i never once said botd did more damage then grief, my point is botd+grief is the best pure wwing setup. you're to ignorant to try it yourself. you can use CoA with base str with it to, and you do 5.5k on hand damage with botd



can't you own me man

i have access to many chars, luis having a barb or not means what to me? my account on 8ups is marvel, and it's a FREE ITEM instant level 99 realm, if you think you're shit let's duel

i said 20000 times grief>botd damage wise, but botd+grief or botd+SS works better IMO, in many ways. i have tested it, i have helped other people test it on me, and it hits much more consistently


and no mcm, i was using a 400/40 zerker when i tested

NO

You claim it hits _MORE_ time than grief.

i sure do, the second i saw the beauty that is grief, i wanted to make a max leap, dual wield, coa grief barb. now when i tested this it didn't work very good, not to mention i lacked 35 str for coa. so i tried with beast, and finally botd. beast for zerking is better, and yes it has nice ows/it has str. but botd on hand+grief off hit much harder in the aspect of hitting every click/doing good damage. anyone who wants to try it can't deny it. my team barb is using that setup and not zerking

Time to eat some humble pie, son.

1) You can never hit 100% of the time, cap CTH is 95%. Even a Fallen knows this.
2) 10k AR vs 1k DEF assuming same CLVL gives you a 90.9% CTH.

As far as "trying it myself", how about this for empirical evidence?

My barb using 40/400 GRIEF + 40/270 BEAST alternating with 415 EBOTD + 40/270 BEAST vs level 9 no def no block druid with 17760 life (enough to tank a WW).
Full WW done starting half a screen away and ending half a screen away, 10 attempts for each weapon.



Notice a pattern? I'm going to assume for the time being that you aren't completely oblivious to reality and can actually understand the above chart. If you need your hand held, let me know ok bud?

why would you even think to correct that, i'm saying as far as ar vs defense, the fact is on average the 5% chance to miss isn't evident when i test 200 times

botd+grief>grief+beast, how about me you tortured and menzo go onto iam8up's and test it. it takes 2 minutes to install that patch

get this through your head- i'm not talking about damage. stop bringing up damage, are you that slow? how many times do i need to correct you before you get to my point, botd+grief TOGETHER in a dual-axe barb setup will hit more consistently, espically vs druids, then grief+beast

This post was edited by marvel. on Jul 4 2006 04:23pm

kid whips out fucking excel lmao. and random kids start defending mcm and luis, they start off by saying GRIEF DOES MORE DMG lol, no shit, then lets talk about ias, no shit. randoms don't listen to marvel then, not like he hasnt used barb longer than you have played d2 ><

mid summer, do not correct my grammar or usage of commas

ill stand by the fact botd+ss for melee, or botd+grief for vs all is better then grief+beast. you can't use 2 griefs without raising stats, and i feel it's weak vs druids, and the ar is terrible for the most part to

i beat you on qq-apeliotes in the same game as martin and some other people (jordan maybe?) martin also dueled you that game, and if i had qq-apeliotes, that means he had qq-sub.

menzos barb execrate had probably the highest damage ive ever seen on a dual wield barb

wasnt me paht. was alex on my acct.

http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm

It seems logic, reasoning and all the evidence in the world won't convince this guy. Oh well, have fun with your sub-par barbs Marvel and friends.