Paladin vs Warrior - ARR better set roles!

[Velhart]

For version 2.0, the roles of each class/job will not change; however, there is a chance that the concepts change. Based on this we will be working to revamp them so that the actions will fit each concept accordingly.

Source

I believe in the new version it won't matter which one you bring, PLD or WAR, just whoever can tank well. We will have 24-man raids, so it wouldn't surprise me if the tanks were a mix of both.

[stanleyyoung]

everyone has opinions of what pld needs and doesn't need which is based off what we had in 1.0, we can't really judge pld until we see it in action in 2.0 how much it changed or not. Some ppl had no problem using pld and used it effectively and some ppl had problems with pld and couldn't use it effectively. their are many things we could do to help out pld like some have said in this thread and others like it, boost def, hp, better enmity plus abilities, aoe skills, more dmg etc etc.

i for one would like to see pld thrive in ARR but how about boosting its ability to block considering it has a shield why not make it effective and use it alot more rather then being a paperweight or some thing on your arm. For that matter how about pld can parry also, heck maybe SE can allow pld shield to be included in its auto attack. the list can go on & on of how to fix pld but until beta hits in 2 weeks we can then see what SE has in store for the new pld at that time we can give constructive criticism and feedback.

Us stating what pld was in 1.0 and then using that to judge what it should be in ARR or just speculating what it will be is kinda pointless, only thing which we can actually do now is state the bad things pld had in 1.0 and give our concerns for SE so we don't end up with the same problems come ARR.

[BumblebeeTuna]

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.

My LS did speed runs with whatever our tank felt like playing..war or pld didnt matter they were both fine. Hard mode darnus was PLD as was ifrit extreme...PLD was quite good actually and more fun to play than war imo. war was definately not the end all be all of tanking.

Also if you had good crowd control from blms and drgs it didnt matter if you had a pld cause half the time wars didnt even get a steel cyclone off before the groups were dead. And pld aoe flash was nice for grabbing groups.

[Zangetsu]

I think the reason people disliked PLD and thought WAR was better is because they were uninformed about how certain enmity abilities worked. Once our PLD learned how to use them right we could nuke nonstop on BLM without a worry of pulling hate. Just one of those cases where SE wants us to figure it out on our own.

[Darkillumina]

anyone claiming paladin was a bad tank or inferior to warrior after the update in march or april or whenever it was, and especially after the nerf to steel cyclone... is wrong

just flat out wrong.

stop perpetuating the myth.

This so much. It's as if people played warrior for 5 minutes when it was released with the other jobs and created their opinion based on that. After the SC nerf and the PLD tweak in April, PLD was superior for most end-game fights.

It's like people missed out on the last 8 months of 1.0's existence. CC 17 minute was infinitely easier at Chimera with PLD, Ifrit Extreme was done with a paladin and Van Darnus hard was done with a Paladin. (I haven't even seen a Raven Nevermore run done with a warrior tank). Garuda was easier with a Paladin as well.

Really the only end-game situation that warranted a warrior was a AV 17 minute run and even then it really came down to preference.

The thing that pisses me off about a thread like this is that the myriad voices of the uninformed are drowning out those who actually participated in the actual end-game content and are crying for changes to PLD. The fact of the matter is if PLD were/was buffed anymore nobody would have used warrior for anything except farming trash in Nat.

[Toxsik]

Logged in on the forum just to like / say i agree with the OP 110%

[Quatre]

This so much. It's as if people played warrior for 5 minutes when it was released with the other jobs and created their opinion based on that. After the SC nerf and the PLD tweak in April, PLD was superior for most end-game fights.

It's like people missed out on the last 8 months of 1.0's existence. CC 17 minute was infinitely easier at Chimera with PLD, Ifrit Extreme was done with a paladin and Van Darnus hard was done with a Paladin. (I haven't even seen a Raven Nevermore run done with a warrior tank). Garuda was easier with a Paladin as well.

Really the only end-game situation that warranted a warrior was a AV 17 minute run and even then it really came down to preference.

The thing that pisses me off about a thread like this is that the myriad voices of the uninformed are drowning out those who actually participated in the actual end-game content and are crying for changes to PLD. The fact of the matter is if PLD were/was buffed anymore nobody would have used warrior for anything except farming trash in Nat.

This. So much this.


I have shared the same sentiments in the beginnings of this thread.


Also- Altena/ Reika....


Having been a PLD main and done -every- fight in this game, Altena is correct in all of her assertions.

Let's compare AOE abilities WAR vs. PLD




WAR: Steel Cyclone, Whirlwind.

PLD: Hallowed Ground, Cure, Holy Succor, War Drum, Flash, Rampart.



I personally preffered to go WAR until after we killed princess, Princess would die before the guard could spawn, and sometimes died before the marshal even got there if spawn was far enough away.

Just personal preference though.

[fusional]

http://youtu.be/eTsfKI_C9ZI

mute the music if it bothers you, but pay close attention to what kind of tank we have (hint: paladin) and to the color of my aggro bar as the fight progresses. from 2:20 on it goes red and stays red for the entire rest of the fight- and as you can see i don't hold back whatsoever.

why is this important? because this absolutely never would have been possible with a warrior tank.

first of all, we'd need quite a lot more healing to keep up a warrior tank- forcing us to swap out a dragoon to bring an extra whm and also calling on the bard to help heal as well. the more bard needs to support, the less attention they can pay to shooting meteors and dpsing darnus. this means we'd likely have to swap yet another dragoon for a 2nd bard or 2nd blackmage.

this means a sub-10 minute kill would have been impossible.

second, it also means i would have pulled hate and kept it until i died. (and if any dragoon dies, a sub-10min kill is impossible.) warrior just does not have the snap aggro tools paladin does, so paladin will reach the enmity ceiling faster and stay there more easily.

and yet the claim that keeps getting repeated is that paladin was bad, underpowered, inferior to warrior, unwanted in endgame etc. so tell me how there's anything wrong with paladin in endgame when paladin is without a doubt the only tank capable of holding aggro in this situation? and while we're at it, where are all the videos of people beating ifrit extreme with a warrior tank if warrior was so much better? if paladin is bad and unwanted, why did everyone use it in the two most difficult fights in FFXIV?

i get that not everyone played all the way to the end, or they played more casually and therefore experienced mostly easier content, and in their experience people preferred warrior for easier content. i get that not everyone gave paladin a chance after the buffs (&nerf to SC), and that not everyone had an opportunity to test both tanks in the most rigid, unforgiving fights in the game...

...but at least frame your opinion within that context.

the bottom line is that paladin was already incredibly strong and hands down the superior endgame tank at the end of 1.0, and yet if you keep crying for more buffs and square actually listens to you- all it will serve to do is make the warrior class *completely* irrelevant and ineffectual in 2.0.

[Andrien]

This so much. It's as if people played warrior for 5 minutes when it was released with the other jobs and created their opinion based on that. After the SC nerf and the PLD tweak in April, PLD was superior for most end-game fights.

It's like people missed out on the last 8 months of 1.0's existence. CC 17 minute was infinitely easier at Chimera with PLD, Ifrit Extreme was done with a paladin and Van Darnus hard was done with a Paladin. (I haven't even seen a Raven Nevermore run done with a warrior tank). Garuda was easier with a Paladin as well.

Really the only end-game situation that warranted a warrior was a AV 17 minute run and even then it really came down to preference.

The thing that pisses me off about a thread like this is that the myriad voices of the uninformed are drowning out those who actually participated in the actual end-game content and are crying for changes to PLD. The fact of the matter is if PLD were/was buffed anymore nobody would have used warrior for anything except farming trash in Nat.

That is 3 content where PLD shines and only on the bosses, but for everything else, WAR.

[fusional]

That is 3 content where PLD shines and only on the bosses, but for everything else, WAR.

so when paladin shines on anything with a modicum of difficulty, and warrior is in actuality only used more for easier content- how is this really an argument against paladin? in pre-abyssea FFXI warriors and sams and monks tanked easy stuff all the time.

in virtually any MMO, whenever you have content that doesn't require a lot of healing people will try to get away with using fewer and fewer defensively-tuned classes to squeeze in more dps for faster kills. that's life.

you guys can't see the forest for the trees.

the problem isn't paladin, it's a lack of content which favors or requires it. (ie: challenging stuff)