Sigtric wrote: »

tnanever wrote: »

Sigtric wrote: »

tnanever wrote: »

Sigtric wrote: »

tnanever wrote: »

Sigtric wrote: »

tnanever wrote: »

Sigtric wrote: »

tnanever wrote: »

leepalmer95 wrote: »

tnanever wrote: »

Sigtric wrote: »

BossXV wrote: »

Recently a called servant of the Nine did a poll, most of the community wants 2H to be 2 set pieces

Like I said I duel wield a lot, and tank a ton, but what really turns me off from 2H is lacking a set piece, 5/5/1, not 5/5/2

It doesn't really matter what 'most' of the (limited polling base of the forums) community wants when it's stuff that effects balance. A lot of people think it's a good idea only because of the benefit but don't see the bigger picture.

Most kids want to eat nothing but ice cream for dinner all the time but that's not a good idea, except to them because it's what they want.

So sigtric, it sounds like you're one of those crazy people who think the devs purposefully made 2-handed weapons overpowered, and purposefully compensated by giving a free monster-helm or 5-piece set bonus to 1-handed weapons in order to compete. Ridiculous assumption on several levels.

In pve magicka is king, they all use staffs. They do not need a boost.

In pvp 2h is by far king, most stamina builds use 2h because its simply just better, better skills, better passives.

Currently you can complete basically 95% of pve content with a 2h build, dw builds have slight more dps than 2h for stamina dps and therefore are preferred in end game trials which have dps races etc..


2h or staves do not need a buff.

Its easy enough to go 5/5/2 with both staffs or 2h now. Its choices and consequences. Live with them.

You've completely missed the point. Regarding the set completion point, it's completely irrelevant whether or not a certain weapon type is "good enough" or "most powerful". It doesn't matter if certain weapon types "do not need a boost."

Until you understand it, read the above statements over and over again. Most people against 2-handed weapons counting as 2 set items just don't get that - they have a Pavlovian response of screaming various "BUT BALANCE!!" garbage whenever this topic comes up. Really - it has NOTHING to do with balance. What ever balance problems exist between weapon types should be fixed regardless. The issue is strictly about allowing all weapon types to be equal in set completion - it would give us players more options, which should be balanced regardless.

The already are equal in set completion. One item=one item.

Wrong. One item = one slot....EXCEPT for two-handed weapons, which in turn suffer a set-completion penalty. It's amazing you can't see this basic fact.

Sometimes I wonder what it's like...

1 item = 1 item. Tooltip doesn't say slots filled. It says Items. That's a basic fact.

It's real easy to believe anything when you think you are right, I get it. But I'll take the REAL fact that they've a) commented on this before: WAI and wont be changing it b) are the ones actually working on the data, and see the logs that show the whole picture. Your popping off trying to demean people who disagree wont change anything for me.

Would it be nice if my double staff MDK set up gave me 5/5/2? Sure. Doesn't mean it's right.

Your basic facts are irrelevant.

Uh yeah sigtric, one item is one item. Nice tautology there, detective. Nobody cares, because it's completely irrelevant. What's relevant is the fact that 2-handed weapons have a slot penalty for set completion.

So you've resorted to ignoring all facts and logic, and bringing up irrelevant topics like balance. Sad.

lol ok baby

Oh, now you're calling people "baby" - LOL. Desperation. Alright sigtric, do yourself a favor and try to redeem yourself by addressing the main argument I've made (I'm quoting from just a few posts ago, in case your attention span is as poor as your debate ability):

---

If the devs really did want 1-handed weapons to have a whole extra 5-piece or monster helm set bonus, to just be on par with 2-handed weapons, it would mean (unless they are completely inept) they would have to consider the balance of all combinations of 5/5/2 vs 5/4/2 vs 5/(backbar 5)/2 vs 5/5/1 (among other setups). This is insane. There is no way they did this, and you'd be a fool for thinking they did.

What the devs did is obvious - they tried to balance each weapon type against each other weapon type. It just so happens that as a consequence of 2-handed weapons only counting as one item, some weapon types aren't as capable as others in completing sets. Yes, it's that simple.

---

Address it. Show the world why you think the devs did account for all of that instead of simply balancing weapons against each other. You have one chance.

If you're dense enough to believe balance is irrelevant regarding a change that would affect combat? Then no. Not playing your game. You win.

Thanks for demonstrating how ignorant you are. Nobody said balance is irrelevant to combat. NOBODY.

I'm feeling very generous. I'm allowing one more try. I'll even give you a hint - balance has nothing to do with allowing players to complete sets equally, no matter which weapons they choose. Whatever balance problems that may arise should be dealt with regardless - it's literally not part of the topic.

Now take advantage of my charity. Address the main argument that I've posted. You and stevil still have not even remotely addressed the topic - just shouted noise about irrelevant balance concerns.

You've twice now said balance is irrelevant. You are fixated on what you what and fixated on what is keeping you from obtaining it. Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall because you refuse to see past your nose.

As I stated, I'll be taking the fact that the devs have said WAI and wont be changing it in the past, plus the fact that they know the ins and outs of this game better than you into my consideration. You can keep your 'charity'.

You should've taken the charity. Based on your performance here you're gonna need as much charity as you can get on these forums.

Yes, I've stated several times that balance is irrelevant. I'm right. Making all weapon setups equally fun/interesting should be the goal. Adjusting balance will be no problem. You don't purposefully limit the game because you're too dull to conceive of how the devs would balance things. Your dullness is not an argument.

STEVIL wrote: »

...
Again, straw man.

You are the one bringing up the tesing of thousands of combos, not me.
...

LOL. No stevil. Apparently you haven't been paying attention at all. I brought up the testing of thousands of combos because that's the only way your argument would be legitimate. I literally brought up the point to help you, because you had nothing. By bringing it up, it shows how ridiculous your argument is, because it's such a ridiculous way to balance all weapon types + all class types + all set combinations. Frankly, it's one of the most ludicrous things I've ever heard when it comes to any game's balance. That is how ridiculous your argument is. That is why the only rational thing to believe is that you're wrong, and that 2-handed weapons aren't specifically strengthened to make up for lack of set bonuses.

....either that, or you're insinuating the devs are oblivious morons that don't take set bonuses into consideration.

I see this getting locked soon since the topic at hand as devolved into two people that know what they are talking about vs one short sighted n'wah talking out their backside

Tbf people should elaborate on why they feel weapons were "balanced" this way! In fact, there seems to be a strange notion as to assuming having one weapon for one job is even remotely balanced. Dual wield and bow for stam DPS and Destro staves for mag DPS. That's it! And this would hardly be affected by adding another set piece to 2 handers.

The greatest imbalance in the weapon lines are these.
In PvP sword and board is king sorry @leepalmer95. For many reasons which I won't get into but importantly one of the reasons is the extra set piece. It's either another bit of proc damage, another 5 piece of sustain (think syrabane, or bloothorn) or maybe ulti regen. All of these can also be said about the ability to slot a monster helm if you want to go the other way.
In PvE the only thing that changes is that small gap between mag and stam end game DPS becoming greater. Which has nothing to do with an extra set piece, sure it doesn't help but it's a completely separate topic, and regardless it should not be a reason to remove choice for players that want the ability to mix and match more of the sets in game?

STEVIL wrote: »

tnanever wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

...
Again, straw man.

You are the one bringing up the tesing of thousands of combos, not me.
...

LOL. No stevil. Apparently you haven't been paying attention at all. I brought up the testing of thousands of combos because that's the only way your argument would be legitimate. I literally brought up the point to help you, because you had nothing. By bringing it up, it shows how ridiculous your argument is, because it's such a ridiculous way to balance all weapon types + all class types + all set combinations. Frankly, it's one of the most ludicrous things I've ever heard when it comes to any game's balance. That is how ridiculous your argument is. That is why the only rational thing to believe is that you're wrong, and that 2-handed weapons aren't specifically strengthened to make up for lack of set bonuses.

....either that, or you're insinuating the devs are oblivious morons that don't take set bonuses into consideration.

you have now moved even into complete altfacts territory there.

and so...

"Altfacts territory" - lol. I haven't heard that excuse before. +1 point for originality, but you still have no argument, and you are wrong.

There is no reason to arbitrarily limit set options for 2-handed weapons. Your inane balance concerns are irrelevant.

BossXV wrote: »

STOP! STOP THE VIOLENCE! what have I done :'(
I have started the Armageddon, listen WE ARE ALL NERDS! Don't beleive me? We're on an MMORPG forum! We have more in common than divides us my brothers...


UNLESS YOU ARE AN ALDEMERI SCUM OR some One that does NOT BELEIVE IN 2 2H PIECE BONUS!! RAAA

You've just done what a lot of people have done, and should keep doing, until the issue is addressed. This either needs to be fixed to make all weapons equal in set completion, or the devs need to just come out and say that their intention is to make 2-handed weapons more powerful to make up for the missing set bonus.

Until the devs respond to this issue, these threads should continue.

Also yes, aldemari dominion is scum.

khajiits and argonians should get an extra slot. Tail armour...

This should be changed yes, a 2H should have the same potential as DW including getting the same amount of setbonus.

Those saying it shouldnt.... lol....

smokey13a wrote: »

Arundo wrote: »

Those saying it shouldnt.... lol....

right back a ya

Yeah yeah all fine but your an idiot if you think that the extra set bonus on DW does not give you extra over 2H.

Both should give exactly the same DMG on a heavy attack with the same set bonus (not talking about using skills or anything). Heck all weapons should give the same DMG so that we can play the way we want as was advertised when ESO came out. Even Bow should be viable.

It's an interesting discussion but the factors involved in deciding it shouldn't involve the pros and cons of the 2H skill line or melee damage and so on, the whole balance of 1 HANDED/DUAL WIELD being compared to 2 HANDED, DESTRUCTION STAFF, RESTORATION STAFF, BOW etc. would need to be looked at.

One guy posted here that the ICE STAFF should be considered too and I hope it was a (personal preference) joke, otherwise it brings nothing to this discussion.

Arundo wrote: »

Pot... Kettle... read my full post next time I already said they should balance it so that 2H is exactly equal to DW with the same setbonus benifits. But I guess its hard to read for certain people who think they are right and dont give a *** about others opinions.

Have a nice day yourself

I did read your full post (after you edited it while I was typing) and as you said yourself "not talking about skills or anything" when as skills are a very large part of combat it has to be taken into consideration and not just heavy attack's and as I said 2H can be stronger then DW depending on the scenario so because of sets/skills and everything else that contributes to all the different types of builds they couldn't balance it so 2H and DW are exactly equal, some 2H builds will always be stronger then DW and some DW will always be stronger then 2H, its literally impossible, just giving 2H the extra bonus would NOT balance them.

also I do respect other peoples opinions if they themselves don't disrespect other peoples opinions (which is exactly what YOU did in your first post that I responded to) or at the very least have a cogent argument which just FYI "lol" is not.

smokey13a wrote: »

I did read your full post (after you edited it while I was typing) and as you said yourself "not talking about skills or anything" when as skills are a very large part of combat it has to be taken into consideration and not just heavy attack's and as I said 2H can be stronger then DW depending on the scenario so because of sets/skills and everything else that contributes to all the different types of builds they couldn't balance it so 2H and DW are exactly equal, some 2H builds will always be stronger then DW and some DW will always be stronger then 2H, its literally impossible, just giving 2H the extra bonus would NOT balance them.

also I do respect other peoples opinions if they themselves don't disrespect other peoples opinions (which is exactly what YOU did in your first post that I responded to) or at the very least have a cogent argument which just FYI "lol" is not.

Speaking of talking to a wall lol

Your not respecting anything your twisting words because once again your going on about the extra setbonus would mean it is inbalanced while i said they should balance it WITH the same setbonus benifits. So yeah I guess this will be an endless discussion with you and sorry I have better things to do. So lets just call it a win for you so I can get on with my day and not get stuck in this pissing contest with you.

STEVIL wrote: »

key point is this, the set bonus is a piece of the puzzle but even if that is eauallized and you equalize the wpndmg unless you keep going to equalize the skills (ie all the same) it still wont be the consequence-free choice you are conjuring any way you want to have meant.

me, i want my choices to matter and so... i like having different weapons do different things and not be exactly the same.

Because you added this I will respond once more. The skills of your weapons. class, etc should be the variations you can make . It should not be because the heavy attack on one weapon hits harder then on another because of the current setbonus lacking on 2H.

You want choice, I too want it too be able to use any weapon and not have to use a certain weapon because otherwise I'm not valid in PVE and PVP.

BossXV wrote: »

Have the devs said ANYTHING, regarding this recently

It only would give us more builds

I duel wield a lot okay, but I would like more viable ,2H builds

I think maybe 2h stam weapons but not staves. If staves classedas 2 slots iy would be far too op

Arundo wrote: »

smokey13a wrote: »

Arundo wrote: »

Speaking of talking to a wall lol

Your not respecting anything your twisting words because once again your going on about the extra setbonus would mean it is inbalanced while i said they should balance it WITH the same setbonus benifits. So yeah I guess this will be an endless discussion with you and sorry I have better things to do. So lets just call it a win for you so I can get on with my day and not get stuck in this pissing contest with you.

ummm, did you even read the first page?, people made arguments for 2H counting as 2 set pieces and I respectfully disagreed and explained the reasons why I disagreed as did others and your response to everyone that disagreed with 2H counting as 2 sets pieces was "Those saying it shouldnt.... lol.... " so your disrespecting all of those people and now your getting on your high horse telling me I don't respect other peoples opinions...really?

I guess you were right when you said "Pot... Kettle...".

Those who have a good argument have my respect those who just said "no they should" can gtfo imo. Just look at the first comment. This is the general problem on these forums we need some troll slayers on here. Everytime someone comes up with a suggestion there are flocks of trolls waiting to disagree. Seems to be a sport or something.

But can we move on ?

I am more interested in the semantics of it. The inventory specifies main HAND and off HAND, not main weapon and off weapon, I feel on that basis it should count as two as it is taking two hand slots. It's almost irrelevant that its only one weapon because slots are divided by body parts not weapons. Two hands = two slots.