Curse

voltman135 · Feb 19, 2011, 10:46 PM // 22:46

The new update has been out for a few days now. Lots of people are saying how great dervishes work in FoW as a replacement for the 100b warriors.

OK, lets be honest, Does VoS really out perform 100b? or is it just some passing fad. I would like to here from someone whos has run both builds, not run WITH someone with each build but actually run both builds themselves and can attest to how they compare.

If played correctly dual 100b warriors in FoW works pretty much flawlessly. Heck, you can really do it with one if you have to, just takes longer. So, I am a little skeptical on they fact that a dervish out performes a warrior.

If it is true then I need to start getting my necro ready to run MoP, cuz I dont have a dervish.

Midget Minionmaster · Feb 20, 2011, 11:20 PM // 23:20

I've ran both builds, and i would say that they are tied. I like running Vos better, but either one doesnt matter. I dont see 100b war being run out of Fowsc any time soon.

ErrantVenture · Feb 21, 2011, 03:39 AM // 03:39

LOD has stopped running two 100b wars as a single dervish can do the job of both. PUGs might handle HB better but for experienced players the dervish is far superior.

Life Bringing · Feb 21, 2011, 03:39 AM // 03:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErrantVenture

LOD has stopped running two 100b wars as a single dervish can do the job of both. PUGs might handle HB better but for experienced players the dervish is far superior.

Actually you've never needed 2 100b warriors =\

Iron Smerf · Feb 21, 2011, 05:53 AM // 05:53

Quick pros/cons rundown of the 2.
100b
The good:

Cannot get stripped
Higher Armor

The Bad:

Less effective for cleanup
Less energy for "prep" skills

VOS:
The good:

Effective for cleanup (holy dmg)
Slightly more damage (sand shards)
More energy

The bad:

Enchants can get stripped
Less armor
New concept, more messups

These things are just general things. I've heard many of these complaints and excuses while pugging with each, and by personal experience. Each have there strengths. I personally find that taking one of each is the most effective way as they can support each others weaknesses.

Life Bringing · Feb 21, 2011, 07:05 AM // 07:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron Smerf

Quick pros/cons rundown of the 2.
100b
The good:

Cannot get stripped
Higher Armor

The Bad:

Less effective for cleanup
Less energy for "prep" skills

VOS:
The good:

Effective for cleanup (holy dmg)
Slightly more damage (sand shards)
More energy

The bad:

Enchants can get stripped
Less armor
New concept, more messups

These things are just general things. I've heard many of these complaints and excuses while pugging with each, and by personal experience. Each have there strengths. I personally find that taking one of each is the most effective way as they can support each others weaknesses.

VoS has terrible energy management

tipiak · Feb 21, 2011, 10:49 AM // 10:49

Life, with puggies you need two 100b

I've run a bit with and without D PUGs, and the D never had the same builds. It was pretty good overall. But when a spike fails, D take more damage and it can be tricky when they spamming like hell with SS/Empathy/100b on their faces.

Sydis · Feb 22, 2011, 12:22 AM // 00:22

I've played both, I prefer using the Dervish more. They do a bit more dmg, and there is no lag when you spike like there is with a war.

Like everything Pug at your own risk, but for ally/guild Dervs should probably be preferred

Shanks R Us · Feb 23, 2011, 04:05 AM // 04:05

I think the dervish is better, if you're using the right build. Conviction makes the forest cake, holy dmg makes undead easily, sand shards & ermites makes mobs fall, it's just overall better.

Gondrakif · Feb 24, 2011, 10:26 PM // 22:26

I have done both and i think VoS is a bit better, that been said the difference is quite small so if i need a spiker i won't say no to a 100b.

@Life Bringing: no energy issues whatsoever

Kaida the Heartless · Feb 28, 2011, 12:19 AM // 00:19

As long as you are running a Zealous Scythe you shouldn't have any issues (that the Warrior wouldn't be having anyways). If you are second late on the spike with either, you are going to be pressed for energy.

thetwistedboy · Feb 28, 2011, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shanks R Us

sand shards & ermites makes mobs fall

Um, FYI, elemental damage does nothing in HM, so goodbye sand shards being useful. and whirlwind attack does more damage than eremites.

All in all, the 100b and the VoS are equal in spiking ability, its MoP that kills the mobs anyway. I think that the 100b is a bit faster at spiking though because in case the derv forgets, he needs to use extend enchantments, VoS, and air of superiority. I honestly have no preference to either, they are about the same. derv has more dmg with constant 100b, warrior has more defense with a shield

Kunder · Feb 28, 2011, 12:37 AM // 00:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by thetwistedboy

Um, FYI, elemental damage does nothing in HM, so goodbye sand shards being useful. and whirlwind attack does more damage than eremites.

1. Elemental damage has nothing to do with it, its armor-ignoring vs armor-respecting damage that matters.

2. Sand shards does such huge damage that even after armor reduction its pretty respectable. Even against 100 armor foes its a good 150 damage nuke. Your average caster is at 80-ish armor, and most warriors are around 105-110ish. It would suck if you were an ele who took 2s to cast it, but its a free insta-cast damage enchant that only adds to what you are doing. That makes it good.

The difference between Whirlwind and Eremites is basically not there. You don't use either for their + damage, you use them for the attacking all enemies feature. If Whirlwind did +0 damage you would hardly notice the difference. You don't see many enemies living with 3 health left because your Eremites didnt have the extra damage, you see them with half their health left because they weren't hit with the full damage of your attack.

loshon · Mar 02, 2011, 03:45 AM // 03:45

100b still seems a bit better for pug/pubs in my opinion, just because of the really low spike time when done correctly.

But, as previously stated, they're just about equal. 1 of either will do fine.

Little Wibblets · Mar 03, 2011, 03:18 AM // 03:18

I'm curious if anyones tested using a Warrior Axe build. The main skills would be Triple Chop, Cyclone Axe, and then Whirlwind Attack. These are three attack all adjacent skills you could chain. After the first two you should have enough adrenaline for Whirlwind.

As others stated earlier the main damage is not the attacks themselves but the attack of attacking all adjacent foes.

I was wonder what others think or is having multiple "attack all adjacent" skills just overkill and not good for clean up.

Life Bringing · Mar 03, 2011, 03:37 AM // 03:37

VoS and 100b both trigger MoP (1+mobsize) times. Those three skills that you mentioned trigger it a total of 3 times.

Little Wibblets · Mar 03, 2011, 04:01 AM // 04:01

1+MOB Size times?

MOP is only on the one target, correct? Doesn't 1+Mob size mean that MOP would have to be on all the targets in the group?

Life Bringing · Mar 03, 2011, 04:21 AM // 04:21

No...100b and VoS both deal their physical damage per foe hit. If you hit 2 foes, the aoe damage from those skills triggers twice. If you hit 10 foes, the aoe triggers 10 times and so on. With triple chop, there is no additional damage packets, so the MoP target is only hit by physical damage once.

thetwistedboy · Mar 03, 2011, 05:48 AM // 05:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kunder

1. Elemental damage has nothing to do with it, its armor-ignoring vs armor-respecting damage that matters.

2. Sand shards does such huge damage that even after armor reduction its pretty respectable. Even against 100 armor foes its a good 150 damage nuke. Your average caster is at 80-ish armor, and most warriors are around 105-110ish. It would suck if you were an ele who took 2s to cast it, but its a free insta-cast damage enchant that only adds to what you are doing. That makes it good.

The difference between Whirlwind and Eremites is basically not there. You don't use either for their + damage, you use them for the attacking all enemies feature. If Whirlwind did +0 damage you would hardly notice the difference. You don't see many enemies living with 3 health left because your Eremites didnt have the extra damage, you see them with half their health left because they weren't hit with the full damage of your attack.

I am aware that the damage of ww attack and eremites does not matter, but the person who was trying to argue that VoS was better decided to say that it mattered. And if you don't use eremites and ww attack for their plus damage, then what is sand shards there for? a measely 150 extra damage on a full spike is nothing. 100b warriors did without it, so why should it be taken on a VoS? MoP is what does most of the damage on a spike anyway. and don't even try to tell me that sand shards is good on the smaller mobs. it isnt. the damage is basically non existant there.

Elemental damage is armor respecting damage. with exception to a few skills such as ancestor's rage. So it is relevant.

Kunder · Mar 03, 2011, 06:04 AM // 06:04

How is Sand Shards not useful for smaller mobs? Its still 150 AoE, which turns into 300 AoE if you are using it right. Thats 300 AoE whenever mob size is less then that required for MoP to insta-kill things but still greater then 3 or 4.

Quote:

Elemental damage is armor respecting damage. with exception to a few skills such as ancestor's rage. So it is relevant.

So say that its weaker because its armor respecting damage, not because its elemental damage. Is it so hard to use accurate terminology?