Armsmen in 2018

12346

Comments

  • Zyraxes wrote: »
    Also, I would add that somehow arms is forced towards thrust spec most often than not which adds yet another ailment to the class. The formula for 1h thrust is 50/50 str/dex...Now add this to a class that has dex as a tertiary stat...

    Again, 2.5 spec for arms is bare minimum.

    This is true from my experience with the armsman as well. I put out a couple threads requesting greater weapon variety in the slash and crush polearms lines to help balance the efficacy because thrust is so effective it's almost pointless not to spec it.
  • Llewd wrote: »
    36 sub/50 2h or pole/35 shield/31 parry/the remainder xbow

    You are assuming that "jo schmoe" every day average player can land side styles easily..in a zerg/BG setting 99% of the people who would be playing an Armsman still click abilities so thinking the would be able to land a side style on a moving target is a reach. And nobody said they are broken, they are just inferior to Hib/Mid versions once Pole and Plate were made obsolete imo.

    Good points, Bumbles.
  • opo66 wrote: »
    Idk why spec points are so important?

    Can always adjust growth rates on Pole style to account the loss of Parry tbh. Would make more sense than revisiting spec points.

    Polearm growth rate adjustments is one of the options we've provided as a plausible tweak in the right direction.
  • edited February 6 PM
    I honestly don't see any reliable arguments from the naysayers other than "OMG armsman is fine"!

    Read my two posts on page five, as well as the other documented posts, digest them and come back with constructive answers, facts and comparisons.

    You'll have very few arguments if you'd compare the armsman class head to head with both hero and warrior.
    Warriors, at least, are far FAR away, for too many years, with this single spec 1h/2h with 5.8-6.0 speed 2H weapons, similar growth rates to the polearm spec, much higher parry and considerably higher WS. Also, warriors have an innate 5% more WS boost if people keep forgeting this or don't know this fact at all. Till a few years ago, let's say, that the gap was somehow bearable but not anymore!

    Broadsword has to step in and do something to bring armsman in line.
    I don't advocate nerfing. There's often no need to nerf other classes(unless they're very OP), just buff the damn underperforming ones.

    35 shield spec, side slam, come on.. Heavy tanks have to bring shield spec to 42, it's mandatory, always was. In skirmises and especially in zerg fights, a heavy tank needs to slam a lot.

    I stay strong by the fact that armsman needs 2.5 spec points and adjusted growth rates for the polearm line.
    Slightly buffed thrust 1h weapons as well because of the 50/50 dex/str formula HANDICAP! When AMF and Plaguebringer ruled as 1h weapons, this used to balance this handicap..not anymore.

    My two cents.




    Post edited by Zyraxes on
  • edited February 6 PM
    Zyraxes wrote: »
    Also, I would add that somehow arms is forced towards thrust spec most often than not which adds yet another ailment to the class. The formula for 1h thrust is 50/50 str/dex...Now add this to a class that has dex as a tertiary stat...

    Again, 2.5 spec for arms is bare minimum.

    This is true from my experience with the armsman as well. I put out a couple threads requesting greater weapon variety in the slash and crush polearms lines to help balance the efficacy because thrust is so effective it's almost pointless not to spec it.

    We hardly have other spec option other than trust. Slash spec for albs is garbage(except infils), especially for armsman. Crush is sub par because of crappy weapon selection and junk 1h styles along with huge endurance .
    Post edited by Zyraxes on
  • edited February 15 PM
    Bump.

    Is there any chance that Broadsowrd is listening and analyzes this thread a little bit, going through all the presented facts?
    Post edited by Zyraxes on
  • yeh pretty disappointed with the patch just generally for alb tanks probably merc and pally are only tanks that I would say are in a good place for group play reaver is good solo but other toons do better job in group as for arms snap shot is good but wasn’t really what I was loooking for rr5 penalty needs looking at and growth rate or spec points for arms
  • Melee heretic is another toon that could be good in groups and it’s a simple fix change reactionary to positionals but hey this is armsmen thread.
  • Thought is was somewhat strange an armsman was loading his crossbow as we were heading out leaving him in the dust. Myself, on mine, have decided cocking the thing and then only shooting for some silly distance even with x-long range expensive bolts isn't worth the time or damage dealt to play. Snapshot? More like 'stun me while I load this thing up' shot.
  • I'd say with confidence that BS has been reviewing nearly every thread recently and are taking suggestions into consideration. Being that they decided to add snapshot as a class specific ability in a hot-fix patch is a huge step in the right direction. They didn't go over board and make overboard class adjustments this time. Remember that this is just a small tweak in preparation for 1.127.

    I don't have any inside information but I'm sure BS is still looking at additional ways to tweak the heavy tanks if it is deemed necessary. I'd still like to see some style revamps in the polearm line as well as improvements in the crush line/slash line (as well as better polearm weapon selection in crush/slash). Polearm at the moment definitely favors thrust in terms of weapon selection, let's allow some variance and offer some slash/crush polearms as well.

    Keep sending in information, feed back, arguments and opinions in favor of certain changes as well as arguments and opinions against changes.
  • Zyraxes wrote: »
    Armsman needs 2.5 spec points so does the pally. They are cursed with this double spec for 19 years now.
    Armsman not even with 2.5 spec will be able to reach warrior offence/defence - 50 sword/hammer that gives you full WS for both 1h and 2h, 42 shield 41 parry.
    A 2.5 armsman would barely have a 50 pole, 39 1h, 42 shield, 30 parry! Still massively lagging behind warriors in terms of WS and defence.
    Double spec had its justification back in the day when pole had slower speeds (equalized across the board with the other realms heavy tanks since ToA?? lol) + higher growth rates (arguably) - hardly the case for years, or a decade or more?

    Also when you cite better absorb on plate, don't forget evade 1 for both warriors and heroes. It just takes one evade in a fight to eliminate that absorb advantage.

    A boost of spec points of 2.5 and better growth rates for armsman is minimal at this state of the game.

    while i agree that the double spec penalty compared to warriors is bad, armsmen still have better armour. when i fight armsmen or heros or duel warrios on my savage, i notice the effect of armour. paladins and armsmen have the best armour in the game. if you don't see the value of the extra armour....
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • tald wrote: »
    this thread sound makes it sound like Armsmen are under performing?
    Brut wrote: »
    Totally agree with all of the above heavy melee has been neglected on all realms with armsman being the weakest out of all 3 I personally prefer my warrior out of all 3 for surviability and dps but arms is definetly the weakest haven’t played my hero for a long time but can’t comment

    care to explain how/why armsmen is the weakest?

    - they have the best rr5 (full movement, increased movement with vest proc with ability to deal damage - unlike their counterparts)
    - multiple classes to reset stun immunity so they can peel/re slam/kill (theurg rr5 / cleric rr5 / ST / ST)
    - best interupt classes at their side (again this is a choice if you run minstrel/theurg)
    - heretic rr5 / paladin celerity+af / necro magic ablative (again this is a choice)
    - best class cloak /use


    The thing i see is people just want a boost on their class. The arguments on this thread are so biased I just wonder when people will stop crying about their class and just play it!

    We just had a hot fix and now players want a boost on their class, you having a laugh right?

    There needs to be work on other area's of the game, not just class changes!
  • This is an armsman thread solic to discuss armsman issues do you still play alb or is it hib or mid if you don’t want to contribute any suggestions please don’t try to derail the thread so far it has been very civil and informative.
  • I really hope they aren't done adjusting the Arms... Snapshot was a start but please tell me they have more in mind and are just taking it slow.
  • Oh.
    My.
    God.
    This.
    Thread.

    I already solved it in 2018, and you nerds are still talking.
  • Warrior ftw, period
  • Mace80 wrote: »
    I really hope they aren't done adjusting the Arms... Snapshot was a start but please tell me they have more in mind and are just taking it slow.

    People that only play arms are blind to other classes weaknesses. They assume that because they get something (dual snares + dual stuns in each advanced line, exceptionally high style damage modifiers) that every tank gets it, which they don't. Arms has always had an edge regarding its unique kit of styles, abs, rr5+DD3 combo, celerity support, and recently becoming the only heavy with its own pbt-pierce cloak.

    But they whine because they are missing a few parry compared to warrior and cant testudo. Its a joke really. Hero's cant complain in the same way because of moose and celtic spear. But comparing an arms to a warrior and proclaiming the arms is somehow worse and in need of love is asinine.

    Snapshot was already too much.
  • Uh... Armsmen have the least access to celerity of any heavy. Every group has a heal Warden and a Healer with atleast 18 aug

    :confused:
  • Not gonna push that one hard. I was talking more historically (when 250 qui + 20% haste wasn't standard) and about pally's uniqueness.

    For sure now in 2019/2020, even with minst celerity you have to build around having celerity on alb where mid/hib base support come with it in basically any 8man. Can't deny that.

    Pally/Arms duo or Pally/Arms/XXX trio was a beast for a long time labby years and beyond. No better celerity support than another tank next to you providing it.
  • edited February 21 PM
    “care to explain how/why armsmen is the weakest?

    - they have the best rr5 (full movement, increased movement with vest proc with ability to deal damage - unlike their counterparts)
    - multiple classes to reset stun immunity so they can peel/re slam/kill (theurg rr5 / cleric rr5 / ST / ST)
    - best interupt classes at their side (again this is a choice if you run minstrel/theurg)
    - heretic rr5 / paladin celerity+af / necro magic ablative (again this is a choice)
    - best class cloak /use”

    Maybe they could just run a Shield Merc (or a Merc period. Or a Reaver. Or a Heretic) since 3/4 of those benefits have absolutely NOTHING to do with the Armsman class itself B)

    Also, I’m sure there’s TONS of Armsmen who wait until a melee hits them, procs their 9? second vest proc, and then hit their rank 5. :'( ;)
    Post edited by Enkertons on
  • Rohan wrote: »
    Mace80 wrote: »
    I really hope they aren't done adjusting the Arms... Snapshot was a start but please tell me they have more in mind and are just taking it slow.

    People that only play arms are blind to other classes weaknesses. They assume that because they get something (dual snares + dual stuns in each advanced line, exceptionally high style damage modifiers) that every tank gets it, which they don't. Arms has always had an edge regarding its unique kit of styles, abs, rr5+DD3 combo, celerity support, and recently becoming the only heavy with its own pbt-pierce cloak.

    But they whine because they are missing a few parry compared to warrior and cant testudo. Its a joke really. Hero's cant complain in the same way because of moose and celtic spear. But comparing an arms to a warrior and proclaiming the arms is somehow worse and in need of love is asinine.

    Snapshot was already too much.

    You are basing this on one heck of an assumption that I don't/haven/t play hero/warriors as well.
  • I am probably doing something wrong with my arms but the distance for bolts shown on the xbow cannot be achieved with any bolt i buy.
    Also, stopping to load the thing just makes it harder to use the stupid thing.
    "Hey guys. Wait up. I'm cocking my weapon." that can't even shoot for more than 100 damage
  • Snapshot allows you to use your xbow while running
  • Yea you can still chase your target while snapshot is up...its basically a means to keep someone in combat so they don't stealth or speed away. That, or a way to interrupt while rooted (as long as range allows) Frankly, though, while rooted I'd rather throw a champ DOT or disease on them than snapshot...so really its best for chasing someone and keeping them in combat.

    Its nice, but not enough alone to fix Armsmen.
  • @Cartoan You don't use you Xbow other than when snapshotting. If rooted, doing CL disease is much better.

    The Armsman isn't miles away from hero/warr imo. Free snapshot gives the arms a unique ability that has it's use.

    The only thing that the Arms doesn't have is the 20+ duration snares that both hero and warr get.
  • edited February 21 PM
    Arms Doubler is a 23 seconds rear snare, medium + to hit High damage, chains into 7 second stun with medium to hit and higher style damage.

    Specing 46 shield as warrior you can get the same 23 seconds but not +to hit and 1/2 the style damage that does not chain into anything. The only other 23 second is in sword @ 50 and sword has NO positional stuns.

    Arms positional medium bonus to-hit high damage snares into stuns are its specialty, not its weakness.
    Post edited by Rohan on
  • edited February 21 PM
    The 23 seconds peel must be in polearm too , not only in two handed weapon . Which arsmans will use two handed seriously ?
    Post edited by Hellblast on
  • Sword, along with Axe and Hammer, generally compare worse to other realms' 2handed lines because they are, in fact, basic 1handed weapon lines and not 2handed lines. Mid getting free 2handers in their 1handed lines is its specialty, not its weakness.

    Warriors having to use lower damage, lower tohit shield styles to do what other realms need to spec into 2handed lines to do is partially made up for by them having a higher WS/damage table than other tanks.

    LW also gets a med/high snare/stun back chain. It can also swap damage types on demand, as can CS, which also gets a 20 second side snare, and is far more relevant to this discussion because people are asking for a buff to Polearms, not Two Handed.
  • The snare argument breaks down to this: I won't spec for it so I want it for free. I don't care that my advanced lines have inherently better style chains and effects for PvP than other lines. They can spec for something so I want it, I can spec for it too but I wont and want it in both my lines!

    'Free 2h' only means some extra parry. 16 more at r6 compared to arms (slash or thrust), less at higher rank... yay! 8% chance to parry vs plate having 7% more inherent ABS + all the other aforementioned things arms get that are strictly better compared to warrior weapon lines. (for FREE you could even call it)

    Warriors aren't the ones in here pining for love, Arms-only-players are @Drane
  • edited February 22 PM
    Rohan wrote: »
    Warriors aren't the ones in here pining for love, Arms-only-players are @Drane

    Funny, because the things you keep listing as Arms style advantages, are actually things that Heroes can also get. You came into a thread where the majority of the posters are asking for Pole buffs and then you started complaining about the Two Handed back/snare chain while intentionally ignoring that LW also gets one. Having a medium/high damage snare/stun back chain isn't a Arms exclusive advantage. Warriors not having one is part of a tradeoff for mid not having to spec into 2handed weapons (which benefits more classes than Warrior, and which Warrior gets additional advantages to help make up for). You're being incredibly transparent here.

    Arms gets Plate while Heroes and Warriors get evasion. Heroes get free IP and can swap weapon types in their 2handed lines. Warriors/Mid get more limited damage types and are forced into 1handed styles, but get free 2handers (no scare quotes necessary) which translates into extra parry, and higher WS/damage tables. Arms can spec into any damage type for their 2handers, but have to subspec into that weapon type.

    Pole has not kept up as time has gone on, which is why people are looking at giving it a buff.

    I can't believe that it's 2020 and people are still struggling to figure out tradeoffs that have been in the game since release.
    Post edited by Drane on
  • edited February 22 PM
    I did not intentionally ignore pole, as I referenced it multiple times here and in the 1.127 thread. But when someone says arms don’t get a 23 second snare when they do I’m gonna call it out.

    Pole has aged as well as any other heavy weapon line. In fact with alb getting better access to celerity recently with minst and self pbt cloak their style utility effectively increased.

    Warrior shield spec got some ‘love’ in the 2 new melee styles which I would gladly give for better styles in their weapon lines. But as I mentioned in the other thread, arms are welcome to these 2 styles at 44 and 46 shield as they would/do require minor investment and are not nearly as useful as they seem in a vacuum. No bonus to-hit snares with shield (low damage, giving up a 2h swing) are not good, much less a reason for arms to be calling foul and asking for love. I hope they get these styles so the arms-only-players will see first hand how they actually perform.

    TL:DR pole is fine. Warriors are fine. Hero’s moose is slightly unbalanced and could use a downside after its duration to remove the ‘free IP3’ aspect. Snapshot was unnecessary but not the end of the world, but no more love is necessary.

    Instead there are a plethora of classes and interactions that overperform elsewhere that could be looked at. And by substitute help all heavies be slightly more impactful/useful for their intended roles.
    Post edited by Rohan on
  • Rohan wrote: »
    I did not intentionally ignore pole, as I referenced it multiple times here and in the 1.127 thread. But when someone says arms don’t get a 23 second snare when they do I’m gonna call it out.

    Pole has aged as well as any other heavy weapon line. In fact with alb getting better access to celerity recently with minst and self pbt cloak their style utility effectively increased.

    Warrior shield spec got some ‘love’ in the 2 new melee styles which I would gladly give for better styles in their weapon lines. But as I mentioned in the other thread, arms are welcome to these 2 styles at 44 and 46 shield as they would/do require minor investment and are not nearly as useful as they seem in a vacuum. No bonus to-hit snares with shield (low damage, giving up a 2h swing) are not good, much less a reason for arms to be calling foul and asking for love. I hope they get these styles so the arms-only-players will see first hand how they actually perform.

    TL:DR pole is fine. Warriors are fine. Hero’s moose is slightly unbalanced and could use a downside after its duration to remove the ‘free IP3’ aspect. Snapshot was unnecessary but not the end of the world, but no more love is necessary.

    Instead there are a plethora of classes and interactions that overperform elsewhere that could be looked at. And by substitute help all heavies be slightly more impactful/useful for their intended roles.

    I appreciate your input, it's important to have alternative view points to incorporate as much information as possible when evaluating class alterations.

    I would argue that just because you believe "pole is fine" doesn't imply that the combat line shouldn't be evaluated, it most certainly should. On a side note, the aspect of the armsman that gave it it's unique advantage, plate armor, is essentially negligible today. I understand hero and warrior classes would state "I would love to take plate armor if you don't want it"... well, most certainly you would if it meant keeping the plethora of unique advantages that your class already has as well, trust me, the extra 6% or so of melee damage mitigation doesn't go as far as one may believe.

    Also, to correct one of your claims, armsman didn't call foul and request "love" because warriors received two shield styles at 44/46 respectively. The armsman class requested evaluation because they've become subpar as the game has aged. It's a viable request, and one broadsword has deemed appropriate to evaluate as well.
  • Specifics are important.
    ‘Behind the times’ is a blanket statement any class can make.

    Anytime anyone in this thread has been specific their argument fell flat.
  • Rohan wrote: »
    Specifics are important.
    ‘Behind the times’ is a blanket statement any class can make.

    Anytime anyone in this thread has been specific their argument fell flat.

    That's not true at all. The specifics are exactly what broadsword is reviewing and why something as specific as snap shot was removed from 25 investment points into xbow and changed into a class specific ability.

    The only specifics I've read from you include two snares in the two-handed melee line compared to the warriors 44 and 46 shield line, along with the blanket claims that "armsmen are fine".
  • that was my clearly labeled TL:DR which you obviously didn't read, grats.

    "The specifics are exactly what broadsword is reviewing and why something as specific as snap shot was removed from 25 investment points into xbow and changed into a class specific ability."
    Highly debatable. VW's got solo rr5 love (double the self ablative value) out of nowhere 2 years back and continue to be top of the solo foodchain. You think that was infinitely wise? BS doesn't make mistakes? ever? Which specifics do you think that was regarding? and as I said I'm not here to debate what has already been given. It was unnecessary but fine. What I am debating is the ridiculous concept that Arms somehow needs more.
  • Rohan wrote: »
    that was my clearly labeled TL:DR which you obviously didn't read, grats.

    "The specifics are exactly what broadsword is reviewing and why something as specific as snap shot was removed from 25 investment points into xbow and changed into a class specific ability."
    Highly debatable. VW's got solo rr5 love (double the self ablative value) out of nowhere 2 years back and continue to be top of the solo foodchain. You think that was infinitely wise? BS doesn't make mistakes? ever? Which specifics do you think that was regarding? and as I said I'm not here to debate what has already been given. It was unnecessary but fine. What I am debating is the ridiculous concept that Arms somehow needs more.

    No one stated they're infallible. Obviously they've made changes to their methods of determining class review.

    Armsmen do need additional review, polearm does need reviewed. What, in the sense of "review", are you afraid of? I'm not suggesting how broadsword should alter the armsman class to benefit it, that's not my job. Analogues to a car owner submitting their vehicle to a mechanic shop for "review", as a customer and player of the armsmen class I am submitting the class to be reviewed.

    You state that the class is fine and nothing is needed. You are well within your rights to make that claim. I am stating that I've played the class since 2014 and it's efficacy has decreased steadily over the last 6 years; therefore it is in need of being reviewed.
  • I'm asking what I have always asked, why?
  • Muylae wrote: »
    Zyraxes wrote: »
    Armsman needs 2.5 spec points so does the pally. They are cursed with this double spec for 19 years now.
    Armsman not even with 2.5 spec will be able to reach warrior offence/defence - 50 sword/hammer that gives you full WS for both 1h and 2h, 42 shield 41 parry.
    A 2.5 armsman would barely have a 50 pole, 39 1h, 42 shield, 30 parry! Still massively lagging behind warriors in terms of WS and defence.
    Double spec had its justification back in the day when pole had slower speeds (equalized across the board with the other realms heavy tanks since ToA?? lol) + higher growth rates (arguably) - hardly the case for years, or a decade or more?

    Also when you cite better absorb on plate, don't forget evade 1 for both warriors and heroes. It just takes one evade in a fight to eliminate that absorb advantage.

    A boost of spec points of 2.5 and better growth rates for armsman is minimal at this state of the game.

    while i agree that the double spec penalty compared to warriors is bad, armsmen still have better armour. when i fight armsmen or heros or duel warrios on my savage, i notice the effect of armour. paladins and armsmen have the best armour in the game. if you don't see the value of the extra armour....

    The additional AF benefit is most noticeable through the Pally.

    When speaking of the armsman class exclusively, you're talking about 6% total (I believe it's 6%) of additional melee damage mitigation compared to the hero and warrior (who make up for this with evade I). 6% is not significant what so ever. 6% of 100 damage is 6 hit points. 6% of 1,000 damage is 60 hit points. Would you really notice being hit for 1,000 damage versus 940 damage?
  • Rohan wrote: »
    I'm asking what I have always asked, why?

    The armsman classes efficacy has steadily reduced over the last 6 years, in all aspects, in survivability/defense and melee combat efficiency.

    The armsman class needs reviewed and it is being reviewed
  • So you deny that pbt pierce cloak is a significant benefit in the last 6 years to Armsman efficacy?
    You deny that minstrel gaining celerity was a benefit to armsman efficacy?
    You deny that the proliferation of Sight necros recently, that can easily debuff for arms, is a benefit to arms efficacy?
    You deny that the recent change to Empty mind (and class/astral cloak AoM) in the current tower meta is a benefit to arms efficacy?
    You deny that the commonality of Tics and tic's amazing rr5 effecting arms has been beneficial to arms?

    A huge amount of the love given to competing classes in the past 4 years has largely been rolled back. Heavy tanks have not had a lot of love in the same period but have suffered no nerfs. Their styles were reviewed at the same interval as other style lines were and outside of stealthers (buffed then nerfed) almost no style buffs have been given to anyone in the interim.

    Outside of anything specific to armsman that could be brought up I see no reason for heavies to be the basis of an upcoming review and challenge your assertion that they are being. Something was given but you have no proof that there is more to follow.
  • Rohan wrote: »
    So you deny that pbt pierce cloak is a significant benefit in the last 6 years to Armsman efficacy?
    You deny that minstrel gaining celerity was a benefit to armsman efficacy?
    You deny that the proliferation of Sight necros recently, that can easily debuff for arms, is a benefit to arms efficacy?
    You deny that the recent change to Empty mind (and class/astral cloak AoM) in the current tower meta is a benefit to arms efficacy?
    You deny that the commonality of Tics and tic's amazing rr5 effecting arms has been beneficial to arms?

    A huge amount of the love given to competing classes in the past 4 years has largely been rolled back. Heavy tanks have not had a lot of love in the same period but have suffered no nerfs. Their styles were reviewed at the same interval as other style lines were and outside of stealthers (buffed then nerfed) almost no style buffs have been given to anyone in the interim.

    Outside of anything specific to armsman that could be brought up I see no reason for heavies to be the basis of an upcoming review and challenge your assertion that they are being. Something was given but you have no proof that there is more to follow.

    I would highly dissuade you from making class determinations based on the abilities of other classes. If I have a minstril, a paladin, a sight necro, a heretic and i'm running the armsman loyalty cloak, I should do just fine, right?

    The efficacy of the armsman class has decreased over the last 6 years. I'm not referring to the possible efficiency boosts other classes have on the armsman. You can make that argument for every class combination in the game. I'm looking at the class exclusively in and of itself and comparing how effective the class was 4-6 years ago against today. That is the reasoning behind why the class is being reviewed.

    You just listed 3 classes and an item /use as your sole argument as to why the class doesn't need reviewed.

    I'll reiterate. The efficacy of the armsman class has decreased over the last 6 years. The class requires review.
  • Nothing about the Armsman has changed in 6 years in a negative manner. Your argument is that other classes have gotten abilities that make Arms less strong no?
  • Rohan wrote: »
    Nothing about the Armsman has changed in 6 years in a negative manner. Your argument is that other classes have gotten abilities that make Arms less strong no?

    Not so much as how you stated it. The game has evolved over the last 6 years and the armsman class hasn't. So you have 3 options:
    1. Do nothing
    2. Revert all of the changes that have indirectly reduced the armsmans effectiveness over the last 6 years
    3. Review the armsman class and determine what changes may be made to increase the efficacy that has been lost

    This thread was made in 2018 for the same issues that are still being identified today. At that period in time broadsword decided on option 1 and nothing was deemed necessary. Fast forward two years and the issues were reintroduced. This time broadsword agree'd and determined to evaluate the class, whether that involves tweaks to the combat lines (polearm specifically as has been stated in this thread by others) or some other alteration, that is up to the development team to evaluate and determine how to increase the class in a way that doesn't pervert it into an overpowered archtype.
  • Can you give a single example of ‘evolution’ that affects the Armsman more than another melee?
  • Rohan wrote: »
    Can you give a single example of ‘evolution’ that affects the Armsman more than another melee?

    That isn't the basis of this thread. If you'd like to discuss ways in which the Hero or Warrior classes require similar evaluation, please feel free to do so or create an additional thread focusing on those specific classes.

    This thread has to do with evaluation of the armsman class and ways to increase the efficacy it has lost following stagnation over the last 6 years.

  • edited February 26 PM
    So you can’t? Not a single example?
    You brought it up man.
    Post edited by Rohan on
  • edited February 26 PM
    @Amp_Phetamine I think you are looking at the Armsman strictly from a solo perspective, because right now, they are equivalent to Hero and Warr in a 8 man environment.

    Snapshot was a nice add-on that I think is all the armsman needed to make it "unique" and give it a bit of flavor.

    I don't see any additional modification required to the arms. The freezing chest proc is underwhelming, but tbh it's compensated by the loyal cloak /use2 that is just ridiculous to have on a peel tank.

    I didn't think it would be that great but after playing my arms and pushing into hib caster groups, not having to swing twice at casters to get through bubble to slam is just incredible. That cloak makes the armsman in my opinion, and it makes the hero cloak look pretty bad, but hero has Moose.

    I'd consider the arms a case close, only diff with other tanks is the lower parry due to the alb requirement of weapon speccing. What is the melee mitigation you get from plate vs chain/scale and what do you lose in parry as defence? Do they balance out?

    Example, plate gives 6% more melee damage mitigation (not sure of the true value), how much parry do you lose with the missing 15 points in parry or so?

    Also plate is there 100%, while parry is RNG base. It might just be equivalent.
    Post edited by Shoke on
  • Rohan wrote: »
    So you can’t? Not a single example?
    You brought it up man.

    I gave you six years worth of "examples" to review. Your counter arguments have devolved and you're currently attempting to discredit my claims through semantics.

    My position hasn't changed.
  • Shoke wrote: »
    @Amp_Phetamine I think you are looking at the Armsman strictly from a solo perspective, because right now, they are equivalent to Hero and Warr in a 8 man environment.

    Snapshot was a nice add-on that I think is all the armsman needed to make it "unique" and give it a bit of flavor.

    I don't see any additional modification required to the arms. The freezing chest proc is underwhelming, but tbh it's compensated by the loyal cloak /use2 that is just ridiculous to have on a peel tank.

    I didn't think it would be that great but after playing my arms and pushing into hib caster groups, not having to swing twice at casters to get through bubble to slam is just incredible. That cloak makes the armsman in my opinion, and it makes the hero cloak look pretty bad, but hero has Moose.

    I'd consider the arms a case close, only diff with other tanks is the lower parry due to the alb requirement of weapon speccing. What is the melee mitigation you get from plate vs chain/scale and what do you lose in parry as defence? Do they balance out?

    Example, plate gives 6% more melee damage mitigation (not sure of the true value), how much parry do you lose with the missing 15 points in parry or so?

    Also plate is there 100%, while parry is RNG base. It might just be equivalent.

    I appreciate your input @Shoke.

    Yes, when I first created this thread it was heavily influenced by my experiences with the class in a solo perspective. From that regard the armsman class is inferior to the hero and warrior; however, I also agree that major class alterations shouldn't be made to cater to a single form of game play, although it has been done (I.E., attempting to make vampiir's and valewalkers more group friendly and the assassin alterations to making them group friendly which resulted in highly over powered solo classes that had to be reverted, valewalker not so much).

    I'm very hesitant to consider a class "fixed" due to an item /use ability, regardless of how potent it may be. There are templates and builds that don't incorporate the loyalty cloak and for that reason I'm against considering the armsman class fixed as long as you build your template around that specific item.

    I also believe that the damage mitigation differential is 6% which the hero and warrior class somewhat compensate for with 5% base evade in evade I, while the warrior isn't required to spec two-handed and therefore has significantly higher base parry (I too would like to see the actual %value if anyone good with numbers may show) and the hero makes up for it with Stag form. Those are just examples.
  • edited February 26 PM
    I gave you six years worth of "examples" to review. .

    no you keep saying '6 years'. that's not equivalent to a single example.
    I would highly dissuade you from making class determinations based on the abilities of other classes.

    Arms has not had a single nerf in those '6 years'.
    So your entire argument is predicated on other classes abilities changing. In other words, Complete and utter hypocrisy.
    Post edited by Rohan on
Sign In or Register to comment.