Why is Wizard tankier than Barbarian?

General Discussion
08/29/2016 09:24 PMPosted by Strolln
08/28/2016 07:13 PMPosted by BlizzGamer
Tried playing LQ Barb, HT WD, UE DH, and FB Wiz this patch. Wiz is the least squishy out of all of them. I'm not the one to push leaderboards, but I did run GR70+ with all of em, and to me it seems like there's definitely a balancing issue going on. FB Wiz having 2 extra free lives opposed to 1 for everyone else makes a big difference I think. and a crazy ring like Halo of Arlyse. Also as a fan of Barb since D2, kinda upset that the WW set is nowhere near viable. It neither deals out enough damage nor is it tanky. Am I playing it wrong? I feel like the game's balance is still way off for it to be going into maintenance mode.. Idk.


Sounds about right, barbs struggled in pvm d2 too compared to sorcs. Although you could make a nearly immortal barb with the right gear and skill choices (i think it was taunt and integer damage reduction). Damage could never be on par w most sorcs though


What... Barbarians in D2 are naturally way more tanky than Sorceresses lol...

Barbarian: http://classic.battle.net/diablo2exp/classes/barbarian.shtml
1 Vitality point gives 4 Life
They have Battle Orders, which can easily give them a ton more HP, even more than a Call to Arms would.
They have Iron Skin which gives them natural defense.
They have Natural Resistance which gives them innate All Resistances.

Sorceress only have Energy Shield... And you have to build specifically to use that, they aren't one point wonders like Iron Skin or Natural Resistance are.

From personal experience, in PvP most Sorceresses have like ~2k-3k Life... Barbarians have 5k-6k easily. There is a huge difference in their ability to tank, and it's why you constantly see Sorceresses die in Baal runs lol.
08/29/2016 10:36 AMPosted by Kukiri
Why is Wizard tankier than Barbarian?


My question is, why shouldn't a wizard be tankier than a barbarian? Big and stupid does not mean you can stop more damage than small and smart.


But your making assumptions - barbs are stupid and wizards are small.
08/30/2016 12:19 AMPosted by Melos
What... Barbarians in D2 are naturally way more tanky than Sorceresses lol...

Barbarian would still be dead before it got within melee range of a sorceress
08/30/2016 01:00 AMPosted by Steve
08/30/2016 12:19 AMPosted by Melos
What... Barbarians in D2 are naturally way more tanky than Sorceresses lol...

Barbarian would still be dead before it got within melee range of a sorceress


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aqL2KbRiUc&t=2m9s

There are ways for a Barbarian to get to a Sorceress... Like Enigma for starters lol. Leap is also actually extremely strong for BvC builds because the knock back radius is enormous and interrupts casters quite easily.

Check it being used here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOLhO4seMW8

Also, are you arguing that a Sorceress is more tanky than a Barbarian, or just harder to catch thanks to Teleport? This thread is about how TANKY the Wizard is compared to a Barbarian, and in comparison the Sorceress from D2 to the Barbarian in D2. Being able to be more evasive =/= ability to tank.
08/29/2016 10:36 AMPosted by Kukiri
My question is, why shouldn't a wizard be tankier than a barbarian? Big and stupid does not mean you can stop more damage than small and smart.

Hmm well, I don't really see this as some sort of social-justice issue like you're making it out to be lol. It's basically just meeting player expectations for different classes.

When a player picks a warrior class it's because they enjoy playing melee style and expect the warrior class to play in such manner. And when they pick a ranger class, they expect a lofty shoot and dash style of play. Call it traditional gaming conventions or whatever, but it exists.

So when I play a barbarian, what I'm looking for is a tanky melee gameplay as opposed to when I'm playing a wizard, I'm not really looking to going around bashing monsters bluntly all melee-style.
08/28/2016 11:42 PMPosted by seek
Just quit playing, like me.
Devs don't know what the F they're doing. I lost hope for this game.


I think Activision just needs to be obliterated from the face of the earth imo.
08/28/2016 07:13 PMPosted by BlizzGamer
Tried playing LQ Barb, HT WD, UE DH, and FB Wiz this patch. Wiz is the least squishy out of all of them. I'm not the one to push leaderboards, but I did run GR70+ with all of em, and to me it seems like there's definitely a balancing issue going on. FB Wiz having 2 extra free lives opposed to 1 for everyone else makes a big difference I think. and a crazy ring like Halo of Arlyse. Also as a fan of Barb since D2, kinda upset that the WW set is nowhere near viable. It neither deals out enough damage nor is it tanky. Am I playing it wrong? I feel like the game's balance is still way off for it to be going into maintenance mode.. Idk.


The 2 life isnt really from firebirds. Technically, only one life comes from it.

I main a barb and i can tell you why Wizard with a Firebird setup seems tankier.

The answer is: Ice armor with Halo and Parthans.

Take just one out then you become super squishy. Hell, even just play bad ie: stay out of crowded places; will get you killed. The strat is super cheese that all you have to do is stand where its crowded and let the trifecta combo work its magic.

Barbs on the other hand are different. I main a barb and it requires sooo much to achieve something a wizard can do with less effort. Barbs also depend on AoE (its been a long time barb problem) that its really hard to survive without a big pack to either use parthans or use Life sustain from skills.
Because back in the day Jay Wilson kept banging on about his 'Battle Mage', remember? He must have loved his own idea so much... and it's obvious his opinions of the game are still highly regarded in the Blizzard office.
Barbs have been ignored the last few patches, other than nerfs to our group support buffs

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum