Curse

icemonkey · Apr 07, 2006, 07:25 PM // 19:25

note:shock goes through spell breaker

Mezmo · Apr 07, 2006, 08:15 PM // 20:15

For PvE hammers defently aren't the way to go. Both sword and axe easily out due hammers there. In pvp though i'd say hamers and axes are the best two tank weapons. Axes are the better spike weapon, while the KD of hammers can be devistating. Normally my guild runs both a hammer and an axe tank. The hammer brings the target down and the axe finish them off along with a small spike. Also a hammer tank can keep a monk busy with continous KD while the axe tank spikes another target.

I agree with what's been said about hammer's needing some defensive skill or buff. That or speed up hammer attack rates. Those are the two things that seem to handicap me more then anything else. But even so hammers are defenetly worth having on your team, allthough they seem to need another tank along to be able to seriously pressure a group.

Rey Lentless · Apr 07, 2006, 11:20 PM // 23:20

PVE Hammers would be significantly better if they fixed crude swing. It's a retarded concept that an attack that requires multiple targets around you to be worth using, to be easily interuptable. You fix that attack, and you can start making a case for hammers to be usable despite their lack of a shield in pve.

I think swords could use a base damage buff as well, and not just hammers. Since axes have better dps on runners (and most people do kite), their usual damage is significantly higher in a normal pvp environment. However, axes also have better damage against targets that aren't kiting them as well. I don't think that's balanced. If axes are better against kiters (and again, that's most), then they should at least have a superior dps against targets that aren't moving. I don't buy the concept that it's ok to have swords with inferior dps because of the higher minimum damage on swords. I think maximum damage (and not just because of criticals), can be more important than minimum damage.. so I don't see a lower range of damage as a positive, and certainly not a positive that justifies lower dps, and significantly lower dps in normal environments (kiting).

I'm unsure of the fix for this however. A base damage increase would be ideal, but that would disturb the economy too greatly. A speed increase would be potentially be game breaking because swords are already the fastest in the game, and unlike changing hammer speed, you're making the fastest even faster, so that could disturb balance in a number of different ways. It's less than a 5% dps difference, but when you consider normal conditions where more than 20% of your hits are crits, swords don't need any help doing 'less' damage. I don't think balancing skills to make up for this is ok either. Skills should be balanced with each other, not buffed or nerfed to make up for a base flaw in an ability line.

Evilsod · Apr 07, 2006, 11:45 PM // 23:45

Why not simply improve the upgrades for hammers?

Maybe boost the +health a little or the +armour. Vamp gets boosted between hammers/axes/swords so why not them? 10 more health or 2-3 more armour can't hurt that much can it?

Hammers can be used in PvE. When bored and waiting for Europe to get the favour i sometimes go do Thirsty River as a hammer warrior. Quite easy to solo the priests in a few attacks + 3 attack combo. The only problem is the monk priest who in 1 WoH basically nullifies half your spike.

Vindexus · Apr 07, 2006, 11:58 PM // 23:58

Why are you all talking about ways to fix hammer? HAMMER IS GOOD.

Da Cebuano · Apr 08, 2006, 05:48 PM // 17:48

I figured something to turn the tides for hammers. You know how the hornbows have innate 10% armor penetration? Why not hammers? All hammers should have an extra 10% armor penetration built in, not too overpowered, but it gives hammers an extra kick they need. Heck even a 15% would be good.

Daneish · Apr 08, 2006, 05:53 PM // 17:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vindexus

Why are you all talking about ways to fix hammer? HAMMER IS GOOD.

Vindexus is always right.

TurinPT · Apr 08, 2006, 06:26 PM // 18:26

man RA is full of hammer wars nowdays.. like 50% of them.
I hate them when I'm monking.. worst than most mesmers.

SziP · Apr 08, 2006, 06:49 PM // 18:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by TurinPT

man RA is full of hammer wars nowdays.. like 50% of them.
I hate them when I'm monking.. worst than most mesmers.

Thats the purpose ^^

Byron · Apr 10, 2006, 03:48 PM // 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by icemonkey

note:shock goes through spell breaker

Odd, but true. Shock is considered a "skill," for some odd reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

Why not simply improve the upgrades for hammers?

This idea has some merit, and would be an easy fix to the lack of shield. Of course we must remeber the reason for lacking a shield: Damage. But the damage spread is so small that it isn't worth considering in most cirumstances. KD can be achieved just as easy with an axe, perhaps even moreso, with bull's strike and shock. Hammer is a specialty weapon, it seems, in today's pvp environment.

There seems only one logical fix to this dilemma: nerf Eviscerate. That skill is causing all sorts of balance problems. It takes a sword 2 skills and 11 adrenaline to get a deep wound, with a damage enhancement of ~20 (assuming 16 in swords). Axe does it in one hit and 8 adrenaline, with a damage enhancement of 42. Double the damage, half the time...we know that bleeding is pretty much a joke. Eviscerate makes a one warrior spike possible, which is rediculous IMO. I think eviscerate would be on my bar even if it cost 10, even 12 adrenaline.

Without Eviscerate, crushing blow would carry a lot more weight. That said, without eviscerate, axe wouldn't carry nearly as much power, encouraging some bloody creativity and tactics in your typical pvp warrior. It doesn't take much brainpower to hit the skills in a row: Frenzy->Shock->Eviscerate->Executioner's.

Using a hammer takes some skill and forethought, as does a sword. Unforunately, that doesn't make axe any worse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vindexus

Why are you all talking about ways to fix hammer? HAMMER IS GOOD.

Hammer = respect.
Axe = standard.
Sword = sub-par.

But I love the sword so much.

JR · Apr 10, 2006, 03:56 PM // 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

Sword = sub-par.

Could you try and justify that statement?

tafy69 · Apr 10, 2006, 04:04 PM // 16:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR-

Could you try and justify that statement?

I can give it a good shot

Lowest DPS from all weapons
Worst Spike from all weapons

Oh poor Swords. Hammers own compared to the poor sword guy, the only saving grace sword has is that its non elite skills are better than the other weapons.

moriz · Apr 10, 2006, 04:11 PM // 16:11

sword does have instant crippling and the omgwtfpwnedlol skill (also known as final thrust) going for them. other than that, they do seem to be subpar.

i would still want a sword warrior on my team though, just for hamstring and the instant knockout finisher.

JR · Apr 10, 2006, 04:32 PM // 16:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by tafy69

Lowest DPS from all weapons

Barely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tafy69

Worst Spike from all weapons

The 70% Sever/Gash/Final spike is bad now? News to me. It's no Eviscerate, but i'd say it was better than you're average Hammer spike.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tafy69

the only saving grace sword has is that its non elite skills are better than the other weapons.

And there it is. The reason why Sword warriors see so much use. With Axe or Hammer you need an elite to make a truly decent offensive character. With Sword you don't. When it comes down to it "Charge!" is one of the best skills Warriors get, and only Sword warriors can really make use of it. For all intensive purposes it may aswell be under Swordsmanship.

nebuchanezzar · Apr 10, 2006, 04:41 PM // 16:41

Like Vindictus said Hammers are good.
Having said that though. All the weapons are "good" if used in the proper context. I dont see that you get more damage by giving up your shield with hammers. You get knockdowns. Your crits have a higher damage now but when considering the slow swing its all good imo.
Like the one quoted about the monks feeling of a good hammer warrior. Just your presence adds a little fear. Especially with other KDs like Irresistable Blow (ya cast Aegis and Guardian =]) or Bulls Strike (wait til your right up on em so they dont stop and it gets wasted). As a hammer warrior I hate how long it takes to get my Backbreaker ready but really once I land that one its GG for that char. Add in another warrior to hit with you like say a sword warrior with Final Thrust=]??
Unfortunately its pretty easy to get some serious KDs on an ax or sword warrior too now. Shock, Gale, Bulls Strike, Bulls Charge off the top of my head and (not counting BullsCharge) you still have an elite availabe for use. Try though I may I still cant find a better Elite than Eviscerate.
One downsides I see to hammers are the adrenal costs weighted by attack speed. I do see this but the game gives a lot of power to KDs. Another big hit is Crushing Blow. Hammers warriors need Energy to inflict Deep Wounds. No other weapon does making an already E heavy warrior more E intensive. I think just that change would greatly affect hammer warriors most fairly without unbalancing everything but eh...what do I know. I mean Ax has 2 ways to do it via Dismember and Eviscerate and the sword has Gash and to go with Sever Artery. A final hit is that I agree weakness for the weapons condition is....pathetic. It would only help vs another warrior and if its a sword one its the ripostes etc that will kill him not the avg attacks.
Long story short...Hammers are not Gimps!! They KILL PEOPLE! Ask any monk thats been KD chained perfectly. I dont agree that they actually do any better DPS in a real world environment of pvp with all the anti warrior hate hits hammer warriors that much harder....I mean look at one of us under Shadow of Fear compared to the ax guy swing what seems 2x as fast now instead of just a 1/2 sec or so
Enough rant..=]

Vindexus · Apr 10, 2006, 04:46 PM // 16:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by nebuchanezzar

Like Vindictus said Hammers are good.

How can you misspell something you just read :P?

SaintGreg · Apr 10, 2006, 04:48 PM // 16:48

Quote:

Shock is considered a "skill," for some odd reason.

All "touch" skills are skills

The thing I like about hammer is that it may look only so-so on paper, but when you actually get to playing it, it works surprisingly well.

Byron · Apr 10, 2006, 05:42 PM // 17:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR-

Could you try and justify that statement?

I'm a big fan of swords; I'd say they are my favorite weapon, so you have to realize it pains me to say that. They suffer largely from missuse, but they also have a couple fundamental flaws, (at least until factions comes out), that prevent them from being as good as an axe:

As said, eviscerate.
No adrenaline elite...energy is hard to come by.
Conditional skills: Gash, Final thrust
Galrath can't measure up to executioner's.
Hamstring, ha!
And low max damage.

These can be countered, of course. Zealous weapons, secondary classes, etc. But these are also things axes don't have to worry about.

Quote:

The 70% Sever/Gash/Final spike is bad now? News to me. It's no Eviscerate, but i'd say it was better than you're average Hammer spike.

My most favorite, when used on an already bleeding target:Gash->hundred->Final. Tell me that's not hot. And I'm not sure about the hammer claim: Backbreaker->Crushing->Protector's deals out some fierce (and unconditional) damage in a pretty short amount of time.

Quote:

When it comes down to it "Charge!" is one of the best skills Warriors get, and only Sword warriors can really make use of it.

In a team capacity, absolutely. But we're talking about personal glory, here!

Quote:

Originally Posted by nubuchanezzar

You get knockdowns.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

KD can be achieved just as easy with an axe, perhaps even moreso, with bull's strike and shock.

I see you remark on that later in your post, good show.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nebuchanezzar

Ask any monk thats been KD chained perfectly.

KD chain doesn't work so well outside 4v4, due to the prot capability and quick healing factor. I monk pretty often, so I would know the dangers first-hand. After you know the warrior is a KD chain, you just guardian his target, and gg. Often flexibility is more useful, even in hammers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaintGreg

when you actually get to playing it, it works surprisingly well.

And its much more fun than axe-ing. Not to say axe-ing isn't fun, of course.

Eet GnomeSmasher · Apr 10, 2006, 07:07 PM // 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by nebuchanezzar

Unfortunately its pretty easy to get some serious KDs on an ax or sword warrior too now.

Exactly. My rants all this time havent been about how hammers suck but that axes and swords can achieve the same damage output (slight margins) and KD without sacrificing a shield and swing speed.

JR · Apr 10, 2006, 08:00 PM // 20:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eet GnomeSmasher

Exactly. My rants all this time havent been about how hammers suck but that axes and swords can achieve the same damage output (slight margins) and KD without sacrificing a shield and swing speed.

When Axes can pin a target to the floor for 4 seconds, come call me.