New to Angband, warriors and rogues and what´s up with overeating?!

[Nick]

As Estie says, there is no real balancing of classes or races against each other - Since I've been maintainer they've probably become less balanced if anything. My aim is to try and maximise fun and variety.

As for the overeating mechanic, that has been recognised as overdone; in the latest development version it's been changed so that digestion becomes much faster when full, so at worst it's about 10 turns of penalty.

[Pete Mack]

I just won in 88k player turns with a warrior. On the other hand, I found the Trident of Wrath at DL 40/CL 33 and used it the rest of the game, with occasional swaps to Aglarang. I definitely got 6 blows.
That said, i agree that for HT, 6 blows is nearly impossible, and heavy weapons bring max blows down to a little over 5. But the strength multiplier and extra stats makes a big difference for standard artifacts.

BTW: Best Bert/Bill/Tom drop ever.

[Estie]

My earliest Wrath find was from Wormtongue; more likely event having him drop it than Bert trio, I guess.

As for warrior balance, even the "bad" 2k heal alone makes up for the extra blow (percentage) in the late game; but imagine finding Pain instead of Wrath.

[archolewa]

Personally, I've won several times with a warrior (three or four I think) and never with a mage, despite trying many times. I've only won once with a Rogue, and that was with 4.2.0, before wand recharging got nerfed a bit. So the warrior doesn't feel weak to me, just better aligned with a different playstyle.

I really like the warrior because their high HP gives you room for error. You're much less likely to get one-shotted by a breath because you mistook Kevlax the Many Headed for a young dragon. You're also less likely to get thrown into tough situations by the RNG (i.e. your frostbolt spell fails three time in a row and suddenly a podunk Hydra becomes a major threat because you're almost out of SP and the hydra still has lots of HP).

They're also, paradoxically much less dependent on dungeon drops. Mages need specific drops (i.e. the dungeon books) to become more powerful. Warriors just need speed, resistances, and weapons (and telepathy). Where those resistances are, where those speeds are, and what weapon it is really isn't that important.

I would also argue they're more powerful than paladins until paladins get Heal reliable, and more powerful than blackguards until blackguards get Wolf Form. By the time the other classes surpass the warrior, the warrior is still *plenty* powerful enough to facecrush most things.

In short, other classes may have a higher ceiling of power, but warriors have a much higher floor, and it's the floor that matters until the endgame.

[Saru]

The way I think of it warriors should be weaker compared to other classes endgame than other classes for multiple reasons, but I'll spare you all the tirade

Muscle can only take you so far before you turn to spells.

[wobbly]

I think in terms of reliably being able to win I'd pick warrior. Which is partially just preference and certainly the priest is a contender there. While most classes can win quicker then the warrior, I suspect the average win time is probably better on the warrior then the full casters. Most players will take a long time putting a mage through. Going for a fast turn count on a mage is risky. Its possible, but you don't have much room for mistakes.

[Estie]

Youre all bonkers. A paladin isnt _that_ much weaker than a warrior at the start; just play him as if he was a warrior, except stay 5 levels more shallow, if you must (its very possible to get more milage out of him).

Youll have to buff up with spells before the fight, but after that is done, paladin is as good as warrior.
He will surpass warrior long before 2k heal becomes reliable - basically, after the first couple stat potions when either gets ~3+ attacks with the heavier weapons.

Lategame is no contest, as everyone agrees.