SOE, what is the role of berserker? Cuz, its sure not tank

[Arinwulf]

What is the point of the berserker class anymore?   We can't get into groups as dps because we are outclassed by all the fingerwagglers and the scouts. And we are not optimized for tanking and its not worth the complaining when we can't stand up to mobs like the guardian.  Why don't you just come out and say that the berserker class is useless so people won't waste anymore time on it?

Everyother mmog out there has given their heavy armor fighters an option to do damage or to tank, and if you choose damage, you are viable in a group, that is, no other class significantly out damages you.

So, any Devs wish to comment on this?  Does marginalizing berserkers factor into your plan to cut down on the number of different classes?

You guys do a lot of good work in so many ways in creating the milieu, only to bork things up beyond recognition when it comes to class roles.

[Junaru]

If you were asking about raids I might back you up but for groups? Are you insane? Have you run any of the tSO instance yet? Been to Befallen?

[TumpieBrell]

Try some of the new TSO instances like Cavern of the Afflicted, or Obelisk of Akzhul. Plenty of linked encounters - you can tank while doing some of the highest dmg in your group.

[Yimway]

Arinwulf wrote:

What is the point of the berserker class anymore?   We can't get into groups as dps because we are outclassed by all the fingerwagglers and the scouts. And we are not optimized for tanking and its not worth the complaining when we can't stand up to mobs like the guardian.  Why don't you just come out and say that the berserker class is useless so people won't waste anymore time on it?

You do just fine tanking, especially for multiple encounters like we're seeing in some of these instances.

What I have to fault many berzerkers for is not having a tank AND dps spec and being able to swap them on there mirror and have the gear hotkeys to switch roles for the evening.

[TumpieBrell]

Actually it's a lot easier now that our DA aa doesn't require a shield. In a pinch, our DPS spec = use a second sword.

But yeah, we could do some great dps specced properly in some of the new instances.

[Thunndar316]

I think Zerkers are the 2nd best option if you can't find a Guardian.  However, I have stated my opinions before and I won't go into it much deeper.  Personally I think all fighters should be able to tank a raid with proper gear and skill but SOE obviously wants certain classes to be > others.

[Kaberu]

I've seen a vast improvement in tanking with my 80 Berserker, most notable against a horde encounter, such as in some of the Befallen zones (for example). Of course there is a little ommission in your post: You actually have to spec for tanking!!

The inherent problem with Berserkers (which I'm not specifically saying is your problem) is that the players are so use to speccing for damage, they forget about boosting their defensive abilities. If you want to tank, spec for it. Hybrid and/or damage-for-aggro builds won't cut it unless you have some nice back up in your group.

A simple and quick browsing in the Berserker forums on this official site, as well as some community sites, will reveal that some Berserkers are having little-to-no problem tanking TSO zones while dual-wielding, let alone the many doing well with the traditional sword and board. At the very least, I think it's safe to say you are missing something.

My personal test was having my ranger friend pound the everliving crap out of me with his ranged attacks while I just used defensive abilities. I easily lasted more than twice as long as I did before the TSO changes and enhancements.

The capability is there whether you've reached it or not. My suggestion is to try and mix your spec up, try out different combinations and maybe gear differently. However, if it turns out to be something silly, like your top resist is 40% or your best armor is one or two mastercrafted/legendaries... I reserve the right to laugh a little on the inside.

Perhaps you can link your character and list your AA specs?

[Xalmat]

TSO is the Berserker's expansion to shine for once. They're much preferred over Guardians because of the high amount of AoE content and their higher DPS.

[Arinwulf]

I don't like tanking to begin with. Burned out tanking as a warrior in EQ1. When EQ2 came out (the reason I bought the bloody game to begin with was because berserkers could really do damage.  I figured I would only tank if necessary. Then they nerfed us to uselessness.  When I ask to join a group these days, the first thing out of their mouths is,  we need you to tank.  Tanking is thankless and due to SOE "tuning" anemic for the berserker class.  Really, SOE needs to quit screwing around and start eliminating their unwanted classes. 

bottom line-  If there are no roles for berserkers besides tanking, then why have the class?  Guardians tank, they are optimized for it. Hell they even do damage about as good as a berserker.  So what's the point of the berserker? 

When a wizard in VP gear can tank better than a Berserker of the same level, you have a BROKEN game.

Why is this so hard to understand, SOE?   

[Xalmat]

Arinwulf wrote:

I don't like tanking to begin with.

Then you picked the wrong class. I suggest a Swashbuckler. Berserkers are all about being a Tank first, DPS second.

[Arinwulf]

Xalmat wrote:

Arinwulf wrote:

I don't like tanking to begin with.

Then you picked the wrong class. I suggest a Swashbuckler. Berserkers are all about being a Tank first, DPS second.

You have no clue what you are talking about.  Berserkers were about damage first, tanking second.  The guardian class is about tanking first.  Do you have a fluid blockage to the brain?  What's so hard to understand about this?  THERE IS NO POINT TO HAVING THE BERSERKER CLASS ANYMORE.  SOE wants us all to be guardians.

[Xalmat]

Um, excuse me, but I actually play a Berserker. Level 80 with mythical. I regularly group with a fully geared out Berserker in my guild as well.

What do you actually play?

Not only do Berserkers tank extremely well, but they rock the parse too, especially if it's an AoE fight.

[Kordran]

Arinwulf wrote:

I don't like tanking to begin with. Burned out tanking as a warrior in EQ1. When EQ2 came out (the reason I bought the bloody game to begin with was because berserkers could really do damage.  I figured I would only tank if necessary.

That's like a Fury saying that they don't like healing to begin with, and they really just want to play as a caster. You are a warrior, your job is to tank and your damage is there to help you do that job; it's not something to do as an alternative. If tanking isn't your thing, then play a scout. Seriously.

[Curs3]

Sounds like a troll to me... anyways I manage to do get pretty high on the parse without my epic so far plus steal aggro from pallies and guards.

I love berserker, screw off pall

[Gisallo]

Arinwulf wrote:

You have no clue what you are talking about.  Berserkers were about damage first, tanking second.  The guardian class is about tanking first.  Do you have a fluid blockage to the brain?  What's so hard to understand about this?  THERE IS NO POINT TO HAVING THE BERSERKER CLASS ANYMORE.  SOE wants us all to be guardians.

This illustrates what I saw coming.  There were plenty of zerkers that were 100% wearing chain and leather dps gear, standing in a group as melee dps, not even considering tanking.  I saw A LOT of people complaining about the loss of DA as being class breaking and realized ..."ooops they don't see themselves as a tank they see themselves as melee dps".  In the beginning the class was the exact opposite of what you want it to be.  They were a tank first who dpsed more because of less survivability and so could be melee dps if absolutely necessary.

Well let me break things down.  Berserkers have been and always have been tanks first end of freakin story.  Zerks did a little more damage than Guards and guards were a little more durable that was the trade off.  The damage was not there to say "you are not a tank", but rather to try and say "they are tougher but you help bring the mob down faster so its a wash."  That fine a balance though can't survive years of expansions, updates and uneven class developement.  The reason many zerkers ended up filling melee dps roles and not MT or OT roles is because the class was eventually broken in comparison to Guards and Pallys thanks to Amends.  Now the rest you may find irrelevant because for some reason you seem to think a Zerker was never meant to tank.  They were they just had a hard time.  I am sorry that you may have come to the class when the easiest way to go was to roll him as melee dps, but the rest of us want to tank again and now that we can we are happy again.

Even with that in mind here we go for damage.  In the Cruicible I was 3rd on the parse (behind a Ranger and a Warlock) and I was in freakin' defensive stance for 2/3rds of it, in Befallen 2nd (behind a Swashbuckler).  That seems to be pretty fair seeing as how I am a fighter class.  I wasn't even running ACT for that, just spamming.

In this expansion we are rocking because we do way more AOE damage than Guards and with the changes to our aggro tools we can actually handle single target stuff pretty well too now.  Look at all the Guard and Pally foums.  On both you will see them complaining about many of the changes because Zerkers and SK's can actually tank again and their slots are no longer "protected" simply because they have the right class name. 

Lastly in undercutting your "they want us to be guards" train of thought, what the zerks lost in terms of dps the Guardian lost too, so parity has been maintained in the realm of dps.  As far as I can see all that got goofed with was the stam tree we share.  Since the same dps balance is maintained there we have nopt "become" anything and with the increase in AE encouters we are actually better off parse wise than before.

[Arinwulf]

First of all, my main is a level 80 zerker, I have my epic, but not mythical.   I have played this game from  the beginning.

Secondly, let me ask you "Tank first" geniuses something.  If a zerker's job is tank first, damage second, what is the role of a guardian?  What is the distinction to our class?

Third, a Fury is about damage first and secondary healing. If you want a healing druid, you make a warden.

What is so hard to understand about this?   Ostensibly, there are differences in the roles of each class, otherwise, why have all these classes?

[surepaw]

Arinwulf wrote:

I don't like tanking to begin with. Burned out tanking as a warrior in EQ1. When EQ2 came out (the reason I bought the bloody game to begin with was because berserkers could really do damage. I figured I would only tank if necessary. Then they nerfed us to uselessness. When I ask to join a group these days, the first thing out of their mouths is, we need you to tank. Tanking is thankless and due to SOE "tuning" anemic for the berserker class. Really, SOE needs to quit screwing around and start eliminating their unwanted classes.

bottom line- If there are no roles for berserkers besides tanking, then why have the class? Guardians tank, they are optimized for it. Hell they even do damage about as good as a berserker. So what's the point of the berserker?

When a wizard in VP gear can tank better than a Berserker of the same level, you have a BROKEN game.

Why is this so hard to understand, SOE?

Arinwulf wrote:

You have no clue what you are talking about. Berserkers were about damage first, tanking second. The guardian class is about tanking first. Do you have a fluid blockage to the brain? What's so hard to understand about this? THERE IS NO POINT TO HAVING THE BERSERKER CLASS ANYMORE. SOE wants us all to be guardians.

WHAT?!!!!!!!!................I mean...................WHAT?!!!!!!

Zerker was not meant for tanking? What are they, a buffed up scout? Zerkers tank fine. They do great damage. Can they do more damage then a scout? No, but they can take a hit better then a scout.

The question you should ask yourself is if you chose a fighter class to be pure DPS is what the heck were you thinking?

They are not pure DPS, they have great DPS and can tank. Can they take a hit better then a guardian? No, but they can also put out more damage then a guard.

I suppose the same could be said of my swash, we have an AA line that allows us to tank. We actually tank well. WE put out more damage then a zerker, but a zerker tanks better then a swash. Does that make the swash broke? Nope. We are still asked to tank from time to time, but our main job is DPS.

The zerkers main job is tank, and they can put out some good DPS while they tank. In the new TSO instances you need alot of DPS, a zerker or SK is perfect for that.

For example, in Mistmoore Manor, there is a named that if you do not kill them in a certain amout of time the ceiling drops down on you. You need to pump out between 14K and 15K DPS as a group or you are dead. Using a zerker as the tank is perfect for this. They can pump out some serious DPS to add to the 14-15K total. Especially if you have some low DPS classes in your group, you can still make it.

Did you want zerker to do as much damage as a swashie and take a hit better? Did you want the zerker to take a hit as well as the guard AND do more damage? Like I said at the beginning...................WHAT?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dareena]

Umm...  Okay, I'm just a lowly scout player.  But to my novice understanding, guardians were the single target tanks and berserkers were the AE tanks.  Along with that, guardians were built to be slightly more defensive while berserkers were built to be slightly more offensive.  (Paladins and Shadow Knights were supposed to follow this same parallel, expect from a hybrid's perspective.)

The ultimate issue eventually become that the classes were no longer equal reflections of each other.  The guardian's tanking ability in RoK was godly due to the high number of single mob targets.  In addition, a mythical guardian could match the DPS of a berserker.  Combined with the growing imbalances between the two classes over previous expansions, berserker became a shunned class by much of the EQ2 player base.

In TSO, there are so many linked mob encounters that it gives my brigand a real headache.  It's in this world that a berserker shines as a tank choice.  And if this wasn't enough, the guardian's shield advantage for the Stamina line (from their mythical) is now being shared with both classes.  So once again, the playing fields are supposed to be relatively balanced.  Guardians no longer have a DPS edge and the mix of solo and group mobs in TSO can make both classes desireable for a group.

Have I got any of this wrong?  While I haven't paid complete attention to the issues, this was my general understand of the issues.  And if I'm right, what is the point of this thread?  That the berserker should be a beefier swashbuckler with a little lower DPS?

[Arinwulf]

Ok, lets start from the beginning.  When EQ2 came out, they made a distinction between  Defensive Plate wearing fighters and Offensive plate wearing fighters.    There was no distinction based on AOE.  The defensive plate wearer was a great tank, high hp, best ac and nominal damage,  the offensive plate wearer was the opposite, great dps, nominal defensive skills.    The classes had different roles.  The bezerker was never intended to be the main tank. Off tank maybe, back up, but not the main tank.  The guardian had the role of meat shield.  There was a difference to the class.  Now, even with TSO changes, what is the point to having the two classes. AOE?  that's all? What the hell kind of design is that?  There is no reason for the berserker class to exist at this point and if they are going to keep things like this, then they should just merge them. 

If you "berserker players" want to tank so much, why do you play a zerker? why aren't you playing a guardian?

Can anyone answer that question? 

Dareena, thank you for taking the time to respond with your post. I acknowledge that things are different now than they were under RoK, but its still nothing more than a bandaid on a bigger problem.  One combat feature shouldn't be the basis of an entirely new class.  But really that's all its gotten down to.

[Xalmat]

Arinwulf wrote:

If you "berserker players" want to tank so much, why do you play a zerker? why aren't you playing a guardian?

Can anyone answer that question?

Because Zerkers are more fun than Guardians, and they have a better looking class hat.

I mean seriously, Viking hat pwns all!

[Arinwulf]

Xalmat wrote:

Arinwulf wrote:

If you "berserker players" want to tank so much, why do you play a zerker? why aren't you playing a guardian?

Can anyone answer that question?

Because Zerkers are more fun than Guardians, and they have a better looking class hat.

Hmm, ok, well hard to argue with that kind of relentless logic.  I concede, sir, to your keen ability to focus on the salient points. 

[Grumpy_Warrior_01]

To the players that are sipping this kool-ade about berserkers being the gods of AOE and guardians being the gods of single-target encounters, explain something to me.  If a berserker's ability to hold aggro on multi-target encounters is better, how can you logically say he does not also hold onto single targets better?  It makes no sense.  Whatever aggro tools are used on multi-target encounters can also be used on single targets.

[aias]

Arinwulf wrote:

Ok, lets start from the beginning.  When EQ2 came out, they made a distinction between  Defensive Plate wearing fighters and Offensive plate wearing fighters.    There was no distinction based on AOE.  The defensive plate wearer was a great tank, high hp, best ac and nominal damage,  the offensive plate wearer was the opposite, great dps, nominal defensive skills.    The classes had different roles.  The bezerker was never intended to be the main tank. Off tank maybe, back up, but not the main tank.  The guardian had the role of meat shield.  There was a difference to the class.  Now, even with TSO changes, what is the point to having the two classes. AOE?  that's all? What the hell kind of design is that?  There is no reason for the berserker class to exist at this point and if they are going to keep things like this, then they should just merge them. 

If you "berserker players" want to tank so much, why do you play a zerker? why aren't you playing a guardian?

Can anyone answer that question? 

Dareena, thank you for taking the time to respond with your post. I acknowledge that things are different now than they were under RoK, but its still nothing more than a bandaid on a bigger problem.  One combat feature shouldn't be the basis of an entirely new class.  But really that's all its gotten down to.

Sounds like you've been playing a different game than the rest of us.  Swashbuckler is what you really want.

[Hardain]

Berserkers have allways been great tanks in EQ2, and i've played one since launch. Even in 2004 they were considered as tanks(and why wouldn't they been?), that's why they wear plate. Offensive tanks yes, but still capable of tanking all content without problems. And now with TSO we're one of the best tanks out there, especially for instances.

[LygerT]

what's with all these stupid threads about zerks lately anyways?

i'd be impressed if a guard can tank alot of the new heroic zones as well as we can. what the OP needs to do is find some healers that don't suck, seriously..

(there. someone has to be the d**k and it may as well be me)

[Slayer505]

Anyone that thinks Berserkers can't, or shouldn't tank is playing the wrong class.  I'm a day one Berserker and I've been MT for my guild for a while now, including ALL instanced content in RoK.  If you're maxing out your DPS then you're probably tanking since you probably have aggro, cause, guess what, zerkers don't have detaunts.  Berserkers are tanks, end of story.  If you made a Berserker just to DPS you rolled the wrong class.  That said, the best way to tank as a Berserker is to max out your DPS.  I'm almost always in the top 5 on the parse on most raid fights.

Given the large number of AE fights in this expansion, I'd be willing to bet you're going to see a large exodus of former Zerkers who wussed out and betrayed in RoK betraying back now.  Lucky for me I don't have to since I was too [Removed for Content] stubborn to betray.  Of course I still managed to MT all of RoK so I guess I got the last laugh.

[Gisallo]

Arinwulf wrote:

Ok, lets start from the beginning.  When EQ2 came out, they made a distinction between  Defensive Plate wearing fighters and Offensive plate wearing fighters.    There was no distinction based on AOE.  The defensive plate wearer was a great tank, high hp, best ac and nominal damage,  the offensive plate wearer was the opposite, great dps, nominal defensive skills.    The classes had different roles.  The bezerker was never intended to be the main tank. Off tank maybe, back up, but not the main tank.  The guardian had the role of meat shield.  There was a difference to the class.  Now, even with TSO changes, what is the point to having the two classes. AOE?  that's all? What the hell kind of design is that?  There is no reason for the berserker class to exist at this point and if they are going to keep things like this, then they should just merge them. 

If you "berserker players" want to tank so much, why do you play a zerker? why aren't you playing a guardian?

Can anyone answer that question? 

Dareena, thank you for taking the time to respond with your post. I acknowledge that things are different now than they were under RoK, but its still nothing more than a bandaid on a bigger problem.  One combat feature shouldn't be the basis of an entirely new class.  But really that's all its gotten down to.

You clealy miss the point.  The purpose of a Guardian and a Zerker was to have 2 different ways to plate tank.  One way was low damage take more than you dish out.  The other way was to give at least as good as you got, the theory being you take the enemy down faster you don't have to take as many hits.  Additional AOEs had a lot to do with this.  Not so much to maintain aggro but to help take down multiple foes faster to again balance out the marginal difference in durability.

Now as the game progressed Guards complained it was insane to solo because while it was hard to kill them it took them forever to kill things (like templars).  To balance this out Guards got better at single target dps to the point they were almost as good as Zerkers.  This was the beginning of zerkers being much less desireable in the tank department.  If now the guard has comparable single target dps AND more durability why use an equally skilled zerker?  This thus cause zerkers to either make sure they were great at their class, caused them to betray, or made them start kitting out only for dps. 

As a pure dps zerker, even under the old set up, you were NEVER going to be as good at dps as an equally equipped and played Swashy, Brigand.  Thats what made zerkers red headed step children.  If given a chance we could OT well, and dps decently, but there were classes that could do better in all of those categories.  Since from the beginning, whether you actually realized it or not, we were tanks.  Hence things like taunts rescue.

[Gisallo]

Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:

To the players that are sipping this kool-ade about berserkers being the gods of AOE and guardians being the gods of single-target encounters, explain something to me.  If a berserker's ability to hold aggro on multi-target encounters is better, how can you logically say he does not also hold onto single targets better?  It makes no sense.  Whatever aggro tools are used on multi-target encounters can also be used on single targets.

Okay tank 101.  Maintining aggro (without transfers) is hate and/or dps.  Now I'll use even numbers to make this work.  Tank 1 has 4 taunts that effect single target worth 800 hate and 5 single target CA's worth 1000 points of damage.

tank 2 has 2 single target taunts worth 100 hate, 2 AOE (or encounter taunts) worth1 200 hate 3 single target attacks worth 600 points of damage and 2 AOE (or encouter) CA's worth 400 points of damage.

on a single target tank 1 generates 1800 points of hate, 2 generates 1400.  more hate means dps can burn more.  However tank 2 also is potentially effecting things to an extent that are  not the single target to the tune of 600 points of hate without tabbing through targets.  Hence AOE vs single target

[scrible]

WOW and i thought i was the dumbest zerk in the game

having dragged my arrrse up from 0 to 80 with a zerk as my 1st toon while trying to learn the game at same through what it turned out was not a good time (how was i to know ,i knew nothing about the game ).Even i soon learnt that our 1st job was ment to be that of the tank,it was not a role i would have chosen for my 1st toon if i had known but thats what i got and i stuck with it with a lot of help from these forums among other places ,and now finally we are starting to be seen as tanks once more what could be better!

As for the idea that we should have 2 aa set ups one for dps and one for tanking this makes perfect sense i currently use the standard str sta int one but woiuld love some idea's on 2 different set ups for the different roles.

well thanks for all your help over the past and its still great to be a tank and a tank formost !!

best wishes scrib

[Jhot]

Zerkers can't tank? Are you joking? Nothing its all black or all white, and you know, the most fun is in the middle. Knowing how to play your class does not put you in one side or the other, you have to be able to adapt the situation and dont cry when things does not go as "expected". I use to play instances with my guildies and in most of them we have the big mama tanking (guardian) and me with two swords spreading love in the background. Of course there are moments i need to control my damage and others where i just give it all. I have different macros for my weapons and i try to adapt to the situation. You know, sometimes things go as expected and sometimes not, and there is where the zerkers can do amazingly well. You can do great dps and in the next second you can be a wall of iron and keep the aggro while the situation goes under control again.