Buff on Strength needed!
la_cabra_de_vida
Strenght has some of the best skills in the game in the line, it needs no change.
Damuffinator
I must agree that I think strength is a LITTLE bit underpowered. 1% armor pent isn't going to do very much, even at 16 str, it might add a few extra dmg, maybe like 5 or 6, but thats not going to make much of a difference.
I think the +10 health idea is actually a good idea, or maybe it should be 1.5% armor pent perhaps.
I think the +10 health idea is actually a good idea, or maybe it should be 1.5% armor pent perhaps.
N1ghtstalker
the title only made me lol
strenght is good as it is
why? cuz you cut chunks of out of a guy's armor with ease
it's fine so let it be
and strenght has good skills as people said, the strenght attribute is fine as it is
tactics needs a buff but not strenght
/notsigned
strenght is good as it is
why? cuz you cut chunks of out of a guy's armor with ease
it's fine so let it be
and strenght has good skills as people said, the strenght attribute is fine as it is
tactics needs a buff but not strenght
/notsigned
Melissa Is HOT
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Lost Explorer
Why not change Armor Pen. to Aden. Gain every rank you have in Str. it gives you an extra 1% chance of getting double the Aden.?
 I dont think it would make it overpowered due to it being chanced. |
13% pen> 13% chance to gain double adrenaline.
Pyro maniac
strength's inherit effect is bad, the skills in it are godly and the profession itself is unique in it's skills and armor
October Jade
I would like to see a coherent, logical explanation for the decision that Strength should only apply to attack skills. If warriors' true purpose is to spam 1 2 3 4, then the damage from the build-up attacks becomes even more negligible in comparison. Making such a distinction just seems silly and inane; Strength should affect all attacks instead.
This is less a buff than a correction to what was a stupid differentiation in the first place.
This is less a buff than a correction to what was a stupid differentiation in the first place.
MithranArkanere
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by October Jade
I would like to see a coherent, logical explanation for the decision that Strength should only apply to attack skills. If warriors' true purpose is to spam 1 2 3 4, then the damage from the build-up attacks becomes even more negligible in comparison. Making such a distinction just seems silly and inane; Strength should affect all attacks instead.
This is less a buff than a correction to what was a stupid differentiation in the first place. |
Critical Strikes affect ALL hits.
And Primal Rage would be more logical like that.
moriz
armor penetration on ALL ATTACKS? are you insane?
Arkantos
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by October Jade
I would like to see a coherent, logical explanation for the decision that Strength should only apply to attack skills. If warriors' true purpose is to spam 1 2 3 4, then the damage from the build-up attacks becomes even more negligible in comparison. Making such a distinction just seems silly and inane; Strength should affect all attacks instead.
This is less a buff than a correction to what was a stupid differentiation in the first place. |
Savio
Balance isn't decided by roleplaying fluff "logic" crap, it's decided by balance logic.
jhu
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by moriz
armor penetration on ALL ATTACKS? are you insane?
|
farmpig
Why not +1 hp for each level in str. For example if u have 10 str u have a +10 hp bonus. The skills linked to str are quite useful, over buffing str will cause unbalance imo.
JR
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by UltimaSlash
Considering that warriors generally don't go for high armor targets...
|
Strength is fine. It's definately not one of the stronger primary attribute lines, but currently it is worth speccing into and is not breaking the game. I see no reason to change that.
ensoriki
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jhu
why not? critical strikes affects all attacks, not just attack skills.
|
Savio
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JR
Where do people get this idea that armor penetration is better against high armored targets?
|
That or people are stupid. Maybe both.
Marverick
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by October Jade
I would like to see a coherent, logical explanation for the decision that Strength should only apply to attack skills. If warriors' true purpose is to spam 1 2 3 4, then the damage from the build-up attacks becomes even more negligible in comparison. Making such a distinction just seems silly and inane; Strength should affect all attacks instead.
This is less a buff than a correction to what was a stupid differentiation in the first place. |
moriz
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jhu
why not? critical strikes affects all attacks, not just attack skills.
|
please at least think a little about the consequences, before making inane comparisons.
Red Sand
As far as the original suggestion to change Strength:
/notsigned
It's a shame that it takes three pages to get a worthwhile comment.
/notsigned
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by October Jade
I would like to see a coherent, logical explanation for the decision that Strength should only apply to attack skills. If warriors' true purpose is to spam 1 2 3 4, then the damage from the build-up attacks becomes even more negligible in comparison. Making such a distinction just seems silly and inane; Strength should affect all attacks instead.
This is less a buff than a correction to what was a stupid differentiation in the first place. |
shoyon456
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ensoriki
thatws why daggers are weak
|
As for strength, warriors are not supposed to have e management, and strength serves a warriors purpose just fine imo.
Tyla
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shoyon456
Which is why the critical strikes/defense A/D build needs to be nerfed... but thats another story.
|
Selfish defense is bad.
But that's another story for another thread.
Bowstring Badass
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shoyon456
Which is why the critical strikes/defense A/D build needs to be nerfed... but thats another story.
As for strength, warriors are not supposed to have e management, and strength serves a warriors purpose just fine imo. |
Wait what? No emanagment for wars? Then why are there zealous mods....
Anyway strength is fine as it is.
MsMassacre
When you consider that Good Builds can make almost every attack an attack skill, then strength equates to a free 13% armor penetration on every attack (or whatever your strength.) Even assuming only about 3/4 of your attacks are skills, with 13 strength that's still 10% armor penetration ALL THE TIME when averaged out.
That's pretty damn powerful.
But what if you're NOT using attack skills on almost every hit? That would be a Bad Build, and Strength will not avail you. It's like how energy storage suddenly becomes a bad attribute if you use a signet build, or how divine favor becomes a bad attribute if you use an-enemy targetting smite build, or fast casting becomes a bad attribute if you run a pure beasmaster mez. No attribute in the game can transform a bad build into a good one.
PS- Even if you could convince me Strength was lacking, the fixes you propose are many too twinky. 160 hps for free? 16% armor penetration on NORMAL ATTACKS? Why not just propose this; "For each pt of Strength, one nearby enemy per second dies suddenly of congenital heart failure and drops a rare minipet."
That's pretty damn powerful.
But what if you're NOT using attack skills on almost every hit? That would be a Bad Build, and Strength will not avail you. It's like how energy storage suddenly becomes a bad attribute if you use a signet build, or how divine favor becomes a bad attribute if you use an-enemy targetting smite build, or fast casting becomes a bad attribute if you run a pure beasmaster mez. No attribute in the game can transform a bad build into a good one.
PS- Even if you could convince me Strength was lacking, the fixes you propose are many too twinky. 160 hps for free? 16% armor penetration on NORMAL ATTACKS? Why not just propose this; "For each pt of Strength, one nearby enemy per second dies suddenly of congenital heart failure and drops a rare minipet."
October Jade
Assume 14 Swordsmanship/13 Strength and a customized, 15% always weapon. Accounting for the 19.6% critical rate, c-spacing yields these averages.
60AL: 31.0 dmg per attack
70AL: 26.1 dmg per attack
80AL: 22.0 dmg per attack
Note that armor bonuses (ex. innate +20 vs. physical) are regarded differently in damage calculations and irrelevant to penetration, so I didn't bother evaluating them. Read here for further information.
Now suppose that the 13%AP applies to normal attacks. The figures look like this.
60AL: 35.5 dmg per attack
70AL: 30.5 dmg per attack
80AL: 26.3 dmg per attack
The average of the margins is +4.43 damage.
Under these constraints, as well as constant Flail, one makes 0.281 normal attacks per second.
In terms of output, changing the attribute as I suggested grants a mere 1.24 additional DPS in this scenario. I don't think it would unbalance much of anything. Why not then make Strength function sensibly instead of being so arbitrary?
60AL: 31.0 dmg per attack
70AL: 26.1 dmg per attack
80AL: 22.0 dmg per attack
Note that armor bonuses (ex. innate +20 vs. physical) are regarded differently in damage calculations and irrelevant to penetration, so I didn't bother evaluating them. Read here for further information.
Now suppose that the 13%AP applies to normal attacks. The figures look like this.
60AL: 35.5 dmg per attack
70AL: 30.5 dmg per attack
80AL: 26.3 dmg per attack
The average of the margins is +4.43 damage.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MsMassacre
Even assuming only about 3/4 of your attacks are skills, with 13 strength that's still 10% armor penetration ALL THE TIME when averaged out.
|
In terms of output, changing the attribute as I suggested grants a mere 1.24 additional DPS in this scenario. I don't think it would unbalance much of anything. Why not then make Strength function sensibly instead of being so arbitrary?
Savio
Video games aren't based on sense. Why the hell doesn't my axe cut off limbs?
Teutonic Paladin
DO NOT FIX WHAT IS NOT BROKEN.
Please!
Please!
jhu
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by moriz
and have you ever considered how much DPS a warrior can do by just autoattacking with a permanent 13% AP?
please at least think a little about the consequences, before making inane comparisons. |
jhu
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ensoriki
thatws why daggers are weak
|
FlamingMetroid
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jhu
critical strikes affects all weapons, not just daggers
|
moriz
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jhu
damage from 13% ap isn't as much as you'd think
|
warriors do enough damage as it is. there's no need to make them even stronger.
Trevor The Wave
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by holymasamune
You are dumb if you think strength is underpowered. Almost as dumb as those people who think soul reaping is underpowered.
It gives you access to the most important stuff, like bulls, rush, flail. |
eennnrraaggiginnggg cchhaaarrgggeeee
body blow
other strength shit