Which one?

[Grutch_Fallowhorn]

Which one of the heavy fighter is going to be the best at holding that attention of the mobs. I plan on doing raid content and want to be considered a "raid" tank. Not sure if this question can be addressed at this time. All of the 4 defensive fighters look fun to play and even the zerker and monk seems interesting for an old eq player. Just wanted to know opinions.

[Tazzrin Jaegernaut]

Well from what we have now is this:

Dreadknight: Nasty stuns that will help a bit on crowd control. They will probably be the most arcane of all the defensive fighters (until we find out more about the Inquisitor.) One of the cooler factors of the DK's is Dreadful Countenance which will instill fear into the hearts of their enemies.

Paladins: Possibly the most utility of the defensive fighters (again, until we hear more about the Inquisitor.) It sounds as though they will have some very nice auras, some heals, and of course they will most likely be the sought after defensive fighters when engaging in undead encounters.

Warriors: Now with warriors we have had a little more details obtained through leaks than any of the other fighters. Unfortunately, it seems that the leaked newsletter has been pulled and is no longer available to see. Luckily though, TheDrunkenDwarf was quick enough to post copies of pieces of the newsletter in our forums: Here, Here, and Here. What we do know for sure is that warriors are going to be the beasts of DPS for the heavy fighters. Also, notice how many of the attacks the warrior has at his disposal have some sort of agro increaser. Looks promising for the agro department :wink: .


However, Sigil has stated before that agro lock, such as what was in EQ, will not be in the game. It will most likely take very skilled players to have something close to what we remember as agro lock. So, fighters should consider training their rescues as well.

Finally, we cannot tell at this point who will be having the most agro control of the defensive fighters. But, being bias and judging from history, I will be putting my money on the warrior :twisted: .

[ellestil]

At this point I would agree with your assertation. It seems warriors have about the same mitigation/hp as the DK, Pali, and Inquis. So at that level they are the same. However, warriors have high DPS ( the highest of all other tanks ). This of course lends itself to holding aggro. That's not to say that the other classes may not get some spike or over time dps abilities, but at this point we don't know how vast the dps difference is.

After that, the warrior abilities seem to all have some sort of aggro modifier on them. ( There is no list for the other classes that have been posted or leaked concerning +aggro to their abilities. )

Take all three of those into consideration and it appears at this point that the warrior will be able to manage aggro the "best". But, that's going off of partial unfinished info, so who knows by the time it hits live servers.

I will say that I hope the aggro management isn't too huge a difference between the classes, otherwise, it doesn't matter if a pali or dk can take a hit as well as a warr. Their other main purpose is to hold hate off of the soft targets. If a warr does this too well above the others, guess who's gonna have a harder time getting a group and who's not. But I think Brad and Co. already know this and will work to keep it reasonable.

Ellestil

PS-Just to be clear, I think all tank classes should be roughly the same when it comes to taking damage and holding hate. Where I think their true differences should shine is their abilities beyond those two jobs. DK's for CC, Debuff, maybe some lifetaps and such. Pali's for buffs, heals, and such. Inquis for anti magic, mana regen, CC (who knows), and warr's for group enhancements such as increase dps, better exploitation of enemy weaknesses and the like.