Frostwrath, Blade of Command

[Kasreyn]

I was discussing this with a few people tonight and I was thinking that a compromise might be in order.
I was thinking that there aren't enough 1hs at the UT TOT tier. Frostwrath could help with that.
I was thinking that rangers could use a shot in the arm at tanking compared with other light tanks, like monks. Frostwrath could help with that.

I concede that as is, Frostwrath would be a wildly good 1hs for rangers at it's current tier. Its current ratio is 0.875. Maybe knock that down to a 0.86 and add ranger to it.

 

[Budizzle]

Also, to clear things up, agro procs account for a very minimal portion of a tanks threat. Anyone who has a patriarch knows that it very, very rarely procs, the majority of the agro from it lies in its low delay. Frostwrath also rarely procs, and the proc is very resistable.

Hi.

This is not true...

Edit: Please don't nerf Frostwrath before I get it.

 

[Mythryn]

Hi.

This is not true...

Hi.

I've done the parses and math myself. Do you know how much agro is generated on every melee hit, or even every melee swing? Because I do, which means I have a much better idea just how much agro is generated from procs vs. from melee, and agro procs account for very little. Just like DD procs count for very, very little of say a rogue or monks DPS.

 

[Budizzle]

Hi.

I've done the parses and math myself. Do you know how much agro is generated on every melee hit, or even every melee swing? Because I do, which means I have a much better idea just how much agro is generated from procs vs. from melee, and agro procs account for very little. Just like DD procs count for very, very little of say a rogue or monks DPS.

Oh, my bad. I'll totally retract my statement now.

I've used both the weapons in question (Exodus was kind enough to let me play with their midget for a couple months). Both of them proc quite a bit more often than "rarely" -- which is a weightless term when not compared to anything, anyway. In fact, the only weapons I've used that proc more than Frostwrath are Flamescar and UT bat/shanker. And really, most weapons in that tier seem to have a pretty congruent proc rate.

"Minimal" is also misleading. Why? Because it depends on quite a few factors: class, AAs, ae, etc. You can cite numbers all day, but how it actually functions is the only thing that matters. Based on your claims (numbers), in THEORY, I would be able to hold aggro with Steam-Powered Autoslicers more efficiently than I could with... just about anything else. False. I'll let you try it yourself on Bud if you want. Or fuck, you could just ask any rogue on the server. I do not need to know how much hate is generated by each swing to observe simple cause and effect. I don't even want to know.

I cannot hold aggro off most DPS in the same tier without stacking procs (rbow, weapon procs, Melwin Idol, etc). This is not an empty claim... I have tried.

Spare me the preaching about math and parses because, honestly, numbers don't mean a fucking thing compared to experience.

Edit: Back to the topic. I think adding a ranger stance that increases aggro would be a better solution than adding the class to Frostwrath. Ranger /s 4 is worthless if you're not getting hit, and it's easier to hotkey between stances than it is to switch weapons, especially considering swapping weapons drops all stances. It would also allow rangers without this one, high tier piece of loot to have a reliable aggro option.

 

[robopirateninja]

Spare me the preaching about math and parses because, honestly, numbers don't mean a fucking thing compared to experience.

Your anecdotal evidence might have more emotional weight for you, but the game is made out of math equations and code, not "experiences." An evenly weighted die can come up the same number five times in a row, it doesn't mean it's impossible for it to roll a six, even if you have never personally seen it.

Edit: Back to the topic. I think adding a ranger stance that increases aggro would be a better solution than adding the class to Frostwrath. Ranger /s 4 is worthless if you're not getting hit, and it's easier to hotkey between stances than it is to switch weapons, especially considering swapping weapons drops all stances. It would also allow rangers without this one, high tier piece of loot to have a reliable aggro option.

You say in your post that you can't keep aggro with a warrior who already has this sword, but you think rangers should get MORE aggro? Why?

I was thinking that there aren't enough 1hs at the UT TOT tier. Frostwrath could help with that.

Are there no new 1h weapons in plane of frost? I haven't seen all of the items out of there yet, but in this tier range there is for sure:

-Malik's Sword (AC and a parry mod, equippable by rangers)
-Funeral Guardian's Tonfa (AC, aggro proc)
-Flamestrike Mace
-Valor, Blade of Enthann (AC, riposte mod, aggro proc)
-Flame-forged longblade
-Cane of Calefaction

Even if there are ZERO one handed weapons out of Frost, there are at least six one handed weapon options for rangers at this tier, and some of them include tanking stats. If a ranger REALLY wanted to tank for some reason, I would expect them to put in a shield, or a 40AC two handed sword. I don't think tanks at this tier who use Frostwrath need a DPS nerf so that rangers can have another sword option.

 

[Eustace]

I was discussing this with a few people tonight and I was thinking that a compromise might be in order.
I was thinking that there aren't enough 1hs at the UT TOT tier. Frostwrath could help with that.
I was thinking that rangers could use a shot in the arm at tanking compared with other light tanks, like monks. Frostwrath could help with that.

I concede that as is, Frostwrath would be a wildly good 1hs for rangers at it's current tier. Its current ratio is 0.875. Maybe knock that down to a 0.86 and add ranger to it.

1hs. There are tons of 1hb's. I also wouldn't consider LT fire longsword or PoFrost 1hs to be UT/ToT level.

 

[robopirateninja]

Do rangers have some innate bonus that makes one weapon type preferable to another?

 

[Eustace]

Yes.

 

[robopirateninja]

If it's relevant, you should say what it is. The skills cap at the same rank and the text for their styles on the wiki specify two weapons, not two swords.

edit: I see on the wiki that rangers get 250 piercing as well, so there's the shanker from UT available as well

 

[wolfwalkerEci]

why compromise on this weapon? there are plenty of other weapons that can do this job of gaining agro. If a ranger just has to have agro and wants a weapon then go loot one of the other options. This weapon should not be reduced in stats at this point in time just because one or two people wish their class was on the weapon.

 

[Dzillon]

Do rangers have some innate bonus that makes one weapon type preferable to another?

Very good question, I suppose the answer is not about some innate bonus cause there is none, but some 14% 1HS gear bonus mmh no ?
Adding a class that was openly denied by devs, thanks to a nerf ? That would set an awful rule.
I suggest this thread just dies. And don't get me wrong I almost supported adding rangers on this, mostly lorewise it sounded appealing.

 

[Eustace]

why compromise on this weapon? there are plenty of other weapons that can do this job of gaining agro. If a ranger just has to have agro and wants a weapon then go loot one of the other options. This weapon should not be reduced in stats at this point in time just because one or two people wish their class was on the weapon.

Why compromise on this weapon?
Lack of one-hand slash items in the tier range. (There are only two, Flamescar and Frostwrath, and I'm pretty confident in saying Flamescar is supposed to be a tier higher than Frostwrath.)

Rangers are supposed to be light tanks.

Frostwrath>Flamescar. By quite a bit. By way more than it should be. IMO, Frostwrath and Flamescar should have their ratios flipped because an UT aggro weapon should NOT be better than a ToT quest aggro weapon. However, just flipping the ratios would make Frostwrath eat a straight nerf - it would be more favorable to add ranger than leave it as is if this is done.

Why not compromise on this weapon?

It was designed to be an ultimate upgrade for warriors, long ago, which is why it stands outside of normal progression.



That's the arguments I've seen for it so far. That's the only viable argument I've seen against it so far. Most of the cries against doing this lack basis beyond calling people loot-whores, or hoping to get special attention for their class, etc. Does it need to be changed? Perhaps, perhaps not. It really depends on perspective and whether there is supposed to be a linear progression outside of sanctum.

If there is supposed to be a linear progression outside of sanctum, then the gear needs to fall in line with available upgrades being greater than previous drops, unless the previous drop in question was an extreme rare that was set as a tier greater than the difficulty of the encounter (or other loot drops) because of its extreme rarity. Frostwrath is pretty much not-rare. If this is your perspective, then it needs to be changed.

If there is not really any true progression of sorts, with just a lot of different encounters at varying difficulties that drop assorted pieces of gear, then Frostwrath most certainly does not need to be changed because there is no line of ascendance. It's all pretty much random and there are no tiers. There are simply encounters, and some have better loot than others.

 

[Budizzle]

Your anecdotal evidence might have more emotional weight for you, but the game is made out of math equations and code, not "experiences." An evenly weighted die can come up the same number five times in a row, it doesn't mean it's impossible for it to roll a six, even if you have never personally seen it.

You say in your post that you can't keep aggro with a warrior who already has this sword, but you think rangers should get MORE aggro? Why?

Even if there are ZERO one handed weapons out of Frost, there are at least six one handed weapon options for rangers at this tier, and some of them include tanking stats. If a ranger REALLY wanted to tank for some reason, I would expect them to put in a shield, or a 40AC two handed sword. I don't think tanks at this tier who use Frostwrath need a DPS nerf so that rangers can have another sword option.

Your reading comprehension is horrible, or you're intentionally trying to misconstrue my post. Either way, stop being a retard.

Like I said, my "anecdotal evidence" is all that really matters because it's more resolute than theory. I had no problem holding aggro with Frostwrath, nor do I have issues with Bud's current weapons (Gishna sword and Gotss hammer). I claimed that my aggro is better with weapons that have a proc compared to those that do not -- more specifically, Steam Powered Autoslicers; which, according to Jose's theory, would be a bigger aggro factory than Frostwrath and 4.2 stick.

I don't care whether or not rangers get more aggro tbh, but I do understand there's scenarios where rangers are the optimal class to steal aggro and hold it. This thread is not about how many 1handers are available to a ranger in that tier, it's about how many are available that allow a ranger to hold aggro using their tanking stance (there are none with pure aggro iirc). Also, it's already been said that their stance does not work with a 2hander, and there's even fewer shields available to a ranger than aggro primaries.

Read and comprehend my posts before responding. Thanks in advance.

Edit: Also, that little gem of an analogy you offered is autistic. Try again.

Frostwrath>Flamescar. By quite a bit. By way more than it should be. IMO, Frostwrath and Flamescar should have their ratios flipped because an UT aggro weapon should NOT be better than a ToT quest aggro weapon. However, just flipping the ratios would make Frostwrath eat a straight nerf - it would be more favorable to add ranger than leave it as is if this is done.

I agree, but Flamescar's aggro production is very comparable, if not superior, to Frostwrath's.

 

[Eustace]

I have to concur with Bud there, he's one of only two warriors I know of who can hold aggro over me when I'm trying to pull crap off of him.

It's more about skill than gear on that.