test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Why hate GWF ??

13»

Comments

  • pando83pando83 Member Posts: 2,564 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    lobo0084 wrote: »
    As pointed out by a guild mate yesterday, many CW's already see themselves as the king of AOE. They seem to view the movement we see here on the forums to give GWF a more specialized and powerful AOE role as 'stepping on their turf'. I'm not sold on it myself.

    From my view, CW should be primarily control oriented and top of it's game in that role. Their secondary advantage would be range (for control, defense, and dps), with DPS being something they are solid at, but not the kings of. This seems logical to me.

    Allowing GWF to move a few key single-target powers into multi-target (think restoring strike as cone sweep instead of single target, etc), and letting us do more damage than any other party when we're hitting multiple targets? That seems like a solid game changer. AOE would be our strongest point, followed by a burst tank and mobility. None of this 'tanking as good as or better than a GF', but also not doing mad single-point damage to rival a TR, or area control which affects the CW's.

    I would support that. I don't think our tank and mobility should suffer more, but I do feel that it's possible we have too much CC at our disposal, and single point alpha strike at times, to warrant just buffing the whole class outright. It would feel fair to me if they took some of our 'trades' away before giving us more awesomeness.

    Right now, the only build that may work in PvP is sentinel. Other builds are just paper warriors. If you try both the destroyer path and the sentinel path, you'll see that the survivability you gain exceeds by far the attack power you lose.
    I've seen one GWF really focused on damage. He got like 49% crit chance, good ArP, 7k power, 11k healing/ damage. But also 21k hp with not much defense. You can try life steal on such build, but it works only when you deal damage, and in PvP such build would be dead before he can land a single hit. On the other hand, in dungeons it probably can rival a rogue when it comes to damage dealt.

    My personal opinion is that our pre-nerf slam damage would've been a good starting point to make us real AoE DPSrs.
    The buff spinning strike got, doesn't even come close to what we got previously.
    They should just give one build that can tank a bit more than the regular destroyer, and deal single target dps, and one build that can tank more and deal AoE damage comparable to the pre-nerf unstoppable. So that such GWF can be a AoE true DPSrs.
  • lobo0084lobo0084 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 663 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    pando83 wrote: »
    Right now, the only build that may work in PvP is sentinel. Other builds are just paper warriors. If you try both the destroyer path and the sentinel path, you'll see that the survivability you gain exceeds by far the attack power you lose.
    I've seen one GWF really focused on damage. He got like 49% crit chance, good ArP, 7k power, 11k healing/ damage. But also 21k hp with not much defense. You can try life steal on such build, but it works only when you deal damage, and in PvP such build would be dead before he can land a single hit. On the other hand, in dungeons it probably can rival a rogue when it comes to damage dealt.

    My personal opinion is that our pre-nerf slam damage would've been a good starting point to make us real AoE DPSrs.
    The buff spinning strike got, doesn't even come close to what we got previously.
    They should just give one build that can tank a bit more than the regular destroyer, and deal single target dps, and one build that can tank more and deal AoE damage comparable to the pre-nerf unstoppable. So that such GWF can be a AoE true DPSrs.

    I like an aoe build, a single-target build, and a control build, personally.

    Just by my own experiences, and my own impression of fair and balanced, I have to say that asking for more tank AND DPS, to go along with our already strong mobility and diversity, would be asking for too much. And asking for too much more often then not leads to receiving too little.

    Besides, tanking mobs is actually easy with a full destroyer build. Taking into consideration a character who uses their mobility and cc capabilities, along with a relatively easy-to-reach gear score, and we can take on much larger groups of mobs than all other classes, save GF's and the spare DC.

    In PvP, our survivability in all branches is, again, our mobility. Getting in range, getting out of range. Our sprint goes further and lasts longer than any other mobility option. Plus, we do have utility abilities that I'm pretty fond of.

    I would argue that the GWF's I see who fail in pvp, are standing still and expecting their unstoppable to do all the work. Obviously, with the recent nerf, they can't continue to do that. It is a burst tank, short and easily spent, just enough extra life to allow us to either finish the kill or disengage.

    Again, our mobility and speed need to be taken into consideration, AND USED. I don't think giving us more armor or damage resistance is really balancing when you take that same mobility into the equation. Those used to running and gunning, so to speak, will become extremely powerful. You give me more tank, and I will do far better than I am now, and I feel I'm doing well for my gear score and being mostly in PUGs.

    Do you balance to those who can make a class work for them? Or those who can't?
    "Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate

    "D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.

    Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
  • rojorrojor Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 178 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    lobo0084 wrote: »
    I like an aoe build, a single-target build, and a control build, personally.

    Just by my own experiences, and my own impression of fair and balanced, I have to say that asking for more tank AND DPS, to go along with our already strong mobility and diversity, would be asking for too much. And asking for too much more often then not leads to receiving too little.

    Besides, tanking mobs is actually easy with a full destroyer build. Taking into consideration a character who uses their mobility and cc capabilities, along with a relatively easy-to-reach gear score, and we can take on much larger groups of mobs than all other classes, save GF's and the spare DC.

    In PvP, our survivability in all branches is, again, our mobility. Getting in range, getting out of range. Our sprint goes further and lasts longer than any other mobility option. Plus, we do have utility abilities that I'm pretty fond of.

    I would argue that the GWF's I see who fail in pvp, are standing still and expecting their unstoppable to do all the work. Obviously, with the recent nerf, they can't continue to do that. It is a burst tank, short and easily spent, just enough extra life to allow us to either finish the kill or disengage.

    Again, our mobility and speed need to be taken into consideration, AND USED. I don't think giving us more armor or damage resistance is really balancing when you take that same mobility into the equation. Those used to running and gunning, so to speak, will become extremely powerful. You give me more tank, and I will do far better than I am now, and I feel I'm doing well for my gear score and being mostly in PUGs.

    Do you balance to those who can make a class work for them? Or those who can't?

    I am most inclined to disagree with you on the sub categories of potential build paths( aoe, Single target and control ), in that the class has fighter in the name which in the D&D universe implies that it is in some part a tank or at least capable of being one.

    But what is really starting to worry me is that at the moment we are all currently specced in the Swordmaster Paragon path, and the name leads me to the conclusion that we are already in the aoe paragon path for the class yet are tanky to all get out (minus the taunts for some reason), sure the devs alluded a little while ago to us being able to dual wield in the future, which will probably be the single target dps path, then the logical third path would be some sort of tank one (which we seem to already be in but screw logic right ?). Here is the kicker at the moment though, all other classes have one paragon path available for their use at the moment as well yet they have been able and are still able to fill 2 or more roles in a group simultaneously where as we cant even get one. Going off this Analysis they have either severely botched our current paragon path out of some deep seeded sub-conscious class hate because we vaguely resemble a jock with a baseball bat or simply do not know what to do with us so they stick us out to pasture for months on end till they can release paragon paths, give us a warm blanket, cup of hot chocolate, apologize profusely and claim they didn't know we were outside all winter and apologize again for the frost bite to our extremities.

    Bear in mind that there are logical jumps in my rambling above, the assumptions are still based on fact and in game experience ( i have all classes - minus the rogue because i detest its play style - to 60 with t1-t2 gear ).
  • lobo0084lobo0084 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 663 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    Honestly, I don't think they know what to do with us.

    I don't understand, however, why "tank" seems to be what so many want in our class, when tank is the realm of the guardian fighter. It's like them clamoring, as they are right now, to do even more DPS and alpha because they feel they are inferior to everyone else on the damage board, even when they spec for it.

    Of course, they are inferior in many ways for damage, but their real power is their tank and CC abilities, which they often overlook.

    Why is it that 'tankiness' is such a concern? And is it more related to how GWF is played by certain players than the actually capabilities of the class when played, excuse the phrase, 'correctly'?

    And of course, should it support both playstyles, adding paragon paths instead of removing options, as the developers seem to have done so recently?
    "Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate

    "D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.

    Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
  • tarmalentarmalen Member Posts: 1,020 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    They gave us three specific roles.
    AOE
    Single Target
    Tank

    We could spec/feat any of those roles and do well. Now that they have removed AP gain per target from a few skills the choice has narrowed to just 1 spec we can do well and that is Tank. The other two roles became cheaper versions of other classes.
  • coyne22coyne22 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 6 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    I am constantly dying in PvP due to Unstoppable being bugged and GF ridiculous knock backs which they chain together and keep me on the floor for 30 seconds. The bug is happening in PvE now sometimes too. I liked when the GWF got balls about him and could last against multiple enemies: that is his role. We're talking about a big fighter who basically berserks, of course he should be able to stand toe to toe with a skinny little rogue, especially with a weapon 20x bigger. I like that the GF is tough but he shouldn't be tougher than the GWF, they should be somewhat equal, some of the GF's I've seen aren't even doing their role, they DPS like crazy. But anyway I thought Unstoppable was to shrug off control effects, now I can't use it because I'm always being controlled.
  • coyne22coyne22 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 6 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    I think anyone complaining that fighters are too tough should be thankful they have RANGE and can dodge away.
  • zalcszalcs Banned Users Posts: 345 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    What really needed nerfing is tenebrous and the sentinel tree. But people will start QQing like crazy if tenebs get nerfed because they have spent great amount of money on them, and devs know this, so... no nerf.

    Edit: the unstoppable nerf was sorely needed to, don't get me wrong lol
  • esteenaesteena Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 1
    edited August 2013
    zalcs wrote: »
    What really needed nerfing is tenebrous and the sentinel tree. But people will start QQing like crazy if tenebs get nerfed because they have spent great amount of money on them, and devs know this, so... no nerf.

    Edit: the unstoppable nerf was sorely needed to, don't get me wrong lol

    Lets nerf anything that doesn't go your way :rolleyes:
  • rojorrojor Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 178 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    esteena wrote: »
    Lets nerf anything that doesn't go your way :rolleyes:

    This is precisely my main issue with cryptic's class balance methods since cbt2, instead of giving classes a method to counter the imbalance they just nerf the class into the ground, for example:

    Cleric has decent self heals = OP in PvP = nerf the class = not give other classes the ability to reduce the targets heals by a certain percentage with a debuf.

    Gwf does decent single target damage = can go toe to toe with a rogue in pvp = nerf into the ground = don't limit the damage to pve and make skill subset rules like 33% reduced damage in pvp.

    Gwf unstoppable is too OP for max health stacking sentinel builds = nerf into the ground = not give other classes a rune or ability that works off the enemy's max health ( 3% of enemy's max health in damage ).

    There are many more instances of such nerfs but i just cited the above ones to give you an idea of why the current method of class balance is just wrong.
Sign In or Register to comment.