Curse

eudas · May 05, 2006, 07:56 PM // 19:56

They make great damage-dealers, though.

Hot tank-on-tank action FTW...

eudas

unienaule · May 05, 2006, 07:57 PM // 19:57

I would have to say that just because they are spellcasters does NOT mean they know what they are doing.

Dove_Song · May 05, 2006, 09:24 PM // 21:24

if your team feel s they can soak up the melee damage and direct you to go after the spell castors....your not a "tank" anymore.....you've just become a "damage dealer".

The definition does not need to change, becuse you are no longer "tanking".

Swinging Fists · May 05, 2006, 10:50 PM // 22:50

Now that we have Assassins, the Assassins should go right past the enemy melee to take out the spell casters while the Warriors tank the melee fighters.

Zexion · May 05, 2006, 11:10 PM // 23:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by noblepaladin

Sometimes people use "tank" for warrior. I think this is horrible because many newer player end up thinking they are "tanks" just because they are warriors. This is so wrong. A warrior is not good at taking damage at all! A warrior is the same as an elementalist with 20 more armor unless they have the right build, you might as well have an elementalist use ward against melee and stand in front of 4 enemy warriors, she would do much better. As someone said, MOST warriors cannot "tank" without 2 monks constantly healing them. A "tank" is character that is designed to absorb damage. The solo warrior IDS farming build is an example of a true "tank" build. It can survive attacks from 30 imps forever by constantly using healing signet while only taking 0-1 damage per attack, due to about +100 armor on top of the normal 80 armor from Dolyak, Watch Yourself, and Elemental Resistance. When I play a monk and there is a good "tank", the only thing I have to do is to remove conditions or hexes. The divine favor is over enough to keep the "tank" warrior alive. Only the degen or hexes actually hurt the "tank", because most of the other damage is absorbed by armor or avoid by stances. People should stop calling warriors "tanks" until they see that they actually have defensive skills.

The same goes for "nukers". When someone is looking for a "nuker" they are usually looking for an elementalist. Rarely do I seem them accept an Echo/Shatter Mesmer or a Barrage Ranger as a "nuker", although both of them are just as capable in dealing AoE damage.

Actually, it is 40 more armor when it comes to taking physical damage. And if you do some stats, I am sure you will get the result that a majority of the enemies in PvE does physical damage (warriors, assasins, rangers).
Additionally, there is a shield. 16 armor. And quite often, I, and a few warriors I know, use Watch Yourself!
That's 136 armor vs physical. Then comes -2 damage from a single piece of knight, which all good warriors know to have. And likely -2 conditional shield. And -2 or -3 on chest. So, -6 damage and 136 Armor. Let's do the math.
The formula for the % of damage you take with x AL is this:
Damage%=2^((60-x)/40)*100

Let's insert 136.

Damage%~=26,79%
That makes you take almost only 1/4 of the damage.

So you take damage*0,2679-6 damage per attack as a warrior.

And let's look at the ele, with 60 armor (vs phys).
The formula gives Damage%=100%
And eles have no damage reduction.
So they take the exact damage done to them. And even when they use Armor of Earth (at 12 Earth Magic), they only gain 60 armor. 120 armor halves damage. So the warrior takes almost half the damage of an ele using Armor of Earth, minus 6.

So yes, a warrior is VERY GOOD at tanking damage.

_Zexion

MMSDome · May 05, 2006, 11:44 PM // 23:44

assassains arent really tanking, they bascially are running in front of a squad of marines naked getting shot at.