for the gwf why does everyone go swordmaster?

blackxxwolf3

i heard from everyone iron vanguard is better but all i see is swordmasters. whats up with this?

juleadream

Swordmaster was originally the only paragon path available for Great Weapon Fighters... I'd imagine a lot of the ones you see were rolled in the early days of the game. I myself have 2 GWFs... one IV and the other SM. Swordmaster "feels" more natural for the class, at least to me; much like Iron Vanguard seems more natural for GFs.

blackxxwolf3

ok thanks i was thinking of rolling one it looks like a lot of fun.

blackyluke

juleadream wrote: »

Swordmaster was originally the only paragon path available for Great Weapon Fighters... I'd imagine a lot of the ones you see were rolled in the early days of the game. I myself have 2 GWFs... one IV and the other SM. Swordmaster "feels" more natural for the class, at least to me; much like Iron Vanguard seems more natural for GFs.

True, but the main reason is that GWF has no strong AoE Encounter since Frontline Surge is nerfed (M4 Release). For this encounter people went IV. With the changes to Sprint using Threatening Rush is even more obsolete and a good GWF is all about his Sprint use.
Flourish is one of the best GWF encounters, it does a lot of damage and has a high crit rate due to multiple procs of damage from the encounter and if one of them crits - all crit.
Crescendo also does superior damage to Indomitable Strength which makes up for the longer cast time.
Pretty much everyone is using Daring Shout so you still have the mark that you lost from Threatening Rush.
I love Frontline Surge, I like Threatening - The GWF class playstyle doesnt come close to a "Great Weapon Fighter" in PvE. Your playstyle is more similar to what you'd expect a rogue would be. Dodge, stab, run, hit as much as possible as fast as possible, dodge again ~


Most GWFs come from M2(Deep Gash PvE) and M3(Roar, Destroyers Purpose PvP) when GWF were vastly overpowered. In module 1 and later beta phase GWF was unpopular. It is also a more simple appealing class with somewhat one-dimensional playstyle, this (don't force me to explain) makes it popular too. Once you've started playing GWF it's honestly easier to play than classes like TR, HR, DC and CW (at least if your trying to be good). So people stick with it. Also the lategame increased a lot in the last modules and switching your main or dropping a geared character is now a much more painful decision than ever.

lewel555

blackxxwolf3 wrote: »

i heard from everyone iron vanguard is better but all i see is swordmasters. whats up with this?

IV is better but still not good enough to make gwf a playable class. Nerfed class being nerfed, we may as well play it in the spirit of the DnD gwf. And that's swordmaster. We die, but we keep our honour and pride. Yes swordmaster makes us feeble and squishy, but at least it makes it clear and obvious for everyone that the class is cursed, when they see a gwf dying to one trash mob skeleton or rat.

lewel555

blackyluke wrote: »

a good GWF is all about his Sprint use.

Definitely not. Sprinting like a Serengeti antelope while wearing 100 pounds of armour and sword? In Chivalry movies, have you ever seen Ivanhoe running faster than Maurice Green?
Too bad there is no gwf class advocate to explain the devs that Sprint has to be replaced by, say, weapon block.

thestaggy

SM has superior DPS and hence is the preferred path the DPS-centric PVE part of the game.

However, IVs tend to dominate PVP. Threatening Rush, while limited, is still a valuable gap-closer and Frontline Surge, while nerfed, helps with controlling your opponent. SM's slow cast time on Flourish is also a bit of a liability against decent and better PVPers, the kind that does not stand still and let you just hit them. IV also gives you access to the broken Ferocious Reaction class feat.

xeezert

My first GWF was IV, my 2nd is SM and she's since gone on to be my main while the IV is just a leadership mule.

Personally, I just don't like IV mechanics. As SM you can keep WMS for AOE and SS for ST slotted and really not have to think about switching at-wills although one certainly could.

I'd like to use wicked strike but it pretty much almost gets me killed since you get stuck in the animation and can't sprint out of it sometimes, unlike WMS which is way more responsive. IVs would have to use wicked strike as an AOE. I'm not a fan of threatening rush either especially since they changed it to being charge based.

The things I really like about SM are the Crescendo "teleport" which is a nice way to launch yourself halfway across the screen to the big baddy, recover from a dragon knockback etc. and steel blitz + mighty leap/avalanche of steel/spinning strike on trash mobs which can be pretty devastating when timed right. Feated roar + steel blitz into a clustered mob will pretty much fill your determination bar as well.

I've no idea how the numbers compare for either, so I'm not saying one is better than the other although I feel like it might me a wash in the hands of a skilled player.

I just go by the playstyle that suits me more, speaking from a PVE perspective.

theoddis1

I have played both and I think its more what your playstyle is I know IV under the hard math will lose to a SM but I love being able to TR around the mobs and gather them with CAGI then bop them all down with FLS, does it do a lot of damage? meh its ok but that 3-5 second breather that it gives my whole party or an quick intterupt to keep a caster from casting ot a mob from leaping on the squishies tends to make my runs silky smooth

on the other hand some people enjoy the dash around do a bunch of damage and dash back out before your <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> gets pushed in for ya


the difference between SM and IV is so negligable that its basically ether or...

that being said mod 6 blows for GWF nether paragon is fun when your chain mail is made from fuzzy felt and Papier-mâché