For as long as I can remember, two handers have always fallen short of AC and Hp when compared to two one handers. Does anyone know if the devs have ever explained this oversight and what they've said?
I don't think it is an oversight. 2hs are not for tanking and 1h are. I get that zerkers can only use 2h but they arent supposed to be tanks and therefore dont need ac.
iirc, the reasoning is that it takes more time/effort to upgrade both 1handers than it does to upgrade a single 2hander. for that extra timesink 1handers get a combined higher hp/ac compared to 2handers of the same tier.
See, but sword n board already get plenty of bonuses (see: Shield Block, Shield Specialist). Also, if Zerks weren't meant to tank, they wouldn't wear Chain armor. I'm not saying they are tank classes, but they are expected to be able to take hits and survive, and they often end up as tanks in plenty of group content.
This logic just doesn't make any sense to me. Just because classes have certain abilities to survive direct melee combat in the short term does not a tank make. Are shaman or rogues supposed to be tanks? They both wear chain. I would argue that monks are more intentionally oriented towards tanking with their abilities than are berserkers or rogues, yet they wear leather. Beastlords less so, but as a hybrid they have more capability to tank than to berserkers and again, they wear leather.
Sword and Board get some bonuses via AA's, yes, but not everyone gets those AA's. I know that Rangers, Warriors, and Knights get Shield Block, I do not know who else gets that AA. Shield Specialist, however, is limited only to the Knights and Warriors - no one else. As for who the "tanks" are, the main three tank classes are (obviously) Warriors, and then Knights. There are two "Light Tanks" however - and one of them surprised me when I first heard it, as I had gone for years considering them a melee dps class and not a tank of any sort, light or regular - Ranger and Monk. The other classes, regardless of what armor they wear, are not considered tanks.
I would not really call monks a light tank. 1. They have no taunt button 2. They have no agro abilities Rangers are a light tank, as they have both of those abilities.
I don't disagree. That was pretty much the reasoning I had gone by before being told by Ngreth I think it was, might have been a different dev, that Monks are alos considered to be "light tanks". All I can do is tell you what I was told.
If Monks would be considered "light tanks", then Zerks would be at least as much so. Monks have worse armor but better evasion skills, while Zerks have less evasive ability but better armor. They also have stun and snare abilities to generate aggro (although I'm honestly not sure how good the snare discs are for aggro), as well as a defensive AA with a pretty quick recast (10 minutes, 7 with AAs) to absorb up to 40% of incoming melee damage up to x damage. It might be a bit uneven to use Zerks as a specific example, though, because they're the only class that CAN'T get/use Shield Block. On the other hand, with just about everyone getting Shield Block and many classes also getting some version of Staff Block, I'm mildly surprised Zerks haven't gained some manner of two-handed block ability as well.
Zerkers have the knight HP table as I recall to help offset the disadvantage of 2hder weapons having lower total stats than standard 1hd/shield options. It may have been the urban legend at the time they introduced the class but that is how I recall it panning out.
Monks have Much higher AC Returns after softcap then Zerkers, so they not only avoid better but they mitigate better as well
All that means is Monks get 5% more post-softcap AC. Zerks get 25% while Monks get 30%. However, as has been mentioned before, Monks also get weaker armor to work with (leather versus chain), so I don't see that making much of a difference overall.
With how low the softcaps actually are, and how much AC is available, that 5% difference means that Monks have more AC available to them than Berserkers do. That sounds very similar to the scenario Rangers and Monks were in at the start of Secrets of Faydwer - Rangers had a higher AC softcap (by a couple points) and Monks had a higher Overcap Return. Monks were able to out-mitigate (as well as out-avoid, due to the difference between Parry and Block) Rangers when equipped with the same tier gear. Actual AC values (you do know that Displayed AC is a meaningless figure, right?) are so low that Devs have steadfastly refused to put them ANYWHERE we can see them, even though there is plenty of room on the stats tab of the player window. That 5% overcap return difference is freaking HUGE. That's assuming you are correct in that it is 5%.
So shamans are tanks ? rogues are tanks ? Your logic fails. Nope you're right and the years of parsing to prove the opposite is wrong. Are you really trying to say zerkers are just as capable of tanking as monks? Have you ever played this game ? Have to be trolling.
You know this ain't true right ? Just look at magelo for the top of each class. If zerkers had a higher hp table you would notice the difference you don't. Top Zerker 101k Top Monk 103k Top Ranger 105k This is 9 months after ROF came out most of these are in full tier 2-3 gear going to tier 4 the trend will continue. I would assume all 3 classes are going AC > HP augs
I see: zerker 102 monk 103 rog 104 ranger 105 SK 105 Pal 107 War 109 However it's less clear that they're all AC oriented players. The tanks will be, but all it takes if 5% of say zerkers, monks or rogues to focus on HP over AC and (no matter how valid) they'll naturally be the top on hp. Certainly on the top rog I see several non-AC high HP augs. [Personally as a rogue who wants dps as priority, I'll take heroics > AC > hp which sometimes means zero AC augs. (Obviously I prefer heroics + AC + HP )] HP doesn't affect tankability that much though. Mitigation, evasion and even things like runes all help . In that respect, ber and rog on are par and behind monks and rangers, who in turn are behind the true tanks. Classifying monk and ranger as "light tank" is maybe a bit unfair, but I can see where the logic came from.
Zerkers and Rangers cannot tank as well as monks. Ive tanked raid mobs after watching zerkers and rangers get smacked. I have never seen a ranger live much past WS and zerkers usually die so fast it looks like theyve been one rounded at these raids. Obviously there are different levels of gear and choices to be made with augs and such but given comparable gear and AA, Monks have always done better tanking with the exception of the great nerf of the PoP era.
While it may be True that Monks tank well, they lack the agro of a Berserker or even a Beastlord both of which out Tank rangers imo they drop like Flies sprayed with raid. Berserkers and Beastlords have great survival disc and tools as well rangers just have Weapon Shield that kind of shows there not suppose to be hit as much.
