Tanks

[Galok Icewolf]

You tell Miax 'paladin defensive skills maxing out 10-20 points higher then warrior defensive skills is discouraging'

Miax tells you 'Post a constructive feedback post on the BBS, outline the issues, use all facts, and propose a balanced solution. '

Currently, at this point, Warrior defensive skills max at:
Parry: 80
Shieldblock: 90
Dodge: 65
Shieldpunch: 90

Paladins, and Anti-paladins skills max at:
Parry: 99
Mounted combat: 99
Dodge: 65

It seems to be that there is a big difference between mounted tanks and warriors. Not only do they get bonus's to hit, and can wield a 2handed weapon, they can tank better. Add the bonus exp (paladins), poison (antis) and whatever misc. skills and spells, the system seems tweaked.

Personally I think something needs to be done about this. At almost any given time there are more paladins on then warriors (goodie side). I dont think paladins and antis with all their bonus abilities should be tanking better then warriors which deal with the drudge, but none of the benifeits.

I don't know the best way to go about this, but possibly raising warriors dodge and parry to 95? 99? would help. Maybe the step is to lower paladins skills, though i loathe to do such a thing (I too despise downgrades). Currently at this time, I dont have anything better to add.

[ShaylaRose]

Galok, correct me if I am wrong because I am both relatively new here and not prone to playing warrior/tank types, but one aspect below confuses me.

Warriors get parry, shieldblock, and dodge defensively while paladins get parry, mounted combat, dodge. However, for the paladin to get all his defensive bonuses, he must forgo any opportunity to bash, doesn't get shieldpunch, etc. In my experience, bashing/shieldpunch are very important to many/most battles. What a paladin gains in defense, he loses in utility. A paladin on his mounted horse is just that. A tank.

Maybe I am missing something, and I certainly don't mind having my attention directed to some aspect of play I don't see or lack understanding of

I travel with both Toarn and Vvar often, not to mention many other friends in both classes, and find that each is equally important to my own personal protection and success

Shayla
- Aedyra the Elven Enchantress

PS: I think the alignment restrictions also make paladins more difficult to play. A warrior gets many more options in EQ and opponents as well.

[rylan]

From what I've seen, after the defensive skill fixes, Palidans -don't- tank as well as warriors.

The main reason we use them as primary tank a lot is because the warriors are busy bashing or SPing mobs, and palidans absolutely rock at rescue (which they should). However, for some really nasty fights, we'll use a buffed up warrior to tank because they got the hps and shieldblock skill.

Also.. dodge caps at 65? That seems kinda low for warriors.. you haven't been able to notch it up past there?

[Galok Icewolf]

ShaylaRose, A paladin on his horse, can charge, which in essence is the same as shieldpunch.

Rylan, I have confirmed it with my tests, (gromikazer 50th level warrior) and others. In the long run, testing a paladin tanking the same mob as a warrior, the paladin _does_ tank better. Not only do they get a skill that rivals shieldblock, they do it using a two handed weapon. They get a bonus to hit using 2handed weapons, and so can wear more hp/dam gear.

[This message has been edited by Galok Icewolf (edited 10-08-2001).]

[Grungar]

Just curious, and not too sure that it fits in here, but where does riposte cap for them respectively?

I dunno bout moving dodge up to 95 or 99, but certainly something above 65. When Grungar was a warrior, even with 100 agi, he never really dodged much of anything. Parry, riposte, or get smacked. Usually get smacked.

Parry I agree should be up in the high 90's. Warriors are, after all, the masters of armed combat- this includes not only smacking things around with your sword, but preventing yourself from getting smacked.

I've not played a warrior this incarnation of the MUD, so my opinion is fairly worthless. I just wanted to concur that warriors should parry and certainly dodge better than they currently do.

Fear the halfling tank if dodge and parry go up to 99

- Grungar "Ruh roh, rit's romework rime" Forgefire

[Jurdex]

Paladins have crappy hit points.

Its give and take.

Also, all you need is a shield. They need a horse, which die somewhat easily in many situations. Not to mention they need to try and mount the horse before they start tanking.

Have you done high level zones with high level warriors and mounted tanks? Which ones?

Dornax
Jurdex

[Lyt]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Galok Icewolf:
<B>
Rylan, I have confirmed it with my tests, (gromikazer 50th level warrior) and others. In the long run, testing a paladin tanking the same mob as a warrior, the paladin _does_ tank better. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How does an evil wrace arrrior get a chance to group with a paladin and test this? *Scratch* I am curious.



[This message has been edited by Lyt (edited 10-10-2001).]

[Galok Icewolf]

This is my whole point touk. I don't need to tank better then paladins, but when they tank better, hit harder, exp faster, and get spells it seems excessive.

Warriors with a parry of 95 and a dodge 0f 80, would make warriors barely (if that) tank as well as paladins.

They need a horse.. but they do it 2handed. Checked the hps on mounts lately? my gawd.. i saw a couple yesterday with 1600 hps..

[Galok Icewolf]

Lyt, I dont need to be grouped with a paladin, to see he/she is tanking better.

[Ensis]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Galok Icewolf:
They need a horse.. but they do it 2handed. Checked the hps on mounts lately? my gawd.. i saw a couple yesterday with 1600 hps..</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats pretty lucky, I think on average my mounts are about 400-900 hp at level 42..and considering they goodie aligned like us, an unholy word or two and they're done. Cloud is even worse on them. They hardly regen HP at all, or MV for that matter, and if you try to make them rest they keep standing up. total pain in the arse. Pally's have a couple upsides to warriors, but like touk said, they don't get nearly as many groups as the warriors. This is usually why:

I can hold my own tanking most of the time but i can't eat too many areas without biting the dust.

With all the best HP equipment I think i could be comparable to a dwarf/barb without any HP equipment.

Most of the time people don't even think about charge being relatively equal to shieldpunch, and since its not really even a skill (ie: doesn't notch.) you can't really increase it. I think Hyldryn said with 99 mounted combat he hit charge 50% of the time?? thats pretty bad IMO.

Pally's are hybrids, they can't heal like clerics, and they can't tank like warriors. Granted with the higher defensive skills they have a little more likelihood of not getting hit in combat, but when you do get hit..its gonna hurt, just ask my ship groups. with -100 ac mounted and 485 HP?.. heh i see a lot of OUCH and YIKES!

I DO THINK that warriors need an upgrade though. I, personally don't like that they are only meatshields now. Most of their skills everyone else has, with the exception of headbutt, shieldblock, and shieldpunch, the latter two paladins/anti's having equivalent.

What about later on in levels giving them the option to specialize in a weapon group? ie: Specialize 2h slashing, specialize 1h slashing, specialize 1h bludgeon, etc. Giving them hit/dam bonus or an extra attack or something?? I think that would make most of the warriors out there pretty happy. no?


E

[Galok Icewolf]

Well, I dont know what hyldryn was testing on, but i can tell you shieldpunch is no where near 100% especially since it maxxes out at 90. against mobs 55th level or so, its around 60%. 59th level mobs, and size, whatever it ends up being around 50% in my experience. Level of the mob makes a big difference.

I checked a who alot.. on average there are 2.5-3x as many paladins on as goodie warriors at any given time... I wonder why...

[Rokub]

Paladins proc weapons are outreagous, I don't comprehend why they have them and no one else does. Healing weapons such as avenger and planetar? Avenger even stones them. I haven't been around to converse on this issue but the evils don't seem to have weapons that heal them or lifetap and such..
No specialized weapons other then sword of dancing shadows from dk vault for evils. Which has a dmg proc. not a healing proc.
This issue always makes paladins better tanks. Those heals and stone can save your butt if the healing is slow or the stoneing is slow.

Rokub

[rylan]

Well, while its nice that Avenger procs stone and heal, it is random.. if you rely on that in zones or against high level mobs, then you're in for a nice 'Welcome to Sojourn' prompt.

Palidan mounts.. we have -numerous- occasions where the palidan mount gets killed.. even with protection spells. They don't have spellsave eq, so they regularly take 400 from a cloud, or 300 from unholy words. See anyone using heals on mounts instead of the tanks or group members? Didn't think so.
Then usually when it dies, we're in an area where the pali can't get another mount.. oops, there goes their tanking ability.

Am I correct in assuming that rogues have a higher dodge skill cap? That would make sense to me.. if they can get dodge to 90 or something. Even so I think warrior dodge should get to at least 80.

btw galok, shieldpunch seems to be effected substantially be shield type and weight. Do some experimenting and you can get shields that work better than others.

Also.. as far as I am concerned, hit/dam on the tank doesn't matter. So a palidan gets a bonus with a 2h weapon.. thats their speciality.. but as tank its not their job to be dealing a lot of damage.. they're there to defend agains the mobs and protect the group.

[Galok Icewolf]

I am a warrior rylan. I have used, 3 lb, 20 lb, 50 lb, 55 lb shields. Thier weight in shieldpunching makes little difference from my experience. I shieldpunch the same with a conjured wooden shield as i do with a polished bone shield.

Thats a point i didn't want to bring up rokub, because you can't count on eq to make a character. Still the avengers are sick...

[This message has been edited by Galok Icewolf (edited 10-09-2001).]

[Laxlez]

"Am I correct in assuming that rogues have a higher dodge skill cap? That would make sense to me.. if they can get dodge to 90 or something. Even so I think warrior dodge should get to at least 80."

I was a bit shocked to find the warrior cap was at 65, since I was worried that my dodge skill was low at 76 (rogue)... but then again, it's my only defense. I don't know what it caps at for rogues, but it must be fairly high since I'm only level 40 and mine's at 76..

-Laxlez

[Ensis]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Rokub:
<B>Paladins proc weapons are outreagous, I don't comprehend why they have them and no one else does. Healing weapons such as avenger and planetar? Avenger even stones them. I haven't been around to converse on this issue but the evils don't seem to have weapons that heal them or lifetap and such..
No specialized weapons other then sword of dancing shadows from dk vault for evils. Which has a dmg proc. not a healing proc.
This issue always makes paladins better tanks. Those heals and stone can save your butt if the healing is slow or the stoneing is slow.

Rokub</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

keep in mind trolls regenerate, ogres have doorbash, between the two of them the HPs are insane, duergar drow and all the evils have their fair share of innate powers, which are more reliable in zoning situations than the procs coming from avenger. As far as items with wicked proc's..I'm sure there are plenty out there, and i'd take a damge proc any day over the occasional 'heal'.

E

[Zrax]

I don't see how race is relevant in a thread about class balance, there can be human warriors as surely as troll warriors. A 100 dmg proc weapon vs a 100 hp healing proc weapon doesnt seem like much but when you look at it in terms of healing 1/6 of a tanks hp vs doing 1/100 of a targets hp then the healing proc becomes far more significant. One thing about trolls, I will never deny that the regen rate is more than kick ass for doing solo exp at the 1-40 levels, and doing some small-mid level equipment, however the downside of fire damage at higher levels in zones overwhelms the benefits of regeneration far and away. If trolls are powerful tanks it is because they are an agile, high hp race that can bash well, but not because of the regen.

I would love to be able to wear 2 shields and have my chance of shieldpunch and shieldblock increased, because i cant do crap for damage as a warrior anyway.

[Nokie]

dodge (very good) (90)

Not sure if it's capped yet or not though...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Laxlez:
<B>I don't know what it caps at for rogues, but it must be fairly high since I'm only level 40 and mine's at 76..
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



------------------
Nokie 'No you don't!! That belongs to me!' Quickfingers

[rylan]

I think the cap is 90 for rogues, since Laxlez mentioned his is 76 at lvl 40 (which would lead to 90 at lvl 50).

[Ensis]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Zrax:
I don't see how race is relevant in a thread about class balance, there can be human warriors as surely as troll warriors. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's relavent because only human's can be paladins/anti's. The thread was about pally's tanking vs warriors tanking, not goodie warriors vs evil warriors.

E

[This message has been edited by Ensis (edited 10-09-2001).]

[Zrax]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ensis:
<B> It's relavent because only human's can be paladins/anti's. The thread was about pally's tanking vs warriors tanking, not goodie warriors vs evil warriors.

E

[This message has been edited by Ensis (edited 10-09-2001).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your right, this is about class vs class tanking, and that is why your post pointing out the powers of evil race innates and hitpoints was irrevlevant, and still is.

[Jurdex]

Avenger isn't that great anymore. Stoning proc is annoying. Why? Cuz then you can't dscale. Ohhh, that lovely area dispel magic avenger does? Got my group spanked in the TF air zonelet. Led to a very long CR. The occasional heal? Whoopee. If we're relying on that (which we never do), we're already toast. The avenger is glamorous for a lower level group, but a lot of the time Jhorr wields different weapons for various reasons.

Anyway, paladins are usually my main tanks in zones if they have +hp eq (which almost all of them do not). Why? Because that is about the only thing they are there for.

So there are 3x as many paladins on as goodie warriors. Probably. There are also 3x as many rogues on as invokers. Why? Rangers and paladins are easy to play and level up. They do get screwed later on because they usually get few groups.

Warriors are by far the most balanced class on the mud. They have a purpose and they serve it well. I don't take more than one mounted tank unless I need to. I'll take as many warriors as I can. Jeesh.

Dornax
Jurdex

[Zrax]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jurdex:
<B>Avenger isn't that great anymore. Stoning proc is annoying. Why? Cuz then you can't dscale. Ohhh, that lovely area dispel magic avenger does? Got my group spanked in the TF air zonelet. Led to a very long CR. The occasional heal? Whoopee. If we're relying on that (which we never do), we're already toast. The avenger is glamorous for a lower level group, but a lot of the time Jhorr wields different weapons for various reasons.

Anyway, paladins are usually my main tanks in zones if they have +hp eq (which almost all of them do not). Why? Because that is about the only thing they are there for.

So there are 3x as many paladins on as goodie warriors. Probably. There are also 3x as many rogues on as invokers. Why? Rangers and paladins are easy to play and level up. They do get screwed later on because they usually get few groups.

Warriors are by far the most balanced class on the mud. They have a purpose and they serve it well. I don't take more than one mounted tank unless I need to. I'll take as many warriors as I can. Jeesh.

Dornax
Jurdex</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


This isnt meant as an attack at you but the same thing could be said of clerics being very balanced and very purpose oriented and great for filling that purpose and yet you have lobbied for changes and benefits for them quite a bit. It depends on perspective, and i dont see any reason to justify a paladin being better at parry than a warrior.

[Galorion]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I don't see how race is relevant in a thread about class balance</font>

It's relevant because the Paladin class is restricted to being human - it's one of the major disadvantages of the class.

Personally, I think that while mounted, paladins NEED to tank better than warriors. Otherwise, there's absolutely no reason to bring one to a zone group over a warrior.

[cherzra]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Galorion:
[QUOTE]Personally, I think that while mounted, paladins NEED to tank better than warriors. Otherwise, there's absolutely no reason to bring one to a zone group over a warrior. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm, if they tank better and have the same hp because they have a great 2h bonus which easily allows them to wear a polkadot, roots/invasion belt and 2 amethysts, along with the ability to wield nice 2hnders and the best rescue in the game, what is left for warriors?

I like playing warrior, but I hate seeing mages with better daggers than the best 1h slashing weapon available, or rare load 1h slashers (cough rippling) being +1 +2 pieces of crap.

[Todrael]

Fear my +4 +3 mage only dagger.

-Todrael

[Todrael]

If a class needs to be 'the best' at something to be taken into zone groups, why take necromancers, rangers, conjurers, druids, or bards? Every class has strengths and weaknesses. A paladin does not have to tank 'the best' in order to get taken over a warrior.

I'd also like to address everyone's talk about the Avenger. It's really silly, in my opinion, to use the defense that 'if you're depending on it, you're screwed'. Duh. No one's saying you depend on it, they're just mentioning that it's power goes beyond that of almost anything else that's available, even if it isn't the artifact item you seem to think we think it is.

-Todrael

[Galorion]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Hmm, if they tank better and have the same hp because they have a great 2h bonus which easily allows them to wear a polkadot, roots/invasion belt and 2 amethysts, along with the ability to wield nice 2hnders and the best rescue in the game, what is left for warriors?</font>

Sorry, but I really disagree with bringing eq into class balancing discussions - the vast majority of players won't have the items mentioned so it's not a fair evaluation of class vs class.

[Todrael]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Cap'n Touk:
[B]If Paladins tank better then warriors, then there is a reason to bring them to the zone[B]</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Touk, you agree with us that paladins tank better than warriors. I thought the point attempting to be made was that this probably shouldn't be the case. Paladins have many abilities beyond that of tanking or damage dealing which make them a unique class in many respects.

-Todrael

[Guest]

1. Interesting topic.
2. Weapons (even unique to a class) shouldn't be part of *this* particular discussion. That really ought to be evaluated independantly.
3. Race plays a large role in limiting the Paladin class, and as such is reasonable to include here.
4. Keep up the posts, and resist the occasional flames. Everyone has good info, just from a different perspective.

The one thing to keep in mind (and I'm not talking about specifics in this case) though, is that just because one skill can hit 99 and another skill (entirely different skill) can hit 90, that doesn't necessarily mean that the one that can hit 99 is better. Different skills use different systems. I'm not sure how these particular skills compare in that regard.

[Jurdex]

1. I won't ask more than 1 mounted tank per group unless I am forced to.

2. I don't really care what damage a warrior or paladin does. I'm bringing rangers and rogues for that.

3. I've played a warrior to level 50 twice and have one at 30 right now. I don't see a problem with the class.

4. What I brought up about clerics was because the exp is ridiculously slow and at the time there was no real incentive to play a cleric unless you loved the class, as evidenced by the meager few clerics there were at high levels. By the way, I also didn't bitch about shamans or druids, I made suggestions FOR MY CLASS. So make suggestions for warriors, stop complaining about mounted tanks.

Also, unless you've grouped extensively with both mounted tanks and warriors, how can your opinions be taken seriously?

If a paladin didn't tank better than a warrior I wouldn't take them to a zone (I never had before this wipe).

Dornax
Jurdex

[Todrael]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Todrael:
If a class needs to be 'the best' at something to be taken into zone groups, why take necromancers, rangers, conjurers, druids, or bards? Every class has strengths and weaknesses. A paladin does not have to tank 'the best' in order to get taken over a warrior.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Since everyone is repeating themselves, I thought I would too.

-Todrael

[cherzra]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jurdex:
So make suggestions for warriors, stop complaining about mounted tanks.
[/B]</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1) Warriors have to wear as much hp eq as they can, this is silly. Proposal: give every warrior +1 hp/ level more, i.e. 50 hp more at lvl 50 so they wouldn't have to walk around looking like half mages.

2) Hit and dam eq downgrades 2 wipes ago combined with the newer need to wear hp eq are sort of overlapping. Warriors do nowhere near any big amount of damage anymore, and 2hnders are out of the question now with pc tanking and shieldblock. Rogues do more damage, yet they also have the nicer and more damaging weapons. Proposal: upgrade the harder to get 1h weapons (rippling/ebony/etc) to max +7 or +8 combined hit/dam or something (see my other thread on this), and better dice than silly 2d6 or whatever. Having to wear hp rings (which ppl will still need to do even if they have 50 more hp naked) means losing +2 +4 from ring slots, so gaining +2 +2 on a weapon doesn't matter.

3) Change KOing from headbutt for warriors to being stunned for some rounds? It's useless now unless you want your zone group to wait 3 minutes till you recover, and practising it is pretty much out of the question too.

4) More weapons! Everyone wields an gcd or an ebony if they have one. Nobody cares about rippling, shadows sword, gleaming mithril axe or engulfed anymore. More variety! Heck I envision one being +5 +2, another +4 +4, another +3 +4. More quests like Saukuruk's dagger, Kirin horn, Khanjari or GCD!

Anyway... my main gripe is weapons. It's about all warriors can brag about, even though we know we don't do damage. They are pretty bland +1 +2, +2 +1 stuff. I'd really like a +6 +2 Saukuruk or +4 +3 Oblivion too ya know, and those are no-warrior!

anyway maybe more later I'm tired - bedtime.

[Zrax]

Jurdex,

The suggestion of the post was to raise warrior max skill level, it wasnt to bitch about paladins. Paladins were being used as a frame of reference. I didnt read anywhere in the thread where someone suggested a paladin downgrade, but maybe i didn't read the thread carefully enough.

Cherzra, what is funny is that my favorite weapon now is the silver githhanki longsword, if i didnt have too many cursed weapons to carry right now I would curse it to because i don't do enough damage for it to matter.

[kiryan]

clerics, warriors are base classes (I think enchanters and invokers might be too on sojourn). You dont modify them unless the change is balanced with the sub classes. i.e. you dont make warriors hit harder because then rangers and rogues start bitching that they dont have a niche ect...

There isnt supposed to be anything special about warriors. At the same time, another class shouldn't fulfill all the jobs of the warrior plus get other perks (i think thats the current problem with paladins, think back to oldschool tanking nuking monks).

Best reason to play a paladin, 2h weapons, innate hitroll, spells, mounts, 25% exp bonus on evil mobs, avenger, layhands. That translates into fun and variety. I think they are powerful atm. Biggest reasons not to play a paladin, good race and low natural hps. Paladins have weaknesses but they are not very visible. Biggest one I can think of is negative exp from good aligned mobs, problem is where are the good aligned zoning level zones? Same reason goodies are bitching about holy/unholy word (again heh).


Jurdex best reason to play cleric, get a lot of groups, let me rephrase that, make or break groups. Same goes for enchanters.

Chezra, you cant seriously tell me you would wear less hp eq if you had 50 more hps. I sure as hell wouldnt. Ill always wear hp eq in the slots where you get the biggest bang for the buck, rings, cloak, ringmail, or at least until I stop dieing zoning (that should never happen). Only thing that will change what warriors wear is like a 3/3 or 4/4 eq in those slots, and then i might wear hit/dam rings zoning (maybe not im a troll and those clouds hurt). I agree with you on the weapons, I want bigger weapons. Group bonuses to hit/dam/ac for having warriors/melee (warriors would get higher bonuses) would be neat.

Someone, forgot name, evil races get a lot of innates. Squids, Duegs, and drow are blind during the day, snakes lose 4 or 5 slots, trolls and ogres are pretty rad, but please note that we dont have any subclassed melee, trolls take evil amounts of fire damage (I ate a >758 pt cloud with fire prot yesterday from skeloh), and ogre corpses can only be dragged by ogres.

[Jurdex]

The only person who posted anything constructive really so far has been Cherzra in my opinion..

The basis for giving warriors something cool shouldn't be, in my opinion, who else has what.

I don't sit there and say, Shaman have the biggest heal in the game, I want group full heal!

I just think there has been a whole lot of saying how things are this way and that, but very little proposals or solutions offered..

Dornax
Jurdex

[Vylare]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jurdex:
<B>The only person who posted anything constructive really so far has been Cherzra in my opinion..

The basis for giving warriors something cool shouldn't be, in my opinion, who else has what.

I don't sit there and say, Shaman have the biggest heal in the game, I want group full heal!

I just think there has been a whole lot of saying how things are this way and that, but very little proposals or solutions offered..

Dornax
Jurdex</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Although I can't offer ANY suggestions about warriors, cuz I personally do not like to play them, all I can say is we need more of them. Day after day I sit at 3w because there are either a. no clerics or b. no warriors. So there must be something good about them to make them so needed - OTOH it appears there is also something missing, because not as many people are playing them as in the past.

And honestly, I think comparing class x to class y will not result in getting anything constructive accomplished.

[Grintor]

Cherzra hit it on the head. You said everything i was thinking up to that point.


I'd like to see someone compare skills between like levelled paladin and human warrior. that really only way you can tell if there is an imblance.

[Galok Icewolf]

Okay. Let's recap. Its been said paladins tank better then warriors. They use 2handed POWERFUL weapons AND tank better. I wasn't saying they should be downgraded. I asked that warriors be upgraded a little. Im not just making stuff up, I have a 50th level warrior, and I have several high level palading/anti friends. You cannot tell me they arent more powerful. Fine and dandy, I don't care, I want to be able to tank, because THATS THE WARRIORS JOB. Warriors dont get to do damage BECAUSE WE HAVE TO TANK.

If we cant tank as well as paladins and they get to do more damage, and get spells blah blah blah. It just sounds something needs to be tweaked. If you people can't see that, then theres something wrong.
(P.s. Anti/paladins do as much, if not more then rogues and rangers guarenteed.)

[kiryan]

If I remember correctly, human paladins maxs out around 500 nekkid hps. My troll will have around 725. With amys ringmail polkadot your looking at about 175 extra hps. So your looking at around 1100 for a vitted troll and 875 for a paladin. Thats pretty healthy difference, until you start factoring in all the other cool things they get. Layhands, mounts, better defensive skills (unless they get unmounted), better rescue, better dam, and some cleric spells. Not to mention amy belt gives them another 70 hps. Its excessive in my opinion, way too many perks, be like if invokers got stone even if they couldnt specialize in it, itd be too much.

Why play a warrior you have more variety as a paladin and you level 25% faster (thats an estimate). You never have to kill good aligned mobs (does dam exp get added negative against the proper mobs?) and you dont even have groupign restrictions anymore (though thats a good thing for the class).

[Galok Icewolf]

I don't think thats necessary touk, but maybe a good first step. I personally think warriors should get some bonus with hitroll? or tank better. I just know i needa have 30 hitroll to hit 95% and at 26 hitroll my hitrate is only like 85%. Paladins need 21? i mean.. theres a big difference there, but this is off the subject of tanking.

I still think warriors need some definate help in regards to tanking, or some ability that helps them tank better or something.

[Jurdex]

Allow evils to have antis. That sounds perfectly agreeable. That way you can see how much better they are at tanking.

Anyway, as far as warriors needing a perk.. I would tend to think the fact they are a requirement for zoning would be a major one! Mounted tanks simply aren't a necessity.

I do think weapons should have a whole lot more variety for warriors and adding procs to shields or spells to them would be cool. Say a shield that blurs or stones 1/gameday or armors you everytime you aren't, etc..

Dornax
Jurdex

[ssar]

I think warriors sp and shieldblock skills should max out at 99 - something they can excel at.

Pallys/Antis should parry better than warriors I think - that's something they seems suited to excel at.

Warriors dodge could maybe do with a slight increase, but I think barb, dorf, troll, ogre, dooger, snake dodge shouldnt be as good as elf, drow, halfling.

Don't want anything too unbalancing though.

Cherzra and others really hit the nail on the head about weapons, on this thread as well as others..

Many 1h warrior weapons should be a tad better, IMO, (like engulfed, cc sword, etc) and there should be a few more cool ones available.


On with the hunt..

Mogr.

[Tarod]

Maybe Warriors should get more experience from taking damage since we are meatshields. heheheh

My 2 coppers

[Gavry]

Just though I throw my 2c in here:

One important point to note is that a Pally can never bash while mounted. A warrior, even the tank, can still bash and tank. Was in a little group with a cleric and ranger earlier tonight and had to spend the whole time with my horse following me about because I had to bash and tank. Consequently no mount block, therefore a worse tank than a warrior.

Hehe, but then I'm only 36th lvl so havn't had the experience of high level zones yet this wipe so maybe I have no clue what I'm talking about. hehe

Gavry

[Galorion]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Thats pretty healthy difference, until you start factoring in all the other cool things they get. Layhands, mounts, better defensive skills (unless they get unmounted), better rescue, better dam, and some cleric spells. </font>

Yes, but don't forget to factor in all of the other disadvantages to the paladin class: must be human, negative xp for non-evil aligned mobs, must have a mount to tank, and the biggest one - cannot tank and bash at the same time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Why play a warrior you have more variety as a paladin and you level 25% faster (thats an estimate).</font>

So you can have more hps, the ability to tank and bash at the same time, not have to deal with needing a mount to tank, and be a required class for a zoning group. Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if the paladin xp table is harder than the warrior xp table.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You never have to kill good aligned mobs (does dam exp get added negative against the proper mobs?) </font>

Don't forget, paladins also lose xp on neutral mobs. And yes, they get negative damage xp on non-evil mobs.


[This message has been edited by Galorion (edited 10-10-2001).]