Speaking for myself only, as an SK I have zero problems with warriors having more AC, more HP, and more mitigation. How much more is workable within the confines of current content? No idea. But DPS in relation to the tanks (and let's face it, none of us have great dps) should go Sk, WAR, Pal (unless undead) Period. There should NEVER be a situation where warriors out DPS Sks. This should not even be a discussion. Conversely, I agree that there should never be a situation where a warrior should not be more ideal as a tank than either Knight. That said tanking = holding aggro and taking damage while trying to mitigate as much of it as possible. While keeping people more squishy than yourself from being hit. DPS has nothing to do with tanking.
I think the recent changes were amazing for the game. Two classes gained a nice, NEEDED upgrade and no classes were nerfed. The ability for knights to tank in a raid is an absolute necessity for those classes to be useful. It was ridiculous before, being a tank that can't tank. Warriors lost zero and are the exact same class they were before the changes. They still hold a tanking advantage and are the first choice for a tank. A little bit more utility for them would be nice, but they can't change the tanking ability from what it is now. The only negative is that warriors feel they aren't as special now. Its a major win for the game and fun factor for soooo many people, while not hurting any class. That is a rare thing and was very nice to see. There is currently no tanking issues right now and if DGB does anything, it should be to add more utility to warriors.
The problem with giving warriors a decent tanking advantage, is that they need to either make mobs too wasy for them to tank, or too hard for a Knight to tank. As far as pure tanking goes, they all need to be very close. Yes, a warrior should make the margin of error larger for healers etc, and they have that now. The only thing they can do is to add utility to the warrior class, but the tanking distance needs to remain very close.
Yes, it does. Guilds have 10-12 tanks on a raid. The combined DPS of all these tanks won't be equal to 10-12 DPSers obviously, but maybe it will be equal to a couple DPSers which is important. Mob dies faster, tanks live. Years of paladins actively lobbying for warrior DPS nerfs have lead to stagnation of all tanks' DPS, and tanks' contribution to raid DPS has diminished. It's many of these same paladins that care zero about aggregate tank DPS, and think tank DPS is all about getting an aDPS group vs a trivial mob and getting 1 good parse a year for ego purposes.
Of the quoted number or 10 - 12 tanks on a raid break that down. How many are Warriors? Typically 6 right? How many are Paladins? Typically 3-4, right? How many are Sks? Typically 1 or 2 right? Why is it that if 12 tanks are needed only 2 of those are from one of the three classes? And since Sks are the tank capable of producing the most Dps, how exactly then can you justify saying that DPS has anything to do with tanking?
*grabs steering wheel* This really isn't the thread for these sort of opinions. Choosing winners and losers just results in tank warfare. Let's be above this.
I am attempting to be above class warfare. It would really be great if we all agreed on class strengths / weaknesses. I have offered an idea to help warriors, and have not yet seen any feedback on said idea. I am for moving forward and all tanks having a purpose. Nerfs should not be called for. Attacking people should not be done. All tanks should be able to.....tank. What they can do outside of that or how they can do it is up for debate.
I agree with what Buds had to say. Its fine to try and find a way to differentiate between the tanks, but NOT at the expense of going back to the huge disparity in tanking between tanks.
Tank dps in a raid really means ZERO to anyone, did you do your job or not is all the raid cares about. If your worried about TANK DPS you need to change classes. Now if you want to compare dps as situational to any of the three tank classes I would say SK best dps followed by Warriors that should be capable of short term burst dps so they have that little extra. On an undead mob Paladin should lead the tank DPS class. I don't know how anyone wants to argue dps matters as a tank doing your job of actually tanking something. Your job is to live as long as possible while keeping its attention focused on you. If your dps matters while your tanking something your not tanking it your trying to dps it to death.
Do I need to take a screenshot and show you where it is (yes, I have a warrior myself...)? No wonder you think your dps is low - you evidently don't even have fundamental class AAs.
Tank DPS does matter. You always should be trying to maximize what you can put out. Every little bit adds up. That doesn't mean do terrible at your primary role. That means put out as much DPS as you possibly can, while still exceling at your primary role.
Speaking for myself only, as a warrior I have zero problems with shadowknights having both invis spells, FD, snare, instant mounts, powerful AE agro and powerful self healing ... but DPS in relation to the tanks (and let's face it, none of us have great dps) should go WAR, Sk, Pal (unless undead) Period. There should NEVER be a situation where Sks out DPS warriors. This should not even be a discussion. Concurrently, I agree that there should be many situations (as there already are) where knights are more ideal as tanks than warriors. That said tanking = holding aggro[sic] and taking damage while trying to mitigate as much of it as possible. While keeping people more squishy than yourself from being hit. DPS has everything to do with every character's desirability and the fun of driving it, once the basics of a battle are covered, not to mention being key to beating several modern raid events.
Agro and Aggro are both actual valid real-world spellings and I'm surprised how few people seem to know this. /carry on.
Seriously? Warriors should do more DPS than Sks? Although on top of melee we have a pet, DDs, DOTs, and lifetaps? Are you serious? Maybe you should play a rogue instead. More Dps + SOS
I saw the point. But these are your classmates. This is the attitude they have. If you cannot reach consensus within your own class ( or at least understand the tradeoffs of being THE best tank) I do not know how your class can improve. The imbalance that existed in tanking is no longer, nor will it ever return. DRE, I have read a lot of your posts over the years. you are one of the reasonable warriors. You want your class to advance and improve, but not necessarily at the expense of others. I want much the same for SKs. I am sorry that you are saddled with what appears to be so many others that simply cannot be reasonable.
Only thing that has been consistent is Paladin dps on undead. So how to fairly split Warrior and Sk dps? What if Warrior and SK dps are supposed to be equal just generated differently? IS the SK pet even worth anything solo, group or raid? Should it just be discontinued beyond lvl 105 or beefed up?
Seriously? Berserkers should do more DPS than Rangers? Although on top of melee they have DDs and DOTs? Are you serious? Seriously? Wizards should do more DPS than Beastlords? Although on top of DDs they have melee, a pet, and DOTs? Are you serious?
The pet is largely viewed as a walking DOT. Worth casting as over time it does some damage. But I don't think for a second it will ever get beefed up. That said, SKs have too many abilities whose sole purpose is to do damage, to see it be equal. The only buffs I can cast are group I've and and aggro buff. And no one wants that but other tanks.....who are not Sks.
