Remove the 10% more damage taken on Berserker stance?

[insidelane]

lol @ 86% of votes, it's fine l2play

[neh0e]

you can take the same magical damage as every other class in game just dont use zerker stance and btw you also have a stance were you take less damage and can spell reflect a spell.

just learn to use all stances properly in PVP dont try to make them simpler.

[Balduvian]

Hi Everybody

I had quite some Discussions with my friends over this issue and i would like to hear your opinion.

In my opinion they should change it to 10% less armor, because it would be fair to other melee users but also reduce the absolute dominance of magical users over warriors

What do you think?

Lol buff warriors? Like the poll said: It's fine, l2p

[Hjaldar]

lol @ 86% of votes, it's fine l2play

prolly because they don't play a warrior them self and just really enjoy nuking em down! i hope they remove it one day, annoying on bosses like Muru/felmyst when you allready take a lot of dmg >.<

[Reconor]

Seriously, l2p.

In zerker stance you get intercept/pummel, ww extra nuke/aoe dps, and 3% overall more dps because of the crit chance. (which is not gimped by resi nor high crit chances, because hey.. if there was no 3% extra crit chance, guess what, you'd have even less crit chance <.<) The stance is meant to be more effective vs casters (same way battle stance is generally more effective vs rogues) and with a swift defstance/reflectswitch, its ideal to deal with annoying mages trying to keep their distance or combined with battle stance for keeping track with running druids, etc.

Tbh the 10% damage is a fair trade to the advantages, if you play it right you won't take that much more damage anyway.

You don't have to invent the wheel yourself, but if you don't understand its concept you're doomed to fail.

[blessu]

Well Berserker stance isn't fine. If pummel, intercept & whirlwind would be usable I would never ever go in berserker. It just sucks tbh..

[spankey]

Seriously, l2p.

In zerker stance you get intercept/pummel, ww extra nuke/aoe dps, and 3% overall more dps because of the crit chance. (which is not gimped by resi nor high crit chances, because hey.. if there was no 3% extra crit chance, guess what, you'd have even less crit chance <.<) The stance is meant to be more effective vs casters (same way battle stance is generally more effective vs rogues) and with a swift defstance/reflectswitch, its ideal to deal with annoying mages trying to keep their distance or combined with battle stance for keeping track with running druids, etc.

Tbh the 10% damage is a fair trade to the advantages, if you play it right you won't take that much more damage anyway.

You don't have to invent the wheel yourself, but if you don't understand its concept you're doomed to fail.

Oh sorry you are right, every other class takes also additional damage when they want to use some of their main damageing skills... oh wait :

[jizzyburnizzy]

berserker rage is what makes berserker stance so nice

[topfer]

I just want to take the same magical damage as every other class in game!
The -10% armor is just in so we are not getting even more op against rogues

Mages around the world agree, I just want to take the same MELEE damage as every other class in game!

Some people are *never* happy until the gold medal is just given to them. Entitlement ruins mmos.

[Tigercat]

Berserker Stance is fine, learn to work around its drawbacks.

There are more important things warriors need fixed, most of them related to frost mages and resto druids.

[Deleted]

Try to spellreflect or even equip a shield while being stunlocked in serker stance with absolutely no avoidance (no parry, no dodge) :-X

If you are stunlocked and in need of spellreflect, it means you fight at least 2 targets, lets say a rogue and a mage.

In WL threads, as soon as someone thinks of complaining about having problems against multiple targets, he's flamed to death.
This is not what I am gonna do, but let me say, spell reflect IS your friend. if you are stunlocked and cant sr, that's just... well 2 targets hitting on you

On topic, 3% more crit and fear immunity NEED a downside, and not only to physical attacks.
And if that POM Pyro then crits you for 6000 instead of 5400... well you should've spell reflected it!

[Tigercat]

If you are stunlocked and in need of spellreflect, it means you fight at least 2 targets, lets say a rogue and a mage.

In WL threads, as soon as someone thinks of complaining about having problems against multiple targets, he's flamed to death.
This is not what I am gonna do, but let me say, spell reflect IS your friend. if you are stunlocked and cant sr, that's just... well 2 targets hitting on you

On topic, 3% more crit and fear immunity NEED a downside, and not only to physical attacks.
And if that POM Pyro then crits you for 6000 instead of 5400... well you should've spell reflected it!

Just making sure of something here.....you do realize spell reflect can't be used in berserker stance right?

[Deleted]

Just making sure of something here.....you do realize spell reflect can't be used in berserker stance right?

stance dance?

[Tigercat]

stance dance?

Then that pyro wont do more damage anyway.

/paradox

[dtangel]

I don't think the issue is the 10% dmg. That seems fair, and adds to the strategy/challenge of playing a warrior, otherwise people would just run around in Zerker Stance all the time.
The problem is the 10% dmg vs3% crit ratio.
It's not so much of a pre TBC/ post TBC problem, but more about the gear players have. The better the gear, the less meaningfull it becomes to have 3% crit. Nonetheless the +10% dmg taken is a steady modifier,as your oponent's gear escalates so does the damage you take.

It's like the Antecipation talent on the Protection Tree. +20 Defense rating is useless and the points better spent somewhere else once your gear fills in that role.

[Geboran]

I don't think the issue is the 10% dmg. That seems fair, and adds to the strategy/challenge of playing a warrior, otherwise people would just run around in Zerker Stance all the time.
The problem is the 10% dmg vs3% crit ratio.
It's not so much of a pre TBC/ post TBC problem, but more about the gear players have. The better the gear, the less meaningfull it becomes to have 3% crit. Nonetheless the +10% dmg taken is a steady modifier,as your oponent's gear escalates so does the damage you take.

It's like the Antecipation talent on the Protection Tree. +20 Defense rating is useless and the points better spent somewhere else once your gear fills in that role.

I agree.

3% crit is minimal, as it doesn't scale nearly as well as the 10% flat damage. I would think that Blizzard could set it so that you get a bonus to your crit, based on level:

60 - 1% crit added
70 - 2% crit added
80 - 3% crit added

Total crit added at 80% in Berzerker Stance: 9%

Much better, IMO.

[Devon]

Hi Everybody

I had quite some Discussions with my friends over this issue and i would like to hear your opinion.

In my opinion they should change it to 10% less armor, because it would be fair to other melee users but also reduce the absolute dominance of magical users over warriors

What do you think?

i think they should make u take 20% more dmg in berserker stance

[Azreell]

I agree.

3% crit is minimal, as it doesn't scale nearly as well as the 10% flat damage. I would think that Blizzard could set it so that you get a bonus to your crit, based on level:

60 - 1% crit added
70 - 2% crit added
80 - 3% crit added

Total crit added at 80% in Berzerker Stance: 9%

Much better, IMO.

The last thing warriors need atm is more damage.

Melee classes already scale far faster and more efficienctly then casters.

I can't see how you made this suggestion with a straight face.

[Iosif]

Don't Prot warriors stance dance too?

In raids when a warrior has to stace dance he normaly can't afford to miss a beat with Threat Generation (Atleast if im in the raid)

In PvP Stance Dancing is used as a swicher from a offensive to a defenive mode, allowing a warrior to retain 30 Rage would allow them to spell refect much sooner making them much harder to kill for casters, ATM Casters are the only true counter for a warrior

[Deleted]

Then that pyro wont do more damage anyway.

/paradox

you are right that it does not do the 10% more dmg if it hits you in battle stance. but where is that paradox?
my point was only that warriors complain about those 10% more dmg they could have avoided by a relatively simple macro.

anyway, I think the fact that you can work around this 10% (as tigercat has also stated previously) by /killing the target faster and /stance dance is enough to satisfy the disadvantage of.... well taking more dmg.