Warriors

D

Darm

Dalayan Beginner
Many of you know that I play a Warrior and Cleric duo and have been around since the WR days. This thread is about some concerns I have regarding the Warrior class and the raid game, more specifically, my personal disapproval with the seeming ideal of one warrior per raid for the vast majority of content.

It seems, and many would agree here, that raiding guilds tend to revolve around one single warrior. Even back when raids were 36 man, people were reluctant to bring in and gear up new warriors because there is very little if any use for them besides being a spot filler if they aren't the main tank. Sure, they do a bit of DPS, but it's insignificant compared to that of the more preferred classes. Sure, they can rampage tank and aux tank, but so can monks, paladins, shadowknights, etc. Sure, they can /shield the main tank, but shielding honestly doesn't seem to help enough to make people want a second warrior.

Warriors are, in my opinion, the most gear (and probably AA) dependant class in the game, and that isn't going to change. From a guild's perspective, seeing a new warrior coming in means a lot of time and drops to invest to be able to bring him up to par. It also means one less spot for a DPS or healing class. Basically, having more than one warrior is usually viewed as not a good thing. Is this how it is intended to be? Is content being designed to promote one warrior per raid? Is there anything that can be done to make any extra warriors more useful to a raid? I sincerely hope that I'm not left with needing to either beg my way into being a spot filler to mootch rotting gear, or needing to create my own guild with Darm as the MT just to be able to continue to progress gear-wise with him.

I love playing my warrior; the reason I made a cleric in the first place was to help me level and play my warrior. Now, being at the end game, everyone wants my cleric, and essentially, wants me to ditch my warrior if I am to raid. This is stressful for me. Sure, I enjoy contributing towards beating an encounter regardless of the class I play, but for me personally, spamming Light of Eternity, group heals, and ducking isn't very fun. I want an active and important role to play with my warrior, even if it is secondary because I may not be tanking in a lot of situations.

Please feel free to share your opinions, concerns, or any ideas you might have that could make warriors more valuable.
 
Warriors do have the /shield ability, which isn't really enough to give them a slot on a raid, but makes a second warrior worth more than their paltry dps.
A second warrior is a pretty good ramp or aux tank, since their mitigation is better than another melee, and they do more straight up dps than a shadowknight, though probably not by much.

I do agree that it would be nice to see more use for a second warrior on a raid, but with 15 possible classes and an 18 man cap, raid slots are going to be scarce regardless, it's not like anyone is super happy to see a second shadowknight or mage on a raid either.
 
The second warrior can /shield, aux and ramp tank all at the same time. Which is worth mentioning. And basically it is the same boat for SK's and Pally's like Tyrone said. Maybe it is my warrior bias, but I feel that aside from their buffs I would rather have a 2 warriors than a SK and/or a Pally. /s 9 is pretty amazing.
 
I'd take a second paladin over a second warrior in most situations, because:

-the pally would be more dps, and WAY more dps if you happened to be fighting undead
-the pally could heal themself/ group hot
-the pally can get snap aggro on a mob MUCH better than a second war if the MT goes down and something is loose and chewing through squishies

Unfortunately for SKs, only the third point applies to them, and they are pretty much at the bottom of the totem pole for redundant raid slots.
 
I have also felt for a very long time that there was a problem with warriors in the raid game. There is very little benefit to having more than one warrior compared to multiples of any other class
 
robopirateninja said:
, it's not like anyone is super happy to see a second shadowknight or mage on a raid either.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with a second SK or mage, prehaps not ideal but if 1 more SK or Mages breaks your raid you have bigger issues.
 
iaeolan said:
I have also felt for a very long time that there was a problem with warriors in the raid game. There is very little benefit to having more than one warrior compared to multiples of any other class
Click to expand...

I could see an additional style for warriors. /s 12 gives steady mitigation with no stamina actually being lost but an addition of /s 13 which I could see negating riposte/parry/etc and adding significantly to their DPS in return for no loss of stamina. A bit like /s 10 but without the massive drain.

Adds to their versatility while limiting them from being both DPS and tank at the same time. Still have to consider what that would do to other classes though. Who would get pushed out to make room for the warrior?
 
There are several classes that do not "stack" very well in raids, but I think warriors are definitely the ones you wouldn't ever want to use more than one of. Raids are tight as is, and using up a crucial slot on them is pretty wasted. Should work on warriors aggro if not anything else.
 
i dont really see the problem, theres alot of classes that don't stack.. mine is one of them.. atleast extra warriors have some utility
 
Warriors have the ability to /shield other peopl (including of course, other warriors). It's significant enough that having 2 warriors on your raids can be helpful =).
 
warriors make sweet aux tanks as well as backup tanks for when the first one eats it and are pretty good at tanking during that bad pull.

2 warriors = A+
 
Pre 2.0 two warriors were almost a must, or at least a huge boon. Now more than one warrior is not needed and is in all honesty inefficient.

Just the new lay of the land and how the game is set up imo.
 
Momatose said:
i dont really see the problem, theres alot of classes that don't stack.. mine is one of them.. atleast extra warriors have some utility
Click to expand...

Atleast bst do some dps and 2x paragorn on raids is kinda nice ngl about that
 
Darm said:
a lot of great stuff
Click to expand...

the only problem is, if you make warriors more viable, as in, give them the ability to have 0 mitigation, and then do a bunch more DPS, then they're pushing out melee classes =).
 
Waldoff said:
Pre 2.0 two warriors were almost a must, or at least a huge boon. Now more than one warrior is not needed and is in all honesty inefficient.

Just the new lay of the land and how the game is set up imo.
Click to expand...

NGL this is pretty narrow minded, and I hope that this is not the opinion of staff but rather your personal opinion as a player. Warriors still out tank anyone else in the game assuming gear levels are equal, and 2 wars with one aux tanking and /shielding the other who is tanking is pretty sweet and allows you to run less healers or let your druids nuke and dot instead of healing as much. Everything has a tradeoff and balance, just because it doesn't fit into your mold of raiding or play style doesn't mean that others can't use it be more efficient in other ways.
 
Tempus said:
NGL this is pretty narrow minded, and I hope that this is not the opinion of staff but rather your personal opinion as a player. Warriors still out tank anyone else in the game assuming gear levels are equal, and 2 wars with one aux tanking and /shielding the other who is tanking is pretty sweet and allows you to run less healers or let your druids nuke and dot instead of healing as much. Everything has a tradeoff and balance, just because it doesn't fit into your mold of raiding or play style doesn't mean that others can't use it be more efficient in other ways.
Click to expand...

do you know his pc *is* a warrior?
 
When a staffer posts unless they are directly saying this is a staff opinion they are normally speaking from there own personal opinion. Just an fyi for further discussions.
 
Tempus said:
NGL this is pretty narrow minded, and I hope that this is not the opinion of staff but rather your personal opinion as a player. Warriors still out tank anyone else in the game assuming gear levels are equal, and 2 wars with one aux tanking and /shielding the other who is tanking is pretty sweet and allows you to run less healers or let your druids nuke and dot instead of healing as much. Everything has a tradeoff and balance, just because it doesn't fit into your mold of raiding or play style doesn't mean that others can't use it be more efficient in other ways.
Click to expand...

His argument is that two warriros on a raid are not efficient. I don't see how this is narrow minded. There are 15 classes in SoD with 18 raid spots, those three extra spots should be filled with DPS and Healing. I don't see how a second warrior is ever more value added then say, an extra cleric/druid/DPS class. Calling him narrow minded is a little extreme.

This is of course assuming you have a full raid and the ability to fill it with whatever classes you chose, but I believe this was the basis for his argument in ther first place.

I do agree with you Tempus that a second warrior can be useful on raids if you have the room, but there is no real reason for a guild to gear up a second warrior if they already have one war/sk/paladin. The extra raid space would be better served elsewhere.

As far as Sarm's argument goes, I really don't see a problem. There are many classes that dont stack well at all on raids. A second warrior is still more useful on most raids than say a second enchanter, bard or shadow knight (assuming equal gear).
 
Adfain said:
His argument is that two warriros on a raid are not efficient. I don't see how this is narrow minded. There are 15 classes in SoD with 18 raid spots, those three extra spots should be filled with DPS and Healing. I don't see how a second warrior is ever more value added then say, an extra cleric/druid/DPS class. Calling him narrow minded is a little extreme.

This is of course assuming you have a full raid and the ability to fill it with whatever classes you chose, but I believe this was the basis for his argument in ther first place.

I do agree with you Tempus that a second warrior can be useful on raids if you have the room, but there is no real reason for a guild to gear up a second warrior if they already have one war/sk/paladin. The extra raid space would be better served elsewhere.

As far as Sarm's argument goes, I really don't see a problem. There are many classes that dont stack well at all on raids. A second warrior is still more useful on most raids than say a second enchanter, bard or shadow knight (assuming equal gear).
Click to expand...

Look, I didn't call him an idiot or a jerk or anything. I was merely saying that if you think outside the cookie cutter box you can find a reason and useful ones for having more than one warrior on a raid. Ignoring that and saying that is less than optimal is reltaive and subjective. Thusly I think posting that view is narrow minded. Which is the definition of narrow minded.

Yes I know his PC is a warrior, I also know that one of my two is a warrior who routinely raids with *gasp* another warrior and we do very well as a tanking team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom