Requesting Class Clarification - GWF

silknight · April 2013

I'd really like to hear from a Perfect World rep what the vision for Great Weapon Fighter will be. Will it be viable as a striker in groups contributing enough to warrant the position, or will it be regulated to defender and tanking group runs? Or is it going to be a mixed class, trying to do both at the same time but good at neither? Or will it be both, and specialization will allow you to pick your path?

supjeremiah · April 2013

It has no place in the game right now. We're getting out DPS'd by Clerics.

zingarbage · April 2013

In the stream yesterday they described it as a damage dealer that has comparable damage to the trickster rogue. In game today, it seems very underwhelming.

kimonagi · April 2013

I'm still enjoying the class but there are a few things that do bother me a little. Right now i have 2-3 abilities that i rarely or never use. I dont really see the point of ravaging strike (the right click at-will), the ability just doesnt seem to fit the class at all (you just stand there getting hit and it doesnt seem to do more damage then the other). Not so fast seems like a poor leveling ability and a good PvP one so i dont understand why they give it right at the start when you are leveling.

silknight · April 2013

--double post removal--

silknight · April 2013

I like aspects of the class, there is just alot that of things that are contradictory. I hope they clean up the ability system before the end of the month. I hope they get rid of some of the more useless sword master abilities like the weapon master strike. Maybe they'll bring back the Reaver ability in the initial videos.

mewbrey · April 2013

Was doing many dungeons today, in beta 4. And the great weapon fighter I tend to group with (we play as a cleric, guardian and great weapon fighter during this beta) and he was on top dps, was doing double the damage other gwf where doing in the group.

Don't really know enough about what he was doing but there was a clear diffrence in the damage even when being under a level or two of the other gwf, wizards and rogues. All I know was he tended to be double the other gwf's and about 20% higher than mages and then around the same or a little higher than rogues, this is on the final damage done anyhow.

leisses · April 2013

The class is still pretty good, it's just you guys were used to play with the class a lot better than it should be.

The talents for GWF were giving incredible bonuses before the changes and now are giving balanced bonuses like other classes.

silknight · April 2013

leisses wrote: »

The class is still pretty good, it's just you guys were used to play with the class a lot better than it should be.

The talents for GWF were giving incredible bonuses before the changes and now are giving balanced bonuses like other classes.

They were somewhat decent in BW3, just to squishy. Now BW4 we're still squishy, at least I haven't noticed much of a change in that regards, and now our damage is much much worse. Sure strike nerf is uncalled for, as we're trading AoE damage viability for focused single target damage. If I change from AoE to Single target, I expect to do almost as much damage in my single attack as the combined power of my aoe swings against a group.

They wrecked the damage, and without it the class loses it's role. Doesn't damage well, doesn't tank well = not worth playing. I think that whatever metric they're measuring these changes against are messed up, or their math is wrong.

zurkhon · April 2013

Now having had a chance to try everything out finally I can say that if you want to be a DPS machine go TR. If you want to have good DPS with some utility go GWF.
I will admit though that the GWF needs some additional survivability (especially in lower levels). Even if just a boost to their Hit Points or some type of deflect bonus.

adozu · April 2013

while i've been agreeing left and right the nerf too damage was too much (needed but softer) i don't agree with: "If I change from AoE to Single target, I expect to do almost as much damage in my single attack as the combined power of my aoe swings against a group."

the gwf role as a striker is to deal damage to groups and it was just a tad too good at that at high level (reason why it got nerfed). if it could deal the same damage it deals AoE to a single target it would fail that because now it would be exactly as viable in both roles. single target dps has been decided to be rogue's gimmick and gwf aoe. as much as rogue can't do aoe damage gwf single target dps is not supposed to be as good as the damage it can deal while dealing with groups.

that said, more love for gwf is needed: needs to get it's damage partially restored and needs to get "something" to make it more viable at level 1-20 which is the range it's weakest at and what risks driving most players away from the class.

silknight · April 2013

Really, the AoE dps gimmick is pointless in 1v1 situations. With weakened 1v1 damage output it only hurts us in most PvP situations, and hurts us on boss fights and elite monster encounters. Honestly, I'm not asking to have the ability to pull the same 1v1 numbers as a TR all the time, but I should be able to pull them in certain situations , just as a TR or any other should be able to pull the same AoE numbers in certain situations.

dwyvyrn316 · April 2013

I'm totally un-impressed with the battle strike at 50 points. If that is our last ability it needs to cover a bigger area, particularly if its going to do less damage than it did in the last beta. Moving the stapble charge ability to needing 45 points is almost criminal. If these are the level of changes that are going to happen this close to "live", which I guess is technically now open beta, I don't see this as something I'd play long term. "Needing" to make these type of changes this late in development is a clear sign of lack of vision for the class. Being that there are so few I don't quite understand that...

enderlin50 · April 2013

I felt I was doing more damage them Beta Phase 3

kimonagi · April 2013

adozu wrote: »

while i've been agreeing left and right the nerf too damage was too much (needed but softer) i don't agree with: "If I change from AoE to Single target, I expect to do almost as much damage in my single attack as the combined power of my aoe swings against a group."

the gwf role as a striker is to deal damage to groups and it was just a tad too good at that at high level (reason why it got nerfed). if it could deal the same damage it deals AoE to a single target it would fail that because now it would be exactly as viable in both roles. single target dps has been decided to be rogue's gimmick and gwf aoe. as much as rogue can't do aoe damage gwf single target dps is not supposed to be as good as the damage it can deal while dealing with groups.

that said, more love for gwf is needed: needs to get it's damage partially restored and needs to get "something" to make it more viable at level 1-20 which is the range it's weakest at and what risks driving most players away from the class.

Class would be much easier to balance if it had some sort of role. Seems to me like the devs are playing ping-pong with it. Not sure if it should be a striker or a defender, they really need to decide on what this class should be. Personally i dont even think it should be called a Fighter class since half of its abilities seem to be drawn from the Barbarian class and feels right now like a striker wanna be but thats just me.

kimonagi · April 2013

silknight wrote: »

Really, the AoE dps gimmick is pointless in 1v1 situations. With weakened 1v1 damage output it only hurts us in most PvP situations, and hurts us on boss fights and elite monster encounters. Honestly, I'm not asking to have the ability to pull the same 1v1 numbers as a TR all the time, but I should be able to pull them in certain situations , just as a TR or any other should be able to pull the same AoE numbers in certain situations.

I strongly feel like pointing out that i dont care about PvP in this game until they come up with a reputation/faction system that allows you to quest or do task for conflicting factions, and right now thats lightyears away.

IMO they really to launch this game with five unique base class with defined roles, add a ranger class and warlock class like they intended and work on opening those LATER ON in developpement. Yes i used caps lock because everytime i mention that this could be fixed after launch, someone makes a post telling me it would delay the game.

Guardian Fighter: The archetype of the 4th Edition fighter defender class. Just because you used the build name doesnt mean you are prevented from making it THE fighter class in NW. They are a good translation of the Fighter class and guardian fits well with the defender role. AFTER LAUCH they could add animations of them using a two hande or even dual weild with blocking.

Great Weapon fighter: Rename the **** class barbarian alreay and make it a AoE striker. We need that role right now and the abilities fit well with the archetype.

Control Wizard: AFTER LAUNCH, let them use differant implements that catter to other playstyles. Use the other implements in the players handbook to see how they could affect their powers. AFTER LAUNCH add more spells that would reflect the playstyle of a war wizard instead of wasting time developping another boxed-in build for wizards.

Have a few ideas for Cleric but its two in the morning and i need a break.

Notice that i dont mention rogues...These guys are sitting in a pool of cryptic radiance love since BW1 hehe (I still love you guys

)

Take it easy, work out and drink some cold ones!

silknight · April 2013

I'd still love some Great Weapon Fighter clarification from anyone in the know, at least before open beta begins. I know Jack Emmert said there were 5 distinct classes in this Pax interview, but it seems like there are only 4 really fleshed out classes. TR , GF, CW, and DC. GWF still seems up in the air in the air to me still, and before I fully commit to the class I just want to know their vision for the class.

zingarbage · April 2013

silknight wrote: »

I'd still love some Great Weapon Fighter clarification from anyone in the know, at least before open beta begins. I know Jack Emmert said there were 5 distinct classes in this Pax interview, but it seems like there are only 4 really fleshed out classes. TR , GF, CW, and DC. GWF still seems up in the air in the air to me still, and before I fully commit to the class I just want to know their vision for the class.

I know one of the intended roles is an Aoe striker just from asking PW. I'm assuming they are still tuning them.

silknight · April 2013

zingarbage wrote: »

I know one of the intended roles is an Aoe striker just from asking PW. I'm assuming they are still tuning them.

Zin any chance you can link that source? Even their posts come up short of calling it a DPS, this post for instance . I mean from everything said you'd think they're gonna be able to be up there with the strikers. The ambiguous part is they compare it to both a defender and striker at the same time. They don't say if it will be able to excel at either roll, and personally, I don't want to be suckered into a jack of 2 trades, master of neither. If they can excel at either roll, via feats and abilities, great let them state that clearly, but if not, speak now before ya bait and switch players into the class before making it into something else, just bad hybrid cause there are plenty of other games that have bad hybrids, and I don't play them any longer.:rolleyes:

zingarbage · April 2013

silknight wrote: »

Zin any chance you can link that source? Even their posts come up short of calling it a DPS, this post for instance . I mean from everything said you'd think they're gonna be able to be up there with the strikers. The ambiguous part is they compare it to both a defender and striker at the same time. They don't say if it will be able to excel at either roll, and personally, I don't want to be suckered into a jack of 2 trades, master of neither. If they can excel at either roll, via feats and abilities, great let them state that clearly, but if not, speak now before ya bait and switch players into the class before making it into something else, just bad hybrid cause there are plenty of other games that have bad hybrids, and I don't play them any longer.:rolleyes:

I can't post the source, but I'll send you a PM.

Requesting Class Clarification - GWF

Comments