ROR without war

[Luth]

I refuse to write a wall of text, sorry, just i notice we're playing a different game if you deny that 2H TANKS dispense a lot of dps maintaining an high survivability and if you deny that mdps are the weakest classes in the game.
The rest of what you wrote is a your wrong interpretation about what i mean.

In my opinion a well balanced pvp game must rotate around this concept: TANKS > MDPS, MDPS > CASTERS, CASTERS > TANK.
If not, every meachanics will be unbalanced.

This is just my 2 cents. Cya

That wall of text was also information for the other players around, to prevent the spread of unproven blabla.

Again you write a lot of assertions without delivering some reasons for it. In my wall of text i made it pretty clear why i think that tanks are not the "über-DDs" you seem to believe they are and why melee DDs are not "weak" (btw, mdps is no class).
I really don't know what you believe what a massive DPS boost one gets while wielding a 2handed melee weapon.

Maybe you could make it a bit clear what i "misinterpreted" exactly.
You wrote

TANKS (with shield!!!) > MDPS, MDPS > CASTERS, CASTERS > TANKS

The part in brackets, as well as your previous text, means that you think only tanks with a shield are the counter to melee DDs, while i wrote that the difference in damage output and resistance on s&b tanks vs 2H tank is not as big as you may believe.

As i have shown already many times in this forum, i'm well aware that the foundation of this games balancing is based on different archetypes.
But the point is: Your conclusion that melee DDs are weak and 2h tanks are very strong is plain wrong.

A general hint at the end:
In the very near future "argumentation skills" of a seven year old (e.g. "I'm right and you are wrong. period.") won't be tolerated anymore in balancing discussions. It is really advisable to read the linked rules to get an idea about proper argumentation.
Either this or get rek'd by the mods...

[noisestorm]

^-- Hi.

[Penril]

hi!

[Toldavf]

I'd of applied for the job but I'm generally to lazy.

[sydd]

Also a well balanced pvp/rvr game isn't balanced around individual counters but rather synergies ( And in War's case there are A LOT).

If you talk about synergies I agree with you, but in any case it is not fair that some classes are much stronger than others 1vs1, or rather, it is not fair that some classes can be played only in groups.

That wall of text was also information for the other players around, to prevent the spread of unproven

Right, correct, but we do not always have time to do it and above all these are topics discussed already thousands of times and about which everyone has an opinion and it's hard to find a solution.

The part in brackets, as well as your previous text, means that you think only tanks with a shield are the counter to melee DDs, while i wrote that the difference in damage output and resistance on s&b tanks vs 2H tank is not as big as you may believe.

Ok, tell me, please, how many s&b tanks you see in RVR or Sc.

If your answer is "s&b tanks have the same number of 2H tanks" then we're playing a different game and it's not possible to discuss further on this topic. It's like to speak different languages.

If instead you recognize that most of the players prefer to play a 2h tanks i would like to have, by you, an explanation about it. It's possible that i can uderstand your vision about WAR unbalanced issues.

As i have shown already many times in this forum, i'm well aware that the foundation of this games balancing is based on different archetypes.
But the point is: Your conclusion that melee DDs are weak and 2h tanks are very strong is plain wrong.

This is just your opinion, it's not the truth. I don't know how many mmorpg did you play before (and after) WAR, but every pvp mmo i played before and after it, there were no imbalance pvp issues so big as in WAR. This is a fact.

A general hint at the end: Think about having the truth in his pocket saying that the others have definitely wrong is the real "argumentation skills" of a seven year old.
I prefer to ask for explanations and listen to what others are saying, but, once again, it's just my opinion.

[peterthepan3]

If by 2h tank you mean level 28 Chosens with greens and suffering from 'lol me Sauron!!' Syndrome then yes - there are a few. Doesn't mean they're useful. Has no bearing on balance whatsoever.

The group with 2 SnB tanks playing well and using htl will always prevail in orvr.

[Azarael]

@sydd:

I will confirm that I'd have purged you from a balance topic already. You keep asserting a point but you are shifting the burden of proof and offering none of your own. If you are unwilling to explain in detail why 2h tanks are great and MDPS are weak, which goes contrary to established doctrine in small scale favouring melee train groups in T4 and the obvious need for protection in large scale, then the burden of proof is on you. If you're unwilling to support your point, stop posting - that's a moderational instruction and not a request.

Ok, tell me, please, how many s&b tanks you see in RVR or Sc.

If your answer is "s&b tanks have the same number of 2H tanks" then we're playing a different game and it's not possible to discuss further on this topic. It's like to speak different languages.

If instead you recognize that most of the players prefer to play a 2h tanks i would like to have, by you, an explanation about it. It's possible that i can uderstand your vision about WAR unbalanced issues.

Invalid point, try again. You're assuming that the trend for 2h tanks is based on their being more powerful than MDPS and S&B tanks. This is an assumption and is invalid. It's also wrong. I play a 2h tank (SM) but I do not do so because I believe it represents a strong class / playstyle. I do so because that, personally, is more fun for me in most situations than playing the S&B variant. I will also note that on the rare occasion that I deign to play the current implementation of RvR, I generally use a shield.

[Tiggo]

@sydd: It's also wrong. I play a 2h tank (SM) but I do not do so because I believe it represents a strong class / playstyle. I do so because that, personally, is more fun for me in most situations than playing the S&B variant. I will also note that on the rare occasion that I deign to play the current implementation of RvR, I generally use a shield.

also ad to that: we in t3 now for a long time, most players are maxed out for a long time. So NATURALLY they try things out, and the first thing for a snb tank to try out is go 2h and have some fun with it.

[Shadowgurke]

If instead you recognize that most of the players prefer to play a 2h tanks i would like to have, by you, an explanation about it. It's possible that i can uderstand your vision about WAR unbalanced issues.

People play MDPS with no guard or situational awareness. People die a lot. They see Scenario scores and realize that tanks make super high damage. What they don't realize is that they only do mediocre damage but their survivability makes them survive a lot longer hence putting out more damage with very low pressure. People roll tanks. But they have the mindset of being a dps with high survivability and not with the intent to play a real tank, guarding people and stuff. That mindset also leads to them running 2h over the SnB variant.

[footpatrol2]

People play MDPS with no guard or situational awareness. People die a lot. They see Scenario scores and realize that tanks make super high damage. What they don't realize is that they only do mediocre damage but their survivability makes them survive a lot longer hence putting out more damage with very low pressure. People roll tanks. But they have the mindset of being a dps with high survivability and not with the intent to play a real tank, guarding people and stuff. That mindset also leads to them running 2h over the SnB variant.

This ^

Look at the questions asked in advice everyday. Which tank does the best dps...