Removing Auto Crits and Direct Hits from WAR

[Shurrikhan]

Adding to the topic at hand, I'd also like for Inner Chaos to not replace Fell Cleave.

Wouldn't that essentially gut the (admittedly constraint-based) mechanic, though?

It's kind of like giving Bard an extra charge on Bloodletter or an extra stack stackable (though not spendable) on Perfect Pitch, or giving Monk up to 10 chakra to spend at a time.

Sure, it's freeing, but is that necessarily what we want if it then removes some few-yet-significant gameplay decisions that make the job's play require a bit more immediate reaction and/or forethought?

[Lucy_Pyre]

Please don't put words in my mouth. I neither mentioned enrages nor implied it being a huge detriment. It's simply an annoyance as an omni-tank, especially when that 100 DPS means a lot when you're aiming for high parses.

Adding to the topic at hand, I'd also like for Inner Chaos to not replace Fell Cleave.

It was mentioned that it's a DPS loss, and I pointed out how it's a more or less irrelevant one. Also, no, that "100 DPS" does not mean anything when aiming for high parses. I've been playing a lot of Dark Knight in Hades lately for a change of pace to the mindless mount grind, and I'm still completely capable of pulling orange/pink on that job with only a few DH melds (pieces that are used by DRK and only DRK).

For any potential curiosity, my stat spread on DRK.

Strength - 4,155
Crit - 3,589
Det - 2,157
DH - 560
SkS - 1,571

You will notice that my DH is around half what it should be for a tank that doesn't share gear with WAR, and my average DH rate over a fight is usually around 2%, with only one or two singular direct crits in the majority of cases. Doesn't prevent me from doing well. So, if you're doing lower than you want due to melding Det and not DH, that's a problem with you, not the stats or your gear.

We're going to have to disagree with current war, but why do you think war should be 2nd on dps? Warrior has the lowest apm and simplest rotation out of all four of the tanks. I agree war needs some sort of buff but comparing it to the to the other tanks, it's in a fine spot being behind on dps atm. It's the best self-healing tank and it never has to double weave anything either. With how current war plays personally I say, it shouldn't be above the other tanks in terms of dps, it's the least skill intensive tank and has a good defensive kit to make up for it's lower dps. You can't really argue in favor of war doing more dps than the other tanks in the current state it is now, the other tanks all have to work harder for their dps.

WAR should be 2nd on DPS because it offers the least to the party of all tanks, barring GNB. Thus meaning that the only tank that should do more DPS than it is GNB as a result of this. PLD has a significant amount of party utility and should be beneath WAR in terms of DPS due to that.

[RavenFall_]

It was mentioned that it's a DPS loss, and I pointed out how it's a more or less irrelevant one. Also, no, that "100 DPS" does not mean anything when aiming for high parses. I've been playing a lot of Dark Knight in Hades lately for a change of pace to the mindless mount grind, and I'm still completely capable of pulling orange/pink on that job with only a few DH melds (pieces that are used by DRK and only DRK).

For any potential curiosity, my stat spread on DRK.

Strength - 4,155
Crit - 3,589
Det - 2,157
DH - 560
SkS - 1,571

You will notice that my DH is around half what it should be for a tank that doesn't share gear with WAR, and my average DH rate over a fight is usually around 2%, with only one or two singular direct crits in the majority of cases. Doesn't prevent me from doing well. So, if you're doing lower than you want due to melding Det and not DH, that's a problem with you, not the stats or your gear.



WAR should be 2nd on DPS because it offers the least to the party of all tanks, barring GNB. Thus meaning that the only tank that should do more DPS than it is GNB as a result of this. PLD has a significant amount of party utility and should be beneath WAR in terms of DPS due to that.

Sure the utility argument is reasonable. The gap between their utility is so big that war should be given something to compensate for it, to balance the tanks out more. However, paldin has more going on in it's rotation so I don't think simple potency buffs should be enough to put war ahead. I can't concede that the simplest rotation should do the 2nd most damage, even factoring in utility. For war to be ahead, in my opinion it would need a bigger kit and or a more skill intensive rotation. You need to factor in not just utility but the effort that goes into one's rotation. On the basis of utility alone is a weak argument, I believe the disparity in dps is justified because one tank should not have to do less work to output more damage.

[Lucy_Pyre]

Sure the utility argument is reasonable. The gap between their utility is so big that war should be given something to compensate for it, to balance the tanks out more. However, paldin has more going on in it's rotation so I don't think simple potency buffs should be enough to put war ahead. I can't concede that the simplest rotation should do the 2nd most damage, even factoring in utility. For war to be ahead, in my opinion it would need a bigger kit and or a more skill intensive rotation. You need to factor in not just utility but the effort that goes into one's rotation. On the basis of utility alone is a weak argument, I believe the disparity in dps is justified because one tank should not have to do less work to output more damage.

Paladin with all of its utility is already the single most popular tank with Dark Knight coming in at a strong second. It doing a little bit less damage will not affect that in any way and, in fact, pushing Warrior past it to be 2nd in tank DPS will give a bit more of variety in tank comps, as running GNB and/or WAR will now be a little bit more favorable.

[RavenFall_]

Paladin with all of its utility is already the single most popular tank with Dark Knight coming in at a strong second. It doing a little bit less damage will not affect that in any way and, in fact, pushing Warrior past it to be 2nd in tank DPS will give a bit more of variety in tank comps, as running GNB and/or WAR will now be a little bit more favorable.

I don't believe that having a little more dps will solve the popularity problem. for people to pick one tank over the other the dps gap would have to be significant. If paladin is made to have slightly less dps than warrior, much won't change it'll still have more utility with slightly lower dps, it would still seem like the better choice to many ppl. The popularity disparity exists because people subjectively think that war is the dullest tank and I agree. If you want war to be more prevalent in party comps then argue for a more intricate and fulfilling rotation.

[Lucy_Pyre]

I don't believe that having a little more dps will solve the popularity problem. for people to pick one tank over the other the dps gap would have to be significant. If paladin is made to have slightly less dps than warrior, much won't change it'll still have more utility with slightly lower dps, it would still seem like the better choice to many ppl. The popularity disparity exists because people subjectively think that war is the dullest tank and I agree. If you want war to be more prevalent in party comps then argue for a more intricate and fulfilling rotation.

The rotation is perfectly fine as is, all the job needs are some minor potency buffs. I don't think WAR needs to be on PLD's level of popularity. All I care about is proper balance.

[ForteNightshade]

Wouldn't that essentially gut the (admittedly constraint-based) mechanic, though?

It's kind of like giving Bard an extra charge on Bloodletter or an extra stack stackable (though not spendable) on Perfect Pitch, or giving Monk up to 10 chakra to spend at a time.

Sure, it's freeing, but is that necessarily what we want if it then removes some few-yet-significant gameplay decisions that make the job's play require a bit more immediate reaction and/or forethought?

That is a poor comparison. Bard gets so many Bloodletter procs they'll outright lose some no matter what they do. You simply can't press the button fast enough in some scenarios. An extra charge alleviates this without changing the gameplay whatsoever. With Monk, Chakra isn't its main focus. It also doesn't potentially conflict with its rotation. That being said, you venture over to any Monk discussion and the RNG on Chakra is among the many complaints people have.

I'd rather it be freeing the Inner Chaos boiling down to "Is a buff up? No? Hold it as long as possible and hope a buff pops up before your Charges refresh or IR comes off CD." Even in a static, there are plenty of times where you have to just throw out an IC to avoid it clipping with IR, though it obviously is more easily to mitigate in that scenario.

It was mentioned that it's a DPS loss, and I pointed out how it's a more or less irrelevant one. Also, no, that "100 DPS" does not mean anything when aiming for high parses. I've been playing a lot of Dark Knight in Hades lately for a change of pace to the mindless mount grind, and I'm still completely capable of pulling orange/pink on that job with only a few DH melds (pieces that are used by DRK and only DRK).

It's Hades. No one cares about EX Primals nowadays. In Savage that 100 DPS can easily be the difference on where you hit orange, especially in the pug scene where buff alignment and kill times are not going to be consistent.

That being said, I can and have parsed orange on other tanks; Gunbreaker, specifically (different character). It doesn't change the fact I still lose damage on them for no reason beyond Warrior being the only tank wanting a different meld set. When no other role has this problem—even Black Mage can run a crit set to avoid conflicting with Summoner and Red Mage—I see no reason Warrior has to be the one exception.

[Nedkel]

But why would you meld det instead of crit on war?
Crit melds does slightly better on guaranteed crits and without them. Check the numbers and intervals again.

[Terkhev]

although there are some people who picked up warrior only recently, who are against that and for some reason they are very vocal about it.

I see nobody even bothered to respond to that, but I'm not such a nice person, so...
Bullshit. Not a single old WAR player I know defended 4.0 and only few of them prefered HW version over 4.2. Me included.
Seriously, goin on this funny "old guard" trip is so lame and childish I'm not even sure how to comment it without getting banned. I don't want to attack you personally, because, unlike you, I'd rather discuss points and not the person who made them.

OT: Removing guarntees DCrit is not bad idea itself, and I absolutely agree with gauge bonus. But I think we first need to move some FC potency into baisc combo.

[Khimer]

I see nobody even bothered to respond to that, but I'm not such a nice person, so...
Bullshit. Not a single old WAR player I know defended 4.0 and only few of them prefered HW version over 4.2. Me included.
Seriously, goin on this funny "old guard" trip is so lame and childish I'm not even sure how to comment it without getting banned. I don't want to attack you personally, because, unlike you, I'd rather discuss points and not the person who made them.

OT: Removing guarntees DCrit is not bad idea itself, and I absolutely agree with gauge bonus. But I think we first need to move some FC potency into baisc combo.

Oh god, thx for sparing me. But if you claim that no WAR main defended 4.0 iteration you sure are surrounded by some rp warriors rather than actual warriors. You should talk to other people some time outside your fc or something. Ask any pro WAR main what's their favourite warrior iteration was and they'll probably say before 4.2. I wouldn't expect you to agree, cause by the way you talk you sure sound like samurai main, i do tip my fedora to you.