Fulminating needs to go?

[Slartibartfast]

Originally Posted by Tamui

Let's put this in a scenario:
I'm a Conjurer, and a Barbarian fully buffed with DI and everything rushes through a zerg to kill me. No one stops him, I cast Steel Skin(5), he casts Kick, Fulminating and kills me in 2-3hits. Thus it renders Steel Skin useless, because it failed to protect me for mere 3seconds. I understand Barbarians are damage dealer, but c'mon, buffed with Steel Skin(5) with Full-Almost full HP and die?

Consider yourself lucky. Warlocks don't have SS. Barbs are slashing us as butter, and there is no way to stop them. Being WM warlock and get slashed like this in RvR from lower level barb is funny.

--
Slartibartfast / Exorcist

[Slartibartfast]

Originally Posted by Mashu

And when conjurer is down, how long is barb going to survive without UM ? Does it have Low profile, Son of the wind or Sanctuary ? And come on.. this is bull's shit, when I hit fully buffed conju it with berserk+ fum it says 0 damage in first hit.

What's about warlocks? How do we survive without UM, Low profile, SotW and Sanctuary? Oh wait, we don't...

--
Slartibartfast / Exorcist

[Gabburtjuh]

Originally Posted by _Kharbon_

I'd like to emphasize what Hayir and others said here. If any character rushes into group of enemies, by fair balance he should die. The fact that barbs are able to buff, exit the fort into a group of enemies, kill one (or more) of them and get back into safety alive, shows how bad balance is.

If barbs were a bit weaker, they would have to cooperate a bit - two of them focus on one target perhaps? Or does this require too much skill?

Barbs are OP at forts, UP (underpowered :P) in open field.
Mages are UP at forts (I'm not talking about attacking from ledges), OP in open field
Archers are about 50:50 speaking generaly, although it is true that hunters are somehow weaker than marks. That doesn't belong in this thread though.

Barbs can solo capture a fort (including breaking a door), if they are lucky enough that no enemy shows up. As far as I'm aware, no other class does that. Is this fair? I often see barbarian shot off horse still managing to kill one of the enemies. I saw a barb defeat three enemies in less than 15 seconds. Is this fair? I wish my lock could get out of fort, kill three barbs and get back in again... At least I would admit that there's imbalance though.

Yes, and I've seen locks/marks/hunters kite 3 or more people to death in open field, can a barb do that? Sure its abit strange that one person can take a fort, but you'd either have to power doors (worse for low pop times) or nerf barb damage really hard, which leaves you with the question what to give barbs in return, because as it is, the damage is deadly, but thats it, thats all they have, they have burst speed, ok, but they also have melee range, they have UM, ok, but thats countered by their weakness, range..

[GreenAngel]

Originally Posted by Gabburtjuh

Yes, and I've seen locks/marks/hunters kite 3 or more people to death in open field, can a barb do that? Sure its abit strange that one person can take a fort, but you'd either have to power doors (worse for low pop times) or nerf barb damage really hard, which leaves you with the question what to give barbs in return, because as it is, the damage is deadly, but thats it, thats all they have, they have burst speed, ok, but they also have melee range, they have UM, ok, but thats countered by their weakness, range..

Archers are less good in open field, you can say whatever you want, but I've got good gear, no decent, no good gear and I barely hit 200 on Barbarians during fort wars. Archers can't kill in 5 seconds, nor hit above 400 (with some exeptions which are few). Barbs are not as good as ranged people are in openfield, true. But Archers aren't as good as Warriors during fort wars. Fair enough to me.

For me this is a Barb (I play Knight, Conj, Lock, Hunter, Barb and Marks):

• Onslaught makes them rushing into a zerg practically invulnernerable for immobilisation spells. But good as it is if damage and attack speed is nerfed.
• Dual Wielding plus buffs make them hit very fast or even faster than that.
• Fulminiating makes them hit very high, too high.
• Can kill during a lvl 4 or 5 kick.
• Big difference regarding damage between Knights and Barbs (Barbs hit 800 during fort wars, Knights hit around 200).
• Barbs think they should be able to rush into a zerg and kill 4 people at once.
• Frenzy gives them a lot of defense (I hit higher on other knights (being a Knight) then on Barbs).

So I think this would be nice:

Decrease Damage slightly (50-100 dmg)
Decrease attack speed significally
Decrease Fulminiating damage (not too much)
Give Frenzy to Knights as well (Barbs keep it) but nerf it.

[errei]

This open field-weakness is BS
horned barb on open field can beat any ranged.
horned ranged on (fort) war can do...? pfff.

not mentioning that once the barb/knight find a tree/rock to hide (and even the most "clear" areas of WZ have good plenty of trees or rocks), the ranged cant do shit.

neigther mentioning that melee's resistence is fucking high (resist the same than a SOTWed archer), in a "perfect" open field, if a barb resists the ambush/ DS/ will domain / slow / ivy or whaterver he uses to try to escape, the archer/mage is suposed to die.

[Tigerious]

Yes fulmi should be removed, but then give us back a longer duration of Unstoppable Madness.

[GreenAngel]

Originally Posted by Tigerious

Yes fulmi should be removed, but then give us back a longer duration of Unstoppable Madness.

If damage and attack speed are slightly decreased than I think that's a fair thing.

[Tigerious]

Damages are ok without fulminating.

[GreenAngel]

Originally Posted by Tigerious

Damages are ok without fulminating.

1000 + hits are in no way okay, with or without any other spell there is.

[Aries202]

Damage isn't the problem, with or without fulminating. The problem is how fast a barbarian can hit now with the introduction of Duel Wield.