Curse

Jeydra · Sep 23, 2009, 12:16 PM // 12:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by M @ T

ZomFg melee/ranged attacking classes are wtfOP.

Yes, they are. Well not exactly. Melee is overpowered, range less so.

Are you actively seeking an argument? Because if you are, I don't mind giving you one.

draxynnic · Sep 23, 2009, 12:20 PM // 12:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by qvtkc

Learn to play then, adrenaline management is second nature to any half decent warrior, if you knew it you would not need FGJ (which is one of my favorite skills, by the way, it's a great help but by no means necessary). The only build/s where FGJ really makes a huge difference is various Dragon Slash builds (godmode etc).

I'd argue Earthshaker builds as well - it means the critical mass for being able to cycle Earthshaker is halved. In general, though, other builds - Warrior's Endurance, Hundred Blades, lower-tier builds such as Enraged Smash-based builds - don't need it, especially if they're not using Whirlwind Attack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenomortis

13 Strength would put it at 13% Armour Penetration. A higher Swordsmanship rank would also have other benefits.
GDW would be another insane buff.

Point of information: Strength doesn't affect autoattacks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

It's not that hard to survive. Before you go in, micro Prot Spirit on yourself. If you get Blinded / Weakened, micro Foul Feast on yourself. If you get hex-stacked, micro Convert Hexes on yourself. Even more dramatic is two ER Elementalists maintaining Holy Veil + Purifying Veil on you.

Which means that you have the rest of the party supporting them. The Warrior isn't powerful by itself, but as the tip of the spear, of course they're going to be dangerous. You'd be worried if a character that has half the rest of the party behind them isn't dangerous - but if you seperate the haft from the point, suddenly the point is a lot less dangerous. Same with Warriors - part of their balancing is that they have a lot of potential, but require support to reach that potential.

Spellcasters that are offensive in their own right rather than forming part of the haft of the spear are much more independant - they may not be able to dish out as much as a properly supported Warrior, but all they have to worry about is interrupts. Plus, if the skills being used to support the Warrior were used to deal damage directly instead, you probably would see a similar amount of damage coming from the party as a whole.

Xenomortis · Sep 23, 2009, 12:44 PM // 12:44

I would argue that an unsupported Warrior is still more powerful than an Elementalist or other offensive caster (excluding an OoU MM) that is equally unsupported.

Yeah, a warrior without Orders, SoH or GDW isn't going to hurt as much, but D Slash is still going to hurt and Earthshaker is still going to put enemies on the floor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Point of information: Strength doesn't affect autoattacks.

Oops. My mistake.

M @ T · Sep 23, 2009, 12:59 PM // 12:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

Yes, they are. Well not exactly. Melee is overpowered, range less so.

Are you being serious? Have you actually read anything people posted?

A War needs support to be good. Blind, Cripple, Hexes, you name it, prohibit a war from doing what he is supposed to do. Kill stuff. That's what warriors do. Kill stuff. Why do you see Wars in HA or GvG? They kill stuff.

Kill stuff=Warrior, Warrior=Kill stuff. I actually think I'm going to rename my War to Kill Stuff

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

Are you actively seeking an argument? Because if you are, I don't mind giving you one.

Actually no, I don't intend to do so with biased people.

Desert Rose · Sep 23, 2009, 01:11 PM // 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenomortis

I would argue that an unsupported Warrior is still more powerful than an Elementalist or other offensive caster (excluding an OoU MM) that is equally unsupported.

In this context support does not only mean damage buffs but also condition-/hex-removal. Just put blind on a war and he's nearly useless, a caster on the other hand is far harder to shutdown.

Xenomortis · Sep 23, 2009, 01:20 PM // 13:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Desert Rose

In this context support does not only mean damage buffs but also condition-/hex-removal. Just put blind on a war and he's nearly useless, a caster on the other hand is far harder to shutdown.

This is PvE. Hard shut-down is not too common and few hexes trouble a physical. The worst that I can think of is Soothing Images.
Blind isn't too common, but is a real annoyance when it comes up and it tends to be plastered when it does.

Jeydra · Sep 23, 2009, 02:17 PM // 14:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by M @ T

Actually no, I don't intend to do so with biased people.

Yeah, I didn't think I'd want to argue with someone who's probably worse than me in both PvE and PvP.

Suit yourself, happy trolling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Desert Rose

In this context support does not only mean damage buffs but also condition-/hex-removal. Just put blind on a war and he's nearly useless, a caster on the other hand is far harder to shutdown.

Mayhaps, but if Warriors did 1k damage a hit, you could still blind them and they'd be nearly useless - still overpowered though right?

qvtkc · Sep 23, 2009, 02:45 PM // 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

Good question. I haven't the slightest idea.

lol I need to start bringing Asuran Scan ahahha

Still, that doesn't make warriors overpowered, since it has the same effect for any physical. Warrior is probably the worst profession for it since we have lower energy regeneration.

Reverend Dr · Sep 23, 2009, 06:58 PM // 18:58

There was an underlying message about Ensign's old post Why Nuking Sucks. The message was that the game itself was based around warrior. Your midline keeps your warriors going, slows their warriors, and prevents their team from slowing your warriors, or in another words the game is about warriors. The game is balanced around warriors.

(well, at least it used to be and it is no mere coincidence that the game had a larger, more active, and more satisfied population back when it was. Unfortunately cries for 'diversity' along with poorly designed classes, too many skill additions, in the case of PvE absolutely moronic AI, too many enemy deaths, the PvE/PvP split, ill-thought-out PvE skills, and a community that won't even admit that permanent invulnerability shouldn't be in an MMO).

Tenebrae · Sep 23, 2009, 10:13 PM // 22:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

There was an underlying message about Ensign's old post Why Nuking Sucks. The message was that the game itself was based around warrior. Your midline keeps your warriors going, slows their warriors, and prevents their team from slowing your warriors, or in another words the game is about warriors. The game is balanced around warriors.

And the funny thing is that you can roll thru pve with ease without a single warrior or melee on your team lol . Warriors are balanced and no matter what pve skills are or anyone blaming their rage on warriors with asuran scan.
Another funny thing is how biased are some ppl with their arguments ; lets take a look to the poor mob W .... did 1 of them take down an entire party ? are Ws hard to counter ? nah. Did any nuker take down an entire party or half in 2-3 sec ? yes . Are they hard to counter ? not hard if you have brains but definetly HARDER than counter warrrios and thats undeniable.

_Nihilist_ · Sep 24, 2009, 01:41 AM // 01:41

Warriors are perfectly balanced. 'Nuff said.

That's why I've enjoyed mine for 3.5 years as my main. I had a few rough patches where other profs seemed to outstrip my Warr... but then I got educated and got back in full swing.

Adrenaline makes me [insert appropriate word here]

Perfected Shadow · Sep 24, 2009, 10:21 AM // 10:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Which means that you have the rest of the party supporting them. The Warrior isn't powerful by itself, but as the tip of the spear, of course they're going to be dangerous. You'd be worried if a character that has half the rest of the party behind them isn't dangerous - but if you seperate the haft from the point, suddenly the point is a lot less dangerous. Same with Warriors - part of their balancing is that they have a lot of potential, but require support to reach that potential.

Spellcasters that are offensive in their own right rather than forming part of the haft of the spear are much more independant - they may not be able to dish out as much as a properly supported Warrior, but all they have to worry about is interrupts. Plus, if the skills being used to support the Warrior were used to deal damage directly instead, you probably would see a similar amount of damage coming from the party as a whole.

I made the same point a few pages back, but you explained it much better. That also applies to other physicals btw; in response to 'physicals are OP'.

And to those implying they want nerfs to physicals, when have you seen something like:
"Oh there's a WE warrior/Moebius sin/WS derv/insert physical dmg dealer here, he does crazy dps, let's take him instead of spirit spam/SS nec/VoR mes/AP spiker/fire nuker (yes pugs still stand by teh fire ele)/insert caster dmg dealer here"?
You don't because the minor extra thinking and effort required to make sure those physicals are supported are just beyond most people in pve.

draxynnic · Sep 24, 2009, 11:13 AM // 11:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenomortis

I would argue that an unsupported Warrior is still more powerful than an Elementalist or other offensive caster (excluding an OoU MM) that is equally unsupported.

If the enemy doesn't have anything to counter either, you'd likely be right in many cases (although I'd argue that an unsupported but uncountered AP-fuelled EVAS spammer is scarier). However, there are a lot of ways to significantly reduce the danger posed by a physical attacker - block chances, blind, miss chance hexes, weakness, snares, etc. Spellcasters, especially spellcasters that ignore armour, are harder to shut down - there are ways, of course, but they generally require more effort than anti-Warrior counters.

Kenzo Skunk · Sep 24, 2009, 02:22 PM // 14:22

The only thing that had always annoyed me about my warr is the fact that he HAS TO RUN to the target to actually do something. Other than that, warriors are balanced very well imho.

Jaigoda · Sep 24, 2009, 03:05 PM // 15:05

I have to stop and laugh a little bit at this thread. A lot of people are thinking about this wrong. First of all, it's very important to distinguish between PvE and PvP.

With PvP, if something is broken, it is going to be used on YOU, and if you don't use the same broken tactics, you're much more likely to lose. You can't tell the other team to not bring those skills/builds, so you in turn will have to use them in order to compete. This creates a meta where everyone is forced to use certain broken builds in order to well in the game, creating very little variety and just making the game much less enjoyable to play. In other words, OP builds make the game much less fun simply because it doesn't allow you to viably run anything else.

PvE, however, is different. You can use whatever skills you want, because the enemy is static. Monsters always use the same skills, and as long as you have enough attack power and defensive strength, there's no reason to take broken PvE skills. Sure, OP stuff like AScan and SY make it that much easier and faster, but you can just as easily go through the game without using a single PvE skill. If you really hate how broken a skill is, just take it off your bar and be done with it. You can make PvE as hard as you like. I myself don't mind at all taking AScan, AoHM, SoH, SY, and a whole lot of other stuff that others might consider to be broken, but it doesn't affect anyone else, because I'm not playing against them and my using those skills is not forcing anyone else to.

Basically, if you're really that worried about balance, you can make general PvE as balanced as you like by simply not taking the OP crap that some people apparently think is breaking the game. If you want to cry about how broken a skill is, and then turn around and use it yourself, then you're just making a contradiction for yourself because nothing in the game is forcing you to use it.

Now, to the actual topic: Are warriors well balanced? It depends on how you look at it. If you consider having 100 DPS with the ability to make everyone else on your team close to invincible to be broken, then no, they are not balanced. But if you look at the entire game and put Warriors into perspective, considering what other professions can do and how Warriors square up to them, I would say they are quite balanced. Assassins, the biggest competetor of the Warrior, can still pump out a lot more DPS, but they're lacking a bit on the utility side. Paragons can put out more support and utility, but they'd be very hard pressed to match the DPS of a warrior. Overall, they don't break the game, but they can compete with any other profession in damage and utility.

Jeydra · Sep 24, 2009, 05:32 PM // 17:32

@above - two things:

1. Properly support Warriors deal a lot more than 100 DPS - at least twice that number. There was this screenshot of an A/D Critscythe dealing 250 DPS to the Master of Damage without buffs from his team, which says something.
2. Do you think there should exist a weapon that does 1k damage a hit? After all, if you don't like it, you can simply unequip it and not use it. Or how about, do you think Warriors should be able to deal 1k damage a hit? After all, if you can Blind / block / snare / however you want to counter the Warrior who's so easily countered, he's still almost useless right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perfected Shadow

And to those implying they want nerfs to physicals, when have you seen something like:
"Oh there's a WE warrior/Moebius sin/WS derv/insert physical dmg dealer here, he does crazy dps, let's take him instead of spirit spam/SS nec/VoR mes/AP spiker/fire nuker (yes pugs still stand by teh fire ele)/insert caster dmg dealer here"?
You don't because the minor extra thinking and effort required to make sure those physicals are supported are just beyond most people in pve.

On the other hand, if you do get 8 competent human players who can run any build with any primary profession, can you think up a competitive teambuild that uses SS Nec / VoR Mes / AP spiker / Fire Ele etc? In fact, can you think up a competitive teambuild that doesn't use the "support / cleanse physicals so they can deal damage" idea that can keep up with the kill speed of a team that does?

PS: I argue that all physicals are overpowered. Warriors just happen to be the most overpowered of the physical classes.

Reverend Dr · Sep 24, 2009, 06:05 PM // 18:05

Where the hell is this 1K a hit being pulled from? The closest I've seen was a hit around 800, but that was done by a derv not a warrior.

Take anything that deals damage and increase its damage. Keep doing this and eventually yes things will be out of balance. But no one is increasing warrior damage, so what is your point?

Physicals can be slowed and must be supported, properly supported physicals will deal more damage. It is a tradeoff, do you not see this? Is your complaint that physicals deal too much damage taking that tradeoff into account? Or is your complaint about the lack of:

Quote:

a competitive teambuild. . . that can keep up with the kill speed of a team that does?

This is the same motivation behind the old communities cries for 'diversity' that ultimately lead to terrible class buffs, poorly created new skills that left many disgruntled and appeased no one. Lets have another round of elite buffs to improve diversity, but instead it just forces a smaller group of skills ahead of every other skill and does the opposite of improving diversity.

Tenebrae · Sep 24, 2009, 06:09 PM // 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

1. Properly support Warriors deal a lot more than 100 DPS - at least twice that number. There was this screenshot of an A/D Critscythe dealing 250 DPS to the Master of Damage without buffs from his team, which says something.

1-A/D is not a warrior and has buffs in its bar and you know it.
2- 2XX minimum DPS warriors ? yeah NM right ?. Once again , word is cheap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

PS: I argue that all physicals are overpowered. Warriors just happen to be the most overpowered of the physical classes.

Wrong, they are not , once again you are blaming a class for your rage against Asuran Scan and other PvE Skills. Read carefully , those pve skills ( except SY ) are not warrior exclusive so warriors or any melee are not the ones to blame. Ignore my comment as many times as you want but thats the truth , deal with it.
Come here when you have some tests without buffs , pve skills , tricky HM foe lvl and squishy prof targets .... otherwise is just cheap talk about dreamland numbers.

Jeydra · Sep 25, 2009, 12:30 AM // 00:30

The 1k damage is an example - if you didn't get it, then consider the even more bloated example: do you think Warriors should be able to deal 10k damage a hit? The argument is that the reasons given for why Warriors aren't overpowered don't consider just how much DPS Warriors can currently do, and would reasonably apply regardless of whether Warriors are dealing 100 DPS or 10000 DPS. There has got to be some point when Warrior DPS is too high and the argument breaks down, yet it isn't mentioned.

Yes I do not like the fact that physicals deal too much damage taking the tradeoff into account.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

This is the same motivation behind the old communities cries for 'diversity' that ultimately lead to terrible class buffs, poorly created new skills that left many disgruntled and appeased no one. Lets have another round of elite buffs to improve diversity, but instead it just forces a smaller group of skills ahead of every other skill and does the opposite of improving diversity.

You know I disagree with you, but not the point. This is PvE. Do you know of anyone in PvE who got disgruntled with the skill balance that gave other classes the ability to match the DPS of a Warrior?

@Tenebrae - of course this time I'm not talking autoattacks and 1) use skills and 2) count buffs from the entire team. I have said I'm talking about PvE. I have also said that all melee classes are overpowered. Why should I test without buffs, or without PvE skills? Warriors can make use of Asuran Scan, Strength of Honour, For Great Justice, Save Yourselves. So can Dervs and Assassins. All three classes are overpowered, Warriors just happen to be more overpowered than Dervs and Assassins. What's your point?

Also, after what happened from the last screenshot, I don't see why I should even bother.

Jaigoda · Sep 25, 2009, 04:57 AM // 04:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

The 1k damage is an example - if you didn't get it, then consider the even more bloated example: do you think Warriors should be able to deal 10k damage a hit? The argument is that the reasons given for why Warriors aren't overpowered don't consider just how much DPS Warriors can currently do, and would reasonably apply regardless of whether Warriors are dealing 100 DPS or 10000 DPS. There has got to be some point when Warrior DPS is too high and the argument breaks down, yet it isn't mentioned.

Yes, there is a point when something becomes so broken even PvE can't ignore it. However, at the moment there are still areas that will prove very difficult for inexperienced groups, even with the big PvE skills that you claim are broken. Player error still plays a large role in more difficult areas of the game. I don't think it's near the point where the game becomes too easy to finish.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

You know I disagree with you, but not the point. This is PvE. Do you know of anyone in PvE who got disgruntled with the skill balance that gave other classes the ability to match the DPS of a Warrior?

Correction, ever since just after NF (with the creation of Critical Agility), assassins have been ahead of warrior DPS by a good amount. The only thing that's really changed for the two is that it's been easier for 'Sins to carry utility, allowing them to compete better with warriors as frontliners.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

All three classes are overpowered, Warriors just happen to be more overpowered than Dervs and Assassins. What's your point?

Assassins are more OP than warriors.. Now we can spam SY just about as well as a warrior (see the newish updates to Jagged Strike and Fox Fangs), and still pump out a lot more DPS than DS+SY. Plus, we synergize much better with damage buffs because of a faster attack speed (SoH is something like +50 DPS, before AScan).

Warriors are good and all, and they provide a lot of utility to the team, but they can't come anywhere near the DPS of a 'Sin. You can spout crap about 100 damage per autoattack and 200 DPS, but in practice the Sin will always come out on top in damage. I'd like to see you try and prove otherwise.