a serious attempt at getting ideas from the community for fighter balance(aka threat)

BChizzle wrote:

That is where I and the math disagree with you. As parsing continues to go up, the impact of a +.20 multiplier increase on crit damage is far more effective than a 25% increase on ONE damage type. The more raw damage the non crusader does, the more their crit multiplier differenial increases the results. Right now, a 20k dps guardian and a 30k dps crusader are getting approximately the same effect between the crit multiplier and Knights stance, or 1.8k dps.
See, crusaders are only getting an increase of 7.5% (give or take) of their dps via Knights Stance, while guards get approximately (all subject to actual parses, abilities, etc) of about 10.2% with the crit modifier. It is obvious to see that as the dps parses get bigger, that the impact of the crit chance will get bigger because it is on ALL damage, not just melee damage.
I will agree with you that give us this with 2 handers is down right stupid, I even told the pally that recommended that the same thing. But yet, the calls to nerf this ability kept coming and people down right ignored the other ability that actually provides on a similiar dps amount more damage.

BChizzle wrote:

Plate tanks don't need our avoidance on them, but it is a very, very powerful buff. It's enough of a jump in survivability to be equivalent to the heals provided by an extra healer (though obviously not the cures, buffs, & group heals). It's the difference between having a regular tank and an uber tank. Likewise, we should not need the buff I'm proposing to be effective, but it should be available nonetheless. Otherwise any time you are in a situation with a plate tank and a brawler you will always be better off having the plate tank tank since the brawler can make him so uber.

Jalathan@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Sorry but your math is complete fail. a .20 advantage on the multiplier is only a 10% advantage at 200 crit bonus, it is only a 5% advantage at 400 crit bonus its is only a 2.5% advantage at 800 crit bonus and so on and son on until infinity, however the knight stance multiplier will always be a 25% advantage.

I don't want that contrieved as me saying Guards aren't broken, they obviously are. I can't make specific comments on their abilities as my only guard is very low and I've never gotten one past lvl 25... That being said, I can make one statement, they are not real fun to play. I would rate it similiar to watching paint dry.
One thing I can think of is. Paladins bring some buffs, some heals to a senario to do their job of protecting the group and/or raid, where is the utility for the guardian? He/she is supposed to be 'guarding' the group, protecting them, where is his/her ability to do that? I think that is really what the class is missing (beside a boost to their over all dps). Give them group wide intercepts, give them group wide second chances to block for someone (ie, they throw themselves in front of the mob, forcing it to contend with him) both of which could have agro responses involved. I think they could justify bringing up their dps some, make the class a little more fun to play (not top tier dps, but enough that at least it wouldn't be more fun to go paint the house and then watch the paint dry...)
For Brawlers, they need their DPS upped, just a straight upping of offensive ability. Make their strike through immunity innate and get rid of their stances completely. Give them a temp buff for the mit increase and level out their tanking ability at about the same level as brigands/swashies. Give them some more utility to give them a real reason to be in a raid and drop the nonsense about them being real raid tanks, sorry guys, but with the way SoE has raid tanking it isn't gonna happen without blowing something else up. If they ever set up something other than a straight up, 12/24 people just beating the crap out of a mob mentality for raiding, I could see some options, but with the mentality of mobs just hitting harder with more hit points, avoidance tanking just isn't gonna cut it. There are just too many ways avoidance tanking fails it isn't funny

BChizzle wrote:

The main reason I hated the fighter revamp is the removal of stance dancing that is for sure. Not only that but the sheer mass of hate that fighters could easily pump out by having a single taunt macro was huge and ridiculous, and since DPS went way way down while doing it there was no real reason to push anything other than that one button.
Now if they did stick with stances than agro should be equal no matter which stance you are in. Even now defensive stance drops DPS a good chunk which drops agro...that agro should be made up through raw hate. That alone would make defensive stance much more useful because the 15% mit is nice to get.
However, what is the point? Why not make survivability the single realm of gear (along with other players obviously). I mean there is plenty of +mit gear or gear with +block on it...gear that is already become used very little because you can simply drop down into defensive stance to make up the same amount that having a good tanking BP and shoulders would give you. Take away the option of getting 15% more mit from defensive stance and instead force tanks to wear more defensive gear for longer at least, gear which btw does cause the choice of less DPS. Most tanks I am sure are like me and get the tank gear early and than try and find every way to get out of it.

Jalathan@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Not only is your math horrible but so are your ideas. Brawlers are tanks, learn to live with it.

Bruener wrote:

Making survivability based on gear is a horrible idea becaus eyou can't switch gear in combat. That is the whole point in stances, if you aren't in a tanking role say for example the OT on a single target mob or the 3rd tank in the raid, if the MT goes down you can pop a positional hit a temp then switch into defensive and tank the mob until the MT is back and ready then you can go back to dpsing, doing it by gear gets rid of tanks utility. You would know this if you actually had a class that was gear and stance dependant.

BChizzle wrote:

ummm, wrong.
a .20% advantage on the multipler is extremely powerful, especially since just about everyone in the universe, even in crap gear is at or above 100% crit chance. I would agree with you if crit chances were still down around the 50% range, as that bonus is highly dependent upon the crit chance being high to work.
Let us take a 20k parsing guardian, of that at a 1.5 multiplier (their innate, prior to any other buffs they might have on gear) they would only need to put up only 13333 raw damage (at 100% crit rate). A crusader has to put up significantly more (in the same senario) of 15,385 raw damage to get the same end dps number (without KS, just pure crit bonus here). While for a crusader, Knight stance, even on the BEST parsing pallies will only be about 7.5% of their total dps (25% of 30%). now, on a 20k dpsing pally and a 20k dpsing guard. The crit bonus gives them a total of 2k dps, while KS gives the crusader 1.5k dps. That puts the non crusader at a 500dps advantage (at that point alone).
At 30k, the guard above now only has to put up 20,000 raw damage to hit the 30k dps mark, while a crusader has to put up 23,076. Now we are upto a 3k difference. How much of that 30k crusader dps is from knights stance? 2,250. Wow, that difference is now 750dps. For every 10k in dps that is put out, you will see that 250dps increase (again, based on basic formulas that keep all outside factors the same, every fight is different and will parse differently, but in general, this is pretty close).
Now, if a crusader can find a way to get their melee damage above 30% of their parse and still parse high, then that advantage begins to wane, but I've noticed my parses tend to put my melee at 20-25% of my parse and I've heard of others hitting the 30% mark. I've not personally heard of higher ones though.
NOW, the issue comes down the fact that guards are well behind in the dps area. Does that make the dps that a crusader put out as wrong? Since when is the guardian the end all, be all of benchmarking for what other classes can be capable of? Personally, from what I've played of a guardian, there is hardly a more boring class save a shaman.

BChizzle wrote:

Did I say they weren't? No. I said the mechanics don't suit them as tanks. But I do believe they never should of been tanks in the first place.

Jalathan@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Again your math fails. Let me see if I can better explain this very simple concept for you.
At 200 crit bonus for a crusader the warrior/brawler would be at 220 crit bonus. That is a 10% difference. The Crusader would still keep the 25% auto attack bonus.
At 400 crit bonus for a crusader the warrior/brawler would be at 420 crit bonus. That is a 5% difference. The Crusader would still keep the 25% auto attack bonus.
At 800 crit bonus for a crusader the warrior/brawler would be at 820 crit bonus. That is a 2.5% difference. The Crusader would still keep the 25% auto attack bonus.
Now if one were to assume that auto attack damage will maintain its spot at roughly 25-40% of total dps well you can see that the knight stance advantage will become absolutely huge over an extra .20 crit bonus as things progress. In fact we already see its advantage assuming 33% auto attack dps at 240 crit bonus because (This calculation might be a bit over your head)
Crit bonus Advantage 8.3%*1=0.083 (The 8.3% is using crusaders at 240 crit mod vs 260 for warrior/brawler)
Knight Stance 25%*1/3=0.083
Of course these calculations completely ignore the DPS that doesn't crit into the equation (IE Procs) and the reality is auto attack damage is a much larger % of our total critable damage meaning the break even point is much much lower then the 240 crit mod I am pointing out here.

Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:

The jump is not anything more then a plate tank putting their avoid on another plate tank.

BChizzle wrote:

Sorry to quote myself...
I'd like to just point out while this clearly displays that at some point knights stance will need to be changed I don't think it is an issue right now.
If I was guessing SOE will eventually change it into something like "Adds 50% of your total strength to your melee hit damage." As proven many times in this game % modifiers end up being way OP over time.

BChizzle wrote:

Ok, I can see the basic of what you are saying and I stand corrected on that amount, but even then it isn't a game breaking difference, even at the extremely high end. The problems go much deeper than KS vs Crit (which was my point)
I don't approve of your condensending statements as to what is and isn't above my head, a simple correction of the formula would of been sufficient. It is easy to get to the wrong results when you have the wrong formula, I had been lead to believe that the crit multiplier was just taht, a multipler of damage (ie, instead of getting a crit of damage x1.3, others were getting a crit of damage x1.5). I must of missed the post where it was officially explained.
The way I see it is we have two problems.
1) Guardians are about as much fun to play as watching grass grow. This needs to be fixed. They need to have more to do, bring more to the table and even if they don't bring the same dps, bring the same level of usefuless to a raid (either more surviviablity, more group buffs (I still like the group intercept and group shielding buffs, I think those would help a great deal, not all they need, but it would make a nice part).
2) Brawlers have the raid tanking ability of that above mentioned grass. Which, in my opinion, is where they should be, with more dps, some temp mit buffs and the ability to tank as well as a rogue. So, again, that is more a problem with the perception that SoE has built that brawlers are ever going to be able to tank in a system that every single tanking mechanic works against them. Right now, avoidance tanking in raids (and even some instances) simply is not an option, the mobs hit for too much and without the ability to mitigate it, you become one hit wonders. it isn't a disparagement of you as a player, it is the combat mechanics that cause you the problems. Only problem to that is, if they fix it so that you can tank as well, then so can just about every scout that can strap on a shield and get their avoidance through the roof.
Honestly, the only real chance brawlers have a chance of being raid tanks is if SoE moves away from the tank/spank (with/without script) 24 man beat the crap out of a single mob (or small group of mobs) in the same room where the only difference that mob really has is how many hit points it has and how hard it hits. This is not a disparagement of you, vinka or anyone else's (inlcuding my wife who plays a monk) ability to play, but if you can't even admit that the cards are stacked against you so high you can't see the top, then you are even more delusional than you claim we crusaders are.

Jalathan@Antonia Bayle wrote:

1) I never said it was over your head I said it might be.
2) Crit bonus is a multiplier, you are correct in your thinking that you get a 1.3 multiplier while non crusaders get 1.5 multiplier however the point your are still missing is that as that multiplier increases it does so in a linear way, the initial advantage isn't 20% it is 15% and it shrinks as crit bonus mod gets higher.
3) You have no clue as to what brawlers are capable of. Brawlers can and are tanking raid encounters including hardmodes and can stand and take damage with plate tanks, they might not be the absolute best but every tank archetype can do the job of standing there and getting hit. Brawlers problem in this expansion is agro generation while tanking vs the AE tanks whos agro generation is just too much to handle for brawlers.

BChizzle wrote:

1) you insunated it heavily
2) and you seem to keep missing the point that Knights stance is only a percentage of a percentage of dps. All they have to do to reduce it, should they choose to, is to prevent the dps of weapons from going up as fast as the dps of abilities. Instantly, the amount of dps that is effected by the crit bonus goes up, while the dps benefit of KS goes down. It is a numbers game and regardless, it is overly immaterial even high up. At best, KS will be 10% of a crusaders damage and that is if their auto attack is 40% of there overall dps. The lower that auto attack % is, the lower the benefit of KS and there are a ton of ways they can alter that aspect.
3) Again, I don't think I ever said you COULDN'T do it, just that you couldn't do it efficiently, I also believe that I stated that you shouldn't be able to do it as well, but again, that isn't COULDN'T do it either. I remember about 3 years ago, before TSO, Paladins could tank every raid in the game, but they were always the 3rd choice for MT and often laughed at because even though they could do it, Guards and Zerkers were always better at it. So I understand where you are, in that regard. But likewise, when raids only need 2, sometimes 3 tanks, the logic of having 6 tank classes is down right stupid. I'd rather have a way that I can get a brawler into a raid and have them being effective, productive and useful than forcing them into a role they are neither designed for, nor the game is designed for them to be in. Not when there are 4 better choices already.
Will there be brawlers who are exceptions to the rule? sure, just as there were pallies back in the Guard/Zerker days who were exceptions and did what others said they couldn't do (I was one of those back then tanking what others said I couldn't), but we were held back because I wasn't a guard and I knew it and I know it now. That is just the way it is.

I think in the end, we all want the same basic thing. 24 classes that all have a role in the scheme of things. Who all bring things to a group and/or raid to make them desirable.
But we all have to face reality here, there are only so many slots to go to fighters, period. 2 and sometimes 3. There is NO way we will ever have a reason for 6 desired tanks in that senario. That is all we are alloted, 2/3 slots.
Even in a fighter heavy raid,
there will be more scouts (4 bards, 3 rogues, 2 preditors)
More mages (4 enchanters, 2 Sorcerers and a conjurer)
More healers (3 clerics, 2 shamans)
2 tanks... that is all that there is left room for, to take the third (which is unnecessary for most fights) you have to kick someone else out, someone who will not be as able to fill in the role that is being kicked out as well as the one getting kicked out.
If you want to attack what is wrong with this game, look at that. You need 4 bards and 4 enchanters and 2 tanks... Typically you want 3 dirges and only 2 tanks... 3 of one class, yet you only want 2 from a whole archtype.
There is no way you can make 6 fighter classes desirous in that senario, EVER. Unless at least 2 of them become non fighter classes and can fill in one of the other roles and provide some utility that the other can't.

Jalathan@Antonia Bayle wrote:

2) Knight stance is a straight % multiplier it will always be 25% if you know anything about how things work you would understand why it will become a problem in the future and will be changed, every ability like this has seen the same nerfs eventually. I am not calling for a nerf on it I am just mearly pointing out to you that it will happen.
3) On a monk I have tanked more things then any tank on your server plates included. Your idea of what a brawler can and cannot do is based upon ignorance.
Ammmusingly a quick search of your character turns up a toon in legendary who cleary does not raid. I don't really care that you aren't a raider and this isn't some sort of elitist remark, but you really aren't in raids so you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to brawler tanks. I'd suggest since you are on AB you group with Vinka or even ask her friends in Bloodthorn whether a brawler can tank effectively or not.

BChizzle wrote:

He just suffers from the same ignorance that 95% of the player base does that brawlers don't have surviveability. What we have is severe lack of agro management versus other tank classes, and an offensive stance that is the equivalent of just having an illusionist in the group, and about as effective when there is an illusionist in the group as a large pile of poo. They should have removed the haste cap when they removed the potency cap and it would have fixed our offensive stance, either that or remove the innate dual wield delay penalty when in offensive, either of which would have made an effect that is at least useful in offensive without a stance focus adorn.

BChizzle wrote:

He just suffers from the same ignorance that 95% of the player base does that brawlers don't have surviveability. What we have is severe lack of agro management versus other tank classes, and an offensive stance that is the equivalent of just having an illusionist in the group, and about as effective when there is an illusionist in the group as a large pile of poo. They should have removed the haste cap when they removed the potency cap and it would have fixed our offensive stance, either that or remove the innate dual wield delay penalty when in offensive, either of which would have made an effect that is at least useful in offensive without a stance focus adorn.

BChizzle wrote:

You are actually incorrect, I do raid. More pick up than anything at this point, I don't have the time to be a 'serious' raider these days. I was out of raiding since shortly after RoK came out until here recently, so I'm having to go back and pick up gear to go foward as I was completely out of the game for TSO. Between that and an extremely bad RNG run, I've not gotten the pieces I need to get my TSO t3 set to move up into better stuff and being a tank, it is extremely hard to get instance runs without the better gear due to survivablity issues. It is hard to get the gear to tank when you need the gear to tank type of thing, so your options tend to be to step backwards and get the higher gear of a tier earlier, which is what I'm doing.
It may suprise you to know that I'm glad you can tank that stuff. I may not think you should be able to, but since SoE says you are a tank, it is good to know that they have at least made it possible for you to do so. It doesn't seem to jive with all the posts I see on Brawlers and since my guild has no brawlers (that raid) and I raid with no brawlers from outside the guild, the only thing I do have to go on is what I see in these threads and all I ever see is brawlers complaining about their lack of ability to raid tank... So, forgive me for not knowing that and I'm happy to be corrected. At least now I know to give no credit to those posts complaining that brawlers can't tank.