2h swords

[Gurnisson]

All classes are easy. There's some difference, but not that major imo. Anyway, I find dedicated 2H swords quite dull and haven't played it in a while. Bardiches and Axes are cool though.

[Casimir]

Pros use a morningstar

[Voester]

So much of the melee class imbalance could be solved by simply reverting the ass-backwards spin nerf and stab sweet spot buff.

[Vodner]

So much of the melee class imbalance could be solved by simply reverting the ass-backwards spin nerf and stab sweet spot buff.

As much as I would like that (I'd be sad to lose the instastab for my 2h lolfeints though), it's probably never going to happen. I recommend just playing 2h or or polearm at the moment.

[Kafein]

that will kill half the playerbase no matter which weapon you will use.

No, if I do that with a 1h I will need double the amount of strikes. I will also be unable to actually spam them since they will try to spam and s key me (or dance) at the same time, forcing me to block twice more than them, and ten times more than if I had a 2h or pole in my hands.


It's just a rule of warband. Now that everybody learned how to block, duelling somebody that has a longer weapon takes infinitely more effort no matter how unskilled that person is.

[BlindGuy]

And now you know why 1handers are the boss: with a 2h bastard sword I walk left and forward, spamming right, and win. With a poleaxe I do a sideswing followed by an instastab and win. With a 1hander I must follow u as you fucking cowardly hold S key, I hit you over and over with something ugly and blunt then pull my shortsword and slit your throat. 1handers are the most stylish and coolest way to play. Its like using Scout or pumpgun is CS: its shit but puts nubs in their place once they realise they got owned with a gimped weapon.

Obviously shielding is different, decent melee shield allows you to do many funny things to noobs, the best of them being making them beat their teammates to death. This is both effective to win rounds and very amusing.

EDIT: Just remembering when I had a MP shield...charging into a gang of kapikulu, sure in the knowledge that they are gonna destroy each other while all I have to do is hold rightmouse and keep moving between them... oh good times good times.

[Corsair831]

Why does it seem like 70% of players use them?
Do YOU use them?
If so, why?

easy, high damage, long range, spammable

[Kajia]

people use it because its overpowered, no disadvantages at all.  Broken animations and unrealistic insane reach that outranges pretty much all but the dedicated longspears.  Human nature is to gravitate to the path of lease resistance and maximum reward. 

change all 2h sword thrusts to polearm animation and then you'd actually see some diversity in 2h.  its also fault of lazy, apathetic or incompetent devs/balance team.  When swords account for 75% or more of 2h dmg/kills, something is wrong.  For one, all unbalanced weapons probably need a weight increase of about 25-50% so they have chance to stun just about any sword or weapon in the game.

2handers usually don't have a shield. but I generally agree with the rest.
and as for the devs: devs are just normal people, they have to sleep and eat and work. so that's that. also, they don't seem to be in favor of full realism, I was proposing something like that too, but you have to think of all the 2hander players right now who would be fucked if that's ever going to happen. it's certainly dangerous to change things that drastically. as I realized, this version of cRPG is not meant to be realistic.

[Akynos]

All the high tier polearms do more damage than large majority of 2h

Firstly, to note that this quote is obviously right, as if you take the cream-of-the-crop polearms, they will indeed do more damage than the majority of 2h as we include all the shit weapons that nobody but a farmer uses. That however does not prove much.

What others would understand is that polearms generally do more damage than 2h. Is it true?

I will take the example of a 21 str build with 100 wpf against 60 armor. I will post average damage as can be seen from the crpg calculator. I will only list the weapons which do 25 damage or over. Sorry if I forget some.

Polearm (new 75p and 50b lances excluded):

Long maul: 29
Great Long Bardiche:26.5
Great Long Axe:26
Long War Axe:25
Bec de Corbin:25


Two-Handed:

Great Maul:36
Morningstar:29.5
Mallet:29
Persian Battle Axe:28.5
Great bardiche:27.5
Bar Mace:27
Flamberge:26.5
Great Axe:26.5
War Axe:26.5
War Cleaver:26
Persian War Axe:26
Maul:26
Battle Axe:25
Long Iron Mace:25

As you can see, we have 5 polearms that can deal over 25 damage with 7 PS to a 60 armored character. In contrast, we have 14 2h weapons.

and are for the most part superior in range to 2h

If you talk about spears and pikes, obviously yes. It is the main function of polearms after all, reach.
But I suppose you include there the 'top-tier' weapons which have swings. Are they really that long?

I suppose you are familiar with the different reaches due to animations:

(click to show/hide)

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 = +50

2h Polearms
Overhead = -15
Left-to-right = -7
Right-to-left = -2
Thrust = +19

1h Polearms
Thrust = +50

Let's compare the reach of the longest sideswing polearms with the longest sideswing 2h. We shall compare right-to-left, as it gives an advantage to polearm.

Polearm:

Scythe ( meh) : weapon reach: 182   battle reach: 182 - 2 = 180
Fauchard (bleh): battle reach: 170
Glaive:158
Great Long Bardiche : 153 ( that's my boy!)
Military scythe:153
Long hafted blade:151

2h:

Flamberge: weapon reach: 152  battle reach: 152 + 13 = 165
Danish: battle reach: 137
German Greatsword: 136

Taking the most advantageous animation swing, we can see that the decent damaging polearms ( unless you want to make your point with scythe and fauchard) are no more than about 15 length longer. And still, only the GLB has a great damage with it ( which is why I use it). I won't consider the flamberge, that wouldn't be representative.

 

Polearms have the most obvious animations.

For most players, they do not. That's the reason why people think I'm faster with GLB than with their danish.  The animation is not fluid like with 2h, it is very slow on chambering but looks really fast when released. However, technically, both weapons reach a target at the same time.

 

You also keep convincing me that you have absolutely no idea about how this game works.

As always, your mouth runs before your brain, Bjord. You are smart, but childish as well.


Anyway, most of this post isn't for you. You wouldn't be able to learn from it anyway. Its simply to show the community that polearms are not that good compared to 2h. I'll still argue that the animations and the horse-stopping make up for the rest. Generally speaking, you could say that polearm and 2h are pretty much even.



EDIT: @ Leshma: I already experienced thrusting a horse that didnt die, the rider was untouched and so he hit me. True, it doesn't happen most often. As for the polearm stop where ' the rider can still hit you' I could also say that you don't know what you are talking about, no offense intended.

[_GTX_]

What others would understand is that polearms generally do more damage than 2h. Is it true?

I will take the example of a 21 str build with 100 wpf against 60 armor. I will post average damage as can be seen from the crpg calculator. I will only list the weapons which do 25 damage or over. Sorry if I forget some.

Polearm (new 75p and 50b lances excluded):

Long maul: 29
Great Long Bardiche:26.5
Great Long Axe:26
Long War Axe:25
Bec de Corbin:25


Two-Handed:

Great Maul:36
Morningstar:29.5
Mallet:29
Persian Battle Axe:28.5
Great bardiche:27.5
Bar Mace:27
Flamberge:26.5
Great Axe:26.5
War Axe:26.5
War Cleaver:26
Persian War Axe:26
Maul:26
Battle Axe:25
Long Iron Mace:25

Nice post Skono firstly, alot of work gone into it... and it wasent a wall of text.

Those 2h is the recently buffed axes, which in average is pretty short and only has 3 attack directions. The polearms u put em up against has more reach and 4 attack directions, aka the stab. The other part is chrushthrough... which is very limited in reach, and also only has 3 attack directions. The chrushthrough weapons is pretty damn slow aswell.

Ofc there is a few weapons, which is not under these 2 categories. I just felt like that it needed to be noticed, that most of the weapons came from those 2 categories.

Edit: Ty rufio, cant believe i forgot that!

[rufio]

also forgot unballanced vs ballanced weaps ;) witch is a major factor imo. also imo 2handed animations are the eazyest to chamber.

[Akynos]

Indeed, I was solely looking at the 'damage' factor as a reply to Bjord. As I said, I think both are pretty balanced, and despite the damage advantage of 2h, there are minor elements that change the balance, as you guys pointed out.

[BlindGuy]

I agree with Rufio, 2handers are piss to chamber but I can never pull a chamber on a sideswing for a long polearm. Dont know why, I time it right, just dont work...

Prior to polestun removal, polearms were superior,  BUT:

2handers are easier to use, easier to master

Polearms are harder to master but ultimatly they are used by some of the very best players to such devastating effect. Also they have nice bonuses to a lot of them, such as the bonus against shields, secondary modes to knock down, etc.

I think what we have is stilleto dagger vs swiss army knife: one may be deadlier straight up, but the other is certainly more usefull to have.

[Kafein]

Multiple polearms certainly cover a wider range of specific uses.

However, no polearm is as "good at everything" as a greatsword. Good for duel, good for clusterfucks, good anticav.

[WITCHCRAFT]

that will kill half the playerbase no matter which weapon team you will use.

I would say more than 3/4 of my teamhits (received and dealt alike) are from 2H or pole sideswings. You can hit things outside your range of view sometimes!