It would be a nerf if 1H+Shield would be adjusted down. However, there currently is plenty of room to go upwards in DPS without even getting close to the 2/3's of a real DPS class as was suggested. Dual wielding currently has only got downsides. Even wielding a 2 hander has more upsides than dual wielding at the moment (bigger riposte damage). It is ridiculous when you think about how this could ever have become the current situation. Dual wielding should be a trade-off. You trade off survivability for more DPS. Once that is in place, I might consider trying that trade-off and see how it would do against older group content (it's like using Offensive disc in VoA or House of Thule content -- it hurts, but atleast you get something back for it).
Given that DW is for DPS and that's either tanking trivial content or when someone else is tanking, where's the meaningful loss of survivability for which one should be awarded more DPS? There isn't any. There's no "tradeoff" the way you suggest. The tradeoff is DW is unsuitable for tanking and rather than getting rewarded with riposte and ADPS damage all the damage your are doing you are doing Scot free, You're paying no cost and aren't therefore entitled to benefit except your parse reflects more of your own damage and less ADPS and damage earned because you are being pummeled to earn it - ripo's, DS, etc. Here's real paying for it: Midasa's Dragon Slayer 127+13/24 proc 1: Force of Anger VII proc 2: Anger IV (MKrarrg's Striking Stone) Fortitude, defensive disciplines vs. Eye of Xorbb tanking with healers pouring mana into you And here's not paying for it: Verdant Coiled Blade 258/30 proc 1: Force of Magic VII Aug: 16 DMG (Rixact's Gear of Crushing) OR Verdant Heart Piercer 107/19 proc 1: Vampiric Strike V Aug: 10 DMG (Cacophonic Shard) Verdant Neckcracker 125/22 proc 1: Strike of Flames V Aug: 10 DMG (Ire of Reivaj) Furious, offensive disciplines including Offensive Discipline which makes it so you shouldn't tank for 4 minutes vs. trivial content where you don't need a shield or DPSing with someone else tanking Well guess what - one probably does more DPS when using offensive disciplines rather than defensive disciplines. Someone found a corner case like 20 light blues, AE Taunt, Furious, Battle Leap Or they didn't own 2-1Handers or 1-2Hander so they "DPSed" with a 1H DPS weapon or compromised the aggro of Chapterhouse Standard by putting a 10 DMG aug in it and used one of those with a shield and omg used offensive disciplines??? omGoodness that means DW and 2H aren't viable. No, actually it means we do more DPS using offensive disciplines than using defensive disciplines and that weapons setup for DPSing do better when we try to DPS than those setup for aggro. The first thing one wants to do if trying to prove S&B is too good and DW should replace it is to pretend there's a major issue that must be solved. There's a couple of corner cases where S&B cam be used with offensive disciplines to advantage. So what? NOT unheard of by any of the classes in the Tank Archetype. There were more corner cases where DW could be used to advantage tanking before Shield Specialist and I don't recall much protest. There's no trade off in survivability for more DPS if DW is for DPS and not tanking. The tradeoff is we aren't getting seriously hurt and are still doing good (for us) DPS. Oh SOE can prod and poke disciplines and abilities and even create a DPS weapon buff clickie that can go in the Symbol of the Planesmasters slot to go with the Rogue poison choice and illusion choice we already have. But that's not going to nerf S&B down enough so we DW most of the time. Not when we pay for consistent with our class DPS when tanking with a shield in virtual blood.
Or doing weak content. My SK alt 2H tanks in VOA content. Tanks that Sword-Board, even when the content is trivial and a 2H (or Dual wield) would easily live are terrible tanks leaving AAs/DPS on table. If I'm farming an Aug in VOA, or even many T1 spots, and Im dealing with Raid Level Tanks as a healer if I don't see them using Max DPS, I'll call them out. Dual wield should be a "between" option for Warriors Tanking Damage Shield/Board > Dual Wield > 2H DPSing 2H > Dual Wield > Sword/Board
We're not discussing swarming, light blues, or otherwise slumming. We're talking about tanking in a level appropriate setting or a raid. Again, tanks worried about their dps are like clerics in a raid worried about their dps. The only people who care are the ones measuring their own e-peens.
The whole 'we want DW back' debate started with a loss of agro. ISS, modern hate discs and riding pet hate made much of this irrelevant, but DW provides an excellent opportunity to maximize swing agro and increase granularity of hate procs- 50% more weapon procs, 50% more IBR and a 50-60% increase in swing agro. Combine that with the hatemod buff we've been requesting for ages, there's a lot of ground to be gained in environments where we need to switch targets faster than our hate discs refresh.
In the fast kill/trivial mob environment that kind of thing might be entirely appropriate. However DW has no role in current content which should be challenging enough that all members of the Tank Archetype should be using shields. DW is for DPS, Starting quite early on 2H DPS performance was compared to DW DPS performance and 2H damage bonuses were adjusted. This primarily benefited knights since Warrior (and Ranger for that matter) DW DPS outperformed our 2H DPS performance even after the 2H damage bonus adjustment. Incorrectamundo. When knights lobbied for tank parity outside of raids that means tank parity outside of raids. You can't take away Warrior superiority vs. Drolvarg Ragers, Jord Kriegers and a handful of name mobs outside the raid environment and give knights superiority in the fast experience swarming environment. That key to a good group/fares poorly adventuring alone tradeoff that needed to be addressed because of tank parity. There's a unmatched ability to survive brutal mobs/fares poorly vs. masses of lighter hitting mobs tradeoff that needs to be addressed as a consequence of imposing tank parity too.
Rune proc, not blowing all your discs on a single mob, intelligently using cyclone, roar of challenge...the list goes on. Just in general NOT being a bad player solves ALL of these problems. I will never understand the want or need for DW in today's EQ, when it has been eliminated for quite some time - if they want to add it as some mediocre DPS tool, that is fine...but we really don't "need" more aggro.
I kinda worded that funny, I wasn't really looking to make a personal attack. It's more that if they added DW as "hey guys this is more aggro and that's all it is", it wouldn't be utilized really at all...since our aggro is fine as it is with shield+1h.
Random Idea You could make Dual Wield the default raid set up for Non-Tanking Warriors, making it a skill issue for a warrior to Bandolier quickly back and forth. AA: Off hand high proc 1 Tic 3k Heal over Time (really ends up 6k because of phantom tic) Warrior not tanking would use that to help mitigate (lol... heal in this case) AE Rampage/AE damage produce a little more dps Or Raid Leaders who like to mid-max thier whole raid and max the whole raids dps. My guild often has over 54 on a raid . I'd like to not have to boot a warrior for a late logging in person automatically. For a warrior to be "Okay" dps, but not a dps.
I'd agree with your assessment of today's affairs, especially since RoF. My post started as more of a re-cap of how the quest to bring DW back began. Do you not find it particularly odd that Warriors (of all classes!) have such poor swing agro? Considering the first decade of EQ where we were entirely dependent on swing/proc agro, it's a huge paradigm shift to the modern era of activated hate. While many would say these changes are for the better, there's undoubtedly a trend of blurring of the lines between Warriors and Knights - a blurring many Warriors are not happy about. The saddest part is it all started with ISS not working as intended. The fact that two years later the AA still has not even had the description text updated to match the functionality speaks volumes toward the developers' ignorance of the issue. I didn't take it as one. Just suggesting another way DW can be differentiated from being 'second rate DPS'. Anyway, on the specific subject of multitarget agro, I'd target Roar of Challenge as our next discipline that needs an overhaul instead of just an upgrade. The resist rates and 3 target limit seriously limit what could be a potentially awesome disc.
Well, still full agro on a resist, even if it's similar to an 8/9 year old SK AE hate disc. With half the recast time. And unlimited targets instead of 3.
I think what may happen if devs turn a serious eye to this question is genuine choice. You want DPS? Then wield 2-1H DPS weapons or a 2Hander with DPS augs on them, use Spider's Bite, click a DPS weapon proc buff, choose an illusion that helps DPS production, and use damage related disciplines. Each DPS thing you do making it increasingly difficult to get aggro and survive challenging content. You want to tank challenging content, Then wield an aggro weapon like Midasa's Dragon Slayer and have a big chunk of DMG appearing as elenental damage not real DMG, use aggro procs, click an udated SoTP, use Scorpion's Agony and and use defensive disciplines - everything you do insuring your personal DPS plus ADPS you are getting because you are tanking is typical for a Warrior and everything you do to DPS higher takes away some ability to tank. Bbbut someone may be in S&B and "cheat" by doing everything else as if they were DPSing? Well certainly in a lot of content people will DW or use a 2H and "cheat" and hit the taunt button, etc. You got peanut butter on my chocolate! No, you got chocolate on my peanut butter. I don't think SOE will get involve in such things. S&B is for tanking. DW and 2H is for DPSing what can't hurt you or when someone else is tanking - good enough.
I'm getting really tired of this "shield rules all" rhetoric. You are seriously making the argument that there is no meaningful trade-off in dual wielding because you'd have to go to lower-end content to survive or have someone else tanking? I see two trade-offs right there... but... Here's news for you, I can survive dual wielding in current high-end group content but I donot do it because I donot gain anything from it... I only lose (DPS, survivability and perhaps some good will towards whoever has to heal me). I bet I could even survive dual wielding on raids, our healing team will see it as a challenge. If they can keep me alive for 15 minutes on current raid bosses, then I'm sure I could survive dual wielding for quite a while as well. As said before, there should be a trade-off. I should be able to trade cleric mana (which is always full) for more DPS. I should be able to trade survivability for more DPS. I don't care if it doesn't fit in your cookie cutter mold for what a tank should be.
Plus when or if you have say 8-9 warriors some nights, it gives you chance to tradeoff AC from sword/board to dps dual wield! So you would think makes since? But currently dual wield is useless. I never swap out of sword/board, it makes no since with current situation. But that being said if they don't have a way to boost dual wield to dps set-up then just give us a knight style 1 handers bigger damage! Would love to see even if only beta next round to test.
Yep, I am seriously making the argument that a Wizard, a Rogue, or a Warrior who is DPSing is not trading off survivability for more DPS. They are performing the role of DPSer which includes NOT getting hit. If someone else is tanking and you aren't getting hit you aren't trading any sacrifice of one for a gain of the other. I could probably paddle a canoe with a pool cue but that doesn't make a pool cue a canoe paddle. Defensive setup An aggro weapon like Midasa's Dragon Slayer with a MKraggs Striking Stone one it, Scorpion's Agony, Brells, and Simple Gnomework Illusion sure doesn't look like optimum offense to me. Look at the weapon+aug ratio. I'd content you were "dressed to tank". Offensive setup Verdant Coiled Blade 258/30 proc 1: Force of Magic VII Aug: 16 DMG (Rixact's Gear of Crushing) OR Verdant Heart Piercer 107/19 proc 1: Vampiric Strike V Aug: 10 DMG (Cacophonic Shard) Verdant Neckcracker 125/22 proc 1: Strike of Flames V Aug: 10 DMG (Ire of Reivaj) Scorpion's Bite, Ranger Buffs, Dragorn War Mask. Look at the Weapon ratios. My guess would be DPSing behind the mob dressed to DPS beats dressed to tank DPSing behind the mob. If it does not it should be fixed. One should therefore do horrible DPS when dressed to tank and getting beaten on? Not at all, you're paying in rightous dressed to tank and tanking blood for that ripo, DS, and ADPS damage you get tanking. When you aren't tanking, dressed to DPS, and DPSing you're watching someone else take those lumps and frankly Druid-like survivability would be enough then <- there's your payoff you're doing that DPS not getting hurt in the process of doing it.
In terms of pure DPS I don't even see a problem with them being primary flagged. Viva la Wurmslayer! Taking a step back though, dual wield was broken by AA's. Itemization is not the fix - AA's are.
