|
|
|
|
#1
06-15-2017, 11:52 AM
|
|||
|
Warrior if you plan to do anything at 60. Also, warrior dps is top tier here. Warrior gets weaker and weaker up till 49. At 50 they can start using good proc weapons (slow, lifetap), 52 is evasive, and at 55 kicks stun. A 60 warrior with gear can basically run around anywhere on this server without a real threat of anything being able to kill you. Also, warriors can do a ton of spells here via procs and clicks. Basically become rangers (minus track) in utility.
__________________
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
06-15-2017, 01:09 PM
|
|||
|
Thank you everyone for responding and sharing your valuable input. Another question to ask as well... On P99 server, which class is more common/rare between the SK and Warrior? I'd also be leaning more towards the class that there are less of. I rather stay away from the tank class that there are already too many of.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#3
06-15-2017, 01:19 PM
|
||||
|
First: assume all groups have well-played enchanters
Second: forget warriors have half the perks you mention for paladins Conclusion: Paladins R gud
__________________
IRONY
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#4
06-15-2017, 02:31 PM
|
|||
|
The only thing delusional is how greatly you are exaggerating the utility a warrior's melee dps vs SK/pal in group settings. There's a reason the overwhelming majority of PUGs prefer the tank role be filled by a knight, it's because group content is for the most part steamrolled and the damage output of a warrior vs sk/pal in those situations simply does not make a significant difference in group efficiency. What does make a significant difference in efficiency is being able to quickly and reliably generate aggro (aka the primary role of a tank in group) which SK/pal excel at and Warriors struggle with in comparison. Not to mention Paladins having an extremely versatile toolkit in groups that a war doesn't without the aid of clickies. It's not even close, Paladins are superior group tanks in every single way imaginable.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
06-15-2017, 02:45 PM
|
|||||
|
Quote:
__________________
IRONY
Quote:
| ||||
|
|
|||||
|
#6
06-15-2017, 03:18 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#7
06-15-2017, 02:33 PM
|
|||
|
The worse the group is the better a paladin is. The better a group is the better a warrior is. It is not accurate to say paladins are better group tanks in every single way imaginable. There are many scenarios (50+) that a warrior is going to do better.
__________________
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
06-15-2017, 02:35 PM
|
|||
|
Sounds like you are trying as desperately as you can to justify your subpar class. I'd take a well geared and well played warrior in most groups over a Paladin. Unless I was playing my monk in which case none of those classes would be tanking.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#9
06-16-2017, 09:56 AM
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Sage is correct.
__________________
Quote:
 . | ||||
|
|
|||||
|
#10
06-16-2017, 01:19 PM
|
|||
|
How often does a well-geared Warrior do leveling-type groups? Heck, a well-geared anything? That's a meaningless discussion of hypotheticals. Folks sitting in north Temple Veeshan gear aren't exactly filling up the LFG lines in Karnor or City of Mist. The Warriors you'll get during the leveling phase will mostly be typical for that environment: Mediocre equipment and largely unable to hold aggro with any reliability.
In response to the original post: Shadow Knights serve well for leveling, and small-group (duo/trio/etc) activities at the level cap. They're not a key raid class. Warriors are the opposite, functioning only poorly in typical leveling groups but they're a critical raiding class. Most pick-up groups are happy to have any kind of tank, as the archtype isn't particularly common, but given a choice they tend by and large to prefer tanks who can hold aggro reliably, meaning knight types. No tank class shines through all facets of the game, so pick a class that suits what you like doing most. Danth | ||
|
|
|||
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
