EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > The Development Corner > In Testing Feedback
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-24-2005, 05:20 AM   #31
Valta

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 242
Default



illum.se wrote:
You can claim a lot of stuff in the name of balance but no way in hell is a tower shield the same as a kite shield, sorry.
No way. It's as simple as that. Wake up....




go on a middle age melee show and ask them if you can use a tower and a kite shield and you will notice THEY ARE THE SAME. the "big barn door" does NOT provide any more protection in melee combat then a kite shield, more then that, it cuts your attack skills by about 80%. The only additional protection a tower shield gives you over a kite is vs projectiles (especialy named: arrows - no tower shield is strong enough to hold a bolt). From own expeerience I would say, your defense with a kite shield is much higher then tower.
 
and now please stop [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing about reality. a) its very realistic as it stands now b) if you want it realistic, they would have to fix even more things and I bet noone would be fine with that.
Valta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 06:46 AM   #32
Ramsy02

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 48
Default


Ibishi wrote:
THE REASON THAT CRUSADERS DO NOT GET BOWS, RAPIERS, DAGGERS, SPEARS, ETC. is b/c they all do.....*drumroll*....PIERCING DAMAGE, and SOE says Crusaders don't pierce. Mages don't get slashing, priests dont get slashing (save druids who get sword) or piercing (save shamans who get spear), Scouts don't get crushing (save for throwing hammers and blunt arrows). As far as tower vs. kite.  1% is about the same as it is right now on live.  cedar tower is 16.8 cedar kite is like 16.1.  as the numbers go up the % difference is basically going to stay the same but they're both getting an improvement. I concur with Kilopy in general in his last post.  If you think Warriors have no problems themselves you need to take the time to go learn.  We're all really just getting minor tweaks while they figure out the big changes, then we'll get more real work done for us. Crusaders are completely inarguably the best aid-tank class in the archetype.  That is more than they got in EQ1 and its a very important role.  Crusaders can also MT many targets just fine, as can brawlers.  Guardians can tank...everything, and get very poor aid-tank utility.

Message Edited by Ibishi on 04-21-2005 01:35 AM


Crusaders have never been able to use Piercing weapons , even as far back as D&D if i remember correctly . Guardians are the only PURE tank class in Everquest2. Paladin=Warrior/priest, SK=Warrior/neromancer?, Beserker= Warrior/scout(scout for their dps abilities) Guardian=Warrior so for the arguement of all tank classes should be equal in tanking abilities is just stupid. I don't think guardians should be way above , just have a better edge in battle cause we are only all defensive class in the game. making kite/tower shields the same effectiveness will make it so guardians dont have a edge now .
Ramsy02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 11:52 AM   #33
prisoner

General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I normally try to keep my posts professional and in a decent manner,  but I gotta say that this is the biggest bunch of crap argument that guardians have ever come up with.  God forbid someone be able to tank as well as you (as advertised).  I have no experience with monks or bruisers,  but I hope that their deflection % comes close as well,  and if not,  it should.  Tell me,  why do you care (the guardian) how well another tank does its job?  Cause you really shouldn't.  It shouldn't affect you one bit.  You will still be chosen a good majority of the time for a group/raid anyway and yet you are whining that tower shields and kite shields have the same block %.  Pardon me while I laugh.

Ok I'm back.

Its been discussed over and over,  the balance is already in your favor thus far.  Crusaders come close,  but we are still behind.  Sad but true.  I'll gladly give you my ward that blocks most of 1 hit from a solo mob for your bow.  Enjoy the massive power drain.  Lord knows I do. 

Of all the dumb things to complain about... ugh I need a stiff drink.

17

prisoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 02:25 PM   #34
uzhiel feathered serpe

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 461
Default

Its all about balance. U notice the only people who say tanks are balanced are Guardians, when there are 6 other tank types. No, they are not balanced. At no time did it state that Guardians were supposed to be the UBER tank. Nowhere.  Now that alot of us are in in 50's its plain to see that either guardians have to be adjusted down, or the other tanks have to adjusted up.

I am in favor of adjusting other tanks to be on par with guardians. Its not about making cookie cutter tanks. Its about having 6 interchangeable tanks in ALL aspects.  If the differences are so great now that Guardians tank 90% of raid encounters what happens in 10 lvls? or 20 lvls?

Unless the devs start adjusting things now, the differences will just keep growing. Stop trying to justify why Guards should be at the top.

The fact of the matter is that there will be an adjustment. What type is yet to be determined, but Im betting on the +defs buffs that let Guards tank 3 lvls above other tanks, no matter how well buffed the other tank is.

Also, how much utility are my heals and wards when I'm tanking? Heals and wards cost so much power that I can be at half power in a blink. Maybe if they made them less power intensive they would be good for something.

Also, the highest kite shield goes up to 820..i know..I have it. The highest tower shield ive seen goes to +890, so there is still a difference. 

On another note, Guardians keep telling me they have no utility. Last time i checked Guardians can DRAIN power. What is more important in a raid, draining power or my 550 power intensive heals? specially when there are full healer types.

Guardinas also have alot more hate generators than we do...can we say hold the line? or taunting blow? on top of your taunts already? and these dont costs anywhere NEAR as much mana as Crusaders aggro generators.

Uzhiel, lvl 50 Paladin, Eternal Chaos, Faydark

Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on 04-24-2005 03:31 AM

uzhiel feathered serpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 05:48 PM   #35
Ramsy02

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 48
Default


uzhiel feathered serpent wrote:

Its all about balance. U notice the only people who say tanks are balanced are Guardians, when there are 6 other tank types. No, they are not balanced. At no time did it state that Guardians were supposed to be the UBER tank. Nowhere.  Now that alot of us are in in 50's its plain to see that either guardians have to be adjusted down, or the other tanks have to adjusted up.

I agree Its about balance. Only reason we say its balanced now is, only edge we got on other tank classes is, we can take alittle big more dmg cause of higher hps and the 0.5% a tower shield increases avoidance.

 What ways do  guardians have to be adjusted down? i havnt seen a valid point on that yet. If you say adjust so everyone tanks the same . sure go ahead but now they have to increase DPS  of guardians so we will be wanted at all in groups.  If they dont make us have more dps then they should just merge guardians with beserkers and delete the guardian class cause there will be no point at all to have them.

WE only have defensive abilities compared to what pally/sk/zerker's have. so it would make sense for us to have alittle edge when it comes to tanking. Only role a guardian has is tank. Guardians have no different roles to be played in a group, other tank classes do.

I am in favor of adjusting other tanks to be on par with guardians. Its not about making cookie cutter tanks. Its about having 6 interchangeable tanks in ALL aspects.  If the differences are so great now that Guardians tank 90% of raid encounters what happens in 10 lvls? or 20 lvls?

Unless the devs start adjusting things now, the differences will just keep growing. Stop trying to justify why Guards should be at the top.

If they make it so all tank classes are equal defensively, guardians will be at the bottom. yes they need to adjust so all tanks are the same. but, if this means putting guardians at the bottom to make paladins happy... i guess that does make sense since theres 20x more paladins than anyother class and it will make there customer base more happy

The fact of the matter is that there will be an adjustment. What type is yet to be determined, but Im betting on the +defs buffs that let Guards tank 3 lvls above other tanks, no matter how well buffed the other tank is. Im sorry but i dont understand what you mean by this. If your saying a level 45 guardian can tank better than you if your level 48 , you got problems then. this game is based on Levels. Levels mean everything. I've been in  groups with my healer thats level 30 and i havnt seen a noticeable difference in tanking between tanks

Also, how much utility are my heals and wards when I'm tanking? Heals and wards cost so much power that I can be at half power in a blink. Maybe if they made them less power intensive they would be good for something.

This is coming from a level 50 paladin? Heals=argo=save cleric in some situations. Really all the healing does is make you able to solo any mob non caster 4-5 levels below you with ease including named. which guiardians have trouble with some. give you 1 example. Terkus the Raidleader Level 35^^. when  i was 37 i soloed him  cause i can use the HO trigger for a 31pt heal every 10 secs.. Now you can not do that for heals. I could hardly solo him when i was 40! I die 3 out of 5 attempts. Thats the difference of heals

Also, the highest kite shield goes up to 820..i know..I have it. The highest tower shield ive seen goes to +890, so there is still a difference.

On another note, Guardians keep telling me they have no utility. Last time i checked Guardians can DRAIN power. What is more important in a raid, draining power or my 550 power intensive heals? specially when there are full healer types.

What a power drain of 25 or so per tick for 12seconds?  doesnt do much good at higher levels when mobs regenerate faster than it takes away.

Guardinas also have alot more hate generators than we do...can we say hold the line? or taunting blow? on top of your taunts already? and these dont costs anywhere NEAR as much mana as Crusaders aggro generators.

At my level(41) i have 1 aoe taunt , 1 single mob taunt, and 1 melee that adds hate. also all have  that Recue that never works. But we seriously lack dps . DPS is a huge factor when trying to keep hate up

Uzhiel, lvl 50 Paladin, Eternal Chaos, Faydark

Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on 04-24-2005 03:31 AM


Your missing what i was saying. No way do I, as a guardian, want to beable to take the best out of all the other tanks.  What i am saying is , If this furture update continues how it is, What will guardians beable to contribue to a group/raid? Who would want a guardian over a pally/sk/monk/bruiser/Pally . They all tank the same but HAVE TONS MORE crap to contribue to a group than a guardian. Lets see. DPS, Heals, rez spell that can be handy if cleric goes down , pally can rez cleric with 50% power and health. That in itself is pretty valueable or if cleric is getting crushed and pally cant get argo back he can throw in LoH or heals.  Guardian has to say. ooh sorry my dps is too low and taunts suck , will rez with a feather after i run this argo off . or beserkers have massive DPS so if a group has a tank they can be easily added to a group and improve DPS huge and also group now has backup tank if main goes down. Not sure about SK but i know in EQ1 they had really good taunting abilities and decent DPS. in groups monks/bruisers are really good. they tank just fine(the ones ive grouped with) and have pretty good dps abilities.not that good in raids cause when they get hit, they basically get hit with max hps from attacks so can be tricky keeping them alive. This arguement about " hey ill gladly give up my heals/wards for a bow is stupid because guardians can say, I'd rather give up the bow and beable to rez and heal myself and group members. Paladins NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO Dual wield in any realistic RPG game. This goes back to D&D . And if my memory serves me right, they never been able to use daggers and spears either. so its just not a SoE thing. I will be fine with all tank classes tanking the same on mobs but either DPS needs to be dropped to the same as guardian or guardians DPS needs to go up paladin rezes need to go away.Then we will all be equal.

Message Edited by Ramsy02 on 04-24-2005 06:57 AM

Ramsy02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 06:09 PM   #36
Damonious Ba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 55
Default

anyone wants to open a thread "SKs and Palas that truely would have wanted to become guardians"
__________________
Damonious Ba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 07:17 PM   #37
Anariale

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 476
Default

The fundamental point everyone is missing is that the Shield Factor of Tower Shields is still higher than Kite Shields.  Thus, even if the base block rate is the same between the two, Tower Shields will still be better.  The differences in the classes are on the order of ~1%, not much. Actually, right now, the Block Rate % = Shield Factor / Level.  Im not sure where the base rate cues in. Furthermore, every tank is supposed to be able to handle the job as main tank, not just guardians.  Im sorry, this isnt EQ1. W
__________________
Wyrd, 80 Paladin - ex-Ghosts of War, Permafrost
Darton, 70 Guardian (was stolen) Permafrost
Anariale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 09:50 PM   #38
Ramsy02

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 48
Default


Anariale wrote:The fundamental point everyone is missing is that the Shield Factor of Tower Shields is still higher than Kite Shields.  Thus, even if the base block rate is the same between the two, Tower Shields will still be better.  The differences in the classes are on the order of ~1%, not much. Actually, right now, the Block Rate % = Shield Factor / Level.  Im not sure where the base rate cues in. Furthermore, every tank is supposed to be able to handle the job as main tank, not just guardians.  Im sorry, this isnt EQ1. /agree W

Thats my point really when you think about it. but since guardians was designed at launch to be better defensively and are currently trying to change it so they all do, a DPS increase or something needs to happen with guardians or they will be no point to them
Ramsy02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 10:33 PM   #39
Blackdog183

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 267
Default



Ramsy02 wrote:


Anariale wrote:
The fundamental point everyone is missing is that the Shield Factor of Tower Shields is still higher than Kite Shields.  Thus, even if the base block rate is the same between the two, Tower Shields will still be better.  The differences in the classes are on the order of ~1%, not much.

Actually, right now, the Block Rate % = Shield Factor / Level.  Im not sure where the base rate cues in.

Furthermore, every tank is supposed to be able to handle the job as main tank, not just guardians.  Im sorry, this isnt EQ1.
/agree
W


Thats my point really when you think about it. but since guardians was designed at launch to be better defensively and are currently trying to change it so they all do, a DPS increase or something needs to happen with guardians or they will be no point to them





I dont think I have seen anyone say that you dont deserve one, that would be a part of ensuring there is balance.  I do however see a whole bunch of guardians having a fit that the other tank classes are(finnaly) getting some attention.  That strongly suggests a "king of the hill" syndrome.  If all tanks are balanced, that means yes guardians may be on the sidelines some, hey welcome to the club.  I would like to see guardians get some sort of advanced protection ability, make them a "guardian" capable of protecting other classes via buffs etc, while still maintaining their core ability to tank.  At the end of the argument, no one can say that not all tanks should be able to tank....thats all that the other classes want. 

Instead of the guadians in here that are whining and complaining because much needed changes are coming around that *may* put your slot as the [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing raid king in jeapordy, why dont you start making some reasonable requests that would keep you still viable in groups that you arent the MT, since that seems to be your chief complaint.

 

__________________
Iceband Fatebringer
Leader-Shadows of Freeport
51SK/59 alchey
Blackdog183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 03:21 AM   #40
Ibis

General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 155
Default

blackdog, shove it.  you're the one with the inferiority complex.  guardians have issues too and you have no problems tanking anything in this game. ANYTHING.  you can tank darathar just fine.  it sucks your GUILD won't let you. but thats due to the PEOPLE you're with.  it has nothing to do with the capability of the crusader class or its sub-classes.
Ibis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 03:30 AM   #41
Ibis

General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 155
Default


Anariale wrote:The fundamental point everyone is missing is that the Shield Factor of Tower Shields is still higher than Kite Shields.  Thus, even if the base block rate is the same between the two, Tower Shields will still be better.  The differences in the classes are on the order of ~1%, not much. Actually, right now, the Block Rate % = Shield Factor / Level.  Im not sure where the base rate cues in. Furthermore, every tank is supposed to be able to handle the job as main tank, not just guardians.  Im sorry, this isnt EQ1. W
uh, BS?  shield factor and block rate are the same thing, as you said, contradicting your own stement that they are different.  If the block rate is equivalent, so is the shield factor.  why cant people get this? they've said this before.  shield factor is how the shield scales upward, the block rate is the representation of the shield factor vs. a even con mob of, I guess, heroic difficulty.  its easier to say that the base chance to avoid is 20% than to say tier 4 towers are now 900, tier 5 towers are now 1600, etc.  now the base chance to avoid for all kites and towers is 20% against an even con mob, and will rise based on the quality of the shield.  which means they scaled the shield factor up on them all.  block rate is the sum of an equation factoring in the shield rate, it isn't a simple number thrown into the system. those who perpetuate and agree with your statement, in that the shield factor and block rate are somehow not correspondent and that towers will still be superior, only show their lack of knowledge on the subject....such as those concurring with your post, and should henceforth [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]. there IS a hitch.  you see, they MIGHT scale differently upward.  but that hasn't been stated.  as far as we know both the base chance and scalability is the same.  again I am angered at the lack of proper information being given.  [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] "being tested".  gallenite was all flowers and love when he explained downtiering and we get jack [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] when this is also a massive change to the game.

Message Edited by Ibishi on 04-24-2005 07:34 PM

Ibis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 06:35 AM   #42
Anariale

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 476
Default

Ibishi... Seriously bro, calm down, take a step back. The bottom line is that Kite Shields will have a lower Shield Factor than Tower Shields.  Thus, they will not block as well as Tower Shields. End of story Now, if you think the increased aggro generation, better defensive buffs, Tower Shield, larger weapon selection and items available in the ranged slots for stats are not as good as a Ward (thats minimal effectiveness for a Plate wearer) and a Heal... reroll.  Thats how classes are different, but can handle the same role. No, Guardians were NOT designed to be the "best" tank in the game.  Sony specifically designed AGAINST that concept.  Each fighter class was designed to handle themselves as a tank in different means.  Thats exactly what was done here.  One is not supposed to be necessarily better than others.  Rather, the classes are designed to be different, but with equivalent effectiveness. Again, this is not EQ1.   If you think Guardians are supposed to be the give all, end all of tanks... youre wrong.  There isnt much else to say there. W
__________________
Wyrd, 80 Paladin - ex-Ghosts of War, Permafrost
Darton, 70 Guardian (was stolen) Permafrost
Anariale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 09:33 AM   #43
Blackdog183

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 267
Default



Ibishi wrote:
blackdog, shove it.  you're the one with the inferiority complex.  guardians have issues too and you have no problems tanking anything in this game. ANYTHING.  you can tank darathar just fine.  it sucks your GUILD won't let you. but thats due to the PEOPLE you're with.  it has nothing to do with the capability of the crusader class or its sub-classes.



First off, you shouldnt be telling anyone to shove anything anywhere.  Second, inferiority, thats a pretty bold statement.  I have asked for balance, plain and simple, and while the devs arent doing it in the manner that I would prefer, I will take what I can get for now.  You dont need to get yourself confused about my guild or the people in it.  FYI we dont have a guardian MT, we have a SK do it.  Just because youve got your head so far in the sand you cant understand simple logic isnt my fault.

The tanks should have balance, now if that means bringing us up, and giving you increased DPS and some more offtanking skills, then that would present a reasonable balance.  The fact is, most of you guardians are scared to death that your "uber tank" position wont be as prestigious as you feel it is.  You cant refute it in anyway, so dont bother.  All the comments I have seen thus far from people whining about this change pretty much prove my point. 

lvl 50 Guardian_013456 says "OMG you mean I wont be the uber l33t tank I think i am!  OMG to the forums everyone, time to whine!"

__________________
Iceband Fatebringer
Leader-Shadows of Freeport
51SK/59 alchey
Blackdog183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 12:43 PM   #44
prisoner

General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 213
Default



Ibishi wrote:


Anariale wrote:
The fundamental point everyone is missing is that the Shield Factor of Tower Shields is still higher than Kite Shields.  Thus, even if the base block rate is the same between the two, Tower Shields will still be better.  The differences in the classes are on the order of ~1%, not much.

Actually, right now, the Block Rate % = Shield Factor / Level.  Im not sure where the base rate cues in.

Furthermore, every tank is supposed to be able to handle the job as main tank, not just guardians.  Im sorry, this isnt EQ1.

W



uh, BS?  shield factor and block rate are the same thing, as you said, contradicting your own stement that they are different.  If the block rate is equivalent, so is the shield factor.  why cant people get this? they've said this before.  shield factor is how the shield scales upward, the block rate is the representation of the shield factor vs. a even con mob of, I guess, heroic difficulty.  its easier to say that the base chance to avoid is 20% than to say tier 4 towers are now 900, tier 5 towers are now 1600, etc.  now the base chance to avoid for all kites and towers is 20% against an even con mob, and will rise based on the quality of the shield.  which means they scaled the shield factor up on them all.  block rate is the sum of an equation factoring in the shield rate, it isn't a simple number thrown into the system.

those who perpetuate and agree with your statement, in that the shield factor and block rate are somehow not correspondent and that towers will still be superior, only show their lack of knowledge on the subject....such as those concurring with your post, and should henceforth [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].

there IS a hitch.  you see, they MIGHT scale differently upward.  but that hasn't been stated.  as far as we know both the base chance and scalability is the same.  again I am angered at the lack of proper information being given.  [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] "being tested".  gallenite was all flowers and love when he explained downtiering and we get jack [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] when this is also a massive change to the game.

Message Edited by Ibishi on 04-24-2005 07:34 PM


The "shield factor" isn't the same.  It used to be "AC."  While a kite and a tower may now have the same block %,  the mitigation added from a tower will still be higher from that of a kite. 

TowerA - Shield factor 500 - block 20% , KiteA - Shield factor 400 - block 20%.  You'll still have a higher mitigation number.

Shields bring 2 things to the table.  A block % and a mitigation bonus.  Besides,  the block % is part of avoidance while the shield factor of a shield goes towards mitigation.  Make sense ?

17

prisoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 02:03 PM   #45
Ramsy02

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 48
Default


prisoner17 wrote:

Ibishi wrote:

Anariale wrote:The fundamental point everyone is missing is that the Shield Factor of Tower Shields is still higher than Kite Shields.  Thus, even if the base block rate is the same between the two, Tower Shields will still be better.  The differences in the classes are on the order of ~1%, not much.Actually, right now, the Block Rate % = Shield Factor / Level.  Im not sure where the base rate cues in.Furthermore, every tank is supposed to be able to handle the job as main tank, not just guardians.  Im sorry, this isnt EQ1. W
uh, BS?  shield factor and block rate are the same thing, as you said, contradicting your own stement that they are different.  If the block rate is equivalent, so is the shield factor.  why cant people get this? they've said this before.  shield factor is how the shield scales upward, the block rate is the representation of the shield factor vs. a even con mob of, I guess, heroic difficulty.  its easier to say that the base chance to avoid is 20% than to say tier 4 towers are now 900, tier 5 towers are now 1600, etc.  now the base chance to avoid for all kites and towers is 20% against an even con mob, and will rise based on the quality of the shield.  which means they scaled the shield factor up on them all.  block rate is the sum of an equation factoring in the shield rate, it isn't a simple number thrown into the system.those who perpetuate and agree with your statement, in that the shield factor and block rate are somehow not correspondent and that towers will still be superior, only show their lack of knowledge on the subject....such as those concurring with your post, and should henceforth [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].there IS a hitch.  you see, they MIGHT scale differently upward.  but that hasn't been stated.  as far as we know both the base chance and scalability is the same.  again I am angered at the lack of proper information being given.  [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] "being tested".  gallenite was all flowers and love when he explained downtiering and we get jack [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] when this is also a massive change to the game.

Message Edited by Ibishi on 04-24-2005 07:34 PM


The "shield factor" isn't the same.  It used to be "AC."  While a kite and a tower may now have the same block %,  the mitigation added from a tower will still be higher from that of a kite. 

TowerA - Shield factor 500 - block 20% , KiteA - Shield factor 400 - block 20%.  You'll still have a higher mitigation number.

Shields bring 2 things to the table.  A block % and a mitigation bonus.  Besides,  the block % is part of avoidance while the shield factor of a shield goes towards mitigation.  Make sense ?

17


Hrm the only thing that a shield does when i equip it is increase the avoidance nothing  added to the mitigation. you need to start making sense
Ramsy02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 02:37 PM   #46
prisoner

General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 213
Default



Ramsy02 wrote:


prisoner17 wrote:


Ibishi wrote:


Anariale wrote:
The fundamental point everyone is missing is that the Shield Factor of Tower Shields is still higher than Kite Shields.  Thus, even if the base block rate is the same between the two, Tower Shields will still be better.  The differences in the classes are on the order of ~1%, not much.

Actually, right now, the Block Rate % = Shield Factor / Level.  Im not sure where the base rate cues in.

Furthermore, every tank is supposed to be able to handle the job as main tank, not just guardians.  Im sorry, this isnt EQ1.

W



uh, BS?  shield factor and block rate are the same thing, as you said, contradicting your own stement that they are different.  If the block rate is equivalent, so is the shield factor.  why cant people get this? they've said this before.  shield factor is how the shield scales upward, the block rate is the representation of the shield factor vs. a even con mob of, I guess, heroic difficulty.  its easier to say that the base chance to avoid is 20% than to say tier 4 towers are now 900, tier 5 towers are now 1600, etc.  now the base chance to avoid for all kites and towers is 20% against an even con mob, and will rise based on the quality of the shield.  which means they scaled the shield factor up on them all.  block rate is the sum of an equation factoring in the shield rate, it isn't a simple number thrown into the system.

those who perpetuate and agree with your statement, in that the shield factor and block rate are somehow not correspondent and that towers will still be superior, only show their lack of knowledge on the subject....such as those concurring with your post, and should henceforth [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot].

there IS a hitch.  you see, they MIGHT scale differently upward.  but that hasn't been stated.  as far as we know both the base chance and scalability is the same.  again I am angered at the lack of proper information being given.  [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] "being tested".  gallenite was all flowers and love when he explained downtiering and we get jack [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] when this is also a massive change to the game.

Message Edited by Ibishi on 04-24-2005 07:34 PM


The "shield factor" isn't the same.  It used to be "AC."  While a kite and a tower may now have the same block %,  the mitigation added from a tower will still be higher from that of a kite. 

TowerA - Shield factor 500 - block 20% , KiteA - Shield factor 400 - block 20%.  You'll still have a higher mitigation number.

Shields bring 2 things to the table.  A block % and a mitigation bonus.  Besides,  the block % is part of avoidance while the shield factor of a shield goes towards mitigation.  Make sense ?

17



Hrm the only thing that a shield does when i equip it is increase the avoidance nothing  added to the mitigation. you need to start making sense



Last time I checked it affected both.  I'll try it again next time I log in. 

17

prisoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 03:27 PM   #47
Axhine

Loremaster
Axhine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 39
Default

And now Tower shields are = to Kite shields, this is lame why not make chian = to vanguard then?
__________________
Abigor
Everfrost Server
Heroes Fate
Axhine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 05:38 PM   #48
Damonious Ba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 55
Default


Anariale wrote:Ibishi... Seriously bro, calm down, take a step back. The bottom line is that Kite Shields will have a lower Shield Factor than Tower Shields. Thus, they will not block as well as Tower Shields. End of story Now, if you think the increased aggro generation, better defensive buffs, Tower Shield, larger weapon selection and items available in the ranged slots for stats are not as good as a Ward (thats minimal effectiveness for a Plate wearer) and a Heal... reroll. Thats how classes are different, but can handle the same role. No, Guardians were NOT designed to be the "best" tank in the game. Sony specifically designed AGAINST that concept. Each fighter class was designed to handle themselves as a tank in different means. Thats exactly what was done here. One is not supposed to be necessarily better than others. Rather, the classes are designed to be different, but with equivalent effectiveness. Again, this is not EQ1. If you think Guardians are supposed to be the give all, end all of tanks... youre wrong. There isnt much else to say there. W

alright ... all should be different, but still equal ... guardian = more defense, nearly 0 offense => that makes him the tank for bigger raids, mostly because of his buffs though, so basically any tank class can tank a raid easily with a guardian in his groupbersi = less defense, more offnse/dpspala = less defense, heals/wardsk = less defense, debuffs, dpsif you want to have all tanks be the best tank, just remove bersi pala and sks out of the game. because a tank = most defense class wearing plate armor. (fullstop)going for groups, monks make the best tank anyway bc of dps and high avoidance.anyway, this topic is about shields... and everybody is talking lots of [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]. shields dont provide mitigation yet on live servers, so its all about block rate and block rate = shieldfactor / lvl. so if blockrate tower = blockrate kite, then shieldfactor doesnt matter or is equal. and this actually compares a door to a tablet.
__________________
Damonious Ba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 05:38 PM   #49
Nibbl

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 177
Default

 

Message Edited by Nibblar on 04-25-2005 06:15 PM

__________________
__________________________________________________ _________
Necros or Bust!
Nibblar 55 Necro, Sithero 54 Warden, Groll 50 Guardian
Thales 47 Illusionist, Epicurus 46 Inquisitor, Kyros 48 Necro
Nibbl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 05:41 PM   #50
Nibbl

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 177
Default

 

Message Edited by Nibblar on 04-25-2005 06:13 PM

__________________
__________________________________________________ _________
Necros or Bust!
Nibblar 55 Necro, Sithero 54 Warden, Groll 50 Guardian
Thales 47 Illusionist, Epicurus 46 Inquisitor, Kyros 48 Necro
Nibbl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 07:27 PM   #51
uzhiel feathered serpe

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 461
Default

Im curious as to where you got your information that there are only 2 pure tanks? What exactly makes a Berserker a pure tank? or a guardian? Did u figure that out now? or did you know that when you created your toon?

The devs have acknowledged that +def buffs give an unfair advantage...and since Guards are the only tanks that have an advantage in +def buffs....you draw your own conclusions.

I dont care if I get no piercing damage. Ive learned to live with it, same for DW.  These abilities dont have anything to do with "pure" tanking. Bruisers can DW and use piercing. Does that make them "pure" as well?

We all know that tanking is getting an adjustement. Dont be surprised when guards get "fixed". If there are imbalances now, they need to be fixed now.

I dont care if you guys get a hit points boost..or a mitigation boost. Thats your thing. I even go so far as to say you guys should get bit more utility or an increase in DPS. I agree that my heals mean I should have less hit points....but the def buffs need to be ACROSS the board.

Tanking doesnt mean taking less damage. By that rationale templars and inquisitors can out tank us, since they can just keep healing themselves. Tanking means being able to kill the MOB you are fighting.

Whether defensively or offensively.

A bruiser, using offense, should take a mob down just as quickly as a Guard. . But this DOES not happen. The bruiser or monk dies alot faster.

A Crusader, using their "hybrid"( I hate that word) abilities, should take a mob down just as quick as a guard...but again, not happening. We are taking more damage...the comparison is a lvl 50 mob. I tank it at lvl 54, Guards tank it at lvl 57.

Common, does that not sound crazy?

So you get the SAME evasion, more hit points, more mitigation, and more + def buffs than evasion tanks....and you call that balanced? why? because you guys are "pure" tanks and therefore somehow deserve this? Where has SoE came out and said such a thing.

Thats just ridiculous to say tanking is balanced as is.

I'm not advocation nerfs at all. I'm saying ALL tanks need to be brought up to the same lvl as guards when tanking. If you have more DPS then that mob should DIE alot quicker and the tank should take just as much damage as the Guard who has less DPS, but more hit points and mitigation.

This is the test. Fight Darathar for 1 hour, with an evasion tank or Guard. When the dust clears who is left standing..because if a Guard is a defensive tank and a Bruiser is an offensive tank then they should take darathar down right? just in different way, correct?

Im curious too. Stick me tanking Darathar, so then I can use those fabulous heals and wards that make me so UBER, right? until Darathar nukes me for 3000k. My ward absorved 500 and my heals 570. Great, i say..but wait..i just blew 300 mana on it..by the 7 AE, im OOP...oh oh...

Uzhiel, lvl 50 Paladin, Eternal Chaos, Faydark.

Who lives?

Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on 04-25-2005 08:51 AM

uzhiel feathered serpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 08:52 PM   #52
Damonious Ba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 55
Default

.)guardian matter:besides of our defense buffs, there is nothing special to the guardian, we have a low dps when onehanded, dont have that dmging abilities, but we have 3 single target taunts and 2 ae taunts. if you take away defense buffs, we got our taunts, but why should we tank ? the guardian was meant to be the most defensive tank with nearly no offensive abilities at all. so i definately dont want offensive abilities, i chose a guardian because of that.tanking =! killing, tanking is holding agro and getting beat up by a mob or an encounter -- so while a guardian might be able to solo higher stuff because of his defense, it takes him by far longer making it inefficient. thats why a guardian is not the main choice for a single group tank.they dont need to nerf defense, theyd just need to alter it so that i would provide 50% avoidance, 50% mitigation and it would be fine. give us mitigation isntead of avoidance and we might not be able to solo those blue cons ++ mobs, but we'd still be the defensive tank like its meant.talking from my experience with the other tank classes and from the talks i had with friends who play them, i can say that they all got their Pros and Cons, they all got their strengths and weaknesses already, and itd be total crap if you made all tanks the same, then youd only need 1 tank class.and this whole matter goes as far as the discussion about kite and tower shields, bc yet only guardians and zerkers are able to use them, so SoE didnt want to give them to SKs and Palas, so tower shields are meant to be better / different than kite shields, if tower shields would be less defensive, why should a guardian use them ? so the main question is what is the sense of tower shields and why cant SoE figure it out and give it its stats.
__________________
Damonious Ba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 11:10 PM   #53
Eadric

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 184
Default

I'm a warlock (50th), but I recall during beta that SOE said many, many times that there are no hybrids and that EQ2 was based upon archetypes. I specifically remember them stating that there would be situations where each of the fighter sub-classes would be the best tank for the job. The fact that guardians are the go-to guy all of the time is indicative of a problem in their design.

I'm not saying that guardians (or berserkers) will not or do not need attention in other areas (i.e. DPS, utility), but all of the fighters are justified to want equal facetime in tanking raids.

Eadric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 01:38 AM   #54
Nibbl

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 177
Default

Not sure what an SK or Pally is then if its not a hybrid...  They do pretty much the same thing as EQ I, part fighter with a little cleric/necro...  Seems the same... Guess SOE can call it whatever they want SMILEY  Apple is and Apple to me...

 

__________________
__________________________________________________ _________
Necros or Bust!
Nibblar 55 Necro, Sithero 54 Warden, Groll 50 Guardian
Thales 47 Illusionist, Epicurus 46 Inquisitor, Kyros 48 Necro
Nibbl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 01:43 AM   #55
Eadric

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 184
Default

I guess it comes down to role. They each have one part to play and that part is fighter.
Eadric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 02:02 AM   #56
uzhiel feathered serpe

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 461
Default

"This is the test. Fight Darathar for 1 hour, with an evasion tank, then a Guard. When the dust clears who is left standing..because if a Guard is a defensive tank and a Bruiser is an offensive tank then they should take darathar down right? just in different way, correct?

Im curious too. Stick me tanking Darathar, so then I can use those fabulous heals and wards that make me so UBER, right? until Darathar nukes me for 3000k. My ward absorved 500 and my heals 570. Great, i say..but wait..i just blew 300 mana on it..by the 7 AE, im OOP...oh oh..."

No one mentioned the test. Wheres the flavor in this? I invite any high lvl guild to try this....im interested in the outcome. This is very tasty. I can smell the flavor from here. :smileyindifferent:

So this is what guards mean when they say flavor...interesting.

From what I can tell, only the  status quo gives the tanking classes flavor. ANY change, no matter what, will unflavor the concoction?

I dont think so. I'll stick to my opinion about balancing ALL tanks to tank equally, whether offensive or defensive.

Message Edited by uzhiel feathered serpent on 04-25-2005 03:13 PM

uzhiel feathered serpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 02:28 AM   #57
Damonious Ba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 55
Default


Eadric wrote:

I'm a warlock (50th), but I recall during beta that SOE said many, many times that there are no hybrids and that EQ2 was based upon archetypes. I specifically remember them stating that there would be situations where each of the fighter sub-classes would be the best tank for the job. The fact that guardians are the go-to guy all of the time is indicative of a problem in their design.

I'm not saying that guardians (or berserkers) will not or do not need attention in other areas (i.e. DPS, utility), but all of the fighters are justified to want equal facetime in tanking raids.


it currently is like that:for the difficulty on the mobs you are going to engage you would rather pick monk/bruiser, bersi, pala or sk as a tank rather than a no-dps-guardian.if every tank class should be able to tank i.e. darathar the same good, youd only need 1 class, bc then you wouldnt need any differences, bc dps doesnt matter as a MT on a raid.
__________________
Damonious Ba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 02:42 AM   #58
uzhiel feathered serpe

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 461
Default

No man, you wouldnt have just one class. You would have one tank.......and the choice to pick from 6 types, instead of one. It seems to me that guards are just afraid to be one of the tanks, instead of the ONE tank. :smileyindifferent:

You wont become obsolete. You will still have more AC, hit points, and mitigation that other tanks. What you wont have is the +def buffs that other tanks dont have and a decrease in the avoidance that you shouldnt have. Because if you guys are so defensive and have more mitigation that the rest of use, then you should also have less avoidance than us.

Seems only right?

uzhiel feathered serpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 03:55 AM   #59
Nibbl

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 177
Default

 

Message Edited by Nibblar on 04-25-2005 06:10 PM

__________________
__________________________________________________ _________
Necros or Bust!
Nibblar 55 Necro, Sithero 54 Warden, Groll 50 Guardian
Thales 47 Illusionist, Epicurus 46 Inquisitor, Kyros 48 Necro
Nibbl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 10:35 AM   #60
Ibis

General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 155
Default


Anariale wrote:Ibishi... Seriously bro, calm down, take a step back. The bottom line is that Kite Shields will have a lower Shield Factor than Tower Shields.  Thus, they will not block as well as Tower Shields. End of story Now, if you think the increased aggro generation, better defensive buffs, Tower Shield, larger weapon selection and items available in the ranged slots for stats are not as good as a Ward (thats minimal effectiveness for a Plate wearer) and a Heal... reroll.  Thats how classes are different, but can handle the same role. No, Guardians were NOT designed to be the "best" tank in the game.  Sony specifically designed AGAINST that concept.  Each fighter class was designed to handle themselves as a tank in different means.  Thats exactly what was done here.  One is not supposed to be necessarily better than others.  Rather, the classes are designed to be different, but with equivalent effectiveness. Again, this is not EQ1.   If you think Guardians are supposed to be the give all, end all of tanks... youre wrong.  There isnt much else to say there. W

wards are far more useful to both plate tanks and leather tanks than reactives are to leather tanks compared to plate.  the absolute load that shamans spew about wards is untrue.  damage received at the end of a ward is indeed mitigated properly.  you don't believe me? I BET you haven't tested it.  I have tanked epic to epic to epic mob with shoulders that have a reactive 50pt ward, and there is no way in HELL thats true.  I would be absolutely SLAUGHTERED if the effect ever came up b/c the mob would immediately do max damage - 50 on me.  that has never been the case.  shamans are [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed for credibility right now and so are the crusaders rallying behind their so-called proof. guardians do not have an excess of aggro generation by comparison to crusaders. go and actually get some numbers and tell me you're extremely or even somewhat inferior.  we do have good defensive buffs, but they would assist a crusader in the group as much as the guardian in the group as much as the druid in the group b/c they are group buffs.  crusaders have superior aid-tank skills.  so its not that I'm superior to you in mitigation, its that I cannot provide the same assistance to your mitigation as you can to mine, that I do not also receive as product of my buffs.  The reason for this is that our primary aid-tank skill is intervention based and broken (last I checked, which was a while back).  They create extra damage and don't (or didn't) activate reactive heals or wards present upon the guardian sentrying the MT. I never said guardians are meant to be the end all, I said your statement about block rate and shield factor was incorrect.  WHERE IN HELL DID I SAY THAT?  You're [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ing your own credibilty here.  You're showing your inferiority issues by accusing me of saying you should be inferior.  You're in a fetal position before I even show up. block rate is the sum of the shield factor versus the power of the mob you're fighting.  if block rate is equivalent then so is shield factor.  they only specified base though, so there may be hope in that towers scale better in shield factor such as plate scales upward more than chain, but its likely that the increase from weak to strong chain and weak to strong plate is the exact same % as will be weak and strong shields.  Therefore if the base is equivalent and the scale is equivalent, then they are merely a fashion choice. the reason they didnt say shield factor, was b/c that number varies dependong on the tier of the shield.  an oak shield will be inferior in shield factor to a cedar shield, but their effect against the mobs of the appropriate level, will be equivalent - 20% base.  So you either have them stating that 1-9 levels kites will have a 120 base, 250 for 10-19, 500 for 20-29, etc. or you have them stating that the base chance to block will be 20% (handcrafted probably) throughout the game. I didn't say this was EQ1.  I played a paladin in EQ1 and trust me I don't want either crusader class shafted in EQ2, but you're not being shafted that much more than I am at the moment.  I've got my own issues that need fixing and the crusaders, SKs especially, are parading around claiming I am a god incarnate and that my issues are non-existant.  Your issues are not that severe.  Brawlers are the ones with raid tanking issues, not crusaders.  Oh, and I actually do visit test to look around.  Do you?
Ibis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:53 AM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.