>>So, to recap, size restrictions, giving up offense and
>defense
>>of a dual wield, increased chance of getting hit if you are
>>unsuccessful which is determined by a nebulous gear factor
>>like cranial only more so since your helm factors in, and
>>hurting yourself. Why do you think you *would* use it when
>>lasher makes lash reliable (plus -morale)?
>>
>>Tac
>
>
>1. Flails and whips do not parry well, orcs do not dodge
>well, and I think the drop from most other weapons to whip is
>greater than the drop from offhand-wield to no offhand-wield.
>So I think in some cases I might prefer mace and banner over
>whip, offhand, and lash.

Feel free to try it. Your defensive drop doesn't matter as much, since you don't defend. But again, I'll let you prove me wrong. Also, assuming you will have a banner at any given time is faulty. The choice is not between mace/banner and whip/axe, but between whip/axe and mace/nothing.

>2. I was really thinking shaman in particular and I prefer
>maces to whips.

I'm not sure what this means. You'd rather use a mace vs a shaman vs a whip vs a shaman? What does it matter? Maces are heavier = more likely to drop, and headbutt (again AFAIK) isn't permalag, so how is headbutt better than lash?

>Also, as a couple side notes:
>
>3. I do not see how the Horde is "useless" like you said in
>your goodbye thread.

It's addressed in the assemble/rally post.

>4. I'm not sure of your character list other than Tac
> outlander fire dagger/exotic?? - I think we played together)
>and a couple orcs. And I vaguely remember that you favor
>low-defense-extreme-offense type builds. Am I correct in
>saying that Thrunna was your most successful character,
>PK-wise to date, in terms of PKs and PK ratio? If so, don't
>you think it's a little inconsistent that you're claiming orcs
>suck in PK and need all these powerups?

Tac was Outalander exotic hands and nothing. He never chose a second spec.

Srithra was the other orc. Skruggra. I'm not interested in playing e-peen with character lists. Mine sucks, so I'll bet you'll win. Just because I enjoy playing orcs doesn't mean I enjoy low-defense/high offense builds in general. Thrunna was my most successful orc to date, yes. Pk-wise at hero in general? Certainly. PKs, sure, by 5-10 total wins. Pk Ratio? No. Kehade was 50-2 or 50-3. Most of my characters look more like Srithra, ~40-7 pre-hero, then... disaster.

No, I don't think it is inconsistent. Especially since I don't think orcs suck at pk. Pre-hero, they are in fact disgusting. I'm betting I could pull a Shura with a level 35 Shig-ru.

I've said in the past that they suck at HERO pk, and that has been true at many times in the past. It has been shown (at least under some circumstances) that Maumlauk is viable at hero. I believe I've shown Shig-ru as viable. I haven't seen Mundugu or Skuggra as viable, but I haven't played one since the most recent changes.

Now while I can't imagine how either on of those could do well at hero (they appear to lack anything offensively to make them frightening), regardless of changes, I chose not to make any comments about them because I just don't know. I haven't played one.

The point of the whole thread is not to say, orcs suck, please make headbutt lag 5 rounds and never miss, but rather to say, "Headbutt sucks. I just played one of the most successful orcs to date and found it useless. If you think that headbutt is a skill that should be used, it needs to be changed, here is the manner I would suggest."

Tac