A Study Of N00bs

[oldmandennis]

My theory is that n00bs are either born or created. The mechanics and atmosphere of each class can greatly affect the percentage of n00bs to solid players in each class.

Some n00bs are born. The person sitting at the keyboard is an asshat who doesn't care about being a better player. They woln't listen or take advise. Born n00bs (BNs) will choose a class based on sterotype, and then they might reroll to something with flashy abilities or a reputation for being overpowered.

Some n00bs are created, or more acurately some classes do not force the noob we once were to be better players. We were all inexperienced once, but the best way to learn is swift and painful death when you make a mistake. It is better if the same mistake that gets you killed while questing is the one that kills you while instancing. Also, if you are playing an overly popular class, you simply get LESS groups, and therefore less chances to learn.

Classes that attract a lot a lot of BNs right off the bat:

Warriors - people like to think of themselves as big and strong
Rogues - antisocial types like sneaking around
Mages - pretty obvious archtype
Pallys - strong and can heal sounds like easy mode, plus it might attract alot of people who played Pally in another game

Classes that don't:

Priest - selfish players don't usually like to play a class that is clearly about helping others
Shaman - not alot of direct analogues in other games, description sounds like druid minus cool shapeshifting

Classes that attract BNs because of cool abilities / rumors of uberness:

Rogues - being stunlocked makes you want to reroll a rogue to get back at the bastard
Shaman - <sing> The hills are alive with the sound of "NERF SHAMMY" </sing>
Pally - those bubbles SEEM overpowered (not saying they are, just they seem that way)

Now for the classes that fail to make good players out of their n00bs:

Warriors a little bit, because zerk and zerg is ok for solo. However it is a high profile position, and people should help explain how to tank and manage aggro. Also, they are in demand for 5 person groups.
Mage about as much as Warrior, because solo play is about killing things fast. However a few deaths with the rest of the group /laguhing at you usually teaches them how to do it. Medium demand, its nice to have one atleast, but there are alot of them.
Druids not at all, because seeing the game from the MT, healer, secondary healer, and sometimes even DPS position (all in the same battle) should give you a good perspective on how all those spots should play. Usually in high demand, especially since they can fill so many roles.
Warlocks minimally, they are used to playing with a tank, just sub the warrior for the walker, and bring out the imp/sucubus. Medium demand, there's not a lot of them competing for spots, but they aren't particularly necessary either.
Priests not at all unless you are exceptionally dense and don't leave shadowform. 99% of priests got into it cause they like to heal. And of course they are always in very high demand.
Hunters there are alot of, relative to their utility. Still, it doesn't seem like they have an exceptionally complex roll in groups, and not super different then their roll in solo play.

Rogues are tough for me to analyze here. It's often nice to have one around, but there are usually 7 clamoring for that spot. And people often don't like them because they are so high on the BN scale above. I don't know much about how their abilities play out solo compared to in groups.

And that leaves Pallys and Shammys, two classes who's jobs change radically in groups. A big part of the problem is that in a smoothly functioning group, they contribute relativly little. They both add a little melee DPS, they both do a little buffing, and are just along for the ride on 95% of pulls. Then all of the sudden things get hairy, and people expect them to instantly and expertly pull out some of their rarely used tricky spells, which there are a lot of. Also, bad shammy/pally play will only be really exposed when things are going south, and usually there is someone else to blame. Mob gets away from the Tank and eats the priest? It might be the Shammys fault for blowing all his mana on shocks, but he could just as easily blame the priest for using GH instead of renew and not hitting fade fast enough, or the warrior for not locking the mob down properly. Lacking that immediate feedback of "I made a mistake, and it is completly my fault we wiped" makes it tougher to learn. Add that to the fact that there are a LOT of both of these classes out there for the BN reasons above, and you end up with people who have an incomplete picture of what their class entails.

I know I have one glaring defencie here: I have no explanation for the popularity of hunters. Is there some sort of coolness here I'm missing? They grind up levels very well, I'd say just about the best, but they are really tricky to dual with. Anyone out there have a good explanation for their popularity?

This is not ment to start a flame war. You'll notice I've cast as many stones at my own class as any other. We all know a good class X is better then a bad class Y, and you party with Z player of class X and he saves your bacon frequently. We are talking about generalized pubbies here.

I hope this can continue the discussion from the jacked CTF thread in a civil manner. I look forward to feedback, as the shaman is the only class I've capped, though I've played everything else atleast 20 levels, sometimes quite a bit more.

[Munkay]

This is not ment to start a flame war.&nbsp;

:whistling:

I hope this can continue the discussion from the jacked CTF thread in a civil manner.&nbsp; I look forward to feedback, as the shaman is the only class I've capped, though I've played everything else atleast 20 levels, sometimes quite a bit more.

I've read your post and I'm still a bit fuzzy on what you're asking. What are common classes played by people? And the reasons people play them based on opinions of strength/power? It appears to be the point of your post. If your thesis is that "uber builds" keep people from evolving into good players, please take the time to phrase it a bit better. Since your post so far leads me to ask...

So whats you're point about "born noobs"? I'll try to keep this short and simple: The lurkerlounge accepts and encourages people to play however they want to play. Sure, many people choose to do variants, or "harder" and "less popular" builds. But there are people here who are casual gamers, who play a few times a week and enjoy "uber builds" or what you seem to player "noob characters."

I realize the term "noob" has morphed from the original meaning: a new player. And since you're carrying a negative connotation with it, trying to generalize everyone who plays a popular build as a "noob" isn't going to make any friends here. So far you've demonstrated a failure to understand your audience, the first step towards making a flame war, regardless of how many "this is not a flame war" warnings you make.

Hopefully this post is helpful,

Cheers,

Munk

[oldmandennis]

Ok, I'll try to be a bit more clear about my intentions and definitions.

First off, I'm starting with the theory that some classes have a higher percentage of poor players then others. Then I'm trying to explain the pattern I see. I'm asking people to contribute their observations and alternate theorys.

I realize the post was long, I just threw a bunch of stuff out there, hoping for a civil discussion to follow. I'm sorry if it didn't come out that way.

I thought my definition of born noob was clear: A person who does not care when their poor play makes things less fun for the people in your party. Almost by definition, if you are reading this site, you do care. For example, I have no problem running instances with shadow speced priests. It's actually fun to see who is quicker on the draw, my earthshock, or his silence. But if he tries running LBRS in shadow form forcing me into the main healer role, he is getting kicked and not asked back.

trying to generalize everyone who plays a popular build as a "noob" isn't going to make any friends here.&nbsp; So far you've demonstrated a failure to understand your audience,
[right][snapback]81804[/snapback][/right]

Please reread the OP, it said nothing about builds. I did say two particular classes (one my main, one I played a fair bit) had a substantial pair of pitfalls: solo and group play being very different, and poor play not leading to immediate, severe, and unambigious failure. Pointing out that pitfall is different then saying everyone who plays that class is a n00b, which, as a glance at my sig would show, would include me. While I don't claim to be the greatest shaman ever, I'm not going to write a massive post only to come to the conclusion that I am a n00b.

[Mavfin]

Interesting what you said about pallies in group play.

Pallies that play in 5-mans with my main (warrior) usually end up with watch-the-healer duties, and play off-tank to my main. I can't say they don't contribute, because they do. I miss things, or we get an add when I'm busily tying down 2 mobs already. And a little extra healing when that mob that broke sheep ate the healer in 2 bites can make the diff between a wipe and surviving to res the healer.

For a small funny: Was helping guildies in Maraudon, had just killed the princess...we jumped over the waterfall, (2 mages, healer, warrior, druid that helped w/princess and before gone to bed), and the 1st mage down lands right smack on top of Rotgrip....CHOMP. Dead mage. We killed Rotgrip, but only because I was overleveled.....talk about a surprise.

[oldmandennis]

Interesting what you said about pallies in group play.&nbsp;

Pallies that play in 5-mans with my main (warrior) usually end up with watch-the-healer duties, and play off-tank to my main.

[right][snapback]81853[/snapback][/right]

Exactly my point! Not that watch the healer is not important (my shammy usually does the same thing) but if good play is important at that position, chances are something else has gone wrong. In my opinion, it helps people to learn when their mistakes quickly lead to a wipe, and everyone knows what the problem is. The heal guard doesn't get that, because there is usually something else: "We had a patrol", "Imp Sap broke", "Bad Aggro Management", "I didn't know that mob could shield bash", and way down the list is "You should have been quicker to heal the priest".

[Mavfin]

Exactly my point!&nbsp; Not that watch the healer is not important (my shammy usually does the same thing) but if good play is important at that position, chances are something else has gone wrong.&nbsp; In my opinion, it helps people to learn when their mistakes quickly lead to a wipe, and everyone knows what the problem is.&nbsp; The heal guard doesn't get that, because there is usually something else: "We had a patrol", "Imp Sap broke", "Bad Aggro Management", "I didn't know that mob could shield bash", and way down the list is "You should have been quicker to heal the priest".
[right][snapback]81866[/snapback][/right]

Well, I'm usually in the position of teaching the younger (in levels, and a lot of times in age) guildies, some of the intricacies of group play....usually by pointing out what mistake was made that either wiped us, or caused them or someone else to die, although the group may have partially survived. Gently and tactfully, in the way of "Did you understand what happened when you used charge in the instance and aggroed the 2 mobs in the corner, when I was waiting for the 2 mobs *not in the corner* to come to me, <young warrior>?" rather than YOU IDIOT! LET ME PULL! :D

I find that's the first thing to teach them is to NOT touch the mob that's coming to us when we want to fight them where we are and not down the hall closer to their spawn points. Patience, young <insert class here> Usually worst offenders are warriors who charge, or hunters who concussion-shot and send pet, which stops the mob before it's time to stop them....aggro adds ensue, and chaos and death(s). I've had to teach lvl 60 hunters in UD Strat this...don't stop the abomination that's coming to me, please! Of course, once the hunter starts, the other ranged people start nuking, and I have to *really* work to get aggro on the mob.....thank God I have defiance.

[kandrathe]

First off, I'd say that you are probably wrong. Poor players choose all classes. The difference is that some classes accentuate errors of commission, and some mask errors of omission. For instance, a priest that over heals and takes aggro, or is unable to heal the main tank due to going oom casting offensive spells. I don't take issue with a shadow specc'd priest who makes it clear that they are not the designated healer, but if you are the designated healer and you run out of mana because of offense then that is a problem.

Good players still make mistakes, but good players also learn and are quick to react to their tactical environment and try to adapt.

I can speak best regarding;

Hunters there are alot of, relative to their utility. Still, it doesn't seem like they have an exceptionally complex roll in groups, and not super different then their roll in solo play.

Harumph. It is good that you try to equally alienate everyone.

Group play is very different from solo play. Our utility is in a bunch of little tricks, like traps, tracking, flare, and some intangibles. For instance, I can poor on damage and if a sequence of crits breaks aggro away from the MT, I can FD removing myself from the hate list, jump up and continue to poor on the damage.

Or, use freeze traps strategically for crowd control, for example, in a Maraudon run we had to pull multiple elite stone golems, by keeping the pets passive the two hunters in the group could lay freeze traps in line to serially trap one of the golems, and even feign death, and reapply the CC if needed.

Just like a rogue, we are strongest when we are applied against targeted mobs, and weakest when 200 bugs come rushing the main tank.

[Concillian]

Really it is only warriors that bother me a whole lot. Most of the other typically boneheaded classes are less of an issue if you have a good warrior.

After warriors get defensive stance, they need a quest that is solo-only instanced and highly scripted. It should involve keeping a party of BONEHEAD NPCs alive by holding aggro of multiple mobs at the same time. It should have a very nice quest reward so there is a motivating factor to do the quest, preferrably a weapon choice, because this would encourage the 'noob' warriors to complete the quest as early as possible.

The quest would be preceeded by an NPC who makes mention of all the skills that create additional threat on mobs so that warriors actually are given information in-game on how to tank. At that level they would not have the option of using sweeping strikes / whirlwind, etc... for adding threat to multiple mobs, they would pretty much have to use revenge and sunder.

[oldmandennis]

First off, I'd say that you are probably wrong.&nbsp; Poor players choose all classes.

...

Or, use freeze traps strategically for crowd control, for example, in a Maraudon run we had to pull multiple elite stone golems, by keeping the pets passive the two hunters in the group could lay freeze traps in line to serially trap one of the golems, and even feign death, and reapply the CC if needed.&nbsp;

[right][snapback]81876[/snapback][/right]

While poor players choose all classes, some classes tend to attract more, IMHO.

Thanks for bringing up the trap dance. I'd forgotten about it, and when it's done right it can be very cool and useful.

I stand by my comment, however

Hunters there are alot of, relative to their utility.

but it was mostly aimed at the fact that there are a LOT of hunters on my server (don't know about yours).

I'm still curious about the appeal of hunters. What was the draw that made you roll one?

[Roane]

I'm still curious about the appeal of hunters.  What was the draw that made you roll one?
[right][snapback]81891[/snapback][/right]

I know you're not asking me, but... I played a Hunter in beta as soon as I could (then set her aside after making 20 so I wouldn't ruin live game surprises), have one hunter at 56 and another at 43. You could say I'm pretty into hunters.

The appeal for me is:

1) Soloability - I tend to solo or duo often and being able to solo efficiently and with less death risk makes me happy.
2) Pets - I like pet classes. I think it takes skill to effectively manage both my own skills and aggro, and that of another creature that is under my control. I discovered how much I liked this way back in EQ, playing my Magician (I think that was what the class was called. It's been a while.) who could summon elementals. I think you'll find many people who learn once to play a pet class well will keep coming back to them.
3) Range - I like fighting from range. It's purely an aesthetic/play style choice, I think, because I can't think of a logical reason for it. I've been playing Rangers of one type or another since I started playing RPGS, both CRPGs and tabletop ones.

I think that a lot of other people are attracted to hunters for the same reasons, regardless of their individual skills or play styles. They see and hear that they're an "easy" class to solo with. (I don't think they're easy -- just reliable and efficient -- but that's me.) They think having an animal follow them around is cool. (I get asked about my pet by new players even once in a while, if I run through Goldshire - "How do I get one of those?")

To my perception, the one big disadvantage is usefulness in groups. They don't have any skills that a group will think they need. I'm lucky in that I have a bunch of Lurkers to play with on Stormrage, and a great community that's not hung up on "optimal" groups on Cenarion Circle, so that it's never been a problem for me... but I sure have heard some interesting horror stories.

Edit: Missed a grammar error

[Brista]

A good basic group composition is tank + healer + 3 dps classes. Possibly tank + healer + 2 dps + hybrid to allow extra flexibility. Or tank + 2 AoE dps + 2 healers for area effect teams.

So rather than there being too many hunters, I'd argue that from the grouping perspective there are too many hybrids.

As for classes attracting certain types

Hunter - appeals to explorer type players, offers self reliance, can seem noobish simply because pet control is actually quite difficult to get the hang of and can be spectacularly and memorably disastrous

Priest - for every kind-hearted priest playerl who just likes to heal people and socialise I suspect there are 3 players who chose priests for the element of social control. You always get invites, you can say and do things that would get other players /kicked or /ignored and no one with any sense annoys you. Less likely to attract new players simply because a support role is a less obvious choice than a main role

Warlock - appeals to the most thoughtful of players because it's a very complex class to play. It has a basic new player appeal in that it's a nuker with a meat shield which seems a sensible way to face a dangerous world. Generally though it's for players who want a challenge, possibly people who suspect there is some secret uber build hidden in this class which seems gimped but which Blizzard claims is balanced

Druid - jack of all trades class with near specialist level healing, it should be a lot more popular than it is. I see, perhaps with an overly critical eye, a lot of bad druids, players just locked into one approach. I guess it attracts a middling type, more sophisticated than the "i just wanna hit stuff" crowd but not the hard-core power-gamers

Shaman - the popular choice for Horde on my server. It has a strong reputation as a borderline over-powered class which attracts a lot of people. Very newbie friendly in that it's hard to get a shaman really wrong. Kill things, heal in a crisis. I must admit, I do get rather frustrated with the ones who can't even manage that, as we discussed in the other thread

Mage - good choice for killers and aggressive players in particular. Very newbie friendly as it's hard to get the class role wrong. Kill stuff. If you forget to bring drink it's still not a problem. Once the mage player masters sheeping, frost nova and giving drinks to the healer they become an exceptionally valuable party member still without needing any especially complex playing skills

Rogue - prime killer choice, also a popular choice for thinking players and people who like the role. Very newbie friendly in a pvp context because you're much safer as a stealth class than most. Seems to attract a lot of immature people, maybe it's just that the class is more heavily item dependent than most but I've trekked through a lot of instances with some rogue spamming "pls dun roll on the sword - i neeeeeeed it" beginning at least an hour before said sword could possibly drop and repeated every minute or two

Warrior - the prime choice for both the most and the least experienced. The most experienced players like warrior because no one affects the success of a group more than the tank and a great player has the greatest impact in this role. New people like the heroic feel, high capacity for damage and the prospect of a the most uncomplicated class to play. Easy to learn, hard to master.

Paladin - the basic appeal, I think is a fighter with heals, which makes a lot more sense than a fighter without heals. It's also the Alliance flagship class and it's a heroic class. I think more sophisticated players see paladins as the chance to get a taste of all the roles, as the best class for surviving and as a very good contribution to any team. Many paladins I've spoken to say they picked the class to play with friends. A class for socialisers, definitely

[Mavfin]

Ok, I'll comment on two posts here.

1: the post about boneheaded warriors (I play warrior, remember). My Godz, there's a ton of them out there who don't understand taunt and hold aggro. Alone in a group, you get a bad group, usually. I have run into situations where a warrior with better EQ than me is designated 'main tank', and then goes on to show that he/she doesn't have the first clue how to do it. I generally just quietly take over his job, holding the aggro, and he becomes the off-tank that he's wonderfully suited for, and doesn't even know he's been replaced. :D

2: this goes for any class, but I'll say it again, in a different way than oldmandennis. Rogues and hunters, I hold my breath as to what kind of bonehead I'm going to get in pubby groups with those two classes. I think some of it is high #s of the class, meaning more idiots total, and some of it is just the potential for disaster that the class brings if played badly. Can you say pet accident? Can you say rogue detected in the middle of 4 mobs, runs back to group with a train? I thought you could.

On the other side of this, I have friends/guildies (same thing, really, our guild is a good bunch) who play these classes. And I love having them around, as with any good player, regardless of class.

Now, let's toss out examples of bad things classes can do with bad players, just out of my memories:

Paladin: I had a pally in a scholo raid group (loot run) who, when we had a 2nd one of Rattlegore's cronies come out to play on the stairs with us, he picked up the 2nd one. Due to no fault of his own, it was beating him up pretty badly, and the healer didn't get to him, and by the time I got to him to taunt the mob off (and I mean *just as the mob turned to me*) he feared it to save himself, he said.....("but I was gonna die!!!!") of course, feared mob went back in room, brought 5 cronies with it, dead group. He got a pretty good outline of why you can't use fear in scholo from the group leader. DOH!

Warrior: charge into mobs, aggroing 2 or more mobs that you didn't want aggroed...need I say more? overuse of charge in instances by not-so-smart warriors seems to be the norm.

Hunter: pet accidents that wipe groups, and the one in ud strat that kept starting out with concussive shot on the abominations before they got to the tanks. We let him tank one, and he got the point and quit, although we had asked him to quit 3 times before that.

Rogue: the smart ones will, if caught on a sap (which happens every once in a while) will just die there, be rezzed, and try again. The dumb ones, will bring all the mobs back to the group Also, aggro control is learned by the good ones, and never by the bad ones. They do learn that opening with Ambush means that I will probably go taunt another mob, 'cause that one's their mob till it dies or they do. The ones smart enough to Vanish don't open with Ambush :shuriken:

Mage; Hmm, the mage in scholo that decided to aoe-pull the aoe room....he dropped blizzard into the front half of the room, and ran....I think about 25 mobs came on that pull, .and the mages that decide they can do the pulling since their fireball range is 40 yards or whatever max is. Mages indirectly lead to healer-death, since they're usually near them. (yes, there are places mages do sheep pulls, of course, and that's a good thing)

Priest: the aforementioned running out of mana to heal with because they were doing offensive spells, or the ones that like to pull with SW:P followed by Mind Blast (again, shackle pulls are used in places, I know) The first hard fight shows the bad priest pretty quick, or the bad MT. I know the difference.

Druid: Hmm, the druid who never buffs or heals, just goes into cat and hits stuff...usually bad druids are of the complete DOH! variety, and only do one thing. The rest of them are valuable, because they can adjust to do what's needed. Haven't found much middle ground with them. Of course, they can fill so many roles, there's lots of ways to cause disasters. It's a more complex class, so less idiots play it? Dunno

Warlock: good warlocks are wonderful, so-so warlocks will hide in the back, SS the designated person, and DoT everything, so not causing much trouble, while bad warlocks can combine the worst of hunter pet accidents with mage aoe stupidity. 'nuff said.

Shaman: another hybrid class like pallies that have to do something really dumb to be shown as idiots, unless they're the main healer, of course. Did have one do a chain-lightning pull, though. *shudder*

There, I've bad-mouthed every class! :D

[Quark]

Rogue: the smart ones will, if caught on a sap (which happens every once in a while) will just die there, be rezzed, and try again.&nbsp; The dumb ones, will bring all the mobs back to the group&nbsp; Also, aggro control is learned by the good ones, and never by the bad ones.&nbsp; They do learn that opening with Ambush means that I will probably go taunt another mob, 'cause that one's their mob till it dies or they do.&nbsp; The ones smart enough to Vanish don't open with Ambush&nbsp; :shuriken:

Okay, gotta respond here. I used to think it'd be smart to just die on a failed Improved Sap. Two things prevent this, in reality. First, it can happen too often. One UBRS run we had Improved Sap fail 7 out of 10 attempts. Are you saying it's fair to expect a Rogue to die or Vanish 7 times in two rooms? Second, the rest of the group doesn't listen. There have been plenty of fights where I wanted to die, but couldn't because someone else already engaged.

Now I Sap and if Improved fails, I hit Evasion immediately. I wait about half a second before deciding to bring the group back or not. Most of the time, the players were ready to begin with so we'll start fighting anyway. Extra CC + Tanks will peel targets off me before Evasion wears off, or I die. Either way, the group really isn't hurt that much. Of course, on certain pulls (last Dragonkin + Orc before the General, for instance) I specifically say "don't save me if Improved Sap fails," because IS failing brings too much of a risk of adds.

Now, the Ambush. Ask Darian how often I Ambush. Then ask Darian how often I don't steal aggro from him, and how often if I do it immediately goes right back to him (with Feint). Now I'll admit, sometimes I open up a little bit too early and get destroyed by a Mortal Strike and lucky crits, but unless my Feint misses and I don't realize it quick enough to Vanish, I'm not gonna keep aggro unless I specifically want to. However, there is no way I'd be nearly as usefull if you took my Ambush away from me. There's already other Rogues I play with who use Cheap Shot, and the battle is too quick for Garrote to be of any use - if Garrote could even compare to my Ambush in the first place. Should a Rogue consign himself to Cheap Shotting an already stunned mob? No, if aggro's a problem he should be watching the debuff bar for a Sunder Armor and then start fighting.

[Quark]

Druid - jack of all trades class with near specialist level healing, it should be a lot more popular than it is.[right][snapback]81923[/snapback][/right]

Now I don't mean to go on a rant here...

Wait, yes I do. Forgive me for the tangent later, but this is something people I play with have heard me complain about. Druids will never get anymore attention than they already get from players the way they stand. Do I know why people didn't choose druids to begin with? I have no idea, to tell the truth. I know a main reason they'll continue to stay away after they know the game: res abilities. We all know the "other" druid rolls are inferior to the alternatives. Maybe they should be, maybe not so much, but 90% of groups pulling in a druid expect a healer. There is the fact that a druid can be worse healing stat-wise than a priest, especially considering PW:S. More important, in my eyes, is the res.

Two groups I've taken through DM North for Tribute runs:
1) Warrior, Priest, Mage, Rogue, Hunter. All goes smooth until the 6 dogs right before the king. During the 6 dogs, the Mage goes down. It's alright, he's used to it :whistling:. Priest does a res and we move on to the King. Warrior goes down with the King at 4% life, we kill King. Priest does a res and we collect our rewards.

2) Warrior, Druid, Mage, Rogue, Hunter. All doesn't go smooth until the 6 dogs, but that's of no consequence since we all ran back it was no fault of priest versus druid. At the 6 dogs, the Mage dies again. So the Druid uses his res, and we keep going. The Warrior dies right before the King goes down again. Oh crap, Res is on cooldown. Warrior releases and starts running back. An Eye of Kilrogg respawns and kills him. Now we're stuck because we have to make sure the King doesn't disappear. So the warrior opts out of the loot, we grab it, and run back to help him.

A warrior lost his chance of loot simply because of the difference in Res ability.

The druid vs priest argument may not make that much of a difference true healing wise. But then you try to take care of the res difference, so you bring in a Paladin. Who gets kicked out on a Tribute Run? Take out the Mage, you have it much harder because of lack of AoE. Sure, the plants aren't too tough, but dogs are. You also lose the always awesome Polymorph. Take out the Hunter, and you lose the common strategy of Hunter's pet on Cho'Rush. Take out the Rogue, and you lose the easiest way to one key, and the ability to pick open another (instead of killing a guard and losing tribute). This + lost Sap makes it a little more difficult, though an Engineer or Blacksmith can cut in to bust open the one door. Take out the Warrior might be the best option, so now your two main positions have the 2nd option instead of the first -> Pally/Druid instead of Warr/Priest.

Can anyone tell me any of that is really preferable to simply having a Priest?

[kandrathe]

Really it is only warriors that bother me a whole lot.&nbsp; Most of the other typically boneheaded classes are less of an issue if you have a good warrior.

After warriors get defensive stance, they need a quest that is solo-only instanced and highly scripted.&nbsp; It should involve keeping a party of BONEHEAD NPCs alive by holding aggro of multiple mobs at the same time.&nbsp; It should have a very nice quest reward so there is a motivating factor to do the quest, preferrably a weapon choice, because this would encourage the 'noob' warriors to complete the quest as early as possible.

The quest would be preceeded by an NPC who makes mention of all the skills that create additional threat on mobs so that warriors actually are given information in-game on how to tank.&nbsp; At that level they would not have the option of using sweeping strikes / whirlwind, etc... for adding threat to multiple mobs, they would pretty much have to use revenge and sunder.
[right][snapback]81881[/snapback][/right]

... and some mage to keep silenced with shield bash. The reward should be a decent main hander and shield.

[Treesh]

Now, the Ambush.&nbsp; Ask Darian how often I Ambush.&nbsp; Then ask Darian how often I don't steal aggro from him, and how often if I do it immediately goes right back to him (with Feint).&nbsp; Now I'll admit, sometimes I open up a little bit too early and get destroyed by a Mortal Strike and lucky crits, but unless my Feint misses and I don't realize it quick enough to Vanish, I'm not gonna keep aggro unless I specifically want to.&nbsp; However, there is no way I'd be nearly as usefull if you took my Ambush away from me.&nbsp; There's already other Rogues I play with who use Cheap Shot, and the battle is too quick for Garrote to be of any use - if Garrote could even compare to my Ambush in the first place.&nbsp; Should a Rogue consign himself to Cheap Shotting an already stunned mob?&nbsp; No, if aggro's a problem he should be watching the debuff bar for a Sunder Armor and then start fighting.
[right][snapback]81929[/snapback][/right]

I've got to agree with Quark here. If I wait even just two seconds into the fight before ambushing, I generally won't take aggro from the warrior. Now, blade flurry + slice and dice with my sword will pull aggro to me a lot of the times which is part of why I don't use it in dungeons unless a group of non-elite things go to the druid healer. Then you bet I throw on blade flurry, slice and dice and then hit evasion. If there's a third one, it gets blinded for a bit. Since they're non-elites, they are either dead by the time evasion wears off or else the main target has gone down so the tank (or a real offtank) can get things off of me. But I keep the druid safe and able to heal everyone else.

But honestly, opening with ambush does not make a rogue a bad rogue. There aren't a whole lot of other openers from stealth and the smart rogue knows how to use ambush and feint (when necessary). There are rare cases such as way too many crits right in a row, but that's an exception and not the norm.

[Concillian]

The reward should be a decent main hander and shield.
[right][snapback]81939[/snapback][/right]

On the contrary. The reward should be one of the biggest, baddest 2H weapons available to warriors of that level, with an option of a pretty good 1 Hander too. If the reward is only a good mainhander and a shield, any of the "DPS" style warriors will simply skip the quest when they fail it because it's too hard and the reward isn't something they'll use.

You must make it attractive to the demographic who will benefit most from the excercise. The people who would be interested in a great 1H + shield weapon are not the people you need to help learn how to hold aggro as much as the 2H uber-DPS warriors who will charge into a group and after the first heal only have 1 on them.

[kandrathe]

While poor players choose all classes, some classes tend to attract more, IMHO.

Thanks for bringing up the trap dance.&nbsp; I'd forgotten about it, and when it's done right it can be very cool and useful.

I stand by my comment, however
but it was mostly aimed at the fact that there are a LOT of hunters on my server (don't know about yours).

I'm still curious about the appeal of hunters.&nbsp; What was the draw that made you roll one?
[right][snapback]81891[/snapback][/right]

My main in D2 was also an Amazon. I guess I prefer some distance from that nasties. Gives me time to react, and help to control the action. Hunter is appealing because you can use the pet to hold aggro on mobs (I find up to three is managable) and then with a combination of focused fire and healing become your own team. If the mobs are too big for the pet to tank, then they are too big for most people to solo as well. I like grouping, but I don't want to be solely dependant on it. This is the same reason why I have developed to a high level of skill an Alchemist, Engineer, Tailor, Enchantor, and Leatherworker (only missing Blacksmith). While I think I work well within the guild to help others, and also receive help, if I want to make 40 wicked leather headbands to disenchant I wouldn't feel right tasking someone else to do that for me.

I think one problem with Hunters, or any player that solo's primarily is that they do not learn group skills. I am flabergasted when I hear of Warriors at the Scarlet Monestary, or Maraudon level trying to be Main Tank with a two hander and never learned defensive stance. The game is heavily weighted with big instances for 40+, but really what people need are more optional and short intense small instances at level 10 and every 5 levels to encourage more grouping. One of the reasons there are so many Dead Mines or Rage Fire Chasm horror stories is that for many people it is the first time they ever grouped and faced obstacles as a team.

Also, our minds are branded by the specatular failures we've witnessed, but the amazing saves quickly fade from our memories. My Horde hunter wiped a group in Rage Fire Chasm when the team decided to not clear a section and jump down. I was a N00b and did not know that the pet would go around, and he pulled the 20 uncleared mobs. I made that mistake once, and I have never made that mistake again. But for those the other 4 people on the team, I reinforced their stereotype of hunters. If one of them had said, "Ok, we are going to jump down. You should dismiss your pet now". Things would have been fine and I would have learned the easy way.

My point is that smart people learn from their mistakes, and so even if someone was incredibly incompetant at level 20, or even level 40, that doesn't mean they will continue to be a N00b forever. Also, maybe they just needed someone to say something in a constructive way to help them learn how to play their toon a little better.

[Mirajj]

First...I rolled a hunter because the class appealed to me the most of all (still does...*looks at his C list...*) . The main appeal was the solo-ability of it. I have huge chunks of time where I am the only Lurker, or one of a couple around. I don't really like pubbie groups (haven't had many good experiences with them) and I like to work at my own pace, be it fast as I can, or slowly. However, this leads to end game problems....

I think one problem with Hunters, or any player that solo's primarily is that they do not learn group skills.&nbsp;

Exactly, it has taken me several of the high end instances and a great amount of patience with guild party members to break some/most of the solo bad habits AND learn good pet management. Doan and a certain cliff in Mauradon come to mind...

But you can't get that unless you have someone willing to help you through the mistakes. I've gotten a lot better at aggro management, pet management, and beign a team player. But I can assure that if I'd been yelled at and kicked out of the group when my cat accidently woke up Doan in SM, I'd not have learned much, and would have been pretty bitter. Or if I'd been kicked after my cat ran down a cliff, bringing a lot of uncleared slime mobs with her, that I'd not have learned that they don't follow you off a cliff (Like I thought that they did)., but take the 'sensible' way down.

Instead of jumping down my throat, calling me all sorts of names, and other things, the groups recovered from the wipes (or very near wipe misses), and explained things to me. Those things haven't happened again, and I've gotten better...but only because I learned where I screwed up, and had folk who cared enough to help me learn, instead of cut me down.

If I'd been playing with pubbies, I doubt I'd still be playing.

My point is that smart people learn from their mistakes, and so even if someone was incredibly incompetant at level 20, or even level 40, that doesn't mean they will continue to be a N00b forever.&nbsp; Also, maybe they just needed someone to say something in a constructive way to help them learn how to play their toon a little better.
[right][snapback]81943[/snapback][/right]

Exactly. But, I will say, there are some beyond redemption.

[Treesh]

But I can assure that if I'd been yelled at and kicked out of the group when my cat accidently woke up Doan in SM, [right][snapback]81944[/snapback][/right]

I still smile when I think of that run. :D