Rolling a SK or warrior

[Jimjam]

From 30+ I imagine the sk/war is gonna be mainly pulling / positioning adds to be CCd while the charm pet does a lot of the work.

My first static was enc/dru/sk (later swapping to war, then even later swap to cleric and monk) and honestly the melee had to make itself useful in things apart from melee otherwise it would just slow down xp compared to the casters just doing charm shenanigans.

52+ perhaps the warrior can clinch boss fights with evasive/defensive. SK may be able to do some cooler pulls / corpse recoveries.

Most of the time the difference won't be as large as people are making out.

[Lampolo]

1. Paladins/Shadowknights are generally superior as tanks for leveling groups. For a large portion of players on P99, this is the vast majority of their play time. Their utility and snap agro are better than a Warriors. In leveling groups mobs die so fast it doesn't really matter how your DPS composition is set up, and you don't need disciplines of any kind. If the majority of players truly cared about min/maxing DPS in group scenarios, under-geared players would never be allowed to group. This clearly isn't the case.

This group you doesnt need a tank

2. Shadowknights specifically are superior to Warriors in groups where pulling is an important aspect. Fungi Tunic camp is a perfect example. You would always pick a Monk or Shadowknight in a Cleric/Enchanter/XXX trio. You need the extra pulling power, you don't need disciplines, and DPS doesn't matter that much.

Why bother with SK when you can have a monk?

3. Warriors are superior to hybrids in any tanking situation that needs disciplines, whether this is solo, group, or raid. This is why Shadowknights are generally the worst raid class. They have no good disciplines, and they don't even have Divine Strength or SoulFire like Paladins. On P99 life taps are nerfed, and guilds aren't interested in doing the Harm Touch spamming strategy. Guilds also do not use SKs for pulling.

Seems reasonable.

Making a blanket statement like "Warrirors are always better" is just wrong and unhelpful. As I mentioned earlier, I agree with Keebz that if you are a player that worries about changing their mind about a character later on down the road, Warrior is the safest bet. They get more useful as they progress, whereas Paladins and Shadowknights always have a certain level of usefulness, but never surpass the overall potential of a Warrior.

Yes, all classes can have a certain level of usefulness.

Hopefully OP responds to this thread at some point, because we may be able to determine what his end game goals are (if any). My assumption has been he doesn't care too much about end game, because he doesn't raid. But I don't know for sure, it is just an assumption.

We have already established wars are better now don't you agree? No need for this detail.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Lampolo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This group you doesnt need a tank

Why bother with SK when you can have a monk?

Seems reasonable.

Yes, all classes can have a certain level of usefulness.

We have already established wars are better now don't you agree? No need for this detail.

No evidence given, and the logic here doesn't prove your point that Warriors are always better. You are basically just saying Warriors are better in specific end game scenarios, which everyone here agrees upon. You are throwing out a huge chunk of the game by dismissing leveling lol. And as for Monks, OP is asking about SK vs. Warrior. It doesn't sound like OP wants to roll Monk. Since he is in a static, SK works just fine for Fungi Tunic camp.

[Bardp1999]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How am I ruining group comps? I will re-iterate my points for people interested in how the game works. You do no appear to be interested in an actual discussion, or care about how the game works.

1. Paladins/Shadowknights are generally superior as tanks for leveling groups. For a large portion of players on P99, this is the vast majority of their play time. Their utility and snap agro are better than a Warriors. In leveling groups mobs die so fast it doesn't really matter how your DPS composition is set up, and you don't need disciplines of any kind. If the majority of players truly cared about min/maxing DPS in group scenarios, under-geared players would never be allowed to group. This clearly isn't the case.

2. Shadowknights specifically are superior to Warriors in groups where pulling is an important aspect. Fungi Tunic camp is a perfect example. You would always pick a Monk or Shadowknight in a Cleric/Enchanter/XXX trio. You need the extra pulling power, you don't need disciplines, and DPS doesn't matter that much.

3. Warriors are superior to hybrids in any tanking situation that needs disciplines, whether this is solo, group, or raid. This is why Shadowknights are generally the worst raid class. They have no good disciplines, and they don't even have Divine Strength or SoulFire like Paladins. On P99 life taps are nerfed, and guilds aren't interested in doing the Harm Touch spamming strategy. Guilds also do not use SKs for pulling.

Making a blanket statement like "Warrirors are always better" is just wrong and unhelpful. As I mentioned earlier, I agree with Keebz that if you are a player that worries about changing their mind about a character later on down the road, Warrior is the safest bet. They get more useful as they progress, whereas Paladins and Shadowknights always have a certain level of usefulness, but never surpass the overall potential of a Warrior.

Hopefully OP responds to this thread at some point, because we may be able to determine what his end game goals are (if any). My assumption has been he doesn't care too much about end game, because he doesn't raid. But I don't know for sure, it is just an assumption.

You're making stupid points that don't really apply to the actual game play of 3 friends rolling new toons on the server.

Why would agro matter in this trio when Charm DPS is the only other damage being put out? Agro is completely meaningless in this group. learn to root shit. Warrior is the better tank in virtually every scenario you can imagine besides needing an SK to FD split - and for 99.999% of camps in P99 an enchanter can do this just as well if not better.

Unless you are in very expensive gear SK and Pallys are hot garbage at taking and mitigating damage and take a noticeably larger amount of mana to heal than a warrior. Not to mention if they make it to the 50s warrior disc outweighs any/all benefits of that hybrids have. Hybrids are not as good as warriors, pretty much period.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Bardp1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're making stupid points that don't really apply to the actual game play of 3 friends rolling new toons on the server.

Why would agro matter in this trio when Charm DPS is the only other damage being put out? Agro is completely meaningless in this group. Warrior is the better tank in virtually every scenario you can imagine besides needing an SK to FD split - and for 99.999% of camps in P99 an enchanter can do this just as well if not better.

Unless you are in very expensive gear SK and Pallys are hot garbage at taking and mitigating damage and take a noticeably larger amount of mana to heal than a warrior. Not to mention if they make it to the 50s warrior disc outweighs any/all benefits of that hybrids have. Hybrids are not as good as warriors, pretty much period.

I guess you forgot about charm breaks, spells resists, etc. If the Enchanter plays perfectly and gets perfect luck, the third person isn't needed lol.

[Bardp1999]

The reality is P99 isnt rocket science, play whatever you want OP, the differences are mostly flavor. Warrior Disc is singularly game-breaking but that's only at the very high end.

I have a 60 SK - in mostly full raid gear now - I leveled him twinked to the literally extreme and Myrdrraal was known as pretty much the best tank possible in any zone I was in while leveling. But that's with Sword of Pain (got it at lvl 5) fungi, CoF, Crown of Narandi, Elder Beads, Blood Ember greaves, ect ect ect.

Was super fun on SK

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Bardp1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The reality is P99 isnt rocket science, play whatever you want OP, the differences are mostly flavor. Warrior Disc is singularly game-breaking but that's only at the very high end.

I have a 60 SK - in mostly full raid gear now - I leveled him twinked to the literally extreme and Myrdrraal was known as pretty much the best tank possible in any zone I was in while leveling. But that's with Sword of Pain (got it at lvl 5) fungi, CoF, Crown of Narandi, Elder Beads, Blood Ember greaves, ect ect ect.

Was super fun on SK

Yup, agreed. In OP's case, I would only advise him to roll Warrior if he has doubts about whether or not he wants to raid later on. In that case Warrior is the safest bet. Or if OP has some very specific camps in mind his other two friends are planning on doing at high levels. In that case his choice would depend on the camps in question.

[Toxigen]

Ideally the OP just rolls a monk, honestly.

Best of most worlds.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Toxigen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ideally the OP just rolls a monk, honestly.

Best of most worlds.

I do agree. Monk would overall be better for OP's trio if we removed the requirement of SK or Warrior.

EDIT: Nevermind. Should have read OP's posts again. The reason why OP isn't rolling a Monk is because he already has a level 49 Monk. I would imagine if he just wanted to roll another Monk, he wouldn't be asking about SKs vs. Warriors in the first place.

[Bardp1999]

Monks are fucking TERRIBLE tanks until high lvl or fungi

Source: My first character on the server was a monk that i lvled to 60 untwinked