cRPG

cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Tanken on April 26, 2013, 07:41:31 pm

Title: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 26, 2013, 07:41:31 pm
As the Title suggests-- Iron Flesh versus Weapon Mastery.
Which do you choose?


Also, this is in regards to if you are a dedicated class, not a hybrid. Obviously if you're a hybrid, the answer would be Weapon Mastery. But I want to know from a Dedicated Class standpoint, which do you prefer? IF or WM? GET YOUR VOTES IN!
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Vibe on April 26, 2013, 07:42:05 pm
is this even a question
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 26, 2013, 07:42:34 pm
Yes Vibe, it is, and I feel that the answer is going to vary between US and EU somewhat--so that's why I asked.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tydeus on April 26, 2013, 07:43:19 pm
is this even a question
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Necrorave on April 26, 2013, 07:44:07 pm
Always been a fan of Weapon master.  Speed has always been first to me.  The best part is, I don't even spam
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 26, 2013, 07:46:21 pm
I kind of want to know the formula for Ironflesh and Weapon Mastery. I think I've always undervalued WM a little bit, primarily because I just do one weapon proficiency, is it worth it to raise it from 110 to 130ish? and if so, why?
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on April 26, 2013, 07:46:49 pm
I'm hybrid, but if I was pure melee I'd still take WM over IF.  I prefer offensive skills versus defensive.

Pretty sure I'm in the minority though, I think most NA pure melee prefer IF over WM (and I think EU may lean more towards WM than IF, but still thinking the majority would take IF over WM, just not as much consensus)
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Gurnisson on April 26, 2013, 07:47:34 pm
I prefer to have 5-6 WM as a dedicated melee player. Fuck ironflesh gayness.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Necrorave on April 26, 2013, 07:49:00 pm
I'm hybrid, but if I was pure melee I'd still take WM over IF.  I prefer offensive skills versus defensive.

I always considered myself a defensive person.  I figured that my defensive playstyle makes up for the lack of ironflesh so I put some into offense in case I need to be aggressive.  (Which I usually fail at)
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Chris_the_Animal on April 26, 2013, 07:50:40 pm
Almost on every build im finishing WM to its biggest...I want to make faster stabs with my lawlpike or aim better with my xbow. IF is better for people with unloomed stuff maybe...

Fuck ironflesh gayness.
Fuck your +3 Underwear!  :mrgreen:
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Arjay on April 26, 2013, 07:52:18 pm
I always choose WM over IF, it just feels like it was meant to be.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rainbow on April 26, 2013, 07:53:26 pm
I don't even know why this is a question.

Max out your IF in relation to your str and max out your WM in relation to your AGI.  They are both very important.

Power Strike has become an after thought. 

If you suck at blocking get more IF.  If you are a great blocker I would probably still have higher IF then WM but not by much.  I found the best build to be a 21/18 build w/ 7 PS IF and 6 WM ATHLETICS.

High damage is derived greatly from wep speed and footwork. 

I really dont even know why this is a question to be honest...  I would understand more IF VS PS or WM VS ATHLETICS
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 26, 2013, 07:56:14 pm
I don't even know why this is a question.

Max out your IF in relation to your str and max out your WM in relation to your AGI.  They are both very important.

Power Strike has become an after thought. 

If you suck at blocking get more IF.  If you are a great blocker I would probably still have higher IF then WM but not by much.  I found the best build to be a 21/18 build w/ 7 PS IF and 6 WM ATHLETICS.

High damage is derived greatly from wep speed and footwork. 

I really dont even know why this is a question to be honest...  I would understand more IF VS PS or WM VS ATHLETICS

The reason it is a question is for new players and players who aren't sure. Also, in case you didn't read--The poll asks "If you had to choose one" meaning if you were min/maxing a build, say 21/21, which would you strive for first? IF or WM? It's a valid question, and I think we need to look beyond our personal bias of the question and realize that solid answers can help direct new players in to better understanding the choices of the skill leveling.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rainbow on April 26, 2013, 07:57:54 pm
IF would probably be 1 higher then WM in the end build if thats the case.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: MrShine on April 26, 2013, 07:58:05 pm
Wow, I'm actually surprised there are so many fans of WM.  Leveling a shielder with 21 strength no ironflesh (56 hp) I get 2 hit pretty much all the time.  30 armor, 40 armor, 50 armor it doesn't really matter.

Meanwhile with my 70 hp 52 body armor main 2 hits are very rare, usually it's 3 or 4.

I'm all about the ironflesh, and I don't see that changing unless the base wpp you get changes.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Turboflex on April 26, 2013, 07:59:45 pm
WM has a very marginal effect on overall ability to connect weapon with opponent quickly.

Footwork, positioning, weapon ghostreach and ability to break animation or hiltslash all are a lot more important. WM just gives you a marginal increase if you are just standing still and swinging in a vacuum.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tibe on April 26, 2013, 08:04:19 pm
WM....ofcourse.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Malaclypse on April 26, 2013, 08:12:59 pm
WM has a very marginal effect on overall ability to connect weapon with opponent quickly.

Footwork, positioning, weapon ghostreach and ability to break animation or hiltslash all are a lot more important. WM just gives you a marginal increase if you are just standing still and swinging in a vacuum.

^

The speed gain is negligible (especially on weapons which are already fast). Proficiency does however increase min/average/max damage, but being that I typically wear armor which reduces my proficiency by 6-7 at most, I opt for IF more in a single melee prof build- the base 111 prof is enough.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Grumbs on April 26, 2013, 08:28:00 pm
I wouldn't recommend new players to go with no WM, but 3+ just so you can get some WPF while leveling. Attack speed matters more for new players because they don't know how to use player movement while attacking, turning into attacks, or which attacks of their will go through or when you must block etc. You have to pay for repairs less often with higher wpf too. As you get better the need for WM goes down, but IF is good regardless of how good or bad you are. Even if you are a pro blocker if you die in fewer hits with no downsides then its worth having imo

The difference between 111 to 150+ isn't really that much, but if I was levelling still I would put some points into WM probably. Much rather max IF tho
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Macropus on April 26, 2013, 08:48:30 pm
For me answer is WM obviously. Why? Because I know for sure I don't wanna use middle/heavy armor, so IF is useless for me anyway.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tydeus on April 26, 2013, 08:50:59 pm
Here's a suggestion, get both. Stop doing high conversion builds, and start getting both IF and WM, you won't regret it. 6 skill points are never worth 1 extra ps or 1 extra athletics, not even close.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: oprah_winfrey on April 26, 2013, 08:52:34 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Neither!
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rainbow on April 26, 2013, 09:01:14 pm
Here's a suggestion, get both. Stop doing high conversion builds, and start getting both IF and WM, you won't regret it. 6 skill points are never worth 1 extra ps or 1 extra athletics, not even close.

Agree 100%
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 26, 2013, 11:50:12 pm
I gotta say, I'm kind of shocked at the current poll. I thought for sure more people preferred WM over IF, but it's good to know that I'm not alone in my decision.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Teeth on April 26, 2013, 11:53:39 pm
I only get WM because I think it reduces the stab stun from doing a bad stab, which as a poker is kinda important. Apart from that I think WM is IF's little bitch. I have a 1h alt with 1 WM and it feels fine. I remember going from 4 to 7 WM when I reached level 33 on my main. I did in fact notice a speed difference, it has had zero impact on my performance though. To be honest it kinda depends on the weapon I want to use, slow and high damage weapons benefit a lot more from WM than fast and low damage weapons.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Torben on April 26, 2013, 11:58:38 pm
I like my wpf to be at least around 150,  and see how much points i have left after that.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tennenoth on April 27, 2013, 12:03:16 am
I need to put points into two areas, archer and 2 handed in order to keep my build up, I can't do that without my 8 weapon master but I do also have 1 iron flesh, albeit I am level 34.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Kalam on April 27, 2013, 12:11:43 am
Neither. They're both for boring people. Except in tri-builds. In which case, weapon mastery is the better choice.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Kafein on April 27, 2013, 12:16:27 am
I don't even know why this is a question.

Max out your IF in relation to your str and max out your WM in relation to your AGI.  They are both very important.

Power Strike has become an after thought. 

If you suck at blocking get more IF.  If you are a great blocker I would probably still have higher IF then WM but not by much.  I found the best build to be a 21/18 build w/ 7 PS IF and 6 WM ATHLETICS.

High damage is derived greatly from wep speed and footwork. 

I really dont even know why this is a question to be honest...  I would understand more IF VS PS or WM VS ATHLETICS

Wait what ?

Any sane experienced player will always max PS before IF and ATH before WM

Also the best is to invest just a few points of WM and let the rest go to IF. But only if your armor justifies those IF points.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Haboe on April 27, 2013, 12:22:00 am
Totally depends on your build really...

If you have plenty of agi as a shielder for example, WM is a must for me. Gives you an extra edge on speed and damage output. IF is merely a filler for your remaining skillpoints.
Ranged units, WM obviously.

Str stackers... Gay anyway  :mrgreen:
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Relit on April 27, 2013, 12:25:49 am
Why not both? I have both as high as I can get.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 27, 2013, 12:28:23 am
Why not both? I have both as high as I can get.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login



...because it asks you to pick one you silly goose.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Moncho on April 27, 2013, 12:50:29 am
I prefer IF for a simple reason: FUCKING TEAMMATES. QQ
As a front line shielder, I take so many more hits from the back (that pikeman trying to wiggle, the 2h hero trying to stab through you, accidental stuff) than from the shield protected side.
WM is nice, but I feel like 120ish wpf is more than enough for any 1her.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Taser on April 27, 2013, 12:50:58 am
As a taser with no IF and 7 WM, I think I'm going with ..... *suspense*

(click to show/hide)

As a side note, how many people in NA really do no IF at all?
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Jarold on April 27, 2013, 06:00:16 am
Best builds ever conceived. 21/15 and 15/21      that way you can max out all your important groups and more!
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Matey on April 27, 2013, 08:06:50 am
the better question would be "Which is the better skill" as opposed to "which do you like more" I like WM way more, but IF is a far better skill.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: FRANK_THE_TANK on April 27, 2013, 08:15:44 am
As the Title suggests-- Iron Flesh versus Weapon Mastery.
Which do you choose?


Also, this is in regards to if you are a dedicated class, not a hybrid. Obviously if you're a hybrid, the answer would be Weapon Mastery. But I want to know from a Dedicated Class standpoint, which do you prefer? IF or WM? GET YOUR VOTES IN!

You should also state the obvious - This is for melee only derp le derp.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Count_Grishnackh on April 27, 2013, 06:00:26 pm
(click to show/hide)

24/15 full PS all the way.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: NuberT on April 27, 2013, 06:10:45 pm
lvl34 - 21/24 - 8WM, 8ATH, 7PS, 0IF

I think as polearm player high WM is very important to catch up with the superior 2h animations.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: The_Bloody_Nine on April 27, 2013, 06:41:39 pm
btw is the old formula of wpf reduction still valid?

then you can do the math, lets say six WM gets you 156 wpf and 3 WM 130. you then only have to figure out how much armor weight you need to reduce with the 3 WM build to get same effective wpf as with the other. Then you can look if the higher hp is more worth it or more armor.

I don't care that much about that stuff but I'm one of the guys who never felt any difference between 130 and 160 wpf anyway. So 3 WM is usually enough, rest goes into IF.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Angantyr on April 27, 2013, 07:06:00 pm
WM, even if zero or very little WM is entirely viable, currently I still go for 6 even when not going hybrid. But every time I feel how easy it is to wield a weapon with only 1 wpf, I feel like I'm cheating myself.

Maybe I'd do it differently if I was respeccing right now, but it was still announced a long time ago by chadz that WM would eventually be made worthwhile.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Sandersson Jankins on April 27, 2013, 07:48:35 pm
If I'm using +3 armour (which is all the damn time since I'm a filthy shameless disgusting loom-crutcher), then WM.

If I'm not, then WM but I whine about having no IF all gen.

I used to do 0 WM builds quite a lot, but the difference between 111 wpf and 130+ is astronomical to me.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: San on April 27, 2013, 07:53:13 pm
It's easier to have 0-2 points in WM than 0-2 points in IF.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Kuyamzoleta on April 27, 2013, 07:57:03 pm
prioritize WM over IF. If you have any excess points just dump them in IF, as that skill section will always be the last priority.

Get enough WM to have at least 120-140 prof. in your dedicated weapon class, and dump the rest of your points in IF.

INF/2H...point prioritization
1)PS
2)ATH
3)WM
4)RIDING/SHIELD
5)IF

If you're going to be a shielder or a bowman your priorities will switch around a bit but still, IF should be your last concern because having IF doesn't help you learn how the game works as much as the other points do.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Dach on April 27, 2013, 10:15:40 pm
IF is by far the better skill...

I just lol'ed at everyone complaining about gay STR crutcher in this thread... it just prove the point...  :lol:
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Royans on April 27, 2013, 10:17:28 pm
Does this thread even mean something?
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Prpavi on April 27, 2013, 10:21:38 pm
always max out WM
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Kaelaen on April 27, 2013, 11:50:18 pm
I used to go weapon master first, but these days if I do a standard 18/21 build I'll max out iron flesh over weapon master.  This is because I remember when FCC was a bit more active about a year or so ago and Cyranule hadn't respecced to archery yet.  He had 130 proficiency in two-hander (to have proficiency in polearms), used the slow as fuck sword of war, and people screamed at him for being a spammer despite using a build and equipment with terrible stats for spamming.  This was because he had good footwork, timing, and understanding of weapon ranges, things I feel are all very important skills to master and if anything maximizing weapon proficiency feels just as much a crutch as maximizing iron flesh to me.

Both are maxxed out on my main but whenever I make skip the funs I always have low wpf because I like being able to live despite the presence of ranged players and teammates.  Fuck teammate, including myself.

-idlewind
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Osiris on April 27, 2013, 11:52:40 pm
I prefer IF for the simple fact that there are so many ranged it makes me RQ with no or very little IF :P


that said i never go under 3 wm and usually have 5 :D

21-15 shielder 7IF 5 wm 18-18 6IF 5 wm so pretty close. only time i have 3 is for cav
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Torp on April 28, 2013, 12:30:34 am
I always max wm - and then i fill in if when i'm done, usually 1-3 points depending on my build, more if i go for high lvl (33-ish) builds.
I know the actual damage and speed increase is very small, but i like the feel of being faster, it improves my feinting, it lets me get those quick stabs in etc. - for me its a question of surviving another hit from the enemy or getting in another hit or two yourself due to the superior speed.... and in that case, i prefer being more 'aggressive'
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rhaelys on April 28, 2013, 01:04:41 am
It's better to think about what people complain about more: Strength crutchers or Agility crutchers.

Oh wait, nobody EVER complains about Agility crutchers.

Why is that? Because Strength has access to Power Strike and Ironflesh, which directly improve the damage you deal and the damage you can take before dying. Agility has access to increased movement speed and marginally faster swings and slightly more damage, but still less compared to Power Strike.

Just remember folks, you can't swing your weapon faster if you're dead. Ironflesh directly increases your survivability, and thus allows you to swing your weapon at all.

For single prof melee only builds, Ironflesh first then Weapon Master. Also, no more than 8 skill points to attribute points conversions as Tydeus said.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Kafein on April 28, 2013, 01:16:47 am
The very best players of the agility "school" are very tough to kill because they block everything, which can be damn annoying at times. You just don't see many of them because a decent player with a STR build will do just as good during your typical round. Also good skills is closer to a consequence of high agi than a cause. Agility has many advantages but they only become useful with a lot of game practice.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: MrChubbikins on April 28, 2013, 02:12:08 am
Does WM make that much of a difference? With 24 strength, 8 PS, and 111 WPF, you do 45 average dmg with a 30 cut 1-hand. Now with 154 WPF you do a whole 3 more dmg.

I don't see why anyone other than archers would use WM.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 28, 2013, 07:24:31 am
The voting has done a 180, WM now surpasses IF. So, I suppose this thread does mean something.


Was not expecting it to turn around, will be interesting to check in on this periodically the next few days to see how the voting turns out once I'm sure most forum lurkers have seen it and cast their vote.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: FRANK_THE_TANK on April 28, 2013, 07:33:15 am
Bullshit and lies!

I still stand by my statement of clarification. It should say melee/nonhybrid only.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tanken on April 28, 2013, 07:43:42 am
Yes, I thought about that right around the 2nd page's time of arrival Tank. And I believe if I had specified then yes, the voting would probably be slightly different...but I gather from posts here that most players realize it is in reference to Melee. Perhaps just the looky-lous may bump WM's votes because they are ranged
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rhaelys on April 28, 2013, 09:09:39 am
It just amazes me how people can vote for Weapon Master and yet complain about Strength crutchers (more specifically complaining about how people with high Strength have high damage output and high survivability - a direct result of having points in Power Strike and Ironflesh). It could also be that I'm deluded in the belief that Ironflesh is a superior skill, or that I'm simply NA scum.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: WITCHCRAFT on April 28, 2013, 09:34:02 am
Answer depends on your class. As a pure arbalest xbow (no melee wpf at all, just pure agi/ath/wm) I much prefered 10 WM to some WM and some IF. Run 'n gun someone then find cover to reload that arba as fast as humanly possible.

As a melee build (1h/shield, 2h, pole, pretty much everything) iron flesh is almost NEVER a bad investment. High HP stacks really well with high armor value that most melee prefer anyway. 2H and pole users can do quite well with high WM too. I sometimes like to set my STF character to a high wm and ath and duel with 2d polearms (halberd, english bill, those newer spear-variants). If you can combo quickly enough, two directions is all you need. Also hilarious for instantly guillotining horses and their riders after you rear them.

Of the two skills, I prefer high WM. In general I prefer speed-oriented builds and WM is all about that.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rhaelys on April 28, 2013, 09:36:41 am
Answer depends on your class. As a pure arbalest xbow (no melee wpf at all, just pure agi/ath/wm) I much prefered 10 WM to some WM and some IF. Run 'n gun someone then find cover to reload that arba as fast as humanly possible.

As a melee build (1h/shield, 2h, pole, pretty much everything) iron flesh is almost NEVER a bad investment. High HP stacks really well with high armor value that most melee prefer anyway. 2H and pole users can do quite well with high WM too. I sometimes like to set my STF character to a high wm and ath and duel with 2d polearms (halberd, english bill, those newer spear-variants). If you can combo quickly enough, two directions is all you need. Also hilarious for instantly guillotining horses and their riders after you rear them.

Of the two skills, I prefer high WM. In general I prefer speed-oriented builds and WM is all about that.

This topic is about dedicated melee only.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Haboe on April 28, 2013, 10:14:31 am
Yes Vibe, it is, and I feel that the answer is going to vary between US and EU somewhat--so that's why I asked.

And how exactly were you gonna seperate them in the results?  :rolleyes:  :mrgreen:
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Dezilagel on April 28, 2013, 10:33:54 am
Never had a single point in IF.

I like hybridizing, as well as having high WPF so WM is a natural pick.

Any spare points i put into shield, for utility.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: WITCHCRAFT on April 28, 2013, 10:37:44 am
This topic is about dedicated melee only.

Dedicated class. You can play dedicated ranged too you know...
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Kafein on April 28, 2013, 10:40:39 am
I think you need to cast another poll, separating NA and EU + separating ranged and melee
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rhaelys on April 28, 2013, 10:41:39 am
Dedicated class. You can play dedicated ranged too you know...

Yes, I thought about that right around the 2nd page's time of arrival Tank. And I believe if I had specified then yes, the voting would probably be slightly different...but I gather from posts here that most players realize it is in reference to Melee. Perhaps just the looky-lous may bump WM's votes because they are ranged
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Cyclopsided on April 28, 2013, 11:14:46 pm
The amounts of times I have been called a high-agi spammer when I have 0 WM on most of my melee characters should note to you how little it effects gameplay.
footwork effects weapon speed a billion times more than WM does.
90% of your increased speed will come from moving the right directions at the right times
an additional 15% will come from athletics making those movements faster
and 5%ish will be form wm making your weapon swing faster.

it is just so marginal. The damage bonus can be worth it though: I would choose 7 WM over an additional PS. So don't do any dumb conversions that way lol.


IF on the other hand is amazingly useful, especially to lower-mid armored characters. This is the biggest misunderstanding people have of IF characters, they assume they are all being used for heavy armored players. Which is fine if you want to be a slug, but they completely discount the much better reasons to use IF for medium and light armor. I play almost exclusively in dresses. IF makes me go from being able to survive 2-3 hits to being able to survive 5-6 hits. I can get shot by an arbalest and survive vs dying to a body shot. I can survive 4 more arrows than not. I can survive teamwounds.
I can make Mistakes in the heat of battle two or more times than if I was an agility build.
And thus, KDR raises. I have fun. None of the small balance changes make you angry. You survive all the petty shit that makes WM-stacking players go apeshit over. IF makes the game more fun since you don't need to rage at it over dumb deaths

(click to show/hide)
And that is why My characters usually have plenty of IF.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: oohillac on April 28, 2013, 11:22:17 pm
I notice a huge difference between 1 WM and 6 WM, and prefer the higher WM if I have the option.

Currently a 30/10 (level 31), so IF-heavy.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Gurnisson on April 28, 2013, 11:40:20 pm
snip

What's your opinion of a 0 wm pikeman/mauler? I would definitely get WM as those classes myself, and being a piker on my main, I pick WM over IF.

WM is an offensive skill, adding a bit of damage, compared to the defensive skill ironflesh. I always feel bad when I survive a lot of hits in melee because of high hp, since I believe making mistakes should be fatal. Knowing that I won't survive too much made my overall play and decision making on the battlefield better.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Cyclopsided on April 28, 2013, 11:45:14 pm
What's your opinion of a 0 wm pikeman/mauler? I would definitely get WM as those classes myself, and being a piker on my main, I pick WM over IF.

WM is an offensive skill, adding a bit of damage, compared to the defensive skill ironflesh. I always feel bad when I survive a lot of hits in melee because of high hp, since I believe making mistakes should be fatal. Knowing that I won't survive too much made my overall play and decision making on the battlefield better.
I played a high IF pikeman for well over a year as my main melee character. Definitely the most effective pikeman build I ever used was 24-15 with maxing my PS, IF, ath, and leftovers for wm. [Light/medium armor]
I believe people's views on IF are completely wrong as seeing it as a defensive skill. IF lets you play more aggressively and do stuff that would otherwise be suicidal.
In the case of a pikeman, it lets you survive several more arrows as you assist your teammates on the front lines. It lets you survive that stray hit or two that sneaks past your teammates. It lets you risk those chambers when that 2h stabs at you.

0 WM mauler is stupid don't do it. WM has increasingly more effect on weapon speed the slower the weapon, stack WM for a mauler don't be dumb. It can be the difference between being interrupted right before a crushthrough or not.

But I definitely agree that having good decision making is essential -- don't let being able to survive a few more mistakes on the battlefield   MAKE you make more mistakes. Does that make sense?
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Gurnisson on April 28, 2013, 11:49:41 pm
I guess you wouldn't use the build I'm going for then. At 33 it'll be 24/21 with 8 ps, 7 ath and 5 wm. All wpf in polearms
 
I usually had 2-4 IF points before, but I don't really notice much of a difference between a couple of points or no points. It would either be full investment or no investment for me, and I usually do the latter.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Cyclopsided on April 28, 2013, 11:50:38 pm
I guess you wouldn't use the build I'm going for then. At 33 it'll be 24/21 with 8 ps, 7 ath and 5 wm. All wpf in polearms
 
I usually had 2-4 IF points before, but I don't really notice much of a difference between a couple of points or no points. It would either be full investment or no investment for me, and I usually do the latter.
You are right, I would have done 21/21 in favor of maxing more skill points instead of one more PS.
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Tydeus on April 29, 2013, 01:01:39 am
IF on the other hand is amazingly useful, especially to lower-mid armored characters. This is the biggest misunderstanding people have of IF characters, they assume they are all being used for heavy armored players. Which is fine if you want to be a slug, but they completely discount the much better reasons to use IF for medium and light armor. I play almost exclusively in dresses. IF makes me go from being able to survive 2-3 hits to being able to survive 5-6 hits. I can get shot by an arbalest and survive vs dying to a body shot. I can survive 4 more arrows than not. I can survive teamwounds.
I can make Mistakes in the heat of battle two or more times than if I was an agility build.
And thus, KDR raises. I have fun. None of the small balance changes make you angry. You survive all the petty shit that makes WM-stacking players go apeshit over. IF makes the game more fun since you don't need to rage at it over dumb deaths

The reason why people say IF is so much more effective for high str builds, isn't due to a lack of usefulness for low to medium armored or lowish to medium str characters, it's that your effective health pool increase per point of IF rises with an increase in armor. Clearly you get more survivability out of stacking hp with armor, than only doing one of the two. So I think stating that IF is "especially useful to lower-mid armored characters" is incorrect due to what you're suggesting. That's not to say getting IF on a low-medium armored target is a poor decision, it's just that there is clearly a very good reason to get it with a highly armored character.

I do the opposite of you on my STF characters, I don't get IF and instead I get extra athletics and wear heavy armor. Two builds I run are 12/30 and 15/27. My 12 str build has the highest possible armor value in all slots other than boots that you can get with 12 str, and my 15 str(sometimes 14) character uses plate armor. Sometimes I do an extra conversion and get 1 extra athletics for the hell of it (20 point conversion build). It's certainly not the most effective build overall, but the survivability you are capable of is really quite amusing. My 12 str, 62 body armor character can consistently force bounces on 1h swords and completely nullify damage entirely from certain archers. Armor is without a doubt, the single most effective tool for increasing one's survivability.

Similarly, your weapon has more of an effect on your damage than your character build. Why's this matter? Because nearly everyone chooses equipment after they have their build created and what you should actually be doing, is creating your build around specific weapons/armors. The player > the equipment > the build.

Sorry for seemingly being off topic, but even if you narrow it to a melee only discussion, you're still left with many things to think about.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Cyclopsided on April 29, 2013, 01:30:56 am
yes tydeus, I agree with your points -- But I am just pointing out that people completely neglect the idea of IF + light/medium armor because they ONLY think about the synergy of heavy armor and IF.

"oh look at that guy in a leather coat , he will die easily" But the leathercoat is +3 with +3 heavy gauntlets and they have something like 37 body armor for 3.5 weight, and with all that IF they can take a lot of hits while being fast on foot.
That is nothing to ever neglect, the value of NOT being seen as a threat, or alternatively as being seen as an easy target.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: owens on April 29, 2013, 08:03:06 am
21/15

always every gen all day every class
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Cyclopsided on April 29, 2013, 09:41:25 am
21/15

always every gen all day every class
21/15 (lvl 30) (1h/shield) is one of very few perfect builds. Every stat it uses is maxed. It is balanced perfectly.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Muki on April 29, 2013, 11:11:57 am
Ill go with WM since the weapon speed you get from wpf will always be more useful to me than IF; than again I'm a 18/18 build so I get the best from both I guess.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: MrShine on April 29, 2013, 03:58:23 pm
The very best players of the agility "school" are very tough to kill because they block everything, which can be damn annoying at times. You just don't see many of them because a decent player with a STR build will do just as good during your typical round. Also good skills is closer to a consequence of high agi than a cause. Agility has many advantages but they only become useful with a lot of game practice.

The reason they can block well is because they have athletics, not because they have weapon master.  I agree athletics is a great offensive & defensive tool because you can center yourself against enemies better and pick & choose battles.  If this thread was 'IF vs. ATH' I think it would be a much tougher call for me, but seeing as it's 'IF vs WM' it's ironflesh all the way no question.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Gurnisson on April 29, 2013, 04:02:04 pm
If this thread was 'IF vs. ATH' I think it would be a much tougher call for me

You would actually consider taking IF over maxing athletics as infantry? :lol:
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: MrShine on April 29, 2013, 04:03:57 pm
You would actually consider taking IF over maxing athletics as infantry? :lol:

Only if I had a low athletics build in the first place, but it would have to be REAL low (like 30-9, 33-6).
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: GuiKa on April 29, 2013, 09:30:20 pm
You can't just ask this question like that. It really depends on what weapon you are using, your playstyle, the mode you play, etc ....
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Kafein on April 29, 2013, 09:57:08 pm
I find WM to be useful on my main char because even though I can't really tell the difference when I try to see it, fights feels much more confortable. With a lot of WM, I rarely find myself thinking "I should've hit first" when I get killed. Less than with low WM, anyway.

The reason they can block well is because they have athletics, not because they have weapon master.  I agree athletics is a great offensive & defensive tool because you can center yourself against enemies better and pick & choose battles.  If this thread was 'IF vs. ATH' I think it would be a much tougher call for me, but seeing as it's 'IF vs WM' it's ironflesh all the way no question.

I think the first reason they block well is because with low IF they simply need to block to do a good score.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Rhaelys on April 29, 2013, 11:28:03 pm
I think a lot of people view IF vs WM in a duel server type of situation, ie "If only I had hit him sooner". Honestly, when was the last time you actually said or thought that on a battle server? If you want to hit someone sooner, get a faster weapon.

You can't ignore ranged and cav, which are just as integral to the shitty battle experience as melee combat. You can't block arrows unless you have a shield. You can't block cav bump damage at all.

In those instances, in which you lose 50% or more of your health from an arrow or bolt before you even get into melee range of the opposing team, or when you die to a cav bump, do you think...

"I wish I had more WM"

or do you think...

"I wish I had more IF"

I know that whenever I get shot by a ranged projectile or hit by cav charge damage, I don't think "I wish I had more WM".

I think "I'm glad I have 10 IF".
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: oprah_winfrey on April 30, 2013, 03:35:25 pm

I think "I'm glad I am a bundle of sticks with 10 IF".

That is what I say when I am playing strength builds.
Title: Re: A Great Debate: IF vs. WM -- What's your pick?
Post by: Corsair831 on April 30, 2013, 04:22:40 pm
the only skill i get is horse archery, there's no point getting any other skill, IF, WM, Riding, Shield, all suck, only horse archery shows the true path