Warrior Hp/AC vs Sk/pally

Whats the hp difference between a warrior and sk/pally/ranger at 40's+?

Does AC/Defense ability differ because of class or is that totally dependent on gear alone?

Curious if a warrior can truly tank better at high lvls outside of raids even or if its so small it wont make a group any stronger?

I know everyone says SK best group tank due to agro management but I'm asking if warrior can hold agro fine in said group...does he then surpass SK in tanking or are they virtually on the same table with same equipment equipped?

If there is almost zero difference...then yes, short of being a raid tank...I may just roll a SK for more things to play with.

Not starting a debate just a simple quick question.

TLDR=== Do warriors naturally have a great deal more HP/Defense by lvl 50 or are SK's/Paladins so close that it is unnoticeable?

The biggest difference is in disciplines. If you won't need to defensive or anything like that, SK is better. A warrior will survive longer in an 'Oh crap' situation. But the SK will be better in a group 90%+ of the time.

Warriors get an innate bonus that functions exactly like -5 SPA 168 (Defensive) (This is where the "DI - 1" thing comes from, but the math works exactly like -5 168 and makes a lot more sense than "DI - 1")

Knighs eventually get an AA that gives them some SPA 168, but I think it was nerfed to -4? I forget Also not sure when that shows up on TLPs and if you're on agnar, not sure they actually get it.

Warriors also have a higher AC softcap.

Warriors do have inherently more mitigation, so equally geared the warrior will take less damage. There won't be a lot of HP difference during classic, maybe a couple hundred more hp for a top geared war over a top geared knight at most.

At 50 in classic warriors really struggle with aggro, especially aggro on more than one mob. Later on in Agnarr's life it will get a little better for a warrior on a single mob, but SK/Paladin are still going to be far superior at controlling aggro on multiple mobs at the same time. Other than AE taunt (a once every 10 minute ability) warrior doesn't get any ability that will create aggro on more than one mob at once until DoN.

I'm pretty sure the skill caps and hps are same between warriors and knights.

Where a warrior has the advantage is in ac, and once Kunark comes out, the defensive discipline, which is 45% melee mitigation while it's running.

I'm going to point you towards this post, but it's very complicated what Dzarn goes through about AC:
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/index.php?threads/ac-vs-acv2.210028/

What you're looking for is this part:

Those values are at level 100, but you get the idea, warriors have a higher AC soft cap and get more out of the AC over the soft cap. It's not much more, 35% for warriors and 33% for knights, but it's more.

Tanking is so gear dependent that "outside of raids" it's going to depend on how geared the warrior or knight is. A raid geared knight will tank way better than a bazaar geared warrior.

An equally equiped warrior and knight the knight will hold aggro better and tank just fine against group mobs. On phinny as our healers got better focus and our tanks got better geared most guilds start having knights tank raid mobs.

Warriors do more damage/ have more ac and hp.

They also have disc's starting from Kunark onward that has a heavy defensive component making them the single most best raid tank for 98% of the raids.

Later hybrid tanks -- that is Paladon and SKs become viable raid tanks for some raids but optimally it will always be a warrior.

Hybirds have waaaay better agro control than warriors throught all expansions agnarr will get..beyond that I dont have experience.

When it comes to group content for thr most part all 3 tanks will work, however Hyrbids are better because of their snap agro abilities.

If anyone tells you a shadowknight is better than a Paladin in group situations then they are just ill informed or biased. From classic to ldon Paladins smoke SKs as group tanks, especially in the pop era.

Ranking the tanks you'd put them like this:

For raids-
1. Warrior
2. Paladin
3. Sk

For group content -
1. Paladin
2. Shadowknight
3. Warrior

I'm not against knights tanking raid mobs, but what does better focus have to do with it? Complete heal is exempt from all focus effects.

In the Luclin + Pop era there was alot of effort to "define" hybrid tanks and the direction take was as follows:

Paladins were given amazing group capacities from large fast heals/long stuns/ in ldon they get one of the best hp buffs in the game, it has a short timer tho however stacked with a pot9 it gives you more hp + mana regen than cleric's main hp buff...pot9 doesnt stack with hov....and their line of low level mana cheap stuns blows all other tanks abilities to hold agro out of the water (it's not even close).

Shadowknight were taken down the path of a dps tank...their aa's and spells give them a real nice dps boost. From 1k nukes(spears) and nicer dots. In addition to their life taps etc critically procing for extra dps.

So it depends on your style of play really.

1. Raid tank?
2. Group tank?
3. Group + more dps?

Warriors do have a bit better itemization for hp in classic than knights do. For instance war indicolite set gives about +15 more hp and about +20 more stamina than the equivalent knight sets. So they do end up with a slight hp edge in classic. If you look at magelo for agnarr and sort by hp, the top ~6 spots are all war, and the #1 knight is about 200 hp behind the #1 war.

For the entire duration of agnarr, sk/paladins will be better tanks on anything outside of raid mobs.

If you are worried about people not wanting a warrior in group content I wouldn't be. IMO provoke makes warriors a TON more viable as a group tank as they typically would have been back in the day. I think that bridges the gap between the knight classes by a lot. On multiple pulls, once you kill the first add, you taunt the mez'd mob and then slap a provoke on it and you've most likely guaranteed that mob isn't going to anyone else.

If a warrior knows that they are doing I think they can be very close to knight tanks in a group situation as far as aggro control. Provoke is a game changer. Without it I would 100% agree with everyone else, as on p99 warriors were horrible at tanking in XP groups, where the chanter/cleric would always take several hits after a mez break.

The extra DPS that warriors provide is really nice in solid XP groups, as it just helps speed things along that much more. Also, DD/Stun wep augs also help warrios ability to hold aggro, which is another neat addition that they typically wouldn't have in this timeframe.

Even in raid content SK/PAL > War for Classic & things like Venril Sathir in Kunark. These guilds using warriors to tank raid content in classic is hilarious but also a little sad to see.

Fearless disc yo!

You are drastically overstating how useful provoke is. Yes, it helps, but no way does it put warriors on equal footing with knights when it comes to aggro generation. Classic warriors have to fight constantly with people pulling aggro, even with provoke. And if you don't have an enchanter to lock down adds? Forget about tanking them, they will be on the healer every time.

Honestly, if this is for Agnar and you are not planning to be a raid tank with this character, its going to be down to personal preference on your part. Do you want to be the agro king, able to solo at times, or meat shield, etc?

Yes this is for Agnarr, I really need to remember to point that out when I make these posts, sorry guys.

Well, I feel if I wanted to solo id just roll an alt for farming/solo....if I roll a tank it would be solely for tanking in groups.

Maybe this is a horrible example, but lvling in the hole, I have only grouped with mid 40 sk/pally and there health is blown up rapidly by these mobs. I'm not saying THEY are doing anything wrong, just was wondering would a warrior be much tougher in this situation or is that just a simple case of hard hitting mobs or lack of end tier gear yet to buff the ac/hp?

I want to be able to manage agro for sure....hate playing my monk and not being able to help peel something because I have no agro generation ability. Poor, poor casters....just have to watch em die while I punch things In the back.

I also would just like to be as tough a tank as I can be but not if we are talking the difference in a few hundred hp or a few ac....that wont change much. I didn't know if say a 50 warrior would naturally have a lot more hp then an sk....thought maybe that was reason for them main tanking dragons.

Doesn't sound like the difference is enough to notice a group going smoother healing wise/downtime because of a warrior over hybrid tank.

Think you all answered these questions pretty well, thanks again.
Be safe friends

In classic, there really isnt really anything you could classify as a "tank". Until velious, the difference between the best raid geared tank, and a person who just has group gear is very negligible (other then epic). In your situation of a level 40-50 warrior vs a 40-50 knight, they will be about the same ammount of tankyness, except for the knight can hold aggro better. Knights will continue to be the best aggro for the entire duration of quarm, and interms of tankyness for groups, youll will see knights be tankier because sks are constantly lifetapping which makes them easier to heal, and paladins are going to be stunning+have self heals. In pop it changes pretty durastically the difference in tanking outside of raid content. Warriors get nothing that makes them tankier for group content(outside of defensive which you wont realistically be using much in groups), where as pop is where knights start to get selfbuffs that actually make a noticeable difference in tankyness.

If you only plan on group tanking I'd probably a knight over a warrior. Honestly in the early expansions a Ranger is a better group tank than a warrior. Also in Classic there's basically no reason for a warrior to be raid tanking unless you run out of knights. Once Kunark comes around then Warrior discs make them the tank of choice for most raid mobs, certainly for the duration of Agnarr anyways.

Shadow Knights are quite overrated IMO. I'm guessing a lot of the acclaim they get is from later expansions. So they can FD? Big deal. Its a lot slower than when a Monk does it and rarely utilized in a good group, I'm pretty sure warriors deal more DPS, and Paladins are much better for aggro.