Why are SKs so much more powerful than Warriors?

steelbadger wrote:

He switched. Yes. His Guardian is also naked.

Darkonx wrote:

Is he REALLY naked, or just naked because EQ2Players can't be bothered to update to include items from an expansion until the next expansion?

Kurgan@Everfrost wrote:

He's still the best tank on that server naked tbh.

SKs and Pallies are more powerful than warriors because SKs and Pallies are better than warriors. true fact

there we have it. the truth.

juggalo0385 wrote:

Yep. We all know it. Just wish SOE would address it.

Are Crusaders a Hybrid class in EQ2?

They melee, cast spells, and heal so... yea.

Then by the very meaning of hybrids in fantasy based games, they should not expect to fill the roles of the classes they are derived from as well as the parent class.

Toranx@Crushbone wrote:

Crusaders are hybrids by definition. Problem that ensued is the notion "Crusaders are part time tanks and it would be better to wait for a Warrior class tank." Or "Hey, we'll take a crusader for now but when a warrior is LFG we're gonna drop you for him/her." Once upon a time SK's had a running joke, "You couldnt spell suck without SK." In fact 2 expansions ago there was absolutely zero need or desire to even bring a Crusader into a raid guild cuz all you needed was a Warrior class or 2. Crusaders were paper tanks.
SOE's vission is that each class can do what the other can, but in different ways. Over balancing and re-balancing of the classes and their abilities, leads us to where we are today... The only class now that has any major issues is Guardians and group encounters. Paladins, SK's and Berzerkers all perform well. Guardians are the single target beasts among tanks.
So your statement on paper is sound, the problem is it doesnt sell.

BChizzle wrote:

it says his gear was stripped for battleground exploits.

Khatiru@Butcherblock wrote:

Yay.

ok i've been compiling parses for like a week and a half, and i have an answer, but the answer has been here the whole time. since long before the current expansion, ppl have been saying, in truth, that auto attack counts for less of SK's overall parse than other things. contrarily, a zerk's auto attack counts for the majority of his/her parse. why is that ? well that's easy: all things being equal, weapon, mob, buffs, etc, they both toons will do equal auto attack damage (not counting crit mults, because 1) this disparity has been here since tso and 2) the crit mult difference is too low to bridge the gap, read the whole thing to understand why) but an sk's spells will do significantly more damage. so, auto attack damage being, say, 4k dps for both tanks, but while the sk pulls another 6k from spells/procs, the zerk pulls 3-4k from spells and procs. i parsed 7 raids and there's just no denying it. sk spells >> zerk ca's. by a wide margin. for my parse, 1 of my top 9 dps abilities is a ca. the rest are procs/pom/cob/etc. for an sk, it's like 5 of 9. this will be easy for anyone to parse out. check it out. yes i know warriors got a higher crit mult in the new expansion. but, the bottom line, it wasn't enough. we need like 10 more.

The root of the problem is requiring DPS to hold aggro. It's got all of you so worried about the SKs dps numbers you forget your job shouldn't require ANY dps. Its a design flaw.

i know this. but it is what it is

Tenka@Nagafen wrote:

Your 1) is wrong, The disparity has NOT been there since TSO. During TSO everyones base CB was 130, now Warriors/Brawlers have 150, and Crusaders still have 130. Your 2) is wrong as well. +30 off the base, vs +50 off the base, is nearly double. That's a very significant difference. Also, berserkers in particular get 100% AE auto attack, which grants a ton of additional damage on fights where there are multiple encounters. These are the reasons a berserker in particular relies more heavily on AA to parse high.

sounds like you agree with me. auto atk damage was equal in tso. same crit mult. anyway i'm not gonna argue with you over numbers. parse your guild's sk and parse your guild's zerk. the sk will get a lot more damage from their spells than the zerk will get from ca's. just parse it. i have 250 aa btw, and zerk aa's really don't do much for dps.

Tenka@Nagafen wrote:

Read what I said. During TSO everyones base CB was 130, now warriors have 150, and crusaders still have 130. This disparity only arose with SF. Again, it did not exist during TSO.

dude.....the auto attack damage is roughly the same. crusaders get some deal that boosts 1h damage. just ****ing parse it. parse warrior ca damage vs sk spell damage.

Darkonx wrote:

The base crit bonus difference comes from SoF, you're right.
But the 20% meless crit bonus gain on a mythical weapon (54/308 min/max dmg) is only 6.22%.
I would qualify this by "small improvment" on auto attack.
The gain on melee CA is, at best, below 11% for small spread dmg CAs.