Warrior Ring Vs. Berserker Ring?

[Russki Niko]

Using a whip, what would be better; warrior ring or berserker ring?

[Jethraw]

I'm pretty sure berserker ring will always be better. Because I'm pretty sure it gives better bonuses than warrior in everything.

[AnImp3HitMe]

Warrior ring gives you a bonus to slash attacks (meaning you hit more accurately)...berserker ring gives you a bonus to strength so you hit harder with any attack style.

 

Warrior ring is much much cheaper...you decide.

[Necrolic]

Warrior Ring gives +4 attack, it's virtually unnoticeable. Berserker can add an entire 1-2 damage to your max hit (depending on how your strength adds up, but at least 1). Berserker is always better.

[Siith Slayer]

Personally I don't care for either but I would get a berserker of the two. As stated before the warrior ring gives a bonus that pretty much does nothing... Berserker ring can either be helpful or do next to nothing as well so that's why I don't really like either of them

[billions911]

if u are using whip, get beserker ring, if using other weapon like granite maul, get warrios ring

[CJ Smiley]

Zerker Ring, strength bonus can be hella useful.

[Mano]

For warrior ring to be better, you need to be hitting less than half the time.

[Necrolic]

if u are using whip, get beserker ring, if using other weapon like granite maul, get warrios ring

 

Wait... what? Warrior's ring helps with slashing weapons, meaning it's useless with gmaul and the like. It'd only be useful with like, d scim and whip. Berserker ring benefits everything.

 

There's also no good reason to ever get Warrior's ring it is pretty much useless.

[AnImp3HitMe]

So has someone on the internetz actually calculated the usefulness of attack versus strength at varying gear levels, enemy defense levels, character stats etc...and done legitimate theory crafting by discovering what internal formulas are being used? Or are people just talking out of their butts when they say stat x is better than stat y.

[Necrolic]

So has someone on the internetz actually calculated the usefulness of attack versus strength at varying gear levels, enemy defense levels, character stats etc...and done legitimate theory crafting by discovering what internal formulas are being used? Or are people just talking out of their butts when they say stat x is better than stat y.

 

It's called an educated guess. +4 strength gives you +1-2 maximum damage. Now consider how little difference +4 attack would make in comparison judging by how little difference there is between how frequently you hit with similar weapons (Dragon Long and Dragon Scim for example, 2 attack difference). Between those 2 weapons I just named, there is no noticeable difference in how frequently you actually hit your opponent. If you kept count, you might notice like a 1 hit difference across 10 fights, but that's nothing compared to an additional 1-2 damage.

[Lost 3nvy]

I think it's all preference ^_^

 

I believe in Attack bonuses haha although some people here said the difference

isn't even noticeable or whatever but I think it makes some difference and I

think hitting accurately and a bit more constantly is better than hitting 1-2 more

damage sometimes. (don't attack me all personal preference! :D)

 

Maybe you should just get both :P

But if you already have the best outfit (or close to it) for strength bonus, go

for more attack bonuses rather than added strength bonus from the ring.

 

Lost 3nvy