Warrior riposte damage.

[booster]

why should a warrior have to rely on a shield to tank better than a paladin?

 

[Kharras]

Learn to build agro off your higher agroing, less tanking able tanks we call knights.

ROFL! Less tanking able? Ringo...you are a great guy...but come on. You know that an equally equipped Knight can tank anything a Warrior can as good or better. /stance 4 is the mitigation BOMB! I have seen this in action since tier 1 and it's pretty awesome. Oh...btw...I definatley don't want Pallys or SK's nerferd in any way. Who really would? The more powerful they are...the smoother raids go. Warriors however do need a "tweak" as 500hps add up to about 1/4 of a hit on lots of raid mobs which = about 1/4 of a second longer lifespan hehe.

Nothing complex needs to be done to fix warriors. I propose an increase of 5 points in the defense skill should be parsed. That should help alleviate the mitigation issue while dual-wielding and not be game breaking.

A Warrior shielding a Knight is the best tanking option in the game in respect to mitigation and maintaining aggro off dps. This makes the Warrior class basically a "Shield Boy" and is broken in respect to the powers a Warrior gives up to be the king of single-target damage mitigation.

 

[Budizzle]

I am not sure where this 50% number came from but honestly it isn't true in most cases at even the highest tier. It depends a lot on the fight in question to when or IF you can use a shield. Another thing to keep in mind is if the tier you are on has poor warrior weapon selection (or just has not dropped) the time frame that you are able to realistically use a shield without much worry of dps pulling agro diminishes.

Yeah, 50% seems to be the absolute maximum amount of time a warrior can shield on any progressive encounter. I'm aware that it is usually far less than 50%, which further increases the need of a warrior buff in some respect.

 

[Mythryn]

Why not actually increase the effects from Advanced Anatomy like they were supposed to (perhaps even more so), and increase Foelock agro by 75 or 100%, but only allow it to trigger once every 6-12 seconds. (to prevent a warrior from taking a swing at 5 different mobs and locking them all down) This would help with their agro woes, allowing them to equip a shield without fear of losing agro. Or, instead of upping foelock, increase the mitigation from the warrior stances to 32% (for /s 9) and 20% (for /s 12), and change Advanced Anat to increase the agro generated by 100-110% (instead of the 50% it currently increases it by now).

Edit: Also, capping the block skill gained from shields at something like 190 or 200 would prevent this problem from getting any worse at later tiers, without capping shields AC at an arbitrary number, making them terrible at later tiers.

 

[Severien]

I'd say its a good deal higher than 50%, at least as much as 70% in some fights (and a handful of fights that allow for more), but its playing a game of "oh fuck oh fuck oh fuck please don't lose aggro and kill the dps."

Why not actually increase the effects from Advanced Anatomy like they were supposed to (perhaps even more so), and increase Foelock agro by 75 or 100%, but only allow it to trigger once every 6-12 seconds. (to prevent a warrior from taking a swing at 5 different mobs and locking them all down)

That would destroy our already marginal ability to tank multiple mobs.

 

[Mythryn]

I'd say its a good deal higher than 50%, at least as much as 70% in some fights (and a handful of fights that allow for more), but its playing a game of "oh fuck oh fuck oh fuck please don't lose aggro and kill the dps."



That would destroy our already marginal ability to tank multiple mobs.

Boohoo? So you'd have to switch targets every x seconds and melee them for a bit? Welcome to tanking like Shadowknights.

 

[Severien]

I already have to do that even with the ability to foelock multiple mobs. If I were tanking like a shadowknight I'd be sitting on a nice little pile of utility spells while doing it.

 

[Budizzle]

Why not actually increase the effects from Advanced Anatomy like they were supposed to (perhaps even more so), and increase Foelock agro by 75 or 100%, but only allow it to trigger once every 6-12 seconds. (to prevent a warrior from taking a swing at 5 different mobs and locking them all down) This would help with their agro woes, allowing them to equip a shield without fear of losing agro. Or, instead of upping foelock, increase the mitigation from the warrior stances to 32% (for /s 9) and 20% (for /s 12), and change Advanced Anat to increase the agro generated by 100-110% (instead of the 50% it currently increases it by now).

Dual wield is a warrior's unique feature among the tanks; reducing the necessity to use it is not a solution.

.

And even if everything you mentioned was implemented, it still would not address the problem of knights mitigating/avoiding as much damage as warriors while they're dual wielding.

 

[Mythryn]

.

Uh, it is a solution, just not one you want to see. I'm sorry if that upsets you.

Edit: Also, read the whole post before you jump on one point:

Or, instead of upping foelock, increase the mitigation from the warrior stances to 32% (for /s 9) and 20% (for /s 12), and change Advanced Anat to increase the agro generated by 100-110% (instead of the 50% it currently increases it by now).

 

[Mythryn]

Back to the parses, I also wonder what a SK would look like in those circumstances, since they're supposed to be better tanks and weaker DPS.

Exactly the same? The only thing that is different between SK and Paladin tanking is the tanking styles, and these parses were done in /s 3 (for the knight, /12 for the warrior).

 

[Budizzle]

Uh, it is a solution, just not one you want to see. I'm sorry if that upsets you.

Edit: Also, read the whole post before you jump on one point:

No, it isn't. I really don't see the staff going to lengths to make a pretty vital element to game mechanics obsolete. That's what warrior dual wield is -- a vital element their class and gameplay. Not only would it be shitting on lore, but a warrior able hold aggro while constantly shielding would intrude on a knight's function imo. Swapping shields comes with the territory.

I also do not believe manipulating the stances will improve or alleviate the current problems, but that is a good suggestion.

 

[Mythryn]

I also do not believe manipulating the stances will improve or alleviate the current problems.

...Then just what do you want? Did corefire gib you with a riposte or something and now you're on some crusade to see warriors immune to ripostes? I offer two suggestions to help the situation, and while I don't really think the former is a viable option (but it's still a suggestion), I think the latter is pretty viable. I would allow Warriors to duel wield, which you seem to be a fan of, as well as soak up those ripostes which you dread, and keep agro a slight bit better. I fail to see how that wouldn't help the 'current' situation. I see it causing some problems at lower tiers, sure, but I guess you're just adamant about those evil ripostes.

 

[Budizzle]

...Then just what do you want? Did corefire gib you with a riposte or something and now you're on some crusade to see warriors immune to ripostes? I offer two suggestions to help the situation, and while I don't really think the former is a viable option (but it's still a suggestion), I think the latter is pretty viable. I would allow Warriors to duel wield, which you seem to be a fan of, as well as soak up those ripostes which you dread, and keep agro a slight bit better. I fail to see how that wouldn't help the 'current' situation. I see it causing some problems at lower tiers, sure, but I guess you're just adamant about those evil ripostes.

Actually this thread has grown to encompass all warrior shortchanging, apparently. Namely inadequate mitigation compared to knights while dual wielding. My suggestion on this point has already been posted -- buff warriors to take ~20-25% less damage than knights while dual wielding and up to ~37% less damage while shielding -- though I did not detail how to accomplish this.

The reason I originally started with riposte damage was because I didn't want to reach for the stars without having additional input. I never implied that my original suggestion would fix everything, but it seemed like a good start.

 

[Kharras]

Exactly the same? The only thing that is different between SK and Paladin tanking is the tanking styles, and these parses were done in /s 3 (for the knight, /12 for the warrior).

Yeah...lucky for the peeps who want this topic to die. If Zae decides to post Pally mitigation in /stance 4......well......the Warriors on the server will probably resort to torches and pitchforks! lol!

 

[Marza]

as well as soak up those ripostes which you dread... but I guess you're just adamant about those evil ripostes.

Like I said earlier (and Stope) if they are indeed changing the way agro is generated per swing to not rely on fast weapons being superior than this is a problem that could be potentially fixed by offering warriors slower weapons to wield. (I have no idea if they are actually changing this btw)

But in terms of the Warrior vs Knight debate I am not sure if that is what is the problem.

 

[Salarus]

yea, as a paladin, i'd LOVE to see the parses for /s 4, it REALLY doesn't seem all that good when I use it, but hell, I havne't parsed it, so again i'd love to know. Also, warrior /s 9 parse, you know, the stance you *should be tanking most fights in* would be great to see.

Also, if knights are so amazing, could someone please explain this list to me:

Guild - Tank
Aeternus - Gwaine
Amicii - Mafate
Army of Exile - Budrick
Bane - Behn
Chaotic Winds - Jaxelthorpe
Ethereal - Bopper
Exodus - Grimar
Goon Squad - Fuwok
Novus Ordinatum - Kuldain
Numinous - Ardenn
Phoenix Rising - Ratkon
Revelation - Gunder
Sacred Band - Tyvec
Twilight Underground - Ringo (Paladin)

One paladin, and as per a previous post that is already explained. I've raided both a warrior, and a paladin, and while I *do agree* warriors need a little bit of love, it's apparent to me by that list, that nearly EVERY guild is usuing a warrior, leaving me with the conclusion of either A: every guild on that list but TU has no idea what they are doing, or B: Warriors are not as useless as they are being made out to be.

Also, if at all possible I would love to see parses comparing pally/warrior/sk mitigation in their tanking stances, /s 9 for warriors, /s 4 for paladins and I don't know what for sk's, throught hte tiers. 1,3,5,7 and 9 for a more clear look at tank progression/mitigation.

 

[Severien]

Should be engaging most fights in, you mean. Stance 9 does not last forever, it doesn't even last half of the fight. 12 is where the meat and potatoes are.

Personally in my guild it was always assumed that warriors were #1 so that is what we used, and to be fair, they still are, but its extremely marginal, to the point where a knight might be a safer choice due to guaranteed aggro coupled with self healing and a warrior's shield.
It's also worth noting that in this list, the guild using a paladin main tank is the number one guild on the server by a fair margin. This isn't why they're there, but it might be indicative that they know a thing or two that you don't. Also, Goon Squad isn't really accurate because at least when I would come around and help them out, they used Volkov to tank absolutely everything.

 

[Salarus]

For the vast majority of fights, /s 9 will last if not the entire fight, the majority (use acumen) maybe in a couple longer fights, and encoutners in tier 8+ which I haven't touched yet, that may be true, but that is a small portion of the raid game as a whole.

Yes, they are number 1, they've been around for fucking ever, I was on a break when TU formed, but from the players iv'e seen in it, it's a combiation of Steel, Ruin, and Fusion, so good, the guild that ended up with the best players from some of the best guilds is on top, and per a previous post why they don't use a warrior is explained. Also, I know for a fact that Kazimir, a warrior was the main tank for *nearly every* encounter fusion did, so guess how some of those knights got up there?

About GS, I don't raid with them, but that list was supposed to be "who tanks the most in your guild" so if they posted wrong thats their fault, and you raiding with them a couple times really doesn't make you a credible source for who raids the most. And i'm not 100% but isn't volkov from ruin?

But again, as per my previous post, I believe we need a *lot more parses* before we can form any sort of conclusion on this issue.

 

[Severien]

For the vast majority of fights, /s 9 will last if not the entire fight, the majority (use acumen) maybe in a couple longer fights,

If you believe this, you are very wrong. And yes, I know what Acumen is used for, thank you.
This is of course assuming we're both talking about raid encounters, if not, my bad, but I'd still disagree because if your group is good and pulling often you're going to be regenerating stamina at least as often as you are using it.

Yes Volkov is from Ruin, hence the joke RuinSquad, please try to keep up with server current events.

 

[Salarus]

Really? So when I boxed Kazimir for a copule months me not running out of sta with /s 9 most of the time didnt' happen? Unless they changed something with /s 9 or sta regen buffs in the past year or two, you shouldn't be having an issue.

Also, if he's from ruin, they why did you bring him up? And him tanking more in that case is entirely irrelevant as he's BETTER GEARED. I'd also assume that GIZMOMANF out tanks KULDAIN....I wonder why?!?!

Bringing up weak ass argumetns like that really shows the lack of sound material you're bringing to this thread.