Curse

Lux Aeterna · Aug 04, 2009, 09:48 PM // 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Also, mobbing is a completely viable strategy on Saltspray. It takes three above average teams who can properly coordinate their movements to beat a tenacious mob there.

Or rather, wait till you have some decent numbers and wipe the floor with their sorry asses on the bridge.

Bobby2 · Aug 11, 2009, 09:25 PM // 21:25

Tiger Stance? Seriously?

moriz · Aug 11, 2009, 10:56 PM // 22:56

had i bothered to, i'd have a 500-32 victory on ancestral lands as luxon. shame i didn't take it.

with that in mind, /unthread.

icedwhitemocha · Aug 11, 2009, 11:22 PM // 23:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by God_Hand

Apparently you didn't notice the /thread the first time around.

*Points to 500-92*

I find Tiger Stance to be a hell of a lot better than Flail, personally.

Oh my god, the kurzicks won a match. Definitely worth a /thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Tiger stance sucks balls, and so do you for using it.

Ambitious · Aug 12, 2009, 06:03 AM // 06:03

I'm not sure, but I'm getting tired of playing on Grenz.

Gimme some Saltspray.

God_Hand · Aug 12, 2009, 06:04 AM // 06:04

Forget it, see my Final Thoughts on Page 15...

Quote:

Originally Posted by icedwhitemocha

Tiger stance sucks balls, and so do you for using it.

You must take AB really seriously.

tmakinen · Aug 12, 2009, 07:56 AM // 07:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by God_Hand

Are there really active statistics buried in the 13 pages I haven't read? Because otherwise this thread's got nothing.

Fairly good statistics were already given in threads like this and especially this. The current Luxon dominance is a well-established fact by now, and this thread discusses possible reasons for it.

You might not have realized that your contribution actually reinforces the basic claim of this thread. Your team was fighting on Grenz which means that on average Kurzicks were taking one on the chin. And I don't want to even start with your team composition

Catchphrase · Aug 12, 2009, 11:24 AM // 11:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by icedwhitemocha

Oh my god, the kurzicks won a match. Definitely worth a /thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

It is thread worthy because it happens once in a millennium!!!!!

Lux Aeterna · Aug 12, 2009, 06:45 PM // 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby2

Tiger Stance? Seriously?

Tiger stance, mighty blow, heavy blow, AND ONLY ONE HAMMER.

Quote:

Originally Posted by God_Hand

EDIT: Yep, not reading the rest of the thread sure did make me look like a dumbass! Which I am of course.

I bet you don't switch off sundering while camping opposing warriors.

Lexar · Aug 12, 2009, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Oh please, skill hung up on the tiger stance? The build is perfectly fine. No monks on his team and a self heal that's better suited for adrenaline management, it's only sensible to not take frenzy in that case.
Especially since average AB players don't really often make a distinction between priority targets and hard targets, half the time he'd be attacked and have to go without frenzy anyway.

Not only that but really, really, do we need to feel better about ourselves by pointing out how we don't like someone's build. Really?

Maybe some people don't share the prevalent opinions here that some skills are better than others. And the funny thing is, they're right and the majority of gwguru is not.

Skills that are more desirable are not better by definition. They're different. Frenzy isn't necessarily better than any other skill that increases attack speed, it merely has a different functionality. That's the whole point of balance in a game to begin with. So when you claim frenzy > tiger stance, it's not fact, it's only stating an opinion.

And so, flaming someone for having a different opinion than you do, well what should I say, it seems to me that it defeats the purpose of pointing out his nonsensical post.

This is something that has been bothering me for a while on the forum, not just this topic.

lord of all tyria · Aug 12, 2009, 10:38 PM // 22:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lexar

Oh please, skill hung up on the tiger stance? The build is perfectly fine. No monks on his team and a self heal that's better suited for adrenaline management, it's only sensible to not take frenzy in that case.
Especially since average AB players don't really often make a distinction between priority targets and hard targets, half the time he'd be attacked and have to go without frenzy anyway.

Not only that but really, really, do we need to feel better about ourselves by pointing out how we don't like someone's build. Really?

Maybe some people don't share the prevalent opinions here that some skills are better than others. And the funny thing is, they're right and the majority of gwguru is not.

Skills that are more desirable are not better by definition. They're different. Frenzy isn't necessarily better than any other skill that increases attack speed, it merely has a different functionality. That's the whole point of balance in a game to begin with. So when you claim frenzy > tiger stance, it's not fact, it's only stating an opinion.

And so, flaming someone for having a different opinion than you do, well what should I say, it seems to me that it defeats the purpose of pointing out his nonsensical post.

This is something that has been bothering me for a while on the forum, not just this topic.

Frenzy IS better than tiger stance. But you shouldn't run either on a hammer ^

Lexar · Aug 13, 2009, 12:15 AM // 00:15

Please at least read more than 1 sentence.

Or you're trolling.

Lux Aeterna · Aug 13, 2009, 12:41 AM // 00:41

Nobody uses frenzy on hammer now, but anyway frenzy is perfectly fine in AB for axe/sword builds. I've had rounds without a healer where I didn't die, despite not having a healer and rarely cancelling primal rage, in fact often I don't even cancel primal rage under a reasonable large amount of fire.

Tiger stance is bad because:

- You can only use it half the time, with a long recharge.
- If a target blocks once, in a block heavy meta, your IAS ends and you have to wait 10-20 seconds to use it again.
- You can't use it, then chase with enraging, then use it immediately again.

Not to mention the mighty blow + heavy blow combination which makes an otherwise strong devhammer build into something of a joke.
Soooooo Kurzickkkkkk. Might as well put throw dirt on there somewhere.

Reverend Dr · Aug 13, 2009, 02:05 AM // 02:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lexar

So when you claim frenzy > tiger stance, it's not fact, it's only stating an opinion.

In almost every case tiger's stance is inferior to frenzy. Any time that you are taking damage, either you are backline supported or you die. In that case Tiger's stance will let you get off a little bit more damage than frenzy before dieing, but the chance of that little bit of damage making a difference is extremely low. As such I feel fine in stating that frenzy > tiger's stance and have it supported by empirical evidence rather than mere opinion.

About the only time I've seen it seriously run was right after factions released as several split warriors used it for soloing the guild lord room (back when warriors could do such), but even those warriors sided with stuff like auspicious parry or shadow form being more useful.

Shrimz · Aug 13, 2009, 02:55 AM // 02:55

Frenzy > everything for axe/sword

Flail > everything for hammer.

Bobby2 · Aug 13, 2009, 03:33 AM // 03:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

As such I feel fine in stating that frenzy > tiger's stance and have it supported by empirical evidence rather than mere opinion.

Sad but true, wtb more viable IAS options

GuLLinda · Aug 13, 2009, 07:37 AM // 07:37

Tiger Stance is good enough for AB imo, 20sec recharge is nothing in AB, and when do you use tiger stance? normally when you gonna get a target down yes? and if that target blocks your attacks, your hammer attack might also get blocked, with all the block we have in this game now days.
Flail is of course nice for hammer but Tiger stance isnt shit option.

Short said, if you're pro, none of these two stance will make any difference.

Jaran Cell · Aug 13, 2009, 10:04 AM // 10:04

I agree with GuLLinda.
Not everyone can use Flail effectively and as a monk I'd rather have a beginner warrior running around with tigers stance than Frenzy X)

Lexar · Aug 13, 2009, 10:44 AM // 10:44

Empirical evidence is close to impossible. What you describe is only one of many possible scenario's. There is no real way to measure how good a skill is in a game like this with people running around everywhere.

And then even if frenzy seems to be more practical in many situations for people, it's still an opinion. The thing is, if it seems a better choice for you, it does not necessarily mean it's the better choice for the next guy. If it's always a better choice for someone else, then yes, but it's simply not. Some people just play differently.

For example another way to test it, is to equip two people with either frenzy and tiger stance and no other skills. That would come closest to an empirical test, so you see how pointless that is in a real scenario?

What I'm trying to say here is not so much that frenzy isnt better than tiger stance, I'm saying how pointless this trend is of claiming this or that skill is better and stating that as if it's factual. Just because people happen to think so does not make it true. And then when someone else has a different preference, they're suddenly wrong somehow. That's what bothers me.

shem · Aug 13, 2009, 12:45 PM // 12:45

are you seriously trying to argue that because people are bad at using skills that these skills are then bad