Breaking this topic out of the "Warrior fixes" thread since opinions on this tend to dominate discussions on almost any other topic. Here is the last update from early March: https://forums.station.sony.com/eq/index.php?threads/warrior-class-fixes.206994/page-22#post-3062258
Before I share my opinion on this, a couple of facts: Shield provides overcap AC, but out-DPS's other stances due to SS Dual Wield has no meaningful benefit, but used to be our best DPS stance 2H was historically used pseudo defensively for low agro and riposte advantages The way these discussions have evolved over recent expansions: Warriors want to have a reason to Dual Wield again Elidroth appears to favor 2H for DPS, while many Warriors would prefer DW for DPS. The current proposal of "between 2H and shield" doesn't give DW any clear advantage My proposals: Mitigation increases should be applied to the class, not the stance (e.g. more ranks of Phalanx) Warriors best reason to DW again should be that it provides our highest DPS. 2H already favored for riposte, boost 2H further via riposte rate (mixed offensive/defensive)
I thought back when War used DW it was for agro as well as dps, but mainly for agro since the "need" of the shield was not required back then, and the 2 procs + swing agro was needed.
Absolutely, but this is no longer relevant since the majority of our hate has moved to activated vs proc/swing.
My thoughts were that 2h being highest dps lowest defense was like a Scottish man with a claymore, go Braveheart and cut the man in half, but you open yourself up during the process. The DW being the in between thinking of the Chinese death of a thousand cuts, but able to deflect parry and dodge. S&B doesn't need an explanation to me the roles would be S&B - really tough content, raids, and named DW slightly tough content, off tanking and general trash. 2H - when you have another tank in group and want to dps or the mobs are trivial.
This comes down to the "reality vs mechanics" debate and there are clear trends in EverQuest. Classes that can use DW or 2H produce better DPS with Dual Wield. Examples: Monk, Ranger, Beastlord, Warriors (historical). Like stated previously, the 'slightly tough' reflects "between 2h and shield" scenarios do not provide a practical use for Dual Wield. The reason being those situations do not have clear lines of "sufficient mitigation" which present opportunities to make "middle" setups ideal, so this is only a theoretical advantage. In actual use a Warrior would choose to either maximize some portion of defense or offense. Only through a DW>* model does each stance carry a maximum benefit - 2H retains and improves damage advantage vs multiple trivial enemies (or through discing if DW gains DPS mostly via procs) So if you'd permit the friendly jab, you're thinking like a Knight... not a melee class
You sir are correct I am thinking as a knight. I figured Eli's goal was to keep the tank arch close to each other. Also not all playstyles are the same and thus some would use them in that configuration. I agree most raid geared would then use 2h in non raid scenarios. But I can easily see a group geared using DW to survive with a real cleric and S&B with a merc cleric. Also I would agree historically, but historically 2H has been broke for all but SK/Pal and Zerker, (and monk for defensive, weird i know right). Maybe they are trying to fix that issue..maybe I would also jab back and say think like a tank first, and dps second
That would suggest shield usage all the time, which is the unbalanced situation we have currently that Warriors wish to address. I find knights well-balanced with their setups, but the situation is more complex for Warriors. To be forwardly honest, I don't want to DPS like a Knight, in terms of image or actual damage dealt. Warriors should exceed Knight capacity in areas relevant to melee. It seems clear that this is why we were given Dual Wield in the first place. Unless that warrior is "moloing" easy content, the rest of the group is doing sufficient DPS and an adjustment to the already-low Warrior's DPS is immaterial compared to the defensive benefits of the shield. In all practical likelyhood, a tank who is able to survive without using a shield is going to be able to survive with a 2H.
I understand not wanting to dps like a knight, but in all honesty, you don't, you don't have the spells to do that. You do have the skills to do more dmg in melee though. I would have no issues at all with a war auto attack in DW being the same as a knight with their special 2H, and a War 2H being slightly above that. Then the devs can give activated abilities for dps that make the 2h of War be = with knights 2h dps setup (including spells) and the DW somewhere in between. I only go down that road because that is where Eli is leading you. all the tanks when full out burn and when in group mode should do around the same dps, same as the dps classes should to each other. I know knights have been higher than wars for a while, and I dont agree with that. TBH i would say wars are way easier to balance than Knights because you don't have the spells to take into effect + their melee. The Wars only have a couple of activated abilities + ADPS to consider, hopefully you will get more with these changes.
You commented that 2H is broken for most classes, this is entirely due to poor 2H weapon ratios. I can see where you're going, but because you add spells to melee it makes more sense if 2H ratios were fixed and tiers looked like: Knight 1H < Warrior 1H < Knight 2H < Warrior 2H < Warrior DW Elidroth has a lot of classes to consider. When it comes to Warriors, I'd prefer leading to being led.
It is better to give suggestions and help guide than to try to led. I hope I am helping with ideas and helping to flesh out your thoughts, as you know, I don't really have a chip in this poker game when it comes to wars. my war alt is only 85 and in UF gear, hes kinda sad
I would like to see a mechanic that refreshes rampage or just procs rampage from a buff similar to sneering grin. For DW that could give it an area that it excel instead of fading away in the middle ground like you said.
If it refreshed rampage that would be fine, but if it proced it, you couldn't use it with a chanter, or on raids at all.
There are plenty of encounters where aoe is viable. Should warriors excel there? Naw probably not, but it would give us something we lack and give us player feedback, which I feel is something else we lack.
I was saying it would be fine if its controlled by clicks, not something that is on all the time. I don't think anyone would want an aoe that is on all the time (unless it was pure agro, not dmg)
I honestly would want it on all the time if it was tied to a stance. If you are facing an encounter where it wouldn't be viable, just changes stances. To me, stance changes should be substantial, if they are going in at all. Nickle and dime-ing our DPS or mitigation is just dumb. We will be right back to where we are now.
I hope however they go about any changes, it doesn't result in warriors being less good at tanking. A shield stance that cannot be used with final stand discipline immediately raises red flags for me. In theory maybe you could just click off the buff, maybe. Or the whole thing could end up a whole mess like how they did nttb. Unintended/unforeseen buff stacking issues seem quite possible. Since some of the game developers apparently don't and have never played this game, major changes worry me. Would it be "neat" to have a warrior dual wielding? sure. If it some how broke them tanking for a few months, no thanks.
And it makes the most sense for this to go in the 2H stance, if we're generating a round of attacks it should be our highest hits. I read this as they just wouldn't stack, e.g. how Phalanx doesn't stack with Defensive line
I am pretty sure it just doesn't stack on top of last stand to control the power of that discipline itself but improving our mitigation with other weaker discs like steadfast stance.
I don't much care what the changes are as long as -the defensive gap between shield and non shield use becomes a bit more narrow. -shield use relative dps becomes undeniably the worst of all available weapon setups. -we don't have to rely on "stances" needing button clicks with timers. Any changes should be passive and take effect immediately on weapon swap - just like every other class who plays this game. Beyond that I don't much care what they do. I just want a reason to use something other than my shield situationally.
