Curse

Absolute Destiny · Dec 17, 2007, 07:40 PM // 19:40

I was wondering about this the other day.

Speaking strictly for warriors:
Making offhand weapons gives more potential for strategizing (sacrifice the shield's armor bonus for additional attack damage) as well as greater potential for enchantment bonuses (inscriptions, upgrades, etc).

Also, an added bonus could be doubling the attack rate (two axes moving faster than one).
Weapon skills would employ the primary hand weapon when used.

Stormlord Alex · Dec 17, 2007, 07:49 PM // 19:49

Because, you know... warrior damage isn't already strong enough?

/notsigned

Onarik Amrak · Dec 17, 2007, 07:52 PM // 19:52

Balance be damned.

/notsigned

thedeadlyassassin · Dec 17, 2007, 08:58 PM // 20:58

try an assassin instead

Curse You · Dec 17, 2007, 10:26 PM // 22:26

/notsigned

Shields can be considered weapons. Ever been hit in the face with a large flat piece of metal? Yea, it hurts.

Phoenix Tears · Dec 17, 2007, 10:37 PM // 22:37

signed...

this game needs more fight styles...and dual wielded fight style belogns to it...

who says that anet can't balance this, when they implement a dual wielding fight style to GW ....but oh..

i forgot...Anet is working on GW2 and those, which are at GW..care only for Bugs and eventually Skill Balancing every x months....

with this mentality will GW1 be doomed some months after GW2 's release for sure...

GW1 has lots of points, that can be still improved in kind of gameplay mechanics, content and so on...

and people act here..as if Anet couldn't handle it..to implement dual weapon style..without balancing this change....

Naet gave us Assasins..sure..and whats the price for weilding 2 Daggers and not just 1 ? right..is low weapon damage for the improve frequency of attacking...

who says..ths can't be so too for fighting with 2 Swords or 2 Axes ?
that when you weild 2 of them..that the basic weapon damage gets then slightly reduced...

Swords for example then from 15-22 to 12-18 and Axes from 6-28 to 4-24

got ..people don't be direct..ever so small minded...get FANTASY !!!
there are lots of ways to implement this and letting it not end into an unbalanced disaster as u might think it would end up "instantly" oO

CyberMesh0 · Dec 17, 2007, 10:40 PM // 22:40

What about daggers?

Phoenix Tears · Dec 17, 2007, 11:54 PM // 23:54

daggers don't count imo..because they get handled like 2H items ..
you don't even have the possibility to equip 2 different daggers...you have to wear ever a set of 2 same looking ones, cause daggers get handled in GW like 2H weapons, where you need only to eqip 1 thing to your character...that counts then automatically to both hands....

and why made this Anet ? simple..because anet was too lazy to program it correctly and to give by this way the game a proper working dual wield system for all kinds of melee weapons, which are 1H based

when games like Lineage 2 can have a dual wield system for weapons..than can GW have this too...and now don't tell me, that GW1 hasn't the engine for a dual weapon fight style .... that would be just a bad lie

Onarik Amrak · Dec 18, 2007, 12:36 AM // 00:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curse You

/notsigned

Shields can be considered weapons. Ever been hit in the face with a large flat piece of metal? Yea, it hurts.

Someone needs to post a screen of Turai vs Joko.

bhavv · Dec 18, 2007, 12:37 AM // 00:37

Anet cant balance the game properly as it is, but we dont need warriors with 80 armor dealing more damage then sins while at the same time not requiring any skill of combining their attacks.

LoL!!! Im wielding two swords and killing everything easilly now with frenzy and power attack while I have mending and healing hands on me! Now this game is balanced cos my wammo works!

yum · Dec 18, 2007, 12:41 AM // 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

when games like Lineage 2 can have a dual wield system for weapons..than can GW have this too...and now don't tell me, that GW1 hasn't the engine for a dual weapon fight style .... that would be just a bad lie

U mean the game in which ranger can oneshot anything? Now, that's what I call balance.

TaCktiX · Dec 18, 2007, 02:17 AM // 02:17

Dual-wield weapons are a GW2 suggestion, GW1 will never be able to balance them with the current system.

Legacy Virus · Dec 18, 2007, 02:27 AM // 02:27

I hear so many suggestions that just sound like people wanting to make this look like wow.

The daggers a 2 handed weapon for a simple reason, daggers generally come in pairs and besides could you imagine a sin wielding 2 vamp daggers or 1 vamp and 1 energy dagger....they would be near unstoppable.

It wasnt lazyness that made daggers 2 handed it was pure common sense and balance.

Shadowmere · Dec 18, 2007, 06:02 AM // 06:02

while i don't think true "dual wielding" could be balanced in Gw I think a gimped version of it might. the offhand weapons would have to be severly limited from their main hand counterparts. for example an offhand sword would be a "short sword" it would have lower damage than a regular sword as well as only 1 (if any) upgrade slot.

another weapon idea I think would be interesting would be to have claymores and great axes, two handed swords & axes that have greater damage, but slower attack and lacking the bonuses a shield offers.

so all in all, I think this cold work and be fun but I am perfectly happy with the current system

Biostem · Dec 18, 2007, 06:25 AM // 06:25

Well.. there is another way of balancing this - make the off-hand weapons "lighter" versions of their primary-hand couterparts, and treat dual wielding as a sort of auto IAS - thus the off hand item would do less damage than the main hand, and there'd be some downside to dual wielding like needing and even higher rating in its skill and perhaps a movement penalty.

So, a primary sword might do 15-22 damage, 9 req, and an off-hand sword might say "+5 req" and do 8-11 damage. Thus, you'd need a 14 rating in swordsmanship, and there'd be some other drawback...

Savio · Dec 18, 2007, 06:38 AM // 06:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biostem

Thus, you'd need a 14 rating in swordsmanship, and there'd be some other drawback...

14 Swordsmanship is not a drawback.

lishi · Dec 18, 2007, 08:15 AM // 08:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biostem

Well.. there is another way of balancing this - make the off-hand weapons "lighter" versions of their primary-hand couterparts, and treat dual wielding as a sort of auto IAS - thus the off hand item would do less damage than the main hand, and there'd be some downside to dual wielding like needing and even higher rating in its skill and perhaps a movement penalty.

So, a primary sword might do 15-22 damage, 9 req, and an off-hand sword might say "+5 req" and do 8-11 damage. Thus, you'd need a 14 rating in swordsmanship, and there'd be some other drawback...

any damage bonus will unbalance the game, there arent much way around.

if you tell me you will lose the shield or extra energy there is a thing called weapon switch.

Hammer and other 2 hand weapon will be left out etc etc etc.

The only way to make it work would be make a new attribute line called "dual weld weapon" and make completly new skills for it

sky sliverwolf · Dec 18, 2007, 08:24 AM // 08:24

lol ya i can see it now, wars with 2 weapons, hey why not casters 2 lol

/notsigned

JeniM · Dec 18, 2007, 08:54 AM // 08:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

The only way to make it work would be make a new attribute line called "dual weld weapon" and make completly new skills for it

YEY can that line replace "Strength"
Great skills in that line but as a primary its a terrible bonus unless your using the skills

HawkofStorms · Dec 18, 2007, 08:43 PM // 20:43

/notsigned
PS Phoenix Tears. The lack of duel wielding isn't an "engine" thing. It's a "balance" thing.