- Chambers against crushtroughs should work.If only high str can use crushthrough weapon,then it will be very slow.People will learn chambers against this weapon,and it will be useles.So if to do it in this way,chambers should not work.
If only high str can use crushthrough weapon,then it will be very slow.People will learn chambers against this weapon,and it will be useles.So if to do it in this way,chambers should not work.I think half of the whole plan is tat crushthrough shouldn't be that big of an advantage so that people who know how to chamber can take out a crushthrough guy easily
I think half of the whole plan is tat crushthrough shouldn't be that big of an advantage so that people who know how to chamber can take out a crushthrough guy easilyIndeed.
Indeed.Advantage against mauls should have people who is good in moving and timing,as it works now.
Crushtrough is a fun class to play, but it needs to be less accessable and powerful. It also needs better counters.
Advantage against mauls should have people who is good in moving and timing,as it works now.
Why shouldn't the morningstar have a bonus against shields? Then it'll be back to pretty much just axes being good against shields.Morningstar used to be crushtrough without bonus against shields.
If only high str can use crushthrough weapon,then it will be very slow.People will learn chambers against this weapon,and it will be useles.So if to do it in this way,chambers should not work.
Chambers take more skill than overhead crush spamming, therefore it should work. Chamberblocks SHOULD render a crush useless.You dont understund what you are talking about.Chambers are not so hard to do,and when you will have posibility to chamber crush,maul will become useless.Unskilled shielders will just spam overhead,and skilled will do chamber every maul overhead.Now you will say that chamber isnt easy,but when you will have posibility to chamber crush,you will learn it and understand,that its quit easy.While maul vs shielder fighting,trust me,is much more hard to protect yourself against 1h 150 skill feinting then from great maul overhead,because 9 weigh does not allow you to dodge,and having 9 weight shield with proper footwork allow you to block this maul,or strongly reduce the crush damage.I cant understund why people are complaining if in native we had same maul with same stats but cheaper.
The maul is lots slower in Native. As I've said before, I can spam a mauler in Native every time they go for an overhead. In cRPG, against someone who doesn't suck and didn't go derpaherpa-full-strength-build, it's not possible.
Hi guys, Magikarp here :wink:
I've recently heard that crushtrough is getting removed from the barmace and long iron mace, I couldn't agree more!
But!:
Why remove it from cRPG in the first place? My post will be about the morningstar.
Current problems with crushtrough:
- All blunt weapons, giving knockdown and high damage, biggest mistake ever.
- Crushtrough too frequent, even on low ps.
- Crushtroughs go trough chamber blocks
- Too much whine about it
Fixes, according to my plan
- Remove crushtrough from blunt weapons, except great maul and polehammer.
- Nerf Morningstar damage to 35 pierce, remove bonus against shield, give it crushtrough back and make the cost equal to great maul.
- Make crushtroughs less frequent against higher ps opponents
- Make crushtroughs impossible for low strength characters, only for high ones (full str preferably)
- Make heirlooms a necessary thing to give it crushtrough traits (Morningstar)
- Chambers against crushtroughs should work.
This in my opinion would be more balanced. Instead of the rash decision to remove it entirely.
Thanks for reading!
~Magikarp
I spammed phyrex few times, so it's possible.
The maul is lots slower in Native. As I've said before, I can spam a mauler in Native every time they go for an overhead. In cRPG, against someone who doesn't suck and didn't go derpaherpa-full-strength-build, it's not possible.But you have agi build,no?Means you have high athletics,and you have german great sword that have only 2.5 weight,means you can keep the distance and spam/feint maul to death.
But you have agi build,no?Means you have high athletics,and you have german great sword that have only 2.5 weight,means you can keep the distance and spam/feint maul to death.
Crushtrough is a fun class to play, but it needs to be less accessable and powerful. It also needs better counters.
The same could be said of shielders: I see a lot of people going shielder nowadays and it has few counters. A dedicated shielder is impervious to arrows and bolts. They also have a massive advantage against 2h/polearm users; they don't have to manual (directional) block! This means that feinting is ridiculously easy, because they only need to think about the direction of their attack and don't need to worry about the direction of their opponents attack. With most shields they'll be as fast as a 2h/polearm user (usually faster; most shields except huscarl have close to 100 speed and the better 1h weapons have 97+ speed, while the better 2h have 92 speed) and don't really need to worry that they've got 20 less range - after all, how long does it take someone to close that 20 unit distance? It's barely enough for one well-timed swing, which is easily autoblocked.
Which brings me to my point: aside from throwing (well, sort of; with enough projectiles their shield breaks) and cav, shielders have only two other weaknesses; axes and crush through. An axe will take at least 4 or 5 swings to break a decent shield, which is usually played out as a swing while they're out of range and then the occasional lucky swing between their numerous, fast feints. Then, if you get that far, the shielder is now without their shield and are essentially a 2h (side sword has the same length of a katana, one less speed and similar damage) with full health, while you're down to whatever they've taken off already.
Crush through should force shielders to deshield (for fear of the crush through). As it is, crush through is only reliable with great maul vs shielders and only works against crap shielders. Any decent one can take out a maul user. An heirloomed bar mace works ok, but do we really have to retire just to have a chance against shielders?
I think the heirloomed +weight of crush through weapons should be removed. This will stop them being crap when unheirloomed and OP when heirloomed. Then, I think the formula for crush through should be altered; make it much less likely to crush through when someone blocks with a weapon, but much much more likely (with an unloomed bar mace) to crush through a shield. Either that, or simply make shields have as little HP as they did in native (where 2-3 hits with a heavy axe would break it).
The only problem with this is when a shielder puts their shield away when a crush through (slower, short length) weapon comes out, only to put it away as soon as a better weapon comes out. Oh well.
As it is, crush through seems about the only advantage to playing a 2h. Without it, 2h is outranged by cav, outranged (and outswung) by polearms, is shot up by ranged and is turtled to death by shielders (unless many 2h with axes gank a shielder, but I believe in balancing for 1v1).
trololol. Unequip shield and fight like inferior 2h that wasted gold for shield and wasted skillpoints for it ? U mad bro ?
Besides, some shields already require skill to use, bucklers and cav shields are examples.
Buckler requires skill? Against ranged it isn't great, against melee it's the same as any other shield (though it does break quickly from an axe at least).
I can beat 2h and polearm users in a duel without a shield on my 1h alt as easily as I can with my 2h. The only way I'm limited without a shield is I don't do as well in big brawls (2h have the range to stay back, but a 1h without a shield can get killed easily in a big group fight).
If you think it's so ridiculous, how do you propose 2h/polearms have some kind of advantage over shielders? Everyone keeps saying it's 'rock paper scissors', but I've yet to see what advantage 2h users have against any class. They're marginally faster than a shielder, though not enough to mean anything and they have slightly longer range which can be countered easily by face hugging, they can get shot in the feet through a board shield by ranged (somehow; it's kinda ridiculous when I play my archer and shoot through the wood into someone's foot and kill them) and they don't have the range advantage vs cav. Which class is 2h meant to beat?
I can beat them too, still, dueling with worse stats (they have no wasted points in shields), worse damage and worse range and worse speed and less stun is surely disadvantage. IF you don't get how, i can't help you.
They have advantage in feinting speed, they are faster so breaking the rythm against them is harder to do, they deal more damage so they can turn into swing more, they stun. They have some chances against horses (unlike 1h). They are great for supporting in melee, and that is their role.
This game is not paper rock scissor. 2h is melee support, they have best dueling weapons, they have mauls, they have edge over shield users and in specific cases against pole users. 2h is meant to be melee, like poles and 1h+shield, they are not supposed to be melee counter. Jack of all trades.
what are the cons of crush through weapons?1)It has weight to stun enemy.
a little bit slower
What are the pros?
Crush through, unable to be blocked by anything
Normally higher base damage
Most cases the ability to also knockdown
There are not enough cons at the moment to outweigh all the gains.
Studded Warclub 92 base speedWarclub have very low weight.To crush peasant weapon.Iron mace and Bar Mace are going to be be nerfed.I am talking about really heavy weapon,such as mallet and great maul.
Long Iron Mace 94 base speed
Bar Mace 92 base speed
what do blades get? blades don't do anything extra special the swing a little faster? ok ill trade you a slight faster swing for a high chance of not being able to get blocked.
I'm fully aware that they'd be at a minor disadvantage, but I don't get why they should therefore have a big advantage vs melee when they have their shield on.
1h have a huge advantage in feinting (as I said, they can feint all day and never have to worry about changing direction to block), they are almost as fast (often faster if vsing a higher tier sword), damage difference is negligible (at most it takes one extra swing to kill someone on my 1h compared to my 2h, unless they're heavily tin canned), stun only happens if the 1h blocks with their weapon (at least, I've never stunned nor been stunned with a shield).
So 2h are the jack of all melee trades, master of none? Because they sure can't beat ranged (because of the shield nerf) and they barely stand a chance against cav (they have much chance as a 1h if they each have a pike, though). How can someone be the jack of all trades, but only melee 'trades' (even then their advantage over the other two melee 'classes' ius highly questionable at best)? And, by 'support', do you mean the 2h's role is to stand back and swing into a group fight?Polearms also have to buy pike to counter cav. Shield is not only protection against ranged but also burden (sloooooooow, cant dodge well).
1h are at a minor disadvantage at best when fighting without a shield vs 2h. If you block well, then the IF won't really be missed either, so no skill point disadvantage. 1h has the best animations, hardest to read. Overhead/left swing are particularly nice, and even though the thrust isn't nowhere near as good as 2h swords, it can still be tricky.
2H is dominating because most skilled players go 2h. When a skilled player goes 1h+shield like (well okay total NOOB but shows how easy shielding is) Olwen they can easily top the scoreboards because you can kill the average and below skilled players with no risk at all (from either ranged or melee.)
UrLukur, I can duel you in native with an arming sword while you have a Greatsword. Fact is, I haven't seen a single person who's skilled at dueling claim that 1h swords have "shitty animations." And I'm not saying 1h is superior, no, the animation advantage is counterbalanced by weight and reach advantage (damage doesn't really matter, 1h animations tend to hit the head pretty much automatically), plus the 2h thrust animation is cool.
1h when shield is on have disadvantage in feinting.
When it's off, they don't have initiative to feint (range, range, range).
Not really faster than even greatswords, due to multiple factors (stun), with light shields happens.
Polearms also have to buy pike to counter cav.
Shield is not only protection against ranged but also burden (sloooooooow, cant dodge well).
2h is great for teamwork, it's already great in melee. Just help your team, not expect to go solo. 2h is dominating the servers, it's surely not UP. More like OP.
Also, to put it bluntly, you have problem just with huscarl and side sword.
1h have shitty footwork with shield, without shield footwork is comparable. 2h have range advantage, that coupled with footwork advantage, build advantage and animations advantage owns against the shield.
That super side strike have -20 range, and require aim, it's not instant head hit, every strike can be aimed.
2h is dominating because it's most powerful. Everyone can top the scoreboard. ATM i top it. It's not telling anything about it's duel abilities.
I can duel with you too. 2h have better animations.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
(http://img80.imageshack.us/i/mb34m.jpg/)
Care to explain why? I find feinting a lot easier with my shielder because I don't have to worry about directional blocking.
Only if you've made a really slow turtle build which can't run faster forwards than the average player can run backwards.
Wait, what!? You think that getting stunned once off (haven't had it happen to me more than once in a fight with someone) means that a scimitar or side sword is slower than a greatsword? What other factors do you have in mind?
Polearm users are expected to have to use polearms...what's your point? Regardless, my polearm alts can take out almost any cav (except the very best) with a long voulge or even the long hafted blade.
I find it a great burden to not be able to dodge those arrows and, instead, only soak thousands of them up with my huscarl.
I have to agree with Xant on this; the more skilled players go with 2h/polearm builds. I don't think I'm amazingly skilled, but I find my thrower and turtle builds too easy to be fun (except as stress relief), so I prefer to play my 2h and polearm builds.
I'm not sure what this means (I can't understand what you're trying to say). I think you're saying that I'm only complaining about the huscarl and side sword. Even if I was, that's still a viable weapon selection (just because there're others, doesn't mean people won't choose the best). However, I'm talking about a range of shields (though huscarl stands out as the worst; I turtled a guy with a polaxe today and he hit my shield 6 times without it even coming close to breaking...he didn't get a 7 because he was dead and I still had full health) and a range of weapons (elite scim, cav sword with it's ridiculous range, etc).
You've really gotta drop some of this stuff. Build advantage? Because they might have put those 6 or so shield points into an extra 3 agi or str? That's meant to give them some massive advantage over you when you don't even have to manual block? The animations aren't an advantage; the swings with 1h seem as fast to me as 2h, except 1h swings are harder to see. 2H stab further, that's it. Shouldn't be a problem if you know how to click the right mouse button.
Most of my left to right swings with my 1h are head shots, unless I'm looking at their feet.
Anyway, in light of this thread I spent most of my game time today picking 1v1 fights with 2h and polearm users. Occasionally they won (some of the absolutely amazing players can block basically anything), but most players who weren't renowned for being the best on the server lost significantly more than they won. My shield was rarely broken (aside from when I got ganked) and when it was the enemy usually had very little health left and died quickly. I'm not saying I'm skilled; I would never beat people 1v1 that much with my 2h - I'm saying shielding is easy mode for duelling.
Edit: I can barely even see that picture; it's so bloody small! Upload the full size version, not the thumbnail!
hanks for posting the pictures showing you dominating as a shielder...that really strengthens your point...somehow?
So... what was the point again? That with 1h+shield even you can get on top of the scoreboard once in a while? (7-0, lulz)
I mean honestly, what? I thought you'd be posting screenshots of you pwning with 2h, that might've meant something. But right now... wut?
Oh, shit! It's... 12-2!
HELL NAW!!!!
(.... in native, too, not cRPG.)
LOL that shit's hilarious, you keep a 12-2 screenshot of yourself like a prized possession apparently. And you're on a stacked clanteam vs some randoms :lol:
Old screen, i rarely do screens. I just did 3 kills in one round with 2h in cRPG.
Old screen, i rarely do screens. I just did 3 kills in one round with 2h in cRPG.
That still doesn't strengthen your argument UrLurker: I'm talking about balancing 1v1. I can see no advantage for 2h (I'm talking grand scheme of things; not 'he has 20 more range!') in a duel. Which class are they supposed to be better than? Or do you believe they should be slaughtered by archers and cav (while shielders are only slaughtered by cav) and then have an equal or lesser chance against shielders?Even with Mauls they can crush with teamwork, so they have advantage. With axes they have it too. The game is not only 1vs1. 1vs1 they have advantage over other melee.
At least with a fastish crush through weapon (if they made it better vs shields, though worse vs weapon blocks) they'd have an advantage over one class. The only 'advantage' I have with my 2h over my 1h is I kill crap players faster (though my 2h risks getting an unlucky hit from them if I screw up a block, whereas my shielder is at risk of getting hit only if my heart fails IRL mid-duel). Speed in killing large numbers of crap players is not an advantage.
Sorry Magikarp; didn't mean to derail the thread. In a roundabout way I was trying to show that the main advantage a 2h has against a shielder with a huscarl (especially loomed) is a decent crush through weapon (either that, or they need lots of time, amazing manual blocking skills and a big axe).
Edit:
IT"S CLEARLY OP THEN!!!1111
On a more serious note; were you duelling skilled shielders when you got those? Or did you gank a few peasants and decide you had the skillz?
On a more
Heirloomed Barmaces are indeed too powerful, heck, I think having such a blunt wep with ct to be too OP.
Great Maul and Polehammer are hardly a good counter to uber blockers and shielders, if the faster ct is removed entirely and throwing is finally at a normal level, than the German Greatsword build will be dominant. Huscarl will probably be nerfed, so shielders will be less powerful.
whether a crushthrough attack is successful is mostly dependent on the weight of the weapon. a non-heirloomed bar mace crushes rarely, a mallet/maul/great maul crushes a lot, as it should be. really all that needs to be done is balancing the weight of the heirloomed bar mace and long iron mace. reduce the weight they gain so a gen 1 bar mace crushes an avg of 20% of the time, gen2-25% and gen3-30%, boom crush-through fixed.I agree, not with the percentages, but mostly what you mean is what I mean.
don't remove crush through from these weapons just tweak the damn weight of them
100% crushthrough can never be removed.
Pure str + great maul = 100% crush
THINK ABOUT IT!