2 combos (4 swings) from a knight to kill me. With Yellow, so +1 con, at level 65. I know we're meant to be feeble, but I remember seeing somewhere a while back that we were supposed to be able to dodge hits better than other races. Which still seems to be nothing.
And I know I've made a multitude of these threads, but 4 swings isn't always enough to get away, and I feel like a newbie being kicked in by a strong guy on steriods when I come up against them. We should be so much better at avoiding their blows, because otherwise we're knight-bait. I can take on mages, just about, and guardians too, but knights just walk all over me in a fashion that is out of proportion to how much time I've spent trying to be able to survive getting attacked randomly. And disproportionately to how someone of my level should be, too.

And this may be wrong in places, but it's just gone 4am and I'm annoyed after being completely screwed by yet another knight, so neh.

Which knight was it laysus? It didn't happen to be an artiwhore knight with 19 str and the best weapons in the game did it?

It happens with most knights, damn you.
And read the bit about it being 4am, I make no claims of coherency or consideration of what I'm saying.

Edit : not important.

Anyone who goes up against Ixion's dead, pretty much, it's just a matter of how long it is...Having crazy strength, artifacts, and the best weapons helps too.
Avoidance for the faeling race would make sense, I suppose, since there's so tiny, and can fly out of any problems. They are disadvantaged like crazy against knights currently.

Faelings are disadvantaged against everything.

Oh yeah, hrmm, that's true. :S

Ixion is a friggin tank with massive weapons, but he is far FAR from unkillable. Trust me.

I'm fine against mages and guardians, if I can stay on the offensive. Just with knights, it's impossible to stay on the offensive when they're dealing out that much damage.

This is true. My good friend is a Faeling and she says that she has been killed over and over by the Knight class... Then again that could be just because she is not that great of a fighter. But ya. You get my drift.

I can't say I've seen dexterity do anything for Faeling OR Furrikin. I'd like to call it a bug, but I'm not informed enough on how it's supposed to work. But consistently I've found myself just as able to dodge a blow as the next person, no more, no less. Maybe it's just me, though.

Maybe a warriors accuracy is increased as his level of Knighthood/specialization increases reaching a point where they become a marksman, therefore probably missing could be a possibility of 1 out of 15 hits?

I think it's combat. Okay, 'cause I just took on Folken, and he missed me four times in a row. Not BAD. But still, useless later on, where constitution, intelligence and strength definately aren't.

Knight damage is ridiculous no matter how you look at it.

Knights are mostly supposed to kill by damage. If you consider that warrior damage is ridiculous... Good! That means that something is right around here.

What do you guys preffer? Speed/afflict knights or powerful/damage/bulk/often times slow knights? I'd go for the latter. I hate the former.

Knight damage is ridiculious against Knights and Guardian/Wiccans. Its insane against any Mage.

Allow me to be dumb for a while.

I think that weakest races: Faeling will always be the most susceptible to damage (or anything if you want to see it this way). Therefore I think the weakest race should aim to try be the most elusive. Getting caught may mean a close encounter with death, probably in increase depending on the foe you encounter (weakest race to strongest race). Therefore, I think that furrikins and faelings even when veteran knights may miss you not, I am sure that the other hundreds of rookies will. In any case, all small races should work to be completely elusive, even if it may become hard to be. Though, probably something that Faelings/Furrikins (Furrikins more, IMO) should be exempt of is their xp penalties. This would at least balance the fact that they may be the most prone of dying when in direct confrontation with a threat,

Knight damage isn't all that bad.

As a knight with 3k health and no surge, I could tank Daevos or Valek beating on me without fighting back.

My damage is rediculous but im an artiwhore, live with it.

or you could just make us speed knights like veery other IRE game then youd be back here going bring back the damage

Reason you can tank so much is huge amounts of armour. Mages can't do that. Nor can guardians, to a lesser extent. Plus the good races for those things, i.e Mugwumps, have lower con (10) than you (15. Or 14 for the average Brood Viscanti).

For some reason I've aways believe that a races ability to tank is first and foremost it's racial attributes: high cont, and if they have any type of defences (regen/protection/etc.). The armour I've always believed it is supplementary, though some races need armour more than others... and others just have the obscence capability of also wearing an armour despite their tank-esque base.

Warriors paramount is damage in all it's forms, also dealing with damage as well. I think mages/guardians are the center of afflict/distance fight things like that, so they may fare better against those types of attacks, though may have as an Achilles tendon is how they deal with damage.