Guards vs SK

[RafaelSmith]

Bruener wrote:

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

Its times like this where I really wish we had class "reps" from SOE taking part in each classes forums. I would be happy with some sorta "state of the class" as viewed from SOE..........so we can at least see if everyone is on the same page or not.

As for the topic at hand........ask anyone that knows me.......I hate hate hate nerfs but after looking at this whole fighter situation from the perspective of a Gurad and a Assassin that has gotten to group with just about all the fighter types across all levels of play..........the conclusion sadly is that some have it "too good". Its not healthy for the game as a whole to have a tank class that can tank as easily as an SK can with almost no dependency on gear, experience or skill.

Guard has to struggle to do its job and no matter how good he/she is they are sill reliant on everyone in the group doing their job......that IMO is how a Tank class should be.

Really hate the direction the game is taking.

It is the direction the game is going though. Did you have a chance to try out the fighter revamp when it was on test? Literally agro was a joke. A legendary geared tank with a taunt macro could hold agro off of raid geared DPS easy...in defensive. No tank is even close to that today. Even Crusaders that have probably the best agro out there can't come close to that. For all the complaints you guys have for SKs being able to do it, they are not doing it with a 1 button macro sittin there in defensive legendary geared holding agro from raid DPS. Raid geared SKs have to work to keep agro from raid geared DPS if they have no transfers.

Based on the original fighter revamp SOE is going to basically make Agro easy-mode for everybody. They do not want people to rely on hate transfers, hence the removal of them on the tank revamp. They want legendary geared tanks to be able to hold agro off of raid geared DPS without these transfers. That is messed up.

The worst part is the removal of stance dancing and the consolidation of buffs into stances. Expect it to come again, just like the proc nerf and Avatar gear nerf...all SOE really does is delay it and than basically put it back in like it was even against the out-cry of players. The tank revamp will be much, much worse.

So, everybody knows it is coming. SOE has announced they are still going to do it around xpac time. Than why do people keep creating threads like this to vent and complain. 7 similar threads on the first page here. More in the general forums. Its not like SOE is going to read the same stuff over and over again. I suggest that everybody, especially tanks, beta test the next xpac and than make sure mass feedback is given. We are talking a much bigger change to tanks than LU 13.

Yes I did beta the revamp......hated it.  About the only good part was the concept of Taunt crits.....but the rest of the changes were horrible.  Sure they would have made my job easy........stupidly easy......but thats the last thing I want.  Tanking should be a challenging and fun struggle.........not frustrating and surely not boreing and easy.

And again your viewpoint is the limited top-end raid view where I can only assume things don't seem as broken as they do everywhere else.    But  crappy, barely 2-month old SK alts in T2 with Fabled weapon are in fact able to lock aggro down in just about any group without hate xfer.

On my server only a few established raid forces run with a Guard....usually a Guard that has been with them the whole time so has had the chance to get the best gear and such.  Everyone else runs with a SK....some with SKs that were created recently because its just so much easier for everyone involved.  New Guards or Guards that were just starting to serve thier MT roles stand no chance and are quickly swapped out for SK alt #10000.   As with everything else people want the quick and easy way.....sadly today that means SK.

I really feel kinda bad for the "old timer" SKs out there  that actually know what it likes to struggle as a tank....that realize that showboating is not the way to go.  A day doesnt go by that I am not in some group, some raid or just general chat where joking about how obsurd SKs are these days isnt commonplace.

I am hanging on til expansion just to see how badly they ruin the role of MT.  I am more than confident that the majority of the playerbase will welcome mindless easy-mode tanking.

[KinMorbidreamer]

Nicholai24 wrote:

ITT: Guardians QQ'ing about the good ol' days of.. err.. every other expansion before TSO.

Suck it up, big guys -- I mean, that IS the class description, right?

This.

Everytime another class gets the ability to tank Guardians cry a river. It was the same way in WoW with warriors once paladins got the ability to tank.

I'm beginning to think that it takes a certain crybaby mentality to play a warrior in MMOs... maybe thats why I could never stand rolling one.

[Xethren]

Iadenie@Permafrost wrote:

Nicholai24 wrote:

ITT: Guardians QQ'ing about the good ol' days of.. err.. every other expansion before TSO.

Suck it up, big guys -- I mean, that IS the class description, right?

This.

Everytime another class gets the ability to tank Guardians cry a river. It was the same way in WoW with warriors once paladins got the ability to tank.

I'm beginning to think that it takes a certain crybaby mentality to play a warrior in MMOs... maybe thats why I could never stand rolling one.

We arent crying that other fighter classes can tank. We are up in arms how a SK can hold aggro against a whole group on their own without hate transfers or the needed classes that need to be paired with a Guardian like a coercer or dirge.

We are upset that almost the entirety of TSO is heavily encounter based which is the first strike against a Guard since they have very little AE control, so this means that almost no one would run a TSO dungeon with a guard. You could but you would be there all day. Why take a Guard when you can take an SK and the whole group turns into easymode: no one has to watch their aggro, nukers and DPSers can go all out without fear of ripping off the tank.

Almost every class can rip off a guard with little effort. Even duoing I cannot pull mobs off my monk friend, and Im spamming my taunts and CA's endlessly.

The only thing guards are the best at anymore is taking the hits, but what good is that slight advantage when we cant even keep hate locked down on us. EQ2 has turned into a game of DPS = hate, since Guards have some of the lowest DPS of any class that is another big strike against us.

We are still good for tanking kunark dungeons because of the single mob focus, but the group has to watch their aggro meter. People want to do things in the least amount of time possible. Are they going to take a Guard and spend hours trying that TSO dungeon, or take an SK and breeze right through it.

I bet you that if you had your own guardian and realized how behind we are at almost everything you wouldnt be trying to bash a busted class further. You go play a class that not many people need anymore and not try to turn things around for it.

[Grumpy_Warrior_01]

Iadenie@Permafrost wrote:

Nicholai24 wrote:

ITT: Guardians QQ'ing about the good ol' days of.. err.. every other expansion before TSO.

Suck it up, big guys -- I mean, that IS the class description, right?

This.

Everytime another class gets the ability to tank Guardians cry a river. It was the same way in WoW with warriors once paladins got the ability to tank.

I'm beginning to think that it takes a certain crybaby mentality to play a warrior in MMOs... maybe thats why I could never stand rolling one.

So Ladine, I see you have posted exactly 22 times over nearly 4 years of coming to these boards.  Can you explain to the readers of this forum why you are fishing around in Guardian threads that haven't been touched in almost a month, and give us a better idea of the purpose behind your necro-post in this particular thread?  Did you have some point to make, or am I just missing it between the references to crybabies and WoW?  If you are posting just to stir things up that's called trolling, it's not allowed, and I'll try to get you banned if you can admit that's the only reason why you posted here today.

[Aull]

Next expac if guards start ripping aggro from sk's like sk's do guards now will that constitute that guards are OP like sk's?

[Rahatmattata]

Iadenie@Permafrost wrote:

Everytime another class gets the ability to tank Guardians cry a river. It was the same way in WoW with warriors once paladins got the ability to tank.

I'm beginning to think that it takes a certain crybaby mentality to play a warrior in MMOs... maybe thats why I could never stand rolling one.

Gratz on proving you are a tool. You don't play a guard, so your opinion here means less than squat. I'm beginning to think it takes a certain [Removed for Content] mentality to look like a complete fool in 3 sentences.

[Landiin]

Aull wrote:

Next expac if guards start ripping aggro from sk's like sk's do guards now will that constitute that guards are OP like sk's?

Yup, unless the Sk is clearly under geared or skilled. Aggro should be the same across the board for all fighters.

[Aull]

In all honesty I still think that every fighter should have the capability of holding aggro with good results even if tranfers are not present. I don't think aggro should be super easy either but definately better than what we have now. Once that is achieved each fighter should be known for something special.

[Disma]

First of all i created this post to show that base threat values on taunts vary from class to class and there is really no reason for this. I did not create this thread to cry and say Crusaders should not be able to tank, but now that they have been given love and can take a hit like the warrior class, the warriors (especially Guards) need to be given some dps love so we can hold agro like they can.

It is not uncommon to see a crusader doing 10k-15k dps in a raid situation while tanking, so why are their base threat values on thier taunts higher as well? Crusaders are fine as they are and do not need a nerf what needs to happen is warriors need to be brought up to their level so heroic content and raids are just a little easier to tank. One fighter archetype should not have to rely on threat transfers and group makeup when tanking. As it is now there are two ubertanks that can dps and have great survivablity and have no trouble at all holding agro no matter what situation they are in.

The game is at the point now that any fighter can tank any encounter and survive, the focus now needs to be on agro control and balacing the classes this way. A lot of heroic and raid encounters are aoe encounters which most raids and groups will use a crusader or zerker to tank as they have heavy aoe dps and aoe taunts, so why would raids or groups switch between having a Guardian tank one encounter to a Crusader tank the next encounter and so forth? No raid does this, they will just have the aoe crusader tank the single target mobs since aoe taunts are effective against single targets, but this can not work the other way. Single target taunts do not effect aoe encounters. Guardians are the only plate fighter class that does not have aoe taunts. Guards can use the agility aa line and have thier autoattack hit multiple targets in front of them and get an extra aoe ability as well, but this does little to hold aoe agro.

I was not calling for a nerf of abilities for any class I was just trying to bring to people's attention that base threat values are vastly different for some reason. It makes no sense to me whatsoever that an aoe tank has a higher base threat increase on a single target taunt ability than a guardian does when the guardian taunt is M2 and the Sk one was just a master 1 it is just mind boggling. And the fact that aoe taunts work on single targets while single target taunts do not will just make them more attractive tanks.

And for those of you that think there was nothing wrong with Crusaders their aoe agro has been broken and causing even more threat increase than it was supposed to. This is taken straight from the EQ2 Players page:

"First and foremost, we have identified a problem with a couple of abilities for Crusaders; Holy Ground and Grave Sacrament.  Those abilities, rather than generating an amount of hate toward the hate list, were in fact moving the crusader up by ranks; thereby practically guaranteeing that crusaders would dominate agro."

Read the full article at:

http://eq2players.station.sony.com/...mp;locale=en_US

[Aull]

Good post Dismall. I agree with your " It is not uncommon to see a crusader doing 10k-15k dps in a raid situation while tanking, so why are their base threat values on thier taunts higher as well". Being able to hold aggro with dps and have higher taunt values is absurd and that is why we are having issues in todays game. The lower the dps is of an expected fighter class should allow them to have higher taunt values than a fighter know to be higher dps.

Many believe that guards shouldn't have it that way cause they are deemed the best raid mt ever, but other crusaders can tank raids too and rock the herioc instances with the greatest of ease. So why can't guards perform as decent in a heroic setting is my argument. I think it would be nice if guards did see increases to their aoe aggro in threat. Not saying that guards should be better but they should be more than capable in a non perfect group setting.

[RafaelSmith]

Aull wrote:

Good post Dismall. I agree with your " It is not uncommon to see a crusader doing 10k-15k dps in a raid situation while tanking, so why are their base threat values on thier taunts higher as well". Being able to hold aggro with dps and have higher taunt values is absurd and that is why we are having issues in todays game. The lower the dps is of an expected fighter class should allow them to have higher taunt values than a fighter know to be higher dps.

Many believe that guards shouldn't have it that way cause they are deemed the best raid mt ever, but other crusaders can tank raids too and rock the herioc instances with the greatest of ease. So why can't guards perform as decent in a heroic setting is my argument. I think it would be nice if guards did see increases to their aoe aggro in threat. Not saying that guards should be better but they should be more than capable in a non perfect group setting.

Its the same question ive been asking all along.   Why is ok for one fighter type to have been boosted to be fully capable of MTing any raid encounter, remained one of the top two choices for OT, able to put out T2 or better DPS and be superior for group content as well........yet Guard should be content with being "best" choice for a few encounters and worst choice for everything else?

I think all fighters should be on equal footing when competing for tanking roles........but it needs to be across all levels of play.  Its fine that SKs are now on equal footing for raids......but we need to be on equal footing when competing with them for heroic content. 

Lets make no bones about it.........filling tank slots for raids and groups needs to be a competition where player skill and gear level is the deciding factor.

[MoeSizlak]

Interesting statement about HG and GS, thanks for pointing that out, I'd missed it before.  The one thing I wonder though is how much it's going to change SKs aggro gen and holding ability.  Obviously it's a nerf...but will it be a nerf that will really be felt?

I gotta admit though I would LOVE to see all the SKs up in arms about needs aggro buffs all the sudden and just give them a "welcome to our world" response.

[Bruener]

Tesar@Unrest wrote:

Interesting statement about HG and GS, thanks for pointing that out, I'd missed it before.  The one thing I wonder though is how much it's going to change SKs aggro gen and holding ability.  Obviously it's a nerf...but will it be a nerf that will really be felt?

I gotta admit though I would LOVE to see all the SKs up in arms about needs aggro buffs all the sudden and just give them a "welcome to our world" response.

Lol, did you just start playing the game in TSO?  SKs had more issues than any other tank in RoK.  They had the second lowest DPS, worst agro control, and bad survivability.  So most of us actually had to deal with issues unlike Guards just having AE agro problems.  There a huge gap between what SKs needed and what Guards could use.

Furthermore, unlike DPS, hate has a max number of what you need.  All the hate above the second person on the hate meter is a waste.  Hence, why Guards really don't have an agro problem except when doing lots of AE or from another tank.

[Rahatmattata]

Bruener wrote:

Hence, why Guards really don't have an agro problem except when doing lots of AE or from another tank.

Seriously dude. Maybe you should try and actually play a guardian before you further comment about what it's like to tank with a guard. First of all, if you can't hold aggro from another tank, why not just let the other guy tank? Second, assuming equal gear/skill and no transfers or tank buffs, a guard isn't holding aggro unless ostance + dw. If you have a dirge you can get away with a shield in ostance, or dw in dstance. If you have a dirge + transfer, you can do pretty decent in dstance with shield.

In a raid, you aren't holding aggro with templar, defiler, warden, dirge, coercer in dstance with shield unless the raid dps is throttled by running around excetuting scripts or being stifled every 10 seconds. So, you either have to tank in ostance or drop the warden for a swash/assassin. Either way, you are gimping survivability just so you can hold aggro, which makes our sweet survivability advangtage mean squat. It's been said a million times, but for some reason you can't grasp this basic concept of guards having to give up survivability to hold aggro.

And really, guard threat in dstance + shield + 3 priests dirge & coercer is fine, assuming other tanks either have the same threat capability OR less survivability. Having to tank with 2 priests and 3 classes buffing your hate because the raid feels like they should be able to go balls out 100% of the time is [Removed for Content]. Either buff guard hate/dps so they can do it with 3 priests while staying defensive, or nerf crusader hate, or nerf crusader survivability, or boost guard survivability even more.

[Bruener]

Rahatmattata wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Hence, why Guards really don't have an agro problem except when doing lots of AE or from another tank.

Seriously dude. Maybe you should try and actually play a guardian before you further comment about what it's like to tank with a guard. First of all, if you can't hold aggro from another tank, why not just let the other guy tank? Second, assuming equal gear/skill and no transfers or tank buffs, a guard isn't holding aggro unless ostance + dw. If you have a dirge you can get away with a shield in ostance, or dw in dstance. If you have a dirge + transfer, you can do pretty decent in dstance with shield.

In a raid, you aren't holding aggro with templar, defiler, warden, dirge, coercer in dstance with shield unless the raid dps is throttled by running around excetuting scripts or being stifled every 10 seconds. So, you either have to tank in ostance or drop the warden for a swash/assassin. Either way, you are gimping survivability just so you can hold aggro, which makes our sweet survivability advangtage mean squat. It's been said a million times, but for some reason you can't grasp this basic concept of guards having to give up survivability to hold aggro.

And really, guard threat in dstance + shield + 3 priests dirge & coercer is fine, assuming other tanks either have the same threat capability OR less survivability. Having to tank with 2 priests and 3 classes buffing your hate because the raid feels like they should be able to go balls out 100% of the time is [Removed for Content]. Either buff guard hate/dps so they can do it with 3 priests while staying defensive, or nerf crusader hate, or nerf crusader survivability, or boost guard survivability even more.

Seriously dude.  Maybe you should talk to the Guards that do it every day no problem.  And no tank tanks in defensive, hit rate drops too much and it is not worth the very small amount of survivability it gives ya.  Furthermore, why do you need 3 healers?  There are very few instances where you would throw the warden in the MT group.  But yes, a Guard with dirge/coercer/warden/defiler/templar can hold agro off of a high DPS'ing raid.  The ones that would give him problems with hate are the other fighters.  Think Trumak said it best in a post saying he has no problems holding agro.  Guess maybe he just knows what he is doing.  The fact is you only need enough agro to be just above the highest agro generating DPS class.  Other tanks with more agro learn to control and ride the hate meter below you, usually giving up hate buffs to make sure of it.

So please don't bring up D-stance.  No tank uses D-stance.

[Rahatmattata]

Bruener wrote:

Think Trumak said it best in a post saying he has no problems holding agro.  Guess maybe he just knows what he is doing.

I don't know who your buddy is, but I don't think any guard has problems holding aggro in ostance with a coercer, dirge, and assassin. Plenty of tanks use dstance. Maybe not when you are in T4 gear and have really sweet jewelery, but if you're getting your as handed to you and you stay in ostance you are re tarded. Takes two clicks.

[Landiin]

Rahatmattata wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Think Trumak said it best in a post saying he has no problems holding agro.  Guess maybe he just knows what he is doing.

I don't know who your buddy is, but I don't think any guard has problems holding aggro in ostance with a coercer, dirge, and assassin. Plenty of tanks use dstance. Maybe not when you are in T4 gear and have really sweet jewelery, but if you're getting your as handed to you and you stay in ostance you are re tarded. Takes two clicks.

Don't let  Bruener tweak you, he is a tool and likes to hear his self talk. EVERYONE knows we have issues holding aggro except a few people like Breuener that can't seem to grasp it. Best thing to to is not to feed the troll.

[Davngr1]

Rahatmattata wrote:

I don't know who your buddy is, but I don't think any CLASS has problems holding aggro in ostance with a coercer, dirge, and assassin. Plenty of tanks use dstance. Maybe not when you are in T4 gear and have really sweet jewelery, but if you're getting your as handed to you and you stay in ostance you are re tarded. Takes two clicks.

   with that set up a fregging cleric could hold agro..  lol

[Bruener]

Rahatmattata wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Think Trumak said it best in a post saying he has no problems holding agro.  Guess maybe he just knows what he is doing.

I don't know who your buddy is, but I don't think any guard has problems holding aggro in ostance with a coercer, dirge, and assassin. Plenty of tanks use dstance. Maybe not when you are in T4 gear and have really sweet jewelery, but if you're getting your as handed to you and you stay in ostance you are re tarded. Takes two clicks.

Lol, what it takes 2 clicks to toggle D-stance for a few seconds and than 2 clicks right back to O-stance.  D-stance is a waste 99% of the time, and you will be using O-stance.  With a correct set up and fighter can hold agro easily.  So I corrected him because he stated with an awesome set-up he could not hold agro.  Well maybe the problem is that he is sitting in D-stance and not actually balancing hate with survivability.  Cause 99% of the time D-stance is not worth using.

[RafaelSmith]

Bruener wrote:

 With a correct set up and fighter can hold agro easily. So I corrected him because he stated with an awesome set-up he could not hold agro. Well maybe the problem is that he is sitting in D-stance and not actually balancing hate with survivability. Cause 99% of the time D-stance is not worth using.

Once again your speaking from a vary narrow point of view....where top end gear and absolute optimal group construction is the norm.

I dont know how many times it needs to be mentioned but the problems Guards are facing outside of that environment are real and not in balance with the other fighter types.  You say things are fine......ok they are at your level........but they are not elsewhere.   Good balance needs to be uniform across all levels of play and its currently not...in fact it gets more and more out of whack the lower you go. 

What a newly minted SK with very little actual experience is able to get away with in terms of effectively tanking groups or beginner raids like WoE is absurd.   Everyone that actually looks at the game across all levels of play knows it.

[Bruener]

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

Bruener wrote:

 With a correct set up and fighter can hold agro easily. So I corrected him because he stated with an awesome set-up he could not hold agro. Well maybe the problem is that he is sitting in D-stance and not actually balancing hate with survivability. Cause 99% of the time D-stance is not worth using.

Once again your speaking from a vary narrow point of view....where top end gear and absolute optimal group construction is the norm.

I dont know how many times it needs to be mentioned but the problems Guards are facing outside of that environment are real and not in balance with the other fighter types.  You say things are fine......ok they are at your level........but they are not elsewhere.   Good balance needs to be uniform across all levels of play and its currently not...in fact it gets more and more out of whack the lower you go. 

What a newly minted SK with very little actual experience is able to get away with in terms of effectively tanking groups or beginner raids like WoE is absurd.   Everyone that actually looks at the game across all levels of play knows it.

This is not a narrow view-point at all.  The fact is at level cap, 80, you know where everybody has been playing and where the majority of your playing will happen.  At cap 99% of the time defensive stance is not worth going into.  The loss to DPS/agro is not worth the very small survivability increase.  This is very common knowledge.

It is also very common knowledge that a monkey could hold agro with a group set up of coercer/dirge/assassin.  So, instead of throwing outrageous claims out there and asking for the moon I corrected what was obviously a false statement.  Tweaks, not revamps are needed.

[Landiin]

Bruener wrote:

 So, instead of throwing outrageous claims out there and asking for the moon I corrected what was obviously a false statement.  Tweaks, not revamps are needed.

Why not you do ever post you make..

[Rahatmattata]

Bruener wrote:

instead of throwing outrageous claims out there and asking for the moon I corrected what was obviously a false statement.  Tweaks, not revamps are needed.

Asking to be able to tank in dstance, sword & borad, with 3 priests, dirge, and coercer is asking for the moon, and requires a revamp huh? Whatever you say champ.

You didn't correct a false statement, you simply squeezed out a pile of steaming crap that has nothing to do with what I was talking about. You said defensive stance is useless and you saw some guy post on the forums that he can hold aggro. That's nice but has nothing to do with what I said. I can "hold aggro" too.

This will probably be way far beyond your feeble grasp of common sense, but guards like to get as defensive as possible. There's something satisfying for a certain type of player that plays a pure tank capable of maximizing defense and survivability. When players want to be the biggest, hardest to kill tank, they pick a guardian. There is no other reason to roll a guard over another class in the game, unless you just have a hard-on for the class helm or epic weapon appearance. Guards put up with being a terrible class solo. They don't mind having less dps and very little utility. They don't mind not being able to lock down five million mobs with the push of a single button. They are satisfied in just knowing they survived an encounter when any other tank would have gone down like a ton of bricks.

Anyway, you are a waste of time.

[Bruener]

Rahatmattata wrote:

When players want to be the biggest, hardest to kill tank, they pick a guardian. There is no other reason to roll a guard over another class in the game, unless you just have a hard-on for the class helm or epic weapon appearance. Guards put up with being a terrible class solo. They don't mind having less dps and very little utility. They don't mind not being able to lock down five million mobs with the push of a single button. They are satisfied in just knowing they survived an encounter when any other tank would have gone down like a ton of bricks.

Wow, its about time you admitted what I have been saying.  This is what people should roll Guards for, and this is exactly how Guards are designed.  They are the biggest, hardest to kill tank.  Hence, the popular pick for MT still.  So, just like since launch this is what Guards have been designed for and what their niche is.  So why do they think they need OT tools.  Or why do they think they should excel in heroic where survivability is hardly an issue?

This is what I have been telling you.  And you just admitted it.  People should roll Guards to MT.  That is what they do, the best.  Stop expecting everything else.  1 tank to fit the MT spot.  3 plates to fit the OT spot.  That is 3 competing for 1 spot.  When survivability is less of an issue (heroic) the 3 are better choices.

STOP ROLLING GUARDS TO NOT MT.

[RafaelSmith]

Bruener wrote:

Rahatmattata wrote:

When players want to be the biggest, hardest to kill tank, they pick a guardian. There is no other reason to roll a guard over another class in the game, unless you just have a hard-on for the class helm or epic weapon appearance. Guards put up with being a terrible class solo. They don't mind having less dps and very little utility. They don't mind not being able to lock down five million mobs with the push of a single button. They are satisfied in just knowing they survived an encounter when any other tank would have gone down like a ton of bricks.

Wow, its about time you admitted what I have been saying.  This is what people should roll Guards for, and this is exactly how Guards are designed.  They are the biggest, hardest to kill tank.  Hence, the popular pick for MT still.  So, just like since launch this is what Guards have been designed for and what their niche is.  So why do they think they need OT tools.  Or why do they think they should excel in heroic where survivability is hardly an issue?

This is what I have been telling you.  And you just admitted it.  People should roll Guards to MT.  That is what they do, the best.  Stop expecting everything else.  1 tank to fit the MT spot.  3 plates to fit the OT spot.  That is 3 competing for 1 spot.  When survivability is less of an issue (heroic) the 3 are better choices.

STOP ROLLING GUARDS TO NOT MT.

Ok fine........nerf SKs enough so they cannot serve as raid MTs........so they are forever stuck running heroic instances .......then things are fair?  I mean if a Guards only purpose in life is to MT raids then nobody else should be able to fill that slot.

Being an SK I am sure you simply forget that being  a effective MT involves more than just having high mit %.  See you get to have pretty close to Guard surviveability.......and many would argue in some cases higher surviveability that actually matters........over the top DPS......which equals over the top aggro.   You take all that stuff for granted.   Yes in raids.....for an MT.........DPS and Aggro are rather insignificant.......because your there to take the hits........everyone else handles the DPS and aggro for whichever tank is MT. 

The acronym MT does not just apply to raids you know?  

Groups need MTs..........small raids need MTs.......

How are things balanced when your class gets all the tools to be effecitve regardless of content while mine only gets tools for raids......and then its only a small segment of raids where those tools actually make a difference?

All the mit and avoidance in the world is totally and completely useless if the mobs are off beating on the healer, the warlock and everyone in between.  Again you take this stuff for granted......easy mode self generated aggro + more than enough surviveability + stupidly crazy DPS.

You are without a doubt one the most closed minded selfish self absorbed players I have come across in any game.

[Rahatmattata]

Bruener wrote:

Guards have been designed for and what their niche is.  So why do they think they need OT tools.  Or why do they think they should excel in heroic where survivability is hardly an issue?

The same reason shadowknights think they need MT tools. Any fighter should be able to fullfill the job of MT, OT, or emergancy snap tank, with varying degrees of effectiveness. If guards are the best suited fighter for main tanking raids, they should be the least effective OT... but they should be able to do it somewhat effectively. Which they can for the most part, it's just fights like the overking and avatars that have continuous waves of adds where they are all but useless. Again, guards need a small boost to AoE threat.

I don't believe guards should excel in heroic content. They should be able to get the job done without having to have the best obtainable gear from heroic content and a perfect group setup, but leave the "excelling in heroic content" to crusaders and zerkers.

Regardless of all this crap no dev is going to bother to read, the bottom line is shadowknight is the best fighter for soloing, pvp, and anything having to do with tanking, except main tanking progression raid mobs... and even that can be debated. I'm sure in Brownie's fantasy island all is well and balanced, but in the real world we call this overpowered.

Gratz on once again proving you are a fool.

[Bruener]

Ok, here is the problem.  We are at the end of a 2 year level cap of 80.  Everybody is so far into diminishing returns that since we are at the end things have started sweeping over to tanks that hold agro more over pure survivability.  This is common and part of the problem with the whole diminishing returns mechanic.

Now, in February level cap is increasing to level 90.  Once again survivability will straight up be king.  Temp mit buffs are going to have some real meaning.  With a couple minor tweaks to agro Guards are going to be just fine, and at raids are going to be obvious choices for MT still, even more so than now.

Furthermore Gaylon your argument for SKs being MT is not accurate at all.  Its not like SKs are given tons of tools to MT, what they have is awesome agro and some people like that instead of actually working progression.  They would rather just have a tank they can throw in there with a less than ideal set-up to hold agro off the wizards that can't get link.  There are just as many Zerkers and Paladins MT, and they actually have better survivability.  Paladins take less damage and have even easier agro control.  Zerker with Adrenaline are also good choices for MT compared to SKs.  However, the best choice is still Guards because they do have enough agro to hold mobs from very high DPS in correct set-ups and they do handle damage the best.  It is not a secret.

That being said, yes at the end of 2 years everybody being level 80 and even the brawlers climbing real high into diminishing returns for mit things have swung towards the tanks that just plan hold agro the best.  Its because at group level a Wizards could tank with a good healer.  Please don't forget that there is a level increase right around the corner and that alone is going to mean an expansion where survivability is once again king of all.  Mit is not going to be as easily capped.  Soaking more damage is going to be extremely important.  Hopefully you guys can understand this.

[RafaelSmith]

Bruener wrote:

Ok, here is the problem. We are at the end of a 2 year level cap of 80. Everybody is so far into diminishing returns that since we are at the end things have started sweeping over to tanks that hold agro more over pure survivability. This is common and part of the problem with the whole diminishing returns mechanic.

Now, in February level cap is increasing to level 90. Once again survivability will straight up be king. Temp mit buffs are going to have some real meaning. With a couple minor tweaks to agro Guards are going to be just fine, and at raids are going to be obvious choices for MT still, even more so than now.

Furthermore Gaylon your argument for SKs being MT is not accurate at all. Its not like SKs are given tons of tools to MT, what they have is awesome agro and some people like that instead of actually working progression. They would rather just have a tank they can throw in there with a less than ideal set-up to hold agro off the wizards that can't get link. There are just as many Zerkers and Paladins MT, and they actually have better survivability. Paladins take less damage and have even easier agro control. Zerker with Adrenaline are also good choices for MT compared to SKs. However, the best choice is still Guards because they do have enough agro to hold mobs from very high DPS in correct set-ups and they do handle damage the best. It is not a secret.

That being said, yes at the end of 2 years everybody being level 80 and even the brawlers climbing real high into diminishing returns for mit things have swung towards the tanks that just plan hold agro the best. Its because at group level a Wizards could tank with a good healer. Please don't forget that there is a level increase right around the corner and that alone is going to mean an expansion where survivability is once again king of all. Mit is not going to be as easily capped. Soaking more damage is going to be extremely important. Hopefully you guys can understand this.

So not only are we suppose to be content with only being useful for raids.......its only until the other tanks have gotten their gear at which point we are back to where we are now...worst choice but for a few select encounters?

Thats a really sad way of classs design and balance.

[Rahatmattata]

Bruener wrote:

Ok, here is the problem.

No, here is the problem. shadowknight is the best fighter for soloing, pvp, and anything having to do with tanking, except main tanking progression raid mobs... and even that can be debated.

[Bruener]

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Ok, here is the problem. We are at the end of a 2 year level cap of 80. Everybody is so far into diminishing returns that since we are at the end things have started sweeping over to tanks that hold agro more over pure survivability. This is common and part of the problem with the whole diminishing returns mechanic.

Now, in February level cap is increasing to level 90. Once again survivability will straight up be king. Temp mit buffs are going to have some real meaning. With a couple minor tweaks to agro Guards are going to be just fine, and at raids are going to be obvious choices for MT still, even more so than now.

Furthermore Gaylon your argument for SKs being MT is not accurate at all. Its not like SKs are given tons of tools to MT, what they have is awesome agro and some people like that instead of actually working progression. They would rather just have a tank they can throw in there with a less than ideal set-up to hold agro off the wizards that can't get link. There are just as many Zerkers and Paladins MT, and they actually have better survivability. Paladins take less damage and have even easier agro control. Zerker with Adrenaline are also good choices for MT compared to SKs. However, the best choice is still Guards because they do have enough agro to hold mobs from very high DPS in correct set-ups and they do handle damage the best. It is not a secret.

That being said, yes at the end of 2 years everybody being level 80 and even the brawlers climbing real high into diminishing returns for mit things have swung towards the tanks that just plan hold agro the best. Its because at group level a Wizards could tank with a good healer. Please don't forget that there is a level increase right around the corner and that alone is going to mean an expansion where survivability is once again king of all. Mit is not going to be as easily capped. Soaking more damage is going to be extremely important. Hopefully you guys can understand this.

So not only are we suppose to be content with only being useful for raids.......its only until the other tanks have gotten their gear at which point we are back to where we are now...worst choice but for a few select encounters?

Thats a really sad way of classs design and balance.

Yeah, what 2 years from now.  Meaning Guards rock it out survivability for an xpac.  Until the xpac after comes out than you start seeing the same thing happen.  Its not like this is a new phenomenon.  EOF was the same way as TSO.  Looking back tanks were more balanced than RoK and KoS.  Its because of diminishing returns and the other tanks once again caught up to Guards and by the end surpassed them.  Zerkers could easily jump into the role of MT.  Crusaders were much better off than in KoS and RoK.  Than RoK hits and it started the whole process over.  Guards owned everything.  It wasn't until TSO that other tanks were given survivability to once again close the gap that things came into balance.  TSO to a lot of people, minus a few heroic Guards, is more balanced for tanks than it ever has been.  Now, what do you know we get another xpac with a level increase where once again survivability is king.  They don't make it easy to cap stuff right away.  They leave room to do that for the next xpac.  If you didn't touch anybody right now and just kept their abilities increasing at the same % into T10 Guards would still rule because of survivability.  Now they most likely will get some tweaks to help with agro in the heroic area and suddenly Guards are going to rock.  Its no secret and you can go ahead and save this post to come back to it to remind yourself that some people can see patterns a lot easier than others.

Guards in SF are going to be happy.

And ratattouli you are wrong.  Yes SKs are considered one of the best for solo'ing.  I wouldn't know PvP because this is not a PvP game.  PvP has an entirely different set of rules and that is not what most people are playing.  As far as grouping Paladins are just as good as SKs in heroic, and Zerkers rock thru it as well.  Last, raiding.  Raiding is all about progression.  If you are not progression you are not a raiding guild.  Thats like saying just because you go raid PR you are a "raider".  In real raiding Guards are hands down the best MT.  Crusaders and Zerkers competing for the OT spot.  What you see is exactly what EoF was sporting and why suddenly people look back and say that EoF was pretty balanced.  The same thing will happen when people look back on TSO.  Some people can recognize it for what it is right now.

Whats funny is because Guards don't have the agro control that Crusaders and Zerkers do, which really affects heroic game-play, they think they are broken and think they deserve to be kings of all tanking all the time.  You are already king of one type of tanking, why do you need to have more?