Curse

Arreghon · Nov 09, 2005, 11:59 PM // 23:59

Hi, I currently have a lvl 20 war/ele and was curious to know from peoples experience is the best or one of the better options for hammers. The hammers are max damage req. 8 and +15% above 50.

Hafts consist of...

Vampiric (5/1 Life Steal)
Sundering (10/10 Armor Penetration)
Furious (10% to double adrenaline)
Or any type of elemental damage (which?)

Grips I am trying to decide deciding on situations..
Fortitude (+30 health)
Defense (+5 armor)
Shelter (+7 armor vs physical)
Warding (+7 armor vs elemental)
Hammer Mastery (+1 hammer 20% chance)

My thoughts would be to have one hammer either having vamp,sund,or furious with either a +30health,+armor, or +1hammer....and also another one with one type of elemental and either health, armorm or +1 hammer.

Any information from players experience would be great thanks!

Hodor · Nov 10, 2005, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Cruel Haft. Deep wound is great, 20% of max health. Get Stone Fist gauntlets for longer knockdowns. I prefer +5 Armour to help compensate for no shield.

Man With No Name · Nov 10, 2005, 12:53 AM // 00:53

Forget about all the Hafts or Pommels with a % chance -- they're utter pants

. The conditional ones don't tend to see much use either.

Vampiric, Zealous or Elemental are the only worthy hafts for any weapon.

Generally you'd pick -- Vampiric 5/-1 on a Hammer. 4 hits 20 more damage ( through Life Steal ) -- not to be laughed at.

Unless you want to go W/E with Conjure [Element] -- which would require you to use a haft of that Elemental type.

As for Pommels,

+30 Health
+5 Armour and
+20% Longer Enchantments

Are accepted to be the most useful.

I usually opt for the +30 Health since Warriors already have a high Armour Level.

+5 Armour can have both a positive and negative effect depending on what your fighting, for example:

Against certain Elementalists more Armour is actually worse due to the "25% Armour Penetration OR Ignores Armour" effect on some spells. Same goes for opponents that use Health Degeneration.

Vice Versa for attacks that do hit your armour -- Physical attacks ( Arrows, Axes, etc ), Fire / Water spells, Wanding :P

NatalieD · Nov 10, 2005, 12:57 AM // 00:57

I'd go with Vampiric and +5 armor, unless you're using enchantments that could benefit from the increased duration.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Man With No Name

+5 Armour can have both a positive and negative effect depending on what your fighting, for example:

Against Elementalists more Armour is actually worse due to the "25% Armour Penetration OR Ignores Armour" effect on some spells. Same goes for opponents that use Health Degeneration.

Vice Versa for attacks that do hit your armour -- Physical attacks ( Arrows, Axes, etc ), Fire / Water spells, Wanding :P

Wait, do you just mean that +armor is worse than +health against armor-ignoring damage, or that it's worse than not having anything? 'Cuz the former makes sense, but...

Man With No Name · Nov 10, 2005, 01:01 AM // 01:01

The former.

Even taking a +5 Armour will be more beneficial than not using any Pommel at all -- even if it won't help in that particular fight. But eventually you'll fight a team that will rely on attacks that hit armour -- then the +5 will be better than the +30 Health.

I just tend to get hit with Life Sapping Hexes, Holy Damage, Chaos Damage, Shadow Damage, Air Spikes and Obsidian Flames/Crystal Waves -- all of which ignore armour totally or partially

. +30 Health works best against all that.

A-Net need to let PvP characters carry 4 Weapons -- like PvE characters. Then I could have every base covered...

Farin · Nov 10, 2005, 01:47 AM // 01:47

I use +30 Hp on warriors, many times they die to degen. I'd go with a 5/-1 Vampiric and +30Hp.