I'm just going to start this off by saying, the below is probably a waste of a perfectly good explanation, but I'm bored coming home from work, so here we go! Thank you captain obvious! Wait wait, so Rangers should only use weapon shield when they're tanking, and offensive discs when they're DPS'ing, right? Just wanna clarify! Oh yea.. I guess they're not tanking if they're not using weapon shield. Man, thanks for clearing that up! Itemization is the worst way to fix a problem when the source is in our AA's. It's also more work in the future, seeing as how every item released from here until the end of EQ needs to fit that schema. Bad idea. Again, thank you captain obvious. I've been doing that since PoP. As opposed to the damage reduction we got when using defensive in the old days? This is a problem that only exists in your mind. Do you seriously expect us to believe that adding a 10 damage aug was enough to DOUBLE your DPS? That makes ZERO logical sense. I'm sure Elidroth is bright and fair minded enough to see how you're either lying, burned DPS discs, or something else to seriously skew the numbers. We have two warriors who posted that have tried to replicate your numbers, and no one has come even close to that kind of a jump. I'm gonna say this as directly as possible so there's no confusing with you. You, along with many warriors during the "old days" didn't understand the class completely. Allow me to explain. Ever since PoP , MANY warriors, many of whom contributed to the information we currently have (prior to OoW, HP > AC, remember?)) used all weapon forms. Sword and Shield, Two-handed weapons, dual wield. Each situation had a need, and that need was met by knowing which tools to use and in which situation to use them. During PoP, we tanked many of PoTime targets with the Shield of Strife. During GoD we had our trusty Aegis of Blackscale, OoW we had the Shield of the Planar Assassin, DoDH we had Thick Basalisk Hide Shield, etc. Warriors who knew their class, namely most of the end game warriors, would switch their weapon load based on the needs of the situation. Here, I've even kept most of my gear through the expansions I actively raided. Note, these are here for my own memories, as those generations were the most memorable and entertaining for me. Sadly, I lost my PoP and GoD shield somewhere along the lines, but my most active time was DoDH / OoW, which is my most complete set. As you can see, I have 2 2-handers, two weapons, a shield (and ranged). "The warriors who were DWing 24/7" as you like to keep saying are warriors who 1) Didn't understand their class, or 2) Didn't care. Since you seem to be convinced that everyone was 24/7 DW'ing, that tells me that YOU were DWing 24/7. I suspect you are more towards the 1st type of warrior rather than the 2nd. That's okay, nothing is wrong with that. Many old school warriors didn't know the benefits of AC, or how the taunt skill actually worked. There were only a small number of people in the community who understood how warrior abilities functioned. TSW was a small community back then, and information was not disseminated to the majority of the warrior population, not to mention no one at SOE ever talked about how our abilities worked. We knew mobs hit us, magic happened, and damage was reported. We tried a bunch of different things, but ultimately had no way or knowledge of how to actually measure what was the most effective way to perform at our peek. Personally, I absolutely LOVED how each of our weapons had a purpose, but with that purpose came a price. Warriors who understood the class and knew how to play the class used each weapon form in appropriate situations. When a warrior was main tanking, other warriors would use 2-handers so as not to draw agro. When a warrior was main tanking, they were using sword and shield, when they were cleaning up trash mobs or in most group situations, dual wield was the best form for snapping agro quickly and keeping it. On encounters where we needed survivability, a warrior would engage a raid target (or a named) and build agro. Then, when the warrior was satisfied (enough procs hit, enough hate discs landed, etc), he/she would call for the rest of the raid to engage. This was our main function on every raid. DPS was never a concern of warriors, although any DPS we generate was gravy, and well, gravy is tasty. From the DPS point of view, we sacrificed DPS for survivability, and we sacrificed survivability for DPS. It was a very nice and even trade off. From an agro generation point, we sacrificed agro generation for survivability, or increased agro in exchange for reduced survivability. Again, a fairly even trade-off. Dual Wield, served as a medium ground that was sufficient for most casual situations, but not optimal. With the group setting, there was room for it tanking in a less than optimal situation. In a raid situation, if you've got a good enough heal team, again, you've got room for tanking raid targets in a less than optimal situation and well, since the warrior class was largely a mystery during the "old days," most healer teams had to be exceptional, since most warriors had no idea how much mitigation a shield actually provided. The game was more forgiving back then, yes, but It was a balanced situation for all involved. In the game's current form, we get survivability, agro generation AND DPS, with zero drawbacks. That is textbook unbalanced and overpowered. I mean, is that okay with you? Do you enjoy playing a boring class that any talentless hack can play? Right now, the game is get max AA, gear up in generic equipment (since everything is all/all now), and boom, we're done. Every warrior is essentially how well they can make a few hotkeys and whether or not they can hit em at the right times. A simple google search has someone who's already itemized their hotkeys for you. Learn what they do and for when to use em, and you're done. There's zero knowledge of the class necessary, no analysis of a situation determining the optimal tools for it. Hell, even augs are simple, as most of them are pretty much high AC, high hDex, high hAgi, high HP, all in one package. Stats are meaningless as we're all capped out. So where's the skill that's required to play the class at a higher level (meaning level of skill, not actual experience level)? I ask again, do you enjoy playing a boring class that any talentless hack can play? If you do, hey, keep playing the class you are. No one is asking you to change a single thing, nor are we asking devs to take away anything from S&B. If you want to keep using S&B 24/7, THEN DO IT! However, the rest of us would like a choice. Right now, we don't have a choice, we're forced into S&B 24/7. If I wanted to do that, I'd play a knight, as presently, they are superior to warriors in pretty much every single way. I have a whole list of things I would love to see the warrior class get to once again make us the superior tank. Bringing function back to our weapons is just one of them that seems to be the most highly asked for amongst the community. Remember, Knights are hybrids, they are lesser copies of us. They are SUPPOSED to be inferior to us when it comes to tanking. Their spells are supposed to get them to be closer to us, but they should never be our equals, muchless superior. We don't compare ourselves to them, THEY COMPARE TO US. They should be jealous of us, strive to be us, wish they were us, have wet dreams about tanking as well as a warrior. Do they? Kelefane and Elric could answer that better than me, and I doubt they have any envy for us, seriously. If anything, I suspect most knights feel pity for us, how we've been shoe horned into a pathetic shadow of what we used to be. I'm very sorry that you're unable to see the truth of that..
An M1A1 is always a tank, whether it's current job is training, riding on the back of a transport, or delivering devastating damage from it's weapon systems, whether it's sustaining fire or not at the moment, the situation does not make it "not a tank". A warrior is always a tank, that's what they were designed from the ground up to be, no matter what their current role is, no matter if they can take some actions to improve their defensive performance or to improve their offensive performance, their design and specs are those of a tank, because that's what warriors ARE, not what they BECOME through skills or what they're holding in their secondary slot. Nonsense, it's gone nowhere, it's still very much the case. Warriors are the premier tanks of Norrath, always, from character creation on. They don't ever stop being tanks. No it's not, warriors are the masters of ARMS and armor, and shouldn't require special warrior exclusive weapons to be effective or to not have a massive imbalance between weaponset configurations. The system is *broken*, and needs a FIX, not extra efforts on the warrior's part, but effort on the design staff's part to FIX the system where strapping a garage door on your left arm somehow gives your right arm superhuman strength, then putting another weapon or using a huge cleaver somehow makes you less OFFENSIVE. The bull who returns from the stud ranch knows more about being a bull than the spoiled and massaged beer fed Kobe veal. The WARRIOR is what you should seek when healing is shaky, the WARRIOR should be the solution, not what is in his secondary slot. The WARRIOR should be the one who chooses when it's appropriate to use a shield or when to use his other weapon sets, not the spoiled, massaged, Kobe steer. The warrior class needs less ridiculous protectionism over it's DPS while tanking using a shield at the expense of the whole of the class. The class has a MAJOR and SERIOUS problem of desirability in this game. People don't seek warriors, it's as bad or worse than LDON for group level warriors out there since people can get a rent-a-tank for less than they bring in during an average group. The fact that we bring far less to a group than the other two tank classes and have to have a garage door on our left arms just to compete is insane. I have to kind of chuckle at this statement since you don't know design intent, or percentages, but the irony that you would invoke final stand and Elidroth together is cute, since he has pretty much said he doesn't like Final Stand and has it on his target list. I don't believe you, I've looked far and wide for this famous quote, so that I could see the context and under what circumstances this was referring to, and you've been asked on several occasions to cite it and you cannot, so unless you can deliver a quote in it's intended context within the thread in which it was found, this is just another BB obfuscation, simply not to be believed. Your "vision" is simply put, bred out of paranoia, a diety complex and never what is best for the game, just what is most in line with how BB can phinegle his way into power though politicking. Dual wield and 2h should ALWAYS be useful to a warrior, and should ALWAYS exceed S/B in damage delivered under every single circumstance. It should also be usable by a warrior TO TANK when the warrior chooses, not when "massa BB" chooses for it to be usable (i.e. never)
I'm going to go ahead and say that every single class falls under this category (especially DPS classes). It's just how EQ is now, there's a formula and a hotkey for everything. No one class is "harder to play" than the other except maybe necros and only due to the absurdity of switching spell sets to maintain dps (bet devs smack themselves in the face everytime this is brought up). Bar in mind that this doesn't mean I assume everyone plays to the maximum of their class's potential, just that the information is out there in so many forms that if they wanted to -- they could Does it suck? You bet but there's no way it's ever going to change without a serious overhaul of the game's mechanics (basically it'd have to be an FPS to incorporate any kind of true skill).
I do disagree with you, but I totally understand what you're saying. I've grouped with clerics who were max AA'ed, had raid gear, but couldn't keep me alive if their life depended on it. There are people that just flat out suck at there characters, regardless of gear, AA's, levels, whatever, there's a difference in skill level of the player that makes a difference. Personally, I don't know much about clerics, or bards; but when you get someone pretty balling behind the wheel of those characters, your party (group game) can totally tell the difference. I've seen bards who know how to chain pull and not have any down time, yet still manage to keep songs on the party, etc. Same could be said for SK's and their chain pulling, who maintain clicky life tap (between epic 2.0 , anguish bp, and something else I can't remember, Sk's can maintain lifetap procs indefinitely), mages who weave clicky nukes in between their nukes, who use swarm pets to deal with adds properly, etc. There are lots of LITTLE things that a character can always do, but most players either don't know, are too lazy to do, or whatever, and to a group with those classes in there, that difference is obvious. When I played my SK through VoA, most guild groups took me over the SK with twice my AA's because I pulled, tanked, DPS'ed, off tanked, etc. I was better than him as a player, using the same character. Same can be said for warriors, those that remember to snare, those that don't mash the taunt key, those that know how to peel mobs from incoming; despite how many are in camp, etc. Those minute differences used to matter so much more. Some chanters back in the day, I knew I could pull the entire zone and felt comfortable. Some clerics, I didn't even watch my HP bar. That said, there were clerics where I watched my HP bar like a hawk, and other chanters where I would spend the extra time single pulling a room (or hunting down a single target, since warriors couldn't fade back then =P). Warriors used to have a certain degree of that, with using the correct weapons for a situation and what not, but that seems to be gone as far as I can tell. It's saddening to me, honestly.
https://forums.station.sony.com/eq/index.php?threads/war-pal-irc-chats-10-12.2222/ <11Dre> Hi Elidroth, I'd like to know your opinion on viability of Dual Wield and 2H weapons for Warriors. A lot of Warriors would really enjoy Dual Wielding again, in particular but everything is trumped by 1H+Shield right now. <11Finalstand> Well what I asked would you consider giving us more sinister strike ranks that improve dual wielding dps and add in a parry type of buff that increases the viability of duel wield it only has 1 rank <11shiftee> to please both crowds, kind of a convoluted work around but it is what it is <11Finalstand> well pretty much dw is only good when we have to have swing hate <11shiftee> or <11@Elidroth> I've said many times that I want dual wield to be viable again, but not for tanking <11shiftee> could you drastically increase the base value of the higher ranks <11Finalstand> its lower dps and it takes away a huge chunk to our mitigation <11@Elidroth> as it should <11Finalstand> I know <11@Elidroth> though I don't think it should be lower dps <11shiftee> of hand of piety, since it isn't going to crit there is no harm in increasing the base value of the higher ranks to adjust for inflated hp pools <11Voodoman> dual wield two handers, for battleblade <11WaeSheol> if a warrior DWs then they do it at their own risk missing all that mitigation <11@Elidroth> agreed Shiftee <11@Elidroth> it can be higher per tick <11Finalstand> but it also can get us one rounded just swinging to it to build more hate a parry type effect making it somewhat able to let us survive a few rounds would help <11Dre> If not for tanking and not for DPS (should that not be 2H?) what role would you give it? <11shiftee> not the heal over time elidroth <11@Elidroth> DW should be for dps <11shiftee> the direct heal <11@Elidroth> 2H should probably be the same, but give you different benefits <11@Elidroth> right now I don't have a real clear method to get there unfortunately <11Finalstand> well it gives us way more hate then sword and board thats where the issue lies we only use it for hate <11@Elidroth> I know what I WANT to do, but just don't have any real way to get there <11WaeSheol> if your in a group and have 2 tanks im sure one can DW np <11Finalstand> no the one using dw would be the one tanking <11Dre> Could you share then what you'd like to do? I personally would like to see DW, 2H and 1h+shield all be viable against group content at least (mabye have to shield up for named) <11WaeSheol> agro meter they can manage <11@Elidroth> Please don't PM me.. I won't answer <11Finalstand> because of the swing hate that just swinging causes and the procs you would have to basically use 2 weapons with the deaggro proc on it to not tank <11shiftee> lol <11@Elidroth> I don't have time to deal with multiple conversations <11krozman> Ok, i'll be the one who asks. Can we please get a mount AA that is a tad bit more.....masculine? <11@Elidroth> no <11Voodoman> he wants a pony <11shiftee> hahahaha <11shiftee> pegasus is masculine look at that old claymation greek movie <11Beezy-again> I want my unicorn with a pink bow on the horn! <11krozman> My 3 year old daughter things i look pretty. That can't be the solution to my avatar! <11@Elidroth> what I see really for warriors is 1h/shield is for tanking, DW and 2H are dps <11Voodoman> my little paladin pony <11Beezy-again> Kidding of course <11@Elidroth> DW hits faster for smaller amounts and less crits, while 2H hits slower, but harder, with a chance for BIG critical hits <11@Elidroth> but is also less accurate [BA: emphasis mine] Looked far and wide Frodlin did. Now Frodlin, given that S&B is for tanking and we all seem to agree that we "don't think it [BA: DW and 2H] should be lower dps", Iirc you were chatting with Rashere when he was creating SS to address the issue that our 1Handers were not shield appropriate the only question is how much less DPS should Warriors do in their usual role geared properly to perform it? SS was provided because 30% less was waaaaaay to much. Clearly 0% (or S&B out DPSing DW/2H) is waaaay to little. I claim the damage gap between our aggro augged Warrior only tank weapons and our +10DMG augged damage weapons needs to be reduced so as to eliminate that S&B "DPS setup" and then adjust SS so that the damage loss is roughly equal to the survivability gained. I suggest S&B should do on the order of 10% less damage than DW or 2H (assuming that DW and 2H provide appropriate Warrior DPS first). The fact is that in more challenging content the use of defensive discs rather than offensive one's will further widen the survival/DPS tradeoff in favor of DW/2H out DPSing S&B. What's your unreasonable and ill informed suggestion?
Funny how in that same IRC chat: Yet BB has suggested warriors should get self healing. Yay for quoting Elidroth only when it suits him. Still reading, hey look!
Funny how I said self-recovery from wound received during combat consistent with abilities we already have and you change that to self-healing. Oh, funny how when you were looking for other things Elidroth said you missed, "<11@Elidroth> you're not going to be tanking via DW anymore." You're not laughing. <11@Elidroth> I've said many times that I want dual wield to be viable again, but not for tanking <11@Elidroth> DW should be for dps <11@Elidroth> 2H should probably be the same, but give you different benefits <11@Elidroth> what I see really for warriors is 1h/shield is for tanking, DW and 2H are dps <11@Elidroth> DW hits faster for smaller amounts and less crits, while 2H hits slower, but harder, with a chance for BIG critical hits <11@Elidroth> but is also less accurate I've made a good faith suggestion that's consistent with stated developer policy.
Again, with all the other parses here being nowhere near your numbers, I'm pretty sure you're lying, stacking discs, or whatever to skew the numbers to support your argument. Think about it, if you've got 10 people saying the sky is blue, and you're chanting the sky is red, who would believe you? Why you want to argue that is beyond me. The only thought that comes to mind is you're trying to create a new problem to deflect us from addressing the main issues with the warrior class: Lack of versatility, being nearly equal to knights in terms of mitigation, having less than optimal lockouts on our defensive discs, having excessive timers on our DPS discs. Ahhh sorry, I thought recovering hitpoints during combat without the use of another class was self-healing. My mistake! We've been asking for that quote for weeks, and you've never provided it. You're also quite delusional, or lying; can't tell which. So we justifiably assumed that this was another one of your delusion, so hey, good on you. You already highlighted it, there was no reason to say it again. Nope, didn't ignore it, and I actually read over all of it very carefully. However, maintaining a black and white view of "tanking" is pretty silly. There's no reason why 2H and DW should be equal in tanking ability. Suggesting that DW get a slight boost to be somewhere in between 2H and S&B is not inconsistent at all. Is he suggesting I shouldn't even tank an orc pawn dual wield? No, of course not, that's ridiculous. Is he suggesting that I shouldn't be able to tank a current content trash mob dual wield? Maybe, it's not clear, at least it's not clear to me what his definition of "tanking" is. Was he referring to the raid game? Was he referring to the group game? Again, you took his statement and made sweeping assumptions and base your thought process on those extreme assumptions, that's a very dangerous mindset to be in. Yes, I am. And thank you for finally linking the quote. We've been asking you to provide that link for weeks now, giving us the link so we can all read in context is really handy. Thanks, I really appreciate it. Yes, you are. You always have been. SS gives a tremendous DPS boost to S&B, throwing the balance of DPS and agro generation completely in favor of it. Spreading it across all weapon forms, or removing it equalizes all the weapons forms, and allows the natural skills of the characters (dual wield skill, ferocity, sinster strikes, merciless blade, punishing blade, etc) to take their natural course in establishing DPS (and agro generation) balance. What exactly is considered trivial enough to forgo the benefits of a shield? Is a Shard's Landing trash mob trivial enough? Or do you consider having to go back to Argath for trivial? Trivial is a subjective term. If you're going to throw it out, you need to define WHAT trivial is, as the only place such an interpretation exists is in your own head. When I say "Dog," some people think Rottweiler, some people think Poodle. Maybe work on expressing your subjective terms more clearly, and the rest of the community can actually understand what you're talking about. As has been said, and proven by others, your parse is wrong, or you're lying.
<11@Elidroth> I need to nerf dps in 1h/shield and increase DW and 2h dps "I claim the damage gap between our aggro augged Warrior only tank weapons and our +10DMG augged damage weapons needs to be reduced so as to eliminate that S&B "DPS setup" and then adjust SS so that the damage loss is roughly equal to the survivability gained. I suggest S&B should do on the order of 10% less damage than DW or 2H (assuming that DW and 2H provide appropriate Warrior DPS first)." What enormous gap? There's a gap but my suggestion would deal with it. Now THERE'S a gap. Note how it's just like I said - too wide a gap between our aggro augged Warrior Only tanking weapon and a (8?) DMG augged damage weapon. And sir my suggestion would deal with it too. You like the afk tanking too big gap better than my Rage of Rallos Zek, Warsheols Blade/Shield Topple, light disc, Killing spree up most of the time 13K parse? My sugguestion would largely rein in the huge boost I got with a 10DMG augged Verdant Heart Piercer and shield too. The issue is getting rid of that S&B +10DMG augged damage weapon "DPS set up" anomoly and tuning undisced S&B to be less DPS than undisced DW and 2H, <- that's a fact Jack. Even Damoncord's parces show that it's a fact. "This is a problem that only exists in your mind." <- incorrectamundo. You really should "look far and wide" before posting. Must be catching.
20% increase in damage, that he admitted since he was afk, someone may have ninja buffed him. Not reliable numbers, Dre's parse is a bit more accurate, but even there, he admits irregularities were possible. You notice that when Dre did his parse, he actually posted his numbers that the +10 damage aug provided a 12.5%ish boost to his DPS in both DW and shield? That's what we call relevant information. We establish a baseline that a +10 damage aug adds approximately 12.5% to DPS. Something was a little out of wack with the regal battle hammer in his parse, but that could be that he had a really favorably time with the RNG, ninja buffs, etc. Either way, that's a far cry from your DOUBLE damage numbers that you posted. So you compared your sustained DPS while tanking, to a burn DPS parse, and scream "OMG OP!!! NERF!!!!!" Did you try parsing burn with those same discs and such while DW'ing / 2H'ing? That would be relevant data.. Yea, if I parse my mage's DPS without burns and with burns, there's a pretty big jump too. Thanks for stating the obvious, and for finally stating that you were using discs. That's relevant information when you're stating numbers from a parse. But that's okay, I've already determined that you have no interest in contributing anything. Huh? I'm the one who referenced Damo and Dre's post, so obviously I read em? You're smoking some pretty good stuff man, go back to the 60's.
<11@Elidroth> I've said many times that I want dual wield to be viable again, but not for tanking <11@Elidroth> DW should be for dps <11@Elidroth> you're not going to be tanking via DW anymore. As Frodlin has reported (and as we all know) SS was provided to address the fact that Warriors did not receive shield appropriate weapons. Instead we were using S&B using a weapon designed to be used 2 at a time. You are entitled to express your opinions including we should be able to tank challenging content using DW and SS should be removed from the game. While I'm not at all confident the SOE might implement my suggestion: They could boost the Warrior only aggro weapon's ratio eliminating the elemental damage instead and do a few things as well to have undisced DW and 2H damage exceed S&B damage. I am very confident SS ain't going away, S&B will be for tanking and we'll do Warrior appropriate DPS in our usual role geared to perform it, and I'll be doing my best DPS DW/2H using offensive discs since I'm not the guy tanking or the content is trivial.
K, you're back to worthless, irrelevant garbage. Though happily, I did get everything from you that I cared about (you admitting you used burns to pollute your parse, and the link to the original warrior chat where Elidroth said "not for tanking" in it's actual context). I consider this to be the most I've ever gotten out of anything you've posted. Back to ignoring your worthless garbage.
Ok, precisely as I suspected, no real context, no real definition of terms, just a vague reference and BB acting as though it's gospel truth for all scenarios involving "tanking" always. He couldn't be more wrong. Elidroth was clearly referring to high end raid roles in the context of the discussion, (He even alluded to segregating group oriented benefits from raid level benefits later on in the same discussion) yet BB is trying desperately to "broad brush" it, making it universally applicable, because ONLY if it's universally applicable will his insane drive at S/B dominance. If he's referring to universality, then do the right thing and make non-tanking warriors a true DPS class on par with rogues, monks, and berserkers, by inversing every hate skill to negative with an offhand weapon equipped, and be done with it. Somehow I don't think that he was referring to universal tanking though. Other classes use dual wield for tanking in every day content (this is the content that 90% of EQ players are doing on a routine basis), including rangers, and monks. Warriors should be motivated to AND have a reason to use dual wield AND be significantly better at tanking in those scenarios than those classes. A dual wielding warrior should be a SOLID tank in group daily content, and they should gain offensively more than they give up defensively to make it happen. The same is true of other classes and 2 handed weapons (i.e. Berserkers). And the same concept needs to be right in place there as well, that the warrior should be able to do the same thing, only MUCH better defensively (you'll notice that none of those classes are in any jeapordy of being offensively beaten by warriors with those weapon configurations). For "Seat of your pants" content where actually surviving is an issue between WARRIORS then Sword and Board is fine, and no warrior in Norrath denies it. They just want options when not doing "seat of the pants" gates level content, and they STILL want to be a desirable, fun class to play and have options.
So you think it's valid to have buffs that normally last only 18 seconds to 1 minute on for the full duration of a parse when discussing how much damage we should do? If so you clearly have not clue how long they should be working. Did you also run Offensive the full time of the parse, even though it lasts about 3 min refreshes in 4 min? War Sheol's recourse lasts 1 min, long refresh, Rage of Rallos 18 seconds longer refresh, Killing Spree about 30 seconds if I recall refresh depends on how fast YOU get the killing blow. If you had those 3 you mentioned on all the time during the parse no wonder your data is horribly off. And earlier my parses showed an even greater disparity when I was raid buffed, I'm having to run the S&B DPS parse again when I get the time someone did come in and buff me.
Excuse you? I did that parse vs. mobs in Shard's Landing and stated "gulp 13000DPS doing next to nothing sustained using a fast high ratio 1H/10DMG aug with a shield. What I did to do that you can do under FS." In other words I did everything possible I could think of except any disc that would make it so I couldn't FS. I kept Killing Spree up as much as I could. What I should have done of course was setup to DPS and do two full cycles of everything I've got except 7th year offensively and the same defensively. The points were twofold: 1. The gap between our Warrior Only aggro weapon aggro augged and a 10DMG augged damage weapon is to great for both to be fairly increased by SS - your afk parses as if we afk when DPSing show that. Your parses show that. Your parses show that this gap is too wide.. 2. The use of even minor DPS abilities FAR exceeds the 10% or so our tanking setup has over DW as shown by your parses. Do you DPS unbuffed? I don't. Generally I know ahead of time if I'm tanking or not and get appropriate buffs. And sadly (well not sadly because you're missing the point on purpose) I want this stuff properly fixed, I have the best Warrior Only tanking weapon, close to the best 1H DPS weapons with both 10DMG augs, and will as usual loot a top 2Hander before the expansion is over. I'm in fine shape even if SOE ravaged all non-raiding tanks by making their S&B DPS horribad 11@Elidroth> I've said many times that I want dual wield to be viable again, but not for tanking <11@Elidroth> DW should be for dps <11@Elidroth> 2H should probably be the same, but give you different benefits <11@Elidroth> what I see really for warriors is 1h/shield is for tanking, DW and 2H are dps <11@Elidroth> DW hits faster for smaller amounts and less crits, while 2H hits slower, but harder, with a chance for BIG critical hits <11@Elidroth> but is also less accurate I've read your comments, you don't want these issues properly fixed - not even close. Do anything resembling my suggestion and Warriors still "1h/shield is for tanking". I don't think y'all can get the DW/2H DPS advantage high enough or S&B nerfed enough to get S&B put back in the dumpster. I'd be amused as heck if EoA appeared only on shields next tier. I got a thread title saved as a text file - "We ARE tanking with S&B, how bad did you want our DPS to be?" The complaint is too transparent. You can read that chat with Elidroth and see what's going on. It is one step above that post in the new player forum with that guy saying since he didn't have twin lightsabers in his future he was cancelling his 50 accounts. But it's not much more subtle. The issue is getting rid of that S&B +10DMG augged damage weapon "DPS set up" anomoly and tuning undisced S&B to be less DPS than undisced DW and 2H.
Funny I don't see you quoting this endlessly.... <11@Elidroth> I need to nerf dps in 1h/shield and increase DW and 2h dps So now that Eli has said this months ago and you seem to be on his like a new born. Are you ready to admit that S&B is more dps?
"I claim the damage gap between our aggro augged Warrior only tank weapons and our +10DMG augged damage weapons needs to be reduced so as to eliminate that S&B "DPS setup" and then adjust SS so that the damage loss is roughly equal to the survivability gained. I suggest S&B should do on the order of 10% less damage than DW or 2H (assuming that DW and 2H provide appropriate Warrior DPS first)." ^ "<11@Elidroth> I need to nerf dps in 1h/shield and increase DW and 2h dps." My suggestion above is intended to maintain Warrior appropriate DPS when tanking with S&B and eliminate any S&B "DPS setup" that exceeds DW/2H DPS. I won't even bother with Frodlin - he goes from BB probably made those quotes up to what was being said was ambiguous. He responded to a request for a parry type buff for use when DWing with "<11@Elidroth> I've said many times that I want dual wield to be viable again, but not for tanking." That's not terribly unclear. It's time for you to cut loose the "we should be able to tank challenging content using S&B" people and focus on DW and 2H DPS - a politician pretends to put up a good fight on losing causes (I did my best!) but picks battles he knows ahead of time are already won. You read what Elidroth said in context.
