HACKED

[Kulin_ban]

HACKED

[Ronin]

You are somehow right. Have to test in-game though, as the relationship between espada eslavona and long espada eslavona is the same for ages. And I always had more success with long espada eslavona.

For example the difference between 90 and 80 length is not equal to the difference between 90 and 100. All weapon types have an optimized length. The model also matters too.

[Ronin]

I don't have any of those two, and not planning to get my hands on them as I didn't like the both. Short weapon with a thrust is not a good combination for me and arming sword just looks like a middle ground for me. I'd prefer knightly arming or a niuweidao depending on what kind of weapon I prefer. I see you're not trying to advertise to sell you looms, but rather provoking people to realize by considering an actual action. I get that. But have you tried those two weapons in game? Arming sword might look like a bad choice, but it might be better than it's numbers.

And what value are you talking about?

[Ronin]

First of all, thanks for understanding.

Welcome mate

The "value" I was referring it is the one you suggested: "which one is ACTUALLY better ingame". That value is very subjective to builds / styles of play, so it is kind of irrelevant to this discussion. Balancing is done with numbers, so numbers is all what people care about.

Yea I forgot about the builds. But they are relevant. Numbers mean much, but they are actually not everything. I can't agree to it that much. I always see the Highland Claymore and Sword of War as a proof to this. Their appearance and stat-sweetspot actually matters a lot. People don't agree to this when thinking theorithecally, but the statistics prove that these factors make an impact over time.
95 length is considered as the ideal length for 1h weapons for example. Some people even told that 100+ length weapons don't work as they sound (combined with lesser speed of course) and anything below 90 might feel short. I'm just saying, lets take those things into account too.

BTW, I DO need a 0 slot sword, and BSS would be my weapon of choice. That is how I came about to start this thread, when I saw that something was obviously wrong. Before patch, I am pretty sure that BSS had 31 pierce and 31 cut on +3 state, so it was somewhat balanced.

I'd prefer spathion with the current setup

[Penitent]

It seems with these 1h changes the devs are putting a greater emphasis on weapon length when balancing a weapon.  What I'm trying to say is, its seems they consider weapon length to be a greater benefit for a weapon than speed or damage in most instances.

In a way, they are correct.  Especially for 1h weapons, 10 length can mean a big difference.  It effects your characters "threat area" and therefore combat effectiveness.

At the same time, I agree with you that there seems to be a rather large difference in the two weapons you list.  The BSS is waaaay better than the arming sword, even when considering length, in my opinion.

[Matey]

weapon length can be really misleading. The Italian sword has 98 reach compared to the Long Espada's 103... the 5 difference feels huge to me, but when comparing a grosse messer with 85 to a broad one handed battle axe with 73, i barely notice the difference. I will sacrifice the extra damage of the italian for the 5 reach of the long espada, but i wont sacrifice the damage and shield breaking of the broad one handed battle axe for the 12 extra reach of the grosse messer. The reach difference between the broad short sword and the arming sword MIGHT justify some of the other differences, i would have to play around with both to decide.

[Penitent]

weapon length can be really misleading. The Italian sword has 98 reach compared to the Long Espada's 103... the 5 difference feels huge to me, but when comparing a grosse messer with 85 to a broad one handed battle axe with 73, i barely notice the difference. I will sacrifice the extra damage of the italian for the 5 reach of the long espada, but i wont sacrifice the damage and shield breaking of the broad one handed battle axe for the 12 extra reach of the grosse messer. The reach difference between the broad short sword and the arming sword MIGHT justify some of the other differences, i would have to play around with both to decide.

I know what you mean by this, I've experienced the same thing. 

There must be some kind of "critical length" or something...something length threshold that helps determine how useful a weapon really is on the ground in CRPG.  It probably relates to how long other people's weapons are (2h, poles) and how close people usually stand to each other during a fight. 

I'm thinking that once you have an enemy in close range, they are in close range.  A 70 length or 80 length weapon will do.  It doesn't matter.  They are either close and can be hit, or are too far and cannot.

However, lots of people like to "dance" in and out of range of their longer weapons (2h, poles) so in those cases a weapon of 95 length or 103 length might become very noticeable.  This is when players are in kind of a gray-area in terms of distance and you are asking yourself "are they just inside my range, or just outside my range?" and the longer weapon decides this.

[Spa_geh_tea]

I don't get it......please help me understand.


You are comparing bananas and pears.....both are fruit. That's about it.

Examples:
 Arming sword should be compared to a Nordic sword.
 Broad short sword should be compared to Nordic short sword of war.

What you have shown me is a better sword is more expensive. Males sense, no?

[Nazurdin]

You make it sound like arming sword were ever desirable. 

[San]

Broad Short Sword has too many pros over Arming Sword balance-wise.

It has stats so good that many swords in that range are made undesirable.

Still arguably worse than the liuyedao, an even cheaper weapon.. Maybe the arming sword is just underpowered still?

Additionally, the stats for length 80-90 One-handers are on a different tier than 90-100+, too.

[Soldier_of_God]

well, in 100% of all cases, the weapon with the longest length will always hit more often, and more effectively keep the player out of harms way.

Lets just say a mad scientist cloned ZAN, and gave one a 70 length iron battleaxe with 36 cut, and the other a long espada with 27 cut and 103 length. considering the two clones were both fighting with monk robes on, who would get the most kills?

long espada Zan, thats who. case closed.

[XyNox]

well, in 100% of all cases, the weapon with the longest length will always hit more often, and more effectively keep the player out of harms way.

Lets just say a mad scientist cloned ZAN, and gave one a 70 length iron battleaxe with 36 cut, and the other a long espada with 27 cut and 103 length. considering the two clones were both fighting with monk robes on, who would get the most kills?

long espada Zan, thats who. case closed.

Why is that ? If you choose a shorter weapon you will most likely adapt your playstyle accordingly. No one would try to outrange someone with a longer weapon.

[Ronin]

well, in 100% of all cases, the weapon with the longest length will always hit more often, and more effectively keep the player out of harms way.

Lets just say a mad scientist cloned ZAN, and gave one a 70 length iron battleaxe with 36 cut, and the other a long espada with 27 cut and 103 length. considering the two clones were both fighting with monk robes on, who would get the most kills?

long espada Zan, thats who. case closed.

Long espada has 27 cut AND 28 pierce. If you want to make this kind of comparision, compare an arabian straight sword (28 cut) and an iron battle axe (36 cut) maybe?