GF protector vs conqueror

kr3nd

How much difference can be felt between a prot and a conq build?
I do not see much difference between the 2 path's bonuses, only the final feat makes them different.

My guildmaster told me I will have a really hard time in cot and lol because I am playing with DPS feats.
But playing as conqueror helps me a lot in farming dailies and RP, so I do not want to lose my biggest DMG buff.

Is that (max 20%) dmg reduction, which protectors can apply to others crucial for tuern and lostmauth?
Or I can just be fine with 50k hp 50% DR and 20% deflect?

umcjdking

If using the same gear, they feel slightly different. Conquerors do noticeably more damage, but are far more squishy than Protector's. It might even equal out in DPS due to Protector's not ever really needing to heal if build offensively.

query523

If your Conq feels squishy you are doing something wrong. You do not really need to block every single attack. When you learn how to block and attack tactically you're still tanking as all hell. You just hit folks more often....

kr3nd

query523 wrote: »

If your Conq feels squishy you are doing something wrong. You do not really need to block every single attack. When you learn how to block and attack tactically you're still tanking as all hell. You just hit folks more often....

I do not feel squishy, that is why I asked it before spending 78k on reset and making my life harder with slowing down my grindig speed.

caexar

There is a difference and it is noticeable in the areas of survivability, damage and threat generation.
Both can do the job the GF was meant to, hold threat, it just comes down to how you want to do it. Put the two side by side of equal skill and the Protector is the best in the game at grabbing and keeping aggro. Nothing beats it. The Conq kills way faster than the Prot, I mean it ain't even close and it tries to hold threat through damage on top of marks.

If you like more utility (protectors KV + ItF buffs the parties damage more than a conqs ItF if feared right) more survivability, more threat generation then go protector. Your offense will be almost non existent but you can carry a group.

If you want great survivability with respectable damage and good threat generation go with Conq.

hypervoreian

caexar wrote: »

There is a difference and it is noticeable in the areas of survivability, damage and threat generation.
Both can do the job the GF was meant to, hold threat, it just comes down to how you want to do it. Put the two side by side of equal skill and the Protector is the best in the game at grabbing and keeping aggro. Nothing beats it. The Conq kills way faster than the Prot, I mean it ain't even close and it tries to hold threat through damage on top of marks.

If you like more utility (protectors KV + ItF buffs the parties damage more than a conqs ItF if feared right) more survivability, more threat generation then go protector. Your offense will be almost non existent but you can carry a group.

If you want great survivability with respectable damage and good threat generation go with Conq.

^^^^

Hi fellow GF.
I am against your opinion.In my knowledge Conq > Prot in threat generation.

Yet you and many others are keep saying that.
I do not see a feat in prot path that gives more threat to prot.
None.
Plus,Conq does 25% more damage and has 10% more critical.So logic says that GF Conq using the same encounters with GF prot,is superior to threat generation and holding aggro.

But what makes me impression is that not only you but many others insist that prot aggroes better.How is that possible?I am really curious.As said prot tree does not have any feat that gives extra aggro.

caexar

Brawling Warrior boosts threat generated during Enforced Threat's duration and Balanced Shield Fighter boosts threat generation with aggravating strike at-will due to damage increase. Further to it, threat is not calculated on a flat 1:1 damage to threat ratio, which is why bigger damage does not always equal bigger threat.

Another thing that you're skirting around is that in order for the conq to have such a significant damage advantage and thus threat through damage, they have to have combat superiority and usually trample the fallen or steel blitz slotted. Since Prot doesn't have to rely on damage alone they can slot enhanced threat to skyrocket their marks priority.
Most conqs will also have damaging encounters slotted to take advantage of their strengths whereas Prot can slot in KV for an additional DR boost and continuous threat generation on top of everything else.

If your response is "well the conq can run that loadout too!", then my reply would be WTF are you playing a conq for then?

hypervoreian

caexar wrote: »

Brawling Warrior boosts threat generated during Enforced Threat's duration and Balanced Shield Fighter boosts threat generation with aggravating strike at-will due to damage increase. Further to it, threat is not calculated on a flat 1:1 damage to threat ratio, which is why bigger damage does not always equal bigger threat.

Another thing that you're skirting around is that in order for the conq to have such a significant damage advantage and thus threat through damage, they have to have combat superiority and usually trample the fallen or steel blitz slotted. Since Prot doesn't have to rely on damage alone they can slot enhanced threat to skyrocket their marks priority.
Most conqs will also have damaging encounters slotted to take advantage of their strengths whereas Prot can slot in KV for an additional DR boost and continuous threat generation on top of everything else.

If your response is "well the conq can run that loadout too!", then my reply would be WTF are you playing a conq for then?

^^^
I see.So is brawilng warrior with ET.Ok ET is usually slotted by Conqs but they lose aggro cause they do not have the spesific feat.
I accept that but not the att will damage one,cause already Conq does superior damage to a prot even if a prot is hitting with aggravating strike.

As for EM yes i accept that too.I almost never run this ,i usually slot combat superiority and steel defence.
But why i do that?Cause i never if ever i lose aggro.I just lose aggro to a GWF Intim briefly in vs the left scorp battle in elol.And briefly against TR in final laustmauth battle.
But 90% of the cases i regain aggro with Iron Warrior.
My rotaiton for elol (where is the sole case i lose aggro) is Into the fray,KV,Iron warrior. Shield talent ,steel defence.Crushing Syrge,tide of Iron.

For this rotation (which i think optimal for current dungeon and classes abilities and comps) the prot does not have any aggro advantage against me a typical conq.
If he is IV he would slot EM instead of Steel defence;In that case he must be extremely cautious cause he might end up with aggro,that cannot cope with.And usually backsteps in order to use pot.
While a conq with steel defence and villain's menace can literally jump on top of scorpion or jump in the centre of laustmauth's breath aoe.
So he regain aggro just by better positioning and doing damage while Prot backsteps.

---

So ,yes from technical point i see that the only advantage a prot has,as concerning threat is Brawling Warrior and Enforced Threat combo.
When someones runs this comp ,Prot SLIGHTLY has the edge in threat generation.
In any other case i think threat wise prot =conq.And sice Conq always does more damage (even with his att wills) he will slightly has more aggro than a prot.

The question you ask:Since i use the same rotation with a Prot in pve...Why not use prot tree instead?The answer is flexibility.
I want to go to a normal relaxed skirmish?I slot Combat superiority and steel deefence and go offensive rotation.
Some of my friends want to go elol?Utility selection powers and i am ready to go.
Pug pvp?Lunging ,Flourish,Anvil.If only one or no Cws are present i will enjoy the match except if i run into pvp premade.
Single player and farming rp in WoD or Shar?Again dmage encounters.

The end summary for me is that conq has same or better threat that a prot,same survivability or better(take measure-the ac and deflect feats a a conq can take them are early on prot tree)significanlty better damage.the only thing that lucks is brawiling warrior.It seems minor to me.To forfeit all these advantages in order to have a slight advantage when you use enforced threat in your rotation.

Anyway these are personal choises and each runs his optimum build accordinbg to his gamestyle.But my advice to new GFs out there:Stay Conqs

silence1x

I have played as both and while I do like Protector, I typically do my dailies solo so Conqueror is the better choice for me. If I run a dungeon, I slot KV and ITF if asked but otherwise just stick with Griffon's, Lunging Strike and (usually) Anvil of Doom.

$.02

caexar

Whoa, judging from the response you posted maybe you think I meant that conqs can't generate threat at all which I never said. My whole stance is that when built to their strengths, the Prot will out aggro everything. By choosing a non damage dealing passive threat generation load out the conq is essentially working against its own best asset of damage output. Lol whut?
I will also say again, damage output absolutely does not equal threat generated. I think you are placing a little too much stock in that belief. If it did no GF even a conq, would ever be able to pull aggro off of them DPSers.

A typical Conq load out will have at least two damage skills and damage enhancing class features. The Prot threat load out will run ET, IW, and KV along with EM.
ET is a threat build over time on top of a hard taunt. IW threat build over time. KV can add stupid amounts of threat built up over its duration which is now constant.

As for survivability, the conq will always take at least 20% more damage then a protector will thanks to the prot capstone. There is no comparison between the two. Conq is tough as nails sure, but Prot is indestructible. Better guard duration and far superior mitigation potential.

Conq don't suck. They're awesome but they don't "tank" as well as a Prot. Nothing does.

hypervoreian

caexar wrote: »

Whoa, judging from the response you posted maybe you think I meant that conqs can't generate threat at all

^^
No fellow Gf ,in winter i just have a lot of spare time and i like to talk A LOT!!!

query523

Look a conq will out aggro everything in the game except a GF (any build) slotting enhanced threat. I tested this rather extensively during ToD when I would often end up in an instance with 2 or more GFs. So basically that 'superior' threat generation only matters if there is more than one GF in your party (why would you do that?) otherwise it is using a class feature you did not need in the first place. This is not to say Conq is the end-all be-all. Just saying that that differential is functionally meaningless.

umcjdking

In PVE, the difference between Conq, Tact and Prot is just down to playstle when geared EXACTLY the same. Conq deals about 15% more damage but is prone to mass damage spikes and chain CC's; they are good in steam rolling dungeons like PK but struggle against single target bosses where you cannot solely rely on you natural health regeneration/lifesteal to keep you alive. Protectors, it's the opposite, you suffer more from attrition than spike (being slowly beat down out of your HP) more effective in extended boss fights like ELOL and ESOT. Taticians are, IMO, in the best spot due to the very quick daily recharge (which is critical for GF damage and survivability)., they excel everywhere.

thestaggy

caexar wrote: »

If your response is "well the conq can run that loadout too!", then my reply would be WTF are you playing a conq for then?

In my humble opinion the Conqeuror is the most versatile path. Tactician tries to go down the middle but it masters none (in my experience with the path) and the Protector can take a beating, but not that much more than a Conqueror. Conquerors can easily surpass 50% DR and load up on the HP to make them viable tanks in eSoT and eLoL before heading into dailies and outperforming a Protector by a considerable margin.

damnacious

Almost any GF build can work depending on the gear, skill, content and reasonable selection of Powers and Feats.

From my personal perspective and from trying a number of different builds with my main GF and have 3 other level 60 GFs of various GS and specs, I have found the Protector very difficult to surpass in terms of a 'tank'.

My reasons for this are pretty simple - I focus not on how well I do in terms of damage but how well I can reduce the damage taken by myself and my party and how I can increase the DPS of my party.

In this regard, a well-built Conqueror as a 'tank', for example, can work almost as well as a Protector with little difference. A well-built Tactician can 'tank' almost as well too. However, for me, the difference often will lie with the selection of Powers and Feats if everything else about the characters are the same. As a Conqueror i find it unsatisfying to take Enhanced Mark (EM) coupled with the artifact off-hand EM class feature that reduces target DR by 5%. Yet, when this is used with the Draconic Templar set, Protector capstone, Knight's Valor (KV), Into the Fray (ItF), Enforced Threat (ET), Tab+Threatening Rush (TR) and a 54% DR (with Armor Specialization) you end up: debuffing target's DR by 50%, taking 50% of party damage, increasing party DPS by 60%, increasing party Run Speed and Action Point Gain by 15% and debuffing target damage by 25%. This effectively means that your party are only taking 37.5% of their normal damage, are dealing a minimum 125% more damage (with CA from Mark) and are moving a lot more quickly.

Now, there's nothing stopping either a Conqueror or Tactician build from doing almost exactly the same thing except for debuffing target damage by 20%, however why would a Conqueror generally bother? As a Conqueror this would effectively mean you are sacrificing all three of your Encounter Power slots to use the least damaging Powers that would most benefit from what the Conqueror does... increased damage.

Similarly, although the Tactician build is good and capable of doing almost exactly what the Protector might do, the Protector still is capable of debuffing target damage by 20% more than a Tactician is capable of. This is off-set by their capability to increase their own survivability and damage of themselves and their party however, yet for party survivability it still doesn't stack up successfully against the Protector's debuff.

In addition to all of this is the Protector Feat Shieldmaster. No other build can attain this except Protector and for any extended fight in either PVE or PVP, this Feat, when couple with Shield Talent, is unparalleled.

So, although it really comes down to personal preference, play style and build preference, I personally prefer Protector as a 'real' "Tank" any day.

query523

[QUOTE=umcjdking;9876811 Conq deals about 15% more damage but is prone to mass damage spikes and chain CC's; they are good in steam rolling dungeons like PK but struggle against single target bosses where you cannot solely rely on you natural health regeneration/lifesteal to keep you alive. [/QUOTE]

1. Avoiding chain CCs and spike damage. This is a technique many of us developed when Gaurd was a lot more melty. Learn the animations for big hits and CCs and only gaurd when those attacks (for Ap gain as well) honestly this makes equal sense on a tact or conq. Maybe more for a tact because eating all those little attacks also boosts AP.
2. Single target. Fortunately when tanking a single target you are usually tanking something that hits really hard/ CCs so using 1. will give heavy returns. So I tend to use that to time my encounters to come up with VM which comes up fairly often in that circumstance. If you are already maintining a mark and using LS's enhanced threat you can pin it indefinately and not fall behind on HP.

umcjdking

A same-build protector will outdamage a Conqueror in a boss fight due to not having a need to run KV.

In ELOL, my protector can slot Lunging Strike/ITF/Anvil, Combat Superiority and Enhanced Mark. I still floor his damage by 35% through nothing but gear and feats.

My conqueror simply can't do that. The entire team will die.

xtremoz

I am Conq GF and i run all end game content, yes i can be 1 shot on eLoL if i dont block the right attack or if i dont move, like staying inside the scorpion lava circule, but i think prot build will die also 1 shoot if he doesn´t block the right attack.

what i say to u is unlock eLoL and eSoT, run it as Conq if u die allot, try again and learn to avoid what killed u (take a healing class dc sw guildmate). if u see there's no way to do it then try respec.

p.s. KV its a great skill saving party members, but can kill u if they dont even try avoid reds. (eLoL and eSoT can be done without a gf, so if your party die cant all be gf fault).

grabmoore

umcjdking wrote: »

A same-build protector will outdamage a Conqueror in a boss fight due to not having a need to run KV.

In ELOL, my protector can slot Lunging Strike/ITF/Anvil, Combat Superiority and Enhanced Mark. I still floor his damage by 35% through nothing but gear and feats.

My conqueror simply can't do that. The entire team will die.

Why so? A Conq doesn't need KV in eSOT end boss. He can turn the boss to the wall and tank it like a usual tank would, while dpsing the best possible.
KV is only needed for damageboosting the party through Knight Captain set.

Also I wonder why most of you respected GF players do value the Protector capston so high? It's only useful on single targets in my humble opinion. But excatly there, at Draco/Lostmauth/eSoT end bosses, I have no issue surviving with KV activated. I just don't feel the need of up to 20% mitigation.
Last but not least, threat generation. All 3 are the same. Don't fool yourself. If you feel, you generate not enough threat, get a Dread Warrior. Get a rust monster, if you want mitigation.

As you might have noticed, I favour Conq over the other two any day

hypervoreian

grabmoore wrote: »

Why so? A Conq doesn't need KV in eSOT end boss. He can turn the boss to the wall and tank it like a usual tank would, while dpsing the best possible.
KV is only needed for damageboosting the party through Knight Captain set.

I am Conq and i tank the boss against the wall with KV active.I never turn it off since the start of the skirmish.
many other Conqs can do the same.

And i have seen full turtle Prots get oneshot....

kr3nd

There is quite a discussion, I like it.

BTW are you using ioun stones? Does it affect the stats much?
(I am not a fan of the companion system since it just an AD shrink)

query523

Another Conq saying I can tank those instances without KV fairly consistantly and am also fairly certain I do more single target damage.

checkmatein3

To Preface My post: I play a Swordmaster-Conqueror GF.

I will sum up discussion between the Paragon Paths:
1. Choose Conqueror if you want to do more damage in solo and party PvE and do not expect to be in guard much.
2. Choose Protector if you want to be tankier and have more time in guard and debuff the mobs/boss defense.
3. Choose Tactician if you want to boost your party's AP gain to do dailies.

As far as survivability, that is completely independent of any of the paragon path choices above.