Hi all,
thinking about which is the most versatile and useful way to upgrade a sword/spear + shield set for defensive purpose.
+5 armor or +30 hp? which inscription?
pls post your opinions on which is the best way to create a defensive set.
Thx
Defensive weapon set
Tirzan
Marty Silverblade
Might want to give some context to get better answers. What profession? PvE or PvP?
Spear: +5e inscription and +5AL. iirc 5AL results in 9% less damage for a 90AL character.
Shield: +30 health and +10ALvs<damage type>
You'll need a few shields to protect against different damage types.
EDIT: Might want a +15%/-5e on the spear depending on context.
Spear: +5e inscription and +5AL. iirc 5AL results in 9% less damage for a 90AL character.
Shield: +30 health and +10ALvs<damage type>
You'll need a few shields to protect against different damage types.
EDIT: Might want a +15%/-5e on the spear depending on context.
jimme
I have different options for my defensive set, but my 'main' is
HSR10% and Armor +5
then I have a +15%/-5e with +30hp and a +5e +5armor
HSR10% and Armor +5
then I have a +15%/-5e with +30hp and a +5e +5armor
Tirzan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty Silverblade
Might want to give some context to get better answers. What profession? PvE or PvP?
Yeah, you're right i'm talking about PvE and caster professions.
Windf0rce
60 AL character (caster prof.) = 100% damage taken
+5 armor weapon = 65 armor = ~91% damage taken
+8 armor (shield req. not met) = 68 armor = ~87% damage taken (13% reduction)
+13 armor (shield req. not met, +weapon) = ~80% damage taken (20% reduction)
+16 armor (shield req. met) = 76 armor = ~76% damage taken (24% reduction)
+21 armor (shield req. met + weapon) = 81 armor = ~69% damage taken (31% reduction)
See this page: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Armor_rating
I usually take the +13 armor route in PvE and PvP, it is a good compromise without spending any attributes (except for Monk in PvP where I go for the shield requirement).
+30 HP and +5 armor each have its own advantages, though. +HP is better if you want to use Sup. Runes for whatever reason, to counter the health loss, and also better against armor ignoring damage and degen. +armor is better in the long run as you take less damage and lose less HP, so it is less taxing on your healers. It helps in PvE to reduce those big damage numbers, the bigger the damage the better a %reduction is, and worse the flat +HP is, IMHO.
+5 armor weapon = 65 armor = ~91% damage taken
+8 armor (shield req. not met) = 68 armor = ~87% damage taken (13% reduction)
+13 armor (shield req. not met, +weapon) = ~80% damage taken (20% reduction)
+16 armor (shield req. met) = 76 armor = ~76% damage taken (24% reduction)
+21 armor (shield req. met + weapon) = 81 armor = ~69% damage taken (31% reduction)
See this page: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Armor_rating
I usually take the +13 armor route in PvE and PvP, it is a good compromise without spending any attributes (except for Monk in PvP where I go for the shield requirement).
+30 HP and +5 armor each have its own advantages, though. +HP is better if you want to use Sup. Runes for whatever reason, to counter the health loss, and also better against armor ignoring damage and degen. +armor is better in the long run as you take less damage and lose less HP, so it is less taxing on your healers. It helps in PvE to reduce those big damage numbers, the bigger the damage the better a %reduction is, and worse the flat +HP is, IMHO.
TheodenKing
Armor is almost always a better option than is health. The most common exception I can think of is when you are travelling with an imbagon or a shelter rit, in which case the extra armor helps you less than it otherwise would.
Desert Rose
If +5 armor or +30 health is better depends on how good you're with weapon swapping and if you're are attacking with your weapon.
As a caster you want to be in your casting set only a split second before a cast, and switch back to the defensive det as soon as you have finished casting. In this scenario +5 armor will be way better because not only you'll survive longer, but your monk will have to heal you less.
If you use a defensive set as a panic button if you're about to die +30 health is better. +armor can be seen as a multiplier of your health, if you're already low on health more armor doesn't help as much as additional health.
As a physical you want to stay in your normal weapon set as much as possible (that's why you want to use +5 armor here) and mostly only switch to the defensive set if you're close to death; in that case +health is better with the above reasoning.
As a caster you want to be in your casting set only a split second before a cast, and switch back to the defensive det as soon as you have finished casting. In this scenario +5 armor will be way better because not only you'll survive longer, but your monk will have to heal you less.
If you use a defensive set as a panic button if you're about to die +30 health is better. +armor can be seen as a multiplier of your health, if you're already low on health more armor doesn't help as much as additional health.
As a physical you want to stay in your normal weapon set as much as possible (that's why you want to use +5 armor here) and mostly only switch to the defensive set if you're close to death; in that case +health is better with the above reasoning.
Tirzan
I see the defensive set like an option to swap to when you are under spike or heavy dmg situation, I don't usually always swap casting set with defensive one after each spell. In this case I think +hp is better than +armor, right?
Shield inscription is the option that gives me more troubles. I don't want to carry a shield for each dmg type. So i'm wondering which is the better and more versatile to use.
Shield inscription is the option that gives me more troubles. I don't want to carry a shield for each dmg type. So i'm wondering which is the better and more versatile to use.
Desert Rose
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tirzan
Quote:
|
Shield inscription is the option that gives me more troubles. I don't want to carry a shield for each dmg type. So i'm wondering which is the better and more versatile to use.
The -5/20% and -2/enchantment/stance inscription only reduces physical damage, meaning slashing, blunt and piercing, in other words three different types of damage. So, if you are hit once with every type of physical damage -5/20% would reduce the damage by 3, and -2 by 6. As it can be seen -2 is far better than -5/20%, you should never use the latter. +10 armor reduces the damage by ~15,9%, if you're hit for 38 damage the damage is reduced by 6, if the damage is higher the damage reduction is higher, too. This means when you're hit for at least 38 damage per hit on average +10 armor is better than -2, even if you never switch the shield. +10 armor has another benefit over -2, you can also choose a +10 armor against elementar damage; imo in PvE elementar damage if more threatening than physical damage because of two reasons: 1. Monster groups mostly only have bad or even no support for physicals; this means with Aegis, Blind, Weakness, etc. you already nullified the opponent's physicals. You don't really need additional armor against physical damage. 2. The majority of physical damage is inflicted by martial weapons (for example swords), and the damage of those weapons are only affected by the weapon attribute, not by the level of the wielder. Elementar damage is often dealt by skills, and the damage of skills is increased by higher attribute and higher level. This means even a high level Warrior will deal only marginal more damage than a level 20 Warrior, but a high level Ele often deals 70-100% more damage than a level 20 Ele. +armor is better the higher the damage is, and against high level foes elementar damage will often be very high compared to physical damage. So, in short: If you only want to use one shield and never want to change it in, between fights or in an outpost it's best to use a +10 armor against fire/lightning or another elementar damage type you thing is often encountered in PvE. |