Paladin DPS

[Notpit]

"the Paladin will be more reminiscent of the Monk/Ranger classes"

This is clearly not the case. If the devs have made an intentional decision, then I don't see much cause to whine. A minor change to the stances will fix any imbalance from the latest /s 4 nerf. But if that is still the role of the Paladin then the OP seems very valid.

I would also point out that on that same thread, Wiz later said, "Also, it's not melee only."

So if the original concept behind Paladins is accurate, then the goal is to have Paladins producing more dps "reminiscent" to monks and rangers.

 

[stope21]

This thread was created to showcase a disparity in pure melee DPS between the tanks so no, including spells does not make sense at all.

Please re-read OP, it is about total dps -- not just melee.

Oh yeah, things are so dire for paladins what with the utility of AE taunt ability and group heals. The only valid point you have is that high MR mobs make your aggro pretty sketchy. If you can not understand why Paladins can't be doing more DPS than shadowknights while still retaining their heals and buffs then I just don't know what to say to you.

Sk's also get FD, a pretty sweet agro buff, and a HUGE mana regen tap. But we're not here to compare every aspect of the class, we're comparing the fact that paladins were intended to do the most dps of the 3 tanks and they arn't even close.

The easiest way to improve paladins as I mentioned in OP would be to significantly amplify stance 5. It would then give paladins throughout the teirs an increase in dps. People keep bringing up weapons, when I really don't see there being bad progression with weapons. If anything, weapons have some of the best progression out of every thing I have seen in SoD.

 

[Salarus]

Wow, this thread has gotten pretty out of control.

First, Paladins use blinds, period. It's one of our best ways to get aggro, and bringing up your expereince on live really has no merit here.

Paladins also do not have an "area taunt" (warriors have that) we have literally 2 spells that are PBAOE spells, with a 6 mob limit. The first of this, is Wave of Light, which is an AoE blind (no damage component) and the second is Word of the Crusader (damage + stun) which because useless in a situation where you have anyone trying to mez.

Also, Paladins and Shadowknights are NOT as closely related as you would like us to believe. Both classes do some some common things, but thats to be assumed, they are both in the "tank" catagory. There are however, many variations which "heals" vrs "spell damage" don't account for. Here's a quick example, feign death - enough said.

 

[BenGordon]

Ohh fun this thread has turned to sk vs pal dps ill participate.

Anyways, it is near impossible for me to fairly parse the 3 classes.

This point must be stressed. Tank dps and SK vs pal dps is going to GREATLY vary across tiers. There are so many situations where a paladin will have a dps advantage and visa versa so simply posting one even though I know you realize it is far from credible.

Just a quick look at Ringo/Jenks parsing, SKs > Pally for dps (Outside of Undead areas, but boy does HHK/Cata get BORING after so many runs through.) (And supposedly suppose to be the better tank as well.)

Yes because in normal grouping situations especially jenks vs ringo his dps would not be superior in everchill, eldenals, firstruins, rust factory etc. Basically any exp zone in the game where there are pulls of 4+ mobs. As a matter of fact I have heard certain paladins not naming any names brag about how they can get up to 750 dps+ easily just by tanking 5-6 mobs. Take someone like ringo who could literally sustain like 15 everchill orcs beating on him at once if you wanted to post comparative parses of only those situations heads would spin. Ringos 10 minute parses on blue treants in faydark are the most retardedly misleading parses I have ever seen and you might as well of blasted my harmtouches off at least once just to make them more misleading (or you did? figure 4 maybe ). Its quite disappointing that Ringo would even post those numbers because some of the less informed people are gobbling them up and spewing back out blasphemy and its shitting this post up beyond comprehension. You would be a gigantically stupid idiotic moron to see that little parse demonstration and make a blanket statement like oh well its quite obvious and I am convinced SKs are greater dps than Paladins.

My official thoughts: Comparing SKs vs Pals is maybe your best hope for a dps increase but the issue here is not solely dps and several people have touched on this already but when asking for an increase to one area of a classes ability (DPS) you have to consider balance and consider the capabilities of both of these classes top to bottom. Yes I get deflux you get big better self heals etc. I know for a fact the devs have a good idea of how they want to approach the roles of paladins they have already demonstratively taken the steps to fill some of the gaps with their ikisith spells and I know that there will be specialized tomes etc to better balance the classes. I also know that if you think you are presenting something new to specifically Woldaff/Zaela you are not, they are very informed on the issues here and this is why paladins got nerfed in the first place. Everything else aside, just from what I have witnessed with the nerfs to Paladins the role of the class in the high end raiding game has been devastated. There probably should be something to increase their dps whether it be a stance or spells or whatever.

 

[tinkaa]

I think neither paladins nor sks fill that role of the "dps" and "manipulating opponents".
When I used to parse Grimar, Cvetkaa and Sauga, the dps difference wasn't big, or at least I expected it because Cvetkaa always uses all possible lifetap proc buffs (~16 dps difference for shroud of the leech vs paladin with rbow, and she always uses Melwin's idol, while Grim and Sauga didn't).

My new parses showed paladin constant ~10 dps over sk, but on all fights combined here is the result (total time 47 minutes):
Paladin crit 22.5% of the time, was 216 melee dps and 8 proc dps with Antediluvian Axe and Rbow, so 224 dps combined.
Sk crit 15.6% of the time, was 195 melee dps and 21 dps from deflux, spear of agony, again using Antediluvian Axe but with the self-buff shroud of the leech, so 216 dps combined.
The knights in question had identical gear except the bp (seething hatred vs devout crusader's), same attack and same buffs except paladin was using rbow and sk shroud of the leech, both 2% deity bonus, no tomes, same race.

If paladins are to resemble monks/rangers in form of their dps, I'd expect their melee dps to be slightly buffed. Would they actually have spell slots for other damage spells? I know I'm short on them with Cvetkaa, using deflux and spear when it pops, but no dots.
As said before, paladins don't seem so much better dps to deserve the title of best dps of the tanks - but then again what's up with sk "careful manipulation of mobs"?
I always wondered why sks don't get any dps stance at all, outside of /s 2, because I thought that paladin offensive stances were a tiny bit better than they are, but after I played one a couple of times, I'm not too impressed with them either.
I'm only stating this because I think it's vital to consider all aspects when you talk about "paladins are dps tanks, sks are utility tanks". If paladin dps was to be buffed, then I hope the utility of sk "manipulative" spells will also be revised.
If 10 dps difference is worth of calling paladins the best dps of tank classes, then fine, but if it was to be buffed, I'd support something done with yaulp or some stances revised (for both knights).

Some people already made posts while I was writing mine, but I basically agree with Behn.

EDIT: I just figured out the mob I parsed on was neutral humanoid, so the paladin and sk aas took effect - paladin did 10% more dps as if the npc was good and sk did 15% more dps as if the npc wasn't humanoid - so if the mob was non-humanoid good the paladin dps would be even better.

 

[stope21]

Words

Welcome to the internet where a bunch of goons hastily read through what you write. An environment where collective collaboration rarely forms common agreement.

 

[Sateru]

They never were Tyrone. They have never been the best DPS tanks if you're including both melee and spell DPS. Almost their entire spell set is defensive. The base classes retain their semblance of balance from live. Think of the class as being cut in to three pieces. Tanking, melee DPS, and spells.
Tanking and melee DPS are comparable for shadowknights and paladins (warriors I would have to see some parses) but you can not actively compare spell balance in terms of DPS. In this sense paladins and shadowknights mirror each other, a paladins ability to heal is supposed to reflect a shadowknight's ability to do damage in the general sense. If you increase a paladins DPS to the point where he can effectively out damage a shadowknight's sum DPS while still retaining his healing ability then he has become overpowered in comparison.

If paladin spells were supposed to be defensive only then paladins should be the better tanks. You're pretty much saying that knights should have their intended roles reversed. And I really don't see how being able to out dps a SK would make paladins overpowered in comparison, they are still the better tanks.

 

[Ikaa|LoveYums]

a plethora of unnecessary personal attacks

Enjoy your extended vacation.

Lets keep this discussion on topic, and free from any more personal attacks.

 

[JarL]

I happen to like Luclin graphics ><

 

[Salarus]

Regarding SK's as utility tanks....

SK's have the ability to pull, they ever have a nice stnace for some lower tierd zones which makes quite a few really hard splits with lots of mobs as easy as 1 2 3...

The ability to feign death should in no way be downplayed, as having a puller is neccesary in nearly every raid zone I can think of, and there are only 3 classes who can do it, shadowknights being the second best of the 3 imo, and they are very capable pullers.

 

[Budizzle]

You do realize that your post has all of the same flaws as Stope's, right?

Um, no.

Please "detail why my logic is flawed." You are suffering from a self serving biased. I am not a mind reader, and no I wont accept your statement with no supporting details and a brief "just accept it" statement. I understand people may know their class and may know how to play. That is wonderful, yet not applicable to anything.

Okay.

You're using /s 10 as a staple of warrior dps. It's not. Why? Because it's rarely used by anyone. Just because warriors can use /s 10 is irrelevant; citing warrior /s 10 as a reference to their dps capacity is like citing rogue /s 9 in defense of their tanking ability: stupid. The only difference is nimble is actually useful. Even if a warrior is not tanking, burning stamina on /s 10 decreases their ability to tank efficiently should they need to, I don't know, do their job.

What are you talking about? My dps should be more asymmetrical? Okay guy.

Sorry, this was a typo. I meant symmetrical. It happens.

I'm not sure how I can be more clear. Paladin dps should be an even combination of spell damage and melee. Your own parses show that paladin dps is favored heavily by melee damage. That is not symmetrical.

Now your saying mellee dps is irrelevant. You are right, when im meleeing a raid boss being tanked by a warrior or a sk, my melee dps is COMPLETLY irrelevant. Are you insane? You act like all tanks are always tanking. I'm a pally, on raids I tank only if both our warrior and sk are dead.

I can't believe you have the audacity to call me a dolt when you are so ironically wrong.

All things considered, melee and spell damage stand irrelevant against a tank's premier form of dps: damage shield. Far and away. The only thing that will even come close to bridging the gap is tomes, and even full tomes will not seal it completely.

Obviously you're not understanding my point. You will never out dps a warrior or SK that is eating damage with a stacked damage shield on or vice versa. Even with full tomes. Damage shield is a HUGE portion of tank dps.

I don't see the point you are trying to make. I've already established that 2hers are more dps than 1hers from a higher teir. I'm not asking for 1hers or 2hers to be changed, and I think the progression on weapons that I can use is actually quite good. Can you please make a more understandable statement?

Wait wait wait. What you're lobbying for is situational damage against raid mobs when you're not tanking? Well, you didn't specify that in your OP, you just generalized paladin dps in any situation. Which would be a better crusade since paladin dps is lacking overall.

Paladin melee dps is overpowered compared to their spell damage. Again, your very own parses have confirmed this. A big portion of this problem is a product of paladin 1handers with amazing ratios. The remedy may seem pretty clear cut -- buff paladin spell dps -- but it's very hard to do without overpowering existing weapons or paladins in general. Current knight 1hand progression is almost a bigger mistake than the +25% to melee, spell, and healing potency provided by full tomes. From a developer standpoint, it really limits what you can do regarding other aspects of knights if they remain true to their previous theme of progression.

I've already verbalized my opinion on your cognitive clarity; spare me your thoughts. Paladin melee dps is not balanced with their spell dps.

 

[stope21]

I think neither paladins nor sks fill that role of the "dps" and "manipulating opponents".
When I used to parse Grimar, Cvetkaa and Sauga, the dps difference wasn't big, or at least I expected it because Cvetkaa always uses all possible lifetap proc buffs (~16 dps difference for shroud of the leech vs paladin with rbow, and she always uses Melwin's idol, while Grim and Sauga didn't).

My new parses showed paladin constant ~10 dps over sk, but on all fights combined here is the result (total time 47 minutes):
Paladin crit 22.5% of the time, was 216 melee dps and 8 proc dps with Antediluvian Axe and Rbow, so 224 dps combined.
Sk crit 15.6% of the time, was 195 melee dps and 21 dps from deflux, spear of agony, again using Antediluvian Axe but with the self-buff shroud of the leech, so 216 dps combined.
The knights in question had identical gear except the bp (seething hatred vs devout crusader's), same attack and same buffs except paladin was using rbow and sk shroud of the leech, both 2% deity bonus, no tomes, same race.

Parsing to see what a class can put out in terms of the upper limit of dps should be done using a 2her, not a 1her. When doing so, sk's lose a lot less as they have less of their next weapon attack round be consumed by their casting. Also, if we are going to have official numbers. I would really appreciate the test characters names so that I can fomelo them to find out more info than just their gear is almost identical. Their race should be identical, spec points, tomes. These are all obvious things, but it builds confidence when we can see that they are all the same, or there is at least mention.

There are a lot of factors that always get left out, that could be overlooked by the one person parsing. I have already said the info I provided has its errors, yet every other parse I see from devs -- there is just no consideration publicized for faults. Its a wham bam, slap the info up kind of approach. No explanation.. you're right yall don't owe that to us.. it's free thing ya'll put together and we can either take it or leave it. That doesn't mean that people arn't going to have problems with it... That doesn't mean people arn't going to get upset about things, some certainly will.

People play this game for so long, putting forth the time and effort to be able to become the character they want to be. There's going to be disagreements. While I'm not condoning personal attacks, I think there is a general lack of care or concern for the reasons why generally reasonable, experienced, knowledgeable people react the way they do. They just get thrown in e-jail and called an asshole.

 

[stope21]

Um, no.
You're using /s 10 as a staple of warrior dps. It's not. Why? Because it's rarely used by anyone. Just because warriors can use /s 10 is irrelevant; citing warrior /s 10 as a reference to their dps capacity is like citing rogue /s 9 in defense of their tanking ability: stupid. The only difference is nimble is actually useful. Even if a warrior is not tanking, burning stamina on /s 10 decreases their ability to tank efficiently should they need to, I don't know, do their job.

I think a better argument, or what you mean, would be the fact that an equally geared warrior will always be tanking and never dps. So their dps is irrelavant. This has some merit, however it is misleading. If you wish to opt out of being compared as it is unimaginable that a warrior ever not tank, that still leaves the comparison to sk's. Or should we consider sk's to always be tanking as well? The fact of the matter is, not all 3 of these classes are going to be tanking simultaneously, all the time. That is where their potential to dps comes into play.

Sorry, this was a typo. I meant symmetrical. It happens.

I'm not sure how I can be more clear. Paladin dps should be an even combination of spell damage and melee. Your own parses show that paladin dps is favored heavily by melee damage. That is not symmetrical.

Paladins just plain and simply don't get an abundance of of worthwhile spells that do damage that would increase their dps over their melee-only dps. I assumed you knew this. If you didnt, now you do. Maybe you are suggesting to add spells that do more dps and can improve a paladins dps? Regardless, I'm not here to play the guessing game as to what you meant.

Um, no.
Paladin melee dps is overpowered compared to their spell damage. Again, your very own parses have confirmed this.

Saying melee dps is OP compared to their spell dps is completly meaningless. I don't give a fuck how I do the dps. Total DPS is Total DPS is Total DPS.

A big portion of this problem is a product of paladin 1handers with amazing ratios. The remedy may seem pretty clear cut -- buff paladin spell dps -- but it's very hard to do without overpowering existing weapons or paladins in general.

We don't get dw. W/o dw we pretty much have to have something make up for it. That is why the ratio's on knights weapons are good.

Furthermore, you are so focused on your comparison to warriors that you cant fathom the fact that EVEN COMPARED TO SK's WE ARE DOING LESS DPS AND THEY HAVE THE SAME EXACT WEAPONS. Furthermore, its the 2hers that YOU also can use that are what does the better dps. You have access to the EXACT same weapons that do MORE dps than our "OMG OP 1HERS."

 

[neonovas]

I would really appreciate the test characters names so that I can fomelo them to find out more info than just their gear is almost identical. Their race should be identical, spec points, tomes

The knights in question had identical gear except the bp (seething hatred vs devout crusader's), same attack and same buffs except paladin was using rbow and sk shroud of the leech, both 2% deity bonus, no tomes, same race.

i didn't see anything about AAs or spec points either, i just assumed they had all possible but who knows

 

[Budizzle]

I think a better argument, or what you mean, would be the fact that an equally geared warrior will always be tanking and never dps. So their dps is irrelavant. This has some merit, however it is misleading. If you wish to opt out of being compared as it is unimaginable that a warrior ever not tank, that still leaves the comparison to sk's. Or should we consider sk's to always be tanking as well? The fact of the matter is, not all 3 of these classes are going to be tanking simultaneously, all the time. That is where their potential to dps comes into play.

No. Warrior stamina is a precious, limited commodity. Even if a warrior is not tanking, they should never burn their stamina on /s 10 because they might need to tank in the immediate future.

You will never out dps whichever class is tanking, reciprocating that, the other two classes will never out dps you when you're tanking. You're also completely disregarding anything outside this scenario. Paladins can hold aggro on 10+ mobs at a time without too much effort, whereas the same amount of mobs is a tall order (read: impossible) for an SK or warrior to maintain aggro on over heals. You will do huge damage if you stack a 100pt DS against those 10 mobs. I'm sure you're aware of this since you do it pretty frequently. Do not ignore the balancing issues associated with damage shield.

I think a better argument for you would be "make paladin dps superior to the other two tank classes overall" in lieu of "you nerfed paladins so now give me more dps while aux tanking raid encounters."

Paladins just plain and simply don't get an abundance of of worthwhile spells that do damage that would increase their dps over their melee-only dps. I assumed you knew this. If you didnt, now you do. Maybe you are suggesting to add spells that do more dps and can improve a paladins dps? Regardless, I'm not here to play the guessing game as to what you meant.

Hi. This is exactly what I'm suggesting, in addition to maybe a stance that increases their current spell damage potency. I hope you didn't have to guess too hard...

Saying melee dps is OP compared to their spell dps is completly meaningless. I don't give a fuck how I do the dps. Total DPS is Total DPS is Total DPS.

You have a very narrow, shallow vision. Think of what repercussions a 40/15 ratio knight 1hander might cause, or what that would be reminiscent of. Spoilers: EQ Live. If you haven't played lately, inflated item progression has been crippling it for years. Now imagine a 35/30 knight 1hander in harmony with paladin spell damage. This leaves more room for both item and spell progression, reducing and delaying the effects of inflation.

"Gimme gimme gimme" without considering negative repercussion is what makes you a dolt.

We don't get dw. W/o dw we pretty much have to have something make up for it. That is why the ratio's on knights weapons are good.

Again, you are completely ignoring your potential spells. Your spells alone should have the capacity to negate most of a warrior's melee dps imo.

Furthermore, you are so focused on your comparison to warriors that you cant fathom the fact that EVEN COMPARED TO SK's WE ARE DOING LESS DPS AND THEY HAVE THE SAME EXACT WEAPONS. Furthermore, its the 2hers that YOU also can use that are what does the better dps. You have access to the EXACT same weapons that do MORE dps than our "OMG OP 1HERS."

No. Just no. I have acknowledged quite a few times in the past and even in this thread that paladin dps fails comparatively. Furthermore, unless a warrior is soloing or duoing (lol), they are not wielding a 2hander. Furthermore, you are so focused on receiving a buff to dps because your class got nerfed that you're completely ignoring... everything else. Furthermore, you need to understand and accept that I agree with you about paladin dps. Furthermore, furthermore, furthermore.

 

[BenGordon]

You will never out dps whichever class is tanking, reciprocating that, the other two classes will never out dps you when you're tanking.

I am not so sure I agree with this. I am fairly sure if enough aux tanks are in front where I can go to the back and attack on most mobs I will outdps the tank +damage shield. As a matter of fact that statement to me is wholly wrong.

You're also completely disregarding anything outside this scenario. Paladins can hold aggro on 10+ mobs at a time without too much effort, whereas the same amount of mobs is a tall (read: impossible) order for an SK or warrior to maintain aggro on over heals. If you stack a 100pt DS against those 10 mobs, you will do huge damage. I'm sure you're aware of this since you do it pretty frequently. Do not ignore the balancing issues this will cause.

Every single paladin in this thread including OP absolutely refuses to acknowledge this fact when attempting to discuss "DPS".

Edit: And I think this is another reason why the only parse presented here is midleading. DPS potential on a paladin peaks infinitely higher than most melees let alone tanks. For example Ringo in hhk floors 1-4 can probably get his dps consistently somewhere in the 800-1200 range. That is just another issue concerning balance and I don't think it would be unfair or unbalancing to give them some way to generate single target dps because a majority of raid encounters your dps is focused on one single mob obviously.

 

[Salarus]

Pallies can not hold aggro on 10+ mobs without trying, that's bullshit. The ONLY case when we can, is when we are fighting undead (consecrate), adn even then we get resisted, GG groups dead.

Fact: Wave of Light and Word of the Crusader hit 6 mobs each MAXIMUM, I know as low - mid tier paladin, I get a bunch of resists, which leads me to having to single target AA stun/blinding light a fuck ton of mobs so that I don't lose aggro. This is in no way easy, and while i'm casting, the only dps output i have is via my DS, and thats a LOT of casting.

Fact: warriors can foe lock and hold down 4 mobs without really trying, I used to do this all the time. SK's can too, i've never played one, but from what i've read about them, and how iv'e seen them played, it seems fairely simple.

Fact: Black Bears are the best type of bear.

P.S. Beet's, Bears, Battlestar Galactica

 

[Budizzle]

Pallies can not hold aggro on 10+ mobs without trying, that's bullshit. The ONLY case when we can, is when we are fighting undead (consecrate), adn even then we get resisted, GG groups dead.

Fact: Wave of Light and Word of the Crusader hit 6 mobs each MAXIMUM, I know as low - mid tier paladin, I get a bunch of resists, which leads me to having to single target AA stun/blinding light a fuck ton of mobs so that I don't lose aggro. This is in no way easy, and while i'm casting, the only dps output i have is via my DS, and thats a LOT of casting.

Fact: warriors can foe lock and hold down 4 mobs without really trying, I used to do this all the time. SK's can too, i've never played one, but from what i've read about them, and how iv'e seen them played, it seems fairely simple.

Foelock is 500 hate iirc. Unless your group is generating a consistent 3000 dps, you're not going to kill mobs fast enough for foelock to hold aggro off heals and rains. Even with an archaic cleric I can't hold aggro off heals that long. When I'm grouped with a druid/shaman main healing and someone who enjoys raining, like a mage or that fucker Tarutao, I lose aggro pretty often.

The biggest advantage of pbae aggro spells is they do not hit the same 6 targets each time if you retarget. It's random. The other advantage over warrior/sk aggro is you do not need to be on the same target as the rest of the group to hold aggro off them, allowing you to switch targets much more frequently.

I have played Sauga enough times to know that his aggro on a copious amount of mobs is fairly easy to sustain. It's true that Sauga is higher tier than most paladins, but that doesn't make my claim invalid.

 

[Salarus]

excuse, me, I forgot to add foe lock and aggro clickies. And if your dps is single target (rogues, rangers, and wizards without a death wish) then you'll be doing fine aggro wise.

Also, with teh 6 cap, sure it CAN hit other mobs, but the probability is with "10+ mobs" that even after burning both there will still be stragglers.

Also, the ability to tank that many mobs is HIGHLY dependant on gear. Personally, more than 4 orcs in EC can be an issue geared as I am. I've played paladins with better gear, and yea it eventually gets easier to take the damage, and you do get a few less resists, but again, it's still hard to keep aggro on more than 6.

 

[Dzillon]

I am not so sure I agree with this. I am fairly sure if enough aux tanks are in front where I can go to the back and attack on most mobs I will outdps the tank +damage shield. As a matter of fact that statement to me is wholly wrong.

Wait who's gonna auxtank if the SK goes behind ? the rogue ? It's just not the knight job to go pretend knights shine from behind.
Actually I'm curious how they manage to hit while auxtanking compared to other melees (they would prolly not beat a monk, but maybe get close to a ranger with a compareable 2H ?) while adding more auxtank value than any other melee class - which can't also be neglected, even if knights want to bring that discussion to a sole DPS thing.
I just think adding more melee DPS for a non dualwielding class isn't reasonable - I remember stated it should be on par with a Beastlord, is it the case ?

About spells, Flame of Light could really use an upgrade or maybe start a small spell line to get some MR based spear-like DD.

Then about stances there's always something tweakable, there were good suggestions here, mostly improving 5 should make up enough.