newbie needing DD class choice advice

[celticguy]

Greeting and huzzah to all!

This game has finally piqued my interest and i wondered, which class either magical or physical has a good damage output (dont care for defense much since i tend to go completely berserk on killing the mob) which would fit my berserker-style approach of slaying?

Thanks in advance :)

[Signatus]

Barbarian ftw.

You'll even have a power called berserk that removes your evasion and part of your armor points.

Have fun (you have to choose warrior at start and at lvl 10 you cn pick your subclass on a quest given in the first city after initiation zone)

P.S. The best damage dealing alternatives are warlocks (subclass from mages) and marksmen (subclass from archers), now it's up to you to decide which is best ^^.

[e30G]

Barbarian if you want to go melee. Marksman if you want range. Warlock if you want good crowd control spells.

[celticguy]

thanks to both of ya, ill give barbarian a try then

[CHeesE_13]

yay.............another barb to worrie about............yay :mf_hide:

[Arrius2410]

I still can't make up my mind between Knight and Barb... I mean, both do good in pvp right? and other than knight having more def and a shield and barb having more off and 2 handed weapons? whats the real difference?

how are they in the wz? one on one and large scale pvp battles?

[Aries202]

in a pvp logicly a barb would win knights are tanks do decent dmg i guess and protects allies with their auras(area protections)barbs do a lot of dmg and poor defence well not as great as knights there basicly the ones that throw areas in fort wars yes 2 handed weapons are cool but a shield is better :wiggle14:


Aries.

[ncvr]

In a knight vs. Barb situation the knight should win if he uses some skill. The problem is that if neither of them use skill then the barb would win.

The biggest disadvantage in pvp with a knight is they have no range and very little speed, so if you fight a hunter and the hunter knows what he's doing you're likely to get very little hits in, even if you immobilise him (which you probably won't succeed at anyway).

In war, knights can last a long time even if they charge into the middle of the enemy mindlessly with just a few basic buffs on. Barbs can do a lot of dmg, over twice as much as a knight sometimes or even more although in a battle they're targetted a lot and their lack of any real defense other than resist dmg spells makes them quite easy kills especially if there are other warriors who just mind squash their buffs.

[magnet]

I still can't make up my mind between Knight and Barb... I mean, both do good in pvp right? and other than knight having more def and a shield and barb having more off and 2 handed weapons? whats the real difference?

how are they in the wz? one on one and large scale pvp battles?

Yeah both kick ass in PvP against most classes but this isn't really a PvP game so... Knight vs Barb depends really on chance (whether you will block a Barb's most important skills and dispel his own buffs); both can win, but it really depends on a lot of factors. Usually at high level you try to have a setup which works good both for war and 1vs1 situations (because they happen even not if under PvP rules). The setup most Knights use nowadays is not that appropriate to fighting Barbs (because most go for the area attack rather than Army of One) whereas most Barbs have a setup working quite good on Knights.

It's just the same at war, with the proper setup a Knight is extremely useful at war. You give protection to your allies so that they last _way_ longer, you can protect them, you lead charges (which is definitely awesome, being first in a group of warriors rushing towards a group of 30 enemies gives some good adrenaline :p) and you mainly support Barbs who are the actual damage dealers. Once again it depends on the skillset you will choose, some Knights setup for max damage and do quite a lot (can have hits around 1200 with buffs/southcross/and strength maxxed) but it's always a compromise.

In the end it all comes to your setup, but if you're interested in damage dealing, choose Barb. If you're interested in support with a good proportion of damage dealing, choose Knight. You can kill with Knights too, but time is of the essence, and what matters is to kill fast. No one does this better than Barbs. However, the Barbs + Knight duo rocks so both are needed.

I think there's also the matter of the realm. I think classes "cluster", with a few of each class in the group it's way better. Mages are always targeted first, so if there are a few Mages, you balance who is gonna be targeted (which decreases the chance of insta-kills). Archers don't shoot that fast but when there are 2 or 3 of them they do kill very fast and they create an "arrow stream". And Warriors on their own don't do that much good, but pack them together and it's like a wolf pack -- you don't know who to target, who to stop, and only death awaits :p.

That's why Alsius' warriors are so renowned, why Ignis is famous for their terror chains (a lot of Warlocks, very hard to fight against) and Syrtis' handful of Archers (and mainly Hunters) so hated ;). Nowadays every realm has a lot of each class (except Alsius which has fewer Archers than the rest) but the proportion of online players at one given time (ie, when you play) allows or not for that kind of playstyle.