Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vroek
It dont seem fair to improve knights to an extent that barbarians wouldnt stand a chance, even in terms of RvR based balance.
Warriors usually clash them being balanced 1v1 is very important even with RvR standards. Its not like the knights 800-900 SC go by unnoticed 
How much your SC hit for with off with their heads and onslaught 1.4k ?
Compare that with Matons hit and think about him having -100% protection -100% evasions. |
I'm lucky if SC does 800 on a Barb, it's more often in the 700s (when it does the 225%, else it's more like 250!), precisely because of Frenzy. -100% protection may change the end result a bit but not to the point of being a disadvantage compared to instakilling Knights imho. -100% Evasion isn't such a big difference since lately I have seen Barbs resist (without protection dome) as much as evade...! Of course it *is* a huge difference in RvR terms, but on 1vs1 in the end the advantage goes WAY towards the Barb; so when talking 1vs1 Barbs have it better imho (now, depends on Barbs, some who don't go for insane damage are OK).
And SC with 1.4k I only saw that on some low-level with no armor... I'm happy with 1k hits though and not complaining about Knight damage. Those 1k hits are *only* on mages. Archers and Barbs have it around 700, Knights around 900...
I think it would really make sense if Knights had a defence at least as good as Barbarians and Archers, I mean, they're supposed to be the tanks, not the Barbs nor the Archers. And as I said blocks are in exchange of damage -- and you put as many points in damage buffs as I put in blocking buffs.