Diminishing returns starts at 14 strength (13 is more, 14 is less). I'm guessing that you with 22 strength now is actually down close to what you with 19 str was doing then, though it is (understandably) hard to actually test that now. 19 is definitely less effective than it was, and 13 is definitely a bit more so.

Hmm, I would swear Ceren did some tests that showed the returns were not really all that noticeable until after 18. Could be remembering wrong.

Hi, I have 24 Strength and a big balance penalty. ;( Undo Dmpppp


(J/k, Tae'dae are nice for warriors)

Are you trying to suggest that Warriors are only designed for bashing?

Most classes do magic damage so warriors can't really tank them very well. Plus quite a bit of tankiness comes at the expense of mana, which makes them easier targets for mana kills. So warriors can tank other warriors, but not much else.

I'm leaving out Bashing because we are discussing PvP not PvE (You know, what most of the skills and credits and artifacts are put into)


What annoys me the most is the credit investment imbalance between these high damage archetypes.

I am suggesting that one-handed warriors are the best bashers in the game. Surely you would agree that should require some tradeoff? Not to mention they have the potential to attack and recover more quickly than any other class than bards, the potential to tank better than any other class (yes, even against magic damage), and the potential for extremely high damage output.

I agree that it costs too much to be a good warrior. However, there is also the point that other classes do not even have the option of improving themselves that much. If I were to dump 10k credits into Derian, it really wouldn't make him much more dangerous PVP-wise than he is now. A warrior, on the other hand, can become much more dangerous with the credit investment. All of those artifacts could be viewed as a benefit or a liability, depending on your take on things.

In any case, you're right, warriors are expensive. They also don't do as much damage as bards usually. However, they do massive amounts of wounding, and things like 1-hit pinlegs are incredibly dangerous to anyone besides other warriors. It is simply wrong to suggest they are horribly weak and need buffs. Warriors have their benefits and their downfalls like everyone else. They need some tweaks, bards and monks need some fixes, but people are entirely too dramatic about it all.

They're nerfing my pinleg before I even get a chance for a onehit pinleg.

...no.

But not monks?

No to which part? I'm sure I can find examples to back up all of those. They might not be the absolute best in every area - for example, you'll never get a damage kill without some hindering help - but they are very good in every area I listed.



I am not sure about monks now. Before, they were easy enough to interrupt that monks were relatively slow. I never worked the numbers, but over 30 seconds in an actual, practical fight, I would expect warriors to get more attacks in than old monks. That was before this recent round of changes, though. Everything seems to be flipped now, so I don't know.

better to buff warriors than to fix bards or monks Thats all I was saying.

They are good in the areas you listed. But they are beaten by monks in speed, and by bards in damage. You'll have to pick out specific examples to get counterpoints, but I can just point at whole classes and have a nice proof of my arguments.
Also, another noteable thing. Vis bashed from, what, 92 to 98 in a week and a half as monk. As warrior, that took me about a month. I used to do 2.4k damage as a warrior with my damageruned, max damaged flails before DMP and with 24 str. I'd be lucky if that's 2k right now, without any wounds. 2k isn't hard to get as a bard, and a monk just needs some wounds and can start dishing out mean damage.

But still. I don't get how you can say onehanded warriors are the best bashers in the game. O.o

Because that way, other classes don't get their bashing nerfed!

Yeah, from what I've seen and heard, monk bashing is waaaaay too easy.

Am I the only one who feels DMP made warrior wounds really really screwy?

Not saying bards couldn't use some tweaking...but actually being one in combat situations really shows you how limited they are. I love when people use achromatic aura/egovice/etc and octave as an argument that bards are OP. I've never been caught in octave.



NO! It's either warriors are totally laughable and I can tank them until the sun goes down no matter how experienced they are, or they buy some arties and I've got 70,000 wounds in just under a minute...not an exaggeration. (well, it was closer to 71,000)

I wish I was more in the latter category than the former, but I'm just not... yet. I just haven't been buying the right arties to make me a DMP-capable warrior.

You know, if you guys really want, we can upgrade everyone else to fight like bards and monks, and then everyone will complain, only commercial systems and systems coded by experienced scripters will be viable, and things like trans magic, trans resilience, and trans combat will move from fairly important to bare combat requirement.

Just saying.

You don't think we're there already? Commercial combat systems do VERY well here, I think, and I'm constantly hearing it mentioned (usually in a whiny sort of tone) that trans magic/resilience/combat are needed for any sort of fighting.

I don't think we're there already, no. I do think it'll be a whole lot easier than dealing with dragging bards and monks down to everyone else's level (especially bards--there's one reasonable bard envoy and three that're like ZOMG DON'T NERF ME!!1 ). Blanknote and glamours through faeleaf are already in the chute, ninshi and choke will eventually get fixed, and then we'll just stop balancing downwards and upgrade everyone else instead.

Yay!