No miss at Transcendent Knighthood

by Unknown

Back to Ideas.

Ildaudid2006-12-05 06:02:01
Capitalist Warriors??
Unknown2006-12-05 06:35:20
QUOTE(Ildaudid @ Dec 5 2006, 12:02 AM) 359994

Capitalist Warriors??

I would say the opposite of Commune warriors, that being the City warriors
Ildaudid2006-12-05 06:50:42
OK then, wtf is he talkin about? Commune warriors are insane compared to city warriors tongue.gif
Unknown2006-12-05 06:55:25
QUOTE(Ildaudid @ Dec 5 2006, 12:50 AM) 360004

OK then, wtf is he talkin about? Commune warriors are insane compared to city warriors tongue.gif

blink.gif blink.gif blink.gif





doh.gif
Gandal2006-12-05 07:45:10
Umm, the general much higher bar for warrior success, imo, than, say, mage.
ferlas2006-12-05 11:32:31
QUOTE(Gandal @ Dec 5 2006, 05:30 AM) 359989

EDIT: Level 63 Aslaran still having a little trouble with rockeaters (need to sip/shield)...normal at all?


I remember bashing gorgogs as a wiccan without having to sip at all tongue.gif
Gandal2006-12-05 12:25:58
sad.gif need to run as a lvl 72 merian (3300 health with staff, lucidian was 4k+ at 65 :crying)
Shorlen2006-12-05 15:14:42
For the record, I was expressing concerns, not saying I was against the idea. I don't have access to the game's formulas, so I can't integrate damage over time properly for warriors and non-warriors, taking into account the fact that overdamage (damage above and beyond the creature's health) doesn't do a thing. Mages get this far more often than warriors on late fight crits, and it is *not* ignorable.

It seems like, against mobs, warriors have more tankiness (more con + better anti-mob armor), but kill slower. That seems like the intended balance. Of course, non-warriors get Forcefield, but meh, forcefield is OP (especially for demis, since can't they use it to dodge Pheonix?) for bashing, we all know this.
Unknown2006-12-05 15:20:29
QUOTE(Gandal @ Dec 5 2006, 06:30 AM) 359989

I hates capitalist warriors:
Explanation
For the low-leveled, it sucks major a**.
For the high-leveled, it is much much much faster.
Also, apparently warriors generally need more credits for competence.
*mutter

Common misconception! Warriors are great for Newton, because they don't use up mana (no need to drink/meditate!). Of course, they need weapons first. When they hit level 60 and/or get fast weapons (not even masterwork), hunting becomes almost a pleasure. The downtime between level 20 and 60 is short enough and doesn't really matter.

As for PvP - no other class can do as much with only one skill transed (knighthood spec) as warriors can. Plus, they already have Weaponparry, so they don't have to invest in Combat that heavily.

QUOTE

EDIT: Level 63 Aslaran still having a little trouble with rockeaters (need to sip/shield)...normal at all?

Not normal at all. You're doing something horribly wrong. What's your class?
Daganev2006-12-05 16:28:52
Warriors are not the tankiest while bashing at all.

Certain races may be better than others, but its not the class.

I think only guardians are less tanky than Warriors.

mages>wiccans>bards>warriors>guardians IMO.

For warriors, the real bashing power comes from athletics, with skills at fabled like flex, not knighthood.


edit* my term tanky refers to the ability to handle multiple mobs quickly, not to max health. (for example, as a faeling, I'm more tanky than as a human because of the sip bonus, even though the max health is much lower)
Aiakon2006-12-05 16:39:36
Warriors whine too much.
Daganev2006-12-05 16:42:20
Oh, and I'm pretty sure that "capitalist warriors" was meant to refer to the idea that the poor are really poor and the rich are really rich.

Even though thats not really true about capitalism *nod me*
Unknown2006-12-05 16:45:10
QUOTE
mages>wiccans>bards>warriors>guardians IMO.


I disagree with this. Bards can barely wear any armor, even with their acrobatics they're much less tanky than warriors. Wiccans, it all depends on the race. As a level 78 mugwump, I could barely handle a single unlinked bull (in fact, I died to them on several occasions). I'll agree that telekinetic mages are at least as tanky as warriors, but I don't think other mages are all that tanky. I would say, for pure tankiness (not taking into consideration speed of kills, etc):

mages > warriors > wiccans > bards > guardians

QUOTE
Warriors whine too much.


Agreed!
Shorlen2006-12-05 16:47:32
Why the heck are bards listed as more tanky than guardians? They don't get draconis, remember. And ONLY tk mages are tanky. Well, aquas have passive health healing if they meld and their godly staff twirl, but still.
Daganev2006-12-05 16:47:48
QUOTE(mitbulls @ Dec 5 2006, 08:45 AM) 360112

I disagree with this. Bards can barely wear any armor, even with their acrobatics they're much less tanky than warriors. Wiccans, it all depends on the race. As a level 78 mugwump, I could barely handle a single unlinked bull (in fact, I died to them on several occasions). I'll agree that telekinetic mages are at least as tanky as warriors, but I don't think other mages are all that tanky. I would say, for pure tankiness (not taking into consideration speed of kills, etc):

mages > warriors > wiccans > bards > guardians
Agreed!


Hmm, I'm sure bards keep changing, but either they can wear robes, or they have skills that greatly reduce damage when wearing leather.
Unknown2006-12-05 22:22:04
Bard can't wear robes, but they can getthere leather batted which allows them to be proofed. AFAIK, we don't have any skills that boost our tankiness when in leather. dots.gif Good grief, that sounded worng.
Daganev2006-12-05 22:28:16
QUOTE(Ytraelux @ Dec 5 2006, 02:22 PM) 360195

Bard can't wear robes, but they can getthere leather batted which allows them to be proofed. AFAIK, we don't have any skills that boost our tankiness when in leather. dots.gif Good grief, that sounded worng.


hmm, warriors can wear robes, why can't bards?

I thought they could, except certain skills only work with leather on.
Diamondais2006-12-05 22:46:57
QUOTE(daganev @ Dec 5 2006, 05:28 PM) 360199

hmm, warriors can wear robes, why can't bards?

I thought they could, except certain skills only work with leather on.

They can, they just lose some Acrobatics skills. Good idea for hunting, not so good idea for PvP.
Gandal2006-12-05 23:08:06
QUOTE(Cuber @ Dec 5 2006, 10:20 AM) 360087

Common misconception! Warriors are great for Newton, because they don't use up mana (no need to drink/meditate!).
(umm...but still Smoke Mountain monsters die in four club hits, one blast)
Of course, they need weapons first. When they hit level 60 and/or get fast weapons (not even masterwork), hunting becomes almost a pleasure. The downtime between level 20 and 60 is short enough and doesn't really matter.
(????was short for Keldor with influencing though happy.gif)
As for PvP - no other class can do as much with only one skill transed (knighthood spec) as warriors can. (hm, okay.)
Plus, they already have Weaponparry, so they don't have to invest in Combat that heavily.
Not normal at all. You're doing something horribly wrong. What's your class?
Aslaran lvl 63 Paladin, only up to rubeus in rituals, master knighthood, might have something to do with it (also Gifted herbalist, which is where the lessons are going)

Ildaudid2006-12-05 23:38:47
QUOTE(Ytraelux @ Dec 5 2006, 05:22 PM) 360195

Bard can't wear robes, but they can getthere leather batted which allows them to be proofed. AFAIK, we don't have any skills that boost our tankiness when in leather. dots.gif Good grief, that sounded worng.


My bard is wearing 60/50 robes right now... huh.gif