In these message forums which we're all using, Knights are listed under the TANK forums, along with warriors, when it comes to our class discussions. Not in the hybrid section. Nice try though
only applies to you it looks like, to the dev's it no longer applies, glad your opinion doesn't matter in that regard, but you are entitled to it regardless..... bud
I'm curious, for all the knights who feel that the parent class/sub classes system is a thing of the past, and knights should tank on par with warriors because all 3 are tanks. Do you feel then warriors need a new niche, whether that be in dps, self runes/healing, some other utility, or do you see warriors as just becoming obsolete now. Surely the people who feel all 3 tank class should tank similarly well, don't feel there is no value to the knight abilities that warriors don't get. Palidin Splash and SK epic alone, would make me choose a knight over a warrior if all 3 tank similarly. Otherwise the argument is just warriors should be obsolete, and anyone starting a new player should of course pick a knight.
The bolded part is where you fail at logic. The very idea of a hybrid class in every sense of the definition thereof is to start as a base class and sacrifice a portion of that class to add abilities from another class and become something that is still mostly the base class but better than the base class in the area they added abilities to. From the old EQ model, this means SKs are mostly what a Warrior is but more offensive by the addition of Necrotic spells / abilities. IOW, SK should mostly tank like Warriors and measurably, meaningfully out DPS them. A hybrid doesn't mean less than both in all ways, as you seem to think - that would be ridiculous.
I always hoped they would go with the: pally = hp tank, more hp, more self healing but takes the largest spikes, and has healing mods, great single target agro, weak ae agro War = highest mitigation less spiky great single target agro, great ae agro SK = combo of hp/mitigation, higher hp than war for lifetaps, but less mitigation. Taps and leech, great ae agro, good single target. This allows all tanks to do the job, just in different ways. but alas they went the way they choose.
I really could care less what happens to the Warrior class, I don't play, nor do I ever intend on playing one. Stop pretending this is about the paladins and the SK's, it's warriors complaining. I have played Zehn who is a paladin since March of 99, and stuck through the class when we had no role whatsoever, in group or in raids. I will play a paladin until the game sunsets. LOL ... do I feel warriors need a new niche? Hahahaha, funny stuff. I am going to play regardless if any warriors even show up. Life will go on. The sun will still rise. Ultimately, you and I have options. We don't own the concept of game play. The devs have decided this is how it shall be. Play the game, or don't. In the end none of this is in our control.
You have ignored every single point that's been made, which doesn't surprise me given your amazing history of simply not paying attention to anything that you assume you disagree with, whether or not it's the case. Of course your "no true Scotsman" fallacy is cute (I'm right unless those I'm playing with are untrained monkeys), and it's been used BY YOU to represent every possible scenario, from when warriors had ZERO tools except a broken taunt button and procs to hold aggro, where your definition of "if the DPS knows what they're doing, they won't draw aggro" to "If they're going full burn because of a Paladin or SK holds aggro so well, but can't adjust to you then they don't know what they're doing", to now "If they cannot squeeze every cooldown without thinking about aggro, then they don't know what they're doing". Additionally, you're missing the philosophical nature of my posts, and are chicken littling the details. I'm specifically NOT talking about specific skills, or when or where some specific tipping of balance occurred, they're all over the place in the history of EQ, and I'm say that THAT IS THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM. Missing the forest for the virii on the parasites on the insects on the leaves of the trees by hooking into one extremely tiny set of circumstances relative to what is an enormous game. The problem isn't this skill or that, it's not the current position of the teeter totter of balance, nor is it defined by how you and your other 4 personalities define as balance, because you clearly have no eye whatsoever for total game balance. So you'll find a couple of instances where the balance has tipped out of your favor and focus on those, rather than taking a step back and recognizing that top raiding tanks with thousands of AA isn't the entirety of the game, it's a small, mostly insignificant part of it. The problem is that the experience for warriors making their way to the top is so utterly devoid of fun, independence, power, etc that they have a legitimate argument for a payoff at the end. Remove that argument by fixing the trip and you can balance off the top with no issues at all. I'm saying "Do what it takes to make the tanks interchangeable, but fix lower and mid end warrior issues (which you are woefully unaware and ignorant of) so that they have no reason to expect the pinnacle position that you so desperately desire". This isn't issues from 2014 or 2006, they're issues from the 90s, they're issues that are ongoing and have been there since the formation of this game, and you know this full well, but are incapable of understanding how much bigger and more important it is than your petty little clique at the very top.
This is also correct, this happenned in Omens, same exact thing, and it sent players packing. Nothing encourages departures like the potential for downtime, and that means "If I can't get anything done without a group, the time LFG is wasted downtime" and the more "requirements" to optimize the group the more downtime. Downtime represents to the customer a basic disrespect for the customer's needs and time, and they will flock in the presence of too much downtime, or a lack of a feeling of power. This game does not have the population to support trying to do the kind of social stuff that had originally been intended. It's focus should be on extending it's life as long as possible, and you don't do that by making a plate tank requirement to get anything done, or any kind of special requirements, you do it by throttling back, making it a little easier to do everything. The history of MMO's has shown time and time again, the appeal to hardcore "hardmode" fans leads to mass migration. Discord after LDON was the original MMO disaster (Luclin was a near disaster, but it survived because of a lack of competition). The real winner however for "Stupidest design decision ever made" was WoW with Cataclysm after the massive success of WotLK. It was as though they didn't have Discord to show that this is exactly what NOT to do, but then they did it. The amount of money Blizzard lost from the WoW exodus from Cataclysm is staggering, and it was ALL about assuming that hardcore sentimentalists were the core of the game and needed to be heard, when they were mostly thrilled with the expansion, yet blizzard lost millions of dollars every month from the silent majority who went "well, this is no fun". The irony is the hardcore crowd would've stuck around regardless if they were appealed to or not, they just would've sneered and reminisced about the greatness of blah blah and whined about 'easy mode'. Making a plate tank gap too big is one of those "doomed to fail" experiments, because it creates downtime and will cause people to log off in frustration of not being able to do anything.
The title of this thread is "palidin balance" . No, it is not balanced. That is fine that you don't care if its balanced or not, but that isn't what this thread is about. It must be awesome to raid or group with a person like you. Someone who flat out says, they don't care if the game is balanced, or if the warrior class ends, its absurd and typical at the same time. Amazes me.
Ok, I'll bite. Why do I have to care about class balance? I lose what? Someday this game will not be here. The one's who need to care about it are the one's making a living off it. I only play a paladin (I have a bard someone else levelled up so I can use as a buff bot), and I will make it work no matter what skills you give me, or take away from me. I don't even care we got the new stance. What amazes me, is you actually think I should care, and because I don't somehow I am wrong. But for you to actually imply that giving the knights some mitigation is going to doom the entire warrior class to oblivion is borderline neurotic. I challenge any excetional warrior to admit that in the end they wont tank longer, and tank better than any knight in game. Stop selling your AA's and disc's short and acting like the knights have been given the key to the city.
They should just remove all proficiencies. Mobs tuned to just wars having it made mobs too difficult to tank on a knight or knights being eaten by strong adds. Giving everyone proficiency makes more people getting 1 shotted by raid mobs, named or trash, or more difficult group mission mobs because all tanks have it so mobs are tuned to that. Then there's the argument over balance. Or just leave it and call it whatever it is.
I wasn't aware of the Mitigation% not stacking because I couldn't find any confirmation of this and came to the forums for an answer, when people here couldn't confirm it and simply asserted the % issue I took matters into my own hands and confirmed it without parsing. Oh well I answered my own questions no thanks to the big egos floating around here. HEROES!
Hi again there sir! Sorry if you feel that I wasn't taking your word for it but I wasn't. I Ended up confirming it by myself using observational science. Have a great day! GREAT HEROES!
Again, with any sort of ability to use the search function on this forum you would have found the stacking post(s) with details. Has nothing to do with big egos floating around, moreso, incompetent users/researchers. WOW! You did exactly what his post suggested that you do! Please continue with the minute by minute updates on your journey through EQ 101. Did you ever consider if your posts weren't rude people might be more inclined to be helpful?
I'm glad you confirmed how mitigation works by using your 'observational science'. People wonder why others bash each other on this forum. It's not always over strong opinions about their class; a lot of the bashing is directed to fools who quickly spark up a thread (or multiple threads) with no idea how anything works and do not take the time to look when told differently. Additionally, these same people do not accept what is being shown to them in numbers on charts and screenshots from the game. The easist way to spot these foolish people is when they are shown to be wrong, they do not admit it, but instead, try to play it off as if others are still wrong. Then they end it by trying to derail the very own thread line by trying to sarcastically bate people into creating a hater thread. *I wish I was your guildie. (*example of sarcastical bating)
Great post sir! What exactly would you have searched for to discern why knights think they needed a stance? Did my questions seem rude to you because I wasn't aware that knights felt they were lacking mitigation? Could it be because I tanked fine before the stance came? I believe it would be considered incompetent to provide falsifiable evidence as a confirmation tool as has been done here. Egotistical or incompetent which would it be? You see the problem is relying on parses one can't provide confirmation no matter how helpful they wish to be. I did end up confirming it myself however. It is good to know and will affect my playstyle to a certain degree. Thanks again for the great reply! GREAT HEROES!
haha... I like where this thread is headed... or at least where i'm about to take it. Please, let us know what your standards are when using observational science. What did you do and how did you do it to get your results?
