I assumed one of two nerfs would hit warrior in 3.1
1) potency nerf on fell cleave
2) damage taken increase added to dps stance.
People seem to forget that pld had better tank cool downs and potential dps through the entire 2.0 block
I assumed one of two nerfs would hit warrior in 3.1
1) potency nerf on fell cleave
2) damage taken increase added to dps stance.
People seem to forget that pld had better tank cool downs and potential dps through the entire 2.0 block
This thread reeks of #DarkWarriordin homogenization.
Phoenicia! you've been summoned to lay the truth on these Nerfmongers!!
They do. 25% more. :-P
1. Oversimplified/Untrue, post 2.1 a WAR had very close to equal mitigation to PLD including its shield.
Simply finding the % uptime of each cool down and multiplying it by its mitigation shows 2.x WAR and PLD on par for Physical and PLD behind on magical damage.
The deciding factor was that PLD can drop a lot of cooldowns back to back making it preferable for things like T4, but WAR has more frequent garunteed mitigation for fights like T5.
WAR mt had better DPS and OT provided much better support at a minor DPS loss.
It was this imbalance that made SE give PLD shelltron and WAR raw intuition, although the second should arguably not be garunteed mitigation because all of WARs kit already was.
2. Irellevant. How balanced the past was has no bearing on whether or not a class is balanced now. Never will. This is not an argument. It is salt.
Edit 3: even if it was a valid argument, 1.x was all about WAR with PLD getting far less use than WAR did in 2.x. So it is either one a piece or WAR with a better history. Same balance team.
Last edited by MeeYow; 09-23-2015 at 02:51 AM.
Please show me any serious content where a WAR can "overwhelm spam", and then show me any content where a DRK can't do the same with Abyssal Drain.
but... they do...? Both grit and shield oath decrease damage take , therefore switching out of them increases damage taken. currently, the only thing warriors lose from switching to their overpowered dps stance is a healing decrease, and emnity generation, neither of which is really necessary any more
Um... They also lose a grip of HP without defiance...but... they do...? Both grit and shield oath decrease damage take , therefore switching out of them increases damage taken. currently, the only thing warriors lose from switching to their overpowered dps stance is a healing decrease, and emnity generation, neither of which is really necessary any more
Defiance = 25% HP increase, 20% increase to healing receivedbut... they do...? Both grit and shield oath decrease damage take , therefore switching out of them increases damage taken. currently, the only thing warriors lose from switching to their overpowered dps stance is a healing decrease, and emnity generation, neither of which is really necessary any more
ShO/Grit = 20% damage reduction
These are the same. In fact, WAR's is actually worse as you receive less per heal (%-wise) on top of healing abilities not working with the increased healing received. The former is made up by WAR's self healing, the latter is just an error that hasn't been fixed.
Anyway, the point is that without them all 3 jobs take the same damage. If you suddenly make WAR take INCREASED damage while in Deliverance, then WAR is now taking more damage than PLD/DRK. PLD/DRK will remain to be able to tank outside of their tank stance, whereas WAR will now be forced into using Defiance.
I genuinely didn't realize this needed explaining, but there you are.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.