Warrior Stance Changes

[Sateru]

OR if paladins are supposed to be the most dps of all tanks it could be made so that they do not take an aux penalty beyond the first mob or two, in other words they deal as much dps if they are tanking 1 mob or 6, not making them better tanks per se but making them better suited to their role of fighting multiple mobs at once.

I think we already have enough bad stances, we really need a non /s 3 tanking stance. I do like the more mobs better tank stance idea though.

 

[Mythryn]

The first semi-constructive, non-aggressive post in his posting history.

You're misunderstanding my stance, and have been from the get-go. I never, ever said I think warriors should ALWAYS tank with a shield. While you're whole 'Warriors can tank with 2 weapons thats the way it should be' stance is flawed, I don't think a warrior should need a shield to out tank any other class, and I'm sorry if you somewhere, somehow thought I did.

 

[Budizzle]

You're misunderstanding my stance, and have been from the get-go. I never, ever said I think warriors should ALWAYS tank with a shield. While you're whole 'Warriors can tank with 2 weapons thats the way it should be' stance is flawed, I don't think a warrior should need a shield to out tank any other class, and I'm sorry if you somewhere, somehow thought I did.

You're arguing semantics. "Always," "100%," "constantly," are just words I use reflect my opinion: warriors already have the ability to shield for a sufficient amount of time, and the amount of time a warrior can wear shield on any one fight grows as the warrior progresses to a maximum of what should be 50%. This is balanced. What is not balanced is the amount of damage a warrior takes while he is not wearing a shield compared to the other tanks throughout all the tiers. I fail to see how my mentality in that regard is flawed. Enlighten me.

I'm not putting words in your mouth. I don't assume to know your "stance" on anything that is not obvious. However, you are obviously crusading to give warriors the ability to shield more frequently. Which, as I stated crystal clearly already, should not be the solution.

Now I need you to stop misinterpreting my stance. I think it would be awesome to shield always, mostly, constantly, and/or over 9000% of the time... but that does not fit the ideals and lore of the intended role of my class. If I wanted to run around with a shield on, I would have been a knight.

Edit: Also, I have no qualms with fostering an inherent hostile and aggressive nature. I'm not a very nice person.

 

[Salarus]

Honestly, I like the diea (if at all possible) to giving paladins a stance that gets better as we take on more mobs. Lets be real here, this is what we are built to do (or so it seems) and with the duration of /s 4 not lasting long enough for me to tank most trash mobs, I think paladins need a re balance in some way. I have always agreed with budricks' stance, that warriors should be able to severly out mitigate paladins, but honestly, I think this last stance change was overkill.

Also, I still would love to see some parses done throughout tier progression with tanks, as those parses seem to be of ONE paladin and ONE warrior of the same tier, as recently I was in a tier 1-2 guild, spent a shit ton of money and time on my toon, and was getting out tanked (pre nerf) by a warrior who had less than half of my aa's, which included at that time the lack of the majority of his defensive aa's. So again, I would love for someone to take a peek into tank progression if at all possible.

 

[Kirin Folken]

Maybee a good solution to this would be to give paladins or change style 3 to a non draining stance that gives parry and mitigation based on the number of mobs they have on their hate list they are tanking. Ie 1 Mob a very very minor bonus and each mob after that gives a decent bonus up to 4-6 mobs. This would help more clearly define the role of paladins while not steping on the toes of sks/warriors who were meant for single target agro.

Prehaps a good canidate for a new /s 7 ?

/s 4 I would still like to see as Paladins single target tanking stance.

I have tryed useing /s 7 were it should be useful, I was lucky to see a single proc before I ran out of stamina and the aggro it generated didn't even seem like that much.

/s 7 = Good concept but Fail in game currently

 

[Noktar]

Also, I still would love to see some parses done throughout tier progression with tanks, as those parses seem to be of ONE paladin and ONE warrior of the same tier, as recently I was in a tier 1-2 guild, spent a shit ton of money and time on my toon, and was getting out tanked (pre nerf) by a warrior who had less than half of my aa's, which included at that time the lack of the majority of his defensive aa's. So again, I would love for someone to take a peek into tank progression if at all possible.

Well the futher you are in tiers the better the knights will be compared to warriors since shield and knight only primairys get better and the weapons for warriors really isnt progressing the same way ac/hp wise.

But besides those 2 slots most gear is wearable by both so tier progression isnt big at all.

 

[Salarus]

Yea, but as a paladin, the shield slot can reallllllllllly be a big factor (block skill benefit.) But I think it would be incredibly interesting to see the parses, of all three tanks throughout the tiers, as imo, even with the recent work there still needs to be a re balancing. Not just for warriors, but for sk's and pallies also.

I think that /s 7 chance is a great idea, as I never see that proc actually go off on the VERY few times I actually end up using it.

 

[Arcen]

Why not allow warriors use their second weapon as a shield. Grant the same benefit of wearing a shield, and have something like 2/3 * hp = AC for the formula?

Just like the monk block skill..

 

[vistachiri]

I'll put this very blatantly: allowing warriors to shield 100% of the time, at whatever cost, would interfere with class roles. Whether or not you agree is irrelevant because it's the truth. You can argue that "this is not live," but that is also irrelevant since class roles are universal and pretty clearly defined.

Faulty assumption. Class roles are certainly not universal from game to game, even when its a shard version of the game. Take necros in either game as an example.

 

[Severien]

Regardless, dual wielding is our "thing" as warriors. I think most warriors on the server would rather that aspect of warriors be improved rather than bunching us in as knights without spells.

 

[Elaith]

is paladin's s/4 very much finalized and devs have no plan to change it?