Warriors are useless in 90% of the games content

[Ennewi]

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

Of course. Warriors can tank in XP groups. I don't think anybody has said they can't. OP is pointing out they aren't as good in this role, which is true. If you could pick any tank in an XP group that doesn't need Warrior discs, you would pick a Paladin or SK over a Warrior.

You can root mobs when you have a Paladin or SK tanking as well. However, Paladin's and SK's can provide snap agro when needed. Warriors cannot.

It's just such a cheap and easy fix is all. Long list of classes, most of them more popular than knights, and each can compensate for what the warrior lacks in group content, and from very early levels. Whereas no amount of buffs can really make up for either knight's lack of that all-important disc.

[Lampolo]

Aggro is only a factor if you suck

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

It's just such a cheap and easy fix is all. Long list of classes, most of them more popular than knights, and each can compensate for what the warrior lacks in group content, and from very early levels. Whereas no amount of buffs can really make up for either knight's lack of that all-important disc.

Agreed. But root breaks happen, and bad pulls occur. That is when a Warrior is at it's weakest, because they cannot do much about it. Paladins and SK's can do much more in these situations.

In the grand scheme of things, leveling a Warrior is generally more productive over an SK or Paladin if you plan on raiding. You are correct on that point. But not everybody builds their characters for raid tanking.

Unless you are leveling in a static group, people aren't going to prefer a Warrior in an XP group because they have better raid potential. They will prefer an SK or Paladin. Again, not saying people should avoid Warriors as XP group tanks. I don't like stigmatizing classes, and they can tank.

[loramin]

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

Of course. Warriors can tank in XP groups. I don't think anybody has said they can't. OP is pointing out they aren't as good in this role, which is true. If you could pick any tank in an XP group that doesn't need Warrior discs, you would pick a Paladin or SK over a Warrior.

You can root mobs when you have a Paladin or SK tanking as well. However, Paladin's and SK's can provide snap agro when needed. Warriors cannot.

EDIT: I am not trying to suggest people shouldn't play Warriors in XP groups, or that XP groups shouldn't take Warriors. Warriors simply have weaknesses outside of raiding.

You seem to have completely ignored:

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

I do a lot more damage than knight tanks,it makes up for the minor inconvenience.

Now, I personally don't know how much better your average warrior's DPS is compared to your average Paladins or Shadow Knights. It may be an insignificant amount.

But, I'm at least curious to see some data on it, because if Warriors offer significantly more DPS, that means faster killing, which means faster XP ... which would mean they're superior in many groups (ie. any group where "root agro" is sufficient).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You seem to have completely ignored:



Now, I personally don't know how much better your average warrior's DPS is compared to your average Paladins or Shadow Knights. It may be an insignificant amount.

But, I'm at least curious to see some data on it, because if Warriors offer significantly more DPS, that means faster killing, which means faster XP ... which would mean they're superior in many groups (ie. any group where "root agro" is sufficient).

I didn't ignore it. My first post in this thread stated that Warriors do good DPS.

However, people generally over-estimate DPS in terms of it's ability to net more kills per hour. DPS has diminishing returns on P99, so the effectiveness of DPS depends on the camp, and how much DPS your group already has.

From levels 1-50 or so, the game wasn't balanced around the concept that people would all have 21% worn haste items and Velious era weapon ratios.

Many groups on P99 are already out DPSing the content by a large margin simply due to their over-gearing.

When you have a Warrior in the group filling the tank role, their primary concern is tanking the mob. Extra DPS is nice, but there are situations where you need to stop attacking the primary mob and try to get a mob off another player. You lose DPS when this happens. The group is already expecting the tank to have lower DPS, because they are not filling one of the DPS roles in the group.

[Ripqozko]

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

You seem to have completely ignored:



Now, I personally don't know how much better your average warrior's DPS is compared to your average Paladins or Shadow Knights. It may be an insignificant amount.

But, I'm at least curious to see some data on it, because if Warriors offer significantly more DPS, that means faster killing, which means faster XP ... which would mean they're superior in many groups (ie. any group where "root agro" is sufficient).

It's really not that much different if weapons are good on knight.

/GU Lord Doljonijiarnimorinar in 177s, 92687 @523 | Riphealer 13741@(80 in 170s) | Molf 13498@(80 in 168s) | Gatruk 13442@(78 in 171s) | Kittla 11514@(68 in 169s) | Enviee 8790@(54 in 162s) {X}

Riphealer is my pally with gozz shovel, monk, mink, rogue, war below me.

[Ennewi]

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

In the grand scheme of things, leveling a Warrior is generally more productive over an SK or Paladin if you plan on raiding. You are correct on that point. But not everybody builds their characters for raid tanking.

And of course knights get put to use as MAs versus Kunark targets, including VP. It all kind of evens out, even if roles are lopsided and situational.

[Snaggles]

Grind level content is easy. Crappy players just earn the spotlight when a tank can’t chain cast level 9 aggro spells.

[enjchanter]

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

This type of statement from op is only ever made by dps class or dog shit pally/sk or maybe just the naive. Wars are #1 xp tank. Learn how to play you scrubby loser

Oh yeah buddy I'm sure we're all in awe of your skill in auto attacking and rotating a mob 180 degrees

[Crede]

Pal/sk are on same damage table as war. Add in sk pet, prob out dps war sub 60.

With that being said, war is good if you’re gonna form super groups to snipe mobs that require disc to kill.

Otherwise, ogre sk for groups.