Short sword vs Short arming sword

[LordRichrich]

Short Sword
weapon length: 81
weight: 1
difficulty: 6
speed rating: 102
weapon length: 81
thrust damage: 26 pierce
swing damage: 26 cut
Price: 1794

VS

Short Arming Sword
weapon length: 81
weight: 1
difficulty: 7
speed rating: 103
weapon length: 81
thrust damage: 26 pierce
swing damage: 26 cut
Price: 3375

Just saying, way too similar for that price difference

[Jarlek]

Short Sword
weapon length: 81
weight: 1
difficulty: 6
speed rating: 102
weapon length: 81
thrust damage: 26 pierce
swing damage: 26 cut
Price: 1794

VS

Short Arming Sword
weapon length: 81
weight: 1
difficulty: 7
speed rating: 103
weapon length: 81
thrust damage: 26 pierce
swing damage: 26 cut
Price: 3375

Just saying, way too similar for that price difference

This goes for literally ALL 1handed swords.

Check Long Arming Sword and Knightly Arming Sword.
Check Simple Sword and Arming Sword.
Check Simple Nordic Sword and Nordic War Sword.

All the higher end 1h swords needs a buff.

[Laufknoten]

Hehe, I thought about making the same topic some time ago.
I would suggest making the short arming a bit longer, like 84/85 lenght. That together with the 1 point advantage in speed would make the weapon at least slightly better than the short sword and kinda justify the ~100 more upkeep.

[Spa_geh_tea]

Let's be honest. Who even uses these weapons? Maybe 1 or 2 players in all of crpg for about 3days.

Crpg has a shitton of items, which is beautiful. We all love it very much. But, maybe its time to downsize and remove all the redundant/boring/unused items and make room for something new and exciting. What that is, who knows. But it does at least open the door to fill in new items and more relaxed constraints on balance to other unused items.

Thoughts?

[LordRichrich]

Let's be honest. Who even uses these weapons? Maybe 1 or 2 players in all of crpg for about 3days.

Crpg has a shitton of items, which is beautiful. We all love it very much. But, maybe its time to downsize and remove all the redundant/boring/unused items and make room for something new and exciting. What that is, who knows. But it does at least open the door to fill in new items and more relaxed constraints on balance to other unused items.

Thoughts?

Yup. There's so many shitty 1h's, 2h's, poles, armours etc. Devs say there's not many slots left for new items, try removing the ones we have, like the stupid 3k cloth armours

[Mr_Oujamaflip]

Seems good, might not be a bad idea to remove some of the multicoloured armours and see if its possible to classify them as one armour with a selectable colour independently. Might save some slots at least.

[Falka]

shitty 1h's, 2h's

Shitty 2h? Which one? Except some cheap axes all 2h swords are fully viable weapons.

Check Long Arming Sword and Knightly Arming Sword.

All the higher end 1h swords needs a buff.

How many players using Long Arming Sword do you see? One? Two? Even now with hugh difference in upkeep almost everyone uses high tier, expensive weapons, making them even better will not help. 

[Jarlek]

How many players using Long Arming Sword do you see? One? Two? Even now with hugh difference in upkeep almost everyone uses high tier, expensive weapons, making them even better will not help.

I've always used the LAS over the KAS, same as all the smart people. Just because some people are dumb enough to use the KAS doesn't change the fact that most don't.

[Tovi]

A lot of 1h swords should be faster.
Have you ever tried to hold a real 2h sword and a 1h sword ? How can a 2h sword be faster than a 1h ?

[Falka]

some people are dumb enough to use the KAS

Dumb? Why should I use Long Arming Sword when I can use KAS which has better stats? And price? Who cares about upkeep when training lessons cost over 4 mln.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

At the loom prices height people would pay 1,8k+ for 3+ looms, they were still above 1mil last I checked, when people are willing to part with 1mil for slight advantages you're an idiot if you use a weapon that's worse in every way except a tiny amount of upkeep and it's not purely for style.