Curse

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 01:32 AM // 01:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Savio

In case you missed it the first few times, nobody gives a shit about armor/absorption nerfs because those are the least important aspects of a warrior.

Wow, Armor and absorption? The least important aspects of a warrior?

I'm... amazed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magikarp

a warrior offers tons of armor boosting, party-wide buffs, constant ready to fight, undying dps, and enough armor to back it all up, and keep ticking.

Karp for one seems to believe armor is a significant asset to warriors in his defence of them here.

You can't have it both ways.

Stormlord Alex · Dec 12, 2007, 01:36 AM // 01:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

Wow, Armor and absorption? The least important aspects of a warrior?

I'm... amazed.

/clap

Yes, Warriors aren't for defense.
Welcome to Guild Wars, where they kill shit instead of tank shit.

Savio · Dec 12, 2007, 02:00 AM // 02:00

In PvE, warriors only use one armor-boosting skill, "Save Yourselves!" (or "Watch Yourselves!" if they don't have SY.) Additionally, warriors already have the highest base armor level of all the class - 80 AL +20 vs physical, +16 from a shield - so self-armor buffs are worthless. The armor nerf, which prevents 2 or more +armor skills stacking above 25, does nothing to warriors.

MercenaryK · Dec 12, 2007, 02:19 AM // 02:19

I like killing shit without having to worry about dying in the front lines....

Close thread now? I thought this was all done and over with.

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 02:30 AM // 02:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Savio

In PvE, warriors only use one armor-boosting skill, "Save Yourselves!" (or "Watch Yourselves!" if they don't have SY.) Additionally, warriors already have the highest base armor level of all the class - 80 AL +20 vs physical, +16 from a shield - so self-armor buffs are worthless. The armor nerf, which prevents 2 or more +armor skills stacking above 25, does nothing to warriors.

hmmm, a lack of concensus amongst the inner party.

Comrade Alex says armor doesn't matter Warriors aren't for defense.

Comrade Savio says warriors already have so much base armor they don't need buffs.

I recall reading Son of Ra's treatise on combat mechanics back in the day when it was THE definitive resource. I browsed guildwiki and it seems not much has changed. Aside from armor ignoring skills Armor still plays a pretty significant roll in damage reduction... last I checked.

Savio · Dec 12, 2007, 02:34 AM // 02:34

Having high armor doesn't mean warriors are used for defense. It means they last longer when they're up front raging faces. Stop being stupid.

MercenaryK · Dec 12, 2007, 02:36 AM // 02:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

hmmm, a lack of concensus amongst the inner party.

Comrade Alex says armor doesn't matter Warriors aren't for defense.

Comrade Savio says warriors already have so much base armor they don't need buffs.

I recall reading Son of Ra's treatise on combat mechanics back in the day when it was THE definitive resource. I browsed guildwiki and it seems not much has changed. Aside from armor ignoring skills Armor still plays a pretty significant roll in damage reduction... last I checked.

I would agree with the importance of armor for damage reduction, especially in PvE where monsters, higher levels, hit insanely harder than your level 20 PvPer that will hit your warrior. Extra armor in PvP isn't necessary, but the boost does help I'd say. But you're taking less damage to a little less damage, so is it worth the skill slot?

LightningHell · Dec 12, 2007, 02:39 AM // 02:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

-snip-

I'd ask for why you're ignoring my posts, but whatever.

Also...

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

hmmm, a lack of concensus amongst the inner party.

Comrade Alex says armor doesn't matter Warriors aren't for defense.

Comrade Savio says warriors already have so much base armor they don't need buffs.

Let's get this straight.

In Guild Wars, Warriors pwn face.
In Guild Wars, Warriors have high armor.
In Guild Wars, since they have high armor, they don't need to bring that many self survival skills to survive.

So, Warriors having high armor actually weakens your argument.

Magikarp · Dec 12, 2007, 03:50 AM // 03:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

Karp for one seems to believe armor is a significant asset to warriors in his defence of them here.

You can't have it both ways.

lol, terrabaed example. i said party wide buffs, meaning the WHOLE team, not just the warrior. thats another reason why warriors are so good at what they do. its called utility.. and in particular, party based utility. we still pwn face outside of using it.

Don Zardeone · Dec 12, 2007, 05:06 AM // 05:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

I recall reading Son of Ra's treatise on combat mechanics back in the day when it was THE definitive resource. I browsed guildwiki and it seems not much has changed. Aside from armor ignoring skills Armor still plays a pretty significant roll in damage reduction... last I checked.

Yep, back in the day... 2chapters and an expansion ago.

PvE:
Some of the popular elites for warrior back then were 100blades (Hey, I used it...), Gladiator's defense,... euh.

People relied on sever+gash. Dismember was high adren so not many brought it. Cyclone axe was used a lot.

PvP had chargewarriors with sever, gash and an interrupt and hammers were everywhere. Axes usually had eviscerate, not much changed for those.

Factions shows up and PvE swords swap to D-slash and hardly any of them look back. PvE axes swap to triple chop and I don't think any of them looked back.

Duplicates of skills make some combos better which pushes out some of the defensive skills warriors used to take. D-slash, sun&moon, galrath and silverwings. Axe/Tactics with low str bring penetrating blows and chops powered by an aoe executioners strike (Triple Chop)

Tiger stance means you can actually use an IAS that isn't /R in PvE

Nightfal shows up and brings us flail, 33% IAS which means a 50% DPS increase. The PvE skills are kind of meh and come way too late.
Still, warriors have been given access to a plethora of pain delivering devices.

GW:EN adds an unconditional adren-based KD in brawling headbutt. Hax-hammer builds with other PvE skills, etcetc.

Back in the day, we tanked and tanked because our damage wasn't that impressive and eles could easily nuke everything. Now things run away from aoe and warriors can brutalise things too.
Times change, so do roles.

Still, some tanking is needed. And for all this time, dolyak never let me down. But this is the only defensive skill I bring. Maybe endure pain to boost health to take an alphastrike more safely.

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 07:17 AM // 07:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Savio

Having high armor doesn't mean warriors are used for defense. It means they last longer when they're up front raging faces. Stop being stupid.

I never claimed warriors are used for defense, I defy you to quote me as having said so.

I did say warriors armor is weaker now than before.

Stop being insulting, stop with the ad hominem attacks please.

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 07:24 AM // 07:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by MercenaryK

I would agree with the importance of armor for damage reduction, especially in PvE where monsters, higher levels, hit insanely harder than your level 20 PvPer that will hit your warrior. Extra armor in PvP isn't necessary, but the boost does help I'd say. But you're taking less damage to a little less damage, so is it worth the skill slot?

I admit that bringing defensive skills cuts into offensive capabilities Merc., can't argue with you there.

I decide whether to compromise dmg for defense on a situational basis, like everyone else probably does.

Since this is the campfire I'd assumed we were discussing PVE...

LightningHell · Dec 12, 2007, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

I never claimed warriors are used for defense, I defy you to quote me as having said so.

You quoted people and said they were used for defense. They didn't.

Quote:

I did say warriors armor is weaker now than before.

Which is untrue.

Quote:

Stop being insulting, stop with the ad hominem attacks please.

http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...&postcount=118

much?

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

I admit that bringing defensive skills cuts into offensive capabilities Merc., can't argue with you there.

I decide whether to compromise dmg for defense on a situational basis, like everyone else probably does.

Since this is the campfire I'd assumed we were discussing PVE...

Okay. In terms of PvE...

Warriors had Dragon Slash and Triple Chop, indisputably the two best PvE Warrior elites in the game, introduced in Factions. They got Enraging Charge, arguably the best opening stance in PvE, and Flail, the best IAS stance, in Nightfall. They got Brawling Headbutt and SY! after that.

And you're saying Warriors are gimped from before? :O

And to keep track, these are posts that you haven't responded to, when they have provided valid points:

http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...1&postcount=81
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...7&postcount=85
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...8&postcount=89
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...9&postcount=90
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...5&postcount=98
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...&postcount=102

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

I'd ask for why you're ignoring my posts, but whatever.

Also...

Let's get this straight.

In Guild Wars, Warriors pwn face.
In Guild Wars, Warriors have high armor.
In Guild Wars, since they have high armor, they don't need to bring that many self survival skills to survive.

So, Warriors having high armor actually weakens your argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

I'd ask for why you're ignoring my posts, but whatever.

I've read your posts, I just didn't feel any need to respond. Although I don't necessarily agree with everything you say you are at least polite and tend to express opinion as such instead of misrepresenting it as fact.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

Let's get this straight.

In Guild Wars, Warriors pwn face.
In Guild Wars, Warriors have high armor.
In Guild Wars, since they have high armor, they don't need to bring that many self survival skills to survive.

So, Warriors having high armor actually weakens your argument.

1. Pwn face is subjective and meaningless to me. Do Eles Pwn face?
2. agreed, warriors have high armor
3. I guess it depends on what you consider to be "that many". The skills necesary to survive are largely situational. I seldom play any mode w/o condition mgmt of some sort and a self heal if my build allows.

Since my argument is that warriors are comparatively weaker I don't think that my argument is any less sound due to their high base armor lvl.

Full Metal X · Dec 12, 2007, 07:36 AM // 07:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

1. Pwn face is subjective and meaningless to me. Do Eles Pwn face?
2. agreed, warriors have high armor
3. I guess it depends on what you consider to be "that many". The skills necesary to survive are largely situational. I seldom play any mode w/o condition mgmt of some sort and a self heal if my build allows.

1. No eles don't pwn face.
2. Was there eveer an arguement?
3. 0-1 and I heard monks are good.

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 07:47 AM // 07:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

You quoted people and said they were used for defense. They didn't.

Which is untrue.

http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...&postcount=118

much?

Okay. In terms of PvE...

Warriors had Dragon Slash and Triple Chop, indisputably the two best PvE Warrior elites in the game, introduced in Factions. They got Enraging Charge, arguably the best opening stance in PvE, and Flail, the best IAS stance, in Nightfall. They got Brawling Headbutt and SY! after that.

And you're saying Warriors are gimped from before? :O

And to keep track, these are posts that you haven't responded to, when they have provided valid points:

http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...1&postcount=81
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...7&postcount=85
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...8&postcount=89
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...9&postcount=90
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...5&postcount=98
http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...&postcount=102

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

You quoted people and said they were used for defense. They didn't.

Find the quote if it exists. It doesn't so good luck with that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showp...&postcount=118

much?

Check your facts there's no ad hominem attack there. Ad hominem is Latin for at the man. When one's attack attempts to discredit the presenter rather than refute the argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

Okay. In terms of PvE...

Warriors had Dragon Slash and Triple Chop, indisputably the two best PvE Warrior elites in the game, introduced in Factions. They got Enraging Charge, arguably the best opening stance in PvE, and Flail, the best IAS stance, in Nightfall. They got Brawling Headbutt and SY! after that.

And you're saying Warriors are gimped from before? :O

As I've said before, those are all fine skills. I love e-charge and flail.

Blind and block make d-slash spam a pie in the sky proposition.

Triple chop isn't as robust as the old cyclone chop+zealots fire trick.

Drunken headbutt and sy while fine skills level only with lots of grind and consequently aren't on my bar.

Yes I'm saying warriors are gimped compared to before. A few new attacks don't make up for changing the basic mechanics of warrior armor and absorption. Nor are said attacks usefull if you're warrior is blind or blocked from the plethora of such skills that came along with the new attacks.

LightningHell · Dec 12, 2007, 07:47 AM // 07:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

I've read your posts, I just didn't feel any need to respond. Although I don't necessarily agree with everything you say you are at least polite and tend to express opinion as such instead of misrepresenting it as fact.

Quote:

1. Pwn face is subjective and meaningless to me. Do Eles Pwn face?

Pwning face, meaning having the best consistent damage out of all classes as well as having party-wide armor buffs in PvE. In PvP, easily the most flexible of the offensive frontline characters.

Quote:

3. I guess it depends on what you consider to be "that many". The skills necesary to survive are largely situational. I seldom play any mode w/o condition mgmt of some sort and a self heal if my build allows.

You don't have monks?

Quote:

Since my argument is that warriors are comparatively weaker I don't think that my argument is any less sound due to their high base armor lvl.

Okay.

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 07:51 AM // 07:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magikarp

lol, terrabaed example. i said party wide buffs, meaning the WHOLE team, not just the warrior. thats another reason why warriors are so good at what they do. its called utility.. and in particular, party based utility. we still pwn face outside of using it.

you said what you said, quote's in my post, read it.

LightningHell · Dec 12, 2007, 07:56 AM // 07:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

Find the quote if it exists. It doesn't so good luck with that.

I was mistaken - it should have read "...that said they were used...". However, you did say this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

Wow, Armor and absorption? The least important aspects of a warrior?

I'm... amazed.

Karp for one seems to believe armor is a significant asset to warriors in his defence of them here.

You can't have it both ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

Check your facts there's no ad hominem attack there. Ad hominem is Latin for at the man. When one's attack attempts to discredit the presenter rather than refute the argument.

I do know what ad hominem means - in fact, your ad hominem was a case of ad hominem tu quoque, if I must say so.

Quote:

As I've said before, those are all fine skills. I love e-charge and flail.

Blind and block make d-slash spam a pie in the sky proposition.

Triple chop isn't as robust as the old cyclone chop+zealots fire trick.

Drunken headbutt and sy while fine skills level only with lots of grind and consequently aren't on my bar.

Blind and block should not be a problem in PvE, as the average player should be intelligent enough to switch targets.

Explain the second statement - also, Triple Chop along with midline support via Splinter Weapon, etc...

Quote:

Yes I'm saying warriors are gimped compared to before. A few new attacks don't make up for changing the basic mechanics of warrior armor and absorption. Nor are said attacks usefull if you're warrior is blind or blocked from the plethora of such skills that came along with the new attacks.

I think you're mistaken. Warrior armor has never been nerfed, nor Absorption runes. Nobody actually uses Absorption anyway.

Anyway,

Quote:

I've read your posts, I just didn't feel any need to respond. Although I don't necessarily agree with everything you say you are at least polite and tend to express opinion as such instead of misrepresenting it as fact.

Does that mean simply that you don't have anything to say to what I said, and that you have no solid argument to refute mine?

LockerLoad · Dec 12, 2007, 07:59 AM // 07:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

Pwning face, meaning having the best consistent damage out of all classes as well as having party-wide armor buffs in PvE. In PvP, easily the most flexible of the offensive frontline characters.

As I said it's a highly subjective term but using your example I'd say 1v1 mes pwn face. Against groups Eles pwn face. Rock paper scissors...

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningHell

You don't have monks?

Okay.

Like many players I'm forced to pug or hench as my guild isn't very active. I find it's prudent to bring a self heal and a rez for such situations. You'd be amazed how many party wipes I've averted.