Since Fighter's get Recklessness, what the point of a DPS class now?

What play environment was this buff designed for and what's the point of being any DPS class now for 95% of the content? My Sorc has been my main for years but now if I want to DPS, I'm better off just logging in my SK. The downside to Recklessness stance is only really seen on raid named if tanking. For solo, grouping, and most of the raid content, what's the downside to being a fighter now when you can tank anything while doing the same DPS as a Mage or Scout?
Below are 3 full Underdepths runs since the patch using the same group. I had UT and Bolster on Vicah (a warlock), Gaarysal (a SK) did not. Had the buffs been on him, I would of been absolutely smashed into the ground. We both have the same baseline gear of using faction armor and hm heroic jewelry.
So, why bother continue playing my Sorc when I can do the same dps AND tank on a SK?

If tanks are now able to DPS, why DPS-classes are not able to tank?
And... if DPS-classes are able to tank, why the separation of classes? This is a rhetorical question to developers
If a player starts to play a tank, it must understand their role !

SF = Everbers and Everinqs
DoV = Everbraw and Everinqs
AoD = same
GU 64 = Evertanks... and Everinqs

inspire1444568 wrote:

Swashy & Brig both used to be able to tank, using their Stamina trees & a round shield. But that was long ago, & has since fallen by the wayside.

Freejazzlive wrote:

I have personally never witnessed the mythical rogue tanks that people like to talk about. A single AA line does not a tank make. It's like how people thought monks were a DPS class just because we have a couple AAs that reduce threat and hate positions.
Any content a rogue could tank, didn't really require a tank.

The_Cheeseman wrote:

I never mentioned anything about content.

Haciv wrote:

The worst and funniest part of the whole Reckless thing is the all the fighters are in serious denial and 100% justification mode in support of how brilliant the SOE development team is and how right they got this one...
I have many ALT, I raid on many of the ALTs I have, 2 or those are SKs and one is a Brawler, my DPS classes will most likely far behind in the priority list under these conditions. I do expect to see my ward healer get a lot more action though.
I was never dumb enough to roll al Brig or Swashy, I -hated- the class hat , and I'll use Reckless as my justification becasue I'd just have to delete it at this point as long as it wasn't of my 90+ crafters.

There really isn't a need for rouges anymore. Maybe bring in a brig on a progression but they are not really needed vs the DPS and safety you would get from running a fighter in that spot.

I love the idea of classes/styles being able to fill multiple rolls.
Unforunately only enacting it for SOME classes was a mistake to say the least.
Really wish SoE would stop using the excuse of this being a 'living, breathing' MMO to push out content in unfinished chunks. I can just imagine phrases like "we'll just finish it later" is thrown around in those offices constantly.
It's not wreckless tank vs. dps, its Class who can DPS AND main tank vs. DPS. We've already successfully used wrecklessness fighters on bosses several times. Not tanking, but just in the raid doing DPS. So any 'it's just for trash' lines are from a place of ignorance and delusion.
Who wants to bet something very similar to this will be in EQ Next? It's sequel-testbed all over again. I remember it all too well when EQ1 started getting huge revamps that just happen to resemble mechanics that ended up in EQ2.

I didnt think SOE was really going to introduce Rekclessness into live server, but they did.
Recklessness should be removed completely.
Maybe warriors and brawlers with recklessness dont matter so much.
But SK's DPS is really crazy for now.
SK can parse almost as much as sorceror, which had been predicted by many people.
Cuz it is a very easy math.
Melee DPS + non-melee DPS　× 2 ≒ DPS on recklessness roughly.

Solution 1 = Remove Recklessness completely ( i recommend this )
Solution 2 = Tone down Recklessness and adjust it
Solution 3 = Let every arch-type use Recklessness

i love how everyone told the devs that this was going to be bad and they ignored everyone.




so either every facerolling crusader is THE BEST PLAYER ever and the dps are morons or this ability is stupid broken..

Koleg@Unrest_old wrote:

As soon as Recklessness appeared on Test I immediately voiced my dissent and explained in detail why I believed it to be a flawed concept. Not every fighter-player thinks that Recklessness is a good idea. Unfortunately, SOE doesn't seem to be listening to those of us who actually know what we're talking about.

I hardly play my Guardian anymore ....and Guardian really is one of the least effected by this Reckless stance.....but when it was first introduced it should have been obious to anyone with a clear...non-selfish brain that it was a bad idea and frankly uneeded.

There is no reason why you can not raid now with one Guardian, let's be generous and say eight healers and thirteen crusaders and crush all content. Imagine all the thirteen crusaders all parsing 200K+ minimum. Eight healers are there just to get off the raid killing dots that SoE decided there needed to be to get more healers into raids. I have no clue what SoE's thinking was on this since they don't share thier thought process (or in this case lack of thought process). It was a stupid idea that tons of people had warned them about, which they decided to ignore. Not sure how long this is going to last because to tell you the truth I didn't think the Monk as an MT was going to last long. So many classes are now seriously deminished, some to the point of being lucky that they are already in a raiding guild. I'm a troub and we have been marginal players for a long time now and the new recklessness really doesn't hurt or help my place in a raid. But I sure hate seeing how desondent a lot of my dps class friends are. SoE has shoved this down your throats without caring how you (non-tank dps types) are being effected. Sorry but all I can tell you from a troubs point of view, deal with it case this is SoE's long term plan that they spent a boat load of time and money on. Don't look for any relief any time soon.

Jeepned2 wrote:

Parsing 200k without recklessness, in fact I was able to parse 200k on a mob before I raided PoW. Not saying this to brag, just kind of pointing out that this person is just overly emotional and not trying to understand where a tank is DPS wise. If anything they really need to make this stance more viable for zerk/Guard. Its been less than a week and you all think its broken. I also dont think you understand what a raid really needs to contend in this game, if you think its a 6 crusader set up, obviously you are just trolling and want some sort of response to your negative remarks.
And as far as numbers go, remember when a class was viable based on the spells and abilities that they had and their ability timing on casting them? Because you clearly dont, and most people here dont. It must be the numbers of dps that classes put out that makes them important on raids, not the buffs they give others, not the heals, not the amazing power feeds, debuffs. Just the DPS that people complain about thats all thats important to people here. ( this does not apply to rangers, they obviously need more than focus aim at the moment to help the group/raid out)
The funny thing is I doubt there was as much complaining about this when the game came out and parsing wasnt really existant. I wonder why people loved the game so much then..... Maybe just maybe because people just liked playing what they liked playing. Shocking, i know..

Haciv wrote:

Same thing happened with Beastlords. Better DPS and more functionality/flexibility than any of the T1 DPS classes.
Oh well

Fendaria

japanfour wrote:

yes tanks have been doing too much dps for a long time. they should all be lower on dps than every single mage and scout (all utility included).

the premise of these archtypes is that they cannot take a hit, so in return they hurt it faster.

tanks CAN take hits. in exchange for having this ability, they hurt mobs slower. its a fair trade and makes things even.

except eq2 has aggro broken and relies on dps to hold aggro

the above poster proves me point. you have someone coming on here seeing a reckless tank matching a buffed sorc, and his response is hey so what i put up similar numbers before reckless, before pow.

the fighter archtype is broken. its all over the place with its fingers in all the roles, even before reckless, and the undisputed tanks to boot.

now they can keep tanking and do very respectable dps. this is either the end of the class system as we know it (other classes can jump to new major roles), or else the fighter archtype is now a prestige archtype. better than all the others.

i see the need to get more fighters in, it just needs to be in a utility capacity, NOT as a dps. the dps market is saturated with frustration already over addition of beastlord. fighters new stance should be a utility stance that doesnt compete with (buffs differently) bards or chanters.

each group needs 2 utility, a chanter and a bard. yet there are only 4 utility classes out of 24 (taking up 8 in raid). this is the best role for tanks new stance and its the least saturated market. meanwhile, fighters are 6 classes out of 24 (taking up 3 in raid).

from a design perspective, utility is not one of the big 3 (tank, heal, dps), and is the best choice for an alternate role a stance could give. crossing roles in the big 3 destroys the core purpose of having classes.

if you look at enjoyment of playing, there is a gap for utility. if ANYONE simply gets a new role added to their archtype it should help address this recruitment issue.

there are so many reasons a utility stance is the right move, from recruitment, to group/raid slots, to niche filling. as well as not ruining class system by violating big 3.

ratbast wrote:

Ideally what should the best tank parse? I dont think that anything but T1 DPS should be topping the parse, I think utility classes should be competing with tanks atleast when they arent in relentless, I think that relentless dps should be inbetween utility and a DPS focused class. Thats just my opinion based on what content I play and how I play personally, so naturally I like the stance and support it. I am just saying what you think should be in this game is nothing more than an opinion. Show why you think what. instead of "HMM THIS SHOULD BE HERE AND THAT SHOULD BE THERE BECAUSE I SAID SO"
I understand the difference between the classes. I just dont think this change is as grave as people make it out to be. I also think its too early to pass all of this judgement, I think people should really test it and kind of reserve judgement untill then.
DPS based hate has been around norrath since eq1. I doubt they will make it any different. People like doing damage, hate gain is an excuse for a fighter to do its job and enjoy being able to damage things at the same time.
I believe that the stance is a utility to a group or a raid. Because it shifts the purpose of a tank to suit something else, hopefully decreasing the timesink on some encounters.
Each group does not need a chanter and a bard. Its nice and all, but its not always needed. Usually one of the two will do for any heroic content, and most Hardmode group content. Ideal group make up should be looked at on an encounter to encounter basis instead of this general ideal of group makeup. Another problem that I see here is this generalization of how people think this game needs to be played. Its silly to throttle the versatility of something because of what people think works or doesnt work based on their opinions on how the game must be played.
I dont agree with you on your design perspective. These 3 roles arent supposed to be exclusive IMO, I am a healing tank, that provides utility, but I havent been the top choice for hardmode stuff ,groups or raiding at first. Yet back before this stance, no one was complaining about paladins being able to heal rez dps and tank. I just think your idea on these roles being so rigidly cut is not the way to go.
I dont think that this was added to boost tank recruitment in raiding, and I think just adding something cool isnt the way to go. I do think however that Troubadors and coercers need more fun abilities that make them enjoy the class more. I have never seen such a high turnover rate in anyother class. I just feel that people just dont enjoy those two classes in PVE. PVP is another story though..
Maybe for a troub or a coercer yes. I dont care about the big 3 being seperate, I understand the focus of it in each archetype, I just dont get people that want tanking traits to be exclusive to tanks and vice versa. some encounters in this game dictate versatility and every class needs what it can get to work with the encounter and succeed.

Honestly I my gripe isn't about fighters DPSing, my gripe is about them still being able able to stay alive for a sustained period of time with agro while in the stance. IMO the should die faster then a mage if they get agro. Block should be forced to 0, mit and avoidance should be slashed by no less then 35% and their heath should take a hit too.

japanfour wrote:

Ultimately, equal to the second best healer. I'd say the best healer but as far as DPS healers go Inquisitors are just as broken. Tank hate should have -NEVER- been based on the same mechanic as DPS. It was a cop-out and the "lazy" way for SOE dev's to build the threat system, becasue they can globally apply it rather than building two different measurements.

I do have to say... Reckless Hate Modifiers are fun to play with now at the very least. Having Peaceful links on your tanks if kind of funny for a Coercer. Reckless + Enranging Demeanor is almost a wash but will still stack with Dirge/Assassin Hate. So even in Reckless a good/smart fighter can easily remain with +100% Hate Mod or drop down to -100% if they so choose, which would be the +/- caps.