouped with Guards ffs!  Our damage will never be that great, but neither will our tanking.  THAT'S where the imbalance lies.  Why is the Zerker grouped with an SK in Moorgard's 'damage table', when the Zerker and Guard both come from the Warrior class?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The Berserker described in the OP is unfortunately like the monk/bruiser class in EQ2.  I don't agree with it, but that's the class it seems you would probably rather play (err, with sharp weapons of course).  If you ask me, the Zerker SHOULD be as you described it... but it seems (especially with the upcoming combat changes) that we are merely slightly 2nd rate heavy plate wearing meatshields.  For God's sake - a PALADIN tanking better than us?  Come ON!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Pnaxx]

<P>I agree almost to the letter with the OP. If we are going to be significanly different aftre the patch, let it be as less def and more offense. We should leave the tanking upto the gards if we have to. Mond u , im happy with where we r now, but if we are getting the nerf bat, lets not all the sudden play as if we are hitting with a nerf bat...if u get my drift. If we are to be  on one end of the spectrum...let it be the dps end at the cost of def!</P> <P>We are Zerkers! That is wut we do best...kill lotts at a fast pace til we die, or all are d3ead around us. Really, that is the spectrum we need to be towazrds. Let them take away our shields....and some...or all of our def buffs like recless stance and weapon shield. Those 3 items alone would nerf our def capability and make us far less harty than a guard fer tanking....but we still could tank if we were the onlyone around to do it. We really shouldn,t be as good as guards anyway at any lvl.....that is their territory...let them keep it. </P> <P>I knoe that many of u have built ur identity on ur tanking...as have I...but...if we r getting nerfed.....lets be an increased dps and decreased def...not the other way around...at that poiont...we r USELESS!  A SECOND RATE GUARD AT BEST! [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]! </P>

[Pinche Va]

<P>From Sony's guide to characters...</P> <P>__________________________________________________ _______________________________________________</P> <P>Berserkers are among the most dangerous warriors, inflicting heavy damage on their foes with their chaotic fighting style.</P> <P>__________________________________________________ _______________________________________________</P> <P> </P> <P>Ok, when I started a melee char, I wanted to hurt things. This line inspired me to choose beserker. Why? Because I wanted to hurt things. Its really simple. I didnt pick a beserker because I wanted to tank mobs. I took a beserker because I wanted to KILL mobs.</P> <P> </P> <P>On the flip side someone could argue that they said *among the most dangerous WARRIORS*, implying that zerkers did good damage based on the 2 warrior sub classes. You would be grasping, but hey its your own opinion to read incorrectly.</P> <P> </P> <P>The operating words in that class defining sentence are *inflicting heavy damage*.  Im sure the vast majority of people didnt pick zerkers because they thought, "What a great defensive class!", after reading that snip.</P> <P> </P> <P>Long story short, I wanted to have solid damage output. If I wanted to have the best damage output I would have picked a wizard type. Anything short of nukers, I would read as zerkers coming in not far behind. Maybe one could argue that assassins should be ahead. That actually seems valid. But no way should all of those classes be in front of a class that was supposed to inflict heavy damage.</P> <P> </P> <P>I can agree with some modifications. I cannot agree with where that list has us.</P>

[Darkd]

I would like to see our dps and tanking abilities be based on the use of a shield.  If I use a shield then I should be absorbing hits and doing very very little damage.  Why?  Beacause I am hiding behind a shield!  Now if I am strong engough to pick up that "OH MY GOD ITS HUGE" axe and swing it then someone should say "OH MY GOD ITS HUGE" when they see my damage numbers.  I am even willing to wear medium armor to accomplish this so I have more mobility and range of motion to do that damage.  If they are ready to put Pallys about us in the tanking department I am fine with that but when a little elven bard in his tights and playing his little flute hits harder than me, theres something wrong.  Giant Hulking Barbarian swinging a 50 lb axe vs a tiny skinny wood elf bard swinging 2 tiny knives and a guitar.  Who do you think should do more damage??

[Frownyfi]

Guys I have to admit I'm just as anxious over these combat changes (and over that DPS tree) as you all are, but I don't think it's worth getting upset at this point until we actually see the whole picture on Test.  We've been listening to Scouts and Mages whine about our DPS for weeks and months now, so of course it's only natural to catastrophize about how SOE might mess up the class by destroying our damage potential.  That DPS rank tree didn't help much. However, we don't know what else has changed regarding our class.  Like the posters before me have mentioned, maybe they are simply re-invisioning the Berzerker class and making us more hardcore tanks in line with our Guardian brothers.   Until we see ALL the changes there is no way to know how this is going to effect us.  My advice is just to hold your tempers (what I thing to ask of a zerker <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) and be patient until the patch is released on Test.  Then if we are nerfed to hell our complaints will be legitimate and we will be able to form logical and informed arguments against the changes. <div></div>

[Styk]

/rant on explain to me HOW IN THE HELL does Enchanters and Bards ( the two BIGGEST SUPPORT ARCHTYPES )  get better dps then us in the new combat system? So whats gonna happen? They have the massive utlility and decent dps to boot? SoE what is going thru your g.d. p.h.u.k.k.i.n minds with this concept? Are you guys getting wasted nightly and saying  " Hey!!!! lets redo eq2 like this har har har " or or are yall at SoE getting P.O.D.ed too much any dont have an logic? I went thru Berserkers in eq1 being garbage ( well that an monks ) now your gonna put me thru this as well ? What kinda herb are you smoking SoE, because your dopeman is getting payed phatty style ..... /rant off <div></div>

[Darkd]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frownyfish wrote:<BR>Guys I have to admit I'm just as anxious over these combat changes (and over that DPS tree) as you all are, but I don't think it's worth getting upset at this point until we actually see the whole picture on Test.  We've been listening to Scouts and Mages whine about our DPS for weeks and months now, so of course it's only natural to catastrophize about how SOE might mess up the class by destroying our damage potential.  That DPS rank tree didn't help much.<BR><BR>However, we don't know what else has changed regarding our class.  Like the posters before me have mentioned, <FONT color=#ff0000>maybe they are simply re-invisioning the Berzerker class and making us more hardcore tanks in line with our Guardian brothers.</FONT>   Until we see ALL the changes there is no way to know how this is going to effect us.  My advice is just to hold your tempers (what I thing to ask of a zerker <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) and be patient until the patch is released on Test.  Then if we are nerfed to hell our complaints will be legitimate and we will be able to form logical and informed arguments against the changes.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>The new brother to the Guardian is the Palidin.  This has been stated before.  Our new Brother is the Shadowknight.</DIV>

[ArivenGemini]

<span><blockquote><hr>Darkdog wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Frownyfish wrote:Guys I have to admit I'm just as anxious over these combat changes (and over that DPS tree) as you all are, but I don't think it's worth getting upset at this point until we actually see the whole picture on Test.  We've been listening to Scouts and Mages whine about our DPS for weeks and months now, so of course it's only natural to catastrophize about how SOE might mess up the class by destroying our damage potential.  That DPS rank tree didn't help much.However, we don't know what else has changed regarding our class.  Like the posters before me have mentioned, <font color="#ff0000">maybe they are simply re-invisioning the Berzerker class and making us more hardcore tanks in line with our Guardian brothers.</font>   Until we see ALL the changes there is no way to know how this is going to effect us.  My advice is just to hold your tempers (what I thing to ask of a zerker <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) and be patient until the patch is released on Test.  Then if we are nerfed to hell our complaints will be legitimate and we will be able to form logical and informed arguments against the changes. <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>The new brother to the Guardian is the Palidin.  This has been stated before.  Our new Brother is the Shadowknight.</div><hr></blockquote> Oh great, paired with a scout <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </span><div></div>

[einar4]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rhaaman wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>I disagree myself. What you have in mind seems to be more the version of the historical beserker as well as the EQ1 variant. We're the more offensively tuned version of a <STRONG>warrior</STRONG>. I would like to be reflected as such (a decent tank with above par DPS as far as fighters go). </P><BR> <P>Message Edited by Rhaaman on <SPAN class=date_text>06-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:40 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P> Actually the historical berserkers of old Norse used shields, and while they were usually bare chested, you have to remember that only the richest of the norse raiders would even have a chain hauberk.    Most of them fought with padding such as skins and furs, maybe thick leather. Many would strip their shirts off and charge into battle, true... but many of the vikings did that who were not berserkers... it was bravado.  Remember that those warriors that gleefully ignored their fear and fought with disdain for the risk of death were taken to the halls of Asgard when they were struck down, and would feast with Odin and Thor.  </P> <P> If you read the old sagas and Irish laments, you can see that the berserkers were known for one thing (well, besides being stupid)... a blood rage as they ran into the fray without concern.  Their armor and weapons mattered little, only the "Red Rage," probably named from the red haze one sees when over-excited to the point of fury. </P> <P> They certainly had shields.  An old story, I think from Egil's saga, was to actually related to illustrate the hero's cleverness.  The hero, faced with a small "gang" of angry berserkers, was confounding them with his wit.  The leader, showing his consternation and rage, chewed on the edge of his shield.  The hero of the story, on horseback, moved up and kicked the bottom of the chieftain's shield, smashing his face and killing the berserker chief and demoralizing the rest of the "gang" </P> <P>  What I don't understand is why the fuss?  I have yet to see anything concrete about any of these changes they are doing.  All I hear is "well when we do the rebalancing patch..." but its been that way for months.  To me its really starting to sound like the kid that works in the local comic book store, wears his Star Fleet uniform to work, and has been writing an Amazing Novel for the past 4 years.  There is no point in getting annoyed until we at least see something concrete on Test. </P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Smear]

<DIV>I'm not a Berserker, but as a Monk, I can sympathize with what's to come, though might not how you would expect.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>At least when it comes to you guys, you picked the offensive version of a class (Warrior).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monks chose a Defensive version of their class, but now it appears we're to be more offensive than an offensive subclass.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can't speak for everyone, but I'd love to trade spots with you guys in that Tree if I could <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Adrenachro]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Frownyfish wrote:<BR>Guys I have to admit I'm just as anxious over these combat changes (and over that DPS tree) as you all are, but I don't think it's worth getting upset at this point until we actually see the whole picture on Test.  We've been listening to Scouts and Mages whine about our DPS for weeks and months now, so of course it's only natural to catastrophize about how SOE might mess up the class by destroying our damage potential.  That DPS rank tree didn't help much.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ff3300>However, we don't know what else has changed regarding our class.  Like the posters before me have mentioned, maybe they are simply re-invisioning the Berzerker class and making us more hardcore tanks in line with our Guardian brothers.</FONT>   Until we see ALL the changes there is no way to know how this is going to effect us.  My advice is just to hold your tempers (what I thing to ask of a zerker <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) and be patient until the patch is released on Test.  Then if we are nerfed to hell our complaints will be legitimate and we will be able to form logical and informed arguments against the changes.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>That's very true, we DON'T know what else has changed in our class.  There are slivers of evidence that Guardians' tanking abilities might be altered (they've been playing with Parry and Defense a lot I think), the only reason I can think of being that they MIGHT be bringing other tanks closer to the ability of Guardian's tanking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I still don't feel it's justified to pair us with SK's and pair Guards with Pallies... I mean this is my opinion, but classes should be the SAME across citiies.  A monk being a defensive version of a Bruiser just doesn't sound right to me.  Why should it matter what city you picked?  Why should an SK be less defensive than a Paladin?  Don't give me this good/evil justification, just because you're 'evil' doesn't mean you should be less defensive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Which brings me back to what I said first... that they may be bringing tanking 'ability' closer between the sub-classes, which is what *I* want.  I accept that we're at the lower end of the tree in DPS because we can tank, hey, fine.  But I just don't want to be an 'OK DPS' and 'OK TANK' subclass... that's jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none syndrome.</DIV>

[Leatherface77]

<DIV>"Oh great, paired with a scout <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif" width=16 border=0>"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> As an sk I laughed at that  I really did. I am worried about these changes as well and frankly am not that optimistic about them.  I think its really going to hurt all of the fighters in finding groups and being used in raids. The market prices of rares and high end equipment will surge again.  Two fighters in a group will be unheard of probaly. Zerkers are already great tanks with the best taunts and aggro management.  I hope they dont lower your dps too much (nor mine) as It is what makes our subclasses unique from our counterparts. It is nice to be paired with you here have a beer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But what do I know...Im a scout j/k</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Terrorcon 49 ogre sk of blackburrow</DIV>

[ArivenGemini]

<span><blockquote><hr>Leatherface77 wrote:<div>"Oh great, paired with a scout <img src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif" border="0" height="16" width="16">"</div> <div> </div> <div> As an sk I laughed at that  I really did. I am worried about these changes as well and frankly am not that optimistic about them.  I think its really going to hurt all of the fighters in finding groups and being used in raids. The market prices of rares and high end equipment will surge again.  Two fighters in a group will be unheard of probaly. Zerkers are already great tanks with the best taunts and aggro management.  I hope they dont lower your dps too much (nor mine) as It is what makes our subclasses unique from our counterparts. It is nice to be paired with you here have a beer.</div> <div> </div> <div>But what do I know...Im a scout j/k</div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote>/salute You get evac right?  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I think that not only are rares and high end equipment gonna surge in cost, but so will skill upgrades.. an already insane market.. its going to explode as people go "o crap, I need to upgrade!!" The biggest thing that comforts me in the changes is I am guaranteed a group in my guild at least... and I think building a reuputation as a good tank is going to be even more essential in the coming days..</span><div></div>

[Leatherface77]

<P>:smileymad: Evac is sprinkled around  a little too much in this game. It is useful in that long run from cazic to the docks however.  It was funny the first time I used it to save my group I fizzled like 15 times in a row. My advice to everyone stock up on rares and adepts you may need for your alts cause prices will soar.  Who knows things might not be that bad I still ahve all this y2k stuff I didnt use.</P> <P>Terrorcon 49 ogre shadowknight</P> <P>There is no light that can end all darkness</P>

[XensosKinein]

<DIV>Okay... I'l admit I didn't read this WHOLE post, but I read most of it. I agrre with some points, but not all. First, I picked a Zerker cause, other than suiting my RL personality, I wanted a good rounded class that could tank small groups and MA raids. It would be SOOOOOO wrong to nerf the armor on Zerkers as I have a whole lot of time and GP invested in armor and I don't want to trade it for anything.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My big concern is this... guards get huge defense buffs, pallies get heals. Zerkers WERE supposed to get DPS to balance it out, however, My 48 Zerker using 2 Imbued ebon axes, Master 1 Mutilate, Master 1 Rage, and every buff available... with Unflinching will and controlled rage OFF can not not best a lvl 45 Pally. We put this to the test if EF on 06/23/05. Using Combat Stats, the Pally consitantly outperformed my Zerk by 1,000 points (Zerk ~4,000 Pally ~5,000 on Single and Group encounters). That's just plain freaking ridiculous. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I picked Zerker from the get go, and within a week they had totally nerfed them. I think it's about time SOE un-nerfed them. Zerkers can not defend as well as Guards, and have NO heal capabilities.... and yet, can not outperform either class in DPS.... this just seems wrong.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If nothing else.... give us a kick [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] ward spell. Historically, Berserkers ran into a battle, and no matter how hard the were hit, they would keep fighting. That sounds like a ward to me. Berzerkers survive by sheer will alone on the battle field and feel no pain. I say, ward the Zerks and nerf the pallies.</DIV>

[scl]

No offense, but if you can't out damage a Pally at any level, let alone one who is 3 levels below you, you're doing something very wrong. And you were duel wielding? I think the weaponsmith pulled a fast one on you, he obviously sold you two pristine rubber axes, not ebon. <P>

[WolfSha]

<P>Yeah, find and kill your weaponsmith (get some npc vendor weapons on the way).  I'd expect to out dps a pally with my fists.</P> <P>anyway..</P> <P>I don't want to loose our heavy armour (cause i look so good in ebon!) or our tanking ability.  I don't wanna be top tank and MT raids like a guard - if i did i'd have made a guard, but i do want to be able to group tank well.  That's what zerkers are supposed to be in this game, we are tanks, we're not a dps class.  However, i DO expect to do decent damage.  I didn't make a guard, i made a zerker and i made one because i wanted to sacrifice some defence for offence and i expect to see the results!</P> <P>We have no utility like the crusaders so we should out-dps as pally and out-tank a SK.</P> <P>That list doesn't look very good, I'm but not panicing quite yet - there are no figures with this.  I don't think our position on the list is particularly unjustified - can you really argue that we should be out damaging a monk or bruiser?</P> <P>And the groups may even overlap slightly for all we know.   Even if they don't there may not be a lot of spread between these groups, so the difference between from 3 and 4 may only be a few extra dps.</P> <P> </P> <P>I'd expect to see a big jump from the dps of group 3 to group 2.  You'd expect a swashbuckler to do a LOT more dmg than a bard or monk for instance.</P> <P>What you might find is the groups 1 & 2 are similar and 3 & 4 ar similar with a big gap between 2 & 3.  In that case it may not be as bad as it seems...</P> <P> </P> <P>The main thing i find worrying is MG's statement that a guard focusing of offence will be able to out dps a zerker focusing on defence....  This could mean so many things.  Does it mean 1H + shield vs 2 hander?  does it mean that and the guard has master 1 on all his attack spells while the zerker has left them all at app 1? what? </P> <P>I hope it's a pointless statement, designed to try to point out simply that your position in the list is not fixed.  Which is re-assuring for us - most zerkers carry around a lot of gear to tank/dps as needed, but i wish he hadn't used us and guards for an example if that's all it was!!</P> <P>It's way too vague, and i suspect that's because SoE doesn't really know themselves yet.</P> <P> </P>

[Ralluw]

<div></div><div></div>/rambling_ideas on I propose a comprimise based on skills, forget armor, weapons, whatever, zerkers and guards are warriors, we use anything we want (cept monk fist weapons).  At the basic level we should be the same, we were both level 19 warriors at one point, level 20 should be no different.  All that should define the subclasses imho is skills. So what should the skills do to define the classes, well, it seems SoE doesn't want to define one class as the greatest "tank" but at the same time want guardians to be the best tank, basically I think the horrible concept of "balancing" is destroying the glorius concept of "uniqueness". Anyways, to the point, skills, what if zerkers and guardians had basic skills that swung either one either way, skills that are fundamentally warrior skills (thou using our subclass abilities for unique extra effects) Examples (the names and actual values are irelevant, just the idea behind the skills) -Defensive Buff: --Guardian: +10 def, +500hp, -8 CPS (crush pierce slash), -5%dps, -5% atkspd, --Berserker: +8 def, +250hp, -10 CPS, -10%dps, -10%atkspd -Offensive Buff: --Guardian: +8 CPS, +5%dps, +5% atkspd, -10def, -250hp --Berserker: +10CPS, +10%dps, +10% atkspd, -8def, -500hp Scale, tweak, etc this as you will, but you can see these allow either to outdo the other on the flipside, and you can see berserkers sacrifice more offense to increase defense, while guardians must sacrifice more defense to increase offense. I think shields are overrated, perhaps I am wrong since I don't tank much, but if they are so good, then 1h weapons should be half of a 2h or 2 dw's, i think it is ~75% thou.  Perhaps the type of shield should have a detrimental effect to damage, like bucklers have no change to dps, round shields have a -5% dps modifier, kite shields have a -10% modifier and tower shields are -20%.  (or a scale similar to that). On top of this armor may need melee dps modifers (possibly even skill/magic as well) such as VLA gives +20% magic dps, +10% skill dps, +50% melee dps (increase mage magic dps, but also dps variant for other classes at massive ac loss) LA gives +10% magic dps, +15% skill dps, +30% melee dps (increases monk melee dps, good variant for priests) MA gives -10% magic dps, +35% skill dps, +10% melee dps (increases scouts skills (i.e. burst damagers), good skill vairiant for HA wearers and magic variant for crusaders/priests) HA gives -20% magic dps, +10% skill dps, -20% melee dps (highly dibilitating for dps) Now the only off thing is the drop off on skill dps for the HA, this is to make HA debilitating so that it is worn for def over off. /rambling_ideas off I don't mean to suggest these ideas are exactly how it should be done (numbers and all), but just a rough idea, basically that pretty much any class can drastically increase dps at the cost of offense, OR <b>perhaps that should be the very definition of the berserker class</b>, that we can benefit with a increase in dps from wearing non-HA armors in which case maybe all this should only refer to the berserker class.  I think I like this conclusion the best, but will leave my rambling to show you how I arrived at it. P.S. I posted a follow up explaining just this conclusion that is on the next page of replies. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Ralluwen on <span class=date_text>06-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:06 AM</span>

[Ralluw]

I don't mean to fall into the "responds to his own posts, and is talking to himself and self admonishing" syndrome, so yes, I am the same as the previous poster ^^ This is a summary to the previous post's conclusion. I suggest the berserkers new class definition be: "Warriors capable to greatly increasing dps at the expense of mitigation."  Thus we can compete with scouts offensively if we choose to match them defensively, but likewise we can remain nearly the same as guardians.  This would be <b>THE</b> berserkers capability in the game (besides berserking for more damage). <div></div>

[ThePhoni]

<P>Ok I just wanted to stop by and clear up some confusion.  </P> <P>YES bezerkers are tanks, no one said that they were not.  My ideal image of a bezerker tank would be one that does great damage and has great taunts ( by great i DONT mean how high it  is now, yes we need some kind of nerf.. but NOT to group 4, we should do similar damage to monks/bruisers in group 3).  I am willing to give up the defense side (just like scouts and monks/bruisers do) to get more offensive powers.  </P> <P>Just a quick word on raiding.  In the endgame raid situation, you always want/will have the BEST defensive/survivable tank.  That tank is NOT a bezerker, nor should it be, a Guardian who goes max defense SHOULD be better at surviving against a raid mob.  This means that the endgame raid MT will be a guardian and not a bezerker.  Unless they change it so that bezerkers are randomly better at defensively tanking than guards in the combat revamp this is our role.  And yes without good DPS that means that our role in raiding will be reduced.  Because from a game mechanics position we are not the best, and if raid mobs are that hard you really do have to have the best.. accept no subisitutes.</P> <P>What i do not understand is what role a zerker has to the people that do not want us to do DPS?  I mean did you guys not read the class guides/notes when you decided to play a zerker like me?  I mean do you just want to be an inferior meatshield? I can understand not wanting to give up heavy armour.. or whatever, but why are you so eager to give up the DPS that well, by everything SOE put up ( and STILL has up) about the class, should be the major role of the class...</P> <P>Ok the bezerker i envision can tank normal group mobs fine and assist in killing them quickly, the only real change would be accepting that we wont be MT'ing a raid mob ( WHICH IS EXACALLY THE SITUATION 95% OF ZERKERS ARE IN NOW).  For that i am willing to give up something.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Corosis]

Personally, I chose berserker because I wanted to be the kind of warrior that deals alot of damage even if I have to put myself in a low defence way to get increased speed and damage from anger where as my friend chose guardian to be a defensive wall but at the expense of having about as much offencive capabilities... of well, a wall. I'm rather happy with zerkers as they are (boy was the old bloodlust spoiling), I out tank and out damage my paladin 3 levels higher than me, course his heal spells save my [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] on a regular occurance. When I have to I can tank great, or I can just be dps; I dont damage like an assassin and by no means do I think we should, and same goes for tanking like a guardian, but we definately should be like the name implies, a brute that will do anything it takes to see his enemy decimated even if he has to take alot of hits. Oh, and I prefer a sword over an axe, keep those [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] things way from me, let the eq1 zerkers have em. <div></div>

[Daun]

I agree with the OP, I don't understand why we see heavy armor tanks and light armor tanks but never see medium armor tanks. I think it would be great to remove our heavy armor abilities and make us more of an offensive tank like a monk. :smileyvery-happy: 

[Espyderman]

No morw whining is my vote. Let SOE make changes to their game as they please and if its not loved by all may they lose sales and accounts.

[Dherf]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Daunte wrote:<BR> I agree with the OP, I don't understand why we see heavy armor tanks and light armor tanks but never see medium armor tanks. I think it would be great to remove our heavy armor abilities and make us more of an offensive tank like a monk. :smileyvery-happy: <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>How foolish is this thing!!!</DIV>

[Vatec]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> einar438 wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rhaaman wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>I disagree myself. What you have in mind seems to be more the version of the historical beserker as well as the EQ1 variant. We're the more offensively tuned version of a <STRONG>warrior</STRONG>. I would like to be reflected as such (a decent tank with above par DPS as far as fighters go). </P><BR> <P>Message Edited by Rhaaman on <SPAN class=date_text>06-24-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:40 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P> Actually the historical berserkers of old Norse used shields, and while they were usually bare chested, you have to remember that only the richest of the norse raiders would even have a chain hauberk.    Most of them fought with padding such as skins and furs, maybe thick leather. Many would strip their shirts off and charge into battle, true... but many of the vikings did that who were not berserkers... it was bravado.  Remember that those warriors that gleefully ignored their fear and fought with disdain for the risk of death were taken to the halls of Asgard when they were struck down, and would feast with Odin and Thor.  </P> <P> If you read the old sagas and Irish laments, you can see that the berserkers were known for one thing (well, besides being stupid)... a blood rage as they ran into the fray without concern.  Their armor and weapons mattered little, only the "Red Rage," probably named from the red haze one sees when over-excited to the point of fury. </P> <P> They certainly had shields.  An old story, I think from Egil's saga, was to actually related to illustrate the hero's cleverness.  The hero, faced with a small "gang" of angry berserkers, was confounding them with his wit.  The leader, showing his consternation and rage, chewed on the edge of his shield.  The hero of the story, on horseback, moved up and kicked the bottom of the chieftain's shield, smashing his face and killing the berserker chief and demoralizing the rest of the "gang" </P> <P>  What I don't understand is why the fuss?  I have yet to see anything concrete about any of these changes they are doing.  All I hear is "well when we do the rebalancing patch..." but its been that way for months.  To me its really starting to sound like the kid that works in the local comic book store, wears his Star Fleet uniform to work, and has been writing an Amazing Novel for the past 4 years.  There is no point in getting annoyed until we at least see something concrete on Test. </P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Well, I disagree with this last part wholeheartedly.  It's going to be MUCH harder changing SOE's mind about things once they've actually put the effort in.  It's far more effective to get involved as early in the decision-making process as possible.  And frankly, I think they're going the -wrong- direction.  In fact, I'd agree with the poster who would like to switch Monks and Berserkers in the damage list.  Berserkers are all about dishing out a beating and taking one too.  But right now, it's SOE's intention for our damage to improve while we're tanking.  But if going berserk lowers our defenses, then the whole concept is flawed.  Healers won't want us to be MTs because we'll take more damage.  But no one will want us to be OTs, because we only do our best damage when we're MTs.  Doesn't anyone else see the Catch-22 here?</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>And if we WAIT until SOE is almost done with the revamp, it will probably be too late to change The Vision (TM).  Yes, too much fan input can be a problem, because everyone wants to do more DPS while having better defense.  In some games, you end up with classes that are superior in both areas (in Asheron's Call, a mage wearing a buffed robe was a superior tank for most of the game's early years, yet had better DPS than archers or melees as well; it finally ended up that the majority of "optimal" characters were Life Mages with some kind of killing skill [War Magic, Bow, Sword, Axe, whatever].).  And that is NOT what I would like to see in EQ2.  But yes, I do think that the entire Fighter archetype should do a lot of damage.  We're all trained killers.  Scouts need to be stealthy to do their huge damage.  Mages need to be protected by Fighters to do their huge damage.  But it still makes sense that Fighters should do respectable damage as well.  And frothing madmen with biker tattoos and big axes should be near the top of that chart.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>SOE dug themselves into a hole with the archetype system; but if we don't tell them what we are hoping for out of our class, they may pick a route we really don't like while digging themselves out.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Every tank should be able to tank.  But that doesn't mean that every tank should be tanking ALL the time.  There are too many Fighters (over 30% of all characters) for that to be a viable solution.</FONT></P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Vatec]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Espyderman wrote:<BR>No morw whining is my vote. Let SOE make changes to their game as they please and if its not loved by all may they lose sales and accounts. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>Ah, and so the anti-whining begins.  It's one of the most ironic things I've found about message boards:  there are always people who whine about the "whiners."</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>Yeah, sure, some of it is whining or wishful thinking.  But some of it is constructive criticism.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>And I find the whole defeatist attitude of "Let SOE do whatever they want, then vote with your wallet" to be, well, defeatist.  I would rather be proactive and derail SOE's bad ideas BEFORE they get to the stage that customers start bailing.  YMMV.</FONT></DIV>

[Fazzarya]

I kind of like where we are right now. In my humble opinion Berserkers make the best group tanks while Guardians make the best raid tanks. Fine with me... /shrug

[Nydysean]

Wow that dps chart was well, interesting.  I play a troubador and can remember being in a group in rov in their upper 20's.  There was a person putting out a damage chart after every battle and do you want to know where yours truely was.  I was right above the healers and well below everyone else.  But hey that was fine with me, I am a bard.  I sing wonderful songs to inspire my groupmates to greater deeds.  Any dps that I do is just a bonus.  I think moving our dps up that high, thought it would be fun, is definately not the right solution.  If they have that concept mixed up I don't want to think about what else could be flawed on that chart.

[Dherf]

<DIV>Vatec - Barbarian - 20 Berserker / 18 Craftsman<BR>Beldacar - Wood Elf - 20 Ranger / 14 Outfitter<BR>Kiri - Gnome - 13 Bard / 15 Scholar<BR>Krusk - Dwarf - 13 Cleric // and others<BR>Living and dying on OASIS since 11/09/04 </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>--------------------------------------------------------------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No offense, but you not creeds that are better to carry someone of your characters to a decent level before advising to  SoE what to make or not to make?  </DIV> <DIV>How you can say what would be better to change in a class when the your maximum level is 20?</DIV>

[Crazyhorse]

<P>Just a heads up guys. First Moor said that our auto attack damage will take a hit but our skills should keep our dps up. Second Moor also was quoted in another post talking about how zerkers in the MT position will still deal great damage. At this point they seem to have picked how things will turn out, now it's time to ride the wave and see where we end up.</P> <P>Crazylabrat</P>

[Vatec]

<span>No offense intended, but read the bio:  I've been playing MMORPGs for close to seven years now; I've played Asheron's Call and Dark Age of Camp-a-lot, as well as beta-tested  or open-betaed every major release since then.  So I think I have a =very= good idea how these games work.  More to the point, I have a very good idea how I want =this= game to work. Remember, achieving high levels in a game is as much a matter of time spent as it is an indicator of competence or comprehension.  I read each post for the content.  There is a reason the sig is at the BOTTOM of a post:  because it is not particularly relevant to the subject.... So I shall kindly request that, if you don't have anything constructive to ADD to the discussion, you please refrain from dragging it down to a comparison of l33tness ;^) I will happily admit that many, many people have more free time than I do, so many, many people have higher-level characters than I do :^D<blockquote><hr>Dherfel wrote:<div>Vatec - Barbarian - 20 Berserker / 18 CraftsmanBeldacar - Wood Elf - 20 Ranger / 14 OutfitterKiri - Gnome - 13 Bard / 15 ScholarKrusk - Dwarf - 13 Cleric // and othersLiving and dying on OASIS since 11/09/04 </div> <div> </div> <div>--------------------------------------------------------------</div> <div> </div> <div>No offense, but you not creeds that are better to carry someone of your characters to a decent level before advising to  SoE what to make or not to make?  </div> <div>How you can say what would be better to change in a class when the your maximum level is 20?</div><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Memmoch]

<div></div><div></div>What do we have to give up to get the DPS we want?  You should change that title to what do you have to give up to get the DPS you want.... I don't want to give up ANY of my tanking abilities.  I think we do just fine in the DPS department as well, when you proc berserk and use your abilites AFTER your done berserkering you will find we have AMAZING DPS.  That's why if a zerker goes all out (one that knows his class that is) he WILL pull agro.  Someone that knows his class will have to tone back his DPS some in order to NOT pull agro.  So my response to your question is what do we have to give up to KEEP the DPS we have?  Also when will we be getting the adjustments inorder so that we can have the SAME mitigation as guardians have?  And finally if we have to give up the ability to TANK RAID mobs in order to keep the DPS we have or improve it then.....nevermind Sony, up our Defense and lower our DPS....those rogues should be able to turn auto atk on and walk away from the computer and out DPS us hehe. Sorry had to add, please those of you wanting a Berserker to be a DPS machine get the concept Sony introduced in EQ1 out of your heads, EQ1 Berserkers and EQ2 Berserkers are NOT the same creature, if they was I wouldn't be playing and loving mine! <div></div><p>Message Edited by Memmoch on <span class=date_text>07-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:37 AM</span>

[Dherf]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Memmoch wrote:<BR> What do we have to give up to get the DPS we want?  You should change that title to what do you have to give up to get the DPS you want....<BR><BR><BR>I don't want to give up ANY of my tanking abilities.  I think we do just fine in the DPS department as well, when you proc berserk and use your abilites AFTER your done berserkering you will find we have AMAZING DPS.  That's why if a zerker goes all out (one that knows his class that is) he WILL pull agro.  Someone that knows his class will have to tone back his DPS some in order to NOT pull agro.  <BR><BR>So my response to your question is what do we have to give up to KEEP the DPS we have?  Also when will we be getting the adjustments inorder so that we can have the SAME mitigation as guardians have?  And finally if we have to give up the ability to TANK RAID mobs in order to keep the DPS we have or improve it then.....nevermind Sony, up our Defense and lower our DPS....those rogues should be able to turn auto atk on and walk away from the computer and out DPS us hehe.<BR><BR>Sorry had to add, please those of you wanting a Berserker to be a DPS machine get the concept Sony introduced in EQ1 out of your heads, EQ1 Berserkers and EQ2 Berserkers are NOT the same creature, if they was I wouldn't be playing and loving mine!<BR> <P>Message Edited by Memmoch on <SPAN class=date_text>07-27-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:37 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Great post, I'm totally agree with that.</DIV> <DIV>And btw Berserker class in Eq2 is very loved, instead in Eq1 that was a failed class.</DIV>

[Styk]

EQ1 Berserkers being DPS machines? Are you out of your mind? They were a [Removed for Content] piece of s.h.i. t that took a whole nother expanion before they got their class AA's and even then you couldt do decent damage till you have Time + gear ..... un yeah what ever ( trust me i had one of the first 10 lvl 65 and 70 zerkers in eq1 ) Dont't even get me started on eq1 zerkers.... Now for the current situation.... If they make us Heavy DPS WHILE tanking then i can live with that..... give them Guards all the defense they want, i didnt sign up for that.... But to have overall better agro then me is just plain stupid Zerkers might be good at snap agro but in the long run guards will win... Ggroup agro control, guards are better as well .... Hopefully SoE will truly give us or spot in the revamp.... this game has one expansion for it to shape up ...... too many good MMO titles are comming that can potentially rip EQ2 pieces and i hope they are listening <div></div>

[Memmoch]

<div></div><div></div>You misunderstand what I meant by the eq1 berserker, I didn't say that they was successful but that a DPS machine was their intention in eq1 <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> In EQ2 it is their intention that we are Tanks, and I for one am very thankful for this because it's about time a MMO comes out with a MT that just looses it and goes crazy with rage while trying to kill a mob, or what we like to call going "berserk"  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I have to disagree with you on the taunting issue as well Styker on guardians having better taunts.  In all my 50 lvls of play I have never had a guardian out taunt me.  Not a single time, never not once in any situation.  I think guardians have 2 maybe 3 aoe type taunts (I'm counting group hits in this as well) at lvl 50 they can cycle while fighting.  Berserkers have 9.  We have 9 combat abilites that we can hit 1 after another that hits the entire group either AOE based or group encounter based. If someone playing a berserker knows their class they can and will pull agro from guardians everytime.  A smart Berserker can and WILL have the ability to control any situation, we can HOLD agro forever accross a raid environment, group environment, duo environment.  The only classes that has ever given me trouble with agro are the scout and mage classes.  Even then if they give me time to set up (establish hate as I like to say) then they can cast/hit at will without fear of pulling agro.   A guardian will never be able to make this boast.  It all goes into knowing your class, not just us but everyone with you; and if they don't know their class it's always good to have the MT know some background on them to make suggestions ( stop breaking my INC HO!!!, don't open up the fight with Ice Comet!). Sorry, forgot we have 9 total counting reactive procs not 8. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Memmoch on <span class=date_text>07-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:46 AM</span>

[Vatec]

<P>Um, I don't believe anyone is arguing about =current= berserker capabilities.  It's the intended changes, one of which was giving Guardians better taunting abilities.</P> <P>Fact is, we don't know anything about the upcoming combat revamp other than what Sony has told us.  Unfortunately, some of what they have told us has given a few people serious concerns about the future of the class.  If they reduce our damage and give Guardians better taunts, that may or may not be a good thing.  But if they make our damage output primarily determined by whether or not we are tanking, we will end up being the -only- tank class that does less damage when not MT.  That means we will -only- be desired as MTs, and maybe not even that if Guardians prove to be better at it.</P> <P>Now do you see my concerns?<BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Memmoch wrote:<BR> You misunderstand what I meant by the eq1 berserker, I didn't say that they was successful but that a DPS machine was their intention in eq1 <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR><BR>In EQ2 it is their intention that we are Tanks, and I for one am very thankful for this because it's about time a MMO comes out with a MT that just looses it and goes crazy with rage while trying to kill a mob, or what we like to call going "berserk"  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR><BR>I have to disagree with you on the taunting issue as well Styker on guardians having better taunts.  In all my 50 lvls of play I have never had a guardian out taunt me.  Not a single time, never not once in any situation.  I think guardians have 2 maybe 3 aoe type taunts (I'm counting group hits in this as well) at lvl 50 they can cycle while fighting.  Berserkers have 9.  We have 9 combat abilites that we can hit 1 after another that hits the entire group either AOE based or group encounter based.<BR><BR>If someone playing a berserker knows their class they can and will pull agro from guardians everytime.  A smart Berserker can and WILL have the ability to control any situation, we can HOLD agro forever accross a raid environment, group environment, duo environment.  The only classes that has ever given me trouble with agro are the scout and mage classes.  Even then if they give me time to set up (establish hate as I like to say) then they can cast/hit at will without fear of pulling agro.   A guardian will never be able to make this boast.  It all goes into knowing your class, not just us but everyone with you; and if they don't know their class it's always good to have the MT know some background on them to make suggestions ( stop breaking my INC HO!!!, don't open up the fight with Ice Comet!).<BR><BR>Sorry, forgot we have 9 total counting reactive procs not 8.<BR> <P>Message Edited by Memmoch on <SPAN class=date_text>07-28-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:46 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Amasi]

<DIV>As far as DPS goes, i sort of have to agree with the poster. When I come to play an mmorpg I LOVE the look of full plate armor and a awsome looking sword or axe. However, what annoys me the most is that the developers of this game cookie cut things down sooo much. If i want to be class that can give me the full plate armor and awsome looking sword i want, i have to resort to basically being a meatshield. I ask why? Know that I am not asking to be the ultimate warrior that can mow through any mob I want. Nor am i asking to be at the tip top of the DPS chain 24/7. However, its annoying to play these games as a warrior and get turned down by a group when they tell you "sry we already have a tank, would add ya but u cant do enough damage". Wheres the fun in that? Wheres the fun in having to have the PERFECT group in order to go through things instead of being to interact with your fellow players in ways u want to. I dont want the best damage, but why cant you just leave us fighters dps alone so atleast we can do enough damage to make a significant difference that a group wont mind having there.</DIV>

[ThePhoni]

<DIV>Well, the point of this thread was to tell everyone that bezerkers did not want to lose DPS in the combat revamp.  But at the same time to understand the community's concerns about an unbalanced class.  The fighter class has 2 main attributes to balance: tanking and DPS.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All i wanted to say was that I think bezerkers just like bruisers and monks should be balanced more twards DPS and a little less twards tanking ability. I think they should be in group 3 not group 4, per the orginal weblink i posted.   I do not want to be a second rate guardian.  I DO STILL WANT TO MAIN TANK GROUP ENCOUNTERS, I just want to let the notion of main tanking raids go.. so that we might have another role in the raid: DPS</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>the orginal post was trying to come up with a way to balance the DPS many bezerkers want, and to STILL KEEP GOOD TANKING ABILITY.  I suggested many routes, which may be taken to achieve this goal.. which is balanced? well only testing will tell that.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What i want the bezerker to be is the damage dealin warrior that can slay is foe's on the battlefield, not a meatshield.  If SOE wants us to be meatshields, please change the class discription to : fearsome warrior that can take alot of hits and shouts really well.  Instead of explaining our class as one that "deals great damage", because i am just about fed up with being lied to.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Well i hope i answered everyone's questions.  If not i will try again tommorrow.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Memmoch]

<div></div>I think I understand what you was saying Vatec, aye I don't want to be the only choice of MT at a raid, and it wouldn't be any good to have our DPS reduced from the combat changes if we did not get more mitigation ability in exchange for it.  If they [Removed for Content] our DPS, increase the guardians offensive cabilites and taunting cabilities....well that would just suck lol. I agree with you on the point that Berserker's shouldn't loose too much DPS ThePhoniex but your views on us NOT being a valid choice for RAID TANK is false....I for one want to be my guild's Raid MT.  So by you saying berserker's in general want to be more DPS and less tank is not accurate, Berserker's want the cability to be Either Raid MT OR DPS.  I suggest you read my response to Eukatae's post "Walking a mile in a monkeys shoes"  I give SOE's exact discription on our class straight from their Website and their Guide.  Very cut and dry we are Offensive oriented Tanks, designed to buff offensivly and be that meatshield.  If this wasn't what you was wanting sorry, should of read the full discription before you invested time into being a Berserker.  But don't give up hope, I for one don't think this combat change is going to ill effect berserker's that badly.  It said it was giving us offensive and defensive skills and slightly reducing our standing DPS....which I think means probably just reduce the total dmg per swing of our weapons when we just stand there with atk on.  This last part though is just my interpetation of the changes...we won't know for sure until it hits test. <div></div>

[Oldboy420]

<HR> <DIV> <DIV>I'm concerned about the combat changes from a slightly different perspective.  My concern is that we don't seem to be gaining any extra ability in tanking/taking damage.  These changes seem to be purely focused on damage dealing potential, which, for an offensive oriented class like us, only means losing utility.  Don't get me wrong, I love my Zerker, he is an immensely fun class to play.  But sometimes I feel that since only a Guardian can tank the high tier raid mobs (and raiding is the pinnacle of EQ2), I'm just a sub-par Guardian with a little more damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know that sounds like I'm selling the Berserker (well, the Berserker at present) a bit short.  We are definitely the second best tanks in the game, and we have wonderful group buffs.  But do any of you ever feel like you would give up some of that dps (and come on, it's not THAT great!) for the ability to tank like a Guardian?  Hey, if you are reading this and saying "Well maybe you should have rolled a Guardian then!", you have every right to think that.  I think that myself sometimes too.  But the thing that makes me STOP thinking that is that we are both Warriors.  There shouldn't be only -one- class in the game that can tank Vox, Darathar, etc... I think that Berserkers should be able to MT them, just with large negatives to our offense (effectively making us equivalent to a Guardian).  Why not?  We are from the same Warrior class, can anyone give me a reason as why NOT to have that equivalence?  I would be happy for a Guard to buff their offense for the sake of their defense, making them equivalent to Zerkers.  Sure, it blurs the lines a bit more between the sub-classes, but so what?  If people understand BEFORE they chose to be a Warrior that Warriors are the premier tank class in the game, then they should just deal with the fact that our DPS is low.   But what would counter that low DPS is the ability to tank any raid mob in the game.  That would make me feel like I play a class that really shines in something.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It seems we are 'almost-Guardians' with more damage.  However, with the looming combat changes, we will lose some of that damage.  I ask - where does that leave Berserkers then?  And furthermore, where does it leave Shadowknights, Monks and Bruisers?</DIV> <P></P> <DIV>Tukaran<BR>50 Berserker<BR></DIV> <HR> </DIV> <P> </P> <P>Tukaran i think were u went wrong here is assuming you as a Berzerker cannot tank as well as a Gaurdian. YOU CAN! All you need is a gaurdian in your group for the group def and hp's . Sure the gaurd may have more total hp's but you have every bit the same Def/Parry and can keep aggro much better than the gaurd. The problem is finding a situation where a Gaurd is willing to back off and let you tank for the better of the raid force. Berzerkers also make the best tank imo because if for some reason the Zerker whom is main tanking goes down the gaurd is right there to pick it up, the only think lost from the zerker going down would be the hp's lost to gaurd . This is huge cause if your doing it the other way around Gaurd tanking goes down and Zerker picks up slack he will be without the Def he needs and falter quickly. Imo this was the way SOE initally intended people to tank raids , due to the amazing DPS/ aggro zerkers do while taking damage and the amount of "Gaurding" spells Gaurdians have that they NEVER EVER USE. Problem is now its come to be common knowlege that Gaurds are better tanks , and Zerkers have insane DPS. So w/o trying to speculate on changes one thing we do know is Gaurdian grp buff is gone , and tanks are moving down in dps and b ecoming more balanced.. Here is the problem , Your getting a dps downgrade and your current best way to tank (gaurd grp def buff) is being taken away also. Basically you MIGHT be able to buff yourself now somewhat close to a gaurdian w/o a gaurd in your group. There will only ever be 2 good tanks with this new system ( based on DPS changes and current roles) imo it will be the best Tanks and best DPS of the tanks thats is the only option really .. Gaurds will get a huge upgrade in these changes thru removing the rest of the tanking classes  roles , cause even if Zerkers become as good of tanks as gaurds it wont matter due to the fact Gaurdians are already established as the RAID TANK and thats never going to change on any high end raiding.</P>

[Sin_of_the_Lot]

<P>personally id suggest the following method of dps working</P> <P>dps would be calculated based more on stats each combat art / weapon would have a base damage, each point in strength would affect that damage for a certain ammount per class, Zerkers could have 3% per str point so a 100-150 damage attack with 200 strength would deal 300-450 damage where a guardian with a modifier of 2 would do 200-300 with the same. each ability would have to have a seperate base damage rating assassinate for example would have around 1.5-2k with a modifier of say 1.5</P> <P>same would go for tanking abilities, currently all STA affects is how much hp you have why not have it affect mitigation buffs aswell? a person with 200 stamina using a +100 mitigation buff only gets 100 why not modify it to add the stamina to it for 300 total thus making stami more saught after.</P> <P>a third thing would be armor why not put a strength requirment on armor instead of a skill? why can a mage with 150 strength only use cloth armor when a zerker with 90 can use a full plate mail? strength should affect the armor types one can wear and if being under the ammount one would be affected by a slowed attack speed or slower walking speed and higher power drainage.</P> <P>stats currently do about jack squat in this game i dont notice a single difference in my damage output with 90 strength or 230 that coming from a level 42 berserker froglok. all it affects is my power and how much junk i can lug around. the only stat that makes a significantly noticable difference is agility.</P> <P>as a berserker who likes to go all out on str with no respect for armor (i generally use medium or even light for higher STR boost) the method of having statistics affect damage output or defense is more appealing. the group wants a tank? then ill just use stamina. they want dps let me switch to strength the simple thing of playing a class how you want to play it becomes so much easier when you add a simple thing such as statistics into the formula. some thing (in the zerker forum test announcements) on abilities have been released which pretty much cripple 2 of the berserkers most favouvered abilities, tides of war (group haste now becomes a group chance for berserk)  and some other one which i havent achieves yet which is simple referred to as the +1k health buff which becomes a measly health regen buff. a big loss i dont like makes tanking easier sure but when i chose this class the npc said you will cause havoc and destruction in your path. standing infront of some dopey dragon trying to eat me doesnt seem like causing destruction id much rather shove my pike up is rectum and make it raor in pain as i rip it out sideways</P>