BS/INV vs BS/WP need input from the folks who know


Mercator

 

Posted

I need some help figuring out which of the 2 is going to be more fun to level.
I cant figure out if the massive smashing lethal resist, good def, and debuff resistance added to INVs passives will make for better quality of character life than WPs good against pretty much everything combo of high regen, lowish resists and some def that WP brings to the table.
Does anyone have any experience with crap I wish I'd rolled this one instead of that one?
For what its worth I dont want to avoid mobs with psi. AVs with Psi (if it ever comes to that) yes I'll avoid them like the plague, but I dont want to skip any story arcs that have Psi.


Feel The Burn

 

Posted

I haven't looked at the hard numbers on either set. But I can speak with some experience to enemy types and some of the set differences.

/Inv strikes me as a solid set for being tough. There are holes in your armor, Psi being the Major Offender in most arguments. But for those holes you walk away with what I've seen as amazing damage resistance. Coupled with a self-heal you're fairly well packaged in your your secondary. For solo work, Invincibility gives you a aoe taunt with hit bonus.

/WP is like the middle ground between /Inv and /Regen. You lose some of the awesome damage resistance in favor of a well rounded package of end/hp recovery, defense and resistance. This package includes a self-rez (for when mistakes happen) and an aoe taunt that improves your regen.

They'll have slightly different playstyles and unfortunately, something you'll have to experiment with or find someone with direct experience to give you their comparison.

I can tell you, I have a BS/SR that I find is amazing. I don't take damage often, when I do, it HURTS. But i keep a few inspirations on hand for emergencies and otherwise, run my missions at x8. I like a target rich environment. But I do find the allure of Invulnerability enticing.


Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome.
Isaac Asimov