Rework axes (some general proposals)

[Commodore_Axephante]

Wall of text alert. I love axes. Just can't stop.

I could be ways off, and I would be happy to hear about it if you feel that way, but I think axes are generally not as effective as other options in CRPG. I'll keep using them anyway, for style if nothing else, but hear me out. The math is in: cutting damage is just not as good as blunt or piercing, and 1h, 2h and poles all have great options from those camps. It doesn't seem like there is really any good reason to use an axe, besides general badassitude.

However, historically, this wasn't the case. Axes played a major role in warfare, and it wasn't just because berserkers wanted to look sweet on the field. There is a reason Axes were weaponized from their tool ancestors, and a reason they stayed relevant all the way up into the rape of the New World (which, by the way, means they sort of out-lasted swords).

Now here's the crux of it. Firstly, axes are cheaper than swords. There is less metal involved. The game represents this in a way, but it could be better. Secondly, and more importantly, the hack of an axe penetrates deeper than the slash of a sword. That's why people don't cut down trees with swords. In the days before heavy plate, before the advent (or need for) piercing weapons, axes were the piercing weapon.

So here's my suggestion. Not sure how the innate axe bonus vs. shields works mechanically, but if they break shields better than swords do, why wouldn't they be better at busting armor, just the same? However, we can't have them doing piercing or blunt's job, so... what if we gave them some sort of passive bonus against light and medium armors?

What this would do would allow axes to sort of fit a niche between cut and piercing. From a balance perspective, I think this would only improve the game, creating more diversity.

Swords would remain the versatile choice - they can slash for cut damage, and stab for pierce, when they need to bust armor. Axes would lack that pierce potential, making them less effective against armor than a sword in a skilled fighter's hands, but they would be more generally utilitarian and noob friendly (which is also realistic, as they were often the weapon of the lower classes). And then, for the big guns, there's the piercing and blunt options we know and love.

What do you think?
(Should I add some kind of poll to this? If so, what would you put on it?)

EDIT: And, for the record, I think all axes should be polearms with no stabs... I mean, if you can't stab with some of those Chinese swords that actually have points, how the hell can you justify stabbing with an axe? Besides, 2h animations with axes make no sense.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 Beautiful. And these aren't even for fighting.

[Miwiw]

Afaik the bonus against shield makes them very useful against those, meaning they are breaking them very quickly compared to swords or other stuff. That's already a great advantage, given there are many shield users present.

About what kind of axes are you talking, there are 2h/1h and pole axes. They are all doing cut damage and that, compared to most swords with a high damage.

1h: Broad One Handed Battle Axe has 35 cut dmg, the Nordic Champion Sword only 32 cut. However the NCS can stab but you can use the axe in x-mode to cause pierce dmg as well (that only applies to this 1handed axe though). Of course the axes are also shorter than most other swords but they aren't glancing as much at light/medium armor.

2h: The Great Axe has 46 cut dmg, that is the same amount of dmg the Flamberge is causing with swings. 2h axes are however unbalanced but bonus against shield and a nice speed makes them kinda useful however not many people are using them.

Pole: Most people do indeed use pole axes as they are balanced and are also good compared to 2h greatswords (without a good stab but bonus against shields). In the pole section only the long bardiche has more cut dmg than the Great Long Axe, however the bardiche is unbalanced.

Axes are after all doing amazing high dmg versus light /medium gear. Blunt/pierce is better vs high armor rating aka plate, but axes are useful there too, imo. Theyre kinda underrated however, a light buff would make them less rare indeed.

[Commodore_Axephante]

You lay out the current state of it well Miwiw, but while I haven't done the math, I suspect that those high cut numbers still make them vastly less damaging than the piercing options, or even the stab of swords (edit: I meant to say against light armors, too).

From the Game mechanic thread (two contradictory lists, not sure which is right)
 At 15 armor cut is about 11% weaker than blunt
- At 30 armor cut is about 24% weaker than blunt
- At 45 armor cut is about 37% weaker than blunt
- At 60 armor cut is about 45% weaker than blunt
- At 75 armor cut is about 50% weaker than blunt

and then:

- At 15 armor cut is about 21% weaker than blunt
- At 30 armor cut is about 43% weaker than blunt
- At 45 armor cut is about 50% weaker than blunt
- At 60 armor cut is about 83% weaker than blunt
- At 70+ armor cut glances always

Like I said, I haven't done the math, but 15 or 21 percent at only 15 armor? That's pretty damning.

Edit: Oh, err, that's blunt. But you get the picture.

[Nazurdin]

The only thing 2h/long axes need is separate shaft and head damage.

[Commodore_Axephante]

The only thing 2h/long axes need is separate shaft and head damage.

Without massively buffing the "head damage", that would effectively be a massive nerf. They'd still be just as unattractive as they are today, and then some. But I agree that it would be more realistic.

[Miwiw]

(click to show/hide)

You lay out the current state of it well Miwiw, but while I haven't done the math, I suspect that those high cut numbers still make them vastly less damaging than the piercing options, or even the stab of swords.

From the Game mechanic thread (two contradictory lists, not sure which is right)
 At 15 armor cut is about 11% weaker than blunt
- At 30 armor cut is about 24% weaker than blunt
- At 45 armor cut is about 37% weaker than blunt
- At 60 armor cut is about 45% weaker than blunt
- At 75 armor cut is about 50% weaker than blunt

and then:

- At 15 armor cut is about 21% weaker than blunt
- At 30 armor cut is about 43% weaker than blunt
- At 45 armor cut is about 50% weaker than blunt
- At 60 armor cut is about 83% weaker than blunt
- At 70+ armor cut glances always

Like I said, I haven't done the math, but 15 or 21 percent at only 15 armor? That's pretty damning.

I see, I should have read that topic and that list gives me a different view on it. One thing to say is that cut doesnt always glances on 70+ armor at least. 79 is the max armor you can get currently with loomed Heavy Gauntlets and loomed Milanese Plate. I had about 72 armor once with loomed Gothic Plate and I got 3 hit quite easily by cut weapons (in that case it were 2h Greatswords though). I was without any IF though and 18 STR only. High armor values are also not really the best choice to go.

I'm all in for a light buff of some axes, especially the 2h axes as they are really rarely used.

[EponiCo]

Like I said, I haven't done the math, but 15 or 21 percent at only 15 armor? That's pretty damning.

What you are forgetting is that in general pierce/blunt has a much smaller base damage. Only steel pick, warhammer and great maul escape this rule and they are all op anyway.

[Falka]

I think axes are generally not as effective as other options in CRPG.

Erm, what? Great axe isn't effective? That's sth new to me... 

I'm all in for a light buff of some axes, especially the 2h axes as they are really rarely used.

  On the second thought you are right, at least 60 dmg for Great axe is just a must... 

[Commodore_Axephante]

Erm, what? Great axe isn't effective? That's sth new to me... 

I mean look, it will kill people if you hit them with it, yeah. But can anyone argue that it stands up to any of the greatswords? What with all their stabbiness, etc? Is the shield bonus really enough to make up for that, and the shorter length?

[Falka]

But can anyone argue that it stands up to any of the greatswords? What with all their stabbiness, etc? Is the shield bonus really enough to make up for that, and the shorter length?

On siege I would take Great axe over any other 2h, including greatswords. 50 dmg, 96 speed and bonus against shields, yeah, not effective at all 

[Berserkadin]

You should try siege with str build + great axe. You will rape.

[Commodore_Axephante]

On siege I would take Great axe over any other 2h, including greatswords. 50 dmg, 96 speed and bonus against shields, yeah, not effective at all 

50 cut, with no pierce alternative and no lolstab (though I still don't really know what that means, tbh). But alright, your opinion holds weight.

[Falka]

50 cut, with no pierce alternative

With 50 cut Great Axe deals more dmg than morningstar to almost everyone, so wouldn't say lack of pierce is a disadvantage.

[XyNox]

As an archer, 2h weapons arent really my department and even if I play on an alt I wouldnt choose axes over swords. That is mostly because of style concerns though as axes appear sort of "primitive" to me.

Anyway, I have to agree with the OP. A bit more damage and shieldbreaking does not compensate for shorter reach and unbalanced IMO. But I dont think the problem lies in the values of axes but more in those of greatswords. It just does not feel right to see someone wearing full plate armor gets twoshotted by a SLASH of a sword. I am no historian but I just cant imagine that a blade, which is built to bend in order not to break on impact, can slice through hardened metal and actually cutting the flesh blow. Even more so when you imagine that under those sheets of steel is probably another layer of mail or lamellar. It may be a realism concern but even looked upon gameplaywise, look around, greatswords and greatswords everywhere.

But then again, what can you do ? If you nerf the damage of greatswords, the offset between 1h swords and 2h swords wouldnt appear to be right ( and needless to say the forum will be shitstormed in a matter of minutes ). If you buff the damage of 2h axes they will oneshot even more than 2h swords do now. If you buff plate, even more people with low ps will get autokilled due to not being able to deal any damage at all to plateusers.

The only reasonable thing I can imagine is giving weapons hybrid-damgetypes.

A small indicator next to the damage value that says: Damage 46 (20c / 15p / 11b ) for examle.

If that is too complicated, giving axes or head-heavy weapons a 50/50 mix of cut and pierce( or blunt ) in general would do also I guess. But since that would probably mean a lot of coding I doubt we will see any changes since M:BG probably consumes all the devs attention atm.

[Commodore_Axephante]

The only reasonable thing I can imagine is giving weapons hybrid-damgetypes.

A small indicator next to the damage value that says: Damage 46 (20c / 15p / 11b ) for examle.

If that is too complicated, giving axes or head-heavy weapons a 50/50 mix of cut and pierce( or blunt ) in general would do also I guess. But since that would probably mean a lot of coding I doubt we will see any changes since M:BG probably consumes all the devs attention atm.

Great solution, actually. But you're probably right about it never seeing the light of day.