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 06-20-2012, 12:41 PM   #1
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

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

"Changes are coming to PVP and fighters class for EverQuest II."

Sounds Scary...

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 12:48 PM   #2
Gealaen_Gaiamancer

Loremaster
Gealaen_Gaiamancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Unrest
Posts: 157
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

"Changes are coming to PVP and fighters class for EverQuest II."

Sounds Scary...

There's not enough information to be scared, yet.  Wait until tomorrow afternoon. 

__________________
Fight with honor and triumph!

Gealaen_Gaiamancer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 12:51 PM   #3
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

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

Gealaen_Gaiamancer wrote:

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

"Changes are coming to PVP and fighters class for EverQuest II."

Sounds Scary...

There's not enough information to be scared, yet.  Wait until tomorrow afternoon. 

These forums will be in uproar if we think will happen happens.

Beastlords will be the best tanks soon. SMILEY

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 07:43 PM   #4
The_Cheeseman

Loremaster
The_Cheeseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,285
Default

I have very little hope for balance while the avoidance mechanics and current massive stat inflation still remains. All a "fighter revamp" will do is reshuffle the hierarchy again, like they do every time they try to "balance" things. Oh well, as long as every class gets their turn in the spotlight, I suppose it's okay in the long term.

__________________
The_Cheeseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2012, 12:27 PM   #5
Troy

Loremaster
Troy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 100
Default

The_Cheeseman wrote:

I have very little hope for balance while the avoidance mechanics and current massive stat inflation still remains. All a "fighter revamp" will do is reshuffle the hierarchy again, like they do every time they try to "balance" things. Oh well, as long as every class gets their turn in the spotlight, I suppose it's okay in the long term.

I guess that may mean its time for Pallys and Zerkers to take center stage . . . lol!

Troy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2012, 02:45 PM   #6
Grumpy_Warrior_01

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 528
Default

Here is a TLDR for the fighter archetype references in the June 21 SOE telecast.  This is mostly direct-quoted snippets from the developer responses:

Changes are coming to the Test server in an effort to make fighters a more-fun class to play.

Recklessness :   This is an ability granted to all fighters at level 20 which is an extremely offensive, high-risk high-reward attack stance.  Using the Recklessness stance you do extreme amounts of damage.  Your ability damage is vastly improved, however your incoming damage is also vastly [increased], and you have more trouble holding aggro.  If you are the third fighter in a raid, you can do some noticeable damage.

Strikethrough Immunity :   Whenever you use a temporary avoidance buff such as Shadowknight's Furor or Dragoon's Reflexes, you will have strikethrough immunity while those temporary buffs are active.  So when you expect your avoidance to go up, it actually goes up.  This is completely intuitive and more reliable.

Fighter Heals :   All fighter heals are now based upon a percentage of the target's maximum health.  For example, Lay On Hands would be pretty much a complete heal, no matter who you target.  Fighter heals will not be affected by potency.  If you want a bigger heal, get more health.  This change will offer more flexibility and fun factor for fighters.  The Recklessness stance and the heal change will allow raids to take a fourth fighter to do some offense or to help heal, instead of using that spot for another wizard.

Grumpy_Warrior_01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2012, 05:06 PM   #7
Yimway

Loremaster
Yimway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 9,707
Default

Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:

  The Recklessness stance and the heal change will allow raids to take a fourth fighter to do some offense or to help heal, instead of using that spot for another wizard.

Lets face it, another BL or another fighter...  Doesn't matter, recklessness is pointless.  It only opens up the door to dps wanting to be able to tank, etc, etc.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2012, 08:50 PM   #8
Tekadeo

Loremaster
Tekadeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 364
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:

  The Recklessness stance and the heal change will allow raids to take a fourth fighter to do some offense or to help heal, instead of using that spot for another wizard.

Lets face it, another BL or another fighter...  Doesn't matter, recklessness is pointless.  It only opens up the door to dps wanting to be able to tank, etc, etc.

Who cares?  Let 'em tank if they want to.  Tanking is just a headache anyway these days.

__________________
Tekadeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2012, 09:52 PM   #9
BChizzle

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,095
Default

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

BChizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2012, 10:19 PM   #10
Aull

Loremaster
Aull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,429
Default

From what I have gathered so far this doesn't sound like an entire fighter revamp but more of allowing fighters to have a stance available to them to help fill less than perfect groups. Basically if a group cannot find an available dps mage/scout then another non tanking fighter could fit the group and move on with game play.

As for clearing trash on a raid then this would allow any non tanking fighter a place to help burn through and move on to more important things that comes later in the raid.

I think it all comes down to competing with other new games that have less classes but far more versitility for each class.

Honestly I welcome this but if I had my choice I would want far more content across the board. More overland zones to explore and also the herioc and raid setting as well.

I doubt that even with this change that raids will suffer with the to many fighters in the raid. It may allow for two more fighters but the raid structure as a whole will still need to be planned accordingly.

Aull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 01:16 AM   #11
Kimber
Server: Nagafen
Guild: Rapture
Rank: Ni4Ni CEO Alts

Loremaster
Kimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 721
Default

I really dont see the point of the stance tbh.  I dont see how its going to put more fighters in raids or even in groups.  Most of us at 92 are putting out 30K+ DPS in quest gear in O stance ( yes I low balled it a bit for some of us but you get my point ) and if you watch what buttons you mash you wont pull aggro.  The only way it will really help us get spots in raids is to put it up to T1 DPS cause I know given the option of taking anouther wiz or lock putting out 100K over a tank putting out 50K ( just using numbers here is all ) the wiz or lock goes every time.  It has to be a bump to T1 dps or it will not work. 

And in closing if I wanted to be T1 dps ( or any DPS for that matter ) I would have rolled a DPS class

__________________
Server Nagafen

Guild Sickpuppies
Kimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 04:01 AM   #12
Fairin

Lord
Fairin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 54
Default

"but i rolled a _fighter class_ to dps!" - quoteing alot.. of people this .. is only going to end up badly

Fairin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 05:08 PM   #13
Bruener

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

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 06:25 PM   #14
BChizzle

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,095
Default

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

None of those are nerfs in fact they are all buffs for all tanks, you have been making stuff up for years and again being exposed for it.  Again Bruener your crying has always been blah blah blah  I cant play my class but your class is going to be nerfed at the fighter update, well its here and guess what fighters are getting buffed you couldn't be further from the pulse .

BChizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 09:04 PM   #15
Bruener

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

BChizzle wrote:

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

None of those are nerfs in fact they are all buffs for all tanks, you have been making stuff up for years and again being exposed for it.  Again Bruener your crying has always been blah blah blah  I cant play my class but your class is going to be nerfed at the fighter update, well its here and guess what fighters are getting buffed you couldn't be further from the pulse .

Come on man, is ignorance a huge part of your role-playing?

Those are obviously buffs which I have stated in many threads was a need for ALL Fighters.  The issue is in Fighter DPS in relation to T1 DPS and how large the gap has gotten, which in turn puts a lot of pressure on minimum amount of spots for Fighters.  We went from 4 comfortably in SF to even that 3rd feels like a real drag in DoV.  Of course you know this because in tells you completely agreed with the limitation on Fighter spots because of the DPS issue.

Heals not scaling.  Again something I have posted about many times since DoV.  I even had this discussion with you in tells a couple months ago and how they needed to be changed to % based heals to scale...and you agreed.

Strike through immunity.  This was a bare minimum that we all agreed needed to happen.  Now I wonder if Brawler temp abilities will show the same "immunity".

This covers the issues Fighters in general have been having.  Than there is the issue of balance between Fighters which Xelgad specifically said there are going to be some fixes to cover balance.  What exactly do you think that means?  I guess we will see on Tuesday, but as of right now some of us have been spot on.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 09:11 PM   #16
Laenai
Server: Oasis
Guild: Tyranny
Rank: Raider

Loremaster
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 634
Default

I feel like I'm misunderstanding something....

Will this new stance replace the offensive stance? Or is this an addition ie yet another extra stance for brawler hotbars?

__________________
Laenai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 09:27 PM   #17
Tekadeo

Loremaster
Tekadeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 364
Default

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

TBH I'm usually against Bruenor's ravings but I see you guys go 'round a LOT, and this is him owning you right here.  Not that it's his own original idea, most fighters would agree we all needed this.  I would say we also need more on our Defensive stance (additional hate bonus, about 100% to taunts, and uncapped hate) but idk.

SK's are dam near T1 DPS as it stands so idk how this is going to work with Reckless up.

__________________
Tekadeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 09:28 PM   #18
Tekadeo

Loremaster
Tekadeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 364
Default

[email protected] wrote:

I feel like I'm misunderstanding something....

Will this new stance replace the offensive stance? Or is this an addition ie yet another extra stance for brawler hotbars?

No it won't replace the offensive stance, it just makes it mostly redundant, just like the Brawler's medium stance.  It is a waste of a hotbar spot if it's there hon.

__________________
Tekadeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 05:38 AM   #19
BChizzle

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,095
Default

Tekadeo wrote:

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

TBH I'm usually against Bruenor's ravings but I see you guys go 'round a LOT, and this is him owning you right here.  Not that it's his own original idea, most fighters would agree we all needed this.  I would say we also need more on our Defensive stance (additional hate bonus, about 100% to taunts, and uncapped hate) but idk.

SK's are dam near T1 DPS as it stands so idk how this is going to work with Reckless up.

Apparently you haven't been paying attention, Bruener has been crying about getting non SK's nerfed for years and promising everyone it was coming.  The rest of us you know the sane people have been talking about getting tanks buffed rather than nerfed and that is what has happened.   I have been a proponent of buffing tanks and very supportive of fighter heals getting fixed (but not crit), SK's being allowed to cast BL in combat, and I hate strikethrough as a mechanic it is bad design.  All you have to do is browse a little history and you will find Bruener crying about how other tanks will be getting nerfed come the fighter revamp when others have said the right solution is to buff buff buff.

The only thing left now that will be unbalanced is still the amount of instagib crap that encounters throw at us, SOE needs to fix encounters so they hit more often but for less or else quite simply the tanks with the most tools will still be the most effective choice.

BChizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 02:11 PM   #20
Caethre

Loremaster
Caethre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,167
Default

Fairin wrote:

"but i rolled a _fighter class_ to dps!" - quoteing alot.. of people this .. is only going to end up badly

(( ^^^ so true.

Already you get "fighters" who think they are DPS first and tanks second. This new stance will just make that worse *chuckle*.

I know I won't use the new stance on my monk anymore than I already use the offensive or hybrid stance I have now, so it won't make an iota of difference to me personally.

But perhaps I can see this new stance will help some casual raidforces and PUG raids, who take whomever turns up, and a 4th, 5th or even 6th fighter in this stance might be a better option than an empty slot or a very weak character of another class ))

__________________
Countess Felishanna Silorielenwe [92/320 Templar|92 Sage](Koada`Dal)

Lady Lorianna Ardinwena [92/320 Monk|92 Carpenter](Koada`Dal)

Lady Suzanna Narinyaare [92/320 Conjuror|92 Woodworker](Koada`Dal)

Lady Annaelisa Lorinfinlinde [92/320 Fury|92 Tailor](Koada`Dal)

Lady Silvianna [92/320 Illusionist|92 Jeweler](Koada`Dal)

Jennianna [92/320 Dirge|92 Weaponsmith](Koada`Dal)

Aurielle [92/320 Wizard|92 Alchemist](Koada`Dal)

Valerianna [92/320 Guardian|92 Armourer](Koada`Dal)

Sarahanna [92/320 Swashbuckler|92 Provisioner](Koada`Dal)

Katherianna [92/286 Beserker|92 Sage](Koada`Dal)

Guildleader of The True Path - A roleplay-based guild (level 77) on Antonia Bayle
Caethre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 11:10 PM   #21
Tekadeo

Loremaster
Tekadeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 364
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

Fairin wrote:

"but i rolled a _fighter class_ to dps!" - quoteing alot.. of people this .. is only going to end up badly

(( ^^^ so true.

Already you get "fighters" who think they are DPS first and tanks second. This new stance will just make that worse *chuckle*.

I know I won't use the new stance on my monk anymore than I already use the offensive or hybrid stance I have now, so it won't make an iota of difference to me personally.

But perhaps I can see this new stance will help some casual raidforces and PUG raids, who take whomever turns up, and a 4th, 5th or even 6th fighter in this stance might be a better option than an empty slot or a very weak character of another class ))

I don't see any issue with someone rolling a fighter just to DPS.  If you don't want to play with them for some reason, then don't.  It simply doesn't affect you, so stop worrying about it.  And recklessness is officially replacing your hybrid stance.

And some tanks ARE dps.  Zerkers and SKs are REQUIRED to DPS, and DPS hard to hold aggro.  We have no siphons or transfers at all period.  It is the way the class was created, and truthfully we both sacrifice a lot of survivability for this offensive potential.  Love the rage tho, keep it up.

__________________
Tekadeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 11:59 PM   #22
Bruener

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

BChizzle wrote:

Tekadeo wrote:

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

TBH I'm usually against Bruenor's ravings but I see you guys go 'round a LOT, and this is him owning you right here.  Not that it's his own original idea, most fighters would agree we all needed this.  I would say we also need more on our Defensive stance (additional hate bonus, about 100% to taunts, and uncapped hate) but idk.

SK's are dam near T1 DPS as it stands so idk how this is going to work with Reckless up.

Apparently you haven't been paying attention, Bruener has been crying about getting non SK's nerfed for years and promising everyone it was coming.  The rest of us you know the sane people have been talking about getting tanks buffed rather than nerfed and that is what has happened.   I have been a proponent of buffing tanks and very supportive of fighter heals getting fixed (but not crit), SK's being allowed to cast BL in combat, and I hate strikethrough as a mechanic it is bad design.  All you have to do is browse a little history and you will find Bruener crying about how other tanks will be getting nerfed come the fighter revamp when others have said the right solution is to buff buff buff.

The only thing left now that will be unbalanced is still the amount of instagib crap that encounters throw at us, SOE needs to fix encounters so they hit more often but for less or else quite simply the tanks with the most tools will still be the most effective choice.

"We're also changing how the Strikethrough mechanic interacts with tank classes. First, Crouching Tiger and Bodyguard will no longer grant full time immunity to Strikethrough. As the Brawler classes have gained active and passive tools to reduce spike damage, full time Strikethrough Immunity is no longer necessary. Furthermore, our content designers will be able to use Strikethrough to challenge groups regardless of which tank class they're using. For the second half of this change, Strikethrough Immunity has been added to all buffs that temporarily increase uncontested avoidance by 20% or more. This will make those temporary buffs more reliable and intuitive."

Gonna keep going?

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2012, 05:20 AM   #23
BChizzle

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,095
Default

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Tekadeo wrote:

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

TBH I'm usually against Bruenor's ravings but I see you guys go 'round a LOT, and this is him owning you right here.  Not that it's his own original idea, most fighters would agree we all needed this.  I would say we also need more on our Defensive stance (additional hate bonus, about 100% to taunts, and uncapped hate) but idk.

SK's are dam near T1 DPS as it stands so idk how this is going to work with Reckless up.

Apparently you haven't been paying attention, Bruener has been crying about getting non SK's nerfed for years and promising everyone it was coming.  The rest of us you know the sane people have been talking about getting tanks buffed rather than nerfed and that is what has happened.   I have been a proponent of buffing tanks and very supportive of fighter heals getting fixed (but not crit), SK's being allowed to cast BL in combat, and I hate strikethrough as a mechanic it is bad design.  All you have to do is browse a little history and you will find Bruener crying about how other tanks will be getting nerfed come the fighter revamp when others have said the right solution is to buff buff buff.

The only thing left now that will be unbalanced is still the amount of instagib crap that encounters throw at us, SOE needs to fix encounters so they hit more often but for less or else quite simply the tanks with the most tools will still be the most effective choice.

"We're also changing how the Strikethrough mechanic interacts with tank classes. First, Crouching Tiger and Bodyguard will no longer grant full time immunity to Strikethrough. As the Brawler classes have gained active and passive tools to reduce spike damage, full time Strikethrough Immunity is no longer necessary. Furthermore, our content designers will be able to use Strikethrough to challenge groups regardless of which tank class they're using. For the second half of this change, Strikethrough Immunity has been added to all buffs that temporarily increase uncontested avoidance by 20% or more. This will make those temporary buffs more reliable and intuitive."

Gonna keep going?

Ive been tanking in offensive for months now this is a buff since now I will be strikethrough immune in offensive.

BChizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2012, 06:40 AM   #24
Boli32

Loremaster
Boli32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,425
Default

Honestly it'll be better just to get rid of the stances altogether - they just either didn't do enough or were an unnessercary nerf; Recklessness as it sounds should have been how the offensive stance should have worked in the first place. effectively trading the tank's ability to survive for increased DPS when you were not needed to hold agro.

Perhaps ironically the brawler stances were already like this and they had 3 of them to choose from... plate tank stances were pretty much meaningless whichever stance you were in most times.

If I was in charge I'll just drop the offensive stance completly; add the stat boosts to the self buffs (e.g. +s/c/p +STR +proc) and then change the defensive stance to (+mitigation, +health - removing the negative drawbacks) and use the new reckless stance as the offensive stance.

The amount of times I've got in an argument over tanking in the offensive stance simply because it is called the offensive stance and not the defensive stance is crazy. Pretty much from RoK onwards I never considered using the defensive stance at all  - and thus in many people's eyes I was "not a real tank".

The same will be true for the new recklessness stance - if it does not reduce the tank's ability to take damage it will simply be the new stance - but at the same time it needs to be strong enough so a tank can physcially take a hit before swapping to the "tank stance" should they need to in an emergancy.

Boli32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2012, 12:41 PM   #25
Yimway

Loremaster
Yimway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 9,707
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Honestly it'll be better just to get rid of the stances altogether - they just either didn't do enough or were an unnessercary nerf; Recklessness as it sounds should have been how the offensive stance should have worked in the first place. effectively trading the tank's ability to survive for increased DPS when you were not needed to hold agro.

No!

That was exactly Aerilik's design that got shot down unilaterally last time.

Just cause you choose to do dps should not mean you can't build agro.  Sure you should trade survivability for dps, that makes sense, but when you out-class content there should be no reason no to go into as little survivability as needed and still tank.

This idea of a stance that sets agro to 0 is a bad idea.  Why don't other classes get the same stance?  The answer is it would be game breaking for anyone else to have it, and that is sufficient reason for it not to exist for fighters as well.

I realize we've not seen the stance yet, but the entire thing smacks of exactly what we saw before.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2012, 02:24 PM   #26
Caethre

Loremaster
Caethre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,167
Default

Tekadeo wrote:

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

Fairin wrote:

"but i rolled a _fighter class_ to dps!" - quoteing alot.. of people this .. is only going to end up badly

(( ^^^ so true.

Already you get "fighters" who think they are DPS first and tanks second. This new stance will just make that worse *chuckle*.

I know I won't use the new stance on my monk anymore than I already use the offensive or hybrid stance I have now, so it won't make an iota of difference to me personally.

But perhaps I can see this new stance will help some casual raidforces and PUG raids, who take whomever turns up, and a 4th, 5th or even 6th fighter in this stance might be a better option than an empty slot or a very weak character of another class ))

I don't see any issue with someone rolling a fighter just to DPS.  If you don't want to play with them for some reason, then don't.  It simply doesn't affect you, so stop worrying about it.  And recklessness is officially replacing your hybrid stance.

And some tanks ARE dps.  Zerkers and SKs are REQUIRED to DPS, and DPS hard to hold aggro.  We have no siphons or transfers at all period.  It is the way the class was created, and truthfully we both sacrifice a lot of survivability for this offensive potential.  Love the rage tho, keep it up.

(( Sure, players can do whatever they like ... roll a tank to play DPS, roll a healer to tank, roll a mage to be a healer, whatever floats their personal boats. But you are right, I will avoid playing with the few people who are quite that stupid as a rule.

Back on planet "know-what-the classes-are-for", fighters are designed with the PRIMARY role of tanking in mind. Those fighters who think that maxing their parse is more important than staying alive or keeping aggro, and more important than their groups actually living through fights and their raids not wiping, are quite welcome to keep grouping with other people.

Unfortunately I do end up meeting them in PUGs when not playing my own tank from time to time. :/

"Love the rage tho, keep it up". Whatever that meant ))

__________________
Countess Felishanna Silorielenwe [92/320 Templar|92 Sage](Koada`Dal)

Lady Lorianna Ardinwena [92/320 Monk|92 Carpenter](Koada`Dal)

Lady Suzanna Narinyaare [92/320 Conjuror|92 Woodworker](Koada`Dal)

Lady Annaelisa Lorinfinlinde [92/320 Fury|92 Tailor](Koada`Dal)

Lady Silvianna [92/320 Illusionist|92 Jeweler](Koada`Dal)

Jennianna [92/320 Dirge|92 Weaponsmith](Koada`Dal)

Aurielle [92/320 Wizard|92 Alchemist](Koada`Dal)

Valerianna [92/320 Guardian|92 Armourer](Koada`Dal)

Sarahanna [92/320 Swashbuckler|92 Provisioner](Koada`Dal)

Katherianna [92/286 Beserker|92 Sage](Koada`Dal)

Guildleader of The True Path - A roleplay-based guild (level 77) on Antonia Bayle
Caethre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2012, 02:31 AM   #27
BChizzle

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,095
Default

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Bruener wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Im still lulzing waiting for the all encompassing fighter nerfs Bruener has been crying about for years.  Thank God the devs have enough sense not to listen to you guys.

Lets see 3 major issues I said needed to be addressed.

1. Fighter DPS

2. Fighter Heals not scaling

3. Strike through on saves

And I guess you missed in the webcast at about the 11:50 mark where he specifically mentions some class balance fixes too.

Lulz'ing a lot?

None of those are nerfs in fact they are all buffs for all tanks, you have been making stuff up for years and again being exposed for it.  Again Bruener your crying has always been blah blah blah  I cant play my class but your class is going to be nerfed at the fighter update, well its here and guess what fighters are getting buffed you couldn't be further from the pulse .

Come on man, is ignorance a huge part of your role-playing?

Those are obviously buffs which I have stated in many threads was a need for ALL Fighters.  The issue is in Fighter DPS in relation to T1 DPS and how large the gap has gotten, which in turn puts a lot of pressure on minimum amount of spots for Fighters.  We went from 4 comfortably in SF to even that 3rd feels like a real drag in DoV.  Of course you know this because in tells you completely agreed with the limitation on Fighter spots because of the DPS issue.

Heals not scaling.  Again something I have posted about many times since DoV.  I even had this discussion with you in tells a couple months ago and how they needed to be changed to % based heals to scale...and you agreed.

Strike through immunity.  This was a bare minimum that we all agreed needed to happen.  Now I wonder if Brawler temp abilities will show the same "immunity".

This covers the issues Fighters in general have been having.  Than there is the issue of balance between Fighters which Xelgad specifically said there are going to be some fixes to cover balance.  What exactly do you think that means?  I guess we will see on Tuesday, but as of right now some of us have been spot on.

When we spoke I told you brawlers didnt need ST immunity anymore because we were at plate levels in mit.  I also told you I didnt need to even use my defensive stance anymore and if my temps were reliable I could tank in offensive or mid easily and it was actually a benefit as I wouldnt get fiery feedbacked all over the place.  I never said heals shouldnt scale and I agree a % base effect or just adjusting the amount the heals do is what will make it worthwhile.

The answer is yes brawlers can use their temps for strikethrough immunity in offensive now this is a buff, it will result in a bit more than 40 seconds of immunity to strikethrough per 1.5 minutes.

Again you think this is the solution to balance but it won't change anything, your class didn't get anything that will make them worth bringing to a raid, quite simply the most tricks to get through all the stupid one hit mechanics our lazy devs keep throwing at us will make that choice of tank what should be raiding and guess what nothing has changed about that.

The real problem here is the universal nerf to mit thats basically going to screw over everyone.  More wards are going to be eaten on physical aes means less heals on the tank means bye bye tank on physical ae encounters.

BChizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2012, 06:01 AM   #28
Boli32

Loremaster
Boli32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,425
Default

[email protected] wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Honestly it'll be better just to get rid of the stances altogether - they just either didn't do enough or were an unnessercary nerf; Recklessness as it sounds should have been how the offensive stance should have worked in the first place. effectively trading the tank's ability to survive for increased DPS when you were not needed to hold agro.

No!

That was exactly Aerilik's design that got shot down unilaterally last time.

Just cause you choose to do dps should not mean you can't build agro.  Sure you should trade survivability for dps, that makes sense, but when you out-class content there should be no reason no to go into as little survivability as needed and still tank.

This idea of a stance that sets agro to 0 is a bad idea.  Why don't other classes get the same stance?  The answer is it would be game breaking for anyone else to have it, and that is sufficient reason for it not to exist for fighters as well.

I realize we've not seen the stance yet, but the entire thing smacks of exactly what we saw before.

The cancelled fighter revamp was more due to the how taunting worked and gathering hate gain whilst actively reducing dps in the defensive stance.

I was more advocating that there is no need for EITHER an offensive or defensive stance (shove all the bonuses on the self buffs) but merely turning reckless on/off instead would count as going offensive or defensive.

Boli32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2012, 06:33 AM   #29
BChizzle

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,095
Default

[email protected] wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Honestly it'll be better just to get rid of the stances altogether - they just either didn't do enough or were an unnessercary nerf; Recklessness as it sounds should have been how the offensive stance should have worked in the first place. effectively trading the tank's ability to survive for increased DPS when you were not needed to hold agro.

No!

That was exactly Aerilik's design that got shot down unilaterally last time.

Just cause you choose to do dps should not mean you can't build agro.  Sure you should trade survivability for dps, that makes sense, but when you out-class content there should be no reason no to go into as little survivability as needed and still tank.

This idea of a stance that sets agro to 0 is a bad idea.  Why don't other classes get the same stance?  The answer is it would be game breaking for anyone else to have it, and that is sufficient reason for it not to exist for fighters as well.

I realize we've not seen the stance yet, but the entire thing smacks of exactly what we saw before.

The cancelled fighter revamp was more due to the how taunting worked and gathering hate gain whilst actively reducing dps in the defensive stance.

I was more advocating that there is no need for EITHER an offensive or defensive stance (shove all the bonuses on the self buffs) but merely turning reckless on/off instead would count as going offensive or defensive.

People like to make crap up about the old fighter revamp that never existed.  You hit the head on the nail, the problem was that the old revamp went too far in turning tanking fighters into tauntbots and that was everyones issue with it because it was boring as hell to spam your taunts and not to be able to dps.  It had nothing to stances agro or anything along those lines.

BChizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2012, 03:45 PM   #30
Beko
Server: Antonia Bayle

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 283
Default

Everyone deserves to play how they want to play.

Beko is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:24 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.