Dual Wield is by far the WORST option a warrior could go with for -any- situation. It's just bad, period, that's all there really is to it. Aggro generation hasn't really been an issue for a long time so even trying to use that as a positive has been thrown out the window
Dual wield might be advisable for the cool looking contest ;-) And I'm pretty sure at low level it has its advantages. Sanae.
This thread seems to be filled with people that think that warriors getting a bonus will hurt them, and so while they are not warriors themselves, they feel that they should make it seem like warriors are actually equal to knights at this point in the game so that things can stay the same with them on top by a large margin. That's pretty sad as an attitude to have.
They blew it during GoD. Warriors were explicitly told that they should and would always tank better than Paladins and SK's (Connor, many of the things knights are asking for...). We were specifically told that we would have the unmatched ability to survive the most brutal battles. The half warriors complained (while hiding their half-warrior brother, Rangers, in the cellar) that the whole warrior was doing what he should and he was told he would do. By DoN we got to see "tank parity" but not parity in anything else - no utility parity, no combat self healing parity, and somewhat amusingly Warriors which had been the longstanding unofficial baseline in melee DPS became no longer the 120 (true DPS classes), 100 (Warriors), 80 (knights) class but "not a DPS class". Apparently a Warrior in a raid who is not tanking is in the mind of those that matter a tourist class. BUT Warriors have gotten some utility (in fairness the 2nd Phase Melee Update that was cancelled had some utility-like abilities in it). And thanks to attributable DPS provided by other classes at least the MT (if he's not dumping everything he has into survival) does decent DPS. TBPH, some changes - better able to use S&B, potion vendors, Mercs, aggro abilities - have improved that class in very good directions. It hasn't been all bad. Throw Warriors a bonus? No thanks. Just stop flensing any microscopic worthwhile remnants from the class - we've been beaten down (and knights have been elevated) sufficiently.
Warriors have become the hated stepchild of tanking. They need us to tank the big bad bosses while they are current content. As soon as the content is one expansion old Knights will tank it all better then a warrior. With the release of RoF and the lack of giving warriors anything to bring them up to par with knights in the group game shows to me that; If they could just deleate our class all together and make shadowknights the primary raid tank they would call it a day and so would be done.
I like the warrior class like it is now. Of course it can always be better but I think we have some good abilities. The only thing that I find absurd is why we do more DPS with a shield in our hand than with an extra weapon. (But I learned to live with it ) Sanae.
riiiight man i swear you all have tinfoil hats, and on a raid the sk class is the least wanted of the 3 tanks so what is your issue? sk/pal were fearless, warriors hated taht so they got it too. not that many raid targets ever feared but god forbid once in a great while there was one a knight was better equipped for. as for passives/selfhealing, thats the only way we can help make up for not havign the innate tankigna dvantages and better discs, taht warriors have. the only reason we're "preferred" in lower content is becase you DONT need to be using those discs at all times or be max geared raid etc to do your job, afterall it's group not raid, why should you? warriors are not hurting idk why this constant insistance that you are. idk any guild taht intentionally stacks 6+ sk's on a raid, but they would all love to have that ability with warriors if they dont have at least that many. even pallies with their ungodly splash, 6 isnt erally a needed number, but mroe than 1-2 is nice. idk anyone that thinks havign a couple sks isn't enough despite all these thigns you seem to make us so much better than you are. i know sks needh elp in some areas and that other areas are keeping us back, and you coudlnt pay me enough to play a warrior personally, but i also recognize that warriors are just fine outside of soloing.
... Tegila...when you said "you coudlnt pay me enough to play a warrior personally," it unjustified everything else that you said. It seems just propaganda filled. The only thing you can come up with is that warriors got fearless? I saw an sk tank at the end of HoT in SS tanking, and when the merc healer died he just kept going. Soon he kicked the only healer in the group for another dps, so this single sk was fulfilling two roles and making room for an entire additional dps class. Could a warrior ever do anything close to that? It's not even close so you have no argument in the group area. Oh no a warrior has fearless though. So fearless for that kind of power is really a fair trade in your eyes? I just want to reiterate this. You're balancing out the ability of a geared sk to tank with no healer at all, leaving the spot either empty so you get a whole person's exp, or adding in a dps class (effectively making the addition of the sk's dps equal to the sk's dps + the dps class's dps) with the fearless ability, which the last time I saw it used was in MM in the HoT group missions. That's the best you can do at trying to make it sound like warriors have it as good as sk's do...? .... .... I didn't even have to mention the sk epic, sk swarming ability, or that there are posts already about knights being able to tank raid mobs better than warriors in several cases with modern content. I'll add those here though in case you end up trying to respond man. The differences between sk's and warriors are unbalanced heavily in favor of sk's at this point in the game. I hope you open your eyes enough to see that some day and stop with the propaganda that you're putting out here. Honestly it reminds me of when Sacha Baron Cohen plays a role that is mocking a third world dictator. Instead, do the right thing and just be honest so the game can be more fun for everybody. That's all I have to say.
And I'm sure that this sk went on for hours doing this....or wait! Did he have to med to full every 3 minutes? It would make no sense to drop a healer if the group was doing and exp grinding.
to the first part: no , i cant stand ANY pure melee class, to me theyre no fun, monk rogue zerker warrior. i have cpl rogues jstu for sos running around, but not to play. and that right there is why you couldnt pay me to play a warrior. has nothing ot do with the quality of the class, but my own personal tastes (as i said, personally) you also couldnt pay me enough to play a pet class, a real pet class nec bst mag, not my thing, and im not big on casters. i hate 1trick ponies as well so a cleric..no fun. thtas me, personally. thats not saying omg those classes all suck and no one should play them. theres a really simple thing you need to rememer if yo uthink im spreading some kidna propaganda about sks and wars: Warriors are in far bigger demand for raidingguilds than sks, like 5times as much, if you guys were so bad and knights were jsut as good, guilds would just give up trying to find good warriors and use the sk's that are twiddling their thumbs waiting for openings and complaining about raid utility. as for the sk in hot, was he group or raid geared? what were the other classes in the group? a paladin could do that longterm better because of their abilities than an sk (you said dorpped healer for dps later on) remember sk epic is 90second of 5 minutes otherwise its just taps. in raid gear its a different story, a group tank in top tier current expac doing that, is an issue, but it's irrelevant if it was a raid tank (also hot was pretty easy across the baord, voa was wehre htey boosted named hps and abilities). again, you pointed out an expansion 2+ years old now, how about current content? you want to use an example about current state of affairs, then use current content for yoru examples. im just sick of hearing warrior need need need need everywerhe evil knight evil knight evil knights everywehre. ALL TANKS HAVE ISSUES, the issues are just different usually. we ALL need some boosts, the boosts just vary, and are often in different content. warriors need less in raid for boosts, knights need less in group, warriors need a lot of boost in solo though. you cant just look at 1 thing and say knights are all op'd in everything in teh game and poor warriors all cowering in teh corner begging for help..it's BS and you know it
Silly Bard doesn't know what he is talking about. For defense (best survivability) warriors use sword and board. For offense (best dps) warriors use sword and board. If there is a situation that a warrior is not the MT he can switch from his sword and baord to add dps to the group by gearing up his......oh....his sword and board. Unlike the other tank classes who use sword and board to tank that switch to their 2 handed what evers to add dps, warriors do not get to go back to the basic set up of duel wielding that made them unique back before UF.
So you are arguing that when we aren't tanking Warrior 2H DPS from the rear should be > Warrior S&B DPS from the rear. I agree. IF this is not the case, then Warrior 2H needs improvement. Of course Warriors should also do appropriate for the class DPS when tanking since that's our usual role. S&B for tanking challenging content (all current content should be challenging). 2H when not getting hit DPS. Perfect. All bases are covered sensibly. 1, Not basic. We could use a 2hander or S&B at level 1. We tacked on DW at level 7. Masters (but not grandmasters) of all weapons, etc. 2. Not unique. Rangers, a Warrior based hybrid class, DW. Warriors simply have more in common with the other heavy plate tanks including an affinity for S&B and 2 handers than we have in common with the lightly clad Ranger class. The DWers, Rangers, Monks, Rogues, Bards aren't tanks and we are a tank.
Battleaxe that is exactly what I am saying. I'm fine with where our dps is at S+B while tanking compaired to the other tank classes. It's the options we have to choose from. S+B is our ONLY option. I try parsing in comparison every time I get a new weapon. Be it 2H or addition one hander for duel wielding. If I am not the tank I'm still sporting S+B. I would like to see it be as (just throwing out numbers) a 20% increase in dps / 20% decrease in defense while duel wielding and a 40%/40% with a 2h equiped. That just sounds logical to me. That goes for all tank classes mind you. Pal/Sk should suffer a substantial decrease in Defense if they are using a 2h weapon. Just my opinion though and I know how much that matters
Not good numbers. A 5% increase in damage or mitigation is at minimum a whole tier's difference. In an ideal world a shield should provide a pile of defensive capability (SOE got it right) the 1H mainhanders used by tanks should be massive (not whimpy epee's or small swords - those are for lightly clad duelists), appropriate for use with a shield, and only able to be aggro augged aggro weapons. All three classes that tank should be able to do class appropriate DPS when performing their usual role (tanking) and geared appropriately (like a tank). Given the above, a Warrior offhander should be a main gauche, parrying dagger, sword breaker - of dubious value in defense and in offense. DW is rather obviously not a tanking setup. Nor IMO should Florentine style in the hands of a heavy tank (lightly clad nimble Rangers etc. might and should get different results) be able to inflict the damage of a heavy weapon (whether a shield appropriate 1H or slightly larger 2Hndr). Given both above, a tank 2Hander should be able to approach the damage tanks can generate (ripostes and damage shields are justifiable compensation for taking those risks) while tanking and using S&B. Able to approach - say one tier less while in short duration burn mode. Without needing to accept the risks of tanking while generating that DPS. Rather obviously SOE will do what they believe is sensible to do within the confines of what the code can handle. In a new product - I believe the subject wouldn't even come up. All three classes that tank would have shield appropriate 1Handers from the get go and DW would likely be reserved for Rangers, Monks, Bards, and Rogues.
All other warrior weapon utilities are useless compared to Sword and Board abilities at higher levels. No matter what combination you use, this combination is highly superior at this point in the game. I have read multiple posts above in this thread stating various cures for this problem... from comparable tank 1 handed weapons across the board to "there is nothing wrong with warriors". These are highly disappointing and missing the point entirely. At this point in Everquest our classes have come so far and it is such a contest to make our characters better than any others that we lose sight of where our classes began. Ultimately, Warriors are a mid-offensive, high- defensive class based upon our lack of magic as a utility. We use different weapon set-ups to make ourselves more useful in different settings and by and large the larger part of our warrior community was happy with the workings of our class... until Underfoot. It seems at this point that many things were happening in game... for all classes with the exemption of Warriors. Since this point our class has been left at the wayside our disciplines are in sore need of upgrade and update, our discipline timers are a complete mess. Our weapon utilities are not weapon utilities at all, for the only feasible option for a Warrior that wants to survive AND do anything remotely crossing relevant damage in group or raid situation is Sword and Board. Ever since the implementation of our superior sword and board abilities it has been a constant patch and go aspect to our class to make us even remotely relevant in a vastly changing game. The truth is any way you look at it our class can not keep going the way it is going. There will be naysayers and people that disagree all around but for the most part the warrior community wants back what was taken from us. The ability to choose and differ from other classes with our gear based upon situation. We were never meant to be streamlined into a sword and shield, we were meant to make utilization of all weapon types since the very beginning of the game. Now I am told that duel wield is not a tanking utility only shields should be usable by a tank class. Obviously those people have never played a warrior and/or the game of Everquest in the past decade because up until only a couple of years ago our best bet for tanking was either duel wield or shield utility.... whichever we chose and you lose the basics.... ac and mitigation from the shield for a sword or damage and aggro from the sword for a shield, based upon situation... with a large amount of damage for a two handed weapon.
