Thread: Warrior "buff" in 2.1: not what we are expecting?

Originally Posted by Liger

I have tanked BC T1 boss as a war last night and I have relized that it becomes very difficult for war/healer to keep up to the massive damage when the boss has 3 to 4 stakes on. It seems right now PLD can survive this, but it sounds like after 2.1 PLD will not or war will be able to do the same as PLd and survive the 3/4 stakes. snip

They said in the live letter they were't nerfing PLD or content but adjusting/buffing WAR.

Just a quick observation. I think Hiir is simply having difficulty communicating what he/she wants to say, which is WAR is not bad. It is not comparable to PLD, since PLD is OP, but I think he is stating that WAR is being played as 'intended', from YoshiP & Co.'s point of view which may or may not have been skewed via player experience.

Originally Posted by Kelanen

Just a quick observation. I think Hiir is simply having difficulty communicating what he/she wants to say, which is WAR is not bad. It is not comparable to PLD, since PLD is OP, but I think he is stating that WAR is being played as 'intended', from YoshiP & Co.'s point of view which may or may not have been skewed via player experience.

No, everyone understand what Hiir is stating.
No one is saying that Hiir is wrong for his basic argument, which is that Warrior is viable for content.
What everyone is disagreeing with him on, is the fact that he is then asserting Warriors are equal to Paladins, and that somehow, abilities such as Thrill of battle are equivalent to being immune for 10 seconds to all damage.

His basic argument is sound, but the rest is just poorly done.
Second, stop ripping quips! Be original man!

Originally Posted by Leiron

Second, stop ripping quips! Be original man!

Not sure if this was said in jest in lieu of the actual quote or if you're serious. If you're kidding, lol. If you're serious, lol.

I hope you can distinguish between the two.

Originally Posted by Kelanen

The level of criticism toward a person’s ability to absolutely refute another’s argument seems to be a guilty pleasure for players on these forums; players seem to insinuate their intellect in a very subliminal way, thereby implying that their point of view or stance on a certain subject matter is more correct or somehow absolute.

I'm not sure I quite understand what you're trying to communicate. I guess you mean to say that people here seek a perceived intellectual superiority by bashing others' viewpoints? That may be true in cases, but it hardly drives behaviour on in this particular forum. Some of us have occasion to get a bit testy with the antics of a dedicated few who actively ignore facts and invariably respond with "L2P, noob". You can go back to the many, many threads with good discussion of various mechanics, complete with parses and rather thorough maths, and you'll see that there are constructive discussions aplenty. These users will just throw all of that out the window and proclaim that the game, created of math, is immune to logic mathematical rigor, and will make absurd proclamations which result in pages and pages of annoyed responses.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...UE&usp=sharing

Calculator (Pixel's (??) Modified)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...1E&usp=sharing

/shrug

/wander off

Paladin has a better mitigation kit. Better itemization. It's baselines are higher for damage and it doesn't rely on damage to live.

Oh - I guess I should point out that even though Paladin does generate less hate it also requires less incoming healing (thus a PLD generates less group hate).

Anyway.



Warrior buffs are probably going to happen right around my Birthday - so that'll be a nice gift from the devs.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, cry about it on the forums.

Originally Posted by nguyenmb

But just because noone has disproved your math yet doesn't mean there isn't a flaw in there. Actually, I think you should already know your flaw, the fact the you haven't accounted for the actual battle, party dynamics, and communication - the hard things to model yet many of you discount people's anecdotes when you haven't been able to do it theoretically.

Well then, does WAR in Defiance out-DPS PLD in Sword Oath because some guy on the forums said so? It doesn't take a particularly detailed model to see the absurdity in such claims. The most rudimentary understanding of game mechanics will suffice. Honestly, it's not hard to tell where the weaknesses in theorycrafted numbers lie. Those of us who make them are acutely aware of the assumptions we made to come up with the numbers. You cannot talk down the reduction in healing bonus from using Inner Beast; it isn't listening. Neither does Eos snub a tank because it's carrying a sword. The sorts of silliness that show up in these are generally easily dismissed, and that's why you see a lot of "but your maths can't describe the game" flat denials as rebuttals.

(Your examples are also rather poor -- it's pretty easy to quantify the mitigation from Mountain Buster, for example. It is functionally no different than dropping a percent-reduction cooldown which acts on those attacks. You can by extension estimate 5s, 10s, 20s, and 30s effective health pools depending on desired interval length.)

Originally Posted by Leiron

THe majority of BC turn 5 groups that completed it were PLD/PLD.
War/War has been among the rarest combinations and I know of no group who used such a composition and completed BC turn 5

I still have yet to see a WAR/WAR T4 run. Getting about time that there should be enough Myth stuff to go around that 2 WAR might do it.

I really dont understand how the developers didnt intend for plds to use CDs to not die? the whole point of hollowed ground is to not die. My only wish for war would be for our cooldowns to be more than marginally useful, and heals to be big enough to at -least- make up for the fact that we have no mitigation. The whole argument that war doesnt need fixing is dumb, just because a few wars have completed content doesnt mean anything. Frankly as a war, you are there as a favor and likely a last resort, because it is all easier with 2 plds. from the beginning, they have said they wanted all content to be completed with any combination of jobs with about the same difficulty (2t,2h,4dd). the only case this seems to be untrue is late coil, 2 wars. sure its probably possible, but extremely stressful on healers.

edit: i could fully accept being less of a tank if we were more of a damage dealer. this doesnt seem to be the case either.

Why are people bitching about WAR getting a buff, period? Would you rather content or PLD get nerfed? No? STFU then, and play WAR or go slap on another weap, and leave the WAR players to doing what enjoy doing. Playing their WAR classes.