Warden Feedback Thread

[siipperi]

why not have all classes(like 1 dps spec at least per class) in range of 5-10% of dps.not on a dummy but in a raid so that classes who benefit from raid debuffs(like fire mits) do lower dps on the dummy.
for me burg,champ,warden,guard,beorni ng,mini,capt could do 55-60k dps and hunter,lm and rk like 20% behind for the fire mit compensation.

I'm old school in that regard. I understand where some are coming with it but trait trees aren't constructed to support that. Game allows way too much customization towards other lines of important traits, while having stuff like aggro copies available for tanks in DPS.

[Geremir]

That's why I said abnormal amount of criticals and using that as argument how much guardian does that someone used is bad one as I said.


I don't see warden as DPS class no. Both warden and guardian are tank classes with both should having lower DPS than actual DPS classes. Warden a bit higher than guardian. But neither on the level of real DPS classes but on 2nd class behind actual DPS. But if guardian is nerffed for example to 40k DPS, wouldn't it be ridiculous to have another tank class doing 55-60k DPS, while supposedly to be as good tank? Imo guardian should be about 25-30% behind top DPS. Warden 15-20%.

What I am trying to say in general is that Warden has been pretty much the same from the first beta until now (Light Damage legacy got updated and applied to several bleeds, whilst the hidden 25% bleed damage got removed), Guardian however has been lifted up with 15-20k DPS in one go in the latest patch, thats quite a gap. At the first beta I didn't do as much damage (~45k) as I did until I changed my rotation dramatically(~55-60k). We shouldn't make judgement from a few people doing a parse and say that that's a common DPS parse, because 99% of lotro population isn't reaching parses like that. Seeing that it is possible makes people think its controversial to the entire population, simply because it is possible. As for the amount of crit's thats abnormal on almost every class.

Even though the character panel may give a role of defence to Warden, my personal opinion says that Warden is also a main DPS class. Why? RK and Warden got released at the same time during Moria. Whilst RK always had the option to both heal and DPS, Warden always had the option to Tank or DPS. In my opinion it should stay that way. Secondary Warden dots from multiple Wardens still don't stack (on the exception of the AoE ones, Desolation, Surety of Death, Brink of Victory, War Cry). I haven't actually tested it myself yet, but i'm 99% sure that Guardian dots do stack, just like champion ones. Raids will never allow the use of more then 1 DPS Warden, therefore the 2nd Warden will lose its DPS anyway if you were to raid or do an instance with two in the first place. Guardian's would uphold the same damage in that place then anyway.

I know it's unlikely you would do a raid with a Guardian DPS in the first place, but generally speaking two Warden's in DPS together do way less damage then any other class combined (2 Guards/Champs/Hunts/RK's/Burgs in this current stage), since there dot's don't stack, but overwrite.

So I think that's the main reason why they should maintain Warden DPS as it is right now and lower Guardian with a fair amount to around: (~40-45k ish)

[Giliodor]

I don't see warden as DPS class no. Both warden and guardian are tank classes with both should having lower DPS than actual DPS classes. Warden a bit higher than guardian. But neither on the level of real DPS classes but on 2nd class behind actual DPS. But if guardian is nerffed for example to 40k DPS, wouldn't it be ridiculous to have another tank class doing 55-60k DPS, while supposedly to be as good tank? Imo guardian should be about 25-30% behind top DPS. Warden 15-20%.

There's no reason for red line guardians to be 25-30% behind top DPS, provided that they lose access to their defensive abilities while traited for DPS.

I'm old school in that regard. I understand where some are coming with it but trait trees aren't constructed to support that. Game allows way too much customization towards other lines of important traits, while having stuff like aggro copies available for tanks in DPS.

why not have all classes(like 1 dps spec at least per class) in range of 5-10% of dps.not on a dummy but in a raid so that classes who benefit from raid debuffs(like fire mits) do lower dps on the dummy.
for me burg,champ,warden,guard,beorni ng,mini,capt could do 55-60k dps and hunter,lm and rk like 20% behind for the fire mit compensation.

Kind of related to what I said above, but in each case, DPS has to be balanced against utility. You could never have a captain do 55-60k DPS, along with every other class. It provides far too much utility. That way, no one would ever take a champion, guardian, warden, etc.. It's exactly the same principle with the fire mit. debuffs. The classes that provide them should do less DPS, because they increase the group's overall DPS.

DPS has to be balanced against utility and defensives. Burglars have far too much of both, and should thus, in their current state, but somewhere below champions and guardians. Either that, or their survivability/utility should be reduced. Same argument with guardian DPS. Their current DPS isn't too high, if their survivability is reduced.

Perhaps a good first step would be reducing the overall trait points. That way, not as much can be picked up from the support/tank/healing lines while in DPS.

[Elwha]

Even though the character panel may give a role of defence to Warden, my personal opinion says that Warden is also a main DPS class. Why? RK and Warden got released at the same time during Moria. Whilst RK always had the option to both heal and DPS, Warden always had the option to Tank or DPS. In my opinion it should stay that way. Secondary Warden dots from multiple Wardens still don't stack (on the exception of the AoE ones, Desolation, Surety of Death, Brink of Victory, War Cry). I haven't actually tested it myself yet, but i'm 99% sure that Guardian dots do stack, just like champion ones. Raids will never allow the use of more then 1 DPS Warden, therefore the 2nd Warden will lose its DPS anyway if you were to raid or do an instance with two in the first place. Guardian's would uphold the same damage in that place then anyway.

I know it's unlikely you would do a raid with a Guardian DPS in the first place, but generally speaking two Warden's in DPS together do way less damage then any other class combined (2 Guards/Champs/Hunts/RK's/Burgs in this current stage), since there dot's don't stack, but overwrite.

So I think that's the main reason why they should maintain Warden DPS as it is right now and lower Guardian with a fair amount to around: (~40-45k ish)

Yep, providing the fire mit debuff that gives Hunters a monopoly on DPS gets nerfed into the ground. Red Warden offers zero grp utility, like anti-utility, and as such should be a viable option to fill a DPS role. We all know Guards will continue to be taken as the preferred main tank anyways. Most of us have seen this song and dance before. Blue Warden changes were as already mentioned nice QoL, but not enough to level the tanking field.

[Constrictions]

I'm gonna comment on HoTs and morale leech. Current mitigation caps is 62 or 63% (+ what you get from your group). To allow class have significantly stronger HoTs it means class with be utterly broken in terms of a tank. 5k HPS single target, Over 7k HPS as group tanking situations. That is extremely potent combined with debuffing/buffing class already does when cross traiting to yellow -mitigation and -induction (extremely potent now with hunter being red line). Devs need to be extremely cautious of this. Warden can already solo in live T2CM 3mans (like CoS) with with 10%+ less mitigations. I'm not objecting like 20% morale tap increase but going beyond that will cause some serious issues how much warden is capable of soloing instances. normal self heals on other hand do not need to be stronger.

Like I argued earlier in the thread, the entire point of having self heals was to proactively bridge the mitigation gap. If they're raising the mitigation cap, the potency of self heals should theoretically be reduced, although it is questionable as to whether thats even necessary right now. Proportionally, wardens self healing capabilities were actually far better in almost every expansion until quite recently, where now the bulk of the HS comes from restoration (which is a terrible design that doesn't force any trade-offs).

Soloing 3mans, even on T2C is not anything new for the warden. It's virtually always been the case that the class has had this capability.

You forget one important thing. You can have 40s duration on those buffs.

That to me is the most fun part of warden as a class. If it was just to keep 3-4 things up and otherwise AFK I would just play guardian. If that's overwhelming amount to players they can choose not to use everything but turbine gives class tools to choose from. Warden should be the most potent tanking class in the game if you are involved to the gameplay 100% of time doing perfect rotation. If not it should be significantly worse imo. It should be high skill ceiling class, in fact highest skill ceiling in this game. I'm all about giving warden a ton of tools but they should build them.

It's not the same class as 8 year ago. Neither are other tank classes. People have used that argument earlier in this thread. Game is just not same game it was in 2009 and design of classes need to change to suit the needs. If players are against, sure have your old warden that we have in live. I frankly prefer beta one with significantly more interesting tanking rotation and better survivability, while offering great group utility as a tank and can switch to highest DPS as tank character on the fly.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on the first half of what you've written. It needs to be said however, that the warden has not had the same 'high skill ceiling' for most of its lifespan now, and has been given tools that directly contradict the proactive nature of the class (which, I maintain, only ever concerned threat or bridging the mitigation gap with self heals).

Concerning these things, threat mechanics are practically dead given that you can hold aggro with as little as 1 or 2 dots, and cementing this diminished need to attend to threat, wardens have been given a snap-back force taunt. Self healing is concentrated into too few gambits (Restoration, safeguard, EoB), meaning we can keep up 60-85% of our HPS with little to no cost to threat. Given design oversights, we have been forced to rely on two skills that overcompensate for the mitigation gap (DC) and a reactive 50% heal (NS). None of these things complement anything that you just said you want to see in the class, yet this is what the case has been for over half a decade. The only exception to this, has been that we must work to keep our avoidances up with gambits. But, because of ####ty itemisation, we've been more often than not forced to max out our BPE via gambits, while every other tank has been able to reach the same avoidance caps by virtue of their gear and traits. A la, this approach is a shot in the foot in terms of where we rank as a tank.

--------------------------------------------------------

As for the second - the class is not the same, but this is not by design. The warden we have had for most of its lifespan now, has been incidentally crafted with kneejerk bandaids.

You say 'If it was just to keep 3-4 things up and otherwise AFK I would just play guardian', but literally the only thing that has ever fundamentally separated the warden from the guardian is that wardens were designed to be an avoidance tank, in the same way as guardians are a mitigation tank. Last I checked, Guardians have never needed to press entire sequences of 3-6 skills in order to maintain cap mitigations, so why are we, out of nowhere, expecting that this should be how wardens function?

Threat was Guardians only real 'management' job, apart from keeping an eye on when to pop their cooldowns/force taunts. It was much harder for Guards to manage threat than it was for wardens. But now that threat has been thrown out of the window, virtually all they can do, with do what little of their job remains, is press 3-4 skills.

Your position seems to be something like this:

1. Wardens were designed to be a class with the highest skill cap for tanks
2. Being designed to manage threat proactively, via gambits, is a large part of what gave the class a high skill cap (inferred)
3. Dedicated threat management is no longer required of any tank class
4. The warden should still be a class with the highest skill cap, that relies on managing its role via gambits
5. The only thing left for wardens to manage via gambits is it's survivability
6. Therefore, in order for wardens to retain the same skill cap, wardens should be made to engage in even more survival management

This idea is nothing but a recipe for disaster. Even among the most skilled wardens, this approach to tanking is going to create a much more instability with regards to how much damage wardens will receive compared to mitigation tanks (which simply have all their defences with not even 3-4 button presses). Especially under situations where you're dealing with a lot of crowd control, wardens will be even less reliable than they traditionally were.

You also seem of the opinion that wardens should not be avoidance tanks anymore, but made into some kind of mitigation tank, one that has marginally lower mitigations than the other tanks, and compensates this loss with small self heals. Seriously dude, why not just go and advocate for guardians to be forced to manage something instead of being the lazy ####ing ##### of a tank that they are?

I think they have listened quite a bit warden feedback. Knowing a lot of stuff I have pointed out being problematic for the class have been implemented (ST taunt, more mitigation building options, and so on). But other class like minstrel is just dreadful that one has no clear direction what they want to do with it.

All I see from these changes are more bandaids, even if they are slightly more well thought out than all the others.

There is no rational justification for turning wardens into guardians, that simply use gambits instead of skills, all while having to press dozens of buttons to maintain the same effective (phys/tact) mitigations and the same effective avoidances.

[gaara908776]

Like I argued earlier in the thread, the entire point of having self heals was to proactively bridge the mitigation gap. If they're raising the mitigation cap, the potency of self heals should theoretically be reduced, although it is questionable as to whether thats even necessary right now. Proportionally, wardens self healing capabilities were actually far better in almost every expansion until quite recently, where now the bulk of the HS comes from restoration (which is a terrible design that doesn't force any trade-offs).

Soloing 3mans, even on T2C is not anything new for the warden. It's virtually always been the case that the class has had this capability.



I agree with you wholeheartedly on the first half of what you've written. It needs to be said however, that the warden has not had the same 'high skill ceiling' for most of its lifespan now, and has been given tools that directly contradict the proactive nature of the class (which, I maintain, only ever concerned threat or bridging the mitigation gap with self heals).

Concerning these things, threat mechanics are practically dead given that you can hold aggro with as little as 1 or 2 dots, and cementing this diminished need to attend to threat, wardens have been given a snap-back force taunt. Self healing is concentrated into too few gambits (Restoration, safeguard, EoB), meaning we can keep up 60-85% of our HPS with little to no cost to threat. Given design oversights, we have been forced to rely on two skills that overcompensate for the mitigation gap (DC) and a reactive 50% heal (NS). None of these things complement anything that you just said you want to see in the class, yet this is what the case has been for over half a decade. The only exception to this, has been that we must work to keep our avoidances up with gambits. But, because of ####ty itemisation, we've been more often than not forced to max out our BPE via gambits, while every other tank has been able to reach the same avoidance caps by virtue of their gear and traits. A la, this approach is a shot in the foot in terms of where we rank as a tank.

--------------------------------------------------------

As for the second - the class is not the same, but this is not by design. The warden we have had for most of its lifespan now, has been incidentally crafted with kneejerk bandaids.

You say 'If it was just to keep 3-4 things up and otherwise AFK I would just play guardian', but literally the only thing that has ever fundamentally separated the warden from the guardian is that wardens were designed to be an avoidance tank, in the same way as guardians are a mitigation tank. Last I checked, Guardians have never needed to press entire sequences of 3-6 skills in order to maintain cap mitigations, so why are we, out of nowhere, expecting that this should be how wardens function?

Threat was Guardians only real 'management' job, apart from keeping an eye on when to pop their cooldowns/force taunts. It was much harder for Guards to manage threat than it was for wardens. But now that threat has been thrown out of the window, virtually all they can do, with do what little of their job remains, is press 3-4 skills.

Your position seems to be something like this:

1. Wardens were designed to be a class with the highest skill cap for tanks
2. Being designed to manage threat proactively, via gambits, is a large part of what gave the class a high skill cap (inferred)
3. Dedicated threat management is no longer required of any tank class
4. The warden should still be a class with the highest skill cap, that relies on managing its role via gambits
5. The only thing left for wardens to manage via gambits is it's survivability
6. Therefore, in order for wardens to retain the same skill cap, wardens should be made to engage in even more survival management

This idea is nothing but a recipe for disaster. Even among the most skilled wardens, this approach to tanking is going to create a much more instability with regards to how much damage wardens will receive compared to mitigation tanks (which simply have all their defences with not even 3-4 button presses). Especially under situations where you're dealing with a lot of crowd control, wardens will be even less reliable than they traditionally were.

You also seem of the opinion that wardens should not be avoidance tanks anymore, but made into some kind of mitigation tank, one that has marginally lower mitigations than the other tanks, and compensates this loss with small self heals. Seriously dude, why not just go and advocate for guardians to be forced to manage something instead of being the lazy ####ing ##### of a tank that they are?



All I see from these changes are more bandaids, even if they are slightly more well thought out than all the others.

There is no rational justification for turning wardens into guardians, that simply use gambits instead of skills, all while having to press dozens of buttons to maintain the same effective (phys/tact) mitigations and the same effective avoidances.

Well put. Even still, you're not mentioning that a Warden won't be able to maintain 100% of their mitigation buffs, self heals, and BPE/DoT threat skills with the way they're currently implemented. Due to the short duration of both fist and shield gambit buffs without using an un-imbued LI, Warden's will have to either choose Aggro + Mits, or Aggro + HoT's, or no aggro and HoT's + Mit's. If it's intended for Wardens to have all of these buffs used simultaneously to tank as well as a Guardian, which even with a theoretical uptime of 100% for all 3 types of buffs(physically impossible in the current state) it still wouldn't bridge the gap.

[siipperi]

Like I argued earlier in the thread, the entire point of having self heals was to proactively bridge the mitigation gap. If they're raising the mitigation cap, the potency of self heals should theoretically be reduced, although it is questionable as to whether thats even necessary right now. Proportionally, wardens self healing capabilities were actually far better in almost every expansion until quite recently, where now the bulk of the HS comes from restoration (which is a terrible design that doesn't force any trade-offs).
--

Having stance of warden should be what it was 9 years ago will just mean warden will be incapable of tank modern content and will continue to do so. Classes must change because game has changed drastically. Game is not anymore designed about very low healing from healer classes but around knowing healing is plenty and it can be used very frequent with ability to use CD skills significantly rapid pace than before this means design of mobs needing to hit significantly more is needed and it's not even that big even now if you just use double disables on the boss. While restoration overpowers over other heals it doesn't mean other heals aren't must use for greater benefit than just pure healing. You are also wrong about avoidances between tank classes.

If warden wants abnormal amount of mitigations, they are 50% medium armor after all, they need to build it. While guardian by design should be 70% tank but we all know what happened with HD and it's fine.

I have been vocal for years about guardian tanking so what ever you write about that class means nothing.

Warden has by far best threat at the moment in this game. Guardian pales in comparison. It's not even a contest at the moment who's significantly better at holding aggro. And repeatedly capable of doing so.

[gaara908776]

Fully buffed on live server I have 235k morale. On beta I have 250k without cappy buff.
Tanking 3-man 100k morale is fine, 6 man and raid you need some gear so you get close to 200k.

You don't need finesse when tanking. Maybe for some fight where you don't want to risk the ranged gambit resisting but 40-70k finesse is fine.

Yes it's all well and good that you have that much but as he is saying, the only way those numbers are possible is by using gear not meant for the Warden class. You have to use might jewellery for the tactical mitigation and extra vitality and/or 3/4 slot non Light of Erendil gear. There is no way around arguing that Warden gear is terribly itemized. Ive got 200k morale fully buffed on Live and even in some Abyss fights it feels like I'm barely scraping by.

The player you're responding to is 100% correct, the cap morale unbuffed is about 145k if you use all of the best agility gear available solely from the Mordor expansion. This number is extremely low compared to other Tanks, and needs to be re evaluated during itemization in future updates. Wardens are a 100% agility based class, the transitional period in which might provided equal benefit to Warden as agility has long since passed. Therefore, we shouldn't have to be using gear meant for other tank classes in order to scrape by as a raid tank.

[Constrictions]

Having stance of warden should be what it was 9 years ago will just mean warden will be incapable of tank modern content and will continue to do so.

What about the concept of an avoidance tank is impossible regarding modern LOTRO?

Classes must change because game has changed drastically.

I 110% agree.

But does this mean changing the entire concept of a class? I'm not convinced this is anywhere close to being necessary.

Game is not anymore designed about very low healing from healer classes but around knowing healing is plenty and it can be used very frequent with ability to use CD skills significantly rapid pace than before. This means design of mobs needing to hit significantly more is needed, and it's not even that big even now if you just use double disables on the boss.

Yes, combat was sped up, and healing was increased to compensate. In fact, minstrels have for the most part been overcompensated, given the efficacy of the interactions between their traits and legacies.

What does this mean for the warden though?
Just because combat was sped up, and the healing potency of healers increased along with it, this doesn't mean we need to change the fundamental concept of the warden as an avoidance tank.

If anything, perhaps we might argue that their avoidances need a small buff to deal with the increasing amount of attacks/damage, and/or that their own self healing needs to be increased in potency too.

While restoration overpowers over other heals it doesn't mean other heals aren't must use for greater benefit than just pure healing.

Well of course, benefits to block stats are tied to the perseverance line. Regarding the healing though, the actual HPS effects of all the other heals together, are barely half that of restoration. As for the BPE rating/buffs of this line, it is a totally trivial benefit for the reasons listed just below.

You are also wrong about avoidances between tank classes.

How?

Every class can get near cap avoidances, with the heavy classes not having to give up much of anything to gain these avoidance levels and still have top tier morale pools (over and above wardens). Sure, wardens gain some additional partial chance and mitigation. However, the actual effect of this extra partial avoidance and partial avoidance mitigations are watered down by the facts that:

• They have a very small effect regarding overall TPS, in virtually every fight
• Wardens must consistently maintain them via gambits (and, can only do so a rate that is not worth the effort with respect to how much damage these buffs actually mitigate)
• The effect of the mitigation tanks' base mitigations is over and above that of the partial avoidance/mitigation and self healing, even if wardens were capable of maintaining them 100% of the time.

Now, the +20% morale buff wardens are getting will probably offset this itemisation advantage, that has allowed heavy armoured tanks to cap BPE and have high morale pools. But the warden is still left without a meaningful avoidance advantage, lower mitigations, and self heals with a huge skew towards one gambit in terms of potency.

If warden wants abnormal amount of mitigations, they are 50% medium armor after all, they need to build it.

Why? It's not at all clear why a tank should have to actively 'build' its defences to minimum standard.

Are you considering that avoidances are, under the unchanged design, meant to act as a form of mitigation?
Are you considering that avoidances were, under the unchanged design, meant to be the wardens primary means of mitigating damage?

While guardian by design should be 70% tank but we all know what happened with HD and it's fine.

What exactly about HD are you referring to? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Warden has by far best threat at the moment in this game. Guardian pales in comparison. It's not even a contest at the moment who's significantly better at holding aggro. And repeatedly capable of doing so.

Threat is mostly arbitrary in the current environment. Sure, wardens still generate their own threat far quicker than the other tanks. That's pretty trivial though, because threat generation pretty much doesn't matter, given that every tank has a force taunt, and every force taunt acts to guarantee aggro transfer. Because of this fact, there is not much of a meaningful difference between the threat management of each tank class. Keep in mind, threat generation is only one element of threat management.

In fact, as a result of the force taunt thing, we could very easily argue that the most meaningful advantage lies with the tanks that have the most spammable force taunts. This is, of course, still the Guardian.

[Constrictions]

By the way siipperi, I'm responding to you specifically on this, not out of malice, but because you have been one of the most consistent voices advocating for these strange kinds of ideas.

[siipperi]

In fact, as a result of the force taunt thing, we could very easily argue that the most meaningful advantage lies with the tanks that have the most spammable force taunts. This is, of course, still the Guardian.

Yeah I think we done here.

[Joedangod]

In fact, as a result of the force taunt thing, we could very easily argue that the most meaningful advantage lies with the tanks that have the most spammable force taunts. This is, of course, still the Guardian.

[Imbrahil]

• Dance of War now grants +1% Physical Mitigation
• Conviction now grants +1% Tactical Mitigation

Why did DoW and Conviction get nerfed from +3% to +1% (if this isn't a typo)? First, even with 65% maximum mitigations, we are still too far off regarding Guards/Cappies in terms of survivability (since we don't have any emergency skills and B/P/E doesn't matter that much against current bosses). Then it's a bit absurd that a 4/5-Gambit gives the same amount of mitigations as a 2/3-Gambit does. Those are Finisher-Skills...they should be more potent than the first and second Gambit of the chain. And don't forget, that the animation of DoW takes ages: if this doesn't see a change, DoW will simply not be worth your time whil tanking...

With no signs of changes to buffduration (i assume we still have 30s from the last builds) or scaled self-heals, those changes to DoW and Conviction are simply unjustified!

Please consider tweaking this.

[Anduil]

• Dance of War now grants +1% Physical Mitigation
• Conviction now grants +1% Tactical Mitigation

Why did DoW and Conviction get nerfed from +3% to +1% (if this isn't a typo)? First, even with 65% maximum mitigations, we are still too far off regarding Guards/Cappies in terms of survivability (since we don't have any emergency skills and B/P/E doesn't matter that much against current bosses). Then it's a bit absurd that a 4/5-Gambit gives the same amount of mitigations as a 2/3-Gambit does. Those are Finisher-Skills...they should be more potent than the first and second Gambit of the chain. And don't forget, that the animation of DoW takes ages: if this doesn't see a change, DoW will simply not be worth your time whil tanking...

With no signs of changes to buffduration (i assume we still have 30s from the last builds) or scaled self-heals, those changes to DoW and Conviction are simply unjustified!

Please consider tweaking this.

I guess it is a typo. But even with +3% on DoW and Conciction, I am not really happy with the "new blue warden".

With 30 seconds buff-duration, we will be extremely limited in what we can do in this timeframe. If we aim for 65% mits, skill delay and ridiculously long animations of 23-line-gambits do not improve that matter.
Building the complete 23-line from scratch plus using DC in order to keep up 65% mits costs around 18 seconds. After that, we have 12 seconds for other things before we have to start over.
In those 12 seconds, for example, you can use Marked Target, Diminished Target, Stance Swap, Ranged Adroit Manoeuvre, Stance Swap back, re-build 1st 23-gambit - and that´s it.
No morale-taps, no self-heals, no aoe-dots, no shild-mastery, no nothing. You get it ... no heal, no damage, no threat, no BPE buffs.

Of course, in every second round of rotation you could replace Marked Target & Diminished Target with something else, and usage of battle memory will help a little bit.
But come on. I am all for that Wardens have to make choices, but this timeframe is way too short.

Furthermore, dc-nerv to 5% is way to much without introducing a panic button/gambit. As long as such is not introduced, set dc mits from 8% to 5% per target. 15 seconds duration, 30 seconds cd, blue-line only.
Ofc, dc should get detached from mits completely one day.

Thoughts?

Cheers,
Vala

[Imbrahil]

I guess it is a typo. But even with +3% on DoW and Conciction, I am not really happy with the "new blue warden".

With 30 seconds buff-duration, we will be extremely limited in what we can do in this timeframe. If we aim for 65% mits, skill delay and ridiculously long animations of 23-line-gambits do not improve that matter.
Building the complete 23-line from scratch plus using DC in order to keep up 65% mits costs around 18 seconds. After that, we have 12 seconds for other things before we have to start over.
In those 12 seconds, for example, you can use Marked Target, Diminished Target, Stance Swap, Ranged Adroit Manoeuvre, Stance Swap back, re-build 1st 23-gambit - and that´s it.
No morale-taps, no self-heals, no aoe-dots, no shild-mastery, no nothing. You get it ... no heal, no damage, no threat, no BPE buffs.

Of course, in every second round of rotation you could replace Marked Target & Diminished Target with something else, and usage of battle memory will help a little bit.
But come on. I am all for that Wardens have to make choices, but this timeframe is way too short.

Furthermore, dc-nerv to 5% is way to much without introducing a panic button/gambit. As long as such is not introduced, set dc mits from 8% to 5% per target. 15 seconds duration, 30 seconds cd, blue-line only.
Ofc, dc should get detached from mits completely one day.

Thoughts?

I completly second this. Numerous users have pointed out, that 30 second buffduration is simply not enough. I am really fine with Gambits giving +Mits, but I don't like the current Gambit selection. I would prefer having the mits (at least the +3% ones) on Shield Mastery and Shield Tactics because of their 1 minute duration. However, if they are going to stay on the impressive Flourish line, we need a way to increase our buffdurations in the future.

Right now, Warden may have the ability to tank T2 Bosses again, but he has to rush trough his Gambits to maintain this ability and has to use a force aoe taunt (very bad design) every ~20 seconds. Because you only have 12 second spare time, as Vala pointed out, there isn't time for much else.
Wardens take more damage than Guards/Cappys that's only natural, but without a way to compensate this (group utility, meaningfull buffs/debuffs, etc.) they won't be nearly as wanted in raids as Guards and Captain Tanks are. Right now, there is simply no reason to choose a Warden over the other classes. We can't survive on our own like we once did. We don't have enough time to excel in Trashpulls like we once did. Our grouputility (Diminished/Marked Target/ -20% Inductions) also can't compensate this.

[Oelle]

concerning DC.
Long term, it would be best, if DC is just a tauntskill + maybe damagereflect, but not connected with mits. Mits should be available all time and not rely on forcetaunt thats bad to use in the first second of a fight.
So long term wise, please give wardens a skill that gives them survivability plus a mass forcetaunt. Not one in both.

Short-term, wardens either need cooldowns for increased survivability (every other tank has those) or higher mits generally. I'd say let DC give 10% mits as long as wardens dont get survival skills and as soon as they get some, either let DC give 5% mits or give all mit bonusses to gambits.
Something like 23 = 2% mits, 232 = 3% mits, 2323/23232 = 5% mits (on tact, one phys, thats 65% if all are running and DC gives no mits).
1% mit bonus is quite poor anyway for such slow gambits that share gambit builders with those needed for aggro and avoidance.

[Beltharas]

8 pages of comments, update scheduled for tomorrow, and still no word from any Dev on the design goals or rationale for the warden changes? A little interaction would go a long ways here

[Constrictions]

Yeah I think we done here.

I haven't been writing to convince you. Not that you have made much of an argument for your perspective, anyway. The less people are convinced the warden must become something it isn't, the faster it can be adapted to the current environment.

But hey, oh my god this guy is(?) wrong about X or Y thing, therefore his whole thesis must be totally wrong!!

Yeah, cool story bro. If you think I'm wrong about something non-trivial, the least you can do is refute my counters instead of throwing in the towel at the first sign of resistance.

?

[Joedangod]

?

+ +

[Hildilas]

+ +

Btw i would love to have the SAME kind deflect of on DC. It is super cool :3

[JFDCamara]

I haven't been to Bullroarer but as I saw no notes on that just a small wish of mine:

Make spears as good as swords for wardens.
It's just silly a class that has mentions to spears everywhere from skills to traits is simply better with swords.

Men and Elves (2x) have the sword damage bonus (+5%) while the upgraded intrinsic parry from swords is a great 3%.
Menwhile spears have no racial bonuses and all they have is a lousy bleed (that is currently utterly pathetic in live).

The status currently is that swords are better both defensively and offensively.
I think a similar parry on spears would go great lenghts to make it viable (the offensive part can be mitigated by a warden specific improved bleed from spears).

[Krindel]

I don't know if someone pointed out this. Since our all AoE taunts are now Tactical skills, Recklessness +50% melee damage and other +melee damage buffs do not affect them.

[Anduil]

I don't know if someone pointed out this. Since our all AoE taunts are now Tactical skills, Recklessness +50% melee damage and other +melee damage buffs do not affect them.

That is correct and was pointed out in warden class forums. Related information:

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...11#post7842111

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...65#post7842565

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...40#post7843340

Cheers,
Vala

[Tasatir]

Is there something new at the Warden? Which solves the main issues?

[Kander]

Is there something new at the Warden? Which solves the main issues?

Only bug fixes of bleeds not stacking from different wardens.