Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

are you enjoying guardian pvp?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Classes > Jedi Knight > Guardian
are you enjoying guardian pvp?

AlyoshaCephas's Avatar


AlyoshaCephas
04.15.2012 , 09:34 PM | #21
Quote: Originally Posted by Sickboy_ View Post
>using the CLASS DESCRIPTION AS AN ARGUMENT

You're way too dumb to be posting on these boards. Your opinion is invalid. Leave.
I know it's hard to admit you're wrong, but you're wrong. Your argument is akin to saying "I know you designed my class to be a healer class, but I don't want to play it that way, I want to do DPS on par with DPS classes! If I choose to not heal that should mean my ability to heal is moot!"

You've chosen an AC that is fundamentally about tanking/support. Yes, it has trees that focus more on DPS, but the skills that make the AC unique are consistent regardless of the chosen tree. Again: use them or don't. But don't cry that something is broken because you are either too poor a player to use your class to its full potential and/or too ignorant a gamer to understand that DPS is not the sole indicator of skill or a class' ability to contribute.

And... really? I hope you're kidding, because I weep for you if you actually think the class descriptions are a moot point. I'm sorry you ignored them, I'm sorry you think that the descriptions the developers of the game gave you to work with don't inform your understanding of the classes. But, on the small (and sad) chance you're being serious, such an (mis)understanding is your fault, not anyone else's.

Sickboy_'s Avatar


Sickboy_
04.15.2012 , 10:02 PM | #22
Quote: Originally Posted by AlyoshaCephas View Post
I know it's hard to admit you're wrong, but you're wrong. Your argument is akin to saying "I know you designed my class to be a healer class, but I don't want to play it that way, I want to do DPS on par with DPS classes! If I choose to not heal that should mean my ability to heal is moot!"

You've chosen an AC that is fundamentally about tanking/support. Yes, it has trees that focus more on DPS, but the skills that make the AC unique are consistent regardless of the chosen tree. Again: use them or don't. But don't cry that something is broken because you are either too poor a player to use your class to its full potential and/or too ignorant a gamer to understand that DPS is not the sole indicator of skill or a class' ability to contribute.

And... really? I hope you're kidding, because I weep for you if you actually think the class descriptions are a moot point. I'm sorry you ignored them, I'm sorry you think that the descriptions the developers of the game gave you to work with don't inform your understanding of the classes. But, on the small (and sad) chance you're being serious, such an (mis)understanding is your fault, not anyone else's.
If guardians are ONLY intended to be tanks, why do they have two dps trees?

That's what I thought. You are using ad hominem and logical fallacies in an attempt to sidetrack the debate, because you have no argumentative skills whatsoever.

AlyoshaCephas's Avatar


AlyoshaCephas
04.16.2012 , 05:20 AM | #23
I've never said here or elsewhere, nor has BW, that Guardians are "only intended to be tanks", and have acknowledged their DPS trees. As I see it, there are two things to be considered against the suggestion made above that DPS Guardians should be on par with the DPS of a Sentinel.

The first is that BioWare has introduced us to them as different classes and provided us with their design and expectations for each. From the very first encounter you have with the choice between the two ACs, one is represented as a DPS class and the other as a combination of support and DPS. The Sentinel creates a "web of damage" that sees "holes in the enemy defense" to efficiently attack. The Guardian is a "wall between the good people of the Republic and their enemies ... dar[ing] opponents to attack." They are "a hard target to take down" and "inspire allies to amazing feats". Even just these snippets from the shortest descriptions should warn away any misinterpretation that both are intended to be equally effective at pure DPS.

The second is simply that within the Guardian's unique skills, and I mean those that are not specific to any tree, are several support skills (i.e., Guardian Leap, Taunt, Challenging Call, Guard). You cannot ignore these skills in the conversation, even if you decide to do so in your gameplay. If someone chooses to not use a portion of the skills of their AC that is a valid, if inefficient, way to play their character. But to pretend they aren't there is to misrepresent the Guardian in a conversation about its role, and to choose to not use a portion of an AC's capabilities means the class has indeed been gimped, but not by anyone but the player.

I realize that for most people in MMOs the definition of effectiveness for any class in PvP except healers is "more DPS", but this, thankfully so, is not the case in SWTOR. You are correct to say that Guardian is subpar in DPS, but incorrect to assert that such an imbalance in DPS equals ineffectiveness. If your only interest is being the best at DPS in PvP, I strongly encourage you to be something other than Guardian, as its articulated role and skills make it clear that it is not a pure DPS class and will therefore always do less DPS than the classes that are.


tl;dr: BioWare has shown through their descriptions and provided skills that they do not intend Sentinels and Guardians to be able to DPS at an equal level.
  • If you want DPS, go Sentinel.
  • If you want a combination of DPS and support, go Guardian.
  • If you want Guardian to do pure DPS on par with Sentinel... well, you'll probably need to develop a new game.

CapuchinSeven's Avatar


CapuchinSeven
04.16.2012 , 05:59 AM | #24
Quote: Originally Posted by Smashbrother View Post
Dude the description of a guardian is the complete opposite of support.
Just ignore all those MMOs and PNP games that have a leader/warlord buff support class with descriptions akin to "leaders on and off the battlefield".

Not that I think Guardians are nothing but support. But yeah, you're talking crap.
I know chop-knees.

croll's Avatar


croll
04.16.2012 , 08:11 AM | #25
Quote: Originally Posted by AlyoshaCephas View Post
I've never said here or elsewhere, nor has BW, that Guardians are "only intended to be tanks", and have acknowledged their DPS trees. As I see it, there are two things to be considered against the suggestion made above that DPS Guardians should be on par with the DPS of a Sentinel.

The first is that BioWare has introduced us to them as different classes and provided us with their design and expectations for each. From the very first encounter you have with the choice between the two ACs, one is represented as a DPS class and the other as a combination of support and DPS. The Sentinel creates a "web of damage" that sees "holes in the enemy defense" to efficiently attack. The Guardian is a "wall between the good people of the Republic and their enemies ... dar[ing] opponents to attack." They are "a hard target to take down" and "inspire allies to amazing feats". Even just these snippets from the shortest descriptions should warn away any misinterpretation that both are intended to be equally effective at pure DPS.

The second is simply that within the Guardian's unique skills, and I mean those that are not specific to any tree, are several support skills (i.e., Guardian Leap, Taunt, Challenging Call, Guard). You cannot ignore these skills in the conversation, even if you decide to do so in your gameplay. If someone chooses to not use a portion of the skills of their AC that is a valid, if inefficient, way to play their character. But to pretend they aren't there is to misrepresent the Guardian in a conversation about its role, and to choose to not use a portion of an AC's capabilities means the class has indeed been gimped, but not by anyone but the player.

I realize that for most people in MMOs the definition of effectiveness for any class in PvP except healers is "more DPS", but this, thankfully so, is not the case in SWTOR. You are correct to say that Guardian is subpar in DPS, but incorrect to assert that such an imbalance in DPS equals ineffectiveness. If your only interest is being the best at DPS in PvP, I strongly encourage you to be something other than Guardian, as its articulated role and skills make it clear that it is not a pure DPS class and will therefore always do less DPS than the classes that are.


tl;dr: BioWare has shown through their descriptions and provided skills that they do not intend Sentinels and Guardians to be able to DPS at an equal level.
  • If you want DPS, go Sentinel.
  • If you want a combination of DPS and support, go Guardian.
  • If you want Guardian to do pure DPS on par with Sentinel... well, you'll probably need to develop a new game.

Good read m8 but let me tell you something, what you said here should be expected to happen with any class but sadly that's not the case.. a commando with its dps tree, makes more damage than a gunslinger which is a pure dps class. Gunslinger makes a quicker work of its opponents but at the end of a WZ both classes makes dps with a difference of 5% of each other and if this is a fact, it should be expected from each class when you select dps tree.

BTW i have never said guardians doesn't do damage, i only said that when a dps tree selected, guardians become unefficient and unsuccesful on the battleground which shouldn't happen.
DIFFICULT TO SEE. ALWAYS IN MOTION IS THE FUTURE.
SWG Veteran-Radiant

Gearsofwarthree's Avatar


Gearsofwarthree
04.16.2012 , 08:24 AM | #26
I don't really see the point of arguing over a in game description. But if we were to agree guards should do less dps then a sent then the lesser dps so called wall should have better overall defense cds. Which most would say we dont and i think thats what annoys dps guards. Now only if our taunts worked for ourselves too.

VoidJustice's Avatar


VoidJustice
04.16.2012 , 08:30 AM | #27
Quote: Originally Posted by CapuchinSeven View Post
Just ignore all those MMOs and PNP games that have a leader/warlord buff support class with descriptions akin to "leaders on and off the battlefield".

Not that I think Guardians are nothing but support. But yeah, you're talking crap.
I lead my guilds pvp premades. I am the first into battle. I call the battle plan at the Wz gate. I execute the most dangerous opfor solo most of the times. I defend all our healers. I defend our dps, I attack into multiple BM and WH geared players solo and do appreciable damage and slowing before killed, allowing for strategic capping and Wz pwnage.

If that's not leading a Wz what is?

Vigilance Guardians got buffs
Focus Guardians got nerfs
(3v1 !!!! lol op much Focus spec?)

adapt

Guardian is super viable pvp wise.
I 2v1 just fine most classes (not heavy armor classes and no healing).

1v1 is almost a given but yea there are a few players on my server that trolop me
and that's great, means I still have stuff to learn.

You give me teammates that listen, I win warzones.
IMHO that's working as intended. OP maybe... ><

no offense guys but, Im kicking serious butt in half Champ, Half BM...
(Full On Vigilance spec)
maybe my server is less competitive due to low population thou...
however, you are as good as your opponents make you so Im only that
good also... those on larger servers will be better due to statical placement
of skilled players.

Pugs... are pugs... win some... lose lots. You can't carry an entire team of pugers against premades...

Also I don't expect to 3v1 other BM geared players but, hey maybe I just
have lower expectations... /shrug
If Im entering a fight at 3+ v 1 I expect to lose... slow as possible and focus defence helps alot in this situation, as does awe and aoe snare. Awesomesauce...

Also, being a good "GUARDIAN", means all the healers that are left still heal you, and we all know what happens if you give any guardian a heal or 2. PWNAGE.

team play > I solo 3v1 lololololololololololololol spec

p.s. Not trying to be rude, Im not lying about my performance, and you can do it too... will help any guardians willing to learn, adapt, overcome.
Understanding is the true weapon of a Jedi and willpower is the iron clad arm that wields it.

AlyoshaCephas's Avatar


AlyoshaCephas
04.16.2012 , 08:56 AM | #28
Quote: Originally Posted by croll View Post
Good read m8 but let me tell you something, what you said here should be expected to happen with any class but sadly that's not the case.. a commando with its dps tree, makes more damage than a gunslinger which is a pure dps class. Gunslinger makes a quicker work of its opponents but at the end of a WZ both classes makes dps with a difference of 5% of each other and if this is a fact, it should be expected from each class when you select dps tree.
I agree 100%. For what it's worth, my comments were directed only at the implied and overt statement in above posts that if the Guardian does not do as much DPS as a Sentinel they are broken. Regarding those two ACs, it seems clear to me that the differences in descriptions and skills granted should prove that discrepancies between their DPS numbers are intended and are unlikely to be changed (nor should we expect them to). Efficiency goes beyond DPS numbers, and while defense strategies are not everyone's cup of tea in PvP, they are game changing abilities that the Guardian, spec'd in any tree, can shine in.

That said, I think such arguments should be made to address the discrepancies in other classes. By no means do I think this game doesn't need serious work in balance. This is just coming from someone whose experience in game has been mainly Guardian and Sentinel and am speaking about the differences between them both.

CapuchinSeven's Avatar


CapuchinSeven
04.16.2012 , 09:23 AM | #29
You missed my point Void bud, I'm not personally saying that I think we're a support class just that the sentence "we lead on and off the battlefield" doesn't really change much given that warlords/leaders is a common class in RPG games and is almost always a support buff class.

I don't think we're support personally, just that the point he made doesn't really work.
I know chop-knees.

TomC's Avatar


TomC
04.16.2012 , 01:12 PM | #30
Quote: Originally Posted by Smashbrother View Post
The very definition of the word leader is not support.
This makes me sad for anyone you hope to lead.