Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
  1. #41

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Quote Originally Posted by omglazor
    Spell Deflection would make more sense - you deflect the next spell used against you, reducing damage by 25/50% (slap it onto Weapon Mastery - 2 talent pts). I think 100% would be OP, but 50% every once in a while would be quite nice.
    How would you handle the real reason warriors spell reflect then, which is to reflect sheeps and cyclones and other forms of CC? Cause giving a spell deflection halving DD doesn't address that.
    When you shoop da whoop, you feel powerful and don't want to lose it, and then a guy in plate armor comes and turns your woop against the shoop, hence, making you got laz0red.

    Guild No Quarter - www.nqguild.org

  2. #42

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Quote Originally Posted by olicon
    Why don't you use it to psych out people then? Like say, pull out a shield.. but don't bother casting spell reflect--just keep pounding on the target. You won't do much dmg, but they'll do even less.

    The restrictions are put there for balance purpose. The opponent should have a visual queue of when you can use the spell, and react accordingly. They shouldn't have to worry about critting themselves for 6K after you MS them for another 6K (then execute them right afterward).
    The moment i see my MS crit for 6k in pvp , i will be a happy warrior

  3. #43

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Battou:

    Spell Deflection - you gain a 50/100% chance to resist the next spell. Fix't

    It's not spell reflection, but I don't think SR needs a specific buff because it can be an extremely powerful tool if timed right. I do however want to be able to resist POM Pyros, Shatter Combos, fatty Conflags, etc without having to cripple myself.

  4. #44

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Skilled warriors understood something like two years ago the purpose of spell reflection; tempo.

  5. #45

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raptorg
    Spell reflect is fine, it's a really powerful ability if timed right.

    Pummel, however, should be castable in battle stance.
    And hamstring in defensive stance..
    And Chains of Ice should use all runes and runic power


    I can understand stance dancing but Spell Reflect costs 3 GCD's (Weapon changing in combat 1 GCD, Spell Reflect, then you cant switch back to 2 hander until either spell reflect happens or you just decide to dump the cooldown without it being used, then another GCD to switch back to weapon) I think a tier addition to use spell reflect without a shield with either higher CD like they did with Juggernaut nerf would be feasible

  6. #46

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    I think that I could live with it if they let you reflect say 50% of the spells damage while using a 2h and all while using a shield.

  7. #47

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Quote Originally Posted by omglazor
    Battou:

    Spell Deflection - you gain a 50/100% chance to resist the next spell. Fix't

    It's not spell reflection, but I don't think SR needs a specific buff because it can be an extremely powerful tool if timed right. I do however want to be able to resist POM Pyros, Shatter Combos, fatty Conflags, etc without having to cripple myself.
    This is pretty much what I had in mind for a spell deflection as well, I would put a higher shared CD with Spell reflection on it as well. Something in the neighborhood of 15-20 secs
    When you shoop da whoop, you feel powerful and don't want to lose it, and then a guy in plate armor comes and turns your woop against the shoop, hence, making you got laz0red.

    Guild No Quarter - www.nqguild.org

  8. #48

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    I don't know 15-20 secs sounds pretty brutal, I see no reason why you couldn't leave it at 10 seconds shared - every 10 seconds you have a choice of deflect a spell and continue pew-pewing, or strategically reflect a sheep/cyclone in order to put pressure on their partner.

  9. #49

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Quote Originally Posted by omglazor
    I don't know 15-20 secs sounds pretty brutal, I see no reason why you couldn't leave it at 10 seconds shared - every 10 seconds you have a choice of deflect a spell and continue pew-pewing, or strategically reflect a sheep/cyclone in order to put pressure on their partner.
    Combined with charge and intercept, being able to reflect and interrupt that easily would turn the warrior class into faceroll vs certain casters.
    When you shoop da whoop, you feel powerful and don't want to lose it, and then a guy in plate armor comes and turns your woop against the shoop, hence, making you got laz0red.

    Guild No Quarter - www.nqguild.org

  10. #50

    Re: Do you think that spell reflect should require a shield?

    Mmm... shatter combo? Teehee ;D

    I do agree with you and I might be a tad selfish wanting something like that *evil grin*, however I do think that having both SR and Spell Deflection on a 20 sec shared CD would be too brutal. I would still take SR on a 10 sec CD vs having 2 abilities on a 20 sec CD. 15 sec might be more reasonable.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •