EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire - View Single Post - Permanent Tanking Inequality? Aye, says Moorgard

Opa · 04-28-2005, 11:16 PM

uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:
let me put it to you this way, Opaki, because you're a bruiser..

A guard can get the SAME evasion or more than you, gets more hit points, more mitigation, more taunts/ aggro skills, tanks about 3 to 4 lvls above you..

You DONT see anything wrong with this? How is this considered a small gap? There is nothing small about this.

Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on 04-28-2005 10:25 AM

No, I do think this is a problem. Once again, I never said the system is perfect. I believe mitigation tanks shouldn't have 50% avoidence base to my 76%.

I want avoidence tanks to be true avoidence tanks, and I want mitigation tanks to be pure mitigation tanks. As it stands now, both or sort of half breeds. "Plate tanks" are about 50/50. I'm about 75/40. I think it should be much more stark. Something like 90/10 and 10/90 (or however the numbers work out).

But, in short, my position is this: it's okay that we're not all raid tanks. I don't need to be a raid tank. And I think it's unfair to say that just because an SK or monk can't tank Darathar, that somehow the tank classes are unbalanced.

So, long before all the crazy word games, rhetorical battles, accusations, rants and defensive manuevuers, that was what I was saying:

Things aren't perfect. I'd love to see them changed in certain ways. And I don't think it's true that if I can't tank Darathar, I'm broken. I'm not some archconservative about the current system; I like lots of the ideas brought up here about spell resists, and about building raids so that different tanks have a different sort of situational superiority. I hope the devs are looking at them seriously.

And for once, I'll close my post without egging someone on.

04-28-2005, 11:16 PM	#83
Opa Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 280	uzhiel feathered serpent wrote: let me put it to you this way, Opaki, because you're a bruiser.. A guard can get the SAME evasion or more than you, gets more hit points, more mitigation, more taunts/ aggro skills, tanks about 3 to 4 lvls above you.. You DONT see anything wrong with this? How is this considered a small gap? There is nothing small about this. Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on 04-28-2005 10:25 AM No, I do think this is a problem. Once again, I never said the system is perfect. I believe mitigation tanks shouldn't have 50% avoidence base to my 76%. I want avoidence tanks to be true avoidence tanks, and I want mitigation tanks to be pure mitigation tanks. As it stands now, both or sort of half breeds. "Plate tanks" are about 50/50. I'm about 75/40. I think it should be much more stark. Something like 90/10 and 10/90 (or however the numbers work out). But, in short, my position is this: it's okay that we're not all raid tanks. I don't need to be a raid tank. And I think it's unfair to say that just because an SK or monk can't tank Darathar, that somehow the tank classes are unbalanced. So, long before all the crazy word games, rhetorical battles, accusations, rants and defensive manuevuers, that was what I was saying: Things aren't perfect. I'd love to see them changed in certain ways. And I don't think it's true that if I can't tank Darathar, I'm broken. I'm not some archconservative about the current system; I like lots of the ideas brought up here about spell resists, and about building raids so that different tanks have a different sort of situational superiority. I hope the devs are looking at them seriously. And for once, I'll close my post without egging someone on.