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 02-27-2012, 03:16 AM   #181
Kimber
Server: Nagafen
Guild: Rapture
Rank: Ni4Ni CEO Alts

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

Pretty sure Guards were not as end all be all as Tala makes it out to be in ROK.  I started playing around ROK release rolld my zerk up to mid 60 got asked to go guard did that got to 80 and could not stand it.  Went back zerk got my Myth and loved it as a MT for smaller easy T1 raids for a bit till TSO came out ( was close to the end of ROK and I needed to get gear so I really did not push it to much). My wife on her SK was asked to go Pally when we could have all class's on each side and did that and loved it also.  Still did MT/OT on my Zerk with the Wife filling the other slot on her Pally for what raiding in TSO we did do.  We know a Monk that was MT on a few raids during this time also.  So all this chest beating about oh this tank is the king at this time or that is all BS guys.  Yes Brawlers have it better now and Guards did have it better in ROK just as SK had it pretty good in TSO.  Thing is if we want balance we all have to agree that there are some things that have been made a bit OP about some of them and some things that have just been outright nerfed to hell and back that should not have been touched.

__________________
Server Nagafen

Guild Sickpuppies
Kimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 03:19 AM   #182
Corydonn

Loremaster
Corydonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 744
Default

BChizzle wrote:

Corydonn wrote:

Novusod wrote:

There are a couple of key things you guys keep forgetting about.

Firstly the supposed brawler DoV era is nothing like the domination Guardians had in RoK. It was a monopoly for guardians in RoK. Do you even understand the meaning of the word monopoly. It is a combination of the latin words mono meaning one and poly meaning selection. So monopoly meant one selection and that is what RoK was like with Guardians. You either raided with guardian MT or you didn't raid at all in RoK. TSO was the same way only with SK being the main GoTo tank everyone needed. DoV is nothing like that. There is actually competition now between the tanks in DoV unlike in previous eras. For all the advantages brawlers have the class is still not actually needed for anything. Secondly everything in DoV can be and IS routinely killed without a brawler in raid. There is a difference between being nice to have and having a clear monopoly. If there really was a brawler monopoly then people like Bruener would NOT be raiding.

I'm pretty sure I still raided in RoK/TSO even when I was a really bad brawler.

Most guilds rolled with guards till TSO then SK's, yes a select few good brawlers had raid spots but back then they were viewed mostly as a joke or a throw away spot.  Even more so the top bruiser in the game back then switched to guard and Confirmed how OP they were.  I dont see Bruener the supposed top SK in this game switching his main to a brawler mustn't be that much of a difference.

No, I really was terrible back then. All you had to do to get a mob was hit divide and conquer and healers could keep you up in offensive stance while hitting no cooldowns. Defensive stance was unheard of for me back then. SMILEY Plus I remember guilds using SKs as MTs to progress and even get mythicals back then.

Corydonn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 06:27 AM   #183
Novusod

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,719
Default

Corydonn wrote:

BChizzle wrote:

Corydonn wrote:

Novusod wrote:

There are a couple of key things you guys keep forgetting about.

Firstly the supposed brawler DoV era is nothing like the domination Guardians had in RoK. It was a monopoly for guardians in RoK. Do you even understand the meaning of the word monopoly. It is a combination of the latin words mono meaning one and poly meaning selection. So monopoly meant one selection and that is what RoK was like with Guardians. You either raided with guardian MT or you didn't raid at all in RoK. TSO was the same way only with SK being the main GoTo tank everyone needed. DoV is nothing like that. There is actually competition now between the tanks in DoV unlike in previous eras. For all the advantages brawlers have the class is still not actually needed for anything. Secondly everything in DoV can be and IS routinely killed without a brawler in raid. There is a difference between being nice to have and having a clear monopoly. If there really was a brawler monopoly then people like Bruener would NOT be raiding.

I'm pretty sure I still raided in RoK/TSO even when I was a really bad brawler.

Most guilds rolled with guards till TSO then SK's, yes a select few good brawlers had raid spots but back then they were viewed mostly as a joke or a throw away spot.  Even more so the top bruiser in the game back then switched to guard and Confirmed how OP they were.  I dont see Bruener the supposed top SK in this game switching his main to a brawler mustn't be that much of a difference.

No, I really was terrible back then. All you had to do to get a mob was hit divide and conquer and healers could keep you up in offensive stance while hitting no cooldowns. Defensive stance was unheard of for me back then. Plus I remember guilds using SKs as MTs to progress and even get mythicals back then.

The only thing that is terrible is your terrible memory. Divide and conquer did not work on hardly anything in RoK and nobody seriously used brawler tanks in RoK. Nobody used a brawler MT to kill Druushk for the first time or to tank Trackanon. Most guilds didn't use brawlers at all because they were jokes and the only guilds that did have a brawler in the raid were run by leaders who didn't know any better. If things were going well for you Corydonn then you were the exception not the rule. The thing that stands out most is just how useless brawlers were back then or how little they were wanted or needed in raid. Brawlers were the worst tank in game by a mile with sub par dps and lousy utility to boot. Also the whole tank in offensive stance itself was a horribly broken mechanic. TSO was a joke for brawlers too where I had to spend most of that expansion raiding on my alt dirge because the guild I raided with retired its' brawler slot.

I wasn't the only one who was having these issues. I remember when Truumak gave up on his bruiser tank halfway through TSO. That was the low point for brawler tanks because the best and last of the old school brawlers couldn't do it anymore. That one event was a wake up call to the players and devs that things had gotten so bad that it was do or die time. Either fix the class or it is time get the out of dodge. The fixes that eventually came are the same ones being complained about in this thread. Strikethrough immunity being a big one and our death prevent being the other. What is rediculous is that brawlers are still the only tank that don't get a self death prevent before level 90.

The off season tanks of DoV don't know how good and easy they have it now. By no means are SKs and Zerkers under the same presure to quit and retire or were being forced out of raiding like brawlers were in RoK and TSO. They may not be the flavor of the month but they are not broken either. The whole thing is just a bunch of crocodile tears from a bunch of has beens who can't stand the idea that they are not the best anymore. I say this with 100% seriousness that class ballance is the best it has ever been right now. For the first time ever there is real competition between the tank classes.

__________________
Novusod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 02:32 PM   #184
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

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

Yes... because people are really looking for Shadowknights and Zerkers to Main Tank there raids... 

All serious raiding guilds use a certain type of brawler as a main tank, there IS no comparison to other classes, if you don't have a brawler you are just holding your raid force back.

If you can't see the crazy amount of damage reduction/avoidance/dps/snap aggro/utility/death saves/mitigation/good scaling aa abilitys that brawlers simply have that doesn't completely blow away the other fighters then you MUST be blind.

Also, this game doesn't really matter until level 90, and it takes a day to get it.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 05:18 PM   #185
Yimway

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

Darkonx wrote:

I'm not saying Monks should be nerfed. Never once have I said that. I believe other tanks need additional abilities, and base cooldowns altered, for there to be any semblance of balance however. -25% recast off the base of Furor, and in combat BL would be a decent start.

I'll say it, content feels  too easy on my monk, and reasonable on my guard.

MTing on my paladin seems like why would I want to given the other options, but the class remains extremely solid, for all things outside of raid.  I will not speak to SK, Bruiser, or Zerker, as I've all but deleted these toons.

I'm pretty sure the answer isn't to make everyone do things as easily as a monk does, the answer is somewhere inbetween.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:35 PM   #186
Gungo

Loremaster
Gungo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Crushbone
Posts: 5,378
Default

Novusod wrote:

The only thing that is terrible is your terrible memory. Divide and conquer did not work on hardly anything in RoK and nobody seriously used brawler tanks in RoK.

You are correct ROK was the expansion they nerfed target locks/Drag. A clear example of this is Avatar of flame pillars were draggable in EOF and NOT draggable in ROK.

This is also the expansion they introduced strikethrough although it was just on the revamped avatars. The next expansion "TSO" every npc had strikethrough and it wasnt until SF we received immunity.

Gungo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:38 PM   #187
Gungo

Loremaster
Gungo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Crushbone
Posts: 5,378
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Darkonx wrote:

I'm not saying Monks should be nerfed. Never once have I said that. I believe other tanks need additional abilities, and base cooldowns altered, for there to be any semblance of balance however. -25% recast off the base of Furor, and in combat BL would be a decent start.

I'll say it, content feels  too easy on my monk, and reasonable on my guard.

MTing on my paladin seems like why would I want to given the other options, but the class remains extremely solid, for all things outside of raid.  I will not speak to SK, Bruiser, or Zerker, as I've all but deleted these toons.

I'm pretty sure the answer isn't to make everyone do things as easily as a monk does, the answer is somewhere inbetween.

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

Gungo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 07:21 AM   #188
Novusod

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,719
Default

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

Brawlers were given strikethrough immunity for a reason and that was because they wanted to make us long term viable tanks not just tanks that lasted 10s while parry was up and then splat. Strikethrough immunity was no bandaid fix as you keep calling it. Our entire class is ballanced arround avoiding hits. That is what makes us avoidance tanks. Brawlers don't have plate armor or crazy stoneskins like guardians or lifetaps and wards like crusaders. Brawler strikethrough immunity is never going away so long as the devs intend for us to be serious tanks. The plate tanks are just going to have to put on their big boy pants and deal with the competition. There is no content in the game a plate tank can't handle so it is fair and ballanced as far as actual raiding is concerned. I have no problem calling a spade a spade here. The game is ballanced and that is the end of it.

__________________
Novusod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 02:29 PM   #189
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

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

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

Brawlers were given strikethrough immunity for a reason and that was because they wanted to make us long term viable tanks not just tanks that lasted 10s while parry was up and then splat. Strikethrough immunity was no bandaid fix as you keep calling it. Our entire class is ballanced arround avoiding hits. That is what makes us avoidance tanks. Brawlers don't have plate armor or crazy stoneskins like guardians or lifetaps and wards like crusaders. Brawler strikethrough immunity is never going away so long as the devs intend for us to be serious tanks. The plate tanks are just going to have to put on their big boy pants and deal with the competition. There is no content in the game a plate tank can't handle so it is fair and ballanced as far as actual raiding is concerned. I have no problem calling a spade a spade here. The game is ballanced and that is the end of it.

Yeah if they removed strikethrough immunity not all brawlers could easilly tank everything, just like all tanks can't tank everything easily now.

Its called balance.

YOU REALLY don't need all the stuff you have AND strikethrough immunity, if they don't remove it they are going to have to get rid of your death prevention or put a huge penalty on it, such as only a 50% chance to proc.

Your too powerful and theres no way to buff the other tanks to your level without revamping there entire aa's and making heals critical again, and then adding MORE buffs to figher healing, so they parse atleast 8000-12000 hps, then adding MORE stoneskins to guardian.

Which they won't do, because that would make us OP in solo/pvp content. (whoever even plays that anymore.)

Even if thats not the entire point, its much easier just to nerf brawlers then buff everyone else, BUT if they find a way to buff tanks up to a brawlers power instead, so be it, I hate nerfs anyways.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 03:13 PM   #190
Yimway

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

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 03:37 PM   #191
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I just keep getting flashbacks of being oneshotted with tsunami up =(

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 03:58 PM   #192
Yimway

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

Damager wrote:

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I can get some psuedo numbers doing this and then just adjusting for the difference in uncontested avoidance using a constant.  If I can find an opportunity to get some comparison pulls done I will.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 05:03 PM   #193
Bruener

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

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I just keep getting flashbacks of being oneshotted with tsunami up =(

Yeah because defensive stance doesn't add anything else right?

Really Brawler avoidance would still be superior, but they would have to be a little more reliant on avoidance lend from another tank....like Plates have to be in current game.

The mechanic needs to go though because it completely nullifies a tool SOE needs to keep the super high avoidance numbers in check across the board.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 05:06 PM   #194
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I can get some psuedo numbers doing this and then just adjusting for the difference in uncontested avoidance using a constant.  If I can find an opportunity to get some comparison pulls done I will.

That should get you close.

Defensive avoided - Mid avoided = X - 14% (difference in uncontested) = Strikethrough damage /shrug 

Guess would be 30% increase in damage  ( factor in also tsunami and bob and weave would no longer be as effective and only way monk can heal anything back is if hit for over 40% of their health, useless in Instances and most EM)

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 05:28 PM   #195
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I just keep getting flashbacks of being oneshotted with tsunami up =(

Yeah because defensive stance doesn't add anything else right?

Really Brawler avoidance would still be superior, but they would have to be a little more reliant on avoidance lend from another tank....like Plates have to be in current game.

The mechanic needs to go though because it completely nullifies a tool SOE needs to keep the super high avoidance numbers in check across the board.

Adds aggresion, and 25% mitigation to worn armor, He is just compairing avoidance (strikethrough vs no strikethrough) Not total damage.

Monk avoidance would have to be superior still in order to mitigate the damage compared to other tanks as they have no real reactive heals or stoneskins that work under a certain percentage of damage takin. Inner focus only works on physical damage and must be over 25% of your max health 2 attacks, Superior guard only works if hit for 35% of max health 1 attack, reactive heal procs when hit over 40% of max health.. This would lock the monk in as the very worst instance tank,

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 05:36 PM   #196
Yimway

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

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I can get some psuedo numbers doing this and then just adjusting for the difference in uncontested avoidance using a constant.  If I can find an opportunity to get some comparison pulls done I will.

That should get you close.

Defensive avoided - Mid avoided = X - 14% (difference in uncontested) = Strikethrough damage /shrug 

Guess would be 30% increase in damage  ( factor in also tsunami and bob and weave would no longer be as effective and only way monk can heal anything back is if hit for over 40% of their health, useless in Instances and most EM)

If I was a betting man, I'd say the difference will be closer to 15 than 30.  And I bet the difference in deaths will be rather small.  I hope to have time to run the numbers though, cause the results will be interesting regardless of who is correct.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 05:47 PM   #197
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I can get some psuedo numbers doing this and then just adjusting for the difference in uncontested avoidance using a constant.  If I can find an opportunity to get some comparison pulls done I will.

That should get you close.

Defensive avoided - Mid avoided = X - 14% (difference in uncontested) = Strikethrough damage /shrug 

Guess would be 30% increase in damage  ( factor in also tsunami and bob and weave would no longer be as effective and only way monk can heal anything back is if hit for over 40% of their health, useless in Instances and most EM)

If I was a betting man, I'd say the difference will be closer to 15 than 30.  And I bet the difference in deaths will be rather small.  I hope to have time to run the numbers though, cause the results will be interesting regardless of who is correct.

Yeah I know what your thinking and probably correct if you dont factor in tsunami and bob and weave. However, if you compare tsunami being used twice in one fight now (Thats 40s of no autoattack damage) vs tsunami being strukthrough heh it goes way up. 

This is also why our avoid looks so high on parse, its the bob and weave and tsunami inflating the numbers for short durations. 

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 06:18 PM   #198
Bruener

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

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I can get some psuedo numbers doing this and then just adjusting for the difference in uncontested avoidance using a constant.  If I can find an opportunity to get some comparison pulls done I will.

That should get you close.

Defensive avoided - Mid avoided = X - 14% (difference in uncontested) = Strikethrough damage /shrug 

Guess would be 30% increase in damage  ( factor in also tsunami and bob and weave would no longer be as effective and only way monk can heal anything back is if hit for over 40% of their health, useless in Instances and most EM)

If I was a betting man, I'd say the difference will be closer to 15 than 30.  And I bet the difference in deaths will be rather small.  I hope to have time to run the numbers though, cause the results will be interesting regardless of who is correct.

Yeah I know what your thinking and probably correct if you dont factor in tsunami and bob and weave. However, if you compare tsunami being used twice in one fight now (Thats 40s of no autoattack damage) vs tsunami being strukthrough heh it goes way up. 

This is also why our avoid looks so high on parse, its the bob and weave and tsunami inflating the numbers for short durations. 

This is why a lot of people have been saying that the strike through immunity should be put on ALL fighter avoidance saves.  Otherwise how is that any different than the Plate fighters having to deal with the strike through on theirs?

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 09:47 PM   #199
circusgirl

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,424
Default

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I can get some psuedo numbers doing this and then just adjusting for the difference in uncontested avoidance using a constant.  If I can find an opportunity to get some comparison pulls done I will.

That should get you close.

Defensive avoided - Mid avoided = X - 14% (difference in uncontested) = Strikethrough damage /shrug 

Guess would be 30% increase in damage  ( factor in also tsunami and bob and weave would no longer be as effective and only way monk can heal anything back is if hit for over 40% of their health, useless in Instances and most EM)

If I was a betting man, I'd say the difference will be closer to 15 than 30.  And I bet the difference in deaths will be rather small.  I hope to have time to run the numbers though, cause the results will be interesting regardless of who is correct.

Yeah I know what your thinking and probably correct if you dont factor in tsunami and bob and weave. However, if you compare tsunami being used twice in one fight now (Thats 40s of no autoattack damage) vs tsunami being strukthrough heh it goes way up. 

This is also why our avoid looks so high on parse, its the bob and weave and tsunami inflating the numbers for short durations. 

This is why a lot of people have been saying that the strike through immunity should be put on ALL fighter avoidance saves.  Otherwise how is that any different than the Plate fighters having to deal with the strike through on theirs?

While I'm completely against the idea of getting rid of brawler strikethrough immunity, I think it would be entirely reasonable to put strikethrough immunity on all 100% avoidance temporary buffs.

circusgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2012, 10:42 PM   #200
Bruener

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

I really don't think you guys are getting why strike through immunity should be removed.  Its not even a balance issue its a mechanics issue.

A similar example I could give is the new crit mechanic that will be coming up.  They are basically going to give the mobs an innate crit chance to do a little more damage.  Now imagine if they made Crusaders immune to being crit on.  2 Fighters completely immune to a mechanic designed to make sure that Tanks especially don't become too invincible destroys the purpose of the mechanic.

The great side effect of removing strike through immunity is that it does go towards balancing Fighters.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 01:03 AM   #201
Novusod

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,719
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

Stop trying to back peddle, as you know exactly what would happen without strikethrough immunity. It was just a couple pages back where you said Gungo and Blanka wouldn't be raiding. That is pretty funny considering they are some of the best brawlers out there. In the case of Blanka he actually tanked raids in TSO because he had the best Avatar gear in the game. The thing is there is no tanking in DoV on a brawler without strikethrough immunity. So all brawlers would be out of job if you trolls ever got brawlers distroyed with nerfs.

I know for myself that there are certain mobs that cause defensive stance to drop sometimes. It is usually fatal within a half a second of losing the strikethrough immunity attached to the defensive stance. The difference between having strikethrough imminity and not having it is night and day. As soon as strikethrough immunity drops it is just instant splat and the healers are like what that heck killed me. This is why strikethrough immunity has never been touched. It is far too easy to proove what happens when an avoidance tank stops avoiding hits. It is just instant splat dead so don't even try to tank without strikethrough immunity on a brawler. Every brawler knows this, the devs know this, and even you know this if you would be honest enough to admit it.

I have been in a top tier guild for the last few months and we use guardian, SK, and bruiser to do the tanking. The game is very well ballanced between the three of us and none of us are struggling. But I will tell you one thing there is no room in any guild for a tank that cannot tank. Things are the way they are for a reason and that includes brawler strikethrough immunity. Brawlers don't have any super huge advantage over other tanks. The only tank that is kind of weak is the berserker and that is because they were unfairly nerfed by PvP trolls. Breaking brawlers will not make berserkers better. Worry about your own class and stop trying to destroy mine.

__________________
Novusod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 01:19 AM   #202
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

meh

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 01:25 AM   #203
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

I really don't think you guys are getting why strike through immunity should be removed.  Its not even a balance issue its a mechanics issue.

A similar example I could give is the new crit mechanic that will be coming up.  They are basically going to give the mobs an innate crit chance to do a little more damage.  Now imagine if they made Crusaders immune to being crit on.  2 Fighters completely immune to a mechanic designed to make sure that Tanks especially don't become too invincible destroys the purpose of the mechanic.

The great side effect of removing strike through immunity is that it does go towards balancing Fighters.

I dont think you understand brawler mechanics personally. You are arguing with people that have been brawlers for years and stuck it out through the good and bad. The only people in here i see complaining are people who either 1 never played a brawler or 2 rolled one after they where fixed.

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 01:36 AM   #204
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

Bruener wrote:

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Damager wrote:

Strikethrough immune is only in full defensive, MT in mid stance that would give you a rough comparison.

I can get some psuedo numbers doing this and then just adjusting for the difference in uncontested avoidance using a constant.  If I can find an opportunity to get some comparison pulls done I will.

That should get you close.

Defensive avoided - Mid avoided = X - 14% (difference in uncontested) = Strikethrough damage /shrug 

Guess would be 30% increase in damage  ( factor in also tsunami and bob and weave would no longer be as effective and only way monk can heal anything back is if hit for over 40% of their health, useless in Instances and most EM)

If I was a betting man, I'd say the difference will be closer to 15 than 30.  And I bet the difference in deaths will be rather small.  I hope to have time to run the numbers though, cause the results will be interesting regardless of who is correct.

Yeah I know what your thinking and probably correct if you dont factor in tsunami and bob and weave. However, if you compare tsunami being used twice in one fight now (Thats 40s of no autoattack damage) vs tsunami being strukthrough heh it goes way up. 

This is also why our avoid looks so high on parse, its the bob and weave and tsunami inflating the numbers for short durations. 

This is why a lot of people have been saying that the strike through immunity should be put on ALL fighter avoidance saves.  Otherwise how is that any different than the Plate fighters having to deal with the strike through on theirs?

Correct, I have been saying that all along. Bring the others up to where the monk is. The brawler will flounder without it, the plates would find a happy medium with it in their temps.

Either way it wont get a guild any further in progression.

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 12:54 PM   #205
Bruener

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

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

Stop trying to back peddle, as you know exactly what would happen without strikethrough immunity. It was just a couple pages back where you said Gungo and Blanka wouldn't be raiding. That is pretty funny considering they are some of the best brawlers out there. In the case of Blanka he actually tanked raids in TSO because he had the best Avatar gear in the game. The thing is there is no tanking in DoV on a brawler without strikethrough immunity. So all brawlers would be out of job if you trolls ever got brawlers distroyed with nerfs.

I know for myself that there are certain mobs that cause defensive stance to drop sometimes. It is usually fatal within a half a second of losing the strikethrough immunity attached to the defensive stance. The difference between having strikethrough imminity and not having it is night and day. As soon as strikethrough immunity drops it is just instant splat and the healers are like what that heck killed me. This is why strikethrough immunity has never been touched. It is far too easy to proove what happens when an avoidance tank stops avoiding hits. It is just instant splat dead so don't even try to tank without strikethrough immunity on a brawler. Every brawler knows this, the devs know this, and even you know this if you would be honest enough to admit it.

I have been in a top tier guild for the last few months and we use guardian, SK, and bruiser to do the tanking. The game is very well ballanced between the three of us and none of us are struggling. But I will tell you one thing there is no room in any guild for a tank that cannot tank. Things are the way they are for a reason and that includes brawler strikethrough immunity. Brawlers don't have any super huge advantage over other tanks. The only tank that is kind of weak is the berserker and that is because they were unfairly nerfed by PvP trolls. Breaking brawlers will not make berserkers better. Worry about your own class and stop trying to destroy mine.

I find it extremely pathetic that you actually think Gungo and Blanka are some of the best Brawlers playing...it tells me a lot about your understanding on who is playing end game and how they are doing.  I believe it was Gungo himself that posted in another thread that he understood he was not part of the best of the class...putting himself as a mediocre player.  This is not a dig at Gungo just a relay of what he said.  I am sure that he would still retain a raid spot because he commits to the time and knows how to play which is a huge part of what it takes.

Both those Brawler sources have also stated that strike through immunity should be moved to temps instead.  Because honestly with them limiting mobs strike through (once they actually find the time to nerf it) it is not as large as you think and with temps still retaining the mechanic you don't have to worry about dying to auto attacks like Plate tanks do right now when using a save that SHOULD be avoiding that 100%.

Unlike you nobody else thinks things should be balanced the way they are for F2P either.  So not suprising you are doing everything you can to retain bad mechanics design to keep your class just that much better.

__________________
Bruener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 01:55 PM   #206
Novusod

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,719
Default

Bruener wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

Stop trying to back peddle, as you know exactly what would happen without strikethrough immunity. It was just a couple pages back where you said Gungo and Blanka wouldn't be raiding. That is pretty funny considering they are some of the best brawlers out there. In the case of Blanka he actually tanked raids in TSO because he had the best Avatar gear in the game. The thing is there is no tanking in DoV on a brawler without strikethrough immunity. So all brawlers would be out of job if you trolls ever got brawlers distroyed with nerfs.

I know for myself that there are certain mobs that cause defensive stance to drop sometimes. It is usually fatal within a half a second of losing the strikethrough immunity attached to the defensive stance. The difference between having strikethrough imminity and not having it is night and day. As soon as strikethrough immunity drops it is just instant splat and the healers are like what that heck killed me. This is why strikethrough immunity has never been touched. It is far too easy to proove what happens when an avoidance tank stops avoiding hits. It is just instant splat dead so don't even try to tank without strikethrough immunity on a brawler. Every brawler knows this, the devs know this, and even you know this if you would be honest enough to admit it.

I have been in a top tier guild for the last few months and we use guardian, SK, and bruiser to do the tanking. The game is very well ballanced between the three of us and none of us are struggling. But I will tell you one thing there is no room in any guild for a tank that cannot tank. Things are the way they are for a reason and that includes brawler strikethrough immunity. Brawlers don't have any super huge advantage over other tanks. The only tank that is kind of weak is the berserker and that is because they were unfairly nerfed by PvP trolls. Breaking brawlers will not make berserkers better. Worry about your own class and stop trying to destroy mine.

I find it extremely pathetic that you actually think Gungo and Blanka are some of the best Brawlers playing...it tells me a lot about your understanding on who is playing end game and how they are doing.  I believe it was Gungo himself that posted in another thread that he understood he was not part of the best of the class...putting himself as a mediocre player.  This is not a dig at Gungo just a relay of what he said.  I am sure that he would still retain a raid spot because he commits to the time and knows how to play which is a huge part of what it takes.

Both those Brawler sources have also stated that strike through immunity should be moved to temps instead.  Because honestly with them limiting mobs strike through (once they actually find the time to nerf it) it is not as large as you think and with temps still retaining the mechanic you don't have to worry about dying to auto attacks like Plate tanks do right now when using a save that SHOULD be avoiding that 100%.

Unlike you nobody else thinks things should be balanced the way they are for F2P either.  So not suprising you are doing everything you can to retain bad mechanics design to keep your class just that much better.

I think it is extremely pathetic that you are trying to have it both ways in saying that those two are bad and then agreeing with them on changing strikethrough immunity. If you see I think Gungo's position on skrikethrough immunity is delusional. There is one undeniable fact that NO brawlers would be raiding seriously if strikethrough immunity was nerfed. It does not matter how good a player someone is if the mechanics are stacked against brawlers then they won't be raiding. And damm straight I want my class to remain viable. I like eq2 and I like raiding so I am not going to give up this position without a fight.

On the subject of F2P most of the player base is bronze and silver or casual non-raider so of course it makes sense to ballance classes for them as well. At low levels and with unmaxed AA plate tanks are light years more powerful than brawlers. Brawlers are the least played tanks and the bruiser is one of the least played classes over all. The most popular class in the entire game is the Berserker. These are the statistics that the devs actually look at when they factor in F2P class ballance. http://eq2mission.flame.org/summary...venture_classes The devs are not going to nerf a class that is already unpopular nor are they going to buff up a class that is already seen as over powered flavor of the month.

__________________
Novusod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 02:01 PM   #207
Talathion
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Cladire Mortii
Rank: Initiate/Slave

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

Novusod wrote:

Bruener wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I agree with you strikethrough immunity needs to go away and be put on all avoid buffs. I also dont think the heroic AA needs a third death save, its a sollid AA without that final rank buff. In fact no tank should have that many death saves the DP or die mechanics are dumb.

You are delusional if you think brawlers would still be viable raid tanks without strikethrough immunity. The day that happens most guilds would permanently bench their brawlers so fast your head would would spin. Do you think Darkonx keeps you arround for your wit? Ha, you would be gone too or are you so blind as to not see the point of this thread is to remove brawlers from high end raiding. If you take away the reason to bring a brawler tank then guilds aren't going to keep us arround just for the heck of it.

It is dificult to quantify how hard that would affect brawlers or not.  I'd love to see some real data on it, but there isn't a viable way for us to simulate it.

Gungo suggest that passive strikethru avoidance be removed and smaller strikethru avoindance %'s be added to short term buffs.  This method does seem to have merits when adjusting and balancing tanks across all 3 archtypes, and certainly is more flexible than having those who have it and those that do not.    A system like this allows brawlers to benefit from a higher % on short terms if that higher percentis warranted when compaired to their overall damage avoidance, mitigation, and ability to avoid deaths.

Since they'll need to add something new to treadmill for in the next expansion, strikethru avoidance or something similar seems a likely candidate.

Stop trying to back peddle, as you know exactly what would happen without strikethrough immunity. It was just a couple pages back where you said Gungo and Blanka wouldn't be raiding. That is pretty funny considering they are some of the best brawlers out there. In the case of Blanka he actually tanked raids in TSO because he had the best Avatar gear in the game. The thing is there is no tanking in DoV on a brawler without strikethrough immunity. So all brawlers would be out of job if you trolls ever got brawlers distroyed with nerfs.

I know for myself that there are certain mobs that cause defensive stance to drop sometimes. It is usually fatal within a half a second of losing the strikethrough immunity attached to the defensive stance. The difference between having strikethrough imminity and not having it is night and day. As soon as strikethrough immunity drops it is just instant splat and the healers are like what that heck killed me. This is why strikethrough immunity has never been touched. It is far too easy to proove what happens when an avoidance tank stops avoiding hits. It is just instant splat dead so don't even try to tank without strikethrough immunity on a brawler. Every brawler knows this, the devs know this, and even you know this if you would be honest enough to admit it.

I have been in a top tier guild for the last few months and we use guardian, SK, and bruiser to do the tanking. The game is very well ballanced between the three of us and none of us are struggling. But I will tell you one thing there is no room in any guild for a tank that cannot tank. Things are the way they are for a reason and that includes brawler strikethrough immunity. Brawlers don't have any super huge advantage over other tanks. The only tank that is kind of weak is the berserker and that is because they were unfairly nerfed by PvP trolls. Breaking brawlers will not make berserkers better. Worry about your own class and stop trying to destroy mine.

I find it extremely pathetic that you actually think Gungo and Blanka are some of the best Brawlers playing...it tells me a lot about your understanding on who is playing end game and how they are doing.  I believe it was Gungo himself that posted in another thread that he understood he was not part of the best of the class...putting himself as a mediocre player.  This is not a dig at Gungo just a relay of what he said.  I am sure that he would still retain a raid spot because he commits to the time and knows how to play which is a huge part of what it takes.

Both those Brawler sources have also stated that strike through immunity should be moved to temps instead.  Because honestly with them limiting mobs strike through (once they actually find the time to nerf it) it is not as large as you think and with temps still retaining the mechanic you don't have to worry about dying to auto attacks like Plate tanks do right now when using a save that SHOULD be avoiding that 100%.

Unlike you nobody else thinks things should be balanced the way they are for F2P either.  So not suprising you are doing everything you can to retain bad mechanics design to keep your class just that much better.

I think it is extremely pathetic that you are trying to have it both ways in saying that those two are bad and then agreeing with them on changing strikethrough immunity. If you see I think Gungo's position on skrikethrough immunity is delusional. There is one undeniable fact that NO brawlers would be raiding seriously if strikethrough immunity was nerfed. It does not matter how good a player someone is if the mechanics are stacked against brawlers then they won't be raiding. And damm straight I want my class to remain viable. I like eq2 and I like raiding so I am not going to give up this position without a fight.

On the subject of F2P most of the player base is bronze and silver or casual non-raider so of course it makes sense to ballance classes for them as well. At low levels and with unmaxed AA plate tanks are light years more powerful than brawlers. Brawlers are the least played tanks and the bruiser is one of the least played classes over all. The most popular class in the entire game is the Berserker. These are the statistics that the devs actually look at when they factor in F2P class ballance. http://eq2mission.flame.org/summary...venture_classes The devs are not going to nerf a class that is already unpopular nor are they going to buff up a class that is already seen as over powered flavor of the month.

I lost you after you said: Brawler's don't have any advantages besides strikethrough immunity, here let me name a few just at the top of my head...

- 3 Death Preventions with fast reuse/NO Drawbacks like every other fighters.

- 360 Degree Avoidance, All the other fighters have 180 Degree Avoidance.

- High Damage Reduction/Higher then any other fighters.

- The ability to use 2 weapons and a Shield, retaining high DPS while tanking.

- Very good Snap Aggro.

But its ok, because its not a free class it should be better then all of the rest! Just like you said!

Sorry... you have no idea what your talking about, Brawlers will be fine without strikethrough immunity.

Talathion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 02:36 PM   #208
Yimway

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

Novusod wrote:

There is one undeniable fact that NO brawlers would be raiding seriously if strikethrough immunity was nerfed. It does not matter how good a player someone is if the mechanics are stacked against brawlers then they won't be raiding.

I'm not backpeddling at all, and I do not at all believe that statement.

If brawlers retained 50% strikethru avoidance, I feel they'd still be raiding just fine.  I do not believe the 100% number is needed, and I don't believe any one should be getting 100% outside of some rare short term buff with a reasonably high reuse.

I think all fighters probably deserve some % of strikethru avoidance via different buff packages, i don't believe they should be the same, I do believe brawlers need the highest %.

I still vehemently believe strikethru avoidance was a stop-gap decision that should have already been addressed.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 03:00 PM   #209
Damager

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 124
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Novusod wrote:

There is one undeniable fact that NO brawlers would be raiding seriously if strikethrough immunity was nerfed. It does not matter how good a player someone is if the mechanics are stacked against brawlers then they won't be raiding.

I'm not backpeddling at all, and I do not at all believe that statement.

If brawlers retained 50% strikethru avoidance, I feel they'd still be raiding just fine.  I do not believe the 100% number is needed, and I don't believe any one should be getting 100% outside of some rare short term buff with a reasonably high reuse.

I think all fighters probably deserve some % of strikethru avoidance via different buff packages, i don't believe they should be the same, I do believe brawlers need the highest %.

I still vehemently believe strikethru avoidance was a stop-gap decision that should have already been addressed.

We are talking balance between fighters here. So brawlers should never be under Guard in survivability (or any other fighter as they should be equal, or better situationaly by class). Atans guard is less geared then my monk and retains 1600 more mitigation. The percent that that reduces damage increases by level of Mob so yes the brawler would have to retain its superior avoidance thats a given when compairing mit vs avoid. To level the field out in temps if brawlers dropped to 50% strikethrough immune which would put our temps 50% stikethru also then the equal would be  making the Guards stoneskins able to be struckthru as well or the brawlers temps would have to retain immune to strikethru.

Damager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 03:22 PM   #210
Yimway

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

Damager wrote:

We are talking balance between fighters here. So brawlers should never be under Guard in survivability (or any other fighter as they should be equal, or better situationaly by class). Atans guard is less geared then my monk and retains 1600 more mitigation. The percent that that reduces damage increases by level of Mob so yes the brawler would have to retain its superior avoidance thats a given when compairing mit vs avoid. To level the field out in temps if brawlers dropped to 50% strikethrough immune which would put our temps 50% stikethrough also then the equal would be  making the Guards stoneskins able to be struckthrough as well or the brawlers temps would have to retain immune to strikethrough..

You realize with the curve of mitigation, that 1600 is around 2.5% damage difference?

Tanking hasn't been about mitigating damage for some time.  Its been more about damage avoidance in my opinion.  As we discussed earlier in this thread.  Some tanks have lots of tools to avoid predictable damage, some have lots of tools to survive unpredictable damage, and some have no tools at all.  In the end, we as a community are choosing the ones that do best against what is unpredictable as that is the hardest to deal with.

__________________
Yimway is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:36 AM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.