Defensive or Offensive

-Edge- · 02-13-2008, 05:28 PM

Which side do you view as more elite? Feel free to bring up reasons why.

magnet · 02-13-2008, 05:46 PM

It's not as easy to decide, so for the benefit of all I made a honour/lameness ranking.

Most honorable classes: Mages and Warriors.

Warlocks are very weak to damage and die at their first mistake. They require a lot of experience to be played correctly.
Barbarians even more so.

Conjurers are very hard to play and can be frustrating but they make the world turn.
Knights help the group big time and yet they have few rewards.

Lamest class: Archer.

It is truly difficult to decide which sub-class is the lamest here.

We have to choose between Hunters who use lame tactics, always run, but on the other side can't do much otherwise because their damage is shit.

Marksmen on the other hand have powerful attacks, awesome defense... They are lame because they have too much of everything, and playing an overpowered class is obviously lame. Some are known as Barbarians with Range, others are Knights with Range (see Kritheo who tanks at Herb and even use "walking" mode to show how secure he feels tanking with his Marks, with 3 Knights hacking furiously his flesh).

Thus the question: Which is the lamest subclass, Marksman or Hunter? Many philosophers have debated on this matter for years without reaching a definitive answer.

Obviously, considering those facts, we can conclude that Syrtis is the lamest realm, with so many archers, and that Ignis and Alsius still are somewhat honorable (even if lately Ignis has gotten too many archers, a sign of impending doom

).

PS: for those who don't read second degree:

Signatus · 02-13-2008, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magnet

We have to choose between Hunters who use lame tactics, always run, but on the other side can't do much otherwise because their damage is shit.

Meh... That shouldn't be your opinion after 3 hunters rep shot 6 or 7 goat mages in front of menirah a week ago!

And "lame tactics"... nah, I can't believe I'm reading this, we are the defensive class with more diversity in its powers... conjus have one tree full of healings and another full of summons, knights have... wait, what do they have that works? You can have at least 2 known setups (with, without pet) or even sacrifice damage for tricks... etc, conjurers have "good" and "bad" conjurer (namely supportive and warjurer) and knights have... die slowly or even more slowly...

And we do not always run... sometimes we go camu

And when we run that's because it is a situation where everybody would run from... the difference is, hunters get away with it and the "poor" warlock had to kill 3 before being caught...

I voted defensive, even though knights are included...

But then again... all goes down to the player, whichever class is chosen.

fluffy_muffin · 02-13-2008, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magnet

[....]
Lamest class: Archer.
[...]

I do not know.. lough or just pass it by.
Archers the lamest hmmm. I am watching screenshots of selfcrashing ppl, ppl who hug trees and run to the water and most of them are warriors.
Next time when you say that archers are lamest than ask your ignitian friends how they escape from stone after we capture it (/me point big X on window).
Belive me i will not run if i do not need.

phoenix_jackson · 02-13-2008, 11:23 PM

I'm a Warlock. But I vote for defensive simply because of conjurers and Hunters "tricks" (as I call it). For Knights, I need to learn more about them to speak more of them.

As for the "lame" comment, it is but an opinion and not to evoke a refute. Although, the term itself would have been circumlucoted for a less provocing means. Still, it IS only an opinion.

mrclean · 02-14-2008, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zielski

I do not know.. lough or just pass it by.
Archers the lamest hmmm. I am watching screenshots of selfcrashing ppl, ppl who hug trees and run to the water and most of them are warriors.
Next time when you say that archers are lamest than ask your ignitian friends how they escape from stone after we capture it (/me point big X on window).
Belive me i will not run if i do not need.

I think hunters do not self crash cause they don't need to do so. They can escape almost everytime they want.

So I agree with Elrik, since I play sometimes my lvl 49 marksman I must admit, there's no challenging playing archers in warzone.

I feel my knight funnier cause I really have to think about what I do, and if the situation is hard I have to fight, I can run a little to restore mana, or a little health (that increase sooo slow) but I'm always an easy target for an archer at least if I'm alone or at range in the open area.

We can test it if you want, a pvp fight in the warzone, I'm sure u will win most of the time (probably always). Last but not least I'm not saying archers overpowered (preventing flames

) cause the situation makes the player good. Archers have a life a bit easier imho.

fluffy_muffin · 02-14-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fean0r

I think hunters do not self crash cause they don't need to do so. They can escape almost everytime they want.

Almost. Marks will not run he have same speed as you and sprint is much better than moblity. Ofc he can use sotw... as some marks does :|
Hunter. Well if i want to run away from knight np. but other classes have chance to stop me if i have no mana :}

Quote:

Originally Posted by fean0r

So I agree with Elrik, since I play sometimes my lvl 49 marksman I must admit, there's no challenging playing archers in warzone.

Oh yes it is.. another archer or Maton

Quote:

Originally Posted by fean0r

I feel my knight funnier cause I really have to think about what I do, and if the situation is hard I have to fight, I can run a little to restore mana, or a little health (that increase sooo slow) but I'm always an easy target for an archer at least if I'm alone or at range in the open area.

Well in some pvp i realy must chose wise what i do. Realy if not drv, skit or some barb will do their job (Well those 2 guys kill me all the time :/).

Quote:

Originally Posted by fean0r

We can test it if you want, a pvp fight in the warzone, I'm sure u will win most of the time (probably always). Last but not least I'm not saying archers overpowered (preventing flames

) cause the situation makes the player good. Archers have a life a bit easier imho.

Np but i am not so sure that i win.

misaccc · 02-13-2008, 06:13 PM

Man....can i say both?

ByteMe · 02-13-2008, 06:29 PM

I voted offense with the exception of the conju who IMO is the most valuable player on the field!

Pizdzius · 02-13-2008, 07:20 PM

Conju conju conju

View Poll Results: Which is better?
Offensive ( Barbarian, Marksmen, Warlock )	12	32.43%
Defensive ( Knight, Hunter, Conjurer )	25	67.57%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll

02-13-2008, 05:28 PM	#1
-Edge- Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Łódż, Poland Posts: 1,506	Defensive or Offensive Which side do you view as more elite? Feel free to bring up reasons why.

02-13-2008, 05:46 PM	#2
magnet Count Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: France Posts: 1,416	It's not as easy to decide, so for the benefit of all I made a honour/lameness ranking. Most honorable classes: Mages and Warriors. Warlocks are very weak to damage and die at their first mistake. They require a lot of experience to be played correctly. Barbarians even more so. Conjurers are very hard to play and can be frustrating but they make the world turn. Knights help the group big time and yet they have few rewards. Lamest class: Archer. It is truly difficult to decide which sub-class is the lamest here. We have to choose between Hunters who use lame tactics, always run, but on the other side can't do much otherwise because their damage is shit. Marksmen on the other hand have powerful attacks, awesome defense... They are lame because they have too much of everything, and playing an overpowered class is obviously lame. Some are known as Barbarians with Range, others are Knights with Range (see Kritheo who tanks at Herb and even use "walking" mode to show how secure he feels tanking with his Marks, with 3 Knights hacking furiously his flesh). Thus the question: Which is the lamest subclass, Marksman or Hunter? Many philosophers have debated on this matter for years without reaching a definitive answer. Obviously, considering those facts, we can conclude that Syrtis is the lamest realm, with so many archers, and that Ignis and Alsius still are somewhat honorable (even if lately Ignis has gotten too many archers, a sign of impending doom ). PS: for those who don't read second degree: __________________

02-13-2008, 07:20 PM	#10
Pizdzius Baron Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Polish Side of RA Posts: 779	Conju conju conju __________________ Pizdzius Swedzioszek Leader of CBA Regnum Comic <- my Regnum Comic , RSS version -> RSS (if you wish to contact me on my other realm character: Ignis - Josephine)

02-13-2008, 11:23 PM	#5
phoenix_jackson Initiate Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: South Korea Posts: 150	I'm a Warlock. But I vote for defensive simply because of conjurers and Hunters "tricks" (as I call it). For Knights, I need to learn more about them to speak more of them. As for the "lame" comment, it is but an opinion and not to evoke a refute. Although, the term itself would have been circumlucoted for a less provocing means. Still, it IS only an opinion.

02-13-2008, 06:13 PM	#8
misaccc Banned Join Date: May 2007 Location: Belgrade!!! Posts: 1,807	Man....can i say both?

02-13-2008, 06:29 PM	#9
ByteMe Master Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 423	I voted offense with the exception of the conju who IMO is the most valuable player on the field!