Curse

Raccoon · May 25, 2009, 11:54 AM // 11:54

Axes have almost always been the best option for warriors. Swords should have a reduced damage output but a slightly faster attack speed. I'm talking something like 7% faster.

PahaLukki · May 25, 2009, 02:20 PM // 14:20

I think the crux of the issue is dismember and axe rake being vastly superior to hamstring and sever -> gash. This is because in PvE most things are some form non-fleshy and dismember is simply usable while sever -> gash is not. Hamstring costs 10 energy which is totally foreign to a class that has 20 base energy and 2 pips of energy regen, all the while axe rake is an adrenaline skill. But that gives another advantage to swords. Do you honestly think the kiting monks are going to wait while you charge axe rake? Thought so. Hamstring allows a warrior to enraging charge a caster -> hamstring -> sever -> gash... in a quick succession.

But, swords could be slightly faster than axes to bring them into balance. It would work well with warrior's endurance being a stance now (in PvP), and you can't use IAS skills (the real problem probably was dismember -> power attack -> protectors -spike anyhow).

And true dat about comparing the weapons to their real-life counterparts. This game is not even pseudorealistic in any sense, + we have all sorts of story/world-breaking gameplay elements like unlimited spawning golems. Anyhow, if there was any pseudorealism we'd have on-hit cast-interruption (constant dwarven battle stance, a feature I would love in these fantasy combat games.) Now we have the casters toe to toe with swords. The other is just using ranged casting skills and the other one is using melee-skills. And then they circle-strafe, quake-style, if nobody brought a snare. This is why I always say this game has no back and frontline, because the disadvantages of having melee whack at a caster are near non-existent. Always have, always will. May GW2 make a difference, I only hope so.

MithranArkanere · May 25, 2009, 03:04 PM // 15:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by silavor

But people run water because they know they need slow-down hexes, and people run fire for pewpewpew. Warriors run axes for pewpewpew, and warriors run swords for... epeen comparison in PvE?

If I want to apply deep wound to a djinn, I'll use an axe.
If I want to apply crippling with the first hit, I'll use sword.

The skills are different. And in PvE, have you ever tried Hundred Swords + Wirlwind attack? If not, you should.

(Datura) · May 26, 2009, 06:27 AM // 06:27

I think what Haggus said makes good sense, as in why the skills for the 2 weapons are the types that they are.

I switch between sword and axe builds often.

The slight increased attack speed for swords suggestion would balance them a little better imo.