For a combat primary, no scratch that, combat only guild I'm beginning to suspect we're the weakest combat guild. I'm nearing circle 100, granted circle chasing, and I'm having the darndest time keeping up with Rangers, Bards, Warmages, and Clerics. The only guild where I'm somewhat comparable are moonmages. I haven't hunted with Thieves or Necros as of yet. Anyhow, at this point I'm really getting depressed I've wasted a ton of time for very little reward. I could cut and paste my exp all etc. etc. but after raiding the simucoin store and readjusting all my stats and abilities a dozen times I'm almost certain this is a guild issue, mainly.

Does it all get better? or time to parachute off this crashing guild?

cough trader - armor secondary cough

I'm not an expert on barbarians by any means, but they seem to be doing alright from my vantage point.

1. Defenses just under a paladin.
2. Survivals just under a ranger.
3. Ranged on par with a ranger (dual load).
4. The biggest primary skillset in the game, by a large margin, that they can milk for TDPs.
5. One of two guilds without a single defense or weapon in the tertiary zone.
6. Versatility in self-buffing that is second to none (in and out of combat).

The ONLY problem I see is that the mastery feats are essentially mandatory, so costly, and take so long to get. IMO, they should be treated the same as magical feats. They should cost 1 slot each, and be available as soon as you have 100 scholarship and 50-100 of another skill. I mean, if a barbarian is going to be treated like a magical tert guild then they shouldn't get a second penalty just because they're barbarians.

> It's purely X # of criiters per hour.

IMO, here's the hierarchy (100+ as anything under that is still working towards getting their skills):

* Necromancer (USOL / Zombie)
* Warrior Mage
* Bard
* Clerics (undead)
* Barbarian (HT + Offhand & crossbow or dual-load bow).
* Rangers (dual load)
* Thieves (backstab)
* Moon mages (TM+TKS+SLS)
* Clerics (living)
* Paladin
* Empath (hunting constructs/undead)
* Necromancer not using necromancer abilities
* Trader
* Commoner
* Empath (hunting living)

---

This is, of course, ignoring a whole slew of factors. Spawns. Critter levels. Hunting at level vs slightly below or above. Reward differences based on critter level. Time invested into the character. A barbarian will be able to two-shot creatures that train their tertiary skills (like tactics). A warrior mage can do the same for their skills (like armor).

Asking for a barbarian to kill as quickly in a hunting area that's shared with a mage of equal level isn't a fair request. The mage will likely have spent more time (thus having more TDPs, stats), have magic skills far beyond their tert skills, have AOE damage capabilities, and stronger or more varied buffs / debuffs(again magic prime vs tert).

Bards are, but why rangers? How do they kill more quickly than a barbarian? CC's? TM? I didn't think magic terts would see that much of a benefit compared to the higher weapon skills / stats on the barbarian (for time spent).

AoE power is the most important factor in straight kills/minute IMO. In any event, differences you see sometimes are more a consequence of some guilds or abilities being really freakin' strong right now relative to the rest.

That in mind, you have no chance coming close to optimized warrior mages and bards and clerics. Their AoE magic is very potent, especially if they're mixing in cyclic TM, and they're weapons secondary. The difference between rangers and barbs shouldn't be THAT big if you're using all your offensive potential. Naturally, magic terts can't use TM as effectively as magic primary or secondary guilds, so I'm guessing the difference is snipe with lots of electricity-ing arrows (persistent messaging bug) and maybe ancillary TM attacks.

Try this: Grab a good crafted bow or crossbow and your favorite thrown weapon. (Yes, this works with bows... You just have to be quicker on the trigger.) Aim, use your favorite roar(s) (Anger is likely all you need), offhand lob until fully aimed (you may opt for "get (thrown weapon); lob left" syntax to avoid canceling the aim if you're using a stick bow) and fire. You should kill pretty damn quick with that combo. You still won't come close to your WM, bard and cleric friends if they're optimizing their damage, but you can always annoy the hell out of them in PvP. Every MU hates BMR.

If you're talking about melee, there really isn't much you can do other than get really big and strong and use huge weapons, which I find only barbs can really use effectively at high circle due to skill set placement. You're better off sticking at range and going with the best crafted ranged weapons you can get your hands on. In any case, barbs rely on quality weapons more than anyone, so make sure you're using the best stuff you can afford and that you're not using inefficient weapons, like large edged, or you'll suffer a lot more than the other guilds you mentioned.

>AoE power is the most important factor in straight kills/minute IMO.

I agree, which is why I specifically said 'I think Barbs are in an alright place with respect to single target damage', and went on to mention possible solutions to a Barbs lack of AoE.

This is a drum a lot of people have been beating for a long time.

>A 100th circle ranger or cleric is going to be very different than a 100th circle barbarian.

Yup.

>I agree, which is why I specifically said 'I think Barbs are in an alright place with respect to single target damage', and went on to mention possible solutions to a Barbs lack of AoE.

Sorry, I was replying to the OP, not yours specifically.

Out of curiosity, is the complaint related to training or just killing in general. If the former, I can't think of too many reasons why anyone would want to kill extremely fast. On my primary character, I've hunted with guilds that can kill more quickly (most of them), and it's more annoying than anything else because it leads to inefficient training. If it's the latter, for trash clears in quests or invasions or whatever, I get that, but it's probably more an cyclic/TM balancing thing than a barb balancing thing. Not sure if it's intended that some guilds can wipe hordes THAT fast, particularly the cyclic+TM+weapon crew. As much as I enjoy simultaneous crossbow + offhand/preloadedTM + cyclic + TM on my warmage, it's obviously out of balance.

By the same token, faux BMR can feel overpowered in PvP, so I imagine it's tough to balance guild identity with interguild spells and abilities. Seriously, though, try out various weapon combos. I think a lot of people would be surprised by how efficient some of them can be.

I've played both ranger and Barb.

It really felt like my dps was a lot higher as a ranger. Maybe I'm missing something but even ranger's non aoe spells do a lot of damage, damage spells in general do a TON of damage. I don't recall anything with my barb that could add as much on to the weapon damage.

I mean, as far as killing as fast as possible, my Ranger definitely seems to excel over my Barb in that area.

You prep, target, attack, cast. That's a ton of damage compared to just attacking with the weapon?

>If you aren't training HT, Xbow, Polearm you're probably missing out on a lot of potential damage dealing.

I'd say stick bows for barbs, and you can rock thrown with stick bows simultaneously just like you can with XB.

>It really felt like my dps was a lot higher as a ranger. Maybe I'm missing something but even ranger's non aoe spells do a lot of damage, damage spells in general do a TON of damage. I don't recall anything with my barb that could add as much on to the weapon damage.

I think it evens out some late game. I could be wrong, but I rarely even bother with TM on my paladin when I'm interested in killing quickly. Big weapons just melt stuff when you're talking single targets. Big TM casts are just a mana sink and do significantly less damage anyway. Who cares when the TM hit killed my target when the next draw/chop/whatever would've, and it costs me a debilitation cast.

>And how OP is BMR in PvP?

Depends on the opponent but it basically shuts down debilitation, and debilitation is a BIG part of PvP (and the game in general). Even match barb fights are just whiff-fests for me, often both ways, without debil. Just work on getting really good at PvP, then just kill your buddies' characters when they poke fun at how much slower you kill. Just kidding... Half-kidding. Do spar. It's fun.

IMO, any guild without secondary damage options (cyclic attacks, AoEs, single shot TM, whatever... the main point is that while they have prep times they don't require a strict dedication to just doing those similar to aiming a physical missile weapon) is at a disadvantage. Past that point, it's all about personal preferences. Maybe there can be an argument where elemental damage as a whole has an advantage because armors tend to lean heavily on the physical side, but that's another issue.

In the end, Barbarians are at a disadvantage because they lack those secondary damage options. Until they can perform secondary damage -- AoE or single shot -- they'll be at the same overall DPS disadvantage as anyone else who lacks those options.

If explicit secondary damage options aren't possible, for whatever reason, maybe one way to help resolve this is to give Barbarians are 1 out of 4 chance to perform a double-strike of any attacks performed (for twice the RT), since that could possibly emulate how magic users can target a TM spell, attack for ten seconds, then cast the spell (the only time RT takes place for the magical attack). Along with this, reformatting whirlwind into an automatically triggering RT-free strike that costs inner fire would potentially be a way to emulate cyclic AoE damage.

Those would help push Barbarians into the same level of DPS capability as magic users.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>I'd add a caveat for dual load and other special attacks (really just backstab). Dual load more than makes up for lacking TM, although rangers can do it better.

Is dual load a really cool way to balance out TM spells being used in conjunction with physical ammo-based missile attacks? Yes, absolutely. But that's also a different beast entirely to being able to do melee strikes with TM and/or thrown missile weapon strikes with TM. I don't think dual load makes up for the fact that magic users can do a series of melee strikes while preparing a TM spell that had no initial roundtime buy-in (like dual load has, which I think is twice the RT as a normal load, right?).

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>So really this is a nerf MU's down to what is considered normal or bring barbs up to what is "normal" damage. The trick here is to figure out what the normal or expected amount of damage is.

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with secondary damage sources. It's just that not everyone has them.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

> Again, the above is an example, I'm sure the devs can come up with something more elaborate. It's the fact they didn't is what concerns me, which one can infer from that MU's damage is a bit higher then what the devs currently want them at.

I don't think you can infer design goals simply by listing what hasn't been developed. Otherwise, you might as well say that GMs want everyone to reroll their paladins and traders.

That's exactly the problem. Barbs have to fight higher level opponents to train, so their primary skill is never an advantage it's just the table stakes for a daily training sessions. Let barbs train 10% longer on a creature than other guilds and problem solved.

>Dual load more than makes up for lacking TM, although rangers can do it better.

Uh, why do Rangers do Dual Load better? I'm not sure what I'm missing here - Barbs can buff more offensive related skills than a Ranger (Str/Agl/Bows, compared to a Ranger only being able to buff Str/Bows or Agl/Bows).

I think I remember Earthquake originally being an AoE damaging berserk but it got shot down for whatever reason and Kodius had to make it into a debilitator instead. And with our limited amount of abilities we can keep up at once I don't know how much use it gets when roars are less costly and achieve the same goals.

I think the auto counter attack is the best way to go to boost barb damage, and to keep it from being OP just have it use the weaker moves like feint or jab, depending on weapon in hand. Since I came back to DR in 2012 I've tried to barb and then sold 2 barbs, I'm on my third one now after taking a break from the guild and compared to my cleric and necro barbs feel weak in the PVE department. I rarely PVP so can't comment there.

To help:
-Masteries are essential. End of story. Why are Barbs so penalized when it comes to these when MU's have access to the essentials so early on? Without the masteries it would be like a boxer stepping into the ring with one leg and an arm tied behind his back. Until you get Tribalist or Powermonger you can't keep up crap for buffs unless you do nothing but spam analyze flame and combos.
-Barbs need to be able to buff more, every other guild (except traders!) can buff more at once, makes barbs look like little kids playing in mommy's make-up.
-Barbs need some way to inflict more damage that reflects the nature of the guild, counter-attacks seem to make a whole lot of sense, like a meditation that way we do actively have to do something to get into the mode (though honestly as THE weapon master guild it should come naturally). Maybe have the % chance of counter attacking go up with melee mastery (or expertise!), have it start at like 10% and every 100 ranks it goes up by 5% or something.
-And like many others have said, a cool unique ability that says "Damn! These dudes are rough when they connect with <super awesome armageddon ability>!"

Disclaimer:
My first barb when I came back I sold him not far into 3.0, he was circle 120 something, my second one was like 65th (in 3.1), this third one is in the low 60's so maybe my experience is on the crappier side because I sold before a lot of tweaks went into effect and haven't gotten to a decent circle since then. But that in itself should say something about where the guild sits right now, when someone that loves the idea of being a Barb can't stick with it.

And with that, it's well past bed time.

>>Uh, why do Rangers do Dual Load better?

By being able to dual-snipe. This allows them to use their primary skillset (Stealth and Scouting, both able to be buffed at 20%, and they have a Perception debuff which just puts the contest more in their favor.) to improve accuracy and damage dealt. It also has the added defensive benefit of staying hidden.

All things being equal the Ranger will do more dps with dual-snipe than a Barb with just dual-load.

I think some of the people here are making false comparisons.

Yes, barbs move up the critter tree faster than other guilds on a per circle basis. No, that's not something that needs to change (it's driven by skillset, not by anything else). Those skillsets are the best combat skillsets. Yes, that does mean that someone in another guild in the same hunting area is higher circle than you. It also means that they likely have more TDPs and more total ranks -- unless you've been training all weapons the way you should have (which maximizes your skillset advantages and slows your progression rather than circle chasing).

Yes, other guilds can kill mobs faster than barbs, due to AOE. So what? Our single target damage is quite high, we can buff a ridiculous number of skills and use them all.

When hunting, I maintain 4 forms at all times, swap my 5th after every kill (e.g. panther for stealth, etc -- obviously dragon swap for eagle when training ranged), 5 berserks and 2 meditations. I could probably maintain a third meditation if I so desired. I do not find my buffs, AOE debil, etc etc to be lacking. I do not find this list of buffs to be behind other similarly leveled MUs, but I could be wrong:

You are currently practicing the Bear Form and will hold focus of it for 42 roisaen.
You are currently practicing the Piranha Form and will hold focus of it for 36 roisaen.
You are currently practicing the Dragon Form and will hold focus of it for 58 roisaen.
You are currently practicing the Monkey Form and will hold focus of it for 36 roisaen.
You are currently practicing the Panther Form and will hold focus of it for 89 roisaen.
The Famine Berserk will rage within you for 8 roisaen.
The Earthquake Berserk will rage within you for 7 roisaen.
The Tsunami Berserk will rage within you for 9 roisaen.
The Tornado Berserk will rage within you for 9 roisaen.
The Wildfire Berserk will rage within you for 9 roisaen.
The Tenacity meditation will persist in your mind for 39 roisaen.
The Contemplation meditation will persist in your mind for 11 roisaen.

Sure, it sucks that I have to cycle forms to keep training I guess? The 5 form limit is a bit annoying, I could maintain more - but I'm pretty happy with the list of ones I have.. I'm looking at adding flashflood to my constant buffs, but it isn't really necessary and makes it a bit harder to maintain everything if I'm not in a melee expertise cycle. I also don't actually need all the form buffs at all times either and it makes decisions interesting at least. To some extent, it balances with the volume of buffs we actually have -- how many guilds truly engage in combat with more than 12 spells active (buffs/cyclics)? Not to mention the expertise buffs (specifically accuracy and damage) that seem to stack with all the other buffs.

Yes, lower circles are significantly harder -- I have every cost-reducing mastery or IF generation buffing (in combat) mastery to keep these maintained. The lower circles, and to some extent extreme reliance on masteries, should be balanced. It's a frustrating gate to have to work through with a younger char -- more frustrating and harder than the camb walls.

Conclusion -- Not going to argue with a buff to barbs, and certainly a passive secondary damage source would be welcome. That said, when it comes to buffs, single-target combat, and progressing through the hunting ladder, we do it best. We might not be the best at farming money.

>>The counter of course is that a guild like Moon Mages or Necromancers (weapon terts) aren't going to be doing significant weapon damage

I still think the circle-requirement-to-combat-effectiveness comparison is a bad one. The fact that someone is X primary/secondary/tertiary is inconsequential to DPS generation. Being weapon (or magic) tertiary is only a hindrance if you're in a rush to have X amount of skill.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>The issue I have is not that Barbs suite isn't awesome, it's that they can only use such a limited chunk of it.

This is probably a bit off of the original topic, but is it really that bad nowadays? There have been a lot of changes and additions with regard to IF since 3.0 that have allowed barbs to put up a pretty significant number of buffs. I don't see barbs struggle to keep buffs up nearly as much as when 3.0 first hit.

I mean, it's unreasonable to want to use all buffs at once because you have access to so many of them.

>I still think the circle-requirement-to-combat-effectiveness comparison is a bad one. The fact that someone is X primary/secondary/tertiary is inconsequential to DPS generation. Being weapon (or magic) tertiary is only a hindrance if you're in a rush to have X amount of skill.

I wouldn't go that far. I'm at a point where it would take me literally years to catch up my tertiary skills (talking about just the ones I've tried to keep close) to my primary skills, and that's assuming I'm able to halt related primary skills from moving while backtraining. If we're talking under 500 ranks, then yeah, you can probably make a solid attempt at keeping inter-set skills close. I don't think you can dismiss skill set altogether, however, unless the skill cap is reduced to a lot less than 1750.

>I believe that snipe isn't a damage bonus, it provides no mechanical benefits to the attach other than staying hidden. Poaching is what tests your stealth against their perception to lower their defenses to the attack and everyone has access to that.

I think it's an accuracy bonus, but that can translate to damage. At least that's how it seems using the eye test, the DR equivalent of the butt dyno. I don't play a ranger anymore and never played a high circle ranger, but it's a simple enough test if anyone wants to give it a shot. Just take an unhidden dual-loaded shot and then snipe and poach one on fresh creatures.