|
|||||||
| Notices |
 |
| Thread Tools |
08-12-2006, 08:17 PM
|
#31 |
|
General
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 372
|
65 Monk here. I've put all my AA's into DEF and Deflection, and special gear with those skills on it. I can handle heriocs perfeclty fine, put most plate tanks to shame. MOST heriocs, every now and then there's a herioc that just thrashes me for no apparent reason. 75% avoidance becomes like 20%. Epics are a mixed batch, few of them are a breeze most avoidance doesn't do jack. It would be nice if maybe they tweaked the stances so dps meant actualy dps and def was solid defence tht actually worked across the board not just on random mobs.
|
|
|
|
08-18-2006, 08:48 PM
|
#32 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 226
|
Here is how good we are at tanking atm.
Tanked one of the dragons in PoS the other day (Syamiak) while a Pally took the other 1(Barakah).
We are both dressed pretty much in full fabled/Claymore items. Ignoring temporary miti buffs etc, Im at about 73% avoid and around 4.2k Mit, while he is at about 49% avoid and 5.5k Mit. we were both in similar grps. (yes i know avoid is kinda low but had no dirges)
easy fight anyways with green mobs but boy was i suprised when i check the parser.
Ignoring AE effects etc i got hit 13 times and took 33k of auto attack damage highest hit was about 4.5k. Deflected/Parry the rest or else the mob missed me. Pally got hit a grand total of 1 time for a whopping 230 damage, all the other attacks he parry/blocked or mob missed.
Was this just an unusual run of the dice? are the 2 dragons that much different in ability to hit a toon and i just picked the tougher of the 2? or are we actually as crap as that parse points to? Yes i did do almost twice the dps of the pally but the healers actually had to heal me compared to the occasional cure which is all that was required for him.
Dont get me wrong i love my monk and i know we have skills that other classes would love FD being a prime example, but surely seen as SOE does class all fighters as tanks there should be a little less difference in tanking ability between avoidance and mitigation tanks. Groups i have no problem with, but it would be nice to be at least 3rd choice of tank at T7 rather than oh dear we have got no plate tank lets not bother raiding today. Message Edited by Illustrious on 08-18-2006 09:55 AM Message Edited by Illustrious on 08-18-2006 09:57 AM |
|
|
|
|
08-18-2006, 11:58 PM
|
#33 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 289
|
I am not surprised. I have few times tried to calculate difference between mitigation and avoidance and I always came to same conclusion: avoidance tank even with higher avoidance than mitigation tank gets hit for much more as total damage. Avoidance is not even closely as good as SOE tries to tell. While pally was probably a bit lucky, results is still according to calculation and in addition to that confirms what I have seen healing brawlers.If someone comes here telling that monks are ok tanking I can tell as a fact that it is because healer works twice as much for keeping him up...
__________________
=========================================== If your parents did not have a child, it is unlikely that you will have one either |
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 12:16 AM
|
#34 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
|
Avoidance works.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 04:38 AM
|
#35 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
|
Uh, exactly how well does it work, and against what. Blue heroics, heroic named blues, heroic named whites or yellows, trash blue/yellow/orange epics, blue/yellow/orange epic named? With what level of gear and buffs bringing you up to what in avoidence and mitigation? Any special buffs like wards, stoneskin, that sort, plus any good support so the mob is taken down fast so that it does not have time to get lucky?My experience is that against saaay a level 67 single up heroic vultak I can stand there all day out of combat while it tries to take my health down, I can solo some level up to 67 or so triple up heroics and duo (no healer) up to say 69-70, against yellow or higher heroic named I can tank them but need good support, perhaps more than a plate tank, against say some trash in Labs I can tank if I have good heal support and especially if the healers know to switch to healing me in time (tsunami helps), but usually if the named epic notices me I go down too fast to get healed anyway (at least outside of labs, I could probably tank some for a bit in labs). This is at from 3300 to 3450 mitigation and 70 to 71 avoidence (before buffs), with seldom an avoidence buff (sometimes a fairly minor one) and almost always with no shaman class to back me up (rare on Antonia Bayle), and health from 7.7k (self) to usually 10.5-11k (only at most 2 healers and no dirge in my group). Gear is mostly fabled now although only high legendary bracers (excarnate) and Zhorroz breastplate plus the Claymore stuff, chitin rings, MoA and other good jewelry, twin twin calamities or a flapping staff, good gear getting close to maxed out in many cases. I have tank racial traits and semi tank AAs (eagle shriek, 4 in parry, 4 in +% health, crane flock).So that is my take on "avoidance works", in some cases yes, in some it seems to have no noticable effect. I would love to try it out on an epic named WITH shaman support and WITH a dirge and all that just so see how it goes, but against many epic named and some epic trash that probably would not be enough the way things are now.It is my beleif that avoidence for monks and bruisers needs some boost against the tougher mobs, some higher named heroics, a signifigent amount against trash apics, and a good amount against epic named, especially white to yellow and up.
__________________
"Thirty" Now I know what you are thinking, "Thirty" ,what kind of a name is "Thirty"? Your right. It's nearer fourty actually. |
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 05:06 AM
|
#36 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
|
Part two, the suggested solution (long but its a serious issue with no simple answer that needs a solution that works and especially is NOT a game breaker):It is my beleif that avoidence for monks and bruisers needs some boost against the tougher mobs, some higher named heroics, a signifigent amount against trash apics, and a good amount against epic named, especially white to yellow and up. The devs have stated as much, so Im not alone in this.It is my belief that this can be done by making a permanent (and possibly invisible) non power and concentration taking buff to monks and preferable seperately to bruiser (so they can be tweaked individually) that adds a certain amount of avoidence types when fighting certain types of mobs. A smaller amount when fighing high level heroics or perhaps just heroic named, a greater amount when fighting epic trash (amount going up as the level of the trash goes up), and an even greater amount when fighting epic named, higher the higher level of the named. I suggest a buff, applied seperatly to monks and bruisers, so that avoidance can be changed for them only, without effecting how it works on say that berzerker with 65% avoidence. I suggest a buff also because the code for buffs exist and so this is a much more easily coded solution than some other way to change monk and bruiser avoidance seperatly from all other classes avoidance. Just changing how avoidence works would put us in the situation that led to this situation, where avoidence scales down so fast against some mobs that it virtually dissapears, or at least seems to do too little to be usefull, as compared to before where avoidence could make you untouchable, resulting in its needed nerfage. Also, a buff could at first be tested by a dev bringing along a bunch of Dev castable buffs of different levels of effectivness so as to see by putting them on the test brawler or taking them off and replacing them with another just what effects they have in different circumstances. Testing this way could be quick and easy and under complete dev control, no need to make a test server wide change at first, just cast it under controlled conditions in controlled tests on selected test subjects.It could take into acount your tier (the problem was mostly noticed in tier 7 so perhaps it is mostly needed in tier 7), your level versus the level of the monster, and especially what class the monster is, solo, heroic, very heroic, heroic named, epic trash, epic named, tough epic named. It can also be paired with some way to equelize the ability of monks to avoid damage from crush/slash/pierce AOEs so that it is about that of plate tanks, perhaps by adding some multiple of avoidence to mitigation so that the resist number is about that of plate tanks. Also, it needs to take into account thing such as mit buffs, especially the 3 minute bruiser mit buff. It may be needed that the avoidence buff scales down somewhat if you use your mit buff, since + avoidence and + mit may = superman, might be time to add a little timely kryptonite while that buff is up, and remove it when it goes away.It would then have to be EXTENSIVLY tested with the intent of NOT repeating the mistakes of the past and ending up with avoidence supermen, causing the cry if "Nerf!" to be heard throughout the land. You would probably have to test it under the most realistic circumstances possible, to make sure you avoid this, plus "worst case" tests such as a monk and bruiser with the very best possoble avoidence gear that could be had, the best support and external buffs, the various types of AA setup (including the new seperate AA trees to come), and if possible some real players, both brawlers and non brawlers, to test it and also to observe it, support it, etc, so as to include both brawlers and non brawlers in the test so as to avoide brawler advocates from skewing the test in their favor, or brawler haters for that matter. In some cases you might even need a full x4 raid force of real players plus dev observers to test it under specific conditions, like worst case gear, certain mobs, that sort of thing, with live comment from players, perhaps later forum comment, Devs going over logs, live parsing, and especially experienced and knowledgable players (probably volenteers) to test it and comment on it. Heck, you could even use teamspeak for real live as-it-happens comment, plus it would be easier for the Devs to say what they want tested and how more quickly.The most important thing to find out is, in all cases of gear, support, and mob type and level, how much avoidence is too much. Once you KNOW that, you can then improve avoidence for monks and bruisers without fear of breaking the game. This could at least result in somewhat better and more generally usefull avoidence for brawlers, perhaps not causing them to equel plate tanks (who need a job after all), but at least making them more viable tanks and in some cases even the preffered one. One thing of note, the new tree type seperate monk and bruiser AAs to come, this will have to take that into account. Perhaps the avoidence buff above could be signifigently different depending on say if you go down the monk tank tree than if you go down say the monk dps and agro reducing tree. Don't want to make a new improved monk tank and then have it turn into superman (or be reduced to uselessness) with some future AA or skill or gear or buff or mob skill, after all. One final idea which may help a little, our avoidence scales down much faster than mitigation does when facing epics, names, higher levels etc. Perhaps one thing that can help is to make a buff that offsets mitigation scaling down for monks and seperatly for bruisers so that theirs scales down more slowly or even not at all. This would result in the brawler having more mitigation versus these critter to offset the greatly reduced avoidence versus these critters. The advantage here is that too much avoidence, being an all or nothing, has the danger of being game breaking, whereas mitigation has no such danger. A little more mitigation might not help a lot, but it would help a little and would mean that you could reach adequate brawler tanking ability with just a little less of that potentially game breaking avoidence needed. This buff may need to be reduced when in the presence of things like mitigation buffs caste on or by the monk or bruiser.
Message Edited by PrimusPilus on 08-18-2006 06:10 PM Message Edited by PrimusPilus on 08-18-2006 06:13 PM Message Edited by PrimusPilus on 08-18-2006 06:20 PM
__________________
"Thirty" Now I know what you are thinking, "Thirty" ,what kind of a name is "Thirty"? Your right. It's nearer fourty actually. |
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 06:38 AM
|
#37 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 48
|
I feel my "job" as a monk is and always will be the offhand tank...back up tank. I think I am basically a low DPS rogue class with a decent amount of hit points. I don't think the monk should really be considered a tank class. If a monk is a tank...than so is a Brigand with a shield. Both of them can tank fairly well against one Mob with decent support and deal out more damage in the process. However, I also don't like the fact that every one always needs the character to be one of four classes. In my opinion the Monk and the Pally are their own classes. I fell that a monk is a fighter/rogue hybrid and a Pally is a fighter/priest hybrid, but SOE calls them all fighters or tanks. Then we have mezzers and pet classes that I feel shouldn't fall into the same catagory as a wizard or warlock, but SOE calls them all mages. Heck, I've seen more than a few necro pets that tanked better than a lot of guarians I've seen. Should we consider the Necro's tanks aswell? I guess what I want to say is the monk and bruiser are not just another tank...they are their own unique class that has very little in common with any other class. Don't roll a monk thinking you will tank every thing. Roll a monk to play a class that is out of the norm...that's what I did. I like the fact that I am not cookie cutter character with one role. As a monk I am good at many things but a master of none...besides playin' possum.
And about avoidance...yeah it don't work so well. What I would like to see is take our mitigation buff that roots us and make it switch our mitigation for avoidance. So if we had 75% avoidance and 35% mitigation, the CA would root the monk and make avoidance 35% and mitigation 75%...we are rooted after all. How can we be avoiding much all that much? I think that would help a little bit. I think that CA only lasts for 20 seconds or so any way...and it roots us...that right there should make it give some huge benefits. A few more hundred mitigation really doesn't help alot when you are so low to start with. This would also mean that there would be no need for changes in the coding...just a CA that switches one number for another.
Message Edited by Gustuv Wynd on 08-18-2006 07:42 PM |
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 11:38 AM
|
#38 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 289
|
True, it works. Problem is that it does not work even closely as well as SOE tells us, but still it technically works.
__________________
=========================================== If your parents did not have a child, it is unlikely that you will have one either |
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 11:50 AM
|
#39 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 289
|
That is not going to happen as long as avoidance and mitigation tanks use same rules for avoidance. SOE cannot really tune avoidance as it is now because changes to it would change mitigation tanks too. SOE should take new look to combat system and revise avoidance system totally for avoidance tanks.Avoidance tanking should absolutely use avoidance as part of mitigation (total mitigation = armor mitigation + avoidance part which varies based on luck with avoidance mitigation check), not just to check if you avoided whole blow. That would reduce spike damage to tolerable level.
__________________
=========================================== If your parents did not have a child, it is unlikely that you will have one either |
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 12:29 PM
|
#40 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
|
That would also make avoidance tanks mitigation tanks with an edge. IE its a dumb idea.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 01:48 PM
|
#41 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 289
|
And surely you can tell better idea(s) to get rid of spike damage and make avoidance tanking generally a viable form of tanking? While you may not notice difference between your tanking and mitigation tanks at a moment, I can tell you as a fact that healer behind your back knows it for sure.I did not make my monk for solo as it is now. I made it for tanking which is almost a dream with current "working" avoidance system. I would say that brawlers are one of the most gear dependant classes in whole game: unless you have uber gear you can forget tanking. On the other hand average geared mitigation tanks do nicely unless they try something extreme.
__________________
=========================================== If your parents did not have a child, it is unlikely that you will have one either |
|
|
|
|
08-19-2006, 09:18 PM
|
#42 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
|
All they need to do is adjust the way mitigation/avoidance scales so that the gaps aren't so huge. So instead of a fully buffed guardian being at 80% mit and a fully buffed brawler being at 60% mit, you'd get a fully buffed guardian at 60% and a fully buffed brawler at 57% or something. Then they'd need to rescale avoidance the same way. They should also lower the caps on both avoidance and mitigation, at the same time increasing the amount of stats required to get there. Maybe have 6k equate to 50% mit instead of 80% like it does currently, with the top end of the spectrum for both offering significant diminishing returns. However, saying avoidance tanking right now doesn't work is wrong. It works fine. When I played Gaige I tanked just about every mob in the game. /shrug
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 12:43 AM
|
#43 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 105
|
Simple fact of the matter is, currently there is absolutely NO reason to have a brawler in raid situations. Zerkers wear plate and out-dmg us if you want an off tank. One might make a small (very small) argument for dps/haste group buffs..but other than that..(see above statement)... /shrug. It's really that bad now. As far as I'm concerned, a "brawler" type class should be changed to a straight/hybrid dps class anyways or make our dps aa's actually make a difference, but thats another thread.
My answer? I re-rolled a swash and I'm already to 60, so unless they change our class, one way or another (useful dps or useful tank....not [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] dps or group tank)...I have retired Slapp.
__________________
 "
|
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 01:16 AM
|
#44 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 289
|
And you expect us to take that as an absolute truth? Like I said brawlers are very gear dependant. What may work with your top class gear does not work at all if you use lower level gear. You know that in groups brawler always have to show that he/she is at least equal or better than possible plate tank. If brawler and plate tanks have same level gear and spells, brawler always loses as avoidance tank needs superior gear in order to get even, not to even talk about beating the mitigation tank. For me that is good sign that it does not work fine.
__________________
=========================================== If your parents did not have a child, it is unlikely that you will have one either |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 01:25 AM
|
#45 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
|
Well your opinion is your own, but mine is better.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 01:51 AM
|
#46 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
|
Um, if you read my whole post, especially the second one, you would see that I dealt with this by making a buff that effects ONLY monks and seperatly bruisers so that avoidence as it is now for all others is unchanged. Changing avoidence and how it works for everyone would require such massive changes that I don't think the Devs even want to touch that. It would essentially change everything about the game, making the rules those of a whole new game, requiring a LOT of testing and beta to prevent all kinds of unexpected things happening, plus you would need to change practically every encounter in the game, items, pretty much everything.Also, I limited how avoidence is beefed up so that in many cases it will see no change at all, it should only change thing in specific circimstances where it needs it. In many normal circumstances no change is needed, such as monks versus most heroics.Also, I limit my idea of mitigation plus avoidence to only how well AOEs are avoided (and only crush/slash/peirce AOEs), using it for all incoming attacks basically turns the monk into either a plate tank or "bulletproof monk", I signed up to be a monk, not a nerf target or a plate tank.
__________________
"Thirty" Now I know what you are thinking, "Thirty" ,what kind of a name is "Thirty"? Your right. It's nearer fourty actually. |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 02:20 AM
|
#47 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
|
Changing the way things scale and lowering the caps is being seriously looked at by the Devs, so I hear. Exactly how they will do it is probably the result of the look at mitigation and avoidence they are doing right now (data gathering) plus I expect they would then have to extensivly test any change, and there would probably be changes to monster mit and avoid as well. The only detailed word I hear is that the idea of lowering caps is very seriously being considered (how would it effect monster mit, one wonders?).My idea above is just this, to change the scaling, in this case carefully bring avoidence for brawlers only up in some circumstances where the gap gets huge, and less or non where it does not. I don't nessissarily see nerfing plate tanks to possible uselessness as a good thing to even the playing field. I don't even really want a "level playing field", I'v seen games like that and it degenarates into a grey sameness for all classes. In fact, given some monk advantages over the plate types, I don't even want them to be even in tanking ability, because first plate tanks need a job and if this made monks the preffered tank in many or most situations the plate types would be screaming. All I'm looking at is closing the gap in those cases where that gap is rather huge at the moment, while preserving the flavor of the monks and bruisers (that is, I signed up to be an avoidence tank, not a plate tank). This should, if done right result in plate tanks still being the preffered tanks in most situations, but making monks viable enough that they can also do it, and when doing it having some advantages at it as well as some disadvantages. The result is monks will not be frowned on or looked over in raid tanking situations, as most are now by most raiders, but be viable if not optimum tanks in tanking situations, and in some situation actually be prefferred (like say power draining mobs).Also this claim that avoidence is "fine" isn't exactly true, according to the Devs. They see it as not quite right and are looking at it, although cautiously as one would expect given it's past history. Also, I suspect that for a monk to tank just about every mob is to a great extent the result of having 23 other people who know how to support and use a monk as tank, which is unfortuatly rare (I sure would like to hear how its done, and spread that info far and wide!).
__________________
"Thirty" Now I know what you are thinking, "Thirty" ,what kind of a name is "Thirty"? Your right. It's nearer fourty actually. |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 02:28 AM
|
#48 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
|
I preffer the way the Devs are leaning for the next expansion, AA trees. That is, you can go down the dps plus agro reducer line, ending with a monk flavored dps class, OR go down the tank line, ending with a monk flavored tank with signifigently greater survivability (in a monk sort of way) than if you went down the dps line. I like choice, and it would end the "are monks really tanks" debate. They would be if thats what you want, or not if you don't. I like choice, too much "balance" is boring, choice and differences beween classes and even different specced versions of the same class are much more interesting and flavorfull. Plus if you try to turn all monks into pure dps the tank monks will be justifiable angry, and vice versa. Give em both a tree with very signifigent differences if they go down that tree and everyone is happy.
__________________
"Thirty" Now I know what you are thinking, "Thirty" ,what kind of a name is "Thirty"? Your right. It's nearer fourty actually. |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 02:31 AM
|
#49 |
|
General
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Taxachusetts
Posts: 213
|
As always I have to agree with this guy even though he likes taco bell...Also I didn't read this post entirely but here in there, cause it seems like the same old BS over and over again...A monk is not an MT for raids unless a mob strat requires so (won't name any as I would be giving out strats =P, but they exist)Let the plateys do their job, and stick to yours (dps/offtanking/MA/puller)Be happy with what you have, because i feel a nerf coming eventually as it has been too quiet on the front for some time now.Best tanks in order imo...Guard,Pally,Zerk,Sk, Bruiser,Brig,Wizzy*lol*,Conj,Troub,Ranger,[expletive haxx0red by Raijinn],And we are down the list somewhere near here, Warlock, oh yea here we are, Monk |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 04:27 AM
|
#50 |
|
General
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 16
|
in reply to the comment about aoe ca's being unvaoideable. i just wanted to let you know thats false. ive avoided aoe knockback ca's many times, even off orange mobs like cheldrak. you probably dont avoid them because you're in offensive stance which is normal. but even in offensive stance you can still avoid them if you nice nice fabled gear with +def/deflec and +parry on it.Now going back to the topic here, i think brawlers need better aa's. take warriors for example get they tsunami, mitigation, hate gain aa's. what do we get? procs and +parry/deflection, basically nothing. what we need is a mit aa just like warriors get, or give us more dps, or both! Afterall, warriors do have a great dps aa line.LeethalBruiser of The Tribunalwww.thetribunalguild.net
Message Edited by Vegter Leeuwen on 08-19-2006 05:31 PM Message Edited by Vegter Leeuwen on 08-19-2006 05:40 PM Message Edited by Vegter Leeuwen on 08-19-2006 05:40 PM |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 11:20 AM
|
#51 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 289
|
I do not think that using AA is a good idea. Main reason is that basically AA is just icing on the cake and if cake itself is not doing too well, you cannot fix it by increasing icing. Tuning should be done on the basic level without AA affecting it. While I agree that it is a good idea that you could tune your basic brawler with AA, it should not be so that without AA you cannot really tank as it is now.Personally I call brawlers tanks as long as SOE does not officially move them outside of fighter category. They are tanks, just bad ones. Somehow I wonder what SOE meant when they created fighters who are 3rd class tanks and mediocre dps. You cannot really tank or dps and utility is not that massive either (who needs small haste in groups anyway?).
__________________
=========================================== If your parents did not have a child, it is unlikely that you will have one either |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 11:37 AM
|
#52 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 289
|
Now that I think about it... If you would increase needed stats to get to caps you would also effectively void large part of gear in the market (if needed stat requirements would be raised you would need better gear to in order to get same effect than before even as group tank). You would need low end raid gear to tank in groups and top end raid gear to in order do anything in the raids. That would mean pretty much total re-itemization and I do not think that SOE wants to do it.Also your idea seems to be to move brawlers to totally mitigation with just different attack animations (your examples 3% difference in mitigation does not justify them to be called avoidance tanks anymore). So whats the difference compared to my idea which you claimed would make brawlers to mitigations tanks with just minor additional flavour?
__________________
=========================================== If your parents did not have a child, it is unlikely that you will have one either |
|
|
|
|
08-20-2006, 05:37 PM
|
#53 |
|
General
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Taxachusetts
Posts: 213
|
From what I have heard giving s tanking AA's will be part of the solution, I just hope they offer dps for us with the dps complex
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 01:43 AM
|
#54 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
|
I'v heard the same, with an agro reducer in the dps route. If they offer an agro reducer as an option, it only makes sense to offer something usefull to tanks in the other branch of the tree.
__________________
"Thirty" Now I know what you are thinking, "Thirty" ,what kind of a name is "Thirty"? Your right. It's nearer fourty actually. |
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 03:14 AM
|
#55 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 209
|
where have you heard this ? was it in a post.... is there a link..
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 03:53 AM
|
#56 |
|
General
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Taxachusetts
Posts: 213
|
Everything I hear comes from the grapevine or one of my many many sources. It is good to network in this game especially if you are in a higher end raiding guild, or even care about the progression of your class, because they don't give you much info (them = soe)*Edit*I have also heard the same about the aggro reducer, I completely forgot though, it is all the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] booze lol...
Message Edited by KazzySoJazzy on 08-20-2006 04:55 PM |
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 08:12 AM
|
#57 |
|
Lord
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkiye
Posts: 1,305
|
Ah if so, they decided to take us out of fighter and place to scout  oh, I made myself sad 
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 11:53 AM
|
#58 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 209
|
thats what i thought, so mostly alot of chinses whispers then, ie made up stuff  EDIT, however i do like the idea of different AA paths depending on how they would like there toon to be.Message Edited by ArcticBlue182 on 08-21-2006 12:54 AM Message Edited by ArcticBlue182 on 08-21-2006 12:55 AM |
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 12:38 PM
|
#59 |
|
Loremaster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
|
You'd be surprised what rumors prove to become true. I guess it all depends on which grapevines you listen to. That said, Selch as much as I hate aggro reducers and the thought of deaggro given to the brawler classes it makes sense, because a lot of players play the brawler classes to dps. Besides, if they give a means to ditch aggro via the new AAs, I'm fairly sure they'd give a means to generate it also. I could be wrong though...
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 04:19 PM
|
#60 |
|
Lord
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkiye
Posts: 1,305
|
What would worry me most is all classes to have that kind of stuff, it would be really wicked to see a guardian refusing to tank because they invested on DPS but if the rumors are true, I'll go towards tank obviously or if there is jack of all trades without "agroreducer", I can do that too, since in a duo, I'm the tank, I'm the dps most of time as well. Yes, I can understand the reason behind this rumor however, I'm kinda in fear of future that we would "label" as DPS class and lessening more of our defensive abilities which is already far more lesser than a bruiser.Also more sad thing we would need to spend all our AA's to be able to tank as a plate which we already should, rather than making avoidance worthwhile than currently is. a DPS AA going Berserker would be much better DPS than an DPS AA going brawler while still be able to tank as better as a TANK AA'd brawler. That would also mean in raid, better to have a DPS AA Berserker than a DPS AA brawler anyway. Message Edited by selch on 08-21-2006 07:23 AM
__________________
|
|
|
|
