I know, I was merely stating the fact that guild hall dummies inflates the DPS of high elemental damage weapons to levels you can't replicate vs actual mobs. My Double Trouble beats my Chapterhouse Standard in the hall, but not outside of it. The relatively small gap shows that making a weapon type/setup neutral would be easy. Make a new AA that boosts the damage of all weapon types/setups (including S&B) by 10% and remove 10% of the DPS bonus from SS/ISS.
If this is your way of supporting BA's arguments, I don't know what to tell you. S&B 24/7 is horribad. Shields are not heavy armor. S&B should not be the best DPS setup for warriors. DW is for both tanking and DPS, despite BA's and Elidroth's opinions to the contrary. These are not open for discussion.
Using the Katana of Pain from above with it's 8 damage aug and my shield. Combat Dummy Fana in 1384s, 9411k @6800dps , Damoncord 9411k @6800dps (100%) Damoncord -vs- Combat Dummy Fana: -- DMG: 9411038 -- DPS: 6800 -- Scaled: 6800 -- Slash: 9315802 -- DirDmg: 95236 -- Non-crit rate: 61.6% -- crit rate: 38.4% -- Attempts: 3602 -- Hits: 2764 -- Missed: 838 -- Accuracy: 76.7% -- Avg Hit: 3404 -- Max hit: 8959 -- DMG to PC: 0
I don't have any stake in this debate, I legitimately do not care what we end up with for DPS/Tanking - whether that be good or bad. I was only stating that for now shield is the best DPS and obviously the best tanking.
Nope. If you understand how Shield Specialist was originally conceived and then implemented in practice, removing just 10% of the DPS bonus from SS+ISS won't do anything. Better to simply remove both AA lines and get rid of the massive DPS disparity that currently exists between S&B and both DW and 2H. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. SS was originally conceived to give us the agro boost we sorely needed with S&B... look how that turned out.
It adds the Strike of Ire proc when using a shield. And the 'your spell is interrupted' error when dual wielding or using a 2h.
I was suggesting no effective change to S&B (as the AA I proposed would benefit S&B too), just boosting other weapon types. This could also be accomplished by making the a new AA that gives a 10% boost every single non-S&B setup individually, but it'd be easier from a coding standpoint to give an across the board DPS boost AA... and going forward they could just add more levels to that instead of worrying about balancing punishing blade, SS, etc. My stance is that auto attack DPS should be weapon type neutral, S&B included. Ideally, the best S&B, DW, and 2H setups from a given tier should do roughly the same auto attack dps, say, within 3% of each other. I have no problem with giving situational boosts to different weapon type's DPS, but I think trading S&B auto attack dps superiority for DW or 2H auto attack dps superiority wouldn't do anything to progress the class.
DW 24/7 was horribad. The lack of Warrior weapons that had the ratios needed to be appropriate for use with a shield and sufficient aggo while using S&B conceded an advantage to knights in an area Warriors should have had parity. Shields are heavy armor. Do the math. DW has been the best DPS for Warriors throughout most of the time the game has existed. DW is a DPS setup. The subject is open for discussion. You, for example, are discussing it even though a developer had ruled on the topic. Does anyone really think removing SS and ISS from the game and making DW the Warrior 24/7 setup again is going to happen? Does anyone really think shields aren't going to continue being heavy armor and swords are going to have shields built into them? Does anyone really think SOE having ruled DW is not a tanking setup/DW is for DPS that will change?
It appears so far right now that one of our big issues is that we are stuck in S&B for tanking and DPS even though, we have been told that DW or 2Handers should be our DPS set. The bonus from Shield Specialist is inflating the damage of our 1 sword to almost the point of a 2hander of the same tier.
I think that's a legitimate PoV. But I also think in actual use vs. challenging content (most group content and beyond) DPS by a Warrior is constrained by a need to be prepared to use defensive abilities while DPSing with another doing the tanking is offensively unconstrained. Such a change would result in Warriors in their usual role and dressed to perform that role doing a whole lot less DPS,,,unless you factor in ADPS which is group makeup dependent and not intrinsically Warrior capability dependent. Which was the situation knights experienced until recently. A weapon meant to be wielded 2 at a time is not shield appropriate. Paladins, for example still do pretty impressive Slays while in S&B. In Warrior prefered content our DPS when tanking generally plummets unless others grant us ADPS - we can't launch a lot of offensive power while concerned about our survivability.
Seriously, you're like a special ed kind of special. No one, NO ONE, NO ONE has said ANYTHING about Dual Wielding 24/7. It's been parsed and posted here that DW and 2H are LESS DPS than S&B currently is.
BA maybe you should look a little closer, this is without all the DPS we would gain from ripostes and DS's from tanking. I haven't said a thing about our tanking here just how out of sync our DPS is.
It's funny Riloden just created this login, and send me a F-Bomb dropping PM blasting Batteaxe and praising Kelefane whose motivation I question. Then he posts this NERF call, by saying let's destroy Warriors DPS while using a shield. Go away
I looked a little closer. I didn't see "just how out of sync". I see a 10% difference which might easily be due to weapons, putting offensive buffs on a tank dressed to tank, etc. Given "the sky is falling" tone by DW as close to all the time as possible fans I expected something closer to the 30% DPS loss S&B experienced when replacing an offhander with a shield prior to SS. I personally appreciate your posting parses. But I don't see them as definitive in method, setup, or results. They are a report of AN outcome with the situation that produced it mentioned - nothing more. I'm sure SOE will conduct it's tests the way SOE wants to conduct them. Provided SOE believes tests are warranted.
So you don't see a problem that our DPS setups are doing 10% less or even equal (if we assume that adding damage augs and picking "optimal" DW / 2H weapons would account for 10%) compared to S&B, a specifically defensive setup? A better comparison would be to unaug all of the weapons and get a strictly bare-bones, even parse. IMO, DPS-wise, we should be doing at east 25% more with DW and at least 50% more with 2H, but that's just me.
Guess he didn't look at the last one posted where I adressed his opinion that I used a tank weapon to DPS with S&B instead of a DPS weapon. When I swapped weapons for that parse I lost a whopping 51dps. 51 DPS being the difference between my agro sword and a DPS sword while using S&B the weapon set that IS NOT our DPS set. And yet our DPS sets are about 10-15% behind our tanking set in DPS. But since he wants us in S&B 24/7 he's not gonna argue thats wrong. He's been spouting that mess that we are heavy tanks and all we need is S&B to DPS, Tank, and shouldn't think of more. It really looks like you don't want a warrior, you sure seem to want a knight without the spellbook, and even without the second weapon set to DPS in.
Is that what I said? I don't see a problem when after declaring the sky was falling it turns out that in a rather unrealistic parse a not fully tuned for tanking defensive setup is within 10% of an offensive setup not running offensive discs. A sword is a sword and a shield appropriate sword "looks" a lot like a 2H. Not like a 1Hander designed to be used 2 at a time. I don't recall a lot of outcry over the 30% DPS loss S&B experienced when replacing an offhander with a shield prior to SS. We should do Warrior typical DPS when tanking. When tanking challenging content there will be ripostes and damage shield damage, And when DPSing with one of our 2 DPS setups there will be offensive discs. Dissatisfied? You'd "demand" offensive discs not just be locked out with a defensive disc running but that offensive discs shouldn't be available at all when we use a shield? Sure,,, are you equally willing to sing the virtues of EoA appearing only on shields??
So you say our top DPS should only be when we are tanking? You say our top DPS should only be when using a Sword and Shield? The reason we didn't have an outcry on the DPS loss from going DW to S&B is you're trading a second sword's DPS and agro for a shield's survival why expect to NOT lose DPS? I'm not sure how much experience you have with long term parses normally Discs give a short term bonus but over long times they even out.
Taking away from S+B defined AAs (defensive or offensive) is a bad idea. We are still significantly behind knights (ok i'll just say it....shadowknights) dps useing this setup. I think S+B is close the the way it should be. The problem is Devs have totally ignored adjusting DW and 2H the way they did S+B over the past several expansions. As I havn't followed the forums over the years, any insight from players (who have) on why Devs have done this to us would be appretiated. A Dev response to (why did you take DW away from us?) would be even better.
What exactly is "Warrior-typical DPS?" Are you suggesting that S&B should be our median form and DPS (and by proxy mitigtion) should scale from there? If that's the case, why are you suggesting a form that is supposed to be high defense and low dps to be the median, when it's specifically not at the median spectrum. if anything, Dual Wield is the more realistic form to what our "median" should be. Defense = sacrifice offensive power for the sake of defense; and pure offense is a sacrifice of defensive ability (AKA two-handed weapons) and dual wield should be right smack in the middle of it all. Doesn't that make a whole lot more sense? You've said before many times that DPS is not our objective, yet you're also saying we should be doing this "warrior typical" DPS in shielded form? Which is it? Our goal is agro maintenance and defense when tanking challenging content. DPS does not factor in at all. The problem I forsee with boosting our already boosted DPS is you start down a path of adding and adding and adding. Its difficult to keep adding and adding to arrive at what is balanced without getting to an over-inflated position than what (may be) intended. Sorry, I prolly could word that much better, but my brain is shut down at the moment.
