Curse

mostro · May 03, 2005, 07:52 PM // 19:52

When I said formation I did not mean it like a rigid formation on an RTS or turn-based tactical game. Formation in GW would need to be loose and fluid, if there is any at all. We already know that most of the time warriors need stay in front, casters in the middle, and monks in the rear of the group. I was simply wondering if there is a value to expand this into a formation in GW, but I guess there probably is not.

Another advice to remember if you are playing as a warrior: always be aware of your team position, especially the monks who have to heal you. Basically you need to make sure that you are always in the healing range of your monks (unless your team strategy dictates otherwise). A lot of times a warrior can run too far ahead (to chase an enemy monk for example) and accidentally pulled his healers to the front, exposing them to unnecessary dangers. It can also aggravate your monks if they have to run forward in order to be able to heal you because the time they spend running is the time they spend not healing).

airetosE · Aug 01, 2005, 03:46 PM // 15:46

Back to the subject of the original post, I'd have to say that using the advantages of having two or more characters side-stepping to flank opponent (or even a group of opponents) would be highly beneficial, as the targeted foe will only be able to face one of the incoming attackers at any one time (and hence would be taking the unshielded incoming damage from at least one attacker).

This would probably be a useful tactic for PvP matches, where the natural instinct of most people is to rush into the thick of the battle to the back where the casters are, ignoring the flankers on the sides (who if they are rangers, would be dealing some nice damage to the unshielded runners

)