Paladin vs Warrior - ARR better set roles!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

But in anycase, I was thinking at work and I think they can leave it like it is IF and ONLY IF the dungeons promote balanced play, meaning you'll always have a paladin and a warrior in the party. I won't mind working together, but I will mind it if you have to pick one or the other because the content will be much harder or impossible by having one of them around. I dispised the need to class stack and am looking forward to class and job changes that make it stupid or unneccisary to do so.

---

i fine with main and back up tanks or even two types of tanks as long as they are balanced and viable to use. i also hate class stacking and having either classes or jobs obsolete/pointless to use give certain content sucks. But first what matters most is how SE balances the content for low/full man, classes over jobs & vice versa, main & back up tanks etc etc along with having class stacking becoming something of the past. Next it comes down to the design of the class/job and how it goes about doing its role.

All this thread proved that War and pld was fine in all situations some people used pld more some people used war more.

The only thing I see proven is that some people believe both of them can tank everything effectively the way they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

The only thing I see proven is that some people believe both of them can tank everything effectively the way they are.

---

Well this isnt completely true at the end of 1.0. War has more DD designed combos that can generate hate faster when other abilities are on cool down and on the otherside Paladins shield block is massively more powerful then parry could ever be. Also War is alone on an island for all of his abilites, hp gain, and tp generation. PLD had boons form having a whm which is another reason besides guaranteed block that pld fighting Darnus hard was significantly easier.

I would just like war and gld to be adjusted where it could fit in spots that are vacant. For instance war should be able to be fit into that DD roll and while not be equal give something else to the table that drg or mnk cant. Same for Gladiator instead of pld because pld to me is to far gone to not be tank (I mean design not statistically as you can do dd pld and put up numbers far beyond most suspect).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

The only thing I see proven is that some people believe both of them can tank everything effectively the way they are.

---

Except they are not lol, there are -clear- winners for different situations.

For same skill and gear, there will be situations I will always pick a WAR over PLD and a PLD over WAR. Never "meh either one I dont care".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altena

To be honest, I would rather 1 tank with 30 DD's taking down an enormous mob.. Call me a traditionalist but a lot of "dual tank" mechanics end in a main tank holding the boss, and the off-tank sitting in a corner voking adds all night. It never ends in a fun battle mechanic for the off-tank.

---

Having multiple tanks is much more than that.

Let's take the example of Four Horsemen in Naxxrammas. You assign a tank to the two mobile horsemen (Thane Korth'azz and Baron Rivendare), who place a stacking mark on anyone within 20 yards of them that deals damage. The tanks ideally have to switch between Thane and Baron at around 4 marks, because if the stacks get higher the amount of damage it deals can easily kill them.

You also have stuff like Twin Emperors in AQ40, where the tanks HAVE to keep both mobs apart because if you let them get within...I think it was 30 yards of each other, they heal themselves.

Then you have encounters where you have to keep mobs in place like the opening phase for Thaddius, which requires both tanks ensuring that Feugen and Stalagg stay on their platforms while getting punted from one side of the room to the other.

Then you have stuff like Iron Council between keeping mobs apart and phase 3 Steelbreaker having a move that is a guaranteed tank kill (giving the raid a sort of time limit on killing him).

Sure, you also have stuff like switching the same boss because of a stacking debuff (Gorthok the Impaler) as well as having the second tank help pick up adds (Freya), but a raid encounter with multiple tanks is not always like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

Except they are not lol, there are -clear- winners for different situations.

For same skill and gear, there will be situations I will always pick a WAR over PLD and a PLD over WAR. Never "meh either one I dont care".

---

You are not understanding what Reika says. A being better than B does not means that B is bad or not effective.
Both can tank effectively in everything, one will have an easier time, the other a harder time, but effectiveness, both have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skies

You are not understanding what Reika says. A being better than B does not means that B is bad or not effective.
Both can tank effectively in everything, one will have an easier time, the other a harder time, but effectiveness, both have.

---

Effectiveness is rated on the whole scale. If john is way better then bob at X then bob is not an effective choice.


So I disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

The problem with your take on rampart is that Warrior can use rampart too. 1 on 1, non-retarded pld vs non-retarded warrior, warrior will win at Aoe agro. You have to look at the skills that one job can use that the other cant, so rampart and sentinel have to come out of the factoring. In 2.0, having full tp at the start would help the warrior more with aoe threat than, because pld doesnt have any aoe based tp skills that it can use before a block (wardrum), while warrior can just go apeshit and win.

---

After reading this response I now know that you don't understand what makes rampart a strong hate ability.

The strength in Rampart hate is based on hitting your party members with it. Each party member it hits, gives rampart a larger hate boost. If I could be bothered I would hunt around for the BG post about the specifics, however AoE rampart is a GLD trait. WAR's using Rampart are self-buff only, therefore it generates very little hate. (Less then even a provoke or flash).

As for sentinel, the boost in Sent comes from weaponskills, but truthfully the boost isn't very significant and isn't really worth arguing to point. I can't even recall if the hate boost in Sent is also a GLD trait or not, so someone might have to chime in with this one.

A WAR going "apeshit" with weaponskills is not as effective or superior to a PLD who knows how to use their hate tools correctly when up against holding hate off a DRG or MNK (who's TP gain is much higher then a WAR, therefore more weaponskills). The only weaponskill that generates a hate boost for WAR is skull sander, and it truly isn't a very powerful attack. SC & Godsbane is certainly not enough to maintain extremely solid hate against a fully buffed Doomspike, Chaos Thrust or RoT (as an example).

In Warrior's defence, they do have Antagonize which is an effective ability if used correctly, along with Collusion that got quite a bit of a hit in the nerf, but certainly isn't enough to say that they have better AoE hate control over PLD.

Quote:

---

But in anycase, I was thinking at work and I think they can leave it like it is IF and ONLY IF the dungeons promote balanced play, meaning you'll always have a paladin and a warrior in the party. I won't mind working together, but I will mind it if you have to pick one or the other because the content will be much harder or impossible by having one of them around. I dispised the need to class stack and am looking forward to class and job changes that make it stupid or unneccisary to do so.

---

I am all for balanced party setups. I also don't mind WAR still sitting in that slightly "off tank" role to an extent but I personally miss WAR in a heavy DD role. I personally loved the job in certain situations in 1.x, however I am the first to admit that our main PLD tank had a more effective tanking ability in pretty much all content. The only content that he would play WAR was to dual-tank Cutter's 17min (which can also be easily done full timing PLD mind you)

This is probably one of the extremely rare times you will hear me talk about my 1.x end game experience as I hate to share this information/give the impression that I am gloating, however this time I feel it to be necerssary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duelle

Having multiple tanks is much more than that.

---

Every situation I have experienced that requires 2 tanks has included 1 tank often stuck in a corner holding useless trash mobs while the rest of the party kill the boss..

Mechanics like this aren't fun because it leaves one tank doing not much at all. Taking Princess in CC as an example (an example that I actually know.. I read the first paragraph of your response and gave up trying to understand what you were on about truthfully).
In order to get a 5 chest run, you had to hold Marshall and kill Princess first (as you probably know). A common strategy was to get one tank to hold Marshall to the side while everyone zerged Princess. For plenty of CC runs I have been that off-tank and I have to say it is quite a dull task, and this is only a small example.

Other examples are times where lots of mobs pop, and one tank kites them around the edge of the map (ie Moogle fight) while players pull 1 mob off at a time. Ever tanked that fight? Running in a circle for an eternity holding a bunch of mobs that no one is killing is such a boring mechanic.

<See editing notes>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sakasa

I think you mis read my post the pld being to far gone to not be a tank means exactly that it to far down the design path for a tank. It is a tank you cant make it more versatile and somewhat balanced with out removing what it already has and as a design putting later skills to add more versatility to pld are gimping it if other classes are getting things that improve its direct design. Which clearly is stated in a logical way if you read the whole paragraph instead of pulling a CNN and taking out a section with out context.

---

Ah I see, I misunderstood your post. My apologies, I will edit it out. Then in fact yes I agree with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altena

Every situation I have experienced that requires 2 tanks has included 1 tank often stuck in a corner holding useless trash mobs while the rest of the party kill the boss.

---

Kel'thuzad had that, though I wouldn't call the Guardians of Icecrown useless, as they had as much HP as Kel and were technically impossible to kill without highly risking a wipe. It's really all about context.

Quote:

---

I read the first paragraph of your response and gave up trying to understand what you were on about truthfully.

---

I'm guessing that's on me for assuming people easily understood the concept of having multiple targets to control during a fight.

*takes long breath*

The concept of the four horsemen is that you have four bosses. Two of them stationary and two of them mobile. The stationary pair would stay in the back of the boss room and needed to have someone within range of them, otherwise they would spam a nuke that would hit everyone in the room for huge damage. The mobile pair needed to be held by one tank each.

Lady Blaumeux & Sir Zeliek = Stationary

Thane Kor'thazz & Baron Rivendare = Mobile

Anyone within 45(!) yards of a horseman would get a stacking debuff called a mark (Rivendare yould give you Rivendare's Mark, Zeliek would give you Zeliek's Mark and so on). The marks did more damage the higher the stack it was. The amount of damage could be releably healed until around 4 marks, as higher stacks would hit you for more damage and would eventually one-shot you.

The point of having two tanks is to have Thane and Baron far enough that the tanks and DPS on each would only be afflicted by one mark. At around 4 stacks, the tanks and the DPS had to switch targets and drag them apart again to allow one stack to drop and start getting marks from the new target. So if you're tanking Baron and I'm tanking Thane, at 4 marks we would switch so that you get Thane and I get Baron, allowing your marks from Baron to drop and getting marks from Thane (and vice versa for me).

Try reading the other examples I mentioned, please.

PS: I don't put much stock on 1.0 encounters aside from Garuda and Nael, as I understand it's mostly hold-over content and doesn't have much in the way of mechanics outside of adds and super-one-shot moves. We haven't seen a proper encounter that really requires a second tank, but we may get there in 2.0. I hope, anyways.

Did Nael with both a PLD and a Warrior. Paladin kept better hate, Warrior was less fragile and did more damage.

As a Dragoon, I preferred to have Paladin as the primary tank and, if feasable, a Warrior as the secondary.

With a Paladin tank it could be pretty much assured that I am second on the hate list unless a warrior is present as the mounting damage.

I would flatly rip hate off of a warrior if the fight was long enough. I had to pace myself too keep in line with hate and that meant I was doing lower damage. (and exposing myself more as it meant I absolutely needed chameleon which sadly bumps the much more useful featherfoot off my list.)

With both, the Warrior's damage can offset the hate I generate, but I'll still fluctuate form third to second on the hate list. But with elusive jump I can ditch to the secondary tank if the Paladin drops for any reason, and the run survives.

Sadly, the situations in which a Dragoon, Paladin, and Warrior are all together and preferable were non-existent in 1.xx. Hopefully that'll change in ARR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyrist

I would flatly rip hate off of a warrior if the fight was long enough. I had to pace myself too keep in line with hate and that meant I was doing lower damage.

---

That's part of being a dps, you were doing it right.

The dps mentality of DPS DPS DPS DPS, for some situations it's fine when you "have" to get things done before death comes knocking but dps should always be paying attention to there situation, others situations and their hate control in battle. Sounds to me like your just doing your job right unlike many that seemingly want to burn through content as fast as possible and think we tanks can compensate for their stupidity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FedeMax

At the end everything I did it was Warrior. Every dungeon it was ask for a warrior, Garuda, King Moogle, Ifrit was ask for a warrior. The only battle I did not see a warrior all the time maybe 50/50 was Raven. The only one for sure that was ask for a Paladin that I ever did was Hamlet Defense since Paladin could heal himself.

---

i won't say it would've been *impossible*, but rivenroad (hard) and ifrit (extreme) would have been idiotic with a warrior tank. completely and utterly awful.

also, with DDs who actually push limits, most all situations favored paladin tanks in the end. including garuda and av/cc. warriors just couldn't keep hate off DDs going completely all-out (and if you disagree, that's fine- it just means either your DDs weren't actually that great, or they were holding back), and additionally paladins were so strong that they could just about cover most or all of their own healing- freeing your group up to do even more dps by swapping out healing for more damage.

in fact, using a paladin tank for AV meant you could get away with having *no healing* for MM if you knew what you were doing.

if you had made this thread in early 2012 it would've been fairly accurate, but after they updated paladin the entire dynamic shifted. anyone who kept using warriors after that were mostly just doing it because it's what they knew, or because they were simply far behind the curve.

as far as burst aoe goes, though, warrior is at or near the top. while dragoon is hands down better in the right hands, warrior is *easier* to aoe with and that makes it more consistent and attractive for inexperienced players or groups wanting as much margin for error as possible (ie: using warriors for most of your aoe in ifrit extreme rather than dragoons. dragoons do the job much much better if your dragoons are great- but if not, you're better off just bringing an extra warrior or two... and most groups did)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyrist

Did Nael with both a PLD and a Warrior. Paladin kept better hate, Warrior was less fragile and did more damage.

---

lolwut? i.. what?

I like a bit of role versatility. Saves me from those well remembered nights of. "Great, we can't find a pld"
Well, at least you can find a warrior..

Warrior was almost unwanted after SC nerf in any content that matters, they do below subpar damages and a very subpar tank too. Their only saving grace was where Ifrit ex requires a warrior to break one of their horn, otherwise they were pretty useless imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duelle

Random scenario

---

Are you talking about another game here? Because I still don't understand where this is coming from.. Kel'whatnow? Guardians of Whatcrowns? Sorry I don't know the game, fight or battle mechanics of whatever you are talking about so can't judge.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and can understand that multi-big-boss fights can work with dual tanks, but in the end it is more efficient for the DD's in a party to focus on one mob at a time.. Therefore you inevitably have one tank either kiting or holding the 2nd mob that isn't the focus.

My question about these dungeons you are talking about - how many players are in there? If we are talking 12+ players then yes I am all for seeing 2 tanks in there for more complex battle content.. However for now, I don't see a "2 tank" scenario fitting in with the typical content we have currently seen in XIV both in 1.0 and the alpha videos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyrist

Did Nael with both a PLD and a Warrior. Paladin kept better hate, Warrior was less fragile and did more damage.

---

Yes Nael was a prime example of a long fight, mixed with harsh mechanics that didn't allow the tank to establish extremely solid hate. Even a decent PLD struggled when Nael starts teleporting all over the place.

However I do disagree that "Warrior was less fragile" as they take pretty similar damage, the only difference is a bit of HP. A well geared PLD falls just shy of a WAR's HP if in a HP set of course, and in most cases is still able to hold plenty of hate. In order for a WAR to keep some kind of hate - you will want them wearing full DD gear so there is no real comparison.

Not to mention PLD has farrrrrr more damage mitigation abilities.

Quote:

---

I would flatly rip hate off of a warrior if the fight was long enough. I had to pace myself too keep in line with hate and that meant I was doing lower damage. (and exposing myself more as it meant I absolutely needed chameleon which sadly bumps the much more useful featherfoot off my list.)

---

This too. WAR has candy hate compared to PLD especially in long fights.

Quote:

---

Sadly, the situations in which a Dragoon, Paladin, and Warrior are all together and preferable were non-existent in 1.xx. Hopefully that'll change in ARR.

---

I know some people that used a DRG/WAR/PLD setup for Garuda, and IE it is a pretty known strategy to include 2x WAR's 2x DRG's. The content was there, nearing the end of 1.xx, but that may also have been due to WAR being a preferable tank to some content before their nerfs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Molly_Millions

WAR was not the end all, be all tank towards the end of 1.0. What are you smoking OP? Please pass it this way.

---

It was the tank of choice for the majority of the game leaving the solely tank class on the sidelines, which is why people still discuss ways to avoid it in the future

Just wait until Dark Knight gets released... *snickers* Will we see DRK outdamaging WAR then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starlord

I agree, Warrior should play as a DD not as a "Main Tank" Back-up Tank sure, but Warrior was the new Paladin in 1.0. Don't do the same thing with 2.0 Please! That's the first thing I'm going to mention in the Beta Forums

---

Punctuation is your friend!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Naraku_Diabolos

Just wait until Dark Knight gets released... *snickers* Will we see DRK outdamaging WAR then?

---

If nothing changes,

Yes. Presuming DRK is the job it should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FireBud

That's part of being a dps, you were doing it right.

The dps mentality of DPS DPS DPS DPS, for some situations it's fine when you "have" to get things done before death comes knocking but dps should always be paying attention to there situation, others situations and their hate control in battle. Sounds to me like your just doing your job right unlike many that seemingly want to burn through content as fast as possible and think we tanks can compensate for their stupidity.

---

To an extent. If we have used all enmity- tools available to us and we are still flashing red - then the tank has a problem. This forces DPS to hold back, which basically means the tank is holding the party up. It's not about "rushing" through content, it's about winning fights efficiently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ricky

It was the tank of choice for the majority of the game leaving the solely tank class on the sidelines, which is why people still discuss ways to avoid it in the future

---

then the majority of the game community was smoking some pretty potent stuff, and/or the majority of the game community never actually did anything in the game after... may?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altena

After reading this response I now know that you don't understand what makes rampart a strong hate ability.

The strength in Rampart hate is based on hitting your party members with it. Each party member it hits, gives rampart a larger hate boost. If I could be bothered I would hunt around for the BG post about the specifics, however AoE rampart is a GLD trait. WAR's using Rampart are self-buff only, therefore it generates very little hate. (Less then even a provoke or flash).

---

I know that part of rampart, but i have observed a fight where the paladin did not actively try to keep agro on garuda after hitting the whole party with rampart and lost agro within 15 seconds, the only real way to keep it after that is with a spirits within combo and then constantly using hate abilities whenever they are ready. Unfortunantly for paladin, they only have 1 that hits multiple targets on 30 seconds, which doesnt produce as much hate as a damaging ability (SC) and one on 60 seconds, which I never witnesed doing what it says it does and need a block (Wardrum). Rampart doesn't do the whole job. Even tho rampart for a warrior only effects itself, it still produces more agro, then antagonize + SC with or without combo will do better than a paladins party rampart and flash on multiple targets, because SW can only hit one thing. And then the warrior is capable if dealing damage to multiple targets in front with their parry counter WS. I have had the fun of tring to test out both paladin and warrior at 50 in natalan, since I really wanted to see if paladin could truely hold the hate against multiples. Rampart didn't save anyone on paladin, and its cooldown is too long to be practical in those situations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

I know that part of rampart, but i have observed a fight where the paladin did not actively try to keep agro on garuda after hitting the whole party with rampart and lost agro within 15 seconds, the only real way to keep it after that is with a spirits within combo. Rampart doesn't do the whole job. Even tho rampart for a warrior only effects itself, it still produces more agro, then antagonize + SC with or without combo will do better than a paladins party rampart and flash, because SW can only hit one thing. I have had the fun of tring to test out both paladin and warrior at 50 in natalan, since I really wanted to see if paladin could truely hold the hate against multiples. Rampart didn't save anyone then.

---

I have seen many a times in similarity where a fully geared WAR popping Antagonise, Sentinel, Mighty Strikes and SC only holds hate for 1 BLM nuke or 1 DRG combo after sisters pop. Besides, a smart PLD switches target to Suparna and does a SW to drop her faster.

In that situation - Hallowed Ground. The end.

As for Natalan - It is WAR's domain simply because they have AoE damage and have a little more survivability then DRG's, don't need to hold hate for long (mobs die in a few seconds due to BLM's/DRG's). Hence my comment - that isn't really tanking, that is trash burning, (Crowd control / killing an area of mobs) not flat out tanking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yrusama

Punctuation is your friend!

---

It may not be in the right places but it's there. Grammar *****.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sakasa

Well this isnt completely true at the end of 1.0. War has more DD designed combos that can generate hate faster when other abilities are on cool down and on the otherside Paladins shield block is massively more powerful then parry could ever be. Also War is alone on an island for all of his abilites, hp gain, and tp generation. PLD had boons form having a whm which is another reason besides guaranteed block that pld fighting Darnus hard was significantly easier.

I would just like war and gld to be adjusted where it could fit in spots that are vacant. For instance war should be able to be fit into that DD roll and while not be equal give something else to the table that drg or mnk cant. Same for Gladiator instead of pld because pld to me is to far gone to not be tank (I mean design not statistically as you can do dd pld and put up numbers far beyond most suspect).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

Except they are not lol, there are -clear- winners for different situations.

For same skill and gear, there will be situations I will always pick a WAR over PLD and a PLD over WAR. Never "meh either one I dont care".

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skies

You are not understanding what Reika says. A being better than B does not means that B is bad or not effective.
Both can tank effectively in everything, one will have an easier time, the other a harder time, but effectiveness, both have.

---

No one understood me XD. I simply meant some people in here believe that both can do it all effectively. I don't. I KNOW paladin is the better single target tank and I KNOW warrior is the better multi-target tank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altena

I have seen many a times in similarity where a fully geared WAR popping Antagonise, Sentinel, Mighty Strikes and SC only holds hate for 1 BLM nuke or 1 DRG combo after sisters pop.

In that situation - Hallowed Ground. The end.

As for Natalan - It is WAR's domain simply because they have AoE damage and have a little more survivability then DRG's, don't need to hold hate for long (mobs die in a few seconds due to BLM's/DRG's). Hence my comment - that isn't really tanking, that is trash burning, (Crowd control / killing an area of mobs) not flat out tanking.

---

But it is still holding hate against multiple monsters, that is tanking. One Job can, one job cant. The same situation would apply in a raid dungeon. Paladin wouldn't be able to take multiple mobs off of a warrior tank, nor would he need to. Could just cover if the warrior was getting in trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

But it is still holding hate against multiple monsters, that is tanking. One Job can, one job cant.

---

DRG can hold hate on multiple mobs, so can BLM, so are you implying that DRG and BLM are tanking jobs?

Any job with a heavy AOE can pull aggro from a group of mobs.

Trash killing =/= tanking.

*edit* You still haven't made me aware of why PLD is so garbage at tanking Garuda sisters. We have seem to not run into issues with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altena

DRG can hold hate on multiple mobs, so can BLM, so are you implying that DRG and BLM are tanking jobs?

Any job with a heavy AOE can pull aggro from a group of mobs.

Trash killing =/= tanking.

---

I don't know If I can explain why warrior would beat paladin in aoe tanking any day any better..... you would actually have to had tried both of them yourself to understand why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

I don't know If I can explain why warrior would beat paladin in aoe tanking any day any better..... you would actually have to had tried both of them yourself to understand why.

---

WAR is probably my 2nd most played job.
Our main tank (who primarily plays PLD) has no apparent issues tanking and holding a multiple group of mobs from well geared DD's.

I don't think I need much experience in PLD to know how the job is played. Watching people tank EG content and understanding PLD's mechanics is enough.

LOL Poor PLD the job was the Puppet-master of the game. I do have to admit I had the luxury of meeting great PLDs on my FFXIV server. I'm sure they will fix it on beta and further patches. I'M JUST WAITING FOR THE NEW MONK WOOT!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altena

WAR is probably my 2nd most played job.
Our main tank (who primarily plays PLD) has no apparent issues tanking and holding a multiple group of mobs from well geared DD's.

I don't think I need much experience in PLD to know how the job is played. Watching people tank EG content and understanding PLD's mechanics is enough.

---

You must not have been trying then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

No one understood me XD. I simply meant some people in here believe that both can do it all effectively. I don't. I KNOW paladin is the better single target tank and I KNOW warrior is the better multi-target tank.

---

I agree that the WAR can -sort of- tank better then say a monk or dragoon, but its not an efficent choice lest its multi target trash mobs.


What I'd like to see is better pure definitions with different styles of that work and less weird hybridness.


WAR is supreme for trash, you just dont ever want to exp with a PLD. But a PLD is way better for boss tanking (unless its multi trash boss stuff).


So rather then see WAR being bad at dps compared to dps classes and being bad at tanking compared to tanking classes (minus his hybrid pro - many trash mobs), and the PLD being good at only boss tanking and bad at everything else - I believe we need to change things. PLD needs some spells that encourage to tank but also dps at the same time - in that way he can work out of boss situations (or promote his group to do more dps, such that its still him helping in out of boss situations). The WAR needs to be decided if he is heavy slow dps or tanking because right now he is just a confused exp machine. (Turning him into full tank wouldnt mean nerfing his damage or at least that much, since its lower then a pure DD - making him a real tank in a different way then PLD would make great gameplay options but just make sure they both can work in all occasions, or just turn him into more DPS less tank)


So I got that you meant each is good at different things but I said that the choice is not about being effective because WAR is not effective at X compared to PLD at Y, and PLD at X is not effective at WAR at Y. Yet those points X and Y shouldn't be different. WAR shouldn't be only good at trash mob tanking - basically exp and some boss mechanics, thats a crappy thing to be put into at end game - and PLD shouldn't be only looked for during boss fights as you are restricted to very specific contents.

Of course who knows what has changed in ARR, so.. just saying 1.0 had issues and I hope they didnt carry them across.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

You must not have been trying then.

---

Hmmm mythril & salts in AV/CC isn't trying? 6min Garuda kills isn't trying?

There is currently no situation where a "tank" needs to hold a large group of mobs for more then a few seconds. Any job with a high AOE damage ability and a good WHM can do that without difficulty. Often people take DRG or even BRD as the tank in the other split room in cutters.


PLD has no issues holding hate during the sisters pop during Garuda, with a simple ability rotation (Flash > Rampart > Hallowed).
PLD also has no issues holding both Princess and Marshall at the same time. These are currently the only 2 situations where truly tanking multiple mobs comes up.

Finally, if PLD has hate issues with a large group of mobs, they have access to one of the greatest AOE threat generators of them all - CURE !

Sigh....... Trying to hold agro against the paladin, not trying to play the game :/. By trying I meant using your agro skills against the paladins agro skills along with your aoe DD.

Did you ever fight Flame Fist?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reika

Sigh....... Trying to hold agro against the paladin, not trying to play the game :/. By trying I meant using your agro skills against the paladins agro skills along with your aoe DD.

Did you ever fight Flame Fist?

---

We killed Flame Fist rather unconventionally most of the time. PLD runs in and HG's. DD's single target zerg FF and kill him before the party wipes. We didn't touch WAR's in that fight because their single target DPS is fairly garbage, and the less AoE flying around the place the better. Did that with most of the beastmen leaders TBH.

As for trying to hold aggro against the PLD > Not on WAR.. Only times I haven't been trash killing really has been IE. Not the kind of fight that you want to try and pull aggro..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altena

We killed Flame Fist rather unconventionally most of the time. PLD runs in and HG's. DD's single target zerg FF and kill him before the party wipes. Did that with most of the beastmen leaders TBH.

---

You never did it with one party?

so many people chiming in on the subject with outdated knowledge :(