The secret to warrior aggro problems ... [Archive]

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 12:57 PM

Raaj,

I'm saying I'm a raid level warrior, I sometimes have aggro difficulties, sometimes I don't. Sometimes I'm so damn angry at the situation I log off and play my necro.

The issue isn't the level of warrior aggro, but as Kildace said, that the level doesn't meet the "standard" by which it's measured. Add to that the fact that knight defense DOES meet the standard, then you have an imbalance. Period.

Kildace, where you're wrong is that aggro generation has never at ANY point in the game had such a large impact upon the role of tank. I'l tell you what's changed.

1. Ancillary cleric heal mana costs (Supernal Remedy and Elixir now have the identicl mana cost as complete heal in the absence of a Healing focus item, and a minimal disparity with. Supernal Light (the emergency large heal) costs 200 MORE mana than complete heal. This means that from ANY time prior to PoP to today, the consequences of a secondary party memebr being hit on a cleric's mana bar have increased dramatically, while the cost of healing the tank has remained stagnant.

2. With Horses, FT15, and KEI (or VoQ), mana regen is so huge compared to any point prior to now that any difference in relative durability between warrior and knight are simply absorbed by mana regen. Mana is simply put... no longer finite. Because of this, the conservation of mana based on the efficiency of the tank is a concept foreign to clerics, yet the conservation of mana when they're putting out 2-3 times the mana on ancillary heals while a warrior is tanking if taunt doesn't fire or if procs don't fire.

3. There is a substantial aggro DPS cap with warriors... don't believe me? Look at this:

Actually, i disagree, its the best mana/damage nuke wizards get that still has a resist bonus. Now, i dont know about time, and Furor could answer you, but in the rest of PoP, and god forbind even farming VT, we use SK tanks whenever we can, and our wizards ignore Concussion.

a wizard without AA can sustain 312DPS until oom at a 4.2 to 1 ratio with a SK tank. our current best wizard sustains 500DPS, at about a 4.4 to 1 ratio, an can cast about 16 SOSes chained. (on horse)

So assuming time precludes the use of SK tanks, your left with warriors, and your forced to lower your DPS. The only advantage to the legs is its instant refresh allowing you to get more hate reduction in between nukes. If your a excellent wizard, which I assume teh ealyer posting wizards are, it allows you to click 3 times and then SOS agian, sustaining about 300DPS. This isnt bad since my current best with a warrior tanking is about 180DPS. (end luclin~early pop agro/proc weapons)

These aren't unskilled players we're talking about here, these are VERY silled wizards who have calculated DPS differences vs. Concussion casts with different tanks. If you can seriously tell me why a SK should have better personal DPS AND be able to enable greater group DPS and this be considered "balanced" I'm all ears.

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 01:08 PM

Warrior aggro is fine, to bad so many people suck at EQ and cant control aggro.

Raaj

06-08-2003, 01:09 PM

If you look at the agro whine posts, the vast majority of them are based around experience groups. Your examples however are basically based around raid level clerics (ft15), and raid level Sk/Wizards.

Raiding and Exp grinding are totally different animals. The experience group agro problems can be solved by people not sucking.

The raid issue is about maximizing dps without getting yourself killed (in the wizards case). The SK better allows him to do that, but as a tradeoff cannot use defensive, and has lower AC/HP. Is it balanced? No, I don't think it is. Their HP and AC levels are too close to a warriors for the unshakeable agro he can have.

Kildace

06-08-2003, 01:20 PM

1. Ancillary cleric heal mana costs (Supernal Remedy and Elixir now have the identicl mana cost as complete heal in the absence of a Healing focus item, and a minimal disparity with. Supernal Light (the emergency large heal) costs 200 MORE mana than complete heal. This means that from ANY time prior to PoP to today, the consequences of a secondary party memebr being hit on a cleric's mana bar have increased dramatically, while the cost of healing the tank has remained stagnant

This i agree with, even if I would say that the emergency last heal costs 400 mana (Supernatural Remedy).

2. With Horses, FT15, and KEI (or VoQ), mana regen is so huge compared to any point prior to now that any difference in relative durability between warrior and knight are simply absorbed by mana regen. Mana is simply put... no longer finite. Because of this, the conservation of mana based on the efficiency of the tank is a concept foreign to clerics, yet the conservation of mana when they're putting out 2-3 times the mana on ancillary heals while a warrior is tanking if taunt doesn't fire or if procs don't fire.

I disagree with this, the average PoV cleric, or the n00bie cleric that has to heal the bad players doesn't have FT15, doesn't have SCM3, doesn't have 4K+ mana. Manapool is still very real for the players that are not in tier 3+ guilds. Those are the players we are talking about in this thread. Having a pally saves mana on the cleric, but it is not that big a deal because he's not as good a tank as a warrior if the group works on their aggro.
And I would like to say this again, if the group WORKS at their aggro, the cleric doesn't have to supernatural light more than once every 5 pulls when shit hits the fan.

There is a substantial aggro DPS cap with warriors... don't believe me? Look at this:
Blah Blah numbers that are irrelevant Blah Blah

I don't even know what you are arguing here ...
This is not relevant to the exp group situations of the people that are complaining about warrior aggro.
This is not relevant to the ex groups of high end guilds (because a wizard doesn't have the time to nuke to oom on a mob until he dies, even on the elemental planes, even with concussion pants they don't, the mobs will last a minute tops, more like 45 seconds if the wiz is not the group's only dps), a SK is a DPS gain, maybe, I still dinstinctly remember situations when my discs or my superior HPS made the difference between the group living, and the group CRing (when clerics LD and such).
This is not relevant to guild raids in trash clearing situations for 2 reasons: even on raids non named mobs don't live long enough for the wizard to nuke from FM to OOM, and if they do, he still has to med up for a few minutes which i find pretty stupid, it's always good to have some spare mana at all times.
This is not relevant to uber mobs, because they are tanked by warriors.

That parse was just one wizard wang waving and talking about an hypothetical situation of a trash mob tanked by an SK that lives for 5 minutes and comes every 2 minutes so he is always FM when the mob comes.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 01:25 PM

Aggro control is the responsiblity of the raid, moreso then it is the warrior. If a warrior can't hold aggro the first and foremost thing that needs addressed is the raid members and their complete lack of any shred of common sense. Secondary is the weapons/attack buffs/hate buffs the warrior is using.

Warriors are balanced fine. Our guild generaly has no problems at all with aggro management. People who bitch about warriors not having enough taunt ability are either surrounded by dipshits or using a Swiftblade of Zek and Jade Mace as weapons.

Throag

06-08-2003, 01:31 PM

I don't think the real problem is warriors, as it's been said before, I think it's more because of the average skill lvl of players nowadays.

I'm far from being the oldest player out there, i've started with kunark but even at that time I think the game was really harder. You had to bear the consequences of every single mistake you could make. Now SoE is just making the game more and more newbi-friendly, and I don't think this is a good thing, the result of this is a bunch of players who PL'ed themselves to 60+ and wonder why they should have to work to earn anything when it's been so simple to reach the "high levels", and that's the kind of players that make the game worse everyday.
I don't want anything handed to me on a silver plate, I want to earn stuff, unfortunately that's not what the majority is thinking now, and that's not where the game is going...

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 01:35 PM

Warrior aggro is NOT fine. I'm just going to restrict this post to your viewpoint.

The simple fact is, if someone keeps pulling aggro off the warrior, the guy who pulls the aggro off the warrior isn't the one that's blamed, it's the warrior that's blamed, it's the warrior who is considered to "not be able to hold aggro".

Why is this?

It's because the warrior is the only tank in the game where aggro can and does get pulled off of them on a regular basis. It's because when it's a pal/sk as a tank, this doesn't happen.

The fact is, when people are not managing their aggro well, it's the warriors that are blamed, it's the warriors get the bad rep, and it's the paladin that the group is most likely going to look for as a rep.

Promethis: that is incredibly blind and judgemental. I know warrior aggro generation is a huge issue. I also happen to be in #4 guild on my server who's cleared Vex Thal including Aten Ha Ra twice, and I DW EB weapons. SO I would HARDLY consider myself to have crap weapons, or surrounded by dipshit people. Talk about your uncalled-for insults.

Kildace

06-08-2003, 01:44 PM

The fact is, when people are not managing their aggro well, it's the warriors that are blamed, it's the warriors get the bad rep, and it's the paladin that the group is most likely going to look for as a rep.

I totaly agree with this fact, and in my rant thread I rant about this because I think that this is just not right. I'm not pretending that my thread will change anything because it won't, I'm just speaking my mind and the mind of most 65+ high end warriors I know.

Tarlor

06-08-2003, 01:44 PM

my old guild farmed aten 7-8 times before i left, also the #4 guild on the server.

i tanked aten without eb weaps, without drawing aggro.

whoa.

edit: drawing = losing

Promethis

06-08-2003, 01:47 PM

I also happen to be in #4 guild on my server who's cleared Vex Thal including Aten Ha Ra twice, and I DW EB weapons. SO I would HARDLY consider myself to have crap weapons, or surrounded by dipshit people

I'm in the #1 guild on the server whos tanked every mob known with the exception of the deeper Time B bosses. Don't get your panties up a bunch in a dick measuring contenst. I wasn't aiming my observations directly at you.

People blame warriors because THEY DONT KNOW ANY BETTER. Think about this situation for a second:

If warriors had gaurnteed ability to taunt, with our HP and defensive skills, it would trivialize a lot of encounters.

The same logic applies to every other class that has aggro issues. If wizards drew zero aggro with their 2k nuke, it would trivialize encounters because they could burn mobs down without any fear of death.

People who bitch about warriors not having enough taunt ability are either surrounded by dipshits or using a Swiftblade of Zek and Jade Mace as weapons.

That still stands, because its true. If your guild manages its aggro then you win and the responsiblity for that isn't solely on the warrior, his weapons, or his magic once every 8 seconds taunt key.

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 02:03 PM

You people need to learn how to read what's written and not make up arguments... I'm going to ask you a STRAIGHT FORWARD question, answer it.

1. Is warrior aggro "balanced" with knight aggro relative to knight's defensive capability vs. warrior defensive capability in exp groups?

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 02:06 PM

I'll answer my question first...

No, it's not...

It does no one any good to say "You suck at EQ, that's why you don't need me in the group and are picking the Paladin or SK", because even if it's true (which it is), the fact remains, the warrior isn't getting the exp group.

Mofu-Troll

06-08-2003, 02:07 PM

I agree with frodlin here , the advantage of useing a warrior to tank over a pal/sk does not even come close to offsetting the groups DPS disparity . Sure warrior can hold aggro , if the group is willing to lower its dps by 40%, and if they are they get a tank thats roughly 10% better at tanking.

Mofu

Kildace

06-08-2003, 02:07 PM

Well answer my question first Frodlin:

Was I arguing that the warrior is balanced in an ex group compared to a pal or an SK? I said it but it was hardly the main subject of my thread.

No I wasn't, I was saying that even if the pals and SK can aggro better, most of the warrior aggro problems we are hearing about on this board could be solved by having the group playing better, and that most groups don't want warrior tanks because of lack of skill / sheer laziness / both.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by Promethis
I'm in the #1 guild on the server whos tanked every mob known with the exception of the deeper Time B bosses. Don't get your panties up a bunch in a dick measuring contenst. I wasn't aiming my observations directly at you.

I could care less about a dick measuring contest.

Yes, you were not aiming that comment directly at me, but you ALSO were directing that comment at everyone who has a problem with warrior aggro, and that includes me.

People blame warriors because THEY DONT KNOW ANY BETTER. Think about this situation for a second:

If warriors had gaurnteed ability to taunt, with our HP and defensive skills, it would trivialize a lot of encounters.

No. A change from the present success rate to a higher one would not change much at all. Gettting aggro still means the mob is going to move, and it still means positioning is going to be screwed up, and that's just as, if not more important as aggro management on many raid level encounters. But then, I'm not asking for 100% taunt, I'm asking for warriors to be given some ability to generate their own aggro on demand, NOT relying on purely luck-based procs, and the riding-other's-aggro, luck based taunt. Warriors have NO ability to generate their own aggro on demand. There is a huge difference there.

The same logic applies to every other class that has aggro issues. If wizards drew zero aggro with their 2k nuke, it would trivialize encounters because they could burn mobs down without any fear of death.

Guess what, they pretty much can already, with a pally and SK. Aggro management is triial with thme as a tank. So in that case, it's already broken. If you want to dispute THIS fact, first, answer me this. When was the last time you saw a nuker pull aggro off of a pal/SK? I sure can't think of any off the top of my head.

That still stands, because its true. If your guild manages its aggro then you win and the responsiblity for that isn't solely on the warrior, his weapons, or his magic once every 8 seconds taunt key. [/B]

No. it's not true, and I've proven already how it is not true.

You said warriors who have issues with taunt are surrounded by idiots and wield terrible weapons.

I say I have issues with taunt and am surrounded by a guild that's in the top end of luclin and I have arguably some of the best warrior weapons in the game.

Frodlin has issues with taunt and he's one of the top 10 well equipped warriors on his server.

So. Your assertion that those who have issues with taunt are surrounded by idiots and have terrible weapons is plain ans simply not true.

And, by the way, I sure hope you're not confusing tanking raid level named mobs with defensive, and XP group tanking. I would hope you would know that THIS problem is only really a problem during XP groups, or yard trash in raids. Tanking named, and aggro management on named is such a completely different story as to be irrelevant in this discussion. Warriors HAVE no problems on named, due to the 10 second rule. It's when the warrior isn't given the time to build aggro at the start of the fight that the problems show up.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 02:19 PM

Frodlin: No. It is not balanced. There is a huge disparity and issue there, and it needs to be addressed.

Raaj

06-08-2003, 02:27 PM

No. it's not true, and I've proven already how it is not true.

You said warriors who have issues with taunt are surrounded by idiots and wield terrible weapons.

I say I have issues with taunt and am surrounded by a guild that's in the top end of luclin and I have arguably some of the best warrior weapons in the game.

Theres also the variable where the warrior can be the one messing up. Take that as you will, but with your agro weapons, having trouble getting agro in VT of all places - I don't know if there's much else to say. You are assuring us that your guild isnt at fault - that only leaves one other person.

Frodlin: No, it's not balanced.

Brutul

06-08-2003, 02:35 PM

Interesting thread...

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 02:38 PM

Nerf knights, warriors are fine and we dont need a upgrade.

School the new players, make them learn how to control aggro, it will be needed later in the game.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 02:39 PM

In an exp group the same applies. I've seen wizards pull off Paladins and SK's while doing exp or trash mobs on raids.

As I'm typing this I'm in a group in Decay with a Rogue, Monk, Shaman and Cleric. All of whom are going all out and cleric is nuking and shaman is doting 3x. I'm using SLW for haste and a BBB for weapon and am having no issues holding aggro. And these are elemental/time equipped guildmates who are killing rather fast without overaggroing.

You can kill fast in an exp group without overaggroing, it just takes skill and practice. Using the right combinations of weapons/spells to do damage with little amount of aggro as possible isn't something you just know once you ding level 60 and zone into PoP for the first time.

CyrzB

06-08-2003, 02:41 PM

/raise hand.

I wield a BoC Primary, and Swap around with RedBlade and Primal Warhammer secondary.

I say that the warrior classes has aggro that does not compare with Pally/SK aggro in the exp group setting.

Yes, we can maintain aggro fine on raid level mobs. Yes, we can hold aggro, even a few seconds, on exp level mobs. Yes, if the enchanter tashes at 90, then slows, then sits at 75, no aggro. Yes, if the shammy slows at 90 and doesn't dot much, won't get aggro.

Of course, since slow lands at 90, I'm tanking it unslowed. That means I need more healing. And since the shammy can't land his dots as much or as early, that means less average DPS. That slows down kills.

I don't think I'm a dibshit warrior. I've been told I hold aggro very well, for a warrior, even. But there is STILL a disparity in rapid aggro generation between the Knight Classes and the Warrior classes. Yes, this disparity becomes most evident on trash clearing or exp groups. No, it's not insurmountable, but yes, I do think the disparity is larger then it should be.

There are 3 priest classes- The Primarly Healer (Cleric) and Shammy/Druid. Yes, a shammy/druid provides more utility then a cleric, and therefore less healing power. The shammy or the druid can replace the cleric in an exp group or as a backup healer on raids (AE, Riposte, DS, Rampage Damage, etc), or in the case of the druid, even function in cheal chains in a pinch. However, the cleric is the clear leader in healing.

There are 3 tank classes- The Primary Tank (Warrior) and the Kinghts. Yes, the Knights provide more utility (HP buffs, mana/hp taps, snares, stuns, attack taps, heals) then a warrior, and therefor should have less tanking power. The Knight should be able to replace the warrior in an exp group or as a Rampage Tank/SA or even function as the MA in a pinch or vrs unresistable slowing mobs. However, the warrior SHOULD BE the clear leader in tanking.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by raaj
[B]Theres also the variable where the warrior can be the one messing up. Take that as you will, but with your agro weapons, having trouble getting agro in VT of all places - I don't know if there's much else to say. You are assuring us that your guild isnt at fault - that only leaves one other person.

Actually, I wasn't referring to myself in VT. Pallies/SK's tank the trash in VT.

My issues with warrior aggro center around the first 30 seconds of any fight, before my weapons have a chance to proc. This is most noticeable wherever it is imperative that the mob be slowed ASAP due to the high DPS they put out, which in most cases is more aggro than I, or any warrior short of maybe a BoW wielder, can put out in the very beginning of the fight, before the weapons have a chance to proc.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 03:04 PM

Promethis:

I notice you're using a very high damage, high aggro weapon. I also notice, you have 7500 HP, and have every possible defensive AA.

I guarantee you that what's just as much of a reason why you're having no problems with aggro is the fact that the shaman doesn't need to slow right off the bat. You have a LOT of hitpoints and AA's and you can tank the unslowed mob without blinking for a while, until you've built up enough aggro that the shaman can slow.

Not everyone have 7500hp, and every single defensive AA, and a very high aggro weapon. Saying that warriors are fine because you, as one of the top 1-2% of warriors in the game, are having no problems is... well, not taking the majority of warriors into account.

I'd like to see you at level 62 with no AA and 4k HP in PoV, wielding a frosty and wavecrasher, and still say there is no problem with warrior aggro. I tell ya one thing, you'd get awful sick of shielding the slower and/or healer, pretty quick. Why? because they would HAVE to slow the mob ASAP or risk you going down. And 9 times out of 10, you'd have to do the mash and pray.

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 03:57 PM

Actually, I'm of the school of thought that I don't really care if Taunt is trivial. There have to be some perks for being a warrior and these days, those seem to be too few and far between. It's easy to get gear like mine and totally lose focus on how absolutely craptastic it is to be the other 99% of the warrior population. Then you are brought back to reality when you do an encounter like The Rathe Council pre-final-dps nerf on the offtankables, and throw your hands up in frustration as to how stupid taunt really is... especially when you are a guild with no active paladins and 2 active SKs.

I think Furor summed it up pretty well about how raid level warriors *should* think about their bretheren.

Kildace

06-08-2003, 04:05 PM

I'm going to repeat this one last time.

The point of this thread is not to say that warriors don't have balance issues. The point of this thread is to say that the common level 58+ player that xps on PoP SUCKS and chooses paladins over warriors in group because he sucks. While warriors are not as good as paladins or SK for aggro they can do *fine* if the whole group works on their aggro instead of clicking on their spells / abilities like brainless chimps. Like they used to.
I am not denying that this is happening, I am not saying that it is normal, I am saying that the skill of most level 60+ players nowadays is pitiful.

For a person that preaches reading comprehension you should work on yours Frod.

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 04:26 PM

Kildace,

I have already said I pretty much agree with you, but that this doesn't mean that there's not a problem. You clearly stated the following though.

But I don't want to call an Sk or Pal nerf, it would pain me to see a class nerfed because of bad players.

So, specifically ruling out the lowering of Pal/SK aggro... and clearly not increasing warrior aggro, what exactly do you think should be done? This is what I'm getting at. I don't mind at all if people were forced to be better players, hell, I prefer it, but people currently don't HAVE to be better players because of the Pal/SK factor, which in turn prevents warriors from getting groups.

Kaldanm

06-08-2003, 04:33 PM

Well, I use Trident of the deep sea and frostbringer for aggro, level 64, 4200 hp unbuffed.
I have NO problems of aggro tanking in pop xp groups (PoV or BoT), and of course no problems at all in raid situation.

What I mean by this : when I tank things, usually nobody die. of course, sometimes the shaman may aggro, but taunt work most of the time, or I proc just early, or I shield him. I think that if any warrior have a problem with aggro, he should change his weapons and stop using some of those crap like shortblade of lightning (war only weapon with no proc ? yea riiight...) and choose between things in the list, in the Steel Warrior Bunker sticky.

I have also meet 3 people on my server that will take a shadowknight or a paladin even if there's already a warrior in a group because they are wussies who can't stand taking a /shielded slap for 2 x 225 once every 3 pulls. there is no warrior blocus that I know of.

If there's a warrior problem, it's the always the same... same mitigation table as knights, too many "all plate class" gear with awesome stats, not enough difference in the tanking ability to counterbalance the utility spells knights have.

Kildace

06-08-2003, 04:49 PM

So, specifically ruling out the lowering of Pal/SK aggro... and clearly not increasing warrior aggro, what exactly do you think should be done? This is what I'm getting at. I don't mind at all if people were forced to be better players, hell, I prefer it, but people currently don't HAVE to be better players because of the Pal/SK factor, which in turn prevents warriors from getting groups.

If i was left to choose, i'd rather see a pal / sk nerf, or a *mild* taunt buffing (making it successful 75% of the time and having it give 200 hate when successful, 50 when not), but I just don't want the game dumbed down that's all.

I agree with you on the rest :)

Promethis

06-08-2003, 04:49 PM

I'd like to see you at level 62 with no AA and 4k HP in PoV, wielding a frosty and wavecrasher, and still say there is no problem with warrior aggro

Then you shouldn't be in PoV. Simple as that.

The trash exp mobs in pov hit for 300-600. I'm sorry but there should be a progression in this game, and if you skipped half the older content and went straight for the second teir pop zones, its your own fault for getting your ass handed to you.

Let me offer this snapshot of an average group (cleric, shaman, wiz, warrior, monk) and how this should work if they all would be paying attention:

1- Monk calls inc

2- Cleric casts HoT spell on warrior when mob is in sight, before the mob is engaged by said warrior, meaning a heal is going and NO AGGRO IS ON THE CLERIC

3- Warrior tags

4- Mob beats on warrior, with HoT spell still going, cleric begins casting Supernal Elixer or some other assorted assist type heal.

5- Shaman begins to cast slow

6- Slow lands 10-12 seconds after warrior begins hitting on mob.

7- Monk kicks, shaman sends pet, wizard nukes and concussions in sequence.

8- Repeat Step 7 as necessary

9- Loot, clap happily at the yellow message, and begin sequence at Step 1.

You don't have to have 7500 hp with every defensive AA maxed in order for that to work. Just requires you to play SMART which is something a lot of people who powergame up to 60 and think they are hot shit seem to have forgotten (again, speaking in general, not directed at anybody in particular).

If you can't make the group work in an experience zone because the mobs just hit to hard, most people would take the hint and move back to an easier zone, ala PoD or Nightmare. Or even Sebilis Juggs or Velketor's Labrynth.

pino

06-08-2003, 04:54 PM

Then you are brought back to reality when you do an encounter like The Rathe Council pre-final-dps nerf on the offtankables, and throw your hands up in frustration as to how stupid taunt really is... especially when you are a guild with no active paladins and 2 active SKs.

OMG an highend encounter that actually require some pal/sk ?!?!?
THIS CAN'T BE !!! change the event ! NERF PAL/SK !!!

:) :) :) :)

/sarcasm off

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by Promethis
[B]Then you shouldn't be in PoV. Simple as that.

That's crap and an evasion of the point I was trying to make.

First of all, at 62, the second tier planes are the only way to get any decent experience.

And secondly, what you are then saying is that the warrior wih 4200 hps should not be in the only place he can get decent experience in, because he can't hold aggro with the early slows that are required. What about the paladin that simply stuns on inc, and the mob is slowed right away, and there is no problem with the tank dropping early due to it not being slowed.

So in essence what you are then saying is the low hps warrior needs to stay in PoN, cause he can't tank an unslowed mob and can't build aggro fast enough to be able to cover the aggro of the slow, while the paladin with similar gear can stay in PoV cause the difference with his snap aggro generation means there is no problem. That's crap.

2- Cleric casts HoT spell on warrior when mob is in sight, before the mob is engaged by said warrior, meaning a heal is going and NO AGGRO IS ON THE CLERIC

Here the cleric is wasting mana, on a paladin this elixer is non needed due to not having the tank face off against an unslowed mob.

3- Warrior tags

Paladin stuns on inc and gets solid aggro before even touching the mob.

4- Mob beats on warrior, with HoT spell still going, cleric begins casting Supernal Elixer or some other assorted assist type heal.

More wasted mana. If a pally was Mt, cleric might be starting the first Cheal now, but most likely not. They'd likely still be medding for several seconds before starting the FIRST cheal.

5- Shaman begins to cast slow

6- Slow lands 10-12 seconds after warrior begins hitting on mob.

Paladin stuns before mob hits camp, mob is usually slowed before hitting camp, and there is no aggro issue. Paladiin never needs to tank an unslowed mob, so the war hp/AC advantage goes right out the window.

You don't have to have 7500 hp with every defensive AA maxed in order for that to work. Just requires you to play SMART which is something a lot of people who powergame up to 60 and think they are hot shit seem to have forgotten (again, speaking in general, not directed at anybody in particular).

You're right. And there lies the problem. This is why paladins are far more in demand than warriors. With paladins, you simply don't need to be smart, you don't need to slow down, you don't need to manage aggro. So why bother getting a warrior when you can have a paladin/sk and have a much easier time of it?

Promethis, must I point out that at the last two Fan Faires in a row, even the DEV'S have admitted there is a problem with taunt?

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 05:26 PM

I don't seem to remember in all the time since I have been playing EQ that a change was ever made to the Warrior class by Sony.

If this is true, then there is quite a gap between us and the other classes, since there have been numerous changes in the game, as well as new expansions, new spells, new mobs, new everything. If we havent changed at all since the beginning, and others have through spells and other abilities, and sony's fine tuning, then either we are perfect and dont yet know it, or, we are an old fence that isn't broken, but could use some new paint.

If a class so based on gear is having to struggle to gain aggro (which is it's intended purpose) from a class who uses spells and can flick aggro off and on like a switch, then theres a problem. Taunt is an opportunity to have a mob aggro you, its not 100% efficient. A spell is a triggered and controlled form of aggro - if you do not want aggro, you do not cast the spell. Our taunting is a roll of the dice, we have initiated the switch to gain aggro, but the cylinder may or may not fire.

I do not have trouble holding aggro, but, I also do not have 0 AA's and wield a frosty and a wavecrasher. If a level 62 warrior cannot hold aggro its because of his gear, NOT SKILL. Its not rocket science to push taunt, and taunt isnt 100% aggro, its a chance to retain lost aggro. So all you veterans of the game can drop the "stop sucking and be a good warrior" card.

Id easily say a class based on gear to provide it's function well (holding aggro) is at a great disadvantage to a class who has spells. The spells in PoP have just gotten so amazing and powerful yet warriors are still back in the Kunark era.

We are dinosaurs my friends. Most of you may curse and shout and say we are still as efficient as ever, and if you think so, I challenge you all to try and use the Red epic blade in Elemental planes.

"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 05:35 PM

If SKs or Pallies want aggro, they can take it. If we want aggro we have to not only ask for it, but have only a percent chance to get it. I ask how that is fair?

Warriors do not use spells. Fine. But we could use some new abilities. When pop was released casters got 5 spells or something every level, while Warriors got jack. I ask how is that fair?

We all wouldnt be here debating the issues surrounding warriors if there wasnt a problem. To say the warrior who cannot attain aggro is a sub standard skilled player is ridiculous. The numbers of the concerned and angry far outweigh the possible numbers of this just being a skill issue.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 05:38 PM

By your argument, you want a completely mana effeciant group. Well that won't happen. Why?

Paladins will never have more HP then a warrior in the same level (read: like in the same guild, able to attain the same armor). Your wasted mana argument is rebutted by that fact alone.

The extra heal on inc from the cleric is more then doubled since a paladin has less hp then a warrior, thereby requiring more heals. Yes a paladin can heal themselves, but guess what? If your constantly on pulls with the paladin casting Wave spells and stunning for aggro, he'll be oom. Meaning you have to wait so he can med. Because without his mana, a paladin has the taunt capabilities of a small gnat.

Now, say a level 64 paladin who has been thru VT will probably have more HP then a level 60 warrior who hasn't. But again, thats apples and oranges. You can't have everygroup looking for that uber equipped 8k+ HP hybrid. Because there aren't that many.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 05:39 PM

And incidently, warriors can grab aggro anytime they wish.

Its called Area Taunt and Hastened Instigation.

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 05:41 PM

I did area taunt just a few seconds ago and I didnt get aggro. Thanks.

You also cannot gain aggro off of low hp aggro, so saying area taunt is a 100% effective aggro solution is horse shit.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 05:48 PM

I did area taunt just a few seconds ago and I didnt get aggro. Thanks.

You also cannot gain aggro off of low hp aggro, so saying area taunt is a 100% effective aggro solution is horse shit.

And by the same token, a stun or wave spell from a paladin won't pull off frenzy aggro 90 percent of the time either.

I did a test with AE taunt just after pop was out with an enchanter. We mezzed a daiku in Tactics and he tashed it ten times then i broke mez and ae taunted. It pulled it off him without problems. So it is hit and miss. But no more then a paladin or SK aggro spell.

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 05:49 PM

try and use the Red epic blade in Elemental planes.

Warriors who get into EPs and deserve being there havent used epics since velious.

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 06:04 PM

And its not warriors who are dinosaurs, its the weapon.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 06:06 PM

Chat is fat though. Like a dinosaur. When he moves its kind of like watching a brontosaurus emerge from the trees, belly swaying to and fro.

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 06:07 PM

Fat is guud, now stop hating, bitch.

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 06:11 PM

I was using the blade to make a point children. I will talk really slow for you.

IF warriors are unchanged since Kunark, like the red epic blade. And the blade is useless and old in the new Elemental POP planes. Would it be considerable to assume that maybe Warriors need a change to co-incide with the changing of the times?

Dont dmg yourself thinking about this now.

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 06:15 PM

Prom,

I really hate to tell you this but I've done a little checking on this...

Your "hitpoint spread" betwen similarly equipped warriors and Paladins is anywhere between 500-1000hp... unbuffed... Add to this BSS and Aura of the crusader and it's now down to.... from the Paladin having more HP (AoTC + BSS = 680) to 320hp. You can't tell me that 320hp in the WORST CASE SCENARIO difference is going to present any mana savings in any way shape or form. It is less than a single hit.

Raaj

06-08-2003, 06:15 PM

First of all, at 62, the second tier planes are the only way to get any decent experience.

And secondly, what you are then saying is that the warrior wih 4200 hps should not be in the only place he can get decent experience in, because he can't hold aggro with the early slows that are required.

Hm funny. Being one of the first people on Terris-Thule into PoV, I was already nearly 64 when we finally beat that trial.

Here the cleric is wasting mana, on a paladin this elixer is non needed due to not having the tank face off against an unslowed mob.

Paladin stuns on inc and gets solid aggro before even touching the mob.
More wasted mana. If a pally was Mt, cleric might be starting the first Cheal now, but most likely not. They'd likely still be medding for several seconds before starting the FIRST cheal.

If paladins are *that* good, why are you still playing a warrior again? You're uninformed - plain and simple.

I did area taunt just a few seconds ago and I didnt get aggro. Thanks.

Try getting closer, and making sure nobody is lowhp.

Honestly, I'm starting to lose faith in you guys. I'm beginning to think it is YOUR FAULT these groups are taking paladins and SK's over you. Why don't you stop being sheep? So you come to this board and see that people are bitching taunt is broken...Therefore it's broken? Try it sometime. Instead of whining in your groups about how bad off you are (because people told you so, not because you think so), try telling that rogue to evade once in awhile. Tell the ranger to jolt, tell the wizard to sit his ass down and stop nuking or you're going to let him die.

Don't get it twisted - I do think warriors could use being looked at. But you have half a dozen high end warriors here telling you that Creating unshakeable warrior agro is NOT going to fix your problems like some magical pill. You will be happy for a little while, but then you'll realize it's completely boring. SK's and Paladins have the ability to outagro us now. They can also cast utility spells. What warriors want is something they can bring to a group to make them the outright first choice for tanks. Paladins and SK's should be chosen for their utility to the group, or as a tank should no warrior be available.

The last warrior "upgrade" in a patch I can remember is pre-kunark when we got Crits and innate MR. If SoE looks at warriors, you better make DAMN sure you're getting the fix you want, because it's going to be awhile before they do so again.

Superchum

06-08-2003, 06:16 PM

"Warriors who get into EPs and deserve being there havent used epics since velious."

That's a little bit of an assumption there. Maybe rewording that to something a little simpler and closer to the truth like:

People in elemental planes are, by now, beyond the Red Epic blade.

It's the word "deserve" that's really the hangup there man.

Even just taking that part out, and saying Warriors who get into EPs haven't used epics since Velious sounds much closer to the truth than saying "and deserve being there."

Anyways, Spine again assumes resisted Rage of Vallon procs don't draw any aggro:
""Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon"
"Your target resisted the Rage of Vallon""

When the epic procs on a mob it has an icon. That means it functions like a debuff (though it clearly isn't a debuff anymore). You even get a spell has worn off message if you don't kill the mob quickly enough and the proc is still active.

What's this mean?

This means even resisted procs on the red blade generate some attention from the monster.

Try chain casting a simple debuff like Disempower on a monster, and have it resisted as many times as your rage of vallon example is resisted.

The end result? The chain casting debuffer now has the monster's attention.

The only reason the Red Blade stops working effectively is it gets outclassed eventually.

A 14/24 doesn't put out enough damage, thus it gets harder and harder to stay on top of the list no matter how much attention you generate with the proc.

And, it's a proc, so you're beholden to the RNG.

But the red blade, in the context of the portion of the game it was designed to function in, does its job wonderfully.

And it gets aggro from resisted procs.

Not +500 hate. No.

But the spell has been designed to generate aggro even upon resist.

That's actually a pretty good deal all things considered.

But I doubt you'll be able to hold much aggro swinging a 14/24 in the elmental planes standing next to a rogue with Ifir and a monk with Puresteel Wraps/Fangs combo and a Ranger with an elemental bow that just started to crackle with energy.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 06:16 PM

The extra heal on inc from the cleric is more then doubled since a paladin has less hp then a warrior, thereby requiring more heals. Yes a paladin can heal themselves, but guess what? If your constantly on pulls with the paladin casting Wave spells and stunning for aggro, he'll be oom. Meaning you have to wait so he can med. Because without his mana, a paladin has the taunt capabilities of a small gnat.

Absolutely not.

The paladin, especially with the present itemization in PoP, has around 80-90% of the hitpoints of the warrior, and that slight weakess is wiped out by the ability to slow the mob before it even touches the mob.

Secondly, in this day and age with FT, mana pres, c5, SP, Bot9, and bard songs, ALL of which give more mana regen, mana is no longer nearly the issue it used to be. Especially with the new 15 mana stuns.

Thirdly, even IF a hybrid ever runs out of mana, they have a taunt of 180, as opposed to the cap of 230 for warriors, which is effectively 75% of the taunt ability of the warriors. That is FAR from the "taunt capabilities of a small gnat" that you're suggesting. Tell me, if paladins are that bad, what's ranger taunt, then?

Now, say a level 64 paladin who has been thru VT will probably have more HP then a level 60 warrior who hasn't. But again, thats apples and oranges. You can't have everygroup looking for that uber equipped 8k+ HP hybrid. Because there aren't that many. [/B]

First of all. There's not nearly the difference you're insinuating. The average 65 warrior will have, oh, 4500hp. The average 65 paladin will have, oh, 3750ish. That's not a big deal at all when you consider the paladin never has to take the beating of the unslowed mob, while the warrior does.

Secondly. Who's saying everyone's looking for an uber equipped 8khp hybrid? I'm certainly not. You don't NEED an uber equipped hybrid, any average hybrid will do. They don't even need to have raid level gear... it's called a windblade and cultural. No, any average hybrid will do.

As for your comment about AT and hastened instigation, first of all, all the taunt would do is ride someone else's aggro, and secondly, AA's should not even be brought into this. Warriors should NEVER have to rely on AA's to do their job, especially when the hybrids do not.
AE taunt with MAX instigation is only reduced by 30% anyway, which means you can STILL only use it ONCE every ten minutes. And, I've seen AETaunt fail more than once.
I hardly call once every ten minutes "grabbing it anytime they wish".

Promethis

06-08-2003, 06:17 PM

Would it be considerable to assume that maybe Warriors need a change to co-incide with the changing of the times?

Dont dmg yourself thinking about this now.

Warriors do change. For example, most of us in the elemental planes have weapons that proc Enraging Blow. Enraging Blow is unresistable. Period.

So, son, instead of waiting for Sony to make level 65+ mobs in the Plane of Fire act like a shardwyrm in Great Divide, take some initiative and make the change happen yourself.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 06:22 PM

Warriors should NEVER have to rely on AA's to do their job, especially when the hybrids do not.

So paladins can use spells for aggro and its OK, but warriors can't use AA's because thats what, cheating or something?

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 06:22 PM

So other classes changed alot? You sure you just arent one of thos players Kildace described who suck at EQ? Why do we need a change, if we do function just fine?

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by raaj
Hm funny. Being one of the first people on Terris-Thule into PoV, I was already nearly 64 when we finally beat that trial.

So what? The situation is completely different then it was when PoP first came out. You're trying to invalidate my point based on the way things were months ago? Please....

If paladins are *that* good, why are you still playing a warrior again? You're uninformed - plain and simple.

Bullshit I'm uninformed. I've been following threads such as this in boards all over the place and in numerous discussions in groups, guilds, with hybrid and warrior friends, etc etc, for months. I still play a warrior because, for all its problems, warriors are still a good class to play. So instead of making blind accusations and judgements that are blatantly wrong, why don't you instead try and contribute something of substance to the conversation?

Did I mention that you can find threads about the warrior aggro issue on just about every class board? That would tend to lend weight to the assertion that there is a big issue here, because not only do many warriors feel there's an issue, so do many members of OTHER CLASSES, as well as the devs themselves.

Who's the uninformed one, here?

Try getting closer, and making sure nobody is lowhp.

Well. DUH!

Honestly, I'm starting to lose faith in you guys. I'm beginning to think it is YOUR FAULT these groups are taking paladins and SK's over you. Why don't you stop being sheep? So you come to this board and see that people are bitching taunt is broken...Therefore it's broken? Try it sometime. Instead of whining in your groups about how bad off you are (because people told you so, not because you think so), try telling that rogue to evade once in awhile. Tell the ranger to jolt, tell the wizard to sit his ass down and stop nuking or you're going to let him die.

Been there. Done that. I'm really sick of coaching those people that don't manage aggro well in my groups. And, I didn't decide warrior aggro had issues because I saw it on the boards, thanks. I'm not a sheep, that's just another incorrect assumption that you've made. I made this decision after experiencing it FOR MYSELF. In fact, I have a hell of a lot more evolved opinion of the warrior issue than simply "taunt is broken". The problems facing warriors today are FAR FAR more complex than that, but the most obvious and often experienced one can be summed up by "warrior taunt is broken", however oversimplified that may be.

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 06:38 PM

Promethis

06-08-2003, 06:38 PM

Really, lets compare for a moment, unbuffed HP (sans self buffs).

Myself, a 65 Warrior with elemental gear (see my magelo below, roughly 7500hp unbuffed)

Now, I present to you the magelo list of the top 6 paladins on my server, all of whom are in the elemental planes and/or Time, most of whom are in my guild:

1 Kable <Talisman> 6662
2 Yuna Tunare 6511
3 Litknight Wandering <Talisman> 6407
4 Kaitlynn val'Kiere <Talisman> 6338
5 Rajahten Summercry <Divine Crusade> 6315
6 Faeanor Fafnersbane <Talisman> 6268

I have almost 840 more HP then the best equipped paladin on my server. Kable is in my guild, and has the exact same opportunity for upgrades that I do.

The same applies for lower levels. Guild by guild I imagine you'll find that a warrior will more then simply 300 or so hp in difference then a paladin. However I could be wrong, its been known to happen. Rarely, but it does.

Anyway thats off topic. The issue at hand is the ability to taunt.

Secondly, in this day and age with FT, mana pres, c5, SP, Bot9, and bard songs, ALL of which give more mana regen, mana is no longer nearly the issue it used to be. Especially with the new 15 mana stuns.

I don't know what fantasy world your living in, but I rarely find a group with an enchanter, druid, bard, beastlord, and paladin sitting in PoV pulling nonstop.

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 06:40 PM

Raaj

06-08-2003, 06:41 PM

Who's the uninformed one, here?

Hey junior, play a warrior in a high end guild for 4+years, then call me uninformed. When you have an understanding of this game anywhere NEAR the level that Kildace, Chatja, Frodlin, Promethis, and any number of others posting in this thread have, then you can attempt to argue with them.

I can tell by the hardon that you have for paladin agro that you cannot possibly have the understanding they do.

So what? The situation is completely different then it was when PoP first came out. You're trying to invalidate my point based on the way things were months ago? Please....

You're right, Mudflation has occured - so your bitching should be less. You have access to better weapons and gear, the people you group with have more FT, and better weapons and gear.

Try again.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by Promethis
So paladins can use spells for aggro and its OK, but warriors can't use AA's because thats what, cheating or something?

Paladins don't need to grind out more experience OVER AND ABOVE levelling to use their new spells.

Telling warriors that they need to grind XP for AA's over and above that for levels, just so they can get better taunt, when the hybrids don't have to, is completely unfair.

What's next, having clerics grind out AA's to heal better when druids just get better heal spells? Shamans grind out AA's to slow better when Beastlords just get better slow spells on levelling?

Promethis

06-08-2003, 06:47 PM

If an item as old as us, and has gone unchanged since Kunark (same as us) then perhaps we need an upgrade!!!!

What more do you want? Seriously? Do you want 10,000 hp? You can get that now.

Do you want the most aggroing weapons in game? You get that now.

Do you want to have gaurenteed aggro on every taunt? Why? So you can pin every mob facing into a corner for 10 minutes and go afk to whack off to screenshots of Firiona Vie?

Want Paladins to be resorted to wearing leather and having a manapool of 12?

I've been playing a warrior since early 1999, and I've seen the changes that took place. I bitched like hell when they gave all melee classes the ability to do crits. I bitched like hell when the defensive tables of rangers were raised.

But you know what, I still hardly have issues finding a group. And I'm the backbone of every raid as a warrior. You'll never, ever, find a paladin or shadowknight tanking an unslowed mob that quads for 3k+ unless its a last ditch effort and all warriors are dead.

You get looked over for groups? Then change the way you play or the people you play with who know how to use a warrior effectively.

Know your place, accept it, or delete yourself and start a paladin and stop giving the rest of us a bad name by constantly flapping your arms and screaming "UPGRADE AND NERF THE REST!" constantly.

Promethis

06-08-2003, 06:49 PM

Newsflash:

having clerics grind out AA's to heal better

They do now.

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 06:50 PM

You idddddeeeeiots.

Im using the red epic blade as personification.

If an item as old as us, and has gone unchanged since Kunark (same as us) and has become less efficient then perhaps it needs an upgrade!!!!

Do you think the same about CH or about clerics? Whats the most important thing a cleric can do on a raid and has that thing been upgraded the last few years?

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 06:51 PM

Know your place, accept it, or delete yourself and start a paladin

That would be like trading in your Ferrari to drive a Miata.

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 06:54 PM

Other epics havent changed either, have they? Infact, most them are obsolute also, like monk epic because of stacking issues and only the cleric epic is of any use now with the right click effect.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 06:56 PM

I have almost 840 more HP then the best equipped paladin on my server. Kable is in my guild, and has the exact same opportunity for upgrades that I do.

First of all, I'm talking average, not the very top end. You keep trying to talk about the very top end of the server and try to say that because the top 1% is fine, there are no problems. That is simply not the case. It would be like saying (as an example) there's no recession because the rich are still rich, when it's really Joe Average that's hit by the problems the worst.

Secondly. The percentage difference between the two of you is still the same. There is between a 10 and 20% difference between the two, which is wiped out the minute the warrior is forced to tank an unslowed mob while the paladin does not.
This percentage difference hold true through every level of the game.

The same applies for lower levels. Guild by guild I imagine you'll find that a warrior will more then simply 300 or so hp in difference then a paladin. However I could be wrong, its been known to happen. Rarely, but it does.

Like I said, 750 or so is the norm. Add Frodlin's buff that is pally only that stacks with virtue, and the difference drops to under 500.

Anyway thats off topic. The issue at hand is the ability to taunt.

Actually, to be more specific, the issue is not the ability of taunt per se, the issue is warrior aggro generation capabilites. It's just oversimplified to "warrior taunt" by many people.

I don't know what fantasy world your living in, but I rarely find a group with an enchanter, druid, bard, beastlord, and paladin sitting in PoV pulling nonstop.

I don't know what fantasy world YOU'RE living in that you think I'm saying that every, or even many groups have all or most of the above.

Obviously I need to speak slower and spell my point out for you so that you get it.

My point is that with all of the upgrades in mana preservation, the fact that all forms of mana regeneration have been increased, (IE c3-c5, PoNature to Po9, marr to replenishment), new forms have been added (SP, FT), and the lowering of stuns to a whole FIFTEEN mana, the issues with mana is not the issue it used to be. The paladin who was going oom constantly in Velious has all kinds of mana in PoP. That just feeds the problem.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by Promethis
Newsflash:

"having clerics grind out AA's to heal better"

They do now.

Way to quote me completely out of context!

The CORRECT quote would be:

"What's next, having clerics grind out AA's to heal better when druids just get better heal spells"

Don't quote me out of context to make a point that would absolutely nothing to with the quote in question, were it quoted in its entirely. Last time I checked, people that quoted out of context lost credibility in very short order.

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 07:07 PM

Now, I present to you the magelo list of the top 6 paladins on my server, all of whom are in the elemental planes and/or Time, most of whom are in my guild:

1 Kable <Talisman> 6662
2 Yuna Tunare 6511
3 Litknight Wandering <Talisman> 6407
4 Kaitlynn val'Kiere <Talisman> 6338
5 Rajahten Summercry <Divine Crusade> 6315
6 Faeanor Fafnersbane <Talisman> 6268

I have almost 840 more HP then the best equipped paladin on my server. Kable is in my guild, and has the exact same opportunity for upgrades that I do.

Kable casts AoTC and BSS and all of a sudden you have.... a WHOPPING 160hp more than him.

Yuna... has 309hp less than you

Litknight: You're eeking up there... you have a whopping 407 more HP.

Kaitlynn: 482

Rajahten: 505

Faeanor: 552

You see, you can't copmpare unbuffed HP and think that there's a linear difference when buffed when they have both self buffs as well as specific paladin buffs that stack with cleric buffs.

Want to see something really funny? Suppose you were duoing with a Shaman. Then you had to go... and these same Paladins showed up.

With heroic Bond at 425 hp
Marzin at 700
AotC at 350
and BSS at 330

They'd have a total HP gain in buffs of: 1805

So....

Kable would have 967 more HP than YOU
Yuna would have 816 more
Litknight would have 712 more
Kaitlynn would have 643 more
Rajahten would have 620 more
and Faeanor would have 573 more HP than you...

Yes, they'd all have MORE hitpoints than you, every one of them, and they'd still have aggro on demand with the push of a button, their groupmates would have more hitpoints than with you, and wow... balanced!

Promethis

06-08-2003, 07:07 PM

That would be like trading in your Ferrari to drive a Miata.

According to you the Ferrari is broken anyway, and a well tuned Miata will get you from point A to point B a lot better then an old busted down Ferrari.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 07:25 PM

I can tell by the hardon that you have for paladin agro that you cannot possibly have the understanding they do.

It's not paladin aggro. It's hybrid aggro that is so clearly superior to warriors, especially in the context of aggro generation on demand.

Elaborate on the "have the understanding they do" bit.

You're right, Mudflation has occured - so your bitching should be less. You have access to better weapons and gear, the people you group with have more FT, and better weapons and gear.

Try again.

That simply shows how narrow minded your viewpoint is, and how little understanding YOU have. Sure, warriors have gotten some upgrades, although the itemization in all tiers short of Elementals show very very few weapons and armour that there aren't as good or better versions of in previous expansions.

However, since then, hybrids and casters have also gotten *more* upgrades than the pure melees, and warriors in particular. They not only got gear, they got 5 whole new levels of spells for each class, while warriors got no new abilities whatsoever. This means that the gap between the classes has in fact effectively INCREASED. Your point would only hold true, if the warriors had been the only ones to get better weapons and gear, while all other classes had stayed the same.

The last warrior "upgrade" in a patch I can remember is pre-kunark when we got Crits and innate MR. If SoE looks at warriors, you better make DAMN sure you're getting the fix you want, because it's going to be awhile before they do so again.

Yep, you're accusing me of being misinformed. Hello Pot, meet Kettle. Warrior defensive abilities were increased in the last review of tanks, I think that was what, 6-8 months ago... I'm not exactly sure and I'm too lazy to check, but I know it happened. Someone can back me up on this, or I will if called on it. Secondly, taunt was also upgraded after one Fan Faire, after complaints, however that obviously did not fix the issue, or these discussions would not still be popping up all over the place.

Shikarii

06-08-2003, 07:27 PM

day late and a dollar short; but for further clarification and simplification.

Are Warriors broken?
Yes. and No.

Do Warriors work correctly?
Yes. and No.

The WHOLE PROBLEM with being a Warrior no matter what zone you fight in is that ( as raaj mentioned and solidifies my point ) you spend most if not all of your time with the same group of people day in and day out for years now; plus have the confidence of working with 100 something other guildmates around you who have one iota of a f**king clue about what they're doing and can ALLOW you to do your job.

Allow. Which leads to the thought of "why should you be allowed to"? Why doesn't it at least halfway work in the first damn place without adding 10,000 additional devices ( aka evade, fd, jolt, aggro demodifing and aggro modifier spells ) to alow the whole raid to progress at the warriors speed and the warriors only and have you, as the warrior, theoretically make or break the entire incident with the possibility of your demise during a fight.

Personally, I don't give a rats ass what zone anyone is fighting in at the monent. Apply the concepts you're trying to make to the 95% of the content most of ya seem to forget or distance yourself from more and more while you make and pass judgements to the class as a whole using examples that so far only 5% tops are experiencing right now.

Raaj

06-08-2003, 07:40 PM

Hey guy, the defensive and taunt upgrades were to multiple classes - not warriors solely.

They not only got gear, they got 5 whole new levels of spells for each class, while warriors got no new abilities whatsoever.

Like they have from level NINE. Why are you acting like Moses parted the fucking sea and said "LET THEM HAVE SPELLS!" - You KNEW they would be getting them.

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 07:46 PM

Raaj,

Were cease, desist, stun, holy might and force designed to be aggro generator spells or is this a side effect which is supposed to be a negative consequence?

Raaj

06-08-2003, 07:49 PM

It's a side effect used to their advantage.

Was AE taunt designed to create seamless defensive switches? Was weaponshield designed to be used to create a "jump" in agro for the tank? Were corners designed to eliminate ripostes on 99% of the raids? Don't get started on feign death.

From the beginning of this game, people have found uses for things that were not "intended". The agro's caused by resisted spells, and stuns are one of them. I agree with you in that the balance needs to be fixed, one way or another...But I don't think you can simply nerf paladins and fix every warrior's problems.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by raaj
Hey guy, the defensive and taunt upgrades were to multiple classes - not warriors solely.

So? It's still an upgrade. What, are you trying to say that you were referring to upgrades that only warriors get now? What possible purpose could that difference serve?

But whatever. Did I mention that warriors also got a new ability? yeah, they call it shield? Bandaid on an gaping wound that it is, it still is an upgrade... and guess what, it's warrior only.

I just wish they'd take that crap away and do a REAL fix to the issue.

Yep, I'm the misinformed one. Honest.

Like they have from level NINE. Why are you acting like Moses parted the fucking sea and said "LET THEM HAVE SPELLS!" - You KNEW they would be getting them.

Yeah, you're right. I did. And so should you. More precisely, you should have known that when you give something to someone, but you don't give any corresponding increase to someone else, that the disparity between them must increase.

Course, SoE should have known that too before they decided to give something to everyone BUT the pure melee.

Frodlin7th

06-08-2003, 07:55 PM

I agree with all of the above examples, although AE taunt SEEMS to be guaranteed AE taunt and not necessarily a "chance", which wouldn't necessarily preclude tank switches.

Weaponshield... nah, that's simply playing with the code... but then again, if we're onto this "warrior aggro is fine" thing, then why is WS even necessary or often used by the most "skilled" players?

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 07:58 PM

Frodlin:

AE Taunt is not completely foolproof. I've seen it fail more than once. Another weakness is not being able to pull off low health aggro.

I'd say it's probably about 95%. It doesn't ALWAYS work, but it's pretty reliable, enough to make it a good tool. Although, I find it far more useful for the AE effect (IE multiple pull, one's on the chanter, one on me, one on the cleric, I AE taunt and pull em all on me) than the reliability of obtaining aggro effect... if you know what I mean.

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 08:06 PM

Id suggest you drop it.

Anyone who owns a BoW or has better gear then the person being flammed is always right. If you are uber you are right. If you disagree with uber you get flammed and called a fucking newbie.

Seriously. Dont waste your time.

p.S. FUCK YOU CHATJA! You let me into your uber channel for uber warriors den you boot me out! Im so saaaaaad =( /cries/

Now I will neva get the bitches!

Promethis

06-08-2003, 08:06 PM

Paladins can out taunt us if they want, everybody knows that.

But I say its balanced. Because the warrior class is deisgned for one reason: taking an insane amount of melee damage.

If a paladin can get MORE hp then I can with MORE buffs, well no fucking duh. Does he have an advantage at casting those buffs himself? Surely he does.

But again, the warrior is designed for damage absorption, plain and simple. If you want a casual game where you don't raid go play Boulders Gate. EQ is being designed around the end game. And the endgame is where warriors do what they are designed to do, better then anybody else.

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 08:08 PM

My psychic abilities tell me I am going to be flamed....

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 08:12 PM

I didnt let you in there, I didnt flame you, I am not going to flame you. So once again, you are wrong.

Chatja ogre

06-08-2003, 08:14 PM

Did you know you can disable sigs when posting? Instead of spamming a thread with a huge sig 5 times per page !

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 08:15 PM

whats the fun in that?

Spinetwist

06-08-2003, 09:06 PM

does anyone remember captain planet!!!!

Redhenna

06-08-2003, 10:17 PM

But again, the warrior is designed for damage absorption, plain and simple. If you want a casual game where you don't raid go play Boulders Gate. EQ is being designed around the end game. And the endgame is where warriors do what they are designed to do, better then anybody else.

If EQ was designed around the endgame, then why was LoY for players 30 to 60? Why are they revamping zones and making them for non end game people? Just because you are in the endgame does not make the whole game revolve around it.

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 10:32 PM

not only that, but the next expansion is to be for people level 50-60, and for single group content.

Two expansions in a row that are expressly NOT designed for the end game are really putting the lie to your statement, Promethis.

Ainmer

06-08-2003, 11:02 PM

What is your source of information on the next expansion? Can you go into any greater detail?

Daemonwynd

06-08-2003, 11:14 PM

I'm not sure off the top of my heard where I heard the level 50-60 target.

For the single group content, etc, my source was this link (http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/products/product.asp?pf_id=235859).

Raaj

06-08-2003, 11:28 PM

If EQ was designed around the endgame, then why was LoY for players 30 to 60? Why are they revamping zones and making them for non end game people? Just because you are in the endgame does not make the whole game revolve around it.

Please :P Green cons hitting for 200, with 20khp, and huge agro ranges? If LoY is for mid levels, it sure missed it's mark.

LoY was some zones added on so they could justify 20 bucks for 8 new bank slots and dye.

Redhenna

06-08-2003, 11:36 PM

Please :P Green cons hitting for 200, with 20khp, and huge agro ranges? If LoY is for mid levels, it sure missed it's mark.

I have had my alt shaman spend plenty of time in LoY, not PoP type exp, but still good, with decent drops for the level, and well designed zones(well, except Gunthark). It is not perfect, but is a nice alternative for people of the apropriate level range. And it is most definatly mid level.

Spinetwist

06-09-2003, 12:31 AM

When I did the CHarm of the Emerald Warrior quest in Gunthak I could just barely solo a few of those Servants of Hate in the hidden caves.

Lorre

06-09-2003, 12:37 AM

I think the start of this thread was focused on the end game portion of EQ. If you're 65 doing EP stuff then I doubt any of you have aggro issues.

The point of a lot of people who post here is that pre EB weapons, aggro is an issue. It has to do with the full spectrum of what everyone has posted. Classes not regarding aggro, different weapon choices for lvl 50-60's, and AA abilites or lvl being more important play a huge role of what a lot of us face.

For the people with EB weapons, lots of AA's, and insane gear . . . These aggro bitching threads dont make much sense. Up in uber land, people know how to maintain aggro, EB and proc weapons flow freely, and views on the class are skewed.

For the people in the exp grinding era of lvls 50-60, we are limited in the different weapons and gear we can get. Warriors do see a difference in tanking abilities compared to knights in these lvls (unless you group with a fully twinked knight) because we can and do tank better. Thats not the issue though. You can have X amount of HP's and nice gear, but it doesnt help if you cant get the mob to hit you .

Thats the issue that a lot of folks have here. For uber tanks out there with EB+ weapons, they dont see this issue and possibly think theres no problem. But for the folks that I have seen around and grouped with, aggro sometimes is the issue.

I think this whole thread was detrailed and turned into a resume posting of who is more uber.

Spinetwist

06-09-2003, 12:48 AM

I argued the same thing with these uber guys. And the response I got was that its all skill. According to them they can tank any pop mob with a lammy and a frostbringer, in fine steel armor, and have just as good as aggro as if they were decked in uber gear and wielding a BoW.

Lots of good points were made in this thread. But it doesnt change anyones opinion, and it certainly doesnt change the state of Warriors in EQ.

I have a Blade of War, full Raex gear, 300 AA's, and have no problem holding aggro. Therefore, I am right. And all of your opinions are wrong. FEAR ME, I am an uber warrior of Everquest! mwa ha ha ha!

/knock on the door/

jimmy! I laid out your spiderman undies for you to wear to school today!

awww jeez mom. Your interupting me trying to be cool and powerful over the internet.

Spinetwist

06-09-2003, 12:50 AM

p.s. Raaj is my new hero

Raaj

06-09-2003, 02:06 AM

Spinetwist-

There are two (2) seperate issues being addressed in this thread. One being the exp groups viewpoint. The other is the raiding viewpoint.

It's been said many times thus far that in a raid setting, where people know how to manage their agro, warriors tanking is not a big issue. Therefore it stands to reason that people controlling agro allows warriors to do their job.

From this, it's easy to infer that in an exp group, if people were managing agro, the warrior would not have issues.

Next, it was said that a warrior doesn't get a chance because he or she is either not chosen, or is replaced by a paladin or SK. This in turn breeds lazy groupmates who will get into a habit of not watching their agro. When a warrior finally does group with them, they will start getting hit - which they'll attribute to the warrior sucking. This helps drive the demand for SK's or Paladins in groups.

So, with all this in mind, you can see it's not the warriors fault, but it's also not the paladin or SK's fault. It's the lazy players who don't watch their own agro's fault. I believe the VERY FIRST POST in this thread was about how the issue was not warriors, but their groupmates. Even though taunt can work fine in these groups, it requires more attentiveness and skill from the rest of the group. It's easier to use more mana healing a paladn or SK though, than it is to find a decent group. For that reason, the disparity needs addressed.

Oh, and, find a new argument. Your whole "Uber-players are keeping me down" thing isn't working.

Superchum

06-09-2003, 02:21 AM

"It's the lazy players who don't watch their own agro's fault."

I'm not sure it's even their fault either, as they're just a byproduct of the imbalance.

The laziness comes from the fact that hybrids keep mobs off the casters so well.

And since PoP mobs hit so damn hard that mitigation gets silly useless at some points (be you a level 52 warrior tanking in tier 1 or a level 65 warrior in Tactics) ... and the mobs have such low HP pools that snap aggro is actually powerful since burst damage takes the mob out so fast ...

Well, it just breeds the situation where a Ranger/Paladin/SK or even a Beastlord can do the same job a warrior can, and most of the time they do it without letting the casters get hit.

It's not the shaman/enchanter/cleric's fault that they would rather have a paladin come tank for the group so they don't have to get beat up on.

They're just being logical, albeit lazy.

Eh ... Pickup groups themselves start off from laziness, as people aren't adventuring or pushing the edge of the envelope. They're "grinding."

Ah well it's late, my train of thought derailed.

I agree with your post Raaj. I just don't think lazy players can be blamed for the problems either.

And finding a solution that doesn't unbalance or unravel another portion of the game is turning out to be a major headache.

Heh.

Kaldanm

06-09-2003, 02:45 AM

Beeeee... This thread was turned just like the 482 others...

:confused:

Kildace

06-09-2003, 03:15 AM

/knock on the door/

jimmy! I laid out your spiderman undies for you to wear to school today!

Hi, I have a job, a level 65 warrior with a BoWar and full Raex, I am 19, live with my Girlfriend and I get laid regularly. Has it come to your mind that you don't have to be a looser to succeed at EQ and that you may quite simply suck at life?

The laziness comes from the fact that hybrids keep mobs off the casters so well.

Part of it yes. It also comes from the fact that the average player has never hunted in a dungeon, ever. In Kunark people could and would do LoIo > OT > DL, but when they hit 50, they'd turn to Sebilis and learn their classes. The mobs hit hard, situations were tight, a lot of fun was had and people learned to control their aggro because you couldn't run around like a headless chicken when you aggroed, if you aggoed you'd die, and more often than not kill the group with you.
Now it's LoIo > OT > DL > PoN > PoV. No dungeon hunting anymore, no aggro control necessary, why control aggro when you can hit the zone, or the graveyard when shit hits the fan. You can really tell which player has played their char in a dungeon more than once and which has done the outdoor route, and it's fairly sad.

It's not the playerbases's fault obviously, people are lazy and when provided an easy to access zone with huge xp and no risk, they hunt there and don't go out of their way in TT to hunt seb. It is still a pity and poor design by Verant.

PS: Try to read the first post before answering my thread, I don't want it to go on and on and on about warrior's aggro being sucky, turn to one of the 10 other threads on the front page if you wish to whine, there is no sympathy to be gained here, this thread is about the loss of skill of the average player in EQ.

PPS: <3 Chatja.

Daemonwynd

06-09-2003, 04:50 AM

The problem with warriors is not maintaining aggro. Any boob with a decent aggro weapon can maintain aggro, once they have obtained it.

That is the key phrase. WHEN THEY HAVE OBTAINED IT.

The reason why aggro is not an issue on raids is again, simple. The warrior is always given quality time with the mob, so they can obtain aggro. Once aggro is obtained, there is no issue. Keep in mind, I'm talking about the named, not the yard trash. There's still an issue with yard trash.

Previous to PoP, there was no big rush to land any high aggro spell on the mob. Why was this? simple. There was no reason to. Mobs simply didn't hit especially hard. I mean, sure, they hurt, but their damage was nowhere near what it is in PoP today. Casters could wait as long as they felt was necessary to launch those high aggro slows and tashes and debuffs. Hell, slows weren't even considered especially important back then, when you look at it.

That could not be further from the truth today. In PoP today, slowers are pressured to get off their slows as soon as humanly possible, because a unslowed PoP mob can chew through a tank's hitpoints and a healer's mana in incredibly short order. This pressure has slowers and healers cutting it extremely clsoe on the aggro list. Where in Velious and Luclin, they had to work to get aggro, and it wasn't all that tough to never get aggro, in PoP, it is VERY easy to get. This is where the disparity between warriors and hybrids come in.

Warriors, even the well equipped ones, rely on two things to keep aggro. Both are unreliable due to the very nature of how it operates. The first one, which is the only way warriors can generate their OWN aggro, is procs on weapons. This proc is based almost entirely on luck. If you have a bad run of luck, you're not going to have any aggro generation with these weapons whatsoever, you might as well be swinging highly polished, decent ratio, fine steel weapons.
The second way warriors keep aggro is through taunt. Taunt is widely accepted to have no aggro value by itself. Instead, what aggro does is "ride" the hate list, putting the warrior on top of the hate list, plus some small amount. Many factors influence taunt, from the level of the mob relative to the warrior, to the skill level in taunt, to the "tauntability" of the mob. Most of all, taunt is based upon luck, the random roll to see if taunt succeeds.

So, as you can see, all warrior aggro generation is based upon luck, and skill has very little to do with it. The only tool warriors have to provide their own aggro, is also based on luck. At the present time, warriors have ZERO ability to generate aggro on demand, they require time with the mob to lock down aggro. But, again, in PoP, the slowers are the ones that are pushed to slow the mob ASAP. These are the two things that are coming to a head. What has to happen in any given situation, is to either a: give the warrior the time, b: replace the warrior with a hybrid to reduce or remove the wait to lock down aggro altogether, or c: get your ass (as a fragile caster) beat on on a regular basis. It's one of those three choices.

Hybrids have come to the forefront in this situation, as two classes that are able to generate snap aggro. In a situation where the mob needs to be slowed ASAP, hybrids cast spells which easily outdo the aggro of a slow before the mob even reaches camp. The mob is slowed, and the tank never gets chunks ripped out of him by an unslowed mob. The group simply does not notice the difference in hitpoints and mitigation between the two, simply because of that fact that the warrior out of nescessity has to tank an unslowed mob, and the hybrid doesn't.

With that stroke, the warrior's weaknesses of not being able to generate aggro on demand, and the flaw of needing time along with the mob colliding with the nescessity of slowing the mob before it rips the tank a new arse, are instantly exploded into issues that are orders of magnitude greater. This issue has been around since before Velious. Do we not remember that Enraging Blow came into the game as a "patch fix" in Velious while they tried to figure out how to resolve the issue?

Warrior taunt is not an issue. The issue is the lack of warrior aggro generation capabilites on demand. There simply is no such beast, and there needs to be. With the spike in aggro at the very beginning of PoP fights, with the disgusting DPS of unslowed PoP mobs, the luxury of time that warriors have had throughout the game to build aggro has been taken away, and it is shining the spotlight on the warrior's worst weakness. This is where the hybrids are stepping in, as they do NOT have this weakness, and are good enough in the tanking area that they are more appealing to the XP group than the warrior is.

I don't care if you're a warrior in full Raex wielding a BoW, I don't care if you're in crusty armour with a lammy and frostbringer, this issue transcends all levels of the game. You CANNOT generate aggro on demand, and you CANNOT generate a spike of aggro at the beginning of the fight to cover the slow. I don't care how uber you think you are, if you think that you're keeping aggro at the begnning of the fight because you're uber, you're mistaken. You're only keeping aggro because the slower is being careful, and allowing you to keep aggro. They aren't slowing while the mob isn't even in camp yet like they would with a hybrid, because they know with a warrior, that's a quick way to see a rez box. Instead, they are permitting you to keep the attention of the mob, while you build enough aggro to cover the slow. This is the issue, and this is what needs to be addressed. If it is not addressed, all we are are hybrids with slightly better DPS and much less utility, because as I've said before and I'll say again, our 10-20% better HP benefit is wiped out nearly the second we're tanking the unslowed mob to build aggro while waiting for the slower to get the damn thing to stip ripping us apart, while the comparable hybrid has generated enough aggro before even touching the mob, that the mob is able to be slowed before getting in melee range of anyone.

I'm not asking for 100% taunt, I'm not asking for the aggro generation capabilities of the hybrids. There are many ways to deal with this issue. Obviously, I prefer giving the warrior the ability to generate aggro on demand, within well defined limits so that the warrior can never be as good as Hybrids in aggro generation, but still retaining SOME ability to generate aggro whenever they see fit. And I'm not talking about improve taunt. Taunt simply rides the hate list. I don't want to be riding some other damn class's aggro, I want to generate my OWN. I want to be able to kick the damn mob in the balls and piss it off so much at me that it doesn't care as much that it just got slowed by someone else, it wants ME dead.

Other ideas would be to increase warrior utility in the form of unhooking disc timers to operate independently. Obviously only one disc would be able to be used at a time. Another idea along the same lines is to give warriors permanent fighting styles... IE damage for when not MT, defensive for tankin hard hitters, aggro for when MT which would be less DPS but more aggro, and so on.

Another idea which could obviously trivialize encounters would be to impove warrior mitigation so as to make the warrior the best one to take damage again.

The least popular idea is to simply nerf hybrids, so that xp'ing with a hybrid as MT is no longer trivial in difficulty. Entire communities would be in an uproar over this one, however.

I hope this clarifies my position on this issue.

Smakz

06-09-2003, 05:16 AM

Daemon, show me a raid where a warrior is given "quality time" with a mob, at our level of play. Hell, when i play MA, i hit something once, twice, maybe 3 times if tripple attack fires, then the rest of the raid commences ass beating.

I notice, on raids, and in EXP groups, the guys that overaggro are always the same people. Every so often you get a fluke occurance of a decent player drawing taunt, but thats rare in a good toon. Every time Raid_mob_02 gets turned away from me, i look to Guild_Rogue_asshole_01, or Guild_Monk_02, its always one of those 2, im not naming names, they know who they are, and would prolly just back up the claim with something along the lines of "you suck thats why" and then continue to pull aggro.

In EXP groups, i have found a few people who love to get hit, theres a few shammys, a rogue and monk or 2, and a few EBay or Twink rangers out there that dont know what to do. But i put the names down on a list in my head, and rememebr for the future for group building purposes.

A well played warrior gets known for not having aggro issues, knowing his job, and doing it well. One that slacks off, blames his gear, and bitches as SoE cause he cant hold aggro gets known for being a whiny asshat who doesnt do his job.

And in response to a previous post about giving a "uber warrior" fine steel swords (lets go with combine swords here, so he can hit shit thats invuln to non magic weapons) and watch him get aggro, yeah, it would happen, cause that warrior knows what it takes to do his job right.

I never had aggro issues when i was weilding gimp ass no proc weapons in PoV. There are people on here gonna blame my aggro on BoC, well, i havent had it forever, and really, had shit for aggro weapons about 3 months ago. Did it stop me from gaining aggro, nope, cause i know how to play my class.

Olafsky

06-09-2003, 05:32 AM

You know I find it funny when these threads are reduced to the "You guys are uber you dont care about me" shit. Lets get something straight everyone of us worked hard to get where we are today in this game.

When you talk about aggro you need to talk about the other people in the group or raid or whatever. It is there responsibility to manage there own aggro. I believe the point of this thread originally was that people dont understand that its not the warriors job.

Here is what I do if super Paly wants to pull aggro and be an idiot I let him do it. Then laugh at him when he dies. Then people in the guild yell at him and I laugh again. Also remember something else we were taking stuff like AoW long before level 65 and all the neat AA's and gear people have now. We were using willsappers and the like and had 6000-6500 hps fully buffed when we did it. You didnt hear us crying then. So why are you crying now?

Varatho

06-09-2003, 06:43 AM

If all you think it takes is warrior skill then pray tell, what is your l33+ strat on aggro generation? Not what other people do while jumping thru hoops to keep aggro on you but what you do to generate your godlike amounts of unshakeable aggro?

Is it something like:

1: Equip weapon(s); get buffs (if applicable)

2: Stand as close to mob as possible and target said mob.

3: Turn attack on.

4: Mash kick/bash/slam when they un-gray.

5: Push (AE) taunt if mob is still not hitting you.

Seriously, is there something that I missed that warriors have direct control over ( and don't tell me disarm: that PoS button generates no aggro and I have proved it. ) and will thusly be available to use under every situation to generate aggro?

Bunnie Burner

06-09-2003, 06:55 AM

damn, 8 pages long... forgive me if I haven't read them all before posting a reply :p

Knights finally have some use, and imo, they are finally fixed and can get groups. After all this time of being a rather screwed class, I think they deserve it.
So let's try to leave the Knights out of this, and figure whats wrong with the warrior. Without making any comparisons.

Aggro isn't the biggest problem for warriors in my opinion, but since the discussion is about aggro, here goes:
------------

Warrior Aggro is entirely based upon his weapon(s).
Taunt shouldn't be taken into count, because all it does is server as Emergency aggro. It gives you a way to regain aggro, but doesn't give any way to Keep the aggro.

So basicaly,
Aggro = Weapons.
You have good aggro weapons, you are a good warrior.

THE problem, is this:

The current "Uber point" of a warrior, is to be effective in a group.
Have no problems with aggro.

So this makes the non uber warriors UNeffective.

It shouldn't be this way.

Warriors should be more or less effective.
And the "uber point" of warriors should be some other bonus.

Possibly the uber point of a warrior could be to have Aggro comparable to knights? (eep, brought knights into this again :x )

But the current "You have to be uber to be an effective warrior" just pisses me off.

I dream of a day, where any warrior can be Effective, even the ones without SoDs or BoCs...

Either make long hard quests for SoD comparable weapons.

Or change the whole EB system.

Have different sorts of aggro effects. Having lowbie warriors needing an arsenal to keep effective aggro.
While the high end warrior just needs one weapon to accomplish it.

Many solutions can be found to make different sorts of aggro procs.

Frodlin7th

06-09-2003, 07:30 AM

Knights finally have some use, and imo, they are finally fixed and can get groups. After all this time of being a rather screwed class, I think they deserve it.
So let's try to leave the Knights out of this, and figure whats wrong with the warrior. Without making any comparisons.

I cannot possibly disagree with this statement more. The whole issue isn't that warriors suck in a vacuum. If limited warrior aggro generation were the "default", people would adapt and learn to get by, learn better how to control their personal aggro and so on. This is seriously the whole point of this thread, and a point that it's impossible to be honest with yourself and disagree with at the same time. As many people... myself, Kildace, Phantron, Khumak, Raaj, Promethis, Chatja, and the list goes on and on and on... have said time and time again is that Knight aggro is so powerful that it enables non-tank players to suck, to be morons without consequence.

Here's some undeniable facts:

1. Knights have the ability to, at will cause a monster to hate them.

2. Knights have the ability to endure the consequences of said hatred under most circumstances.

3. Warriors have greater ability to endure said consequences. In an experience group setting the ability is approximately 10-15% better, and on a raid level monster significantly better.

4. Warrior do not have a 10-15% lesser offsetting chance to cause said consequences to occur, their chance is exponentially smaller and dependent upon slowing the rate of experience gain down.

5. On raid level monsters, the tradeoff is substantial enough to warrant a behaviour change on the part of other players.

6. On Experience level monsters it is not.

This is why the phrase "Dust off my warrior for raids, then put him back on the shelf" is becoming common.

The fact is, the entire problem of 'tanking' is not that warrior aggro generation in a vacuum is insufficient, but that the balance between warrior and knight aggro generation is far too wide while the defensive balance is too narrow. One cannot look into "warrior improvements" without considering knights. it's simply impossible, for if Knights simply didn't log on for a week, people would adapt to the style of warriors without a second glance, indicating that the problem is not with warriors by themselves.

Braeorn

06-09-2003, 08:15 AM

Answer to Frod question many pages back. No, not balanced.

Warriors are so heavily dependant on weapons to generate hate while knights have the innate ability to get it at will.

I'd like to see some balance brought back in. It wasn't until I hit 65 that I started DW'ing hate weaps, and knights get agg from what, a level 9 spell? (no clue what lvl really, but not the point).

I don't want a knight nerf, I don't want to change mains, I don't want to whine till the cows come home...just a little more inate agg ability would be fine.

Besides the flames, most posters here have valid arguments. Shik kinda summed it up in that we sit somewhere in the middle of being broken and being fine. I just believe we could use a little improvement.

Spinetwist

06-09-2003, 09:04 AM

If you busted ass to get the gear you have and attain the level of skill you have, then I respect that. But just because you have reached that level, doesnt make your comments 100% right, and everyone elses' 100% wrong.

The people who are arguing that Warriors are fine are decked in crazy gear, so its no secret they aren't having problems holding aggro. Im not saying warriors are broken, and Im not bitching about aggro, Im simply saying that I think its not accurate for the elemental warriors to compare class issues to the tier 1 & 2 warriors. Thats all Im saying.

Ainmer

06-09-2003, 09:26 AM

Ragnarian

06-09-2003, 09:29 AM

Well, I'm a tier 1 lvl 59 warrior in crappy gear (check magelo) and honestly, I think warriors as a whole are fine. The problems that I have in holding aggro are with groups that don't either understand how aggro is generated or are lazy idiots that don't care to owrry about how aggro is generated.

Example, was in a group the other night in POD LCY with a enchanter, wizard, mage. I would call the incoming and before I hit the mob chanty was tashing, mage was malo'ing, and wizard was unloading the nukes. 3 pulls later the wizard died and I left the group, they were all confused and wanted to know why I left (was using a frosty and barnacle covered axe). I get another group in RCY with a shaman, wizard, rogue 5 minutes later. I have absolutely no problems with aggro, everyone waits a second to attack, no one other than me got hit in this group until like the 23rd pull (I was keeping track)(using a Frosty and Journeyman's walking stick for tash proc).

Also, I have found a couple things that help me hold aggro a bit better. When pulling mobs in (no monk in grp) I usually hit em about 6-7 times before I bring em in. The one thing I do when I lose aggro that brings em back to me 99% of the time before they even hit anyone else is SIT.

My personal opinion is that warriors aren't broke, it's that over time people have become lazy idiots with the dumbing down of EQ in general. To me nerfing Knights wouldn't help, they already lack in HP and mitigation that warriors have, so to make up for that they both have nice aggro generation methods to make up for that shortcoming. Warriors on the otherhand, have great HP and mitigation abilities, so they make aggro generation harder overall. This is what keeps from trivializing the classes as a whole, the balance vs. imbalance of the 2 class types. I don't want to log on next week and see knights nerfed or warrior taunt guaranteed, then they have dumbed down the classes to the newb point you all constantly complain about. This is my opinion on the subject, I'm sure I will be called an idiot on some reply, but that's fine, it's every person's opinion overall here on what needs to be done and not done.

Ragnarian

06-09-2003, 09:29 AM

Well, I'm a tier 1 lvl 59 warrior in crappy gear (check magelo) and honestly, I think warriors as a whole are fine. The problems that I have in holding aggro are with groups that don't either understand how aggro is generated or are lazy idiots that don't care to worry about how aggro is generated.

Example, was in a group the other night in POD LCY with a enchanter, wizard, mage. I would call the incoming and before I hit the mob chanty was tashing, mage was malo'ing, and wizard was unloading the nukes. 3 pulls later the wizard died and I left the group, they were all confused and wanted to know why I left (was using a frosty and barnacle covered axe). I get another group in RCY with a shaman, wizard, rogue 5 minutes later. I have absolutely no problems with aggro, everyone waits a second to attack, no one other than me got hit in this group until like the 23rd pull (I was keeping track)(using a Frosty and Journeyman's walking stick for tash proc).

Also, I have found a couple things that help me hold aggro a bit better. When pulling mobs in (no monk in grp) I usually hit em about 6-7 times before I bring em in. The one thing I do when I lose aggro that brings em back to me 99% of the time before they even hit anyone else is SIT.

My personal opinion is that warriors aren't broke, it's that over time people have become lazy idiots with the dumbing down of EQ in general. To me nerfing Knights wouldn't help, they already lack in HP and mitigation that warriors have, so to make up for that they both have nice aggro generation methods to make up for that shortcoming. Warriors on the otherhand, have great HP and mitigation abilities, so they make aggro generation harder overall. This is what keeps from trivializing the classes as a whole, the balance vs. imbalance of the 2 class types. I don't want to log on next week and see knights nerfed or warrior taunt guaranteed, then they have dumbed down the classes to the newb point you all constantly complain about. This is my opinion on the subject, I'm sure I will be called an idiot on some reply, but that's fine, it's every person's opinion overall here on what needs to be done and not done.

Apothes Drudoll

06-09-2003, 09:29 AM

AE Taunt is not completely foolproof. I've seen it fail more than once. Another weakness is not being able to pull off low health aggro.

umm I don't know what game you been playing but I don't care how many spells you cast on a mob or stuns (most complain about ressited stuns (( granted a non resisted stun may make a heal land and shield may also make a heal ladn))) you can not pull a mob off a char that has low HP aggro period utill they are heald or dead same this applies to all classes and yes even thoes damn Pallys and sk's aggroin machines.

*goes to get some popcorn and a beer* *thinks to self I am only on page 6 going to take a bit to catch up with all the good gossip may need to hit the store for more beer and popcorn*

Kildace

06-09-2003, 09:31 AM

I would phrase this differently.

Either you revamp aggro and make knight a BIT less effective but still better than warrior's, or, you give warrior a unique ability that makes them needed by a group beyond tanking, if the group works at aggro they then have a superior tank and an ability, if they don't they still have this ability.

And btw, if you put me in a group with guildmates, and Combine weapons i would sure as hell manage to keep aggro on me, not because I am particularly good at what i do, I know my job, but because the people I play with also know theirs.

Spinetwist

06-09-2003, 09:34 AM

I think rather then challenge some responses here from obviously competent Warriors in this forum, I am going to hit up PoV and do some aggro testing with some basic weapons - Frosty, Lammy, hell even a Yak.

any suggestions to add to my experiment.

ps. I turned off my sig just for you Chatja. <3

Kildace

06-09-2003, 09:40 AM

The only experiment is to check out your group's behavior, and call it if they play like shit. Tell the wizard to hold is nukes on inc, tell the chanter to not sit after debuffing, tell them to wait till you've hit the mob before attacking, and I can bet that this group will be better than it was before you joined them if they need the advice.

Spinetwist

06-09-2003, 09:46 AM

I don't doubt the group can play a part in controlling aggro, but Id still like to do some field tests to see what all the gruffufle is all aboot.

I dont care about the group, thats something we sometimes dont have control over.

If the arguements supporting warriors are fine are true then I should have no problem holding aggro in PoV using a lammy and a yak. Im gonna try it and see whats up.

Kildace

06-09-2003, 09:49 AM

If the arguements supporting warriors are fine are true then I should have no problem holding aggro in PoV using a lammy and a yak. Im gonna try it and see whats up.

The argument supporting that warriors are fine says that warriors are fine if the group knows how to play. Read the first post again.

I don't doubt the group can play a part in controlling aggro

In a group, if you don't have a BoW or an hybrid, aggro is 70% the group, 30% the warrior.

I dont care about the group, thats something we dont have control over - over peoples skills.

Have you even read this thread at all beside the petty flaming?

Isk

06-09-2003, 09:49 AM

grats on completely missing the point

Apothes Drudoll

06-09-2003, 09:57 AM

The biggest problem is people today is the have to make 65 ASAP and skip the progression of things. Ie back in the day there were zones you did not do well in unless you had visited zones previously and i ttook weeks to make a level not hours as it does now. SO what you get is a bunch of warriors equipped to do HOT or NtoV trying to tank in PoP tier 2+ and whinin cause they can't hold aggro and the pally that has Ntov gear or better can tank as good as a warrior (granted that like equip HP gap not that big wich should be changed so warriors have abigger hp gap imho). so you have a bunch of chars now that all tey want to do is grid to 60 ASAP then grind AA asap so they choose Knites that can get aggro without gear IE spells so they can nuke the mobs down with thier sub par gear and get that level or AA. where as all the old timers around here progressed through the normal progression of things and have gear appropriate to where they are groupin so they ofcourse see no problem.

My solution is to limit PoP to only thoes people that have progressed through NtoV basically gear check chars and only allows thoes that SoE envisioned PoP for to go there. Like that will ever happen hehe it is only going to get worse when SoE opens up the tier 2 and 3 zones to all.

So in short if you follow the normal progression of content then you will have little issue with aggro (if your group doesent suck). But I am willing to bet 75%+ (pullin numbers out of my ass) of the people in PoP without ele access have never set foot in NtoV or SSRA.

So what we have is Pl'd players (essentially PL'd by saying they maximised EXP and not content) who have sub par gear (although with mudflation you can buy some pretty damn nice stuff now adays kinda like my gloves they were spendy as hell but back in the day you would never see them for sale.) and don't know how to properly play thier class IE control aggro and not try to kill as fast as possible to make that exp bar go fast or the aa bar go fast.

EQ is in a sad state thees days I am not sure how SoE can fix it but something should be done and if there is no fix then they should pull the plug reset all the fuggin servers and start over ;)

btw I am sure you all don't give a rats ass about my post's but hey with enough popcorn and beer I will talk till I am blue in the face and nothin will shut me up :p

Frodlin7th

06-09-2003, 10:08 AM

Let me clarify my point and pare it down to the bare minimum:

If there's 3 classes that perform a function, and people can be morons without consequence with 2 classes and they can't with the 3rd, then members of the 3rd class is going to suffer as a result.

Best Solution I can think of: Substantially raise mana cost on aggro generation for the first 2 classes, so that the consequence for acting like idiots is downtime. Less acting like idiots, less downtime... i.e. Less casts necessary of high aggro spells for the equivalent result.

Apothes Drudoll

06-09-2003, 10:09 AM

Oh btw you can take all my aggro from all my spells makes no difference to me when I originally created my pally during velious era (I played a ranger during original content before any expansions started 1 week after my server went live. ranger were so broke back then I deleted him at 50 to make a pally) I did not think hey I am gonan make a pally cause knight classes can lock aggro till the cows come home and nothing but Low HP aggro will break it. No I made a pally because I liked the idea of being able to tank and cast some spells. Hard to go from a casting class to non casting class.

anyway fuggin nerf the shit out of Knight aggro I could care less but I can tell you it will not make any of you that are whinin here happy. Without my spells creating aggro I will find other ways to generate aggro kinda like wars through equip and such.

So any knight that made a knight before pop that tells you they made a knight for aggro abilities is full of shit period.

bah I am rambling now sorry ;)

Ainmer

06-09-2003, 10:11 AM

Apothes Drudoll

06-09-2003, 10:11 AM

grats on completely missing the point

Why thank you I pride myself in missing the point as pointy things tend to hurt.

Frodlin7th

06-09-2003, 10:34 AM

Better suggestion, Frodlin:

Make Lost Dungeons of Norrath incredibly harder and have incredibly higher reward than existing content. This will serve to make group compositions of Warrior+secondary tank. Make the xp and loot in these zones 2x that of existing dungeons, and force a dungeon crawl.

In this way, if people want brainless xp they can go to any of dozens of zones and snooze their way through. If people want a fun night of challenge and reward, they'll grab a warrior and head to a harder dungeon.

The idea is incredibly attractive to me, because dungeons is where I'm WAY more comfortable on Frod. I literally HATE outdoor exp, and really enjoy the volatility and "keep on your toes" aspect of dungeons.

I'd be slightly concerned about that with one circumstance though, and that is, if memory serves me correctly, and I fail to understand the rationale, but people were LIVID during Kunark, particularly casters that the best content was indoors, and the Warrior/Enc/Cleric combo was fairly crucial, while they were relegated to Skyfire mountains, BW, and other "caster friendly" zones.

I'd love the idea of timed content in conjunction with LDoN. What I mean by this is, you set out to do a dungeon crawl... once you pass a given point, a timer begins where you have X number of minutes to get to the next point (similar to how Time is). Mana conservation would become a much more interesting issue since a group would have to have enough to pass that threshold, and blowing it early would have serious consequences to the advancement of the group. Non-Mana using classes would naturally benefit if they kept their cool, and all of a sudden you have a little more balance.

Dinian

06-09-2003, 10:55 AM

Ladies and Gentlemen, it appears that the warrior version of Goodwind is here.

Frodlin7th

06-09-2003, 11:01 AM

Hahahaha,

Spinetwist = Goodwind

Rumblingdeth = Seventhsword

Binnamar

06-09-2003, 01:00 PM

My solution is to limit PoP to only thoes people that have progressed through NtoV basically gear check chars and only allows thoes that SoE envisioned PoP for to go there. Like that will ever happen hehe it is only going to get worse when SoE opens up the tier 2 and 3 zones to all.

erm sorry to say, but this is the worst idea I have EVER heard. Your gimping the guilds that don't have many people by not allowing them to get the levels they need to get the gear. Sure you can do Ntov with a buncha level 60s, but isn't it easier with 65+aa?

Thats also creating bottlenecks/cockblocking areas: guild_001 (just ahead of guild_002) decides in order for them to get a greater lead on guild_002, they will do anything in their power from letting guild_002 into NToV/wherever, letting them run amok in PoP without guild_002 breathing down their necks.

Maybe I picked up the wrong point from your post, but it seems like you would like to insert even more "flags" into the game.

Oh, and raididng shouldn't be tied in any way to exp, rather then to make it easier. A person that can't get to NToV (maybe because of guild not being ready, not being in a guild etc etc) shouldn't be penalized with no EXP.

Apothes Drudoll

06-09-2003, 01:07 PM

They can level to 65 my point is to limit pop zones based on gear IE being ready. the point is to make them go through the normal progression of the game IE original content > kunark > velious and so on instead of doing 6 zones to level 65 (not sure on the amount of zones but I know it is like not that many to get to 65)

and besides they would never implement anything like that it was more hell of it from a old school player then anything else :)

btw I may have played the game a long ass time but I still ahve never been to NtoV (all the guild's I been in have been small family things which is fine with me I could care less f I can grind in PoP or not although I can in tier 1 at least :) )

Apothes Drudoll

06-09-2003, 01:11 PM

oh and just want to add i would much rather go play in NtoV and get the gear there then play in PoP without being in a uber guild.

Redhenna

06-09-2003, 01:31 PM

oh and just want to add i would much rather go play in NtoV and get the gear there then play in PoP without being in a uber guild.

Got to agree with that statement. I pray that the new expansion will have a bunch of high end dungeons where exp is at least as good as PoP, itemization is good, and they are fun. Would make the game a much better place.

Now back to our regularly scheduled debate...

Braeorn

06-09-2003, 02:22 PM

My view is that a warrior playing exactly how they should be, can and is being ousted from xp grps every day because of the ability of knights to lock aggro. I'm not saying that warriors can't hold aggro or that {A} is a better tank than {B}, but an xp grind group can max DPS by this simple fact. Hell, give him the best hate weapons and I'd bet a knight can peel agg away for the duration of the mobs HP bar.

If this was the intent for the knight class, they hey, theres no point discussing it further -- but where does this leave warriors?

I'm no uber warrior, but I've made overlord and into the tier3 zones so I'd consider myself somewhat knowledgeable. I think we need a tuning...plain and simple.

Furor

06-09-2003, 02:34 PM

are all hella WICKED jaded.

Blaming newbies for their own aggro problems is trite. They aren't being stupid, they are being resourceful. They are maximizing their efficiency in experience groups. Duh? Are you guys fucking blind?

"Oh man, this is so ghey. The monk isn't feigning every chance he can, the rogue pressed backstab one too many times, the wizard dropped a EER a bit too early. Kick them all, we need replacements cause no fucking way is our warrior faulty."

Does that shit make sense to you? Anyone with half a brain will simply kick the warrior and put in a paly or SK and PLAY THE GAME AS THEY WANT MAXIMIZING THEIR EXPERIENCE GAIN AND FUN.

But no, when a warrior enters some pickup experience group, a whole new set of ground rules must be laid down. "PEOPLE OF MY EXPERIENCE GROUP, HEAR MY WORDS! YOU MUST WALK ON EGGSHELLS AROUND ME OR FACE DEATH AS NOTHING I CAN DO SHORT OF SCREAM LIKE A WOMAN WILL GET THIS MOB BACK ON ME ONCE YOU DO TOO MUCH DAMAGE AND STUFF!" Meanwhile, WHAT exactly is this warrior bringing to the group? Right, jack shit...

Sorry, it ain't cool, it ain't ok.

And in a raid setting, it sucks too. You're all just too sedated to realize what's going on and how much DPS you are missing out on due to having to really hold back and watch your own aggro so Mister Defensive Warrior can hold on to the precious aggro. I find it unacceptable, lame, whatever you wanna call it... But encounters are tuned around this? Encounters are WRONG. Most of them in PoP are dogshit.

"I'll take another mob that puts out 1200dps with a side of adds please..."

Apothes Drudoll

06-09-2003, 02:55 PM

Does that shit make sense to you? Anyone with half a brain will simply kick the warrior and put in a paly or SK and PLAY THE GAME AS THEY WANT MAXIMIZING THEIR EXPERIENCE GAIN AND FUN.

/rant on

yep I see what eq has come to grindin exp fuck the adventuring learning new content just fucking hit auto attack and go afk then come back to se eyour exp bar has moved well I say fuck it just put in a mob you hail to get level and AA's and EQ qill be soo fucking fun people will throw thier money at SoE. I swear people thees days want everything handed to them on a fucking silver platter and don't want to have to do shit or get the gear to do things. btw while your at it SoE please make a mob we can all hail for armor and shit to or just put /test buff on live servers everyone will have so much damnd fun!!

oh and if you say I am a pally so I can say crap cause i dont have to play with the desparity in aggro fucking take my god damn aggro from all my spells I have said it before and say it now it wont affect me one bit I will still crawl dungeons and enjoy the content and do the grind to xp when I need to.

/rant off

Aldarion_Shard

06-09-2003, 03:10 PM

Furor,

See im torn here, because while I agree with what youre saying, you used the word "hella" :eek:

Furor

06-09-2003, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by Aldarion_Shard
Furor,

See im torn here, because while I agree with what youre saying, you used the word "hella" :eek:

I also managed to bold and capitalize the word WICKED.

Doh, did it again.

Biggwinz

06-09-2003, 03:19 PM

Paladins can out taunt us if they want, everybody knows that.

But I say its balanced. Because the warrior class is deisgned for one reason: taking an insane amount of melee damage.

In order to take an insane amount of melee damage the mob has to actually be pissed at us enough to hit us!

bal·anced, bal·anc·ing, bal·anc·es
v.
To bring into or maintain in a state of equilibrium.

Thats probably the best explaniation for balanced as how it fits here!

Lets see as it relates to exp groups:

Pally
Tanks
Rez's
Heals
No problems with holding aggro (PERIOD)
That means the solid attention of the mobs
That means only having to maintain one person to heal (good on the mana)
That means not haveing to worry that everyone in your group is the BEST aggro manager!

Warriors
Max 1k more hps than a pally
Can migrate damage better (oh oh oh I am wanted for raid mobs)
Oh yeah, I can duel weild so I have two chances to hope the RNG favors me and pray the reposts are in my favor and not the mobs
I can spend AA's to help me cover for when nothing goes in my favor.

I am not looking for nerfs here! I would like to be able to cover my groups butt when they get aggro. I am suppose to take the damage, not the shammy/bst/enc/cleric!

I dont want AA's, weapon procs or something like shield, I just want my taunt button to work as effeciently as a pally or sk! It isnt about equipment and it sure is not about AA's its about balance. I would like to be able to taunt as well as a Pally or SK.

I have yet to see a valid argument on why it is balanced that both pallies and sk's are able to out taunt warrior yet I have a "taunt" button.

I can hold aggro 99% of the time it is the 1% that ends up killing someone

Biggwinz

06-09-2003, 03:23 PM

I think I am going to change my shield butto to the following:

/assist
/pause 2
/shield
/tt I am sorry that my taunt button doesnt work, in the mean time please enjoy my shielding!

Glatius2

06-09-2003, 04:44 PM

It's been said many times thus far that in a raid setting, where people know how to manage their agro, warriors tanking is not a big issue. Therefore it stands to reason that people controlling agro allows warriors to do their job.

A couple of different things. For one, on a raid there is a very clear incentive for people to control their aggro carefully. Often it is only the Warrior's use of /disc defensive which allows the Clerics to time the CH cycle properly to keep him standing. Therefore it's very important that the boss mob's attention stay focused on the Warrior (of course I know you know this, I'm just reiterating for the sake of clarity).

Now, in an experience group this is not the case. /disc defensive is not required, particularly if the mob is slowed early. In fact the safety of the entire group goes up significantly if the mob is slowed as early as possible. So there is no major incentive for people to work at letting the Warrior have aggro in that regard.

And that a Paladin or a Shadow Knight tanking in an experience group will allow the mob to be slowed immediately, thereby not only saving healer mana, but also improving the safety of all concerned, is a significant consideration for players, skilled or unskilled.

The fact is there are players who can't play well enough to allow the Warrior to hold aggro. But there are also many players who see no reason to be bothered with it, even if they're perfectly capable. And if the mobs aren't slowed quickly then the Warrior is at greater risk and as a result so is the group as a whole.

So while you can argue that it's that players suck that make a Warrior's low aggro control a problem all you want, it doesn't change the cold hard fact that when given a choice people are nearly universally choosing the Knight over the Warrior. It may be because they suck as players. It may be because the Warriors suck as players. It may be because the don't want to deal with the additional grief a Warrior represents. It might be because they don't like how Warriors look in their armor. Regardless, it's happening. And telling people that as Warriors their skills suck or the other players that their skills suck isn't going to suddenly get Warriors on an equal playing field with the Knights.

You think Warriors are fine? Great, then offer up something else that will get them groups because they sure as hell aren't getting them now. And most of us were playing the game fine with no trouble getting groups prior to PoP. Many of us were consider very good to excellent players prior to PoP. And you would have us to believe that suddenly we all started sucking or the people we played with all started sucking? That sounds a bit far fetched.

Promethis

06-09-2003, 05:01 PM

Does that shit make sense to you? Anyone with half a brain will simply kick the warrior and put in a paly or SK and PLAY THE GAME AS THEY WANT MAXIMIZING THEIR EXPERIENCE GAIN AND FUN.

The entire glaring WICKED point of my earlier posts was to say fucking deal with the fact that they can get aggro over us. See my post about what a warrior is designed to do.

I'm perfectly happy with my class as it stands now. Only thing I would change is have an external flurry (wouldn't that be just WICKED?!) message $$$

Can I use more taunt? Sure fine, I don't care. I can do my job as it stands now and we kill shit that needs killed (except for when the clerics start accidently clicking BDA on the MT, but thats another rant).

Promethis

06-09-2003, 05:03 PM

the wizard dropped a EER a bit too early.

Don't hate just because you got manaburned by a fucking twink :P

Redhenna

06-09-2003, 06:12 PM

This has turned into a highly entertaining thread. Furor calling people jaded, Apothes calling for a pally nerf(sorta), and what I think is my favorite line:

I am sorry that my taunt button doesnt work, in the mean time please enjoy my shielding!

This gem is close tho in entertainment value:

...fucking deal with the fact that they can get aggro over us...

I can deal with that fact. Trouble is, too many of the other people in this game(whom I need to be able to exp my warrior, as we do not solo well), do not want to have to deal with it. And when the slower or the cleric(both of whom are needed) say they want a knight, the rest of the group is probably going to go along.

Glatius2

06-09-2003, 07:24 PM

The entire glaring WICKED point of my earlier posts was to say fucking deal with the fact that they can get aggro over us. See my post about what a warrior is designed to do.

No, the weren't designed to have this gigantic advantage. It was designed to be a huge disadvantage. The environment and the classes have changed enough that what was once a disadvantage is now an advantage. And while you might be happy with your class, with your impressive megalo and ego to go with it, the rest of us average Warriors are pissed as hell.

But hey, as long as you enjoy the game, screw the rest of us, right?

Grendonbb

06-09-2003, 09:51 PM

Heh if you would stop bitching and concentrate on playing your class well, you'd realize we aren't broken at all. True, taunt could have a better chance of going off, but if you just time your taunting right, you will rarely (if ever) have trouble keeping agro, and even if that .01% of the time that you do lose it, bring that /shield hotkey into use.

All the people who piss and moan about pallies/sks gettin chosen over you in exp groups is because people have learned that you cannot keep agro. It's not our class that has you screwed; it's merely that people KNOW that you cannot hold agro. Yes, there are some people that only decide to group with pallies/sks... but thats their loss.

All in all, all your griping isn't going to change anything. All you're doing is wasting valuable time that you COULD have spent learning how to play your class right.

Frodlin7th

06-09-2003, 11:08 PM

Grendon,

I take that insult as you intended it I'm sure... with great offense. I'm sorry that you hve blinded yourself to the ABSOLUTE truth that you can't hold aggro without lame devices and special buffs and even then, there's no benefit to having you tanking unless you think that conserving mana that would be spent actually nuking with an SK tanking or a paladin tanking is a plus.

I'm sorry, it's not people who ealize how screwd up this class is who aren't 'playing their class right", it's people who have deluded themselves into thinking that there's actually some benefit to having you that are screwing it up for me.

I GUARANTEE you I can taunt better than you... I can TANK WAY better than you, yet here I am, pointing out that the class is still a stinking pile of dogshit, because there's no offsetting advantage to the disadvantage we bring. You DO understand what balance an equilibrium are do you not?

Furor

06-09-2003, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by Grendonbb
Heh if you would stop bitching and concentrate on playing your class well, you'd realize we aren't broken at all. True, taunt could have a better chance of going off, but if you just time your taunting right, you will rarely (if ever) have trouble keeping agro, and even if that .01% of the time that you do lose it, bring that /shield hotkey into use.

All the people who piss and moan about pallies/sks gettin chosen over you in exp groups is because people have learned that you cannot keep agro. It's not our class that has you screwed; it's merely that people KNOW that you cannot hold agro. Yes, there are some people that only decide to group with pallies/sks... but thats their loss.

All in all, all your griping isn't going to change anything. All you're doing is wasting valuable time that you COULD have spent learning how to play your class right.

Simple question there, since you obviously know something that I do not - What exactly does Grendon bring to the table in an experience group? PLEASE, PLEASE tell me. I'm new to this crazy game of Everquest where everybody thinks they know what they're talking about when in reality most people don't know jack shit save for the .5% of the population who are truly educated in the ways of play.

So again, remind me, WHY would I pick you over an SK or Paly in any experience group - EVER.

To put it another way, most of these warriors here, even the old timers, don't realize how many changes came to the Warrior class directly from my gameplay and input to developers. Do you for one minute think you know something I don't? I know how to play my class. I call your post a line of bullshit and I find it fucking insulting. With that said, I am right, you are wrong. Read what I wrote earlier in this thread for the fifth grade definition of why your argument sucks and holds no merit.

BOTTOM LINE: NOBODY GIVES A SHIT IF YOU PLAY YOUR CLASS LIKE THE SECOND COMING OF JESUS. YOUR CLASS IS STILL USELESS IN EXPERIENCE GROUPS WHEN THERE ARE 100 OTHER PALYS AND SKS tHAT CAN TAKE YOUR SPOT AND DO AN INFINITELY BETTER JOB. WITH only 20% of your 'skill.' Sad....

Quit with the BS, some of the end game warriors will support you, foolishly I might add, and shame on you guys, but I'm a fucking Ancient Relic of EQ and I call a spade a spade or in this case, bullshit bullshit.

So again, WHAT IS 'THEIR LOSS' as you put it, from not having you in their experience group? Tell me please - name ONE goddamn thing you bring to the table. You're left with nothing... give it up.

Brutul

06-10-2003, 12:17 AM

Frodlin,

Believe it or not, I agree with this statement 100%...

Originally posted by Frodlin7th
because there's no offsetting advantage to the disadvantage we bring.

What I have a problem with is this one...

Originally posted by Frodlin7th
the class is still a stinking pile of dogshit

The class is most certainly not a stinking pile of dogshit. We have a very solid role on raids now, one of the classes you can't get by without. We are very capable of preforming our function in experience groups. A warrior can be an important contributing member to a good experience group in any zone.

The problem is an imbalance in experience groups. A paladin with similar gear to me tanks 90% as well as I do, and does 90% of my DPS. In addition he can heal fairly effectively and hold aggro 100% of the time. His benefits far outweigh his drawbacks when compared to me. That is an imbalance. For that reason there is no advantage to having a warrior in your group over a paladin in the same gear, and you have to live with worse aggro and no LoH, healing, or any of the other things a paladin can do. The same can be said of a shadowknight. This IS a problem and it DOES need to be fixed.

HOWEVER, delete paladins and shadowknights from the game and there is nothing wrong with warriors at all. We are far from a broken or worthless class. We aren't nearly as bad off as Paladins used to be before they got buffed. Saying things like "the class is still a stinking pile of dogshit" is a huge exaggeration and in my eyes you lower your credibility with this kind of hyperbole.

Daemonwynd

06-10-2003, 12:47 AM

Originally posted by Brutul
[HOWEVER, delete paladins and shadowknights from the game and there is nothing wrong with warriors at all.

I disagree. Remove paladins and sk's from the game and we're still utterly dependant on luck (in proc and taunt success) to obtain and retain aggro. We have no ability to generate aggro on demand, and we are extremely weak in the aggro department at the very beginning of the fight. With DPS of PoP mobs meaning that mobs need to be slowed ASAP going head to head with our lack of anything close to an aggro lock at the beginning of the fight, there's still an issue.

Frodlin7th

06-10-2003, 01:00 AM

Brutul,

The propblem is that it's true... the class is headed toward extinction yet no one really realizes it.

You want to say that warriors are "needed on high end raids"... well, to that i say... not really... you see, playing DI roulette is something that even warriors are starting to need to do. As long as you pop the warrior Cha to 305 and put DI on em, they're gonna live... you can keep DI up on a shadowknight too and play roulette... same with a paladin. It's only a matter of time before it's realized that with the dramatic DPS cap that warriors have that DI roulette + SK aggro DPS means the mobs die in 1/3 the time using significantly less resources. Then the whole illusion of warriors being worth something will come crashing in like the house of cards that it is.

Hell, an SK tanking with DI roulette while warriors /shield themselves to death is just as valid as anything else with crazy PoP mob DPS, except.. again, the mob dies WAY faster.... the thing is, it's not commonplace, so you guys can't see it yet, but it will become so, and then I'll be the one stands here and says "welp I told you, but you chose to be offended that I said that warriors were a stinking pile of dogshit".

JUST like over a year ago, I told you guys that we were going to lose group spots to knights and I was labelled an "alarmist", it has come to pass... when the first 4 pages of my thread "The State of Warriors in EQ" were nothing but the same BS plaudits of "We're fine" and now we're in the sorry state we are in terms of exp groups, when people learn how to properly use /shield + SK/Pal tanks + DI roulette and make mobs die in 1/3 the time, then we'll see what happens.

Some people will make the sorry ass excuses that we have a smattering of hitpoints more than SK's and Pallies and we should be grateful that we have /shield because we're "needed on raids" because of it, or any other number of lame excuses, just remember my words.

Remember that Grendon could "Taunt just fine" and that we just needed to "learn our class"... once we're replaced as raid tanks, there's nothing left, and believe it or not, that day is approaching faster than you want to believe.

Lorre

06-10-2003, 01:16 AM

Wow last time I checked this thread was 4 pages shorter!

Anyways, a lot of people are saying dont fix taunt, just give warriors something that would make them attractive to groups. What can they give us that would make us attractive?

More DPS? Rogues, monks, and rangers would jump all over us

More utilities? We are asking for either more /shield abilities, discs on timers, or AA skills

Well I started my warrior to play a tank. I started a druid at first, but wanted to get in the thick of things during a fight. A lot of warriors knew that they would be taking the damage when they started their class. That role is the issue of this thread.

As of now, warriors are dependent on their gear. Armor is what both knights and warriors depend on so that part is the same for both classes. The part we focus on is the weapons side. Warriors NEED weapons that hold aggro and that usually involves weapons that proc.

Knights on the other hand do not. If you degrade weapons on both knigths and warriors, knights are the only ones that can still do their job. If you unequip weapons for both warriors and knights, guess who can still do their job?

That shows that knights ability to hold aggro is their "ABILITY" and not equipment dependent. Totally untrue for us.

Grendonbb

06-10-2003, 02:36 AM

I will tell you what I bring to the table:

I am better DPS.

I can tank any mobs that are intended to be single grouped, and many that weren't intended to be.

I can tank two mobs at once if croud control dies, or LDs, or hits a lag spike, or anything.

I can area taunt, because, while I don't like falling back on AAs because I don't believe we should need AA to get along, I do think it is quite significant that if a mob pops on our head as cleric casts CH, that I can snap it off immediately and give the croud control time to mez.

If a mez gets resisted, or if anyone gains unwanted agro, I can /shield them, and suck 3/4 of the damage they would have taken, and save god knows how many lives.

If a mob gets lucky and procs a couple of times on me (especially those krigers in BoT), I'm not a puddle of crushed goop, I'm still standing at 15-20% health, which is more than enough for a cleric to heal back up.

I am sorry that I'm not so "wizened" as you are Furor, but I am glad that I'm not so used to being listened to. I see the same people ranting about this crap that have been for god knows how many months... but hey look, we're still getting groups, we're still getting exp, and we still exist. All I see is all of you people being pessimistic talking about how much "better" pallies and SKs are, when you are blinded by the truth that they are not any better than us.

And about this bullshit you speak about me being blinded by flashy gear and aa and all this crap. With all due respect, I believe it is YOU that is blinded to believe that we need all of this to keep agro. Yes, we're at a disadvantage in some areas, but we have advantages in other areas.

All in all, I shouldn't post here, because everyone is to content in pissing and moaning about how "bad we have it". I am sorry Furor that I disagree with you, and I'm sorry that you have to resort to petty insults to try and get your point across... I would have thought better of you.

Haass

06-10-2003, 03:01 AM

What a joke. You really believe you bring that to a group? Here, let me whittle it down for ya.

I am better DPS.

You "May" be better DPS, that is if you have a weapon that allows you to hold aggro AND do decent DPS. If you're someone struggling with a wavecrasher and a frosty to keep aggro, you are not doing more DPS than that pally/SK with the windblade. Even with the same weapons, the DPS different is less than 10% between warriors and SK/Pallies due to skill caps. Also, who gives a flying rats ass about your DPS when the wizards can do MORE DPS to the mob because they know they won't pull aggro?

You don't bring more DPS. You hinder the DPS of the group because everyone else has to evade, FD, and control their casting. YOU SLOW THE GROUP DOWN.

I can tank any mobs that are intended to be single grouped, and many that weren't intended to be.

I can tank two mobs at once if croud control dies, or LDs, or hits a lag spike, or anything.

So can Paladins and Shadowknights. Their Defensive skills are nearly identical, and their AC is comparable. In addition, the mob will die faster with a hybrid tanking (see above), so the mob actually poses less risk to the hybrid than it does to you.

I can area taunt, because, while I don't like falling back on AAs because I don't believe we should need AA to get along, I do think it is quite significant that if a mob pops on our head as cleric casts CH, that I can snap it off immediately and give the croud control time to mez.

Paladins and SK's can do this exact same thing with a stun or a debuff, and they can do it a helluva lot more often than the 15 minute refresh on your button that does it.

If a mez gets resisted, or if anyone gains unwanted agro, I can /shield them, and suck 3/4 of the damage they would have taken, and save god knows how many lives.

People don't gain unwanted aggro with Hybrids tanking. They don't need shield because that situation doesn't occur.

If a mob gets lucky and procs a couple of times on me (especially those krigers in BoT), I'm not a puddle of crushed goop, I'm still standing at 15-20% health, which is more than enough for a cleric to heal back up.

People have shown in other threads that the difference between Knight and Warrior HP is 300-1khp AT BEST. Is 1khp 20% of your buffed HP? It's not even 20% of my buffed HP, so while warriors may not be a puddle of crushed goop, the knights likely are also not dead, and IN ADDITION BOTH KNIGHTS HAVE THE ABILITY TO HEAL THEMSELVES IN THAT SITUATION.

So look again. What do you bring to a group that can't be got with someone else who brings even more to the group than you do?

I am sorry Furor that I disagree with you, and I'm sorry that you have to resort to petty insults to try and get your point across... I would have thought better of you.

Oh, and telling people who have been around for 4+ years to "Play their class correctly" isn't a petty insult? Sure sounds like one to me. You deserve what you get for that last post.

Kildace

06-10-2003, 04:00 AM

By fear of the (Wicked) bitchslap that would ensue if I flat out disagreed with him, I dare say that Furor is not arguing the same point that I am.

Furor is arguing the fact that in great groups, that want to grind at the best of their ability, with seasoned players, SKs and pallies with their superior aggro allow all the classes to maintain a super high dps and are therefore better because mobs fall faster.

I am arguing the fact that the average group in PoV with mediocre players that wouldn't know aggro control if it punched them in the face could do FINE with a warrior, if they knew how to play. That is in response to all the warrior bithing that they can't aggro in BoT or PoV or whatever and that the class sucks. If the group plays decently you CAN aggro in BoT and PoV, easi - fucking - ly. And the group doesn't need to be walking on eggs either. Basic rules like doing the concussion quest, using evade, and not sitting down after debuffs, things you use every day on raids, would do the trick.

I don't think that's being jaded, I think that's being realistic. Furor, when you Xped in Seb and wherever you grinded on PoP, didn't classes in your group watch their aggro? Or did your guildmates throw you out and get a pally because they suck at EQ? Sure they might have settled for 10%, 20% less xp if they were all at the top of their game and wanted to burn the mobs, things they can't do with you and can do with an SK, but hey by this logic some classes would never, ever get groups and the basic xp group would be Shm Cle Wiz Wiz Wiz SK.

I still agree with the fact that hybrids add more to the group than I could dream of, that's a no brainer, but I am, and warriors aren't inefficient at xp group tanking. Not as efficient? Sure. Useless? No way. Is that normal? No it isn't.

And BTW, SKs own warriors in DPS, HARD.

Bunnie Burner

06-10-2003, 06:23 AM

But that would mean any class could be a GREAT tank then?

Even mages could be GREAT tanks! It's up the the group to adapt.
Cleric has to chain heal efficiently, people have to watch their aggo.
If everyone plays well, then mages have no problems at all tanking.

Sure, warriors do fine in exp groups. No one is saying they're jackshit. They can keep aggro if they're lucky with procs, they can live easily...

But what happened to being to the best in that departement? We sacrifice everything to pure tankage. The least we could get is to be the THE class of choice for tanking.
And not just a possible choice for "average group in PoV with mediocre players".

Kildace

06-10-2003, 06:40 AM

Don't bastardize my point, you know what I mean, and you know I'm right, pushing it to the point of the ridicule is not going to make it wrong.

And read my whole post when you answer it. I'm going to quote it again for you :

I still agree with the fact that hybrids add more to the group than I could dream of, that's a no brainer, but I am, and warriors aren't inefficient at xp group tanking. Not as efficient? Sure. Useless? No way. Is that normal? No it isn't.

See?

Fucking Kanites :p

Lorre

06-10-2003, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by Bunnie Burner
But what happened to being to the best in that departement? We sacrifice everything to pure tankage. The least we could get is to be the THE class of choice for tanking.

Totally agree. We gave up all those nice Spells, Lay Hands, Harm Touch, and that blue mana bar to do one job, TANK! If I wanted to do anything else, I would've picked another class. Let face it, we got one job in this game . . . And I want to be the best at it. (most of us do)

Bunnie Burner

06-10-2003, 09:19 AM

No one ever said Warriors were useless...

What I understood Kildace, please tell me if I'm wrong.
Is that you're saying Warriors are completely balanced.
If we can't tank greatly, it's purely the GROUPS fault, and not the warriors.

I'm merely replying that your beliefs can be applied to any other class.

Druids can CC very well using root!!!
Sure the group has to adapt, and stay away from rooted mobs and always stay on the move... but that shows the groups dedication!!
Thus druids are JUST as good as enchanters??
Would you hesitate between a enchanter and a druid for CC duties in your group??
Nope, druids are taken for CC in case there aren't any enchanters or bards available.
And enchanters are just allowing groups to Slack like Fags! eh?

They are a spare. "To use in case of emergency".
I'd hate to see the warrior brought down to that.

To be brief:
In a Slacking group, the paladin is better then the warrior.
In a very Skilled group, hoho! the paladin is still better then the warrior!

And on a sidenote:
Frodlin, when I said to leave paladins aside, I didn't mean to ignore them in the warrior issues. Of course class balancing needs comparison, its the very root of balancing.
What I meant was to leave Knights unchanged. Leave them as they are, but concentrate on bringing warriors up to par.

A lot are saying knights are overpowered, I only meant to say that it's the warrior that is underpowered.

Kildace

06-10-2003, 09:40 AM

That's what I said, read the 11 pages again, see what I admitted, where I agreed with Frodlin, and realise that I said more than twice that warriors weren't balanced and that we were decent xp tanks but not the best choice.

And I still stand by what i say, half the groups that kick the warriors wouldn't have any problem if they knew how to play.

landrain

06-10-2003, 09:41 AM

So basically we have this...

The best equipped warrior in eq, says that warriors need fixxed in the very high end EXP situations.

Elemental equpped warriors say warriors need fixxed in EXP situations.

Planar Warriors say warriors need fixxed in normal exp situations.

I guess we all need to go to Grendonbb's class on how to be a warrior...

Surlok

06-10-2003, 10:00 AM

A lot are saying knights are overpowered, I only meant to say that it's the warrior that is underpowered

-Paladins

Have the ability to buff their groups,Heal the entire group,Stun interupt mobs at will,where applicable,even in case where bash would not,They can rez,They can LoH themselves or others ; instantly.They can wield many of the same "Aggro" weapons a warrior can most noteably a Blade of War.They can root which basically provides them with the ability to Tank and Crowd control for the group as well as healing them..

Ever see a Paladin when the cleric cries about mana, step back Root the mob he is tanking and Heal the group up and keep it rooted/stunned until the group is ready to re-engage.

-Shadowknights

Have group Taps that boost atk thus boosting the entire parties overall DPS,They have group heals which with AA are comparable to a Paladins without aa,They have a Pet for added DSP ,They have DD's and Dots for added DPS as well as Taps For DPS,They can Snare(more powerful an ability than it seems,yet another form of CC especially in an outdoor zone).They have actual Aggro increasing Spells,Numerical Hate increases,That they can use combined with their normal dots debuffs they use for aggro,It gives them the ability to build a seemingly endless amount of hate that they can then...Yes ..thats right FD and drop on a Dime.That initself the ability to build incredible amounts of aggro and drop it on a dime is not reasonable.Not to mention the other things an SK profecient in his FD skill can do,Pull split etc.

Now you have a Tank that can run into a crowd of mobs,Invise,check the area out,Cast a snare on the mob he wants run out,FD and then tag the snared ....He runs back to the group and stands as the mob slowy makes his way to the group all the while being slowed tashed debuffed Pinged with arrows by the ranger,the rogue is already in behind the mob backstabbing and the wizard is nuking merrily away as the SK casts a couple more low mana snares into the mob to keep oit aggroed.When Said mob FINALLY makes it to the SK tank it is already debuffed to hell and at 80% the SK has tapped any life he lost from the pull and has dumped myriad of dots into it pushing his dps up.

I will agree that skill of the group helps the warrior out,I will also agree that High end warriors and even warriors at my level have little trouble with aggro in these situations.A good group is a good group.

What people must remember though is while it may seem like players are choosing the Knights over warriors because they are better at holding aggro than Warriors and they are being lazy and shitty players.That in fact alot of the times it is very expierienced players that are aware of all the other things a knight is capable of and are able to exploit these skills to make the group even more powerful.

I may offer more DPS to a group and more effeicent Mana conservation,I may also offer more experience Tanking as chances are I will have tanked through all my levels where as a knight may have not.

However I cannot offer anything in the way of that which I listed above,I simply do not come equipped with such ability's,Nor do I want them .To say though that Warriors have anything better to offer to an xp group is false,it is just not true.

Take a guy that plays a warrior better than any warrior ever,and throw in the best monk,cleric rogue shamn Ranger or whatever and make a group.

Now Take the guy that plays the Best Paladin Ever and replace him with the warrior and I am willing to bet the group would Be far superior than the one tanked by the warrior.

You never know what you are going to get though,when you are a group looking for a tank, /who Tank LFG is a game of roulette.

Sure the war may have better DPS than the paladin LFG but he might not,his gear might suck,The paladin might be in a VT guild while the warrior may have never seen ToV.The war may well play his well and the paladin may suck,You never know.

In Roulette your best chances of winning are to go black or red,Your worst chances but better payoff is in the numbers.

Right now in Exp groups in Knights represent the colors,And the Warriors represent the Numbers.......

9 times out of 10,Groups are going to go for the safe money.

Frodlin7th

06-10-2003, 10:28 AM

It's a hard pill to swallow, because we want to think that we're needed, wanted, desired, and so on and so forth, that we made the right choice in classes when we made them, that we have some "special role" that no one else can fill. We want to think that our multitudes of hours spent into levelling and gearing up our characters meant something.

When something comes along and forces us to rethink that, our reaction is either one of denial or compartmentalization (a form of denial). We feel threatened, and we enter into this phase where we look for little meaningless areas where we have some little "advantage", regardless whether it's a real advantage or not, and cling on to it, because it helps slow the realization of our real lot. I understand this, I've found myself in the same place, but have come to accept that our role has diminished so far that it's nearly unrecoverable.

Kildace, you're right, as long as people are practicing proper aggro control techniques, we do OK. Let's take a step back and ask ourselves why these 'proper aggro control techniques' are in place.

It's because there was a time when we were realistically better at tanking than anyone else. I remember seeing Paladins and SK's *BEGGING* to be 70% as effective at tanking and offense as warriors. there was a reason to have a warrior tanking and to be practicing "proper aggro control", because there was a benefit to doing so. "Proper aggro control techniques" were invented to overcome warriors' crappy taunt. I remember a time when a Paladin or SK who took aggro from a warrior was chastised not only by the warrior, but the cleric and enchanter and everyone else in the group. Does a Knight 'suck at proper aggro techniques' nowdays if he does the same? No, actually, he or she is met with a sigh of relief.

Don't get me wrong, but the more I think about it, the more i realize that 'proper aggro techniques' are in today's EQ... improper. That there's nothing wrong with saying 'with class A, I can play to my full potential, yet with class B I cannot, therefore class A is better to group with.'. I don't think that's sucking at playing EQ, it's really applying standard logic.

Aggro is the only real quantifiable limit to damage in EQ any more. Mana limitations have become for the most part a relic of the past, like aggro control techniques. If the only purpose for aggro control was to allow the 'best tank' to tank, and the difference between the 'best tank' and his competitors is so minimal that there's no real cost associated with it, then the 'best tank' is the one who doesn't require you to add in the 'aggro control' factor, or at least the one who exponentially raises the bar.

When the difference between warrior and knight in terms of durability isn't much different from the difference between 2 different warriors, then something's messed up. Something is seriously messed up. I'd go so far as to say that there's a lot of Paladins and SK's out there looking for the same groups who are closer to me in tankability than many of the warriors that post their concerns here.

Compartmentalizing ourselves into the "best case" scenario doesn't really cut it. The "when in identical gear, class A will have X advantage over class B". Great, it's true, but when people are forming groups, they dont really take equivalent gear into consideration because individual gear setups vary so greatly.

I guess to answer your question Kildace.... I think that applying yesterday's standards "proper aggro control techniques as a sign of skill" to today's EQ, and because of that, things are broken.

Biggwinz

06-10-2003, 11:50 AM

WTF Grendonbb,

Is it so hard to admit there there is room for improvement in the Warrior Class.

I mean WTF, what would be so bad about improving our Taunt Button? Pallies and SK's already have the ability to grab aggro pretty much at will.

How would this be the end of our class or even EQ?

So why dont you step up and post your reasons why this would be so bad. Explain why giving us the same ability that Pallies and SK's have would be the end of the world?

Actually that goes to all of you who are saying that our aggro is just fine!

I am sorry but there is room for improvements!

Sure I can hold Aggro 99% of the time, if I am let to get it in the first place, it's the 1% that gets someone killed!

Daemonwynd

06-10-2003, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Grendonbb
I will tell you what I bring to the table:

I can tank two mobs at once if croud control dies, or LDs, or hits a lag spike, or anything.

That's not something a hybrid can't do as well.

If a mez gets resisted, or if anyone gains unwanted agro, I can /shield them, and suck 3/4 of the damage they would have taken, and save god knows how many lives.

No. They take HALF of the damage they would otherwise, for 12 seconds, as long as you're in range, you're not using a disc, and they don't move out of range. You take 75%. The hybrids simply don't need this, as they don't get aggro to begin with. I firmly believe /shield was put in as another "patch effort" to deal with the warrior aggro issue.

There's nothing compelling in your argument as to why to take a warrior over a hybrid. Sk's have better DPS, paladins can toss their fastest heal in the game, PLUS they have the lock on aggro we lack.

Khumak

06-10-2003, 12:17 PM

Let's make it really simple. To tank effectively you need to have enough hps to survive long enough for a heal and you need to be able to ensure that you are the one being hit. I think everyone would agree on that definition of a tank. If you aren't getting hit then you are not the tank.

The goal of an xp group is to make as much xp as possible in the shortest period of time. Due to buffs and FT at an average level of gear for level 65, mana is essentially limitless so there is no danger of anyone going OOM. So to maximize xp you want everyone to be able to open up with their maximum sustainable damage potential as soon as the mob is in range.

With a warrior "tanking" while everyone else in the group is operating at peak damage potential, whoever is doing the most damage will be taking the hits and the warrior is essentially just a bystander. The mob will ping pong to whoever is at the top of the hate list and the healer will have to heal multiple group members. Caster deaths are highly likely and downtime due to res is highly likely.

With a knight tanking the mob can be slowed before it ever reaches the camp, casters can begin nuking and debuffing before the mob gets to camp, and the knight can guarantee that he is the only one who will get hit. His personal damage output may or may not be less than a similar geared warrior due to itemization, but the DPS of the group as a whole will be much higher and the safety of everyone in the group will be much higher.

"Controlling aggro" so the warrior can tank is counter productive when you can just get a tank that you don't need to do this for. There is no xp encounter that a warrior can tank for that a paladin or SK can not. DPS difference between a warrior and a knight is insignificant compared to the increased damage a group can do without having to "control aggro". Mitigation difference between a knight and a warrior is so small as to be virtually unnoticeable unless the warrior uses defensive. If he does that then not only is he holding aggro worse than a knight, he's also doing less damage.

With game mechanics as they currently stand warriors are totally obsolete for xp groups. The only situations where they are not completely eclipsed by other classes at every function they are capable of is during raids where defensive is required to survive the healing cycle of a boss mob.

Furor

06-10-2003, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by Kildace
By fear of the (Wicked) bitchslap that would ensue if I flat out disagreed with him, I dare say that Furor is not arguing the same point that I am.

Furor is arguing the fact that in great groups, that want to grind at the best of their ability, with seasoned players, SKs and pallies with their superior aggro allow all the classes to maintain a super high dps and are therefore better because mobs fall faster.

I am arguing the fact that the average group in PoV with mediocre players that wouldn't know aggro control if it punched them in the face could do FINE with a warrior, if they knew how to play. That is in response to all the warrior bithing that they can't aggro in BoT or PoV or whatever and that the class sucks. If the group plays decently you CAN aggro in BoT and PoV, easi - fucking - ly. And the group doesn't need to be walking on eggs either. Basic rules like doing the concussion quest, using evade, and not sitting down after debuffs, things you use every day on raids, would do the trick.

I don't think that's being jaded, I think that's being realistic. Furor, when you Xped in Seb and wherever you grinded on PoP, didn't classes in your group watch their aggro? Or did your guildmates throw you out and get a pally because they suck at EQ? Sure they might have settled for 10%, 20% less xp if they were all at the top of their game and wanted to burn the mobs, things they can't do with you and can do with an SK, but hey by this logic some classes would never, ever get groups and the basic xp group would be Shm Cle Wiz Wiz Wiz SK.

I still agree with the fact that hybrids add more to the group than I could dream of, that's a no brainer, but I am, and warriors aren't inefficient at xp group tanking. Not as efficient? Sure. Useless? No way. Is that normal? No it isn't.

And BTW, SKs own warriors in DPS, HARD.

No man. I'm saying in DOGSHIT groups with people with AVERAGE gear, warriors are never, ever desired over their hybrid counterparts. The last time I played as Furor in a pickup group was in Nam, autumn months of 1969.

I love my warrior. I've played every damn class from A - Z. I'm not talking about the Uber warrior that goes to VP to solo dragons for his leisure. I'm talking about the other 99% of warriors out there that sit there with their LFG tag up in the Plane of Valor all day long. I'm talking about the myriad warriors that send me a tell bitching about how they need their PoJ flag but can't get a group if they're LFG.

Players have advanced since 4, 3, even 2 years ago. They go from point A to poing B using a straight line. They don't zig zag around potholes and jump through hoops.

At the same time, I am saying this thinking has also trickled down from the lack of warriors being necessary for many raid situations (which at one time were in fact HIGH END raids) and is starting to show (Vindi, Tormax, Yelinak, AoW, etc...).

What I am saying is, Mudflation has fucked the warrior class worse than it has the other classes. The general population.

What pisses me off about all of this is, I was talking about this happening during Luclin. Around the time when Rich Waters decided that warriors needed a 'Gimmick" and gave us /shield.

I <3 Shield.

landrain

06-10-2003, 12:40 PM

Ok, imagine this scenario...

The group doesnt all stand on one leg and touch their left finger to their nose while they recite the alphabet backwords...

opps, one guy put P after O... Sorry cleric your CH did only 5 hps of healing...

THAT is what people should consider when they say warriors can work well with a good group.

Why should only warriors have to have everyone else be different and cooperate to do the ONLY job we are good at.. ok well we are supposed to be good at.

Raaj

06-10-2003, 01:19 PM

I love my warrior. I've played every damn class from A - Z. I'm not talking about the Uber warrior that goes to VP to solo dragons for his leisure. I'm talking about the other 99% of warriors out there that sit there with their LFG tag up in the Plane of Valor all day long. I'm talking about the myriad warriors that send me a tell bitching about how they need their PoJ flag but can't get a group if they're LFG.

Players have advanced since 4, 3, even 2 years ago. They go from point A to poing B using a straight line. They don't zig zag around potholes and jump through hoops.

At the same time though, you play like you practice. Do you really believe that these rogues/rangers/monks/whothefuckever are sitting in their groups and thinking 'wow, we have an sk, I don't need to watch my agro' ? No, I think they're completely clueless to the fact that they have been CONDITIONED not to watch their agro. Knights have spoiled them.

The easiest scapegoat for this agro 'problem' is the warrior class, because it's easy to point out. With a warrior, these classes are forced to micromanage their agro (or not, which reflects even worse on the warrior). With a knight, they don't. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why they blame the warrior.

It's a shitty situation. Knights bring everything we bring to a group and more. There is no easy fix though. Even if warriors had unshakeable agro, we STILL offer the group nothing over a knight.

What I am saying is, Mudflation has fucked the warrior class worse than it has the other classes.

I agree. What do you propose as a fix? At this point it seems as if an upgrade to taunt would be drops in the bucket.

Biggwinz

06-10-2003, 01:34 PM

Raaj,

You may be correct but fixing our aggro holding abilities is a step in the right direction!

I dont expect my class to be the class that everyone quits their current class to play, but I would like to be able to actually be a Meat Sheild without haveing to /shield

Apothes Drudoll

06-10-2003, 01:38 PM

It's a shitty situation. Knights bring everything we bring to a group and more. There is no easy fix though. Even if warriors had unshakeable agro, we STILL offer the group nothing over a knight.

I believe the above statement to be false. (now don't go off writing flames just yet.) I am of the belief though that knights bring about 90% of a warrior to the exp group with the added bonus of spells which equals aggro and in some instances players believe this makes knights > Warriors.

To say we bring everything a warrior brings to the group is simply false. aka disciplines your reuse is a lot shorter and some are actually useable) bit more DPS and different AA's IE no frontal stun which increases your dps Knight s do not get that AA Ect.

not trying to start anything I just did not feel that stament was correct in any way shape or form :)

*edit*

I may be nitpickin but I am bored at work and I belive that informed people are much better at deciding things then uninformed people.

Khumak

06-10-2003, 01:44 PM

Disciplines are not very useful in xp groups. Defensive and evasive both reduce your DPS significantly and are don't recycle often enough to fight stuff that consistently requires them. Aggressive and precision increase our DPS significantly but can't be used while tanking because they increase the damage we take by even more. All the other disciplines have a recycle time of 30-60 minutes and most are nothing but an eyecandy disc that lasts for less than 10 seconds. And to top it all off they are all on the same timer so if I pop some useless disc like mighty strike then I can't use defensive for an hour.

Defensive serves about the same purpose as LoH in an xp group. It's our last line of defense when something goes wrong. Imagine if LoH disabled all your spells for 10 minutes. Then you'd have a rough estimate of it's usefulness in groups compared to our discs.

Apothes Drudoll

06-10-2003, 01:50 PM

Raaj

06-10-2003, 01:54 PM

I believe the above statement to be false. (now don't go off writing flames just yet.) I am of the belief though that knights bring about 90% of a warrior to the exp group with the added bonus of spells which equals aggro and in some instances players believe this makes knights > Warriors.

To say we bring everything a warrior brings to the group is simply false. aka disciplines your reuse is a lot shorter and some are actually useable) bit more DPS and different AA's IE no frontal stun which increases your dps Knight s do not get that AA Ect.

Knights can bring:
-Comparable hp/ac due to mudflation
-Comparable if not surpassed dps
-Buffs (ZB, BSS/BMB, Atk, ac, symbols, etc)
-Ressurections (paladin only)
-Feign Death pulling (sk only)

Warriors bring disciplines and /shield. We do have some aa's, you're correct. But so do you. These are things you bring regardless of aa's.

On average, Knight HP/Ac levels are lower, but with ZB/Self heals what cleric is short mana? In the average PoV group, I'd go so far to say that a cleric could probably end up having better mana with a knight than with a warrior, assuming the agro is constant on both.

Apothes Drudoll

06-10-2003, 02:00 PM

Knights can bring:
-Comparable hp/ac due to mudflation
-Buffs (ZB, BSS/BMB, Atk, ac, symbols, etc)
-Ressurections (paladin only)
-Feign Death pulling (sk only)

Warriors bring disciplines and /shield. We do have some aa's, you're correct. But so do you. These are things you bring regardless of aa's.

On average, Knight HP/Ac levels are lower, but with ZB/Self heals what cleric is short mana? In the average PoV group, I'd go so far to say that a cleric could probably end up having better mana with a knight than with a warrior, assuming the agro is constant on both.

This futher demonstates my point that warriors and Knights do not bring the eaxct same things to the group.

also i did say and in some instances players believe this makes knights > Warriors.

More correct may have been in most instances Knights > then warriors in the exp group. :p

again I meerly was refuting the fact Knights brings everything to a group as warriors does :)

Raaj

06-10-2003, 02:02 PM

Knights bring everything we bring to a group and more.

Apothes Drudoll

06-10-2003, 02:05 PM

Knights bring everything we bring to a group and more

The above statement is false for the simple fact Knights do not bring everything a warrior does as in dps as in so on and so forth I did not disputing the fact we bring more to a group. Like I said nitpicking but the statement the way it was made is false plain and simple.

*edit*

fixed crappy spellin and typin

Haass

06-10-2003, 02:08 PM

To say we bring everything a warrior brings to the group is simply false. aka disciplines your reuse is a lot shorter and some are actually useable) bit more DPS and different AA's IE no frontal stun which increases your dps Knight s do not get that AA Ect.

Disciplines are no substitute AT ALL for the spellbook a paladin brings to the table.

I've already covered the DPS issue...the difference is minor between warriors and knights, and you will actually allow the group to perform better, negating any such advantage we have.

No frontal stun is about as retarded of an argument as I've ever seen for class balance. No group chooses an ogre warrior over a gnome just because they say "OMG! THAT OGRE CAN'T BE STUNNED! HE'LL BE A BETTER GROUP CHOICE FOR SURE!"

You bring EVERYTHING to the table that we do, PLUS a spellbook that contains stuns (ever played a warrior and tried to stop a gating mob? 50% chance at absolute best) Buffs that stack with everything, as well as buffs that can be used as a substitute if your only healer is a shaman, and heals for single target and for group to counteract AE damage and to help in downtime.

Trust me, I don't wanna see your class nerfed either, but trying to play off like Knights are useless isn't gonna work.

Glatius2

06-10-2003, 02:59 PM

The above statement is false for the simple fact Knights do not bring everything a warrior does as in dps as in so on and so forth I did not disputing the fact we bring more to a group. Like I said nitpicking but the statement the way it was made is false plain and simple.

I know that Paladins get really hung up on the DPS issue. To them it's a MAJOR difference. But look at it closely and apply some thought to it. The difference is 10-20%. What does that mean? That means that when a Paladin hits for 100 points of damage the Warrior would hit, on the average, for 110 or 120. Do you know how long it takes for that to add up to anything really substantial against a mob with 10k or more HP?

This is not that major a difference. I'd gladly give up that DPS just for the ability to root on demand, let alone heal, stuns, and so forth.

Buun Sofsteel

06-10-2003, 03:13 PM

Man, this thread is some crap.

NOBODY wants to see the Knight classes nerfed. I don't think many people care who brings more to the table. Some of the best warriors out there (in level, equipment and AA) have the luxury of preaching from a soap box saying "Players need to play better, warrior class is fine, remember the good ole dungeon crawl days, blah blah blah. No shit, you are right. But for those of us not endowed with the luxury YET of the Hate building unresistable weps or the 35 minimum AA to AE taunt every friggen ten minutes and are working our ass off to try and get in the xp groups to get there we have a problem.

NOBODY wants to be able to just hit a friggen button and "VOILA! AGGRO IS SOLVED!". We don't want the game easy, we want to be tested, we want to become better, but ...here it comes... WE WANT TO HAVE AN EQUAL SHOT . We want to AT LEAST be able to generate similar hate to a knight class. Damnit, that's it. You hear me? That's it.

sidenote:

You might think Furor is a jerk, you might not like his methods, you might think he is a whiner, but let me say this... I appreciate the fact that he is for the Warrior class. I am sure he has no problem holding aggro personally, but he is still bitching about problems with lower level warriors, thanks and Salut!

I prefer the Colonel Jesseps of the world to the Mickey Mouse Kaffees...

"We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it. I'd prefer you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand opposed. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to."

Buun
60 Warlord

Buun Sofsteel

06-10-2003, 03:19 PM

Gah, I hate it when people rant and then provide no solution.

Solution: Improve my taunt skill slightly. That's all.

Buun
60 Warlord

Braeorn

06-10-2003, 03:26 PM

IMO, everyone read Khumak's post...twice. He hits the nail precisely on the head and that, from what a large majority of warriors is saying, is the problem.

If Knights weren't so close to us in mitigation, AC, and HPs this would not be an issue since healers would go OOM more often, leading to more downtime.

Its both issues - their ability to perma-lock aggro and their closedness to us in terms of 'tankiness' is where the problem lies.

The solution is problematic. Even if we can lock aggro the same, we'll be little different to them except for our /disc in terms of tanking. Give us that much more mitigation/ac/hps and balance for some of the challenging encounters will trivialize. Nerf them and the outcry will be tremendous.

I'm guessing this is the conundrum SOE is facing and scratching their heads over. How do they fix it? I for one would be fine if we could lock aggro the same as them but deal slightly more damage. This would give groups the option of more dps, or more flexibility from a Knight's hybrid abilities.

Mofu-Troll

06-10-2003, 03:49 PM

Here is i think a very feasible fix ; add some real "stun aggro" to warrior slam/bash/kick . I cant figure out why a spell that stuns for 0.0 does infinitly more aggro than warrior stun that lasts bout a second. Im thinking that would be nuff to help a warrior manage his aggro.

Mofu

Biggwinz

06-10-2003, 03:51 PM

I'm guessing this is the conundrum SOE is facing and scratching their heads over. How do they fix it? I for one would be fine if we could lock aggro the same as them but deal slightly more damage. This would give groups the option of more dps, or more flexibility from a Knight's hybrid abilities.

Sounds reasonable, but why less DPS? We bring hps to a fight and that is pretty much it. So if we got aggro lock taken care of that pretty much puts us at having nothing but what 10% hp bonus over Knights?

Pallies for example still bring buffs, heals, stuns and the ever so yummy LoH to a group.

Just a question, looking for a reasonable answer!

Furor

06-10-2003, 04:32 PM

I've been asking for a DoT aggro for, oh, 3.5 years now.

It's used in DAoC and it's going to be used in WoW.

Anyways it's simple.

Warriors get special attacks, (monks, go fuck yourselves please before making commens). Anyhow, they start at level 25, and scale up.

Level 25:
Skill: Rupture
Effect: 5 points of damage per tick upon a successful rupture/25 points of hate per tick upon a succesful rupture. Duration, 2 minutes. Reuse, 24 seconds.

Level 35:
Skill: Maim
Effect: 15 points of damage per tick/50 points of hate per tick. Duration, 2 minutes. Reuse, 24 seconds. DPS gain: 3 dps.

Level 45:
Skill: Disembowel
Effect: 40 points of damage per tick/100 points of hate per tick. Duration, 2 minutes. Reuse, 24 seconds. DPS Gain: 7 dps.

Level 55:
Skill: Eviscerate
Effect: 100 points of damage per tick/200 points of hate per tick. Duration, 2 minutes. Reuse 24, seconds. DPS gain: 17 dps.

Level 65:
Skill: Raze
Effect: 150 points of damage per tick/350 points of hate per tick.
Duration, 2 minutes. Reuse, 24 seconds. DPS gain: 25 dps.

Defintions: The warrior, through experience and training has discovered ways to cause harm to their enemy by striking at vital organs and body parts. The abilities cause extreme pain to their victims, enhancing the perceived threat of the warrior to the creature/opponent.

Why the reuse time? Let me explain. Area Taunt never quite worked as it was intended, primarily due to the fact that Everquest designers do not play nor understand the warrior class. Through use of these abilities, a SKILLED warrior, could very easily create an area of effect taunt upon several mobs at once by careful maintenance via the reuse time on the ability.

Will it break messes? Of course, the creature/mob is bleeding/has his guts hanging out and staggering in pain. There in lays the rub. It has to really be used with caution, but also demands a certain level of skill besides just slamming your idiotic taunt button.

Will it stack with other warriors who use their abilities? Yep. We want to be stackable. This allows us to build aggro chains without having to resort to cheesedick gimmicks.

Will it add undue amounts of DPS? Hardly. At max level a warrior will add 25dps to his total damage output.

Will this fix grouping and taunt issues? In my opinion, most definitely. At the very least it adds a new dimension to the warrior class but stays in line with the abilities and class definition of the warrior.

To prevent a warrior from kiting like a sissy druid, the effects would be linked to the distance the warrior is from the mob.

Additionally, you could not stack all 5 abilities and pretend you're a necro.

Feel free to comment, flame, whatever...

Briq

06-10-2003, 04:37 PM

Frodlin7th

06-10-2003, 04:52 PM

Furor,

That's got to be *bar none* the best idea I've ever seen regarding aggro issues with warriors.

1. It makes sense of the class description, I mean why the heck WOULDN"T a warrior know how to cause lasting damage to an opponent?

2. It adds the potential for crowd control to a warrior's arsenal if he knows what he's doing, and ALSO allows for *relative* non-melee tanking from warriors (see: Those evil bastards known as non-mezzable Rathe Councilmembers for an example of significant usefulness)

3. It actually opens up a viable option for another class... druids to have increased value through the use of damage shields during "multi mob tanking" episodes.

4. It overcomes the most annoying aspect of AE taunt, which is... the heal after AE taunt is used is the one where the cleric gets toasted.

5. It also would make the use of /disc evasive in experience groups much more of a reality and commonplace occurrence.

I can't see any reason to be opposed

Lorre

06-10-2003, 04:53 PM

Ive seen it used in DAoC. Dont think it really helped much.

Hussar

06-10-2003, 04:58 PM

Furor, I have to say, thats a great idea. Better than others I've heard of. Not over powering, and would add some more skill to the game, and some more fun.

Khumak

06-10-2003, 05:10 PM

Yep, that's the best idea I've heard to fix warriors as well. It would bump up our aggro control abilities without giving us aggro on demand. It would give us the ability to counteract heal aggro on a mob we aren't tanking. It would add a bit of DPS that scales with level. It wouldn't increase our hps or mitigation so raid encounters would not need to be retuned. All this without being linked to crappy itemization. Thumbs up.

pino

06-10-2003, 05:34 PM

ok this is awesome.

now Warriors want spells!
priceless.

If i wanted to castspell in Everquest i would have started another class, not a pure melee.

So you want a 3000damage manafree dot ?
And let me guess you want it with instant cast time ?
And most importantly what are you smoking ?

We need help and improvements, we do not need SPELLS imho.

Furor

06-10-2003, 05:43 PM

If I were to take, oh I don't know, a very very sharp sword, slash you across your midsection, you would bleed very heavily, more than likely your entrails would drop out, and eventually, you would die.

Spells? Who said anything about spells?

If I were to take the same sword, and say, oh I don't know, lunge it into your right lung, I would puncture your lung, I would cause your lung to then collapse, I would nearly disable your ability to breathe, and again, cause extreme bloodloss.

I didn't even need magic to do it!

Pull your head out of your ass please. Oh, and you would do well to take some math classes. It seems that MATH isn't your bag, baby.

I even listed the DPS gained for the people that 'don't think so good,' such as yourself.

Redhenna

06-10-2003, 05:51 PM

Stand close to the mob as you can, DO NOT mash taunt, it does nothing if you already have aggro - wait till you lose aggro(if you do) to hit taunt. If you are in an exp group, just ask for them to wait a second or two to start hitting the mob once it comes in.

Hey Briq, I do all that, I rarely loose a slower in a group, I get complimented on my agro control. Guess what tho, I still have a hard time getting a group, because the warrior class has a reputation now for poor agro control. Yes, warriors can function wonderfully well, but knights can take all the agro things we do, do them as well, and have high agro spells. Thank you for your lesson on elementary agro control 101. It is not about us doing things right, because even if we do, a knight still has better snap agro, and can regain agro faster in case taunt fails. As long as knights can, and warriors cannot, there is a basic game inbalance, and knights will be the preferred exp tankis in most situations.

Spinetwist

06-10-2003, 06:08 PM

And that is where you keep missing the goddamn point, Spine.

When I was level 14 I held aggro with my elite dwarven axes.
When I was level 20 I held aggro with my PGT and a silvery axe.
When I was level 40 I held aggro with dual yaks.
When I was level 55 I held aggro with a jade mace and CSS.

This was how many expansions ago? Things are changing - mobs are changing, spells are changing, the only thing that hasnt changed is warriors. That is my point. Equip your Yaks, head to PoV, and then tell me you are the same tank as you were before you unequipped your blade of war. You simply cannot tell me a warrior is 100% skill and that you posses the knowledge and wisdom that will propel any warrior, even in full crusty, to the level of excellence you have. To be a good warrior you must not only posses the skill but the gear as well, this is NOT attainable through a simple Sony revamp of warriors - its a long process of hard work, determination and resorcefulness.

You can easily say its all skill when you are fronting full Raex gear and insane weapons, but take all that away and head back to PoV and I guarantee you will find it difficult to do your job as a tank.

You worked your ass off to become the strong and capable warrior you are today and I respect that. Don't begrade and look down apon others who are struggling with issues.

Saying things like "well I could hold aggro fine with my 2 crappy fine steel weapons" doesnt help. Thats kicking people who are looking for answers right in the nuts.

I don't think warriors are in a state of complete helplessness. I can hold aggro fine and I can tank fine and not worry about other hybrids. I have reached this level of warrior through hard work, the difference being is I wont call people down for having struggles, nor will I call them noobs. You people arguing that warriors are fine and "we have no problems" blah blah blah should offer some suggestions rather then say stop whining you fuckin noobs, and also remember that not everyone is as skilled and as well equipped as you are.

You can begin flaming me ........... now.

Chatja ogre

06-10-2003, 06:12 PM

Level 65:
Skill: Raze
Effect: 150 points of damage per tick/350 points of hate per tick.
Duration, 2 minutes. Reuse, 24 seconds. DPS gain: 25 dps.

That means 3k damage over 2 minutes. 20 ticks of 150 damage. So a manafree 3k dot, yep!

The hate is the interesting part, the damage could be half and the hate remain the same.

Furor

06-10-2003, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by Chatja ogre
That means 3k damage over 2 minutes. 20 ticks of 150 damage. So a manafree 3k dot, yep!

The hate is the interesting part, the damage could be half and the hate remain the same.

It's 25dps. Skew it anyway you want! It doesn't change the fact that it's 25dps. Simple as that....

Twenty Five Damage Per Second.

And yea, over the full duration it is 3k. Woopedy do.

Frodlin7th

06-10-2003, 06:31 PM

Aren't we already in the mana free dot business anyhow? Isn't that all melee damage is?

Dinian

06-10-2003, 06:44 PM

25dps is like pissing in the sea for fully offensive BoW warriors sure, but I'm sure its quite an improvement offensively for others.

Might need to pare down the damage component while keeping the hate similar. Then again, this will be yet another excellent idea that SoE will never implement.

Isk

06-10-2003, 07:19 PM

Aren't we already in the mana free dot business anyhow? Isn't that all melee damage is?Close, but not quite.

Raaj

06-10-2003, 07:24 PM

Actually, its very close considering:

the effects would be linked to the distance the warrior is from the mob.

Kaesorn

06-10-2003, 07:58 PM

Maybe it's different in the higher planes, but I've rarely ever had a mob I'm fighting live 2 minutes unless I'm soloing it. Groups tho? Practically never. 25dps really is the best way to describe it.

I've noticed EQ is really the only MMOG (hell, pretty much one of the only games in general nowadays) that gives pure melee the short end of the stick. In various other games, the "tank" class has not only special abilities similar to Furor's example, but also the highest natural hp regen in the game (comparative to about 35hp/tick naturally). Melees in general get the short end of the stick altogether, with pretty much no actual warrior-only upgrades since...Velious? Well, except shield...which to me sounds more like a "we know about your little problem, but instead of trying to make it better, we'll give you this ability so you're not entirely worthless...only mostly".

Okay, maybe a slight exaggeration there...but yeah, good ideas...great, actually...but it's much easier to come up with these ideas than to actually get SOE to implement them.

Daemonwynd

06-10-2003, 08:21 PM

THEY'RE NOT SPELLS!

This is something that the warrior does physically through weapons and knowledge. Casting and mana has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

You want to call those spells, then all disciplines are actually spells.

Sheesh.

Bunnie Burner

06-10-2003, 08:42 PM

I had a fun time in hate tonight, after the raid.

A monk was grouped with me, she had battlefists.
And I had the pleasure of realising how fucking hard it was to keep the mob off her.

Here's the picture:

I have BoC and SoD, after a while I realised I had better proc my Avatar.

So there I am with maxxed dexterity, BoC and SoD, and 1400+attk.

I stayed as close as possible to the mob (this hardly makes a difference really),
I mashed the Kick button like hell,
used all my DS items
blablabla...

It all came down to this:

If my weapons didn't proc, others would get aggro.

So throughout everyfight, I had the fun time of doing,
Taunt-Kick-Disarm....
again, Taunt-Kick-Disarm... woowoo!...

Taunt-Kick-Disarm... MORE PLEASE!!!

Taunt-kick-disarm!!

And I would still not get aggro if my fucking BoC and SoD decided not to proc.

I still on't undrstand why so many of you don't realise that Warrior's need more tools. Taunt, Kick, Disarm, Shield is what a warrior should have at level 20...
hi, we're level 65 now! still teh same ol Tant, Disarm, Shield, /g Shit sorry :/, tried to get it off you.

I love the idea of taunt dot,
and i'm sure theres quite a lot of other skills that would make it soooo nicely into the game.

5mins of thinking can get you so many ideas worth mentioning..

SOE had YEARS...

Taunt - Kick - Disarm!
Taunt - Kick - Disarm!!!!!

/camp

Binnamar

06-10-2003, 09:09 PM

Taunt kick disarrm 4 liyfe! (not really) (seriously NOT REALLY)

Bunnie Burner

06-11-2003, 06:31 AM

And about that idea for DoT aggro.

I would really like it to be Warrior only Weapon procs,
or Warrior only armor effects.

I'd love to see the day where warriors get quite a few abilities,
but all from warrior specific items.

Have different sorts of Aggro procs,
have dot aggros,
have effects that give DS aggro,
and lots and lots of other items.

This way, the warrior that spends time doing certain quests, camping certain camps etc...
Can scrounge up an arsenal that make him above average.

Come up with a few tactics using different weapons to maximise aggro control...

Having to camp a extremely rare named for an item that highly improves your aggro is something that would actually PLEASE me..

For now... even our fecking elemental armor gives us what?!??!

Auras and Vengeance, Woowoo!

meanwhile...

TAUNT KICK DISARM!

Frodlin7th

06-11-2003, 09:00 AM

While I understand what you're getting at, I simply don't see how sitting on one's butt waiting for a rare spawn would make someone know better how to hurt their opponent in battle.

While I agree in principle that one of the larger warrior issues is a serious lack of itemization, and that that needs to be addressed, I don't believe that any current 'fix" to the ongoing problem of warrior aggro should be itemization based, but class based, and it should make sense within the class.

Biggwinz

06-11-2003, 10:28 AM

While the specilization aggro modifier (DoT) might be something to add to our class, I believe the first and formost fix should be as simple as making the taunt button actually work.

Dinian

06-11-2003, 10:32 AM

It appears to me that unless the DoT special ability was coded up to be like a spell (i.e. grant spell dot agro) then it may end up being terrific as a taunt maintainer and not a huge fix to snap agro.

Taunt button is the clearest example of snap agro... perhaps if something like the DoT idea goes in, it should get front-loaded with a big hate effect. Then the mechanics of the taunt skill doesn't have to change.

Bunnie Burner

06-11-2003, 10:38 AM

Frodlin, to be the Class fix is closely tied with the Itemisation fix,
becuase I have always looked upon the warrior as the amster of arms.
(The warrior may be nothing by himself with his kick and taunt,
but once equipped with his arsenal, he can become deadly)

And that's why I see the warrior's biggest flaw, is to be ignored when it comes to itemization (in PoP above all).

We should be getting the most out of the armors and weapons,
but all we get is vengeance and enraging blows...
while casters and hybrids get tons of focus items.

I'd like the warrior class to be fixed via itemization,
BUT not just as itemization, it should be looked upon as warrior balance.
Every warrior item put into the game should be considered a warrior skill.

But I wouldn't mind at all if the warrior upgrade would simply come through skills either ;)
I just find the weapon/armor part more fitting for a warrior.

And for the sitting on your ass to improve part,
I said it would please me, because I miss camping things hehe.
It would be much better if there were lots of quests to earn weapons.
But saying that camping something would please me was just to show how desperate I am for such a change.
(Although I do miss camping ;)... good old GBS days)

Frodlin7th

06-11-2003, 10:53 AM

I have to totally and vehemently disagree, because the class is currently in it's state of disrepair because they tried "balance through itemization" and it simply didn't work.

People who itemize zones dont' consider class balance at all as part of the equation, and to balance warriors exclusively through itemization while others not leads to all sorts of problems.. you cannot balance a single class through itemization and the rest through skills/abilities/spells. It simply doesn't work.

Bunnie Burner

06-11-2003, 11:10 AM

Where did you see itemization for warriors?

When you look at PoP, 99% of the loot warriors can use is shared with many classes that already have a lot of items going for themselves.
Even things that seem appropriate to be for Warriors only, are shared with paladins, shadowknights and rangers....

Why would it be so hard to put the skills as effects on items?
They've already done it with Enraging Blow and the likes...
would you imagine a warrior without any of the enraging blow weapons?

I'd just like them to take their EBs a bit further and deeper.
And if they can't do that, then they need a new team.

And who ever talked about Exclusively balancing through itemization?

Furor

06-11-2003, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Bunnie Burner
Where did you see itemization for warriors?

When you look at PoP, 99% of the loot warriors can use is shared with many classes that already have a lot of items going for themselves.
Even things that seem appropriate to be for Warriors only, are shared with paladins, shadowknights and rangers....

Why would it be so hard to put the skills as effects on items?
They've already done it with Enraging Blow and the likes...
would you imagine a warrior without any of the enraging blow weapons?

I'd just like them to take their EBs a bit further and deeper.
And if they can't do that, then they need a new team.

And who ever talked about Exclusively balancing through itemization?

The entire point, rather the heart of the argument, is that we do not want a reliance on items. Never have. Yet we are the most heavily item dependant class in Everquest. Having an ability that allows us to actually play our class with some skill aside from luck of the proc or RNG of the Taunt is what I'm asking to see implemented.

An easy solution to snap aggro in this case with a TauntDoT is just add a 0.0 second stun at the front of the initial encroachment. It'll be more than sufficient.

The itemization may be bad but it's nowhere near as bad as it was in previous years. More interesting itemization and AA's could easily be added if we had a TauntDoT. % Mods to our Hate generation, DPS, etc... I could probably write a 20 page essay.

Promethis

06-11-2003, 12:35 PM

Disclaimer: I'm still happy with the class, so don't start bitching at me for going back on what I posted earlier.

Battlefists are like the highest taunting monk 1h you can get, secondary to a SoD imo (I also play a 65 monk btw~).

Anyway, I like Furor's idea. I always thought it would be neat to have more skills (I was envious of FD from the start, so I started a monk) instead of what we have. Rogues get a pleathora of neat stuff (BS, sneak, hide etc etc). Warriors get taunt and kick.

I've wanted more special attacks for a long time, which could be used independant of one another (unlike the Monk class, where you can't use Flying Kick if you just used Eagle Strike, etc). Or bash/kick is a good example.

Warriors are the masters of armed combat, we should have more attacks available to us in reality.

Anyway... good idea.

Biggwinz

06-11-2003, 04:10 PM

I wont bitch at you but it is nice to admit there is room for improvement.

I too love being a warrior - but sometimes hate it cuz of our short comings in the Grand Scheme of things!

Spinetwist

06-11-2003, 04:33 PM

i love the idea of a damage dot where a Warrior will get some hate from applying a critical or a vicious attack causing re-occuring dmg, like what Furor comented - like a piercing slash to the lung causing internal bleeding, the mob would loose hp like a dot because they are bleeding to death, and it would give warriors an increase in hate for implementing that dot.

Now the question would be - would this be an actual skill like slam, or an AA? I think making it like a skill like taunt would be sweet.

It would be neat if the skill looked something like this, just for an example.

[Purge] - This skill initiates a tactical blow to your enemy, causing your target to bleed internally and loose hitpoints over the course of battle.

make the skill usable every 5 minutes, make it like the taunt skill, but with an added dot.

I think thats an awesome idea.

Spinetwist

06-11-2003, 05:02 PM

Or maybe if it was an AA it could look something like:

Name: Debilitating Strike
Pre-Requisite(s) Area Taunt
Level Requirement: 60
Ability Type: Activated
Re-Use Time: 15 Minutes
Max Training: 3 Levels
Point Cost: Level 1: 2 points
Level 2: 4 points
Level 3: 6 points
Description: This skill will grant a Warrior the knowledge and precision to deliver a critical strike to an opponent, causing internal injury and damage over time.

-

I dunno. Im bored at work and just storming some ideas hehe.

Khumak

06-11-2003, 05:25 PM

A 15 minute reuse timer would make it nothing more than a toy. Any "fix" needs to be useable regularly in an xp group. Something useable at least 1 time for every mob we fight.

Spinetwist

06-11-2003, 05:49 PM

I was thinking something along the lines of each skill level knocks off 5 mins of the reuse time, so if you have the max skill, it will be usable every 5 minutes.

Buun Sofsteel

06-11-2003, 06:11 PM

Here is a pasted post form the Newbie forum at everquest .com the pretty much sums up the problem from the perspective of a non-warrior...

Hmm ok my 60 chanters hates grping with warriors, it's just so much harder for them to get decent aggro........ Tash and slow = major aggro and it takes an exceptionally well equipped warrior to get it back off U without draining the cleric's mana pool. This means U need to wait a lot longer for a warrior MT to get the aggro before U can slow......... seen some warriors I have had to leave till mob is 50% health before I can get away with slowing.

Pallies on the other hand rock.... they stun on Inc mob and it's tashed and slowed at 98% health, much less stress all round. I lurve pallies.

But there are some very good warriors out there who have spent huge amounts of time and plat lvling and equipping their toons only to find they still can't keep mobs off their slowers and healers....... maybe that's why they have more hp's and ac but I still fell it is grossly unfair to this class and needs a fix soon.

As it is atm my heart sinks when I join a PoP grp with a warrior MT, no matter how good they are.

That just about sums it up.

No, I don't want the balancing to come from itemization. Warrior_01 doesn't have the same access to items as Warrior_02.
I like the idea of the dot style specialized attack icon and the modifier for improved dps but I definitely don't see that happening.

1) Crits. I don't mind that other melee can crit; hoever, this was designed at the start of EQ to be something that set the warrior apart. Add something to warrior criticals that will again set us apart like

a) crit generates .50 of the damage in hate points sort of like a mini-taunting blow,

or b) there is a chance for a special damaging blow accompanied by it that does 50 percent more damage and also has a .0 sec stun and the accompanying hate to it...hell pull out an old Dragon Magazine critical hits chart for ideas

--Buuns scores a Critical Hit (84)--
--A Nettling Wraith is maimed (42)--
--A nettling wraith sways-- (stun part)

--Buun scores A Critical Hit (66)--
--A Nettling Wraith is dismembered (33)--
--A Nettling Wraith wobbles--

--Buun scores a Critical Hit (126)--
--A Nettling Wraith is scarred(63)--
--A nettling wraith falters--

I don't believe Furors idea will ever come into play because of this...

Verant will not give warriors higher DPS and more ability to hold aggro at the same time. They look at those two things together as being unbalancing. Sorry that is their perspective.

I think Verant will improve the warrior ability to hold aggro and this is what they will do...

Shields

Like it or not warriors gonna get shields. Verant will give warriors better ratio primary one hand only weapons that will not allow another weapon to be equipped in the offhand, only a shield. They will give aa specializations for Bashing type skills that will incorporate both Stun and add Hate.

Stunning Bash 1-5 aa skill
Damaging Bash 1-5
and Proccing Shields

Thus, you will get more defensive, have slightly less dps and yet hold aggro better. Aggro gonna go up and DPS gonna go down. That is how they think.

Buun
60 Warlord

ps... look at the bottom two on Lucy and I will bet you see some more shield type things pop up as they figure it out

http://lucy.fnord.net/spelllist.html?searchtext=bash

Rumblingdeth

06-11-2003, 10:35 PM

Shields are not the answer to this. That just makes Paladins and SKs even more attractive as they have snap aggro and now throw in even more of a DPS advantage (thanks to the over-powered two hander bonus + spells-esp the SKs DoTs and lifetaps). I am moving on to WoW, I am tired of Sony's utter incompetance.

Haass

06-12-2003, 01:13 AM

Shields will never be the answer unless I can use a 2 hander with it (warrior only skill). Warriors are all about Dual Wield, that's what makes them great..the ability to have 2 seperate weapons with seperate effects depending on the situation. I'll be damned if i'm accepting gimping one arm for aggro's sake, that's crap. I spent 9 friggin points on Ambidex, and so did A LOT of other people, and it's not going to shit just because we have aggro issues.

Rumblingdeth

06-12-2003, 01:41 AM

http://pub136.ezboard.com/feqenchantersrealmfrm11.showMessage?topicID=201.to pic

last sentence of posters comments.......

Shikarii

06-12-2003, 04:54 AM

/prays the day WoW goes live so rumblingass will just shut the f**k up and quit being a fanboi

Promethis

06-12-2003, 12:43 PM

If the DoTaunt skills are too complicated, a simplier solution would to just give warriors another attack that adds hate.

An attack that is like Maiming Strike. Activated like kick, with a recycle of 10 - 15 seconds. Hell it doen's teven have to be seperate from kick and bash line, making it so you can only use kick/bash/strike one at a time, and wait on recycle time.

It can be used with any weapon or bare fists, and just adds an extra attack such as rampage does when clicked. But it adds an innate proc similar to Call of Sky, that doesn't rely on a specific weapon type. That innate proc is unresistable and adds a set amount of hate.

Again you'd lose the abilty to kick stun / bash, but it just makes it so you have to chose depending on the situation. A lot of times in exp groups my kick is the only thing stopping a gate on a mob.

Frodlin7th

06-12-2003, 01:00 PM

The reason that I find the dot hate so attractive personally is because it creates a totally different "tanking" role for a warrior than it does for a knight.

One of the biggest problems with how it stands today is that anything that's done to one of the 3 tank classes directly and negatively impacts the other two.

If used skillfully, the tanking of multiple mobs simultaneously in a "chaotic warfare" role, which makes use of some current AA skills (AE Taunt, and Rampage, along with the need for greater HP/AC/Discs) along with different group setups (i.e. Druids and bards for DPS via damage shields and no Slower or necessary CC) the roles aren't 'stepping on one another's toes' but are truly overlapping, creating MORE opportunities for a LOT of different people. It then differentiates the warrior from the knight and makes us feel good about being "better" at something, knowing that the "better" part is not theoretical and empty as it is today, but is something tangible and meaningful.

Dinian

06-12-2003, 01:29 PM

What do you guys think about moving discussion of this proposed ability to another thread? This one is getting out of hand and more people will see a more focused, smaller, thread.

Kellaen

06-13-2003, 10:03 PM

Split it and move. Too much personal shit and the like being tossed around the first 4 pages.

Binnamar

06-13-2003, 10:21 PM

/prays the day WoW goes live so rumblingass will just shut the f**k up and quit being a fanboi

hahaha

Ararkham

07-01-2003, 09:58 AM

Atm seems the best idea to improve the "taunt" skill of Warriors..but as someone said it in a previous post, the damage output (3K in 20 ticks) appears to be overpowered. The Aggro part seems really fine. but well the best Necro DoT does 325 by Tick if i m right (Blood of Thule). 150 Dam/tick seems a bit hard for the Warrior class.. A cap around 100 seems a bit better. Also, to go with Furor's idea, it would be fine that Warriors gain at level 65 (for example) an improvement to our tanking abilities by a better Defensive skill. By this way, we gain a better Aggro power (Furor Idea) and a better tanking way (New Defensive skill).

Correct any b***shit i can say :)

Ararkham

Zierain

07-04-2003, 09:58 PM

Im late on this thread, and its 16 pages, so ya if its already been said before sry =P

Hey, something to actually use that Stamina bar for! (instead of just jumping, gogo similarities to DAoC tho.. but /shrug, its a good idea).

I like those ideas by furor. 3k mana free dot, so? At that level a warrior isnt fighting something that a 3k mana free dot is gonna matter much. BUT, i can see the problem of a war chaining it on a mob and running away. Rinse and repeat and you could essenstial solo a mob with little to no risk at all. Anyways, thats why it should use the stamina bar (Stamina doesnt go up while fighting, goes down, and in a solo situtation the war wouldnt be gaining any back while running away)

In a raid/group situation, it could give usefullness to certain spells/songs like Invigor. Keep that warrior with full stamina and he can keep aggro. (Raze could use like 90% of the stamina bar per use)

Ah well, sounds awesome, hope sony gets a clue and thinks about this idea.

arkady_tremere

07-06-2003, 05:17 AM

Paladin here. First off I'd like to say piss off to anyone calling for a hybrid nerf. Paladins and SKs should be able to out taunt a warrior. This especially holds true for SK's, whose spell changes when they nerfed disease cloud aggro clearly show that Verant wants SKs to be the masters of aggro control. Remember, our spells generate the aggro they do to keep our parent caster classes in check. A cleric/paladin combo could stun lock a mob completely negating any need for a slower, and a necromancer drawing little to no aggro on his spells would just be a machine.

But there's no denying warriors need work. Lets face it, yes most of the problems warriors have getting groups stem from a lazy and stupid player base. The vast majority of people who play EQ are lazy and stupid. If they weren't, there would be a lot more guilds hitting time/EP right now. You have to tune the game around this fact because you can't force people to be smart. Instead of nerfing paladins here's what I think should be done.

1) As was pointed out earlier the disparity between warrior and hybrid hitpoints is far too low. Someone showed how a self buffed paladin can come very very close or even surpass a warrior's hp. I think warriors should get a bonus 1k-1.5k hitpoints spread throughout their levels. This would also make the hp AA's evn more vlauable and have more impact for warriors.

2) Raise the warrior soft AC cap to 1500, as well as have warriors get more out of their ac than other classes. For example, I as a paladin get 15 points of AC per 10 points of AC on an item. Have warriors get 20.

3) Raise the chance of success on taunt to 99% at maxed
skill level.

4) Instead of putting you ahead of the person with the most aggro plus one, make it plus 50. Also have it add 50 instead of 1 on subsequent taunt attempts once you have aggro.

5) I like Furor's idea, but I think he significantly overpowers the damage effect. While I'm not really up to speed on the 60+ spells, I would have sworn there wasn't a dot that did 3k damage. Giving warriors the single best dot in the game, and mana free no less is absurd. A dot that does 70-140 damage a tic is more in line (i.e. it's like you get to bash without having to use a shield) but more importantly make it produce huge amounts of aggro. 200 or 300 points a tic. Make the dot itself last 30 seconds and give it a reuse time of 30 or 36 seconds. Make this skill have a 75% chance to function (at max skill level)and then have the taunt AA's affect this instead. Scale down the damage and aggro according to level, or just make this a skill gotten at level 40 or so.

Another possibility would be an innate bonus to proc, with accompanying AA's to increase this. I personally don't like this idea because it's too equipment based and not eveyrone can afford a proc weapon pre 50's, or even 55.

I know these changes would go a long way towards fixing the grouping game for warriors, but I have no idea how they would affect the raiding game. I am not a raider, I don't like raids personally and find them to be even more gruelingly boring than soloing.

Also the hate numbers were pulled completely out of my ass. I have no idea how aggro is calculated for anything, be it weapons or spells so if my numbers are too small/too big post better ones.

Just my 2 cents, but please, stop calling for paladin nerfs.

Valeris

07-06-2003, 06:11 PM

ignore, i'm just feeling crotchety :p

Chatja ogre

07-06-2003, 06:44 PM

2) Raise the warrior soft AC cap to 1500, as well as have warriors get more out of their ac than other classes. For example, I as a paladin get 15 points of AC per 10 points of AC on an item. Have warriors get 20.

Hello? Do you live in Kunark or something?

Yes, do nerf the taunt effect of stuns, nerf it alot.

Magg

07-10-2003, 10:04 AM

Actually, i disagree, its the best mana/damage nuke wizards get that still has a resist bonus. Now, i dont know about time, and Furor could answer you, but in the rest of PoP, and god forbind even farming VT, we use SK tanks whenever we can, and our wizards ignore Concussion.

a wizard without AA can sustain 312DPS until oom at a 4.2 to 1 ratio with a SK tank. our current best wizard sustains 500DPS, at about a 4.4 to 1 ratio, an can cast about 16 SOSes chained. (on horse)

So assuming time precludes the use of SK tanks, your left with warriors, and your forced to lower your DPS. The only advantage to the legs is its instant refresh allowing you to get more hate reduction in between nukes. If your a excellent wizard, which I assume teh ealyer posting wizards are, it allows you to click 3 times and then SOS agian, sustaining about 300DPS. This isnt bad since my current best with a warrior tanking is about 180DPS. (end luclin~early pop agro/proc weapons)

Frodlin,

I've read plenty of your gripes and complaints here and on the FoH boards. It gets old, and warriors tank fine. I know plenty of warriors that get aggro very quickly, and they hold onto it too. They also take hits better than a similarly geared Knight. They always have, even without using defensive.

Instead of believing everything you read on a message board, why not parse it for yourself? I'm in a pre-elemental guild and we have wizards doing well over 200 DPS with warriors tanking, and just plain old concussion. And these warriors don't have access yet to BoWs, Darkblades of the Warlord, etc. Don't just take my word for it though. Warning, because this next part requires some initiative and perhaps even work on your part: Have your wizards parse themselves while you are tanking, instead of just assuming that what someone else drops a message board is gospel.

If they prefer to have SKs tank, then they obviously have a problem: Their warriors suck. Paladins tank better than SKs do anyway, but I guess they still haven't figured that out either. On a select few mobs a Knight makes a better tank. The list is short.

Frodlin7th

07-10-2003, 11:36 AM

Magg,

It's funny, yes it gets old, but you know WHY it gets old? Because the problem hasn't been adressed. If I keep singing the same tune, it's because the song remains, until it's fixed, my complaint doesn't go away, nor am I gonna shelve it because you're bore reading it. I care about the issue because it's important in terms of class balance.

Warriors tank great, no one denies this. Warriors can aggro OK (in a vaccuum) but there's a DPS gap in using a warrior. This is common knowledge, and anyone who can do a little math can figure out that on any mob that meets certain criteria, that the knight will be a better tank than a warrior.

Criteria:

1. It must not be able to single round kill a non-defensive tank.

2. A CH Rotation interval must be sustainable for the amount of time it takes to kill the mob which can reasonably expect to keep the tank alive.

Those are the only criteria that one can use logically to determine which is a better tank. You claim that the list is short of "select few mobs a Knight makes a better tank." than a warrior and then go on to say "the list is short". I'm sorry, but you're dead wrong. There's a total of 9 elemental mobs(Fennin, Xeg, Offoassa, Hydro, Kriiz, Silence Birds, Raparm, Blazzax, AM Yozanni) 4 pre-elemental mobs (RZTW, Bert, MM, and Rydda Dar) and all time bosses that a warrior is the better tank. ALL of the rest favor a knight, and just because people are too stubborn to use them doesn't make it any different.

Knights are CLEARLY superior on the following Pre-Elemental mobs: TT, Saryrn, Agnarr, TZ Both regular and in RZ script, VZ, Behemoth, 7th Hammer, AD, they do just fine on the other bosses. It's simply not possible to deny the increase in DPS unleashed by knights tanking, you have to have blinders on. In the Elemental Planes, knights can tank Bab, Pyronis, Charmbirds, Wise, All PoE bosses, and so on, and again, the DPS unleashed is dramatic.

To claim that "their warriors suck" as reason to want greater DPS because of the aggro gap is nonsense and shows how little you know of this game, but then again, I have come to expect people to not know very much, or just go with what they know without thinking about it.

Magg

07-10-2003, 11:59 AM

The only mobs in that list where I consider a Knight a better tank are:

TZ, VZ

I can't comment on the Elemental fights, I'm not there quite yet.

Using the fact that a Knight can gain aggro as an excuse for DPS classes to exercise absolutely no control over their aggro is lame. Knights have always been able to gain aggro and hold it, and there is no more of a difference between Knights and Warriors now than there has been since perhaps Velious. People are just finally starting to understand where Knights fit in, and God forbid, that they actually have a niche on raids other than buff bots.

Frodlin7th

07-10-2003, 02:07 PM

Using the fact that a Knight can gain aggro as an excuse for DPS classes to exercise absolutely no control over their aggro is lame.

There's nothing "lame" about unleashing your DPS classes and killing things faster. Tell me how it's "lame" to have something dead faster. Please, enlighten me.

Knights have always been able to gain aggro and hold it, and there is no more of a difference between Knights and Warriors now than there has been since perhaps Velious.

There's a SIGNIFICANTLY smaller defensive diference AND offensive difference between warriors and knights in those two timepoints. Knights have not always been a good choice to tank over the long term, this is NEW, not old.

People are just finally starting to understand where Knights fit in, and God forbid, that they actually have a niche on raids other than buff bots.

And tell me, please... what exactly does a warrior "bring to the table" when he's replaced with that knight. Knights have ALWAYS had lots to do on raids and their role has EXPANDED dramatically *even* not taking tanking under consideration. God forbid warriors have a role which they're best in outside of /disc defensive.

Magg

07-10-2003, 02:39 PM

Warriors take a beating better than any other class. They always have. The warrior niche always existed.

And tell me, please... what exactly does a warrior "bring to the table" when he's replaced with that knight.
Warriors aren't going to be replaced. It has nothing to do with defensive either. Warriors take damage better given similar gear. Obviously an Elemental paladin can tank better than a warrior in Skyshrine gear. But, given identical gear, the warrior will take a hit better. With a warrior tanking, people actually have to know how to play their class. They have to use those spells and abilities their class was given to reduce aggro. What a concept. What you are saying, is that Knights SHOULD NOT have a niche other than buffing and Laying Hands on your ass. You don't think that there should be situations where more is required than throw a /def warrior and a CH rotation at a mob and make HP < 0? What's wrong with encounters such as Tallon and Vallon where having Knights tank is the more logical choice?? Are you afraid that because a Knight is a better tank on a couple mobs that warriors are suddenly going to be obsolete? Where is your data to support this theory? If you claim the system doesn't work, then the burden of proof is on you.

Your whining and carrying on isn't going to get warriors anywhere. If all you are going to do is complain about your class, re-roll as something else and be done with it. You'll have a lot less worries. Half of the problems in this game don't really exist other than on message boards.

Valeris

07-10-2003, 02:45 PM

You so don't want to go there maggs :p

Frodlin7th

07-10-2003, 03:27 PM

Warriors aren't going to be replaced. It has nothing to do with defensive either. Warriors take damage better given similar gear. Obviously an Elemental paladin can tank better than a warrior in Skyshrine gear. But, given identical gear, the warrior will take a hit better.

You show how little you know about this issue when making statements like this:

1. Warriors avoid 1.5% more attempts to hit than Knights based on avoidance skill cap differences.

2. Warriors have the HP/Sta calculation "advantage"

Those are the *only* two differences in terms of tankability between warriors and knights. They don't "take a hit better" unless using a discipline, the damage mitigation tables have never ever ever been shown to be anything other than identical. Making bold claims without actually having to prove them isn't becoming of finding the truth.

With a warrior tanking, people actually have to know how to play their class. They have to use those spells and abilities their class was given to reduce aggro. What a concept. What you are saying, is that Knights SHOULD NOT have a niche other than buffing and Laying Hands on your ass.

So your claim, if I have this straight is that the role of a Paladin or SK should be to enable crappy players to play without consequence?

The idea that healing, buffing, rezzing, stunning, laying of hands, self hate, self imbue procs, and all the other crap out there is "nothing" or isn't a "niche" is silly. Knights should be able to tank, yeah, no problem, but just like us... with a DRAWBACK. You see, that's hat we call "balance". The best drawback is in downtime, it would be the single best balancing factor around. So either a group could deal with aggro issues with the warrior (Our drawback) or deal with the Knight having to sit on his ass and med (Their drawback). It doesn't happen now, there's NO drawback to a knight tanking in an exp group situation, and that's wrong.

You don't think that there should be situations where more is required than throw a /def warrior and a CH rotation at a mob and make HP < 0?

Very few encounters are this easy. Most encounters have multiple adds/AE's, and so on.

What's wrong with encounters such as Tallon and Vallon where having Knights tank is the more logical choice?? Are you afraid that because a Knight is a better tank on a couple mobs that warriors are suddenly going to be obsolete?

I'll tell you what's "wrong" with it. If my tankability on raid level mobs because of /disc defensive is being used as a crutch to gimp me in exp groups then I want every single raid level mob to absolutely destroy you, I want your butt pasted all over the ground, because that's MY role, the one that's keeping ME from being effective in exp groups, so back off man.

Where is your data to support this theory? If you claim the system doesn't work, then the burden of proof is on you.

ROFL, what kind of data would you like?

Your whining and carrying on isn't going to get warriors anywhere. If all you are going to do is complain about your class, re-roll as something else and be done with it. You'll have a lot less worries. Half of the problems in this game don't really exist other than on message boards.

You keep telling yourself that

Pidany

07-10-2003, 03:34 PM

This whole situation did not truely come to light for me until recently.
I played my warrior when Kunark was released and she had no problems grabbing aggro from most mobs and had no problems getting groups. As she got older things were fine until Vellious ... then Luclin and worst of all PoP.
I noticed as most did that it wasn't always me. I played my cleric as a main for a while and that's when I learned about aggro. This carried me all the way to 65 with her, and a new appreciation for my warrior.
Don't heal the monk when he is pulling, don't fire off big heals until absolutely necessary and spam small heals until the tank has aggro. What happened to actually learning the game ?
I am now out agro'd by EVERY class, not just pally's and SK's. People that slow too early and nuke too hard to fast.
Recently I start duoing with my bf's 50 shaman. I noticed he was slowing too early and he would be sitting next to me saying " The mob is on me, can ya get it please?". My response wasn't always sweet but all I could tell him is I am trying and waiting for the taunt button to refresh. I learned tricks as well, like equipping my Silken Whip of Ensnaring long enough to get it snared and make it hate me. All luck as well though in waiting for them to hopefully proc before he got beaten into the ground.
There is certainly an issue with taunt and aggro, but there is a bigger issue with people wanting to prove they can steal aggro from you and bitch about how bad of a tank you are. I have certainly learned how to be vocal in groups that go bad .. you would be suprised at how quick people change when you pop in group say "Control your aggro if you want to keep chain pulling. The cleric can not keep up with everyone getting hit". People tend to hear Chain Pulling and sit like good dogs and behave =)

Bunnie Burner

07-10-2003, 03:51 PM

Why blame others?

If we were the only tanking classe, the way our class works would inevitably set rules of conduct for other group members.

It would become a universal law, that, when fighting a mob, you DO NOT overaggro the mob.

THEN it would be up to the group to handle the aggro, THEN they would be faulty.

Well it's not the way it is. Build a time machine if you wish, and go back to the age of Kunark, where we really did have a huge advantage in tanking.

But at the moment, the rule is no longer set by Warriors.
It's set by knights. Wether you like it or not.

You CAN slow on inc,
You CAN nuke a few times and sit to med,
You DONT have to Feign Death every now and then...

this is the universal law in grouping, and on mobs that don't one round non def tanks.

Why are you all going for the EB weapons then?..
Why are you all drooling over the BoW and the new Time 1hander??
Why is aggro interesting you all?.. we DONT NEED IT!!

We just need groups to adapt to us.

Stop trying to attain maximal aggro capacity, it's not your responsibility.
:p

Magg

07-10-2003, 04:18 PM

They don't "take a hit better"
Given X mob, they [warriors] will sustain less damage overall. You have basically admitted to this, but you are marginalizing the effect of it.

2. Warriors have the HP/Sta calculation "advantage"

Those are the *only* two differences in terms of tankability between warriors and knights. They don't "take a hit better" unless using a discipline, the damage mitigation tables have never ever ever been shown to be anything other than identical. Making bold claims without actually having to prove them isn't becoming of finding the truth.
Prove it. Where are the parses to support this theory? We all know that AC doesn't have a universal effect across all the classes. What you are implying is that 1600, 1800, 2000 or however much AC is the same on a warrior as it is on a knight. Put a knight and warrior up against the same mob, hell even an experience mob. If what you say is true then given a long enough parse the damage mitigated should be near identical.

If in fact you can prove it to be true, then you have a valid case that certainly needs to be addressed: Mitigation. Warrior aggro is just fine as it is, but I would have no argument with warriors getting an even further boost in their mitigation abilities if what you say is proveable. After all, a warrior should be able to mitigate substantially better than any other class.

I'll tell you what's "wrong" with it. If my tankability on raid level mobs because of /disc defensive is being used as a crutch to gimp me in exp groups then I want every single raid level mob to absolutely destroy you, I want your butt pasted all over the ground, because that's MY role, the one that's keeping ME from being effective in exp groups, so back off man.
Warriors having /disc defensive is the reason you claim they can't generate aggro? Ok... Warriors generate aggro just fine. So the enchanter can't tash and slow while the mob is incoming, but they couldn't do that 3 years ago either, could they?

Let me get this straight: What you want is to able to mitigate better than everyone else, do more DPS than rogues and have DoTs that shoot out of your ass to enrage the mob over time, because your aggro generation is such a problem...? Weren't we just talking about the need for a downside?

Not all hybrids have FT15 and 6000m, just make sure you consider that.

Tugurok

07-10-2003, 05:01 PM

That test was already run I thought -- by a cleric. And yes, they all had the same mitigation.

Frodlin7th

07-10-2003, 09:57 PM

1. The Parses on mitigation are public knowledge, see cleric boards for example. I'm not going to go through the hassle of looking it up yet again, but plate classes have identical mitigation, and it's been proven, not by me, but by clerics who were trying to prove the opposite but had an "epiphany" when the data started flowing in.

The next part I'll do one at a time.

[/quote]Let me get this straight: What you want is to able to mitigate better than everyone else[/quote]

Actually no, I want to be able to mitigate MUCH MUCH better than anyone else, except fellow warriors of course.

do more DPS than rogues and have DoTs that shoot out of your ass to enrage the mob over time, because your aggro generation is such a problem...?

This line of argument is what is called "a straw man". What does that mean, Straw man? It means you're making shit up so you can win the argument cause you can't win the actual argument. You're putting words into MY mouth or assigning desires that I have NEVER stated and then arguing with those rather than with what I'm actually arguing.

Weren't we just talking about the need for a downside?

Yes, and we still should be rather than make-believe stuff that you're assigning to me.

It's no secret what I want, I've stated it time and time again. I want to be able to generate aggro proportionate to a knight in direct correllation with the defensive advantage I have. In other words if you have 90% of my defense, I want 90% of your aggro.

Kaesorn

07-11-2003, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by Frodlin7th
1. The Parses on mitigation are public knowledge, see cleric boards for example. I'm not going to go through the hassle of looking it up yet again, but plate classes have identical mitigation, and it's been proven, not by me, but by clerics who were trying to prove the opposite but had an "epiphany" when the data started flowing in.
I think you mean this thread (http://eqcleric.gameglow.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14449) (hint, page 4 for the graph, page 3 for the numbers). Yes, this was rather odd. Overall, clerics were trying to prove that the "plate-class" association was false, that our armor was little more than leather made to look like plate...but it turns out that we do actually have plate mitigation...it's our avoidance that's messed up (makes sense, really).

This line of argument is what is called "a straw man".
I've always wanted to know what to call an agrument like that...been on the recieving end of a ton of them as people start getting touchy because they can't win the argument (in RL...I'm a bit of a newb on this forum still)

Tirien

07-11-2003, 04:07 PM

Hehe, I hear what yall are sayin. I just came back to EQ after taking a years break. Previously I played a 60 chanter in a guild that had cleared kunark and velious and most of luclin. I remember when constantly overaggroing would get you booted from a guild, let alone a group. Being known for it would ruin your rep and you would never get groups. I liked having a pally as a tank, but it was hardly necessary. I loved trains and yelled at the puller when they didn't bring them. We had fun, and we were efficient because we were good. Now I play a warrior, and I almost come to tears when I see the state of the game as it is currently. Wizzies nuking as soon as they see the mob, rangers pulling with snare (I just DO NOT understand this), etc.. etc.. I can't even imagine doing camps like juggs or chardok nobles with these people. I have never been one to ask for nerfs, but pallies and sk's need one bigtime. Why? Because people need to learn a very hard lesson. A wizzy should apologize for getting aggro, not tell you to stfu start an SK....

Aeka

07-11-2003, 04:20 PM

A straw man is a falacy where one misrepresent their opponent's argument to attack it from an extreme or irrelevant angle.

Example: To be an aethist you must absolutely sure that there is no God. The only way you can do that is to examine everything for the presence of God. Since no human can, aethism is flawed.

The problem is that you don't need to be "absolutely sure" there is no God to have some semblance of aethism. Stating that extreme makes the opposition look weaker than it really is.

Gerick

07-18-2003, 03:47 AM

read the first post what bullshit.

Mvreena

07-18-2003, 08:54 PM

I realize people are probably tired of this thread, and that my reply won't be read, but reading it got me fired up, so here goes.

As a warrior who is not 65 (59 to be exact) with a gazillion AA's (3 to be exact) and with fantastic gear (just look at my magelo) Daemonwynd's earlier posts hit it right on the nail. Trying to get in a pick up group is laughable. Think worse than SolB and the waiting list. I'm just now deemed to have acceptable enough aggro control by a pick up group to MT in PoD, whereas I have seen pallys in their low/mid 50's in a pick up group MTing there. I've never even been close to the tier 2 planes in a pick up group, specifically because of that and I won't be for some time. This in and of itself makes it very interesting when you are trying to level to GET into those zones. Because my friends, let me tell you that at 59, tier 1 planes exp even with the new group exp bonus is not fun. Think level 35, 40, 45, etc... when there were such a thing as hell levels.

Amazingly enough, I do not have aggro problems when I am in guild exp groups. I have the occasional moment when the SA forgets to engage the add, and then when the cleric heals, the MoB decides the cleric is a tasty treat. However, I'm sure that has happened to us all. The difference between a pick up group and a guild group, is that my guild knows I'm a good MT and is willing to work with me to keep aggro where it should be, on the person with the best defensive abilities, i.e. THE WARRIOR.

So I guess I come down on the side of all who stated it is crappy players who are to fault as much as anything. I started my warrior when Kunark came out, when ALL classes had to learn how to play there char or else you were kicked out of a group as dead wood or were just plain dead. Yes pally's have set the standard, because they make it easier on everybody else, but is that better? I mean, what's the point in playing EQ if you don't really want to learn your char and get into the adventures and /gasp RPing? If you want mindless entertainment, go buy an X-box or Playstation II, instead of wasting your money each month and with each expansion on EQ!!

That being said, because pally's have set the standard, the only way you are going to get people to start playing smarter is to nerf the pally's or give the warriors better aggro control, which in affect will nerf the pally's, so I say NERF THEM!!!

I'm sure there's a flame coming, just remember, I might not be right, but I am sexy ;)