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

Discussion in 'Tanks' started by Time Burner 2, Feb 18, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Battleaxe Augur

    It is really simple. The representation made by SOE/DBG isn't "tanks better than". It's "warriors are unmatched in their ability to survive the most brutal battles." Not "warriors attuned to nature", "holy warriors", or "unholy warriors". Just plain Warrior "warriors".

    Anything less than knights dying significantly more often while Warriors survive for the majority of each expansion is inadequate. If knights dependably survive just like Warriors for most of an expansion "unmatched survivability" is matched.

    Let's be honest here. No one is entitled to survive like a Warrior PLUS. Anyone who looked at the Warrior class description, then looked at the Ranger (or a knight) class description and said to themselves "ah, 'warrior attuned to nature" must be tanks like a Warrior AND gets all these other goodies too" is beyond deluded.

    Utility doesn't count? Then sirs why did you choose utility when there was a 100% tank in the offing?

    And there are several knights here that were very busy attacking the Warrior Class Defining Ability for years. (And for years they've watched Warriors MT raid boss mobs.) They know that's the way things have been, I know it, and you know it. So this is just a continuation of a let's steal the longstanding Warrior raid role that they've been obsessed with for more than a decade.

    Their class description? They aren't interested (unless it's a free bonus). The Warrior class description? They are very interested but not interested enough to roll one.
  2. Time Burner 2 Augur

    I'm not sure what old class descriptions, or things like "how class X walked uphill in 2009" really matter today for someone rolling a new tank. Today warriors are either less effective or at best effectively even to knights in every non-trivial aspect of the game besides boxing.

    Roll a knight period (unless you want an easy box tank).
  3. Kamea Augur

    I compare a tank in a tank to group to another tank in a tank group (how 95%+ of tanks actually raid.) Guy comes back claiming "apples to oranges." Brilliant.

    And. How is knights getting useful self buffs while warrior self buffs are designed like utter crap anything except a warrior weakness?

    Yes, warriors should be the best in the mitigation. Why shouldn't we? I think the problem is that many knights in this thread are conflating 'mitigation' with 'survival.' Yes all mitigation is survival, but not all survival is mitigation.

    For DPS, warriors should be more DPS than paladins under any situation. I have NP with SKs being more DPS, just not the massive gap that exists today.

    For aggro, comparing a disc/AA-focused class to a spell-focused class is an actual apple to oranges comparison. We 'can' blow all our aggro discs at once, and hope we won't need them again while they're on cooldown (which is 30s-2 mins.) Where as knights aggro relies a lot on spell GDC which is bad for a single mob but good for multiple mobs, since you're always 2.25s away from 'something' being off cooldown.

    Maybe you should ask the MTs in your guild for their tank parses so you can see what bosses do for damage. 5% mitigation equates to about 90k-120k damage reduced per minute on most raid bosses, and fyi, any competent knight should be able to self heal at a faster rate than that. Considering a single cleric can parse at over 500k hp/minute in heals on me, this notion that 5% mitigation should be 'the' warrior advantage is completely detached from the realities of EQ.


    Paladins went from 0 to hero in DPS in 2010 and immediately felt entitled for tank DPS parity and got warrior ISS nerfed.

    Knights went from having 36% mitigation every 12 mins (which they had to wait 14 years to get, mind you) to full time 35% -- in a way that allowed for much better stacking with their absorb/vie discs. Within the first 10 pages of the threads many knights seemed to agree the % was too high, but by page 34 knights already feel entitled to DPS parity.

  4. Ravengloome Augur

    So if they are "at best effectively" even than its basically roll what you want to play. You can literally play any of the 3 tanks and get the same results at that point.

    How is that a bad thing? I mean really?
    Abazzagorath likes this.
  5. Seldom Augur

    No single tank class should ever possess the best single target aggro, best AE aggro, best disc'd mitigation, best sustained mitigation by gigantic margin, superior hit point pool by gigantic margin, best returns on AC and best DPS in "all" situations. Not good for the game. Luckily, developers apparently agree. Warriors still possess many things on the above list FYI, for any of the "new" players thinking of rolling one. At the very highest of end, among the only 15 guilds whom have defeated entire game, there are more active raiding Warriors, than the other two tank classes "combined". VERY powerful class ;).
  6. Ravengloome Augur

    You keep talking like that, those Crazy Dwarves are going to Lynch you
  7. Abazzagorath Augur

    *shrug* You obviously don't understand tanking.

    About as bad as that triconix guy who posted dps difference numbers not even comprehending it disproved his entire point.

    Tanking effectively in terms of damage taken is about surviving spikes. Period. Anything else is irrelevant. Paladin ability to heal is irrelevant unless there is infinite HP pool. Car being able to go 180 mph is irrelevant when the speed limit is 70.

    After all, that is what it boils down to. You see knights can do 10 mph more on an open straightaway but ignore the fact that you have a 4x4 and can go offroad where we rip out our axles in those situations. Newsflash: your jeep can go just as fast on the highway as a Lamborghini when the speed is throttled to the speed limit.

    Warriors tank better than knights. They take less damage. Knights able to self heal on trash that won't kill any of the 3 classes because in those situations you have a real healer is pretty apparent and irrelevant. But again, that is why you and every other warrior whining on this thread have taken a complete right turn at Albuquerque, going from arguing about knights being "better MTs" to whining about utility and downward scaling bs no one truly cares about.
    Nightops, shik and Ravengloome like this.
  8. Abazzagorath Augur

    It isn't even that complicated. I don't care if warriors tanked, healed, dps'd more than me, as long as it didn't effect MY ability to do those things relative to content. Warriors were given something that messed up balance. Instead of nerfing it they gave it to every tank.

    Some of these guys seem to think there is some negotiation with the devs they can do to argue they deserve it and knights don't. They don't get it. Either it stays, or it goes for everyone, and they are right back in the same spot as now, except they are that much closer to non-tanks.
    Seldom likes this.
  9. Ravengloome Augur

    Actually I like the remove it entirely Idea the most. Remove DP, leave mob Damage alone, done.
  10. Time Burner 2 Augur

    These things seem irrelevant with regards to the point of the OP to me - here is why:

    You make two basic points.

    First point - Let's first say you are right in regards to "the warriors have best this and that stuff" to avoid side notes...

    For all these "best things" warriors have, knights absolutely seem to make better solo, molo, and group tanks than warriors do for some reason. And... they can now tank raid bosses as effectively as warriors do.

    Second point - it doesn't matter what end game raiders currently staff, because this patch is pretty new. It's not like raid teams are going to dump warriors - that would be disloyal, and stupid, since warriors can indeed tank raid bosses right? Trying to argue against the OP using this line of reasoning seems pretty weak today.

    Last week I was invited to sit in on a raid where a SK tanked the T3 TBM end game boss. Zero problems at all for the SK, 43 in raid (can you say low heals and dps). The bone about endgame guilds staffing more warriors is irrelevant to the current fact that knights can tank raid bosses with absolutely zero problems.

    Warriors fall behind, or at best match knights in all arenas of play (outside of ease for boxing purposes). Relatively lame dps, solo, molo, group, failboat raid utility, and their crown jewel of tanking raid bosses is now easily shared by knights.

    You call the warrior class powerful in light of this? Warriors are dinosaurs man. Roll a knight new guys.
  11. Kleitus_Xegony Augur

    Explain the skill "Taunt" then. It's only mentioned in the Warrior class description but it's given to Paladins and Shadow Knights at Lvl 1.

    All three tanks also have the same line about their armor in the descriptions. This stuff about how Warriors should have better mitigation isn't supported at all by those class descriptions. All three of them should be mitigating physical damage the same. Rangers wear a lighter armor, chain, and thus should not mitigate physical damage as well as the other three tanks.

    "Warriors build their strength and stamina to unheard-of levels, making them far hardier than any other class. When combined with their heavy armor and excellent defensive skills, warriors are unmatched in their ability to survive the most brutal battles."

    It's the COMBINATION of their heavy armor (which they share with others) PLUS their higher HPs and excellent defensive skills that makes them unmatched. That's exactly the situation that exists now. You just don't like that it isn't by the crazy amount that it was before.

    The quote "...allowing the less-resilient members of their group to remain safe from harm." does not mean that ALL members are less-resilient. Those other two guys, the Paladin and Shadow Knight, standing there wearing the same plate armor are just as resilient as the Warrior. They just lack the HPs and excellent defensive skills. By the way, that doesn't mean they lack any defensive skills at all though. Their skills are likely less powerful (vaguely implied) if not just different than a Warrior's, which again is exactly the situation that exists now.

    Simply adhering to the class descriptions means you should lose the heal on Warlord's Tenacity since that's a Paladin's thing. Probably shouldn't have a way to snare a fleeing opponent since that's a Shadow Knight's thing. Things like Throat Jab, Lionhearted Rally-Cry, Rallying Roar are very much Shadow Knight type abilities. Increasing the AC of your companions with things like Field Armorer are very much along the lines of Paladin abilities. All of those abilities are outside of a Warrior's class description and fit into the descriptions of the two knight classes if you want to adhere to it so closely. In your world, you wouldn't have those abilities at all since what's in the class descriptions for Paladins and Shadow Knights applies to Paladins and Shadow Knights only.

    This is why you look so foolish going on and on and on about class descriptions. There is absolutely nothing to support your claims in the class descriptions. You really need to stop using them. All they are meant to be is the tiniest bit of information about the classes to try and hook someone's interest in one class compared to another.
  12. Time Burner 2 Augur

    Get the same results? Are you joking?

    To repeat for the 9th time, in regards to dps, molo, solo, group, and raid utility content warriors lag behind knights, and are only "at best effectively" even with regards to knights in raid boss tanking. How can you not grasp these concepts I laid out when you are quoting me?

    Do you want your quarter ton truck with or without stereo, air conditioning, cruise control, etc?

    Pretty simple...
  13. Xanathol Augur

    You are purposely dropping context. The context of why it is apples to oranges was explained to you - a warrior not wanting to use his dps disc bc he may have to tank doesn't mean he doesn't possess the ability, but rather that he chooses not to use it. OTOH, knights can use their 'burns' and still be ready to tank. And as I mentioned later in my post, I do see it as a problem that warriors are forced to make a choice but if that is addressed, then sks will need to be revisited as well bc of the unfortunate approach to 'balance' at the moment. Seriously, stop trying to be so confrontational.
    Who says yours should be 'utter crap'? You don't see me stating that.
    I'm with you on that - quite a few knights are.
    I agree in regards to paladins but there is no 'massive gap' today except out of choice. Again, I support opening up that choice, But if you'd use those abilities you'd see that sks are way behind where they should be - the recent addition of 2her stance was just to take it from the realm of completely broken back to unbalanced.
  14. Mistatk Augur

    really? your saying you can't make up for a 5% difference with all your heals and junk. funny, my paladin that i'm now playing can. Maybe you don't know what buttons to push? fine, you feel you need the same mitigation as warriors, plus the ability to heal, and this seems fair to you? not person will address the question of, if you can have knight abilities AND warrior mitigation, why would you just take one. Anyhow, apparently with in all the "holy warriors" there isn't a single honest person so.
  15. Mistatk Augur

    Isn't ROI the top raiding guild? So you got a paladin from the top guild left in EQ coming on forums saying if knights aren't with in 5% mitigation of warriors, then things are completely out of balance? Whats this about a "guild summit". Was the top guild in the game at this "guild summit". Your saying flat out warriors can't mitigate better then paladins with all their cleric abilities, or its not fair to you, mr. super paladin from the top guild. Yeah, I think the developers listen, and I think its your type that gets their ear.
  16. Kamea Augur

    Ok supposed expert on boss tanking despite saying his guild doesn't have him MT bosses....

    How many 160k+ hp rounds do you think an active ~200k hp MT takes in a given night?

    What do you think the average round that kills a MT is?

    You seem to think that "spike damage" is getting 1-rounded from 100% hp.
  17. Ravengloome Augur

    Actually personally I rarely if ever even need my "knight utility" in group content, so i am flabberghasted that the absence of it would even be that bad.

    Ive cast in the last week of grouping with people, exactly 2 rezzes, (guesstimating based on total healing) about 3 heals on people other than myself, and 1 Splash but i think that was on accident. There were 2 deaths (this is over about 12ish hours of jerking around in TBM/TDS)

    What the hell am i going to use utility on in todays group game? O JEEZ i can root off adds...... or i can just tank them... BFD.

    However if you want to argue how my utility afffects the molo/solo game, well you got me there I cant argue.
  18. Battleaxe Augur

    You left out the fact that Rangers get Taunt. Kinda inconvenient when it turns out some abilities are not part of the Tank Archetype but instead part of a Fighter Archetype and doesn't even apply to all fighters.

    Warriors, Paladins, SK's and Rangers all have "warrior" in their description.

    "far hardier", "heavy plate", unmatched ability for survive, the original design team giving Warriors defensive abilities.

    No they shouldn't. Clearly "heavy plate" refers to Warriors and not warriors. As you've noted Rangers don't wear plate at all and they are "warriors attuned to nature".

    1. "Other three tanks"? Then you are suggesting Rangers are tanks?
    2. Clerics and Bards wear plate armor it (as is the case with Paladins and SK's) simply isn't "heavy plate".

    It's the COMBINATION of their heavy armor (which they don't share with others) PLUS their higher HPs (which applies to one class, certainly not warriors which includes Rangers) and excellent defensive skills (again one class - Warriors had as high or higher skillcaps than anyone. Knights didn't even get defensive abilities until GoD) that makes them (Warriors) unmatched.

    The unmatched ability to survive, not the highest numeric value in some stats. Knights die, Warriors live.

    = less resiliant

    Since when did adrenaline rush followed by a crash become a Paladin's thing?

    I seem to remember attacking one's opponent's legs/hamstringing etc.

    All mundane abilities done without magic.

    "Montjoie Saint Denis!"

    No they aren't. "Warriors are the masters of armed combat and defense..." " Warriors train themselves in the skills of combat, mastering the use of all weapons and tactics."
    Hamstring opponents, yelling battle cries and motivating the troops, frightening opponents (Let me see your War Face!) - all things done by Warriors for centuries.

    This is why you look so foolish arguing about class descriptions.
  19. p2aa Augur

  20. p2aa Augur

    No, warriors should mitigate the most dmg in every situation. We choose this class because we were meant to have the highest mitigation of all the EQ classes.

    Really ? Knight keep listing Warlord tenacity as a ready to go warrior ability, it's 20 min refresh, hardly powerful tool that breaks thing.
    If you take Dichotomic Shielding , that adds 45 k HP (around 25 % of HP warrior total) for 1 min every 5 min. You staunch stance is 18 K HP sustainable everytime. Let's take also the 9 k HP advantage warriors have over knight on AA.
    Let's take the 5 min.
    First min, warriors have 36 k HP more than knight
    Second min, knights have 9 k HP more than Warriors
    Third min, knights have 9 k HP more than Warriors
    Fourth min, knights have 9 k HP more than Warriors
    Fifth min, back to first min
    Who has the most HP sustained ? Knights easily. Over the course of a 15 min MT Time, they will maintain HP advantage over Warriors during most minutes.

    Not the case anymore, our best aggro tool has been nerfed or bugged, given we ask for a fix each parse and they do nothing i start to go to a nerf. So atm with an aggro boost x 2 of paladins abilities and SK x 1,5, all 3 tank classes deal the same aggro power on single targets.
    SK has the best AE aggro hands down than any other tank class.

    Yes, we should have best disc mitigation. We used to have with our 45 % def disc over your 36% def disc, but now your 2 small discs combined with Def Prof can beat our 45% def disc.

    With both classes having 35 % mitigation disc all the time, and knights having better secondary tools to use than us, the margin is in favor to knights.
    Repel can be cast it every 15 second. Our best tool is refreshed only after 5 min.

    Fixing it for you
    Superior Hit point pool from knights on sustained time (on most minutes Knights will have higher HP pool than warriors)

    The return is the same for tanks classes, the difference is so tiny it's irrelevant.

    Warriors are none in every situation. Even in a melee dps group, a SK with the same ADPS power (more caster adps than melee adps) will beat a warrior.

    It's not good for the game that you are able to mitigate as good as warriors, and being able to steamroll through group content soloing named mob and trash mob with a wiz merc, because you are invincible in group content with your 35% new mitigation ability at all time.
    I hope developpers don't agree with this, but I have to say that it seems the only tank class played by dev is SK atm, and surprised, SK received the best mitigation boost (Reaver Bargain and War Def Prof), followed by Knights (Def Prof), while warriors see their best aggro disc reduced and still not fixed in group content
    I have to say yes the current devs don't like warriors.
    Still, our goal is to going on telling the truth of what happening atm in the game, and how unbalanced tanks classes are in term of mitigation

    Knights are a VERY powerful class, more than warriors atm.

    Def Prof has been the best tool added to warriors. It allowed us to pursue MT Raid Boss, without splatting right after def disc ended and being forced to tank swap. Allowing us to stop being a one trick pony for 3 min.
    It needed to be added to Knights, but not at this %. 15% stacking with 5 % knight sedulity, so a total of 20%, was enough to make Knights viable in tanking raid trash adds and eating RT of raid bosses, while giving them a chance to still have a shot at Raid Bosses, without being as good as Warriors in MT them. And it was keeping warriors class niche in raid, while keeping too a fair balance amongst tank classes with still an advantage mitigation for warriors.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.