From the
leaked beta newsletter:
Quote:
Offensive Stance
+ accuracy, - mitigation, - agro
When playing in an offensive (non-tanking) role, the new warrior is granted bonuses to combat, and has a variety of attacks available to them. These attacks have specific uses in and of themselves, which then expand and grow when combined into chains. For the most part, attack chains are only available in the Offensive stance. More on this later.
Defensive Stance
+mitigation, +agro, +block chance, - damage
When playing in a defensive role, the warrior becomes much more able to take incoming damage, and all attacks generate more hate. New counter-attacks become available only in the defensive stance, and then only when equipping a shield.
|
I love how dramatically different these two stances are. The thing that I like most about the offensive stance is the minus aggro. Tanks usually don't have any way to lower aggro and I can't count all the times that I was slated to be the second tank if the MT died and I wound up stealing aggro early and dying. The benefit of reduced aggro while in offensive stance is going to be huge in my opinion.
At the same time, I think that the plus aggro in defensive stance is very important. In previous games you would lose a lot of dps when in a defensive posture (as it should be) but this would also cripple your aggro generation since so much of it was based on how much damage you did. Adding an aggro bonus to defensive stance should help offset this and help warriors to do their job more effectively.
What do you think about the stances?