Curse

Wielder Of Magic · May 26, 2011, 07:42 AM // 07:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

I hope you're kidding right ? Last sentence especially is quite a joke , considering people did run R/A , R/P , R/D in Heroes Ascent or other PvP formats for months....I'm not even going to argue about dshot/savage/magebane... Even in PvE , due to better energy management , perma poison,easy perma IAS/IMS , easy blocks and other stuff a ranger using warrior weapons is easily twice better ( and i know what i'm talking about....)

Rangers got less useless elites than warrior for sure( and 99% of them are spirits )

You are obviously clueless about PvE.
PvE is all about what class can kill things the fastest, keep thing alive so they can kill faster, or buffing another class so they can kill ridicilously faster.
poison pressure is a joke in PvE, the fact that you even mention it makes me want to slam my head against the wall in awe.
Degeneration does absolutely NOTHING in PvE.
Poison tip signet is worthless, and you cannot take apply poison when you play a barrage bar.
Barrage in itself is not even that great.
as has been stated before, ms/db sin train in pve or a 100b warrior/vos derv will tear things apart faster, even when mark of pain is not involved.
Sure they can use other weapons then the bow, but it will still be subpar.
Sure it is fun, I run several sword/spear/dagger builds on my own ranger.
But its still subpar.
expertise on daggers lose vs higher specced dagger mastery+crits+e-managment of a sin. not to forget that the IAS of the sin is also permanent, refreshes on crit, and is 33% and not 25%, and adds a noticable armor boost. ( assuming you meant NRA when stating a perma IAS for rangers, if you meant dwarven stability+lightning for perma block&ias you just used two skill slots where the sin used one)

Sure you can spam spirits, but reduced expertise cost does not win from more health from spawning and higher specs. Energy managment on a spirit spam rit has never been an issue since spirit siphon got introduced.

And spears..lets not go there, thats just pure novelty without any form of AoE capabilities. At least a paragon brings shouts and other buffs for the party along with the spear. a ranger can't do that ( or perhaps for 10 seconds after which energy hits 0 because of shout and chant costs).

Block is not that awesome in itself.
At least not in PvE.
you are there to kill stuff, and everything on your bar should complement to that. The best defense is to kill things before they have a chance to kill you.
Basic PvE knowledge.

The poster above you clearly based his post around PvE situations, so I do not understand why you decided to get pvp involved.

Elnino · May 26, 2011, 08:31 AM // 08:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

Untill other profs are addressed [para (both pve and pvp)..ranger...ele (pve)] warriors deserve to be on the back burner..i.e. not worth harking over

No and no.

The issue with eles has got nothing to do with the ele itself.

Missing HB · May 26, 2011, 09:47 AM // 09:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wielder Of Magic

You are obviously clueless about PvE.
PvE is all about what class can kill things the fastest, keep thing alive so they can kill faster, or buffing another class so they can kill ridicilously faster.

And so we get back to the point of the thread , which is warriors are useless at damage dealing compared to sin and dervish.. Nice try though...

I'm not going to disagree that a bow ranger isn't that efficient , but it surely is more than a warrior or a paragon( and the same applies for a warrior or a paragon using a bow)

zwei2stein · May 26, 2011, 11:14 AM // 11:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

And so we get back to the point of the thread , which is warriors are useless at damage dealing compared to sin and dervish.. Nice try though...

And here I thought that 100b/Whirlwind combo was pretty insane damage spike when coupled with such unheard of buffs like splinter/MoP

Wielder Of Magic · May 26, 2011, 11:52 AM // 11:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

And so we get back to the point of the thread , which is warriors are useless at damage dealing compared to sin and dervish.. Nice try though...

I'm not going to disagree that a bow ranger isn't that efficient , but it surely is more than a warrior or a paragon( and the same applies for a warrior or a paragon using a bow)

In my quoted post you speak about the ranger.
Do not convert back to the original topic when I was not talking about that, and neither were you.

Still, I will explain to you why a warrior or a paragon are more efficient then a bow ranger.

the paragon supports the party with shouts and chants. that somewhat makes up for his/her lack of AoE. I have to admit that there is not that much for paragons at the moment besides Imbagon ( that is: things that get accepted in your average PUG ), but it makes the paragon more efficient then a ranger, because the party support makes up for the lack of damage output.

Now for the warrior.
I cannot comprehend why you think that the warrior is worse then a ranger wielding a bow.
A warrior has numerous AoE and support capabilities.
as said before, hundred blades and whirlwind attack alone offer great DPS, combine with mark of pain for even more fun.
Hammers, although less used, also have their uses with AoE KD from earthshaker and several AoE attacks.
Perhaps not that popular or known to the crowd, but certainly viable.
And then we have the support section with Dragon Slash + SY! spam.
Not to forget that a warrior can take advantage from SoH something a ranger cannot, but a warrior can benefit just as much from a splinter weapon as a ranger can.
Right now there really isn't much about the warrior that is terrible.
Perhaps axe could use a slight PvE buff, but I wouldn't really change that much.
Warrior is one of the more balanced professions, and skill changes should be minimal, because the slightest change might push warrior into the ridicilously overpowered department.

With all due respect, if you think that a warrior is worse then a ranger wielding a bow, you are not playing your warrior very well.

On the concept of paragons and warriors using bows:
They don't have to because weapons of their own classes provide way more fun builds that are also way more damaging then everything they could possibly do with a bow.
Perhaps paragons are an exception to this rule ( with many thanks to Khomet for his enjoyable P/R builds), but that is up to debate.
The bow in itself is underpowered.
Sure a ranger can wield a bow better then any other profession can ( with the exception of perhaps barraging ritualists/ spirits strength+volley rits, but once again, thats up to debate), but why would any other profession do that when their own weaponry is way more efficient?

To go back to the original point of the topic:
Nothing wrong with the warrior.
They can stand their ground next to assassins and dervishes just fine.
perhaps a small tweak into the axe mastery and tactics line, but for the rest I would be reluctant to touch anything.

Brian the Gladiator · May 26, 2011, 11:53 AM // 11:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by miriforst

Swords on the other hand is more deserving of a possible buff to keep them more in line with their fellow warrior weapons counterparts but not better than them. The problem is where to begin with swords? Any suggestions?

Swords are weak only in comparison to Dervishes. Swords were customarily used for pressure builds whereas Axes were used for pressure-spikes (calling spikes every 7 seconds with the intent of pulling monk energy, not necessarily killing) and hammers were used for utility and shutdown. Unfortunately, Dervishes have eclipsed warriors for pressure and sword has become obsolete. The ideology behind the dervish update was to make dervishes the pressure melee class. There is no way for sword to compete unless it is revamped to do something entirely different. Right now it conditions and snares (something axe and hammer fail in comparison) but it would have to be reworked from the ground up if you want it to see play because the entire Dervish class's main responsibility is conditions and snares.

Xenomortis · May 26, 2011, 12:02 PM // 12:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

And so we get back to the point of the thread , which is warriors are useless at damage dealing compared to sin and dervish.. Nice try though...

This argument was applied to the Dervish for years. It was never too significant and never convincing.
The difference here though is that the argument is clearly false.
Don't ever touch the Warrior, at all.

Anaraky · May 26, 2011, 02:11 PM // 14:11

Speaking purely from a general PvE perspective (not talking about SC at this point), I think Warrior is the most well-rounded frontline profession in the game. Sturdier then the Assassin and not reliant on enchantments like the Dervish, while dealing comparable damage to them both. I cannot see how you can argue that the damage is significantly worse then either profession. 100b AoE bomb is still fantastic, DS is great single-target and Hammers for knock-locking. Heck you can even go Daggers or Scythe if you feel like it and do well. As someone said, a Warrior able to keep the 33% IAS rolling is going to rape faces (it is a 50%~ DPS increase after all). The fact that you aren't tied up as a Warrior secondary to run SY! is an added bonus.

In SC, the 100b + MoP bomb is still insane.

Quote:

I hope you're kidding right ? Last sentence especially is quite a joke , considering people did run R/A , R/P , R/D in Heroes Ascent or other PvP formats for months....I'm not even going to argue about dshot/savage/magebane... Even in PvE , due to better energy management , perma poison,easy perma IAS/IMS , easy blocks and other stuff a ranger using warrior weapons is easily twice better ( and i know what i'm talking about....)

No, just no. Poisons doesn't mean shit, the ranger block skills are fairly useless most of the time, energy shouldn't be an issue with the right build and the IAS is worse then the Warrior alternative (easier for the scrubs to use though, I'll give you that). Basically you want to trade the best armor ingame, passive armor-pen and Strength+Weapon runes for some shitty condition spreading and survivability skills you shouldn't need in the first place.

I cannot comment on your ability in PvP but as for the PvE side of the matter, you have no clue.

miriforst · May 26, 2011, 03:42 PM // 15:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

I hope you're kidding right ? Last sentence especially is quite a joke , considering people did run R/A , R/P , R/D in Heroes Ascent or other PvP formats for months....I'm not even going to argue about dshot/savage/magebane... Even in PvE , due to better energy management , perma poison,easy perma IAS/IMS , easy blocks and other stuff a ranger using warrior weapons is easily twice better ( and i know what i'm talking about....)

Rangers got less useless elites than warrior for sure( and 99% of them are spirits )

Oh dear...

Pve wise the warrior isn't as wanted as maybe a ritu but the ranger is even less so and for good reasons. They are in a worse situation than mesmers pre-update wise since they are a pvp class with pvp skills in a pve environment. Warriors got hundred blades and granted it was moronic of arenanet to take what is good from one profession and make it better on another (vow of strength) but it is still and option. It is pretty darn powerful. They can sy spam effortlessly, got high armor penetration and big damage in a packet of high armor. And do not compare to dervishes that way, dervishes needs nerfs and warriors should stay where they are. Warriors are the kings and queens of pvp but they aren't to bad in pve either which is interesting.

PvP wise: Are you kidding me? They rule the pvp with only their bulls strike! Loldamage, lolarmor, loladrenalinespam, lolkdchains, lolarmorpen, loldeepwoundswithspike (this is what physicals kills with) are all part of the warrior beast rampaging on your liners. Yes warriors are easily shut down but it is like in strategy games: build anti air fast or get f**ked. Warriors are the nukes and bombers of guildwars, if you do not get those flack canons up in your base fast you will be squashed within seconds by nukes and aircrafts. But if you do the aircrafts becomes less of a threat so that it forces the enemy team to use other resources to pressure in other ways or open a gap for your aircrafts. Tripple melee has been a staple in the meta for a long time now with aegis gone and yes this month we have had a surge of dervishes but already after this recent nerfs we are seeing triple wars again. What do you want? 5 warriors? Rangers are extremely useful in pvp compared to in pve but they are still only a (good) utility box compared to 3/8 of the team.

And wait-

Did you say a ranger using warrior weapons is better? I played RaO for teh lulz a while and it was okay, but the warrior is still better. RaO is expensive even for a ranger and other than that single hammer build what is there? When you use attack skills, each point of Strength gives you 1% armor penetration. <- See that thing? It is kinda important. That + that strenght is a wonderful attribute in it self and that the ranger fails with runes for weapons and that about every useful warrior attack is either adrenaline or strength.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kunder

Don't worry, his knowledge of PvP is just as farcical as it is of PvE

I for once i agree with you.

Voodoo Rage · May 26, 2011, 03:45 PM // 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaraky

No, just no. Poisons doesn't mean shit, the ranger block skills are fairly useless most of the time, energy shouldn't be an issue with the right build and the IAS is worse then the Warrior alternative (easier for the scrubs to use though, I'll give you that). Basically you want to trade the best armor ingame, passive armor-pen and Strength+Weapon runes for some shitty condition spreading and survivability skills you shouldn't need in the first place.

Totally agree.

Ranger with a melee weapon = probably the best way to use your ranger in PvE but not nearly as good as a Warrior, Sin, or Dervish.

Ranger pumping out spirits = also a very solid way to play a ranger but again not nearly as good as an actual Ritualist.

Rangers have always been a "jack of all trades" type of profession, very newbie friendly and open to lots of experimentation but ultimately a little weaker when you finally focus on a particular build and realize that self heals and survivability are really not important in PvE. In the end, the warrior is going to blow things up more effectively than a gimmicky ranger.

On topic, I really don't see why we always need to obsess about making every profession absolutely equal for end-game content. The reality is that most people are most likely just playing NM missions which ALL professions can pull off just fine and any elite player should be capable of addressing the various handicaps of any particular profession that happen to like to play. It's a huge exaggeration to say that any particular profession is "useless" just because you perceive they might be a little weaker; they will just get the job done just fine.

Missing HB · May 26, 2011, 03:53 PM // 15:53

You guys really aren't understanding the point ( well overall maybe i didn't explain myself clearly ).... It's not about the warrior skills but about the class itself... I will argue about the only thing you guys are all telling me : 100b ....

- Almost all damage relies on mark of pain use
- A sin can do it also...

So , where in that is warrior unique and a must for that build ??? All my arguments aren't about the warrior alone but about the warrior in comparaison of other classes especially sin and dervish... An other issue though about PvE is that it can be done with almost anything , so maybe my arguments can be less valid... but still..

Wielder Of Magic · May 26, 2011, 04:03 PM // 16:03

How about...
more armor/higher specced 100b?
Sure a sin can do it.
But a warrior simply does it better.
Following your logic DPS assassins would be useless because warriors and dervishes can also use dagger spam.
sure they can!
but assassins can still do it better.

miriforst · May 26, 2011, 04:18 PM // 16:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

You guys really aren't understanding the point ( well overall maybe i didn't explain myself clearly ).... It's not about the warrior skills but about the class itself... I will argue about the only thing you guys are all telling me : 100b ....

- Almost all damage relies on mark of pain use
- A sin can do it also...

So , where in that is warrior unique and a must for that build ??? All my arguments aren't about the warrior alone but about the warrior in comparaison of other classes especially sin and dervish... An other issue though about PvE is that it can be done with almost anything , so maybe my arguments can be less valid... but still..

Well sorry you need to define for me whether you are talking pve or pvp buff.

You sound right now like you are speaking pve, but then your referance to the ranger sound like you are talking about pvp.

And as above: When you use attack skills, each point of Strength gives you 1% armor penetration.

And: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Strength

dudemonkey · May 26, 2011, 04:35 PM // 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

You guys really aren't understanding the point ( well overall maybe i didn't explain myself clearly ).... It's not about the warrior skills but about the class itself... I will argue about the only thing you guys are all telling me : 100b ....

- Almost all damage relies on mark of pain use
- A sin can do it also...

So , where in that is warrior unique and a must for that build ??? All my arguments aren't about the warrior alone but about the warrior in comparaison of other classes especially sin and dervish... An other issue though about PvE is that it can be done with almost anything , so maybe my arguments can be less valid... but still..

Very few people are trying to argue that the warrior is BETTER than the assassin or dervish. They're just pointing out that the initial assertion ("the warrior is useless/becoming useless") is not correct. The warrior is extremely useful. The warrior deals significant damage when played well and has the ability to bring other things to the table (knockdown, conditions, high armor rating, armor piercing damage).

Also, and probably more importantly, the warrior is a LOT of fun to play for people that play them. Guild Wars is a game, a game is supposed to be fun, warriors are fun for many of us, ergo warriors are not useless. QED.

You're trying to define "useful" very narrowly. Sure, if you limit your definition to "the class that is best at this one aspect of the game", you can argue that any class is useless. Monks are useless because they don't do as much damage as elementalists. Elementalists are useless because their armor sucks. Assassins are useless because they look like they got kicked out of circa 1985 heavy metal bands.

Axel Zinfandel · May 26, 2011, 05:05 PM // 17:05

Ok, sure, I know at least Assassin and it's DB spam outclasses anything DPS wise, most likely. Not sure on the numbers for dervishes per-say, but Warriors aren't the most DPS centric class anymore, but that doesn't mean they don't have their options and fortes.

TBH, when MOST of your damage comes from Orders, SoH, MoP, ect, what class you are matters little, so much as the strengths and weaknesses of your class, how fast you are dishing out packets of physical damage to trigger the latter mentioned buffs. A Monk, nowadays, can strap on 100b build, dagger spam, or what else, and as long as they have those physical buffs, they will be pumping out damn good damage.

The argument between class is simply nitpicking about who can wipe everything off the map faster, because last I checked the builds that made Warriors still desirable PRE dervish buff still exist, you're just neglecting to mention them. WE Axe still exists. WE scythe still probably does, it just might take some innovation. Not to mention even warriors can still dagger spam, on top of 100b, Earthshaker, and what else.

A lot of what people forget is that Tank and Spank isn't the only way to play this game, so all of you really need to stop talking as if it's the only thing anyone ever does in GW.

Not to mention that if Anet kept buffing every single class JUST because another class does it better, then there would be an endless stream of buffing, because they can not account for the very innovation that goes on with build making. With Dervishes it was different, because they realized a fundamental flaw in how the class was made up from the beginning.

But, as I said. Warrior still has some damn good builds, and I've never felt my warrior lacking in any department, though I will say that some other classes might need their faults to shine through.

For instance, assassins could deal with having the armor buff on CA removed. there is no reason that sins must deal ungodly damage AND self-tank like a mo-fo. Seeing as they have Jagged Strike>Fox Fangs>DB that leaves their build elite-flexible, there's no reason the elite can't be used for protection if need be.
Dervishes have the same base issue, but in nature they tend to have more downsides as well, seeing as they regularly deal with spells and suffer a lot of the same consequences as casters do.

TL

R: Warriors are fine, ot

NerfHerder · May 26, 2011, 05:22 PM // 17:22

I think the most important question is, how do you balance a profession/attribute line when they become underpowered due to powercreep?

Anaraky · May 26, 2011, 05:28 PM // 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

You guys really aren't understanding the point ( well overall maybe i didn't explain myself clearly ).... It's not about the warrior skills but about the class itself... I will argue about the only thing you guys are all telling me : 100b ....

- Almost all damage relies on mark of pain use
- A sin can do it also...

So , where in that is warrior unique and a must for that build ??? All my arguments aren't about the warrior alone but about the warrior in comparaison of other classes especially sin and dervish... An other issue though about PvE is that it can be done with almost anything , so maybe my arguments can be less valid... but still..

I cannot speak for anyone else but if you aren't speaking about specific builds but rather the class as a whole I would say that is in the Warriors advantage. Sure an Assassin can do great damage, but they are fragile while doing so and their attack-chain can be interrupted. Sure a Dervish can be sturdy and do a lot of AoE damage, but they are vulnerable to Enchantment-stripping and anything that prevents them to use said Enchantments. The Warrior class suffer from nothing like that, the only thing that can stop a Warrior are the same stuff that can stop the Assassin and the Dervish.

Overall I feel the Dervish and the Assassin has one or two really good but sometimes somewhat limiting builds. Assassin for example has decent but not great AoE, there really isn't a build that can remedy that. Dervishes do great AoE damage, but their single-target is nothing special (as far as I've seen, might be wrong since I ain't a big Dervish player). The classes are niched to a certain degree, Warrior aren't. The Warrior class is kinda like a Ranger that way except, you know, Warriors are actually good. Sturdy, good single-target damage, good AoE damage, nice utility and no glaring weakness besides general melee hate.

Sounds like a pretty strong class to me.

Essence Snow · May 26, 2011, 05:36 PM // 17:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elnino

No and no.

The issue with eles has got nothing to do with the ele itself.

lol seriously...plz reread that...if there is an issue with eles then obviously it has something to do with eles or there wouldn't be an issue. Everything aside...that's just common sense.

Skyy High · May 26, 2011, 06:09 PM // 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

lol seriously...plz reread that...if there is an issue with eles then obviously it has something to do with eles or there wouldn't be an issue. Everything aside...that's just common sense.

Not really. The "issue" with eles can really be traced back to how HM monsters have huge amounts of armor, and the only class that relies almost exclusively on non-armor ignoring damage is the ele. Ele damage is fine in NM, because it was originally balanced around that.

In other words, the solution to the issue isn't to buff eles like mad (just like the solution to rangers isn't to buff their damage). In the ele's case, the solution is to reduce the amount of armor mobs have in HM. That buffs eles while leaving everyone else's damage effectively constant (still crazy OPed most of the time, but still).

Alternatively, and preferably, all armor ignoring damage should be nerfed such that you can't steamroll HM mobs faster than the skales outside of Ashfrod. If the rate of kills went down, ele damage wouldn't look so terrible in comparison. In other words: kill powercreep, stop buffing to compensate.

Of course, that's never going to happen. It takes more work, and it'd piss off players that ANet needs to buy GW2. I can't speak for anyone else, but the main reason I even participate in these kinds of balance discussions anymore is so that ANet hears what the community thinks as they're tuning GW2, so we don't run into this mess again.

Voodoo Rage · May 26, 2011, 06:12 PM // 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

lol seriously...plz reread that...if there is an issue with eles then obviously it has something to do with eles or there wouldn't be an issue. Everything aside...that's just common sense.

I'm guessing that he's referring to the flawed mechanic of elemental damage in general in relation to armor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NerfHerder

I think the most important question is, how do you balance a profession/attribute line when they become underpowered due to powercreep?

It's kind of a chicken or the egg thing. If we didn't constantly buff everything in an attempt to make every single profession equally desirable for high end PvE (which only a tiny fraction of population probably plays), the power creep wouldn't exist in the first place. I'm perfectly content with the concept that maybe some professions just aren't as good as others and people can choose to play them if they want a challenge or a significantly different play-style.

I think the ultimate flaw in this game is people's obsessions with title tracks which forces them to put all their attention into a single character and profession. A lot of players identify themselves as a single profession and they take it really personally if they feel neglected. I'm perfectly content to use specific professions to do certain things that they are better at.