Curse

Rustjive · Apr 03, 2006, 11:41 AM // 11:41

Part of it is due to recent skill changes - notably in the behavior of Bull's Charge and Bull's Strike. Paired with Stoneskin Gauntlets (and why not?), these two skills give Axe and Sword the knockdown factor as well. When knockdown isn't exclusive to just that weapon, the value of that weapon goes down quite a bit.

Vermilion Okeanos · Apr 03, 2006, 12:28 PM // 12:28

Why do I feel the minimum and maximum damage are being ignore in all these?

Axe has 6-28 damage range. That means you going to need to rely heavily on your critical hit. That max damage are the best weapon of axe during the chase. If a target don't move, the axe damage are cut heavily by luck (20% of critical). While axe can not compete with hammer on a kiting target, as each hit of hammer crit is higher than axe crit. Not only that, in a kiting situation, IAS do not help you at all if the target is not slow down in any way. That means 1 hit per chance, and you want the 1 hit to do as much as possible. (slow moving target > non-moving target, when one use an axe)

Back to non-moving target. An axe's IAS also increase their chances to do critical by providing more hits per sec. A hammer on the other hand, easily reach and go beyound what axe's max damage can go. The difference of attack speed between the two are some where around .2-.3 sec. Hammer also recieve more benefit from all the modifier that use %, such as strength's amor penetration and the customize %.

All this are thought out without any inclusion of attack skills. While attack skill is the biggest point of choosing the weapon, the rest is up to you guys with the above point in mind.

Also, the faster a spike goes; the better a spike it is. That is what spike is. No room for warning.

glountz · Apr 03, 2006, 01:09 PM // 13:09

You're right, but that's where the "Charge" Sword warrior is so crucial in any team. It allows your warrs to be in IAS while running faster. Add to that a Bull's Charge Axe warr and a Backbreaker Hammer warr, and this trio is a severe pain in anyone's ass. Not to mention that if the Charge sword guy use Harmstring (but it is really costy) then Sever artery to cover it, it becomes seriously difficult for a target to escape the squadron.

JR · Apr 03, 2006, 02:49 PM // 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by glountz

Add to that a Bull's Charge Axe warr and a Backbreaker Hammer warr, and this trio is a severe pain in anyone's ass.

Holy lycra shorts Batman, no Eviscerate?

Kyune · Apr 03, 2006, 02:52 PM // 14:52

Hmm...I'd argue there's also consideration of skills that have effects if they're blocked/evaded--Swords get the worst end of this, only being able to cause cause bleeding on an evade with seeking blade.

Axe, however, goes straight to deep wound on a blocked swift chop, and hammers have irresistible blow (which generally leads to crushing). There is also the strength-based Griffon's Sweep which KDs on an evade, rather than a block. I'd guess that the lesser quantity of evade keeps it from being more widely used, though.

glountz · Apr 03, 2006, 03:00 PM // 15:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR-

Holy lycra shorts Batman, no Eviscerate?

Not with hammer's Crushing blow and synchro warrior spike. I mean, if you synchro your adrenal spike, Crushing+Eviscerate is just redundant as DW is applied too closely each other.
But I agree that if crushing miss for a reason or another, or if DW is removed, it can be problematic.
Unless you want to apply DW at two different times and don't want to make synchro adrenal spikes, but rather apply a lot more pressure, Evisc is better. Note that we don't run Bull's Charge if our build has a Crippling shot ranger (or any other snare guy, like a water ele) and prefer an Eviscerate guy.
What do you run as warr squad?

Greedy Gus · Apr 03, 2006, 03:21 PM // 15:21

JR was referring to the fact that axe warriors are good because of eviscerate. If you're using an elite on something else, you're better off using a sword so you can still run top notch attack skills.

JR · Apr 03, 2006, 03:27 PM // 15:27

We tend not to run three warrior builds at the moment. However, were we to do so, I would probably look at doing something like this:

Sword
Warrior/Elementalist

Strength: 9 (8+1)
Swordsmanship: 16 (12+4)
Tactics: 11 (10+1)

Healing Signet (Tactics)
Frenzy (Warrior other)
Sever Artery (Swordsmanship)
Gash (Swordsmanship)
Final Thrust (Swordsmanship)
"Charge!" (Tactics)
Rush (Strength)
Resurrection Signet ()

Hammer
Warrior/Monk

Strength: 9 (8+1)
Tactics: 11 (10+1)
Hammer Mastery: 16 (12+4)

Healing Signet (Tactics)
"To The Limit!" (Tactics)
Frenzy (Warrior other)
Earth Shaker [Elite] (Hammer Mastery)
Irresistible Blow (Hammer Mastery)
Hammer Bash (Hammer Mastery)
Rush (Strength)
Resurrection Signet ()

Axe
Warrior/Elementalist

Strength: 9 (8+1)
Axe Mastery: 16 (12+4)
Tactics: 11 (10+1)

Healing Signet (Tactics)
Distracting Blow (Warrior other)
Frenzy (Warrior other)
Eviscerate [Elite] (Axe Mastery)
Executioner's Strike (Axe Mastery)
Shock (Air Magic)
Rush (Strength)
Resurrection Signet ()

Shock being a much more unconditional and effective snare than Bull's Strike/Charge. Everyone went nuts for those two skills after they were buffed, but they still aren't amazing. Also the Shock will help you mess up caster spike which is becoming increasingly popular these days, where Bull's Strike or Bull's Charge wont. I would very much like to have Shock on the Sword warrior aswell, but sadly that character suffers from a lack of free slots. I am almost temtped to drop Rush for Shock on him, but I feel that decent teams will punish you for not having a cancel stance.

Heal Sigs because they allow your warriors a lot more flexibility, and will take some of the pressure off the monks. Rush over Sprint because all of them are fairly energy intensive characters, and it allows a longer run duration which can be usefull.

Byron · Apr 03, 2006, 03:53 PM // 15:53

I'm glad to see this thread take off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eet GnomeSmasher

Just curious...why would an attack speed adjustment be a bad thing here?

Mainly because the DPS would be increased even further. As Ensign's stats have told us, hammers already have the highest DPS on a standard swing. Bringing it down to 1.6 standard cooldown, as Rey Lentless has suggested, would mean that the DPS gap would widen even more. Personally, I think the spike capability should be left to axes. Its using the strengths of each weapon in unison that makes the best team. If all weapons were made even across the board, it wouldn't be a very interesting game.

Quote:

But buffing up hammer skills will work fine too....

I think its the only viable option, for balance's sake.

Quote:

And yes it's still a poor argument to say that it doesnt need improvement because the top guilds use them.

I think iB and EvIL would still be on top if they ran two swords or two axes. That factor, IMHO, is more a matter of player skill than the superiority of hammers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Die in Basra

Hammers do less dps because they can knockdown. That's what they're meant to do.

I think that was their intention, yes, but with gale, shock, and bull's strike, that isn't a good enough reason.

Quote:

iB got to #1 with a hammer. If it was really the case that hammers are subpar, they wouldn't be useing them.

All 2-warrior teams have a hammer warrior(or should) in the lineup. KD->Crushing used in tandum with Eviscerate->Executioner's or Gash->Final Thrust makes for a deadly spike. iB has defintely perfected that factor, and abuses KD with a bull's strike warrior and a hammer most often on the team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

Run the numbers, backbreaker + crushing blow is almost the exact same damage as eviscerate + executioners.

You're right so far as total damage is concerned. But Eviscerate->Executioner's hits in about half the time of Backbreaker->crushing blow, and takes two more strikes of adrenaline to achieve.

Quote:

Calling hammer the unconditional worst spike weapon? I'm not gonna listen to that shit. It's all about perspective.

Agreed. As stated in my post about two-warrior guilds above.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glountz

As soon as Backbreaker is charged, launch frenzy and use Backbreaker-Crushing-even Mighty if you want. You'll see you won't do better with an axe.

Unless you use frenzy on that Axe warrior, and KD the target for two seconds with shock beforehand. The quickness of that axe combo can't be overlooked, IMO.

Oh, I see Rey has already mentioned that. Good show.

Quote:

Not with hammer's Crushing blow and synchro warrior spike. I mean, if you synchro your adrenal spike, Crushing+Eviscerate is just redundant as DW is applied too closely each other.

That's all well and good if your two warriors are constantly on the same target. Rarely does an 8v8 team have that ability, and I think JR- had that in mind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vermilion Okeanos

Axe has 6-28 damage range. That means you going to need to rely heavily on your critical hit. That max damage are the best weapon of axe during the chase. If a target don't move, the axe damage are cut heavily by luck (20% of critical).

Agree entirely. Axe is always a gamble and I consider that factor to be its chief weakness. Its possible for Eviscerate to land for 200+ damage with the focused deep wound, but its also possible for an axe swing to hit a monk for a negligable 7 damage.

Keep those posts coming, eh?

**EDIT: fixed the math and rhetoric of the first paragraph.

glountz · Apr 03, 2006, 03:56 PM // 15:56

EDIT: this is an answer to JR's post.

Well, I'm surprised how it is a simple build, with more self-efficient characters rather than complementary ones.
When we run warr trios, we tend not to add and use multiples copies of skills. For example, we think that Charge + Bull's Charge + Harmstring on different characters is complementary enough not to have multiple rush, or multiple DW applications (Evisc+Gash) or multiple Healing signets (-40 armor seriously is pain) for example...
But finally we're surely wrong... Gah.

JR · Apr 03, 2006, 04:22 PM // 16:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by glountz

EDIT: this is an answer to JR's post.

Well, I'm surprised how it is a simple build, with more self-efficient characters rather than complementary ones.
When we run warr trios, we tend not to add and use multiples copies of skills. For example, we think that Charge + Bull's Charge + Harmstring on different characters is complementary enough not to have multiple rush, or multiple DW applications (Evisc+Gash) or multiple Healing signets (-40 armor seriously is pain) for example...
But finally we're surely wrong... Gah.

The problem with that, is that you are assuming your warriors will always be together. As Byron also pointed out, it is fairly common in my experience for them to split on targets just to apply pressure. With two warriors, I would probably have them both adren spiking the same target. With three warriors I don't think that is the most practical use. Not to mention it can be a bit awkward for anything but the most coordinated warriors to all hit a target at the same time without getting in each others way some of the time.

It may be down to my style of play, but I prefer characters with the ability to be much more flexible. If you put together a set of characters that all have perfectly synergized roles, they are a lot weaker when you have to differ from your desired plan. And that happens far too often. Not that a build shouldn't be designed with how the characters interact in mind, but there is a limit to how realistic that is.

Greedy Gus · Apr 03, 2006, 04:58 PM // 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

You're right so far as total damage is concerned. But Eviscerate->Executioner's hits in about half the time of Backbreaker->crushing blow

No it doesn't. That would only be the case if the axe war was frenzied and the hammer wasn't, which would be a rather ridiculous comparison.

Neo-LD · Apr 03, 2006, 05:00 PM // 17:00

JR, would you still you use that deep-wound-less hammer warrior in a 2 warrior setting, where there is less chance of getting deep wound from another war? No crushing blow seems... blasphemous.

Greedy Gus · Apr 03, 2006, 05:08 PM // 17:08

By the way, I actually never looked very hard at the upcoming factions skills. Now that I have, I've changed my tune. Hammers got a few really nice skills (axe and sword got none that will see competitive play IMO), notably forceful & fierce blow. If these skills remain unchanged when GW:F comes out, you can bet your ass I'm running hammer wars in my builds with forceful -> crushing -> fierce -> irresistable/protectors spikes. You're talking about 430-470 average damage on a 500HP caster, with high frequency. (3 hits between spikes and you're charged again). To give an idea, if all 4 hits were critical (just for perspective's sake), it would be a 597 spike or 553 if using protectors over irresistable.

SaintGreg · Apr 03, 2006, 05:41 PM // 17:41

Greedy Gus, according to http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Forceful_Blow forceful blow is if it is evaded you get knocked down, not your target. No crushing blow.

Although there really isn't any reason to use mighty blow anymore in devestating hammer spikes as fierce blow does more damage for less adrenaline (although devestating is 7 adrenaline so big deal).

Byron · Apr 03, 2006, 05:57 PM // 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

No it doesn't. That would only be the case if the axe war was frenzied and the hammer wasn't, which would be a rather ridiculous comparison.

So maybe I over-emphasized. I don't have the math in front of me, but I've played enough warrior to know that a frenzied Eviscerate->Executioners rarely gets an RoF or guardian in between attacks, but a frenzied KD->Crushing sometimes does. The other big advantage is that Executioner's, when followed by Eviscerate, delivers big damage and fouses the deep wound in one hit. Crushing blow requires another hit afterwards to do that, a problem that Paladin and [Te] have solved by packing Protector's strike with its 1/2 second attack time. Delivered after crushing blow, protectors strike hits quickly, and thus, quickly focuses that deep wound, greatly reducing the chance of heals and/or prots.

Quote:

If these skills remain unchanged when GW:F comes out, you can bet your ass I'm running hammer wars in my builds with forceful -> crushing -> fierce -> irresistable/protectors spikes.

I think we're all getting on that train, but I also think you wanted heavy blow instead of fierce, in this chain: forceful-> heavy->crushing->protectors. More effective that way IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo-LD

No crushing blow seems... blasphemous.

Gotta agree with him there, JR-. If you aren't happy with the protector's strike argument, and are focused on having only 3 attack skills, I'd go Devestating->Crushing->Irresistable. Otherwise, I'd take out the signet, put that 11 in strength (despite the break for "To the Limit!"), and go Backbreaker->Crushing->Irresistable->protector's(for a spike build), as those 4 attacks seem to be the new favorite of American <20 guilds. Or go devestating->crushing->heavy->irresistable for a 1-warrior build. I'm not a fan of having hammer bash on the bar unless your going for a KD chain, since it will drain all of your built-up backbreaker or earth shaker adrenaline.

Speaking of earth-shaker, anyone ever try an Earth-shaker/Aftershock build? I encountered one in HA and it was pretty cool, if only moderately effective. Combined with some e-surge, it could be deadly against ward-based teams.

Rey Lentless · Apr 03, 2006, 06:54 PM // 18:54

Quote:

Mainly because the DPS would be ridiculous when in an IAS stance like Frenzy or Tiger's Fury. Bringing it down to 1.6 standard cooldown, as Rey Lentless has suggested, would mean that frenzy would bring hammer attacks to about 1.1 seconds per hit, instead of the roughly 1.4 that it stands at now.

I think you're unaware of what the current hammer speed is. It's currently 1.75, and I suggested a drop to 1.6. Under frenzy, the speed would be 1.17 & 1.07 respectively. It's a 9% difference, not a 27% difference like you think it is based on your math.

Quote:

Or more relevant, 3 hammer skills vs. 3 axe skills due to skill slots

No, it isn't more relevant. The hammer spike's significantly slower, and I'm afraid that matters. You're talking more about dps, and in that case you have to measure the frequency in which you can use your skills, which again.. favors axes. I don't see a relevant point here.

JR · Apr 03, 2006, 08:32 PM // 20:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo-LD

JR, would you still you use that deep-wound-less hammer warrior in a 2 warrior setting, where there is less chance of getting deep wound from another war? No crushing blow seems... blasphemous.

With two warriors I would take crushing. With three, two of which having deep wound, I like Irresistible enough to sub it in. I tend to find running both Crushing and Irresistible energy intensive enough for it to be counter productive.

DieInBasra · Apr 03, 2006, 08:40 PM // 20:40

Quote:

*sighs* Again NO ONE is saying Hammers are useless. I prefer to use one myself actually...even knowing that I could do a lot more damage with axes. And yes it's still a poor argument to say that it doesnt need improvement because the top guilds use them.

So you're saying that it's balanced (against axes and swords) that hammers do less overall damage and have less defense (lack of shield and it's mods), less benefits from certain mods (zealous mod) to do knockdowns that take forever to charge up or drain all my adenaline?

If by "certain mods" you mean one, and by "forever" you mean 4 seconds(2.5 under frenzy) longer, and that they drain all your adren so you can't chain three together, then yeah, I do think it's balanced.

But if you still use one even though it does less dps, doesn't that mean you think it's balanced too?

Don't try confuse this with the elemtalist issue, though.
FACT #1: Warriors are there soley for damage
#2 They have three options for doing damage
#3 All three of those options are used just as often as the next, so there is balance

You'll never see an elementalist take the place of a warrior when you need damage. You will see a hammer take the place of an axe or sword if you need damage. A elementalist trying to push out dps is useless, a Warrior can do it three ways, and all are used.

I can see where ray is comeing from, ward of stability might change things, but everything is in balance right now. WoS might prompt more people to bring distracting blow or put interupts on rangers/mesmers, but people get around WvM, so I don't think this will be too much differant.

Seef II · Apr 03, 2006, 08:45 PM // 20:45

With the Factions skills, a 3 skill chain is probably

Backbreaker --> Crushing --> Irresistible
Backbreaker --> Crushing --> Protector's
Devastating --> Crushing --> Forceful

Yeah... one skill change. Most of what I'm not liking about the factions skills either require weakness to work optimally, pinning you to one elite lest you run the terrible Staggering Blow, or they just aren't good in PvP (Yeti Smash/Renewing). Forceful doesn't knock down, so you're stuck with Heavy Blow, which itself has issues. Forceful's like a hammer version of Cleave that can even knock yourself down if evaded (Distortion, anyone?). No thanks.

A 4 skill chain, which is probably more of an arena or HA build, can run a lot more. The second KD is nice in arenas, prot strike can be fit in easier, or you can even run auspicious blow.

Currently, the only gripes I have with hammer are the numbers on Mighty Blow and Staggering Blow. Factions is changing it all. Axe users can consider Furious Axe over Executioner's or Penetrating since it's only 5 damage and the extra adrenaline if the spike target gets protted in time helps recharge the spike faster. Lacerating punishes knockdowned targets but probably won't get run, but it's a nice followup to Bull's Strike/Shock.
Swords still have Final Thrust, and if they want it, DPS skills that don't depend on a condition. Hammer? No new knockdowns, PvE skills, and uh, more weakness.