Ok is it just me or are there very few warriors running around? I've done many searches and have been in many parties where I am the only warrior around. When i was lvl 13 I got a tell while I was in Big Bend to join a group runnin in Wailing Caves beggin me to join them. When I got to caves there were maybe 30 people just inside the entrance and I got 2 invites before the actual group that requested me was able to invite. Then they proceed with "woohooo we have a tank. You wont really find me complaining but one thing I noticed from ff11 was that war's couldn't land groups if they paid ppl because they were so overpopulated.
Maybe I'm just getting lucky heh. How is it on the other servers out there? What classes are finding trouble landing groups? What classes are hard to find that everyones unwilling to play? I'm sitting here at work and I'm very curious so give me yer feedback.
Oh btw I do mean warriors and not fighter classes. Crusader and Bralwers do not have the tanking abilities like wars because their taunts are so limited. In many party situations I was able to pull groups of mobs off of an enchanter that made bad choices and decided to throw spells out with no regard for drawing hate.
- Forums
- EverQuest II
- General Discussion
- Warriors and the lack therof
Warriors and the lack therofFollow
Their first MMORPG was probably FFXI.
Mages aren't made of paper in EQ. They are made of tough stuff like cardboard. A crusader or brawler should suffice.
God I hope FFXI players don't try to bring any of that game's hellish group ethic into EQ.
Mages aren't made of paper in EQ. They are made of tough stuff like cardboard. A crusader or brawler should suffice.
God I hope FFXI players don't try to bring any of that game's hellish group ethic into EQ.
hey my first mmorpg was ffxi and i will say proudally i am a warrior errr ok crusader now lol anyway i am around but i will admit there are very few to be found
Warriors were scarce in EQ1 also, partly because they were boring to play, and partly because some of the other classes (paladins and shadowknights) in some cases were better tanks.
I'd say a lot of people who are in this game and who played Eq1 will remember that when deciding on a class.
I'd say a lot of people who are in this game and who played Eq1 will remember that when deciding on a class.
I'm a warrior planning on going Guardian so there are a few of us scattered around the servers. =)
Yeah I'm all about guardian. Of course I'll definately have a secondary character to play when I want to be "less boring". Ok my friends all have chars here including a predator and an enchanter and to be honest with you I have just as much fun playing warrior. I'm running 2 mob groups of 2 dot greens solo and I'm making like 30 silver in 20 min flat. Maybe thats not good for yall but its hellah good for me and its totally supporting my crafts heh.
Also I've been in countless groups where having (and being) the tank has saved alot of time and effort. Also when you get swarmed by a fluke train and 4 mobs are hitting your healer, instead of them running to zone I have easily taken and held the hate for the entire party. How is that boring? :P To each their own ;)
I'm sorry but thats kind of an ignorant statement when its a clearly effective group tactic to have a tank hold hate in group combat. If thats a ***** ff11 tactic I'm sorry but its working in eq2 very nicely :P
Also I've been in countless groups where having (and being) the tank has saved alot of time and effort. Also when you get swarmed by a fluke train and 4 mobs are hitting your healer, instead of them running to zone I have easily taken and held the hate for the entire party. How is that boring? :P To each their own ;)
Quote:
God I hope FFXI players don't try to bring any of that game's hellish group ethic into EQ.
I'm sorry but thats kind of an ignorant statement when its a clearly effective group tactic to have a tank hold hate in group combat. If thats a ***** ff11 tactic I'm sorry but its working in eq2 very nicely :P
the problem is most of the people who are playing eq2 are eq1 players and in eq1 people didnt like playing warriors cause their taunt was broken for so dam long. but then sony decided to fix it and gave warriors abilitys called incite where you would throw taunts at your target and enrage him pretty much so more people started playing warriors cause you could find groups a little easier.
my main in eq was human warrior and i remember before they changed taunt and gave us incite i would sit for 4+ hours lfg or playing alts then they fixed it and i would usually wait a half an hour to get a group tops. so alot of players are going to be nervous about making a warrior cause they dont want to end up getting out agrod by sk and pallys again thru the whole game and never getting groups.
my main in eq was human warrior and i remember before they changed taunt and gave us incite i would sit for 4+ hours lfg or playing alts then they fixed it and i would usually wait a half an hour to get a group tops. so alot of players are going to be nervous about making a warrior cause they dont want to end up getting out agrod by sk and pallys again thru the whole game and never getting groups.
Quote:
Oh btw I do mean warriors and not fighter classes. Crusader and Bralwers do not have the tanking abilities like wars because their taunts are so limited.
You sir, are full of crap. My RL best friend players a brawler and I play a Shaman. Last night we hit 18th and have played together from level 3-18.
The only time anyone but her ever gets aggro is if she allows them to. She is an awesome tank. We have also played with a number of crusaders who tank just fine as well.
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God I hope FFXI players don't try to bring any of that game's hellish group ethic into EQ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but thats kind of an ignorant statement when its a clearly effective group tactic to have a tank hold hate in group combat. If thats a sh*ty ff11 tactic I'm sorry but its working in eq2 very nicely :P
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God I hope FFXI players don't try to bring any of that game's hellish group ethic into EQ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but thats kind of an ignorant statement when its a clearly effective group tactic to have a tank hold hate in group combat. If thats a sh*ty ff11 tactic I'm sorry but its working in eq2 very nicely :P
What he means is your attitude. In FF people were fanatical about have the exact perfect jobs and subjobs, the best equipment, and using Distortion skill chains instead of anything else.
It was an elitist attitude, and its something none of us want to see in EQ2. By coming here and basically bashing Brawlers and Crusaders (both of whom tank just fine) you are sowing the seeds for just that sort of enviroment.
Brawler, Crusader or Warrior all have the ability to be good tanks. Its the player behind the character who makes that happen. I would think that the other fighters you played with either did not have upgraded abilities or just were not all that good at their jobs.
Scholar
34 posts
I agree while in FFXI the group expectations were a bit draconian at times...however in some respects I liked this. I do not like to do anything half assed, and want everyone in my group to do the best job they can.
That being said, I completely agree, that a lot of this is level of effort by the player. No need to have arguments on who is the best tank...we all know how the class stats level and gear works, and the numbers speak for themselves.
That being said, I completely agree, that a lot of this is level of effort by the player. No need to have arguments on who is the best tank...we all know how the class stats level and gear works, and the numbers speak for themselves.
lol i was not saying brawlers or crusaders suck in iny way or fashion. I have seen them being great tanks (although brawlers don't have the AC for serious fights). I think every class is great in its own right and I am not being elitists in any form or fashion. All I was saying was Warriors are made for drawing hate with prime AC. Thats why we get multiple taunts. (I have 5 skills used to draw hate) The main focus of this thread was to point out the limited number of warriors present on my server and I thought it was interesting. If I'm forming a party, whether I'm playing a shaman, enchanter or whatever, I would want a warrior in my group. I would also love to have a crusader and a brawler. You people need to stop attacking and just start listening to what's being said.
The thought of eq1 people being biased against people coming from ff11 is rediculous. People are good in their own right and who here is being "elitist"?
The thought of eq1 people being biased against people coming from ff11 is rediculous. People are good in their own right and who here is being "elitist"?
This thread needs a hug....HHHUUUUGGGG :P
First you said:
Then you said:
You are not saying they suck, but you are saying they suck at tanking. I am pointing out that this simply isn't true. Generating hate in EQ2 can be done in a number of ways. Skilled manipulation of the combat wheel is one, and hate generating abilities is another. Using both any Fighter can hold hate better than the most solid paladin in FF.
This again is simply not true. Brawlers have less AC, but much higher avoidance. They block and parry much more often than a warrior. Sure they have less AC, but that does not mean they take more damage while tanking. They get hit harder but less often.
What you are doing is saying that one class is better than the others in tanking. This simply isn't true. I have also heard people say that clerics make better healers than druids or shamans. In EQ1 that was true, but is definitely not the case in EQ2.
But when you say it people will believe it, and when they get into game they will refuse to group without a Warrior or a Cleric because they believe what people like you are saying. This is why I am so passionate about dispelling these myths.
Quote:
Crusader and Bralwers do not have the tanking abilities like wars because their taunts are so limited.
Then you said:
Quote:
lol i was not saying brawlers or crusaders suck in iny way or fashion.
You are not saying they suck, but you are saying they suck at tanking. I am pointing out that this simply isn't true. Generating hate in EQ2 can be done in a number of ways. Skilled manipulation of the combat wheel is one, and hate generating abilities is another. Using both any Fighter can hold hate better than the most solid paladin in FF.
Quote:
(although brawlers don't have the AC for serious fights).
This again is simply not true. Brawlers have less AC, but much higher avoidance. They block and parry much more often than a warrior. Sure they have less AC, but that does not mean they take more damage while tanking. They get hit harder but less often.
Quote:
I think every class is great in its own right and I am not being elitists in any form or fashion.
What you are doing is saying that one class is better than the others in tanking. This simply isn't true. I have also heard people say that clerics make better healers than druids or shamans. In EQ1 that was true, but is definitely not the case in EQ2.
But when you say it people will believe it, and when they get into game they will refuse to group without a Warrior or a Cleric because they believe what people like you are saying. This is why I am so passionate about dispelling these myths.
While Warriors have multiple taunts, Brawlers and Crusaders make up for it by, y'know, doing more damage. Damage means that the mob hates you. Taunts to the same thing, but that in no way means that a Crusader or Brawler can't hold aggro just as well. All Brawler's need is either an AC or evasion buff so that they can tank better- theoreticially, they're supposed to just dodge enough attacks so that they don't take so much damage, but that just isn't the case. Giving them an improved mitigation/evasion table would solve that problem.
lol i was just stating that warriors were made more for drawing hate and tanking. You guys need to get off of it lol. I honetly believe Wars are better tanks than bralwers and crusaders. Great whoooopie. I did not say the others were ***** tanks and I did not say wars were better at everything. I said they were better TANKS lol. That does not mean brawlers and crusaders CAN'T TANK. My god people did you not eat your wheaties? Listen, I don't care what you think but each job HAS its primary use. Here is an example. I was in a group with a crusader, shaman, and 3 preds. Ok I was pulling in wailing caves and I take 2 orcs that were doing considerable damage to me and it was getting close. When the fight was over and I was a sliver from dying I asked the crusader why he didn't taunt. He said he was spamming it and it never pulled. Now I am not saying crusaders suck. my god if you think that I honestly don't care...i'm also not saing the crusader couldn't tank in the fight. I am ONLY saying that he couldn't draw hate as much as I could. You people are making an issue out of a simple fact and a simple thread. I was only interested in why there are so few warriors. Now I know. You can end this thread now and let it die because you wont get anywhere spamming **** about OMG Crusaders can tank! omg omg.
And yes warriors are better tanks :p
And yes warriors are better tanks :p
Quote:
But when you say it people will believe it, and when they get into game they will refuse to group without a Warrior or a Cleric because they believe what people like you are saying. This is why I am so passionate about dispelling these myths.
Well **** if my thread will keep warriors getting groups I am so sorry. haha. Ok heres what I'll do.
EVERYONE...DON'T GROUP WARRIORS! THEY SUCK. THEY SMELL BAD AND THEY DON'T LISTEN. THEY ARE MEATHEADS!
There now the myth is dispeled and you can go about your day knowing warriors will not get groups anymore haha.
Once again...warriors are not the best tanks. They have higher AC and more taunt abilities. They do less damage and have lower avoidance.
But obviously these are concepts you can't understand.
But obviously these are concepts you can't understand.
Scholar
46 posts
I think denotri hit the nail on the head. Warriors were gimp through the better part of EQ1. I think the EQ1 vets are very leary of going that route again. However, it seems to me that just about any fighter class should be able to tank. They all go about it in different ways of course. For those of you familiar with FFXI, try comparing Brawler tanks to Ninja "blink" tanks. The Warrior and Crusader classes can be compared to Warrior and Paladin in FFXI, although a warrior here has more tools for holding hate than a warrior in FFXI.
With all of that being said, I find it irresponsible of anyone to claim one class is better than any other. IMHO Sony listened to a lot of the complaints of players in EQ1 and took some cues from those that beta-tested. Until we actually see some class imbalance, let's withhold our judgement.
With all of that being said, I find it irresponsible of anyone to claim one class is better than any other. IMHO Sony listened to a lot of the complaints of players in EQ1 and took some cues from those that beta-tested. Until we actually see some class imbalance, let's withhold our judgement.
lol apparently you can't handle when people have opinions. I Think Warriors Are Better Tanks. Why does this bother you so much? Were you abused by a warrior at some time in your life? Did a warrior steal you money in high school? I'm sorry if I didn't make it clear that something I said IS in fact my own personal opinion. I Feel that my taunts and damage make me a better tank. Not a super tank. Doesn't mean other ppl can't tank. Blah Blah. Dude, listen, if you cannot handle people speaking their minds why do you post on forums? You must be angry all day heh. If someone posted a thread saying predators make the best tanks I might chuckle but I wont sit there and cry because they are in some way calling me stupid for thinking something else :P
I'll say it again because the fact that this bothers you just blows my mind. Warriors make better tanks. OoOooOOooOoH :p
Crusaders make great tanks, Brawlers make great tanks, Enchanters make great tanks, Shamans make great tanks, ......
Is this better? :p
I'll say it again because the fact that this bothers you just blows my mind. Warriors make better tanks. OoOooOOooOoH :p
Crusaders make great tanks, Brawlers make great tanks, Enchanters make great tanks, Shamans make great tanks, ......
Is this better? :p
I can handle your opinion. Its just ignorant, and I don't like ignorance. Let me guess, you were one of the people who whined that in FF Ninja's made ****** tanks too right?
I am not trying to change your opinion, because obviously logic is something you just don't get. What I am trying to do is make sure that others understand that Warrior is not any better at tanking than any of the other fighting classes.
The game was created with that concept in mind, and I think that they did a great job with it.
If you want to go around patting yourself on the back and spouting warrior power than go for it.
I am not trying to change your opinion, because obviously logic is something you just don't get. What I am trying to do is make sure that others understand that Warrior is not any better at tanking than any of the other fighting classes.
The game was created with that concept in mind, and I think that they did a great job with it.
If you want to go around patting yourself on the back and spouting warrior power than go for it.
38 posts
Quote:
I can handle your opinion. Its just ignorant, and I don't like ignorance. Let me guess, you were one of the people who whined that in FF Ninja's made sh*tty tanks too right?
I am not trying to change your opinion, because obviously logic is something you just don't get. What I am trying to do is make sure that others understand that Warrior is not any better at tanking than any of the other fighting classes.
The game was created with that concept in mind, and I think that they did a great job with it.
If you want to go around patting yourself on the back and spouting warrior power than go for it.
I am not trying to change your opinion, because obviously logic is something you just don't get. What I am trying to do is make sure that others understand that Warrior is not any better at tanking than any of the other fighting classes.
The game was created with that concept in mind, and I think that they did a great job with it.
If you want to go around patting yourself on the back and spouting warrior power than go for it.
I was going to stay out of this until you used the word "logic".
Let's take this to it's logical conclusion then...
1) Warriors DO have the most effective taunt, this is a fact. I'm talking about the actual taunt ability, not any other obscure thing that generates hate.
2) Warriors ARE able to far exceed Brawlers in AC, this is a fact.
3) All Fighters ARE NOT the same. It would be pretty pointless to have subclasses if they all were the same in every aspect.
So, who was intended to be the most effective "meat shield"? Why, it's the class that can have both the most physical protection and is able to taunt most effectively... The Warrior and it's subclasses!
It's logic, don't take it personally.
If logically AC and Taunt were the two most important factors in determining hate your argument would work.
However, damage causes massive aggro or why would mages be able to steal it? Brawlers and Crusaders do more damage than warriors, ergo they gain more aggro from their combat damage than warriors do. This makes up for the fact that they have less taunt abilities.
Taunt abilities also use power, and a brawler or crusader can use that power to do more damage or to complete combat wheels for still more damage. This of course gives more aggro.
Lets say a warrior takes 20 damage and a Brawler takes 25 per hit. If the brawler dodges one more attack out of every 5 then the brawler and the warrior now take the same damage. So th superior AC becomes less of an advantage.
See my point?
Edited, Tue Nov 16 13:26:47 2004 by Arkelias
However, damage causes massive aggro or why would mages be able to steal it? Brawlers and Crusaders do more damage than warriors, ergo they gain more aggro from their combat damage than warriors do. This makes up for the fact that they have less taunt abilities.
Taunt abilities also use power, and a brawler or crusader can use that power to do more damage or to complete combat wheels for still more damage. This of course gives more aggro.
Lets say a warrior takes 20 damage and a Brawler takes 25 per hit. If the brawler dodges one more attack out of every 5 then the brawler and the warrior now take the same damage. So th superior AC becomes less of an advantage.
See my point?
Edited, Tue Nov 16 13:26:47 2004 by Arkelias
Scholar
31 posts
If brawlers tank as good as guardians, but do more dps, explain to me how these classes are balanced.
I have read multiple posts/FAQ's etc, that say all warrior classes and sub-classes tank the same. I don't believe it. At least not at the "end-game" level (which we are of course not at yet).
I have read multiple posts/FAQ's etc, that say all warrior classes and sub-classes tank the same. I don't believe it. At least not at the "end-game" level (which we are of course not at yet).
Guardians will ALWAYS out tank Brawlers. Monks/Bruisers we will have to see....
38 posts
The conclusion that I came to was not who generated the most hate.
The conclusion is that the Warrior and it's subclasses were clearly meant to be the main tank or "meat shield", and are more suited for the task than brawlers or crusaders.
Brawlers and Crusaders are also suited for the task, but warrior classes are the ones dedicated to that part of a Fighter's role.
Warrior = Most Defensive Tank
Brawler = Most Offensive Tank
Crusader = A Little Bit Of Both with a Clerical Twist Tank
But we don't have to argue this point since on EQ2's website, the Warrior is the only one that has language in it's description that says something like this...
"Warriors use heavy armor and weapons to safeguard their companions..." <-- That is what a "tank" does.
Edited, Tue Nov 16 13:42:12 2004 by esamatti
The conclusion is that the Warrior and it's subclasses were clearly meant to be the main tank or "meat shield", and are more suited for the task than brawlers or crusaders.
Brawlers and Crusaders are also suited for the task, but warrior classes are the ones dedicated to that part of a Fighter's role.
Warrior = Most Defensive Tank
Brawler = Most Offensive Tank
Crusader = A Little Bit Of Both with a Clerical Twist Tank
But we don't have to argue this point since on EQ2's website, the Warrior is the only one that has language in it's description that says something like this...
"Warriors use heavy armor and weapons to safeguard their companions..." <-- That is what a "tank" does.
Edited, Tue Nov 16 13:42:12 2004 by esamatti
10 posts
As long as I have a tank I am happy, playing EQ1 for 5 years, from beta, it really depends on the player, playing the "Tank" class to keep up with the party and keeping hate, etc.
As for FFXI players, I did play that for a few months, and I quit because of Group Ethics, and the whole sense of community all together, but I have a feeling when these players who join us used to the EQ sense of community, players, etc, will have to evolve or die a lonely death.
As for FFXI players, I did play that for a few months, and I quit because of Group Ethics, and the whole sense of community all together, but I have a feeling when these players who join us used to the EQ sense of community, players, etc, will have to evolve or die a lonely death.
thanks esamatti, finally someone with some sense of the topic at hand heh. Oh and FYI AC is a huge factor in my experience. I'll watch someone in group taking 36 damage and when I pull hate I'm taking 20 max :) This also saves power for the healers :P Oh well this topic wasn't meant to go in this direction but I have to say I love a good, evil spirited, debate :)
To all of you people that takes this **** seriously, "get over it....no matter what you do or say this is still a game." :)
A very ****** fun game that I cannot stop playing :p
P.S. to see if this brings more debate.....I have noticed alot of players wearing very poor eq. Now if you experience with a tank is based on grouping with warriors running 250ac using that freeport sword then i'm sorry. I currently have 490ac and I have the best eq I can find/quest because I am addicted to eq'n.
I think I will post another thread on this topic :p Maybe i'll get rated down even more heh
To all of you people that takes this **** seriously, "get over it....no matter what you do or say this is still a game." :)
A very ****** fun game that I cannot stop playing :p
P.S. to see if this brings more debate.....I have noticed alot of players wearing very poor eq. Now if you experience with a tank is based on grouping with warriors running 250ac using that freeport sword then i'm sorry. I currently have 490ac and I have the best eq I can find/quest because I am addicted to eq'n.
I think I will post another thread on this topic :p Maybe i'll get rated down even more heh
Recent Visitors: 73
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (73)
- Forums
- EverQuest II
- General Discussion
- Warriors and the lack therof
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC