Kordran wrote: They are not supposed to max dps without worrying their aggro. Otherwise, remove their deaggro abilities. Giving aoe tanks overpowered aggro on both aoe and single targets is dumb. Bottom line, aoe tanks shouldn't have better aggro control than single target tanks on SINGLE targets.
What it should or shouldn't be isn't really a factor as far as the DPS players are concerned; they're working with how the game is right now, and there will be a lot of pushback if the developers substantially change things to require them to always use deagrros and meter their damage output, regardless of the tank. If you looked at just the threat component of the aborted fighter changes that were planned, the devs were making it eaiser for tanks to lock aggro, not harder. DPS classes would have had less to worry about when it came to "aggro management" on their part, as fighters were basically being turned into taunt monkeys with massive threat generation. The complaint your raising really has to do more with the ST/MT delineation than aggro itself. Right now, a Guardian in a stacked group can hold aggro easily; the primary difference is that other classes, such as the SK, just don't require that group be loaded with of threat buffs/transfers to be able to do the same job, and they also have higher DPS output to boot. Fundamentally the issue isn't that Guardians can't hold aggro well, it's just that it requires more specific group builds and more work on their part; that's where the inequity exists.
Kordran wrote: This kind of gamelplay will make be shelve my Wizard. If it takes no skill to play anymore as a DPS class then no thanks. Talk about mindless button mashing.
Not to derail, but from the DPS perspective, you cannot maximize your damage output with "mindless button mashing". If you look on EQ2Flames, you have exhaustive threads that deal with issues of spell/CA rotation, timing and so on. Just rolling your face across the keyboard is pretty much guaranteed to land you at the bottom of the parse. To some extent, the culprit here is (again) more a player issue with such a heavy emphasis on parsing becuase it's largely one-dimensional. A parse shows who's pumping out the most damage, not necessarily the player who's playing the smartest in a particular fight. And becuase damage is the single, objective criteria that any DPS class can be judged by, it has become the only measuring stick used. In other words, we've gotten to the point that for many players, regardless of what any particular player does or does not do in a given encounter, if they're a DPS class and do over >15K, they're "good", if they do <10K, they "suck". And in an effort to "not suck", they want to be able to go balls-to-the-wall each and every fight to make sure their ZW is up there. Edit: Bottom line, EQ2 has evolved into a parse-driven game, and it's not just the hardcore players anymore. Causal PUGs often run and post parses all the time. But it's not the game developers who did this, it's the players themselves that have decided this is how it should be.
Kordran wrote: I agree with you, but honestly none of that is hard once you learn how to play that class. Putting that on top of playing with a tank and learning where his agro line was is what made it hard. I remember when you were ashamed when you pulled agro from the tank as a DPS class.
Maebus@Antonia Bayle wrote: Yup, but those days are long gone. In today's game, if you rip from the tank, it must mean that the tank sucks. Ironically, in that kind of environment, those same people wonder why it can be so difficult to find a decent tank, and why there's such high turnover for tanks where they burnout and either switch mains or leave the game altogether.
(ps3 wall of test sorry) I have been around since the begining i have watched tank balance ping pong for years sks were crusaders got shot ith dof paladins paladins were brought back in line with kos sks still suffered till tso rok came out 3 of the 4 were balanced guards were overpowered they overshot both with bringing guards in line and buffing sks. tha said guards suffer now more from basic game mechanics then balance. honestly i would have given guards a single large damage 16 target aoe (5k damage without modifiers( and droped sks damage on spells to what it was pre tso and i think that would bring things more inline (total fix no but a quick fix yes) and probobly increase taunt amounts by 6-7k just as a bonus quick fix
Not that my story will be of any value here but seven months ago my eof fabled non myth zerker tanked a few of the tso instances. I will mention that it was some tough runs but we did complete the missions. I did at times take massive damage but my healers did very well. Everyone but my zerker had mythicals so I am sure that their equipment as well as knowledge was monumental to our success. Group make up. Dirge, brigand, templar, mystic, Illy, and my zerker. Aggro was still hard to achieve but again with knowledgeable players we still got it done. All in all it was very interesting to say the least. I was even mailed some plat for tanking it from one of the players. So I would say that as long as the group has the capability to make adjustments to their tank most zones that seem dismal can be done. It just takes longer. I would say that tanking for groups is possibly one of the most challenging and rewarding roles to fill. Extremely high uncontrolled dps classes can/will rip aggro from most tanks. So that is not the tanks fault even if the tank is being blamed.
Aull wrote: All that is true but the issue or the inbalance that exists is that those "requirements" do not surface with SK......DPS can afford to be uncontrolled and the group can afford to go with whatever classes they want because the requirement for Dirge and other hate xfer isnt there. The instance run is quick....no deaths. Once people get used to running groups like that they will only want to run groups like that. Without the absolute perfect group construction and everyone playing smart to manage aggro....tanking most of TSO instances as a Guardian is niether challenging nor rewarding.......its simply frustrating. I can deal with tanking being a challenge as long as I know I control failing or suceeding not some broken underlying game limitation. And all fighters should face a similar level of "challenge".
Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote: I totally agree with you on that. I was basically stating that it can be done, but again when an sk is tank most instance runs are cake even if the sk's play style sucks.
Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote: I don't generally disagree with what you've written, but the group "requirement" issue has always seemed like a bit of a red herring in my opinion. Yes, technically an SK wouldn't require a Dirge, Coercer, etc. for threat buffs and transfers, but those are classes that any decent group leader would want anyway. As a Paladin, I'd want them not for threat, but because I want to see the group putting out >20K and the way to do that is with a solid utility and DPS classes. So, yes, a Guardian who's putting together a group really does want that Dirge, Coercer, Assassin or Swashbuckler, etc. But, in all practical terms, so would a Berserker, Shadowknight or Paladin. So the distinction becomes that it's easier to get away with craptastic group builds with one type of tank vs. another, and I don't know that's really a legitimate measuring stick (but in all honesty, I don't do a lot of pickup groups, either).
The difference is: Guardians HAVE to have it. SK's and Paladins just want it. Please understand the difference between HAVE and WANT. It's huge when your bored and looking to fill up a group and sitting waiting to find a Hate Transfer class. And if you want DPS, check out a group with a SK tank, a single healer, a Troubador, 2 Warlocks and a Wizard in a TSO instance. That's HUGE DPS. You find me the Guardian that can handle that group and I'll give you $10 as long as the casters are alive and actually clicking buttons. I was the Troubador in that group and it was unbelieveable how fast things died and how easily the SK kept agro. I've been in similar groups with a Paladin and it was similar results. I have been in groups with much less DPS with Guardians that were tanking and it made me cringe for my Guardian. It's just so painful to watch when I have a vested interest in the situation. Everybody else in the group just complained about how slow we went.
Kordran wrote: Again where do you people come from? Like Wasuna said, there is a BIG difference in wanting and haveing to have one.
Toran@Oasis wrote: Like I said, I generally agreed with his post, but I think "want" and "need" are moot when they are, in all practical terms, one in the same thing. I could argue that I need to have good utility classes in my group because I don't want to spend 2 hours running a 30 minute zone. In other words, there's a subjective element to this. Regardless, don't get your knickers in a twist, I've also repeatedly stated that I fully support Guardians getting more AE threat generation, and that SOE should abandon the whole ST/MT tanking paradigm.
What do you mean, "you people"? lol Made me think of Tropic Thunder. Making a group with a bard etc is just good group making. Comes from raiding, you don't make halfarse groups for a raid and hope to make it quick and efficient, or fun. I agree with Kordran, you build a good group to get the most out of your time.
We are seeing how things are viewed by different segments of the playerbase. At the top end where most likely any MT is going to have whatever classes he/she may want or need things probably seem ok. The line between WANT and NEED is blurred....if its always available then there really is no NEED. But at my level where I do not have the luxury of building the perfect group the differences between WANT and NEED are vast. Our SK is able to grab whoever may be on in our guild and hit just about any TSO instances with relative ease...sure it might be a 30min run -vs- 45min. By contrast if the absolute perfect group is not available to me.....I dont even bother...its simply not worth it.......that 30 or 45min turns into 2hours..and even then there is no guarantee of completeing the instance. This situation has had a negative effect in that it has spoiled those few high DPS classes we have....the few times they end up grouping with me they get frustrated beyond belief because of the layers of behavior they have to go under when grouped with a Guard. I love leading groups, I love taking charge....its why for the most part I have always played a MT...and even considering my less than hardcore approach I have always tried min/maxed. But the current frustration for me in EQ2 has gone beyond what I can control via gear or class knowledge. The holy trinity in EQ1 pales in comparison to the .....oh I have to have 2 forms of hate xfer, no AE dpers in group, probably 2 healers...yada yada yada. I haven't tanked a TSO instance in quite some time.......still each day I log on say to myself...ok maybe Ill just see if I can put something together.......then remind myself of what sorta gorup I must have.........then just go work on leveling up my Assassin.
Maamadex wrote: A good group will want to make the most our of THEIR time.........That means get a SK to MT.
Maamadex wrote: Ok OK.. let me put it this way.. A crusader does not NEED hate trasfers.. Its nice to have but they DO NOT NEED it to hold agro on mindless button smashing monkeys.. DO you understand that?
Toran@Oasis wrote: An SK can hold agro vs a nearly unlimited amount of dps with no hate management classes in the group. Any other tank has a finite limit to the amount of dps they can tank for. Depending on the tank and the group makeup that might be 8k or 200k, but there is a limit. We're just bent over the barrel by soe until fighter recamp 2.0 rolls around in february. We took it up the rear with Aeraliks nerf bat last November and we're going to keep taking it from him until the 'round 2' comes around. Sure, the reasonable thing to do was to revert the first nerfing until such time as the bigger picture could be worked out, but well, thats reasonable and I don't think we can expect reasonable treatment from SoE in regards to class issues. They simply lack the manpower and the inclination.
I understand perfectly I can do a zone without hate transfers or hate buffs. I have done so with good dps classes and not lost aggro one bit, it still makes the group less by not taking them, so maybe I don't need one but the scouts or the mages certainly think they do for the buffs. Its more of an optimizing thing, if you can take one why not? If you can't thats fine too. Warriors however do need them in most cases to hold aggro. And by that I mean a trouby, dirge, or coercer. I prefer an Illy but they just give buffs heh. Swashy or assassin works ok for a warrior too but they don't buff just help a tank gain aggro with their transfer. As for calling people mindless button mashing monkeys, lol whatever floats your boat there buddy.
