Curse

Stormlord Alex · Mar 24, 2007, 01:37 AM // 01:37

Hmm... good point on the hammer DPS...
Never really thought of it for damage though... I just let the base damage do its thang and use it for disruption - where the hammer, and the warrior as a whole, shine over other melee clases.

glaz · Mar 24, 2007, 03:33 AM // 03:33

actually, there arent that many bunny thumpers now because of the nerf to RaO...

with that said, dev hammer warriors are being used much more often now.

Symbol · Mar 24, 2007, 03:51 AM // 03:51

Hammer warriors are a dime a dozen in GvG.

ZenRgy · Mar 24, 2007, 03:57 AM // 03:57

RaO is common now, in HA anyway, just usually means EW is paired with them.

In GvG warriors are everywhere.

Warriors have good damage even when not using attack skills, good linebacking ability aswell as spike.

Assassins are weak outside of their combo and quick spikes / ganks. When they're not doing combos their damage is laughable, the assassin is there to take advantage of other player's bad positioning.

The Dervish although has high damage isn't as versatile as warriors (considering they can't shutdown enemy frontlines half as good as a hammer warrior, unless you give them EDA). Also their armour is only at 70 meaning they're still pretty fragile.

On another note, can someone tell me why people are running R/D Bunny "reapers" ? That build is retarded imo.

Stormlord Alex · Mar 24, 2007, 04:12 AM // 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenRgy

On another note, can someone tell me why people are running R/D Bunny "reapers" ? That build is retarded imo.

Why do people have sundering daggers?
Why do people use Mending?

There are some depths of idiocy the average person cannot fathom... Maybe bunny reapers are just such a thing.

:EDIT: For you serious types with broken funnybones, this was humour of a sort. Ive never played a bunny reaper and the only reapers I've ever fought dropped too fast (usually 'cuz of me...DIE melee rangers!) for me to gauge their effectiveness. Though I really mean the bit about mending...

moriz · Mar 24, 2007, 04:21 AM // 04:21

a warrior's effectiveness is limited only by the skill and creativity of its player.

an assassin and a dervish's effectiveness is limited by the build.

put a skilled player on a warrior and he's extremely dangerous. put him on an assassin or dervish and he's just extremely predictable.

warrior >>> assassin and dervish. any example to the contrary can simply be chalked up to a lack of skill on the player's part.

Div · Mar 24, 2007, 05:27 AM // 05:27

OMG anet killed the wammo tank! My mending+heal breeze+heal hands+riposte+deadly riposte+dolyak signet cannot allow me to tank everything

ANET NERFED WARRIORS!!! I WANT UBER BUFF PLZZZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wretchman Drake

Asuming the sin doesn't mess up, he just kills faster. True, a Warrior can go on with his standard attacks, but in PvP spikes seem to be more effective, hence there would be no spike groups. A warrior dealing damage over time can be healed consistently, unlike a good sin where the main focus of the monk is himself and his own safety, completely forgetting his team. That's good pressure to someone playing a monk as it's a good distraction.

If Hammer warriors are so good why don't you see them rather than RaO (or bunny-thumpers)?

Just stop before you ridicule yourself even more. In PvP of course spikes are an important part, but for the most part, it is a TEAM spike. Two warriors using eviscerate+executioners and an ele using fireball is going to much harder to catch than an assassin trying to solo something once every 15-20 seconds. In between the spikes, the assassin is completely worthless, as it can't even pressure well because of its low armor and tend to be more of a target when overextended. Unless the other team's monks are retarded and stand still for 3-4 seconds, a sin is not going to kill at all. Just because of your observations of low quality PvP aka kill count maps, it doesn't mean that sins are better than warriors. Kill count maps are such chaos that sins are more easily to kill stragglers alone. In a cooperative environment like GvG or even most of the 1v1 HA maps, sins aren't nearly as effective since they suck at pressure and their spikes are easy to catch (hell, even one mending touch kills it). A sin has to expose+shadow prison for a spike to work usually, and if a team doesn't see that they're retarded anyways. A warrior dealing damage over time can be healed, of course, but eventually the pressure will drain a monk of all his energy, and then a well-coordinated team spike will catch the monks off guard and get the kill. Sins being good pressure to someone being a monk? Have you ever played monk competitively before? I would choose fighting against a sin over a pressure warrior or thumper in any GvG or HA map. Why? Because I know a warrior or thumper can outpressure my healing, but all it takes to stop a sin spike is 5 energy (RC) or (SoA).

And warriors are used over thumpers in GvG play usually. Stop basing all your assumptions on RA and HA.

Oh yeah, this is a good thread if you need to learn how to monk, wretchman. http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10104060

Wretchman Drake · Mar 24, 2007, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by wascal

So umm, the fact Anet has consistantly nerfed warrior skills since july of last year (check the guildwars skill updates list)while increasing the damage and reducing the cost and cooldown of Rit/Derv/Sin skills isnt having a massive effect on the way warriors are used in PvP AND why warriors have become 2nd choice classes when given a choice of sin or derv.
Ive been playing my warrior since day one, got 13mill xp, and ive learned a thing or two about playing a warrior intelligently, and to be honest ive come to the conclusion that the warrior has been nerfed in an attempt to sell the factions expansion to the masses by offering a more powerful alternative to the warrior, who wants to play a crappy warrior when you can play a sin?

Anet had consistantly increased the defensive aspects of the warrior while simultaneously lowering its offensive capability, who needs a warrior with high def if he hits like a girl?

Words of Wisdom here.

ZenRgy · Mar 24, 2007, 06:50 AM // 06:50

Because warriors are so much more versatile compared to Assassins and Dervishes.

Observe top 20 guilds, if warriors are so so bad, why are they being run by top players?

JR · Mar 24, 2007, 07:15 AM // 07:15

I think it's time to lock this complete mess of a thread.

Warriors are not 'dead'. They serve a different purpose to both Assassins and Dervishes as a melee character. Trying to argue that they have somehow been completely replaced by newer classes is just absolute pure ignorance.