Is warrior aggro greatly exaggerated?

[Nitestroke]

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

He said taunt is "much needed" (after declaring snap aggro to be worthless) and his other reasoning for warriors being awesome was disciplines. Taunt is very bad against high level targets and disciplines don't exist until the 50's.



Both of these statements are incorrect. Trying to kill tougher things explicitly creates a lower kill rate, as it takes more time to kill them, and EQ's exp system does not provide a commensurate reward for the effort (not after the very early levels, that is). And as for Trio Challenge content, Enchanter + Enchanter + Cleric is the highest amount of raw power for a straight up fight (if good charm pets are available), but there's a lot of content that requires Feign Death pulls, so a Monk (or perhaps Necro/SK can work sometimes) is required for those.

If any Trio content exists where a Warrior might be needed, then it's going to be something where there are no good charm pets available and the target is unable to be slowed. Something like Stanos Herkanor, if he were theoretically killable by a Warrior + Cleric + DPS trio.

So more gaslighting and more strawmanning. Got it. You guys are so sad. All you're doing is failing to give niche one off examples of warrior not being an optimal third, I could do the same but its useless. You've already been flushed bro, you will just keep coming up to the surface no matter what to mend your wounded pride at looking like a total newb, you are no different than poor little deluded insecure fatty snaggles. Warrior has best stats for hp and ac. Yes that makes them the best tank, that makes them the best third for ench cleric. And taunt and disciplines is just overkill on the debate. Again, thanks for trying but you can save the energy for that exciting kc group where you must live permanently. Nice try tho sport.