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

Hiya Yimin,

It has been a number of years since I have raided, but I do not think the mitigation disparity was the cause of a lack of raiders. I think it is more of a time comitment. Even at only 3 days a week, 3 hours a pop, it is difficult for a working parent to meet at home responsibilities.

Rykard

Unless it was absolutely clear that warrior vs knight balance was incredibly unbalanced in favor of warriors before the changes, the changes were overdone. Other the ranger DPS buff in HOT, I don't think I've seen a single class get as buffed in a single expansion as much as knights did in TBM since I've been playing EQ (FYI, rangers then got nerfed so hard that their DPS is still recovering.)

Thing is, most people rated pallies > wars even before the changes.

People insist on using erroneous arguments like guild population of X class (you guys do know most raiding mains are more than 1 expansion old, and that most guilds hesitate on main changes right?).... And guild tactics, like "Since guilds put knights on adds and wars on boss that mean wars are better." Hint. Pallies 'could' tank bosses as well as wars >2 minutes for years now, it's just that the gap between wars and pals on adds is so high it'd be silly to put wars on adds.

You guys do know that pals could tank Calix, probably the most melee intense mob since VOA, even before the changes right?

You think pals could get close to tanking bosses in tacvi in 2004 for more than a minute? Nope.

(Before stances) Warriors needed to save cooldowns to use after disc to match the longevity of a pal on a boss. Since the changes, we need to blow our cooldowns like Dich shield and Warlord's tenacity -while- LS is going to beat a pal's boss stack, and drop off like a rock after.

Knights are not the default boss tank for raids, and never will be.
Warriors and knights can all tank exp stuff well.
What is wrong?

Most people did not rate Pallies > Warriors before the changes. Not since Warrior aggro was boosted to be so much better.

Prior to the changes, Warriors had far better aggro management as well as superior mitigation to Paladins. Warriors were able to last much longer than Paladins could as far as tanking boss mobs - especially prior to the Paladin being fully geared or at least nearly so.

After the changes, Warriors are still better tanks than Paladins and still have better aggro management tools. That didn't change. Paladins are definitely much closer now though.

Once they started making adds do more damage than a knight could self-heal through, it made more sense to use Warriors on adds as well as the boss tanks. I'm not saying knights couldn't tank any of the adds, just that it was more advantageous to use warriors if and when you could spare them. The possible exceptions would be the 4 casters for the 2nd wave of adds in TDS-4 and the undead in TDS-3. All of those adds can be stunned which is the only advantage a knight (Paladin to be exact) had over a warrior. Even still, you were better off with Warriors as tanks and other classes stunning them since you could easily lose knights if there were a few unlucky resists.

You can keep disputing it, but there was a huge difference in tanking abilities before the recent changes and it was definitely in the Warrior's favor. Constantly saying otherwise doesn't make it true no matter how many times it's repeated.

Personally, Calix never seemed that tough to tank - especially early on in the fight (hint, hint). I always had far more trouble with the Golems in TDS-2 if something went wrong than Calix and Lanys in TDS-5.

I said 16+ years ago, they should have never made the Warrior, Wizard and Cleric class. Those classes preform the main roles of the game the best; Healing, DPS and Tanking. Any other class can't do their job properly, because of these classes.

SKs/Knights are meant to tank, they pretty much have no role that wouldn't better be filled with another class if they aren't tanking. But because of warriors, they can't be the best tanks, because warriors have not utility supposedly. It's a broken see saw and you can't ever balance these classes. You should be able to insert a pally, sk or warrior to tank a boss and not notice a difference. I think now they are getting close to that point and that's the way it needs to be.

Warriors are the exact same now as before the update. This updated just allowed the flexibility of using all the TANK classes to TANK. Take the warrior class out of the game and you have a system that works perfectly for tanking. Just like when they tried to get shamans/druids to heal closer to clerics. Can't have one class that does one of the 3 key roles the best, because content gets created around them and the other classes can't fill their role properly. I understand warriors want to be king of the hill, but think about an SK on a raid before. Warriors still are the best or equal to the best at tanking, so they will always have a main role in a raid or group. There is no issue here.

You can keep saying knights cannot tank stuff in raid. Like Kamea has said it, in our raids (i'm in a mid tier raiding guild, Kamea is in a high end tier raiding guild) we have seen something else. We have seen knights being able to MT Raid Bosses, and not being one rounded like many knights "claim".
You can keep being not honest on your real power, we know it's not true.

Really they are closed to each other ? Warrior as a specialist class has no utility like you said it and mitigation is our speciality.
Knights have some utility, and now reach war mitigation.
Also, knight dps is better than war dps.
How is it balanced for warrior atm versus knights ?

Except that priests aren't balanced in raid content. You cannot raid without clerics, because on tank healing area there is no competition between using clerics or druids / shamans. Clerics destroy druids / shamans, in term of heal power (Cleric multibinds, Cleric group heals) first, and in utility too (DI, Ward of Surety, etc).
Except the druid / shaman community is not whinning like the knight one did to be able to mitigate as good as warriors.

Knights should be able too tank raids boss , just not enough people play EQ any more ,for them not to be made able to tank raid boss ...

Yi Min

Something which no one is even talking about is that stance change was a significant boost to knight DPS and a significant nerf to warrior's main source of burn DPS (Heroic blade.) They get 2H stance -and- get to keep their superior weapons. Not only did the ratios stay the same, they got a small AC boost in the patch on their current 2H.

Warrior v Knight DPS was already the most unbalanced in years before the changes, in favor of knights. As long as I've been playing warriors, I've never seen both pal and SK DPS as > war DPS as it was before the changes. I've yet to see enough burns to really judge the changes, but knights I know told me it's a notable boost.

I'm in no way saying knight DPS is OP; it's not. All tanks have stagnated in DPS vs other classes, but warriors have stagnated more -and- got nerfed. Thanks to big boosts in enc DPS, Warriors are either 15th or 16th in DPS these days, I think a cleric with full aDPS might be able to beat us. At least on undead we're 16th out of 16.

Yet, people like to pretend that DPS for tanks doesn't matter, ergo is irrelevant to balance discussions -- "I don't care about how much DPS I do as (x_class), so it doesn't matter." Even if you don't care, keep in mind that warriors BP click is DPS based (which is freakin stupid btw, but that's another thread.)

Funny thing is, one of the main benefits to wars when I started playing one as an alt in 2004-5 was that they could put out high sustained DPS -while- tanking. XP rates were noticeably higher, due to faster kills, having a war tanking over a pal back then.

You are one of the people that pops off NO THANK YOU!!! you every time utility is brought up for Warriors to make them better? Maybe you don't realize how often Knights asked for tanking improvements and were shot down only to be offered additional utility? Apparently they wisely accepted it when not getting increased durability to be useful for more than one thing.

Extremely strange Kamea. You claim ''most'' people rated Paladins greater than Warriors ''before'' the changes. Yet your guild has 3 total paladins(doesn't appear to even have recruitment open for them) and 9(Nine) total warriors. Why are you guys not recruiting more of this class ''most'' consider greater than warriors? Oh, never mind, I know why. I'll let you continue on blatantly lieing. Continue on raiding with NINE WARRIORS and 3 paladins/2 shadowknights while claiming knights are over powered. Warrior logic /yawn

Immediately after I said that, I said:

People insist on using erroneous arguments like guild population of X class (you guys do know most raiding mains are more than 1 expansion old, and that most guilds hesitate on main changes right?).... And guild tactics, like "Since guilds put knights on adds and wars on boss that mean wars are better."

Would you like me to explain why it's highly erroneous to cite guild populations as proof that a patch which occurred a matter of days ago really didn't change balance?

maybe there was so many bad knights that they were getting one rounded

^

Oh yeah, i know how a few vocal players of your community have lead a trash campaign on it asking to be able to step up to MT Raid Boss, aka mitigating as good as warrior. This has been pretty clear on these boards in some thread.
.

Sojero, no where did I ever equate guild class population with class power. If you read my post, I was making the opposite point. Players need to a) exist and b) be good for guilds to recruit them. It's not a horde like 15k AA paladins sprung out of no where due to a patch in Feb 2016.

The other flaw with this thread is that some base their arguments from the premise that ability to tank raid bosses = how strong a tank is. Utility does matter, and tanking power in different situations matters too. People seemingly pretend such things don't exist.

Oh so for those years and years and years before that "most people" guess your raid leaders and guild recruiters were not part of "most people" you didn't have time to pick up more than 2-3 of them, cause they were the best tanks and all?

I wont go into the rest of your posts because well, your delusional if you believe the crap about paladins being better than wars before the patch. I just wanted to point out that you contradicted yourself, within an hour lol, you amuse me, keep on fightin the good fight.

They weren't there to recruit. There is an actual fight any time a new paladin (or bard or wizard) wants to raid on my home server. I readily believe it's similar everywhere.