Buff Swashbuckling?

[Ronin]

Addition to what teeth said, 1h is the best weapon in clusterfucks. Meaning you will have superb hitting power compared to shielders and better animations compared to other melee classes. The place where swashbucklers shine is clusterfucks, therefore mostly siege (and ships).

[Clockworkkiller]

This makes just as much sense as buffing lances used on foot.

Genius idea, imma make a foot-lance alt right now, can we get a buff to them?

[Tydeus]

There is in fact an advantage to using 1h without a shield. There are different modifiers to which extent weight of a weapon slows down your movement for the 1h, 1h/2h and 2h grouped weapons. 1h has the best modifier, which means that the weight of the weapon you use affects your movement least. With 1h having very low weight and low length, which affect your movement before the modifier above kicks in, you move quite fast with just a 1h.

Eh? http://forum.meleegaming.com/beginner%27s-help-and-guides/running-in-crpg/ I was actually somewhat wrong in my previous statement about weight. It would really just depend upon the comparison you're making.

The class is designed to be used with a 5-7 weight shield, remove that and you end up with a very fast class. 1h can sidestep and switch direction very fast compared to using a heavier, longer weapon of the 2h class. This is considerable to the extent that even though my preferred melee build is 21/21, for 1h without shield I went 24/18. I don't think there was much of a difference in speed between these builds, in fact footwork felt much easier to do with the swashbuckling one.

Again, it's not really that something was implemented to level the playing field between shielders and 1h-no shield characters. What you're talking about is a byproduct of something else, a coincidence. See, when a polearm or 2h is used with a shield, it suffers penalties. To really call 1h no shield a class of its own, you'd need some mechanic that really separated the two. A buff to weapon speed or damage is basically what I'm talking about. Not that I'm suggesting we change the conversation to that, as I think Urist's nudges offer the most intriguing benefits to gameplay here.

Also, blocking without a shield is instant and with a shield is not, but eh.

It's not instant, it's based on weapon speed. Although I think DaveUKR recently found that an equal value of speed on a shield and a weapon does not result in the same effective block speed. I think he found that you need a higher shield speed to translate into the same effective block speed of a weapon.

[Jarlek]

There is in fact an advantage to using 1h without a shield. There are different modifiers to which extent weight of a weapon slows down your movement for the 1h, 1h/2h and 2h grouped weapons. 1h has the best modifier, which means that the weight of the weapon you use affects your movement least. With 1h having very low weight and low length, which affect your movement before the modifier above kicks in, you move quite fast with just a 1h.

According to this, it's the other way around. Weight affects you MORE if it is a 1h. Roughly 1.5x as much as if it wasn't a 1h.

So a 1.0 1h slows you down as much as a 1.5 2h/pole, a 2.0 1h as much as a 3.0 2h/pole.

(click to show/hide)

Listed one-handed weapon weight                      Effective weight for calculation
                 1                                                                         1.5
                1.5                                                                        2
                 2                                                                          3

[Kafein]

Teeth, the longsword has a length of 106, 1 more point than the longest 1h, and vastly superior overall stats compared to any 1h cut weapon (it's hard to compare it with hammers due to knockdown).

Basically, anyone playing 1h no shield would be much better off being a longsword (or even better, HBS) user. And that's exactly what I plan to do personally when I get my hands on that respec thing. Going 2h also allows for a much greater variety of roles, as being able to use a longsword without bouncing pretty much means you'll be able to use any 2h effectively, the LS being on the lower end of the damage spectrum unlike viable 1h weapons which are in the higher end of their category. You can switch to any great sword/miaspamocopterdao or even the best crushthrough weapon in the game if you have 21 STR.

Addition to what teeth said, 1h is the best weapon in clusterfucks. Meaning you will have superb hitting power compared to shielders and better animations compared to other melee classes. The place where swashbucklers shine is clusterfucks, therefore mostly siege (and ships).

You won't hit any better than shielders, except if you count the handful of skill points you can spare if you don't put any point in shield skill. As someone without a shield and with low reach, the only way you can deal with multiple opponents is by using your movement speed, either to buy reach, either to put one behind the other. In a real clusterfuck, you'll no doubt have allies around blocking your way which will lead to your death. Also your right swing is useless if you have anybody on your right, which is pretty damn always in clusterfucks. To say that 1h no shield are the best in clusterfucks in pretty much the opposite of the truth. 2h and poles do better because they kill things and shielders do better because they got a shield. The place where this "class" really shines the most is duels.

Of course I'm only discussing pure swash. When you put ranged hybridizing in the equation, 1h no shield is a pretty solid choice.

[Bobthehero]

Hence why I mentionned bonuses applying only if you have 1h Wpn Prof or 2 slot sword, so archers are unlikely to use it.

[Falka]

Basically, anyone playing 1h no shield would be much better off being a longsword (or even better, HBS) user.

That's not true. I played as 2h since the release of warband, since last autumn play as 1h, and while I was pretty bad 2her I think that I'm quite okay 1h, or at least much better than 2her 1h playstyle just suits me better. And I doubt I'm the only one who's better with 1h

You won't hit any better than shielders, except if you count the handful of skill points you can spare if you don't put any point in shield skill.

Not sure about that, but I always have a feeling that my swings/feints are much faster without shield than when I play as a shielder. It's also much easier to break someone's block playing without shield.

[Jarlek]

That's not true. I played as 2h since the release of warband, since last autumn play as 1h, and while I was pretty bad 2her I think that I'm quite okay 1h, or at least much better than 2her 1h playstyle just suits me better. And I doubt I'm the only one who's better with 1h

Not sure about that, but I always have a feeling that my swings/feints are much faster without shield than when I play as a shielder. It's also much easier to break someone's block playing without shield.

Your swings are not faster, but your feints are. Shields don't block immediately, it takes time for you to "ready" the block. That's what the shields speed rating is for. So when you feint while holding a shield, you get that small added time to ready the shield while feinting added.

[Sandersson Jankins]

That's not true. I played as 2h since the release of warband, since last autumn play as 1h, and while I was pretty bad 2her I think that I'm quite okay 1h, or at least much better than 2her 1h playstyle just suits me better. And I doubt I'm the only one who's better with 1h

Not sure about that, but I always have a feeling that my swings/feints are much faster without shield than when I play as a shielder. It's also much easier to break someone's block playing without shield.

I'm pretty much garbage at 2h (god knows how) as well. I mean, I'd still come out near the top on the battle server from hitting people in the back, but I had a hard time blocking and dueling. With pure 1h I feel like a wrecking machine.

So because something currently isn't being played much, changes that would increase variety and player freedom shouldn't be implemented?
It's the weapon length, not the weight that makes the difference here, although shield weight truly does matter. But again, this is an advantage gained not because of an implemented mechanic meant to buff 1h+no shield, it simply comes naturally with the absence of a shield. It's equal for all shieldless melee.

Hell, I'd be really happy if there was some nice additions made to buckling swashes, but I don't feel that it is a pressing concern. Few players seem to even be interested; most would rather use the perceived "best" thing. In fact, I really like that it's not equal in power to other classes. I hate using shit that is "the best" or "OP" or even "really good" in games. I enjoy gimping myself to some degree. The only thing that frustrates me about the playstyle is the constant weaponstuns by greatswords and some polearms.

[DaveUKR]

Although I think DaveUKR recently found that an equal value of speed on a shield and a weapon does not result in the same effective block speed. I think he found that you need a higher shield speed to translate into the same effective block speed of a weapon.

This might be a little bit incorrect interpretation of my conclusion. It looks like initial shield speed of 0 skill shield and no-wpf weapon can provide the same blocking speed. But there are only 2 shields with speed above 100 and the average speed of shields is way less than the average speed of weapons + people tend to have maximum wpf while shielders prefer to have 4-6 shield skill so the speed bonuses of skills/wpf make it differ.

[Teeth]

According to this, it's the other way around. Weight affects you MORE if it is a 1h. Roughly 1.5x as much as if it wasn't a 1h.

So a 1.0 1h slows you down as much as a 1.5 2h/pole, a 2.0 1h as much as a 3.0 2h/pole.

You are right, I must have remembered it wrong as I was thinking of exactly this thread when I wrote what I wrote. I think it makes more sense the way I concluded it though, when you have one hand free it is much easier to balance yourself when moving, compared to holding something with 2 hands. Now this is a buff I could support. Remove the 1h weight malus and make 2 weight count as 2 weight for 1h as well. Maybe this could be exclusive to 1h when used without a shield.

You won't hit any better than shielders, except if you count the handful of skill points you can spare if you don't put any point in shield skill. As someone without a shield and with low reach, the only way you can deal with multiple opponents is by using your movement speed, either to buy reach, either to put one behind the other. In a real clusterfuck, you'll no doubt have allies around blocking your way which will lead to your death. Also your right swing is useless if you have anybody on your right, which is pretty damn always in clusterfucks. To say that 1h no shield are the best in clusterfucks in pretty much the opposite of the truth. 2h and poles do better because they kill things and shielders do better because they got a shield. The place where this "class" really shines the most is duels.

I think you are once again painting a much grimmer picture of swashbuckling than reality. If you really dislike your own class this much, it is indeed time for a respec. My one reason to play a swashbuckler, I was pretty much the only one in EU when I did, is that fighting as a swashbuckler feels great. There is something about the way 1h blocks, the  posture when fighting and the animations that makes it feel so elegant and fun. Dancing around with the good movement speed, leftswinging and overheading people in a clusterfuck is extremely good as a 1h. I remember going on siege for the first time and as a level 28 swashbuckler in money making gear I outperformed any of my other builds. Maybe the weapon stats plead against it, but I think the longsworder/swashbuckler comparison goes beyond stats, I simply love 1h animations. The left swing is extremely overrated and both the overhead (since the turn rate tweak) and right swing are extremely underrated.

It's not instant, it's based on weapon speed. Although I think DaveUKR recently found that an equal value of speed on a shield and a weapon does not result in the same effective block speed. I think he found that you need a higher shield speed to translate into the same effective block speed of a weapon.

What, so it is harder to block with a flamberge than a bastard sword? In my experience there is no difference whatsoever.

[Tydeus]

What, so it is harder to block with a flamberge than a bastard sword? In my experience there is no difference whatsoever.

Yes, there is a difference. And, as DaveUKR pointed out, wpf also increases your block speed.

[Ronin]

You won't hit any better than shielders, except if you count the handful of skill points you can spare if you don't put any point in shield skill. As someone without a shield and with low reach, the only way you can deal with multiple opponents is by using your movement speed, either to buy reach, either to put one behind the other. In a real clusterfuck, you'll no doubt have allies around blocking your way which will lead to your death. Also your right swing is useless if you have anybody on your right, which is pretty damn always in clusterfucks. To say that 1h no shield are the best in clusterfucks in pretty much the opposite of the truth. 2h and poles do better because they kill things and shielders do better because they got a shield. The place where this "class" really shines the most is duels.

First of all yes, I'm talking about the extra point bonus.

However I do not agree with you here. Pole and Twohand weapons are longer, making them useless in clusterfucks because of allies (and enemies) interrupting your swings early. Left swing of onehanded weapons are pretty useful in clusterfucks, because of the lower reach and higher speed. You won't be using any one handed right swings in a clusterfucks of course, that is the least thing you should do. Overhead on one handed swords are also, I believe, have a lower chance of being interrupted.

[BADPLAYER_old2]

What, so it is harder to block with a flamberge than a bastard sword? In my experience there is no difference whatsoever.

Difference is extremely noticeable if you use a great maul then any fast 1h and only block no swings.

[Gurnisson]

So it wasn't just me then? I always felt blocking with my 69 speed pike was rather painful compared to my scimitar 1h char