[Noselacri]

Originally Posted by Estu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I've heard the argument here that warriors are superior tanks in classic EQ because they have better defensive skills, hence better damage mitigation. However, they have issues holding aggro, to the point that they sometimes need to have the DPS classes delay engaging the mob for a while as they gain hate.

Here is my question. While the warrior is doing this, the mob is effectively not taking any damage (OK, it's taking appreciable damage, but compared to the damage it would be taking if all DPSers were engaged, it's quite small). Overall, the mob takes longer to die, and will hence spend more time beating on the tank. If, on the other hand, your tank is a paladin or a shadowknight, DPS classes can engage immediately (feel free to correct me if I have this wrong), and the mob hence goes down faster, and will spend less time beating on the tank.

How does this extra time spent taking damage compare to the extra damage mitigation warriors have? Can one make a case to use a paladin or a shadowknight instead since the damage taken by the end of the fight might be comparable, or is the superior mitigation so powerful that this issue is minor?

It probably evens out more or less, or the difference is so small that it doesn't really matter. What's more important is that holding aggro throughout the entire fight, even towards the end of it, is not a given with a warrior. You could take a ten second head start and still lose aggro a minute into the fight. Warriors will do the job, and with a group/raid that knows how to operate with a warrior tank, they'll do it just fine as well. The rest just won't be able to push their classes to the limit.

Also, again correct me if I'm wrong, but a warrior has a greater need to focus on DEX and STR gear-wise so that he can hold aggro, while SKs and PALs can afford to gear up with AC, STA, and AGI since they can hold aggro with spells. To what extent does this make a difference in the end game in terms of the ability to soak up damage?

That makes no major difference. Most of the AC gear comes with those stats anyway, or the DEX pieces are available with equivalent AC to the normal stuff.

I also hear that warriors get better come Kunark. In what way? Does this mean that SKs and PALs are even less desired?

Warriors get a lot better in Kunark becase of disciplines, and to a lesser extent because the hybrids were kind of bad in that period of time. Defensive discipline is the cornerstone of raid tanking, and will stay that way until many expansions ahead which will be irrelevant for us. However, it doesn't become truly crucial until Velious, in my opinion, which is where warriors finally become the only real raid tanks.



See, in the current era, warriors basically aren't very good. The amount of mitigation they have over paladins and shadowknights is minimal, and the available gear does not readily exceed the worn AC cap which is when warriors begin to shine due to their significantly more favorable diminishing returns. They are more sturdy, but by a very small margin, and can't hold aggro for shit. Even with two SSoY and all that, your aggro depends entirely on the randomness of procs, and barring periods of extreme proc luck, you won't generate enough for everyone to comfortably do whatever they please without worrying about aggro. I think warriors are preferred for raid tanks at the moment more out of habit and tradition than out of necessity, because there's nothing they can tank that a knight can't, and it's a good deal more risky, even if it's a bit more mana efficient to heal a warrior. It's especially bad while leveling up where warrior aggro is truly pitiful and frankly not good enough to suffice in most cases, especially with non-twinks. I don't slow when the tank is a warrior, because by the time I can cast it without taking aggro, the mob is half dead anyway.

To put it simply, it's usually like this:

Warrior has bad proc luck: aggro is horrible and people will probably die, or will have to wait far too long before engaging/slowing/etc.

Warrior has average procs: aggro is okay, tanking will not be a problem if people are careful.

Warrior has good proc luck: everyone can do as they please, put out maximum DPS, slow early etc.

Paladin/SK is not in a coma: everyone can do as they please, put out maximum DPS, slow early etc.

Thus, since the survival aspect of tanking is currently not noticeably different between warriors and knights, the latter are probably overall better tanks when taking everything into consideration. We're talking like a 5% combined avoidance and mitigation advantage to warriors, and a base HP difference so small that an ogre SK will have more than a human warrior due to natural stamina. This largely changes in Kunark and Velious.