Celtic Heroes

Which one is the best for going solo. I have equal stats in strength and vitality. Also i am around level 50

Stance is good when fighting a melee/ranged monster
Not against mages
The thing about it is if you have a low armour you can just use it to fight higher level melee monsters
Good for support warriors

Frenzy adds more points into strength and attack
It isn't good when you are fighting with low attacking with low armour
It is good for dps warriors

After level 50 you will have to fight mage/druid monsters more than before but you will fight some melee, I would suggest having them both on a high level.

Josh is mostly right. Though I wouldn't recommend putting points in both...only one can be active at a time, so at any given point, you would have an unuseable skill. Unless you have skill points to spare (which almost never happens ), I'd recommend putting some points in Protective Stance, but then instead of points in Frenzy as well....put them in a damage skill, like pummel/giant swing/double attack/rupture/shatter or whatever else you are using.

Frenzy doesn't give a massive boost, so its effects won't be as noticeable as another higher damage skill (in my opinion, at least).

The reason I recommend stance is because the armor buff can be really helpful. Like Josh said, it depends on what you are fighting...the armour boost won't help against the various elemental skills and attacks, but enough mobs do physical damage that it will outweigh that aspect in my view.

Josh is mostly right. Though I wouldn't recommend putting points in both...only one can be active at a time, so at any given point, you would have an unuseable skill. Unless you have skill points to spare (which almost never happens ), I'd recommend putting some points in Protective Stance, but then instead of points in Frenzy as well....put them in a damage skill, like pummel/giant swing/double attack/rupture/shatter or whatever else you are using.

Frenzy doesn't give a massive boost, so its effects won't be as noticeable as another higher damage skill (in my opinion, at least).

The reason I recommend stance is because the armor buff can be really helpful. Like Josh said, it depends on what you are fighting...the armour boost won't help against the various elemental skills and attacks, but enough mobs do physical damage that it will outweigh that aspect in my view.

Agreed. Frenzy has a huge impact at higher levels and with full strength builds. At lower levels stance improve survival more than frenzy helps with killing mobs.

I don't like frenzy never have. From what I've been told it only adds to auto damage and attack so I'm thinking it would only be good for autoing and wouldn't add anything to skills, and to me a warriors main hand weapons are too slow (the ones I've tried) to do any good dps unless hasted which I don't use. My damage has always come from my skills so frenzy has no use to me, I'd choose pro stance over it any day. Now if frenzy added to skill damage also which I think it should then I'd choose frenzy all the way.

I don't like frenzy never have. From what I've been told it only adds to auto damage and attack so I'm thinking it would only be good for autoing and wouldn't add anything to skills, and to me a warriors main hand weapons are too slow (the ones I've tried) to do any good dps unless hasted which I don't use. My damage has always come from my skills so frenzy has no use to me, I'd choose pro stance over it any day. Now if frenzy added to skill damage also which I think it should then I'd choose frenzy all the way.

Frenzy does add to auto damage and attack. However, some Warrior skills do partially rely on auto damage. Rupture/Shatter initial hits are affected by auto damage, (not the skill effects themselves). Sweeping Blow is based on auto damage, and obviously Double Attack is as well. Not enough for a skill-warrior to need to use Frenzy, but enough for it to be a decent option.

I agree that Warrior attacks are a bit slow. Most Warriors prefer to use hammers, which are usually slower than swords. That being said, auto attacks do tend to add up when fighting mobs, so it's always a decent option...even if it's not one that everyone likes.

I don't like frenzy never have. From what I've been told it only adds to auto damage and attack so I'm thinking it would only be good for autoing and wouldn't add anything to skills, and to me a warriors main hand weapons are too slow (the ones I've tried) to do any good dps unless hasted which I don't use. My damage has always come from my skills so frenzy has no use to me, I'd choose pro stance over it any day. Now if frenzy added to skill damage also which I think it should then I'd choose frenzy all the way.

Frenzy does add to auto damage and attack. However, some Warrior skills do partially rely on auto damage. Rupture/Shatter initial hits are affected by auto damage, (not the skill effects themselves). Sweeping Blow is based on auto damage, and obviously Double Attack is as well. Not enough for a skill-warrior to need to use Frenzy, but enough for it to be a decent option.

I agree that Warrior attacks are a bit slow. Most Warriors prefer to use hammers, which are usually slower than swords. That being said, auto attacks do tend to add up when fighting mobs, so it's always a decent option...even if it's not one that everyone likes.

Ok so couple things here.

1. If you aren’t hasted wither using a haste ring, haste dagger, or haste lix you need to be to maximize dps

2. Frenzy boost to attack and auto damage = more skill damage as pointed out above. Disagree that it isn’t worth using.

3. If wars on your server prefer hammers that’s cool, but there is no decent eg hammer available.

Where I’m from, it’s either spear (mordy) or axe (gele). The only war on crom that’s a hammer nut is me. And Spears and axes are faster than hammers by a bit.

Ok so couple things here.

1. If you aren’t hasted wither using a haste ring, haste dagger, or haste lix you need to be to maximize dps

2. Frenzy boost to attack and auto damage = more skill damage as pointed out above. Disagree that it isn’t worth using.

3. If wars on your server prefer hammers that’s cool, but there is no decent eg hammer available.

Where I’m from, it’s either spear (mordy) or axe (gele). The only war on crom that’s a hammer nut is me. And Spears and axes are faster than hammers by a bit.

1. Totally agree.
2 and 3. The topic is discussing the use of frenzy at a lower level, not endgame. I agree that axes are a good alternative to hammers, it’s pretty much up to personal preference and what gear you have.

I don't like frenzy never have. From what I've been told it only adds to auto damage and attack so I'm thinking it would only be good for autoing and wouldn't add anything to skills, and to me a warriors main hand weapons are too slow (the ones I've tried) to do any good dps unless hasted which I don't use. My damage has always come from my skills so frenzy has no use to me, I'd choose pro stance over it any day. Now if frenzy added to skill damage also which I think it should then I'd choose frenzy all the way.

Frenzy does add to auto damage and attack. However, some Warrior skills do partially rely on auto damage. Rupture/Shatter initial hits are affected by auto damage, (not the skill effects themselves). Sweeping Blow is based on auto damage, and obviously Double Attack is as well. Not enough for a skill-warrior to need to use Frenzy, but enough for it to be a decent option.

I agree that Warrior attacks are a bit slow. Most Warriors prefer to use hammers, which are usually slower than swords. That being said, auto attacks do tend to add up when fighting mobs, so it's always a decent option...even if it's not one that everyone likes.

Yeah actually it works really good with double attack but I don't think I've tried it with any other skill. I can't see it increasing any other skill damage that much in later game tho?

But yeah just like a rogues poison weapon, frenzy is kinda weak early on. Offensive buffs on all classes really need a reworking.

I don't like frenzy never have. From what I've been told it only adds to auto damage and attack so I'm thinking it would only be good for autoing and wouldn't add anything to skills, and to me a warriors main hand weapons are too slow (the ones I've tried) to do any good dps unless hasted which I don't use. My damage has always come from my skills so frenzy has no use to me, I'd choose pro stance over it any day. Now if frenzy added to skill damage also which I think it should then I'd choose frenzy all the way.

Frenzy does add to auto damage and attack. However, some Warrior skills do partially rely on auto damage. Rupture/Shatter initial hits are affected by auto damage, (not the skill effects themselves). Sweeping Blow is based on auto damage, and obviously Double Attack is as well. Not enough for a skill-warrior to need to use Frenzy, but enough for it to be a decent option.

I agree that Warrior attacks are a bit slow. Most Warriors prefer to use hammers, which are usually slower than swords. That being said, auto attacks do tend to add up when fighting mobs, so it's always a decent option...even if it's not one that everyone likes.

Yeah actually it works really good with double attack but I don't think I've tried it with any other skill. I can't see it increasing any other skill damage that much in later game tho?

But yeah just like a rogues poison weapon, frenzy is kinda weak early on. Offensive buffs on all classes really need a reworking.

Like I said, as far as I can remember, it only affects the initial hit for Rupture/Shatter (it won't increase the armor loss of Shatter or the DoT of Rupture), and I'm pretty sure that most people don't use Sweeping Blow (which is directly affected by weapon damage, like Longshot).

There isn't that much of an issue with offensive buffs...yes they are weaker at the beginning, but so are weapons and armor I think that for the most part, the main offensive buffs (poison weapon, steady aim, frenzy) are strong enough to be a decent option at any point in the game, without being op enough that people feel like they have to use it.