romotheoneMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 729Arc User
It should be interesting to see the amount of LoL set procs both for me and for the GWF. The GWF reached 143k
CW did 14,7k
The problem here obviously lies within the insane multipliers. Yea, the GWF has a substantial higher base weapon damage, so everything else that multiplies is going to multiply a much higher number, but this isn't the actual problem. The problem is the multipliers. Even if you nerf the lostmauth set, because it hits like a truck, it is not going to solve future problems. Everything else that deals damage and is similar to what the lostmauth set does, it is going to be just as broken. I don't know which GWF player kept saying this, but he was right. Very right. Nerf the multipliers, give the GWF flat damage in exchange.
To clarify some things, we are generally fairly happy with where GWFs are in PVE. They are competitive, and do very solid damage for the risks they take being in melee range (where there are more consistent threats to worry about).
the same is valid for the "BIG pratical difference" in this game between your type of armor. well, rogues dont have the best damage, but by far the best tools to attack w;o counter. the PRATICAL reason WHY GWF DO SO MUCH DAMAGE
We as GWFs I presume!
It shouldnt do 2/3 times dmg as other dps classes with same gear.
The PVE Balance is getting embarassing in this game...
I remember that quote from crush, it was back in mod 5 and in relations to some gwf asking for significant increases in damage. I don't think there is a single gwf asking for more damage now (and that alone says much) and thus we can see that the quote he pulled has nothing at all to do with the state of the game currently. In fact pulling up that quote and posting it is an intentionally deceptive appeal to authority.
appeal to authority would be if I, instead to give valid arguments, i give my position and said that it is valid only because I am an expert in the subject or a subject expert agrees with me.
I have already given thousands of arguments in favor of my point - gwfs dont exercise a functions of "off tank" in these dungeons but DD - and have used this quote to demonstrate what the AUTHOR OF THE WORK told about it (he can be wrong about your projections, but is not).
briefly ... this is not an "appeal to authority ', but a simple citation
appeal to authority would be if I, instead to give valid arguments, i give my position and said that it is valid only because I am an expert in the subject or a subject expert agrees with me.
I have already given thousands of arguments in favor of my point - gwfs dont exercise a functions of "off tank" in these dungeons but DD - and have used this quote to demonstrate what the AUTHOR OF THE WORK told about it (he can be wrong about your projections, but is not).
briefly ... this is not an "appeal to authority ', but a simple citation
Eh? Yes it most certainly is.
I can also pull up many a "simple citation" of a quote where devs claim that they are going to buff/nerf x/y class for so and so reasons that have no relation at all to the current state of the game and if such buffs/nerfs were applied I could again pull up the original quotes ad infinitum but that would be rather dishonest and silly don't you think?
0
schweifer1982Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,662Arc User
Somthing is stinking about this 65300 power??????? WT???? I think any char can do this dmg with this power +Lol set+ with this crit chance even buffer dc .
Mybe he use rank 20 enchants??? Those stats are unreachable not even with stronghold boons.
He shoud teach us how to reach 100929 offensive stat.
I can also pull up many a "simple citation" of a quote where devs claim that they are going to buff/nerf x/y class for so and so reasons that have no relation at all to the current state of the game and if such buffs/nerfs were applied I could again pull up the original quotes ad infinitum but that would be rather dishonest and silly don't you think?
wait, wait, wait... that is not a "simple citation" that is the PROJECTION GIVE BY THE AUTHOR OF THE NEW DESIGNE about how gwf should work for now and why this or that dont will be changed.
commander say "gwf is a offtank - projected for that - so dont should do so much damage" than i show that projection,. he understand. you dont.
what you want about a balance projection is... a pratical balance. a real effect in the reality
The balance projection can be wrong - is not enough for a certain demand or how the player want your class - and worst, a class can be designeded to do "x" but, because of some factors, do "x and y". FROM THERE you can say "look devs, your projection dont work".
you see a "appeal to authority" where dont exist and now will read everthing wrinten by me through your illusions. deja vu...
have a sw that show the same or 80000k of power on preview, so i not will say that is fake. is just not a particular gwf thing.
i just want know how much power he have to be outdpsesd only by 2 times a gwf that have more than 150% of damage bonus. because, for that numbers in act should be much, much more.
I can also pull up many a "simple citation" of a quote where devs claim that they are going to buff/nerf x/y class for so and so reasons that have no relation at all to the current state of the game and if such buffs/nerfs were applied I could again pull up the original quotes ad infinitum but that would be rather dishonest and silly don't you think?
wait, wait, wait... that is not a "simple citation" that is the PROJECTION GIVE BY THE AUTHOR OF THE NEW DESIGNE about how gwf should work for now and why this or that dont will be changed.
commander say "gwf is a offtank - projected for that - so dont should do so much damage" than i show that projection,. he understand. you dont.
what you want about a balance projection is... a pratical balance. a real effect in the reality
The balance projection can be wrong - is not enough for a certain demand or how the player want your class - and worst, a class can be designeded to do "x" but, because of some factors, do "x and y". FROM THERE you can say "look devs, your projection dont work".
you see a "appeal to authority" where dont exist and now will read everthing wrinten by me through your illusions. deja vu...
Oh my word do you even have any idea about the original quote from the dev that you posted? "simple citation" is your words, not mine so now you don't even remember your own post and try to lay that on me? The only reason for you to post the dev quote from back in another era that had nothing at all to do with the current status is as an appeal to authority -- you used it as proof to validate and backup your claim that gwf should be doing double the damage of other strikers and that usage and reference a quote as proof (albeit a quote that is outdated and irrelevant) is an appeal to authority.
Again and back to the original post you quoted that you have no knowledge of what it was about at all. It was from a request for Buffs to GWF damage and not a concern they were doing too much. Put that into perspective with the current situation and anyone with even the simplest ability to reason would quickly realize that it has no relevance at all as to what stands now. You wield it like a greatsword to reinforce your position when in fact it is actually an official position contrary to the one you are assuming.
0
schweifer1982Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,662Arc User
have a sw that show the same or 80000k of power on preview, so i not will say that is fake. is just not a particular gwf thing.
i just want know how much power he have to be outdpsesd only by 2 times a gwf that have more than 150% of damage bonus. because, for that numbers in act should be much, much more.
I can beleive most of those, but the nerfing rogue one. I play a DPS rogue, they are not as powerful as GWF, are easily killed by CW's and have a hard time against tanks and dc's in pvp - and thats a full DPS spec, the stealth builds are worse, they survive longer and cause more agravation, but they're only saving grace is Shocking Execution which hasn't been all that effective in mod 6 anyway (does less damage against mobs than dazing strike and lashing blade for me - only reason people are still getting 1 hit or close to 1 hit with it is because they've got low defensive stats once their armour is ignored).
Also one to add: New race, they've got an active poll going, so not a big shocker.
... ok, that UNECESSARY discussion is in part my fault. the correct word for "simplesmente" is simply. that is not a context thing, you guys have a word for that.
maybe the correct is: "briefly ... this is not an 'appeal to authority ', but simply a citation"?
the rest is just like i predicted... dam karma.
0
romotheoneMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 729Arc User
have a sw that show the same or 80000k of power on preview, so i not will say that is fake. is just not a particular gwf thing.
i just want know how much power he have to be outdpsesd only by 2 times a gwf that have more than 150% of damage bonus. because, for that numbers in act should be much, much more.
It look fake to me also.
I just cheked him he have 35k power .
Also the CW have T.ligthning enchant. -50% dmg
The GWF have Vorpal.+50% dmg
This picture is total fake in all case.
if he have 35k- really, really big - lets calculete. all boons active in the same time+battle awaraness (do less power than say the tooltip, but lets do this) he can have take... ahn... 56312 of power +/-.
that means... nevermind
another thing: that is the laz points
the second best attribute of this guy is better than the laz. the best is, my god, 3 times better. AND A GUY HITTING A DAILY BY 200K DO ONLY 2XTIMES LESS? that is the neverwinter forum. DEVS, READ THAT? i hope so.
No damage boons and Borland didn't have his Stone companion summoned during the VT run.
No one is insterested in "details". Do the same run with the same team composition BUT remove Lostmauth set bonus from it and post the score table. Pretty easy to do.
doing the math is pretty easy thing to do too! Lostmauth set only has 20% dmg. 29% tops for a GWF! This GWF does 3 times dmg of the second one... And we are all interested in the details!
stock and stone I can master, but there's a Wizard to manage here!
It shouldnt do 2/3 times dmg as other dps classes with same gear.
The PVE Balance is getting embarassing in this game...
like i said in another post, some differences is more subjective (and qualitative) than material. for exemple, how much damage you do through your party using a debuff. if you quantify that, you will see that gfs do far more damage than a gwf, in pve, for example. is just a conditional attribute.)
about that romo posts: the single problem here - ignoring thats bizarre 65k of power - is a hipotetical ranger (or rogue... the third one) dont do 2/3 more damage than your cw too. but close to 2x less being DAMAGE A MAIN FUNCTION OF A STRIKER, NOT A CONTROLLER.
thats is the neverwinter forum. do 2x more damage than another class is ok, even if that is the function of another class, if you are a cw.
Will this be on your grave I presume?
1. Controller is aoe dmg. Its not forbidden to do dmg with it! Striker is only means higher single target dmg!
2. This striker-controller nonsense is a dead end and it was deleted in D&D 5.0...
DOING 2 TIMES DMG BETWEEN DPS CLASSES IS NOT OK! No other mmo has it. They have pve balance. The difference between dps classes with same gear and skill should be 10-20% tops like in other mmos!
stock and stone I can master, but there's a Wizard to manage here!
0
romotheoneMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 729Arc User
AND A GUY HITTING A DAILY BY 200K DO ONLY 2XTIMES LESS? that is the neverwinter forum. DEVS, READ THAT? i hope so.
You made some rounding mistakes, but yea... the GWF wasn't even using his Ioun Stone and it was Valindra's Tower. You know, that VT dungeon that has too many monsters scattered around for the GWF to hit them all at once. I was able to catch up. That elol (where it's mostly single target fights in the beginning), it started out with the GWF having 13 mil damage and me having 3 mil. Again, I managed to catch up when the GWF died at the scropions right at the beginning. Is the 200k Ice Knife the only thing you see? You are digging your own grave, speaking so highly of yourself like you are some genious and the only difficulty you have is the language barrier. Numbers and logical thinking are supposed to be international traits. I am using a Pure Lightning, you know, it doesn't enhance my other abilities, it only uses their mechanics to proc damaging effects. I am using a build that is effective and can compete with other CW builds, even tho it's not fully optimized yet.
Thank you for calling out the Devs on this. Hey Devs, increase Ice Knife damage, it's a daily, a GWF's at-will does 1,5x more damage. Thanks. /sarcasm off
Also, whats up with you and the citation of old, outdated quotes from devs? First, you tried to prove that you are right in the CW forum section by quoting mod 3 dev comments, saying that the CW was stronger than expected. How is that relevant after mod 7? The CW went through several nerfs since then. Now you are quoting a dev comment from the beginning of mod 6, when the GWF changes were still new and the only safety-net Cryptic had were the internal testing results. Now that it's obvious that the GWF is overpowered (even stated by the executive producer), how can you still be so much in denial?
You've lost all credibility.
Post edited by romotheone on
0
schweifer1982Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,662Arc User
If you have lol set and high crit chance around 100% then then any other enchant what you put on your char what is not P.vorpal is -50% dmg.
P.vorpal boost your lol set dmg too.
T.ligthing not do anything with lol set 1k dmg is nothing vs 50-60k .
I dont say the photo is fake i say the GWF is fake.
Noone have rank 20 stronghold to got the 8000 power boon ar anyithing else his total offensive stat is more then 100k.
He need at least rank 20 enchants to get this power.
He only had the lvl 3 HP boons from the Stronghold.
Not having a perfect or higher vorpal, doesn't mean that it puts you behind for as much as 50% damage. Even with 100% crit chance, if you are above 100% crit severity, Pvorpal with it's 50% crit sev, doesn't add 50% but less due to diminishing returns. Having a 100% crit chance uptime ALL THE TIME is close impossible, so that means the 50% crit severity is worth even less. Opposing to the huge base damage of the GWF's 2h weapon, the CW's base weapon is the lowest in the game, right next to the DC's. The Orb of Elemental Fire has a damage range of 1230 to 1504, while the GWF's is 1772 to 2166. Any damage multiplier, so in this case, the 50% crit severity, boosts your lostmauth procs by a lot more than it does for the CW. A Pvorp for a CW; doesn't add 50-60k damage to the lostmauth proc, it adds, maybe 5-6k. While this is still a great number, compared to the damage you'd deal without it and the fact that it also boost other damage sources that can crit, I still decided to go with the Pure Lightning. I'm using effects that do not have the ability to crit. (Storm Spell, Abyss of Chaos and now the Lightning enchantment as well)
I get the feeling that you and zacazu are trying to take a slice of the pie you can't digest. You guys claim to be GWF pros, but you seem to lack essential knowledge about the game.
I dont say the photo is fake i say the GWF is fake.
I'm not sure what you mean here. How can the GWF be fake, those were his stats when I inspected him during the eCC run we've had together. We had buffers in the group.
I am not interested if he had summoned his stone or not. I am more concerned about the same run, with the same build but without Lostmauth set.
If you think that doing the same run with a different build is "correct", then, not my problem. But you should look at that fear of yours about GWF-class...
You want army of screenshots and ACT parses where GWFs are doing 2-3* times as other dps classes with the same gear and with ALL have lostmauth set? Fine! You asked for it!
Wrong: Strikers are mean to deal DAMAGE. So, do not make diferences between "AoE" and "Single Target", because the "end" itself (deal damage) is what is mean to. That is the main reason that "strikers" have almost not "control". Controllers are mean to CONTROL. While "controlers" shall deal "damage", this "damage" must not be even near to "strikers".
If you think otherwise, you are totally wrong... but this is not the first time i explain this to you, right?
Google is your friend:
A character with the controller role primarily handles crowds by creating hazardous terrain and repositioning enemies, or spreading conditions and damage over multiple enemies.
Oh boy! When Sorcerer will be out you guys will cry for months...
stock and stone I can master, but there's a Wizard to manage here!
0
lazaroth666Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,332Arc User
Hey guys, for those who are interested in how he got 65k power, it's a very simple thing. Legendary companion (he's using a Dancing Blade) + 3xBonding R12 + Slam and other bonuses like rampaging madness, Prestidigitation, etc etc. However, remember that it is not 100% uptime and it would work fine mostly against bosses or enemies that aren't dead in 3s. If the companion is unable to grant you at least 2 stacks of companion's gift inmediately when you start the fight then you are actually fighting with lower stats than using an ioun stone.
"I'm not sure what you mean here. How can the GWF be fake, those were his stats when I inspected him during the eCC run we've had together. We had buffers in the group."
a super killer gwf have that powers during the dungeons and no boons active? if have buffers (and, my god, that is a lot of buffs and no one are given by gwfs to the party) why you show that status like if that is the main status of that gwf? you need be kicked from this forum. i dont even say nothing about that sad demonstration of your "aoe build". you just need be kicked.
now the most important is how much stupidy this guys are to understand that i use the quots not to do a "quantitative" reference, but a "qualitaty reference" or just to discuss the sense of some cencept. that i will do again, for fun, to response the same destroyed argument of commander if dont come some ***** say that is "appeal to autority".
"control is damage too". lets show the INTERNAL AND DEV consensus about that:
1 - "One of the primary questions we received was regarding the design goal of the Great Weapon Fighter. From a systems design perspective, the Great Weapon Fighter is designed to be a class that excels at AoE DPS and taking hits while providing a bit of control to the fight."
how a class can "excels at AoE DPS" and provid just a bit of control if aoe damage is control? death is not the best control? remember, dont matter how old that is, that is a concept analysis.
2 - Control Wizards primarily focus on controlling the battlefield and dealing damage to a large number of creatures simultaneously. Because of the wizard's role as a controller, they possess more crowd control options than any other class. Their ability to deal high amounts of damage gives them the secondary role of striker.
in the first prase you have a "oração coordenativa aditiva" - no idea how you guys call that - cws do damage and control. now:
"Their ability to deal high amounts of damage gives them the secondary role of striker" that means, the ability to give high amounts against multiples targets give the secondary role of striker. here, the strikers paper come to a quantitative reference. not qualitative (big damages against one)
now the best:
3 - "Control Wizards filled too many roles in groups and were more often than not the “right” choice for a group over other class, and this was very frustrating for people who played other classes."
back in this time, that means control and damage in general.
"Overall the changes will leave Control Wizards with more direct competition in group content and will let them more strongly fill the position of controlling all the foes on the battle field or doing heavy damage, but not both at once."
OR A OR B, BUT NOT BOTH AT ONCE. what is A OR B? damage and control!
and all that cry is based in that... note: that "dev quots is old"? ok, that quote about strikers be single target come to the inspiration of that game. the antecedent, that means. MORE OLD. that old devs quots is not valid because the game are changed... and no the concept of strikers here?
that is the neverwinter forum.
Post edited by zacazu on
0
romotheoneMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 729Arc User
It's funny how you simply pick certain Dev quotes and wikipedia articles that fit your agenda but are unable to adapt your own thoughts to the dynamic development of the game.
It's funny how you simply pick certain Dev quotes and wikipedia articles that fit your agenda but are unable to adapt your own thoughts to the dynamic development of the game.
for who is new in that discussion, now that guys will start to take generical parts of my text, ignoring what alread have be answered and for who that are answered .
Please only use English on these forums. Thank you.
Post edited by kreatyve on
0
romotheoneMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 729Arc User
But that's the thing. If you can't express yourself properly, how should we expect you to even understand what the discussion is about?
Okay, let me get this straight... you want to nerf this class because of just one person did that much damage??? there are plenty other people out there that can do this much damage too [Doesn't have to be GWF]. So, why get mad that this person just because spent their time & money to get this outstanding in their character/class. Also, look how long it took to do those dungeon & the amount of damage even with those stats. By the way, don't forget that they have a set that increases there damage, but you know this... you know how to get it. My question to you is; Why not go out and get it yourself?? Also, the party they are with are set up to increase party member stats & debuff enemies to increase damage. One more thing, Let's not forget that the sole purpose if Great Weapon Fighter (GWF) is a DPS class.
Comments
CW did 14,7k
The problem here obviously lies within the insane multipliers. Yea, the GWF has a substantial higher base weapon damage, so everything else that multiplies is going to multiply a much higher number, but this isn't the actual problem. The problem is the multipliers. Even if you nerf the lostmauth set, because it hits like a truck, it is not going to solve future problems. Everything else that deals damage and is similar to what the lostmauth set does, it is going to be just as broken.
I don't know which GWF player kept saying this, but he was right. Very right. Nerf the multipliers, give the GWF flat damage in exchange.
[Combat (Self)] Critical Hit! Your Lostmauth's Vengeance deals 43477 (34234) Physical Damage to Target Dummy.
sorry, is more than 50% OVER a sure strike CRITICAL (+executioner style).
they dont understand the difference between 25% before and 50% OVER a critical after...
I have already given thousands of arguments in favor of my point - gwfs dont exercise a functions of "off tank" in these dungeons but DD - and have used this quote to demonstrate what the AUTHOR OF THE WORK told about it (he can be wrong about your projections, but is not).
briefly ... this is not an "appeal to authority ', but a simple citation
I can also pull up many a "simple citation" of a quote where devs claim that they are going to buff/nerf x/y class for so and so reasons that have no relation at all to the current state of the game and if such buffs/nerfs were applied I could again pull up the original quotes ad infinitum but that would be rather dishonest and silly don't you think?
I think any char can do this dmg with this power +Lol set+ with this crit chance even buffer dc .
Mybe he use rank 20 enchants???
Those stats are unreachable not even with stronghold boons.
He shoud teach us how to reach 100929 offensive stat.
hm... hack?
Omg that guy is pathetic x3
I can also pull up many a "simple citation" of a quote where devs claim that they are going to buff/nerf x/y class for so and so reasons that have no relation at all to the current state of the game and if such buffs/nerfs were applied I could again pull up the original quotes ad infinitum but that would be rather dishonest and silly don't you think?
wait, wait, wait... that is not a "simple citation" that is the PROJECTION GIVE BY THE AUTHOR OF THE NEW DESIGNE about how gwf should work for now and why this or that dont will be changed.
commander say "gwf is a offtank - projected for that - so dont should do so much damage" than i show that projection,. he understand. you dont.
what you want about a balance projection is... a pratical balance. a real effect in the reality
The balance projection can be wrong - is not enough for a certain demand or how the player want your class - and worst, a class can be designeded to do "x" but, because of some factors, do "x and y". FROM THERE you can say "look devs, your projection dont work".
you see a "appeal to authority" where dont exist and now will read everthing wrinten by me through your illusions. deja vu...
i just want know how much power he have to be outdpsesd only by 2 times a gwf that have more than 150% of damage bonus. because, for that numbers in act should be much, much more.
Again and back to the original post you quoted that you have no knowledge of what it was about at all. It was from a request for Buffs to GWF damage and not a concern they were doing too much. Put that into perspective with the current situation and anyone with even the simplest ability to reason would quickly realize that it has no relevance at all as to what stands now. You wield it like a greatsword to reinforce your position when in fact it is actually an official position contrary to the one you are assuming.
I just cheked him he have 35k power .
Also the CW have T.ligthning enchant. -50% dmg
The GWF have Vorpal.+50% dmg
This picture is total fake in all case.
Also one to add: New race, they've got an active poll going, so not a big shocker.
maybe the correct is: "briefly ... this is not an 'appeal to authority ', but simply a citation"?
the rest is just like i predicted... dam karma.
http://29a.ch/photo-forensics/#clone-detection
I'm using a pure lightning and how is that -50% damage and the vorpal +50% damage? You are spouting so much blsht that it hurts.
that means... nevermind
another thing: that is the laz points
the second best attribute of this guy is better than the laz. the best is, my god, 3 times better.
AND A GUY HITTING A DAILY BY 200K DO ONLY 2XTIMES LESS? that is the neverwinter forum. DEVS, READ THAT? i hope so.
Lostmauth set only has 20% dmg. 29% tops for a GWF!
This GWF does 3 times dmg of the second one...
And we are all interested in the details!
1.
Controller is aoe dmg. Its not forbidden to do dmg with it!
Striker is only means higher single target dmg!
2.
This striker-controller nonsense is a dead end and it was deleted in D&D 5.0...
DOING 2 TIMES DMG BETWEEN DPS CLASSES IS NOT OK!
No other mmo has it.
They have pve balance.
The difference between dps classes with same gear and skill should be 10-20% tops like in other mmos!
Is the 200k Ice Knife the only thing you see? You are digging your own grave, speaking so highly of yourself like you are some genious and the only difficulty you have is the language barrier. Numbers and logical thinking are supposed to be international traits. I am using a Pure Lightning, you know, it doesn't enhance my other abilities, it only uses their mechanics to proc damaging effects. I am using a build that is effective and can compete with other CW builds, even tho it's not fully optimized yet.
http://giant.gfycat.com/WindyFirsthandAddax.webm
Thank you for calling out the Devs on this. Hey Devs, increase Ice Knife damage, it's a daily, a GWF's at-will does 1,5x more damage. Thanks. /sarcasm off
Also, whats up with you and the citation of old, outdated quotes from devs? First, you tried to prove that you are right in the CW forum section by quoting mod 3 dev comments, saying that the CW was stronger than expected. How is that relevant after mod 7? The CW went through several nerfs since then.
Now you are quoting a dev comment from the beginning of mod 6, when the GWF changes were still new and the only safety-net Cryptic had were the internal testing results. Now that it's obvious that the GWF is overpowered (even stated by the executive producer), how can you still be so much in denial?
You've lost all credibility.
P.vorpal boost your lol set dmg too.
T.ligthing not do anything with lol set 1k dmg is nothing vs 50-60k .
I dont say the photo is fake i say the GWF is fake.
Noone have rank 20 stronghold to got the 8000 power boon ar anyithing else his total offensive stat is more then 100k.
He need at least rank 20 enchants to get this power.
Not having a perfect or higher vorpal, doesn't mean that it puts you behind for as much as 50% damage. Even with 100% crit chance, if you are above 100% crit severity, Pvorpal with it's 50% crit sev, doesn't add 50% but less due to diminishing returns. Having a 100% crit chance uptime ALL THE TIME is close impossible, so that means the 50% crit severity is worth even less.
Opposing to the huge base damage of the GWF's 2h weapon, the CW's base weapon is the lowest in the game, right next to the DC's. The Orb of Elemental Fire has a damage range of 1230 to 1504, while the GWF's is 1772 to 2166. Any damage multiplier, so in this case, the 50% crit severity, boosts your lostmauth procs by a lot more than it does for the CW. A Pvorp for a CW; doesn't add 50-60k damage to the lostmauth proc, it adds, maybe 5-6k. While this is still a great number, compared to the damage you'd deal without it and the fact that it also boost other damage sources that can crit, I still decided to go with the Pure Lightning. I'm using effects that do not have the ability to crit. (Storm Spell, Abyss of Chaos and now the Lightning enchantment as well)
I get the feeling that you and zacazu are trying to take a slice of the pie you can't digest. You guys claim to be GWF pros, but you seem to lack essential knowledge about the game. I'm not sure what you mean here. How can the GWF be fake, those were his stats when I inspected him during the eCC run we've had together. We had buffers in the group.
Fine! You asked for it! Google is your friend:
A character with the controller role primarily handles crowds by creating hazardous terrain and repositioning enemies, or spreading conditions and damage over multiple enemies.
Oh boy! When Sorcerer will be out you guys will cry for months...
a super killer gwf have that powers during the dungeons and no boons active? if have buffers (and, my god, that is a lot of buffs and no one are given by gwfs to the party) why you show that status like if that is the main status of that gwf? you need be kicked from this forum. i dont even say nothing about that sad demonstration of your "aoe build". you just need be kicked.
now the most important is how much stupidy this guys are to understand that i use the quots not to do a "quantitative" reference, but a "qualitaty reference" or just to discuss the sense of some cencept. that i will do again, for fun, to response the same destroyed argument of commander if dont come some ***** say that is "appeal to autority".
"control is damage too". lets show the INTERNAL AND DEV consensus about that:
1 - "One of the primary questions we received was regarding the design goal of the Great Weapon Fighter. From a systems design perspective, the Great Weapon Fighter is designed to be a class that excels at AoE DPS and taking hits while providing a bit of control to the fight."
how a class can "excels at AoE DPS" and provid just a bit of control if aoe damage is control? death is not the best control? remember, dont matter how old that is, that is a concept analysis.
2 - Control Wizards primarily focus on controlling the battlefield and dealing damage to a large number of creatures simultaneously. Because of the wizard's role as a controller, they possess more crowd control options than any other class. Their ability to deal high amounts of damage gives them the secondary role of striker.
in the first prase you have a "oração coordenativa aditiva" - no idea how you guys call that - cws do damage and control. now:
"Their ability to deal high amounts of damage gives them the secondary role of striker" that means, the ability to give high amounts against multiples targets give the secondary role of striker. here, the strikers paper come to a quantitative reference. not qualitative (big damages against one)
now the best:
3 - "Control Wizards filled too many roles in groups and were more often than not the “right” choice for a group over other class, and this was very frustrating for people who played other classes."
back in this time, that means control and damage in general.
"Overall the changes will leave Control Wizards with more direct competition in group content and will let them more strongly fill the position of controlling all the foes on the battle field or doing heavy damage, but not both at once."
OR A OR B, BUT NOT BOTH AT ONCE. what is A OR B? damage and control!
and all that cry is based in that... note: that "dev quots is old"? ok, that quote about strikers be single target come to the inspiration of that game. the antecedent, that means. MORE OLD. that old devs quots is not valid because the game are changed... and no the concept of strikers here?
that is the neverwinter forum.
Please only use English on these forums. Thank you.
Here is the wiki to the great weapon fighter: [educate yourself]
http://neverwinter.gamepedia.com/Great_Weapon_Fighter
Learn more about D&D GWFs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_(Dungeons_&_Dragons)
This tells somthing .
Next time if you post somthing press the X on blackdaggers corpse in the boss room.