Curse

forbidden beauty · Nov 03, 2007, 12:06 AM // 00:06

the thing with deverishes is they are very high maintinece i play as both and find when playing deverish i am constantly checking my enchants and watching out for any corruption of enchantments which can be death to people who arnt prepered for it.

whereas warriors can charge in with no preperation and attack they are low maintinence only having to heal themselves now and then and that isn't needed if you have a good monk in the party, they can help out the team alot with stances and the tactics skill is very useful even tho it has been underestimated so much, the armor penitration from the strengh is a small bonus.

Omniclasm · Nov 03, 2007, 02:46 AM // 02:46

In PvE, I see very little reason to use a Warrior over a Dervish. However, heroes are usually rather poor at using a Dervish, since they only attempt self-heals and defense AFTER they start getting a new one ripped.

In PvP, I pretty much always prefer a Warrior over a Dervish.

Bowstring Badass · Nov 03, 2007, 02:17 PM // 14:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skills Overdose

Personally, I believe that the dervish has the highest DPS and AoE damage of any fighting class. The only "downfall" to the Dervish is that it can't tank damage as much as the warrior class can.

Nice thread necromancy...

Sirius-NZ · Nov 04, 2007, 10:53 PM // 22:53

Uh... heh... no. The Assassin definitely does higher single-target DPS than the Dervish.

The biggest strength of the Dervish over a Warrior is that they can be built to handle specific situations much better - whether through changing the damage type, making life hell for casters, enchantment stripping ...

Biggest weakness is that they are usually easier to kill. You can build a Dervish to tank better than a warrior, but you're not going to do as much damage while doing that.

Oh, and Dervishes are usually trickier to play well.