Disclaimer:This is not intended to be yet another "shields vs X" thread.Please use other, existing threads to discuss 2H or DW vs shield usage. From IRC chat - (link here) Discussion goal: Clarify methods and define what those "different benefits" should be. To help remain constructive, I think it's best to focus on these two questions: When and how should 2H outperform Dual Wield? When and how should Dual Wield outperform 2H? also: I'd like to use this example (same IRC) of a distinction that isn't particularly meaningful. What we have here is 'non-streaky' (DW) vs 'streaky' (2H) DPS. Without further qualifiers, this mechanic out-performs the other randomly, removing any element of control. Preferred mechanics would let the Warrior tactically select the best weapons for the situation.
Lets assume 1 on 1, the DPS is identical. This means that more mobs tanked, the 2H would be more favourable due to Riposte of the primary. They could adjust the Riposte rate to compensate further, or provide 2H only disc to further this (Similar to Berserkers Savagery line). The way to make Duel wield stand out imo is through Procs. Make them more meaningful again and up the secondary slot proc rate.
I personally see 2Handers as a slower, substantially bigger swing than DW should be. I'm not sure how they would mod 2Hander's Crit damage without modifying all the sets but it sounds interesting to me. DW IMO should do more damage than the nonDPS weapon set due to you having 2 weapons so you're hitting more often. I could live with the lower chance of crit. If they balanced out over the long term I could see 2Handers being used when mobs have damageshields but not a clear cut reason to use DW.
I don't think it's necessary for their DPS to be identical. For example, increased riposte rates would clearly advantage 2H against multiple weak targets, while increased proc damage would favor DW for single target DPS. More differentiation = good. I'm also not familiar with the berserker mechanic you're referencing. Can you elaborate? What about 100% DS mitigation when using 2H - the 'shielding resistance' AA already has the mechanic in place.
OP omitted a couple of other, relevant to this discussion, statements by Elidroth: Which answers OP's question about when and how X should out perform Y leaving only the question: Are they sufficiently distinct to encouraging using both and situationally preferring one over the other? As things stand (putting aside the issue of S&B vs. DW and 2H DPS when all are used with another player tanking, for purposes of this discussion) I try to take advantage of DW's faster but for less damage and lower critical hits - 10 DMG augs - I'm not getting hit and there's therefore no good purpose to using either aggro augs or AC augs on my 1Handers when DWing (Or aggro procs for that matter - I favor damage procs on my DMG augged DPS weapons. More....damage) Dragorn's War Mask increasing a weapon's damage bonus by 10. With a very fast 1H weapon this is somewhat like using Moss Covered Twig when you could use it in the primary hand - apply the (larger than it should be) damage bonus extremely frequently. While Elidroth has said that we flurry often enough as it is we can take further advantage of fast high ratio 1Handers. Furious. If damage bonus increasers only lets us chip away at a mob's HP even taking advantage of Furious consider all of the previous (fast high ratio 1Hndr, DB increaser, Furious) with a 500 HP DD proc and Rage of Rallos Zek. Every time we swing our mainhander (and we can get a fast 1Handr to swing a lot) - "BLAM". 2H hits slower, but harder, with a chance for BIG critical hits When fighting mobs with big damage shields When benefiting from damage multiplier effects Big ripostes. When benefiting from accuracy increasers (doesn't seem to have a lot of effect atm). (It would be nice if an illusion which usefully increased our accuracy joined Clockwork(Tanking), Dragorn War Mask(DW DPSing) to give hard hitting 2H a weakish substitute for a stance too). In short (too late I know) I think the foundational differences are there and that if 2H is improved situationally and is competitive with DW when both setups are used just cruising it'll all come out in the wash. I don't think there's a huge need for greater DW/2H utility or differentiation until the in-game answers to the larger questions that were responded to in that Warrior/Paladin thread actually appear. Not that suggestions in advance of that event are out of order and shouldn't be entertained.
Battleblade please do not ruin another thread. Size of hits/crits is irrelevant as it all averages out over time. IMO both should be viably equal dps side by side with equal augments. When tanking 2handers will take the cake is ripostes. They also shine a bit better with increased flurry rates (or in theory should).
Why would you want a dps option tied to an defensive ability (riposte). That doesn't exactly produce the desired effect, the whole point of dropping the shield would imply you aren't getting hit and therefore a gain in riposte dmg would be a meaningless distinction from a dps set up.
I specifically addressed those exact points in the first post. Choosing DPS over defense is valid whether we're being hit or not. Both situations should be considered.
I didn't post the statements below, Elidroth did. If you have a problem with what he said take it up with him. If you don't then you and I are on the same page. “<11@Elidroth> what I see really for warriors is 1h/shield is for tanking, DW and 2H are dps...<11@Elidroth> DW hits faster for smaller amounts and less crits, while 2H hits slower, but harder, with a chance for BIG critical hits<11@Elidroth> but is also less accurate” I stand by what I said and believe its an excellent post. Where things do not work much as I've described they should work more as I described and more as Elidroth is quoted above as intending. And Shiftie, it's a little hypocritical to criticize the relationship between ripos and damage when that's one of the three pillars supporting knight swarming (the others being combat self-heals and deflection). While I agree with your point in principle the truth is DW and 2H usefulness doesn't fall off just because you are being hit. It falls off because the benefits of lowering damage intake by using a shield coupled with the damage you can produce while using a shield is more advantageous. It's a point that neither you nor I is going to slip by Elidroth. He's all over this I'm sure. If he didn't want offensive setups to ripo Paladin 2Handers wouldn't ripo. I seriously doubt Warriors will be any less or any more gear entangled than knights when this is all over. And I seriously doubt that there will be any more question about weapon use and roles/pseudo stances. What Warriors, Paladins, and SK's are doing will dictate how they are geared and it will make at least marginal (5-15%) difference. Now kindly let the nice Warriors suggest (as I did in my first post in this thread) how we get that at least marginal (5-15%) difference consistent with developer proclamations.
Maybe I wasn't clear that happens sometimes. The thread isn't about tanking but rather dps. Specifically how to make dw/2her both advantageous under specific situations while still being a viable setup to favor when using them for the aforementioned dps purposes. I find it to be counterintuitive to rely on riposte damage as a contributing factor to distinguish between the two weapon configurations. I'm not saying riposte isn't a viable source of dps or dps gains. What I was saying is that if you are tanking to gain dps you are hampering that configuration while not tanking. In which case it would benefit your class to boost specifically the dps a configuration does while not having attacks focused on you or else you will be balanced in your dps setup with the assumption that you are tanking. If you also gain ripostes should you choose to tank then win/win. I don't know how or why knight swarming got brought into this. I don't care if warriors riposte for a million damage, but only one person can tank a boss at once. So I thought these setups were going to be purposes to boost the non tanking scenario in which case riposte is a poor choice to distinguish 2her vs dw. We know that they can make thing a check for what is or is not equipped. Shield block and deflection specifically check for a shield. In the aa irc chat I suggested warriors get a buff with x duration. This buff adds a skill attack proc with no counters. So long as a 2her is equipped it will fire off 2 or 3 skill attacks with a fixed proc rate. Alternatively it could just be a passive aa purchase with aa trees to increase the number of hits, proc rate, and skill attack damage. It must however pass the check on the 2her so that it cannot be used to gain the advantage of shield specialist the way activated abilities can. You could also use ideas like this in combination. Add a buff that will boost dw damage for 60 seconds not extended, at the end of the buff it will proc a doom triggered debuff on the mob that makes it take more damage from 2h slash, or blunt, or a bigger increase to DW for the next 60s. Ask for the x mastery of weapons aa for passive increases as well. There are endless possibilities to make them more dps than sb setup.
Mastery of weapons would have to be designed in such a way that the benefit is lost when not using a shield - else we end up right back where we started. 5-15% more dps is a crock. Using a 2hander or 2 blades should only yield 5-15% more offensive prowess if an only if using a shield only added 5-15% more defensive prowess. If it isn't a meaningful bump, it won't ever be used.
DPS is a definite consideration, but need not be the entire scope. I'd invite anyone to post ideas for stance-specific beneficial utilities.
Seems to me the easiest way to get to a point where all three configs have their uses is through either disciplines or AAs. Procreate multipliers with crit blast increases when DW maybe in the frontal arc, special attack or Slay type abilities when 2Handing in the rear arc, would be examples. I still believe though that as masters of weapons and defense, all three should prove viable while tanking depending on the situation. I'd love to see an encounter where a dual or triple wielding mob is best countered by dual wielding warrior, or a pole axe wielding boss countered by a 2handed tank.
Agreed, it's AA's that got us into this mess - AA's can get us out of it. Tricky. While my proc DPS is generally terrible, modding it heavily might cause unintended consequences with bard/shaman imbued procs. I think an innate secondary proc with a high mod might be safer (HHE/DD/Stun, etc) Maybe a different/weaker version of decapitate (not level or body type restricted) This is tricky. We don't want mobs to be unfairly punitive to DW melee classes who don't get good 2H options or vice versa, but here are some ideas. 'DW countered' (Defense) mob has a 'power up' buff with a hit counter on it. Buff drops after X hits. 'DW countered' (Offense) mob has an high dmg rune with a hit counter on it. Rune drops after X hits. '2H countered' (Defense) Big DS or defensive procs (Though I'd just ALEX / Fishing pole tank these mobs) '2H countered' (Offense) mob has a low dmg rune (like NTTB) that weak attacks don't penetrate.
Bumping this thread to rephrase a question I raised in another thread. There is a general agreement that both DW/2H should outperform 1H+Shield, however... Should Warriors do more DPS with DW or 2H? Before declaring opinions, let's first consider a couple of facts: DW requires 2+ current weapons and 2 DMG augments DW>2H>1H model is well established with Warriors as the initial baseline DW is a unique stance for Warriors not shared by other plate tanks 2H already has justified situational use (highest riposte damage) 2H damage can be modified independently of other stances via existing AA's 2H has precedent for increased avoidance through Staff block 2H Knight weapons have artificially inflated ratios vs multiclass 2H Now if I may be permitted to sway your opinions more subjectively, I would ask Warriors whether they want to behave more like: Lesser Knights in a DPS role (With an inferior 2H weapon, and without spells!) Classic Warriors and heavy DPS classes who bring the pain with two weapons
No there isn't. There's a vocal minority who managed only to register 27 Dual wield responses vs. 14 Sword and shield responses to the question "When tanking challenging content (group OR raid) as a warrior, would you prefer:" Now it's obvious S&B is a tanking setup and should have no competition in that role. And as far as the substituting for melee DPS class question goes Do you want to DPS like a tank/Beserker or a spoony Ranger/Bard - that's immaterial. DW has almost always done better DPS than 2H for the "pure melee" classes that can use it. Almost always. Obviously as Elidroth once observed with DW being fsst/smaller hits and 2H being slower/bigger hits that's a matter of the quality of our weapons and abilities/disciplines at the time the two DPS setups are compared. And thats the way it should be. I realize some DW 24/7 fans will want to sew up the melee DPS role for DW as well as making massive inroads on S&B's tanking role, but no one weapon set should do 90% of both. Or 90% of tanking and 100% of the melee DPS role. DW 24/7 was a mistake, not a Classic Warrior that we should be returned to. When I rolled my Warrior I didn't even know that mistake had been made much less that it would take so long to correct it.
So the vocal minority is currently "everyone except battleblade"? Pot ... Kettle? I am ambivalent about which should do more damage. I personally think they should be roughly equal. DW will win out on threat generation, 2handers win out on ripostes. Both DW and 2hand need to have a version of "staff block" style avoidance afforded to them. If casters can magically find the weapon proficiency to block with their staves, a master of martial combat should be able to do likewise, and arguably better. Ideally I would prefer DW to do slightly higher single target damage given the riposte aspect of 2handers, but Elidroth has already expressed his ideal of 2handers doing more. I could care less which does more as long as they both do significantly more than using a shield (current shield dps not being decreased from where it presently is.
DW and 2H are DPS weapon setups. They aren't entitled to Staff Block or any other defensive ability not afforded to members of the melee DPS class as an archetype ability. And then since we really aren't members of that archetype and only pretenders we shouldn't get such abilities at full strength.. "I am ambivalent about which should do more damage. I personally think they should be roughly equal. DW will win out on threat generation, 2handers win out on ripostes." Hopefully the only threat generation DW will produce is if you use the Warrior Only Primary Only aggro weapon with an aggro aug smf nerf the amount of damage you could otherwise do. DW will be best with damage bonus boosters, maximized swings, accuracy and strikethrough. 2H will be best given damage multiplier effects, increased accuracy, and swings. I do agree however it's best is our 2 non-tanking DPS setups are roughly equivilent. Then a player can go with what they enjoy or the best that they looted, get the best possible outcome from thatl and be satisfied. Which is the case with some of the melee DPS classes. Which is absolute best waxes and wanes but everything of a given quality is very serviceable. A specific role for DPS setups to differentiate DW and 2H for Warriors is IMO not only unnecessary but counter-productive.
Please stay on topic. The purpose of this thread is to discuss damage balance between weapon setups in light of the upcoming changes. The devs have already stated that both DW and 2hand will be doing more damage than shield use. Unless their damage output is identical, there need to be other aspects to the balance (threat vs defensive perks). Please keep the argumentative off topic banter out. The questions relevant to this discussion: Which should do more damage? How do we go about it? How to we balance what DW and 2handers bring to the table against each other? Ie 2handers outdps DW, what edge does DW maintain over 2handers (and vice versa). And yes, as tanks defense considerations are always relevant. Are they dps setups? Yes, but we're still tanks and are generally always going to be the ones tanking.
If defense considerations are on topic then I've been on topic. Please stay on topic - you aren't a moderator so kindly restrict yourself to discussing the topic at hand.
