The Sk and Warrior EXP disadvantage.

[Glamrin]

Instead of arguing about giving SKs AoE agro so they can compete with paladins or getting more hard zones (which I am sure will happen with Ikisith), why not fight for better exp coming off zones that are already anti-AoE such as Emberflow, FR, the Deep, etc?

Make the exp comparable to AoE Highkeep. (And trust me, as a paladin, HHK/Cata get old VERY fast)

Emberflow isn't anti aoe. It's somewhat sk friendly but there are unfortunately quite a few trash and nameds that comes with/spawns adds, where aoe's helps a ton.
Fr is very aoe friendly, tanking multiples here is very easy on a paladin, tanking 2- a few is possible on sk.

Cata is actually one of the few good zones for sk tank atm, although not being able to crit without a paladin around means caster groups are prefferable over melees. Also with no antimez stance, bard is more than helpful. Cata's biggest problem is cashdrops / gemdrops being pretty crap.

 

[Vartenaal]

ya you can ae deep fr ez pz, you just need a good healer that doesnt slack. i havent really XPed since last november, so i guess im a lil slack

 

[Allielyn]

It should be quite clear to everyone actively playing SOD, that Sk's and Warrior's currently are at a huge exp disadvantage in game. . . . a quick look at top 5 list of players quickly shows that Shadowknights and warriors (+ enchanters really but thats a separate issue) are far below other classes in tomes. I am fairly certain that a look across the entire database would show even more alarming differences. Now this can ofcourse also be a direct result of fewer people playing Shadowknights and Warriors, although if so, the exp disadvantage might very well be the reason for that too.

The problem I have here is your whole basis for arguement: you are saying that "Warriors and SK's lack tomes because it's harder for them to get EXP" and then go on to claim that "Warriors and SK's lack EXP because nobody wants them as tanks".

Both of these statements are assumptions based on correlation, and I can show you pretty easily how they are not causual.

point 1: Warriors and SK's lack tomes: this is true. The question is why?

I absolutely disagree that nobody wants warriors and sk's as tanks. I would take one of either in a heartbeat if I needed a good tank in a group. But there are some issues:

I see a major lack of mained warriors overall - maybe this has something to do with how fun it is to play the classes? Or how anybody who rolls a warrior to start finds that nobody in the raid game wants him because they already have a bot that retired 3 years ago and nobody has to worry about ownership responsibility and dramamongering on that character after donating for a 500k charm? Or maybe that it's not a great duo class so on a server with a slightly lower low-end population it's harder to exp one?

I don't see too many fewer shadowknights, but it's been a while since I actually thought about it. Warriors are definitely poorer off in this respect.

So yes, playabilty of the class may be an issue.

But, the larger issue I see here is tome usefulness. You also noted that Enchanters are low on tomes. Is that because there aren't any high end enchanters? Or maybe the bottom line is just that Enchanters, like SK's and Warriors, don't see a big benefit from tomes, so they don't feel a need to grind them out!

Paladins get a huge benefit from tomes, both affecting their dps (as a dps-type tank) and their heals (as a heals-type class). Warriors, SKs, not so much. I'm convinced that if the tomes provided anywhere near the benefit for these classes, they would pursue them, and they wouldn't have a hard time 'finding groups' to do so.

Bottom line, correlation =/= causation, and I can see a much better reasoning for WHY sk's and warriors lack tomes than 'hay I can't get a group =('

If I were to put out a solution in advance of ikisith tomes I would advocate putting a set of 1% mitigation tomes out for sk's and warriors only. (though I'm not).

 

[Bud]

But, the larger issue I see here is tome usefulness. You also noted that Enchanters are low on tomes. Is that because there aren't any high end enchanters? Or maybe the bottom line is just that Enchanters, like SK's and Warriors, don't see a big benefit from tomes, so they don't feel a need to grind them out!

Paladins get a huge benefit from tomes, both affecting their dps (as a dps-type tank) and their heals (as a heals-type class). Warriors, SKs, not so much. I'm convinced that if the tomes provided anywhere near the benefit for these classes, they would pursue them, and they wouldn't have a hard time 'finding groups' to do so.

I don't know if it has been confirmed or denied yet, but tomes would mean a huge aggro advantage for warriors since the aggro changes, would it not? I'm not implying it'd be any easier for a warrior to keep aggro over dps with equivalent tomes, but harder if a warrior doesn't have enough tomage comparatively. In the upper tiers, that's a necessity more than a luxury.

They may not receive anywhere near the same benefits as paladins from tomes, but their ability to hold aggro pretty much makes tomes a requisite for warriors... assuming tomes do, in fact, affect aggro production.

 

[kibeth]

I can't logically think of a reason the added DPS from tomes wouldn't equal more aggro. Kinda works that way for every other class!

 

[Nodnal]

I can't logically think of a reason the added DPS from tomes wouldn't equal more aggro. Kinda works that way for every other class!

This is true, but SKs spend a lot of their time casting terrors which reduces the amount of melee damage and they get a less overall benefit from tomes because of this. Warriors get some aggro bonus from tomes due to an increase in DPS, but a small amount of DPS is a small amount of aggro generation. I think Allie was just stating that paladins get more benefit from tomes than the other tanks.

 

[Vartenaal]

a lot of emphasis is being made by many people on the fact that "SKs spam terrors constantly". is it just me thats constantly casting something as a paladin? blinding light, divine stun, ae blind, hots, hotting other groups, patching low people with remedy, self healing. that goes on during any raid fight and during a lot (not nearly as much as on raids, but still a lot of time) of time in xp groups too, so a lot of melee dps is lost, yet i still manage to parse about 225 dps with my 1hs and shield.

 

[GuiardoTuneweaver]

25% more damage is a good chunk more aggro generation (not quite 25% due to the innate bonus). I do not agree that the 25% healing boost Paladins get from tomes over SKs and Warriors make them that much willing to go out and xp for tomes.

Allie's argument about botted Warriors may have some truth, but I do not think it applies at all to SKs. SKs are not kept around because of the re-gearing issues that cause Warriors to persist any more than Paladins.

I think Ben's statement pretty much sums it up:

In an exp situation where no tanks were available, my guild has ALWAYS made the choice to bot one of our paladins in exp groups over my SK. They are easier to play they are easier to tome they are a better exp tank.

And it logically follows that if you have a choice between tanks for a typical XP group, you'll always choose the Paladin. Being the best XP tank (by far) is a HUGE advantage over the other tank classes, given the benefits that come out of AAs and Tomes.

 

[Manguadi]

And it logically follows that if you have a choice between tanks for a typical XP group, you'll always choose the Paladin. Being the best XP tank (by far) is a HUGE advantage over the other tank classes, given the benefits that come out of AAs and Tomes.

I really think there's more to the story than this. I have been guilded with a great deal more paladins than shadowknights. Those shadowknights were either extremely stingy with their information, or made themselves unavailable by camping out in hhk basement or fr (which is why jenks was never botted - he effectively didn't allow it).

Warrior information was always readily available, and I have spent a great deal time more botting warriors than I have paladins, and gained far more xp in groups with them. This is largely due to the inactivity of most of the warriors I've been guilded with.

Paladins, on the other hand, have been notoriously generous with their info, and largely available and willing to group. Add to that the primacy of hhk in all things group, and of course they were the tank of choice.

The widespread perception that tomes are bad for warriors and shadowknights, as well as the perception that they aren't as good as paladins for grouping puts the discussion out of the realm of numbers, and into the realm of opinion.

Besides a gross preference for undead, I believe paladins have a singular advantage when it comes to grouping: heals. Beyond that, all advantages have been systematically removed: ghot aggro, which was originally intended to be halved in the nerf, was reduced to 0; the high avoidance of /s 4 was made unparsably better than /s 3; the aggro generated by blinds was reduced tremendously, in spite of woldo's statement that it is okay for a paladin to have better single target aggro than a shadowknight; and before my time, paladin self-heals were reduced by a good amount.

I think that the generalized assumption that paladins are vastly superior in groups comes from history, and not reality.

 

[Ponden]

I think it's easily fair to say that warriors have a EXP disadvantage without needing to look at tomes to prove it. As far as what should be done if anything, /shrug.

 

[Vartenaal]

speaking oh hots generating 0 aggro. i petitioned that once shortly after the revamp that the hots in fact generated ZERO aggro, has this been fixed?

 

[Tyvec-a-tron]

I prefer warriors in groups to knights (and not just because I main one).

 

[BenGordon]

I believe paladins have a singular advantage when it comes to grouping: heals.

You are in the minority here with this thinking even among people who main paladins.

reality

Glad you brought this point up. I find 9 max tomed paladins 1 Warrior and 1 SK. Pretty hard to argue against reality. Its not just a coincidence that there are more mained, max tomed paladins around. Its hilariously not a product of bot availability opposed to bot preference. The ratio of max tomed paladins to SKs/Warriors is somewhat alarming. The point here is that even if you sincerely believe that it is just a perception among players that paladins are better group tanks the reality of the numbers does not lie.

 

[Manguadi]

speaking oh hots generating 0 aggro. i petitioned that once shortly after the revamp that the hots in fact generated ZERO aggro, has this been fixed?

No, it's a mistake that the development team has told me they are happy with.

Jenks:
Looking at the tome completion for various characters who are and have been on the top 5 tells you extremely little. Not only are you looking at possibly the tiniest minority on the server, but I'm fairly certain every paladin that you are referencing completed tomes before highkeep was nerfed the most recent time, and also before the nerfs involving blinds and their tanking stance.

My point is that the advantages paladins had are now gone, and that the source of their primacy has always been the low risk vs. reward in the most challenging zones.

 

[Allielyn]

I think that the generalized assumption that paladins are vastly superior in groups comes from history, and not reality.

I agree with this as well, particularly after HHK exp and cash nerfs.

 

[metvayne1]

My point is that the advantages paladins had are now gone, and that the source of their primacy has always been the low risk vs. reward in the most challenging zones.

lolwhat?

 

[Manguadi]

I mean that killing things you are overgeared for is much faster than things that you are on tier for. Paladins exploit this advantage more fully than shadowknights and warriors. If there were greater incentive to go to higher level zones in terms of xp and money gain, paladins would be no better than equal to the other tanks.

 

[Nwaij]

I mean that killing things you are overgeared for is much faster than things that you are on tier for. Paladins exploit this advantage more fully than shadowknights and warriors. If there were greater incentive to go to higher level zones in terms of xp and money gain, paladins would be no better than equal to the other tanks.

So reality strikes again: Since these incentives aren't there, paladins ARE better then other tanks.

 

[Arcen]

So reality strikes again: Since these incentives aren't there, paladins ARE better then other tanks.

But not due to paladins being OP, but rather harder zones xp/cash doesn't scale as well as it should. Hence my post about upping xp on harder zones.

 

[Glamrin]

I play paladin and sk, and play in groups with others tanking as paladin. I do play somewhat actively (closing in on 300 days played on my shaman). I cannot get the same kind of exp with a shadowknight tank as I can with a Paladin tank in FR, HHK or Rust, the closest I can get is in Cata (and cata keeps me poor and out of funds for my next charm) or Emberflow. Personally I don't play my SK less because I dont think the tomes are worthwhile to get so I don't buy that excuse. I suppose this might be the reason why some SK's don't have more tomes, but all SK's who have posted in this thread so far state differently.

Im not saying paladin's are OP. But I would like to see more zones designed with the SK in mind, and considering that most higher tier zones will eventually become possible to ae, some other changes to sk agro might also help. if thats better single target agro, shorter aa cast, some form of ae stance or higher lvl versions of current lvl 30 pbae debuff or current pbae dd is another question.