endurance burn per style

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:33 pm

Given an "optimal" design for each style, what is the endurance burn most to least per style. My thought:

1. LU
2. SL
3. WS
4. BA
5. ST
6. PL
7. PS
8. PR
9. AB
10. TP

Although, I am not exactly sure where BA fits, and not exaclty sure about 6 thru 9.

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:43 pm

I go...
Lunger
Slasher/ Basher
WoS/ Plunger
Striker/Aimer
RIpper, Piker, and TP

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Mar 10, 2008 Posts: 1999

Worst to 1st on my list..

10 - SL
9 - WS
8 - LU
7 - BA
6 - PL
5 - PS
4 - ST
3 - PR
2 - AB
1 - TP

Advanced Master Poster Joined: Jul 15, 2008 Posts: 382

We all run warriors differently, so our opinions will be different. This is what it looks like to me:

10 - SL
9 - LU
8 - WS
7 - BA
6 - PL
5 - ST
4 - PS
3 - PR
2 - TP
1 - AB

Site Admin Joined: Jun 20, 2002 Posts: 1344

I can't be quite as granular as you guys.

But I can group things up:

Good Endurance: AB, TP, ST, PT

Sucky Endurance: WS, LU

I dont really know: BA, SL, PL, PR

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:59 am

I'd also group them:

High Burn: L, WOS
Medium-High Burn: SL, B, PL
Medium-Low Burn: PR, TP, STK
Low Burn: PS, AB

***Slashers may be high (would tend to think so given the other responses), I just don't run enough of them to really know, but long ago when I used to run them, I didn't feel they were at the same burn as Lungers or Wastes.

Master Poster Joined: Oct 01, 2006 Posts: 202

I think the question as stated is a bit hard to answer since using the optimal design and tactic for each style doesn’t make for a fair comparison. Within that scenario you might well get more productive minutes out of a WS than an ST, but obviously the ST would have managed his endurance better than the waste given the conditions. If you were to design 10 warriors; one of each style with identical numbers, dress them in identical armor/weapons and send them out using the same tactic vs. a scum that didn’t go down however, I’d suspect that the WS and LU would burn out the fastest followed by PL, SL and BA. STs and PS would probably last the longest.

In actual arena scenarios I find PL to be the style that I have to tinker the most with due to endurance issues. I generally don’t design PLs to be able to really dish it out so they have to last a few minutes, and since PLs (imo) rely on dodge more than any other defensive style they need a higher AL than their defensive peers. This often causes balancing damage-output with endurance to be a bit of a chore.

Of the offensive styles I think SL’s are the hardest to manage for endurance, but that’s likely due to design decisions more than anything else. RUs that would make decent SLs but with a good bit of endurance, likely from high CN or WL usually end up as LUs on my teams, and RUs with average endurance that can put out some damage are more likely to end up as BAs than SLs. This leaves a small segment of BS wielding mongrels with non-impressive End/Damage that I make into SLs praying for Decise learns, and those are obviously going to have some endurance issues .

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:49 pm

'Tis an easy question for us as we classify them as such

good (minimal endu burn)
AB, PS, TP, ST (but ST tends to "use" more due to the strategies employed
needy (lotsa endu burn)
SL, LU
ok (reasonably decent burn rate)
BA
mediocre (respectable burn rates)
PR, PL, WS

Unchartered Poster Joined: Dec 31, 2011 Posts: 45

Assurnasirbanipal wrote:

I'd also group them:

High Burn: L, WOS
Medium-High Burn: SL, B, PL
Medium-Low Burn: PR, TP, STK
Low Burn: PS, AB

***Slashers may be high (would tend to think so given the other responses), I just don't run enough of them to really know, but long ago when I used to run them, I didn't feel they were at the same burn as Lungers or Wastes.

Mines different but depends on how you typically run each style too.

High Burn: Lu, WOS,SL
Medium-High Burn: PL
Medium-Low Burn: B, STK
Low Burn: PS, AB,TP,PR