Why don't warriors get knight 1handers?

Most late game warriors have to use a sword and board so why don't they make some warrior 1hs that does increased damage while using a shield? And im not talking about shield specialist because knights get that too. Most late game 1h for warriors do 100-120 damage where knights are running around with 195-220 damage and bringing instant aggro and utility to groups.

/popcorn

Now that's a very interesting question to why Warriors don't get Knight-based 1 handed weapons, I'm thinking it's because it would cause a major dis-balance to damage output if a Warrior was ever allowed to duel-wield such weapons. Perhaps they should make it that Warriors can use something that serves as an "Equivalent" to Knight based 1 handed weapons (in this case, we should call them Warlord 1 handed weapons) but in turn are restricted from duel-wielding such weapons, in turn it can give Warriors a very good reason to Bash with a Shield once again if people ever agreed to this idea.

Thats what I mean why don't they make a sword thats for using a shield increase the damage alittle maybe make it 150 while using a shield and 100 while dual wielding or something like that?

Warrior shield specialist ratio comparison: (elemental damage is divided in half b/c of resist rates)

Warrior raid weapon
114 + (14/2) + 10 = 131*0.65 = 85 + 131 = 216/23 = 9.39 ratio.

Knight raid weapon in warriors hands
221 + (9/2) + 10 = 235 * 0.65 = 152 + 235 = 387/32 = 12.11 ratio

Knight raid weapon in knights hand

221 + (9/2) + 10 = 235*0.25 = 59 + 235 = 294/32 = 9.18

I don't remember the mod from knight shield specialist I am going to guess 25% since 5 per rank * 13 = 65 for warriors.

• Warrior ranks of flurry: 18
• Knight ranks of flurry: 9
• Warrior double attack: 270
• Knight double attack: 260
• Warrior Offense skill: 290
• Knight Offense skill: 255
• Warrior triple attack: 500
• Knight Triple attack: 285

In short a warrior weapon in a warriors hand already has a better ratio than a knight weapon so why complain? A knight weapon in a knights hand has an inflated ratio to make up for the skill advantages the warrior enjoys as the parent class. It however does not overcome their passive dps despite the higher ratio, knights are gaining via spells cast. The slower delay on a knight weapon is there to allow for spell cast threading and would be a net aggro loss for a warrior to increase the dly by a factor of 10 in terms of passive aggro.
A knight ratio weapon in a warriors hand with the inflated shield specialist mod would be absolutely ridiculous, ESPECIALLY when you add a bard and shaman to the mix and are talking in terms of passive melee dps.

I'm betting it's also because for one, the Shield Specialist AA (Warriors get 13 ranks of this AA) only improves damage for 1h weapons while using a shield, to be honest this AA needs to be changed to the kind of ability that serves as an Innate version of Furious Bash (witch was seen in a few number of shields in the past) because sooner or later, that 1 handed damage output will seriously dis-balance 2h damage output so much people won't have a reason to use 2 handed weapons anymore. (witch in turn is why Warriors need a "Warlord" version of the Ranger's Scout's Mastery of Blunt/Piercing/Slashing AA).
For two, I don't think the developers (devs for short) at that time period have ever thought of the idea of Warriors using the "Equivalent" to Knight-based 1 handed weapons witch in turn restricts Warriors completely from Duel-Wielding while using such 1 handed weapons (through they will still be allowed to use a Shield), this is something that should be allowed to one day take place.
For three, most Warriors in turn prefer to tank (damage taking since they are designed to take damage) while duel wielding two weapons and they did so often.

I'm not sure if this answers your question but the one thing I'm sure about, some things within EverQuest have to change, this is one of them.

That's essentially what Shield Specialist does.

Put a sword in your primary hand and a shield in your secondary. Check your DPS.

Take the shield out of your secondary hand or add a 0 DMG offhander so that you are only seeing the damage produced by your primary 1H. Check the DPS.

Shield Specialist makes it "150" when using a shield and "100" when DWing. It just doesn't show the DMG improvement (if DMG is what's actually being tweaked, it doesn't have to be to get that outcome) on the weapon's stats.

IMO it would have been better to make shield appropriate Primary Only 1Handers shared by all three heavy plate tanks with AA's and skill determining class different outcomes. Let's keep in mind that Warrior parent class specialization and higher skillcaps (not that we still have many higher skillcaps left) ought not be subverted by giving Knights higher DMG (and therefore capable of VERY nice Cleanses) weapons. That's rather clearly giving with one hand and taking away with the other.

Shared primaries is a clearer more elegant solution. Hopefully that's what they'll do in EQ Next. Kinda late to retro fit something like that in EQ.

Furious Bash was a complete non-starter. While I applaud devs for trying to make shield use more attractive, Furious Bash didn't do the job by a country mile. Love it or hate it, you'll have to admit that Shield Specialist has made a whole lot of Warrior unwilling to forego the enornous advantages of using a shield - a situation that did not exist prior to Shield Specialist.

*Rubs area between eyes with index and thumb fingers, sighing deeply before typing*

- Knight 1handers have like a 35 delay. Warrior weapons (or any other melee weapons for that matter) have like on average 20 delay.
- Warriors have way more offensive capabilities and much higher skill caps (do you see paladins using riposte disciplines? Eh?!)
- Shield Specialist is unbalancing, in my opinion. My 1hander and 2hander have an 80 damage difference, but the damage output is comparatively similar. Warriors shouldn't be using a shield and doing more damage output than with dual wield (again, my opinion), nor should they be using knight weapons.
- Last I heard, using a shield meant you are defensively fighting. Bash? lol... poor bash.

Knights are supposed to hit slower, but harder, than other melee classes. They get spells to keep up with other melee who can kill much faster. I'm pretty sure warriors are doing just fine holding their own in terms of DPS already. Would've been easier to just look up how knights tick than to make a post and have others jeering in their responses. Just look at class DPS outputs... you want to do even more than a paladin now?

Just play a paladin. Know how much it sucks, killing one mob at a time every three minutes? Struggling against five "easy" mobs while another melee (or non-melee in terms of rangers) pull an army and pew pew and riposte everything to death in a jaw-dropping display of class efficiency? (Okay, I'm just ranting at this point, but I'm out of coffee this morning and my cat doodied on the carpet and AJSHGDAHSGDAKHSDGAD)

There is an AA "Shield Specialist" that pretty much increases the damage of the weapon you are using, which is great because late game warriors use a shield now in every situation, you know, because who would ever want to dual wield... /#$%& sigh. Nothing like getting tells asking for Brells when you are standing in the lobby.

And knights get "instant aggro" because their hate spells are basically always up where as a warrior has to twiddle their thumbs if a mob dies before Scorn has refreshed because if Scorn refreshes too quick a warrior will be overpowered in the raid game... /#$%& sigh agin.

Actually the 3 warrior raid wpns in VoA have 23, 23 and 24 delays. Right where they should be. And I wont bother to address the rest of your absurd post.

To the OP, its because we aren't knights. Shifties post describes exactly why we don't need their ratios.

Don't warriors also have a higher damage table than knights as well?

A better question might be 'Why don't Warriors get Knight two-handers?"
Shiftie, do you have any numbers on increase in swings from Knights Advantage?

If they did that I want duel wield for when I want to dps ;P

The three tanks classess are about as equal as they are ever going to be. They all tank comparably warriors still survive as the Raid tank because of defensive. But I don't expect to ever see SOE give a real advantage to warriors outside of raids again so it is what it is.

Giving warriors knight weapons would suddenly turn non-tanking warriors into competative dps classes. That would throw everything into chaos because the class with the best survivability in the game is now a dps contender.


Tanks should stop worrying about dps, because its not their job. Their job is to tank.

Yes, I'll trade you my knight one hander ratio for dual wield.

No takers?

Then stop complaining.

Had SOE provided appropriate for use with a shield primary only weapons for all three heavy plate tanks right from the start (and secondary weapons having less robust ratios, parry skill increasers, and appropriate procs) there wouldn't have been any Warriors are a DPS machine concerns.

Secondary ratios, offhand damage rate, skillcaps, and AA's would have determined Warrior 2H, DW, and S&B damage output both in relation to each other and in Warrior placement in the pure melee DPS hierarchy.

Of course DPS is a Warrior job. It's secondary to tanking, but it's still a characteristic of the class. Would anyone suggest Paladins shouldn't have heals and cures, SK's ought not be able to FD pull, etc. because they're tanks and these things aren't their jobs?

True Knights are hybrids and get characteristics from two parent classes. But lets not forget that Warriors are melee/fighters in heavy armor with sharp pointy swords. I simply insist swords aren't shields, shield use is appropriate for a heavily armored tank, and that massive swords used with a shield aren't feathers - they inflict damage.

It's way to late to adjust EQ to reflect such views - Shield Specialist is as close as we're likely to get. But it's not too late for future products. IF an EQ Next had knights doing their outside of the tank archetype stuff in addition to tanking and Warrior were low damage guardians only, I surefire wouldn't play such a game. Fighters wound.

I overstated the double attack advantage for warriors. My bad, I forgot to mention that with ranger buffs, and worn ferocity mod all classes meet the double attack cap, and should by the parses long forgotten double attack on every round. This includes knight advantage. So while I don't have handy knights advantage parses, we can agree that double attack cap is reached like reasonable men.

Actually... I didn't realize KA was double attack only. Looks like it's the cousin of the melee 'Ferocity' AA. Both are 6 ranks.

Carry on.

I didn't know guilds considered a warriors dps in recruitment. Thats like saying a magician's secondary task is to heal (summon bandages). Warriors could do zero dps, and the only people to care would be a few warriors who want to play a dps class.
If you want dps, you get a dps class. If you want a tank, you get a tank.