It has been a very long time since I last played the game and I'm wondering which of the following specs is truly going to be the best in Uthgard's relaunch.

50 DW / 50 Slash / 28 Parry

vs

50 DW / 36(+-) Slash / 42 Shield / 19(+-) Parry

So far from these boards, people seem to prefer the Slam variant. I do recall however in this era, that the 50/50 build did superior damage with it's 50 slash anytimer chain, enough damage that you wouldn't really need to slam a target to be able to kill it since you'd hit so insanely hard with a strong template and decent realm rank.

Having spoke to quite a few of the mercs that were considered top tier around 2003, they mostly agree that the 50 weapon spec is the stronger of the two, outside of particular setups. But as I said, so far this forum would seem to disagree, at least from the few threads I've found on the matter.

Discuss!

Almost no one in 2003 bothered to slam.

The only thing 50 slash gets you is the Amethyst Slash -> Diamond Slash chain. Which except for the 2nd style isn't all that.

Sure its a little better than what you can do from DW any time, but Slam is so powerful. Once you slam you can use the DW side chain which is better than the slash chain and your opponent is out for 9 seconds.

Only disadvantage to 42 shield is the manual swap.

I will be going:

44 Thrust, 42 shield, 47 DW, 8 parry (with full AT points)

Bit strange, but i want slam, and the 27 second snare from thrust. Sure i miss a little wpnskill from not going 50 DW but make up for it with ability to peel for groups effectively when needed with slam and snare. This is best utility spec i see, and with thrust weapons you also are good v mid support and neutral to hib support so when you are DPS you can still do dmg effectively.

I might swap when i get PF depending how good it is to get out of 44 thrust.

Connavar wrote:I will be going:

44 Thrust, 42 shield, 47 DW, 8 parry (with full AT points)

Bit strange, but i want slam, and the 27 second snare from thrust. Sure i miss a little wpnskill from not going 50 DW but make up for it with ability to peel for groups effectively when needed with slam and snare. This is best utility spec i see, and with thrust weapons you also are good v mid support and neutral to hib support so when you are DPS you can still do dmg effectively.

I might swap when i get PF depending how good it is to get out of 44 thrust.

I have heard some arguments that thrust weapons aren't "slow" enough to get full utility out of the damage that mercs can do, how do you feel about the weapon choices for thrust at this patch level?

I think 99% of the videos I watch of mercs on Uthgard or other classic style servers they are typically using DW styles (Flank/Shadow's Rain/Dual Shadows) with maybe an anytime ability in there somewhere.

Personally it seems to me weapon choice comes down to which enemies you will be encountering the most of due to armor types.

You might be right about thrust potential dmg for Merc.
In another hand, having bonus vs mid chain mail and neutral vs all hib cant be bad neither.
But yes, regarding my memories of uthgard 1.0, many mercs were crush spec

Can anyone confirm whether when using DW styles on merc, you always use STR as dmg modifier? For some reason i thought it would depend on the weapon you use (i.e. if you use thrust wpns its str/dex) Obviously if i use a thrust style it will then be str/dex, but if i am using only DW styles its only str, even if i am dual wielding thrust wpns?

This will decide if i choose highlander or saracen for launch =p

Thoughts on thrusting saracen build vs crush/slash highlander?

Connavar wrote:Can anyone confirm whether when using DW styles on merc, you always use STR as dmg modifier? For some reason i thought it would depend on the weapon you use (i.e. if you use thrust wpns its str/dex) Obviously if i use a thrust style it will then be str/dex, but if i am using only DW styles its only str, even if i am dual wielding thrust wpns?

This will decide if i choose highlander or saracen for launch =p

I *believe* and always thought, that DW style base damage is based on the damage type you use, so slash/crush= str, thrust=dex.

For armsmen with pole it's different, pole=str always, regardless of damage type!

Maybe someone can confirm this, I always was sure about this but now got uncertain

Thinking about the same spec like you mentioned: 44 thrust / 47 dw / 42 shield / rest parry... looks really good on paper and I always wanted to play a saracen merc with thrust/shield

HolySpartan wrote:Thoughts on thrusting saracen build vs crush/slash highlander?

Pro Saracen with thrust:
- high dex => higher chance to land slam, higher damage from slam, higher evade/block/parry rate
- snare combo
- damage type good vs. mid chain, neutral vs. all hib
- less prone to str debuff (assassin poisons!)
- style!

Pro Highlander with crush/slash:
- higher con (if you get hit and while solo...)
- higher wf due to str (maybe more important while soloing)
- needs only str buff to increase samage (if you use pots while soloing)
...thats it

double post sorry!

Pro Highlander with crush/slash:
- damage type good vs. hib reinforced , hib leather neutral vs. all midgard armors (crush)
- damage type good vs. hib scale and mid studded (slash)
- 5% more cold resist

and most importantly you only lose 10 str + dex value compared to a saracen, which means you can change your mind and go any weapon type you want without losing much damage.

Pro Saracaen
- 5% more heat resist

Highlander, in my opinion, is definitely the better merc for group or solo. Thrust dmg is str/dex, so you're only losing a differential of 10 if you decide to go thrust on your highlander. You lose some defense from lower dex, but you have 3% crush racial (anyone who can spec crush will spec crush in midgard) and 5% cold (RM dmg). The saracen 3% thrust racial will be utilized very minimally and 5% heat is worthless for a merc.

So, a highlander sacrifices a small amount of defense, but he will have better hits, racial defense, and unnoticeable thrust damage difference from a saracen due to str/dex modifier.

That being said, these variables are minimal so go with the race you think looks the best, but all things equal, a highlander will outperform a saracen once the numbers are crunched.

Konnig wrote:Highlander, in my opinion, is definitely the better merc for group or solo. Thrust dmg is str/dex, so you're only losing a differential of 10 if you decide to go thrust on your highlander. You lose some defense from lower dex, but you have 3% crush racial (anyone who can spec crush will spec crush in midgard) and 5% cold (RM dmg). The saracen 3% thrust racial will be utilized very minimally and 5% heat is worthless for a merc.

So, a highlander sacrifices a small amount of defense, but he will have better hits, racial defense, and unnoticeable thrust damage difference from a saracen due to str/dex modifier.

That being said, these variables are minimal so go with the race you think looks the best, but all things equal, a highlander will outperform a saracen once the numbers are crunched.

Highlander may be the better option if you go DW only (no shield), but wouldnt the higher dex/qui of Saracen make up for it due to (slightly) increased evade/parry/block chances, and the higher weapon power with shield (=>slam) if you want to got 42 shield?

Plus, some thrust resist cant be bad either, as merc wears chain... on the other hand, chain is resistant vs. crush anyways

Onze wrote:

Konnig wrote:Highlander, in my opinion, is definitely the better merc for group or solo. Thrust dmg is str/dex, so you're only losing a differential of 10 if you decide to go thrust on your highlander. You lose some defense from lower dex, but you have 3% crush racial (anyone who can spec crush will spec crush in midgard) and 5% cold (RM dmg). The saracen 3% thrust racial will be utilized very minimally and 5% heat is worthless for a merc.

So, a highlander sacrifices a small amount of defense, but he will have better hits, racial defense, and unnoticeable thrust damage difference from a saracen due to str/dex modifier.

That being said, these variables are minimal so go with the race you think looks the best, but all things equal, a highlander will outperform a saracen once the numbers are crunched.

Highlander may be the better option if you go DW only (no shield), but wouldnt the higher dex/qui of Saracen make up for it due to (slightly) increased evade/parry/block chances, and the higher weapon power with shield (=>slam) if you want to got 42 shield?

Plus, some thrust resist cant be bad either, as merc wears chain... on the other hand, chain is resistant vs. crush anyways

Again, the way defense works, the extra dex a saracen gets is so minimal it's barely noticable at lvl 50. only around an extra 2% to your defense. the racial resists, extra hits, and higher wpn skill from a selection of 3 dmg types rather than just 1 again make the highlander better for people who want to min/max. The same reason kobolds make bad savages. Yes they have high dex, but it only give's them about a 2% def bonus over troll at 50 and they lose massive wpn skil/dmg that the troll has.

Play the race you want, but saracen is sub-par to highlander as thrust spec. You might also get bored as thrust, it's nice to have 3 dmg types open. play the race you want though, it's better to enjoy the toon you're looking at then to worry about his performance.

If you're going thrust there really is no wrong race (save avalonian). Highlander does afford you the option of changing specs when you want. I usually go saracen just because I'm always thrust and I hate kilts. Keeping in mind thrust is (str+dex)/2 you only lose 5 points going HL, Briton, or even Inconnu.

Now if you're pure min/max, the Saracen racials make up for the con. That 5% heat will mean a lot vs hibs and 3% thrust will take the edge off your chain vulnerability.

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk

And don't go to the without slam please.

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk