One tank to rule them all? Devs say no.
by Eliah Hecht 
Mar 9th 2007 at 9:48AM
As a healer, I feel like I get a decent view on tank performance. And by now I've had a chance to heal for all three primary tanking classes: Warrior, Paladin, and Druid. From my point of view, both a Paladin and a Druid make excellent tanks when specced for it; in fact, in BC I'd say they tank better than a Warrior. Post-patch, if I had to pick a ranking, I'd say Pally > Druid > Warrior (Druid would've been on top pre-patch), but that really depends on player, gear, and environment. I asked a few guildies (a shadow Priest, experienced in pulling aggro, and a player who's tanked as both a Pally and a Warrior both made themselves available for extended comment; one more each of Druid, Pallie, and Warrior gave quick shout-ins), and here's what emerged (combined with my own observations):
- All three classes are good tanks.
- Pallies and Druids need to try harder to gear for it, whereas Warrior gear tends to be made for tanking more often.
- Pallies and Warriors can tend to be a bit short in the HP and armor department as compared to Druids. However, Warriors have tons of skills related to tanking, as well as parry and block; Pallies also have parry and block, and are pretty hard to get aggro off of.
- Druids and Warriors can't be shielded as much, since it interferes with rage generation.
- Pallies get mana when you heal them.
- Overall, there seems to have been a large shift in BC away from Warrior tanking and towards Paladin and Druid tanking. This has been offset somewhat with 2.0.10, but not by any means completely.
- There's a certain perception that Warriors have the potential to be the best tanks, but it takes more skill to do it.
The devs actually mentioned today that Paladin tanking wasn't exactly where they wanted it to be and there would be attention paid towards that end of things. Overall, they do expect Paladins, Druids and Warriors to fill tanking roles in end-game, whatever they may be. While there may be a flavor distinction between tanks, we don't want to (or want the players to) find some rigid hierarchy by which classes are measured in their tanking potential to the third decimal point.
In my opinion, this is great news. I can't imagine a better perspective. What do you guys think, both on the current differences between tanks, and about the devs' stance as exemplified in this quote?
Filed under: Druid, Paladin, Warrior, Analysis / Opinion, The Burning Crusade
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Tony V Mar 9th 2007 10:22AM
I think Paladins have to try really hard to gear for tanking. Also their itemization is more difficult than other classes, as they basically need every stat in the book (Int and mp5 for rage, spell damage and lots of it, strength, lots of stamina, +defense and +block, a good DPS onehander, and tons of armor).
And if Blizzard doesn't want the tanks pigeon-holed, then maybe they shouldn't have made the first instance full of bleed-immune, undead mobs which can be exorcised.
Toolio Mar 9th 2007 10:21AM
The way I see it, being the tank ends up costing you more in repair bills. I've got a feral druid, and I'd much rather DPS than tank. Although I find the challenge of aggro maintenance as the MT more appealing than spamming mangle.
Burning Adrenaline Mar 9th 2007 10:22AM
I appreciate all three classes. I love the druid healing, paladin blessings, and warrior tanking/dpsing. Yet at the end of the day, the druid can spec for ranged magic damage, healing or melee tanking or dps. The Paladin can spec for healing/ranged magic, tanking and melee damage. On the other hand, the warrior seems to have two main choices, melee damage and tanking. Given the somewhat lesser range of choices for the warrior, and various other reasons, I feel that they should always have the edge in tanking.
Don't get me wrong though. This does not mean that I don't want dungeons where a druid tank may be superior (poly immune), or even a paladin. I want Paladins and Druids to get the opportunity to strut their tanking abilities too. Heck, mages even get to tank one of the new BC bosses. Yet this Warlock feels that overall, the warrior should be the most-able tank of all.
Argent Mar 9th 2007 10:23AM
well, in terms of AE tanking, consecrate still ramps up better than the new t-clap, but that's kinda besides the point -- other than the trash before morose, it's hardly ever needed.
i think like all things paladin, the tanking aspect could best benefit from changes in gear more than anything else.
Jeff Morgan Mar 9th 2007 10:23AM
"There goes my job security." I can hear the warriors now. Quite frankly, though, when I look for a tank, I look like this.
Guild
Friends List
/who
Chat
If no guildies are on, I look to my friends list, where I save important names from several classes. Then I /who for the appropriate levels, leaving my last resort at the chat channels.
I'm pretty much willing to give anyone a first shot, and if they're good, I'll use them again. To me, it's like a finding an enchanter who charges reasonably. Of course I'll tip you well, because you're providing me a service. Likewise, if a tank is good, be they pally, druid, or warrior, I'll try to use them as much as possible.
Players seem to think they should take priority by virtue of the class they rolled. But if I'm nuking aggro with my mage and getting people wiped, I expect to not get invited back. If you can't be a smart tank (and I don't mean you have to hold aggro when some mage doesn't watch his threat), don't expect repeat business. I remember names on both the good and bad extremes. Warriors, you want a job, then do your job well. To the pally and druid contingent, keep tanking well. It's driving up quality in the tanking market.
Burning Adrenaline Mar 9th 2007 10:25AM
I believe I meant to say Mind Control immune instead of poly. My bad. I just woke up.
Doodzin Mar 9th 2007 10:26AM
I agree w/#2.
If protection pallies and feral druids are meant to be equal to warriors for tanking, then why waste a raid slot on a warrior at all???
The other's buffs alone make them a better choice if the tanking is equal.
I think it would be best to leave warriors the best overall tanks with pallies and druids tanking certain situations and bosses that call for it.
James Mar 9th 2007 10:27AM
Well, that's great. Hasn't the party line always been that hybrid classes such as paladins and druids are more versatile, but that comes at a cost in that they will never be able to either heal like a priest or tank like a warrior. Of course, a little ways back, they both got buffed to the point they could out-tank most warriors. Druids got a nerfing, but now comes this fantastic statement from Tseric stating that Blizzard basically feelss like these two hybrid classes should be able to tank as well as a primary class.
So, why the hell would I roll a warrior? They are hell to level up--even fury/arms warriors take forever to kill something. I know, because I got one to 60, and compared to my hunter, he takes longer to kill things, and the hunter doesn't die nearly as often. Sure, warriors have a few oh-&%$# abilities, but those abilities are geared more toward non-solo play. A pally
So again, why roll one now? I'm glad Blizz gave warriors some more buffs, but based on Tseric's statements, that's probably about all they are going to get. If I roll a pally, I get the joy of wearing plate, and I can heal myself, and I can toss my shield (not a big deal, just really cool). Warriors...get to just wear plate. If I roll a druid, I can take on different forms, including a tank form and a dps form, and I can stealth. Warriors can...yeah, not really take on a tank form or a dps form without respeccing between prot and arms/fury.
Well, this has been very enlightening. Glad I retired my warrior. He'll stay there. Priests! Look out, because no doubt Blizz is coming for you next, given . Look for druids, shamans and paladins to be doing your job equal to or better you than in a patch or two.
Kai Mar 9th 2007 10:29AM
My Main is a Warrior and I feel that Warriors should have an edge in Tanking. That's what we do. We don't have any healing or other option available to pallies or Druids and I feel that that should be Balance by Higher HP / Armour and Aggro control.I respect that Pallies can and do Tank and many very well. i just feel that a full on Protection specced Warrior should Have some tanking superioirity....
My $0.02...
noobian Mar 9th 2007 10:57AM
The problem about tanking as I see it still goes back to one basic issue: most Warriors (mine too) prefer straight Arms, Fury or a mixture as opposed to Protection. Druids and Paladins have been tweaked to make effective tanks partly due to this overall tendency on the part of Warrior players. I agree that perhaps they are too effective in this role, particularly Druids, but if you don't spec for Protection I do think it's reasonable that they be picked over and/or regarded as inferior _for tanking_ compared to the other two classes.
Xip Mar 9th 2007 11:01AM
'Paladin ranged damage' to quote someone earlier in this thread... uhm, try to think along the lines of post BC Moondps, halved and then sliced into smaller bits. Paladin ranged magic dps is one of those smaller bits.
Deafdumbandblind Mar 9th 2007 11:05AM
#8 You're missing the point. It's more like: yes all 3 can tank but in doing so each brings something different to the party.
I would agree that in 5 man instances the pecking order is Pally>Druid>Warrior simply because the first two can heal and buff although if a tanking druid pops out of bear form to heal with full feral spec he is likely going to die.
In 10-man and greater instance you are better off having a prot warrior as tank because he has more skills for creating threat on multiple mobs. Also, and it may be my imagination, but plate just seems to take more of a bashing than leather before it gets damaged. When my bear tanks it doesn't take very many encounters before his armour is below 80% whereas my warriors armour seems to be more resistant to damage. Anyone else find that?
Burning Adrenaline Mar 9th 2007 11:13AM
@11
Nobody said Paladin range dps was mage-like, but in specing for ranged holy dps they also get healing spec. In a way, the ranged holy is just a bonus.
Lex Mar 9th 2007 9:22PM
I'm all for the idea of several classes being viable tanks as this protects against relying on the presence of a single class to get a group together, but at the same time I believe that every class should be able to spec to provide some irreplaceable commodity to a raid. It's bad enough that warriors' ability to be the best tanks in the game is in question, but what's equally sad is that arms and fury warriors don't seem to have that special something either. Perhaps mortal strike will prove critical to some new endgame encounter, but I haven't seen it yet. Almost all off-specs provide some raid utility: shadow priests have misery and vampiric effects, ret pallys increase critical strike chance by all attackers, and so on. But why would I ever take a fury warrior when I could take a rogue?
Doodzin Mar 9th 2007 11:20AM
@12
The reason the druid's durability is going down relatively faster than a warriors is because you are actually being hit more. Druids don't parry as much and cannot block at all, so they are actually being hit more often, even tho the end result in damage mitigation is about the same due to the increased armor points you have compared to a warrior.
Druids bite more of the bullet, warriors block and parry more.
Todd Mar 9th 2007 11:20AM
I think Warriors are being usurped a bit with their role as a straight tank. A Warrior doesn't have much other roles to play, just Tank and DPS. A Druid has much more flexibility in what direction they favor. I don't think a Paladin or Druid should ever be considered a full replacement for a Warrior, as this is the Warriors main role.
I hate that the developers are trying to lessen the effectiveness of a class's primary core role. Eventually the importance of rolling a Warrior will be as importance as rolling a Priest, why not role a Druid and you can spec either way at your leisure and just nullify the need for Warrior or Priest.
James Mar 9th 2007 11:21AM
@12
That is a good point--while I haven't raided in awhile, warriors were always the go to class in raids. In fact, we never even considered having a druid or pally tank the pre-BC raid dungeons. That said, those were the pre-BC days in MC and BWL. Given that I've retired my warrior, I can't really comment on how things are in the BC raid dungeons. However, where does this leave warriors who don't do raiding, or warriors who are still leveling and doing just 5-mans, or PvP warriors (non-Arena)?
Honestly, with my hunter, this is all great news. Especially considering how fubar the LFG channel is. Its hard enough getting a team together for, well, anything, and being able to choose between 3 classes for tanking options makes life much easier. But, having been a warrior for a long time, working so hard to level, and to be a good prot-spec raiding warrior, it makes me very sad to see the new stance Blizzard is taking with hybrid classes. I'd love to do more raiding, but it is alot more fun, faster, and easier to level my hunter to 70 then it would be to get my warrior up to 70 and get the gear to do a decent job tanking in a raid. Still, I don't think I would ever be comfortable having anything other than full prot-spec warrior tanking anything larger than a 10 man. But for 5 mans, PvP and solo play, I just don't see why I should roll a warrior when I could roll a druid.
gunn Mar 9th 2007 11:23AM
I don't look at it as.
Warrio > Pally > Druid
for tanking in general.
Simply put, the different tanks are good for different things. For large mob pulls with little CC ability a Paladin rocks. For boss fights Warriors rock. I've yet to see a great Druid tank, however I'm sure they're great in certain situations as well.
Ultimatly Tanks should be rated for Skill,situation, gear (in no particular order) but those 3 things will help you determine what tank you want for which situation.
Such as Attumen in Karazhan. I can't tank it as a paladin (I'm not full protection, here's my spec for those interested http://12.129.242.20/#character-talents.xml?r=Medivh&n=Gunn)
However the undead pulls in the ballroom and various other places I tank perfectly fine, pulling the mobs to me, consecrating, holy wrath, then healing myself with heals coming from the group. We burn those mobs down quickly and it's alot of fun. There is no warrior out there that can hold that aggro better then me. But like I said I just can't take the damage from the bosses without major healing, so I back off during High damage fights and focus on healing with my +healing gear on. (which is what I have on in the armory, not my tanking gear). I am able to tank all the instances before Karazhan and the wonderful thing about my spec is not only can I take a beating & hold aggro, but while doing so I can Heal myself! It really is a beautiful thing to behold.
I've yet to try a full protection spec, but I'm not sure I need too as long as their are capable warriors out there.
Three reasons you will always need a warrior/druid tank.
1) Any fight that drains mana can not be tanked by a Paladin, as we need mana to tank!
2) any mob immune to Magic can't be tanked by a paladin either due to all our aggro holding is from +holy Damage.
3) We only have one Taunt move and it does not work on most bosses, thusly if we lose aggro it's often difficult to regain it (at least in my current spec). Although in fairness I can get aggro back, using High +holy damage moves & Trinkets, but it takes alot of effort on my part.
Thanks :-)
Jason Mar 9th 2007 11:27AM
Buff druids and pally tanking all day long if ya want. Just make their healing abilities and buffs that last longer than 2 min not work and I am all for it.
Sort of like a shadow form for priests, except based on spec.
Genius Jones Mar 9th 2007 11:30AM
It amuses me that Warriors seem to have some kind of entitlement mentality about tanking -- that somehow there's some natural order of things where they are supposed to be at the center of the raid. More often that not in my experience, the loudest of them are players who can be control freaks and have ego problems and who are hungry for attention. The recent dip in Warrior tanking effectiveness really underscored this. The Warrior officer in my guild ripped his clothes, wailed at the injustice of God, threatened to quit, rerolled, and all sorts of other childish things, basically trying to make everyone else's game as lame as possible until he was the center of attention, *cough*, I mean the raid, again. Pathetic. The worst thing is that the some of the other warriors started emulating him. Leadership 4TL, eh?
I play a Druid, and it's true you have to hunt around more for the right gear and discard a lot of stuff that may look good, but actually isn't. I've had my toon a long time so you can imagine I've played all the builds for extended periods of time, but now that we're actually viable as tanks I'm having a lot of fun. Everyone I group with is happy with Druids for either Main or Off tank. My best friend is a warrior and we just swap out roles as necessary as we play. I'm just glad we got some threat back -- that's all I really missed after our 2.10 nerf.