Best focus for 2h and dualwield?

[Odd Hermit]

Let's be real here: there's less than a month left. If you really want to make the styles more balanced at this late juncture you need to bite the bullet, accept some parity and address weaknesses as well as strengths.

 

For example, let's look at dual wielding. Right now, the thing to do for most classes is to take Vulnerable Attack because it gives the DT penetration that the style so desperately needs. Then--two levels later!--you can take Two Weapon Style to offset the attack speed penalty applied by turning on Vulnerable Attack. So, I have to ask: 1. Why not just cut out the middle man and have Two Weapon Style provide some DT penetration in the first place? It's what the style desperately needs and when paired with Vulnerable Attack you could actually deal serious melee damage to heavily armored people without being a rogue or having a buttload of enchantments for once.

 

I'm afraid I can't agree with the characterization of the single 1 hander as a "small" balance problem. 2. I actually think pure 1 handed style is a blight and should never have been offered as a viable option in its own right. That's because straight away you run into the issue where you have weapons that are supposed to be balanced whether they're being used to take up 1 item slot or 2, which has nasty interactions with enchantments that do things other than provide on-hit damage. It's an ugly problem and one that most games don't bother with for a reason. And no, I don't think special enchantments or a special "can only be wielded with both hands available but it totally isn't a 2-hander, I swear it!" tag is an acceptable solution, since frankly i think this game would have been better balanced had they taken on less weapon types to begin with. But I guess if we're stuck with 1 handed style then I think the obvious thing to do is to make the style provide a bonus to both critical and standard damage. It's not a perfect solution, but I doubt we'll ever see one where this style is concerned.

 

As for two handed weapons, they're the one style that seems to get broad approval. 3. Their talent could easily remain the same or be replaced with an attack speed bonus instead if you're committed to giving each style a different bonus. That'd flatten out their spike damage a little bit compared to the old talent but of all the weapons 2 handers are by far the most well-equipped to get by with just their standard damage code.

 

 

1. I think the problem is that DT and DT penetration are too strong right now and they're basically the name of the game. Which is amusingly somewhat historically accurate if what I've read about medieval combat's progression - Stronger armor brought on the phasing out of lighter/slashing weapons and in came the bludgeoning and armor piercing weapons.

 

But it doesn't really work in a game where you're trying to make all options viable.

 

2. I disagree, I think PoE has the mechanics to make 1h very viable and interesting. I think since you have a free off hand, you should get bonuses to spell/ability/item use speed. They could also introduce some abilities exclusive to the style, like Dirty Fighting which could be a conal AoE blind using powder or whatever. It might not get fixed up by release but there's potential and I don't think it should be ignored.

 

3. Yeah, all the damage % boosting talents and enchants make taking higher base damage weapons even more of a no-brainer. Speed multipliers could have similar issues though. I don't think there's a simple solution, just trial and error tweaks/number crunching.

 

Of course, trying to make damage output the same across the board could make things a bit boring. That's why I like things such as the suggested Dirty Fighting ability. Some larger two handers could get a knock down attack from choosing 2h style. Pikes already have their unique range advantage built in. You get the idea - game needs more unique benefits for each weapon and style.

Edited March 4, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Whipstitch]

@Shevek

 

See, but a bonus to DT isn't a separate play style, it's just a bloody damage buff! That's why I tend to think of the 1 handed struggle as a bit of a waste of time, especially when one considers that many 1 handed weapons were rather ineffective in open warfare anyway, with the exceptions being cavalry weapons, things wielded with shields and "1 handed" weapons that routinely saw use with both hands. I'd acknowledge that it's a bummer for Errol Flynn, but maybe he should have thought of that before he opted out of using all his item slots.

 

@Odd Hermit

 

I can't disagree more. You're talking about class like abilities and I'd much rather weapon choice be a largely aesthetic thing.

Edited March 4, 2015 by Whipstitch

[Shevek]

Its not always a damage buff if monster design is done well with high dt enemies with moderate hp and low dt enemies with high hp. That would make create more situational uses for assorted weapons. Bummer for Errol Flynn or no, its a valid, realistic combat style. It should be in the game. It is in the game. It needs to be an attractive choice.

Edited March 4, 2015 by Shevek

[Whipstitch]

When I say something is a damage buff and not a gameplay style I simply mean that player behavior doesn't really change even if there's edge cases where 5 points of armor penetration beats 3 points of damage and vice versa. You're hitting critters with the pointy end and at most you're in a golf bag scenario where you're choosing between 4 loadouts. More likely, you're committing to 2 load outs and one may very well be a shield or ranged weapon swap.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Whipstitch

[Shevek]

Thats silly. This is a party based crpg. Its not all about player behaviour. Its also about party make up.

[Odd Hermit]

 

 

@Odd Hermit

 

I can't disagree more. You're talking about class like abilities and I'd much rather weapon choice be a largely aesthetic thing.

 

 

In DnD and some DnD based games there were "feats" that could grant usable abilities for any class(disarm and knockdown for example) and nobody seemed to mind. I don't see the problem with some weapons getting abilities that are sensible for the size/shape/weight/etc. Some weapons historically had secondary purposes besides just damage output.

 

For example, just copy/pasting from wikipedia:

 

The pollaxe was usually used by knights and other men-at-arms while fighting on foot. The pollaxe has a sophisticated fighting technique, which is based on quarterstaff fighting. The blade of the pollaxe can be used, not only for simply hacking down the opponent, but also tripping him, blocking his weapon, disarming him, slicing him and blocking his blows. Both the head spike and butt spike can be used for thrusting attacks. The haft can be used on blocking the enemy's blows (the langets help reinforce the head to extend the life of the pole shaft), "cross-checking" and tripping him.

 

 

Much more interesting than just a DPS stick.

 

Weapons being merely an aesthetic thing just seems boring to me. I like functional differences.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Whipstitch]

Thats silly. This is a party based crpg. Its not all about player behaviour. Its also about party make up.

Really? I don't think so. All indications are that this game is not Pokemon. Things are rarely Super Effective. The good weapon and style combinations tend to be at least viable against everything and the bad ones tend to be sad against most everything. All I can gather from your post is that you perhaps think it's worthwhile to encourage groups to try and have full pierce/slash/crush coverage be present in the overall group makeup but ultimately I'm not sure I'd even call that sort of strategic decision a real change in play style. It's certainly less marked than say, re-arranging your spell load out.

 

 

 

In DnD and some DnD based games there were "feats" that could grant usable abilities for any class(disarm and knockdown for example) and nobody seemed to mind. I don't see the problem with some weapons getting abilities that are sensible for the size/shape/weight/etc. Some weapons historically had secondary purposes besides just damage output.

 

There's also man catchers, nets and bolas. However, tacking on all-new functionality is likely a pipe dream when the game's coming out in 22 days. If the situation improves at all within the next few patches my money is on solutions that leverage simple math fixes to at least bootstrap everyone into the comfortably viable range. 

 

And, as it happens, the D&D feats and weapon bonuses you're talking about actually did end up taking an lot of flak and there's been a steady movement towards decoupling abilities from weapon choice in Dungeons and Dragons ever since. That's because such things up being derided as feat or equipment taxes that were necessary to make various builds or tactics work at all. You only had so much gold, feats, equipment and actions to spend on maximizing various bonuses so the more conditions you had to meet to effectively bull rush or disarm people the further you got from having the resources to branch out into other tactics. In the end people really didn't like being locked into Combat Expertise, Improved Trip and an expensive Guisarme or a Spiked Chain just for the privilege of being able to trip people. Needing a golf bag of weapons to partake in basic combat maneuvers is sort of a raw deal when the casters can friggin' set people on fire with their minds. 

Edited March 5, 2015 by Whipstitch

[Odd Hermit]

 

Thats silly. This is a party based crpg. Its not all about player behaviour. Its also about party make up.

Really? I don't think so. All indications are that this game is not Pokemon. Things are rarely Super Effective. The good weapon and style combinations tend to be at least viable against everything and the bad ones tend to be sad against most everything. All I can gather from your post is that you perhaps think it's worthwhile to encourage groups to try and have full pierce/slash/crush coverage be present in the overall group makeup but ultimately I'm not sure I'd even call that sort of strategic decision a real change in play style. It's certainly less marked than say, re-arranging your spell load out.

 

 

 

In DnD and some DnD based games there were "feats" that could grant usable abilities for any class(disarm and knockdown for example) and nobody seemed to mind. I don't see the problem with some weapons getting abilities that are sensible for the size/shape/weight/etc. Some weapons historically had secondary purposes besides just damage output.

 

There's also man catchers, nets and bolas. However, tacking on all-new functionality is likely a pipe dream when the game's coming out in 22 days. If the situation improves at all within the next few patches my money is on solutions that leverage simple math fixes to at least bootstrap everyone into the comfortably viable range. 

 

And, as it happens, the D&D feats and weapon bonuses you're talking about actually did end up taking an lot of flak and there's been a steady movement towards decoupling abilities from weapon choice in Dungeons and Dragons ever since. That's because such things up being derided as feat or equipment taxes that were necessary to make various builds or tactics work at all. You only had so much gold, feats, equipment and actions to spend on maximizing various bonuses so the more conditions you had to meet to effectively bull rush or disarm people the further you got from having the resources to branch out into other tactics. In the end people really didn't like being locked into Combat Expertise, Exotic Weapon Focus and an expensive Guisarme or a Spiked Chain just for the privilege of being able to trip people. Needing a golf bag of weapons to partake in basic combat maneuvers is sort of a raw deal when the casters can friggin' set people on fire with their minds. 

 

 

In PoE they can easily avoid that pitfall though.

 

You've got styles and groups of weapons, rather than being too "married" to a single individual weapon type.

[Shevek]

Pokemon... heh, man, that is one deep rhetoric stretch there. Calling for less character development and then likening decusions in party composition to Pokemon... (gotta catch em all? Lol) Well, whatever. Enjoy arguing. I'm going to join more fruitful discussions.

[Osvir]

Instead of making a completely new thread I'll use this to ask...

Are there one-handed flails? I checked the BB quickly to see if there were any in the shops or during character creation but couldn't find any (I seem to recall a Priest of Skaen or someone having a one-handed flail but I may be mixing with one of the IE games and the many encounters).

Reason being: Dual-wielding flails is EPIC (imo, "cool" factor) in the IE games.

EDIT: Nevermind

But hm... no starting flail (ctrl+f "Flail")

Edited March 5, 2015 by Osvir

[Whipstitch]

Pokemon... heh, man, that is one deep rhetoric stretch there. Calling for less character development and then likening decusions in party composition to Pokemon... (gotta catch em all? Lol) Well, whatever. Enjoy arguing. I'm going to join more fruitful discussions.

You're taking this way too hard. People like Pokemon--hell, I like Pokemon--and it's a rare example of a game where damage typing really and truly matters. And it accomplishes that by making damage type and full coverage matter far more than I think people would accept from PoE and also by making access to types highly privileged to various "classes" of pokemon--"bulky water" strategies exist and shape Pokemon in ways that simply do not happen when you switch around which melee weapons your PoE group uses. Pokemon's differences from PoE are illustrative ones and are thus a valid point of comparison whether you're offended by it or not. 

 

Also, the "I don't think so" comment was simply a response to you calling my post silly. Obviously the game is in large part about party makeup. What I dispute is the idea that the game will be noticeably richer if we have two combat styles that involve having one less occupied weapon slot.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Whipstitch

[mrmonocle]

I've found an uber estoc in the games resources, my mind is set now.

[Luckmann]

...any über-rapier? D:

[mrmonocle]

there are a few and one of them is really nasty.

 

OMG, there is one weak but with a lot of enchanment potential (that if they don't add a few nasty enchantments to be generally available).

 

final edit: 2 of all unique rapiers are super omfg!!!!!

Edited March 5, 2015 by mrmonocle

[Sensuki]

Equip an item with the Retaliation property - go fight, lulz to be had.

[Supreme]

So what's the deal here, I am quite confused unfortunately. Is it the damage types?

I understand the whole percentile vs integer deal and why the bigger weapons are way better, but what about the damage types in general?

I am quite confused, people don't want you wearing a spear but they suggest a rapier when it is essentially a minor version of it? Stiletto I might understand, but that one I don't.

And then clubs, that only has a +accuracy but not maces or warhammers?  

[mrmonocle]

Equip an item with the Retaliation property - go fight, lulz to be had.

any idea if they fix anything equipmentwise before the release? Except for the obvious bugs, of course.

[Whipstitch]

BTW, what sort of bonuses do monk fists max out with? I've long been a bit skeptical that they'd really keep up with top flight weapons.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Whipstitch

[Sensuki]

BTW, what sort of bonuses do monk fists max out with? I've long been a bit skeptical that they'd really keep up with top flight weapon

 

Monk fists get a flat damage bonus but they lack the benefit of being able to be imbued/enchanted - so after a while, fast weapons will simply be better. A cool thing for the expansion would be for Monks to tattoo their fists with enchantments or something.

 

 

 

any idea if they fix anything equipmentwise before the release? Except for the obvious bugs, of course.

 

no idea, Josh does that tuning.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Sensuki

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, I was hoping that max level Transcendent Suffering would be balanced against the assumption that high level characters pack seriously spiffy weapons but c'est la vie.

[Doxy]

I wish monks could get some proper weapons.

[wanderon]

Will two weapon fighting apply to monks? (fists)

Edited March 6, 2015 by wanderon

[Sensuki]

It does, yep. So does Weapon Focus Ruffian.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Ruffian? I thought Peasant was Unarmed?

[Whipstitch]

If they ever did include things like a bagh nakh, push dagger, cestus or knuckle duster I'd hope they'd keep them austere.