View Full Version : Ambidexerity or CA/CS?
Mrith
05-28-2003, 07:17 AM
Ok,i'm savin for Ambidex,got 4 pts so far,I have CS1 and CA1,i could go for the 2nd level of either one of those,but was savin for ambidex,friend told me it is awesome,but i also hear cs/ca are important in pop,wich would you guys go for?
Timmok
05-28-2003, 07:40 AM
I would get CA2-3 and buy a decent 2hander.
gulug
05-28-2003, 08:01 AM
even if i wasnt regularly maintanking raids, id still normally be the tank in exp groups and in those situations, id plumb for as much ca/cs as poss before moving on to offensive dps.
however if youve made up your mind to go offensive dps, then the question is what would be the best bang for your buck. i cant open your magelo for some reason, but given that 2handers are currently giving out the most dps, then id go with 2hander aaxp before ambidexterity. however, if all you want is pure dps output and your happy with using 1 handers ,them ambidex is certianly useful
proteg
05-28-2003, 12:39 PM
Ambidex is a waste. In PoP you eat so much Riposte dmg that one handers can be deadly. Make em hit even more then you add a bit more dmg but you're eating more Riposte.
I am not gonna tell you that you should be filling out Defensive aa's, but if you do groups will find you immensely more useful. If you wanna deal more dmg make a Rogue or a GAR.
Oh on the ca/cs thing, I have heard that CA is great cause avoiding procs is very impt. Having gotten pwned by the Maestro cause he procced like mad and on switching Tanks he laid in 4500 dmg in tap procs in a matter of seconds, you may want to consider it next over CS if you go the defense route.
Haass
05-28-2003, 01:41 PM
The only people that have Ambidex nowadays are people who bought it before PoP came out. Even with ambi, my dual fleshgrinders couldn't match up to the gimpy Windblade.
Don't get Ambi. You'll jump on the 2h bandwagon before long.
Mrith
05-28-2003, 01:53 PM
My weps are cord hilted spike driver in main hand and red epic in off hand,i am almost always tanking for guild/groups and if not MT i'm ST,so i never bothered with 2 handers i know they do more dmg,but not good for tankin,plus i recently sold WB.oh and to see magelo just highlight it,copy it,then paste it in address window.not sure why it doesnt work regularly though
faederya
05-28-2003, 02:00 PM
Is ambidextery worth the 9 aa points?
I perfer too duel wield weapons myself.
Draxus Diablus
05-28-2003, 02:26 PM
I look at it this way, getting the offensive AAs will allow you to rack up the defensive AAs that much faster. Ambi/PB will eventually pay off in the long run.
Haass
05-28-2003, 02:31 PM
Well, it's nice, i'll admit. I did indeed see a difference, I was quadding much more with Ambi than without. However, you've gotta put it in perspective. It is your offhand, you can only put out so much damage out of it, and quite often that damage is single digit.
Is it cool? Sure. Is it worth 9 points? For warriors, I don't think so. I only got it to get Marshall. If you're always tanking for your groups, then defensive AA is the way to go.
Braeorn
05-28-2003, 02:39 PM
getting the offensive AAs will allow you to rack up the defensive AAs that much faster
Not trying to submarine you, but I fail to see any logic in this. Not only is 2H better for DPS, but in PoP I'm almost always switching to it once I have aggro. As someone said, the ripostes are unbelievably nuts against anything thats hitting you 500+. Ambi is only going to make the situation worse.
I would go full CA then CS first. 9pts for Ambi isn't worth it IMO.
If its just preference, then do it ;)
Braeorn
Grendonbb
05-28-2003, 02:49 PM
I did not regret for a minute taking ambidex... but then again I have a lot of aas. It helped to make up a little of the gap between my 2h damage and my 1h damage.. and since my best agro weapon is 1h, I obviously use it as much as I can when I need agro. I would be hard pressed to give an opinion either way, but I do think it is very useful if you do intend to wield 2 weapons.
|
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.