5.0 WAR is a disappointment

[Lucy_Pyre]

Didn't i explain this contradiction in the post above?


How can you not see the point of the post? Do you even remember what you wrote in your previous posts or do you just reset every time? I go: "yeah warrior is more complex, because it has to keep a buff up and keep an eye on its gauge, something that gnb doesn't even have to care about" and you go: "duuuuhhhh, keeping SE up is super easy i don't even think about it, how can you call it difficult, duuuh". Which at this point you just enter subjective territory. Well to me double weaving, positionals, timing buffs, and keeping buffs none of that is difficult. If we go by that nothing is complex in this game. BUT THE POINT WAS THAT WARRIOR HAS EXTRA LAYER OF GAMEPLAY THAT IT HAS TO CARE ABOUT IN FIGHTS, EXTRA THONKING HAS TO BE DONE. HOW DO YOU NOT SEE THE DIFFERENCE? GOD PLEASE STOP.

Okay, let me explain this to you in as simple a way as possible so that maybe, just maybe, you're capable of understanding. Gunbreaker's entire rotation/opener can change on a fight-by-fight basis in order to optimize for said fight. That is something that Warrior objectively does not have. Warrior is always the same; you pull with Tomahawk, use Infuriate to get the cooldown running, apply Storm's Eye, consume Nascent Chaos, and then either use your second Infuriate + Nascent Chaos and go into Inner Release, or go into Inner Release and then use your second Infuriate + Nascent Chaos. There is no variation to those two scenarios. Once said scenarios have ended Warrior's rotation falls into the same never-changing 1-2-3 pattern;

1. Keep Storm's Eye up at all times (barring 30s+ long downtimes)
2. Keep Upheaval on cooldown
3. Use Fell Cleave as necessary to avoid overcapping on gauge

And you do this same cycle endlessly until your Infuriate charges come back and Inner Release comes off of cooldown, at which point you do it all over again. This never changes, with the only alteration being certain points in bosses occasionally requiring you to replace a Storm's Path with a Storm's Eye just before a forced mechanical downtime so as to prevent the buff from falling off. That is not complexity, that is having the basic ability to see that your buff falls off when doing your standard rotation and simply alter a singular ability use. It is optimization, but not a complex or difficult one. Warrior is not hard, nor is it complex, and it frankly amuses me that someone who is very clearly unskilled at the job and doesn't understand it is attempting to argue with me about it being such.

[Khimer]

Okay, let me explain this to you in as simple a way as possible so that maybe, just maybe, you're capable of understanding. Gunbreaker's entire rotation/opener can change on a fight-by-fight basis in order to optimize for said fight. That is something that Warrior objectively does not have. Warrior is always the same; you pull with Tomahawk, use Infuriate to get the cooldown running, apply Storm's Eye, consume Nascent Chaos, and then either use your second Infuriate + Nascent Chaos and go into Inner Release, or go into Inner Release and then use your second Infuriate + Nascent Chaos. There is no variation to those two scenarios. Once said scenarios have ended Warrior's rotation falls into the same never-changing 1-2-3 pattern;

1. Keep Storm's Eye up at all times (barring 30s+ long downtimes)
2. Keep Upheaval on cooldown
3. Use Fell Cleave as necessary to avoid overcapping on gauge

And you do this same cycle endlessly until your Infuriate charges come back and Inner Release comes off of cooldown, at which point you do it all over again. This never changes, with the only alteration being certain points in bosses occasionally requiring you to replace a Storm's Path with a Storm's Eye just before a forced mechanical downtime so as to prevent the buff from falling off. That is not complexity, that is having the basic ability to see that your buff falls off when doing your standard rotation and simply alter a singular ability use. It is optimization, but not a complex or difficult one. Warrior is not hard, nor is it complex, and it frankly amuses me that someone who is very clearly unskilled at the job and doesn't understand it is attempting to argue with me about it being such.

While gnb is straight forward: JUST PRESS EVERYTHING ON COOLDOWN. Yeah sometimes you need to change your opener and that means your rotation changes, but you STILL PRESS EVERYTHING ON COOLDOWN. But you know what? Its still more fun than WAR, cause its rotation is engaging, double weaving is engaging, high apm is engaging, having big numbers is engaging.

Yep, no point continuing.
And you still say the same "duhhh, warrior is easy, duhhh" which it is easy, but still has extra layer of complexity over gnb, how can you be so dumb to still not understand that. And it feels disgusting to defend current warrior design, stop making me do it, can you PLEASE give up already.

[Lucy_Pyre]

Yep, no point continuing.
And you still say the same "duhhh, warrior is easy, duhhh" which it is easy, but still has extra layer of complexity over gnb, how can you be so dumb to still not understand that. And it feels disgusting to defend current warrior design, stop making me do it, can you PLEASE give up already.

I will "give up" when someone who very obviously doesn't understand the jobs he's speaking about, stops acting like he does. You can go "oonga boonga press button on CD" as much as you want, but it doesn't change the objective reality of the situation, and that objective reality is that a job whose entire rotation is capable of being changed per-fight to optimize is inherently more complex than a job whose rotation is always the same, with its only alterations being occasionally having to change an ability usage here or there in order to maintain a buff. But please, continue on with this. You're getting more and more desperate for the subject to be dropped as you probably understand that you don't have any basis with which to stand on, and it's entertaining me.

[Khimer]

I will "give up" when someone who very obviously doesn't understand the jobs he's speaking about, stops acting like he does. You can go "oonga boonga press button on CD" as much as you want, but it doesn't change the objective reality of the situation, and that objective reality is that a job whose entire rotation is capable of being changed per-fight to optimize is inherently more complex than a job whose rotation is always the same, with its only alterations being occasionally having to change an ability usage here or there in order to maintain a buff. But please, continue on with this. You're getting more and more desperate for the subject to be dropped as you probably understand that you don't have any basis with which to stand on, and it's entertaining me.

Yeah you still press the same buttons on gnb, i don't know how that proves your point. I want the subject to be dropped because it already covered everything in my first reply to you, but you still drag it out, making same points i debunked on my first message. Literally all your arguments are: "Warrior is easy, you scrub. - Yeah, it is easy. But compared to gnb you have to think a bit more in fights. - No you don't, warrior is easy." And like that for multiple pages already.

[Lucy_Pyre]

Yeah you still press the same buttons on gnb, i don't know how that proves your point. I want the subject to be dropped because it already covered everything in my first reply to you, but you still drag it out, making same points i debunked on my first message. Literally all your arguments are: "Warrior is easy, you scrub. - Yeah, it is easy. But compared to gnb you have to think a bit more in fights. - No you don't, warrior is easy." And like that for multiple pages already.

Except for the part where you have debunked nothing and, in fact, have only proven how little you understand both of the jobs you speak of. You are objectively incorrect and it really is that simple, not that I'm surprised that you can't accept that given that everything I have seen more or less has proven my initial assumptions to be correct.

[Khimer]

Except for the part where you have debunked nothing and, in fact, have only proven how little you understand both of the jobs you speak of. You are objectively incorrect and it really is that simple, not that I'm surprised that you can't accept that given that everything I have seen more or less has proven my initial assumptions to be correct.

You gotta be trolling at this point.