Return of Reckoning

you have all the numbers here...

So comparing your tooltip damage of SQ to SW without tactics slotted; -25% plus alive pet damage for SQ and +25% damage for 10secs every 30sec for SW? ...just checking my math...

To the op, generally speaking i see sw's with higher damage and sh's with more db's.

For them being so different mechanics wise they are pretty dam close to being balanced, some situations will favour the sh and other situations will favour the sw, saying that 1 is easier to be successful on and i will leave that to opinion as no doubt someone will disagree and want to start a flame war.

magicthighs wrote:Mursie, tomato, here's a suggestion. Go to your user control panel, click the Friends & Foes tab, and add each other as foes so you don't see each other's posts anymore. The rest of the forum users would appreciate it.

Or ban the 3 or 4 ppl from posting who always feel the need to argue with everyone, doing so in a manner that always come across as disrespectful, argumentative, belittling and insulting.
Look at previous threads which have gone of track and bein drawn out or derailed.
Whether right or wrong about something if you have ppl ganging up on someone that person will want to defend themselves.

Stinky:

Without VoN:

SH SW Difference
166 216 23%
675 760 11%
462 498 7%
291 337 14%
191 216 12%
191 216 12%
241 266 9%

ø: 12,57%

With VoN:

SH SW Difference
166 270 39%
675 950 29%
462 623 26%
291 421 31%
191 270 29%
191 270 29%
241 333 28%

ø: 30,14%

Fits perfect to my logic that SH has permanent the damage of a VoN buffed SW.

Bretin wrote: Oh and Mr. Mursi:
If you compare flanking shot and behind ya, make sure to compare them with their actual tooltip. Not one at r40 and one base.
It makes you look like a fool to whoever is more than a pug .

Mursie wrote:FS: 636 / BYa: 291 (note: FS also has increased crit chance based on target health loss)

The correct tooltips can be found above.

That isn't my quote - but you have clearly illustrated what a mis-quote is. I hope you can share that with tomato. This is a clear example of mis-quoting. You have literally assigned authorship of a quote to someone that didn't say it.

In addition, you added insult to it. Great job. The rest of your conversation may have had good points, but since you couldn't be bothered to fact check your posts on quotes.. I'm not sure how I can actually read the rest and believe any of it.

Morf wrote:
Or ban the 3 or 4 ppl from posting who always feel the need to argue with everyone, doing so in a manner that always come across as disrespectful, argumentative, belittling and insulting.
Look at previous threads which have gone of track and bein drawn out or derailed.
Whether right or wrong about something if you have ppl ganging up on someone that person will want to defend themselves.

And there are those who played WAR for years and think they know everything, backing up their arguments with feelings and superficial analyses. Some are even asking for 1on1s in a grp game to prove their point.

Guess if you ban those first we have no problem, they dont contribute anyways, they just increase the effort that has to be put into balancing.

Bretin wrote:oh and after we clarified the facts i can provide the following answer for the op:

sw is easier to play. thats why pugs have more success with him. It is the common bonus of playing order. Easier to play, but not always superior.
in fact he cant compete with the SH thats why the elitist pricks of gankbus prefer him any time over the SW.

that is also the reason why you see more sw dealing damage in scs.

ps: i think we can close this now before the puglord goes full salt.

Read my posts in this thread. Then read yours. If you really think the salt is over here... I have nothing left to say. Discussions that I have involve open dialogue and opinion. You literally can't go two sentences without a barrage of insults.

Overall - it weakens any argument you make, even when you sometimes have good ones to make.

Aaaand that's enough.