What in your opinion is the worst class to play all around?

Beastlords and bards need some serious help, their falling behind badly.

Calixto-Combine wrote:

BryanPost wrote:

I am pretty sure most of us SKs are happy where we are now, no need to trade.

#1 sign your class is overpowered!

Or that SK's have realistic expectations after years of being underpowered in the past!

I just wince a little when some paladins (the usual suspects) say all they need to be "balanced" is the same dps as SKs and ae aggro.

Battleblade-Xegony wrote:

but don't warriors get near dps class level damage

best mitigation of all the classes

best disc that is infinatly scaling that is required on raids to be the sole tank....final stand

and have instant cast range agro via discs?

back to BBs regularly scheduled agenda

Gwyddon_7th wrote:

But don't warriors get near dps class level damage

best mitigation of all the classes

best disc that is infinatly scaling that is required on raids to be the sole tank....final stand

and have instant cast range agro via discs?

 

back to BBs regularly scheduled agenda

Warriors don't generally get put in DPS groups for obvious reasons -

not being a DPS class there's not as big of a payoff

at least one of us has a different fish to fry, tanking a named mob and the rest of us stand in queue waiting to tank that named if he dies and set up to tank, not setup to DPS.

our best weapons aren't even on paper the best DPS 1Handers and they typically have a CS IV proc not a damage proc, we put EB augs on them not DMG augs, and we use the Rogue aggro potions not the damage ones.

While certainly one could buff up a Warrior as a DPSer, put them in a DPS group, and squeeze some nice looking DPS out of them that's not how we are used.

So, the fact of the matter is someone could post Warrior DPS = 3000 (or w/e) or just a meaningful and far more typical Warrior DPS = 1500.

If Paladins took the position that the 120/100/80 guidline used in early EQ has become 200/100/75 with Warriors and SK's occupying the 100 slot and we all needed a boost given how far ahead the real DPSers had moved, I for one would understand that argument.

But they are entirely focused on Paladin vs. SK and Paladin vs. Warrior relative position and frankly there's 0 justification for a half priest to have DPS "on a par" with a 100% melee whether we all get a boost or we do not.

Best mitigation is pretty sweet - if it meant anything. I've seen a Knight tank every mob in SoD and unlike PoTime it didn't occur after exhaustive farming, it started practically on Day 1. That's how narrow the mitigation gap has become/gimp the content has become.

And in group content Knights can tank all group content. That alone motivated me to un-mothball my Paladin and enjoy Tank Parity (and massive Spellbook Superiority).

Knights have an infinately scaling characteristic too - AC. Would you be happier if Final Stand was not a disc but was AA purchased Warrior only built in extra AC? 1000 extra AC at level 75, 1500 at level 80, etc.? Like Sturyness but not shared?

As it is Final Stand is reserved for named mobs - much better for Knights since Warriors do not outclass them vs. normal mobs.

I'm more likely to die in a raid because healers lapse than my mitigation. Knights have either their Epic and lifetaps (SK's) or pretty darned good heals. I have potions (slow refresh), an LoN item (both of which Knights can use too) and a BP click. Wheee!

Instant cast ranged aggro? You mean glacially slow refresh aggro discs that if you use on one mob, there's no point in trying to change targets for 30ish seconds?

Warrior, Pally, and SK are all different and each have shortcomings and advantages. Which is true of many of our abilities.

Just don't ask a Warrior for a combat res, heal, or cure. That's priest territory and the half priest/half tank handles that stuff. And it's why Warrior should do higher DPS than that part melee class. Devs acknowledged this back in the day even as they adjusted the damage bonus on 2Handers "Knights will continue to do less DPS than Warriors and other pure melee."

warriors can get the same ac knights do, they just don't gear towards it as offtanks like knights do

if you think taps or self heals will save a knight tanking a raid mob over a 45% reduction in damage/max hit/max damage per round that final stand does you well.....BB

p.s. none of the knight abilities u listed mean anything in group content that will make any difference over having a healer. merc or otherwise. soloblity yes, actual group content no.

trivial bonus to outdated content doesn't over play the sole ability to tank raid mobs and do significant dps while do so either.

After all these years Battleblade, I'da thought you'd be tired of bashing Paladins...

Kneesmasher_Torv wrote:

After all these years Battleblade, I'da thought you'd be tired of bashing Paladins...

Who would ever get tired of that?

Look at what you wrote: "warriors can get the same ac knights do...."

That alone is wrong. Say it backwards "knight can get the same AC warriors do...." Can Warrior gear up and get the same 90% combat res, same nice heals, and same cures all castable on everybody? Not really.

When you have two sets of characteristics and you permit one class to achieve parity in characteristic A (tanking) and overwhelming superiority in characteristic B (priesting) I hope you can see there's an issue or as some Paladins apparently see it - an opportunity.

All that's needed is to achieve "on a par" characteristic C (DPS) to complete total superiority to Warriors.

There's no question that there's an issue if one class was promised unmatched survivability and another is given tank parity doncha think?

Besides, my point is AC like Final Stand infinitely scales. Knights have and infinitely scaling characteristic - AC.

I think Final Stand drops and Warriors continue tanking. Therefore the mob is tankable without Final Stand and since this is true the ability to prop up your own HP's in case of healer lapse is meaningful. I think it would be silly not to concede this point.

I do use potions, probably no less than 20 a day raiding or not raiding. Fizzles happen, timing can be off, I go berserk I click one (and hope I don't need another for the extremely long refresh period).

Warriors have their shortcomings too, but it would be silly to try to make the case that even with Tank Parity (and Spellbook Superiority) we're the worst all around class right now.

It's even sillier for a class with Tank Parity (and Spellbook Superiority) to have members actually try to make that case for their class. Paladins the worst class in EQ? /giggle.

Kneesmasher_Torv wrote:

After all these years Battleblade, I'da thought you'd be tired of bashing Paladins...

After all these years I'd think some Paladins would be tired of targeting intended and justified areas of Warrior superiority in an effort to achieve everything we have while retaining their spellbooks as no-cost bonuses. Guess I was wrong.

I'm just trying to keep my twink Pally inferior to my Warrior main in the pure melee arts since he enjoys massive spellbook superiority. But y'all keep wanting to give him godmode.

Calixto-Combine wrote:

BryanPost wrote:

I am pretty sure most of us SKs are happy where we are now, no need to trade.

#1 sign your class is overpowered!

To be fair, if offered the trade of a Paladin for your class, what class would respond with yes?

#1 sign your class is underpowered.

Battleblade-Xegony wrote:

Look at what you wrote: "warriors can get the same ac knights do...."

That alone is wrong. Say it backwards "knight can get the same AC warriors do...." Can Warrior gear up and get the same 90% combat res, same nice heals, and same cures all castable on everybody? Not really.

which mean nothing considering mercs, compared to your better migitgation, dps and instant agro abilities.

When you have two sets of characteristics and you permit one class to achieve parity in characteristic A (tanking) and overwhelming superiority in characteristic B (priesting) I hope you can see there's an issue or as some Paladins apparently see it - an opportunity.

All that's needed is to achieve "on a par" characteristic C (DPS) to complete total superiority to Warriors.

There's no question that there's an issue if one class was promised unmatched survivability and another is given tank parity doncha think?

Besides, my point is AC like Final Stand infinitely scales. Knights have and infinitely scaling characteristic - AC.

as do warriors they just don't gear for it like warriors.

if you think even 1000ac is even close to a 45% damage mitigation/max hit/total damage per round reduction your more inept then i thought.

I think Final Stand drops and Warriors continue tanking. Therefore the mob is tankable without Final Stand and since this is true the ability to prop up your own HP's in case of healer lapse is meaningful. I think it would be silly not to concede this point.

true but only with an over abundance of healing. on mid-tier raids with lesser healing this isn't the case. and don't tell me you don't use warrior /disc rotations on named to minimize damage intank on the tank.

I do use potions, probably no less than 20 a day raiding or not raiding. Fizzles happen, timing can be off, I go berserk I click one (and hope I don't need another for the extremely long refresh period).

i use heal pots too, but they won't save me, nor will they you. a timely heal, or tank grabbing agro will.

Warriors have their shortcomings too, but it would be silly to try to make the case that even with Tank Parity (and Spellbook Superiority) we're the worst all around class right now.

which shortcomings are those. top end dps, top end tanking, instant agro while moving?

It's even sillier for a class with Tank Parity (and Spellbook Superiority) to have members actually try to make that case for their class. Paladins the worst class in EQ? /giggle.

Kneesmasher_Torv wrote:

After all these years Battleblade, I'da thought you'd be tired of bashing Paladins...

After all these years I'd think some Paladins would be tired of targeting intended and justified areas of Warrior superiority in an effort to achieve everything we have while retaining their spellbooks as no-cost bonuses. Guess I was wrong.

I'm just trying to keep my twink Pally inferior to my Warrior main in the pure melee arts since he enjoys massive spellbook superiority. But y'all keep wanting to give him godmode.

same ole same ole. your propaganda is stellar.

Ronak-Xegony wrote:

To be fair, if offered the trade of a Paladin for your class, what class would respond with yes?

#1 sign your class is underpowered.

In group content I prefer playing a Paladin to playing a Warrior. As an SK I'm sure that you realize all those spellgems offer fun versatility in responce Warriors do not have - it's a boring/highly constrained class.

There's a reason that preferance is group content and not raid content. I enjoy having named boss mobs beat me so hard my vision blurs. In group content, especially in the post Tank Parity era, that opportunity does not exist and therefore fun and versatility in responce trumps it.

I've nearly another 1000AA's to obtain. Undead, big 2Hander with a DMG+7 aug, Slays, Halt the Dead, Benediction, WoT, Root CC, damage shields (oh it's sooooooo unfair, look at 'em die) .... or grind it with a Warrior. There's no contest.

I honestly wouldn't play a Warrior if I didn't raid. I'm rather surprised any non-raider does. Admittedly Mercs make soloing with a Warrior tolerable - it only took 10 years (we should have Henchmen available starting with Kunark for use when soloing only).

Oh, a "point" directed at me....

somebody wrote:

and don't tell me you don't use warrior /disc rotations on named to minimize damage intank on the tank.

We don't.

Thebobo wrote:

Wyvernwill wrote:

Again... How are they a better OT on raids?
Sure, SKs can AE agro... how many raids are there that require multiple people AE Agro'ing to control the adds?  None.  Do SKs have better mitigation?  No.  It's a misconception at best, .

 Having the Choice of AE and regular is vastly superior imo but you asked how many raids REQUIRE AE taunt Zero. BUT is sure as brells helps and makes many raids a lot easier having multiple AE taunting tankes - you know they dont always live ~   BTW like How many raids require a brells caster, zero.

 

The question is... The beauty of Paladins is their heals are strong enough to OT without the necessity of a healer's attention, ever.  

Well thats not entirely true not to mention you go OOM real quick and lots of SOD has 10K hitting adds and just one sizzle or interrupt and you are likely dead.

 

DPS they have an edge and Paladins have an edge with a huge surplus of emergency healing.

SK DPS these days is more then just an edge and more power to them. But the problem I have and IMO Paladin healing has not kept up in relation to the strides Shadow Knight DPS over the last couple of expasnions. 

 

 

I keep hearing the term SK DPS. It's am urban legend. Just because a few SK think they are DPS, and load up every even remotely damage ability we have, then stack it with 7th and glyph and beat some poor dps class performers, does not make us DPS.

Wizard alt >>

Knytul wrote:

and battleblade keeps going.

/shrug. I'll leave "Ron Jeremy parties" to y'all. Have fun.

Lol. I thought you were on a Crusade for "on a par" with Warrior DPS. How's that going? Not well I'd think.

Want a Warrior res on your next raid? A Warrior cure? How about a Warrior heal? I got a bandage right here.....

Wizzy is a good choice. I know of other Knights that duo a Wizzy. They got tanking and utility 100% covered, a Merc handles any heals, the Wizzy speeds up the kills and can Exodus if things go badly wrong. Good setup.

I don't duo and my Pally is on my only account. So when I solo or molo the toon has to handle it all or it doesn't get handled. I find that the Pally's DPS vs. live mobs kills them and vs. undead is actually pretty good.

Knytul wrote:

you are a warrior with an identity crisis.

No sir. You are a Paladin with an identity crises. You aspire to be a Warrior or have parity with or capability "on a par" with pure melee classes in pure melee skills.

Ain't gunna happen sir.

I'm pretty certain that you will continue to do less DPS than Warriors and other pure melees as part of the cost of having a spellbook. It's been the case for a very long time for very good reasons.

Older and wiser Paladins will probably pick up on the fact that the 120/100/80 guideline used in early EQ has become 200/100/75 with Warriors and SK's occupying the 100 baseline slot and point out that all of us need a boost given how far ahead real DPSers have moved.

They'll likely get some Paladin (and Warrior) DPS improvement based on the merits of the argument rather than being driven to narrow well justified and longstanding Warrior advantage.

too late he alread has

Knytul wrote:

lol and u keep going. you have no idea what i want. I pity you man..i really do. You have no idea what the paladin community has been discussing or what we have in store toward the devs over hte next few months. You assume alot but assume poorly. All you are doing right now is making yourself look like an idiot. Seriously. Give it up before you earn the reputation that you dont want.

Actually, I do have an idea of what you want. I do know what the Paladin community has been discussing. And I do know how you hope to get what you want.

All you are doing by asking for things that are "on a par" with Warrior DPS, etc. is to make yourself look silly.

As an alternative you could concider things like the 120/100/80 guideline used in early EQ becoming 200/100/75 and pursue a less Paladin-centric course. Yes, it might not "narrow teh gap" with Warriors but Knights (and others) would be doing more reasonable DPS.

You could look at Slay Undead and concider that some Paladins would give it up in a flash for more normal DPS and others believe it's a central feature of the class. Instead of taking a "poll" on Samana net and gathering wild unbalanced ideas...

you might concider ideas like the Holyforge discipline providing a Fellstrike-like ability vs. live mobs (Paladins ought to have something for when the raid leader shouts "Burn!")

and an increase of slays vs undead mobs

with some reduction in the damage produced by slays (perhaps a cap?) giving you the best outcomes for SU, normal DPS, and burst DPS that devs are likely to allow. You're welcome (I suggested this about 2 years ago).

EGN-like posts aren't going to impress a community that reproduces parses, questions the methods used, and conciders all suggestions under a microscope...

and puts their opinions in front of devs right next to your "Paladins are the worst all round class right now" ones.

Knytul wrote:

no we arent dude. Warrior dps is based on aa's and offensive skills, 2 things we are NOT looking at. Again you are assuming. You dont know what we are going after..Im gonna laff my butt off when the real truth of what we are working out comes out and you do a Face to Palm moment. Maybe then you wont post in paladin affairs ever again.

All you are doing by asking for things that are "on a par" with Warrior DPS....

...regardless of how that DPS is achieved...

reverse damage shields, w/e

is to make yourself look silly. You rightfully gave up DPS in exchange for priestly (that would be healer - note your heals, res, and cures) AND tanking capability. Anything much outside of those capabilities is "out of class character" and you will very likely be called on it.

"Knights will still do less DPS than Warriors and other pure melee. That's one of the costs of having a spellbook." Paladin less DPS than Warriors is both justifiable and very longstanding.

I suspect a dev asked Pallies to put together parces and proposals and did not guarantee a specific outcome.

I also believe that noting that the 120/100/80 guideline used in early EQ has become 200/100/75 and it's this larger issue that cuts across several classes which needs to be addressed and would be more productive than simply piting one class against another and attempting to elevate Paladins at Warrior (and other classes) expense.

The one's who said Paladins are not the worst all round class right now?

Sorry - no one believed you.

Knytul wrote:

You dont know what we are going after..Im gonna laff my butt off when the real truth of what we are working out comes out and you do a Face to Palm moment.

http://crucible.samanna.net/viewtop...f=35&t=6557

"Real truth". Is that anything like the "real deal"?

Where are these parses you are talking about? Show me an sk burn parse. 2.6k burn parse for a I believe max aa paladin using a MMM weapon. If you are as non biased as you say you are you will show me what kind of numbers you see with similiar weapons.

arguing with BB is like kicking yourself in the nuts

sure you might look like a tough guy but you'll end up with less then you started with

http://crucible.samanna.net/viewtop...f=35&t=6557

Players will read that thread on Samana net to get an idea of what some Paladins are thinking.

If you don't want them to draw the wrong conclusions from out of date infomation then maybe you'll have to be more forthcoming which will allow them to provide Paladins and developers their feedback.

Post the parses. Heck though its not relevant to this discussion post what a warrior with MMM weapons and a bard in group can do on a 3 minute burn.

Lol, that's the thing. Paladins compete with others classes. Other classes are definately going to want to weigh in on a topic like increasing the healing tank's DPS, how much, and how it is achieved. Heck, other classes are not only going to want to, they will.

I understand perfectly that sometimes Paladins privately propose things like taking away the Ranger classes Weapon Shield last resort boss mob tanking role and when discussed in the light of day don't happen.

Yes, I understand that if you are going to ask for unbalanced changes that advantage a class that has tank parity AND heals 1000x better than a Warrior, Warriors might question it. I wouldn't be surprised that if people misinterpret efforts to quadruple Paladin DPS, Warriors who should have a minimum of at least 30% more DPS are VERY likely to question it.

And there are a lot of Paladins, some with very fixed views of what the class should be. Not just some of them but all of them are entitled to input.

So do yourself a favor and post current information or deal with a reaction to what you claim is out of date information.

Either way the people who play this game are going to weigh in with their opinions before changes that are wrong, broken, ad unbalanced become part of the game.

You might not CARE atm but I assure you, you will care.

You sure do talk alot of nonsense. Quite impressive trolling skills indeed.

Once again I ask you to stick to the issue that people are having and that is that Paladins are currently underpowered especially when compared to SK's. The difference in dps on the majority of mobs in the game is too large and that disparity should be fixed. No one is asking for them to be equal to dps classes. Heck even the overpowered (relative to paladins) don't approach the dps of the melee dps classes.

Now will someone please post an sk burn parse with bard in group?

And Warrior DPS parses while tanking, in a DPS group, and not in a DPS group.

You are doing the parces with maxed Attack, DPS buffs, etc. in a DPS group, and not in a DPS group (which is the usual case for Warriors and SK's), right?

Knights using DMG augs and Warriors using EB augs?

Group/mid-tier/endgame Rangers, SK's, Paladins, Warriors and the other priests (just to see the DPS healers do)?

Battleblade-Xegony wrote:

And Warrior DPS parses while tanking, in a DPS group, and not in a DPS group.

You are doing the parces with maxed Attack, DPS buffs, etc. in a DPS group, and not in a DPS group (which is the usual case for Warriors and SK's), right?

Knights using DMG augs and Warriors using EB augs?

Group/mid-tier/endgame Rangers, SK's, Paladins, Warriors and the other priests (just to see the DPS healers do)?

Blah blah blah...

This is not a hard concept. Burn dps of all classes can be important in some raids, and in group content. Again, post the burn dps of an Sk with an MMM weapon and a bard in group for a fair comparison with what I posted.

There is a lot of crap said on the pally forum.

To clarify:

SKs don't heal the same (or close) to paladins.

There's never been a difference or intended to be a difference between sk and paladin tanking.

The actual 'issue' currently is that raids and content favour dps which doesn't play to paladin strengths (which are still there). And there isn't as much call for knight tanking on raids per se either.

Paladin dps does need some help (it doesn't have to be quite as bad as it is) and no sk ever had an objection to paladins getting a long reuse emergency ae aggro.

It's not a hard concept.

At a variety of tiers and in groups as well as raids a DPS hierarchy should be adhered to.

The traditional 120/100/80 guideline has become 200/100/75 in some cases. This affects all of the not first rank DPS classes, not just one.

For a very long time it has been the case that Warriors are the baseline DPS melee with Monks (for example) doing a certain percentage more DPS than Warriors and Knights doing a percentage less (except in the case of SK's who approached or even exceeded Warrior DPS when they focused theselves on producing maximum DPS).

The introduction of weapon augs has created a situation where Warriors aug their best weapons with EB augs while other classes use DMG augs.

Warriors typically are not in DPS groups (and neither are Knights btw).

When changes are proposed which might affect the DPS heirarchy there is an expectation that cooked data (atypcal buffs, Weapons, focii, etc.) is not presented

and that the proposed change is in class character, adheres to the established heirarchy, and is balanced across a variety of playstyles and progression in those playstyles.

Disclosure of parces so they can be examined by people like Yoda and Yakk at The Steel Warrior for intentional bias is a reasonable request - unless of course the intent is an unreasonable outcome.

Naubi wrote:

There is a lot of crap said on the pally forum.

To clarify:

SKs don't heal the same (or close) to paladins.

There's never been a difference or intended to be a difference between sk and paladin tanking.

 

The actual 'issue' currently is that raids and content favour dps which doesn't play to paladin strengths (which are still there). And there isn't as much call for knight tanking on raids per se either.

Paladin dps does need some help (it doesn't have to be quite as bad as it is) and no sk ever had an objection to paladins getting a long reuse emergency ae aggro.

Your first sentence is true. The pally forum has plumeted in quality since PoN closed.

Raids definately do not favor DPS any more than it has been favored in the past. Less actually. The Sisters event in Solteris is long behind us. The Anniversary Sprint event doesn't count.

I say this despite the fact that there are a couple of events that are time sensitive. My guild, which the Sprint event revealed to have mediocre DPS (contrast us with guilds that have DOUBLE our DPS), has 0 trouble with those events.

If anything Sprint shows how wide a gap in DPS output is possible for guilds that have reached SoD endgame months ago. Devs can check SoD complete status vs. Sprint times to verify my claim.

SoD content is sufficiently easy that Knights routinely tank many events and have no problem taking over a named mob if a Warrior dies, and no reluctance to do so even if there are Warriors still alive and with full disciplines. Further there is a lot of yardtrash in some cases providing ample opprotunity for Knights to tank as well as multiple mobs needing to be tanked (and anyone can tank them) in several events.

Despite the fact that the first part of their case is pure fabrication (and it can be proven to be pure fabrication) there remains the question of Paladin DPS.

They are a healer/tank with combat resses needed in some events, spot heals having value, their group heal following a Cleric's DArb still very powerful, and a number of detrementals to cure.

They chose this assortment of capabilites, they have value, and even if that value had declined (it has not) the fix is to create events where their healer nature has value once again.

Warriors are not a healer/tank and while SK's do have a secondary pulling role in groups they don't get to excercise it in raids generally. Any reasonable person woud expect a Warrior or a Shadow Knight who is not tanking to do substantially more DPS than a hybrid that opted for clerical skills in addition to basic warrior/tank skills.

Your skills as an SK and mine as a 100% melee are offensively directed. Mine in mastery of arms and armor and your's in offensive magics.

A DPS heracry must be maintained that reflects these truths.

In addition, I play my Paladin (as do many others) based a great deal on not only that healer/tank aspect but on Slay Undead as well. This is not a wave your hand and change it dramatically ability - for many players it's central.

So I'm very concerned reading those 2 pages of misinformation and wild /cough solutions. And I'm particularly concerned because there is not a Community Leader like Frodlin to represent Warrior interests and insure something that looks not to be on the up and up atm is before it becomes part of the game.

Given the synergy of Listless, WoT, and big damage shield IMO Paladins should not get AE Taunt. I'm not done getting needed AA's with my alt yet, so I'm restricting myself to saying vs. undead in a couple of zones it's already very good. Even without Listless.

Paladins a very powerful class who are extremely competaive in tanking capability with Warriors and while they're not having a DPS vs. live  burst discipline and perhaps needing a minor DPS adjustment vs. live mobs while still maintaining the proper DPS heirarcy is an issue, that can't be fairly repaired in a smoke filled room. Paladins will be telling Devs a 135% healing benefit on their Epic is perfecty fine and I've no faith whatsoever that devs won't believe them.

I can't decide whether my monk is a tank or DPS. As a tank I have no taunt and as DPS we require 'the perfect group' to achieve the high DPS. FD was a great feature in the early years when death actually meant something but in todays game it is a poor reason for holding the class back.

Reliance on so many buffs / potions that we cannot generate ourselfs, non scaling discs, and bugs ( issues stacking 3rd spire ) leave monks behind. Check out monkly-business.net.

Who let BB out of his cage ?

Battleblades' next trick will be to get this thread locked and deleted.  It's just like old times...

Kneesmasher_Torv wrote:

Battleblades' next trick will be to get this thread locked and deleted.  It's just like old times...

lol i dont think he even has the ability to post on the paladin class board here at live anymore. they took it away when he had that stroke over knight vs warrior ratios or something else equally meaningless, i forget its been awhile.

Warrior vs. Knight ratios? You mean the discussions about making shields more practical for Warriors? While there were probably 2500 posts total in 3-5 threads, I don't recall anyone getting banned.

Everybody had their say, as it turns out the developers did something, and despite some hyperboyle (Warriors aren't supposed to be able to use a shield!!!!) along the way, the developer solution was sensible.

My Pally alt rarely posts on the Paladin forum on live - most recently

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/p...149920�

Given that he subscribes to the belief as one veteran Paladin once put it on PoN:

If you want to tank and DPS like a Warrior, roll a Warrior.

If you want to heal like a Cleric, roll a Cleric.

If you want to tank in groups and have a tanking role in raids, cast some useful priest spells, and enjoy Slay Undead then roll a Paladin.

there usually hasn't been much of interest to him in any Paladin thread.

Oh, and I hardly want this thread locked and deleted. As the discussions about making shields more practical for Warriors, improving the Warrior ability to stop runners and gaters, etc. illustrates I'm in favor of open discusion.

I'm hoping any player who is interested

will make their views known to developers, post on the thread at

http://crucible.samanna.net/viewtop...f=35&t=6557

post on the thread on the Live forum,

and/or discuss it (politely) on the Paladin serverwide channel.

Battleblade-Xegony wrote:

 their

I agree.
I think a Rogue should so 1% more then a Wizard who should do 1% more damage then Zerker etc etc till Cleric.

All the other things classes get should not come into play more then that. Tanking, Healing, Buffing, utility is all meaningless compared to a burn parse in top end guilds. (Which we should be able to burn onto Guild Hall walls and should be scoth taped to devs heads)

The baseline for DPS should not convert to tanking. I mean a Wizard should not tank a raid boss 80% as well as a Warrior, that would be silly. 

Also if a Rogue does 2% more damage then a Warrior, that should be based on him being with a Zerker, Shaman and bard in his group. Since Warriors dont get this, their DPS should be even higher to compensate. Same with damage augs. Since warriors dont use them their DPS should scale based on not using them.

In the end, if you dmg aug a warrior, put him with a Brd/Shm/Zerk he should about triple a rogues DPS.

Tirnanog_VS wrote:

I can't decide whether my monk is a tank or DPS. As a tank I have no taunt and as DPS we require 'the perfect group' to achieve the high DPS

True of all melee dps classes.  Whats more fun?  Hybrid dps requires more than "the perfect group", since to parse well at raids requires all of the melee augmentation you require aswell as the spell augmentation that a wizard requires.

Regardless, in all cases the dps gain from buffs is largely attributed to the buffer (i.e. a ranger procing flare is enchanter dps, a monk with ruchu is channeling shaman dps, etc...).  The only place the line blurs is in the stacking - that is when a monk has ruchu and no other discs, the additional dps is 100% of the shaman's.  If the monk pops speed focus or crystal palm with ruchu, how much of that dps is the monks, and how much is the shamans?

The funny thing though is that in terms of pure, "unbuffed / unaugmented" dps, monks were actually far ahead of rogues and zerkers (not sure how much the new zerker disc altered that).

Knytul wrote:

it really doesnt matter what battleblade spouts off atm guys on the paladin community. We found something that we think is going to be working for us and we are doing just that. The devs approve, we approve, he doesnt know and wouldnt approve. Its 100% atm. So in the meantime, just ignore him.

Oh and Naubi..."no sk ever had an objection to paladins getting a long reuse emergency ae aggro."...Why that would be YOU that had the objection....remember Beta?

It really doesn't matter what a couple of Paladins think would be a good idea.

There's still class balance, still a DPS hierarchy that takes into account Knights doing less DPS than Warrriors and other pure melee as part of the cost of spellbooks, and still general player opinion (concider the 42 man raid cap 100% atm idea).

It would be far better to get real parses of real classes wearing typical gear for their tier than to start off with obviously cooked parses and go from there rather than to have every Warrior in every guild explode when suddenly Knights with spellbooks are doing very close to, the same, or heaven forfend more (have you looked at SK parces lately?) than most Warriors in in most guilds.

I rather think a developer would much rather head off that explosion than try to ignore feedback as Merloc did with his poor implementation.

Please examine items like Lump of Obsidian with a Slot 1, Type 7 aug slot that goes into no player gear slot whatsoever. Notice anything? Anyone who played EQ would.

A 1:10000 error? Look up Porous Granite Chunk on Lucy.

With that kind of track record and so many classes potentialy affected, I think feedback in advance is appropriate.

Knytul would rather players didn't know because they might object. He said so. Contrast that with issues like making shields more practical for Warriors which were openly discussed and objection was invited. The Paladin proposed changes apparently can't stand up to general examination in advance.

Knytul wrote:

it really doesnt matter what battleblade spouts off atm guys on the paladin community. We found something that we think is going to be working for us and we are doing just that. The devs approve, we approve, he doesnt know and wouldnt approve. Its 100% atm. So in the meantime, just ignore him.

Oh and Naubi..."no sk ever had an objection to paladins getting a long reuse emergency ae aggro."...Why that would be YOU that had the objection....remember Beta?

I remember some paladins dug their own class a hole when they started arguing about which ways paladin ae aggro should be better than SKs "for balance".

most of us were just seeking some kind of AE agro..YOU targeted the concept saying that Paladins should NOT have ae agro whatsoever because it was "Sk's Niche".  Which is why AE Force of Disruption was so perfect in beta until u went off on it.