EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > Class Discussion > Fighter's Arena
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-24-2012, 12:08 PM   #61
Rageincarnate
Server: Unrest
Guild: Vindication
Rank: Officer

Loremaster
Rageincarnate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
Default

[email protected] wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

protection value on shields needs to increase

Intercept needs to be a damage and hate intercept.

Pallies need a reliable stoneskin and snap agros  be able to move and cast aes (all of them) 

sk's need more snap agros and a straight damage reduction maybe a stoneskin move and cast aes(all of them)  need 1 ae with a large range.  Some form of hate siphon to deal with large damage spikes.  Since sk's arent allowed to dps.

I might strangle the person that links a 500k sk parse with 400k of it from other classes.  Just fyi.

zerkers.. taken out and shot ( i have no clue)

Guards .. seem fine..

brawlers seem fine

SK's i am not sure i have seen them played very well and have no agro problems and have a lot more AoE agro then anything i can think of bringing.  as for a stoneskin... not sure they are the "Offensive Crusader"  

Very very very group dependant imo.  I think in a mage group/dps group, yes sk's can rock the hate.  In cruddy groups an sk is literally screwed. 

Looking at parses and seeing things such as elemental tox #1 on a sk's parse tells me somethings wrong.  It is 100% ok to disagree.  I'm just telling you how i'm thinking.  ( i personally have broke 400k+ a few times on my sk.  It's not hard really in a mage group anyways.)  And everytime that huge parse came from warlocks troubs inquis and conjs.  Not me..

I'm really not sure how to balance it really. But i think it could use "something"  I'll leave that for my betters.  Just giving my input.

Rageincarnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 12:23 PM   #62
Banditman

Loremaster
Banditman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,459
Default

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

__________________
Banditman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 12:34 PM   #63
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

Darkonx wrote: Brawlers are still incredibly god-like OP in comparison to every other tank. To a degree that it's mind-boggling how the entire SOE dev-team doesn't make it their #1 priority on a daily basis to fix. I've tanked everything on both, and believe me, BRAWLERS ARE BROKEN.

Quote from the other thread from somebody that actually plays a Plate tank and a Brawler in high end raiding.

Compared to an SK yes I agree brawlers are more survivable, better snap agro, SK has better sustained agro however. Compared to a Guard nope, their pretty close, minor tweaking these two would be on par and would be what other tanks should be striving for.

The funny thing people are not undertsanding is that since 3 of the 6 fighters are very close you really cant call them OP like when the single SK dominated every catagory. The people that say fighters are more balanced then ever before are correct also 50% of the fighters can now effectively tank the content. Guard, Brawler and sk/pally are now all 3 common place in raid and should be no problem to switch around to the mob at hand. The problem is many MTs want one that can do it all, so they roll with the one that is most versitile This is actually debateable on which this one is, for the first time playing EQ2 there is an actual competion between more than one fighter for MT.

The ones that need help in particular areas are not getting it due to people more concerned with nerfing brawlers then the are of making their own class comparable tanks. I mean really the biggest complaint on brawler is superior guard and strikethrough immunity superior guard isnt a big deal to give to anyone and could be easily justified if people focused on that, the strikethrough on mobs was reduced when constructivly asked for by other fighters. Rambling on about nerfing a class because they can tank the content is non productive and in turn would mean changing the content anyway.

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 12:35 PM   #64
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^...

Tallathion and Bruener are more concerened with nobody being able to effectively tank the current content then everybody being able to /sigh.

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 12:39 PM   #65
Rageincarnate
Server: Unrest
Guild: Vindication
Rank: Officer

Loremaster
Rageincarnate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
Default

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

Cutting damage would solve some problems.

Rageincarnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 12:40 PM   #66
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

Novusod wrote:

Aull wrote:

I for one disagree that brawlers were always suppose to be the "kings of defense". If that was true then brawlers would have had more defensive abilities than what they were given to fulfill that statement. Of the two brawlers the monk had better defensive abilities than the bruiser ever had of that era. Bruisers from level 1-79 didn't have any great damage absorbtion/prevention/100% avoidance defensive abilities that made any other fighter jealous.

One of the reasons the fighters are in the mess they are today is because the original vision for the fighters was lost when Moorguard left and the others filled in.

Now I will agree that just a few years back plate tanks had far better mit and their avoidance was on par with what the brawlers had and plates were the fighters that others wanted for the tanking position.

Everyone wants their fighter to be king of the hill and others below them. I think that is why we have the heated debates all the time. 

The original promise of the fighter archtype was that all the fighters would be able to do the same tasks but they would accomplish them through different means. Brawlers were supposed to be the defensive avoidance kings. Warriors are stoneskin mitigators and crusaders have life taps and heals. Problem was the game was so poorly ballanced in the early days it took a long time to ballance those mechanics. But the way the game is now is the way it is supposed to be.

If warriors are supposed to be the stoneskin damage mitigators why are the Brawlers owning this area?

Good question since Monk has Zero stoneskins how are they owning this area? Its mind boggling right?

So thats the trick, when the Monk uses all zero of his stoneskins at once he becomes the unkillable juggernaut ROFL! Cast them fast people!!!

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 12:59 PM   #67
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Damager wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Novusod wrote:

Aull wrote:

I for one disagree that brawlers were always suppose to be the "kings of defense". If that was true then brawlers would have had more defensive abilities than what they were given to fulfill that statement. Of the two brawlers the monk had better defensive abilities than the bruiser ever had of that era. Bruisers from level 1-79 didn't have any great damage absorbtion/prevention/100% avoidance defensive abilities that made any other fighter jealous.

One of the reasons the fighters are in the mess they are today is because the original vision for the fighters was lost when Moorguard left and the others filled in.

Now I will agree that just a few years back plate tanks had far better mit and their avoidance was on par with what the brawlers had and plates were the fighters that others wanted for the tanking position.

Everyone wants their fighter to be king of the hill and others below them. I think that is why we have the heated debates all the time. 

The original promise of the fighter archtype was that all the fighters would be able to do the same tasks but they would accomplish them through different means. Brawlers were supposed to be the defensive avoidance kings. Warriors are stoneskin mitigators and crusaders have life taps and heals. Problem was the game was so poorly ballanced in the early days it took a long time to ballance those mechanics. But the way the game is now is the way it is supposed to be.

If warriors are supposed to be the stoneskin damage mitigators why are the Brawlers owning this area?

Good question since Monk has Zero stoneskins how are they owning this area? Its mind boggling right?

Like previously stated when the Monk uses all zero of his stoneskins at once he becomes the unkillable juggernaut ROFL! Cast them fast people!!!

Are stoneskins the only damage mitigators?  Do you not consider damage reduction and mit buffs mitigators of damage?

Yeah that is what I thought.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:00 PM   #68
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

Cutting damage would solve some problems.

Eventually when they nerf mobs down to make other tanks seem viable that is what they do.  This is not what happens for progression though which is where the real imbalance is.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:01 PM   #69
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Novusod wrote:

Aull wrote:

I for one disagree that brawlers were always suppose to be the "kings of defense". If that was true then brawlers would have had more defensive abilities than what they were given to fulfill that statement. Of the two brawlers the monk had better defensive abilities than the bruiser ever had of that era. Bruisers from level 1-79 didn't have any great damage absorbtion/prevention/100% avoidance defensive abilities that made any other fighter jealous.

One of the reasons the fighters are in the mess they are today is because the original vision for the fighters was lost when Moorguard left and the others filled in.

Now I will agree that just a few years back plate tanks had far better mit and their avoidance was on par with what the brawlers had and plates were the fighters that others wanted for the tanking position.

Everyone wants their fighter to be king of the hill and others below them. I think that is why we have the heated debates all the time. 

The original promise of the fighter archtype was that all the fighters would be able to do the same tasks but they would accomplish them through different means. Brawlers were supposed to be the defensive avoidance kings. Warriors are stoneskin mitigators and crusaders have life taps and heals. Problem was the game was so poorly ballanced in the early days it took a long time to ballance those mechanics. But the way the game is now is the way it is supposed to be.

If warriors are supposed to be the stoneskin damage mitigators why are the Brawlers owning this area?

Good question since Monk has Zero stoneskins how are they owning this area? Its mind boggling right?

Like previously stated when the Monk uses all zero of his stoneskins at once he becomes the unkillable juggernaut ROFL! Cast them fast people!!!

Are stoneskins the only damage mitigators?  Do you not consider damage reduction and mit buffs mitigators of damage?

Yeah that is what I thought.

He specificly said the area of "stoneskin" damage mitigators. ROFL! I cant say bruisers cause well they do have stoneskins /shrug Monk is compairable with their reactive heal but u say thats not meaningful.

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:07 PM   #70
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Damager wrote:

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^...

Tallathion and Bruener are more concerened with nobody being able to effectively tank the current content then everybody being able to /sigh.

Again you guys seem to have pathetic sight on mechanics and balance.  Do you understand at all why the strike through mechanic was introduced?  Do you understand how it is being used ineffectively now since 2 Fighters are immune to it?

We all understand that strike through immunity was a quick, easy band-aid fix to help Brawlers at the time from being streaky.  That time is over and allowing the strike through mechanic to be used correctly would be an advantage to keep fighter avoidance in check (its whole original design).  The fact that you are defending having the mechanic used correctly because you are worried you will actually feel what it is like when they are introducing mobs with strike through and how significant of a difference it makes say a lot about how you really feel about balance.  Put strike through on an even playing field and if mobs are unbalanced it will be obvious across all Fighters instead of Brawler pushing all progression like in today's game.

You all silently acknowledge the difference in strike through that happens every time progression is introduced but none of you want to have to deal with it like the other tanks until they nerf it.  That is a bogus out instead of seeing things balanced.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:14 PM   #71
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^...

Tallathion and Bruener are more concerened with nobody being able to effectively tank the current content then everybody being able to /sigh.

Again you guys seem to have pathetic sight on mechanics and balance.  Do you understand at all why the strike through mechanic was introduced?  Do you understand how it is being used ineffectively now since 2 Fighters are immune to it?

We all understand that strike through immunity was a quick, easy band-aid fix to help Brawlers at the time from being streaky.  That time is over and allowing the strike through mechanic to be used correctly would be an advantage to keep fighter avoidance in check (its whole original design).  The fact that you are defending having the mechanic used correctly because you are worried you will actually feel what it is like when they are introducing mobs with strike through and how significant of a difference it makes say a lot about how you really feel about balance.  Put strike through on an even playing field and if mobs are unbalanced it will be obvious across all Fighters instead of Brawler pushing all progression like in today's game.

You all silently acknowledge the difference in strike through that happens every time progression is introduced but none of you want to have to deal with it like the other tanks until they nerf it.  That is a bogus out instead of seeing things balanced.

Incorrect sir. Strikethrough was introduced to bring down plate tanks avoidance. Strikethrough immune was introduced because strikethrough from the mobs negated the brawlers avaoidance. The "streakiness" of the brawler was fixed with their reactives not strikethrough immunity.

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:21 PM   #72
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Simply making Brawler's Tenacity a 50% chance to proc instead of a 100% chance and removing ST Immunity would be a big step to balancing the tank classes.

This way a brawler would have a "chance" to avoid death, instead of being unstoppable juggernauts.

Also, there needs to be something installed to bring down there autoattack damage down to what a "sword and board" tank has to have, like removing there innate protection and adding protection on there weapons.

The weapons with lots of protection would have less damage.

Right now playing a monk is like having a Guardian with more avoidance/ST Immunity and the ability to use a two-hander and 2 shields at the same time, all with a 3 trigger death save.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:35 PM   #73
Banditman

Loremaster
Banditman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,459
Default

Would someone please use a little of their spare SC and buy Tala a clue?

__________________
Banditman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:37 PM   #74
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

Simply making Brawler's Tenacity a 50% chance to proc instead of a 100% chance and removing ST Immunity would be a big step to balancing the tank classes.

This way a brawler would have a "chance" to avoid death, instead of being unstoppable juggernauts.

Also, there needs to be something installed to bring down there autoattack damage down to what a "sword and board" tank has to have, like removing there innate protection and adding protection on there weapons.

The weapons with lots of protection would have less damage.

Right now playing a monk is like having a Guardian with more avoidance/ST Immunity and the ability to use a two-hander and 2 shields at the same time, all with a 3 trigger death save.

Uhmm thats just silly, reduce the number of death prevents maybe (personnaly I only have 2 spec'd), Your way every fighter with death prevent would also need theirs a 50% chance as well and need changed to a clicky and not always up to balance the same ability. You sir are trying to just nerf brawlers not even attempting class balance. So here we have it death prevent is a shared ability and in order to balance all fighters would have to react the same.

We already clarrified they are not unstoppable juggernauts rofl

Bring down autoattack damage? Its called defensive stance which the brawler must be in in order to have strikethrough immunity.

the weapons with lots of protection already do. They have no MA on them. 

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:51 PM   #75
Silzin
Server: Crushbone
Guild: Revelations
Rank: Raider

Loremaster
Silzin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 537
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

Simply making Brawler's Tenacity a 50% chance to proc instead of a 100% chance and removing ST Immunity would be a big step to balancing the tank classes.

This way a brawler would have a "chance" to avoid death, instead of being unstoppable juggernauts.

Also, there needs to be something installed to bring down there autoattack damage down to what a "sword and board" tank has to have, like removing there innate protection and adding protection on there weapons.

The weapons with lots of protection would have less damage.

Right now playing a monk is like having a Guardian with more avoidance/ST Immunity and the ability to use a two-hander and 2 shields at the same time, all with a 3 trigger death save.

Tala, if you think that Zerkers and Guards need to be able to do more damage when using a shield (and any other changes) them start a thread like you do and try to compose a logical argument for this change to go in and then something good may come out of your posting on the forums.  dont ask for everything in the world for your class and dont ask for other classes to be nurfed, the dev's dont look at those very much. 

__________________
Silzin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 02:09 PM   #76
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Damager wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^...

Tallathion and Bruener are more concerened with nobody being able to effectively tank the current content then everybody being able to /sigh.

Again you guys seem to have pathetic sight on mechanics and balance.  Do you understand at all why the strike through mechanic was introduced?  Do you understand how it is being used ineffectively now since 2 Fighters are immune to it?

We all understand that strike through immunity was a quick, easy band-aid fix to help Brawlers at the time from being streaky.  That time is over and allowing the strike through mechanic to be used correctly would be an advantage to keep fighter avoidance in check (its whole original design).  The fact that you are defending having the mechanic used correctly because you are worried you will actually feel what it is like when they are introducing mobs with strike through and how significant of a difference it makes say a lot about how you really feel about balance.  Put strike through on an even playing field and if mobs are unbalanced it will be obvious across all Fighters instead of Brawler pushing all progression like in today's game.

You all silently acknowledge the difference in strike through that happens every time progression is introduced but none of you want to have to deal with it like the other tanks until they nerf it.  That is a bogus out instead of seeing things balanced.

Incorrect sir. Strikethrough was introduced to bring down plate tanks avoidance. Strikethrough immune was introduced because strikethrough from the mobs negated the brawlers avaoidance. The "streakiness" of the brawler was fixed with their reactives not strikethrough immunity.

That makes no sense.  They introduced strike through.  It wasn't for a while before they introduced strike through immunity for Brawlers because they were streaky.  It was a lot easier to give Brawlers strike through immunity to negate it as a band-aid.  Than they addressed Brawler survivability in general and since have made it so that there is absolutely no more of a chance of a "bad roll" causing death.

The band aid is unnecessary and just causing problems now with content balancing.  Easy recent example is EoW...which once again Brawlers could go tank with a solo healer because their avoidance was such a big factor and they were not getting struck through.  Meanwhile to be able to tank it as a Plate tank with a solo healer you NEEDED to have a Brawler in there to give you their avoidance, which at that point why not just use the Brawler?  I guarantee that in PoW the adds on the boar have too high of strike through once again.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 02:22 PM   #77
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^...

Tallathion and Bruener are more concerened with nobody being able to effectively tank the current content then everybody being able to /sigh.

Again you guys seem to have pathetic sight on mechanics and balance.  Do you understand at all why the strike through mechanic was introduced?  Do you understand how it is being used ineffectively now since 2 Fighters are immune to it?

We all understand that strike through immunity was a quick, easy band-aid fix to help Brawlers at the time from being streaky.  That time is over and allowing the strike through mechanic to be used correctly would be an advantage to keep fighter avoidance in check (its whole original design).  The fact that you are defending having the mechanic used correctly because you are worried you will actually feel what it is like when they are introducing mobs with strike through and how significant of a difference it makes say a lot about how you really feel about balance.  Put strike through on an even playing field and if mobs are unbalanced it will be obvious across all Fighters instead of Brawler pushing all progression like in today's game.

You all silently acknowledge the difference in strike through that happens every time progression is introduced but none of you want to have to deal with it like the other tanks until they nerf it.  That is a bogus out instead of seeing things balanced.

Incorrect sir. Strikethrough was introduced to bring down plate tanks avoidance. Strikethrough immune was introduced because strikethrough from the mobs negated the brawlers avaoidance. The "streakiness" of the brawler was fixed with their reactives not strikethrough immunity.

That makes no sense.  They introduced strike through.  It wasn't for a while before they introduced strike through immunity for Brawlers because they were streaky.  It was a lot easier to give Brawlers strike through immunity to negate it as a band-aid.  Than they addressed Brawler survivability in general and since have made it so that there is absolutely no more of a chance of a "bad roll" causing death.

The band aid is unnecessary and just causing problems now with content balancing.  Easy recent example is EoW...which once again Brawlers could go tank with a solo healer because their avoidance was such a big factor and they were not getting struck through.  Meanwhile to be able to tank it as a Plate tank with a solo healer you NEEDED to have a Brawler in there to give you their avoidance, which at that point why not just use the Brawler?  I guarantee that in PoW the adds on the boar have too high of strike through once again.

ROFL! Roll a Pally they tank EoW easily with single healer, Rageincarnate does it on his SK,  ROFL Watched a guard Tank HM Zek single healer.

Raid Nights I watch a Guard Tank HM Sullons up to Sullon no problem.

What makes no sense is you think they just introduced strikethrough because it was tuesday and they had nothin better to do ROFL!

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 02:25 PM   #78
LardLord

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,515
Default

Damager wrote:

(personnaly I only have 2 spec'd)

We already clarrified they are not unstoppable juggernauts rofl

Well you're clearly not, but other Brawlers are. 

LardLord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 02:29 PM   #79
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

Damager wrote:

(personnaly I only have 2 spec'd)

We already clarrified they are not unstoppable juggernauts rofl

Well you're clearly not, but other Brawlers are. 

Sorry sir, You proved yourself wrong already move along. Unless you have how a brawler alone survives the HM Kraytocs now?

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 02:38 PM   #80
LardLord

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,515
Default

Damager wrote:

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

Damager wrote:

(personnaly I only have 2 spec'd)

We already clarrified they are not unstoppable juggernauts rofl

Well you're clearly not, but other Brawlers are. 

Sorry sir, You proved yourself wrong already move along. Unless you have how a brawler alone survives the HM Kraytocs now?

That argument is silly, much like your heroic AA spec

I bet they could massively nerf the class by balancing that heroic AA and changing Tenacity and the other saves to have an unmoddable reuse, and you wouldn't even notice the difference, since you don't take advantage of those things. 

LardLord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 02:56 PM   #81
Rageincarnate
Server: Unrest
Guild: Vindication
Rank: Officer

Loremaster
Rageincarnate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
Default

Damager wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

Banditman wrote:

Why has no one yet seen the real problem here?

The real problem is that mobs simply hit way too hard now.  There was a time when Clerics would WITHOLD casting their reactives until the tank got down on health a bit so that the reactive would then fill them back up.  Can you imagine it?  Strange but true.

Mobs simply hit way too hard now.  Many times, tanks of all classes are simply killed outright by a single strike.  It absolutely does make Druids an afterthought in tanking situations.  If a reactive isn't fast enough, there is no way a HoT will be.

Aside:  I am starting to think that they had it right back in beta, when all priests had all types of heals.  Clerics for instance got the BEST reactives, but they had Wards and HoT's as well.  Etc.

In any event, tank balance right now is probably the best it's ever been overall.  For once in the history of EQ2, all of the tanks are viable.  That cannot be downplayed.

I don't think the problems lie with the tanks, but with the content.

THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^...

Tallathion and Bruener are more concerened with nobody being able to effectively tank the current content then everybody being able to /sigh.

Again you guys seem to have pathetic sight on mechanics and balance.  Do you understand at all why the strike through mechanic was introduced?  Do you understand how it is being used ineffectively now since 2 Fighters are immune to it?

We all understand that strike through immunity was a quick, easy band-aid fix to help Brawlers at the time from being streaky.  That time is over and allowing the strike through mechanic to be used correctly would be an advantage to keep fighter avoidance in check (its whole original design).  The fact that you are defending having the mechanic used correctly because you are worried you will actually feel what it is like when they are introducing mobs with strike through and how significant of a difference it makes say a lot about how you really feel about balance.  Put strike through on an even playing field and if mobs are unbalanced it will be obvious across all Fighters instead of Brawler pushing all progression like in today's game.

You all silently acknowledge the difference in strike through that happens every time progression is introduced but none of you want to have to deal with it like the other tanks until they nerf it.  That is a bogus out instead of seeing things balanced.

Incorrect sir. Strikethrough was introduced to bring down plate tanks avoidance. Strikethrough immune was introduced because strikethrough from the mobs negated the brawlers avaoidance. The "streakiness" of the brawler was fixed with their reactives not strikethrough immunity.

That makes no sense.  They introduced strike through.  It wasn't for a while before they introduced strike through immunity for Brawlers because they were streaky.  It was a lot easier to give Brawlers strike through immunity to negate it as a band-aid.  Than they addressed Brawler survivability in general and since have made it so that there is absolutely no more of a chance of a "bad roll" causing death.

The band aid is unnecessary and just causing problems now with content balancing.  Easy recent example is EoW...which once again Brawlers could go tank with a solo healer because their avoidance was such a big factor and they were not getting struck through.  Meanwhile to be able to tank it as a Plate tank with a solo healer you NEEDED to have a Brawler in there to give you their avoidance, which at that point why not just use the Brawler?  I guarantee that in PoW the adds on the boar have too high of strike through once again.

ROFL! Roll a Pally they tank EoW easily with single healer, Rageincarnate does it on his SK,  ROFL Watched a guard Tank HM Zek single healer.

Raid Nights I watch a Guard Tank HM Sullons up to Sullon no problem.

What makes no sense is you think they just introduced strikethrough because it was tuesday and they had nothin better to do ROFL!

HM eow?  dude. I get whupped hard by incoming damage on the group of 3.   I run out of toys, heal parse spikes to 50k hps then i die.    We havent tried for awhile... it's annoying >< and it makes me not want to login.

Rageincarnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 03:44 PM   #82
Darkonx

Loremaster
Darkonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 389
Default

Damager wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Novusod wrote:

Aull wrote:

I for one disagree that brawlers were always suppose to be the "kings of defense". If that was true then brawlers would have had more defensive abilities than what they were given to fulfill that statement. Of the two brawlers the monk had better defensive abilities than the bruiser ever had of that era. Bruisers from level 1-79 didn't have any great damage absorbtion/prevention/100% avoidance defensive abilities that made any other fighter jealous.

One of the reasons the fighters are in the mess they are today is because the original vision for the fighters was lost when Moorguard left and the others filled in.

Now I will agree that just a few years back plate tanks had far better mit and their avoidance was on par with what the brawlers had and plates were the fighters that others wanted for the tanking position.

Everyone wants their fighter to be king of the hill and others below them. I think that is why we have the heated debates all the time. 

The original promise of the fighter archtype was that all the fighters would be able to do the same tasks but they would accomplish them through different means. Brawlers were supposed to be the defensive avoidance kings. Warriors are stoneskin mitigators and crusaders have life taps and heals. Problem was the game was so poorly ballanced in the early days it took a long time to ballance those mechanics. But the way the game is now is the way it is supposed to be.

If warriors are supposed to be the stoneskin damage mitigators why are the Brawlers owning this area?

Good question since Monk has Zero stoneskins how are they owning this area? Its mind boggling right?

So thats the trick, when the Monk uses all zero of his stoneskins at once he becomes the unkillable juggernaut ROFL! Cast them fast people!!!

Monks have the best stoneskin ability in the game. It's called Superior Guard. 30s recast ability that blocks the next incoming physical or magical attack > 30% of your max hp. You can completely negate any AE the mob casts, as they almost always have > 30s recast on them. It's pretty broken. Yep. Worst thing is it's not even necessary on most fights, despite it being utterly imbalanced.

Darkonx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 03:46 PM   #83
Darkonx

Loremaster
Darkonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 389
Default

Damager wrote:

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

Simply making Brawler's Tenacity a 50% chance to proc instead of a 100% chance and removing ST Immunity would be a big step to balancing the tank classes.

This way a brawler would have a "chance" to avoid death, instead of being unstoppable juggernauts.

Also, there needs to be something installed to bring down there autoattack damage down to what a "sword and board" tank has to have, like removing there innate protection and adding protection on there weapons.

The weapons with lots of protection would have less damage.

Right now playing a monk is like having a Guardian with more avoidance/ST Immunity and the ability to use a two-hander and 2 shields at the same time, all with a 3 trigger death save.

Uhmm thats just silly, reduce the number of death prevents maybe (personnaly I only have 2 spec'd), Your way every fighter with death prevent would also need theirs a 50% chance as well and need changed to a clicky and not always up to balance the same ability. You sir are trying to just nerf brawlers not even attempting class balance. So here we have it death prevent is a shared ability and in order to balance all fighters would have to react the same.

We already clarrified they are not unstoppable juggernauts rofl

Bring down autoattack damage? Its called defensive stance which the brawler must be in in order to have strikethrough immunity.

the weapons with lots of protection already do. They have no MA on them. 

You only have 2 of your DI triggers in your spec. Clearly you are not on the cutting edge of content where tank choice truly matters. Ok. Good to know.

Darkonx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 03:55 PM   #84
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,780
Default

Brawlers Defensive Stance lowers there autoattack damage?

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 03:56 PM   #85
LardLord

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,515
Default

Darkonx wrote:

Monks have the best stoneskin ability in the game. It's called Superior Guard. 30s recast ability that blocks the next incoming physical or magical attack > 30% of your max hp. You can completely negate any AE the mob casts, as they almost always have > 30s recast on them. It's pretty broken. Yep. Worst thing is it's not even necessary on most fights, despite it being utterly imbalanced.

He probably doesn't spec for it

LardLord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 04:11 PM   #86
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Is this some Monk just doing Heroic content arguing with us or something?

Silly.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 04:13 PM   #87
Darkonx

Loremaster
Darkonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 389
Default

What I plan to lay out below is why a Monk should never die. This is how their abilities work during a fight.

On incoming, you cast Brawlers Tenacity(combined with Chi), this gives you 3 triggers of a deathsave, for 90 seconds. So from 0-90s, you can't die. This has a 150 second reuse.

After that comes down, you cast Tsunami, which makes you invincible to melee damage for 20 seconds. One might think that magical attacks could still kill you, but they can't, because all of the wards you are getting are absorbing the magical attacks since the mobs auto attacks can't do anything to you. Another 20s death-immunity, as it were. 90 second reuse. This takes you up to 110s into the fight.

Once that comes down, you cast Bob and Weave, it's basically another Tsunami, only for 12 seconds rather than 20, and on a 75s recast. This takes you up to 122s into the fight, without having had a chance at death.

Once Bob and Weave comes down, you cast Stone Cold (15% group damage reduction for 20s, on a 50s recast), combined with Provoking Stance(25% damage reduction on a 107s recast). This means you're taking 40% less damage from everything, not accounting for mitigation/resists/your passive 10% when you get hit. You wont die taking half damage from mobs, ever. So this grants you another 25 seconds of invincibility. Guess what? You're now 157 seconds into the fight, and your DI came up 7 seconds ago. Rinse/repeat. You are an invincible, unstoppable, juggernaut.

In this series we never used Perfect Guard, 30s recast single hit stoneskin, that you can use to account for any AE, because we didn't have to!

Nor did we use Inner Focus in this set, a two hit physical stoneskin on a 71s recast, because again, we never needed to!

Yet again, we didn't use Outward Calm, a 30k magical ward with a 30s duration, 45s recast, because there was no need!

Mountain Stance for 4k physical mitigation and 3k to all resists? Why bother! You wont ever die anyways!

Body Like Mountain, it roots me, and I don't need the extra 1200 mitigation, so I'm CERTAINLY not casting that!

Mend? That's a 100% heal that gives me 15% extra block! I don't need it though BECAUSE I DON"T TAKE DAMAGE!

Oh, and 100% of the time I get hit, I proc 30% damage reduction for 3 seconds! It can only proc once every 10 seconds, but hey, I'll take 30% damage reduction 30% of the time, any day!

I get hit for more than 40% of my health, so I heal for 15% of my health? Sounds sweet! (Of course instead of a heal Bruisers get a stoneskin on every successful avoid. You can imagine how quickly that becomes insanely imbalanced, being a brawler and having 94% static avoidance. To give you an idea it's about DOUBLE the amount that a dirge grants. Lol.)

This is all on top of taking less than half as much damage from physical attacks as a plate tank due to innate avoidance/mitigation values. Stop telling me I'm balanced. I play both classes. I am not balanced.

(For terrible players with terrible AA specs, perhaps Brawlers are balanced. For those of us who know what we are doing and min/max though, they are so completely ridiculously imbalanced that it's GAMEBREAKING.)

Just for kicks, I thought I'd do a similar time-line for an SK. Let's say I always want to have an equivalent damage prevention running. Let's see how far through a fight I can get!

I'll open up the fight with Furor, it gives me 15 seconds of avoidance on a 131 second recast(Not strikethrough-immune, or even strikethrough-resistant! Avoidance). Okay, 15s in, I'm alive, good!

Then I cast Manawall, it lasts 12 seconds, but it cancels when your mana drops below 10%, so realistically you're lucky to get 5 seconds out of it. This ability wont be back for another 108 seconds. 20 seconds in, looking good!

Hmm, what to cast now. Let's try Legionnaire's Conviction(180s reuse, unmodifiable). This is similar to the combination listed above for brawlers in that it grants damage reduction, but only to magical unfortunately! So now I get trucked by physical AE's, or even auto attack. Not a period of invincibility, so much as being SLIGHTLY less death-prone. 40 seconds in, and still kicking if a melee AE/auto attack hasn't downed me yet!

After that I cast Crusaders Faith, which heals me for 24 seconds. It wont stop one shots, the only thing it will do is prevent me from getting slowly attacked to death, something that happens so rarely as it warrants massive remarks if it IS ever to happen. It's not even comparable to any of the monk abilities, and I'm rather dubious if I should list it at all. Yeah, 64 seconds into the fight! Still alive if I'm lucky!

What now? I have a single one hit stoneskin on more than double the recast of Perfect Guard. I also have a ward that drains 25% of my groups health that will probably last through one multi attack swing. Other than those two I have nothing up for the next sixty seconds. I'm defenseless for as long as I have defenses, compared to the monk who has OVERLAP on their abilities. Just the act of writing all this out is just showing me again how utterly imbalanced the classes are.

We have 20 seconds of comparable defense to their FULL TIME defense, and then a full two minutes where nothing we have even remotely compares.

How can anyone POSSIBLY think tanks are balanced? It blows me away.

P.S. Just for the record, my SK has MUCH better gear than my Brawler.

Edit: Altered numbers on meditative mending to be correct. Lol.

Darkonx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 04:22 PM   #88
Bruener

Loremaster
Bruener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,010
Default

Took you long enough to finally get that written out.

Yeah...LOOKS BALANCED.

EDIT: BTW that is just comparing to a SK.  I believe that Paladins and Zerks would show even less....

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 04:28 PM   #89
Darkonx

Loremaster
Darkonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 389
Default

Bruener wrote:

Took you long enough to finally get that written out.

Yeah...LOOKS BALANCED.

EDIT: BTW that is just comparing to a SK.  I believe that Paladins and Zerks would show even less....

It's unreal. I'm shocked, horrified, and amazed all at once that people can argue that classes are balanced. Were I to compare a Pally/Zerker I'm sure it would be just as large of a disparity.

Darkonx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 04:39 PM   #90
Rageincarnate
Server: Unrest
Guild: Vindication
Rank: Officer

Loremaster
Rageincarnate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
Default

ty darkonx

Rageincarnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:57 PM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.