Curse

Katari · Jul 23, 2006, 08:04 PM // 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grammar

Hate me for saying this but I think ANet nerfed the wrong aspect of warriors (let me explain).

Two quick facts about warriors:
1. They tank better than any class in the game
2. They deal more damage than any class in the game

Now I'm not a math major, but in this case, 1+1=overpowered.
So what do you do with an overpowered class? You nerf it.
And rightfully so.

Problem is, Anet nerfed the wrong side of the equation. They nerfed the tanking side, and left the damage side alone.
If you ask me, what makes the warrior overpowered isn't their tanking ability, because that's what they're designed to do in the first place. The problem is on the damage side. Warriors shouldn't be outdamaging elementalists and such, but they do (easily, actually).
ANet needed to nerf warrior damage and leave damage aborption alone.

Sure, you could nerf warrior damage to the level of elementalist damage. But then what would you have? As it is, outside of spiking, eles don't have enough damage to be a serious threat in PvP. Warriors (and forms other melee damage) are used in pressure builds because nothing else can apply the same sort of pressure. If you remove the warrior's ability to apply that pressure, then PvP becomes a spike-fest. I don't think we want that.

Niosisw · Jul 24, 2006, 01:50 AM // 01:50

Why not just tank and deal damage? Stop complaining, you have a role to fulfill.

Just use Defy pain and endure pain combo, that's really all you need.

Rest of your skills can be damage.

If you want to deal uber damage as a warrior, go into PvP. It's more satisfying there anyways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grammar

Hate me for saying this but I think ANet nerfed the wrong aspect of warriors (let me explain).

Two quick facts about warriors:
1. They tank better than any class in the game
2. They deal more damage than any class in the game

They deal more damage? Ok, just because you read some article that said "Warrior + frenzy on a soft target = more dmg" doesn't mean anything.

Warrior damage is INSANELY conditional. Why do I say this?

1. You can run.
2. Blind.
3. Multiple hexes that reduce attack time and add dmg.
4. Cripple.
5. Enchantments to dodge melee attacks (I.E.-Guardian)
6. Skills to dodge melee attacks.

Every class has AT LEAST 2 counters to warriors, one of which being kiting. To say warriors deal the most damage is a very naive train of thought.

Grammar · Jul 24, 2006, 03:53 AM // 03:53

^^^ But they do do the most damage.
This has been proven about 9636138135462 times now, it's nothing new.

And the counter argument can be used for any class in the game. I would argue that every class is equally easy to counter if your prep your build for it. That's the beauty of GW PvP: there is no self-sufficiency; teamwork is an absolute must.

The above poster who brought up the pressure vs. spike issue does raise a good point, however. Nerfing warrior damage to fix PvE might throw off the balance in PvP. But I'm not convinced that buffing Ele's is the proper alternative as some suggest.
Either way, I'm definitely not a fan of the damage reduction nerf. It is what it is and I'm dealing with it, but I'm still not a fan. And I will continue to belive that warriors do too much damage (like I said in my first post, feel free to disagree/hate me for it

).

jummeth · Jul 24, 2006, 09:39 AM // 09:39

Niosisw: The fact that you use Defy Pain means that you simply deal less damage to anybody using a weapon elite. Its not that hard to grasp.

The less damage done means more time in the line of fire, and generally means more for the monk to heal.

Shadowfox1125 · Jul 25, 2006, 08:10 AM // 08:10

If you really need to have both Defy Pain and Endure Pain on your skillbar at all times, I'd really reconsider your role as a warrior.. Having both should never be necessary and in my GW career I've never needed to have both of them at the same time. If you really want to "tank," there are numerous viable skills that are not elite that will allow you to tank all you want. IMHO, Defy Pain in PvE is just unnecessary. As jummeth has already stated, the only thing 'tanks' really do is prolong the battle so that your other characters can kill the creatures and it also forces your monks to keep healing you. If you went in with a damage dealing warrior, you could shorten the duration of the battle, allowing the monk to rest more. I feel that as a tank, you aren't doing much that helps the team. And it HAS been proven that warriors do deal the most damage. Think about it--they're warriors; they run into the heart of the battle, sacrificing their lives--it's only fair that they do the most damage. Sins will attack and then flee because that's what assassins do, kill and run.

Xaero Gouki Kriegor · Aug 17, 2006, 07:49 PM // 19:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by lightblade

same goes with elementist...

everybody assume they're the "nuker", while elementist can be a better tank than warriors.

The 5 ward spells: Melee, Foe, Harm, Stability, Element
Obsidian Flesh
Mirror of Ice
Mist Form
Armor of Earth
Kinetic Armor

oh yea...earth elementist = 60 + 50 + 70 + 20 = 200 AL!!!
then you can use ward against foe to trap enemy and ward against melee to help ally
Kinetic Armor can be refreshed with Inspiried Hex on ally with no hex on them

aren't these both elites? do you combine them on the same build?

and also couldn't mist form be easily removed, just like mending or something?
and all those armor spell enchantments be removed? while a warrior can keep all his al using just his skills?

as for obsidian flesh to be removed:

Chilblains
Order of Apostasy
Disenchantment
Well of the Profane
Dark Apostasy
Expunge Enchantments

relying on enchantments to live and tank doesnt go so easy, might as well bea 55 monk with spellbreaker if your gonna tank for a party with enchantments, as for being warrior, he can maintain his al without any removal of enchantments or etc

Sir fredman · Aug 17, 2006, 08:04 PM // 20:04

well in the worlds history warrior usually go first becuase they are melee people and have (maybe) more damage than some other proffesion.. this is my opinion

Guitary Boy · Aug 17, 2006, 08:34 PM // 20:34

I dont understand why warriors should be tanks, sure ele's can get 200+ al but then "drumroll" obsidain flesh! An ele can sit there and take more phisical damage than any warrior hands down + then can have all the spells fail, couple it up with serpents quickness and you have a never ending tank that outdoes any warrior, and maybe even through in a damage spell. Take this into consideration, would you have a warrior sitting there evading most phisical attacks, and maybe taking 20+ damage every few seconds from large mobs and get hexed constantly and battered by spells (depending on mobs) or have an elementalist taking 0-3 damage (depending on mobs) and be invuneralble to all spells, and maybe with aura of restoration the ele would require no self heal? just a thought.

Warriors were designed to be upfront bashing away at things, thats why people create warriors because they like the idea of it. Thats what warriors do, bash, hit and what ever, they are warriors. Sure they are good at tanking, but think about what they are compared to elementalists, people need to broaden up a bit, think of alternatives.

Somehow i think i just killed of warriors in farming. Take no notice of the ele thing

Edit: For the guy saying enchants being removed, all those skills are extreamly rare for mobs, let alone comonly farmed mobs, chillibans is more common but is is a target spell, thus it will fail and wont remove the enchantment, if it is targeted on a ally near you, what is that ally near you for?

Xaero Gouki Kriegor · Aug 17, 2006, 08:59 PM // 20:59

yea but might as well have a 55 or 605 monk with spellbreaker, if you want a squishy up front with enchantments catching most agro and attention, but will they do much damage?, thats my opinion, I love the warrior profession, I can "tank" if i want to, and deal damage if I want to, warriors are an amazing versatile profession, name one place a profession has soloed, and i bet 10 bucks a warrior has went through and done it as well, they deal great damage,

and they are like the shield of a party, but a very rough shield that might hurt a bit if you touch them :P,

but i gotta agree with freedman's comment for the most part

Rera · Aug 18, 2006, 01:29 AM // 01:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guitary Boy

Edit: For the guy saying enchants being removed, all those skills are extreamly rare for mobs, let alone comonly farmed mobs, chillibans is more common but is is a target spell, thus it will fail and wont remove the enchantment, if it is targeted on a ally near you, what is that ally near you for?

Chilblains is dangerous exactly because it does *not* require a target. It is an aoe enchantment removal centered around the caster, and therefore *will* take down anti-spell buffs like Obsidian Flesh, Spellbreaker, Shadow Form, etc.

Furthermore, your entire post is missing the point. The question here is not "Who would make the best tank?" but "What should warriors be doing?" The problem we are addressing is that many warrior players overload on healing and defensive skills, making them deadweight in parties. The fact that elementalists could potentially have higher armor is not related to that point at all.

Xaero Gouki Kriegor · Aug 18, 2006, 05:12 PM // 17:12

well really, i think this whole thread could be dismissed , they are already "tanking" while doing what they normaly do, unless some jackarse is in the back as a w/r shooting a bow, there really is no further discussion on what they should be doing, they tank without even trying if they just do their job and bash the enemy up front and personal

RotteN · Aug 18, 2006, 05:19 PM // 17:19

bodyblock foes and bash away at them, if some idiot caster gets the aggro, try to bodyblock that foe again, and keep bashing. You will take less damage than anyone else without wasting skillslots on it. I never play "tank", and i never will, bodyblocking melee foes in pve, sure, bringing dolyak+endure+defy+watch yourself+shield stance, never.

Guitary Boy · Aug 18, 2006, 07:06 PM // 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rera

Chilblains is dangerous exactly because it does *not* require a target. It is an aoe enchantment removal centered around the caster, and therefore *will* take down anti-spell buffs like Obsidian Flesh, Spellbreaker, Shadow Form, etc.

Furthermore, your entire post is missing the point. The question here is not "Who would make the best tank?" but "What should warriors be doing?" The problem we are addressing is that many warrior players overload on healing and defensive skills, making them deadweight in parties. The fact that elementalists could potentially have higher armor is not related to that point at all.

Granted, sorry about chilblains, my bad.
But read my post again, i did actually mention what i think warriors should be doing. Hence my second paragraph ;
"Warriors were designed to be upfront bashing away at things, thats why people create warriors because they like the idea of it. Thats what warriors do, bash, hit and what ever, they are warriors. Sure they are good at tanking, but think about what they are compared to elementalists, people need to broaden up a bit, think of alternatives."

Inari · Aug 18, 2006, 07:07 PM // 19:07

Well, warriors will always do the most dmg here, because, well, this is not diablo2 (someone mentioned that at the start). Meaning the casters or ranged attackers dont even act at the same speed as a warrior. Imho, the only dmg dealer in this game that actually lives up to its name in this case, is the warrior.

Now, if this was diablo 2, that would be a whole diffrent stroy. If Anet would buff up attack speed of rangers and casting time of casters, we would start to really have all around fun here.

Pick Me · Aug 18, 2006, 07:18 PM // 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inari

Well, warriors will always do the most dmg here, because, well, this is not diablo2 (someone mentioned that at the start). Meaning the casters or ranged attackers dont even act at the same speed as a warrior. Imho, the only dmg dealer in this game that actually lives up to its name in this case, is the warrior.

Now, if this was diablo 2, that would be a whole diffrent stroy. If Anet would buff up attack speed of rangers and casting time of casters, we would start to really have all around fun here.

Yes, because damage is left to the Paladin and the Assassin right? Or perhaps the Barbarian's pure holy damage would be enough to slap Diablo and Baal down (but leaving him vulnerable to everything, even a cool brisk breeze).

Fire Sorceresses do sweet damage, but if Diablo II had the same AoE AI that GW has, then you would see cries from them too.

Although, it would be interesting if we can obtain the power level of monsters. I would like to do 214 fire damage with Mind Burn.

Or have a skill that allows me to do 600 damage to a single monster like the Djinn has.

Inari · Aug 18, 2006, 08:07 PM // 20:07

My only point was that as it stands now, Eles, for example are too slow to dish out damage. And so are rangers. The problem starts and ends with skills like Barrage I think...

One on one, its preety easy to kill an ele (again, only example) with a warrior in gw. In D2, the same thing hardly ever happened (put Enigma out of this).

All I say is, that you worry too much about everything but dishing out dmg as a caster, while the warrior does not.