Curse

Venus · Sep 27, 2005, 07:49 PM // 19:49

I personaly prefer axes for cyclone axe.

stefan16 · Sep 27, 2005, 07:56 PM // 19:56

Theres a big diffrence:

*Sword doesnt need a high requirement to do a decent DPS with even 10 swordmanship on spellcaster
*Axes, as í'd say suck if you dont have 15/16 axe mastery when the target doesnt run

I Use axes by the way

wsmcasey · Sep 27, 2005, 07:57 PM // 19:57

I prefer swords over axes. The higher base damage on a sword means I will consistently do a decent amount of damage. I like to inflict conditions like (cripple, bleed, weaken, poison, blind) that compliment my second profession as a ranger. You may have higher damage spike pontential with an axe, but I don't think there is enough variety in skills.

Zeru · Sep 27, 2005, 08:02 PM // 20:02

To make it really simple

Eviscerate>sword line
sword line>axe line without eviscerate

If you have a free elite, go axe. If you don't, go sword. Galrath/final is powerful but not nearly as good as eviscerate/executioners but easily blows penetrating/executioners out of the water.

Swords are more energy intensive as well, which may be important depending on your other skills.

Makkert · Sep 27, 2005, 08:27 PM // 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by stefan16

Theres a big diffrence:

*Sword doesnt need a high requirement to do a decent DPS with even 10 swordmanship on spellcaster
*Axes, as í'd say suck if you dont have 15/16 axe mastery when the target doesnt run

I Use axes by the way

I fail to grasp this statement....
Can someone explain this to me?

JYX · Sep 27, 2005, 09:03 PM // 21:03

What I fail to grasp is how a wa/mo can run 2 bonds on his monks. Surely, this means he can't use frenzy/sprint. Sprint can be replaced with rush...but Frenzy?...I don't see a way out.

Chev of Hardass · Sep 27, 2005, 09:22 PM // 21:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everous

What I fail to grasp is how a wa/mo can run 2 bonds on his monks. Surely, this means he can't use frenzy/sprint. Sprint can be replaced with rush...but Frenzy?...I don't see a way out.

Berzerkers Stance. With twice the adrenaline you can spike twice as often and you have the speed boost too. Yes, you loose some DPS in your lack of speed buff, but can easily bring your in stance shield, axe/sword/hammer, and +85 armor and not worry about damage nearly as much as a warrior with a focus item and glads armor.

I am not fully sure if it an effective means yet, but I will say it is easy to forget about it in battle and leave your monks unbonded, and then it is bad tactic to use.

Edit, if you read what I was describing, you will see that I was talking about battle rage not berzerkers stance. Enough said

Cartoonhero · Sep 27, 2005, 09:24 PM // 21:24

i personally prefer the axe. i think its all a matter of play style really. i happen to love my chaos axe, but i also have a gold spatha i found that i might try out. its true that the base damage of a sword is higher than an axe, but the possible max damgae of an axe is higher than that of a sword. so its a trade-off. pick one. thats my 2cents.

Ishamael Sedai · Sep 27, 2005, 10:02 PM // 22:02

Everyone plz don't hate on the new players who enter the thread & really don't know what they are talking about. My vote is savage ---> galrath ---> final for a spike over either disrupting ---> evis ---> exec or penetrating ---> evis ---> exec. Eviscerate might be the best skill overall, but I think savage easily tops either disrupting or penetrating. The axe does have the deep wound helping the spike but at the same time this means the combo would include a rake inbetween an evis & exec giving the other team more time to heal/prot their player.

In short interrupts are ftw & an interrupt that can hit high enough (up to around 100) to be included in a spike is hard to resist.

The trouble I see with swords is honestly the dmg the rest of the time especially the loss of dmg from runners when comparing sword & axe. But this is made up some by the ability to snare early with hamstring & bring bull's charge to keep them snared. This isn't even to mention the value of bull's charge if an emo is smiting off the warrior to keep the target in the aoe. Really I am not saying much more than frog has already stated (as far as snares go on this subject) so I shall bow out of the thread making for now.

FrogDevourer · Sep 27, 2005, 10:07 PM // 22:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etaisella

yep, its settled:
I win

I can't beat that. /bow

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dont Look At My

I said everything I need to.
...
As the Sword is a bit faster then an axe

Reread my post... entirely. And if you're unsure, reread Jetdoc's latest post too. You're wrong. And it's something which has been tested months ago. Stop spreading bullshit and learn how to read.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stefan16

Theres a big diffrence:
*Sword doesnt need a high requirement to do a decent DPS with even 10 swordmanship on spellcaster
*Axes, as í'd say suck if you dont have 15/16 axe mastery when the target doesnt run
I Use axes by the way

I'm sure you can expand and give us more facts. Last time I checked this was the relevant formula, and it says you are wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ishamael Sedai

I quoted though because you mentioned the axe spike which I think the sword spike of savage galrath final is better for dropping monks. The disadvantage with sword comes with the less dmg done the rest of the time & the energy cost of hamstring vs evis & rake.

Unfortunately you rarely kill your target with final thrust. So you have to struggle to end the job. Six String mentioned the unstoppable sword skills, but I think they lack the raw punch of the axe lethal combination, their spammability, and the timing given to deep wound: just before the killing blow, that is to say when you need it most. However hamstring is unarguably the best snare available to a warrior because it's unconditional. You run and reach a target, and he's snared instantly. You can't do that with an axe.

Both weapons are very close in terms of efficiency, but unless you have a very specific utility build in mind (typically a snarer or Fear Me spammer), or unless you need your elite slot for something else, you'll get a better damage output (on the long term) and you'll save a lot of energy with adrenaline axe skills.

Yukito Kunisaki · Sep 27, 2005, 10:32 PM // 22:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrogDevourer

Tough to counter? I fail to understand why a mix of swords and axes is tougher to counter. Could you expand on this?

Ok, you've got 3 warriors with only dmg on the brain... Ok, they focus fire, or they spread out, either way, you only need to heal them...

""Uh, oh, now we have 3 DIFFERENT warriors on your team's hide...

Wait a minute, that Hammer guy is making our ele do situps...

Whoa, Savage Slasher here spamming it on our monk cause he knows how to use his energy!

Other monk / caster may be yelling, ""STOP EVISCERATE + EXE STRIKING ME!! I CAN'T HEAL IT FAST ENOUGH!!!""

3 different roles sent to the battle field means 3 different situations to defend against vs. just one.

"Ah but you can just shadow of fear them!"

Dur* they're attacking 2-3 different targets, shutting them out [yay for fear me, Savage Slash, and KD chains...]

3 warriors on one shmuck with all 3 using the same weapons is just begging to be nailed with:

Shadow of Fear
Enfeebling Blood
Chaos Storm
Suffering...

Now if they spread, that's a problem, uh oh, they're all shouting fear me! rapid fire!!!!

In short, 3 warriors doing different things should own your arse...

Schorny · Sep 27, 2005, 11:19 PM // 23:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yukito Kunisaki

Ok, you've got 3 warriors with only dmg on the brain... Ok, they focus fire, or they spread out, either way, you only need to heal them...

Sure, just heal the damage - it's the one true counter...

mhm... no, sorry. I can't understand.

Quote:

""Uh, oh, now we have 3 DIFFERENT warriors on your team's hide...

Wait a minute, that Hammer guy is making our ele do situps...

Whoa, Savage Slasher here spamming it on our monk cause he knows how to use his energy!

Other monk / caster may be yelling, ""STOP EVISCERATE + EXE STRIKING ME!! I CAN'T HEAL IT FAST ENOUGH!!!""

3 different roles sent to the battle field means 3 different situations to defend against vs. just one.

3 situations countered by the same thing: anti-warrior-skills

It doesn't matter if an axe warrior pounds on me or a hammer warrior tries to start a knockdown chain. All I do is counter it by things like aegis, guardian, soothing images,...

So really, the counter is the same

Quote:

"Ah but you can just shadow of fear them!"

Dur* they're attacking 2-3 different targets, shutting them out [yay for fear me, Savage Slash, and KD chains...]

3 warriors on one shmuck with all 3 using the same weapons is just begging to be nailed with:

Shadow of Fear
Enfeebling Blood
Chaos Storm
Suffering...

Now if they spread, that's a problem, uh oh, they're all shouting fear me! rapid fire!!!!

Oh no...

Sorry, but if they spread out, the damage is not focused (which may be fine, depending on the build) but the counters are still the same. It may be a bit more difficult to apply the hexes, but the main warrior hate: chain aegis is still devastating. And with 3 different targets you can't keep rigor mortis up.

So it is an entirely different strategy. And 3 axe warriors can also spread out.

Quote:

In short, 3 warriors doing different things should own your arse...

Sure. 3 warriors is the best offense possible. That's why you see it everywhere in tombs, right?

I really can't understand you.
3 warriors on 3 different targets and all targets get protected isn't that clever. You need to strip the enchants, otherwise you will hit about 40% of your strikes.

Sure, fear me is a great skill and a build around it can be devastating. But there is no best strategy. Everything can be countered. And 3 warriors on 3 different targets are not much harder to counter than 3 warriors on 1 target. (except that 3 warriors on 1 target may lead to body block - but that is a different story).

UberRusty · Sep 28, 2005, 05:07 AM // 05:07

Quote:

What I fail to grasp is how a wa/mo can run 2 bonds on his monks. Surely, this means he can't use frenzy/sprint. Sprint can be replaced with rush...but Frenzy?...I don't see a way out.

Battle Rage.

Ender Ward · Sep 28, 2005, 05:56 AM // 05:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by UberRusty

Battle Rage.

How is Battle Rage a replacement for Frenzy?

The reality is, when you're maintaining two enchants on your Monks as a W/Mo, you can use neither Frenzy, Tiger's Fury nor Berserker Stance (not that you'd want to, really). You have to be content with attacking at normal rates. It's a tradeoff. Two Monks that are harder to kill, or with better energy regen, versus less damage output from the one Warrior on the team.

FrogDevourer · Sep 28, 2005, 06:58 AM // 06:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yukito Kunisaki

Whoa, Savage Slasher here spamming it on our monk cause he knows how to use his energy! Other monk / caster may be yelling, ""STOP EVISCERATE + EXE STRIKING ME!! I CAN'T HEAL IT FAST ENOUGH!!!""

Sorry to sound obtuse, but I still don't understand. Hammers are obviously different from swords & axes (speed, dmg/hit, knock lock...), but why would a mix of sword+axe be tougher to counter than 100% sword or 100% axe? Both weapons have reliable interruption skills (Disrupting Chop can be spammed every 6s under an IAS stance or 10s if you miss 50% of your attacks, and Savage Slash can be spammed every 10s), both weapons are able to inflict a good constant damage output, conditions and an occasional spike. The skills you can use to disrupt boths warriors are the same. My point is that - barring the Fear Me spammer - mixing boths weapons won't increase your resilience.

Bast · Sep 28, 2005, 07:55 AM // 07:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeru

To make it really simple

Eviscerate>sword line
sword line>axe line without eviscerate

If you have a free elite, go axe. If you don't, go sword. Galrath/final is powerful but not nearly as good as eviscerate/executioners but easily blows penetrating/executioners out of the water.

Swords are more energy intensive as well, which may be important depending on your other skills.

Quoted for accuracy.

If you have to run a non-attack elite, use sword. Otherwise use axe and Eviscerate. Any axe build without Eviscerate is heavily gimped. The skill is just that good.

To reiterate and hopefully prevent more misinformation, swords and axes attack at the same speed.

ShadowStorm · Sep 28, 2005, 08:52 AM // 08:52

"Eviserate > Sword Skills > Axe Skills without Eviserate" <-- Zeru

I agree whole heartedly with this statement. My question is, why couldn't A-net have included a Sword elite that was even close to being as powerful as Eviserate is for Axe?

Exar · Sep 28, 2005, 09:42 AM // 09:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowStorm

My question is, why couldn't A-net have included a Sword elite that was even close to being as powerful as Eviserate is for Axe?

To make a difference so that guru nerds have a topic to discuss

Seriously, I guess it was to make things different. Sword can spam conditions faster which combined with some shouts can give a warrior an important supportive role in team.

With axe warrior can be a real dmg dealer. Killer.
I prefere the second way personally

chickenbutt · Sep 28, 2005, 11:44 AM // 11:44

I think axe is better for skill wise butttttttt the dmg is ehhhh......ok.

Yukito Kunisaki · Sep 28, 2005, 03:45 PM // 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by chickenbutt

I think axe is better for skill wise butttttttt the dmg is ehhhh......ok.

That doesn't make any sense at all. Let me swing at you under Frenzy with my Swift Chop, Eviscerate {E}, Exe. Strike and we'll see some "ehhhhh.... ok" damage.