The Tanking weapon set had the BD rune aug, 5 damage 1 disease, the DW had the VoA and HoT 8 Damage augs, and Vile Tormentor skin in the 2Hander.
I realize that the cultural weapons aren't class specific and also less than raid quality, but given that they are all the same tier, and should have ratios that the devs feel are appropriate in relation to one another, AND that they can be used without any procs at all, wouldn't they be the best weapons to parse with ?
It's what I'm working on actually Enizen, but sadly, they're about 50k per weapon in baz right now. two swords, a two hander, a knight sword (to compare to knight DPS), then 2 more for a ranger to compare with. That's about 300k right there, without the cultural augs =P.
Y'all are seriously taking weapon procs into consideration? I'd find it hard to believe that the dps difference in procs between the two stances would be even 1% of your total dps output. Edit: Went back and did the math with the parses posted. Procs did not even reach 0.1% of your total dps.
I think we should stop arguing about it and request this from the devs: Sword + shield = moderate dps (about now) + enough aggro to do our job (about now) + we get shield protection. This is our tank setup. Dual weild = above moderate dps, main hand is same as sword+board, off hand is bonus (keep shield specialist numbers when dual weilding). Survive is weak due to shield loss but we can live with that. This is our fast kill group setup where offhand aggro may matter but the mobs are unlikely to need us to turtle. 2h = crappy aggro but good dps. Figure out where zerkers are in dps and how they get there, then look at numbers for other melee dps, and put us a little below them (but not alot). The reason for looking at zerkers is we share alot of the crit abilities and such so our dps will scale similarly. Edit: This gives us tank (sword + board), easy aggro (dual weild, good for fast kill groups), dps (2her) setups.
+100 S&B = Highest Defense, Weakest DPS, Medium Agro DW = Medium Defense, Medium DPS, Highest Agro 2H = Lowest Defense, Highest DPS, Lowest Agro
I've managed to get the 10 Damage aug, and it's beginning to look like the best way to maximize DPS and agro at the same time would be to pick up Chapterhouse Standard, Damage aug it then use it with my shield.
I have thought for a long time (from experience) that the hate generated from the dps done by +10 dmg is superior to the agro augs with ager IV or rune. Has anyone done a test on this at all? If that's even possible.
Agro and DPS are not directly related. 10 dmg from a weapon adds 10 agro per swing regardless of hit/miss/crit/dmgmods/damage generated. Agro values for procs are obvious. Stun is ~400 agro per stun proc. Spell damage hate is 1:1 on base effect unless the spell has a hate override. Runes have been reported as 2:1. (1000 rune = 2000 hate)
Guess I was wrong then. Even if duel wielding with +10 dmg augs it would take 100 swings to equal 1 proc from a 1000 rune. If your are having agro problems the best thing to do is get rune aug in RoF with 5 dmg rune IV (700). If your a grouper anyway.
You really should not have aggro problems even with a weapon with 0 procs right now. Our hate has become insanely better then it was . The only problem now is if there is a pet class in the group or raid you must make sure you stand right on top of the npc at all times. The pet classes have been getting way way better at controlling this but it really should not happen unless they want their pet to be top of the aggro list which is never when around a warrior or another tank. Warlord's grasp is insanely great if you understand how it works and that you need to use press the attack after a 15 secs or so of it running. But on the topic sword and board should be tied for best dps best hate and best survive-ability since we need to use this in our primary role. It's sad I know but that's just the way it is now. I personally loved DW and wish I could do it for fun sometimes or for utility purposes. But there hasn't been utility added to it yet and he hasn't figured out how to make his vision work just give elidroth a few expansions to figure it out and it might be much different then it is. To all those that think we should lose dps using a shield you do not do much dps no matter what you do your raid should push you below 1% the only time you actually do well is in sustained dps in a group setting which you would not be doing if they lowered sword and board dps.
The standard idea is we shouldn't do more DPS S&B when not tanking. If we are tanking I can see the damage boost from ripostes and such causing it to do more damage. However, if we aren't tanking then yeah it shouldn't do more damage than the other "DPS" weapon styles.
Elidroth said DW is [BA: and 2H are] for DPS. I [who is not Elidroth] would argue that's a problem, not only because we can't do pathetic DPS in our usual role, but because tanking is overwhelmingly our usual role. Without creating higher ratio non-tanking 1Handers, which to my mind creates more problems than it fixes, how do we become a lesser "DPS class" that can not tank while doing it? Maybe: 1. EoA goes on shields. If you are a "DPSer" you don't want, or at least you don't get to have, tank quality aggro. IF you might be called on to tank then you'll have to deal with doing S&B less damage shields and ripo quality DPS. You can't be on call and a commited "DPSer". 2. Discipline created stances. Offensive Discipline might be a step in the right direction. Again it interfers with your ability to move seamlessly into a tanking role. 3. Offhand secondary weapon offensive procs. A short Bard-like overhaste ala Executioner's Axe. An updated Avatar proc that does something worthwhile. (Much) better secondary only weapon DD procs - much better because the offhand fires procs at a lower rate. There shouldn't, IMO, be any objetion to Warriors doing closer to a DPS classes DPS if we can not tank when doing it...provided that when we are tanking our DPS is not abysmal. Utility put it on secondary only and 2H weapons. Don't make it last for minutes so one can get the benefits of going into utility mode (DW and 2H) only long enough to get a proc. Add to it - an updated version of Cripple, Avatar, burst overhaste, ... DPS need not be the only benefit for going into and staying in DW and 2H. It's not necessary to subvert S&B is for tanking and we should do reasonable DPS in our usual role when geared properly to perform it for DW and 2H to have a not tanking role for Warriors.
Existing (near) example: http://lucy.allakhazam.com/item.html?id=75926 Nevederia's Horn secondary 108/20 Effect: Suffocate Obviously if DW or 2H provided sufficient survivability (shields don't provide a huge survivability boost), and aggro, and better DPS than S&B then S&B goes back into the dumpster. If S&B is for tanking (with reasonable DPS while tanking) and DW and 2H is for utility and DPS (not effective in the tanking role) then everything has a role and is superior in that role.
BB I think you would agree with me when I say Warriors should do decent damage when tanking, no matter what weapon style we would use. My statement was when not tanking S&B shouldn't be more DPS than the other 2 DPS sets. After all when tanking we will be getting all the ripostes and such with boosted damage from Shield Specialist which would be a very nice bump in DPS.
S&B is for tanking. Mobs should see a 1H weapon using/shield wielding fighter and go a little insane (EoA should be on shields) realizing they are up against a tank that will make itself the focus of attacks, have the unequaled ability to survive, and will display a mastery of weapons resulting in significant damage. DW and 2H are for DPS [BA: and utility]. Mobs seeing a DWer or 2H user in front of them should just shrug - another melee DPSer making tanking in those setups nearly impossible (EoA should be on shields). So no, I would not agree that we "should do decent damage when tanking, no matter what weapon style we use" since we should not be able to effectively tank in our two DPS [BA:and utility] weapon styles - they aren't for tanking. I would agree that if and only if DW and 2H can't effectively be used for tanking then S&B with it's produced through training conversion of our underpowered mainhander into effectively a nearly 2H ratio arming sword ought not be effectively our best DPS when not tanking. Whether tanking as we should be with S&B or as we should not be with a 2Hander we'll get ripos. One shoot from the hip solution is to have a largish Slot 2 Damage Shield on our shields as well as EoA. You want the benefits of a shield? You best be tanking since otherwise you will lose a fair amount of damage shield damage you might otherwise have. Want to use DW or a 2Hdr? You best be DPSing because DW and 2H are not for tanking. One ought not, IMO, suggest confining S&B with it's nearly 2H ratio arming sword achieved through training to a lesser DPS (especially since when we really turtle up we're using defensive discs precluding the use of offensive ones) without similarly confining our two not tanking/DPSing setups to the DPS role. You don't send out head to toe heavy plate armored fighters wielding a shield into the thick of battle to be damage magnets. You send them to survive being able to administer great harm with that pointy thing they hold in their mainhand. Without the ability to administer great harm there is no reason to have them lead the way. (Tanks are not just movable walls, they have big guns too.)
Warriors are for tanking. Whether they use S&B, 2h, or dual wield their skills and abilities make them a tank type class. That is my understanding of the class. It's not a matter of changing weapons to go from a tanking class to a dps class. Warriors are always a tank class no matter what they use for weapons. Beserkers are a dps class. So when we are talking about warriors its not exactly correct to say "S&B is for tanking". "Warriors are for tanking." is more correct. It's just a matter of how well you want to do it. S&B should be better than dual wield and 2h at tanking. Dual wield and 2H should be better dps than s&b. A shield is not a sword. Two swords should do more damage than S&B because a sword does more damage than a shield. Common sense. 2 arms apply more force to a sword than 1 arm. 2h dps should be greater than s&B. A shield is not a sword.
Common sense that two arms swinging one baseball bat hits a lot harder than two arms trying to effectively swing 2 baseball bats with them getting into each other's way and demanding your full attention and not getting it. (Try chopping down a tree with two hatchets vs. 1 axe wielded with both hands sometime.) BUT EQ hasn't been about common sense and traditionally DW has ben more DPS than 2H even though it should not be. Nod, a shield is not a sword but by the same token a sword is not a shield AND 2-short swords are not 1 BIBS (hand-and-a-half sword - essentially a 2Hander swung with one arm and optionally 2 with it's greater length and mass resulting in greater force - what our training makes our 1Handers into when we use a shield),
You very clearly have never tried to fight dual wield, two handed, or with a bastard sword before, because you very clearly have no idea what you're talking about here.
