![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
To answer the OP:
It's generally going to be rogue > monk > warrior/ranger. Certain fights favor one class over another, whether it's due to different threat conditions (FD is much better than evade) or different raid strategies (sometimes archery is preferred for dps), but outside of those niche situations, and assuming gear levels are roughly equal, it's rogue > monk > warrior/ranger. Quote:
Um, no. Unless you are just saying that anyone can get lucky enough that they never eat a max flurry round? That would be a pretty asinine thing to suggest though. Even max HP defensive warriors (the very best tank for this encounter) can die within a 1s window vs AoW. Remove defensive and it becomes literally impossible to survive a max flurry round. (1154 x 6) + 309 = 7233 dmg in one round where no heals can possibly land between the damage.
__________________
P99: [60 Grandmaster] Carceret (Human) <Good Guys>
P99: [60 Warder] Bloodraven the Pathfinder (Human) <Good Guys> P99: [60 Sorcerer] Melisandre (Human) <Auld Lang Syne> P99: [52 Champion] Alysane (Barbarian) <Auld Lang Syne> SZ : [65 Lord Protector] Cochise (Erudite) <Sanctus Lumen> | |||
|
#2
|
||||
|
Quote:
Also, why do you think AoW can hit 6x in one attack? As far as I know, he can only hit 4 times per single attack (Double Attack + 2 Flurries). He does attack fast enough to attack multiple times per second, but a CH chain going faster than 1 second could heal between attacks. The reason why a Warrior can die in one second is because the CH chain is a 1 second chain, not because AoW is doing 6+ hits in a single attack. This is because AoW can do multiple attacks in a second, which can add up to like 8 hits. You could theoretically heal between those attacks on a CH chain faster than a second.
__________________
| |||
|
Last edited by DeathsSilkyMist; 06-07-2024 at 06:40 PM..
| ||||
|
#3
|
|||
|
You are incorrect. He can hit 6x on a flurry round (plus a bash for a little extra 7th). That is not 2 rounds in the same second. There is no way to remove that chance of death via a faster chain. Now, if you have a TON of dps and a TON of luck, then sure, maybe you avoid the worst case scenario (and many slightly less worse case scenarios that are also fatal) long enough to kill AoW with a lesser tank, but that is just not reasonably possible.
__________________
P99: [60 Grandmaster] Carceret (Human) <Good Guys>
P99: [60 Warder] Bloodraven the Pathfinder (Human) <Good Guys> P99: [60 Sorcerer] Melisandre (Human) <Auld Lang Syne> P99: [52 Champion] Alysane (Barbarian) <Auld Lang Syne> SZ : [65 Lord Protector] Cochise (Erudite) <Sanctus Lumen> | ||
|
#4
|
||||
|
Quote:
And yes, I agree it's very tough, I never claimed otherwise.
__________________
| |||
|
#5
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
P99: [60 Grandmaster] Carceret (Human) <Good Guys>
P99: [60 Warder] Bloodraven the Pathfinder (Human) <Good Guys> P99: [60 Sorcerer] Melisandre (Human) <Auld Lang Syne> P99: [52 Champion] Alysane (Barbarian) <Auld Lang Syne> SZ : [65 Lord Protector] Cochise (Erudite) <Sanctus Lumen> | ||||
|
#6
|
|||
|
It's like you didn't even read, so I'll say it again. Those aren't multiple rounds within 1s, those are single rounds that are happening instantaneously. If they were multiple rounds, there would be combat spam in between them (there is an entire raid of people hitting AoW between every combat round).
__________________
P99: [60 Grandmaster] Carceret (Human) <Good Guys>
P99: [60 Warder] Bloodraven the Pathfinder (Human) <Good Guys> P99: [60 Sorcerer] Melisandre (Human) <Auld Lang Syne> P99: [52 Champion] Alysane (Barbarian) <Auld Lang Syne> SZ : [65 Lord Protector] Cochise (Erudite) <Sanctus Lumen> | ||
|
#7
|
||||
|
Quote:
You can't necessarily guarantee that, unless you know how the messages get ordered, filtered, and sent down to the client code-wise. It's possible messages within a time period like a second are not strictly ordered, as a small difference between ordering wouldn't affect gameplay.
__________________
| |||
|
#8
|
|||
|
In the log provided, AoW has 7 attacks with a timestamp of 16:51:59, 0 attacks with a timestamp of 16:52:00, and 8 attacks with a timestamp of 16:52:01.
If there's no attacks with a timestamp of 16:52:00, then the delay between rounds must be greater than 1 second. If the delay between rounds is greater than one second, all the attacks within a single second must be within a single round. | ||
|
#9
|
||||
|
Quote:
If all message timestamps get rounded to the nearest second, as a simple example, you lose the actual order of the messages within that second. This is one example of how you wouldn't see logs inbetween the attacks.
__________________
| |||
|
#10
|
|||
|
If you think the log file ordering is somehow inconsistent with the lines as they happen realtime, then I think the onus is on you to prove that. We see these rounds happen realtime - they are often the cause of unexpected tank deaths. The logs are not lying to us, they tell the same story as our melee combat in chat windows.
__________________
P99: [60 Grandmaster] Carceret (Human) <Good Guys>
P99: [60 Warder] Bloodraven the Pathfinder (Human) <Good Guys> P99: [60 Sorcerer] Melisandre (Human) <Auld Lang Syne> P99: [52 Champion] Alysane (Barbarian) <Auld Lang Syne> SZ : [65 Lord Protector] Cochise (Erudite) <Sanctus Lumen> | ||
![]() |
|
|