So i finished my PLD... After my WAR

[Kuvu]

This isn't a troll post so don't take it as that but i am just curious what people were expecting when rolling a warrior. I mean i love to have wars in group with me, make my and the rest of the groups life a lot easier. But really how can you roll a warrior and expect to be able to tank like a paladin or in the same breath want the warrior to be changed or "buffed" to be like a paladin. Kind of defeats the purpose of having 2 class's then. It just seems that people got an apple and were wanting it to taste like an orange and that is just not the case. My opinion is that they are good at what they do, they are able to agro multiple mobs and control them very well.

I have a buddy i run CM with as a warrior and we have swapped off tanking and he was shocked at how much dmg compared to paladin. Its just not in the books, you guys are good at adds and OTing and that's it, unless you have 3 healers to keep you up. I am not bashing anyone or the class its just how i see it, you were made for a certain slot in the game and that is where you excel you don't excel out of that. If i rolled a warrior wanting to be a MT i would be upset also but all this hate on these boards is not going to solve your issue. Do as others have and roll a paladin if you want to MT.

Really i don't think i have seen this much hate on a forums since back in swg when nge surprised everyone (well not as bad but its building up i feel). Like i said not being a troll its just my opinion.

[Inosaska]

This isn't a troll post so don't take it as that but i am just curious what people were expecting when rolling a warrior. I mean i love to have wars in group with me, make my and the rest of the groups life a lot easier. But really how can you roll a warrior and expect to be able to tank like a paladin or in the same breath want the warrior to be changed or "buffed" to be like a paladin. Kind of defeats the purpose of having 2 class's then. It just seems that people got an apple and were wanting it to taste like an orange and that is just not the case. My opinion is that they are good at what they do, they are able to agro multiple mobs and control them very well.

I have a buddy i run CM with as a warrior and we have swapped off tanking and he was shocked at how much dmg compared to paladin. Its just not in the books, you guys are good at adds and OTing and that's it, unless you have 3 healers to keep you up. I am not bashing anyone or the class its just how i see it, you were made for a certain slot in the game and that is where you excel you don't excel out of that. If i rolled a warrior wanting to be a MT i would be upset also but all this hate on these boards is not going to solve your issue. Do as others have and roll a paladin if you want to MT.

Really i don't think i have seen this much hate on a forums since back in swg when nge surprised everyone (well not as bad but its building up i feel). Like i said not being a troll its just my opinion.

The point of having two classes is for different playstyles and nothing more. They should do the same thing and same job and be just as effective. For DPS classes melee should be doing way more damage then ranged but currently that is not the case and ranged is doing way more then melee and that needs to be corrected. Why you ask is because melee is taking more damage and has a bigger risk and also they have to move from AoEs.

[gigi_frana]

The point of having two classes is for different playstyles and nothing more. They should do the same thing and same job and be just as effective.

Oh excuse me, are you by any chance the game designer ?

[Faction]

Oh excuse me, are you by any chance the game designer ?

Are you trying to imply that the current situation is intentional by design? If so, then perhaps they should hire Inosaska because he's already better than Yoshi P despite not "being the game designer."

[Kitru]

Oh excuse me, are you by any chance the game designer ?

Oh excuse me, are you by any chance even remotely cognizant of what the concept of a "choice" actually is? Classes exist to present a choice to the players. There are multiple class/jobs within each role in order to present multiple options to players wanting to fulfill that role. This is an explicit design construct. WAR and PLD are both tanks.

There is not a choice, however, if a single option within that role is explicitly better than the other options. That is an illusion of choice because you don't really have one. If you want to be effective, you make the only choice that you have. The other choice exists only to make it seem like you really do have a choice.

It's because of this that classes within the same role need to be able to perform the core functionality of that role within a *very* close proximity to one another. What would be the point to playing a SCH if a WHM was universally better? What reason would there be to play a BLM if SUM could easily blow it out of the water? The choice is essentially made for you by the developers: healers would be WHM and casters would be SUM. Any other choice is explicitly sub-optimal and, as such, it's not a choice. Yes, some people will still choose the other roles, but they're making that choice because they value things like playstyle more than they value effectiveness. Anyone that *didn't* value the specific non-balance attributes of the class high enough to have them overcome the disparity in effectiveness would choose to go with SUM rather than BLM.

Unless the classes are *balanced*, there's no real point in having multiple classes for the same role: without balance you just have the tank class, the caster class, the heal class, the mDPS class, and 5 other classes that don't really serve any purpose other than to occupy other people's time. This is why every single MMO constantly strives to ensure that the classes remain balanced. Those that don't end up shooting themselves in the foot and dying soon after. Once players realize that what they thought was an actual choice is simply an illusion, they tend to get upset and leave, if only because they're pissed that the investment that they made in the character by leveling it up ended up being wasted because they weren't privy to the secret class intent of the developers.

Differences in playstyle are good, but differences in effectiveness are *not*. As such, the difference between a WAR and PLD shouldn't be that PLDs are outright better tanks. The difference should be that they're both equally effective tanks that accomplish their comparatively equal level of performance using different playstyles: WAR focuses on self-healing and active mitigation mechanisms whereas PLD focuses on passive mitigation. That's just dandy. When WAR focuses on self-healing and active mitigation but ends up performing explicitly worse than a PLD even if played absolutely flawlessly, someone done fucked up.

[caspergrey]

Differences in playstyle are good, but differences in effectiveness are *not*.

I agree with most of your post minus this statement. I think that it is acceptable to have one role more effective in one situation, but less effective in another. Both should be viable in all situations. Of course no ONE class should be universally more viable. Also, I think by keeping key differences it allows you to build more synergy in multiple tank groups. If the two classes are equally effective in all cases it keeps strategies relatively consistent regardless of makeup.

Also some players will prefer higher skill cap classes. War definitely has a higher skill cap, so as a result you will get a bad war more often than a bad pld. But I'm not convinced you take that away as long as the same result can be achieved by both classes at max player skill.

This is by no means a comment on the current situation, more a personal opinion on class design in general.

[Kitru]

I think that it is acceptable to have one role more effective in one situation, but less effective in another.

General effectiveness is what I was referring to, not situational effectiveness. Purely by dint of having different mechanics, CDs, and the like, any two classes within the same role will be most effective at different situations.

Both should be viable in all situations. Of course no ONE class should be universally more viable.

"Viability" is a binary aspect: either you're viable or you are not. *Effectiveness* exists on a sliding scale, however. All classes should be viable in all cases and equally effectively, in general. Viability exists as a minimum level of performance for any piece of content. Effectiveness exists as a comparative assessment of performance between multiple classes in the same role.

Also some players will prefer higher skill cap classes. War definitely has a higher skill cap, so as a result you will get a bad war more often than a bad pld. But I'm not convinced you take that away as long as the same result can be achieved by both classes at max player skill.

There's actually a very strong case for high skill cap classes to actually perform *better* than low skill cap classes: the better performance exists as a reward for playing at a higher skill level. It shouldn't be a *massive* difference in performance, but it should still be there simply as a reward for the higher risk contingent in playing a higher skill class.

[caspergrey]

"Viability" is a binary aspect: either you're viable or you are not. *Effectiveness* exists on a sliding scale, however.

Oh, haha, yeah, typo. I was thinking Of course no ONE class should be universally more effective and both classes should be viable in all situations. My point was that I'm personally more lenient with situational effectiveness given overall effectiveness is equal.

There's actually a very strong case for high skill cap classes to actually perform *better* than low skill cap classes: the better performance exists as a reward for playing at a higher skill level. It shouldn't be a *massive* difference in performance, but it should still be there simply as a reward for the higher risk contingent in playing a higher skill class.

Good point.

[C-croft]

I have a buddy i run CM with as a warrior and we have swapped off tanking and he was shocked at how much dmg compared to paladin. Its just not in the books, you guys are good at adds and OTing and that's it, unless you have 3 healers to keep you up.

You can solo tank CM and Praetorium solo with a WAR at this point. You can also solo tank Ifrit HM as long as people dodge fire due to lack of interrupt. Unless you can cycle interrupts with another class... PUG style at least.

[Conna]

This isn't a troll post so don't take it as that but i am just curious what people were expecting when rolling a warrior.
.

Well since both are listed as tanks... We all probably assumed that warrior would be just as effective as pld, but with a different mitigation and playstyle...this was not the case.