Just curious what guild is that and on what server ? You seem to be from
Swedne thats why im asking as I'm to =)
>From: alexander.jones@...
>Reply-To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
>To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [EverQuest] Re: SK or Pali
>Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 09:11:17 +0200
>
>As a guildleader for a pretty large (semi high end, were in the elemental
>planes) , I have to say that the damage/delay on weapons for a warrior has
>nothing to do with him holding aggro. The warrior class is very dependant
>on
>weapons that have an aggro producing proc attached on them. These weapons
>have an ok damage/delay but this has very little to do with the warrior
>actually holding aggro. In my opinion this makes the warrior class somewhat
>broken, but thats another story and wasnt part of the discussion.
>
>There are several weapons that have this some better some worse. Like the
>warrior epic, blade of carnage, Blade of war for example. Blade of war has
>the big advantage of beeing a 2hander to not having to take high ripostes.
>This is absolutely neccessary in some fights to keep the MT alive.
>
>Put 2 warriors beside each other on a mob have them taunt away, one using a
>"turbo" damage/delay weapon without a proc and the other with blade of war
>and I can guarantee who will hold aggro. Every time, all the time.
>
>As for giving an example on why you dont want to take ripostes, imagine
>fighting anything that hits 2000 or higher, and then imagine two ripostes
>instead of one. Thats a pretty big difference. Or imagine fighting a 3600
>quadding mob, it can oneround you without defensive disc, try putting a SK
>or PAlly on this and the fight is over before it started. Im not saying
>that
>this is your average fight, but the do happen quite a bit. The
>"tankability"
>of a warrior >> any other class. The main problem is holding the aggro.
>
>On normal exp mobs a Pally or SK works fine as tank, or on special mobs
>with
>aggro wipes (some mobs memblur themselves for example) or mobs that proc
>detaunt on MT. In these situations it can be troublesome to usea Warrior as
>MT cause the aggro a warrior produces takes a little time, and if its wiped
>every other round it wont be firm aggro, taunting factor on sk or pally is
>high and is easier to control. But these kind of mobs typically arent very
>hard hitters to make them tankable for these non defensive disc classes.
>
>But this is all a highend description and is more intersting if you are 65
>and has a bunch of aa and raid every day. Its not the average exp group
>players everyday fights.
>
>Dont take this wrong, im jus ttrying to provide an insight into another
>world that I suspect most on this list have never seen and have a hard time
>to imagine.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nuada bobkins [mailto:ikestarwolf@...]
>Sent: den 26 april 2003 06:11
>To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [EverQuest] Re: SK or Pali
>
>
>
>Must have missed a few mails hehe, anyway it looks like a typical "my class
>is better argument".
>
>What he means by DPS is Damage Per Second which is how Melees work out most
>efficient weapon combo's. As for a tank (Pure Warrior) not needing DPS that
>is not really true, Tanks have to keep aggro and best way to do this is by
>hurting the target the most, if the Tank isn't doing enough DPS then all
>the
>Taunting in the world won't stop the target hitting the
>Rangers/Rogues/Bards/Casters. As for the pally/SK being MT they don't have
>to many HP, but they can hold their own with decent gear <shrug>
>
>Aranon <Knights In Arms>
>
>53 Bard
>
>Druzil Ro
>
>
> >From: James
>
> >Reply-To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
> >To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: RE: [EverQuest] Re: SK or Pali
> >Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 10:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >What did all that mean. Can u tell me what this bs meant?
> >
> >"LAINE. Mikael (Nol)" wrote:Kinda sux to ask high-end stuff here? =P
>rofl,
>one of the replys had a
> >decent advice and the rest was exactly what you said you didn't want.
> >
> >Another thing, dps means shit to a tank, a tank is about building aggro
>and
>
> >beeing the main focus of your mobs.
> >
> >Pally is useless as a MT, SK is way better but why not a warrior if
>you're
> >looking for a MT? However, like the previous mail said, ogre SK would
> >probably be your best choice.
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Xariak [mailto:xquocdbz@...]
> >Sent: den 21 april 2003 23:58
> >To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [EverQuest] Re: SK or Pali
> >
> >
> >yeah hands down SKs are better dps than pallys id never say different
> >
> >
> >
> >Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >
> >Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
>
> _____
>
>On the move? Get Hotmail on your <http://g.msn.com/8HMUENUK/2731> mobile
>phone
>
>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>ADVERTISEMENT
>
><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245454.3115308.4434529.2595810/D=egroupweb/S=17052350
>93:HM/A=1457554/R=0/*http://ipunda.com/clk/beibunmaisuiyuiwabei>
>
><http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245454.3115308.4434529.2595810/D=egroupmai
>l/S=:HM/A=1457554/rand=978494680>
>
>Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
><http://www.everquest.com>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus