Curse

UltimaSlash · Apr 17, 2008, 10:25 PM // 22:25

Rangers have expertise, which can significantly lower their energy costs for a lot of skills

Mesmers have fast casting, which can significantly lower casting times for spells and signets

Necromancers have soul reaping, excellent for energy management

Elementalists have energy storage, which can boost their energy past 100 at times

Paragon's Leadership is very useful energy management for shouts

Monks have divine favor, making their heals a lot more effective

What about strength? This attribute does only 1% armor penetration per point on an attack SKILL. Considering that warriors generally don't go for high armor targets, strength does not really increase the damage output of warriors by much. Compared to the usefulness of the primary attribute with the other classes, strength is WAY underpowered. Many warriors can do sufficient damage even without a lot of points into strength. I would like to see strength give either +1 damage per point, 1% armor penetration on every attack, 2% on an attack skill, or increase max hp by 10hp per point (seeing how energy storage gives an elementalist +3 energy per point, i don't think 10hp per point would be too extreme - a vitae rune gives 10hp anyway, and an attunement rune only gives 2 energy)

TheSneakyBastage · Apr 17, 2008, 10:31 PM // 22:31

10hp per point in strength? as in 160 damage from strength att alone at 12+1+3 or additional 160hp for the warrior at 12+1+3?

RavagerOfDreams · Apr 17, 2008, 10:35 PM // 22:35

yea if you had +10 health per strength you could easily go over the amount taken up by the sup strength ruin. that + a sup vigor rune would put a tanks health at a fairly high amount =.=

blakecraw · Apr 17, 2008, 10:37 PM // 22:37

The armor penetration idea is pretty lame, but, at the same time, warriors are beastly melee powerhouses, so I don't think they need any buffs. They're probably the most well-balanced melee class, and if it ain't broke don't fix it imo.

ShadowsRequiem · Apr 17, 2008, 10:37 PM // 22:37

Wars have always had a bad primary but this is no way to solve it......

Savio · Apr 17, 2008, 10:38 PM // 22:38

Strength is strong enough as it is, having many useful skills as well as being a requirement for shields. Complaining about its inherent effect is taking a very narrow view on what the attribute does for you when you spec into it.

Toxage · Apr 17, 2008, 10:42 PM // 22:42

I actually think that strength is a pretty strong primary.

Axagoth Baal · Apr 17, 2008, 10:46 PM // 22:46

Apart from +10 hp per point which would be too much strenght does need to be buffed in some way, maybe making armor penetration affect every single hit and not only attack skills, or make it work only with attack skills buffing penetration by 2% per point. Furthermore it does not stack with skills like sundering blow. As it is now it has SOME good skills, some good skills, and a crappy effect compared to other primary attributes.

TrippieHippie89 · Apr 17, 2008, 10:46 PM // 22:46

lol if warrios had extra AP from strength and +1 dmg per attack

16 axe/sword/hammer
10 strength
9 fire/water/air magic

14 dmg from conjure+10 more from strength+10-14 more with a smiter bonding you with SnH=WAY WAY WAY too overpowered war's as they would have +38 dmg to each attack without adding in dmg from evis+exe or whatever else

and if you had +10 health from each point in strength thats 130 extra hp to gvg shock warriors, putting most wars(using 2 minor runes) at...we'll lets see

480 base health
+50 health-sup vigor
+60 health-axe/shield
+40 health-full survivor insgnia
+20 health-2 vigor runes
+130 health-13 strength
780 health warriors without buffs, that seems a bit imbalanced to me

personally i think strength is fine as it is as even when pounding on a monk the difference from 0 strength and 13 strength is very noticeable

Div · Apr 17, 2008, 10:48 PM // 22:48

You are dumb if you think strength is underpowered. Almost as dumb as those people who think soul reaping is underpowered.

It gives you access to the most important stuff, like bulls, rush, flail.

ShadowsRequiem · Apr 17, 2008, 10:50 PM // 22:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by holymasamune

You are dumb if you think strength is underpowered. Almost as dumb as those people who think soul reaping is underpowered.

It gives you access to the most important stuff, like bulls, rush, flail.

Compared to other classes it kinda is. But thats just looking at others primarys.... its good how it is.

Though saying +10hp per point is very retarded.

shru · Apr 17, 2008, 10:56 PM // 22:56

Strength is actualy one of the most powerful primaries out there. Like others have stated, it's passive ability may reek, but the skills in the line are some of the strongest and most varied of any other primary attribute. If you think warriors need a bigger incentive to invest in strength other than the ability to wield a shield and use the skills in the attribute, you're not playing the same game as me.

Turbobusa · Apr 17, 2008, 10:58 PM // 22:58

13% penetration on a shock axe build is very nice...
The only buff I can think of would be str/2 % penetration on auto attacks, but it's not like warriors need it.

Phoenix Tears · Apr 17, 2008, 11:01 PM // 23:01

actualy the increase would be at strength 16 only + 135 hp, due to the fact that hp malus from sup strength is higher, then sup vigor, so nothing with +160 hp, it are in the end only 135 ...

I think imo somehow too, that Strength needs a buff

Either too instead of +1% Ap per point it should be +1 Damage, this way Strength would become a serious good Attack Buff Attribute, if it would increase permanent your damage by 16 points, also this would balance the damage ratio compared to Dervishs, which do compared to Warriors way to overpowered melee damage as base damage...

The +135 HP i think are also nothing too outrageous, that would make them now too powerful, also there are plenty of ways to take down tanks with high hp fast enough, either by suckign fast away their energy and/or disabling them to receive adrenaline, also tanks are not a great problem, their strength lies in their defense, not in their offense, get simple a build to crack the nut ^^ then won't help 135 more hp much, when you are able to easily break the defense

or instead of more Hp Strength could increase per point +1 Defense vs. physical attacks.

Strength could decrease per point by 2% the duration of physical negative conditions on you. So Bleeding, Blinding, Poison, Weakness, Cripple & Deep Wound would last with R16 32% of their duration time lesser on the Warrior, which would stack with runes, so with rune effects warriors could decrease these conditions effects to only half duration, i think thats a very good and strogn privilege for warriors.
It could be also combined with little energiy management, that warriors receive a +1 Energy per 5 points in strength, whenever a negative physical condition ends on them.
So max 3 energy gain ,whenever a neg. codition ends on a warrior, that has at least strength of 15.

Its a unique effect, no profession yet has a primary, that reduces duration of negative conditions, strength fits imo very good for this. With more physical strength a warrior can better withstand negative conditions.
With more strength, bleedigns and deep wounds won't hurt the warrior so much, with more strength you can withstand better weakness, somehow logic, or ? ^^ with more strength you body can withstand better poisons. with more strength you don#t feel so strong the pain of beign crippled. Ok, i find now no good example for blindign, but it is a physical condition, so should strength also affect it , like all other physical negative conditions

TrippieHippie89 · Apr 17, 2008, 11:42 PM // 23:42

i really thought i made it abundantly clear that +1 dmg per strength att is very overpowered

and im not saying tanking wars would be the problem im saying that a 750 health target with 96 armor in gvg would be overpowered

also your rune idea also would make war's almost impervious to conditions with the 30% from strength, 20% from runes and another 20% from shield swaps

since strength is apparently so underpowered...i think fast casting is underpowered as well...i think everytime you interupt someone you should sap X energy from them where X is your rank in fast casting cause making your spells faster just isnt good enough

Voltaic Annihilator · Apr 17, 2008, 11:47 PM // 23:47

i kinda agree on the +1 per hit + 1% armor pen

Carboplatin · Apr 17, 2008, 11:59 PM // 23:59

Str is fine the way it is, it even allow for a shield.

now poor paragons can't have leadership shields, wheres the logic in that?

placebo overdose · Apr 18, 2008, 12:08 AM // 00:08

str is mainly fine i say maybe +1 al for every 2 ranks in str while not wielding a shield

Winterclaw · Apr 18, 2008, 12:12 AM // 00:12

Tactics needs buffing more.

BTW, ES is kind of lame as a skill because there are better ways to manage energy than waste a bunch of skill points to cover the fact you don't know how to play caster. ES is only good when you've got a skill that causes exaustion and then it's mostly so you don't have too little energy while waiting to recover.

BigT · Apr 18, 2008, 12:18 AM // 00:18

Str isnt underpowered, + Warriors get Tactics as well, Ehem, 2 Main attributes, uber running ability ftw?