Posted 28 July 2013 - 06:51 AM
I really believe that it is far from logic. It would be logical if it had the idea behind it, but it doesn't.
I'm not sure if English is hard to understand but anyways, if you don't know what an anchor is, google it. What strife meant when he wrote 'anchor' was that he wants the mob to focus on him. So tanking in a way. In all games if you want to tank something you utilize certain aggro mechanics. Since there are no taunts here or similar stuff, ppl who want to try and tank go for high armor since it seems to sometimes affect the aggro, as is written on gw2 and as several vids show. So to dumb it down high armor = aggro mechanic = anchor = tank.
In any other game you wouldn't go off on lfg as a ranger, assassin, mage or sth else saying "tank lfg" cause it ain't what you are now, is it?
The same way if I was using cavalier, celestial or valk armor and trinkets I wouldn't go running off and making a build thread called "new zerker spec dps guardian" because that's just now what it would be.
So in the end, as much as I appreciate ppl creating new builds and trying to help out new players by posting them, I don't really think that, for the lack of better word, confusing them with false terminology is the way.
The OP in some of the builds posted even says "go zerker armor" or sth, cbb to turn the page, but anyway, this is more of an overall thread on the self heal/survivability options a guardian can have if they don't want to use altruistic healing. Which is okay, if you're into that sort of thing, but it's not tanking, and it's not really group utility support that strife's build or brazil's build provide.
This is pretty logical, I don't get why ppl are having such a hard time understanding my explanations. I mean if I decide to blow up a house using C4, I'm not gonna go on twitter and say that I dropped a nuclear warhead on it...