Doesn't it sort of depend on who else you have in the group? If you have a Shaman, then a monk might be the best tank, as wards completely ignore AC when determining damage, but the monk has high avoidance. If you have a Cleric class with reactive heals, then a Berserker would probably be better. For druid HOT spells, it's hard to say, but probably Berserker because you get hit more often but for less. With a monk you'd take one big hit, and the HOT might not heal them back up fast enough.
One thing you all seem to be forgetting is the role of "healer" is handled differently in EQ2. Cleric classes and Shaman classes are NOT the same thing. Clerics use (for lack of a better term) "physical" heals to keep the tank going, ie when the hp goes down, the cleric heals it back up. Because of this, the heavier tank classes make for a safer tank if a cleric is doing the healing. The cleric has more time to respond to a loss of hp and heal em back up. Shaman use WARDS as a MAJOR portion of their role as healer. Since a Monk will get hit FAR less often than a heavy tank, the wards will last significantly longer than they would on any heavy class. Now if the ward runs out and the shaman isn't paying attention, sure, you can be in trouble...but for a shaman class, a Monk makes the more efficient tank than a heavy. Druid classes depend on regen spells to assist in healing, for this reason a heavy makes a good tank for them. Not much point in regen'ing a tank that isn't getting hit. As for aggro, I'm not sure why this is being argued...monks can hold aggro just fine. Zerkers and Guardians get Hold the Line, which may be the single best tanking skill line in the game at the moment. For our part, a tanking Monk gets the Hand Clap line, which AoE taunts as well as interrupting all casters.
Brawlers dont get a skill equivalent to Hold the Line. Hand Clap ( or Jeer for the Bruiser ) is the regular upgrade to Shout. Guardians and Berserkers get their own upgrades at the same level.
Yes Monks TANK. That is their role. At the moment id say that a zerker will outank a monk by a bit. But what happens as a monk/bruiser goes up in the levels and his agaility and deflection are sky hi then they will be even. I think monks and brusers dont really start to shine till the 30s+. I love the reply moorguard
To clarify the whole monks/wards thing. Monks are good tanks but we rely on avoidance rather than mitigation. What does this mean? It means that (using example numbers, not real ones) a Berzerker would get hit for an average of 150 per hit from a given mob, while a monk will get hit for 300 average but only get hit half as often. Most Clerics don't like this, as it makes it harder for them to heal, as the evil RNG means that if the monk gets unlucky they can get hit 3-4 times in a row and take sudden massive damage. Shamans love this however, because of how Ward works. Ward blocks the unmitigated damage. So although the Berzerker only takes 150 per hit, it knocks 300 off of the ward. So Ward blocking 300 damage on a Berzerker = 600 points from the ward Ward blocking 300 damage on a Monk = 300 points from the ward Clerics like plate tanks, Shamans like Brawler tanks. I like the fact that this leads to 2 alternate tanking strategies. On low level mobs (green - white) avoidance works very well and one ward on a monk will last a long time and lead to very efficient healing. On Yellow mobs, avoidance and mitigation seem about even. On Orange and above, avoidance isn't very good (the mobs bonus to hit means we get hit too much, even with the avoidance boost) and Plate + Cleric is more efficient. All this is, of course, my opinion, and should be taken with a pinch of salt. The game is far too early yet to work these things out for sure. Zadkiel.
Monk + Shaman = awesome tank Zerk/Guard + Templar = awesome tank It depends on how the group is structured, period. I've MT all the way up to 40 and I've also ST and been DPS, it depends on what the group is doing and how the group is made up. Its like Moorgard said "all fighters are tanks, none are better than others, it all depends on the situation". I understand that you guys have 18k hp and 5k ac and PLATE armor and its hard for you to understand that Monks can tank just as well. *pats their head* Its ok big guys, you are still very useful and great tanks
I think saying monks tank better than berserkers...is the core discussion here...and again its a silly comment. Message Edited by OverlordMLF on 12-19-2004 08:27 PM
My big question, if monks/bruisers are equal to the plate tanks when it comes to tanking, is why do they do so much more supposed damage than those plate tanks? I mean, isnt it supposed ot be a trade off...damage for survivability. If its not, and the bruiser class is putting out alot more damage than the plate tanks, plus tanking the same as them, then sumething is fundamentally flawed, because whats teh point of being a plate tank ?
The archetype system is made so that all fighters can tank the same, depending upon the situation. Situation being: mobs being fought, group members, etc. There is no hands down best tank in the game, sorry.
I'd still like to see any evidence, that Brawlers do more damage than say, Berserkers. Especially when fighting multiple mobs ( Runnyeye comes to mind... ). Also, in my limited experience ( low 30ies ) Brawlers indeed can tank quite well, but not equal to a plate tank. We'll have to wait and see what the forthcoming patch brings.
er, no best tank in the game? Please tell me the point in guardian then? If they tank just the same as everyone else then they're just a fighter class with rubbish DPS compared to the others... what a value they'd be to a group...
They are best in a given situation, which is of course exactly what I said. That is how the archtype system works. That is why there is even subclasses, if there wasn't they'd only have like 6 classes. Guardian: tank Wizard: caster Scout: dps Priest: healer But it doesn't work that way. The archetype system lets players expand on their basic role WHILE keeping that role the same, in order to balance the game and give players variety at the same time. I understand that this is a very hard concept for those of you coming from EQ1 to grasp, but that is how this game was designed, built and implemented. Each subclass from a specific archtype can fill their role, whether it be DPS, tanking, healing, etc. Its HOW they fill it, and the situations where they are best at it that make them, and this game, unique.
Of course in certain settings healers and rogues make adequate tanks too. I think its safe bet to make taht if you want to be a main tank...pick a class with a shield, plate and good agro holding skils If you dont want to....have fun running around convincing people taht is the case. Message Edited by OverlordMLF on 12-20-2004 12:55 PM
Youre not getting it. I like to think of the ability to melee as a sliding scale, one end being totally defensive, the other end of the scale being totally offensive. Totally offensive little defence-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------totally defensive little offence scouts fighters Within in the figher sub class, there should be some give and take as the slider moves from defensive to offensive. As the fighter moves toward scout type DPS, his TANKING skills, his survivability, his DEFENCE should drop accordingly. If they do not, if the fighter in question can still crank out better DPS than ANY OTHER FIGHER and still TANK AS GOOD AS THEM, then whats the point of playing any other fighter? Besides for flavor reasons, roleplay, etc. Edit - got rid of all the dumb quotes Message Edited by jhessal69 on 12-20-2004 02:49 PM
I get it just fine you all are rehursing and preaching the Morguard statement and manual Class descriptions over and over...say it enough and its fact i suppose is the mantra you want to practice. I said it early and I will say it again...agreeing with your philosophy.... of sliding scale... I did say Assassins and Wizards can tank jsut fine..its all about what youa re fighting and if you have the waste o space mystic in your group or not ;p Enough already....you all are preaching to the wrong crowd....we are a class taht will not be forming a group and looking to invite a monk to tank whiel we play Dps... Get it? Go preach this "monks are MT's" to some non tank class. We dont buy it and you dont need us to buy it. Message Edited by OverlordMLF on 12-20-2004 04:22 PM
Just becasue you call yourself the "OverlordMILF" doesnt automatically make you the spokesman for all Berzerkers. If you were smart you would love to have a Monk in your group so you could intervene on them while they hold aggro... ever tried this? It's a thing of beauty. Of course there way too much tank ego floating around to ever get someone to do this... MT's want to be the center of attention, all of us do, it goes against all of our instincts as players to actually put the Aggro holding philosphy aside for a creative solution that is far superior to just one tank. Monks deflection with a Plate class intervening on them is incredible.
Actually I never said I was the spokesman for all bersekrers..or pretended to be..thats your assumption..run with it...But understand this is the BERSERKER boards and it seems you have plenty of "my class is uber" to do on the monk boards. As for putting intervene on a monk...umm ya k.......But Ill let you confuse Berserker sklills with Gaurdian skills.. Grab a plate class to take hits for you...grab a shamman to reduce the hits you take...and go to town...again...we arent on a crusade here to prevent monks from being MTs. You see Bersekers thinking they are MT's being Ego? ya right... I'd rather dps while another plate class tanks anyday....in fact I prefer it....I dont have to pull..I get to play Dps..and its more fun..so your assumption about my postings is incorrect...feel free to continue to turn false assumptions into insults however. Ego has nothing to do it...maybe when you post its about ego..and believe everyone posts like you..but thats not the case here. I am blunt...I dont post for your liking or others ...and I say it how I see it right or wrong. If you dont like.../ignore is your friend. But if you do chose to troll other class boards telling them how they should view your class you might want to get use to it. And actually OverlordMLF comes from DAoC where I played for on Morgan La Fay for 3 years or so..I am not from EQ1 and have no preconceived notions about what a monk or warrior should be. Message Edited by OverlordMLF on 12-21-2004 06:25 AM
I wouldn't be so quick to put Monks on the bottom of the list. While Berserker's hold aggro better, Monks seem to do a much better job at not taking damage. I've always heard that the "heavy armor > light armor" debate was dropped in an interview ages ago - It's true in EQ1, but in EQ2 1000 AC is 1000 AC, doesn't matter if you have it in platemail or a nightie. If anyone has hard proof one way or the other, share I was in an AQ3 group in Stormhold, a strange group composition of myself (23 Fury), a 22 Wizzy, and THREE monks (20, 22, 23). I had no problem being the only healer, and not once did anyone drop into the red in over two dozen fights. Then a Berserker joined the team, level 22, and assumed the role of main tank. We were fighting the same things (a variety of blue ^^ and white ^^, with the occasional yellow ^^), with one more group member, and this guy was taking way more damage compared to the Monks that were taking turns tanking before. Fighting went from semi-relaxed, to frantic chain healing on the initial pull, and frequent use of effloresce. Twice he dropped unconscious and by with some luck I pulled him back from the brink of death both times before he died. There's more to tanking than just damage mitigation... This Berserker was great at dishing out the damage, and second to none at holding the mob's attention (very important!), but despite his platemail, he was indeed taking more damage than the Monks I had to worry about prior. There's a lot of variables in my story of course - Equipment, stats, using/not using abilities, pure luck, etc. But just giving another side to the debate from this healer's perspective. All that said, I'd group with this guy again in a heartbeat - He was one of the best MT's I've played with. He knew the lay of the land, always made sure everyone was in peak form for the next fight, etc. etc. In all, he was a natural leader, which is part of a tanks job IMO. Just from a healer point of view, the Monks were easier to keep standing Message Edited by Bad_Mojo on 12-21-2004 11:55 AM
Yep, Bad Mojo, that's the point of subclasses etc.... There are times (considering group makeup) when a different subclass will be more efficient than the other, not only in tanking, but in every main game role. Your group was more efficient with the monk tanking because you are a Fury, if you were a Templar/Inquisitor then you would have likely found the Berserker to be the better tank for your group. All fighters are tanks and all priests are healers, but there is no cookie cutter solution, some combinations are more efficient than others. Message Edited by SomeDudeCRO on 12-21-2004 01:26 PM
I agree with some of your assesment Bad Mojo, that the tanks have to be the leaders and know the lay of the land and know how to pull. Some monks are no doubt better at that then some zerkers. Zerks do get hit for a lot at times. Thing is we can take the hits when we do get hit. At level 22 you don't get hit for much. I am level 36 now and I have 3k hps when buffed with 2100 AC or so. I get smacked on some occasions for 500 on a barrage, whereas my cleric friend gets smacked from the same barrage for 600. A wizard will get hit for 750 barrage. Now, That takes 1/6th of my health and about 70% of the wizards health. I don't get hit often for that, and with reckless counter I normally hit the guy back for about 124. I get hit more than a monk, no doubt, but I can absorb the hit much better and deal damage back when it is inflicted, to help hold agro. This would be fighting a level 41 mob in RE. Now, if I fight a level 34 mob (at 36), it won't touch me but a little. Thing is that the more I get hit the more I counter, the berserk I am which means I hold agro better. In fact, on a non-bugged mob or group of mobs, I will never lose agro even with a wizard chain nuking AEs. Agro management, IMO makes the best tank. -Karg 36 Zerk Lavastorm
