Announcement

Collapse

GameRocks Transfer - Unable to locate toon

UPDATE!! All players with issues locating or logging into their characters since the transfer are required to send in a ticket. Please CLICK HERE for instructions!
See more
See less

Blood warrior for knight,opinions?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Blood warrior for knight,opinions?

    Hello everyone I am knight I consider to switch my oracle for blood warrior any advice would help alot,thank you.

  • #2
    Originally posted by MagicBloom92 View Post
    Hello everyone I am knight I consider to switch my oracle for blood warrior any advice would help alot,thank you.
    In my opinion, the only two eudaemon that are worth while are oracle, and ranger. Maybe archer, but still - I find the blood knight highly overrated.

    Comment


    • #3
      The only really good thing about the blood warrior is the delphics which add damage debuff to the target. So you can time them to best effect, but you can do the same with oracle, and damnation lasts much longer than others, so timing is almost irrelevant, giving you double the damage bonus. Eudaemons really aren't there for their own dps, and that's the only advantage over an oracle. So I say not worth it.

      Comment


      • #4
        The blood warrior's gimmick is that he heals himself with some of his actions. That is fundamentally useless as the self healing isn't as often or as strong as to make it useful. His other gimmick is the CHANCE for a massively damaging strike, which again, is not often enough, reliable enough or even fundamentally damaging enough to be useful.

        The blood warrior is doing 130% damage to all targets with a 15% chance for extra 50% damage with a delphic. The oracle is doing 160% to all enemies and buffing the whole party 100% of the time for 9% extra damage. And that is before you take into account the Oracle's heals which can hit anyone for a significant amount, not the measly 13% of damage done, which means the exact time when you NEED the heals (i.e., vs a tough opponent), the blood warrior heals the LEAST.

        The thing is simply outclassed.

        Comment


        • #5
          Blood Warrior is sort of a special-scenario type of eudaemon, and has very low hp. To me, his skills are not broad enough to be a main. Although being MATK and having archer-alike skills, he's nonetheless still a knight, and still a better cannon fodder than a good hitter, but his low hp gets him when his owner really needs a good cannon fodder, and his enbuffs are not better than Oracle, Hunter or Ranger. Besides, I haven't seen that many successful knight-knight combo so far (doesn't matter it's Sacred or Blood). As a knight, I'd still pick Oracle or Hunter as main, and Ranger as a secondary.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by R238423534 View Post
            As a knight, I'd still pick Oracle or Hunteras main, and Ranger as a secondary.
            Totally agree with what you said, but I think you messed that part up. Oracle or Ranger as main with archer as a secondary.... perhaps?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Alsatia01 View Post
              Totally agree with what you said, but I think you messed that part up. Oracle or Ranger as main with archer as a secondary.... perhaps?
              No, I really meant Hunter is a better choice as main than Ranger. Hunter has a well-rounded skill set and balanced stats, while Ranger is specialized in 3 areas (bleeding, +40% buff and anti-mage) and he is better at speedy kills than survival. I see Hunter definitely has broader use. Just personal opinion.

              Comment


              • #8
                He isn't that anti-mage, really. For one thing, his main anti-mage thing is a delphic, and that takes time to charge. For another, that one is a random back row attack, which doesn't help when there is multiple targets on the field or when the mage is in front (as is likely to happen in most formations you'll meet due to your toon having far higher survivability and therefore tanking ability than anything else; gone are the days when troops were some sort of buffer for your mage).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ranger has a group Manna Shield.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Too specific. Unless you are fighting an entire group of mages with Matk sylphs, it doesn't help that much. Plus 18% or so is... a speed bump at best.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      as a knight i use oracle as main, ranger for wb and di.
                      ING: Eukkie changed name to â€*Evilâ€*Witchâ€*, changed it back to Eukkie
                      Server: S444 Silent Arena
                      Char: Knight
                      Lvl: 80
                      Br: 6m and crowing.
                      Main Sylph: Arise
                      Guard: Oracle

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by R238423534 View Post
                        No, I really meant Hunter is a better choice as main than Ranger. Hunter has a well-rounded skill set and balanced stats, while Ranger is specialized in 3 areas (bleeding, +40% buff and anti-mage) and he is better at speedy kills than survival. I see Hunter definitely has broader use. Just personal opinion.
                        What I meant there, is that there is no 'Hunter'. I wasn't sure to which one you were referring to. (Archer, or Ranger) But now that you've elaborated, I know you meant the Archer so, my bad.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The Hunter is the archer. Its real name is Sanctuary Hunter.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Alsatia01 View Post
                            What I meant there, is that there is no 'Hunter'. I wasn't sure to which one you were referring to. (Archer, or Ranger) But now that you've elaborated, I know you meant the Archer so, my bad.
                            Actually, there's no eudaemon class called 'Archer'. It's always a 'Sanctuary Hunter', with 'Hunter' being a shorthand of the full class name.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by R238423534 View Post
                              Actually, there's no eudaemon class called 'Archer'. It's always a 'Sanctuary Hunter', with 'Hunter' being a shorthand of the full class name.
                              Originally posted by AdaJames View Post
                              The Hunter is the archer. Its real name is Sanctuary Hunter.
                              Lol OMG I feel like such a derp. Myself and everyone on my server always referred them to them as the 'archer'. How the hell did I miss that....

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X