15 Jul 2006 at 03:53 - 103
its funny how as soon as someone complains, theyre automatically labeled a "whiner." well, call me what you will, but first try to find a SINGLE flaw in my argument.
i think i can speak on behalf of warriors in general when i say we can all accept the change to knights armor. the situation of one piece giving universal protection has always been questionable, and my only complaint with ANETs treatment of this is that it took WAY too long to fix. many of us now have pretty much useless knights boots and will now have to spend money we shouldnt have to on new armor pieces.
lets now discuss damage.
monk- light damage (does not ignore armor but is not physical), holy damage (ignores armor), fire damage (obviously not physical)
mesmer - chaos damage (not physical)
necromancer- dark damage (does not ignore armor but is not physical) and shadow damage (ignores armor)
ritualist- dark damage and lightning damage (obiviously not physical)
elementalist - fire, lightning, cold, earth (obviously not physical)
ranger- piercing damage (physical, but can easily be converted to elemental with ebon, fiery, icy, or shocking bowstring)
assassin- slashing or piercing damage (physical, but can easily be converted to elemental with ebon, shocking, fiery, or icy tangs)
warrior- slashing, piercing, or blunt damage (physical, but can easily be converted to elemental with fiery, icy, ebon, or shocking hilt/haft)
does anyone NOT see just how little "physical" damage a warrior can face, assuming hes not farming trolls all day? if not, please dont continue reading- i fear youll lack the intelligence to comprehend what i go into next.
now lets move on to warrior armor types.
berserkers/gladiatiors- 80AL base + 20vs physical (gives health/energy bonus respectively)
dragons- 90AL base + 10vs physical
knights- 80AL base + 20vs physical (provides -3per physical attack assuming a full set)
legionnaires- 80AL base + 20vs physical (provides extra 10AL base if in stance, so lets assume we have 90AL base because it would be silly to wear this if you werent planning on having stances)
sentinals- 100AL while meeting a 13str req
anyone notice a trend of NOT seeing any "vs elemental" bonuses? just keep this in mind while we move onto the next point.
absorption- where is it written that a rune (a MAGICAL item) should protect only against physical damage? a superior rune of absorption has given -3 vs physical AND elemental for over a year now- WHY change it now? this "superior" item is now worthless because EVERY class can avoid doing physical damage.
and now for the main event ....
shields- previously, these were our "bread and butter" items. this is how a warrior worked around the lack of "vs elemental" protection. our -2stance/-2ench/-3hexed/-5 (20%) bonuses ALLOWED us to negate situational damage. an now, as with absorption, these items are crap because (if you missed it the first time) EVERY CLASS CAN AVOID DOING PHYSICAL DAMAGE! so our grognars defender may as well be only +45 health while in stance, malinons +45 while ench, etc, etc. and our "special" shields, our -2st/-2ench or -2st/-3hexed may as well be tossed out. the biggest joke of all is "-3 vs physical attacks while hexed." i got news for ya- unless youre up against an assassin (who again, may NOT be doing physical damage), youre most likely (and i reiterate "most likely") not taking physical damage from whoever is hexing you! a final point on shields- why wouldnt a shield be able to protect you from elemental damage? in movies/comics/mythology, when a person holds up a shield against a fireball, doesnt it help? even in real life, if person "A" is hiding behind a large tower shield and person "B" is standing in the open, which one would get cooked faster by a flame thrower? again, ANET has given us no reason and i dare say CANNOT give us a reason why shield properties should not be "vs physical AND elemental."
there ... said and done. flame if you want, but youll only insult your own intelligence. this update is by far the most damaging the warrior class has faced. i dont think anyone realizes the chain reaction that we will ALL face. how many monks are going to enjoy healing us "whammos" twice as much now? you think tanking assassins are bad? well us warriors, those of us who are SUPPOSED to be able to soak up damage just wont be able to do so anymore. heck, rangers will be better tanks by far vs ele damage unless we all switch to sentinals armor (and with its requirement, yay, there goes diversity!)
anyway .... /signed and signed a thousand times over for the strike.
my warrior will be doing nothing but boozing and exploring until this issue is addressed.