Why even use the sword though when there are so many other good ones. But I guess that is your arguments point.
Think of some changes you'd do, then scan the whole list of 1h weapons(80+) and make sure that it doesn't break balance/replicate another weapon somewhere else. It's 3K gold cheaper than the side sword, that's what you get for going with a significantly cheaper weapon.
+1 pierce and +1 cut would make it too good compared to NWS. Giving it 1 cut on the swings though will make Arming Sword and NWS have the same trade-off between them as KAS and NCS. Could work.
tydeus, you can't really use cost as a balancing factor, at this point everyone's rolling insane amounts of gold; it doesn't really matter that the arming sword is ~~ 3k cheaper than the side sword when the side sword is clearly a direct upgrade (same speed, length, cut, but 4 more pierce damage)
I like the idea. The only downside of fiddling with the Nordic war sword's stats is that the nordic swords are part of a simple progression: Simple Nordic Sword, Nordic Short Sword, Nordic Sword, Nordic Short War Sword, Nordic War Sword and Nordic Champion Sword (i know right, way more nordic swords than i thought we had till i compared them all recently).
So although your balance suggestion makes sense for the 3 weapons, it'll have a knock-on effect for the stats for all the other nordic swords, and other 1handers balanced relative to the ones you've mentioned. Poor Tydeus, now we see the tip of the iceburg for weapon balance. Unless a weapon is totally unique, any balance suggestions need to take into *all* relative stats of all similar weapons. Otherwise Tydeus has to put up with a 'wtf Nordic War Sword is better than Nordic Champion Sword at half the cost' sort of thread.
The Arming Sword is priced comparably to the Nordic War and Italian Swords, yet its stats are clearly inferior to both. In fact, it's the most expensive 1h weapon that doesn't have a clear "niche"-i.e. something it does better than all other weapons.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Just looking at the models, the Nordic War is clearly the "slashing" weapon, and the Italian is clearly the "thrusting" weapon. The Arming Sword looks like it should be a compromise between the two, but its cut damage is worse than either. The problem is, there's only 1 cut damage difference between the Italian and Nordic War, so there's no room between them for the Arming. So here's my proposition:
Nordic Arming Italian
Cut Damage: 32 31 30
Thrust Damage: 21 23 25
-Nordic War Sword gains 1 cut but loses 1 pierce
-Arming gains 2 cut but loses 2 pierce
-Italian-no change (most people consider Italian to be perfectly balanced as is)
Speed remains the same for all. Weight of arming sword should probably be bumped up to 1.5 kg like the other two. Balance cost however you like, no one really cares about cost for 1h weapons anyway. Make it so all 1h swords get the same heirloom bonus (+3c/+2p), and adjust Side Sword as suggested on other threads. This cuts down on the proliferation of 1h stabbiness all over the battlefield, and increases 1h sword variety overall.
Historically, the "Arming Sword"-type weapon was one of the most commonly used types of swords, but you almost never see it in cRPG. Buff it and let's bring more variety to the battlefield!
I like the idea. The only downside of fiddling with the Nordic war sword's stats is that the nordic swords are part of a simple progression: Simple Nordic Sword, Nordic Short Sword, Nordic Sword, Nordic Short War Sword, Nordic War Sword and Nordic Champion Sword (i know right, way more nordic swords than i thought we had till i compared them all recently).
So although your balance suggestion makes sense for the 3 weapons, it'll have a knock-on effect for the stats for all the other nordic swords, and other 1handers balanced relative to the ones you've mentioned. Poor Tydeus, now we see the tip of the iceburg for weapon balance. Unless a weapon is totally unique, any balance suggestions need to take into *all* relative stats of all similar weapons. Otherwise Tydeus has to put up with a 'wtf Nordic War Sword is better than Nordic Champion Sword at half the cost' sort of thread.
Don't mean to sound like an ass hole or anything, as I'm glad you care. But this doesn't actually help at all. The problem is that unless you're breaking costs up and deciding before stats, what weapons go to what section/tier, you've only introduced one more variable to think about when balancing. In this situation it doesn't really make anything more difficult, as it's already clear where each weapon belongs (at least to me), but it certainly doesn't make things easier. There are a lot of variables to think about when balancing and comparing weapons and weapon type vs weapon type has to be included in that.there is shit load of weapons that have their stats way out tier line
two handed sword
Don't forget the Long Arming Sword. Shittier version of Knightly Arming Sword and still at high tier price. Does someone think the 2k price difference makes any difference here?
Think of some changes you'd do, then scan the whole list of 1h weapons(80+) and make sure that it doesn't break balance/replicate another weapon somewhere else. It's 3K gold cheaper than the side sword, that's what you get for going with a significantly cheaper weapon.
You know this is pretty much irrelevant, everybody ready to heirloom a weapon will choose the best one.
I've suggested it in another thread, but I think the Long Arming Sword should gain +1 speed. This would make it balanced with the Arabian Guard Sword and Knightly Arming Sword.
in that case, knightly arming sword would also have to get buffed.
No, 1 swing dmg for 1 speed is a balanced tradeoff that occurs within every weapon class (including 1h). See Liuyedao vs. Niuweidao; both quite popular and differ only by 1 speed/1 cut.
no damn way, 1c damage is not enough to justify 1 speed loss. not to mention that it costs almost 2k more.
It's a balanced tradeoff. With 7 PS ~100 wpf, 31c does about 8% more damage against 55 armor (typical melee player armor) than 30 cut. That's like having +1 Power Strike. Obviously the tradeoff is fair, because lots of people choose Niuweidao vs. Liuyedao.
You may prefer the speed over damage, but others may not. The option should be at least presented so people can make their own choice.
i would like to see where did you found those numbers, not to mention damage is also dependant on movement speed.
people pick niuweidao because it is more than 2k cheaper. upkeep is bitch, moreso when you don heavy armor.
Nightmare, niuweidao is 2k more expensive than Liuyedao. Damage values from http://alpha-lider19.ru/MB/, the only active damage calculator I know of. It may not be 100% accurate, but it provides relative values for comparison.
It's pretty clear from your post history that you just like to pose contrary opinions that are unsubstantiated by reason or logic. The Game Balance Discussion forum is the most effective when people stick to math rather than arbitrary statements (contradictory arbitrary statements in your case). I request that you please not clutter up well-reasoned balance threads with contrarian babble, since it just derails the discussion.
my bad, i missmatched the names of swords. you must also not forget that some weapons have much better looming options than others. i just fail to see why would ANYONE pick 1 damage over 1 speed, especially when there is a 2k price difference,and 140g upkeep difference.
i just fail to see why would ANYONE pick 1 damage over 1 speed
I believe 3strength + 1PS is worth ~2 damage around the 3X range of damage. 1 speed is worth ~12-15wpf. When you get to the extremities of speed, I think it starts to become quite worth it.
Edit: And that is why I prefer the liuyedao.
When you get to the extremities of speed, I think it starts to become quite worth it.
Edit: And that is why I prefer the liuyedao.
OK, here is why someone would choose 1 dmg over 1 speed (31 cut vs 30 cut), using the current soak/reduce formulas from Huscarlton Banks' spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ag5R9vD8esLKdEtZczR1YjdpQlkxOTB4LTBkMjJpckE#gid=7
Values are calculated using 21 str, 7 PS, and 100 effective wpf.
Damage against 50 armor:
30 cut 31 cut
Torso hit, no speed bonus 10.2 10.8 (+6%)
Headshot, no speed bonus 17.7 18.6 (+5.2%)
Headshot, 20% speed bonus 23.2 24.3 (+4.7%)
Damage against 60 armor:
30 cut 31 cut
Torso hit, no speed bonus 5.8 6.2 (+7.4%)
Headshot, no speed bonus 10.7 11.4 (+5.9%)
Headshot, 20% speed bonus 14.6 15.3 (+5.3%)
Do you still fail to see why "ANYONE" would pick 5-7% more damage against a typical player over 1 speed? It's a fair tradeoff, because plenty of people would (and do) make that tradeoff.
Next time you are trying to prove a point, try supporting your argument with facts. You might be surprised to discover that facts are actually more effective tools than even the mighty caps lock.
EDIT-Back on topic, the same analysis shows that the Side Sword does 33.4% more thrust damage against a 60 armor target than the Arming Sword. Quite a serious benefit for a mere 180g upkeep difference. By that logic, where's the sword that costs 1k to repair but has 50 pierce damage?
Eh, I think that most of 1h weapons have their own niche, there's only a few swords, arming sword among them, which are inferior to some other in every aspect.
I already have a Short Arming Sword and a Long Arming Sword loomed. Don't give me a reason (in addition to looks) to get an Arming sword +3 too D:
I say give arming sword +2 pierce. Balanced.
I'd say +1 cut instead. Would make Arming Sword and NWS have the same difference as KAS and NCS, and those two are both used a lot. Arming Sword is rarely used while NWS is used quite a lot