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. Time Burner 2 Augur

    Shifite, less shifting and more direct answers bruh! Try starting with my reply to you at post #701 of this thread please...

    What say you man?
  2. Kamea Augur

    Yimin's posts make Battleblade's posts look good.
  3. Warpeace Augur

    Maybe but way easier on the eyes.
    Kamea likes this.
  4. shiftie Augur

    If you think I'm going to scroll back through this debacle of a thread you're wrong.
  5. Yimin Augur

    Wars just like you wanted for Mage pet nerf claiming the balance issue , this is same War should not out and out tank Knights period you want balance you are getting it ...

    Yi Min
  6. Ravengloome Augur

    Well normally when i roll a class, its because the flavor of the class sounds interesting and they can fulfill their archetypal role.

    It sounds like you only roll a class, if they are head and shoulders above all the competition in a given archetype which is cool too, just not my style.
  7. Yimin Augur

    You say this then right below it you say this

    So do they have raid tanking ability or don't they , to me it seems the only issue you have is your ego is bruised cause knight were made better tanks a patch ago ...Hey and Mage took a beating so War like you would stop talking about balance ,so I rolled a Bst , if you don't like War class pick a Knight ...I was woman enough to make new toon when Mage was nerfed back too stone age :eek:

    Yi Min
  8. Seldom Augur

    Makavien; I have not forgot when Warriors like you and Repthor were pushing for Pal/SK to get a flash type ability, a class specific type of Shield Prof and improved aggro. Even P2aa was on board with Knights getting some type of shield prof mitigation long while ago. Which is why I've found vast majority of this thread beyond ironic. You guys would probably receive much more support than your expecting if you made a thread asking for reasonable things, without downplaying the advantages you still do possess. I'm all on board with Wars receiving more DPS. I'd be on board with Warriors receiving a vie disc too. I'm obviously on board with Warriors getting utility, though that doesn't seem to be a want by the class =p
  9. Time Burner 2 Augur

    I guess I don't see how you can desire that knights be able to tank raid bosses like a warrior, and also have the knights outclass warriors in every other non-trivial area of the game as well. It makes the warrior worth less than knights as a tank, which is why I am telling new tanks to roll a knight (I'm leveling one myself).
  10. Time Burner 2 Augur

    You seem rather adept at picking weakest links out and mocking them. Weaving and bobbing like the shifty hero till the end - well played!
  11. Time Burner 2 Augur

    Basically as a new tank it boils down to do you want your 1/4 ton truck to have ac, and stereo etc or no? If you want to rock a dual wielding, mullet wearing, one eyed dorf warrior cause it's cool - that works.
  12. Kamea Augur

    I had np with knights getting flash and posted in favor of it too. Totally different problem there. Any tank should have an ability like flash to be able to live until debuffs land and heals start flowing.

    The problem with stances is:

    1) Implementation: warriors had to pay dearly for them, knights got them as a freebie, and got a huge unintended buff in the form of DP+innate+mantle/armor stacking (you guys really think DGB intended that?), where as warriors got a FS (LS) nerf with our stances

    2) Tuning: I remember during the first few pages of this thread some knights agreed about tuning.... 30% is a joke. Frankly, warrior DP shouldn't be 30% either, but I don't see DGB adjusting mob DPS.

    Still don't see why knights should get DP and the 5% innate.
  13. Ravengloome Augur

    What did warriors have to pay for in exchange for stances? Actual question.

    In list form preferably.
  14. Seldom Augur

    Phalanx of One mitigation was never intended to stack with LS as it did though and that was stated. It's unfortunate that it stayed in game as long as it did before getting correctly tuned, but it happens. Stuff such as Phalanx mitigation accidentally stacking with LS when it shouldn't have, is what contributed to Knights getting Unholy/Holy discs. Wars should have just received a Vie type of disc same patch IMO. Raven; Phalanx of One was merged into their shield stance. Which at the time, stacked with LS mitigation.
  15. Time Burner 2 Augur

    Edit - looks like you might be asking Kamea above
  16. Kamea Augur

    You left something out, stances put the nail in the ISS coffin.

    Actually, it was merged into DW stance. DW stance was supposed to be similar mitigation and DPS to ISS version 2.0. DW was originally 10%, same as Phalanx. To make up for the heavy S&B DPS nerf and the LS adjustment, they made S&B have a 15% bonus. Yes, it was originally 25% not 30%.

    Even after some bugs were fixed a month in, original stances were poorly tuned. We had to deal with them for 6 months until they buffed them later that year. Even with the DPS buff in stances, we never got back what we lost in the nerf to begin with (not even talking about from ISS 1.0, talking about from an already nerfed ISS), and had to jump through a lot more hoops to get there.

    During this buff they upped DW's mitigaiton to 15% which was good, but they also upped S&B to 30%, which was too much.

    If a 70% FS+Phalanx+innate5+Shining was 'unfortunate,' can I conclude you think a 70% DP+innate5+mantle is 'unfortunate' as well? Or does the shorter duration of mantle make it perfectly fine?
  17. Seldom Augur

    I didn't say unfortunate in the context of my personal opinion. I said unfortunate because Phalanx was clearly unintended to stack with LS (which was stated by developer), yet allowed to stay in game stacking with it so long. Whenever things stay in game for long periods of time before getting tuned, it can make it that much tougher to swallow. Essentially, they were also probably tuning content around LS + Phalanx mitigation, while not intentionally desiring to do so. I have no clue if Vie discs were purposely intended to stack with Shield Prof or not. A developer could only properly give insights on that one. If it wasn't intended, I can tell you I'd want it tuned as quickly as possible instead of seeing it in a patch or forums year(s) later. Personal opinion, I'm more so inclined to believe they were intended to stack
  18. Mistatk Augur

    You notice they are making some changes to DOT's for Beastlords and they take a lot of time to explain what they are doing and why. People play with it on test server and people ask questions and make posts about. They slipped this massive change to knights mitigation in kind of like it was no big deal and won't really affect the game much.

    Another post, someone complained about double harm touches, and with in a few hours Roshen was monitoring the post, saying don't cross-post that topic is already been brought up. And told the guy, you better recheck the forum rules, like the guy did a major violation. Here we are 35 pages into a debate about whether or not knights should have warrior 30% defensive stance, on top of another 5% they added at the same time (just to make certain it was plenty over the top?), and on top of knights are better able to stack there abilities and discs then warriors can. 35 pages into a major fundamental game question of what role warriors will have in a game where knights dominate in every way, and no response from DBG. But a guy posts about an existing topic and immediately is jumped on by official representatives of the company.

    This change is indefensible from a design standpoint, and that is why you will see no official comments about it. And yet at the same time Abazagorath is posting that if paladins don't mitigate with in 5% of warriors on top of all their heals and everything else, things will be out of balance. This thread is about as much of a debacle as this change to the game was. And sure two years from now if the game is still around, some new developer who happens to raid on a warrior will do something equally absurd, but in warriors favor. It is not good for the longevity of the game to make such short sighted design decisions that affect the game so much.
  19. shiftie Augur

    You must have missed the part where elidrith was trying to eliminate the ls design flaw by removing it. This isn't some willy nilly change. I'd wager this as all planned. I give dzarn a lot of credit having observed his well thought out work. Personally I think the devs wanted to marginalize ls. So dp was added and tuned to warriors with the intent to add it to Knights all along.

    I don't recall Knights freaking out and demanding better tanking. If there was such a thing it didn't appear here on the forums. And yet in spite of that the devs added it any way.
  20. Linden Augur

    Go take your crying somewhere else. Because knights can actually OT trash mobs now and sometimes survive being one rounded does not have any negative effect as far as warriors desirability as primary MT's. Go cry somewhere else.
    Thancra likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.