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

You know, its funny how paladins and sk's are being lumped together as "knights" (yes, I know we are) when discussing what was needed. Our abilities are vastly different, our requirement for improvement were different and the impact that stances has done for us is different.

Roll a Paladin then and stop , problem solved.

I have a bridge to sell you.

This is just ignorant. I've stated plenty of times in this thread that warrior MT preference has a lot more factors taken into consideration than a paladin's ability/inability to do the job.

The real game has players. It's not theorycraft on a spreadsheet. And real TOs are made against real events with real mechanics. If you think you've never had a warrior in a TO that the raid/tank leader ranked lower than the top paladin, you'd be dead wrong.

Tank / raid leaders need to consider the opportunity cost. The opportunity cost of swapping a warrior with a paladin in TO is quite high. The ironic thing, this is a reflection of warrior weakness, not strength; being expendable and being strong are two very different things. If warrior end was as important to a raid as paladin mana, I'd start caring more about warrior deaths. If a warrior could contribute as well as a paladin when not tanking, or when tanking adds, I'd consider warriors less expendable.

Are you looney?

Paladin heals lack the mana efficiency as well as the overall punch of the 3 main healing classes. Paladins bleed mana like crazy when they're going all out trying to do everything you're mentioning plus healing.

The only way this makes any sense is if you're loading 3 or more of the big boom self-only heals. That's not a normal situation for most Paladins. If that's what you're referring to, then you win since I don't think any of the healers have big, self-only heal spells like that. Paladin healing spells are geared to use while tanking, so it's no shock that the big boom, self-only heals and burst heals are useful in that situation.

Here's a random little nugget for you to wonder about.... A Ranger can out heal a Paladin if and only if they are healing a single target over a period of time. It all revolves around refresh timers and mana efficiency - I'll leave that up to you to figure out how though. I doubt you'll ever hear a Paladin complain about it though.

You make this sound far simpler in theory than it is in practice.

Assuming there are no fizzles, no resists, the mobs don't generate any push to interrupt your casting (this is why you sometimes see Paladins tank while mounted), and neither of the mobs ever stuns you. It gets much worse as you add a 3rd or more mobs.

Generating aggro on multiple mobs is easier for the Warrior. Your abilities are instant cast and you have better AE aggro tools at your disposal. Don't get me wrong, Beacon and Hallowed Loadstar are huge improvements to Paladins, but anything that goes wrong for the Paladin while those are down causes problems. They are balanced via the refresh timers on them in comparison to what a Warrior can do.

Explain how this is a problem for a Warrior and not a Paladin again? I think I missed something about the cast times and spell refresh timers, fizzles, interrupts, etc... for the 2 crushes plus Force of Disruption, etc... that allow me to chain things like you're stating AND stay ahead of DPS players that are blowing through 14k hate in less than 5 seconds. It's actually the scenario where Paladin aggro tools are the weakest of the three tanks. Don't forget - AE aggro tools work on groups of 1 or more mobs. I'm not saying I have a huge problem, but I see Warriors handle the situation better than I can all the time.

I'd love to see a reasonable discussion of the issues but most of the vocal Warriors are just way out in left field on these things. None of what you guys are ranting and raving about is anything that I actually see happen in game. It all happens on paper and in your own minds, but that's about it.

example: It's trivial for a poorly played, group geared Warrior to keep aggro over and above anything a well played, raid geared Paladin can do.

Yet here you are arguing about how Paladins can use their stuns, crushes, impose, group heals, burst heals, and self-only heals (please, please, please can I have the extra 3 or 4 spell gems you seem to think we have) all in the same encounter, seemingly chain cast, without any regard for cast times, refresh timers, spell group lockouts, fizzle rates, interrupts, etc.... All of the ranting and raving completely drowns out anything true or useful you actually might have mentioned.

To help you out, here's a few realities for you:

• Warriors are still the preferred main tank in raids.
• Warrior aggro abilities beat Paladin aggro abilities.
• Warriors still tank better than a Paladin in nearly every situation, other than stunnable mobs, that requires more healing than the Paladin can keep up with on their own - even if it really is only for 3 out of every 10 minutes with the other 7 minutes being a virtual tie.
• Warrior pet needs fixed
• Warriors probably need some minor DPS abilities added.
• Warrior burn needs looked at - it shouldn't rely on the benefits of stacking ISS and 2Hander Stance as part of the modifiers - that's just silly logic (unless it's me that is misunderstanding why your burn DPS took a hit with the stance fixes).

[/quote]

You have highlighted nothing, except wrong things on what warriors would be supposed to have as advantage over knights, and you have been proved wrong all times.

People may have noticed that Seldom never gave his opinion on the new knight OP def prof stuff he received.
In fact, he gave it, but in another thread

He acknowledged he got overpowered with this ability.
His strategy to blur it has been to post inaccurate information like "Warriors are OP, knight suck" or his ridiculous guild roster searching (guilds rosters made before the change was put in place, and he doesn't understand that if a guild is yet full on tanks they won't recrut more tanks, be it a warrior or a knight).
Just big lol.

• Warrior pet was nerfed 50% last Nov. It was not retuned properly after the nerf and can easily take proximity aggro if used to early in a fight. But. There is so much broken about aggro on raid boss these days; this has absolutely nothing to do with the crap people talk about, I truly don't know more than a handful of wars that are consistent MT could explain either. Yes Phantom Aggressor is OP but it covers up a lot of mechanical problems with the game that will probably never be fixed so be careful what you wish for. I really don't think people know how many problems with raids warriors can cover up using OP PA, so that people don't even know about them.

• 'Minor' DPS abilities? Do you know the state of tank DPS these days? Knight 2H burn DPS ran circles around us before stances and then got a nice buff while we got nerfed.

• You're not misunderstanding it; warrior DPS has been cheesable since 2007 when we got Opportunistic Strike and I'd love for those style of abilities to just go away. People have wildly wrong misconceptions of what warriors can actually do on burns due to a handful of heavily padded parses, and our DPS has always seemingly been balanced around the cheesed parses.

If I didn't think it would lead to bad things I would gladly have this discussion because it seems that many don't understand what pal/sk are burning for either. Either that or we all have vary wide definitions of "burn".

Our main source of cheese, Heroic Blade, is a version of a SK ability that they can (or at least could) cheese too, but it was never as consequential to their DPS as it was to our's, as warriors had vastly superior damage mods.

Here are a couple of realities for you:
A player in your group gets wounded bad. Cleric DArb's (they can have 2(?) per Cleric). Paladin group heals. How much healing took place?

A Ranger can out heal a Paladin on a single target? Does this "..warrior in tune with nature..." get a fair share of tanking? Why then would a "holy warrior" think they deserve to be the golden haired child? (Note that I didn't say "wholey warrior" half/Cleric. You guys are SOOOOO much more than that even if its never put on the balance scale.)

Preferred? A a guild has a choice between a Warrior who has no outside of the tank archetype abilities and a Cleric with a Sword, both of whom can tank the mobs without dying, which do they choose? A little honesty please. IF Rangers could survive as predictably as Warriors they'd be the MTs. Can substitute for a Warrior and brings ANYTHING else to the table = Warrior sits/warrior+ plays.

It's been that way since LDoN when knights had at-will at-range aggro and Warriors didn't.

A guild has a spot in a melee DPS group and is short on healers. Warrior or Paladin?

A guild is doing an event with numerous AE's or detrimental debuffs.

A guild Is doing an event that "encourages" having 5+ tanks in the tank order and 1 (2 preferred) vs. a second mob. Does a reasonable guild field 6+ Warriors and have 0 knights on its rooster? IF Warriors are always the prefered tank they do (successful guilds don't do this).

Paladin fast aggro refresh (compared to Warrior refreshes) makes it possible for them to change targets more readily than Warriors can. Further if someone is an idiot, gets aggro on a mob, gets pwned, and acquires low HP aggro a Paladin can save their bacon and a Warrior can not. This is particularly interesting when it's your Cleric that is being interrupted by a mob that is pummeling him.

Let's face facts. In group content it's tank parity and (knight spellbook superiority). You doubt this? Then why do a few knights in this thread suggest that Warriors should get more utility. If utility never mattered that's what they would say instead.

In raid content knights have a tanking role in practically every event. And once learning is over and farm mode begins they can tank pretty much every event (and many guilds give them more and harder events to tank).

Do Warriors have a curing role? A healing role? High DPS vs. undead? Or does parity mean Paladins get ours (the unmatched ability to tank the hardest mobs in the game certainly disappears by the time guilds enter farm mode) and Warriors never get their's = one way parity.

Our only preferred mobs are the hardest mobs in the game - if raid leadership runs out of knights who meet our survival rates AND bring other capabilities.

Like you need to change target with your insane AE agro ability. Woot hot key that agro and park any mob at low number and let the DPS go to town...any other class has to keep mashing abilities. Yep not underselling Warrior abilities one bit. Really a warrior cant save someone with low HP agro but a Paly can...your leaving a lot out of your story. FYI Paladin agro can be interrupted if being beaten on also...your story doesn't wash. You also fail to mention there is always more Warriors in a raid than Knights.

So all healers should heal the same and all DPS should DPSs the exact same but with tanks Warriors are the cream of the crop, you better go check the current test patch notes I'm not seeing any TANK changes listed.

Yes your examples all go one way....delete your garbage Warrior and roll a Paladin.

Up next Warriors and how they suck in PvP.

Wait people keep saying "knights utility", Did SK's get some while i was gone? I mean you guys aren't really calling running in figure eights utility are you? Or do you really just have hard ons for paladins because we have unicorns? I mean is that what its going to take to get you guys to stop crying, Warriors getting Unicorn mounts?

Is it the fault of Warriors that SK's are told that mobs should fear them etc. yet SK's have hardly ever asked for SOE/DBG to deliver the utility SK's were promised?

I've never ever understood why someone would create a character based on representations made in the class description and not insist that a reasonable effort be made to deliver what a company said it would deliver (and is still saying it will).

You are aware that for years SK's have been told "utility isn't their thing", they have asked, it was never delivered.

Granted alot of the utility they asked for was LOL, but they still asked for it.

Not to be mean or anything but I imagine some of those who said such things have discovered designing and implementing an MMoRPG wasn't their thing either.

(And I imagine some of the requests were contrary to SK class character. Snaring a mob, crippling it, etc. are ok but a Harm Touch that healed your group not ok. Too "friendly".)

And I've read SK forums and sites for years. While there have been some utility request posts (if you can call casting detrimentals on a mob "utility") there was nothing approaching the Warrior reaction to representations made and not delivered. While I didn't support a Warrior Stand Down and said so publicly, the Guild Summit and Phase 1 Melee Update were 6 months to a year over due.

is the moral of the story if Warriors cry hard enough the devs will cave Grandpa Battleaxe? Because that was my take away from that.

My take away is

if a publisher says one thing, people rely on that representation, you prove they are making misrepresentations, they either change what they said or do what they say.

Or do you claim:
~186 HPs after taking into account knight self-buffs makes Warriors "far hardier than any other class."

when knights survive just like Warriors that Warrior are still "unmatched in their ability to survive the most brutal battles."

and that Warrior semi-broken taunt and random procs are competitive with knight at-will and at-range aggro (mid LDoN) making Warriors "the focus of all their enemies' attacks, allowing the less-resilient members of their group to remain safe from harm."

Are true statements by the publisher despite being easily shown to be not the way things were (and should be) in the game.

When one's representations are so easily shown to be false you either enjoy being called a liar, fess up to your miss-statements and correct them, or if you actually meant what you said you fix things.

SOE fixed these (and later broke one of them).

I am sorry sir, but We have already had this discussion (in RE: to your statements about mid LDON Knights and that) and I am going to leave it in the past where it belongs. Although if you would like to relive it, it is somewhere on Elite gamers Archive of the old forums.

Although how you remember things and how I remember them seems to be a bit different, I will leave it at that.