Wurmslayer was a 1-hander ;)
But I agree, I hope to see a lot of variation within all types of weapons both in speed/dmg/whatever. Even in the design I'd like to see all kinds of odd looking blades/staves, I loved the (sometimes) goofy looking weapons that came out of Kunark. I'd love oddities like sickles, scythes, flails, tridents, whips, sai, terbutje.
I like this idea and from what we've heard from the devs so far weapon choice will make a difference when encountering different mobs.
I liked this feel as well. You weren't forced to wield the same weapons as everyone else in your class. In other games you look around and everyone in your class has the same weapons and armor. I liked the feel of eq 1 where you could be a rogue with a dagger and a hard hitting club in your offhand. A ranger with a fast delay sword and a short spear, or a monk with a hard hitting slow polearm. Obviously there has to be some restrictions to make sense with that class but I enjoyed it being as open as possible.
Generally what does the most DPS is better, and what reaches your average DPS faster is preferrable, which biases things towards faster. This is applicable across a lot of games.
EQ's mechanics are very simple. Weapon ratio is all that really matters for DPS.
Let's say you had two sets of weapons in EQ, a two-hander and two dual wielded weapons. Let's say by some miracle the sets were perfectly evenly matched in terms of what their DPS will average out to on an indefinite timeline. The dual wielded weapons would be preferred because you will reach your average DPS faster, whereas on very short fights, slow weapons tend to be very streaky as far as hits/misses go. Hitting faster reduces the influence RNG has on your DPS in the short term.
There are niche situations where this rule does not apply. The point I'm making is that Pantheon will need very well done combat mechanics to make a large variety of weapons viable. The simplicity of EQ makes weapon selection trivial. We need buttons to press. The "feel" of a weapon is not good enough, not to me at least. It needs to actually be better.
BamBam said: Liav great points! What if you can get a weapon that would be lower dps for you personally. But it proc a armor debuff that would increase your teams over all dps output?
That's a great point. It would be a situational thing for me. Solo/group, my personal DPS comes first (unless it's very demanding group content). In raids, increasing your raid's overall DPS is far more important than your own. Sometimes that may mean increasing my personal DPS, sometimes that may mean sacrifcing some personal DPS for a debuff. If the debuff demonstrably increases the raid's overall DPS then that is a no brainer for me.
It also doesn't always come down to DPS in these situations. Proccing a slow on a mob can be extremely valuable, especially in EQ's earlier content. All players should be more than willing to sacrifice DPS for utility if that is what it takes to win.
BamBam said: Liav great points! What if you can get a weapon that would be lower dps for you personally. But it proc a armor debuff that would increase your teams over all dps output?
Good players should always concentrate on making the group/raid better, not just the individual. That's why support classes like bards and illusionists are always in need. When applying buffs or choosing gear, you should give them out based on the group's performance.
I would much rather have equipment that helped out the group over my personal ego. Of course, then you have to deal with the epeen measuring crowd.
I think one way to make more weapon types viable would be to make sure there is a rock paper scissors effect on weapons and armor. I think DAoC did this. For instance slashing weapons are significantly better vs say leather, ok vs chain, and poor vs plate. Then crushing weapons are significantly better vs say plate, ok vs leather, and poor vs chain. This way having the fastest hitting dual wield weapons may not be the best choice. There might be a time where your 2 handed mace is a better weapon to use than your dual wield daggers simply because the thing you are after is more susceptible to crushing damage and you don't have a decent set of dual wield clubs, but you do have this tricked our 2 handed mace.
Unless you can carry a top tier version of every weapon type and 1 handed as well as 2 handers variants you are always going to be faced with choosing the best set up you can make with what you got on hand. You could even make it so some mobs or armor types are easier to take down with large single hits vs smaller but faster hits or vice versa.
You can also give certain weapon types innate abilities. All crushing have a % chance to interrupt, all piercers can cause a bleed effect and so on. There are ways to give everything more situational value.
I never played DAoC but that does sound interesting. I like the idea of using weapons that aren't as high damage for the proc as well. MMO's have become all about just doing as much damage as possible. I like using a weapon for a slow proc or a stun to interrupt casting. I remember having low delay weapons that weren't great damage but had a proc, it would go off fairly often with the low delay. Now this could situationally better than just a straight up higher damage weapon with a slower delay. I hope for options like this.
Some of this can be deferred with mitigation types. If a mob has a piercing mitigation of a flat 300dmb (as opposed to a percentage) and the daggers only do a max of 350dmg without a crit but the 2-hander (lance -- piercing damage) does 800dmg, The 2-hander will be more effective. I'm just making numbers up. The point is that one can balance things out with different mitigation types, to that the fast/low damage ratio isn't as good as a slow/high damage of the same ratio. And that other situations are the other way around. Maybe slow duration attacks are easier to dodge and that shows up in the dodge roll.
Liav said:I'd rather not be forced to carry a bag full of weapons of every kind and swap them out like crazy. That would get old extremely fast.
Thats the thing, you wouldn't be forced. If you are a min maxer type of player that has to be the best at everything they do all the time then you you will choose to carry dozens of weapons around. But thats a choice and with it a trade off. More weapons to be prepared for anything = less room in your bags for loot and makes for more tedious gameplay swapping thim out at every single encounter. Just adds another round of decisions to be made. I am all for as many points in the game that make me make a decision. In this case I would not carry dozens of weapons. Maybe 3 or 4 at most and would make the best of it. My decision woould mean slower kills in many cases but it would free up bag space and would make my playtime more enjoyable and less of a job.
For me and my playstyle it adds more depth to the game and doesn't take anything away. Fully aware that there are some out there that would take convenience over this though. Just my style is all.
Sabot said:I think one way to make more weapon types viable would be to make sure there is a rock paper scissors effect on weapons and armor.
I am a fan of the rock/paper/scissors of weapons vs armor that was present in DAoC. I like having a few great weapons to choose from depending on the situation instead of a single 2h/pair, and it is nice for melee to have something to play around with similar to casters working around different magic resistances.
Blunt > Plate
Piercing > Chainmail
Slashing > Leather
Cloth = Neutral
All right this took speed while i was a sleep, great inputs! Thanks :)
I agree with Iksar that the armor system is a great addition for melee, it makes sense in the game world and give us things to do.
The armor types will defiantly make us think twice about our weapons, and will make us use different weapon types more regularly --> You need that other weapon type skill to be at a decent lvl,
so you can actually hit and damage mobs at your lvl. If you don’t have this, there’s rly no reason to swap weapons. You will do more damage and land more hits,
with your normal setup, where your skills is at the cap.
I think that VR should scale this system, early game this wont have much effect, payers would be comfortable with most weapon setup.
Later on, when fighting a high lvl Ooze or a raid boss. You have to consider your damage type, to be you grp spot worth.
As a player you then need to consider, witch dungeon is best for my setup? Witch mobs do i prefer to slay? Do i need to change weapons for this Boss? - Like stuff like this :)
Maybe you want to lvl up that additional weapon skill, to be able to do that other dungeon or to be more efficient when fighting this specific mob or raid boss.
I personally like when games give me the option and things to go back for. Instead of the 100% 24-hour rush for late game and max level, that has been the trend of most mmo's lately.
When talking Weapons and how they feel, the armor system will make some weapons feel weaker in some situations, but in other situations it will really shine!
VR also should make weapons for situations like this --> weapons that shred armor and/or nullifies some magic resistance. To give to pets and to hand out to your RL noob mate, so he finally can be useful and increase your damage.
Late game weapons or Epic weapons could have an effect like this, and still do a rly good dps. The wielder weapon would be a great addition in any grp, in any raid, and it would also make that player spam FeelsGoodMan :)
For Summoners, if they are able to summon weapon that shred armor and/or removes magic resistance. it would make them worth in a grp and be really cool addition to the gameplay.
Upwards and Onwards, Friends! <3
Iksar said:Sabot said:I think one way to make more weapon types viable would be to make sure there is a rock paper scissors effect on weapons and armor.
I am a fan of the rock/paper/scissors of weapons vs armor that was present in DAoC. I like having a few great weapons to choose from depending on the situation instead of a single 2h/pair, and it is nice for melee to have something to play around with similar to casters working around different magic resistances.
Blunt > Plate
Piercing > Chainmail
Slashing > Leather
Cloth = Neutral
This is a cool idea on paper, but it's for a single player game, imo. Do monks now need to carry 3 different types of claws? This becomes too difficult to balance.
I am also a fan of the pierce/slash/crush bonus depending on what kind of mob you are fighting. It's a great way to implement "situational gear" -- and I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect a high-end monk to carry around 3 different weapon types. They don't all need to be claws. He could have a pair of claws for slashing, a bo for crushing, and a siangham for piercing. Doing this also extends meaningful progression in the game. You don't just get your epic weapon and suddenly stop caring about adding other weapons to your arsenel. Maybe you have a choice of epic weapons to choose from (EQOA did this, was awesome) -- one monk might take a pair of claws because he already has a really awesome bo whereas another monk might do the opposite.
This creates an opportunity for monks to continue seeking out other powerful weapons to add to their kit. Situational gear is going to be a really important part of progression. I understand some people don't like the idea of swapping. I hate the idea of getting the "best" version of something and then being unable to progress for that slot until the next expansion. That's the ultimate form of boredom for me. Rotating weapons out based on the encounter you are fighting actually requires some thought/effort. I would like to see the same thing done for armor as well. EQ2 had gear that had +pierce/slash/crush resist. Most raid bosses hit with crushing so gear with +crushing resist seemed to be the best far more often than not. I would like to see it a bit more balanced.
In a nutshell ... armor/weapon swapping might be "inconvenient" for those hell-bent on min-maxing because it can be pretty demanding if you want to constantly play at peak performance. I still think it's worth it. Nobody is forcing you to swap or be 100% optimal. It's a choice. If you want to use a slashing weapon against a mob that is weak vs crushing, go for it. I care far more about the long term implications of gear swapping for progression than I do any amount of tedium I would experience during combat.
I'm also in favor of slash/pierce/blunt damage types and that they should be ineffective or less effective in some situations.
I'd also like to see weapons differentiated not just by speed/damage characteristics, but by special effects. We've already talked about using longer weapons to keep enemies at a distance, and so on. I think a lot of this could take the form of a simple proc on the weapon - for example, a polearm might have a chance to proc a bind/root. A heavy mace (designed to crush armor) might have a chance to proc a short-term armor debuff. That sort of thing.
All that said, I don't want the realism of weapons to take too much away from the "fantasy" of combat. An example: In Vanguard, my disciple typically used different weapons based on how seriously she was taking the fight (in-character). Run of the mill fights, she just used her fistwraps. Fights that meant something more, she'd use her bo staff. And when she got really serious... the sword would come out. There was no real game benefit to me doing this, but doing it contributed to immersion for me. I know, I'm wierd. However I feel like if someone really strongly identifies their character with a specific kind of weapon, they should be able to use that weapon always. Maybe there are situations where they're a little less effective, but it should never be completely crippling.
I hope that makes sense :)
Sabot said:I think one way to make more weapon types viable would be to make sure there is a rock paper scissors effect on weapons and armor. I think DAoC did this. For instance slashing weapons are significantly better vs say leather, ok vs chain, and poor vs plate. Then crushing weapons are significantly better vs say plate, ok vs leather, and poor vs chain. This way having the fastest hitting dual wield weapons may not be the best choice. There might be a time where your 2 handed mace is a better weapon to use than your dual wield daggers simply because the thing you are after is more susceptible to crushing damage and you don't have a decent set of dual wield clubs, but you do have this tricked our 2 handed mace.
Unless you can carry a top tier version of every weapon type and 1 handed as well as 2 handers variants you are always going to be faced with choosing the best set up you can make with what you got on hand. You could even make it so some mobs or armor types are easier to take down with large single hits vs smaller but faster hits or vice versa.
You can also give certain weapon types innate abilities. All crushing have a % chance to interrupt, all piercers can cause a bleed effect and so on. There are ways to give everything more situational value.
I absolutely would vote for a combat system like DAoC hands down, but I don't think thats where VR is heading.
I do hope they build in a reason to choose between slower and faster weapons. Like Liav said, EQ was all about ratio. Not even counting the issues with 2h v 1h-dw. I want to see all weapons having their areas to shine, and not see a system where it is always the best "ratio" that wins. I have no real idea how to make this happen, but i'd just love to see a more varied world where everyone uses the same weapons because those specific weapons are always hands down the best because of ratio.
This is a cool idea on paper, but it's for a single player game, imo. Do monks now need to carry 3 different types of claws? This becomes too difficult to balance.
In addition to what 1AD7 said, monks could also change their damage type based on their stance (Mantis, Tiger, Bear, etc).
(I would personally prefer such a thing as I'd like to see monks return toward more of a body as the weapon kind of thing over the now common version of claw, staff, punching knife ninjas.)
kellindil said:I absolutely would vote for a combat system like DAoC hands down, but I don't think thats where VR is heading.
Actually, they are going that route. :)
13.4 Will there weapon resists and armor/skin types that affect physical combat?
Yes, what sort of material your weapon is made of and the body type of your target will matter. For example, scale, bone, and slime body types mitigate slashing damage, while crystalline body types take extra damage from piercing attacks.
@Iksar - Well, the damage type resist stuff I know. Honestly I meant more the mechanics of the combat system DAoC had. How weapon damage was calculated based on weapon speed and such.
As a Nightblade I carried around a big slow rapier on my back, and two equal speed faster daggers in my main/offhand. I would open with a crit strike from stealth using the Rapier to front load as much damage into the hit as possible, then swap to the faster weapons to continue mycombo/fight as they were better for sustained damage.