I'm not sure how it is for the US side of WAR, but for us EU people, we have a sort of 'hall of fame' type thing on our EU website...
and guess what?
sorcs and bright wizards are the classes topping the kill list
you do realize, mage type classes have ALWAYS been known for Offense -- LOTS of OFFENSIVE DAMAGE ?
This is pretty standard in any MMO. The robe wearing, spell-caster types are offensive juggernauts. Since this is a pvp game, you are at the receivng end of what mobs deal with in pve games.
You guys knew all this already right ? This was all just a big joke...
No thats rogues. Wizards were always known for there annoying CC. And dmg second, usualy AoE.
Even in WAR WE and WH have the potential to do the most burst dmg in my experience. Specialy WEs
Its just they die easier than casters. All melee do in WAR unless u have a personal healer. Thats why casters get the big scores. But 1on1 casters are easy to kill. Only reason my tank would die to em was large number of them doing /assist on me.
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
I'm not sure how it is for the US side of WAR, but for us EU people, we have a sort of 'hall of fame' type thing on our EU website...
and guess what?
sorcs and bright wizards are the classes topping the kill list
you do realize, mage type classes have ALWAYS been known for Offense -- LOTS of OFFENSIVE DAMAGE ?
This is pretty standard in any MMO. The robe wearing, spell-caster types are offensive juggernauts. Since this is a pvp game, you are at the receivng end of what mobs deal with in pve games.
You guys knew all this already right ? This was all just a big joke...
No thats rogues. Wizards were always known for there annoying CC. And dmg second, usualy AoE.
Even in WAR WE and WH have the potential to do the most burst dmg in my experience. Specialy WEs
Its just they die easier than casters. All melee do in WAR unless u have a personal healer. Thats why casters get the big scores. But 1on1 casters are easy to kill. Only reason my tank would die to em was large number of them doing /assist on me.
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
I'm only entering this conversation because you brought up D&D. Don't really care about WAR.
That said, I'd have to disagree with your statement about thieves/rogues. I know off-hand that they have backstab multipliers starting with at least second addition D&D. I'd have to go look for prior to that. Thieves/Rogues from that point have always very much been a "dps" class with regard to D&D. Mages, on the other hand, were your debuffers and supportive class. Most people only want to think Fireball and Lightning bolt and they completly forget the tons of other utility spells (Grease, Identify, Charm, etc) which way outnumber all the direct/indirect damage spells in D&D.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
No thats rogues. Wizards were always known for there annoying CC. And dmg second, usualy AoE.
Even in WAR WE and WH have the potential to do the most burst dmg in my experience. Specialy WEs Its just they die easier than casters. All melee do in WAR unless u have a personal healer. Thats why casters get the big scores. But 1on1 casters are easy to kill. Only reason my tank would die to em was large number of them doing /assist on me.
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
I'm only entering this conversation because you brought up D&D. Don't really care about WAR.
That said, I'd have to disagree with your statement about thieves/rogues. I know off-hand that they have backstab multipliers starting with at least second addition D&D. I'd have to go look for prior to that. Thieves/Rogues from that point have always very much been a "dps" class with regard to D&D. Mages, on the other hand, were your debuffers and supportive class. Most people only want to think Fireball and Lightning bolt and they completly forget the tons of other utility spells (Grease, Identify, Charm, etc) which way outnumber all the direct/indirect damage spells in D&D.
I was mainly talking about first edition, but right second edition here we go. Any kind of figther was able to outdps thief in anyway. If you read the rules carefully, you should know the backstab applies only outside of combat. It was useless in combat, and your average rogue was pretty much stack with 1d6 damage + magical weapon damage, plus maybe some bonus from strength in case you were extremly lucky. Any fighter class has got multiple attacks per round at later levels and outdps rogue anytime. Thief/Rogue was all about the tricks they have, disguise, open locks, remove trap, bluff..not dps.
And about wizards, you can't compare any class with wizards in 1st/2nd/3rd edition of D&D. Sure at lower levels they were a bit useless and were mostly a CC, but at later levels nothing can compare to spellcaster. Insta-save vs death spells, extremly huge AoE damage spells are just examples. While wizard was doing d6/per level to all enemies in area per round, rogue was doing 1d6 damage to one target.
Rogue was never supposed to be combat oriented class. This class was shining in out of combat situations
All I have to say about this is: it's Doomfist! People stand in big packs in that scenario and a person who spams area of effect with having a specialization in the area on the biggest packs possible is going to get insaaaaane amounts of damage. Hell, even my Shadow Warrior could break 100k in that scenario before the patch.
No thats rogues. Wizards were always known for there annoying CC. And dmg second, usualy AoE.
Even in WAR WE and WH have the potential to do the most burst dmg in my experience. Specialy WEs Its just they die easier than casters. All melee do in WAR unless u have a personal healer. Thats why casters get the big scores. But 1on1 casters are easy to kill. Only reason my tank would die to em was large number of them doing /assist on me.
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
I'm only entering this conversation because you brought up D&D. Don't really care about WAR.
That said, I'd have to disagree with your statement about thieves/rogues. I know off-hand that they have backstab multipliers starting with at least second addition D&D. I'd have to go look for prior to that. Thieves/Rogues from that point have always very much been a "dps" class with regard to D&D. Mages, on the other hand, were your debuffers and supportive class. Most people only want to think Fireball and Lightning bolt and they completly forget the tons of other utility spells (Grease, Identify, Charm, etc) which way outnumber all the direct/indirect damage spells in D&D.
I was mainly talking about first edition, but right second edition here we go. Any kind of figther was able to outdps thief in anyway. If you read the rules carefully, you should know the backstab applies only outside of combat. It was useless in combat, and your average rogue was pretty much stack with 1d6 damage + magical weapon damage, plus maybe some bonus from strength in case you were extremly lucky. Any fighter class has got multiple attacks per round at later levels and outdps rogue anytime. Thief/Rogue was all about the tricks they have, disguise, open locks, remove trap, bluff..not dps.
And about wizards, you can't compare any class with wizards in 1st/2nd/3rd edition of D&D. Sure at lower levels they were a bit useless and were mostly a CC, but at later levels nothing can compare to spellcaster. Insta-save vs death spells, extremly huge AoE damage spells are just examples. While wizard was doing d6/per level to all enemies in area per round, rogue was doing 1d6 damage to one target.
Rogue was never supposed to be combat oriented class. This class was shining in out of combat situations
Well, reviewing my 2nd ed. PHB I will disagree with you on backstab being an out of combat only feature. It was a one use feature, sure. But I guess it all depends on how you played the game. Our campaigns allow for rogues to plausibly still be hidden when combat is going if they were hidden before it started and did nothing to reveal themselves.
I didn't compare them to fighters and I won't. That said, depending on how you played the game (and staying within the rules) a thief could do a respectable amount of damage. Extra attacks give another chance for damage but also another opportunity to role a 1 and screw yourself. All in all, though, D&D probably isn't the best example to use because it is played different ways by many people. I see rogues/thieves as dps. I didn't say they did the most damage per second, just that they were dps. And in D&D being dps doesn't mean you have no other utility. Such limitations apply to MMOs because the devs can only code so much.
Anyway, good chat. Carry on with your debate. I've got other forums with topics I'm more vested in. Cheers!
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
The damge potential and surviveability of the bright wizzards in this scenario are extremly overpowered. Because, I was in the scenario that this screenshot was taken from I can tell you what happened. The BW's would run around in circles AOEing everyone to hell. 3-4 DPS classes would follow in suit of them, just to die off before the BW was killed. You will notice this fact by the amount of players the BW's killed.
As stated here many times. The caster classes trade off surviveability for an exponential amount of DPS. The fact is, the BW's dont have a low survivability. They are able to stay up through an insane amount of damage while maintaining their DPS.
This is a problem. Their DPS should be able to be this high because as most of you are right. They're a caster class and they are supposed to out DPS everyone else. What they are not supposed to do is out last everyone else as well. I dont care how many heals they're getting 3-4 players should be able to pop them.
I'm only entering this conversation because you brought up D&D. Don't really care about WAR.
That said, I'd have to disagree with your statement about thieves/rogues. I know off-hand that they have backstab multipliers starting with at least second addition D&D. I'd have to go look for prior to that. Thieves/Rogues from that point have always very much been a "dps" class with regard to D&D. Mages, on the other hand, were your debuffers and supportive class. Most people only want to think Fireball and Lightning bolt and they completly forget the tons of other utility spells (Grease, Identify, Charm, etc) which way outnumber all the direct/indirect damage spells in D&D.
I was mainly talking about first edition, but right second edition here we go. Any kind of figther was able to outdps thief in anyway. If you read the rules carefully, you should know the backstab applies only outside of combat. It was useless in combat, and your average rogue was pretty much stack with 1d6 damage + magical weapon damage, plus maybe some bonus from strength in case you were extremly lucky. Any fighter class has got multiple attacks per round at later levels and outdps rogue anytime. Thief/Rogue was all about the tricks they have, disguise, open locks, remove trap, bluff..not dps.
And about wizards, you can't compare any class with wizards in 1st/2nd/3rd edition of D&D. Sure at lower levels they were a bit useless and were mostly a CC, but at later levels nothing can compare to spellcaster. Insta-save vs death spells, extremly huge AoE damage spells are just examples. While wizard was doing d6/per level to all enemies in area per round, rogue was doing 1d6 damage to one target.
Rogue was never supposed to be combat oriented class. This class was shining in out of combat situations
Well, reviewing my 2nd ed. PHB I will disagree with you on backstab being an out of combat only feature. It was a one use feature, sure. But I guess it all depends on how you played the game. Our campaigns allow for rogues to plausibly still be hidden when combat is going if they were hidden before it started and did nothing to reveal themselves.
I didn't compare them to fighters and I won't. That said, depending on how you played the game (and staying within the rules) a thief could do a respectable amount of damage. Extra attacks give another chance for damage but also another opportunity to role a 1 and screw yourself. All in all, though, D&D probably isn't the best example to use because it is played different ways by many people. I see rogues/thieves as dps. I didn't say they did the most damage per second, just that they were dps. And in D&D being dps doesn't mean you have no other utility. Such limitations apply to MMOs because the devs can only code so much.
Anyway, good chat. Carry on with your debate. I've got other forums with topics I'm more vested in. Cheers!
I don't really care about WAR either I never played it. But anyway, the best argument against rogue being a dps class is DDO, which is pretty close to pen and paper and there's a lot of people trying to munchkin their characters. I'm sure some would argue, but I think after 2 years I spent in DDO, that pure rogues were terrible for dps and survivability. DPS rogue had to multiclass with fighter class, but they were still behind dps and insta-kill sorcerers. And take a note, that D&D 3rd edition is already partially bastardized by mmo's and gave rogues sneak attack that is usable all the time whenever there is a mate fightning the same mob.
Actually Turbine did it right with their rogue-like class in Lotro - burglar. Burglar is very low on DPS, but has lots of tricks just like old-school thieves always had and its pretty close to the vision of most of the and paper rpg thieves I played.
DPS means squat if you can't A. get alot of kills and B. win the scenario. Personally I think people who brag at DPS but totally suck at getting the kills or winning the scenario or working as a team not worrying over DPS are the worst community members. DPS to me shows you found a couple of targets to beat on who were getting alot of heals and you proceeded to attack them instead of going after the healer or making sure your team was succeeding at the scenario's goals. Even the pictures proves it..they may of gotten alot of DPS but they got squat in XP & RP compared to people with Less DPS....of course that also means the photo is probably shopped.
QFT!
"Give players systems and tools instead of rails and rules"
Comments
you do realize, mage type classes have ALWAYS been known for Offense -- LOTS of OFFENSIVE DAMAGE ?
This is pretty standard in any MMO. The robe wearing, spell-caster types are offensive juggernauts. Since this is a pvp game, you are at the receivng end of what mobs deal with in pve games.
You guys knew all this already right ? This was all just a big joke...
No thats rogues. Wizards were always known for there annoying CC. And dmg second, usualy AoE.
Even in WAR WE and WH have the potential to do the most burst dmg in my experience. Specialy WEs
Its just they die easier than casters. All melee do in WAR unless u have a personal healer. Thats why casters get the big scores. But 1on1 casters are easy to kill. Only reason my tank would die to em was large number of them doing /assist on me.
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
you do realize, mage type classes have ALWAYS been known for Offense -- LOTS of OFFENSIVE DAMAGE ?
This is pretty standard in any MMO. The robe wearing, spell-caster types are offensive juggernauts. Since this is a pvp game, you are at the receivng end of what mobs deal with in pve games.
You guys knew all this already right ? This was all just a big joke...
No thats rogues. Wizards were always known for there annoying CC. And dmg second, usualy AoE.
Even in WAR WE and WH have the potential to do the most burst dmg in my experience. Specialy WEs
Its just they die easier than casters. All melee do in WAR unless u have a personal healer. Thats why casters get the big scores. But 1on1 casters are easy to kill. Only reason my tank would die to em was large number of them doing /assist on me.
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
I'm only entering this conversation because you brought up D&D. Don't really care about WAR.
That said, I'd have to disagree with your statement about thieves/rogues. I know off-hand that they have backstab multipliers starting with at least second addition D&D. I'd have to go look for prior to that. Thieves/Rogues from that point have always very much been a "dps" class with regard to D&D. Mages, on the other hand, were your debuffers and supportive class. Most people only want to think Fireball and Lightning bolt and they completly forget the tons of other utility spells (Grease, Identify, Charm, etc) which way outnumber all the direct/indirect damage spells in D&D.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
I'm only entering this conversation because you brought up D&D. Don't really care about WAR.
That said, I'd have to disagree with your statement about thieves/rogues. I know off-hand that they have backstab multipliers starting with at least second addition D&D. I'd have to go look for prior to that. Thieves/Rogues from that point have always very much been a "dps" class with regard to D&D. Mages, on the other hand, were your debuffers and supportive class. Most people only want to think Fireball and Lightning bolt and they completly forget the tons of other utility spells (Grease, Identify, Charm, etc) which way outnumber all the direct/indirect damage spells in D&D.
I was mainly talking about first edition, but right second edition here we go. Any kind of figther was able to outdps thief in anyway. If you read the rules carefully, you should know the backstab applies only outside of combat. It was useless in combat, and your average rogue was pretty much stack with 1d6 damage + magical weapon damage, plus maybe some bonus from strength in case you were extremly lucky. Any fighter class has got multiple attacks per round at later levels and outdps rogue anytime. Thief/Rogue was all about the tricks they have, disguise, open locks, remove trap, bluff..not dps.
And about wizards, you can't compare any class with wizards in 1st/2nd/3rd edition of D&D. Sure at lower levels they were a bit useless and were mostly a CC, but at later levels nothing can compare to spellcaster. Insta-save vs death spells, extremly huge AoE damage spells are just examples. While wizard was doing d6/per level to all enemies in area per round, rogue was doing 1d6 damage to one target.
Rogue was never supposed to be combat oriented class. This class was shining in out of combat situations
All I have to say about this is: it's Doomfist! People stand in big packs in that scenario and a person who spams area of effect with having a specialization in the area on the biggest packs possible is going to get insaaaaane amounts of damage. Hell, even my Shadow Warrior could break 100k in that scenario before the patch.
Not true, rogues were never supposed to dps. Wizards were always masters of DPS and aoe dps from the very first book of dungeons and dragons. Rogues/thieves.. were always debuffers, and supportive class (traps, locks ..)
I'm only entering this conversation because you brought up D&D. Don't really care about WAR.
That said, I'd have to disagree with your statement about thieves/rogues. I know off-hand that they have backstab multipliers starting with at least second addition D&D. I'd have to go look for prior to that. Thieves/Rogues from that point have always very much been a "dps" class with regard to D&D. Mages, on the other hand, were your debuffers and supportive class. Most people only want to think Fireball and Lightning bolt and they completly forget the tons of other utility spells (Grease, Identify, Charm, etc) which way outnumber all the direct/indirect damage spells in D&D.
I was mainly talking about first edition, but right second edition here we go. Any kind of figther was able to outdps thief in anyway. If you read the rules carefully, you should know the backstab applies only outside of combat. It was useless in combat, and your average rogue was pretty much stack with 1d6 damage + magical weapon damage, plus maybe some bonus from strength in case you were extremly lucky. Any fighter class has got multiple attacks per round at later levels and outdps rogue anytime. Thief/Rogue was all about the tricks they have, disguise, open locks, remove trap, bluff..not dps.
And about wizards, you can't compare any class with wizards in 1st/2nd/3rd edition of D&D. Sure at lower levels they were a bit useless and were mostly a CC, but at later levels nothing can compare to spellcaster. Insta-save vs death spells, extremly huge AoE damage spells are just examples. While wizard was doing d6/per level to all enemies in area per round, rogue was doing 1d6 damage to one target.
Rogue was never supposed to be combat oriented class. This class was shining in out of combat situations
Well, reviewing my 2nd ed. PHB I will disagree with you on backstab being an out of combat only feature. It was a one use feature, sure. But I guess it all depends on how you played the game. Our campaigns allow for rogues to plausibly still be hidden when combat is going if they were hidden before it started and did nothing to reveal themselves.
I didn't compare them to fighters and I won't. That said, depending on how you played the game (and staying within the rules) a thief could do a respectable amount of damage. Extra attacks give another chance for damage but also another opportunity to role a 1 and screw yourself. All in all, though, D&D probably isn't the best example to use because it is played different ways by many people. I see rogues/thieves as dps. I didn't say they did the most damage per second, just that they were dps. And in D&D being dps doesn't mean you have no other utility. Such limitations apply to MMOs because the devs can only code so much.
Anyway, good chat. Carry on with your debate. I've got other forums with topics I'm more vested in. Cheers!
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Now, that we are all way off topic.
Here is what I am trying to bring to light.
The damge potential and surviveability of the bright wizzards in this scenario are extremly overpowered. Because, I was in the scenario that this screenshot was taken from I can tell you what happened. The BW's would run around in circles AOEing everyone to hell. 3-4 DPS classes would follow in suit of them, just to die off before the BW was killed. You will notice this fact by the amount of players the BW's killed.
As stated here many times. The caster classes trade off surviveability for an exponential amount of DPS. The fact is, the BW's dont have a low survivability. They are able to stay up through an insane amount of damage while maintaining their DPS.
This is a problem. Their DPS should be able to be this high because as most of you are right. They're a caster class and they are supposed to out DPS everyone else. What they are not supposed to do is out last everyone else as well. I dont care how many heals they're getting 3-4 players should be able to pop them.
x_-
I was mainly talking about first edition, but right second edition here we go. Any kind of figther was able to outdps thief in anyway. If you read the rules carefully, you should know the backstab applies only outside of combat. It was useless in combat, and your average rogue was pretty much stack with 1d6 damage + magical weapon damage, plus maybe some bonus from strength in case you were extremly lucky. Any fighter class has got multiple attacks per round at later levels and outdps rogue anytime. Thief/Rogue was all about the tricks they have, disguise, open locks, remove trap, bluff..not dps.
And about wizards, you can't compare any class with wizards in 1st/2nd/3rd edition of D&D. Sure at lower levels they were a bit useless and were mostly a CC, but at later levels nothing can compare to spellcaster. Insta-save vs death spells, extremly huge AoE damage spells are just examples. While wizard was doing d6/per level to all enemies in area per round, rogue was doing 1d6 damage to one target.
Rogue was never supposed to be combat oriented class. This class was shining in out of combat situations
Well, reviewing my 2nd ed. PHB I will disagree with you on backstab being an out of combat only feature. It was a one use feature, sure. But I guess it all depends on how you played the game. Our campaigns allow for rogues to plausibly still be hidden when combat is going if they were hidden before it started and did nothing to reveal themselves.
I didn't compare them to fighters and I won't. That said, depending on how you played the game (and staying within the rules) a thief could do a respectable amount of damage. Extra attacks give another chance for damage but also another opportunity to role a 1 and screw yourself. All in all, though, D&D probably isn't the best example to use because it is played different ways by many people. I see rogues/thieves as dps. I didn't say they did the most damage per second, just that they were dps. And in D&D being dps doesn't mean you have no other utility. Such limitations apply to MMOs because the devs can only code so much.
Anyway, good chat. Carry on with your debate. I've got other forums with topics I'm more vested in. Cheers!
I don't really care about WAR either I never played it. But anyway, the best argument against rogue being a dps class is DDO, which is pretty close to pen and paper and there's a lot of people trying to munchkin their characters. I'm sure some would argue, but I think after 2 years I spent in DDO, that pure rogues were terrible for dps and survivability. DPS rogue had to multiclass with fighter class, but they were still behind dps and insta-kill sorcerers. And take a note, that D&D 3rd edition is already partially bastardized by mmo's and gave rogues sneak attack that is usable all the time whenever there is a mate fightning the same mob.
Actually Turbine did it right with their rogue-like class in Lotro - burglar. Burglar is very low on DPS, but has lots of tricks just like old-school thieves always had and its pretty close to the vision of most of the and paper rpg thieves I played.
QFT!