Best solo melee class?

[Vivitron]

Overall bards are the casterest of the hybrids and probably not what someone asking for a melee alt is looking for. I agree with Vexenu that they melee better than people give them credit for, that their solo melee is overshadowed by pbaoe/charm if you're willing to take advantage those, and that a duo/trio with another twink melee can be surprisingly solid.

I have a 57 bard twink I have been slowly leveling. I haven't tried much toe-to-toe, but I have mixed in some attempts at fear+melee (although I have primarily leveled with charm or pbaoe). l was able to clear bloodgills while they were still blue using just fear+melee. I have drums of the beast and lute of the howler, though. Harder to justify melee without those: lute illusion gives 40% haste without costing a song and prime hand drum lets you drum dot while meleeing, so you snare/fear/3xdrum. A similarly geared monk can clear it too, I've heard.

I still mix in some fear+melee when charming, but bloodgills stuck out as one good camp that I could keep clear with just fear+melee. I have recently been trying sebilis entrance; I seem to clear faster when I use more charm relative to melee+fear. Planning to try melee+fear in skyshrine while still leveling, too.

[kjs86z2]

melee with a bard pre epic is doing it wrong

[WarpathEQ]

Originally Posted by kjs86z2 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

melee with a bard pre epic is doing it wrong

Someone hand this man a venomous axe.

[Goregasmic]

Originally Posted by WarpathEQ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Someone hand this man a venomous axe.

The DD is nice but it seems past level 20 or so it will lose its steam. When I see 60s with one I cry inside as something like a jade mace probably has better DPS and bards get access to a 10/18 wristsnapper for like 300pp. 11/24 is not a great weapon by any metric at this point.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

At least for levels 1-45 or so, Bards should do well enough if someone wants to melee. This is assuming you can twink the Bard well. It won't be as good as bard kiting, but some people like to melee. I like melee quite a bit personally.

Using my DPS calculator, let's compare a level 40 Warrior and a level 40 Bard. Both have 150 STR, 34% Worn Haste, Swiftblade of Zek Mainhand, and Blade of Carnage Offhand. They are fighting a level 35 mob.

Without Bard Songs:
1. Warrior - 27 DPS
2. Bard - 18 DPS

This is expected, as Bards do not have Double Attack. At 200 double attack skill the Warrior will be getting about 50% more weapon swings.

Bard using Vilia's Verses of Celerity (20% Haste) + Tuyen's Chant of Flame (21 DoT damage per Tick) + Selo's Consonant Chain (~25% slow):
1. Warrior - 27 DPS
2. Bard - 21 Melee DPS + 3.5 DoT DPS = 24.5 DPS

I'm not an expert bard, so there may be a better combination of songs at that level. You can see that the Bard is now only 2.5 DPS behind the Warrior, while also slowing the mob by 25%. The slow during the fight, combined with HP regen song after the fight, should put the bard at least on par with a Warrior in terms of kills per hour, due to shorter recovery times. Plus bards can pull better than Warriors.

Reaver at level 40 would also be doing around 27 DPS on a Warrior. But obviously SBoZ + BoC is much more expensive.

I also realized Lute of the Howler is clickable at 40, going off of Vivitron's post. At levels 40+ you would certainly be on par with a Warrior if you have a Lute of the Howler, even if the Warrior has eyepatch (20% haste). Saving a song by not casting haste song would allow another song to be played for better survivability or perhaps more damage.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I also realized Lute of the Howler is clickable at 40, going off of Vivitron's post. At levels 40+ you would certainly be on par with a Warrior if you have a Lute of the Howler, even if the Warrior has eyepatch (20% haste). Saving a song by not casting haste song would allow another song to be played for better survivability or perhaps more damage.

To clarify, when I said 40+, I was still referring to the level range of 1-45, so levels 40-45 or so. Warriors 51+ will start to pull farther ahead of Bards melee-wise, and they get triple attack at 60. Bards do get better DoTs, but I am not sure if they are enough to bridge the gap. I am not sure how much DPS a level 60 bard can do with DoTs while meleeing.

[Goregasmic]

I mean warrior is known to be the second worst class to level so I'm not sure you'd want to emulate a shitty version of that. It is possible and if someone wants to do that then by all means do so but when you have access to groups/charm/swarming I don't see any reason you'd go that route. The way I see it is like picking a chanter and root rot/nuke your way to 60. You can but why?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I mean warrior is known to be the second worst class to level so I'm not sure you'd want to emulate a shitty version of that. It is possible and if someone wants to do that then by all means do so but when you have access to groups/charm/swarming I don't see any reason you'd go that route. The way I see it is like pcking a chanter and root rot/nuke your way to 60. You can but why?

The utility of a Bard would make the leveling experience nicer than a Warrior. Bard DPS isn't as bad as you would think from at least levels 1-45 or so, and Bards have the edge when it comes to pulling and recovery times.

Some people prefer to level in a way that's fun for them, rather than the optimal way. A Bard with a Fungi + Seahorse Belt + SBoZ + BoC should level pretty quickly in the lower levels based on my understanding if they wanted to melee. It wouldn't be like leveling a Rogue/Warrior. It would probably be closer to leveling a Paladin/Shadowknight/Ranger.

[Goregasmic]

I appreciate demonstrating the fact that it is kind of viable but you're still spending like 150k to turn a class into something it is not really when you could spend a fraction of that and level 10x faster. Or put that money on a class that does the same thing but better.

[kjs86z2]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

At least for levels 1-45 or so, Bards should do well enough if someone wants to melee. This is assuming you can twink the Bard well. It won't be as good as bard kiting, but some people like to melee. I like melee quite a bit personally.

Using my DPS calculator, let's compare a level 40 Warrior and a level 40 Bard. Both have 150 STR, 34% Worn Haste, Swiftblade of Zek Mainhand, and Blade of Carnage Offhand. They are fighting a level 35 mob.

Without Bard Songs:
1. Warrior - 27 DPS
2. Bard - 18 DPS

This is expected, as Bards do not have Double Attack. At 200 double attack skill the Warrior will be getting about 50% more weapon swings.

Bard using Vilia's Verses of Celerity (20% Haste) + Tuyen's Chant of Flame (21 DoT damage per Tick) + Selo's Consonant Chain (~25% slow):
1. Warrior - 27 DPS
2. Bard - 21 Melee DPS + 3.5 DoT DPS = 24.5 DPS

I'm not an expert bard, so there may be a better combination of songs at that level. You can see that the Bard is now only 2.5 DPS behind the Warrior, while also slowing the mob by 25%. The slow during the fight, combined with HP regen song after the fight, should put the bard at least on par with a Warrior in terms of kills per hour, due to shorter recovery times. Plus bards can pull better than Warriors.

Reaver at level 40 would also be doing around 27 DPS on a Warrior. But obviously SBoZ + BoC is much more expensive.

I also realized Lute of the Howler is clickable at 40, going off of Vivitron's post. At levels 40+ you would certainly be on par with a Warrior if you have a Lute of the Howler, even if the Warrior has eyepatch (20% haste). Saving a song by not casting haste song would allow another song to be played for better survivability or perhaps more damage.

now do it for charm killing