So, the at-range and at-will aggro abilities that Warriors got, which you have been claiming credit for, are now fake aggro and booby prize aggro. Only the aggro generated from DPS is real aggro, is that right? Several of our aggro abilities do have a side effect of damage or debilitation. Harrassing Shout reduces dodge chance, Roar of Challenge reduces accuracy, Gut Punch reduces accuracy and deals damage, Phantom Aggressor and Projection of Fury both actually deal damage to the mob. The amount of aggro generated is very much exaggerated compared to the associated detrimental effects, but the detrimental effects are there. Would you like debuff components added to Krondal's Road and Blast of Anger, so that they can be viewed as real aggro? Ridicule probably won't get anything, since it already has a rune recourse effect. I get that you're trying to argue for Warriors to get more DPS, and that makes sense. As I view it, the different aspects of the tank classes are Survivability, Aggro Generation, DPS, and Utility. Warriors are really heavy on the first two, and have almost none of the latter two. If there are nerfs coming to Aggro Generation, then it would make sense to balance it out by increasing something else. Our Survivability is already really good and recently got huge help from Shield Proficiency, so that probably won't be improving. We've never really had Utility; what few buffs we can provide are very short duration, we have no healing, no cures, no FD, no snares, a couple of debuffs tied to aggro abilities (mentioned above) that are frequently resisted with short duration, though we did get a fade (just like everybody else). There either hasn't been interest in utility or there haven't been good enough suggestions for them to get implemented. So all that leaves to balance is DPS. I really doubt that you're asking for S&B to do better DPS than the other weapon stances, since it is already better mitigation and aggro generation than either DW or 2H. So, if you're talking about baseline DPS, then I agree. But as much as I would also like increases in that baseline DPS, I think we're really unlikely to see it. During the AA chat with Elidroth, we asked about Hasten and Extension lines to our DPS abilities (Fellstrike, Brutal Onslaught, Offensive, War Sheol's), but were told not to expect big DPS increases for tanks in general. There will be a few ranks for Burst of Power, Punishing Blade, and Crippling Fury coming, that's all we know for now. If you want to do more damage, you'll have to look at using the other Proficiency Stances besides S&B. The system is designed for you to make decisions about which weapon setup you're using and why you're using it. The DPS option is there. For a little more DPS, go with DW (and maintain some of the tanking capability after the September patch fixes its mitigation). If you want to do much better DPS, go 2Hand and sacrifice tanking. The tradeoff is there because we aren't being looked at as a DPS class and haven't been for a very long time, so if we want to perform the DPS role anyway then we are giving up the ability to perform our primary role. This point of view reinforces why we're not really getting DPS increases. We are the Guardian Class, as you say. We have Survivability and Aggro Generation, but that's about it. If Sony is going to nerf our Aggro, we're likely to get nothing in return.
Well.... Battleaxe is right to the extent that S&B DPS is incredibly under powered, and it's interesting we need massive pure hate abilities to make up for our incredibly weak swing aggro (under any weapon stance that is.) He's also right about bash being too weak (at least that's I got from skimming his long posts about IRL sword fighting.) The same could be said about most forms of DPS we have beside auto attack: kick/bash/slam, gut punch, knee strike, shield topple, and weapon procs -- are all quite weak. As far as stances: I think 2H DPS is still quite underpowered; I find it silly people would fear a S&B boost because it may put it ahead of another stance. Disced 2H DPS is still only 1/3 the DPS of a melee DPS class. It's like you guys want to protect the weakness of our DPS. (Maybe these are the same guys that still think 2H stance was a 50% DPS boost from what we had before....)
I don't want to protect the weakness of our DPS. I actually agreed that I would like to see an increase to our baseline DPS. I "fear" a DPS boost that affects S&B only because it would invalidate the other weapon stances. We would be back to the same situation we were in before Proficiencies were introduced, where S&B does everything and there is never a reason to swap armaments. Just as BA cries that the old DW 24/7 model was a design error, so is the S&B 24/7 model. Having a shield equipped and using the Defensive Proficiency already gets you access to: shield block a shield block modifier (after the September patch) a large raw AC increase forcing a DI shift 25% mitigation Strike of Ire procs (5000 hate each, much more than a hate mask modified Force of Anger VIII could get you with the Possessed Dreadstone Guardian Blade in your offhand) increased proc rates from Improved Shield Specialist. lower DPS By comparison, having an offhand weapon equipped and using Dual Wield Proficiency gets you: a Parry modifier a slight DPS increase 10% mitigation (after the September patch) loss of large raw AC a Dodge penalty less passive aggro generation than S&B due to the loss of Strike of Ire reduced proc rates compared to S&B And then there's swinging a 2Hander with Two-Handed Proficiency: a large DPS increase baseline mitigation loss of large raw AC a Dodge penalty a Parry penalty a Block penalty (in case you try any funny business with Proficiency/setup mix and match) less passive aggro generation than S&B due to the loss of Strike of Ire inability to activate Flash of Anger reduced proc rates compared to S&B When comparing benefits to deficiencies, giving S&B anything more than DW or 2H seems unnecessary, which is why it should be treated as baseline for damage. It is already hands-down The Best Tanking Setup. Improve warrior damage output overall, not just S&B, and you will continue to have reasons to change weapon setups. Improve S&B DPS only? Then why bother ever using anything else.
I love it. Some of those who have brought us to this pass bring out a variant of the old "aggro OR survivability" argument employed ten years ago by a few knights eager to maintain Warrior incapability to fulfill their role. Review - The argument went like this. Warriors have the best survivability. Knights have the best aggro. If Warriors are given any aggro beyond swing aggro and occasional procs, why would anyone group a knight? Lessee - at the time knights had fast refresh at-range aggro. Starting in LDoN players were unwilling to wait for mobs to reach the tank. They began debuffing as the mob was incoming. They were certainly unwilling to wait for our 2-3 procs a minute to actually deliver a proc before DPSing. Do I claim credit for our disadvantage being reduced? No siree Bob. A SOE employee did that. I claim credit for posting on every last aspect of that issue and ending every post with Tanking = survivability + aggro as if it was Cartago delenda est for two years. Nice pie chart. DW and 2H are DPS setups. Kindly explain to me how running Brutal Onslaught, Glyph, and 7th precluding the simultaneous use of Final Stand is unfair when focusing on a DPS sub-role. ANY suggestion that Warriors can do their maximum DPS while maximizing their survivability and employing S&B is a flat out......less than optimally truthful statement. Now a clever person would point out that Warriors often have to ride the aggro edge while DPSing and make themselves the next tank should the current one fall. A clever person might ask for a huge rune to accommodate a bandoleer switch to S&B and for Fortitude and Final Stand to cancel any running offensive discs should we need to take up the tanking role. But, we're still dealing with people who'd suggest Warriors should do Unmatched survivability OR aggro OR warriorly DPS while tanking when we were clearly to be Thanks to their heavy armor and unheard of stamina have the unmatched ability to survive the most brutal battles AND do class appropriate DPS AND make ourselves the focus of attacks keeping frailer players safe from harm when performing our usual role (tanking) geared properly (like a tank) to perform it. Yes, when standing in for an actual melee DPS class when geared properly (like a melee DPSer) to perform that role DW and 2H (two DPS setups) should produce better DPS than S&B. And yes, even though the Knights of the Mystic Dolphin haven't thought about it we should be able to move to tank mode from DPS mode quickly and seamlessly. Ah, a Warrior approaches.
I didn't understand a single thing you just typed. It's so muddled and confusing so let me try and give answers from what I believe you are attempting to point out. You are saying we should be doing warriorly dps whiling tanking? It can be argued (and you have done this in the recent past) that we do this right now, like you've said plenty of times, but now it seems you switched positions? Is that what you're getting at? According to our Elidroth, DW is not just a DPS set up. It's our secondary tank set up. Please stop arguing otherwise. This battle is long over, although you may see otherwise. Our dps is low, but that's regardless of the stance/weapon set up. We are just a low dps class right now. Most everything we have is underpowered and I don't see this changing any time soon. Lower dps came with the SB 24/7 territory. You dug yourself into this grave, now you must lay in it (and unfortunately all other warriors you dragged into it). Sure, our bash could do more damage, but it should not kill shot mobs like decap/assassinate. Sure, our other abilities can do more damage, but most of those aren't tied into using shields IE gut punch, knee strike, jab through, etc. In the meantime, enjoy these videos Battleblade. Maybe you'll start to see that not everyone needs a shield. one of my favorites. Now this is a warrior!
That's not true, tanking dps was fine with shields for a long time. It's been an an accumulation of multiplicative advancements along different axes that have led to the current relative disparity.
No, it wasn't fine. It was extremely broken and overpowered to the point where every other set up was vastly inferior to it. It's now what it should be, low dps pur tanking/mitigation set up. It was obvious that it was broken because under no circumstance should someone use a SB for both their main tank and dps set up when you have these so-called "true dps" set ups at your disposal. That's like having a grenadier run into battle with a riot shield and pistol or having the Enola Gay (the plane which bombed Hiroshima) armed with only machine guns and then having the grenadier and plane do more damage/kill more people. Would that make very much sense?
You've got a hardon for offhand weapons, got it the last time and the time before that. Beat your dual wielding drum somewhere else, maybe. As you have. Can we talk here about how your choice of how do the job doesn't matter when it's determined that the job is actually a dozen *other* classes' job to do, and you don't have any other abilities or strengths to bring to bear?
I prefer the 'three viable stances' model where we don't have penalties tacked on via buffs and clear winners/losers declared by whether your buff matches your bandolier. All combinations of tanking or DPS'ing with any weapon setup should be possible and yield similar GOOD results. We are the masters of arms and armor. We should perform well with whatever our preference is to use. Our proc agro in particular has stagnated most over the years. Further, with our agro/DPS balance ruined by abilities like Shield Specialist and activated damage mods that increase damage without increasing agro, it's a good thing that our activated 'fake' agro tools took a turn for the better. I'd be happy to return to a less fake agro, higher actual DPS model, but NOT the "every class can out-agro warriors" model where casual types without raid weapons get boned in groups. But this really needs to be done properly - NOT the mess that Shield Specialist and Proficiencies have made.
Want to clarify something since my last post sounded more pro BB/BA than I wanted. I think all weapon stances need a DPS boost, and despite the fact I'm neutral on the DW vs 2H debate, I do think DW needs the biggest boost in term of percentage. However; Even taking all the benefits of S&B into consideration, the DPS isn't at an acceptable level. Hasted attack is in low 10ks, self buffed burn is in the 20ks, +war cry/auspice is in the upper 20ks / low 30ks, full aDPS burn is in the 40ks (ignoring heroic blade / vital strike damage.) To me at least, even the weakest stance should be higher than 2011 berserker DPS.
I agree with this almost 100% (I'm not neutral in pointing out S&B is for tanking should be common for all tanks and that DW and/or 2H is a DPS setup for all melee DPSers.) Does that make you sound more pro BB/BA than you want? Resistance to taking geared like a tank resulted in the rat's nest of ability, discipline, and weapon setup situation we find ourselves in and I'm afraid making aggro "real" will compound the problem. No 200K DPSer is going to listen to a 20K DPS tank telling them that aggro is everybody's job. We going to be told in no uncertain terms to do our job (aggro) so they can focus on their job (topping the parse). Our DPS across all weapon setups ought to be enough of an indication that I'm right. It's not even benign neglect - its ...... Should you want better aggro, do you keep a competing tank class, SK, in your hip pocket to give you VoT? Jeepers - why not just give knights keys to Warrior swords so we have to ask them to unlock them for an hour to use them?? Warrior at long range aggro - how's your's compared to SK and Paladin? Can you bounce a mob halfway across a zone? Warrior fast refresh single target aggro - staying second, changing targets, quick killing yardtrash. Short range AE Taunt (puts us on top of the aggro list for all targets hit) PLUS aggro on every target affected so we have a chance to take aggro from a nuker who will not pause when a tank dies and we are not second on the list. Pulsed short AE aggro. It's a kinetic shortfall that can prevent me from "noticing" a pops at a random time and immediately runs like its on fire mob. A fairer solution would be me "noticing" anything in a 120 degree arc and automatically taking a swipe at it. Less pathetic DPS would pretty much mean more swing aggro and less need for fake non-damaging aggro. It's the enormous DPS gap that is in part responsible for the plethora of aggro by non-damaging means we are /cough blessed to have. I don't expect an unbreakable aggro lock on every mob. But just as I expect reasonable DPS from Warriors when they perform their usual role geared properly to perform it (and I'm NOT getting that), I expect aggro holes that should not exist to be addressed just as aggressively as OP abilities that need to be trimned are.
What? No, I want weapon set ups doing their jobs, not a one size fits all tank/dps set up. Logic doesn't tell me shield=more damage. If you want more damage, you go to a dps set up. But, I already said that all weapon set ups need a damage boost, not just DW/2H. You're just selectively choosing what I say to fit your agenda.
Hmm, really? That's strange. Because it sure looks like you've been taking credit for the implementation of the at-will "fake" aggro for Warriors. This is not clever. We already have a hard time understanding you due to broken English and a wandering argument. Intentionally misinterpreting things only serves to make delivering your point even more difficult. Where, oh where, are you getting this OR argument from? Activating aggro abilities does not lock out being able to activate tanking/damage abilities (with the sole exception of Vital Strike), making it an AND statement. The OR that we are stuck with is choosing between tanking or DPS, enforced not only by the heavy-handed penalties on our new Proficiencies, but by shared cooldowns (Defensive tied to Offensive, Second Spire tied to Third Spire). Those are Dev decisions, we didn't ask for them. The penalties attached to the Proficiencies were unwanted and unwarranted, but we got them anyway, now we're stuck with it. We have been asking for the separation of our discipline timers for ages, which would help remove the OR decision, but that isn't going to happen. A clever person can already cancel a running discipline to immediately switch to Fort or Final Stand. Try this hot button ~ Line 1: /stopdisc Line 2: /discipline Last Stand Discipline Rk. III Line 3: /g Defensive Stance is running! Line 4: /timer 6300 Switching disciplines this way is so fast that the enemy won't even get the chance to sneak an unmitigated hit between the end of the previous disc and the start of the new one. Anyway, I'm going to get back to playing Mystic Dolphin Wars. I'm really close to maxing my Underwater Basketweaving skill, so that I can work on the quest for the Merfolk's Prayer Cloak of the Ocean Lord augment.
The weapon setups, doing their jobs, are entirely subsumed in the warrior class doing its job - which may be undergoing a radical transition, which is what I'd like to have talked about. You are welcome to favor and advocate any setup you like, if you explain how any of it is going to help redress a class balance that includes warriors having only agro tools with which to play EverQuest, but unable to hold agro because that's "everyone's job".
I don't play a warrior in Everquest (although I do play one in Mystic Dolphin Wars), but in my mind, I think a reasonably well played group warrior should be sustaining the following DPS in group play S&B - 8-10k DW- 15k 2H - 20K. Does that sound about right for what warriors should be doing? Well...time to go back to MDW. The next expansion is coming out, Mystic Dolphin Wars Part Deux: Rise of the Jellyfish
There is a not very subtle difference between lobbying publicly for Warriors to receive at-will and at-range aggro and to have shields made more practical for Warriors, which I did and which anyone can still find evidence that I did (along with lobbying for buff and healing potion vendors in PoK) and taking credit for implementation. Players lobby. SOE employees, aware of the lobbying, not aware of the lobbying, or even despite the lobbying, implement as they decide is appropriate for the game. Forgive me for suggesting that seamless mode switching, visual indication of unavailable abilities dues to proficiency lockouts by graying out buttons, perhaps a looongish refresh rune to protect at the belly DPSers should they need to ride the aggro edge are more the responsibility of those whose job is the fit and finish of EQ and less the consumer who at best can post macros or custom UI's whose adoption may not become widespread. Btw I've found that canceling Tail Stand and launching Bubble Attack while flailing about with both flippers and clicking a warning to the rest of the pod is better than Mystic Spear. I wrote half a macro to fit it into my raid repertoire. No 200K DPSer is going to listen to a 20K DPS tank telling them that aggro is everybody's job. We going to be told in no uncertain terms to do our job (aggro) so they can focus on their job (topping the parse). I wonder if we can use /afk Aggro is everyone's job to handle the hate /tells we will be getting.
Whether or not we're tanking plays a notable a role in that. "In theory," offensive is supposed to nerf our tankability while increasing our non-tanking DPS in sustained situations. In reality, it's more like a 10-15% DPS boost over what we could do while tanking anyways, since we have a crapload of abilities with that same mod we can use while tanking. Re: proposed DPS levels -- Ignoring offensive, S&B is already there. DW would need a 50% boost. 2H would need a 25% boost. Warriors can generally do our best DPS AA's/discs while tanking, the only exceptions are vehement rage and offensive. If end is a problem, we can't chain shield topple/vital strike, but that is tiny DPS anyways. If I'm tanking with S&B and using battle leap, war stomp, shield topple, vital strike, heroic blade, brutal onslaught, mighty strike/fellstrike, etc (which is often the case), I think I should be doing more than 8-10k DPS so I disagree with your proposed level on S&B. ========= "The problem" with warrior DPS is more in the 1-10 min time frame, not 10 min+ situations. We can't translate our endurance into (real) DPS, our DPS AA's/discs are weaker and more limited than melee DPS classes (talking %'s, not levels), and 75% of our DPS buffs are of the same mod so stackability is poor. Our weak and poorly stacking discs/AA's hurts out 60-90 second burn, and our inability to translate end into DPS hurts out 1.5-10 min burn. We have heroic blade that can produce a reasonable < 30s parse if we're lucky, and our (relatively) strong auto attack makes our 10 min+ sustained DPS stronger, and people use these figures to get our DPS nerfed.
So you mean the post I made requesting Rage aggro modifier that maybe a handful of people supported? I'm fairly certain the whole point of giving us aggro modifiers is to make our swing aggro more, but if the thing is completely broke, well we're in a heap of trouble, aren't we?
