Yea, so many times i see some idiot GWF standing in one corner trying to beat one elite mob while theres 15 normal mobs hitting the cleric...
GWF is also very gear dependant, they scale very good in endgame.
In PvP if i stand toe to toe against a GWF using his tabskill, ill die if i dont run away and wait for it to end.
They CAN dish out ALOT of damage if played right, yet i think they should do even more AoE damage, not ST damage.
If theres any class that is op based on their classdescription and what they have ontop of their dps its CW
Read the description of the GWF. No where does it describe an AoE class. I think a lot of people who chose the GWF had different expectations and that's why you're seeing the rage. I just wish it wasn't so gimped as to be a one-trick pony class. All arguments aside, it doesn't even do what it's supposed to do that great.
As far as realism goes, this game has magic so realism is out the window lol. Rogues can step into shadows, teleport, summon a giant dagger the size of an ogre that crashes down on your head lol. Realism argument is <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> seeing as this game doesn't follow the laws of our world.
Yes I've heard this type of argument many times in defence of accusations that it just doesn't make any kind of realistic sense for a butter-knife wielding, leather pants wearing skinny guy to do even remotely as much damage as a linebacker covered in steel swinging a 6 foot long greatsword. The argument is basically as follows: The subject matter is confined to fiction therefore realism and probabilities are forfeit. Besides being counter-intuitive (and the fact that some of the in-game examples mentioned above should not be taken at face value and are visual exagerations for spectacular effect; i.e. no giant dagger is summoned), this view is blatantly ignorant of what makes all fiction good: the suspension of disbelief. But don't take my word for it. "Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
I have been through the whole forum. Some say the CW is op then a next says the GDF and then the GWF. Its about learning about what roll your character plays, and I can only say this argument started because some GWF was owned by a rogue when was already on half health! A rogue can take care of lots creeps, but can not hold off one giant enemy 1v1 or GWF for that matter. Did none of you watch the cinematic in the beginning of the game? the Rogue is out front and its only when the big Zombie comes does she have a problem and needs the assist of the Cleric and GWF, while the CW (wait for it) controls all other surrounding damage and threats to the party!!
What would happen if the Rogues HP and damage is lowered?? The class would become useless and would not be able to perform her roll!! And its not like that hasn't already happened, every dungeon I run all other classes totally ignore traps and points of weakness to just smash anything that moves just so they can be out front, forgetting the rogue is supposed to flank/infiltrate/execute and deal a large amounts of direct damage to single targets and be able to clear the path for the rest!!
Rolling natural d20s every time?! No class is that lucky.
The GWF needs to do more damage overall in both single target and AoE at-wills along with encounters and dailies. There should be no reason for the rogue's at-wills to do twice the damage the GWF's do. In fact it should be the other way around. I don't want TR damage nerfed, but GWF damage needs to be increased. The TR would still top the DPS charts simply because the TR still gets more damage due to speed, 2 weapons vs 1. A TR can actually take out mobs faster than a GWF can in most cases. even though they are attacking them one at a time. On basic trash mobs it takes a TR 2 attacks to kill a single trash mob, 1 if he crits. Now without Unstoppable active, Using reaping strike it takes 2 fully charged attacks at 3 seconds each to take out a 1 health bar group of mobs. Or 5 swings with Wicked or WMS. It just shouldn't take a class based on the highest strength, and biggest weapon in the game 5 hits whether in groups or single, to kill trash mobs.
And yes GWF is basically AoE, but that's no reason to neglect it's single target's attacks too. 95% of this game is solo gameplay, and fact is after the GWF is done using his aoe's to kill adds, in most cases he's still left alone against a single powerful boss and that's where his one single target at-will, encounters and dalies, all come into play. Being conservative, against a boss with 100K health doing 200 ~ 300 damage per hit depending on level/equipment, and the occasional 1 or 2 K encounter or daily. it's still going to take a gwf upwards of 500 hits to kill the boss and that's if the boss doesn't have a heal mechanic.
i would like to see buff to GWF AoE like a flat 10-15 % would be fine. dont nerf TR. its suppose to be single target burner. maybe just nerf TRs ulti-one-shotter in PvP by making it not ignore every defense mitigation.
Trust me when I say, nerfing Shocking execution for pvp will do more harm then good.
Honestly do you want to encourage the idiots of the game to use Lurkers assault more?
I killed 3 people in 10 seconds whilst in lurkers assault.
So yeah go ahead and nerf the "when below 50% kill this person" skill because then people will just use Lurkers religiously and then you will see how quickly people die.
It won't be one shots it will be a friggin bloodbath.
The Best PVP Guild on Dragon/Neverwinter: YoloOldSkoolSwagLoveNeverGingersLuvDupStep even if it's just one of us, you might as well just afk.
I personally could care less about pvp balance, the majority of players don't play PVP or do so very rarely, what counts is class survivability and avoiding long drawn out battles in PvE and that in and of itself will improve effectiveness on those occasions when the average player does pvp.
I was top damage on, the bridge skirmish as a GWF, level 57. And my gear is just so-so. That battle had endless adds pretty much. its funny but alot of GWF do not know they have abilities that hit multiple targets including the boss.
If you stand in once place you are gonna get burned, I mean "someone" has to get the top spot but don't let it be a melee class, gotta keep moving.
Actually, rogues should hit harder than Fighters, they always did, because of backstab/sneak attacks. Ever played Neverwinter Nights? Rogues hit way harder than fighters.
I'd be fine with rogued focusing more on sneak attack burst damage instead of sustained damage, but people rage enough about a rouges burst as it is, do you really want to see them bursting for more?
I do think GWFs need a buff, but rogues are fine as thy are, and GWFs shouldn't be hitting harder, they have AoE damage and durability to compensate for the rouges higher single target damage.
Actually, rogues should hit harder than Fighters, they always did, because of backstab/sneak attacks. Ever played Neverwinter Nights? Rogues hit way harder than fighters.
I'd be fine with rogued focusing more on sneak attack burst damage instead of sustained damage, but people rage enough about a rouges burst as it is, do you really want to see them bursting for more?
I do think GWFs need a buff, but rogues are fine as thy are, and GWFs shouldn't be hitting harder, they have AoE damage and durability to compensate for the rouges higher single target damage.
That's where you're wrong... we're talking basic attack damage. Rogue should never do more basic attack damage than a GWF and no they didn't in NWN. Mechanics such as backstab, and sneak attack are expressed by their encounters and dailies, not their basic at-wills. When it comes to basics DPS the thieves make up for it in frequency of attack, 2 weapons vs 1. and AOE's on a GWF's part mean nothing when it takes him 6 swings of that aoe attack to kill trash mobs. the rogue can do the same group in 1 hit each, and for basic at-wills that's just wrong.
That's where you're wrong... we're talking basic attack damage. Rogue should never do more basic attack damage than a GWF and no they didn't in NWN. Mechanics such as backstab, and sneak attack are expressed by their encounters and dailies, not their basic at-wills. When it comes to basics DPS the thieves make up for it in frequency of attack, 2 weapons vs 1. and AOE's on a GWF's part mean nothing when it takes him 6 swings of that aoe attack to kill trash mobs. the rogue can do the same group in 1 hit each, and for basic at-wills that's just wrong.
No rogue is killing dungeon trash mobs in a single hit with at-will attacks.
All good GWF's and GF's must be laughing their butts off when reading threads like these LOL. They're like 'o, soon we'll be able to do equal or more dps as rogues but have better perks olololo!'. Yeah, way to go idiot. Can't wait to get prone'd/stunlock'd to death in 3 hits, or 4 hits with a buffed at-will strike of the prone/stunlock didn't finish it already. Hoping PWE/Cryptic will stay sane and not give into all these clueless scrubs. I fear that they will probably take all this false feedback into consideration when they attempt to 'balance the classes' though.
Oh and for the record, rogues have always done the most damage in D&D if played correctly. It's working fine the way it is atm - more dps when in stealth mode, harder to kill targs when not in stealth mode, hit hard on CW/rogues, hit a lot less on GF/GWF (unstoppable). I don't see the problem.
David Valtiere, Lvl 70 TR with perfect Lvl 60 gear which I don't want to replace cause nostalgia yo ;_;
TR > Striker Role, with Controller secondary
GWF > Defender Role, with Striker secondary
This game follows D&D 4e, so they really should've given a small explanation of those roles so people could stop complaining.
Also, GWF = highest AoE damage in the game.
Basically this, in 4E they've got the rogue right, they hit hard and get sneak attack whenever they have combat advantage, which is fairly easy to obtain. They are strikers with full striker mechanics. GWF in 4E is a defender (not a striker) with full defender mechanics, he just uses a big 2-hander instead of sword and board.
A 4E Essentials Slayer is a full striker using the Fighter class, instead of a defender, that is what I think Cryptic should have used. Or a Rageblood Barbarian. Cryptic seems to have lost their vision for what they wanted the GWF to be. In 4E he is a defender same as the GF, in NW however, Cryptic kinda went with part defender, and part striker, and left the class with an identity crisis. I think people who chose GWF were hoping straight up for a 2-handed weapon striker.
Basically this, in 4E they've got the rogue right, they hit hard and get sneak attack whenever they have combat advantage, which is fairly easy to obtain. They are strikers with full striker mechanics. GWF in 4E is a defender (not a striker) with full defender mechanics, he just uses a big 2-hander instead of sword and board.
A 4E Essentials Slayer is a full striker using the Fighter class, instead of a defender, that is what I think Cryptic should have used. Or a Rageblood Barbarian. Cryptic seems to have lost their vision for what they wanted the GWF to be. In 4E he is a defender same as the GF, in NW however, Cryptic kinda went with part defender, and part striker, and left the class with an identity crisis. I think people who chose GWF were hoping straight up for a 2-handed weapon striker.
4th edition roles aren't relevant to what the NW roles actually are. In NW GWFs are striker primary and defender secondary, so that's what people expect GWFs to perform as.
While it "feels" wrong for the GWF to that kind of pathetic dmg per hit, from a balance standpoint it's ok. The real problem aren't TRs, but CWs. Rogues are nice to stick on the boss and forget about them, but that's about it. The CW does way too much damage for it's CC abilities. You get comparable AE dmg, but far superior single target dmg and control than the GWF, rendering them pretty much obsolete. And since all the bossencunters are essentially the same, the most effective groupsetup is 1-2 DCs, 2-3 CWs and the last spot doesn't really matter, but a TR completes it best.
Yes, when able to go all out on groups of mobs a GWF will outdamage pretty much everyone, but it's just damage, and if this game has something in overabundancy it's classes dealing damage.
That's where you're wrong... we're talking basic attack damage. Rogue should never do more basic attack damage than a GWF and no they didn't in NWN. Mechanics such as backstab, and sneak attack are expressed by their encounters and dailies, not their basic at-wills. When it comes to basics DPS the thieves make up for it in frequency of attack, 2 weapons vs 1. and AOE's on a GWF's part mean nothing when it takes him 6 swings of that aoe attack to kill trash mobs. the rogue can do the same group in 1 hit each, and for basic at-wills that's just wrong.
First, NWN was based off of 3.5. Not 4e. Which proves how much you actually know. And yes, the rogue did far more damage in 3.5 NWN than a fighter. There wasn't even encounter powers or dailies in NWN. Which again, proves you don't know what you are talking about. The rogues damage was based off of a simple formula, weapon damage + Str mod + Sneak Attack Damage. They had this bonus ALL THE TIME as long as the target was flatfooted (CA/Stealth) or had more than one player attacking it (Flanking). One hit from a Rogue in position did more damage than a 2-handed Str fighter.
And if you want to be 'technical' about combat, a 2-handed sword trying to hit 6 mobs in one swing is literally impossible. It would be stopped immediately by the first targets mass....
4th edition roles aren't relevant to what the NW roles actually are. In NW GWFs are striker primary and defender secondary, so that's what people expect GWFs to perform as.
And he does. Striker AND defender. Not just Striker. Whether you choose to ignore the defender part or not is what's irrelevant. They are not a pure striker. Stated both in 4e rules and the devs description of the class on the front page.
If people want to talk about D&D 4e they should at least play it.
Rogues will significantly outdamage even a DPS focused fighter on a single target in 4e. There is no comparison. They require combat advantage to do that damage, but that is pretty tivial to get most of the time. There is an "essentials" class fighter that can compete with rogues called a "slayer" that is extremely one dimensional (no encounter powers, boring as hell to play) and I really hope they stay away from essentials classes in this game.
In an AoE situation a fighter can do more overall damage than a rogue. This comes down to the fact that they have more AoE encounter powers. A ranged rogue (sling/xbow/shortbow), however, can do more AoE at higher levels. Rogues also don't have any AoE at will powers which the fighter does get a couple. Fighters also bring good control with marks and powers like Come and Get it.
Durability wise a 4e rogue will have less HP but generally better defenses and more way to avoid damage than a DPS fighter. Unstoppable does make GWFs significantly tougher than rogues so I think it's ok in NW.
I have a 60 cleric and just last night got my GWF to 60. I'm going to start doing dungeons with him and I'll see how I fare on the damage charts. In PvP, without even really speccing for PvP, I'm not really having any more problems than anyone else in that CWs are annoying as hell and occasionally a rogue daily will just destroy you. If my daily is up I can kill any wizard/rogue in one combo of daily + encounter powers with chain CC. Ray of enfeeblement is incredibly OP and absolutely wrecks you even in unstoppable but that's for a different thread.
I'm really looking forward to dungeons on this guy because playing a cleric has become pretty boring for me. GWFs also have awesome looking armor and weapons.
Overall I think GWFs need some small buffs but nothing major. TRs are in a good place IMO. The only things that need to be nerfed in this game are stacking astral shield, ray of enfeeblement's debuff (which stacks from multiple wizards), and stacking CC in PvP. Everything else is just buffing classes a small amount and changes to the aggro system.
If people want to talk about D&D 4e they should at least play it.
Rogues will significantly outdamage even a DPS focused fighter on a single target in 4e. There is no comparison. They require combat advantage to do that damage, but that is pretty tivial to get most of the time. There is an "essentials" class fighter that can compete with rogues called a "slayer" that is extremely one dimensional (no encounter powers, boring as hell to play) and I really hope they stay away from essentials classes in this game.
In an AoE situation a fighter can do more overall damage than a rogue. This comes down to the fact that they have more AoE encounter powers. A ranged rogue (sling/xbow/shortbow), however, can do more AoE at higher levels. Rogues also don't have any AoE at will powers which the fighter does get a couple. Fighters also bring good control with marks and powers like Come and Get it.
Durability wise a 4e rogue will have less HP but generally better defenses and more way to avoid damage than a DPS fighter. Unstoppable does make GWFs significantly tougher than rogues so I think it's ok in NW.
I have a 60 cleric and just last night got my GWF to 60. I'm going to start doing dungeons with him and I'll see how I fare on the damage charts. In PvP, without even really speccing for PvP, I'm not really having any more problems than anyone else in that CWs are annoying as hell and occasionally a rogue daily will just destroy you. If my daily is up I can kill any wizard/rogue in one combo of daily + encounter powers with chain CC. Ray of enfeeblement is incredibly OP and absolutely wrecks you even in unstoppable but that's for a different thread.
I'm really looking forward to dungeons on this guy because playing a cleric has become pretty boring for me. GWFs also have awesome looking armor and weapons.
Overall I think GWFs need some small buffs but nothing major. TRs are in a good place IMO. The only things that need to be nerfed in this game are stacking astral shield, ray of enfeeblement's debuff (which stacks from multiple wizards), and stacking CC in PvP. Everything else is just buffing classes a small amount and changes to the aggro system.
^^^^Everything that this person said is 100% correct. Quite rare to see on these forums lol. +1.
David Valtiere, Lvl 70 TR with perfect Lvl 60 gear which I don't want to replace cause nostalgia yo ;_;
Why will dps-player never be satisfied until their chosen class deals the most damage out of all classes, in all situations? It's always the same story. There are single-target dps classes and there are AoE-dps classes. GWF is the latter. They will never out-damage single-target dps classes on single targets.
Even factoring in AOE damage...the single target rogue still out dps's the aoe class in an aoe fight...FAQ?
^^^^Everything that this person said is 100% correct. Quite rare to see on these forums lol. +1.
I'm having a 4e marathon weekend with probably 6-8 hours on both Saturday and Sunday. All of our women are either working or out of town this weekend and we are going to be rolling lots and lots of dice.
The party we're running is a Warden, Warlord, Rogue and Wizard.
Im tired of all the "im not top dps even though i rolled a controll, defence/healer class" posts..
TR should ALWAYS be top in dps charts, their the only dps class. Their also extremly squishy in PvE content, the typical glasscannon.
TR basicly have no AoE skills and are only good for bosses, and aoe disarming trashmobs.
So you want to take that away aswell becouse you want to be top dog in ST on bosses aswell? yea..sounds really fair.
Theres only a handful good GWF out there, that actually tries to play ther class as a GWF and not a single target dps class, that ends up in top 2 just below the Rogue, which they should be.
When the TR gets nerfed becouse of all the whining and it will be the worst class to bring to dungeons, every scrub CW and GWF will think their fine becouse they get higher dps in the charts, and TR cant kill them in PvP.
GWF should be the best AoE class, that i agree, CW shouldnt be as good in AoE as they are now, their a controll class. Clerics shouldnt do as much AoE either.
In no situations should any other class then a Rogue be at the top in the charts, and by a good margin.
So you just don't get it do you?
500 mobs surround you....AOE flies everywhere...yet at the end of the day...the single target TR still is out dps'n the aoe machine GWF.
And no...Rogues did not start out the TOP DPS class. Go back to the roots. You let the fighter initiate....you sneak around back... then backstab for lots of damage...then bounce out so that you did not get one shot. You moved around a lot....you did not do as the fighter and hold the choke point while the wizard that is behind you is shooting rays of death all over the place.
The true DPS master has and always will be the Mage/Wizard class....end of discussion.
500 mobs surround you....AOE flies everywhere...yet at the end of the day...the single target TR still is out dps'n the aoe machine GWF.
And no...Rogues did not start out the TOP DPS class. Go back to the roots. You let the fighter initiate....you sneak around back... then backstab for lots of damage...then bounce out so that you did not get one shot. You moved around a lot....you did not do as the fighter and hold the choke point while the wizard that is behind you is shooting rays of death all over the place.
The true DPS master has and always will be the Mage/Wizard class....end of discussion.
Making **** up. If you're a GWF and using aoe consistently and built for it, but getting outdamaged by a TR, you're just bad. Why don't you make a character on Mindflayer and whisper Brooser and ask him what his build is and how he plays.
For the OP, I agree with you on most things when it comes to GWF needing a serious damage buff. But don't nerf classes that are doing well and players are having fun with. Instead bring the lower dps classes up and make them feel overpowered too.
If everybody can reck everybody regardless of class then it will be player skill that determines how good a class performs instead of wonky classy design.
0
basscreat0rMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited May 2013
I agree with OP.
0
battlereaverMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 1Arc User
edited May 2013
All the ignorant rants aside... I have a TR and GWF and my TR trumps my GWF in DPS no problem. As much as I like the argument of "If you know how to play like me you can be number one!" I kind of have to take the stance of if you know how to play it and got it down perfect then why do mediocre rogues keep up in damage?
I am not requesting myself personally that I top the charts and become number one over night. But what I am requesting is to make GWF more useful. If someone is trying to build an ideal group its 3CW and 2 DC or swap a CW for a TR. Leaving the sure it works group swapping a GF for one of the DC. But yet GWF does mediocre damage (based on the fact everyone is maximizing their damage output and functionality) and doesn't hold threat because of this as well and when you do happen to get threat you are a little softer than you should be. But then you have some good CW that knows how to play his class able to CC the room and rotate with another CW if they swap the GWF for another one making AOE tanking non-existent. The way I built my GWF is to keep unstoppable up as much as possible as well as being able to spam slam. I do around 8mil to 9mil damage (even broke 10 mil a couple times) in instances but only to see a couple TR above me at 12-13 million done. I would just like to see the heavier armor classes to feel like heavier armor classes and not a oh well you don't have dodge or block so here soak this up and get one shot by the boss because you didn't sprint fast enough out of the red circle or lagged lol. I really do like my GWF I would just like to have my role in a group where if I am not trying to PUG a castle never group I don't get dropped saying nah we need another CW or TR instead.
Comments
GWF is also very gear dependant, they scale very good in endgame.
In PvP if i stand toe to toe against a GWF using his tabskill, ill die if i dont run away and wait for it to end.
They CAN dish out ALOT of damage if played right, yet i think they should do even more AoE damage, not ST damage.
If theres any class that is op based on their classdescription and what they have ontop of their dps its CW
http://www.loremaster.org
Yes I've heard this type of argument many times in defence of accusations that it just doesn't make any kind of realistic sense for a butter-knife wielding, leather pants wearing skinny guy to do even remotely as much damage as a linebacker covered in steel swinging a 6 foot long greatsword. The argument is basically as follows: The subject matter is confined to fiction therefore realism and probabilities are forfeit. Besides being counter-intuitive (and the fact that some of the in-game examples mentioned above should not be taken at face value and are visual exagerations for spectacular effect; i.e. no giant dagger is summoned), this view is blatantly ignorant of what makes all fiction good: the suspension of disbelief. But don't take my word for it. "Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
What would happen if the Rogues HP and damage is lowered?? The class would become useless and would not be able to perform her roll!! And its not like that hasn't already happened, every dungeon I run all other classes totally ignore traps and points of weakness to just smash anything that moves just so they can be out front, forgetting the rogue is supposed to flank/infiltrate/execute and deal a large amounts of direct damage to single targets and be able to clear the path for the rest!!
Rolling natural d20s every time?! No class is that lucky.
Keep Calm:) From South Africa
And yes GWF is basically AoE, but that's no reason to neglect it's single target's attacks too. 95% of this game is solo gameplay, and fact is after the GWF is done using his aoe's to kill adds, in most cases he's still left alone against a single powerful boss and that's where his one single target at-will, encounters and dalies, all come into play. Being conservative, against a boss with 100K health doing 200 ~ 300 damage per hit depending on level/equipment, and the occasional 1 or 2 K encounter or daily. it's still going to take a gwf upwards of 500 hits to kill the boss and that's if the boss doesn't have a heal mechanic.
Honestly do you want to encourage the idiots of the game to use Lurkers assault more?
I killed 3 people in 10 seconds whilst in lurkers assault.
So yeah go ahead and nerf the "when below 50% kill this person" skill because then people will just use Lurkers religiously and then you will see how quickly people die.
It won't be one shots it will be a friggin bloodbath.
If you stand in once place you are gonna get burned, I mean "someone" has to get the top spot but don't let it be a melee class, gotta keep moving.
I'd be fine with rogued focusing more on sneak attack burst damage instead of sustained damage, but people rage enough about a rouges burst as it is, do you really want to see them bursting for more?
I do think GWFs need a buff, but rogues are fine as thy are, and GWFs shouldn't be hitting harder, they have AoE damage and durability to compensate for the rouges higher single target damage.
That's where you're wrong... we're talking basic attack damage. Rogue should never do more basic attack damage than a GWF and no they didn't in NWN. Mechanics such as backstab, and sneak attack are expressed by their encounters and dailies, not their basic at-wills. When it comes to basics DPS the thieves make up for it in frequency of attack, 2 weapons vs 1. and AOE's on a GWF's part mean nothing when it takes him 6 swings of that aoe attack to kill trash mobs. the rogue can do the same group in 1 hit each, and for basic at-wills that's just wrong.
No rogue is killing dungeon trash mobs in a single hit with at-will attacks.
Oh and for the record, rogues have always done the most damage in D&D if played correctly. It's working fine the way it is atm - more dps when in stealth mode, harder to kill targs when not in stealth mode, hit hard on CW/rogues, hit a lot less on GF/GWF (unstoppable). I don't see the problem.
Basically this, in 4E they've got the rogue right, they hit hard and get sneak attack whenever they have combat advantage, which is fairly easy to obtain. They are strikers with full striker mechanics. GWF in 4E is a defender (not a striker) with full defender mechanics, he just uses a big 2-hander instead of sword and board.
A 4E Essentials Slayer is a full striker using the Fighter class, instead of a defender, that is what I think Cryptic should have used. Or a Rageblood Barbarian. Cryptic seems to have lost their vision for what they wanted the GWF to be. In 4E he is a defender same as the GF, in NW however, Cryptic kinda went with part defender, and part striker, and left the class with an identity crisis. I think people who chose GWF were hoping straight up for a 2-handed weapon striker.
4th edition roles aren't relevant to what the NW roles actually are. In NW GWFs are striker primary and defender secondary, so that's what people expect GWFs to perform as.
Yes, when able to go all out on groups of mobs a GWF will outdamage pretty much everyone, but it's just damage, and if this game has something in overabundancy it's classes dealing damage.
First, NWN was based off of 3.5. Not 4e. Which proves how much you actually know. And yes, the rogue did far more damage in 3.5 NWN than a fighter. There wasn't even encounter powers or dailies in NWN. Which again, proves you don't know what you are talking about. The rogues damage was based off of a simple formula, weapon damage + Str mod + Sneak Attack Damage. They had this bonus ALL THE TIME as long as the target was flatfooted (CA/Stealth) or had more than one player attacking it (Flanking). One hit from a Rogue in position did more damage than a 2-handed Str fighter.
And if you want to be 'technical' about combat, a 2-handed sword trying to hit 6 mobs in one swing is literally impossible. It would be stopped immediately by the first targets mass....
And he does. Striker AND defender. Not just Striker. Whether you choose to ignore the defender part or not is what's irrelevant. They are not a pure striker. Stated both in 4e rules and the devs description of the class on the front page.
Rogues will significantly outdamage even a DPS focused fighter on a single target in 4e. There is no comparison. They require combat advantage to do that damage, but that is pretty tivial to get most of the time. There is an "essentials" class fighter that can compete with rogues called a "slayer" that is extremely one dimensional (no encounter powers, boring as hell to play) and I really hope they stay away from essentials classes in this game.
In an AoE situation a fighter can do more overall damage than a rogue. This comes down to the fact that they have more AoE encounter powers. A ranged rogue (sling/xbow/shortbow), however, can do more AoE at higher levels. Rogues also don't have any AoE at will powers which the fighter does get a couple. Fighters also bring good control with marks and powers like Come and Get it.
Durability wise a 4e rogue will have less HP but generally better defenses and more way to avoid damage than a DPS fighter. Unstoppable does make GWFs significantly tougher than rogues so I think it's ok in NW.
I have a 60 cleric and just last night got my GWF to 60. I'm going to start doing dungeons with him and I'll see how I fare on the damage charts. In PvP, without even really speccing for PvP, I'm not really having any more problems than anyone else in that CWs are annoying as hell and occasionally a rogue daily will just destroy you. If my daily is up I can kill any wizard/rogue in one combo of daily + encounter powers with chain CC. Ray of enfeeblement is incredibly OP and absolutely wrecks you even in unstoppable but that's for a different thread.
I'm really looking forward to dungeons on this guy because playing a cleric has become pretty boring for me. GWFs also have awesome looking armor and weapons.
Overall I think GWFs need some small buffs but nothing major. TRs are in a good place IMO. The only things that need to be nerfed in this game are stacking astral shield, ray of enfeeblement's debuff (which stacks from multiple wizards), and stacking CC in PvP. Everything else is just buffing classes a small amount and changes to the aggro system.
^^^^Everything that this person said is 100% correct. Quite rare to see on these forums lol. +1.
Even factoring in AOE damage...the single target rogue still out dps's the aoe class in an aoe fight...FAQ?
I'm having a 4e marathon weekend with probably 6-8 hours on both Saturday and Sunday. All of our women are either working or out of town this weekend and we are going to be rolling lots and lots of dice.
The party we're running is a Warden, Warlord, Rogue and Wizard.
So you just don't get it do you?
500 mobs surround you....AOE flies everywhere...yet at the end of the day...the single target TR still is out dps'n the aoe machine GWF.
And no...Rogues did not start out the TOP DPS class. Go back to the roots. You let the fighter initiate....you sneak around back... then backstab for lots of damage...then bounce out so that you did not get one shot. You moved around a lot....you did not do as the fighter and hold the choke point while the wizard that is behind you is shooting rays of death all over the place.
The true DPS master has and always will be the Mage/Wizard class....end of discussion.
Making **** up. If you're a GWF and using aoe consistently and built for it, but getting outdamaged by a TR, you're just bad. Why don't you make a character on Mindflayer and whisper Brooser and ask him what his build is and how he plays.
Wow... dumb comments like these with no evidence.
If everybody can reck everybody regardless of class then it will be player skill that determines how good a class performs instead of wonky classy design.
I am not requesting myself personally that I top the charts and become number one over night. But what I am requesting is to make GWF more useful. If someone is trying to build an ideal group its 3CW and 2 DC or swap a CW for a TR. Leaving the sure it works group swapping a GF for one of the DC. But yet GWF does mediocre damage (based on the fact everyone is maximizing their damage output and functionality) and doesn't hold threat because of this as well and when you do happen to get threat you are a little softer than you should be. But then you have some good CW that knows how to play his class able to CC the room and rotate with another CW if they swap the GWF for another one making AOE tanking non-existent. The way I built my GWF is to keep unstoppable up as much as possible as well as being able to spam slam. I do around 8mil to 9mil damage (even broke 10 mil a couple times) in instances but only to see a couple TR above me at 12-13 million done. I would just like to see the heavier armor classes to feel like heavier armor classes and not a oh well you don't have dodge or block so here soak this up and get one shot by the boss because you didn't sprint fast enough out of the red circle or lagged lol. I really do like my GWF I would just like to have my role in a group where if I am not trying to PUG a castle never group I don't get dropped saying nah we need another CW or TR instead.