Warriors

[GuiardoTuneweaver]

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.

With this assumption, I agree that given the current system, more than 1 warrior is not optimal. This is also how guilds recruit to fill their raiding slots (and rightly so).

However, if you can't pick-and-choose the exact raid configuration, multiple warriors can certainly be a great thing. Aux tanking/shielding significantly reduces the amount of healing power required to keep the tank alive, so if you're low on healers or low on DPS (meaning mobs live longer and thus healing mana needs to be spread out), multiple warriors can make things doable that wouldn't otherwise be. Short on CC or pullers? A warrior offtanking again takes less damage than a similarly geared Paladin or SK (again extending healer mana).

2.0 was a big hit for many classes, since as people have pointed out there are 15 classes to fill 18 instead of 36 slots. The "Fortune favors the diverse" code was another hit to many of these same classes, since bringing in another class that can perform close to the same function (such as a Pally or SK instead of another warrior) means a better chance at more drops. I personally feel that both of these changes were a good thing for SoD as a whole, but warriors are one of the classes that were effected the worst from them.

 

[Tempus]

With this assumption, I agree that given the current system, more than 1 warrior is not optimal. This is also how guilds recruit to fill their raiding slots (and rightly so).

However, if you can't pick-and-choose the exact raid configuration, multiple warriors can certainly be a great thing. Aux tanking/shielding significantly reduces the amount of healing power required to keep the tank alive, so if you're low on healers or low on DPS (meaning mobs live longer and thus healing mana needs to be spread out), multiple warriors can make things doable that wouldn't otherwise be. Short on CC or pullers? A warrior offtanking again takes less damage than a similarly geared Paladin or SK (again extending healer mana).

2.0 was a big hit for many classes, since as people have pointed out there are 15 classes to fill 18 instead of 36 slots. The "Fortune favors the diverse" code was another hit to many of these same classes, since bringing in another class that can perform close to the same function (such as a Pally or SK instead of another warrior) means a better chance at more drops. I personally feel that both of these changes were a good thing for SoD as a whole, but warriors are one of the classes that were effected the worst from them.

Ok you are right, reading comprehension ftl for me. With that assumption I agree completely. I was talking more that in the real world practice where you can't always control the classes on your raid unless you have a bot armada which more than one guild does, when i say that 2 warriors will work out and not break your raid over having a warrior and a knight.

 

[iaeolan]

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.

syduck: yes opinions are usually relative and subjective. Your opinion of warrior's ability seems to be overshadowed by the majority seeing as how most guilds raid with one warrior and it is generally impossible for new warriors to gain any foothold in the high end game.

 

[Momatose]

not to mention the fact that besides not stacking well, most new guilds have no use for new warriors because theyre using warrior bots that have been around for years

 

[neodiahs]

its already been said but in my case, being the second warrior in numerous raids has shown me that i can be of some use. i have saved at least 5 or more raids by taking the aggro after the original main tank died and finishing the mob the rest of the way and i also saved the raid by using my abilities to pull the mobs away while clerics would camp to prevent recllearing and rnning back to the zone.
There is nothing more satisfying as saving a raid during a Enthann encounter and preventing us from doing the whole darn thing again. its true a Sk or pally coulda taken up charge but by me doing so they could focus on DPS and their boxed toons more effiecently.
All in all. though i am a bottom feeded at the currant point in my warrios career i am happy with what i do. it sucks haviing a large waiting list for rot loots when i attend raids but i play for the sake of having a fun raid with my guild.

there's my block of text for ya pretty much
Keirga 65th bottomfeeder warrior :dance:

 

[Duma]

/Shield with a high raid tier shield (70-80~AC) takes about 10-15% off a mobs dps (from personal parsing). 2 Warriors /shielding is massive increase to a tanks survivability. Unfortunately a warriors individual dps is castrated and sometimes, especially when your entire raid is racing against getting pummeled by +2k ae's or whatever other pseudo time limit was coded into the encounter, the dps hit isn't worth the increased defense no matter how great it is.

I propose the following....

1. Remove the /shield command from the game.

Reitemize all 2handers in the game with varying amounts of AC.

Add a new /style that takes advantage of AC on 2handers allowing warriors to turn that AC into an AE +parry or Block for anyone within maybe 5 yards essentially replacing the /shield command. Also allow attacks in this style to bypass mobs ability to parry or riposte making it a useless style to use from behind.

or

2. New warrior /style (cleave, mortal strike, etc etc) for 2handers that adds a proc that decreases a mobs AC or ability to avoid attacks drastically for a few seconds. Perhaps take the AC on a 2hander and subtract it from the targets AC whiel the warrior is aux tanking in that style. Giving them a way of increasing their group/raids dps indirectly without increasing their own dps that much. Something that scales their parties DPS based on their power not the warriors etc

 

[ryutakin]

So basically take out a warrior's defensive ability and add in an offensive ability. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense considering warriors are supposed to be the masters of defensiveness

 

[Duma]

So basically take out a warrior's defensive ability and add in an offensive ability. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense considering warriors are supposed to be the masters of defensiveness

Reading comprehension ftw. syduck:

 

[gorgetrapper]

So basically take out a warrior's defensive ability and add in an offensive ability. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense considering warriors are supposed to be the masters of defensiveness

You know... I figured Shadowknights, or Paladins to be the masters of defensiveness (paladins more than shadowknights because of the whole "noble crusader, defender of all etc etc crap)... due to the fact that they can't dual wield like a warrior can, which means they have a shield to use, which boosts up their AC greatly. Theoretically, that's how it SHOULD be, but it's not here.

 

[robopirateninja]

If a warrior could hold aggro while using a shield, do you think you would see a MT without a shield ever?

 

[Darm]

I wish I could hold aggro worth a damn with a shield on. I wonder if it would be possible, or desirable from a dev's perspective, to add some sort of 1h weapon that generated greater threat than normal, but took away your dual wield ability while equiped, meaning that you basically would have to use it with a shield.

Actually, I wonder if you could make it a stance? Have it take away dual wield and greatly increase hate generation. It could either be a stance you could stay in forever, or you could add a mitigation boost to it as well and have it suck you dry like /s 9. It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure if it would even be possible.

 

[Duma]

I wish I could hold aggro worth a damn with a shield on. I wonder if it would be possible, or desirable from a dev's perspective, to add some sort of 1h weapon that generated greater threat than normal, but took away your dual wield ability while equiped, meaning that you basically would have to use it with a shield.

Actually, I wonder if you could make it a stance? Have it take away dual wield and greatly increase hate generation. It could either be a stance you could stay in forever, or you could add a mitigation boost to it as well and have it suck you dry like /s 9. It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure if it would even be possible.

There is already a high raid tier shield that has a aggro proc on it.

Warriors can already shoot out far enough ahead in aggro that they can switch to a shield and maintain aggro after the mob is half dead.

 

[Darm]

Well, there are very few high raid tier warriors on the server. It would be very beneficial to up and coming guilds if their warriors had a way to maintain aggro with a shield on.

Personally, I've switched to shield tanking in the middle of tanking the Warden of Torment, right before the 40 percent fear, and I held aggro through being feared at 40 and 10. People began pulling aggro at the very end of the fight. This isn't what I'm talking about here though. I'm suggesting a way to make a warrior hold aggro just as well, if not even better, while using a shield, if only temporarily through the use of a stance.

 

[Spiritplx]

zomg strat leaks~

 

[neodiahs]

.New warrior /style (cleave, mortal strike, etc etc) for 2handers that adds a proc that decreases a mobs AC or ability to avoid attacks drastically for a few seconds. Perhaps take the AC on a 2hander and subtract it from the targets AC whiel the warrior is aux tanking in that style. Giving them a way of increasing their group/raids dps indirectly without increasing their own dps that much. Something that scales their parties DPS based on their power not the warriors etc

i was actually thinking of something similar along those lines. i was gonna reccomend it to replace one of the warrior stances.(Furious Assault or whatever) which gives the warrior a chance to interrupt spells with a 2hnder.
in my opinion. this stance would more worthwhile if it also added a proc of sorts...something similar to the numerous melee-ish DD's such as rending blow ect that also had a small stun component (something along the lines of "-tank name here- lands a furious strike!!!") so it would still have the chance to interrupt spells and would give warriros a little more dps with 2hnders...just my 2-cents.

back on the main subject... the /shield ability to me is a worthwhile skill and shouldnt be overlooked. if i knew how well it worked in the past i would have done it more often (providing i had a decent shield)

 

[volvov2]

back on the main subject... the /shield ability to me is a worthwhile skill and shouldnt be overlooked. if i knew how well it worked in the past i would have done it more often (providing i had a decent shield)

Except with the 18 man raid cap, /shield is almost worthless, there aren't many raids with more than 1 warrior, unless you are trying to gear up a new MT.

 

[neodiahs]

e. that happened to me in my warrior career (i was to replace old Mt) so that was the case.

 

[Wesell]

With 2 warriors you could double your foelock. Have your backup warrior engage and trigger foelock, MT taunts to pickup the other warriors foelock + 1, then attack and trigger his own foelock, thereby jump starting the MT's aggro and allow everyone else to engage sooner. I'm not sure if this would work or how effective it would be, but it might be a way to put a second warrior to some use in addition to offtanking and /shield.

 

[Duma]

With 2 warriors you could double your foelock. Have your backup warrior engage and trigger foelock, MT taunts to pickup the other warriors foelock + 1, then attack and trigger his own foelock, thereby jump starting the MT's aggro and allow everyone else to engage sooner. I'm not sure if this would work or how effective it would be, but it might be a way to put a second warrior to some use in addition to offtanking and /shield.

Taunt sucks and fails 90% of the time.

Foelock, aggro legs, and ae taunt is already over 1500 hate in 3 seconds. More than enough to start dpsing right away.

 

[Waldoff]

Also the added variable of switching healers from the one tank to the other (so numero uno doesnt die and waste all that warrior like DPS) might not be worth the extra few hundred damage in all honesty. I suppose using AE taunt would get around this but it would waste AE taunt at th ebeginning of a fight. (Although that would be 500 foelock 1, 500 ae taunt, 500 foelock 2 which would be pretty nice)