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

It's a vague announcement only because you disagree with it, it still holds more truth than the crap people are spreading about "intended role" of warrior based on class descriptions from last century. This announcement is now, every other things are from a decade, guess what is "intended" for current game?

Not "many" have pointed out knights will receive a weaker DP, that's just in your dream, there's no reason for that, it's just a wishfull thinking from some that dislike the change. Again, this "vague announcement" holds more truth than the opinion of a few crying warriors (because they're a few, though post a lot).

Warriors are still ahead, no guilds removed their TL of warriors in favor of knights, this has not happened nor will happen. That prooves this change was good and there's no reason to remove it, it was actually right on spot given current situation of tanks.

Ok, well let me clarify for you thancra. By vague i meant, their statements could justify giving knights an 80% mitigation boost, a 50% mitigation boost, a 10% mitigation, or a 2% mitigation boost. I can't really disagree with the statement because of how vague it is. It could mean anything. They do not address why they feel knights and warriors should use the same mitigation stance, and why after years that is now necessary (why not do it 2 years ago?). So, i notice 100% of paladins are in favor of these boosts to paladins. I can understand that. If you think paladins with warrior mitigation and 2h stances, their own 2h weapon sets that warriors cant use, and all their spells and abilities is a good balance, good for you. I think it makes paladins OP and makes me want to play one instead of warrior.

Reasonable? Did you read a different post then I did?

He complained that stances made him die more vs bosses due to clerics thinking they didn't think they needed to heal him as often:

===========

You even make Shiftie sound logical. Do you not realize how silly the argument, "Our heals don't count if we still need another healer", sounds? Following that logic, cleric heals during Tipt in 2004 didn't count since they (95%+ of the time) needed a 2nd healer.

I take it you're one of the majority of raiding paladins that doesn't heal other tanks. Thing is, if you can find one of the very rare paladins that's an expert healer, you'll realize that paladins "can" heal other tanks up there with priests. During UF-COTF, 'a' paladin was top 5 on my heal parse too many times to count, as in, in excess of 100 times, most of those being times he wasn't grouped with me. Sadly he's no longer with my guild (he was also an A+ add tank, and destroyed the DPS figures that Shiftie claimed were the 'max' paladin DPS back in the day, aka showed how three-dimensional paladins 'can' be.) I truly wouldn't know if their heal potential has changed since CotF, but given that no paladins have been crying about heal nerfs in this thread, I'm assuming it has got the normal expansion to expansion increases.




Point being, when you have 6,7,8 warriors on a raid, any of them not actively tanking (boss or adds) are eating a raid slot, because warriors bring less to a raid than pretty much any class, when not actively tanking. "If" a guild had a high numbers of paladins and "if" those paladins were utility-minded, the heals/utility from paladins not actively tanking would more than make the gap in self-only survivability, assuming it's a raid boss with a very low tank one-round chance (note: in the current game that's all of them.)

Basically, your argument is:

"Paladins can heal, therefore knights shouldn't be able to function as tanks."

Meaning you have no argument just class based whining.

I am one of the few people that said these changes were BAD. But just not BAD for the same REASONS people like you think they are bad.

You think they are bad because you are the kid eating your 2 scoop ice cream cone watching the other kids eating their 1 scoop ice cream cone thinking about how great it is that you are getting more, while arguing that its fair because you have two scoops of chocolate but the other kids get 1 scoop of rocky road.

Someone comes along and goes, "wait a second, this isn't fair" and gives the other kids a scoop of chocolate on top and now you're screaming a fit because it isn't fair that they have the same amount as you, but some of theirs is "special" even though it is irrelevant to filling your bellies.

The problem here is that you (warriors) should NEVER have had a second scoop in the first place (defensive proficiency). It was abjectly unfair and ruined your dinner (made major problems with balancing both raid and group content). It was a freaking joke, and all reasonable warriors I know talked about it years ago about how it was OP and would get nerfed.

Guess what? The devs are resource limited, let it go on too long, and now, instead of doing what they SHOULD have done (remove DP entirely in favor of something reasonable for warriors), they just gave it to knights too. Why? Because it was easier than going back and rebalancing TDS and TBM raids again.

Knights are just seeing how great it feels to get that second scoop of ice cream and not still having some empty space in our bellies, i.e., how ridiculously overpowered warriors were. Your *relative* 1 dimensional nature is completely irrelevant. It is a reason for getting more *flavor* (i.e. the choice of something other than chocolate), not more ice cream.

So feel free to ask for more fun stuff for warriors. More yellow fueled spells. No skin of my back. Or argue that all the DPs need to be removed from all tank classes, and I'll be with you there (because us all having it is really going to FUBAR balance for the 13 other classes in today's game once they balance new content against us all having it).

But don't sit there and tell me that warriors should keep it, while knights should lose it or be given a "lesser" version so we can keep dying constantly on hard hitting stuff you breeze through.

You want to argue knight's subtlety is too much, I'm with you there too. Warriors had that 5% advantage for like 14 years now and its not unreasonable, and not enough to cause balance issues.

But any single warrior that complains that 1) they can't get groups or guild invites because of this, or 2) they are sitting because of this on raids, is a freaking liar or is dealing with idiots. It makes zero difference about any of that.

Hmmm I read this completely differently.

I read it as if you're a competent knight, you bring a lot more to any table than a warrior could. You're (now) able to tank within the 90th percentile of warriors at any given time, you can compete with just about any healer in the game (and I've personally witnessed pallies competing in the top 5 on heal parses), as well as your other utility.

If a warrior isn't tanking, he's anything but useful. Our sustained dps if putrid (20-30k in our normal tank groups) and in order to maximize it we risk not having LS up. We cannot heal. We cannot cure. We cannot stun. We cannot do much of anything besides get our faces smashed in.

I don't think knights should've gotten a copy paste of our defensive proficiency. First of all, the original one wasn't 30% mitigation, it was 25%. So at most, I think you should've gotten 25%. In reality, you got our proficiency plus half of our Class Only AA - Phalanx of the One.

Then came the 2h Proficiency. Knights already beat us pretty consistently in DPS parses. Especially this expansion with undead mobs everywhere you turn. Suddenly, you have an ability that improves your melee dps by a good 50-60%. So not only did you get our second scoop of ice cream, you got some hot fudge and sprinkles on top.

Second of all, I still believe we should've just received more ranks of Phalanx. I would've been perfectly content with that. Or just make NTTB/PDH stack with everything again.

Considering pal heals can land on other pals, that wasn't my argument. I was talking about the fact that non-tanking paladins can synergize with tanking paladins 'if' they choose to, and high paladin synergy can go a long way; ie close the mitigation gap on 95% of raid bosses.

Here's the thing. I've never been a "omg knights are OP!" type, feel free to look at my pre-2016 post history if you don't believe me. In fact, when non-BB warriors (aka people who deserve a level of respect in their opinions) would build up knights in the past, I would often disagree. And I've always been far more worried about what happened to wars (I make suggestions every beta) than what happened knights.

But. This patch's knight buff is literally the biggest 1-expansion change I've seen in any class since I've been playing EQ. It can't be brushed aside. On top of that, there have been a string of nerfs to warriors proceeding it.

Even on the narrow issue of stances, stances weren't nearly a big of a buff to us when we originally got them: mind you, they -nerfed- our innate mitigation heavily when we got stances, and they buffed yours'. And the % increase in DPS was significantly for us than for pals (do you have the slightest clue how warrior 2H's worked, or rather didn't work, in 2013?) The way stances were implemented were particularly tuned to warriors at the time. The fact they gave you guys carbon copies of abilities tuned to warriors is laughable.

People choose a class and spend time on a character because they like its unique qualities. It shows a lack of creativity for Daybreak to simply make already similar classes (tanks) even more similar. They have control not only of class abilities, but of the environment. Want to make knights tank better? Make mobs susceptible to the abilities of knights. Choosing sameness takes away enjoyment from the game for those classes who formerly enjoyed distinction.

How closely should a hybrid class be able to perform the core ability of a pure class? If Daybreak makes them to similar, they destroy the value of playing a pure class over a hybrid.

well said dwavlin. Abazzagorath you are purposely changing what is being said. Nobody is saying paladins shouldn't tank well, as your claiming. But yes, they have heals and other things that gives them a big advantage over warriors, so if they also tank equally well, boom, no reason for warriors to be around.

Assuming you're talking about in a raid environment specifically.....you really need to separate the Knights when making general statements Pikaz. Non tanking Sks are pretty much just as useless as non tanking warriors.

I wonder about the equally as well part, do they? Since wars are saying that pal are healing in the top 5, do you sit your clerics out because according to the wars, they heal as well as a cleric and tank as well as a war. Sounds like you can free up some raid space for more dps.

In raids your gonna go for the best, which is still wars, and clerics. In groups, your gonna go for whatever you can find, which is any tank.

The back and forth is all conjecture from your personal viewpoint. As having played all 3, stopped war at 100, pal and sk are 105, I like the changes, means I can play any of the 3 without worrying about losing something, and each bring their own finesse to the situation, with pal and sk you can go with a druid or shaman a bit easier because you have the self heals to get you through till slow or atk debuff lands. With war you can pull more and have better ae agro than pal, and enough discs to keep you at really high mitigation almost indefinitely. With sk you have great ae agro, which is really good when you have a group of mezzed mobs, by the time you get to the second agro is locked, and their epic helps too. all bring something, none are sitting back without a spot now, where is the problem with that.

Hey now we bring T'vyls!

I fail to see how all tanks having the proficiency is any different than before when none of them did, but that's just me.

The difference is with us all having it they're likely to tune mob dmg output around it. Which then dicks over pets, Rangers, monks, enchanters and anyone not a war/pal/sk trying to act as a tank.

Also, it was added to warriors because they were very weak in most aspects compared to paladin or shadow knight. It negates ever having done that, to add it to all three.

Mob damage output was already tuned that way because of Warriors.

I read it as if you're a competent knight, you bring a lot more to any table than a warrior could. I highlighted the key word.

And you still have more dps than we do. And T'yvls Resolve is pretty good. Plus longer range instant cast aggro makes kiting more efficient for you than warriors.

Plus you can at least lifetap and heal yourself if need be. If warrior's aren't tanking, we're just a mana drainer on the healers.

We do plug our knights into healing roles quite often. Are they going to replace clerics outright? No because they don't have all the utility of clerics, but on a single target healing, pallies are fantastic healers. So now pallies are competitive in both their archetypes with their pure/parent classes and that's if they're not already equal/better in certain situations. Plus their healing boosts (Spire, AoTI) are the best in game.

And what if a knight tanks equally well? Are guilds going to replace them and ditch the warriors? Probably not because most people aren't a-holes. Warriors will still tank because there's nothing else for them to do. It's more a charity than anything. The argument of of So-and-So will still have the same role is full of fallacies. If a knight had literally the same mitigation abilities as warriors, I'd bet my bottom dollar that warriors would still be the MT strictly out of principle, not because of their "superiority."

Then you'll fail to know the reason why they were created in the first place.

Yes, and reasonable knights agree that 30 % is too much. I realize you don't care that knights are able to MT Raid Bosses like warriors, but I do and it's not right

As SK and Paladins have access to it too. It will overwrite their inate one, but they can get it too.
Without druid / shaman growth, paladins have an advantage of 18 K HP that they can sustain all day long.

Knights can keep pretending they don't match warrior survivability all they want. When you still have tools like Reaver Bargain for SK, a ton of paladin inate AA that boost Heal received by gigantic amount, a new DI shift called Knight Sedulity which negates warrior former advantage, less HP but more AC than warriors.
When you're talking having some GIGANTIC SELF HEALING tool over warrior, which gives you unmatched level of invincibility in group content and in moling group content including named now with a wiz merc. The parent class should never see the hybrids tanks getting same mitigation than them, even exceeding them when they use their small def disc with Shield Prof up which gives them one of the best mitigation period in the game.

OK but what about SK, they don't bring anything else to the raid game either. Are they add tanks only out of charity?

This isn't directed wholely at Mistatk, but...

The thing which people still haven't accepted; eventhough I brought it up before; is the fact that most of our versitility which can improve paladin tanking can be shared with a warrior. Additionally, some people are making it seem like our raid healing is only going to be done when we are tanking a boss. Also.. if we're healing or casting support spells.. or dps is going to drop but people refuse to factor that into their thinking when looking at our DPS. Just because we have a varity of spells, doesn't mean paladins can MT, help spot heal themselves, maintain agro, and still out-dps-warriors all at the same time during raids.
--------------

And those of you who think paladins didn't need a weapon stance to improve 2h dps were/are wrong.

This should happen.

And then they should upgrade the merc tank a bit more because they are in a very sad state.