Zerks

I kinda think they need something, if only because their skill list is so damn short. I never played one so I have absolutely no basis for any of this, except it seems like they are kinda short on options tactically.

Warrior lores aside, I think Zerks have more options than Warriors for a lot of opponents, centering around haymaker/headbutt/cleaving.

In my opinion after playing a few Zerks here and there (and I appreciate that as a rubbish PKer, my opinion is not going to be the best on this matter) I think they are almost fine. And with the recent changes Behrens made, I think they're even better. My favourate class to play, by FAR.

The only problem with Zerks IMO is fighting melees, and even then, I can appreciate that every class has something that can tear it apart. Either try fighting a Warrior or Blademaster with a Zerk? For a class that promotes an extreme output of damage at the cost of defence, you don't see much of that against warriors or blademasters. I once fought Askarran, and afterwards we were both amazed to see that I didn't land a single attack throughout the entire battle apart from the grazes from dirt kick, and cabal abilities. Fighting a warrior with an uncleavable weapon as a Zerk is single-handedly the hardest type of battle I've ever come across with any single character I've ever played, simply beacuse unless you, the Zerk, hold a huge EQ difference over the Warrior, they can outdamage you.

Blademasters/Zerk is more balanced in the sense that the beating you get from a BLM can be quickly reversed with a well-timed haymaker if it drops them out of sanctuary and their stances - the same doesn't hold true with a Warrior who doesn't rely on stances to fight effectively. But even then, fail a haymaker/cleave or two, and things start going down hill thanks to critical strikes and a blademasters ability to be able to remove one of the main tactics of beating a Blademaster - attrition.

I'm not saying that Zerks are weak. On the contrary, I think I had somewhere within the region of 50-60 challenge wins out of 109 with Ultorn. Now, if it's possible for me to have a kill-to-death ratio that's bigger than 1-15, then the class is by no means weak. I can't tell you how satisfying it is to time a haymaker just before someone does a skill that lags them for a round or two whilst raged and watching huge damage land. Monks, blademasters, clerics, shaman, invokers (Want to see an invoker die fast? Pit them against a well played Zerk), battlemages, and so on. My only qualm is how they're balanced against Warriors, as where a Zerk gets rage to boost their damage, a Warrior has fourth attack and riposte to deal out extra damage too - it means that a well-equipped Warrior can keep up with the damage. And raging against a Warrior? You'd better be feeling lucky about cleaving their weapon. Cleave it, you'll love yourself. Miss, and you're in for some pain. Like I said, I can appreciate that each class has something that can tear it apart easily, like a rock-paper-scissors scenario, but where with most, it's an uphill struggle for the disadvantaged class, Zerk VS Warrior with a burnproof is one of the biggest uphill fights I've come across.

But trust me, Zerk isn't just about bodyslam; bodyslam; bodyslam. You need to play agressively in PK, because a Zerk is all about the offence, not the defence. And that in itself is very interesting. Play one, they're great, and IMO they don't need anything new.

I don't even know what the purpose of my long-winded rambling post was, I just felt the need to write something about Zerks.

Dey

You're also forgetting about rangers. I remember I somehow got all of Senrails eq while he just got a ranger staff and used his leader abilities to get it back. I don't even think I hit him. Same thing happened against Martineius I had all of his eq and when he came back at me I could hardly scratch him. Why do I like berserkers again?

You're right, I forgot about them. I remember fighting against Chrim when we were both fairly well equipped and I got soundly trashed. Good melee abilities + pets + archery makes for a world of pain for a Zerk, especially archers who can reduce your attrition capabilities somewhat by shooting you from a distance whilst trying to sleep for ticks. Having said that, being a WM Glad and not being able to fly can make things harder against rangers.

Warrior > Ranger for Zerk killing though, for easier access to command denial abilities.

Dey

I agree with deykari on this one, I also wanted to toss in an idea for minotaurs. I say they should have an innate mastery of dirt kick, I mean c'mon, they are half bull.

Zerks don't need a tone up.

Zerks don't need a tone up.

Agreed.

Dey

I agree with deykari on this one' date=' I also wanted to toss in an idea for minotaurs. I say they should have an innate mastery of dirt kick, I mean c'mon, they are half bull.[/quote']

And I just suppose those hooves are great for getting dirt up in peoples eyes.

Sorry, but that just made me laugh out loud.

Dey

I think vokers need a skill at 50. Nothing major. Hell, move detect invis up to 50. It just makes it all the more sweet to get your final skill at pinn. Zerks are fine, though, IMO.