Switching mains to a tank role. What is wrong with warr?

[Dizzy_Derp]

People are saying WAR is worse off than DRK and i really don't see how this is the case. They both need significant buffs.

Warrior is quite a bit worse than drk atm but yes the do both need buffs. See drk is way to play and has raid utility in the form of tbn it's also do similar dps. War has zero raid utility and is the most complex and skill requiring tank we have ever had to still do the same damage. All of wars potencies are lower than the other two across the board and both drk and pld get more buff uptime. Its also the most heavily penalised for swapping stances as all of its dps is tied to it's gauge which is not the case for the other two tanks.

[Lannybaby]

Remember how Rauban got his arm cut off? That's pretty much the warrior class right now. They were once incredible, easily the best tank in 3.x. But not so in SB. I mained war in 2.x and 3.x, but made the conscious decision to switch to drk several months before we even heard of SB. I'm so glad I did.

[PK_THUNER]

I'm a WAR main I switched over to DRK. In 8 man content setting the only reason I would use WAR is if I'm OT the whole fight or with the help of shirk, MT in dps stance the whole fight cuz WAR still has higher dmg then DRK. If I have to stance dance a bunch of times it eats my dps by a lot.

For DRK their dmg is pretty stable and there's no gauge penalty from droping grit so if your OT or MT your dmg will be fine but your potential dmg will still be lower then WAR or PLD

[PK_THUNER]

Warrior is quite a bit worse than drk atm but yes the do both need buffs. See drk is way to play and has raid utility in the form of tbn it's also do similar dps. War has zero raid utility and is the most complex and skill requiring tank we have ever had to still do the same damage. All of wars potencies are lower than the other two across the board and both drk and pld get more buff uptime. Its also the most heavily penalised for swapping stances as all of its dps is tied to it's gauge which is not the case for the other two tanks.

Yep that's why in all the EX fights I swap in dps stance with shirk. This way i can maintain 2600-2800 dps.

[PK_THUNER]

Everyone brings up the beast gauge dropping by 50% when you switch but Paladin does the exact same thing and you don't hear PLD's complaining about it.

Ok then let me ask you how many offensive abilities does paladins has that cost gauge? Cuz war has 6, 4 of them cost 50 gauge and 2 of them cost 20 gauge.

[SpookyGhost]

Ok then let me ask you how many offensive abilities does paladins has that cost gauge? Cuz war has 6, 4 of them cost 50 gauge and 2 of them cost 20 gauge.

One, because technically Sheltron is an offensive ability since it procs Shield Swipe. :^)

[whiskeybravo]

I think War feels good overall in either MT or OT position. Better than they've ever felt IMO. The majority of complaints come from what used to be the seamless transitioning from Deliverance to Defiance. I personally feel like it should have some cost, a flat cost, as there is no way to expend remainders of 3, 5, 8 etc. That part was not well thought out. But you really won't be biased in this regard if you never played the tanks pre-SB. Other than that, there's nothing terribly wrong with War, and I'm sure what is lacking now they will fix in some fashion as it's important to keep all the tanks equally viable.

[Tegernako]

Other than that, there's nothing terribly wrong with War, .

There's nothing terribly good about it either. Which is half the problem.

and I'm sure what is lacking now they will fix in some fashion as it's important to keep all the tanks equally viable

Like they fixed PLD in HW? Considering they thought SB WAR was a good idea, I don't have much faith they will do the right thing. I do have some hope, it's just not a lot.

[whiskeybravo]

Like they fixed PLD in HW? Considering they thought SB WAR was a good idea, I don't have much faith they will do the right thing. I do have some hope, it's just not a lot.

There was nothing wrong with PLD in HW, they were just slightly outclassed by DRKs magic damage reduction and overshadowed by the "awesomeness" of fell cleaves. My static ran PLD/WAR up at least until I quite playing. Not that we were ever top of the charts or anything, but there were still plenty of PLDs in HW just like there are still plenty of WARs out there right now.

And I'm not so sure this is what SE had in mind exactly. Others have mentioned that they might've ran out of time or something, possibly. To me it seems like they have some conflicts on what exactly they want the tank role to be. Like, for example, they seem to have this vendetta against tanks gearing for str but then all the abilities they give us are dps abilities? I just think maybe they are confused themselves and why we got this seemingly half-assed attempt at warrior and even dark knight to an extent. It's rather clear that they wanted to boost paladin up after being the ugly dog of HW, but they shouldn't have nerfed war or drk in that process. So, maybe they ran out of time, maybe they were confused about what they wanted, maybe they just didn't do enough testing. Who knows. I'd like to think they'll fix it, but maybe not. Somebody else mentioned that since they already have stuff in the pipeline for the next few months it could be a while before they are able to make any significant changes.

[Tegernako]

1. The point I was trying to make wasn't that PLD was worthless but that it had some glaring issues that were never addressed. This in turn doesn't give me a lot of faith that SE will do anything to fix WAR/DRK problems. Apologies if I worded that badly.

2. Sadly, those faults among others like being an incredibly boring 123 class, low dps, weird combos, etc were not fixed and that actively kept people like me from playing it because it felt bad or boring. Unless you want to argue they were in a fantastic position? The fact remains, people didn't flock to PLD nor actively request PLD specifically a lot for a reason.

3. I highly doubt FC kept people away from PLD.