Dual Wield Vs 2H

Sandman929

I'm sure it's been asked before @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_ANYONE_ELSE, but is there a reason 2H weapons can't count for 2 pieces of a set? If this has been answered elsewhere, could someone please direct me to the explanation?
Having 11 "pieces" with a 2H weapon while Dual Wielding provides 12 seems unnecessarily limiting in build options.

Chims

Sandman929 wrote: »

I'm sure it's been asked before @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_ANYONE_ELSE, but is there a reason 2H weapons can't count for 2 pieces of a set? If this has been answered elsewhere, could someone please direct me to the explanation?
Having 11 "pieces" with a 2H weapon while Dual Wielding provides 12 seems unnecessarily limiting in build options.

Agreed - I don't know why this isn't the case.

DannyLV702

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Chims

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not sure how that is relevant. By that logic I have to use 2 hands, count them 2 hands to hold a 2H weapon. A set for each hand.

Sandman929

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not that I don't appreciate a thorough explanation of the differences between 1 thing and 2 things, because I do, but this particular game mechanic is unnecessarily limiting when it comes to build diversity. Couldn't these singular 2H weapons somehow contain through some magical means the properties of 2 weapons forged into one? Thus fulfilling the 2 piece requirement while still only being a single piece?

Sandman929

Chims wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not sure how that is relevant. By that logic I have to use 2 hands, count them 2 hands to hold a 2H weapon. A set for each hand.

And there's the magical property that could fulfill the 2H weapon counting as 2 pieces of a set...number of hands needed. One set piece per hand needed.

DannyLV702

Chims wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not sure how that is relevant. By that logic I have to use 2 hands, count them 2 hands to hold a 2H weapon. A set for each hand.

It's the weapon giving you the set bonus, though, not the use of a second hand. I've heard someone else say the same as you but it's not the same.

gp1680

Sandman929 wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not that I don't appreciate a thorough explanation of the differences between 1 thing and 2 things, because I do, but this particular game mechanic is unnecessarily limiting when it comes to build diversity. Couldn't these singular 2H weapons somehow contain through some magical means the properties of 2 weapons forged into one? Thus fulfilling the 2 piece requirement while still only being a single piece?

Wasn't there a class in Diablo (barbarian?) that after unlocking a skill, you could carry a 2h weapon in one hand? Is that something that could be incorporated into a passive class skill? Then maybe that class can carry a shield or 1h weapon on the second hand. It might make that class OP, but it's worth a look.

Edit: Maybe make it a fighters guild or undaunted passive so all classes have a shot at it.

Sandman929

gp1680 wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not that I don't appreciate a thorough explanation of the differences between 1 thing and 2 things, because I do, but this particular game mechanic is unnecessarily limiting when it comes to build diversity. Couldn't these singular 2H weapons somehow contain through some magical means the properties of 2 weapons forged into one? Thus fulfilling the 2 piece requirement while still only being a single piece?

Wasn't there a class in Diablo (barbarian?) that after unlocking a skill, you could carry a 2h weapon in one hand? Is that something that could be incorporated into a passive class skill? Then maybe that class can carry a shield or 1h weapon on the second hand. It might make that class OP, but it's worth a look.

Good to see a post not drifting off topic....

Anyway, if someone at ZOS could explain why 2H must necessarily be penalized at slot for set pieces, I'd love to hear it.

gp1680

Sandman929 wrote: »

gp1680 wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not that I don't appreciate a thorough explanation of the differences between 1 thing and 2 things, because I do, but this particular game mechanic is unnecessarily limiting when it comes to build diversity. Couldn't these singular 2H weapons somehow contain through some magical means the properties of 2 weapons forged into one? Thus fulfilling the 2 piece requirement while still only being a single piece?

Wasn't there a class in Diablo (barbarian?) that after unlocking a skill, you could carry a 2h weapon in one hand? Is that something that could be incorporated into a passive class skill? Then maybe that class can carry a shield or 1h weapon on the second hand. It might make that class OP, but it's worth a look.

Good to see a post not drifting off topic....

Anyway, if someone at ZOS could explain why 2H must necessarily be penalized at slot for set pieces, I'd love to hear it.

I'm not sure how my post drifted off topic. I was actually suggesting a scenario that would allow someone carrying a 2h weapon to carry a 2nd weapon and qualify for the 12th slot. I do expect Zos to do something eventually with this, as it does seem to crimp the 2h weapon user.

Sandman929

gp1680 wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

gp1680 wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not that I don't appreciate a thorough explanation of the differences between 1 thing and 2 things, because I do, but this particular game mechanic is unnecessarily limiting when it comes to build diversity. Couldn't these singular 2H weapons somehow contain through some magical means the properties of 2 weapons forged into one? Thus fulfilling the 2 piece requirement while still only being a single piece?

Wasn't there a class in Diablo (barbarian?) that after unlocking a skill, you could carry a 2h weapon in one hand? Is that something that could be incorporated into a passive class skill? Then maybe that class can carry a shield or 1h weapon on the second hand. It might make that class OP, but it's worth a look.

Good to see a post not drifting off topic....

Anyway, if someone at ZOS could explain why 2H must necessarily be penalized at slot for set pieces, I'd love to hear it.

I'm not sure how my post drifted off topic. I was actually suggesting a scenario that would allow someone carrying a 2h weapon to carry a 2nd weapon and qualify for the 12th slot. I do expect Zos to do something eventually with this, as it does seem to crimp the 2h weapon user.

It's just too deep of a suggestion for something that should be simple. 12 available slots regardless of weapon choice. Adding a passive and/or somehow enabling a 2H user to also have something like a shield also equipped changes too much.
Just making 2H weapons count as 2 pieces of a set isn't difficult and doesn't require any other changes or class balancing.

And as for the 1 != 2 crowd goes, we're talking about a world where 5 pieces of matching clothing makes you explode and come back from the dead. I don't think 1 thing counting as 2 things is too far in terms of a divorce from reality.

Chims

DannyLV702 wrote: »

Chims wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not sure how that is relevant. By that logic I have to use 2 hands, count them 2 hands to hold a 2H weapon. A set for each hand.

It's the weapon giving you the set bonus, though, not the use of a second hand. I've heard someone else say the same as you but it's not the same.

First off its not the weapon or the hands its the code of the game, which can be changed.

Secondly i can be argued its not the weapon itself it but me holding it, in my hands. Evidenced since I don't get the set bonuses from items in my inventory.

bubbygink

Obviously, it is by design that if you go with a 2H, Bow, or Staff, you cannot do 2 + 5 + 5 for sets. Unless, of course, you use sets like Clever Alchemist, Lich, etc. which can be activated on your back bar effectively. It is all about forcing choices.

Are you a magicka build? Go with duel wield if you want to use 2 + 5 + 5 but you won't be able to weave. Want to be able to weave with a destro? You won't be able to go 2 + 5 + 5 (again, there are sets that get around this).

Are you a stamina build? Want to use the most well-rounded weapon in terms of abilities (with Rally, a gap closer, a good execute a heavy hitting spamable, and great passives - see, Battle Rush) ? Then you can't use 2 + 5 + 5. Want to go 2 + 5 + 5? Then you will have to go with a weapon line that doesn't have gap closer, burst heal, or major brutality (duel wield) or with a weapon line that is much more defensive rather than offensive (sword and board).

In short, it creates more meaningful choices and forces people to make concessions for certain benefits. Is it more important to get that extra set bonus or use a weapon which is a bit bet suited for your needs?

DannyLV702

Chims wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

Chims wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not sure how that is relevant. By that logic I have to use 2 hands, count them 2 hands to hold a 2H weapon. A set for each hand.

It's the weapon giving you the set bonus, though, not the use of a second hand. I've heard someone else say the same as you but it's not the same.

First off its not the weapon or the hands its the code of the game, which can be changed.

Secondly i can be argued its not the weapon itself it but me holding it, in my hands. Evidenced since I don't get the set bonuses from items in my inventory.

If it was your hand, then try holding any random weapon and see if your hand gives you that bonus then...

Lynx7386

Simple solution (next to just, making 2h weapons count as two items):

Bucklers: an armored bracer that can be equipped with 2h maces, axes, and swords, providing a small armor increase.

Focus: magical items such as orbs, crystals, soul shards, and spell books held in the offhand with a staff.

Quiver: used with bows to provide additional weapon damage.

Avran_Sylt

I agree, especially with the 2H. Dual wield actually provides more damage than a 2H, two gold daggers yields 1572 weapon damage, whereas a 2H yields only 1571 weapon damage. This is excluding the dual wield passive that further increases the weapon damage by 6% of offhand weapon damage (cause originally it's about 17.7%, and odd % to choose). Not only that, but you can apply an enchantment to each weapon with dual wielding. This means that dual wielding in comparison to 2H has more weapon damage, more set builds, more enchant procs (and the ability to have two different enchants on one bar), more damage to low hp targets, more damage to off balance targets, and ability to adjust weapon traits between two things, rather than all or nothing on one.

I think that 2 handers should be allowed to count as 2 pieces of a set, so they get more play in PvE.

Though, why are 2Hs dominant in PvP? would letting people use a 2H and 2 sets rather than one make it even more OP?

Probably, while 2H does less overall damage, it has higher single hit damage attacks, it has a stuns, a gap closer, and a fantastic execute ability. It acts in essence, like the NightBlade class. (which is odd, seeing as you'd assume a dagger wielding person would have more mobility than a hulk using a gigantic sword)

Sandman929

bubbygink wrote: »

Obviously, it is by design that if you go with a 2H, Bow, or Staff, you cannot do 2 + 5 + 5 for sets. Unless, of course, you use sets like Clever Alchemist, Lich, etc. which can be activated on your back bar effectively. It is all about forcing choices.

Are you a magicka build? Go with duel wield if you want to use 2 + 5 + 5 but you won't be able to weave. Want to be able to weave with a destro? You won't be able to go 2 + 5 + 5 (again, there are sets that get around this).

Are you a stamina build? Want to use the most well-rounded weapon in terms of abilities (with Rally, a gap closer, a good execute a heavy hitting spamable, and great passives - see, Battle Rush) ? Then you can't use 2 + 5 + 5. Want to go 2 + 5 + 5? Then you will have to go with a weapon line that doesn't have gap closer, burst heal, or major brutality (duel wield) or with a weapon line that is much more defensive rather than offensive (sword and board).

In short, it creates more meaningful choices and forces people to make concessions for certain benefits. Is it more important to get that extra set bonus or use a weapon which is a bit bet suited for your needs?

But the concessions aren't universal. A DK opting for DW loses any chance at a good gap closer while a Nightblade choosing DW still has a better gap closer in Ambush. Also DW does have Major Brutality.
This makes sense if there was genuine sacrifice across the board. I don't think a 2H Nightblade is at an advantage over a DW Nightblade simply because of the 2H passives that they get for making the sacrifice of 11 slots rather than 12.
If that is the actual reason for this decision, and the reason it won't ever be changed, I can accept that, but I'd just like to know for sure.

Sandman929

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

Though, why are 2Hs dominant in PvP? would letting people use a 2H and 2 sets rather than one make it even more OP?

I think 2H is preferred in PvP for stamina classes because DK's, Sorcs, and Templars don't have a better class gap closer than Crit Rush. Stam DKs, Sorcs, and Templars also don't have a class execute.

Edit: not entirely true for Stam Sorcs with Implosion, but that happens on it's own.

Strider_Roshin

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

This is true however, if we wanted to bring logic into this argument the amount of force applied is dependant on the weight, and acceleration of that object. Meaning it's safe to say that a 2H weapon weighs a lot more than a 1H weapon of the same kind. Now that we have that covered let's address acceleration. If I have two hands on my weapon rather than one I'm going to be able to swing that weapon with two hands much faster than I could with one.

So yes, a greatsword is only one item. However if we're wanting to bring logic in this argument I should be able to hit significantly harder with that greatsword than I would DW.

Chims

People use 2H in PvP because of the gap closer on their back bar. A person who is using DW loses nothing outside of weapon playstyles and related passives. They can have 3 sets, 2 different poison procs and superior damage.

EldritchPenguin

Sandman929 wrote: »

gp1680 wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not that I don't appreciate a thorough explanation of the differences between 1 thing and 2 things, because I do, but this particular game mechanic is unnecessarily limiting when it comes to build diversity. Couldn't these singular 2H weapons somehow contain through some magical means the properties of 2 weapons forged into one? Thus fulfilling the 2 piece requirement while still only being a single piece?

Wasn't there a class in Diablo (barbarian?) that after unlocking a skill, you could carry a 2h weapon in one hand? Is that something that could be incorporated into a passive class skill? Then maybe that class can carry a shield or 1h weapon on the second hand. It might make that class OP, but it's worth a look.

Good to see a post not drifting off topic....

Anyway, if someone at ZOS could explain why 2H must necessarily be penalized at slot for set pieces, I'd love to hear it.

It's quite simple: Build diversity.

If everyone gets 12 set slots, then absolutely everyone will run 5/5/2. It's bad enough that almost every single build only uses a handful of sets, and the rest get left in the dust. At least with 2H, there's some semblance of a build dilemma, since you have to decide between 5/5/1 or 5/4/2 or 5/3/2/1. If 2H gets an extra set piece, then they're going to run exactly the same builds that DW players use. Not to mention that we'd basically never see anyone using DW in PvP again.

dday3six

Strider_Roshin wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

This is true however, if we wanted to bring logic into this argument the amount of force applied is dependant on the weight, and acceleration of that object. Meaning it's safe to say that a 2H weapon weighs a lot more than a 1H weapon of the same kind. Now that we have that covered let's address acceleration. If I have two hands on my weapon rather than one I'm going to be able to swing that weapon with two hands much faster than I could with one.

So yes, a greatsword is only one item. However if we're wanting to bring logic in this argument I should be able to hit significantly harder with that greatsword than I would DW.

The majority of 2h weapons in ESO made into a real world equivalent would be too heavy to swing properly 2 hands or not. So the point is moot. However your also forgetting more mass means more energy spent on acceleration. Specifically you mentioned faster (quicker acceleration) when I'm rather sure you actually mean harder (greater momentum).

Edit - Anyhow to address the OP. ZOS is unlikely to respond without being tagged. However it has been mentioned previously that because 2H weapons have greater utility in their lines the count as one for set bonuses.

SanSan

Why not give every 2h weapon a secondary item?

acw37162

Sandman929 wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

Not that I don't appreciate a thorough explanation of the differences between 1 thing and 2 things, because I do, but this particular game mechanic is unnecessarily limiting when it comes to build diversity. Couldn't these singular 2H weapons somehow contain through some magical means the properties of 2 weapons forged into one? Thus fulfilling the 2 piece requirement while still only being a single piece?

It actually not unnecessarily limiting, it's quite the opposite. Two handers require different combinations and builds the DW builds, itvis actually diversity.

What you are talking about is not limiting your options you just don't have the options you want.

For the record I wish they would give 2H, bow, and staves a second item and item slot but I don't think a lot of people would be very happy with the corresponding adjustments to the skill line.

ADarklore

Interesting OP that you solely mention 2H, when both BOW and STAFF are also subject to this same issue.

Strider_Roshin

dday3six wrote: »

Strider_Roshin wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

This is true however, if we wanted to bring logic into this argument the amount of force applied is dependant on the weight, and acceleration of that object. Meaning it's safe to say that a 2H weapon weighs a lot more than a 1H weapon of the same kind. Now that we have that covered let's address acceleration. If I have two hands on my weapon rather than one I'm going to be able to swing that weapon with two hands much faster than I could with one.

So yes, a greatsword is only one item. However if we're wanting to bring logic in this argument I should be able to hit significantly harder with that greatsword than I would DW.

The majority of 2h weapons in ESO made into a real world equivalent would be too heavy to swing properly 2 hands or not. So the point is moot. However your also forgetting more mass means more energy spent on acceleration. Specifically you mentioned faster (quicker acceleration) when I'm rather sure you actually mean harder (greater momentum).

Edit - Anyhow to address the OP. ZOS is unlikely to respond without being tagged. However it has been mentioned previously that because 2H weapons have greater utility in their lines the count as one for set bonuses.

Nope, I meant acceleration since I'm dealing with force. Also have you looked up the weight of historical greatswords such as claymores? They're not as heavy as you think.

dday3six

Strider_Roshin wrote: »

dday3six wrote: »

Strider_Roshin wrote: »

DannyLV702 wrote: »

It comes down to simple math. A 2h is one, count it, one weapon.


Dual wield requires two, count it, two weapons.

And therefore 2h counts as one weapon because it is one weapon, and dual wield counts as two weapons, because they are two weapons.

This is true however, if we wanted to bring logic into this argument the amount of force applied is dependant on the weight, and acceleration of that object. Meaning it's safe to say that a 2H weapon weighs a lot more than a 1H weapon of the same kind. Now that we have that covered let's address acceleration. If I have two hands on my weapon rather than one I'm going to be able to swing that weapon with two hands much faster than I could with one.

So yes, a greatsword is only one item. However if we're wanting to bring logic in this argument I should be able to hit significantly harder with that greatsword than I would DW.

The majority of 2h weapons in ESO made into a real world equivalent would be too heavy to swing properly 2 hands or not. So the point is moot. However your also forgetting more mass means more energy spent on acceleration. Specifically you mentioned faster (quicker acceleration) when I'm rather sure you actually mean harder (greater momentum).

Edit - Anyhow to address the OP. ZOS is unlikely to respond without being tagged. However it has been mentioned previously that because 2H weapons have greater utility in their lines the count as one for set bonuses.

Nope, I meant acceleration since I'm dealing with force. Also have you looked up the weight of historical greatswords such as claymores? They're not as heavy as you think.

Well there is no such thing a historical greatsword. That's a category mostly related to video and table top games. A way of classifying a broad spectrum of larger than average swords. Most of the 'names' people use for swords are not actually historically accurate. However a Claymore is between 4-6 lbs, about twice as heavy as the typical one-handed sword at 2-3 lbs, but the important take away is the mass. Apply the same energy needed to swing a 4 pound sword to a 2 pound and the 2 pound sword will be swung faster because it's got less mass.

Regardless proper sword wielding techniques revolve much more around control and speed than brute force.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO

What two hander needs is better skills. The ones that are there are not conducive to PvE dps. A cast time spammable, a very weak AOE that is also the weapons DoT, a gap closer that is wholy unnecessary for PvE, and execute that ties you to the aforementioned skills and lastly a HoT that is mostly unnecessary and gives a buff that most get from pots. Oh and an ulti that ignores armor rating, something that is almost already done with the penetration meta going on right now.

This is the real problem with two-handed weapons.

Sandman929

ADarklore wrote: »

Interesting OP that you solely mention 2H, when both BOW and STAFF are also subject to this same issue.

I lump bow and staff in with all the other 2H weapons. Do they need specific mention?

EldritchPenguin

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

What two hander needs is better skills. The ones that are there are not conducive to PvE dps. A cast time spammable, a very weak AOE that is also the weapons DoT, a gap closer that is wholy unnecessary for PvE, and execute that ties you to the aforementioned skills and lastly a HoT that is mostly unnecessary and gives a buff that most get from pots. Oh and an ulti that ignores armor rating, something that is almost already done with the penetration meta going on right now.

This is the real problem with two-handed weapons.

This is true in PvE, but in PvP, they are a force to be reckoned with. A HoT is much more useful in PvP, since you might not have a healer with you. Critical Charge->Wrecking Blow/Dizzying Swing will do a massive amount of damage to a target in a very short amount of time, and it even gives you your choice of Empower or a very powerful stun. Then you get an ultimate that can split tanks in two, and an execute that's simply icing on the cake.

I'm a bit against changing up 2H. While it is lackluster in PvE, the tree was built ground up to be a PvP monster. I like it when everything is best at something, but nothing is best at everything.

Morvane

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-GB/discussion/300957/proposition-count-2h-weapon-as-2-set-items