Darosh wrote:KotBS for a guranteed spot in every group and format, besides solo roam - not really gear dependent, easy to play.
This is true.
Darosh wrote:SM for a spot in more min-max'd compositions (in both, organized large and small scale); afaik, extremely gear-dependent and a lot more challenging to (properly) play than KotBS.
This is also true.
Darosh wrote:IB mainly for small scale (and all-around, especially melee-centric compositions); duos (engi, slayer, x,...), yadayada, reasonable solo roam class - less gear-dependent, but more challenging to (properly) play than SM.
This is true as well. I have seen many good Dwarf players out there, and when they all get together they can be a formidable force. Which, of course, renders a bit of fun for each player by default. However I support the notion an SM is more challenging to properly play than any of the other Order tanks, a fact which also renders a default enjoyment factor.
Darosh wrote:KotBS for a guranteed spot in every group and format, besides solo roam - not really gear dependent, easy to play.
This is true.
Darosh wrote:SM for a spot in more min-max'd compositions (in both, organized large and small scale); afaik, extremely gear-dependent and a lot more challenging to (properly) play than KotBS.
This is also true.
Darosh wrote:IB mainly for small scale (and all-around, especially melee-centric compositions); duos (engi, slayer, x,...), yadayada, reasonable solo roam class - less gear-dependent, but more challenging to (properly) play than SM.
This is true as well. I have seen many good Dwarf players out there, and when they all get together they can be a formidable force. Which, of course, renders a bit of fun for each player by default. However I support the notion an SM is more challenging to properly play than any of the other Order tanks, a fact which also renders a default enjoyment factor.
I expected a major (re)'but'(tal) when I saw all the quotes.
Now, in regards to SM/IB in terms of challenge, it probably wasn't quite right of me to compare them directly - I agree.
I personally cannot - for the luv of god - make SM work for me, the stances and AP management just break me.
I'd say a better approach to describe the challenge provided by both classes is to differentiate between purely mechanical hardships and overall gameflow (e.g. maintenance of cycles and so on).
While the SM, atleast for me, is a mechanical nightmare, the IB has a harder time properly squeezing out every bit of potential.
Ff you get the stances and AP management down with an SM you'll be good and more or less independent of how an engagement develops from there onwards (as in, for example, your rotations cannot be entirely be broken).
While on an IB there are about a million shades of "performance" past the point of grasping mechanics and such; if you were to try to reach and maintain full potential throughout an engagement, you'd likely need 5 hands and a bunch of additional eyes), e.g.: keeping up all relevant buffs 24/7 on all or most group members (of course dependent on the enagagement, for arguments sake in this case a proper one in which all members are either being engaged or subject to hardswaps at any given point in time), adapting buff rotations on the fly to get them back on track, ... ~ there is nothing more painful than being CC'd out of a fluent buff rotation or breaking it by derping about with assists and such, imo.
TLDR: Mechanically, in terms of challenge, it'd be SM>>>IB - gameflow-wise, in terms of challenge, it'd be IB>>>SM. Practicing mechanics (e.g.: [clunky] stances, transitions, dps rotations, ...) versus practicing overall awareness (e.g.: furious party frame tapping, babysitting, ...)
As far as I am concerned, an IB could basically be considered a hybrid of Runepriest and Tank - a SM on the other hand could be considered a hybrid of Maradaur and Tank.
Mate if you want the opinion of a Destro player. I have beat on order tanks for ages now, and I would have to say that the hardest ones out there is the KOTBS, they can be low rr and still be made of steel. Shove a board on him and he will hold a flag in an sc all on his own (they seem boring though). But watching how the order tanks play, I would think that the pesky IB looks the most fun to play, go with a two hander and that self heal, they got an arse as tough as a wombat and they bite like a bull shark.......gees they annoy me, gotta love em though.
CRUDE big boss! (Scrubs can lead too)
Yardpig- Black Orc
Yardy wrote:Mate if you want the opinion of a Destro player. I have beat on order tanks for ages now, and I would have to say that the hardest ones out there is the KOTBS, they can be low rr and still be made of steel. Shove a board on him and he will hold a flag in an sc all on his own (they seem boring though). But watching how the order tanks play, I would think that the pesky IB looks the most fun to play, go with a two hander and that self heal, they got an arse as tough as a wombat and they bite like a bull shark.......gees they annoy me, gotta love em though.
Probably vigilance based. Need more sever blessing.
Khorlar, Thorvold, Sjohgar, Anareth, Toldavf, Hartwin, Gotrin and others -_-
diedrake wrote:Yes, i too play dessy, always have been primary dessy player. But anyhoo out of all tanks of order the knigjt has been main irritation lol.
For me it's Ironbreaker, something about those wee buggers. Like battering a mountain with a toothpick
