Curse

Phades · Jun 29, 2005, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenknight777

Warrior/Mesmer using Illusionary weaponry maxed at 15 can hit 40s a hit.

Downside = Enchantment stripping.

Cripple would be a pain too. It would be amusing having that and balthazars at the same time though.

The Man · Jun 30, 2005, 03:18 AM // 03:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenknight777

Warrior/Mesmer using Illusionary weaponry maxed at 15 can hit 40s a hit.

Downside = Enchantment stripping.

Runes can only be used on primary class attributes...and 15 isn't the max...

Phades · Jun 30, 2005, 05:59 AM // 05:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Man

Runes can only be used on primary class attributes...and 15 isn't the max...

Lol nice catch, i wasnt even thinking in that direction.

Normalized 16 with a possible % chance 17? Heh i havent bothered to wonder if pc skills are hardcapped or if the only tested ranges are for the normalized area.

ZING · Jun 30, 2005, 07:22 AM // 07:22

A player who can actually play a Warrior so that he's a beast on the battlefield (as well as not being a burden to rest of the team) is worth his weight in platinum.

Warrior is the 'default' choice for all gamers. Far to many n00bs and losers pick that class, and just ruin any chance of a good Warrior getting a group in the Tombs.

Best Advice: Form a guild, or join a guild that knows you're a demon in pvp. You'll get asked to go ALL the time when people realize you're a great Warrior. Otherwise expect to wait 2 hrs for anyone in the Tombs to let you play with their 'l33t' group.

Rey Lentless · Jun 30, 2005, 07:43 AM // 07:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Well rangers technically tank better, considering their armor also defends against elemental damage, in addition to stances vs phys and +al vs elemental damage and tend to last longer than warrior stances. So stating that warrios are good due to their tanking ability is beyond moot, since rangers can/do have the ability to mitigate all forms of damage (that can be reduced) more effectivly than warriors by far. The only job that could be argued that does it better would be monks, or rather a pair of monks, but enchantments can be removed, while stances generally only end with wild blow...

That's not remotely accurate. Warriors can be by far superior tanks. If a warrior really wanted to, they can hit over 200 AL. They have a lot more stances useful in different situations. They can have shields, and they have knight's armor and absorption runes.

As far as 'real' builds you'll see, the gap is much closer.. but warriors are still ahead. Either way, these classes are built offensively, because they are at the bottom of the target list, regardless of which of the two you're putting at the very bottom.

If you're to the point where only rangers or warriors are available to target.. then most likely that team's already severely hurting.

Dahl · Jun 30, 2005, 07:50 AM // 07:50

Never judge an entire class based on your experiences. Remember that this game is based on personal skill, not hours played, and not about how some classes are better than others. I personally have been with melee for.. ever since I can remember in the battlefield, and I am quite often the backbone of the group. Knowing what skills to use with others is immense, and trying to make yourself invulnerable to every kind of tactic is fruitless. Stand your ground with your strength, and acknowledge your weaknesses, but do not try to eliminate them. I deal massive damage, and I take damage very very well. I destroy runners (as we all hate). However there are 2 weaknesses to my build, I acknowledge them, but I do not alter my build so much that it hinders my strengths. Remember that specializing is almost in every case, better than being all-around decent.

Sad to say, I can't seem to find a Guild competitive enough that I can occupy enough of my time with pvp. As you say; "expecting 2 hours for anyone in the tombs you let you play with their elite group" can be a hassle, but doesn't happen nearly enough. People rush in without knowing what to do, or simply don't pvp at all, it's rather sad.

***Edit*** I think I'm over tired here... I went way off-topic, still, good advice.

Ristaron · Jun 30, 2005, 04:02 PM // 16:02

I rarely encounter a good warrior. Usually I destroy them in pvp. Just yesterday 2 of them were attacking the monk I was guarding with my ranger. I blinded both of them with throw dirt (affects adjacent foes to your target), and then set a barbed trap to cripple them and make them bleed before escaping halfway across the map with the monk to help the rest of the team.
In the process, I got to higher ground, and the warriors were again after the monk. My barrage could hit them for 50's, so I got several volleys in before they met me where I was blocking the passage through. I blinded them again and set a flame trap.
After several more volleys of barrage (it's my normal attack now

) they were dead.
The rest of my team had killed off the rest of the enemy group in that time.

Ranger is a great class when played well. It is so diverse.
Runners can be taken down from ranged with pin-down.
Entire mobs can be blinded with throw dirt... then up to 7 of them at a time shot with barrage.
If you're a Ranger/Ele you can fire storm a bunch of warriors as they run at you through the lines of traps you set, basically doing more damage in 5 seconds than you would the rest of the round.
You can devote yourself to buffing your pet, let the creature kill stuff (I have yet to see it done).
You can even tank. Rangers have fairly decent armour, and are very resistant to elemental damage.
Get a ranger with drakescale armour, have Greater Conflagration around. You have bonus vs. elemental damage, and against the damage that is delt to you which is now fire damage thanks to GC. You can get like +150 armour against any damage you take, maybe more I haven't been able to get out of the goddamn South Shiverpeaks with my ranger yet to explore everything.

scott silverblade · Jun 30, 2005, 04:53 PM // 16:53

Here's why. It is very difficult to tell the difference between a total newb warrior and a total pro. They will have similar if not exactly the same gear, the newb may even have better gear. The newb may have more skill points from runes. The difference actually comes when you're in battle, when the pro can tell which targets to call, when to charge and when to stay back, and quite frankly, the pro understands the team concept while the newb is just dead set on killing something. There are thousands of newbs out there for every 1 pro, making it very easy for the entire population of warriors to be labled badly when a select core are l33t. Almost all warriors will be newbs until they have had the opportunity to play other characters like a monk or a mesmer. They may know how to kill somebody in 4 hits, yet they dont understand some of the finer points of the game like energy regeneration. Any time they see a target they want to run in blindly and attack until it is dead. I used to be this way until I made a monk and played with it a while. Then I began to understand that patience is 1 hell of a virtue, and that most warriors just dont have it. I know pleanty of warriors who think they are l33t because they can jump a monk in the blink of an eye, however they know little about patience and therefore end up dying many times for no reason. And as mentioned above, my favorite build are the warriors who pack all kinds of defensive stances and personal heals hoping to have some kind of 1v1 duel with another warrior which would decide who wins the battle. As a warrior, if you are attacking another warrior, I hope to holy hell that he is the last person standing because it does take a good long while to kill warriors. The pro warriors carry all out offensive skills, with maybe 1 or 2 team defensive skills. Gladiator's Defense is such a waste of a skill in PvP it is unbelievable. If another warrior is attacking you, he is just as much of a newb for attacking you as you are for having gladiator's defense. So to wrap this babbling up, I guess the moral of the story is finding true l33t warriors is very difficult to do, but when u finally do, it just brings a smile to your face.

kungfumonkey2 · Jun 30, 2005, 05:37 PM // 17:37

I HATE WARRIORS!

BUT.....

Air eles Spikers are no longer dominant in Tombs. They are a decent build still but no longer dominant, dont think they ever really were. An air ele spike team takes a lot more coordination and team work than you think. Anyone that has ever been in one knows this. The coordinated teams have moved on to bigger and better builds, while the more n00bish players are picking up Air eles. The WaMo's are now becoming Air Ele's.

Every class will have its hay day. Right now it is Rangers time to shine, but on the up an up are necros. Anyone here been in a Suicide bomber group? Very fun and effective build with necros. And now with factions it may be even more widely used in denying points to teams for kills.

Warriors will have their turn again. I actually have a PvP build stored away for warriors. I call it the Combine

Here are a few recommended build ideas for you warriors that are frustrated not getting picked up in tomb matches. Let people know you have a plan, and how you can help the team. And that you are not going to just run off and do 100blades, which you just got from Rurick.

W/E: Hammer (Have seen this mentioned in this post)
Skills: EarthShaker, AfterShock.
You job is to dirupt casters and cause chaos. Because they ignore you, you can get in close knock everyone down and do some decent damage. Interupt casters. Don't get locked onto one target and start chasing them around. Your job is to run interferance, you do your job best when surrounded by the enemy.

W/Mo: Whatever weapon, I know warriors love their Fiery swords.
Skills: Martyr, MendAilment
You will help the team out A LOT, with this build. You could take these 2 skills alone and make your self worthwhile. Here is why. Martyr you draw all conditions on you. Bleeding, poison, cripple, blind. From the rest of your team. You will help out your monks a ton. Your Higher health makes you a great sacrificial lamb. With maybe 3 points into protection prayers you get around 20 healing for each condition you remove. So, you are not only healing your entire team you are healing yourself. Monks don't have to worry about you.

ZING · Jun 30, 2005, 05:59 PM // 17:59

If you honestly think about it though, things are set up the way they should be. Warriors are so easy to play in the beginning of the game while casters have to work at their craft. All that's really happened is the pendulum has swung back the other way.

Later in the game it's the casters having and easier time of it (in PvP) while the Warriors have to work at their craft. Thank god things are set up like this because this way you actually get a team made up of many different classes, instead of all Warriors all the time.

Plus I'm sure people who like to play as casters would be very un-impressed if a Warrior could just charge in and kick so much azz that half the other team had to focus on taking him down. That doesn't make for a very balanced game either.

Anethol Belyzhar · Jun 30, 2005, 07:49 PM // 19:49

have ye ever thought about the 2nd class every char may have?
u may find a useful spell or two with various classes to handle such probs...
and have you btw ever thought of not forming a damage dealer instead o' a tank? have a try: put yer strength score to 15 and have a look how many energy flourish will give ye...
AND another thingy: i like to have a rune on every piece of armor (and 2 of the superiors even without penalty

)

Phades · Jun 30, 2005, 07:49 PM // 19:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

That's not remotely accurate. Warriors can be by far superior tanks. If a warrior really wanted to, they can hit over 200 AL. They have a lot more stances useful in different situations. They can have shields, and they have knight's armor and absorption runes.

As far as 'real' builds you'll see, the gap is much closer.. but warriors are still ahead. Either way, these classes are built offensively, because they are at the bottom of the target list, regardless of which of the two you're putting at the very bottom.

If you're to the point where only rangers or warriors are available to target.. then most likely that team's already severely hurting.

Any defense a "warrior" primary can produce, is mimiced by other jobs or the shouts can be used from the tactics as a warrior sub. There is nothing unique in the real tanking options that warriors put forward that isnt trupmed elsewhere. You dont need 15 different ways to do something that only lasts 10 seconds and recycles every 45-60s. Its just silly and redundant, which seems to be the only warrior forte at times. AL vs phys is moot due to the auto evade/block rates available. So it realy only matters against the things that will always hit, which is either elemental or auto al penatrating in nature.

And just like the number of ways to defend against a physical attack is redundant and silly in the warrior line, making a "tank" build is basically silly and redundant in pvp.

Rieselle · Jul 01, 2005, 02:22 AM // 02:22

As a suggestion, I think warriors need more skills that defend other people. Like "Block 75% melee attacks against adjacent allies" or "Block 75% projectiles against allies that are behind you, etc" - especially if they're adrenaline based and low cost.

So if your monk is getting squished, a warrior can run up in front of him and directly guard him, just like in "real medieval life"

JimTheMighty · Jul 01, 2005, 02:47 AM // 02:47

If you want to do that, play W/Mo. There is a strong reason that only monks have efficient ways to protect allies (barring shutting down enemies with, for example, throw dirt, which is different enough due to the existence of things like Mend Condition).

It may seem foolish, but given that warriors are apparently never targeted, why are W/Mo's with ranks in healing and Infuse Health not more popular? After all, if you are sitting there at full its often a good 300 health heal in 1/4 second. That'll take your monk from nothing to full, and they still can't effectively ff you. In a party with a BiPer, it seems like two such warriors could be a more than welcome addition.

Or maybe thats just me.

Kash Zeppelin · Jul 01, 2005, 03:15 AM // 03:15

The reason warriors get no respect in tombs is because 90% of the warriors give no respect to anyone else. When I'm on my ranger and join parties, sometimes the ignorant w/mo complains about how rangers are "useless" and asks for another monk.

It doesn't even take much skill to play a w/mo. Tack on mending, then run up to a monster and sever artery then gash, then if you're low on health use healing breeze. Sorry to say this, but that's the only build I've ever seen when I go up against a warrior, and it is the easiest thing to take down, ever.

Thom · Jul 01, 2005, 04:27 AM // 04:27

I'll join this therapy group and relay my warrior story from today. Was in a group with a monk that was less than solid (my 12 year old bro) in the team arenas. We weren't really serious, but we were winning more then we were losing with some guys I knew. We lost our warrior so we picked up some W/Mo who was bragging about a high fame number (that is normally a mistake). First pick was a group that really shouldn't have been much of a problem, monk and two elmos. Shut down the monk, but we weren't doing enough damage to finish. Drawn out battle as it is clear that our damage output took a dive. Our friend the W/Mo is left and runs around for 5mins self healing and running which was quite a feat. I watched his skills and I saw his elite was Healing Hands!!! He had 4 standard adren sword skills and he continued to use final trust with targets at 75% health. I didn't see him use the other 3 spells although I watched for several minutes, guessing one was rez.

Can you really be an effective warrior with "Healing Hands" as your elite? Skullcrack would be much better or even going without an elite and adding an interrupt. This guy told me the reason we died was because the group sucked--I'm not arguing, but carrying enough healing to keep yourself alive for 4 minutes agaisnt a bunch of elmentalists but wanting to whack away when someone else need heals...doesn't make sense. Warriors don't make good healers and if they are getting targeted the group has normally failed (or the monks will be happy to help). If I have a choice I'll stick with warriors in my guild who know their role.

If you are a warrior with an elite that is a self heal, you really need to THINK. If you are reading this board, you probably aren't the problem.

Rey Lentless · Jul 01, 2005, 09:39 AM // 09:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Any defense a "warrior" primary can produce, is mimiced by other jobs or the shouts can be used from the tactics as a warrior sub. There is nothing unique in the real tanking options that warriors put forward that isnt trupmed elsewhere. You dont need 15 different ways to do something that only lasts 10 seconds and recycles every 45-60s. Its just silly and redundant, which seems to be the only warrior forte at times. AL vs phys is moot due to the auto evade/block rates available. So it realy only matters against the things that will always hit, which is either elemental or auto al penatrating in nature.

And just like the number of ways to defend against a physical attack is redundant and silly in the warrior line, making a "tank" build is basically silly and redundant in pvp.

Tanking skills and multiple stances are not at all redundant in pve. Those aren't reproducable by other primaries and certainly not trumped. I rarely have an offensive skill as a warrior in pve, just as I rarely have a defensive skill as a warrior in pvp. There are a ton of tanking skills available to warriors, that IS how it's unique. Along with shields and high AL.

In pvp, like I said.. neither ranger or warrior are targets, so you wouldn't be taking defensive skills often with either of those. You don't take a primary warrior to get the tactics line. You don't take a primary ranger for whirling defense or something either. You might as a secondary though. The reason to need tanking skills would be that you're NOT a warrior or ranger in pvp.

The warrior's job isn't to tank in pvp.. there aren't any builds that involve a character to 'tank' in pvp. So that's certainly not their forte. If you're not a threat, you're not targetted. If you're not easy to take down, you're not targetted. So there's no 'tank' build in pvp. People can simply switch targets. Warriors in pvp are damage dealers, disablers, or fulfill vital roles with their secondary.. while maintaining the warrior primary to discourage them being targetted. And a lot of non warrior skills involve being within melee range.. which makes a warrior a good choice for those types of builds. There's plenty of reasons to play a primary warrior in pvp. Being a tank isn't one of them. But being a tank isn't a reason to play any character in pvp. Those defensive skills are there for pve, and for secondaries for primary targets.

Phades · Jul 01, 2005, 03:05 PM // 15:05

........... Just read my original post because your comments are becoming very circular. It is redundant when the amount of time spent in defense exceedes the cooldown period of the skills used. To have a total and unending defense for a warrior only requires 3 stances. These stances only protect against physical damage (mainly) and the majority of them end when any skill is used. The difference lies in the other perks associated with the stances from the rangers, but im getting away from what i was talking about originally.

Sure warriros can do damage, but so can everyone else in pvp. Warriors can disrupt other's actions, but its easier to perform with other jobs and can be repeated more frequently in many instances. Other jobs have a better ability to perform large first strike attacks. Thats why the ele teams are popular. Granted if the fight lasts 3-5 minutes warriors will do better than eles for damage, but other jobs that are more DOT orientated can spread dots around and by far exceede the stress the warrior will produce against the single target he attacks. Mind you, this is after all the misses, snares, and chasing that occurs. Sure in a vaccume warriors would seem to be equal, but the only things that can really be treated that way are the near instant cast immediate effect spells.

Also any other job can fake being the secondary better than a wariror can, due to the basic armor options.

Rey Lentless · Jul 01, 2005, 05:50 PM // 17:50

Well, again I disagree with most of that.

In PVE, I take numerous different stances depending on which mobs I'll be up against.. but the average setup involves glad, shield, bonetti's, dolyak, and watch yourself. That prevents knockdowns, helps teammates, and provides continual 75% protection while being able to use skills when needed, even provides energy against things like phantoms. This isn't overkill in fissure or UW, and I don't believe it's equalled by a different character without a warrior profession.

In PvP, I believe warriors are highly useful. There's too many different builds to argue which is better.. but spike builds are very common and they are countered. In the pvp atmosphere that currently exists, where teams are most likely carrying spike counters, warriors seem even more useful atm. I'd much rather have a harder to disable warrior (85 AL, two pools to work with in adrenaline and energy, the ease of use in condition removal, the less common hexes that effect them) that can pump out damage more consistently. They can spread around dot in certain builds, with a spike option available as they build up adrenaline.

In 4 v 4, I think they're even more useful as their defense is more important. You can have 2 mo/2 war, 1 mo/3 war.. or whatever and not have any easy targets for the team to choose from making their armor more relevant. There are wards against melee/foes, aegis, guardian, etc.. that are out there to counter warriors, but there are plenty of counters to all of the professions.

Thinking warriors are just sub-par classes that have roles that any other class can do better is just faulty thinking IMO. Have you played a warrior often? Have you played teams building around warriors, as opposed to just sticking them.

They generally aren't a supporting class and you have to build around them IMO, not just stick them into any build and expect them to fit. I don't think 'we need a warrior' to complete a build is good thinking. Either you're going warriors, or you're not. They're not support classes that you stick into builds like you do with most of the other classes, with the possible exception of a W/E hammer warrior. I wouldn't want to have a build without a mesmer, monk, and ranger very often.. but you can certainly not use a warrior.. so I agree that they're not vital. But..... you can certainly use a bunch of warriors and have a very potent build.

Phades · Jul 02, 2005, 05:24 AM // 05:24

Actually my first job combination was a W/E. I know probably better than most how easily they get shut down. Other subs for warriors compliment being a wariror better, but end up devoting a similar split to the sub job instead of warrior skills in those builds as you do with building your warrior with defensive stances in PvE.

When i setup to tank in pve, ive found that i only ever need bonetti's, gladiators, and disciplined stance. If i was concerned about adrenalin issues, id include either adrenalin boosting shout or berserker stance for multi-tasking offense. If i was concerned about DoT or spell based damage, id bring healing sig to help diffuse the monk healing directed at me, as many conditions can be spammed faster than a single monk can remove. I dont need things like lifebond, healing seed, healing breeze. To be honest, they tend to get me more injured depending on what part of the game im in. I found things like armor of earth to not dramatically increase my ability to absorb damage as i expected it to and obsidian flesh was normally more than adequate. Earth was not in my normal builds past a certain point and began being all warrior the closer i got to the "end game" for pve.This was for 2 main reasons, the first being that the extra AL only really helped against melee damage and there were more effective ways of dealing with that, and the other was how much more effective spell based or condition damage is versus the warrior by its self.

Typically most other warirors i've PuG with in the past tended to be the stereo typical W/Mo idiot that most complain about on the forums here. The vast majority would die very early on in the fight trying to out damage the groups of monsters solo. Actually it would be frequent that if things went bad, id outlast the entire party save one or two of the smart monks that got out early enough to come back and later res the party. A few instances of myself outlasting the entire encoutner wondering how the rest of them died. Of course with no taunt abiltiy 1 character can block/occupy only so many monsters, but anyway this is not what i have grievances with. I do get a vein in the forehead pulse violently when i was with the bad wariors though.

As far as pvp was concerend, i learned very early on that as a sword user with an ele sub, i was very limited in my choices to optimise my effect and typically found myself leaning towards a tackler or damage diffusal for softer targets. This was marginally effective until i began using a hammer, which allowed for more reliable target disruption and limited damage spiking ability. It was still very easy to counter and generally frustrating to play regardless of trying manuvers to avoid damage, changing targets based on reaction, and the general feeling of helplessness to every condition build or smite/IW build. Granted it was easy to beat bad players, but against the gunuinly compentent it was far easier to beat with an ele or a mesmer primary job combination, complimenting what the rest of the team was lacking. This was instead of trying to force the warrior situations to work. Against most compotent players and builds, it really does feel like using the warior is forcing something into a situation instead of something that adapts to it properly.

Dictating that warriors need a specific team to be built around them makes the entire job out to be more of a trick build than a solid balanced build conceptually, because of how narrow the setup must be for it to work. This would be referencing the individual warrior builds, not the entire team combination as other parts of it can work in other builds. I do agree that warriors can have a larger impact the smaller the groups are, due to how limited the choice of targets can be, combined with the unlikelyhood of being spiked out. That does not warrent the arguement that they are equal in any sense of the term.

In anycase, my biggest issues i outlined back on page 2 in a rather long writeup. Its not perfect from all perspectives, but it would sound like you are taking a perspective outside of the warrior job and trying to fit the warrior within it.

*personally id like to see a game where every job would be as important as the "healer" job universally and im only saying anything, due to how bad it is in a few instances. The warrior, in general, is one of those instances.