Curse

Simath · Oct 29, 2007, 04:04 PM // 16:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiskeyjack

Obsidian tank is not needed anywhere,

QFT

So many people don't grasp that.

eloc_jcg · Oct 29, 2007, 04:07 PM // 16:07

Warriors still have their uses considering they have 2 Campaigns more skills than Dervishes do.

jaeharys targaryen · Oct 29, 2007, 04:09 PM // 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheddarbox

So, I'm new to the game. I leveled a few classes and now I'm really interested in leveling a warrior.

However, after talking to a few friends and some guild members, I've been told that warriors are really not all that useful since the dervish appeared. I've heard that dervishes tank just as good if not better then warriors, yet deal a lot more damage, and aoe damage at that. One person went as far as to say warriors are near useless now.

I'm sure they're not useless, but are warriors really that bad?

Again, like to point out that I'm very new to this game, so I am a noob and I'm ok with that. Thanks.

get a new guild
dervishes are the most god awful class, its not even funny. they can be either trees-exploiting a broken skill, or something even worse. warriors can out put insane damage, have an ias(two, actualy) that doesnt suck, and have higher armor. and enchantments are strippable, warrior's natively high armor isnt.

Tab · Oct 29, 2007, 04:12 PM // 16:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaeharys targaryen

get a new guild
dervishes are the most god awful class, its not even funny. they can be either trees-exploiting a broken skill, or something even worse. warriors can out put insane damage, have an ias(two, actualy) that doesnt suck, and have higher armor. and enchantments are strippable, warrior's natively high armor isnt.

But they can't run Ancestor's Rage. Mirite?

Magnus_1 · Oct 29, 2007, 09:20 PM // 21:20

I play a ranger a lot in AB, and Dervs with their fancy enchantments and Auras are so much easier to lay waste to than warriors are. Warriors will always have a place in GW. Dervs are completely optional.

placebo overdose · Oct 29, 2007, 10:25 PM // 22:25

the skill gap between a good warrior and bad one is huge a bad war is dredful and all to common but a good one is a great addition to a team
where as a good derv and a bad derv are closer in skill a bad derv is a pain but is not as deadly and not quite as common anymore and a good derv is a peg or two below a war imo

Draginvry · Oct 30, 2007, 07:46 AM // 07:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by ibreaktoilets

But they can't run Ancestor's Rage. Mirite?

Not to mention countless other short duration enchantments that are absolutely devastating on a derv.

I have a feeling that Ancestor's Rage will eventually be "de-nerfed" solely for that reason. Pity, because it's so much more usefull as an enchantment. Cruel Was Daoshen + Ancestor's Rage delay = win

Solveig Ikram · Oct 30, 2007, 08:17 AM // 08:17

Just one little scenario: Been vanquishing some and tried my hand at some desolation areas. When i ran into those Awakened mobs (with Sab h/h team build and my own usual team, ie 1prot 2heal and lots of damage) the scene resembled a litter of kittens in a pittbull den.
So I tinkered somewhat, tried a Derv tank with holy damage = epic fail.
After many attempts with Melloni's builds and even throwing in Gehraz (do not do this) I opted for Jora. After Jora, with a basic stance build, were added everything was a breeze. Even Joko's Domain.

So to sum up: Warrior > Dervish any day.

bungusmaximus · Oct 30, 2007, 08:26 AM // 08:26

Dervishes need skills and attribute points to become somewhat durable, warriors are durable even with an empty skillbar.
Dervishes have no reliable KD skills (some use bull's strike, but that's really clunky imho).
Dervishes have no interrupts, warriors do, they're not the best interrupts in the game but at least warriors have them.

Dervishes are the new wammos, but that doesn't make them a viable substitute for warriors

RhanoctJocosa · Oct 30, 2007, 08:53 AM // 08:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by SotiCoto

Not that I really belong here.... since for the most part I'm one of the anti-warrior crowd..... but you are exaggerating well beyond what is reasonable here, and you know it.

There's an anti-warrior crowd? I just thought they were bad players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SotiCoto

Just face it... Warriors are far easier to pick up and play effectively than Assassins or Dervishes... A n00b warrior will almost invariably beat a n00b assassin, and is quite likely to beat a n00b dervish too... simply because spamming skills can work for the warrior but will not work for the other two.

Why the hell does it matter what noob players can do? That doesn't mean anything. The assassin and dervish classes are FAR easier to pick up and play than a warrior. Obviously, for the assassin, you need to know what order to press your skills, but that's really just spending 1-2 minutes reading your bar....

Quote:

Originally Posted by SotiCoto

I'm sure what you're trying to express (albeit inefficiently) is that Assassins and Dervishes tend to have a specific order to their attack sequence which generally needs to be adhered to for maximum effectiveness.... whereas Warriors generally don't... allowing for a bit more potential for variety.

Again, not true at all. Most assassin bars allow variation in how you perform your combo, with the generic SP bar as an example, and it's generally the better assassins that make use of this. As for saying dervishes perform their combos in a specific sequence for maximum effectiveness, and that being a difference between them and warriors, well don't warriors too? Bull's --> Eviscerate --> Executioner's, Sever --> Gash --> Final, Bull's --> Wearying --> Chilling/Mystic etc. etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SotiCoto

Mastery of any of these classes however is not only about knowing which skills to hit in which order or in response to which actions by the enemy.... but in knowing the timing and reacting to all that happens around you. One can just as easily be given a warrior build and not know how to use it right as an assassin build. The warrior might be more forgiving of mess-ups..... but in the end, a Master Warrior against a Master Assassin... assuming each is anticipating the other... is entirely likely to come up stalemate. I can't really speak for the Dervish since they're primarily designed for AoE... but I'd imagine it isn't all that different.

While the former part of this post is correct, the latter isn't really. The outcome of the skirmish is wholly determined by your bar. A cripslash warrior rolled with rend touch will almost always lose to an assassin, even if the warrior is one of the best in the world and the assassin is only mediocre.

Perfected Shadow · Oct 30, 2007, 09:12 AM // 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solveig Ikram

So to sum up: Warrior > Dervish any day

And you're basing that on

Quote:

So I tinkered somewhat, tried a Derv tank with holy damage = epic fail.
After many attempts with Melloni's builds and even throwing in Gehraz (do not do this) I opted for Jora. After Jora, with a basic stance build, were added everything was a breeze. Even Joko's Domain.

Comparing AI warriors with AI dervishes then concluding that warriors are better than dervishes...I'd say either you made a crap Dervish skillbar or the warrior AI is just better. But that says nothing of either class being better than the other.

Now the more important factor you should consider is the player.

jaeharys targaryen · Oct 30, 2007, 01:33 PM // 13:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Draginvry

Not to mention countless other short duration enchantments that are absolutely devastating on a derv.

I have a feeling that Ancestor's Rage will eventually be "de-nerfed" solely for that reason. Pity, because it's so much more usefull as an enchantment. Cruel Was Daoshen + Ancestor's Rage delay = win

you come late to the conversation
he was making fun of the fact we just had a 15 post argument about a d/rt i posted in the derv section.

Coloneh · Oct 30, 2007, 09:26 PM // 21:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perfected Shadow

And you're basing that on

Comparing AI warriors with AI dervishes then concluding that warriors are better than dervishes...I'd say either you made a crap Dervish skillbar or the warrior AI is just better. But that says nothing of either class being better than the other.

Now the more important factor you should consider is the player.

QFT. this person has obviously never seen/played a decent dervish.

Whiskeyjack · Oct 30, 2007, 09:29 PM // 21:29

There is nothing useful to be gained from trying to compare warriors and dervish's, both are extremly useful in the right hand's, both are terrible when played poorly(Think "tank" builds), let's leave it at that.

~ Dan ~ · Oct 30, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiskeyjack

There is nothing useful to be gained from trying to compare warriors and dervish's, both are extremly useful in the right hand's, both are terrible when played poorly(Think "tank" builds), let's leave it at that.

Indeed, if you look back at the thread title it was asking whether warrior's are (not) useful, not whether they are better than dervishes. Just because he mentioned the dervish in the OP, does not mean he wanted a comparison. Many people failed to read the thread title properly.

Turtle222 · Nov 04, 2007, 01:58 AM // 01:58

while my fav class is the humble dervish, warriors have an astounding role and can fit many jobs. condition spreader, KDer, runner, you name it. I just think its the sheer amount of inexperienced or new players that pick warrior have given the prof a bad name.

max_rulez · Nov 04, 2007, 12:20 PM // 12:20

AoB= Shit... Why loose your elite on a dervish just to have the same armor as a warrior. Infact still less usally. Oh wait... also having AoB means your vulnerable to enchant removal.... wow that sounds fun...

Magikarp · Nov 04, 2007, 04:19 PM // 16:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by glountz

Dan, you're just a Dervish-biased troll. Will answer your nonsense then let you spit your rageposts.

Yes there are. If you had cleared some Norn Areas, you would have met gentle guys named jotun trolls. Their mesmers are good. BTW Mandragors have some hexes too.

What forbid a warrior from bringing mending touch as well, I wonder. Avatar of Dwayna is an elite form (taking your elite skill) that tries to replace badly the role of a Monk. I could understand its use in limited parties (4 people), but in an eight party, you don't have to devote your elite to a job done by some key role characters in your party. Monks are there for this. Bringing Dwayna is really useful in Hex heavy areas (and still you'll prefer a Divert Hexes monk).
And again, you're bringing a skill to counter. Warriors generally take a damage elite skill cause it's just their job.

Actually you're right near the truth. The power of a warrior lies in its equipment. It can cut down hex durations, and blind duration too by wearing the correct runes. In PVE simply by switching sets I can use a shield+rune to reduce by 33% blind duration. A shield is overpowered also. It grants you +30 health (+45 conditionnaly), damage reduction, + armor against some damage kinds etc... Heck, even monks are using shields nowadays in PvP. Again, without bringing any skill. Plus a superior armor. etc... etc...

Yes, 9-41. With a really low attack rate. Crits makes its weapon powerful.... When they happen. In PVE, Dervishes are actually less powerful than in PvP against single targets. Actually, monster's high level reduces scythe crit potential and rarely turn their back for you. Scythe damage is superior to any warrior weapon only if they AoE. Which, I agree, happen quite a bit in mob clusters.

No PVE warrior bring heal signet. When you're the tank, it's a suicide signet.
No and you're proving yourself as a self centered ego. You won't win a monk on their game. They actually heal, remove, and protect you better than you could. Because that's their role and what they are made for.
You actually saying you can do everything you want but the real thing is that some proffessions does it better than you.
Healing yourself, removing conditions, yes and then? What if you're not the center of the universe? Can you heal other people? remove hexes from other people? No, most dervish skills are self-centered. For example, conviction will grants you +24 armor. Okay. WY! will grant to your WHOLE PARTY 20 armor. See? That's where warriors are vastly superior to dervishes.

Dervishes have niche roles, when your party is limited especially. Dervishes in PvP are often chosen in split 5/3 at the flag stand, due to the limited party size there.

i've been reading through this absurd thread, and sorry dan, she's totally right on just about all of this.

dervs make it seem like they have it all, make it look like its the end all melee spellsword kinda thing, but face it, would any game replace the most traditional of a ll classes, the warrior, with some broken, overpowered class? no. dervs are simply easy to counter utility characters, built usually with little to no team utility, full self support, yet nothing but auto attack to back it up with. if you actually play a derv that deals damage, you'll probably get smacked with all the same junk us warriors do, that we've been handling since the game came out. you came late, gl with a mes, a necro, a warrior, a ranger, a.. oh.. you get the idea... we all counter your class, that has mediocre counters for us.

jawapet · Nov 08, 2007, 11:42 PM // 23:42

The worst thing, in my opinion, that ANet did to the players of guild wars was to remove the effective tanking capabilities that were implemented originally in Sorrow's Furnace. I.e. the ability for wars to bring all agro onto themselves by holding an item. Since the time that that mechanic was removed from guild wars warriors, no all tanking, has become nothing more than glorified pulling and over complicated damage dealing.

Warriors should have a pve only skill that allows them(in pve) to be able to gain and hold agro more effectively. Either a shout or some sort of touch skill should be added to the game to allow wars to more effectively gain and hold agro of enemies.

As for the current measure of tanking; warriors have higher armor then dervishes and have natural AP this makes them better damage dealers and takers then then the dervish on a hit for hit basis. But the dervish can attack multiple enemies with a scythe and has higher energy reserves allowing them tank much better than a warrior where magic is involved. Like I said warrior is now damage dealing not true tanking, and as for damage dealing an assassin can usually do it more effectively than a warrior. Warrior have become the middle ground between 'sins and dervs.

It is possible for warriors to tank, but it takes a great deal of skill and luck. While ive played many positions(all classes) in a party there always seems to be the monk that actually takes more damage and is usually the first spiked and killed. Thus in Guild Wars current system the monk is actually acts the agro taker and thus the tank in mosts partys, although this shouldn't be.

Hopefully ANet will fix this for Guild Wars, but is highly doubtful that ANet actually cares. But lets keep our figures crossed that the will will re-implement proper tanking with tanking and agro holding skills for Guild Wars 2.