Curse

MuKen · Aug 15, 2005, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwookie

What for? The people who want to use R/W will continue to. And there are good reasons to do it which have already been expressed.

If you don't like the reasons given don't use the build. That simple. All this debating to convince people on to their way of thinking is what made this thread retarded.

What for? Because some people (like me) want to know whether or not the generalizations put forth by both sides can be put into practice. This thread is only retarded if people are just arguing for the sake of arguing and not trying to discover which side is actually correct. It seems to me your post achieves only 2 things:

1) suppress an attempt at actually moving the argument in a constructive direction
2) repeat a POV that's already been stated numerous times and will only further degenerate the discussion

If you think the discussions is retarded and incapable of going anywhere, why don't you just leave instead of lashing out at people trying to make it go somewhere?

If you are correct and there are reasons to use R/W then there must be one build with R/W that does something better than any other build. If you are incorrect, then any build you post will be supercedable by some other. I'm just trying to get people to post some things of interest that haven't already been rehashed a million times in this thread.

Bast · Aug 15, 2005, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Frenzy hardly sucks. It's readily understood that Warriors (and Rangers) aren't attacked until last anyway, unless they're highly annoying or in a compromised position (overextended beyond healing range, etc.) With that established, why burn your entire secondary for Tiger's Fury when Frenzy does the exact same thing? You're not getting attacked, so the double damage clause of Frenzy is largely irrelevant. Just don't be stupid about when you use it and suddenly it's a skill with no drawback.

Furthermore, spamming energy skills, while obviously something a W/* can't do forever but an R/W can, is a nonissue at best. For the most part, the best Warrior attacks are Adrenaline based, not energy. Congratulations, you've solved a "problem" that didn't exist in the first place. On top of that, the W/* can do way more damage due to Strength and a level 16 weapon attribute (damage = win), can use Stonefist Gauntlets and Absorption Runes, and hasn't lost the secondary profession and therefore can have other skills that complement Warrior better.

Ward against Melee? The Warrior is less screwed than the R/W is. Warrior's Cunning is a Strength attribute skill, and guess what? the R/W doesn't have Strength. Owned.

That being said, the R/W probably does have a niche (aside from "appearance" builds wherein the goal is to look as much like Legolas from Lord of the Rings as possible). But generally, a W/* is far more flexible and will outdamage the R/W consistently, and by a large amount.

Ollj · Aug 15, 2005, 10:02 PM // 22:02

Ranger warrior with an axe spreads conditions like no other class.
Not more not less

there is a use for every class combo.

yes, the warrior skills sceam for superior runes, but not all of them.

ICURADik · Aug 15, 2005, 10:05 PM // 22:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bast

Frenzy hardly sucks. It's readily understood that Warriors (and Rangers) aren't attacked until last anyway, unless they're highly annoying or in a compromised position (overextended beyond healing range, etc.) With that established, why burn your entire secondary for Tiger's Fury when Frenzy does the exact same thing? You're not getting attacked, so the double damage clause of Frenzy is largely irrelevant. Just don't be stupid about when you use it and suddenly it's a skill with no drawback.

Furthermore, spamming energy skills, while obviously something a W/* can't do forever but an R/W can, is a nonissue at best. For the most part, the best Warrior attacks are Adrenaline based, not energy. Congratulations, you've solved a "problem" that didn't exist in the first place. On top of that, the W/* can do way more damage due to Strength and a level 16 weapon attribute (damage = win), can use Stonefist Gauntlets and Absorption Runes, and hasn't lost the secondary profession and therefore can have other skills that complement Warrior better.

Ward against Melee? The Warrior is less screwed than the R/W is. Warrior's Cunning is a Strength attribute skill, and guess what? the R/W doesn't have Strength. Owned.

That being said, the R/W probably does have a niche (aside from "appearance" builds wherein the goal is to look as much like Legolas from Lord of the Rings as possible). But generally, a W/* is far more flexible and will outdamage the R/W consistently, and by a large amount.

Nothing is readily understood. If someone with 40 armor is attacking me, you can be sure as hell my spike ele will know about it.

We are talking about a Hammer Warrior. And in general, the best attacks are not Adrenal based. The best attack(non-knockdown) for a Hammer warrior is by far Irresistible Blow. The only real reason to gain adrenaline with a Hammer Warrior is for knockdowns. With For Great Justice, and Tiger's Fury a R/W can gain adrenaline just as fast(and most likely faster) than any Warrior.

Didn't you already say no one ever attacks a Ranger? Wouldn't absorbtion be a non-issue... as you put it?

Warrior's Cunning is a great skill. I agree with you there. Adrenal Spiking a Target with Warrior's Cunning/Rigor Mortis is a great way to get a single kill. But 10 energy for such a short duration with a huge recast timer is wasted in longer battles.

Bast · Aug 15, 2005, 10:17 PM // 22:17

Yes. Picking off targets of opportunity = win.

With Frenzy and FGJ, wouldn't a Warrior gain adrenaline at the same rate? And still have a secondary?

Absorption is hardly a non-issue. Free damage reduction is not something to be ignored. Stonefists in fact are a huge issue that you avoided. And since "We are talking about a Hammer Warrior," as you say, I think you should address Stonefists.

Yeah, Warrior's Cunning has huge costs and could use a moderate buffing, but it does make all defensive stances and Ward Against Melee useless for a few seconds, and it'll work under Nature's Renewal.

--------
Oh noes, condition spreading! Apply Poison and Cyclone Axe? Please. Stop using newbish PVE tactics in PVP.

Sammiel · Aug 15, 2005, 10:23 PM // 22:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bast

Frenzy hardly sucks. It's readily understood that Warriors (and Rangers) aren't attacked until last anyway, unless they're highly annoying or in a compromised position (overextended beyond healing range, etc.) With that established, why burn your entire secondary for Tiger's Fury when Frenzy does the exact same thing? You're not getting attacked, so the double damage clause of Frenzy is largely irrelevant. Just don't be stupid about when you use it and suddenly it's a skill with no drawback.

Furthermore, spamming energy skills, while obviously something a W/* can't do forever but an R/W can, is a nonissue at best. For the most part, the best Warrior attacks are Adrenaline based, not energy. Congratulations, you've solved a "problem" that didn't exist in the first place. On top of that, the W/* can do way more damage due to Strength and a level 16 weapon attribute (damage = win), can use Stonefist Gauntlets and Absorption Runes, and hasn't lost the secondary profession and therefore can have other skills that complement Warrior better.

Ward against Melee? The Warrior is less screwed than the R/W is. Warrior's Cunning is a Strength attribute skill, and guess what? the R/W doesn't have Strength. Owned.

That being said, the R/W probably does have a niche (aside from "appearance" builds wherein the goal is to look as much like Legolas from Lord of the Rings as possible). But generally, a W/* is far more flexible and will outdamage the R/W consistently, and by a large amount.

Wow, I want these incredible powers of prediction you seem to posses. 'Don't use frenzy at a bad time' seems like great advice in theory, but how exactly are you going to determine when someone is going to target you. Magic? Wishing? And most of the proponents of the R/W don't proclaim it to be the second coming of christ.

Also the claim on energy attack skills is bunk. There is nothing preventing a R/W from utilizing adrenal skills also. And the energy arguments apply to more than just warrior attack skills. They apply to any skill using energy, which is a fairly large segment of skills. And warriors don't do 'way more damage.' They do 15% more on non attack skills and a fair amount more on attack skills assuming they have a moderate amount of strength. Is it a consideration? Yes. Is it some massive difference? No.

So that leaves stonefist gauntlets and abs runes. Both are nice, but not game breaking. A ranger has a series of decent skills that compliment a warrior just fine. Spirits, antidote signet, various sprints, throw dirt, etc.

And warriors endurance isn't the end all. Against a persistent effect its far less effective than the evasion breaking attacks. It has a 60s recharge. So with a whopping 12 Strength it will be available 1/6 of the time. On the other hand seeking blade can be used roughly once every 3 attacks when TF isn't being used and more like 1/4 when it is. In addition seeking blade et al can be used even in circumstances where a person is not using a stance for the added damage. So they have utility even in the common case where someone isn't using an evasion/block stance. And to claim energy management isn't an issue for warriors is blatently false. Its an issue for all classes, and warriors have it rough with a big old 2 pips of regen.

ICURADik · Aug 15, 2005, 10:52 PM // 22:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bast

Yes. Picking off targets of opportunity = win.

With Frenzy and FGJ, wouldn't a Warrior gain adrenaline at the same rate? And still have a secondary?

Absorption is hardly a non-issue. Free damage reduction is not something to be ignored. Stonefists in fact are a huge issue that you avoided. And since "We are talking about a Hammer Warrior," as you say, I think you should address Stonefists.

Yeah, Warrior's Cunning has huge costs and could use a moderate buffing, but it does make all defensive stances and Ward Against Melee useless for a few seconds, and it'll work under Nature's Renewal.

--------
Oh noes, condition spreading! Apply Poison and Cyclone Axe? Please. Stop using newbish PVE tactics in PVP.

A Warrior can't use Frenzy/FGJ at the start of battle because they will get spiked. So no, it does not give as much adrenaline...

I don't see how you can say energy is a non-issue, yet absorbtion is a key to making the Warrior better. All these skills you use.. Frenzy, Warrior's Cunning, For Great Justice, Irresistible Blow, all use energy. Under QZ 10 energy skills are 13 energy, 5 energy skills are 6 energy.

Bast · Aug 16, 2005, 12:01 AM // 00:01

I never said anywhere Absorption was key to anything. It's merely something a Warrior can use and a Ranger cannot. Same for Stonefists. I wish you'd address this since you seem to be set on R/W hammer types. The Stonefists add a full second (omg!) of knockdown. This is a lot more valuable than Expertise could ever be.

Under QZ, adrenaline skills still cost zero energy.

Anyway, you keep making your silly R/Ws. I choose to use a more advantageous combo.

Scaphism · Aug 16, 2005, 12:06 AM // 00:06

I know I've been in here before, but maybe I can clear up a few things for both sides.

Energy is not a non-issue. It's a big issue in deciding if you'll take a R/W or a W/x. However, you have to decide if there are enough energy based attacks on your bar *worth bringing* that give a R/W more utility than a primary warrior. If you have a build that uses primarily energy based attacks, now would be a good time to share it.
Sidenote: Energy is a bigger issue in the ranger-heavy environtment where you can expect to run into teams using Quickening Zephyr on a consistent basis. Expertise hardens ranger against it's effect- but the point is moot if there aren't many energy based skills in your bar.

Armor IS a non-issue.
You can go back and forth on this one. If someone wants to go out and do the research on this one, go find out exactly (or approximately would be good enough for me) how much damage in PVP is elemental vs physical. *Then we can have a meaningful conversation about armor differences.

Until then, rangers slightly outclass warriors in an heavily elemental damage environment, but it's rather close due to the -5 damage a well equipped warrior will have from his superior absorption + knight's boots. Given that the current environment, from my experience, is a mix of physical and elemental damage (due in large part to ranger teams mixing physical arrows with elemental buffs), I'm inclinded to dismiss this point and move on.

Damage output is a key issue, and I believe warriors have the edge in this category handily. 16 attribute > 12 attribute, without question. You have to make expertise pay for itself to overcome that deficit. That should put anyone supporting the melee R/W on the defensive- if you expect anyone to believe that your R/W build is superior, you need to back it up with proof. We all know that 16 hammer is better than 12 in hammer. No one was trying to debate that point, were they?

Alternately, I should bring up a point a friend of mine made to me privately. The R/W defenders, if they're concerned with damage output, really need to consider using a pet. The numbers aren't spectacular, but if you're interested in running a R/W build and you want to do damage equalling a primary warrior, you need to look into a line you already have.

Otherwise, you're looking at a specialty build.
If it's knocklock, you have to overcome the deficit that losing Stoneskin gauntlets puts you at.
If it's axes...find the good energy skills and bring us a build. My friend (the same from before) suggested disrupting chop + distracting blow + disrupting lunge + feral strike (to gain energy and adrenaline). That's somewhere to start, I don't know if it's worth pursuing further.
If it's a sword...well swords do have the most energy-based attacks among the three weapons, and R/W with swords were very popular, to the point where I designed Aragorn teh Sexah (bottom half) way back when. Yet swords are very mediocre without stacking damage buffs on them, which a R/W cannot do. They're fun for dueling, but I know you're not talking about a dueling character on our boards, right?

Neo-LD · Aug 16, 2005, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bast

Frenzy hardly sucks. It's readily understood that Warriors (and Rangers) aren't attacked until last anyway, unless they're highly annoying or in a compromised position (overextended beyond healing range, etc.) With that established, why burn your entire secondary for Tiger's Fury when Frenzy does the exact same thing? You're not getting attacked, so the double damage clause of Frenzy is largely irrelevant. Just don't be stupid about when you use it and suddenly it's a skill with no drawback.

Furthermore, spamming energy skills, while obviously something a W/* can't do forever but an R/W can, is a nonissue at best. For the most part, the best Warrior attacks are Adrenaline based, not energy. Congratulations, you've solved a "problem" that didn't exist in the first place. On top of that, the W/* can do way more damage due to Strength and a level 16 weapon attribute (damage = win), can use Stonefist Gauntlets and Absorption Runes, and hasn't lost the secondary profession and therefore can have other skills that complement Warrior better.

Ward against Melee? The Warrior is less screwed than the R/W is. Warrior's Cunning is a Strength attribute skill, and guess what? the R/W doesn't have Strength. Owned.

That being said, the R/W probably does have a niche (aside from "appearance" builds wherein the goal is to look as much like Legolas from Lord of the Rings as possible). But generally, a W/* is far more flexible and will outdamage the R/W consistently, and by a large amount.

You know how I know this argument is going in circles? That post is practically my original post at the very beginning, in some places word for word. The main issue I have is that the R/W peple constantly wave their hands at varios skills and tactics they could use, but none have suggested any specific build to use. Meanwhile I have on numerous occaisons posted example warriors and my best stabs at decent R/Ws in this thread... so far, all I see is warrior domination.

Do any R/W people care to prove me wrong by posting a build?

Eet GnomeSmasher · Aug 16, 2005, 12:57 AM // 00:57

This is still going on? Cripes, at this point, if no one is getting swayed why continue this? This is more of a thread where a few people just want to force their opinions on how others should play. Nothing more. The fact that there is even a debate on this shows there's no clear cut advantage on playing/not playing an R/W. Give it a rest already.

bwookie · Aug 16, 2005, 12:59 AM // 00:59

Bleh if you just wanted a build why didn't you just go ahead and ask for one?

Exp 13
Hammer 12
Beast 9

Irresistable Blow
Crushing Blow
Devestating Hammer
Heavy Blow
Mighty Blow
Tigers Fury
For Great Justice

Now go and be merry.

ICURADik · Aug 16, 2005, 01:00 AM // 01:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo-LD

You know how I know this argument is going in circles? That post is practically my original post at the very beginning, in some places word for word. The main issue I have is that the R/W peple constantly wave their hands at varios skills and tactics they could use, but none have suggested any specific build to use. Meanwhile I have on numerous occaisons posted example warriors and my best stabs at decent R/Ws in this thread... so far, all I see is warrior domination.

Do any R/W people care to prove me wrong by posting a build?

In the link I posted to the videos, bbqvshO is played from the perspective of the R/W.

Tuna · Aug 16, 2005, 01:26 AM // 01:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by ICURADik

In the link I posted to the videos, bbqvshO is played from the perspective of the R/W.

People have tried to use this video for the r/w point already in my guild (see bwookie above, you blasphemer!) But look closely at the massive damage thats coming out of this guy, its almost stunning. Its been a while since I've seen it but I don't recall seeing anything over 60. Something about that just says thunderclap + conjure lighting to me

Ubiquitous · Aug 16, 2005, 02:00 AM // 02:00

Well, speaking as a member of the clearly idiotic BBQ guild, the R/W debate isn't one you can examine in a vacuum. The context of the team build and the environment that is created by the current metagame is of critical importance in determining the utility of a build.

As a preface, the W/x's I'm referring to hereafter are assumed to be hammer warriors, since the R/W I'm specifically referencing is a hammer R/W. No sense comparing apples to oranges, after all.

For better or worse, the metagame currently revolves around spirit usage and energy denial. QZ is a factor in a vast majority of GvG battles...and in that environment, a R/W is a completely valid (and in my opinion, superior) option. A warrior finds those 10 energy skills prohibitively expensive, and the concept of using aftershock in addition to things like warrior's cunning, FGJ, and/or a stance with QZ is somewhat ridiculous. Yes, a warrior can do more damage hit for hit. But in these environments, a ranger is going to get a lot more hits in. The additional point is that a ranger doesn't require cunning or rigor to build adrenaline, if somewhat slower - irresistible blow serves that purpose.

AoE isn't enough to ensure that WaM won't be effective in shutting down a lot of melee damage - and if your warriors are already out of energy a lot of the time, it only exacerbates their ineffectiveness in performing the spikes the anti-R/W crowd seems to be saying is one of the relative strengths of warrior primaries.

Also, in a heavy energy denial setting, many monks have energy drain (or tap). A savvy monk can fairly easily destroy the ability for that warrior to even have the energy to use their spike effectively (if the ward isn't already defense enough). Drain, you use frenzy, I call you out and you don't have enough energy to switch stances. Now you're taking double damage without the ability to counter it. If you wait until you gain that energy back, I drop another drain on you.

Incidentally, the concept of only adrenaline based skills being an effective use of the warrior handicaps the warriors in at least a couple significant ways: First, their counters to stances become much weaker. Second, pure adrenaline means that the whole point of having the flexibility to choose a secondary becomes irrelevant. Third, without energy usage, building adrenaline with a hammer warrior is a very time consuming process - all other things being equal, the R/W is going to be able to accumlate the necessary adrenaline to execute the damage/knockdown train more quickly, and hence more often, mitigating the damage bonus the warrior has.

Are there situations in which a W/x is superior? Yes. Are they all that common in the current stage of the metagame? Not from what I've seen. You can believe you've disproven the utility of the R/W, but I disagree.

Ubi

Tuna · Aug 16, 2005, 03:30 AM // 03:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ubiquitous

For better or worse, the metagame currently revolves around spirit usage and energy denial. QZ is a factor in a vast majority of GvG battles...and in that environment, a R/W is a completely valid (and in my opinion, superior) option. A warrior finds those 10 energy skills prohibitively expensive, and the concept of using aftershock in addition to things like warrior's cunning, FGJ, and/or a stance with QZ is somewhat ridiculous. Yes, a warrior can do more damage hit for hit. But in these environments, a ranger is going to get a lot more hits in. The additional point is that a ranger doesn't require cunning or rigor to build adrenaline, if somewhat slower - irresistible blow serves that purpose.

As has been said, if energy is an issue, the r/w might be the right choice. However, I'm not sure how often QZ get run in either tombs or gvg. I believe bbq was running it so going ranger instead of warrior is a decent trade off. However, you DO have admit that the damage that was being put out was weak compared to a primary warrior (per hit, not necassarily total dmg per time).

It seems that through irresistable blow spam the ranger/warrior will do better as a single unit. However, if the team supports the melee character through enchant/hex removal and buffs the warrior will come out on top. I prefer to go with the latter as removing enchants and hexes will generally help your entire team and let the warrior go crazy with his adren skills. I also think the metagame is portrayed a tad too anti-warrior by the r/w crowd. Honestly, how often do you come up against WaM, guardian, aegis, stances, blind, etc all in one fight? You'd be unlucky to fight against 2 of those.

I think you guys are also giving frenzy way to hard of a time. If the warrior gets attacked its going to be a spike and you counter it the same as any other spike: prot spirit and a heal. True, the warrior will take substantially more damage from a spike than a typicall soft target. However, the window is also much smaller (untill frenzy runs out) and having a warrior die once or twice isn't as bad as having your monk bite the dust.

This is what I've deduced. If 2-3 of the items fit your bill from one section its probably the one you want to go with. If you want items from both section, well, forget it or completely rework your build.

Take R/W if:
You expect to be up against heavy energy denial and have semi-heavy energy usage
You expect to be up against heavy anti-melee
Your build utilizes a lot of energy based skills
Your team's build can't offer support

Take W/X if:
You expect to face minimal energy denial and anti-melee
You gain support from other characters
You need to use your secondary to help your team
You need to lots of damage

Ubiquitous · Aug 16, 2005, 03:47 AM // 03:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuna

As has been said, if energy is an issue, the r/w might be the right choice. However, I'm not sure how often QZ get run in either tombs or gvg. I believe bbq was running it so going ranger instead of warrior is a decent trade off. However, you DO have admit that the damage that was being put out was weak compared to a primary warrior (per hit, not necassarily total dmg per time).

Damage per hit, of course. But that's not the relevant metric, especially with anti-melee being what it is. The most important evaluative standard in an anti-melee environment (at least in my opinion) is how much damage can be done consistently, and how often the knockdown chain can be triggered.

Quote:

It seems that through irresistable blow spam the ranger/warrior will do better as a single unit. However, if the team supports the melee character through enchant/hex removal and buffs the warrior will come out on top. I prefer to go with the latter as removing enchants and hexes will generally help your entire team and let the warrior go crazy with his adren skills. I also think the metagame is portrayed a tad too anti-warrior by the r/w crowd. Honestly, how often do you come up against WaM, guardian, aegis, stances, blind, etc all in one fight? You'd be unlucky to fight against 2 of those.

Unlucky? We slot all but a couple of those. Maybe we'd just be that one unlucky team, but I somehow doubt it.

Additionally, the buffs you're referring to are not extremely useful with NR in play. Hence, the context of the current metagame and the build you're running is key in determining the usefulness of the build. Removing enchants and hexes in the most effective way involves NR, and that makes your buffs for your warrior useless.

Quote:

I think you guys are also giving frenzy way to hard of a time. If the warrior gets attacked its going to be a spike and you counter it the same as any other spike: prot spirit and a heal. True, the warrior will take substantially more damage from a spike than a typicall soft target. However, the window is also much smaller (untill frenzy runs out) and having a warrior die once or twice isn't as bad as having your monk bite the dust.

Yes, but having your warrior get unnecessary DP when their monks are staying up because of WaM and Aegis only hurts. And your warrior getting spiked with double damage isn't the same issue as a normal spike. That's why attacking Frenzying warriors is such a huge gimme - you can use normal skills to do heavy spike damage, which bleeds your monks of energy. If the opposing team is using energy denial, you just hosed yourself for the sake of running Frenzy and a warrior primary.

Quote:

This is what I've deduced. If 2-3 of the items fit your bill from one section its probably the one you want to go with. If you want items from both section, well, forget it or completely rework your build.

Take R/W if:
You expect to be up against heavy energy denial and have semi-heavy energy usage
You expect to be up against heavy anti-melee
Your build utilizes a lot of energy based skills
Your team's build can't offer support

Take W/X if:
You expect to face minimal energy denial and anti-melee
You gain support from other characters
You need to use your secondary to help your team
You need to lots of damage

I agree that R/W isn't the end-all-be-all, nor is it superior in all situations. However, as I mentioned before, given the current state of the metagame, I think R/W is generally speaking the superior choice.

Ubi

Tuna · Aug 16, 2005, 05:01 AM // 05:01

I think the verdict has been reached: NR is overpowered.

Eet GnomeSmasher · Aug 16, 2005, 08:16 AM // 08:16

Hahaha. Funny. When someone from a successful guild makes some great points about R/W's, suddenly the argument is how NR is overpowered because it makes an R/W a valid build. Funny stuff.

Neo-LD · Aug 16, 2005, 12:45 PM // 12:45

Hmm Ubiquitous is the sn my friend uses on our forums and in-game (ign = ubi quitous) Guess its popular.

Anyways, while a R/W may be better at attrition warfare in the 'current metagame', I ask why in the world would you use a melee R/W for that purpose when a bow ranger is so superior? They sport more damage output, and are vulnerable to far less counters (wards, soothing spells, etc) and have the ability to add to the attrition game with distracting and debilitating shot.

If you play a hammer, you arent aiming for victory by attition. You are aiming for 5-6 second perma-knockdown 400 damage spike. In which case, a war/* is the only way to go.

I will also mention that while the spirit metagame is common, it does not make up 100% of matches and is far less common in arena. Anywhere outside of its "metagame" a R/W drops off significantly.