On the dps side, for strength based warriors it about 5 dps less then 2h sword, and loss of stun. For agility/strength combo its loss in armor with about the same(or less) dps, comparing to shortsword. Seems now even best longswords are not worth using. They need some boost to become useful. For example add "parry" property to swords and/or better critical?
What's the point of using longsword?
- Thread starter Serge
- Start date
Latest update made longsword even less attractive. Now shiled bonus depend on overall armor, and that make AGI and Light weapon even more attractive, as opposed to STR based longsword. Not even mentioning a new great Light weapon.
Suggestion: Reclassify longsword as Light weapon, may be with some small-mid STR requirement(2-3). Leave 1h weapon only for priests - maces.
Suggestion: Reclassify longsword as Light weapon, may be with some small-mid STR requirement(2-3). Leave 1h weapon only for priests - maces.
Board Troll
Well-known member
- Joined
- 12/04/2016
- Messages
- 525
Serge":1jeodhhf said:
I have to respectfully disagree. The purpose of the reworking of the armor and shield bonuses were to make other builds besides 2h warrior viable.
This has been accomplished.
The longsword is no less potent because of armor and the less potent light weapons become somewhat more viable due to the increased damage absorbsion.
In other words, it made all 3 builds viable options, equally balanced in my humble opinion.
- Joined
- 28/02/2015
- Messages
- 7,584
hand weapon does slightly more damage than before (not much) and many enemies now have reduced damage mitigation, so it is more efficient than it was even not taking into account the shield.
hand weapon also has an added advantage to consider, compared to light weapons: higher damage means you can surpass armor more often. Even if a faster weapon can hit more often, against a highly armored and shielded opponent, the "real" DPS will be much lower, because armor is subtracted from every hit.
Example, to make my point. Imagine two weapons, one hits for 15 each second, another hits for 20 every 2 seconds. Obviously the faster one has a much better DPS.
Now use it on a shielded enemy with armor 20 (negates 8-20 from each hit). The fast weapon is going to hit for minimum damage almost all the time, and will likely do much less damage than the slow one.
So against a highly armored single enemy, 2 handed is great, followed by hand weapon.
Additionally a new mechanic is going to be introduced soon which will favor slower weapons against certain (special) enemies. Can't say more at this point.
hand weapon also has an added advantage to consider, compared to light weapons: higher damage means you can surpass armor more often. Even if a faster weapon can hit more often, against a highly armored and shielded opponent, the "real" DPS will be much lower, because armor is subtracted from every hit.
Example, to make my point. Imagine two weapons, one hits for 15 each second, another hits for 20 every 2 seconds. Obviously the faster one has a much better DPS.
Now use it on a shielded enemy with armor 20 (negates 8-20 from each hit). The fast weapon is going to hit for minimum damage almost all the time, and will likely do much less damage than the slow one.
So against a highly armored single enemy, 2 handed is great, followed by hand weapon.
Additionally a new mechanic is going to be introduced soon which will favor slower weapons against certain (special) enemies. Can't say more at this point.