Paladin vs Warrior - ARR better set roles!

[FedeMax]

With Beta test just around the coner, I want to play tank but on 1.0 Warrior was it and nothing else. The difference in defense and hp between Paladin and Warrior were minimal. Every party and dungeon run was always a Warrior. Paladin was for the most part a unwanted class for endgame content. So I though to bring these up and see what people would like to see in ARR for Paladin and Warrior.

Paladin - Tank 2.0

Greater Defense - to be able to tackle multiple Mobs or Bosses without driving crazy the WHM with cures.

AOE emity skills - be able to run into a room and agro everything around him. Sample the 3 Garudas

Boss disabling skills - a skill that will knock down boss for a periot of time (4-8 sec.)

Greater DPS on a single Mob than 1.0.

Warrior - Crowd Control 2.0

More AOE attack skills - been able to run behind the tank and start attacking multiples Mobs for faster kills on a group.

Less Defense that Paladin - there really needs to be a noticeable difference between Paladin and Warrior squishiness if not everyone will still use just Warrior.

AOE enbledding skills - keeping with making Warrior a Crowd Control, mass killer.

Abilities to reduce or increase emity as needed - that way it can control the his emity to help removed mobs from other DPS classes or less to not take away Mobs from Tank.

I would love to hear what other people would like to see different from the 1.0 Paladin and Warrior or everyone is happy just to scrap Paladin and just make Warrior the tank.

[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

[Orophin]

Speed runs are supposed to be going the way of the dodo, save for some achievements possibly, so people may not feel compelled to bring Warrior all of the time. It may just come down to personal choice in what style a person likes tanking as.

[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.

[Enma]

With Beta test just around the coner, I want to play tank but on 1.0 Warrior was it and nothing else. The difference in defense and hp between Paladin and Warrior were minimal. Every party and dungeon run was always a Warrior. Paladin was for the most part a unwanted class for endgame content. So I though to bring these up and see what people would like to see in ARR for Paladin and Warrior.

This is not right. The hardest fights of 1.0 version (Darnus Hard and Ifrit Extreme) needed a Paladin. Cutter's Cry needed it too. It's harder to use than Warrior but it's far more flexible. You could use Warrior too, so I don't see any problem in it.

P.S.
About Defense in version 1.0 it didn't make any difference, really. Ifrit Extreme could hit WHM or PLD for the same amount of damage... It was crazy.

[FedeMax]

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.

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.

[Molly_Millions]

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.

PLD definitely wasn't unwanted though. Most groups on Balmung used PLD in Garuda fights and Cutter's Cry. Even for moogles a lot of people used PLD over WAR. Just because you didn't want to use PLD doesn't make it useless or unwanted.

[FedeMax]

This is not right. The hardest fights of 1.0 version (Darnus Hard and Ifrit Extreme) needed a Paladin. Cutter's Cry needed it too. It's harder to use than Warrior but it's far more flexible. You could use Warrior too, so I don't see any problem in it.

P.S.
About Defense in version 1.0 it didn't make any difference, really. Ifrit Extreme could hit WHM or PLD for the same amount of damage... It was crazy.

Ifrit Extreme I did not get a chance to do as to see the difference between WAR and PLD, still that is just one battle out of everything 1.0 had that requier a party and every speed run in CC I did with a LS or random group a WAR was ask. The defense between the 2 was so minimun that everyone prefer the DPS of a WAR than the Defense of a PLD.

[Reika]

I agree than WAR should be more of a DPS choice than a Tank choice. It has more HP and offensive ability than paladin, but should have less defense ability than paladin. A paladins extra defense was more from the blocking abilities, but it needs more passive defense, not merely active defense. Blocking also imo really didn't block enough damage nor often enough, that could stand to be touched up on as well.

[Altena]

We used PLD for pretty much everything, even some trash mobs in a few dungeons. WAR was more of an off tank if our PLD pulled a sicky on us, which was extremely rare.

I do agree though, I would much prefer WAR to turn towards the DD/crowd control end moreso then the tanking end. I did like its position in the closing 1.x days however.

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.

TBH the best Warrior I know of on the server couldn't keep hate off decently geared and skilled DD's, compared to a reasonably skilled & geared PLD.