[Rimitto]

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

Animation pet was OP during p99's early years, doesn't seem like Rimitto was playing during that time though. If you're playing mostly AFK and just camping a single spawn the pet is still useful, can unload your mana bar on direct damage spells while the pet tanks, return to AFK, then when you get back you're full mana with a pet still ready to go. Also if you're grouping somewhere that only has higher level MOBs compared to your level, then charm will break a lot and it can be nice to just use the animation to add safe DPS.

actually, that's more or less 1:1 how I used my animations. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I'm not stupid cindy, I know monsters do 'more' damage in some cases, but animations are far more reliable, and in some situations, reliability trumps dps.
If magic were a weapon, the animation spells would have the finesse quality on it. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'll give an example, albeit an odd one. I could go to seafury island, charm something, watch both monsters die and then go for the snipe double-kill. This leaves me with less mana but then I repeat the process.
Alternatively I could take the exp-hit, summon an animation, and just rely on that to kill seafurries. There's no risk of charm break, or wasting of any mana to double-kill at the end. The exp loss is definitely there, but is easily rectified by adding 1 other person to a party. Even without that party, it's still faster in the sense that I can focus more on keeping a steady flow of exp rather than deep diving into charm double-kill hope-it-works tactics. (this is the #1 cause of enchanter deaths, don't even argue that charmbreak isn't)
It's simply a question of steady vs risky from my point of view.
I prefer steady.
people that choose risky just simply cannot understand that methods outside of trying to kill yourself in the stupidest way possible exist.
in example: hurrdurr don't mind me, I"m just gonna charm this super GM mob, give him maximum haste, dual-wield him, give him buffs, yup he's a murder machine noCHARMBREAK ohshitsohstihoshit. *proceeds to blame the cleric*

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

Yes they do. Exact same HP/AC/Defense formulas and skillcaps.

And the big thing you were trying to talk about before was aggro and crowd control. How are SK's doing that better?

Well offhand, I figure they probably have better dps. I've only seen and experienced SK as tanks before, and only have experience as paladin. I've experienced other paladin tanks as well before, so I understand that paladin is mostly a 1-trick pony relying on blind/darkness. I'm assuming SK probably gets additional aggro from their spells, and probably have a decent assortment of weapons that are generally more focused on higher dps, which naturally would get them far more aggro.

as far as HP/AC/Defense, I simply do not see them being comparable in any way shape or form. I'll even take it a step further to add insult to injury on this one. If you're comparing a human paladin to a troll shadowknight, the regen factor alone is going to make the SK better. If you're comparing an dwarven paladin to an ogre shadowknight, the fact that ogres have frontal stun immunity is going to make a world of difference.
It's just a simple matter of logistics that the evil races getting shadowknight are simply better at tanking because of their racial bonuses.
We can keep going by comparing an erudite paladin to an iksar shadowknight if you want....

They're better at tanking, just admit it.

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

I'm assuming you must mean DPS when you say "their ability to drain".

Yeah I prefer SK's as a whole because they do more DPS and fear kiting can be very strong. That doesn't mean they are a better "tank". Against really hard NPC's the Paladin healing is better too, SK spells get resisted.

combined with the above reasons of why SK are better tanks, the "ability to drain" aka lifetap line, doesn't break them out of combat, like paladins would need to do. They don't change targets either. One thing I've noticed, maybe you could explain, is that whenever I'm in combat with my paladin and go to heal, after the heal he tries to "makeup" the rounds he's missed in the next round. Usually since he's self-targetting, the extra hits get nullified. This wouldn't happened with lifetap abilities since the targeting never changes.

You may be noticing at this point that I'm making quite a few small points here and there. What I'm truly getting at is that every single one of these small things adds up to a greater whole. Every single one of these small details is what makes SK the better tank. That's why it's recognizable to me, who is always picky about the small things, that there's a huge difference between paladin and shadowknight.

Even rangers are better overall tanks when properly geared.
notice the wording I used there... "overall tanks".. You mentioned earlier that there are specific cases where paladins are better, but this isn't a "what is better" topic it's the "what is best" topic, which means that you are REQUIRED to at minimum, look at all the possible spots that each class would be applied to. That means in the 10's, the 20's, the 30's, the 40's, the 50's, and 60's.

If you're going to argue raid tank, then that's well outside the concept of "best trio".