give the heavy lance higher cut damage

[Torben]

again:  CUT instead of pierce,  but more.

this might help vs light armored ranged cav that otherwise gets away too easily,  without effecting the damage on armored inf etc,  if balanced out nicely.

remember infantry:  this might mean less ranged cav,  without really effecting you.


good Idea or is the alcohol once again playing tricks on my mind?

[Piok]

Actually almost all spears and swords should have cut damage for stab (historically there were problem even with light mail)  only weapons dedicated to hunt armor should have pierce but be also slower.

[LordRichrich]

Actually almost all spears and swords should have cut damage for stab (historically there were problem even with light mail)  only weapons dedicated to hunt armor should have pierce but be also slower.

What weapons with pointy ends had problem vs light mail?
The whole idea of having a pointy end was to pierce armour...

[Piok]

What weapons with pointy ends had problem vs light mail?
The whole idea of having a pointy end was to pierce armour...

Do you realize that pointy end was in use before first real armor appeared.

[Sarpton]

Do you realize that pointy end was in use before first real armor appeared.

Actually in the early-middle iron age in Europe it was common for a sword to be straight edged tapering to a rounded point.  Presumably because of the rarity of metallic armor.  A wider point will make a larger wound, and if your not worried about anything but quilted at best armor then you would have no problems with a rounder point.

[owens]

most spears had broad "hunting" styled heads. They had trouble peircing scale and mail armour because they were applying force over a larger area.


Remember soldiers were fairly skilled at nullifying even landed hits by making them deflect. Pilum style spears were effective vs armour and shields due to lower surface area and increased pointyness. The awlpike  had a long metal head for a different reason, simply the head couldnt get chopped of.


Arming swords were sometimes cerrated at the base to tear chain armour. Armour really was effective. A sword slash would rarely penetrate chain armour hence why swords got so damn pointy, even though it reduced the power of slashes. Axes, maces, hammers and picks were able pierce armour or break bones but short and clumsy.

Maces were better that axes as they were more balanced and often just as sharp, but incapable of doing as much damage to the poorly armoured.

[IR_Kuoin]

As long as you they remove couche from all the lances except the Great lance and practice lance, any buff / tweak on the H.lance is fine by me.

[Gurnisson]

As long as you they remove couche from all the lances except the Great lance and practice lance, any buff / tweak on the H.lance is fine by me.

The damage was nerfed a lot with the newest patch. Not only the 3 damage on the heavy lance, but the couch modifier as well. Great Lance has the same effectivity as pre-patch with almost double the damage. The stabbing lances stayed the same and therefore has very low damage on couches compared to pre-patch. A thrust will in most cases be deadlier than a couch, at least if you're good at aiming it. Today a stationary peasant (he was throwing stones in linen tunic with a knife on the hip, so not a fake peasant) survived a full speed couch (champ arabian +7 riding + masterwork heavy lance) to the chest. Fun

[Riddaren]

I have finally made up my mind about the heavy lance nerf.
It was a good nerf and just like the 2H changes ended the era of the danish greatsword this will hopefully do the same with the heavy lance.

It's still a good weapon and I would not exchange it for a regular lance or light lance.
Why? Because length matters a lot vs aware opponents and that's more important than making more damage to unaware opponents.

On topic, I'm not so sure about this suggestion. I think I dislike it.
Because I rather make more damage to armoured players than unarmoured, which I'm fine with 2 hitting from time to time.

Besides, it's quite fun not 1 hit killing all the time. It makes it more challenging.
Peasants will be killed sooner or later anyay.

I don't want to see the heavy lance turn into a weapon for attacking low armoured targets.
That would only increase peasant hunting and spawn raping.

[Gurnisson]

I agree with you on most Riddaren, but I still think the heavy lance should have its price reduced (or the prices of the others increased). Stat-wise, the heavy lance doesn't warrant almost double the price of the regular lance.

[Riddaren]

I agree with you on most Riddaren, but I still think the heavy lance should have its price reduced (or the prices of the others increased). Stat-wise, the heavy lance doesn't warrant almost double the price of the regular lance.

Yeah, it would make more sense if the prices of light lance, lance and heavy lance was about the same.

[CrazyCracka420]

It's still a good weapon and I would not exchange it for a regular lance or light lance.
Why? Because length matters a lot vs aware opponents and that's more important than making more damage to unaware opponents.

Bullshit, use an non-loomed heavy lance and tell me it's better than a non-loomed lance or light lance, I'll call you a liar and then beat you in a cav duel with your heavy lance if I'm using a lance.

A MW Heavy Lance is still a good weapon because the original 26p damage on a non-loomed heavy lance (pre-nerf) was still a good weapon.  However a non-loomed heavy is no comparison to a lance or light lance.  Just as a MW lance would (for me) be much preferred over a MW Heavy Lance. 

If that wasn't the case, then I wouldn't have any issue trading my MW Heavy Lance for a MW Lance (good luck finding that trade).

Pre patch we already decided to give up speed and damage for the extra length of the heavy lance, and so they just nerfed the damage even more, and now I feel that it's no longer beneficial to use a heavy lance over a lance.

We were already giving up this trade, why wouldn't they buff the lance or light lance if they want more people to use them instead of making the heavy lance 23p (that's just a joke).

[BlueKnight]

First of all let's compare loomed weapons so it's a better comparison because most players have their weapons loomed and talking about unloomed stuff would be pointless.

- MW Heavy Lance is 11 speed slower (speed of 75) (compared to MW Lance)

- MW Heavy Lance has 26 pierce damage which usually (when I'm playing as a footman with around 60hp and 59 body armour) deals damage of about 20-60% so I am still fine with like 40% hp. If it's couch it is stranger because it may take from like 40%-100% of hp. You can 1hit only if you hit the head with stab or with couch or when enemy was wounded.

- From the way of holding your H Lance you gain around 2/3 of your 10 length bonus. It seems to be something around 2/3 of the lance in front of the hand and 1/3 of the lance behind so you gain something around 7 length.

- Even though your reach is bigger than Lancer's range, normal lancer can adjust his maximum reach easier because his lance is 11 faster and therefore for lancer it's easier to get maximum reach in needed moment. He controlls max reach better and it lowers the advantage of heavy lancer.

- Normal Lance with 31 pierce is probably most of the time 1hitting (haven't seen many of them, that's only assumption). As a weapon with more damage and higher chance of killing an enemy it is better weapon to backstab. As we all know the best way to be a succesful cav is to backstab a lot so the risk of getting killed is decreased to minimum. As a backstabber you don't need that big length of the weapon because nobody is going to attack you anyway. Length is only good against aware enemies or other cav though lance's speed advantage lowers the heavy lance's advantage.

Cotgs_A.... (I am sorry I can't remember the name) is a good lancer on a destrier using a normal lance. It is really challenging to dismount that player. When doing all this accelerating and braking etc. you can use your speed advantage by minimalising effectiveness of proper timing of a heavy lancer and therefore cav duel is kinda even.

What I want to say is that it's not said that good h lancer has to win against good lancer and that as a cav with a lance you can feel the timing better with a faster weapon and fighting against ground units doesn't have to be harder.

What I don't understand is why they lowered the damage of the heavy lance so much while leaving lance with v good damage. I sometimes use it at +0 because it still has 2 more pierce than my MW heavy lance. Also if I get dismounted I have bigger chances of surviving with lance than heavy lance because of damage and speed so I don't need any sideweapon and I look much cooler ;-). Also lance is nealry two times cheaper than heavy lance.

If all cav changed to lance, it would increase their backstab effectiveness, they would hit harder than before patch, they would pay less upkeep and they wouldn't probably lose effectiveness vs infantry (I tried to explain above), therefore I am afraid if cav went for normal lance, sooner or later it would get nerfed in the similar way making it very similar to current heavy lance, so using a lance would be just a temporary solution.

As a +3 h. lancer (alt) I am going for 24/18 build with 8PS 6Riding and 3points to be placed probably in WM I will be pure cav. These 2 more points placed in power strike will somehow reduce 3 less pierce damage. I will suck dick on foot but my cav effectiveness will be unchanged I hope.

And rly, what da fuq was the latest patch... MW Miaodao with 45 cut 115 length and 97 speed... madness. 2h weapons are uneven now. some got extremely buffed with like 2 damage and speed or even 3 damage like axes etc. and all the items kept their prices... I would suggest that if devs make good items average, they should also do something about the price of those items.

Anyway changing h lance's damage into cut wouldn't be good because you can always kill lightly armoured people with lance+bump combo. Weak foot armour (because the bump damage you receive depends on the leg armour that you have if I am right [heard from somebody]), so weak foot armour will make those lightly clothed people suffer a lot from bumps and changing lance's dmg from pierce to cut wouldn't really change anything. Also it seems a bit logical that a speeding pointy sharp spear should have decent damage against armoured units.

for all TL;DR,

lance is a try-worthy item, devs don't really know much about cav, changing stats without touching price shouldn't take place, length of the weapon isn't that important when you backstab, damage is important when you backstab.

I feel like Joker now...

[matt2507]

I did not read everything but I do not think it is the damage that need to increase.
I think it would rather increase the speed because it is just stupid, when my character make an attack, I seem to see a quadriplegic.

And in case it is not possible, I joined the previous post to lower the cost of repair.
I do not see whys we would pay much more for an item that is not superior except in length.

[Riddaren]

I'll call you a liar and then beat you in a cav duel with your heavy lance if I'm using a lance.

Too bad you are NA.