cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Gurnisson on October 06, 2013, 11:49:00 pm

Title: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Gurnisson on October 06, 2013, 11:49:00 pm
Considering just how good knockdown is, is it just me who find the stat difference on high tier picks and maces pretty unfair? While the visibility of the picks might make it easier to get a hit in, the stat boost they have because of the lack of knockdown is pretty much negligible compared to maces. I've been using 1h blunt weapons a lot lately and they knockdown very often, and it makes them a much better choice than the picks.


(click to show/hide)

For 500 gold more you get +1 damage (and pierce instead), + 1 speed, -1 length and lose knockdown. Hooray..

(click to show/hide)

For 1500 gold less you have the same swing damage (just pierce instead), no thrust, +1 speed, -1 length and no knockdown.


And since the best part of picks is the thin model that makes for nice wiggling held attacks, you can just use the spathovaklion to get the good part of both maces and picks, the spathovaklion having both knockdown and a thin model (and great stats to boot). Buff picks or nerf knockdown!
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Grumbs on October 06, 2013, 11:52:50 pm
Nerf knockdown across the board for all weapons. Silly stat imo that rewards people for no good reason
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Swaggart on October 07, 2013, 12:26:05 am
Quote from: Grumbs on October 06, 2013, 11:52:50 pm
Nerf knockdown across the board for all weapons. Silly stat imo that rewards people for no good reason

This.

Remove any chance based mechanic out of the game.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Daunt_Flockula on October 07, 2013, 01:40:10 am
I'd personally prefer nerfing 1h blunt knockdowns to the ground because it makes no sense.

On the other hand, I have no objections to knockdowns caused by 2h and polearms, because, well, that makes sense. Still, maybe their knockdown rate could be tweaked only a little.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Xant on October 07, 2013, 01:48:34 am
Random chance is always gay. Would rather have 100% knockdown on some 2h weapons with -50-75% damage or something.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Jarlek on October 07, 2013, 01:54:09 am
Quote from: ASGUARDIAN on October 07, 2013, 01:40:10 am
I'd personally prefer nerfing 1h blunt knockdowns to the ground because it makes no sense.

On the other hand, I have no objections to knockdowns caused by 2h and polearms, because, well, that makes sense. Still, maybe their knockdown rate could be tweaked only a little.
I'd rather be knocked down by a mace that do 25% of my health than a 2h/pole that does 60% of my health.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Swaggart on October 07, 2013, 02:02:21 am
Quote from: ASGUARDIAN on October 07, 2013, 01:40:10 am
I'd personally prefer nerfing 1h blunt knockdowns to the ground because it makes no sense.

On the other hand, I have no objections to knockdowns caused by 2h and polearms, because, well, that makes sense. Still, maybe their knockdown rate could be tweaked only a little.

Because it makes sense? I'm pretty sure if you got slashed by a sword across your face you'd fall down just the same.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Daunt_Flockula on October 07, 2013, 02:06:21 am
Quote from: Swaggart on October 07, 2013, 02:02:21 am
Because it makes sense? I'm pretty sure if you got slashed by a sword across your face you'd fall down just the same.

Dude, please for the love of whatever is sacred to you, please just don't turn this into a "if you got hit/slashed/bumped/smacked with whatever, you would fall/cry like a pig/bleed/womit unicorn poop/see the stars" rant. I am sick of it all.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on October 07, 2013, 02:06:26 am
Ideally a knockdownlike feature should be based on holding time, the higher your knockdown chance would now be, the further from X amount of held time you'd be allowed to go while still knocking down, random mechanics suck.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Swaggart on October 07, 2013, 02:14:56 am
Quote from: ASGUARDIAN on October 07, 2013, 02:06:21 am
Dude, please for the love of whatever is sacred to you, please just don't turn this into a "if you got hit/slashed/bumped/smacked with whatever, you would fall/cry like a pig/bleed/womit unicorn poop/see the stars" rant. I am sick of it all.

You're the one that brought up realism.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Daunt_Flockula on October 07, 2013, 02:23:40 am
I don't remember talking about realism at all but whatever.

I should really learn to stay away from these discussions. It is plain impossible to throw in your own opinion without attracting some passive aggression from someone.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Swaggart on October 07, 2013, 02:43:56 am
Quote from: ASGUARDIAN on October 07, 2013, 01:40:10 am
On the other hand, I have no objections to knockdowns caused by 2h and polearms, because, well, that makes sense.

This quote. If this knockdowns caused by 2h and polearms making sense isn't an argument based on realism then I apologize.

But it's the only logical basis for saying certain things have knockdown while some don't. If you're actually arguing this from a game balance point of view, I don't understand how weapons that already vastly outpower 1h in terms of damage need to get knockdown on top of that.

Also, lol at the passive aggressive part. I'm pretty sure you don't even know what that means.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Huscarlton_Banks on October 07, 2013, 04:46:18 am
It is pretty annoying having something as effective as knockdown left up to RNG, though I guess the same kind of goes for projectile spread.

A guaranteed knockdown would be pretty rage-inducing as well.

It'd be hard differentiating pierce weapons and blunt weapons of similar length without some sort of gimmicky bonus (modified blockstuns, modified flinch, stagger instead of KD, crushthrough, huge damage but lower speed/unbalanced, etc) if knockdown were removed.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: MURDERTRON on October 07, 2013, 05:05:41 am
Knockdown sucks now because everyone rolls.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Kafein on October 07, 2013, 09:51:07 am
Change knockdown so that it becomes based on controllable factors, or just remove it but then you'd have to buff maces a lot.


Also, 1h knockdown is the least problem. A bar mace knocks people down twice as often. As always, people notice 1h knockdown more because they don't die from 1h blunt as fast.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Gurnisson on October 07, 2013, 04:15:19 pm
This is not really a thread for discussing the knockdown feature in itself, it's more for discussing the balance between picks and maces, where knockdown indeed plays an important part. It just seems like people don't go into the 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce balance while talking about knockdown as a mechanic.

Put it this way, for the few hits you get by using the thin model of picks, you would probably get a lot more with the free knockdown hits and by kicking them up again for 1 or more free hits. Picks are just not worth it compared to maces. A buff to 1h picks or a nerf to 1h maces is needed to make it balanced. Also, for a mechanic that is supposed to have a maximum chance of like 30 %, I still find myself noticing the times it doesn't knockdown, not the times it does knockdown. It happens very often with the likes of Warhammer, Iberian Mace and Spathovaklion, at least.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on October 07, 2013, 04:49:47 pm
Didn't read anything except OP.

I think the picks give you more speed and sometimes (not usually though) a little more base damage than an equivalent blunt 1h.   I personally prefer the knock down ability of the blunt 1h's and will give up some speed for them.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Falka on October 07, 2013, 05:07:23 pm
Quote from: Gurnisson on October 06, 2013, 11:49:00 pm
(click to show/hide)

One more thing, against very heavy armors picks glance quite a lot with low PS, maces don't glance "at all". Picks are definitely underpowered in comaparison to maces/hammers.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Osiris on October 07, 2013, 06:51:17 pm
if memory serves me right (prolly doesnt) Ive been using the military hammer +3 in strat and had 31b but in secondary mode i think it also had 31p. so +0 would be 28blunt 28pierce 80 length 94 speed king of both worlds.


Picks are harder to block but when the blunt knockdown weapons do hit they hit just as hard and put you on your ass :(
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: San on October 07, 2013, 09:13:30 pm
There isn't any leeway for buffing the pick weapons since they already are very good with great speed and power. The speed increase is still somewhat reasonable over maces (spatho is an exception). I'd nerf knockdown first by adjusting weapon weights before I would buff picks.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Penitent on October 07, 2013, 10:55:20 pm
I've been using 1h weapons since I've starting playing this 2 years ago.  I don't think knockdown is that great.  I'll take the +damage, +speed, and low visibility of a pick any day.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Pentecost on October 08, 2013, 01:40:25 pm
Quote from: san. on October 07, 2013, 09:13:30 pm
There isn't any leeway for buffing the pick weapons since they already are very good with great speed and power. The speed increase is still somewhat reasonable over maces (spatho is an exception). I'd nerf knockdown first by adjusting weapon weights before I would buff picks.

I just want to point out that over the last half year, the Steel Pick has had its strength requirement increased by one, its swing speed lowered by one, and its damage reduced by one. Were these changes based on usage statistics or something else? Either way, while I don't think that these changes suddenly make it a worthless weapon, but I do think that there's now little reason to take it over a Warhammer or the other weapons that occupy a similar niche.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Kafein on October 08, 2013, 02:50:17 pm
Low visibility is a really huge advantage. For all the potential hits knockdown gives you, with a pick your last attack could have hit if the enemy didn't do the right block. It really depends on playstyles, whether you fight to kill your opponent as quickly as possible or to survive etc.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: San on October 08, 2013, 03:50:57 pm
Yeah, but the pick had it coming. Glad I bailed out on that. The speed decrease was unnecessary, but the power decrease was.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Gurnisson on October 08, 2013, 04:17:10 pm
I think some of you underrates knockdown quite a bit. I've been using picks and maces lately and maces are just soooo much better. Especially the Military Pick is completely useless when compared to Iberian Mace and Spathovaklion.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Phew on October 08, 2013, 06:20:56 pm
Picks are very weak right now compared to the blunt 1h weapons and even the secondary modes of the Broad 1h Axe and Iron War Axe.

Considering their short reach, I don't know why the devs felt the need to nerf pick speed so much. Picks should be significantly faster than maces/hammers. Right now, the Spathovaklion is faster than the picks AND has knockdown, which is a totally ridiculous combination.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: San on October 08, 2013, 06:36:16 pm
The knockdown is significant, but its trigger percentage isn't very high. I value the good damage against high armor a bit more, so I think 2-3 speed is a good tradeoff when both weapons deal good damage. I believe picks should be at least 99 speed. At 98 speed for instance, the military pick is comparable to the broad one handed battleaxe's secondary mode and the steel pick is worse than its blunt counterparts.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Penitent on October 09, 2013, 05:14:39 pm
To be honest I haven't tried some of the 1h weapons in a while.  I was just playing around with the steel pick and warhammer yesterday. 

I've changed my position somewhat and I think the Steel Pick could use 1 more point of speed.  I really didn't think it needed to be nerfed back when it had +1 damage and +1 speed to be honest...
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Phew on October 09, 2013, 05:33:50 pm
Quote from: Garison on October 09, 2013, 05:14:39 pm
To be honest I haven't tried some of the 1h weapons in a while.  I was just playing around with the steel pick and warhammer yesterday. 

I've changed my position somewhat and I think the Steel Pick could use 1 more point of speed.  I really didn't think it needed to be nerfed back when it had +1 damage and +1 speed to be honest...

64/65 cm reach without a thrust is really short. All of your attacks are within kick range, and these weapons do about the same damage as a Espada thrust (which has almost 3 times the reach!).  With all these limitations, I'm not sure why picks were nerfed in the first place.

Other than Aarkor, I can't even think of anyone on NA2 that even uses a steel pick anymore. And Aarkor has a +3 Spathovaklion than he for some reason always keeps sheathed.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: San on October 09, 2013, 05:39:15 pm
The only heavy steel pick users I knew about were me and kinngrimm before it got nerfed. It's still good, but it's overshadowed now since the decreased speed makes them too comparable to hammers without knockdown. The pick used to be too good because the swords were too weak, but that situation has changed now.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Penitent on October 09, 2013, 06:14:14 pm
I put up a poll to see what the community thinks about the steel pick.

http://forum.melee.org/game-balance-discussion/steel-pick-%28poll%29/msg872105/#msg872105

Let me know if my wording is off.
Title: Re: 1h blunt vs. 1h pierce
Post by: Pentecost on October 10, 2013, 07:37:22 pm
Quote from: Garison on October 09, 2013, 06:14:14 pm
Let me know if my wording is off.

You probably should have indicated to people that the changes you would like to see happen to the Steel Pick (ie +1 speed and damage) are not actual buffs like what happened with the Longsword and Miaodao so much as they are restoring stats that the Steel Pick has lost in the last few updates for reasons that remain unclear. Also, Garison, calling the Steel Pick "underpowered" in any context is not going to get people to be sympathetic to what you are trying to point out, considering that the Steel Pick is one of a handful of 1hs (the others being the Military Cleaver, Military Hammer, Spathovaklion, Iberian Mace, and Warhammer) that isn't completely worthless in Strategus battles. It's a good weapon, just no longer the top dog against armor like it used to be.