#11
|
||||
|
Quote:
Barring massive stat/gear differences, the Warrior should pull ahead in DPS probably in the teens. SKs rarely use their pets in dungeons (they usually just get in the way, and don't provide a huge DPS boost) and don't really get decent DPS spells until higher levels, and even then they are limited by their mana pool. Warriors can start doing massive damage with a Staff of Battle at level 20, with huge crits and crips and no resources to worry about.
__________________
| |||
|
#12
|
|||
|
Given similar gear, a lvl 20 warrior can probably out dps any other melee (even rogue) if they're <40% hp and getting crip blows
| ||
|
#13
|
|||
|
Arguably while leveling up a Knight is going to be a more fun experience. Your tanking will be close to warriors and aggro is available in spades. While the SK is more mobile getting to camps, a pally using some cloudy potions and lulling will make for decent travel. In the high level camps most replacement tanks will train down and die for a rez (you have a chance of surviving as a SK).
In the very high levels warrior defensive disciplines make for better tanking of the named mobs especially if slowing is difficult/not possible and you have a Druid healer. I don’t raid but Khelkar in Velks lower dogs has put my pally in the dirt a few times. Warriors are very gear dependant; knights not as much. Even soloing once a pally hits 45 if you can root it you can kill it (DW helm healing). Likewise a SK can kill anything with enough space if they can land fear. Monks/warriors it’s a race of kill or be killed and unless burning root nets and bandages there are only so many tricks on the utility belt. Both knights have extremely powerful tools the other doesn’t have. I wouldn’t say better or worse but just different. For a 3k twink mainly for fun it would definitely be my path. IMHO, choose between having supreme mitigation or aggro knowing you will envy the other at some point. Even in grind groups I wish I was a Warrior about 10% of the time. Warrior DPS can be amazing but in a group 55+ with rogues, monks and chanter pets it’s all relative and you are just there just to stay alive and to keep the target pissed. | ||
|
#14
|
|||
|
Pretty much every class can manage their own aggro and let the warrior tank. If not, root really works. Warriors are very powerful. Paladins are really fun with the cc and heals, but I’ve played both and am very glad I chose warrior as main.
If you play with smart players that pay attention, warrior is much more powerful. If you play with a crappy group, a paladin can magnify the group’s efforts with its cc skills.
__________________
Jarrow, Warlord
Tamerlan, Grandmaster Varren, Phantasmist <The Second Sons> | ||
|
#15
|
|||
|
With all that said, paladins are super fun to play
__________________
Jarrow, Warlord
Tamerlan, Grandmaster Varren, Phantasmist <The Second Sons> | ||
|
#16
|
|||
|
Pretty much comes down to 1 of 3 choices.
Want to be the best group tank? Paladin. Want to be the best raid tank? Warrior Want to be the 2nd best group tank, best soloer and puller of the 3? SK. I also found the SK spell set much more enjoyable than Pally spells & warrior dps. FD is a godsend. | ||
Last edited by Crede; 03-11-2019 at 12:49 AM..
|
|
#17
|
|||
|
You won't be getting agroe through procs on your halfling warrior until you are in your 50s. You won't have the dex and the procs are just too inconsistent. You need weapons with some kind of decent ratio and a haste item. A wurmslayer and a frostbringer with an fbss or SCHW will be decent enough agroe until the 40s, except when playing with the most twinked players. So if you can get to like 5-6kpp to get Wurmslayer + Frobringer + SCHW, I think you will be twinked enough to play your halfling warrior comfortably in a group setting.
Just remember that agroe from swinging is calculated as (dmg + dmg Bonus) per swing regardless of how much damage you do. You only get a damage bonus for your primary hand. The formula for damage bonus is (level - 25)/3 ... High elf paladin and Ogre SK both sound like fine choices too. If you're going to be casual and never get to 60, I think choosing either of those over a halfling war is a fine decision. | ||
|
#18
|
|||
|
Warriors do generate a lot of swings, IIRC more than any class but monk, so given equivalent equipment, and the warrior's weapons are geared towards melee hate whereas their groupmates are geared towards dps, the warrior should pull ahead on white damage.
Most melee classes have abilities to drop unwanted aggro for when you have a few bad rounds, and if you have a shaman as a slower he can take a beating for a small period if needed. With a rooting class in the group, the warrior can tippytoe tank until he establishes aggro proper. When severely outgeared so he struggles to establish aggro over his melee companions, and they refuse to use their abilities that let the drop aggro... chances are they are geared sufficiently to tank just as well as you. The real weakness of the warrior relative to knights isn't it's inability to hold aggro, it is sufficiently good to keep aggro on a single target in a skilled group. It's the fact that warrior has almost zero ability to CC adds via offtank while also fulfilling the roll of MA/MT. This weakness is somewhat mitigated by the fact that CC and dps class players will screech like gibbons if the MT dares to change his target from the dps mob for even a second, creating a strong peer pressure for the knight to not use the majority of his snap aggro abilities on adds. | ||
|
#19
|
||||
|
Quote:
A warrior was great for grind groups on live. DPS and slowers just paced themselves a bit more and didn't immediately shift 100% of the blame. | |||
|
#20
|
|||
|
You are not worthy of rolling a paladin with a first choice like high elf. You're obv warrior material.
__________________
Pint
| ||
|
|
|