at a loss with this one. Please help

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:51 pm

Ok, gang help me with this one. I am at a loss. Here is the replacement:

13
5
16
5
18
7
6

Any input is appreciated! General Ironcide
Question

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:06 pm

I would go probably either go Lunger with either

13 - 5 - 16 - 11 - 21 - 7 - 11 straight up and train your skills

or go

13 - 5 - 16 - 11 - 21 - 8 - 10 and burn both the DF then SP each once

I would also like to know what others think.

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:12 pm

13-5-16-5-18-7-6 >> 14-5-16-10-20-7-12 LU
Train WL, WT, ST, DF and run it in the initiates to spoil someone's fun.

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 6:26 am

tennisslayer wrote:

I would go probably either go Lunger with either

13 - 5 - 16 - 11 - 21 - 7 - 11 straight up and train your skills

or go

13 - 5 - 16 - 11 - 21 - 8 - 10 and burn both the DF then SP each once

I would also like to know what others think.

We agree with tennisslayer on the "straight up" design.
It is actually a quite decent product.
Most will make it a LU; we would consider BA also.

Don't see much reason for the 8SP10DF burner offered. Just bump the SP to 8 on the first if you want that decise skill.

While we believe tennisslayer's straight up is the probable best option,
if we were making a "burner", it would probably be:
14-5-16-10-20-9-10 (LU or BA)
We believe that Woody first recommended one similar to this.

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Sep 13, 2006 Posts: 1020

My questiion is why run it. I keep seeing all this I would do this and that. Personally, I would recommend sending that down a long walk down a short "dark" path.

For a warrior to be of serious value a wit will combo above 30 is highly recommended. Now some of these guys will say nahh nahh you can have fun running some of these low wit will stat guys, but I guarantee you that they are not running them as primary warriors, or that they have 20 plus mega stat guys out there. Yes those 21 with 17 wit will combos. Now you can choose to run these low potential warriors, but honestly they are going to take you no where.

If you feel up to it, keep him. Just make sure you challenge my guys a lot to help my stats. Otherwise send him back to mama, and get yourself something that will make you excited everytime you send him in.

Grimm

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Sep 13, 2006 Posts: 1020

Oh in reply to BA and LU. You are going to lose to any style that runs offensive. Burner or not.

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Apr 15, 2004 Posts: 2966

Quote:

My questiion is why run it. I keep seeing all this I would do this and that. Personally, I would recommend sending that down a long walk down a short "dark" path.

As far as tourney play goes, almost any warrior with a 21 WL has the potential to do really well in one tournament (Freshman, ADM or beyond) by "busting out".

Basically, the warrior will set himself up at the top of a tourney class and after he has been classified (as ADM for instance) for a particular tournament, he will start training his WL to 25. By a couple rounds into the tournament, he will have a 16 skill advantage over the other competitors at the top of the class. Some number of rounds later, he may have even more of an advantage, depending on what other stats are close to breakpoints.

I, for one, will run anything with a 21 WT or a 21 WL on my regular arena teams. This guy may not have the WT to do great in basic tournies beyond Rookies and Apprentices, but he will do well in regular arena play and has the hope of one "great" tournament some day.

In fact, in most cases, I would rather have an 11/21 warrior than a 17/17 warrior.

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:16 am

Grimm wrote:

My questiion is why run it. I keep seeing all this I would do this and that. Personally, I would recommend sending that down a long walk down a short "dark" path.

For a warrior to be of serious value a wit will combo above 30 is highly recommended. Now some of these guys will say nahh nahh you can have fun running some of these low wit will stat guys, but I guarantee you that they are not running them as primary warriors, or that they have 20 plus mega stat guys out there. Yes those 21 with 17 wit will combos. Now you can choose to run these low potential warriors, but honestly they are going to take you no where.

If you feel up to it, keep him. Just make sure you challenge my guys a lot to help my stats. Otherwise send him back to mama, and get yourself something that will make you excited everytime you send him in.

Grimm

It all depends on why you play the game.

If all that matters is winning tournaments or an extremely high win percentage, than perhaps you should try again. (With the comments by O.A.B. taken into consideration)

However, this warrior can be a successful arena fighter. You say these guys will "take you no where." Fine, but where do you want to go? If I want to have success in the basic arena (Or perhaps an AD bust-out) then he can take me where I want to go. It is all about goals.

I'd run him.

I'd also probably do the non-burner, and I frequently burn.

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 1:44 pm

drdaddy wrote:

Ok, gang help me with this one. I am at a loss. Here is the replacement:

13
5
16
5
18
7
6

Any input is appreciated! General Ironcide
Question

I'd consider making it a brick basher if your arena's set up for it as far as styles to match up against.

17-11-16-5-20-7-8, train to 19-13-16-7-21-7-11, run him in APA/FH, experiment with some weapon/shield combos, I'd try MA/LG early, probably ML with backup MA or WH against heavy armor, HL after he trains up the DF. Ideally he needs some more CN, but a 21 WL can help that a lot. Good luck!

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 2:11 pm

Grimm wrote:

My questiion is why run it. I keep seeing all this I would do this and that. Personally, I would recommend sending that down a long walk down a short "dark" path.

For a warrior to be of serious value a wit will combo above 30 is highly recommended. Now some of these guys will say nahh nahh you can have fun running some of these low wit will stat guys, but I guarantee you that they are not running them as primary warriors, or that they have 20 plus mega stat guys out there. Yes those 21 with 17 wit will combos. Now you can choose to run these low potential warriors, but honestly they are going to take you no where.

If you feel up to it, keep him. Just make sure you challenge my guys a lot to help my stats. Otherwise send him back to mama, and get yourself something that will make you excited everytime you send him in.

Grimm

Hmmmmmmm. We respectfully disagree. This warrior (the 11 WT non burner), managed properly, can and will win regularly in basic.

Is it a tournament warrior? No. So? (Had the question been, what can I make this for the Face, we suspect there would have been a large collection of naysayers!)

If one wants only godlings, one will, indeed, be heavily into purchasing rollup sheets, or DAing habitually. That is simply not as much fun as playing - to many of us.

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 2:16 pm

One Armed Bandit wrote:

Quote:

My questiion is why run it. I keep seeing all this I would do this and that. Personally, I would recommend sending that down a long walk down a short "dark" path.

As far as tourney play goes, almost any warrior with a 21 WL has the potential to do really well in one tournament (Freshman, ADM or beyond) by "busting out".

Basically, the warrior will set himself up at the top of a tourney class and after he has been classified (as ADM for instance) for a particular tournament, he will start training his WL to 25. By a couple rounds into the tournament, he will have a 16 skill advantage over the other competitors at the top of the class. Some number of rounds later, he may have even more of an advantage, depending on what other stats are close to breakpoints.

I, for one, will run anything with a 21 WT or a 21 WL on my regular arena teams. This guy may not have the WT to do great in basic tournies beyond Rookies and Apprentices, but he will do well in regular arena play and has the hope of one "great" tournament some day.

In fact, in most cases, I would rather have an 11/21 warrior than a 17/17 warrior.

We don't think we would go so far as to prefer the 11/21 over the 17/17, but we DO get your point and we DO agree conceptually. We have had some hefty wins, and , more importantly, some great fun, with 11/21 warriors. this one will play fine. (or better)

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Sep 13, 2006 Posts: 1020

Indeed I somewhat agree with you, but many of you who argue such things have several godlings running around. You are not running 5 guys wondering why your winning percent is below 30.

You can play whatever is fun, and I have run sz 17 guys who are very mediocre, but I find it hard to advise someone into running a guy who will go 15-34-2. Expensive? I think if you look at the 10-20 losses you can cut from a warrior before AD, it may even save you money.

Another point what is better, having a guy who takes 2 years to be able to win regularly and then be forced into retirement. Or run a few well designed warriors who will always run the gauntlet with might.

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:36 pm

Grimm wrote:

Indeed I somewhat agree with you, but many of you who argue such things have several godlings running around. You are not running 5 guys wondering why your winning percent is below 30.

You can play whatever is fun, and I have run sz 17 guys who are very mediocre, but I find it hard to advise someone into running a guy who will go 15-34-2. Expensive? I think if you look at the 10-20 losses you can cut from a warrior before AD, it may even save you money.

Another point what is better, having a guy who takes 2 years to be able to win regularly and then be forced into retirement. Or run a few well designed warriors who will always run the gauntlet with might.

I have never had a warrior I consider a godling - well, maybe, I guess I'm not sure what the standard is for one. I have never had a 21/21 and only recently had my first 17/21 (promptly died) and 21/17. If I truly thought a warrior was going to go 15-34 I probably would not run them. However, I think many many, many warriors that are recommended for the DA can have decent records - winning records even with a little luck and attentive challenges and avoids. Some even quite a bit over .500. They just won't TC, have slim chances at a TV, and are not likely to win at better than a .666 clip without a healthy dose of luck.

A .333 win percentage I would DA. The guy listed here can do better than that. I think much better than that.

Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 2:34 pm

Nomad wrote:

Grimm wrote:

Indeed I somewhat agree with you, but many of you who argue such things have several godlings running around. You are not running 5 guys wondering why your winning percent is below 30.

You can play whatever is fun, and I have run sz 17 guys who are very mediocre, but I find it hard to advise someone into running a guy who will go 15-34-2. Expensive? I think if you look at the 10-20 losses you can cut from a warrior before AD, it may even save you money.

Another point what is better, having a guy who takes 2 years to be able to win regularly and then be forced into retirement. Or run a few well designed warriors who will always run the gauntlet with might.

I have never had a warrior I consider a godling - well, maybe, I guess I'm not sure what the standard is for one. I have never had a 21/21 and only recently had my first 17/21 (promptly died) and 21/17. If I truly thought a warrior was going to go 15-34 I probably would not run them. However, I think many many, many warriors that are recommended for the DA can have decent records - winning records even with a little luck and attentive challenges and avoids. Some even quite a bit over .500. They just won't TC, have slim chances at a TV, and are not likely to win at better than a .666 clip without a healthy dose of luck.

A .333 win percentage I would DA. The guy listed here can do better than that. I think much better than that.

Much, much better than that!

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:29 pm

15-11-16-5-20-7-10 WS for arena play.

Train Will/Deft/CNx2, STx2, WTx3 then skills. Could be fun.

drdaddy wrote:

Ok, gang help me with this one. I am at a loss. Here is the replacement:

13
5
16
5
18
7
6

Any input is appreciated! General Ironcide
Question