Curse

Dzan · Jun 14, 2006, 07:25 PM // 19:25

IMO, any warrior build without a deep wound is trash, except in extremely specialized builds. If your warrior chain doesn't include a deep wound, you need to go back to the drawing board.

Thom · Jun 14, 2006, 07:50 PM // 19:50

Forceful-fierce-irresistable is some mean DPS. IMO, the beauty of a dps hammer warrior is Irresistable Blow in the current meta-game. The nice thing about Enraged-Irresistable is that you have 3 adren slots which can contain a utility knockdown or a deep wound combo. I personally think that deep wound should remain an axe duty, since they do it most efficiently.

What is the point of running 3 warriors all built to inflict deep wound? Is there some sort of stacking here that I'm not aware of? If one misses, you may want to back it up, but realize when it doesn't miss you are using a gimp attack. Now I'll admit to running some specialized warriors, but blanket statements aren't all that smart.

Symbol · Jun 14, 2006, 08:33 PM // 20:33

I also think the argument for deep wound becomes much less compelling once you get beyond two warriors. The "OMGZ. MUST HAVE DW" argument is a bit of dogma that needs to be questioned at times.

Quote:

he nice thing about Enraged-Irresistable is that you have 3 adren slots which can contain a utility knockdown or a deep wound combo.

Seems more like a drawback to me. If you actually use these slots with any great frequency you're losing out on a great deal of enraged damage-which was the reason for taking it in the first place no?

Byron · Jun 15, 2006, 05:13 AM // 05:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

I have a hard time thinking about Hammer dps without thinking about Enraged/Irresistable cycle.

Enraged seems like a poor option IMO, considering you need fully charged adrenaline skills to bring in its effect. Typically, if my adrenaline is full, I'll be using it, not storing it to buff one attack. Not to mention it takes the very coveted hammer elite spot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR-

If DPS is all you are after, I would be more tempted to look at Forcefull - Fierce - Irresistible

This is moderately interesting in a pressure build. Used in tandum with a adrenaline gain skill (eg = To the limit, perhaps even FGJ) and a snare, ideally bull's strike, it could be a very effective damage pressure warrior. Having three attacks that often land for over 100 damage, and can be used often, is big power indeed.

As for the deep wound argument - If you're running 3 or more warriors, you're probably going for damage pressure. 3 deep wounds would add to the pressure, IMO, when there are 3 different targets. However, if there is a need to spike, redundant deep wound would be a mild inefficiency. I would take deep wound on all 3 warriors, however, since a 2-warrior spike can kill even with redundant deep wounds. Relying on one guy to put on the deep wound is a bad idea, which we established in another thread: Page 13, Hammer Warriors - Worth it?

Thom · Jun 15, 2006, 10:28 AM // 10:28

Byron, using Enraged means you have to build slightly differently. Instead of 3-4 spammables you have 2 and instead of 3-4 utility skills you have 5 (3 of which are adren). I really can't "prove" that Enraged makes for good DPS, but it definitely "feels" efficient in practice. The point is that Enraged isn't typical and can't be approached with typical warrior thinking.

On deep wound: As much damage as deep wound does in its application, removing deep wound is equally beneficial. You really need to cover DW to use it for pressure. This is really a matter of opportunity cost, since you will be running inherently weaker skills or less utility by working in deep wound. By the third deep wound, I would consider the cost too high. Unless you are running a conditions build, I would find 3 deep wounds extremely limiting.

Byron · Jun 16, 2006, 05:02 AM // 05:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

The point is that Enraged isn't typical and can't be approached with typical warrior thinking.

That's why I shouldn't try thinking about it anymore...