New players - pick a knight if you aren't a boxer

So essentially what warriors have been telling knights since getting DP to begin with. O ok.

I'm too busy planning a wedding to get things nerfed. Hang in there pals my rage is forthcoming.

Will your rage be Valorous?

Remember to hit 7th.

My name says it all about my rage. I'll hit 7th and do some underhanded sh*% too. I'll be sure to get iss nerfed again. And I'll get Paladins nerfed again for good measure.

I don't hate myself enough to read most any of this thread (though 100 pages is a donald trumpian accomplishment).
Is it basically 5 people on auto-repeat?

What happened to 'only knights derail this thread'?

Did I ever say this... imply this.. or well... did anyone on this thread other then you?
"Paladins should tank = to warriors cuz they can cast their heals on warriors if they choose to?"

When was the last time you had 3 warriors together and they didn't get out their mercs? No.. that is not intended as a cheesy joke like, but you put it out there like it is. Is this a common occurrence in your EQ? You're taking a discussion based around EQ of today and placing in your mind like we are all playing in the pre-merc era of EQ.

You still can't separate when posts are in regards to raids vs group. I've told you a dozen times... yes... a dozen times before my conversations are about raiding unless specifically addressed. I'm not trying to jump back and forth between group and raid (or the valuable molo / solo game in Time burners EQ) in order to put forth the shadiest numbers or debate points which fit best at the time.

I know it's hard for you to take a look at something in a different light... but try for once. A raid is made of 54 toons. Tell me anytime from your experience... you have not had a paladin in 1 of the 54 spots? Or tell me you have raids where a paladin did not use their group ac or spire to benefit the tank. I say these things because these abilities will benefit the MT no matter who it is. Can you understand that?

YES... ABSOR-FRICKEN-LUTELY (you all see what I did there) these are considered utility... no question about it. But why do you want to consider them an ability/utility -only to be used- for the benefit of the paladin when the paladin is MTing? Do they not benefit the warrior in the same way as the paladin? (and yes, I have said the self only version is slightly better). When was the last time a warrior was able to use their dicho to benefit the MT'ing paladin? Can you not see why I would not consider targetable ability/utility in an discussion about class MTing? Things that can benefit each tank class equally should be dropped out of the equation to simplify the equation. I mean... come on... we are not discussing which tank class benefits more from the cleric spire or divinity aura... are we? And no.. to clarify... I am not suggesting we drop out stances (or innate mitigation) because they effect the different types of mitigation combos.

If you don't want to accept that concept... then why don't the knights on this forum debate the issue of it being harder for knights to MT because they are not usually in the primary tank group and therefor loose the benefits of the warrior aura or the benefit from having multiple healers (and usually the best healers) in their group. Why not... because it would be a statement that would not hold water in the debate.

Synopsis:
A rear end hurt warrior started a post for attention after the recent patch where Knights got stances. Rather than post an open "Knights are now OP, they took err jerbs, nerf them!" verbiage, he went with "new players don't pick my class", then repeatedly denied the obvious intent of creating the post.

Then 100+ pages of various bickering over tanking mechanics, random varied contextual comparisons from 17 years of game history, accusations for one side getting the other nerfed, flat out open nerf calls, the immensely pointless debate about which tank is the "dps tank", suggestions on ways to improve warriors to offset the changes which are immediately attacked in just about every way, Knights calling warriors rearend hurt, warriors calling Knights scheming liars, repeated (hillarious) threats of going crying to the dev team and/or starting pr campaigns, dumb Knights saying it's totally fine now as is, dumb warriors claiming it was totally fine before the patch, and a healthy dose of sarcasm/Grobbing/memes sprinkled on top just for good measure.

It's been swell. Here's to 100 moar, gents!

The Kamea love story will go on! Next on days of EQlive, will Shiftie get warriors nerfed? And will there be moar baseless crying? Stayed tuned to find out!

You don't hate yourself enough to read the thread. Just enough to come here and ask questions about it and be a troll. Very helpful, thank you.

Theres one of your 5!

Ok. First thing, warrior aura is like 40ac or something. Your talking about ppl with 16k buffed AC, then acting like warrior aura would make any difference. Also, your talking about how warriors can use mercs, but I'm talking about raiding, where there are no mercs. Yes, some raids have a ton of warriors, less paladins, and other raids or guilds, vice versa. Now, which one do you think the raid leader might say, well get them, were low on healers, they can help keep their group up? I don't see why your ignoring my questions, or accusing me of changing the topic. I'm saying since paladins can heal, they shouldn't tank as well as a warrior, and your saying, yes they should, cuz they could heal the warrior. That doesn't make any sense to me.

And, saying knights do/don't get certain benefits from being in a MT group, that is 100% solely a raid leader discression issue. Now sure, you got warriors in the raid, they can't heal, so what can you do with them? make them MT. But if a guild were low on warrior, they absolutely could put knights in the MT group, for whatever mt group benefits you are referring to. MT group benefits, is not a factor of the class, it is a factor of the raid leader and how they like to make groups.

Also, you say when is there not atleast 1 paladin in the raid. Thats great if all you want is brells, but if you want group paladin armor of the inquisitor, you need many paladin not 1. This is right back to the arguement that one of the knights was trying to make that, paladin res and res token is the same thing. Really? I'm out of loyalty points, and it takes like 10seconds to succesfuly cast a res token, that is the same as paladin res?

I'm sorry that you cannot grasp that people have fun playing different classes but still want to do the role of the class that they picked. I am sorry that it sounds like the game is not fun for you anymore. I apologize that the game has has become one where you need skill and comprehension and intelligence to understand how to be good at your class.

Since it sounds like the activity of "fun" has been diminished for you, I would suggest http://thesimplearcade.com/ to find a game that might be fun for you.

Depends do you want a 90% or a 96% rez?

Paladin 96% rez is locked out during raids because stuff....

If you are telling me you could not have fun with a mitigation stance that was 5% less to account for the fact that you can heal yourself, that is hard for me to believe. My paladin I've been playing around with makes that much just off all the procs that are multiplied by his heal AA's that warriors don't get, and his spam heals that go off from stunning and what not. Example, warrior proc a life tap it hits for 1k healed to warrior. I jump over to paladin, the same proc heals for 5k. And that self healing doesn't ask, has a counter of nttb been used this round, is this is a spell DoT, spell DD, or melee hit. Self healing just heals, doesn't care how many times you've been hit that round or anything. So try to say you need all your self healing, plus equal mitigation to warriors, is just absurd.

I'm not clicking on your link, last thing I need is some virus. If you want to change the subject off mitigation and self healing, onto my personal enjoyment of the game, start a new thread. This one is for discussing whether or not, given that knights have the same mitigation as warriors and can self heal, it still makes sense for a new player to roll a warrior currently. I agree with OP that it does not.

Its been many, many years since I myself or anyone i know has cared if its a 96% or 90% res. We just had 3 weeks of double exp, and with out double exp and with barely playing outside of raids I am always pinned at 100% exp. So yeah, shield click res 90%, paladin res 90%, all good to get back into the fight and win. If you were out of combat you probably wouldn't waste a res token anyhow?

I don't think you understand, I have fun with the game and my class because I enjoy it, and my friends, has nothing to do with how OP I am or how UP I am.

I am one of the vocal that say they may have overshot with the tuning, but don't care either way, it didn't effect my play style. I still jump in and tank when the wars are down, this just lets me live longer. I still am one of the main off tanks for my guild, didnt change that one bit, just makes it a bit easier on the healers now.

You talk about procs, you do realize you cannot rely on procs, they are random.

We also do not have the same mitigation, a concept that you willfully ignore, and honestly don't care if you ever understand because your lack of intelligence has no bearing on my or my play.

We are glad that you agree with another person that has a woeful misunderstanding of how things work and would rather only play the OP class of the month.

This thread is seriously beyond stupid at this point.

PS - I have an SK alt

This thread still needs 3k more views to beat the SK thread.

We will get there, that one is over a year old, this one is only 2 months.

Great, we agree they overshot on this change. You don't care either way, that is also great. Add that with abzagorrath doesn't care if warriors out dps berserkers, because it doesn't affect him personally, that is also great.

Key thing being, most people can recognize they really over shot the mark with this change. So, why so many saying they got it exactly right?

And, one other thing. Since paladin were way, way, way, way, more in demand then SK for raids, why give them both the same copy/paste treatment? Why not give SK abit more, since them like warriors, never get added to a raid "because they can also heal etc".

This change was very poorly/lazily/half heartedly done, and so rightfuly some people don't like it.

You want to post again how great this change is? or want me to quote all the people saying how great a change it is? Sure, then I'll post a few more times, that i think it was really, really, poorly done.

Or we can just agree it was like you said overshot the mark, and let it be at that.