Pacheon/Blade vs Pacheon/Force

[ToMaSs_LTTT]

Just read the Title .

100 cap Job war, FW, GW . CH ONLY

[SnowStyle™]

Pacheon/blade? don't wanna be rude but that build sucks, atleast on vsro files, people r going to use mbot to remove your debuffs quick, beside that I never saw any pacheon/force pwning everyone on a serious server, go with pacheon/force for sure, it's a lot better

[Xardoo]

Some of g.masters really are dumbish, its easy to make p.pill via skill non as pot and automatically fixing that bug, anyway, pacheon/forc.

[SnowStyle™]

Originally Posted by Xardoo

Some of g.masters really are dumbish, its easy to make p.pill via skill non as pot and automatically fixing that bug, anyway, pacheon/forc.

Those dual builds usually sucks now... anyways, it was good on official vers of sro cause noone could afford those pills it was so expensive but now its like hp pots xD

[Callum]

Neither, both builds are pretty bad

[SnowStyle™]

Anyways, if you wanna own everyone on a server using vsro files, use an euro char, chineses sucks there

[_HouseMusicx3]

Originally Posted by SnowStyle™

Anyways, if you wanna own everyone on a server using vsro files, use an euro char, chineses sucks there

Euro chars are easy to kill unless they go nab mode and log in their bot buffers

Best build in my opinion for 100 cap is Chinese force glavier

Heuksal 100 / Fire 100 / Force 100

[SnowStyle™]

Originally Posted by _HouseMusicx3

Euro chars are easy to kill unless they go nab mode and log in their bot buffers

Best build in my opinion for 100 cap is Chinese force glavier

Heuksal 100 / Fire 100 / Force 100

Even without their bot buffers, they can take down a chinese easily, eu die easily if they don't spam vigors imo, with all kb kd stuffs from euro a chinese can't even hit twice in a row so they don't stand a chance

[Eifillity]

Originally Posted by SnowStyle™

Those dual builds usually sucks now... anyways, it was good on official vers of sro cause noone could afford those pills it was so expensive but now its like hp pots xD

Chinese dual builds suck? What drugs are you on?

[ToMaSs_LTTT]

Forgot to say its CH only server.. -.-"
+ Pill bug dosn't work there .

[Eifillity]

Originally Posted by ToMaSs_LTTT

Forgot to say its CH only server.. -.-"
+ Pill bug dosn't work there .

Force has an edge over bad PvP'ers - a skilled blade/glavier will eventually kill you though.

Back to the topic; Force/Bow is better in your situation, getting debuffs on your enemies with blade will take too long/ is easier to deny.

[_HouseMusicx3]

Originally Posted by ToMaSs_LTTT

Forgot to say its CH only server.. -.-"
+ Pill bug dosn't work there .

Go force glavier you will love it

[dimkacool]

Dual builds are kinda strong, especially on ch only servers.
I've got one player bitcheon/heuksal/fire on my server, and it was pure ownage at least in 110 cap.
Tho I have to say pacheon/bitcheon looks.. Well, it's interesting, I'm looking forward to see the progress.

[SnowStyle™]

Originally Posted by Eifillity

Chinese dual builds suck? What drugs are you on?

I meant, on pservers using vsro files chineses dual builds sucks against an skilled european char, he'll cure all your debuffs and get you down/back everytime and will win by a crit and btw, on vsro files, chineses damages are not calculated the same way as iSRO files
On official servers, I agree that dual builds rocks but not on vsro servers, I gave it a try ^^

[Eifillity]

Originally Posted by SnowStyle™

I meant, on pservers using vsro files chineses dual builds sucks against an skilled european char, he'll cure all your debuffs and get you down/back everytime and will win by a crit and btw, on vsro files, chineses damages are not calculated the same way as iSRO files
On official servers, I agree that dual builds rocks but not on vsro servers, I gave it a try ^^

I've tried it too, although I have to agree it's hard to kill a STR with cleric as subclass, they're not able to kill you either. Dual builds (Blade/Glavie as my favourite) are one of the strongest chinese builds (Especially after cap 100)