Curse

jdwoody · Aug 30, 2005, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Quote:

but Troll Unguent has very long cast time.

Try a whirling defense before you cast it...

ElderAtronach · Aug 30, 2005, 07:12 PM // 19:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake

Ok I can tell you're full of speculation simply because of one comment.

Rangers have 70 armor vs physical, they're just about as squishy as casters are, warriors tear through them. The only profession that has a large difference in AL vs physical as opposed to the rest are warriors.

If your warriors are attacking the rangers, doesn't that say something about their effectiveness? Reread my post. Think about it for a second. Rangers, built properly, can take down a squishy just as fast as a warrior can. Warriors get gimped by ward vs melee. Rangers don't. Get it now?

Hell Marauder · Aug 30, 2005, 07:26 PM // 19:26

There is some merit to that statement. Not using any skill, considering only base damage, a primary ranger with 14 marksmanship and 12 beastmastery can do base damage 15-28 from his bow PLUS 15-28 from his pet every 2 sec, that's 30-56, more than any primary warrior can do with weapon over 2 second period. Remember that's under assumption that no skill, primary or secondary, is used, a ranger with a pet indeed does more dps than a warrior. Of course, in reality you need to take so many other factors into account including dps from skills and secondary profession, your opponent's armor and ability to evade. That gets more complicated and no one can say for sure who does more damage.

Hell Marauder · Aug 30, 2005, 07:58 PM // 19:58

But then again, if you consider charm animal as a skill, then a pure ranger with no pet will not outdamage a pure warrior using no skill whatsoever.

Jake · Aug 30, 2005, 08:06 PM // 20:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElderAtronach

If your warriors are attacking the rangers, doesn't that say something about their effectiveness? Reread my post. Think about it for a second. Rangers, built properly, can take down a squishy just as fast as a warrior can. Warriors get gimped by ward vs melee. Rangers don't. Get it now?

I was talking to the OP.... in reference to ... "In PvP a warrior's damage only really seems to be anything special against casters, if they're fighting another warrior or even a ranger it doesn't really do much at all. In fact I'd have to say if you added up the damage my ranger did during the match it'd problably outmatch the damage of the warrior. "

neoflame · Aug 30, 2005, 09:01 PM // 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdwoody

Try a whirling defense before you cast it...

Better yet, don't run Troll Unguent in PvP.

A properly built Ranger can be quite damaging.

MSecorsky · Aug 30, 2005, 09:14 PM // 21:14

What's interesting is the hit you get when penetrating shot and a horn bow find that moment of nirvana. I've seen ele health bars drop by close to a half on a shot, plus a little condition spamming can make them rather sad.

I can also outdamage most warriors by virtue of Pin Down plus attacks before they get to me in addition to whirling defense/ throw dirt.

Of course, the IW warriors... pin down and run away, repeat. I hate IW.

derrtyboy69 · Aug 30, 2005, 09:30 PM // 21:30

as a warrior my entire guild wars life, i can tell u a good axe warrior can do ALOT of damage. i cant tell u how many times ive killed an ele, then turned around and plague touched a sword warrior attacking me, then killed him to. plague touch is my favorite skill in the entire game, and against another warrior or ranger, it can turn a bad situation into a great one :0

ElderAtronach · Aug 30, 2005, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Jake: you should include a quote, otherwise people will assume you're responding to the post directly above yours (which was mine). At least you quoted me the 2nd time.

derrty: it's a valid point, I hate when I throw dirt on a W/N (not looking at his secondary), then he plague touches it back to me. Damn W/Ns. lol

smurfhunter · Aug 31, 2005, 12:09 AM // 00:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElderAtronach

If your warriors are attacking the rangers, doesn't that say something about their effectiveness? Reread my post. Think about it for a second. Rangers, built properly, can take down a squishy just as fast as a warrior can. Warriors get gimped by ward vs melee. Rangers don't. Get it now?

you cant really smite on a ranger. anyway thats the only reason i would even use a warrior, to smite on it. otherwise warriors are way too easily countered by shadow of fear/blind/ward/and just running away making them chase.

The Red Griffin · Aug 31, 2005, 01:29 AM // 01:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by smurfhunter

you cant really smite on a ranger. anyway thats the only reason i would even use a warrior, to smite on it. otherwise warriors are way too easily countered by shadow of fear/blind/ward/and just running away making them chase.

The only problem I see with your logic is blind hits rangers too. Strafing hits rangers as well, as was brought up earlier. I laugh when an arrow is shot at me as I just strafe around it. Sure degen and cripple hurt a warrior, but they also hurt a ranger as well. Rangers are not invincible, no class is. I have yet to see a ranger who could take as much damage as a warrior, and still clean house a group of melee monsters. Rangers, one on one, can match a warrior, one on two, and maybe even one on three. But any more than that and the ranger is pressing his luck. A warrior, on the other hand, can hold his own and can still come out on top, depending on the build.

But still, its all dependent on the build of the warrior or ranger. No class was made to be better than another, and Anet just reinforced that with the new skill balancing.

smurfhunter · Aug 31, 2005, 01:31 AM // 01:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Red Griffin

The only problem I see with your logic is blind hits rangers too. Strafing hits rangers as well, as was brought up earlier. I laugh when an arrow is shot at me as I just strafe around it. Sure degen and cripple hurt a warrior, but they also hurt a ranger as well. Rangers are not invincible, no class is. I have yet to see a ranger who could take as much damage as a warrior, and still clean house a group of melee monsters. Rangers, one on one, can match a warrior, one on two, and maybe even one on three. But any more than that and the ranger is pressing his luck. A warrior, on the other hand, can hold his own and can still come out on top, depending on the build.

But still, its all dependent on the build of the warrior or ranger. No class was made to be better than another, and Anet just reinforced that with the new skill balancing.

aaah maybe i confused you but i was arguing on the warrior side

and as far as i see it they both dont do much

thats why theyre number 8 on the priority list, with us emos and prot monks getting battered first

The Red Griffin · Aug 31, 2005, 01:34 AM // 01:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by smurfhunter

aaah maybe i confused you but i was arguing on the warrior side

and as far as i see it they both dont do much

thats why theyre number 8 on the priority list, with us emos and prot monks getting battered first

sorry, my bad. Damn ADD and all. Don't get me wrong, you usually can ignore the warriors untill last. But I make casters regret it. Mm...casters taste yummy. Any good warrior cannot be ignored for more than 5 seconds or so. Otherwise, disasterous things might happen.

smurfhunter · Aug 31, 2005, 01:37 AM // 01:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Red Griffin

sorry, my bad. Damn ADD and all. Don't get me wrong, you usually can ignore the warriors untill last. But I make casters regret it. Mm...casters taste yummy. Any good warrior cannot be ignored for more than 5 seconds or so. Otherwise, disasterous things might happen.

yeap thats the big problem, you gotta be able to take out both

see how much more strategy there is now that NR and spirit spam is dead?

SCOTTYBONES · Aug 31, 2005, 02:59 AM // 02:59

I have played both rangers and warriors. Both classes can deal a great amount of damage if played correctly! I specialized in rangers (r/- ,r/e, and r/mo ) but decided to try a warrior build. My w/n with axe mastery of 16 puts up massive damage in PvP using eviscerate and executioners strike. And yeah I can be counterred, but thats why I play with competent teams mates....so they can save my arse in those unique situations.

Bones

The Red Knight · Aug 31, 2005, 04:03 AM // 04:03

I fail to see how a 16 axe warrior will be out damaged by a ranger maybe out DoTed but 100+ eviscerate is a dead target what ever it is

Jake · Aug 31, 2005, 04:06 AM // 04:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by smurfhunter

aaah maybe i confused you but i was arguing on the warrior side

and as far as i see it they both dont do much

thats why theyre number 8 on the priority list, with us emos and prot monks getting battered first

They're #8 on the priority list because you're attacking a target that can absorb a boatload more damage while being healed/protted by that ignored monk... perfect situation both ways. It's not because warriors and rangers are worthless and non-threatening.

smurfhunter · Aug 31, 2005, 04:10 AM // 04:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake

They're #8 on the priority list because you're attacking a target that can absorb a boatload more damage while being healed/protted by that ignored monk... perfect situation both ways. It's not because warriors and rangers are worthless and non-threatening.

i beg to differ, a warrior by himself never killed a monk in 1-1. warriors are there to maintain pressure on the monk and to distract heals, while the eles do the damage. well at least as far as i see it.

Vermilion Okeanos · Aug 31, 2005, 04:32 AM // 04:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by smurfhunter

i beg to differ, a warrior by himself never killed a monk in 1-1. warriors are there to maintain pressure on the monk and to distract heals, while the eles do the damage. well at least as far as i see it.

A decent hammer warrior with chain knock down can solo a decent monk... then again, it depend on the build.

UberRusty · Aug 31, 2005, 04:37 AM // 04:37

Quote:

i beg to differ, a warrior by himself never killed a monk in 1-1. warriors are there to maintain pressure on the monk and to distract heals, while the eles do the damage. well at least as far as i see it.

I beg to differ, a Warrior by himself HAS killed a Monk in 1 v 1. Even if you aren't a Hammer Warrior, sooner or later you run out of energy against Warrior's output damage. (Unless you're an invinci-Monk, or that Warrior is really crap.)