Some Kind of Regen for Warriors

[sylos]

Being someone who has played a Warrior for awhile. And seeing this brought up a time or two by others. I just figured id post it on here to see what you all thought.

Ive thought of possible given Warriors the ability to increase there Regen. Maybe give them a Bandage skill, that would kinda act like a Rangers Herb, or a Berserkers Trophies.

Like i said it just an idea.

[ottif]

overpower fast healing

[divsky]

Can't they already use berserk to restore health? And I thought I read once that warriors have the fastest passive hp regen of any class anyways. I don't think it's a problem.

[Nycticora]

overpower berserk might be cool

[ewils03]

Berserk gives a little health but then cripples your AC with the added damage. There's been a number of times playing a zerker I didn't bother with berserk because the damage I'd take would make it all even worse, making the little bit of healing not worth it. But, some times it really did help.. just depends on the situation. Warlord regen was brought up again a couple months ago or so, but I think Dav just loosened the reins with being in groups and let Warlords get healed and restored to their natural state, which does make RP sense, to be honest. Being devout followers of a deity, why not get restored by the gods? And it's nice getting back out in front (I'm a tank by nature, so I'm probably biased on that). Giving Warlords a cabal heal would be a little OP, but it'd be awesome tacking on like a +5% regen rate or something small.. being masters of their physical bodies, Warlords have learned to regulate their trauma and quickly mend their wounds. Or something like that.. just a thought is all.

[ewils03]

And only warriors and zerkers have berserk, monks and rangers don't.

[divsky]

Monks have acupuncture and healing. They're some of the best self-healers in the game. And rangers have herb. So I'm not really sure why you would bring those two classes up.

[ewils03]

I totally misread the title lmao Sorry!! I thought it said Warlord, not Warriors. So forget everything I posted

[m1coftw]

Monks have healing, acupuncture.
Serkers have trophy and rage.
Rangers have herb and campfire.
Warriors are shit.

[Davairus]

It is the warrior's role to be dependent on the charity of his team. He is the shield of the entire group and dependent on it as they are in turn. Sorry that your characters cannot all do everything themselves, but those classes you mention have healing have to pay for it in other areas - they pay dearly, in fact.

monk - very reduced max hp and very active on skill use, lots of training to do
berserker - all about rage which dont let you flee, and no blind fighting so theyre damned if they dont use it, and a warrior can tank rage. and just like rage, trophies dont move either
ranger - crappy lag skills and also reduced max hp

Warriors can defeat all of those classes with hobble alone just because they are tankier, in fact, you might even want to consider how those classes perform if they both just sit doing nothing. We see these classes duel to a very even fight ALL the time and the warriors arent even properly geared up.. In fact the player of Lorne will be able to remind you that a pretty humble looking warrior once beat two super-geared berserkers back to back, and polearm on a ranger is a real ass whupping with the pets being tanked fine due to that defense too. Monk will beat you if you track like a snail

If a warrior learns to triage its officially a different class and will need to take a hit somewhere for it. I'm not saying no but you might not like what you get. We need to do much better than just "buff class X" every week, think about the actual root cause and what the problem youre trying to solve is. I'm gonna say homogenous classes is a problem that I dont want to INTRODUCE, especially when youre only looking for a surgical strike on some specific thing (e.g. making riposte chance highr vs mania or something). I can say for sure that if they can bandage up then they will have to take a significant hit, like, we'd have to make purple potions way easier to dispel or some bunk, warriors would end up going back to warlord-only because everyone would decide they suck more than they already did as a knee-jerk. matter of fact a knight warrior literally never happened back in the day

[Nycticora]

I once saw Phostan oneround someone with shield disarm

no lie

[divsky]

I would like to point one thing out. If you look at the players table on the website, Warriors are the most popular guild in the game (excluding monks who I think are just popular because they were recently reintroduced). But if you look at the ratings, of the 35 rated characters at level 50, there is only 2 warriors. And both of them are near the bottom of the rankings.

There might be some validity to the idea that warriors are really struggling at level 50. It doesn't seem like anyone wants to play a level 50 warrior.

[Mikoos]

o.O level 50 giant warrior is one of the best class/race combo in the game. In fact I'd argue that warriors are also the most thought out and...fit perfectly in the game's design.

[xanthas]

i let my 50 warrior expire a couple of months ago because i don't have time to play too much and i forgot. i think they are still viable for pvp (be aggressive or run for the hills) and obviously are great for tanking with aid of support classes

[m1coftw]

Defensive-wise monks are so much superior to whoarriors.

Offensive-wise serkers are just unstoppable monsters compared to wurriors.

And if you want to play hide n seek, you can just roll a warrior without hobble and call it a ranger.

Why would anyone want warrior if monk has so much more utility, berserkers so much more offense and rangers so much more survivability.

What does a warrior bring to the table that those 3 can't?

[Dogran]

Giant warriors own.

Double grip,
Overpower
Riposte
4th attack
All weapons. (Weapon advantage matters again)

Only class I had trouble with on Balan was dks cause of vuln, and zerkers after the changes. Now that weapon advantage matters again warriors are beast.