Curse

Calibretto_9 · Jul 15, 2005, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Right, warriors can be extremely dangerous, and at the "beginning" of the game, learning to counter warriors was probably alot different than it is "now." But that's exactly why I feel something needs to be done. If everybody and his brother has some way to counter a warrior, then what in the WORLD is the point of wasting time on one? And most of what can help a warrior continue to do his job (Hex and condition removals) is lost when the battle really starts kicking. You think a mesmer has time to get that hex of you when he's busy trying to shut down an enemy aeromancer? Didn't think so either. Sure, winning is all about communication, but how irksome to have to stop, fix your warrior up, and move on (Not to mention that it seems the less targeted and oftentimes harder to kill ranger does a much better job of keeping sustained damage on the enemy).

lanilifar · Jul 15, 2005, 12:48 AM // 00:48

Quote:

1, I'm the last man standing beside my dead comrades (And if you think that's a role to play then you're crazy), or 2, I'm hexed and conditioned outta my mind, and pushed aside as the rubbish I've been turned into. If my monk can clear me, I'm great again, until, oh wait... They start ganking the monk and he has nothing to spare for me. I try to help him out, and anyone takes notice, and they lay those conditions or hexes right back on me and continue with what they were doing.

Explanation of your first situation:
Warriors are targeted last because they are so very hard to kill, especially when they have the whole team to support them. This is not a case of ignoring the "useless" warrior, but a case of not wasting the time attacking a target you will be unable to kill.

Observations about your second situation:
On one hand you state that people ignore warriors, on the other hand you state that people spend their time throwing a plethora of conditions and hexes on you. These are contradictory statements my friend. What is your team doing in those 5-10 seconds of fighting while the enemy is hexing and conditioning you? According to your arguement, the enemy wasted that time on your warrior, when they would have been better off shutting down one of the "real" threats on your team. If the enemy is ganking your monk, and then switches back to you in order to re-hex and recondtion you, then you must have been threat enough to switch off the soft target they almost had dead, and this gives your monk those precious seconds he needs to recover health and energy.

Neo-LD · Jul 15, 2005, 12:50 AM // 00:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

Thinks you will want to take with you: Martyr{E}, some enchant removal, a handful of remove hex, wild blow. Augment your damage where possible and don't duplicate run all your support on one character.

In addition, if you anticipate hexes and conditions ruining your day, then why not take attacks that still are effective if they miss? Seeking Blade and Griffons Sweep come to mind. Both will be decent attacks even if they actually hit, too. Use them in a cleave build, Id say.

Calibretto_9 · Jul 15, 2005, 12:59 AM // 00:59

The problem I'm not able to get around is explained in this analogy I think. Villains fear Superman, right? Well what if all villains were given the opportunity to carry a little kryptonite or whatever it's called with them. Now Superman is no longer a threat, end of story.
Same problem with warriors, at least to my knowledge. Warriors are the Supermans, and everybody is carrying kryptonite. And I didn't mean to contradict, but let me clarify.
Warriors most definitely aren't ignored in the beginning (Because you can't, they ARE dangerous unless dealt with). But casting a hex to make them useless is really no big deal, nor does it take a long time. Condition or hex them and move on. And I'm sorry, but if an entire team is ganking a monk, and one ele decides to take a quick sec to blind a warrior, or if the necro wants to switch over to hex him, or even the ranger decides to cripple him, that most assuredly isn't going to give that monk enough time to heal. Even 2 players whacking a monk is going to get to him eventually, and I don't think taking a quick move to stop a warrior is going to give him some magical moment to save himself. Did I say warriors weren't dangerous? No, I didn't (or at least don't think I did and most definitely never intended to). I just think warriors are dangerous for a very small window, then they're taken care of, and the team moves on to more dangerous targets. And the argument that warriors are oh so hard to kill is ridiculous. Watch a warrior's health fly into the void with a decent hex, condition, or hex, even a few good lightning strikes. Doesn't look so hard to kill to me, and yes, while you did state "With a good team," I'm still not finding proof that other players can be just as hard to kill and bring more to a team. I WANT TO BE PROVED WRONG, or I want the game to be modified, because gosh darn, I'm not quitting this until my warriors powns somebody. =)

Thom · Jul 15, 2005, 01:59 AM // 01:59

Cal, you are posting from two perspectives: a poorly played warrior and a necro. When I play a monk, I rarely have trouble with my warriors dying and they normally rack up solid damage. If I have a warrior build, I laugh as I play matyr and remove some hexes. The hexes are recharging and the warriors are racking up damage. Conditions are a self heal battery if you are playing martyr correctly.

Nightwish · Jul 15, 2005, 02:53 AM // 02:53

Maybe warriors are designed to be weak in pvp by Anet

If all the conditions or hexes can be dealt easily by this class, and damage potential of warriors are increased, I bet pvp will be overwhelmed with warriors.

I know a lot of friends switch from range chars to melee ones at some point of a game and prefer the latter (fun factor maybe?). So Anet decides that if you want to have some fun close up and personal, you have to trade off some technical effectiveness

Calibretto_9 · Jul 15, 2005, 02:56 AM // 02:56

It's true, I am posting from two perspectives, and to be quite honest, I'd post from 3,4, even 5 perspectives if I had them, but I don't, therefore I'm asking everyone else's perspective. I've had the opportunity to watch warrior's get out classed by playing both my necro, and by my warrior, therefore I'd say that posting about both of my perspectives is more than reasonable.
On the other hand, I doubt that what I'm doing is handling a "poorly played warrior," because despite my beef with them, I have had my victories and with a good team I've gone just as far with him as the next guy. Not very couth to jump around stating things you don't know, just fyi. I find the warrior class more easily countered and defeated then any other class in the game, plain and simple. I'm not interested in easy kills against newb random or even newb team pvp. The point is that against a team with half a brain, there's a hundred different ways to hinder a warrior, and after playing the other classes, I haven't experienced that.
Also, to finish up, I'm very happy you have a nice martyr build, kudos to you. The point was, that jumping into a team without a specific "monk to save your butt," you're in trouble. Other classes can cope.

twicky_kid · Jul 15, 2005, 03:19 AM // 03:19

i think people have the wrong idea about the warrior. everyone says that noobs play warriors and new players should use them. that is totally wrong. warriors have got to be the hardest class to master. for each class you know the role for that class but a warrior well.... it could be anything really. i've seen a warrior with all smite spells (don't ask how he kept the auras and symbols rolling but i've seen him take on groups of hard monsters by himself). warriors have to have more thought put into them than any other class. ranger yay spirits or interrupts....necro hexing or life stealing.....monk healing or smite......mes is all shutdown......ele fire or air. these classes don't need a lot of thought put into them to make work but a warrior does.

personally i love my warrior mes so i can use hex breaker. deal out alot of conditions with my axe then use epedimic to spread them to everything. works well with swords too.

lanilifar · Jul 15, 2005, 05:26 AM // 05:26

Quote:

Well what if all villains were given the opportunity to carry a little kryptonite or whatever it's called with them. Now Superman is no longer a threat, end of story.

Unless, of course, Superman's allies or Superman himself has the Kryptonite eliminator.

Quote:

And I'm sorry, but if an entire team is ganking a monk, and one ele decides to take a quick sec to blind a warrior, or if the necro wants to switch over to hex him, or even the ranger decides to cripple him, that most assuredly isn't going to give that monk enough time to heal.

This would certainly be different than your original situation, where you stated:

Quote:

I'm hexed and conditioned outta my mind ... they lay those conditions or hexes right back on me

emphasis mine
Blind hurts warriors and rangers, there are hexes to hurt everyone (but IME most people prefer hexes for shutting down casters), and cripple makes it harder for warriors to attack (and to a lesser extent rangers and an even lesser extent the other classes), but cripple makes casters easier to kill. None of the difficulties you listed is an exclusive issue for the warrior.

Quote:

I just think warriors are dangerous for a very small window, then they're taken care of, and the team moves on to more dangerous targets.

The "more dangerous" targets are only more dangerous because the team has spent time and energy to shutdown the warrior. Why is it a tragedy in your mind for a warrior to be blinded and crippled, but perfectly balanced for an elementalist to be backfired and migrained?

Quote:

I know that each and every class can be shut down. For quite a long time my necrowarrior did his time as a necromesmer and I learned all about the glories of shutting down. But it seems to me like every class not only has a plethora of spells to specifically kill warriors, but those attacks often make it to the skill bar in pvp.

It still goes back to this statement, and I have quoted some more for further consideration.
First, you state every class can be shutdown.
Second, you state that every class has ways of killing warriors.
You conclude with your observation that people frequently bring warrior shutdown/killing mechanisms.

Your first point is obvious, and does not support the supposition that warriors bring less to the table than other classes (you included it your statements to preclude others from telling you the obvious).
I am not sure how to take your second point. At first I assumed you meant every class has ways of disturbing warriors, such as blind, cripple, etc. But upon re-reading, I noted your actual words were "every class not only has a plethora of spells to specifically kill warriors...". Killing is a whole different matter than disturbing. The only attacks I know that you may be talking about are the ones that cause damage when a foe attacks, and those Hexes are just as bad for rangers as they are for warriors. If you are indeed talking of killing, well, all other classes are easier to kill than warriors under most circumstances (although necros and monks built for it can be just as hard and maybe even harder to kill, but that kind of build requires sacrifices in other areas, sacrifices which a warrior does not have to make since they have more inate toughness).
You later expanded upon the third point with this question, "If everybody and his brother has some way to counter a warrior, then what in the WORLD is the point of wasting time on one?" That is a good question. Why does everybody and their brother have some way to counter a warrior equipped in their skillbar? I propose it may be because warriors are actually overpowered. If warriors were not such a large threat, people would not be inclined to have such a variety of ways to constantly lessen their effect on the battlefield. It is very similiar to what is happening (or has happened, really) to spike teams. Many people have learned the variety of ways to counter them, just as people learned a variety of ways to counter the dreaded Warriors that were so prevelant in the first few weeks.

Quote:

Watch a warrior's health fly into the void with a decent hex, condition, or hex, even a few good lightning strikes. Doesn't look so hard to kill to me, and yes, while you did state "With a good team," I'm still not finding proof that other players can be just as hard to kill and bring more to a team. I WANT TO BE PROVED WRONG, or I want the game to be modified, because gosh darn, I'm not quitting this until my warriors powns somebody. =)

Conditions affect everyone the same (although warriors have the best ways to deal with them, next to monks), Hexes vs. casters are more deadly than hexes vs warriors, and lightning strikes will kill all classes but rangers faster than they kill warriors.
I doubt you can be PROVEN wrong. The game has too many variables for that to be done on a message board. I can give you my viewpoint based on my experiences.
I have seen warriors on my team that were amazing. I have seen warriors on my team that were crap. Sometimes they were the same people. Sometimes they were so good because the team was able to create a situation where they just seemed brilliant, other times they were able to shine without a lot of team support. Sometimes they sucked because the team was not paying attention, figuring the warrior would be fine until later in the match when more of the team was dead, other times it was their own dumb fault. I have fought against warriors that were amazing and ones that were crap. Sometimes they were the same people. Sometimes it was just the whole enemy team that was overwhelming us, other times a solo warrior was creating enough havoc amongst us to make the rest of the enemy team's job easier. Sometimes my team was just so bad (even if it was with people who have done well and done well together) it made them look good, other times they just outdid us even when we were on our game. Sometimes we were just so on our game it made them look bad, other times they just were really bad. Sometimes the build was just right, other times the enemies build was the perfect counter.
In short, IME, warriors are just as prone as any class to greatness, goodness, adequacy, poorness, and crappiness.

Calibretto_9 · Jul 15, 2005, 08:03 AM // 08:03

Actually, I think I'm more prone to agree with that argument/statement than any that's been posted to date, whether it was just stated more clearly or an original point. As I play my warrior match and match again, I agree more and more with what you said that it's not so much the class that's actually done wrong. After playing with it, I'm getting good at being able to do what I set out to do (With a GOOD monk's help). I think the problem comes in with the fact that there are so many warriors out there that it is far too common for people to carry warrior killing/stopping/disturbing (Whatever you wanna call it) spells. In that instance I think we might see a decline in the number of "good warriors." We'll still see the constant flow of people new to the game jumping on, but I think it's becoming all too common for warrior disrupting spells, and quite frankly it's getting to the point where a warrior has to do too much to get his job done.
I'd like to say that through this post and through lots of practice, I'm not thinking it's so much the warrior class but the number of warriors that is their downfall. Who's going to cut out an anti-warrior spell when they know they'll be facing a warrior more than 75% of the time? Not I, said the blind man. Since it's becoming more and more common to mess up a warrior's game, I think that good players will start switching over until the mechanics of battle change. Maybe that won't happen, maybe characters will continue on with it, but I'd like to see a short lapse in warriors in the arena so they can come back later in all their glory. Heck, if the arena was filled with necros, everyone would figure out ways to kill necros. To finish off tho, I'd like to back up what I'd said with this - If everyone on an enemy team is packing some spell to mess up your game, aren't you hindering your team and isn't that bringing less to the table? Or if anything, bring a limp to the group if anything. I'd like to see warriors either be given the chance to push through the over abundance of inhibitors or at least a decline in their numbers, but we'll probably not see either or. Anywho, just my thoughts on the matter, hope you guys enjoyed the post. ^_^

Zorrander · Jul 16, 2005, 09:44 PM // 21:44

Warriors are pretty much useless unless you make up for their weaknesses with your secondary profession. This game is centered around range and casters as everything in the game can stay away from the warrior who requires being in your face to do anything. After running countless 4v4 arena battles I destroyed my Guild Wars CD's and uninstalled the game. I'm taking a $50 loss by not playing anymore, but this game isn't worth it. There's a reason it's free to play online, you get what you pay for.

QuixotesGhost · Jul 16, 2005, 11:36 PM // 23:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorrander

Warriors are pretty much useless unless you make up for their weaknesses with your secondary profession.

And what's wrong with that?

Zorrander · Jul 16, 2005, 11:40 PM // 23:40

It's like putting $3000 wheels on a $1000 car... you have shiny wheels that impress people, but the base car is still a POS.

Icarium · Jul 17, 2005, 11:18 PM // 23:18

I personaly dont think that theres anything wrong with warriors, the class itself is fine. However, it does seem that theres a very narrow point of view with how they should be played ( im not saying you guys just in general ). In most RPG type games ive played, the warrior is the newbie class, and is useually the damage dealer, wrecker of all things, dragonslayer ect ect. . . while the casters are like the war's support untill later in the game when the casters seem to catch up dmg wise. Im thinking this has really skewed people over the years. the "jack of all trades" who can do a bit of everything, but not really excell in anything. Focus when playing a warrior needs to be lazer like, decide what ONE thing your going for then playtest builds untill you get it. The general dissention the rest of the players have against warriors, i think comes from a million warriors, trying to do everything, and NOT doing anything

Creed · Jul 18, 2005, 12:38 AM // 00:38

People seem to forget a warriors main purpose. Tanking.

If you're making people carry extra skills such as blind to purposly shut down you on the battle field that's 1 less skill they can kill your monk, or casters with.

If they cast cripple / slowing spells on you, that mewans based on reuse times they cant stop your monk / caster from running away and they can survive, you're tanking. Reguardless if it's a person with a sword smacking you 'upside the head' or if it's and ele,, pummeling you with lightning. You're tanking. It's what you're there for first and fore-most.

Not all warriors are easily shut down either. It all depends on your focus as a warrior. Not all warriors need to have monk backup. O well.

QuixotesGhost · Jul 18, 2005, 01:04 AM // 01:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorrander

It's like putting $3000 wheels on a $1000 car... you have shiny wheels that impress people, but the base car is still a POS.

Or making senseless comparisons.

Warrior secondarys have the ability to negate thier weakness against hexes and conditions. I don't see what's so difficult about this concept.

catharsis · Jul 18, 2005, 01:38 AM // 01:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuixotesGhost

Or making senseless comparisons.

Warrior secondarys have the ability to negate thier weakness against hexes and conditions. I don't see what's so difficult about this concept.

Allow me to translate:

"I want to play a warrior, and I want it to be so totally unbeatable and free of weaknesses that everybody will bow before me. Except, warriors DO have weaknesses. #$*#@$@#$ YOU, ANET! UNFAIR!"

You can see exactly the same dynamic at play when people complain about spike builds, or rangers being underpowered, or whatever the metagame will bring us next. Some, like the OP, see something they think is unbalanced and ask for opinions in an intelligent, respectful manner - then actually listen to people's advice. Most just bitch.

Warriors are reliant on their secondary? Well, gee, then I guess it's a good thing that EVERYBODY has a secondary profession, right?

Zeru · Jul 18, 2005, 03:15 AM // 03:15

In no way are warriors reliant on their secondaries. Yes, they're reliant on their team, but so is every class in the game.

Seriously quit insisting on playing a self-sufficient class and work with your team. A warrior with mend ailment on himself is nearly as useless as a warrior with mending and plague touch isn't all that much better as it does kill your energy if they keep condition stacking you.

When natures renewal spam is not popular anymore, you will see some teams running buff stacked sword/axe warriors that pull off insane dps and monks will drop like flies. And the only major things standing in their way will be enchants and wards, not any of this blind or weakness crap that uninformed people think is hard to stop.

Phades · Jul 18, 2005, 03:49 AM // 03:49

Dunno alot of the monks ive seen lately tend to heal for more than 3/4ths their life or more in one shot. This really makes it near impossible for a war to put one down. Kinda sad because alot of the time the monk isnt getting healed from elsewhere and no spell icon pops up. Even worse when they are flat on their back and it happens. Sure my gut tells me that outside healing was happening, but there wasnt a ?/mo running around alive at the time.

Sure making a good group that combines together well is important, but relying on the monk(s) to have spare time to remove all the conditions and hexes for the entire team is asking a bit much, especially when the monks have to worry about being targeted and being disrupted. Typically, when i never had to worry about conditions or hexes as a w/e, was when my team was already dominating the other team. Conversly when i was getting rendered beyond obscelete, was typically when my team ended up losing due to the disruption and damage present on the other team.

The people preaching for non-self reliance are comming from the best case scenario, where it wouldnt really matter anyway. The self reliant people are looking at it from the worst case scenario and it also probably wouldnt matter anyway, but they would at least feel like they are still contributing at the time. Barring things like blackout, knockdown, and powerblock, the forms of denial versus casters arent the same as the forms of denial versus melee. Most are rather temporary or have counters outside of condition and hex removal.

Beyond getting healed, i have not seen anyone make a case for how all other jobs are reliant on another profession on the same level that a warrior is. I dont know if its just assumed or overlooked or what, but in other games i have seen that kind of interdependancy but it really doesnt seem like it exists here. Generally its not fair to make comparisons from pve to pvp settings like that, but typically many pvp exclusive style game formats will create alot of non-dependant classes to compete against each other opposed to introducing denail methods into non-dependant classes.

Hell Marauder · Jul 18, 2005, 08:35 AM // 08:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by lanilifar

Conditions affect everyone the same (although warriors have the best ways to deal with them, next to monks), Hexes vs. casters are more deadly than hexes vs warriors, and lightning strikes will kill all classes but rangers faster than they kill warriors.
.

NO, rangers have up to 115 in base armor against lightning, vs warrior's 85 (or 101 with 16 AL in shield). Any elemental damage on rangers is gonna be lower than that on a warrior.

And a necromancer can get rid of condition faster with plague touch than anyone. Plus, hexes vs warrior and casters are the same. Hexes don't take armor class into account.