What are Warrior Advantages compared to Knights?

This is a situation I'd like to see changed.

Warriors definitely need a fix.. I'm sure we can all agree to that. Personally I think warriors need to get together some way, some how and come up with viable options for what they really want. I'm sure some have tried, but press the issue. I'd also stay off the EQ forums as well, since whatever you come up with will either get trolled or flamed to no end. Have to get out of the mindset of "Knights have this so we should have this" as well. Take Knights completely out of your equation and only focus on your class... Sounds hard I know.. Once you make any mention of another class, your going to get trolled and/or get taken off topic. What you really don't need is more people posting new complaints on the EQ forums. The Devs clearly aren't listen, since this thread has turned into bickering back and forth.

Um not it hasn't.

Omg look at what SOE posted, it's the end of the knight classes!!!!1111!!

"Connor many of the things knight are asking for are Warrior specific. Warriors should and will always tank better than Paladins and SK's
...
Defensive abilities are Warrior class defining and will not be shared. We will be solving this problem be adjusting the events."

No sir it definately was not the case that knights were sexier. Knights were inferior tanks (as they should be).

DON release notes - It's been our goal to have Warriors, Paladins, and Shadow Knights to be capable of tanking all group content mobs. Defensive abilities will not be required we have achieved our goal

And there we have the Tank Parity in what's supposed to be the Wariror classes greatest strength while knights kept their assets free of parity. One Way Parity.

Now if Kelefane insists that since One Way Parity he's advised people who do not raid not to roll a Warrior since they'd be in for a lot of pain and suffering he's at least guilty of a lot of schadenfreude ever since. We're teh sexy, says he. Who's your daddy now??

In raids? I guess he's tired of the Warrior crew that has gotten him access to raid loot all these many years. Woo woo, served your purpose, says he, my turn now. He and other knights may not have instigated the destruction of the Warrior class (they did - remove Defensive from the game or share it was their method) but they sure are in here silently applauding.

"Warriors need more utility"
Like heckfire! Warriors need the "unmatched ability to survive the most brutal battles". Give us what we were promised. The utility chosers ride parade horsies and wield lances.

It's time for significant Warrior combat at-will recovery from wounds. That's how the knight boot ended up on our neck and its how to get it off. (A smaller than we have but still quite large) piece of Warrior mitigation and burst mitigation PLUS combat self-healing we do not have at all got us to knight tanking superiority. Two very different knight classes with the same means to an end that should not be.

^

Not to be taken the wrong way, but. I'm not really looking to gain any utility. If I wanted to be able to feign death, I would make a SK or Monk. If I wanted to dps, I would make a pure dps class. I wanna be the primary tank class, and any talk of making warriors tank on par with knights, but then giving them some gimmicks or knight things is kind of pointless. You could already make a knight, if you want to be a knight. So, warriors advantage at tanking was that they had final stand. Knights did not, they had there spell books. If the developers come out and say, hey we do not want final stand anymore, so were gonna give it to knights also to just put everyone at even field on tanking. Even if they give warriors some gimmicks I don't see how that improves things. I don't need to be told that if Sony trivializes warriors and improves knights, that I should then go play one instead of warrior. That is common sense. But, originaly there was suppose to be two very different things, Warriors and Knights. It is fair to say it's more of just the game getting simplified and mass marketed and easy mode and all that, but I don't have to like it. Rerolling is a great option, as is just maybe not playing. I don't like that they took the class I was playing, and decided that my signature defensive was not something they wanna keep in the game as a warrior only feature. I also don't like that it sometimes seems the people who make these game progress/future design choices, don't seem like people who have been around the game since it began, or for any length of time, and often seem as though they might rarely if ever play the game at all. As far as wether the gap has slightly narrowed with warriors still far ahead, or wether knights and warriors are about equal at tanking raid bosses. This should simply be a matter of numbers, no talk of cultures, preferences, feelings. If tank A has 100k hp and takes 5% less dmg then tank B who has same HP and heals himself for 15% of his hp every 5 seconds, which is the better tank? Now if tank A takes 30% less damage but tank B heals himself for 15% every 5 seconds, which is the better tank? It really does just become a numbers question at some point.

Kelefane after posting it's always been this way when the historical record says it wasn't.

After admitting that you advise players not to roll a Warrior if they don't raid since they'll be in for a lot of pain and suffering. (Which pretty much indicates the state of things non-raiding Warriors are experiencing because they did roll one).

After suggesting more Warrior mitigation when it's clear knights dominate everything from swarming to multi-mob tanking to raid boss mobs despite their lesser mitigation and lesser burst mitigation because they also have combat self-healing

yes, knights are tanking better than Warriors in some raid events. Ive seen with my own eyes knights continuing though raid boss mob stages and tanking right to the end where Warriors would move to the next tank at every stage.

I really don't see how you can continue posting. Even Naubi ultimately conceded she was arguing both sides of a debate not because of the merits but because she didn't want to lose the advantage knights had due to being able to more practically use shields. Is that what this is, you don't want to lose the clear advantage combat self-healing gives knights?? Flawed Warriors are easier to compete with???

We'll probably move this discussion to TSW where Yoda might tolerate a Brael or Shiftee post or three but knight trolls that speak out of five sides of their mouths won't be given a lot of slack.

If you want to continue bringing up an antiquated outdated debate that went on about a decade ago with Naubi, then by all means, feel free old timer.

And no, im bringing up facts and truths about every day game play. Not hyperbole and exaggerations like you, lol - OMG Knights are tanking everything! LOL

How is this conversation even still going? Good god.

So true.
The situation is obvious and serious (high level Warriors and a guild leader or two agree).
The cure is obvious too.

So you want things to go back to the old days, when knights would sit in seb all day long and never get a group, and in the end they would join a group of knights, I remember having my enchanter once join a group of 5 paladins, since none of them were able to find a group so they were forced to join together, boy talking about slow experience.

group level warriors did not have any problems tanking during Voa, in fact they seemed to have it easier than the other tanking classes when it came to tanking names, at least they seemed to finish the expansion first.

The only problem is jealous raid level warriors that envy how easy it is for raid level knights to get things done solo in the group game and, why it takes a raid level warrior running a box group to do the same thing. By the way axe I remember how you used to complain about not getting groups to finish group content for flagging, back in the day.

<shrug> I used to solo using bind wound before fast med was invented, not joking at all. 20min per dark blue kill. Not really about going back to the old days or not. I think it is important to separate raid issues from group issues sometimes, because they have a lot of diferent factors, as well as a bit of overlap. Right now today with cleric mercs and what not, I bet some clerics get frustrated with looking for a group. Sure, they can pop there tank merc and go that route, but any necro will run circles around them and there merc. Now take a raid , clerics are almost always desired and wanted. Ok, some classes are gonna solo better then others, some classes will be more desired in raids. Warriors were already really weak in the solo/group game, and now separately, they have lost a lot of ground in the raid side, with recent changes. The recent changes being knights getting there form of defensive. I can't speak for all but, I'm not sure how much a factor jealousy is. If you crunch the numbers, I think you'd see all in all, knights are tanking about as well as warriors, and maintaining all extras of their class. That is out of proportion and not how it should be. "Should be" being based off what the description of each class said, and what it said the strengths and weaknesses are. I find the game to be more fun with classes each having specific roles, key strengths and weaknesses, pros and cons. You cannot make warriors very similar to knights with out changing what they are suppose to be. If Palidins are gonna tank almost as well as warriors, then warriors would need paladin spells to be on par. Except, then they would just be palidins, not warriors.

This is the dumbest approach I see keep coming up. Is there a single warrior out there that would be unhappy if we got 3500 more AA's to spend?

We aren't "Blessed with having less" - we have less, that isn't an advantage. Period.

Yep we should definately go back to days where Warriors had an "unmatched ability to survive" tanking harder hitting nuisance mobs like Drovarg Ragers found in every expansion, areas like the Bastion of Thunder with its Jord Kriegers, and some group named mobs

while Paladins had their WoS undead Murkgliders, Ruins of Illisin, etc. preferred content in practically every expansion

and SK's did amazing pulls saving long clearings by extracting named mobs or dragging corpses into hard to access places and then coffining less stealthy payers to them.

Everyone with the class based advantages they chose.

OR if knights are going to insist on Tank Parity in group content not having it a one way street where knights get a big piece of Warrior Class Defining abilities giving them parity with our entitled to have it niche while they keep their advantages.

We see how well that's worked out. Even Kelefane concedes that was a disaster for non-raiding Warriors. He just pretends knights always exceded Warriors in group content when the record shows they did not.

Even more clearly than making shields more practical for Warriors or not doing so, the developer reaction to how dramatically combat self-healing advantages knights will show if they are even handed (when Warriors were told they would have unmatched survival advantage tanking) or knight favoring. I'm betting knight favoring.

High level Warriors see the issues, non-Cleric healers confirm, guild leaders talk about Warrior attrition as a means to fewer Warriors/more knights, SK's admit Warriors are awful in group content I can't believe hybrids are still pretending and still posting nonsence.

I complained about superior knight at-will at-range aggro becoming the standard during LDoN making it hard for Warriors to get groups during that era too. Guess what, it was confirmable. Countless slowers, damage casters, and Clerics confirmed that they didn't have to wait for Warriors to establish aggro when they grouped with at-range aggroing knights - and therefor they prefered knights.

I just can't keep repeating myself is the problem. The thread is getting to bogged down with bickering as it is. As Cisco mentioned this is not an optimal place, but we have tried to organize and present condensed lists, we have tried to keep it warrior focused. Its hard today to run an isolated plan when balance is at stake (See below). Anyone recall the Warrior IRC where it turned into a Knight fest?

However, what this thread will do, is get some people questioning habits, it will cause more people to look at log files, and to actually take an opportunity to consider the data. I feel it is worth it to the class to remain at least somewhat vocal, even in light of all of the trolling.

Yes... data...

This is a 4000+ second raid parse, where knight and warrior hits were averaged. You will also notice in that same post I included the disc/AA use, which demonstrated that I used every warrior tool to near perfection; within the 1% of performance.

I am suggesting, very strongly supported by numerous logs, which I have referenced numerous times, that the current hit range variation between knights and warriors, range with the average falling between 5%-10% variation both in average hit and max hit. (game play setting)

Now, I am saying, if you think that is where it should be, then I can respect your opinion. If your going to continue to make blanket statements like: "warriors vastly out perform knights on raid encounters in terms of mitigation," then I am going to tell you you are mistaken. Unless of course you feel that the phrase "vastly out performs" is having a 5-10% (average) mitigation advantage.

I think that is a worthy debate.... is 5-10% enough to really need warriors? Does 5-10% mitigation advantage provide more in game play survivability than the knight tools (taps/healing/utility etc.)? What do warriors need to keep the edge? As people have pointed out, it use to be DI+ Defensive, roughly 50% advantage when big boss tanking. Clearly that was horrible game balance, and was addressed on numerous occasions over the last 10 years.

Today, it has fallen at around 5-10%. This is not a guess, just that is the way the numbers fall in the game play setting with a skilled active warrior and a skilled active knight. Do we see less than 5% variation sometimes? Yep. Do we see warriors step up over 10% sometimes? Yep. Hell on one raid I almost had a 13% advantage over the knight (likely hit 9th).

I recently merged boss tanking (knights/warriors) since ROF came out. The warrior mitigation advantage was at 8%. /shrug. Once again, just fact.

But let me ask you a couple questions Sojero.

1) What do you think a fair number is? How much of a mitigation advantage should warriors have to be the supreme boss tank?

2) What do you think the numerous posters and countless upon countless logs of knights topping their personal healing parses is worth numerically? E.G. if you were to weight knight health recovery with a numeric value that was a correlation to mitigation, what would that value be? For example. Paladins gain 20% from their heals, SK's gain 10% etc.

3) What is your general reason for derailing warrior discussions? Do you want warriors and knights to be interchangeable on raids? Do you fear SK's will become obsolete in guilds? Did I boot you from a guild at some point?

Some people might be speaking in speculation. None of the stories have been wild.

We both agree having 2 knights in a group is ideal. We both agree we are vastly better with them. We are wonderful at taking advantage of their stuff, almost as good as they are at taking advantage of each other. But, imagine for a second instead of 2 warriors in that group, it was another paladin and another SK. Heck, you could get rid of one of the healers then, and add a bard instead. You may not even need the healer in most situations heheh. Rubak (sp) anyone?

Admittedly in a tank rotation you might have a Warrior just to start things out. Fort/FS does give healers and debuffers a chance to settle in. But, should he die then certainly a Paladin is a fully capable replacement. Let's remember that Warrior mitigation abilities are proof only vs. melee. A Paladin when tanking can engage those and offset all forms of damage with passive and active combat self-healing.

Add a Warrior and you've added a tank. Add a Paladin and you've added a tank and a cleric.

Up to the minute tank rotations are a far cry from the 5-6 Warriors guilds were carrying because UF and some subsequent content made them understandably gun shy. Knights have been improved since then.

Warriors are inevitably going to be asked to sit out in favor of more knights/bards. Guilds want to win and sitting Warriors is something they'll have to do.

Kinda makes reassurances that "Oh yeah, you still got that [unmatched survivability vs brutal mobs] - in raids." ring just a little hollow and deceitful.

I see what your agenda is now. You want to see Knights nerfed. How clever of you. /golf-clap

Its really easy to read the tea leaves when reading your garbage posts. You want to see Knights nerfed, plain and simple.

Now go look into the mirror and figure out why you have been a running joke within the overall tanking community for years now. Hardly anyone takes you seriously, LOL.

The current tanking situation in EQ is not parity.

Yes, our guild still uses warriors to tank all raid bosses, and they do it without any issue whatsoever. But that isn't really the point. Knights could do it too. So could a few other classes, as well as pets, for that matter.

Some of it is the fact that content is not tuned to the top anymore, so the tanking requirements are lesser now than before. But, more of it is the fact that warriors need a significant boost. They don't stand out as the clear tank of choice on raid bosses now.

There is no denying that. Even if you are a certain Euro paladin we all know and love. Not this time.

"OR if knights are going to insist on Tank Parity in group content not having it a one way street where knights get a big piece of Warrior Class Defining abilities giving them parity with our entitled to have it niche while they keep their advantages."

How is all three classes having their niche content and being able to use their character according to its advertised strengths a nerf? Surely if Paladins have undead content, Slay Undead, clerical abilities, etc. they have what they chose to have. Ditto SK's. Where is what Warrior were promiced?

On the other hand if group content is going feature tank parity then lets see tank parity. How sir does taking steps to insure parity in group content amount to advocating nerfing knights? If Warriors get wound recovery at an endurance cost like 2 of the 3 classes that tank get combat self-healing and all three classes take that capability into raids, how is that nerfing knights? It isn't. It's rebalancing an imbalance.

It would level the playing field quite a bit where knights currently enjoy advantage, but that sir is what "parity" means.

Or did you think it meant "Let's share your's (hides mine)."

Heck. Piestro suggests Warriors would never have occasion to use such abilities in the first place.

Maybe this is what the devs call parity. What I mean is, what we are seeing right now. Maybe its their definition of parity. By not tuning raids to the top anymore. I mean, we have not been given their definition of parity yet, so I am only going by what I see. Maybe they are tuning the raids the way that they are to give certain classes a broader scope on raids /shrug - Maybe this is their cheesy answer to overall class balance from a raiding perspective - "If we make raids easy, no class can gripe since they'll just end up overpowering it more than ever before once gear saturation kicks in" and oh by the way, we'll end up seeing classes outside of the three tank classes start to tank on raids due to it.

You know that there are issues when classes outside of the three tanks start to get mentioned when it comes to raiding and tanking.

Its why I keep saying that I think there are bigger issues here than simply saying that Warriors need a boost.

As I said before, current day raiding in EQ is skimpy and its easy mode. Nothing is hard. Its why you see classes like Rangers and Monks offtanking adds like champs on raids these days. I bet we see a time in the near future where Rangers and Monks can tank raid bosses. Hell, they already can to some extent.

So with how raids are being tuned, just what do some of you call a significant boost? When Warriors can already tank the bosses just fine? So you want to give a class a significant boost so that they can tank easy mode raid content better? <--(that several classes and pets can tank, not just the three tank classes mind you) - I understand that they need a boost, but some of you are making it out like they need a massive boost. They dont.

Seriously. How do you boost a class that can already tank easy mode raid content? The only way I see, is by nerfing every other class out there that can also tank it. Its like boosting a level 50 tank to go and tank Crushbone. It almost makes no sense. The words "boost" - "easy mode content" - "when they already can just fine" do not compute.

Perhaps we should turn the page and just start discussing the grouping aspects of Warriors. Because if Warriors have any issues at all, its in the group game. That is something that I can agree with 100%. Because nobody will convince me otherwise that Warriors have it bad on raids these days. Why? For the simple fact that raids are easy mode and your beginning to see classes do some things on raids that they couldnt really do before due to it (and im not just talking about the tank classes here) - Raids are being overpowered these days. So boosting any class that can already do their jobs just fine in modern day easy mode, not just Warriors, so that the class can overpower the raids even more is redundant.

I mean, if Warriors were asking for some kind of raid utility to help others outside of their tank crying, I could understand. But fact of the matter, is that Warriors are doing their jobs on raids just fine.

And just how do you get a certain tank to stick out more when the content is too easy to begin with? Especially when classes outside of the three tanks can tank certain aspects on raids? Someone answer this for me.

Seriously off the rails

Tank Parity does not mean Warriors should pull like SK's, cure or heal others like Paladins.

But it pretty much has to mean none of the classes have a deficiency such that people would say don't play that class or you'll be in for a lot of pain and suffering in group content. Where one class has multiple threads on pwning the heck out of X in a way other classes can't duplicate. Where raid leaders don't tell one class now don't tank all the adds solo please - share.

Knights would have freaked out had a Warrior said "We have tank parity in GoD. This must be the parity SOE intended."

I don't expect a big burst mitigation boost and a lengthened timer. Phalanx says the trend is in the other direction, sadly. But in combat recovery from wounds at an Endurance cost is a bird of a different feather. At it's most extreme it reduces the amount of healing others must provide at least for while your endurance holds out. It's not permanent and innate like built in mitigation would be. At it's least extreme that's still useful you can spot heal yourself enough to get out of immediate danger regardless of the way damage was done to you.

I don't expect to be able to solo Mad Mary unassisted and heal myself for 1 hour+. But it is perfectly reasonable for Warriors to recover HP's more effectively than to gulp a potion for 25% of a mob's hit and then wait 3 minutes(?) before being able to do it again. That doesn't get anyone out of danger.

Enough to make Warriors the obvious first choice to tank raid boss mobs? Perhaps not. But it at least narrows a self-rescue gap where Warriors aren't even in the ballpark much less in the game and where knights are enjoying superiority like they invented the term.

How do you boost Warriors when classes like Paladins and SK's can tank raid boss mobs? By enabling Warriors to spot recover from wounds and get out of immediate danger should a healer get stunned, distracted, turns his attention elsewhere, lags, or dies and others don't take over immediately.

I die fairly often with my Clerics having mana in their mana bar - I'd dearly like to grab some HP's so the next AE, next ripo, next DS hit, tick of a detrimental or low HP aggro doesn't kill me. I think loss of exclusivity on defensive abilities and a reduction on the boost provided by the ones we have justifies a little less absolute dependance on others for restored HP's in combat.