Tankin

[Brew01]

<DIV>TANK >>> dps</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>After reading all these posts (which most seem to be the same just reworded) it seems to be getting dragged out. Why don't we try to be constructive and work out the problems that our Flavor of DPS/TANK has created. The community is pretty well split perhaps we could find a common ground and work from there. I'm not as constructive a thinker as Gage or even Sage but I believe if we just work together we could come up with tons of Ideas to Help SOE Help US. What I think would be real cool is reading a post where you two can agree/work together tring to better our class instead of rippin on each other to the point that SOE ignores us all together.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just my 2cp</DIV>

[Brew01]

<DIV>SOB this was supposed to be under the Tank / DPS question lol yes I'm pretty much a Noob forum guy.</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>well ill be the first to kick the healing process off LOL</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>the simplest solution IMO would include class specific armors that one is inclined to tanking and the other inclined to dps - </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>low ac for the dps armor with high str and agility values </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>higher ac for the tanking armor with really high agility as its offset with sides of stamina.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>this in turn would give us MUCH higher statistical values than the other tank or non tank classes. the agility based armor with higher ac would allow bruisers and monks to reach agility values above any other class both in and out of raid - so that the agility difference will be as such to make big enough impact to keep us afloat with other tanks with heavy armor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>on the other hand allow the dps - to lack tanking ability of the higher defence armor so that the really high str keeps the class balanced in and out of raid as far as damage output so that they do dps on par with a scouts at the expence of tankability and damage taking. after all mild or sustained agility allows us to hit mobs - and mobs not to hit us - with the mitigation of say light armor- it would balance perfectly. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>this way - those who have built themselves as dps - can do so - and those who have buiilt themselves as tanks - can do so - just in the knowledge of the cost to do so. those who want to keep the balance- can do so while using different parts of the armors - which would also embody  the hybrid nature of the class on both sides for the warrior types and the scout inclined.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>:smileywink:</DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-08-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:24 PM</span>

[GangsterFi]

Well I built my monk to tank taking all str, hp, and defense/deflection traits. My defense is 270 self buffed. I tanked from level 20 to level 50. I tanked just about every zone in the game so far. I even tanked some ^^^ x2 mobs. I am a monk tank advocate and have laid down many strategies on this forum for monk tanking. Some people who beleived monks cannot tank even started tanking after I made my claims. I get tells and PMs from people all the time about monk related stuff. The fact is we are of the fighter archetype, therefore we are tanks. Lets break down the pros and cons of a guardian vs a monk. Since they are the two extremes of the spectrum. They are the opposite ends of the tank classes.Guardian pros:Best Mitigation in the gameHighest defense in the gameBest deflection in the game (with tower shield)Best taunts in the game (most intuative taunts)Highest amount of HP in the gameLowest DPS of the fighter archetype but can still easily out dps priestsMonks:Decent DPS but are out DPS'd by berserkers (i average 130 to 160dps and i have a master T5 dual weapon)have the lowest amount of mitigation out of the fighter treehave the lowest HP out of the fighter treeHave some utility but its comparable to other fighters (zerks, pallys and sks have some good utility, and yes even guardians have some good utility)Suppose to have the best avoidance but guardians with tower shields and high defense are avoiding better than us.So yeah I would like the fighter tree revamped or content changed to make us have a more viable role. The archetype system is totally flawed. Guardians won't admit it b/c they are on top right now, just like some monks were getting mad when the agi nerf hit and guardians were complaining that scouts and monks were out tanking them. Guardians are gonna get nerfed, is the only thing I can see happening.

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>guards wont get nerfed - they are the top of the tree in defense and are supposed to be that way.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>what needs to happen is we need to be left alone -and be given solid utility outside of scouts - outside of other warriors - or break the class up and start over from scratch</DIV>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>SageMarrow wrote:<DIV>guards wont get nerfed - <b>they are the top of the tree in defense and are supposed to be that way</b>.</DIV><hr></blockquote>I'm sorry, Sage, but you're incorrect. Guardians, Monks, and Paladins are all <i>supposed to be</i> on par with each other defensively. Berserkers, Bruisers, and Shadow Knights are all <i>suppposed to be</i> on par with each other defensively, too, with said par being only a little lower than Guardians, Monks, and Paladins.SOE developers and reps have said so time and time again. If Guardians are at "the top of the heap" right now then either they will get nerfed or others will get boosted.Edited for extraneous characters.<p>Message Edited by FamilyManFirst on <span class=date_text>03-08-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:32 PM</span>

[Isa]

<DIV>Well,</DIV> <DIV>I have kinda been mulling this over.  I personally like where we are at pretty well.  I do not think we are far off.  I like having the extra utility.  I enjoy playing the backup tank.  I am level 35 atm, so I cannot speak on any of the higher level raid mobs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Some have mentioned us losing an attack in favor of a defensive ability.  I would rather not see us lose our attack potential.  I personally think we need to get a rune line that absorbs casting damage, or a percentage of it.  I think that could alleviate the difficulty higher level folks are having against raid mobs, without making them over the top.  Anyone think that is a feasible idea?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mitsy</DIV> <DIV>Crushbone</DIV> <DIV>Legends</DIV>

[mrMyzxcpl]

<DIV>Howdy folks. 'First time poster here. This dps vs. defense issue has lured me out of the woodwork so to speak.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would submit that there is a relationship between dps and defense, based on the following premise regarding fighter utility:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Premise: The utility of a fighter class character in non-solo situations is to hold the mob’s attention until it is dead.</STRONG> This requires two types of skillsets: <BR>        1-MOB aggravation control (taunting, etc) <BR>        2-Survivability—the fighter must be the preferred character in a given situation for holding the mobs attention, i.e., he must be able to withstand the mobs attacks with the least amount of healing needed compared to other members in the group/raid. If this is not the case, then his role as a fighter is eliminated.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> The methods of achieving this survivability can be categorized into 5 groups: <BR>1—Defense: avoiding or mitigating mob damage until the mob is destroyed <BR>2—Damage: killing the mob soon to limit one’s exposure to the mobs attacks <BR>3—Healing: personally healing damage done by the mob. This includes wards. <BR>4—Status Effects: Stunning, knocking down, or fearing the mob to limit the mob’s ability to attack <BR>5-Hitpoints: having more life to begin with makes the mob's job of killing you that much harder.<BR></DIV> <DIV>If we can agree on the above premise (not a small thing), then it would suggest a quantitative measure of a fighter's utility relative to other members of his class:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>To the extent that 2 fighters perform equally on a given mob, in a given group, the following variable will be constant:</STRONG> <BR>HP+self_heal+self_ward-Full_mob_dps*exposuretime*(1-avoidance%/100)*(1-mitigatioin%/100)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Where: </DIV> <DIV>HP = fighter's hitpoints</DIV> <DIV>self_heal = the amount of healing the fighter can apply to himself </DIV> <DIV>self_ward = the amount of warding the fighter can apply to himself <BR>Full_mob_dps = the damage done by a given mob assuming 100% accuracy, 0% mitigation, no status effect. <BR>exposuretime = the amount of time from engaging the mob to the mob’s death <BR>avoidance = the percentage chance of parrying/riposting/blocking/avoiding an attack of the given mob <BR>mitigation = the percentage of damage reduction provided by armor. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The calculation of exposuretime can further be expanded as follows: <BR>exposuretime = mob_hp/group_dps-status_time <BR>Where: <BR>Mob_hp = total hitpoints of the mob <BR>Group_dps = the total damage rate of the group = dps1 + dps2 ...dpsn<BR>Status_time = the amount of time the mob spends in status. <BR><BR>The calculation of avoidance is an unknown at this time, but it is assumed to be a function of the fighter's defense, deflection, tranquility skill and his agility relative to the mob. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As can be seen by looking at the formulae, the advantage of extra DPS for a fighter decreases as the group size increases, since the impact of his increased DPS becomes less as the group DPS increases.  This implies that DPS-focused fighters will always be of less utility to a group as the group size increases. There are other implications of this formula also, but i'll leave it as is until we can come to an agreement on what that formula is first. A clear and complete formula for fighter utility may even suggest some types of tests we can run to compare the different classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This post is getting pretty long, so I'll wrap things up and say that as a monk, I would like to be able to point to certain group makeups and certain mobs and know that I have the best utility of all my fighter bretheren in that situation. I would expect all other fighter classes to be able to do the same. Is that expecting too much? Is my premise regarding fighter utility, or my formula for comparing fighter utility in error? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[ForceUs]

<blockquote><hr>Brew01 wrote:<DIV>TANK >>> dps</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>After reading all these posts (which most seem to be the same just reworded) it seems to be getting dragged out. Why don't we try to be constructive and work out the problems that our Flavor of DPS/TANK has created. The community is pretty well split perhaps we could find a common ground and work from there. I'm not as constructive a thinker as Gage or even Sage but I believe if we just work together we could come up with tons of Ideas to Help SOE Help US. What I think would be real cool is reading a post where you two can agree/work together tring to better our class instead of rippin on each other to the point that SOE ignores us all together.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Just my 2cp</DIV><hr></blockquote>I don't think we need help. Perhaps it's because I'm a mere 39th level and haven't seen the "end game," where monks are men and sheep are scared, or whatever, but I think we're fine. I work harder to hold agro than a guardian--so what. I work it. If a guardian shows up and the group wants him to tank, fine by me; I switch to DPS mode. I haven't had much problem doing my job as tank, and I like my DPS.

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>Force - they are nerfing fighter dps</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>FamilyManFirst- thats cool- you can play a game where a tank is a tank and a caster is a caster and a healer is a healer if you want too - but the interested player base does not play their class cause its the "best class" but because they wish to be unique in both ability and style for thier personal character aspirations. NOT this- the 'same" but "different" but "similiar" crap that you are pushing "in a round about way" - so if you say - that this is how it will be and that i need to get over it or go play something else- then i will- me and 50% of the population who are getting tired of the blah blah blah thats consistent as of now balance and diversity are set on a thin line - a very thin one</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mr.Myz- you might be on to something there - keep working it out - but the current system does not permit individual class based content because that is a double edged sword for both devs and gamers - that would imply making something that we accell at that another class does not - offense is not in question- defense is which all classes have in the fighter archtype but us. paladins tank raid content currently - the only reason SK's dont is because a majority of thier skills are broken at the high end and their life taps dont work in the same capacity as a paladins heal. but a heal doesnt turn the tide of a battle quite like a spell that takes life and replenishes life- which is what is prolonging the implementation of better lifetaps im sure without overpowering them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Did i miss anyone? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[mrMyzxcpl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mr.Myz- you might be on to something there - keep working it out - but the current system does not permit individual class based content because that is a double edged sword for both devs and gamers - that would imply making something that we accell at that another class does not - offense is not in question- defense is which all classes have in the fighter archtype but us. paladins tank raid content currently - the only reason SK's dont is because a majority of thier skills are broken at the high end and their life taps dont work in the same capacity as a paladins heal. but a heal doesnt turn the tide of a battle quite like a spell that takes life and replenishes life- which is what is prolonging the implementation of better lifetaps im sure without overpowering them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Did i miss anyone? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Yes, i certainly dont want to go so far as class-based content. What i meant to say was that there should be a group makeup, maybe even a mob type, where a monk would 'shine' and yet not be necessary, just as there are situations now where a guardian is considered to shine. For example, since the fighter utility formula suggests that mitigation-focussed fighters gain in utility as the group dps increases, more so than a dps-focussed fighter would, it's clear that we monks will NOT shine as tanks in large groups/raids.  Wouldn't it be nice to be able to say that monks shined in small group/solo instances, where our dps made more of a difference? That's all I was getting at.</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>a guardian is considered to shine in all situations they are geared towards which is 100% of content its what they were built for and around -    </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>it still wont matter - the same attacks that we take for  x damage will be mitigated by thier heavy armor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>think about what im saying one star bandit - no matter what they do - mobs are not created around us - we are twinked and created around THEM.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>they change a mob so that they can best us - not so that we can better best them - if it was that simple they could just give all the classes some real great skills and crap that look and feel cool and do great damage- and not care about who gets x amount of what ultra rare loot drop cause we are dropping mobs like hotcakes - '</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>there is a grp build in which we shine - its with wardens - but even then and still - if you ward a gaurdian - it just makes thier HP last longer than it normally would anyway when you could save the power and time for real heals and damage shields if we are talking druids - </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>as far as your equation- we gain in utility AGAINST OTHER FIGHTERS= which in essence is useless given that more than 1 MT is not neccessary in a functional grp. saying as though any amount of utiltiy that we carry with us as a class is even remotely matched by another classes core which tend to achieve the same goals in much higher capacity. aka scouts wizard - bard - enchanter on down the line.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so in essence the value of our utility with other fighters in grp is negated totally in comparison to ANY other archetypes classes... (at times even our own)  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>otherwise on a simpler level - thats basically saying how do you give mobs less HP without making them trivial - in most cases with a healer mobs with epic status HP are still trivial if buffed in the right magnitude by both a well equipped monk and a so called uber gaurdian. dmg output - mob hp=a dead mob -- the only way we would shine more in a Dps/Mt roll is against a solo enemy - but long term is always better than short term - since the same solo mob fought by a guardian - would kill slower - but take less damage- use less power - which inherently means less down time because they dont have to compete to out dps the mobs - we take power to upkeep our dps - which means more exp gain on a consistent basis right?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guardian based solo::: </DIV> <DIV>mediocre dps with low power cost to make kills- </DIV> <DIV>less damage taken</DIV> <DIV>less pwer used - </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monk/bruiser solo:</DIV> <DIV>High dps with high chance to use alot of power making kills</DIV> <DIV>random chance that fight may go unscathed - or take a beating </DIV> <DIV>so may take alot of power just to balance the damage taken in a fight.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>which is the issue while tanking any mob with us out front - too random- no consistency - may go GREAT - may go HORRIBLY WRONG on a blue ""...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>right- so with that being said - exp is the reason for killing any mob outside of loot right? so you are right back to scratch within the given system - its impossible with the given system to get anything concrete established with or around our class. unless they make x mob - only can be hit by a monk/bruiser - lol- but i seriously doubt that..</DIV></DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-09-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:56 AM</span>

[Jochem_Woudlop]

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=combat&message.id=36339Guess there's your tanking content. Pray your deflection is enough <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[mrMyzxcpl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SageMarrow wrote:<BR> <DIV>think about what im saying one star bandit - no matter what they do - mobs are not created around us - we are twinked and created around THEM.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>For the record, I have not 'one-starred', or even rated, any of your posts.</DIV>

[ForceUs]

<blockquote><hr>SageMarrow wrote:<DIV>Force - they are nerfing fighter dps</blockquote>I thought they already did. Are you saying there's <i>another</i> fighter DPS nerf coming?

[Ala]

<DIV>Well, here is my two copper:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <UL> <LI>According to SOE, all fighter classes should tank (generally speaking) equal</LI> <LI>If this is the case, there is a gap between plate agro holders and avoidance agro holders (Monks/ Bruisers)</LI> <LI>Monk avoidance skills are not on par with plate class mitigation</LI> <LI>According to a post some time ago, the DPS order is, or eventually will be:<BR>Mage -> Scout -> Fighter -> Priest</LI> <LI>Many EQ1 players think Monks are DPS due to prior experience</LI> <LI>Half the Monks I play with deny they are tanks and firmly believe they are DPS</LI> <LI>Several players I've encountered think we are healers</LI> <LI>All fighter classes CAN tank, Monks are good tanks but not on par with Guardians</LI></UL> <P>If I were to create a "wish list" for Monks, it would be the following:</P> <UL> <LI>Allow FD/ PD/ SH to work 100% of the time with a longer reuse timer.  There are several classes that have defining skills that always work regardless of the mob's level (like Evac or invisibility).  Thus, Monks will be defined as saving group wipe and not have to travel back to get shards.  <BR> </LI> <LI>Give Monks at least ONE defensive group buff that adds value to the group<BR> </LI> <LI>Allow our invis spell to work on higher level mobs, I have no problem with the power usage I think Mages should have an advantage in this skill<BR> </LI> <LI>Increase the effectiveness of Taunts.  However, this is low on my priority list.  To acquire and obtain initial hate values is less intuitive than others but it can be done by: encounter lock > Group offensive buff > group taunt > single taunt etc... and ensure everyone is assisting you when appropriate.</LI></UL> <P>In the mean time, when we do tank, we have to be "smarter players".  We need to know other classes moreso than Guardians.  We work differently with differnet healers, bards can add to our AGI, some healers can add a hate buff to us making it easier to hold agro.  And, if the mob cons green or blue, Monks are CLEARLY a better choice for tanking over plate class if nothing else happens.  This is important becuase when doing heritage quests or other quests, you will encounter green cons where teh healer may blow their mana healing Guardians, where an avoidance tank will be very littel work for healers.</P> <P>Ok, enough of my rambling...</P>

[xrippe]

<DIV>I think that is part of the utility of the Monk.  We are kind of like playing shortstop in baseball.  If they need more coverage near 3rd they play near 3rd.  If they are in need of more defense near second base they play closer to second base.  Basically a monk fills the gap needed.  You need a tank, boom we use our defensive ablities.  You need DPS?  boom we go offensive.  Gaurdians cant do that, they are locked into defensive all the time because thats what they specialize in.  For this reason I beleive thats why Gaurdians should always be able to tank better than us.  We are the midway between tank and dps, we fill the gap.</DIV>

[ForceUs]

<blockquote><hr>xripperx wrote:<DIV>I think that is part of the utility of the Monk. We are kind of like playing shortstop in baseball. If they need more coverage near 3rd they play near 3rd. If they are in need of more defense near second base they play closer to second base. Basically a monk fills the gap needed. You need a tank, boom we use our defensive ablities. You need DPS? boom we go offensive. Gaurdians cant do that, they are locked into defensive all the time because thats what they specialize in. For this reason I beleive thats why Gaurdians should always be able to tank better than us. We are the midway between tank and dps, we fill the gap.</DIV><hr></blockquote>Well said. If this means we aren't the optimal tanks on big raids, so be it. I like having flexibility.

[RadricTyc]

<DIV>I think they could do just 2 things to make monks tank on par with other plate classes.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <OL> <LI>Extend Brawler Deflection to work 360 degrees, that way pathing bugs and other combat orientation bugs don't cause us to get whacked so bad against tougher encounters.  This also fixes the imbalance that plate armor offers 360 degree mitigation while Brawler avoidance only grants protection for 120 degrees.</LI> <LI>Scale the blocking power of our built in shield combined with deflection as we level from 10 to 20 to 30 to 40 to 50, so that it is equivalent to the following:</LI> <UL> <LI>Level 10 = buckler with a shield factor of 100</LI> <LI>Level 20 = round shield with a shield factor of 300</LI> <LI>Level 30 = kite shield with a shield factor of 500</LI> <LI>Level 40 = tower shield with a shield factor of 700</LI> <LI>Level 50 = tower shield with a shield factor of 900</LI></UL></OL> <P>For the second fix the blocking power should scale as we advance in level, each new point in deflection should move us proportionally closer to the shield factor of the next milestone.  These values would always put our blocking power just slightly above a very good  shield for a warrior of the same level.  This should be enough to compensate for the lack of mitigation.  And combined with the 360 degrees of deflection, we could tank even large groups and adds without the huge issues we have today.</P> <P>This would require some real analysis of course.  But on the surface it seems fair.  Warriors get the advantage in mitigation, Brawlers get the advantage in avoidance, and Crusaders get the advantage in healing/warding.  However if guardian defense is still higher than monk defense by using self-buffs, then they still may have a significant advantage.  Given that they have lower DPS I think this is a reasonable trade-off.  The same trade-off would be true for berserker-guardian comparisons.  Crusaders would trade defense for healing and nuking.</P><p>Message Edited by RadricTycho on <span class=date_text>03-09-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:54 AM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Alarr wrote:<BR> <UL> <LI><FONT color=#ffff00>Allow FD/ PD/ SH to work 100% of the time with a longer reuse timer.  There are several classes that have defining skills that always work regardless of the mob's level (like Evac or invisibility).  Thus, Monks will be defined as saving group wipe and not have to travel back to get shards.  </FONT></LI></UL> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Thats a pretty good idea.<BR>

[Ala]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> xripperx wrote:<BR> <DIV>I think that is part of the utility of the Monk.  We are kind of like playing shortstop in baseball.  If they need more coverage near 3rd they play near 3rd.  If they are in need of more defense near second base they play closer to second base.  Basically a monk fills the gap needed.  You need a tank, boom we use our defensive ablities.  You need DPS?  boom we go offensive.  Gaurdians cant do that, they are locked into defensive all the time because thats what they specialize in.  For this reason I beleive thats why Gaurdians should always be able to tank better than us.  We are the midway between tank and dps, we fill the gap.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I agree for the most part.  However, I've "heard" that Guardians when tanking use most of their mana for defensive purposes and holding agro.  They can also turn into DPS mode if they wish (if not tanking).</P> <P><BR> </P>

[JuJut]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> xripperx wrote:<BR> <DIV>I think that is part of the utility of the Monk.  We are kind of like playing shortstop in baseball.  If they need more coverage near 3rd they play near 3rd.  If they are in need of more defense near second base they play closer to second base.  Basically a monk fills the gap needed.  You need a tank, boom we use our defensive ablities.  You need DPS?  boom we go offensive.  Gaurdians cant do that, they are locked into defensive all the time because thats what they specialize in.  For this reason I beleive thats why Gaurdians should always be able to tank better than us.  We are the midway between tank and dps, we fill the gap.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> I like your analogy but I think its most appropriate for soloing [where I never have to worry about getting a slot :smileywink: ]. When it comes to groups though, I think the entire baseball team is a better analogy. The shortstop has a nice arm but are you going to put him on the mound when you have a pitcher in the bullpen with a great fastball and a nice curveball? SOE keeps saying that mages and scouts will have an advantage in dps over fighters. If a group needs dps I think it likely that they will prefer someone from the archetypes that do more dps.

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>the analogy is awesome but it wont be true when they take the dps- our slot as either or will be placed as our slot as just MT.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>and for the guys who asked - yes scouts will out dps us by far next patch more than likely - </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so we will be a short fat tubby guy eating a donut playing center feild with the rest of the athletically built outfielders.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[xrippe]

<DIV>Hehe, you almost made me snarf my soda =)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But, for the most part anyone that has to assume multiple roles will never be able to specialize and be *great* in them all.  So we will basically end up being a good, not great DPS and a good, not great tank.  Basically manuvering around in a group to fill a need.  If Im not MT in a group I will have Dragon stance and Everburning on.  Ill try not to get aggro because if I do I will get OWNED.  But if I notice the MT is going to go down I can drop all these abilities in a hurry and throw on Sweeping Crane and Karmic Focus.  If I cant get the mob off the tank and he dies I can at least tank the mob until its dead and we get the MT back up and into action.   I dont know of another class that can do that.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The outlook of a monk is balance.  Yen and Yang if you will.  We do act as Yen and Yang.  We are a balance of DPS and Defense.</DIV><p>Message Edited by xripperx on <span class=date_text>03-09-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:57 PM</span>

[GangsterFi]

<blockquote><hr>SageMarrow wrote:<DIV>the analogy is awesome but it wont be true when they take the dps- our slot as either or will be placed as our slot as just MT. </div><DIV> </div><DIV>and for the guys who asked - yes scouts will out dps us by far next patch more than likely - </div><DIV> </div><DIV>so we will be a short fat tubby guy eating a donut playing center feild with the rest of the athletically built outfielders.</div><DIV> </div><DIV> </div><hr></blockquote>Guess you never saw kirby puckett play outfield <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Wiou]

"guards wont get nerfed - they are the top of the tree in defense and are supposed to be that way."IMO, guardians should be thrown a bone.

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wiou wrote:<BR>"guards wont get nerfed - they are the top of the tree in defense and are supposed to be that way."<BR><BR>IMO, guardians should be thrown a bone.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Why?  They are already have no disadvantage when tanking, what do they need to be better at?<BR>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>i broke down in another post that all defensive abilities dont have a disadvantage for the most part.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>offensive tanks have to deal with blocks parrys riposte and resist to achieve thier "roll as offensive tanks". if a brawler is supposed to do dps as a way of building aggro with a mob outside of taunts - what happens when 3/5 skills are parried blocked or missed?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>pretty simple - the same applies when comparing shadow knights and pals - a heal is not resistable or on the larger scale failable-- where as a lifetap is and in much higher frequency to fail than a heal.</DIV>

[Wiou]

They do have a disadvantage. In many periods throughout 20-50, they are not the most preferred tank, IMO, they should always be

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wiou wrote:<BR>They do have a disadvantage. In many periods throughout 20-50, they are not the most preferred tank, IMO, <FONT color=#ffff00>they should always be</FONT><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>*sigh*</P> <P>Why?  The fact that they aren't preferred 20 to 50 is BALANCED!  OMG it shows the archetype system works.  </P> <P>I wonder why some of you guys even play this game. :smileyindifferent:<BR></P>

[Wiou]

To have fun gage?

[Svan]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wiou wrote:<BR>They do have a disadvantage. In many periods throughout 20-50, they are not the most preferred tank<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>im pretty sure that's the whole point of keeping the tanks balanced, so there is not one omnitank that owns all others in all ways and holds tanking dominance for 90% of the game.</DIV>

[Wiou]

Then why be a guardian over any other fighter class?I really dont understand all your "everyone should tank just as good, but monks should be better dps too?" Come on.

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>if a monk and a gaurdian are maxed at equipment for thier level. a gaurdian is the MT every time</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>you dont put a monk out front just cause hes ur friend. its all about AC, then HP, then skill. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>in that order exactly. and if they use every option available to them and max thier equip - for thier - set up - they will always have more AC- more HP- and then skills (we hope the obvious...)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so if we have the best stuff for our given level and they do too-= we will be behind them in those stats listed above.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>now thats speaking on behalf of brawlers- any plate tank has all the same options available to them that a gaurdian does...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so do the same math for beserkers - sk's and pal's - </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so with them being preffered is only a dream with the current set up without class specific armor and equipment.  they are preffered in one environment - and only one - and that too is superceded if an equally twinked pal is involved. the defensive buffs are more than compensated for by the ability to heal instantly in long fights.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>personally i believe the solution would be armor sets for fighter classes specifically - such as armor that gears the direction the class is supposed to go. without us bickering over who does what the best - so that way the balance would actually be undebateable = if we had our own armor  - then these things would be plain cut and dry.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV> and no - there is no omni tank stigma - there never will be - if you want to be pure meat and shield - we know the class you should play.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if you wana little flare of spell casting - we know what you should play</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if you want a bit of martial arts in fighting - we know what you should play.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all these classes are set up just fine to tank 1-50 - and do it all the time without question on the core gameplay mechanics - in all actuality - no one says that you ever have to raid - right??? its not a requirement to raid - for the most part there isnt anything that cant be aquired in some other way for the most part...unless you want a prismatic weapon - LOL - wont even go there.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so seriously - only one class is geared toward tanking <EM>IN ITS ENTIRETY</EM>... key word being entirety... taking damage = holding aggro - thats all that tanking is - the others are built around the IDEA of tanking - well equipped we can tank when not in the presence of a guardian - better equiped we still tank better than a gaurdian whos not up to par with his equipment and adepts.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so unless they twink guardians to be more TANKISH themselves due to thier lackings in dps and utility - they are on par for 1-50 which is all that matters on a realistic level.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ive seen plenty of gaurdians with garbage armor and equpment that i outclassed easily - some as high as 3-4 levels higher than me - simply because i stay on top of my equipment...</DIV>

[GangsterFi]

<blockquote><hr>SageMarrow wrote:<DIV> and no - there is no omni tank stigma - there never will be - if you want to be pure meat and shield - we know the class you should play.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>if you wana little flare of spell casting - we know what you should play</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>if you want a bit of martial arts in fighting - we know what you should play.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>all these classes are set up just fine to tank 1-50 - and do it all the time without question on the core gameplay mechanics - in all actuality - no one says that you ever have to raid - right??? its not a requirement to raid - for the most part there isnt anything that cant be aquired in some other way for the most part...unless you want a prismatic weapon - LOL - wont even go there.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>so seriously - only one class is geared toward tanking <EM>IN ITS ENTIRETY</EM>... key word being entirety... taking damage = holding aggro - thats all that tanking is - the others are built around the IDEA of tanking - well equipped we can tank when not in the presence of a guardian - better equiped we still tank better than a gaurdian whos not up to par with his equipment and adepts.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>so unless they twink guardians to be more TANKISH themselves due to thier lackings in dps and utility - they are on par for 1-50 which is all that matters on a realistic level.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>ive seen plenty of gaurdians with garbage armor and equpment that i outclassed easily - some as high as 3-4 levels higher than me - simply because i stay on top of my equipment...</DIV><hr></blockquote>That is indeed a good point, but if you take two fighters, one monk and one guardian same level same tier equipment, the guardian not only avoids damage better, they mitigate it better. Where is the balance in that? Equipment does infact matter but I can see guardians a few levels lower than me with great equipment out tank me. Shouldn't level have more over equipment?

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wiou wrote:<BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Then why be a guardian over any other fighter class?<BR></FONT><BR>I really dont understand all your "everyone should tank just as good, but monks should be better dps too?" Come on.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Because they are the most defensive class with the best taunts.  Its flair/style.  Some people like that.  Some people like having spells and roll pallys and some people roll monks.</P> <P>Its personal preference.</P> <P>If guardians were the best tank all the time like you say, then why pick the other fighter classes?  We know fighters can't outdamage scouts or mages, we don't have mez or any good buffs/utility, so why exactly WOULD anyone pick any of the other 5 fighters if only guardians are supposed to tank?</P> <P>Monks get good DPS to offset their lack of defense.  By helping to kill the mob faster it helps smoothen out not only our spikes in damage but our lack of mitigation.  What is dead can't hit you.  Most monks think our DPS is an offset to our tanking ability, when in fact its used to bolster our tanking ability by making the lack of defense not so severe.</P> <P>Its also the reason that guardians don't get uber DPS... because they have uber defense.</P> <P>The thought that you can either tank or do damage is wrong, you have to be able to do both, the scale of how much of which you do/possess is what seperates the tank classes.<BR></P>

[Amanojak]

<DIV>Gage,</DIV> <DIV>By your understanding if we do the following test we should have the same result:</DIV> <DIV>The monk and the guardian should be able to kill 10 mobs within the same allocated time.</DIV> <DIV>Ecept this is not true at the moment as you agree. The guardian will kill 10 mobs faster because us monks will get hit alot, and use too much power to DPS. We would spend too much time regaining out health and power. The guardian will just keep swinging and use low power comsumption arts.</DIV> <DIV>So you can be suggesting we up our damage to kill those mobs faster thus...using our DPS advantage to tank better...or equivalent to a guardian.</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>by that same token to make such a vast difference in our dps as to kill mobs at the speed of gaurdians surviveability we would have to do as much dps as an assasin does from behind. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>?????</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>which wouldnt be all that bad since we dont have the utility of scouts = but we still couldnt tank raid mobs</DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-12-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:32 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Amanojakae wrote:<BR> <DIV>Gage,</DIV> <DIV>By your understanding if we do the following test we should have the same result:</DIV> <DIV>The monk and the guardian should be able to kill 10 mobs within the same allocated time.</DIV> <DIV>Ecept this is not true at the moment as you agree. The guardian will kill 10 mobs faster because us monks will get hit alot, and use too much power to DPS. We would spend too much time regaining out health and power. The guardian will just keep swinging and use low power comsumption arts.</DIV> <DIV>So you can be suggesting we up our damage to kill those mobs faster thus...using our DPS advantage to tank better...or equivalent to a guardian.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>No because I'm talking about in groups, not solo'ing.</P> <P>In groups a monk MT shouldn't be doing very many combat arts, conserving most their power for taunts/buffs.</P> <P>The DPS advantage we have is in auto-attack also.<BR></P>

[Amanojak]

<DIV>All things equivalent..I also want my monk to tank solo aswell as guardians..why stop at raid mobs?</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>yeah 0 all things equivalent - people wont play any class but a wizard or gaurdian or templar or assasin... lol  - and the rest will just go play something else.</DIV>

[Amanojak]

<DIV>Heck..all things equivalent..lets all play Diablo..surely we can't have any disagreement there..unless gauge chooses a wizard and start complaing he cant tank</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>BTW Gauge....</DIV> <DIV>You said a few times, part of monk's abilty to tank is his increase damage output...your theory goes...high DPS for monks thus killing the mob faster is equivalent to increase tanking. You also made an analogy about boxers who can KO their opponent faster is just as good at tanking as someone with a rock chin....So are you secretly advocating a DPS increase for monks?</DIV> <DIV>I think I have misunderstood you all this time.</DIV>

[Wiou]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> </P> <P>Gage wrote:</P> <P><BR> </P> <DIV>If guardians were the best tank all the time like you say, then why pick the other fighter classes?  We know fighters can't outdamage scouts or mages, we don't have mez or any good buffs/utility, so why exactly WOULD anyone pick any of the other 5 fighters if only guardians are supposed to tank?</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P>We know fighters CAN outdamage scouts and mages.</P> <P>We have good buffs and utility.</P> <P>For an alternate tank. There will never ALWAYS be a guardian to pick up. I said guardians should be the best, coming in close by paladins and shadowknights, I didnt say guardians/pally/sk had to be way ahead of us, however. We can still fill a tank role in a group, better than any other archetype. (Priest,scout,mage) Which is keeping the role of our archetype.. AND our class! We can do damage too!</P>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Wiou wrote: <P>We know fighters CAN outdamage scouts and mages.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Not intended and not for long.  That's broken.</FONT></P> <P>We have good buffs and utility.  <FONT color=#ffff00>Name them.  Some that would be desired on raids also please.</FONT></P> <P>For an alternate tank. There will never ALWAYS be a guardian to pick up. I said guardians should be the best, coming in close by paladins and shadowknights, I didnt say guardians/pally/sk had to be way ahead of us, however. We can still fill a tank role in a group, better than any other archetype. (Priest,scout,mage) Which is keeping the role of our archetype.. AND our class! We can do damage too!  <FONT color=#ffff00>Well we already know that your understanding of the archetype system is a little off, since you think fighters outdamaging scouts/mages is ok.  The point is if guardians are the best tank there is no reason for a second best, not in two years when there are 5000 guardians on every server.  The same is true with a "best" healer etc etc.</FONT> <HR> </P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[SageMarrow]

<DIV>gage = if you think past the fighter archetype = they are going to HAVE to break the system apart to keep everyone in sync.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>how do you make a conjurer more desirable than a wizard?</FONT> or just as desirable? twink him on both ends = make his pet stronger and his nukes stronger...but wait= if the pets get any stronger - they will out tank one of us for the most part....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><U>so what do you do?</U></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>how do you make an enchanter more desirable to a group without over powering them?</FONT> give them even more mana regen? whats the point in drinks then? beserkers can take their place with the haste buffs and provide decent dps  - and wizards can shovel mana to the healer when things get rough. but that would just be over kill considering golden efreeti boots - manastones- superior station drinks - etc etc etc - most high level wizards will tell you that they couldnt remember that last time they were OOP.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>how do you make a monk an all out tank without uprooting half of his skills and abilities and replacing them?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>how do you make a monk an all out dps machine without making them scouts with sticks?</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff33>how do you make a shadowknight have the same capability to sustain life as a paladin without overpowering life taps?</FONT> - (considering that lifetaps - take life to give life...as opposed to just an outright heal thats merely a power drain)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if you ask all these question then you will see that the system will have to be broken to accomodate the classes without unbalancing them on some if not all levels gage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>these problems are unsurmountable in five minutes and a tweak here and there = they need REAL evaluation and more than likely some new abilites and skills = that in some cases will make one more desireable than the other - i think we can all vouch and say that all conjurers do is make a mess in most cases. starting fights in walls - fighting random mobs while we all stand around looking for the poor thing.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>wizards/warlocks and beserkers hate enchanters cause they slow down fights and render some of their best skills unusable...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They will HAVE to break the system in order to correct these issues and make them desirable and efficient in doing so- saying as though they broke thier own system when the game released for the most part</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by SageMarrow on <span class=date_text>03-13-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:49 PM</span>