Hey folks.

I main Druid and am looking to alt a melee to be bale to actually kill people and be in the middle of it.


Initially I was planning to roll spear hero for this. However, I have been recommended to roll BM instead numerous times now by different players. The reason usually given is that BM has higher DPS and better tools to be a DPS, while Hero is seen as a peel bot.


How accurate is this in reality ? When I watch videos of hib melee trains, spear heroes seem to do quite well.
So what is the actual difference in numbers ?
Is it actually significantly better to run more BMS than heroes in a melee train ?


The set group I play with consists of a hero, BM , warden and bard.
I am not looking for answers like '' hero is betetr for peels, bm better for dps'' without any reasoning behind it.

In my opinion both are good, both do the job quite well, one is slightly more offensive and will be prefered in tank grps (BM) the other is a lil bit more defensive and will be prefered in mage or hybrid grps (Hero).

A hero in a mage grp or a hybrid grp will be able to sustain more damage in the front line and less likely to die when over extending a bit, and will be more reliable as a peeler.

A Blademaster will do more damage in the tank train.

That's pretty much it imo

Aryl wrote:
A Blademaster will do more damage in the tank train.

By how much though ?

Id like to be bale to rationalize this decision somehow :[

bm better peeler but their health bar moves 7% per hit

Nemi wrote:

Aryl wrote:
A Blademaster will do more damage in the tank train.

By how much though ?

Id like to be bale to rationalize this decision somehow :[

Against groups running PBT BM dmg is pretty noticeable compared to hero due to swing speeds and being able to break bubbles consistently. On groups without pbt it is best to have both BM and Hero due to BM having rear snares for staying on targets, but if all you had were heros you would be fine on damage (assuming LW as Annihilation spam is just superior to CS for damage). BM Triple wield if used properly can also add some nice extra damage that hero doesn't have access to (moose=defense cooldown so no help in dmg category).

Other variables that could factor in for min/max purposes are: weapon selection - Hero if he goes LW could do slash or crush dmg whereas BM will be locked into Thrust / Slash / Crush, which isn't huge but if you know armor type weapon weaknesses swapping weapons on hero helps out.

Falken wrote:

Nemi wrote:

Aryl wrote:
A Blademaster will do more damage in the tank train.

By how much though ?

Id like to be bale to rationalize this decision somehow :[

Against groups running PBT BM dmg is pretty noticeable compared to hero due to swing speeds and being able to break bubbles consistently. On groups without pbt it is best to have both BM and Hero due to BM having rear snares for staying on targets, but if all you had were heros you would be fine on damage (assuming LW as Annihilation spam is just superior to CS for damage). BM Triple wield if used properly can also add some nice extra damage that hero doesn't have access to (moose=defense cooldown so no help in dmg category).

Other variables that could factor in for min/max purposes are: weapon selection - Hero if he goes LW could do slash or crush dmg whereas BM will be locked into Thrust / Slash / Crush, which isn't huge but if you know armor type weapon weaknesses swapping weapons on hero helps out.

Ah Falken, thanks for some input.

Hero would go spear if i played one. the growth rate difference between spear back snare and LW annihilation is 20%.

Nemi wrote:
Ah Falken, thanks for some input.

Hero would go spear if i played one. the growth rate difference between spear back snare and LW annihilation is 20%.

Yeah, spear is better for peeling due to back snare, and it also has decent growth rate styles but not nearly as easy as annihilation spam. Both options can work, just depends what you are trying to accomplish. If you go LW you would likely go blades and use the side snare there to help peel, but for dps just Annihilation spam while swapping to Slash or Crush based on armor type you are hitting.

For dmg you would use the CS side spear style, so the dmg difference isn't as huge as spamming back snare, but yes from a rear positional style its 22% according to my sources.

If you already got a hero and a bm in group, a second hero will add almost no extra utility while a second bm will add more damage. tank groups usually try to have one shield tank to guard and slam and fill up with light tanks for damage. adding more shield tanks will not gimp a group but its not optimal.

I dont think it matters that much in 1.65 and is a matter of preference. With new RA-charge, bm was clearly superior since a train of un-cc-able bms could hurt tremendeously at the beginning of a fight.

Main Pro bm point: higher constant damage output, especially when triple wield is considered, and even against bladeturn.

Main Pro Hero point: bigger Burst damage when an assist train of several LW/Spear Heros hits home, might kill an enemy before a (slow or mezzcasting) healer can react.


Secondary a hero is of course more sturdier than a bm,
Tertiary scale is much more expensive than Reinforced armor

shield spec for slam should be available in both classes (ofc bm could also go splitspec pierce blade or so for no shield but +dmg vs chain healing classes AND light tank melees, if you have a reliable slammer already)

Uzkrak wrote: With new RA-charge, bm was clearly superior since a train of un-cc-able bms could hurt tremendeously at the beginning of a fight.

Thank you for your reply!

How does 1.65 charge function exactly ?

This charge here is a 10 sec sprint without endurance cost...while you can still be stunned, mezzed , rooted etc. ... might help when your bard eats dirt or generally sucks with drums
Ofc bms also have flurry which helps bursting every now and then.
But it is only logical that a light tank is a bit more offensive than a heavy tank, which is in exchange more heavy

I personally think BM is better all around. Survivability difference IS BARELY noticeable. BM DPS output is definitely noticeable. Triple wield gives add dmg and cant be crit on. Back snare, prevent flight much more likely to proc, duel wield pops PBTs easily.

BM is better all around. They can perform ANY function the hero can and do it just as well if not better.

Trust me roll a BM.

Please keep us informed about your decision

Zintair wrote:I personally think BM is better all around. Survivability difference IS BARELY noticeable. BM DPS output is definitely noticeable. Triple wield gives add dmg and cant be crit on. Back snare, prevent flight much more likely to proc, duel wield pops PBTs easily.

BM is better all around. They can perform ANY function the hero can and do it just as well if not better.

Trust me roll a BM.

Except when you See all those Bm vids where the bms hotswap their shield all the time.

Evry time they want to slam, they waste 2-3 seconds, a hero would not lose.

And that is when evrything goes right!

You really should consider if you are able to do that in the heat of a fight, where you Adrenalin is rushing and your Fingers get clumsy

Kaziera wrote:

Zintair wrote:I personally think BM is better all around. Survivability difference IS BARELY noticeable. BM DPS output is definitely noticeable. Triple wield gives add dmg and cant be crit on. Back snare, prevent flight much more likely to proc, duel wield pops PBTs easily.

BM is better all around. They can perform ANY function the hero can and do it just as well if not better.

Trust me roll a BM.

Except when you See all those Bm vids where the bms hotswap their shield all the time.

Evry time they want to slam, they waste 2-3 seconds, a hero would not lose.

And that is when evrything goes right!

You really should consider if you are able to do that in the heat of a fight, where you Adrenalin is rushing and your Fingers get clumsy

A) Hero should also swap shield and lw
B) in the beginning it is clumsy but you get the routine after some time