So 2h get better animations
and supposedly epic horseback weapons (which are far inferior to lances)
(click to show/hide)
I'll start looking for them so I can see them in action. I'm sure they are very famous, what with all the kills they must get with such an overpowered weapon. I don't know how I've been overlooking them all this time. I'm sure if you list their names for me, it will dawn on me. I have a lot more respect for people like Huey now that I know he's been handicapping himself with a lance instead of using the overpowered 2H axes.I'm playing partly as a 2h cav now, and I'll tell you why people aren't using the 2h axes on horseback. Because it is a slightly better, although more expensive, option. Namely the morningstar and longsword. You don't see people with the 2h axes on horseback for the same reason you don't see many lancers with the normal or light lance. People prioritize their money spending on weapons. It's also why people choose the Knightly Arming Sword over the Long Arming Sword. Personally I don't get it, but that's just me.
QFT, 2H are way inferior now. I am personally one of the rare cases who actually finds the 2H animations much easier to read than the polearm ones. The better animation thing is indeed getting old. You even forgot to mention the insane damage polearms have, the main thing that makes them better than 2h.(click to show/hide)
Two-handed axes are much better to aim with, its overhead is without a shadow of doubt a million times better than the polearm ones.First thing I noticed when I switched from 2h to polearm is how ridiculously easy to aim to polearm overhead is. It is so predictable, its exactly in the center of your screen and has a constant speed. Great for finishing ganks. 45c to the head = death. The 2H one is way harder to aim. Another big advantage for polearm
I am personally one of the rare cases who actually finds the 2H animations much easier to read than the polearm ones.
Because 2h axes are epic one-hit weapons from horseback. Also, the animations are a lot better
(click to show/hide)
A better 2H axe would be a reasonable compromise. Mark it as unusable from horseback if you want.
Incidentally, if 2H axes are so epic from horseback, who uses them?
I'll start looking for them so I can see them in action. I'm sure they are very famous, what with all the kills they must get with such an overpowered weapon. I don't know how I've been overlooking them all this time. I'm sure if you list their names for me, it will dawn on me. I have a lot more respect for people like Huey now that I know he's been handicapping himself with a lance instead of using the overpowered 2H axes.
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)
'Game Balance Discussion' board. Not Realism board now:)
Still.Definitly. No 2h axe, mace or maul (ok, maybe the 2h mace) should EVER be balanced because it just doesn't make sense. Buff them instead in damage, reach or speed, but never make them balanced.
That grip cries for an unbalanced tag.
:lol:
Laugh all you want. Your only 2H alt is now 2H cav, maybe because you can't kill as many people as you do on your gaystabber main :P
With polearms it's a lot harder to trick your opponent to believing that you already released your attack. Left swing + hold + wiggle = free hit on 90 % of the playerbase with 2Hs because it really looks like a hit, which is hard to do with a polearm. Polearms have a stuttering animation which is hard to imitate. That's why I believe the smooth animations are superior.The stuttering jerky animations are amazing for convincing fake attacks. My favourite is the late rightswing feint and then another right swing. You can cancel it really late and it really looks like an attack. And if all else fails, theres always the close range rightswing feint and stab.
2H stab has length, polearms stab have speed. Greatswords outreach long awlpike, ashwood, awlpike etc.? Well, yes, and it's dumb realism-wise but balancing-wise it's fine since the polestab is faster than the 2H stab.I've seen this claimed a few times now but if using Stabbing Hobo's 'Amount of reach added to weapon length due to animation' numbers we find that the Long Awlpike beats the longest two-hander (Danish Greatsword) in reach in all its animations but the stab where they have the exact same length, and furthermore that the Ashwood Pike beats the Danish on all accounts but the stab. Though the 2h GS stab does outreach many polearms, and unless my math is flawed (it may very well be :P) obviously the '2handers are longer than polearms' belief is a myth.
Danish Greatsword = 124 reach
Overhead = 139
Left-to-right = 141
Right-to-lef = 137
Thrust = 204
Long Awlpike = 185 reach
Overhead = 170
Thrust = 204
Ashwood Pike = 166 reach
Overhead = 151
Thrust = 185
I've seen this claimed a few times now but if using Stabbing Hobo's 'Amount of reach added to weapon length due to animation' numbers we find that the Long Awlpike beats the longest two-hander (Danish Greatsword) in reach in all its animations but the stab where they have the exact same length, and furthermore that the Ashwood Pike beats the Danish on all accounts but the stab. Though the 2h GS stab does outreach many polearms, and unless my math is flawed (it may very well be :P) obviously the '2handers are longer than polearms' belief is a myth.
Why are you adding sideswings on the polearms? :lol:Haha, indeed, I knew I missed something when plotting numbers in. I'm just tired alright :lol:
Also, I can't find the thread but there was a guy testing all animations in crpg one-by-one and according to him the 2H polearm stab was the one adding the least length with... zero added. A long awlpike has the stab length of 185 if those numbers are correct. I don't think the 2H stab is as long as +80 in crpg either though. Don't know the exact numbers though. Maybe the long awlpike is longer but I'm not sure :?It must be same guy I got my data from, Tears of Destiny posted it in the 'General Guide For New Players'. It's old and not entirely accurate data though, the original post is here: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,118906.msg2872758.html#msg2872758
Standard = Onehand overhead (+0)
1h
Overhead = +0
Left-to-right = +0
Right-to-left = +19
Thrust = +61
2h
Overhead = +15
Left-to-right = +17
Right-to-left = +13
Thrust = +80
2h Polearms
Overhead = -15
Left-to-right = -7
Right-to-left = -2
Thrust = +19
1h Polearms
Thrust = +50
*DISCLAIMER*
This test was done against a dummy, with modified weapon lenghts. Margin of error is probably around +/-3. For your information, testing this with no information about the reaches took a lot of time. If you want more accurate results you'll have to do it by yourself.
Data on 1h and 2h should be somewhat accurate, when I got to polearms I just wanted to get done faster so they may be off a cm or two.
since WSE is working, give axes a 25-50% bludgeon damage component: hack damage
Another random modifier. Like we don't have enough of those in World of Warband.Sigh. He obviously didn't mean a random number between 25-50% of the damage should be blunt damage. He meant a fixed number somewhere BETWEEN 25-50% of axes damage should be blunt, while the rest is cut. Same percentage all the time. The range is there as an example, and so that the (un)balancing team can choose exactly how much of the axe damage should be blunt. Capiche?
You ever played with the 2h axes?
They are fucking awesome.
You ever played with the 2h axes?
They are fucking awesome.
If you can spot the pattern in the spoiler you can see why 2h axes are worse than polearm axes.(click to show/hide)
No they are not. I've tried Great Axe last night for a short period of time (I've used it before occasionally) and I must say it's shitty weapon. Short, slow and unbalanced. And damage isn't that epic.I've tried Voulge last night for a short period of time (I've used it before occasionally) and I must say it's shitty weapon. Short, slow and unbalanced. And damage isn't that epic.
At some point I've picked some poleaxes from the ground to try them out. It's much easier to play with those than with 2H Axes and I have 175 wpf in 2H and 1 wpf in polearms...
I've tried Voulge last night for a short period of time (I've used it before occasionally) and I must say it's shitty weapon. Short, slow and unbalanced. And damage isn't that epic.
At some point I've picked up some greatsword from the ground to try them out. It's much easier to play with than with polearm axes and I have 174 wpf in polearms and 1 wpf in 2h...(click to show/hide)
But you totally showed in your post what is wrong with them: Why should anyone use them if they can use a morningstar.Oh, the Morningstar is OP as fuck! I love it for it :D
They may not suck but they for sure arent great. Thats not the problem. The question is why morningstar (without being op) is better then every
single option you could chose as axe.
=> Yes you are right in one point: We need a high tier 2h-Axe. It should be around 1m long to not be like a poleaxe it should be unbalanced but
it should deal incredible damage (like the persian) while not being slow (like the great axe) and it should have the secondary pierce mode (like the other persian).
That would be an axe people would consider.
Morningstar isn't OP. It used to be OP, but I guess you don't remember that.You mean back when it had curshtrough as in native? On all attacks? Always crushtrough because of speedbonus when used on horse? Yeah, I remember that. That doesn't mean that it's still not OP. Sure, it could be worse. But saying it's not worth more than 6,648 gold, when it deals the 2nd most damage in the game, you'd be smoking some weird shit.
Morningstar has an high damage output as pierce damage for a short weapon, but stays way behind if you compare it to the 2h axes which are faster, longer, higher damage and secondary mode possibility.Unless the guy you are fighting is using cloth or is naked, the morningstar is the highest damaging weapon in the game, after the Great Maul. Whiners, like Leshma, who complain about the Poleaxe stab and the steel pick damage, really ought to remember that the Morningstar is 38 pierce damage, 6 more than the pick and 7 more than the poleaxe. With it's "slow" 92 speed, it still will do more damage on each hit AND DPS. While being "only" 82 length.
Even so it looks so badass.+10 to cool. Definitely.
Looks > everything else.
When people talk about the 2h animations being superior, it's not about how hard it is for an opponent to read the swing direction.Yes they are. The 2H animations are better argument exists since a lot longer than earlier active collisions with teammates and objects do.
-Swing is active for full damage much earlier in the animation (i.e. hiltslashing)Polearms can hiltslash just as well as 2H.
The main advantage of polearms, in my opinion, are the occasional stuttering, jerky animations when feinting. 2h gets that too, but far less often. They're usually smooth, thus a million times easier to read.I'd say the main advantage is the damage, but this is true.
I'd say the main advantage is the damage, but this is true.Really Teeth? Really? Do I have to do the "who deals the most damage" post again? Last time it was obviously 2handers, and things haven't changed much. Actually, the morningstar was buffed +1 damage since last time if I remember correctly.
Jarlek wtf they took out crushthrough on sideswings in octobre2009 afaik, were you even playing the Game
back then?
Do you know what a beta is? Iirc crushthrough on sideswings never
existed in warband 1.xxx, only in early stages of the Multiplayer beta.
Jarlek wtf they took out crushthrough on sideswings in octobre2009 afaik, were you even playing the GameI've been playing M&B since the original came out and have been playing since then. Yeah, I remember when they changed it, but that was for cRPG only. As Gurnisson and Christo mentioned as I wrote this, you also got the time AND the changes wrong. Morningstar is still dastardly OP in native, as it always was, and unless you are talking about original M&B (which I thought you were talking about) you got it completely wrong with when it came out.
back then?
And you compare it to the damage onehanders and say its op cause it Deals more damage than onehanders and you also forgot that there is a Penalty for Morningstar in 1h Mode.Sigh. Try to read better next time. I'm not comparing them vis-a-vis each other. I was making a not that the morningstar does more pierce damage than the highest damaging one-handed weapon. Just to show how powerfull it really is. I never said 2handers shouldn't do more damage than one-handers. I was trying to put things in perspective. Do you get it now?
Also you are the whiner here.How am I the whiner here? I'm saying I love the Morningstar because it is OP, making me easily decimate everyone, I say that I would like a new 2h axe added to the game, and I say that I DON'T see a problem with the unbalanced tag. How can I be the whiner when I'm saying I like how everything is now? The only thing close to whining I've done in this thread are about idiots who didn't get my first post, i.e. the 2h axes aren't super-awesome-omfg! because they are cheap. You wouldn't compare the Wooden Stick with the Flamberge, now would you?. Yet still retards keep comparing the 2h axes with the poleaxes. It's just plain retarded.
Morningstar is shorterFirst of all. Morningstar isn't really shorter than most one handers. Most one handers are less than the 82 length of the morningstar AND the morningstar has a bigger bonus from animations in all but the right-to-left swing. Don't believe me? Count the number of 1hs with less than 82 reach. Sure. The most USED one handed weapons probably have an average of 90-ish. I'll be fair to point that out (see? We don't have to only point out the stuff that support our own views. More people should try that), but that is a point that is outside of what we are talking about. You say it is short, and I say yes. I agree. But it's NOT shorter than "most" 1handers. Agreed? That being said. It isn't short enough to be a problem. It is still viable with reach on all it's swings unlike, let's say, the iberian mace. Because of it's short length (70) and 1h animations, you kinda have to use the right-to-left swing most of the time. This isn't a problem with the Morningstar as all it's swings are roughly the same length, and they all have a decent length.
than Most onehanders Not to speak of 2hs or polearms. It has a high Weight which is Great for stuns and
shitty for the Speed.
Bonus against shields is a Big plus but the unbalanced Tag is a EvenThirdly. Bonus against shield is a plus. That is correct. Unbalanced tag is a minus. That is correct. But the Unbalanced tag is WAY too little a minus to balance out the Bonus against shield. Or anything else, for that matter. The only thing "Unbalanced" does is making you unable to stop the attack after you started it. Yeah, sucks in some situations like Leshma said (enemy died and you can't stop the swing, so you hit your teammate), but there really isn't that many places where it will be a problem or liability. It's a bad thing for sure, but very, very minor. You say it is "difficult to play with", then I have to say "No, it isn't. L2p." No offense Blacky, but it really isn't hard to use them.
greater Minus and completly annoying and also very
difficult to Play with.
So we end up with a high damaging andFirst of all, it's not a "cheap" weapon, it's just not an expensive one. It's in the middle (and I think it should be in the lower end of expensive territory).
cheap but rather slow and really Short weapon that is also very
difficult to Play with. Seems Fine to me
Your reasoning fails, Jarlek, because nobody is whining that "2h has no weapon that does as much damage as polearms". There is no weapon comparable to GLA, for example, in 2h category. People are talking about the best-tier, most used polearms vs the best-tier, most used 2handers. You have to take all the other things into account as well. It doesn't do much good if you have a weapon that does 2000 damage but has reach of 1 and speed of -3. 2h has lots of shitty weapons with high damage, yes, but polearms have lots of good weapons with high damage.I'm guessing you're talking about my old post, right? The one I quoted? Yeah, people haven't really complained about polearm damage here. Except Teeth in this quote beneath.
Do a comparison between Danish, German, SoW and Greatsword vs Great long axe, long war axe, poleaxe, german poleaxe and elegant poleaxe. GLB (46 cut) and Flamberge (46 cut) aren't even toptier, just expensive.
So no, your post certainly doesn't show how "stupid the QQ is."
I'd say the main advantage is the damage, but this is true.As I said in my first response to this, it's just completely wrong. 2handers deals the most damage, and I dug up this old post of mine so I didn't have to do a new comparison. You are obviously right in that you can't compare damage alone. Reach, speed and all that matters just as much. I completely agree on that. But if that's the problem (having a lot of damage while still being fast, long or what-have-you-not) then they should have mentioned THAT and not a "Polearms do way more damage than 2handed weapons". I want more that people complain about the RIGHT thing instead of complaining about things that are completely wrong or simply not true. Same as I would object if people started complaining about the reach of 1handers being the longest in the game or the staffs being the fastest. It's not true, check shit before you complain. You can complain about staffs being fast, but don't come and say they are the fastest.
Anyway, let's try to answer you, bit by bit:I've been playing M&B since the original came out and have been playing since then. Yeah, I remember when they changed it, but that was for cRPG only. As Gurnisson and Christo mentioned as I wrote this, you also got the time AND the changes wrong. Morningstar is still dastardly OP in native, as it always was, and unless you are talking about original M&B (which I thought you were talking about) you got it completely wrong with when it came out.Well I've been playing native today and I can ensure you that there is no such thing as crushthrough on sideswings for a morningstar, atleast for infantry. And as I stated above there was a thing called Multiplayer Beta and iirc that was when crushthrough on sideswings was taken out for Rhodock infantry.
What does this have to do with anything anyway? I remembered when it was super OP, how does that apply to me thinking it is still too powerful for its price?I don't. 2handers should do more damage than one-handers and so does the morningstar...so?
Sigh. Try to read better next time. I'm not comparing them vis-a-vis each other. I was making a not that the morningstar does more pierce damage than the highest damaging one-handed weapon. Just to show how powerfull it really is. I never said 2handers shouldn't do more damage than one-handers. I was trying to put things in perspective. Do you get it now?
And jeeeeez luise. Of course I know about the penalty when used in 1h mode. What does this have to do with anything? Did I mention it or make a point about it? Did I ever talk about the morningstar used as a one-handed weapon? You see, I can also drag in unrelated information, reminding you that you never mentioned it and then using it as an argument about how wrong you are.Ehm I thought you were talking about the 1h mode of the morningstar cause you....compared it to the other one-handers damagewise. Cause if you with the penalty the mornigstar as a 1h weapon does less damage than the military pick or steel pick while also being ALOT slower. (Damage penalty was like 30% to speed and damage wasn't it?)
How am I the whiner here? I'm saying I love the Morningstar because it is OP, making me easily decimate everyone, I say that I would like a new 2h axe added to the game, and I say that I DON'T see a problem with the unbalanced tag. How can I be the whiner when I'm saying I like how everything is now? The only thing close to whining I've done in this thread are about idiots who didn't get my first post, i.e. the 2h axes aren't super-awesome-omfg! because they are cheap. You wouldn't compare the Wooden Stick with the Flamberge, now would you?. Yet still retards keep comparing the 2h axes with the poleaxes. It's just plain retarded.kk nvm then :3
First of all. Morningstar isn't really shorter than most one handers. Most one handers are less than the 82 length of the morningstar AND the morningstar has a bigger bonus from animations in all but the right-to-left swing. Don't believe me? Count the number of 1hs with less than 82 reach. Sure. The most USED one handed weapons probably have an average of 90-ish. I'll be fair to point that out (see? We don't have to only point out the stuff that support our own views. More people should try that), but that is a point that is outside of what we are talking about. You say it is short, and I say yes. I agree. But it's NOT shorter than "most" 1handers. Agreed? That being said. It isn't short enough to be a problem. It is still viable with reach on all it's swings unlike, let's say, the iberian mace. Because of it's short length (70) and 1h animations, you kinda have to use the right-to-left swing most of the time. This isn't a problem with the Morningstar as all it's swings are roughly the same length, and they all have a decent length.I certainly do have a problem with the length of the morningstar. I get outreached my MANY one-handers, and apart from GM and Mallet all two-handers and polearms. You really got to be a dedicated w-key hero (like Corrado) to use the morningstar is what I sometimes think. :D
I'd also like to point out that the bec. The polearm equivalent of the morningstar, is just as short. Yet, does anyone really have anything to complain about the reach of any of them? They aren't THAT short that it matters. Does anyone really have a problem with the length of the morningstar/bec?
Secondly. You say it has "a high Weight which is Great for stuns and shitty for the Speed". I'm sorry to inform you about this, but weapon weight does not affect it's speed. If you are talking about MOVEMENT speed, then I see what you say, but I have to disagree. 3.7 weight isn't a lot. Anyone who has used a shield knows that 3.7 is NOTHING. Most shields are 6+ weight, and even there you can get some decent speed. Only when the weight goes to 8+ you really start feeling the weight. Long story short. A weapon with 3.7 weight doesn't slow you down a lot. Nowhere NEAR the ammount armour or a shield would slow you down.Who cares about the weight then lol. It's only 0,7 more than on the SoW. Also : Isn't it like that : More weight -> less effective wpf? So in the end the weight slows you down a tad.
Thirdly. Bonus against shield is a plus. That is correct. Unbalanced tag is a minus. That is correct. But the Unbalanced tag is WAY too little a minus to balance out the Bonus against shield. Or anything else, for that matter. The only thing "Unbalanced" does is making you unable to stop the attack after you started it. Yeah, sucks in some situations like Leshma said (enemy died and you can't stop the swing, so you hit your teammate), but there really isn't that many places where it will be a problem or liability. It's a bad thing for sure, but very, very minor. You say it is "difficult to play with", then I have to say "No, it isn't. L2p." No offense Blacky, but it really isn't hard to use them.First of all, it's not a "cheap" weapon, it's just not an expensive one. It's in the middle (and I think it should be in the lower end of expensive territory).Are we talking about the morningstar in native or in crpg? In native it is easy to use cause you just have to hold one strike (overhead) and crush through anything. :D In crpg things are different. If you compare the length to the damage it isnt really good at all. Katana gets like 101 speed at 95 length, a greatsword 92 speed at 123/124 length. You get my point there? :D
It is also high damaging. But NO WAY is it a "slow" weapon. It's 92 speed, same as the greatswords and only 3 of the axes are faster. It isn't a katana, but it's nowhere near "slow". You also call it short, but as I mentioned earlier, it isn't short enough to be an issue. It defiently isn't "really Short weapon" like you said. Sure, you get outreached by most 2handers and many polearms, but you still got more than enough range to keep some distance with. Lastly, you call it "very difficult to play with". That's BS. Yeah, it's not the EASIEST weapon in the game (Greatswords), but it isn't the hardest weapons either. Personally I would put it somewhere in the middle on the "how easy to use" rankings. You wouldn't want to use it as a bad player, but you haven't got the be a badass to use it properly either. Case in point: HRE loves this weapon.
PS: For the love of God. Please try to at least THINK about correct spelling and grammar next time. It hurts my brain to look at those mistakes!Not even considering this.
I also found the old post where I show which weapon category has the highest damaging weapons. Making a new post to keep it seperate from my reply to Blacky.Jarlek I get your point there but Id like to add one thing : The stab is important too. I would say that polearms to more damage than 2handers cause eg. the Morningstar has (38+38+38+0)/4 damage but the bec has (34+34+34+26)/4 damage. Not sure if its correct but makes a whole lot more sense to me
It's a good read and really shows how stupid the "QQ polearms are so OP and does so much more damage than 2handers" whining is.(click to show/hide)
all your stupid arguements dont mean much if you look at the numbers. Humans will always gravitate toward the path of least resistance.
poleaxes outnumber 2h easily 5:1...theres a reason, the 2h suck
What servers are you playing on? NA? Since I'm playing on EU and on average I this dividing among the different class types:
- Archers 40-50%
- 1hand + shield 20-30%
- 2handers 10-15%
- Polearms 10-15%
all your stupid arguements dont mean much if you look at the numbers. Humans will always gravitate toward the path of least resistance.
Any good weapon can be excellent in the hands of a player who knows how to use it, and any shitty weapon can become a good one.
all your stupid arguements dont mean much if you look at the numbers. Humans will always gravitate toward the path of least resistance.
poleaxes outnumber 2h easily 5:1...theres a reason, the 2h suck
What servers are you playing on? NA? Since I'm playing on EU and on average I this dividing among the different class types:This is an attempt of giving some ish vaules of what normally is on battle servers. There is no big difference between the amount of 2handers or polearms, but I'd say it's leaning a bit more towards the 2handed great swords over polearms in general. (Danish greatsword is used a LOT) But as you can see archers take up nearly half the amount of players. Oops, I forgot cavalry o.O they are very fluctuating in amount based on the different maps, but on horse maps I'd say about 10% of the players are cav.
- Archers 40-50%
- 1hand + shield 20-30%
- 2handers 10-15%
- Polearms 10-15%
I think he's talking about POLE AXES and 2h AXES.
That is correct. I can successfully use Practice Longsword, Shortened Military Scythe, Great Axe, Mallet, name it. But that doesn't mean Great Axe is awesome weapon for infantry player. Can't really feel the difference in actual combat between Great Axe and cheap Battle Axe, that's how good it is.
Really Teeth? Really? Do I have to do the "who deals the most damage" post again? Last time it was obviously 2handers, and things haven't changed much. Actually, the morningstar was buffed +1 damage since last time if I remember correctly.What the fuck are you on about? Please do, cause if I look on the website its obvious that polearms do the most damage. Can't be arsed to read the rest of your wall of texts. Luckily I know I won't miss anything from my previous encounters with you. I await your post, should be hilarious.
So don't come here and tell me that 2handers don't do the most damage.'2handers don't do the most damage.
Berserk wtf? Pole-axes have polestagger, reach, a Stab and don't havethe unbalanced tag....
Your way of comparing is shit and unrepresentative. I use a German Poleaxe with 42c AND 29p. Name a 2H with comparable damage on swings and stab. Oh, and polearms are OP.
http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,25086.0.html
Ark's test showed 30 length on 2h left and right swings (15 for left swing of polearm) so the polearm axes would still be longer on left and right swings (as they should be IMO). The 2h axes are faster (as 2h's should be faster than polearms, which they usually aren't).
i think for 2h vs polearm comparision they have the axes set correctly. For other 2h's they should be faster than most of the polearms, and should be shorter, but from browsing equipment lists it seems like 2h's are longer and slower. Seems counter-intuitive to me.
MW Shortened military scythe.That's loomed, and you shouldn't use them for comparisons. I say the Flamberge. 46c, 24 pierce. Slightly lower than the german poleaxe, but the very close in overall damage. You also gain 21 reach, which is way beyond the point of it making a difference.
Jarlek wtf they took out crushthrough on sideswings in octobre2009 afaik, were you even playing the Game
back then?
And you compare it to the damage onehanders and say its op cause it Deals more damage than onehanders and you also forgot that there is a Penalty for Morningstar in 1h Mode.
Also you are the whiner here. Morningstar is shorter
than Most onehanders Not to speak of 2hs or polearms. It has a high Weight which is Great for stuns and
shitty for the Speed. Bonus against shields is a Big plus but the unbalanced Tag is a Even
greater Minus and completly annoying and also very
difficult to Play with. So we end up with a high damaging and
cheap but rather slow and really Short weapon that is also very
difficult to Play with. Seems Fine to me.
Yes, the german poleaxe does the most OVERALL damage (and is also the shortest poleaxe, just a note), but the bitching wasn't about who had the most overall damage on their attacks, but who did the most damage purely. Try to read what I posted earlier about bitching about the CORRECT thing.I read what you posted. You did a completely unfair comparison, of which you think it invalidates my argument that polearms have a damage advantage. It does not. When I am talking about which class does the most damage I don't get the 3 most extreme examples to show that 2H have the highest damage in the three damage types. That is completely unrepresentative.
Hence me agreeing with you that the polearm axes are longer than the 2h axes (the way it should be IMO). And the 2h axes are faster (as they should be IMO). I think all polearms should "generally" be longer and slower than 2h's. But generally (except for comparing axes) it seems like 2h's are longer and slower than polearms.
2H axes are faster than poleaxes only on equipment page.
2H axes are faster than poleaxes only on equipment page.
I read what you posted. You did a completely unfair comparison, of which you think it invalidates my argument that polearms have a damage advantage. It does not. When I am talking about which class does the most damage I don't get the 3 most extreme examples to show that 2H have the highest damage in the three damage types. That is completely unrepresentative.You are completely right Teeth. How could I EVER believe that when someone said "polearms do more damage than 2handers" they claimed that polearms does more damage than two handers! HAH! Silly me! I obviously should have understood that they meant "polearms have slightly more overall damage on all the attack directions if you also add in the contributing factors of reach, speed and other effects, both positive and negative, of the weapons, and not necessarily pure damage." So my apologies for mixing up those two so similarly sounding opinions.
Just try to take a good look at which weapons get used a lot in both classes, ignore weapons that are one trick ponies and make a good comparison. I'm sure you'll get to the right conclusion.