update: 2h weapons as 2 set items?

Phatmattfu

I think people who are against this are for very selfish reasons.

"I invested alot into my DW swords! I don't want anyone else to have fun with sets unless they do the same!"

Strider_Roshin

br0steen wrote: »

I think this is a good idea. Pve will have more diversity and PvP is already crazy so duck it.

It would be more impacting on PvE than PvP, and PvE is where the 2H needs help. A Maelstrom 2H + 3 Agility gives me 375 Weapon Damage, and 1400 max stam. It would be incredibly difficult to provide a better alternative.

In PvE however, we could finally run 5 Vicious Serpent, 5 TFS, 2 Velidreth. This would be a huge buff for 2H in PvE.

And this is why the change is needed. The difference it would make in PvP would be negligible, the impact it would make in PvE would be significant. And anyone who thinks the 2H is in a good spot in PvE has no grasp on reality.

Strider_Roshin

Mashille wrote: »

Dual Wield already sucks major *** is PvP compared to Two Hander, I hope they don't make it even worse.

Not at all. DW does blood craze which goes through shields, and mitigation; incredibly powerful in PvP. Flurry is my go to for both my DK, and my Sorc; since Uppercut is terrible against an experienced player. DW is amazing for Nightblades as well since they have a class spammable, gap closer, and execute. And the power you get from DW makes biting jabs hit like a truck.

cjhhickman39

Im surprised there has been no mention of the effects this change would have on the economy.
Just look at the traders prices on two hand weapons versus one hand

usmcjdking

Two Hander & Staves should not count as a 2nd item slot.

They should have access to a weapon peripheral that counts as a 2nd item slot.

ParaNostram

Lynx7386 wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

No. Straight up no. Yeah sure it sucks that you don't get that one extra slot piece bonus but also you have to spend less legendary mats making your weapons legendary so whatever.

Edit: In regards to whether or not they're considering it I really hope they aren't.

I'd gladly pay double the upgrade materials if it meant being able to run 5/5/2 with a staff or bow

Fair, if we could find a healthy balance of increased upgrade cost for 2 handed weapons then I would be fine with such weapons counting for 2 slots.

LegacyDM

Lynx7386 wrote: »

DurzoBlint13 wrote: »

I hope not!
they would need to rework all of the weapon skill lines if they did this....IF they are at all concerned about balance. Now there are trade offs to choosing between 2H/Staff and DW. Also, it would have to cost twice as much to upgrade and craft 2H weapons.

Other than material costs, what exactly are the tradeoffs? Dual wield has higher damage output, better aoe, similar healing, and better sustain than 2h, and gets an extra set bonus on top of all that. 2h has only one redeeming feature, and that's burst damage, which has no place in pve.

Bow is in a similar boat, but at least has endless hail and poison injection, which buy it a back bar spot for some pve builds. It lacks a source of major brutality and has a gimmicky heal that hardly ever works when you need it.

Staff isn't in a bad spot, but still gives you less spell power than dual wield and still costs you a set bonus.

Huh? Staff gives you an 8% increase to direct damage spells and the opportunity to weave la/ha from range. Not to mention crushing shock and eots, it's damage output is far superior then using dual wield on a magicka based build.

If they allow staffs to count as a set bonus it will absolutely kill any reason to use dual wield on a magicka based build. The only reason anyone goes for dual wield is the set piece, otherwise if you want direct damage you go staff.

Avidspark

I'd like it

olsborg

Staffs, destrostaffs in particular is strong enough already. If they plan on doing this, it should be for 2h melee only.

Lynx7386

LegacyDM wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

DurzoBlint13 wrote: »

I hope not!
they would need to rework all of the weapon skill lines if they did this....IF they are at all concerned about balance. Now there are trade offs to choosing between 2H/Staff and DW. Also, it would have to cost twice as much to upgrade and craft 2H weapons.

Other than material costs, what exactly are the tradeoffs? Dual wield has higher damage output, better aoe, similar healing, and better sustain than 2h, and gets an extra set bonus on top of all that. 2h has only one redeeming feature, and that's burst damage, which has no place in pve.

Bow is in a similar boat, but at least has endless hail and poison injection, which buy it a back bar spot for some pve builds. It lacks a source of major brutality and has a gimmicky heal that hardly ever works when you need it.

Staff isn't in a bad spot, but still gives you less spell power than dual wield and still costs you a set bonus.

Huh? Staff gives you an 8% increase to direct damage spells and the opportunity to weave la/ha from range. Not to mention crushing shock and eots, it's damage output is far superior then using dual wield on a magicka based build.

If they allow staffs to count as a set bonus it will absolutely kill any reason to use dual wield on a magicka based build. The only reason anyone goes for dual wield is the set piece, otherwise if you want direct damage you go staff.

The fact that melee/stam based weapons are being used on magicka builds perfectly frames the entire reason this change is needed.

Xundiin

Lynx7386 wrote: »

LegacyDM wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

DurzoBlint13 wrote: »

I hope not!
they would need to rework all of the weapon skill lines if they did this....IF they are at all concerned about balance. Now there are trade offs to choosing between 2H/Staff and DW. Also, it would have to cost twice as much to upgrade and craft 2H weapons.

Other than material costs, what exactly are the tradeoffs? Dual wield has higher damage output, better aoe, similar healing, and better sustain than 2h, and gets an extra set bonus on top of all that. 2h has only one redeeming feature, and that's burst damage, which has no place in pve.

Bow is in a similar boat, but at least has endless hail and poison injection, which buy it a back bar spot for some pve builds. It lacks a source of major brutality and has a gimmicky heal that hardly ever works when you need it.

Staff isn't in a bad spot, but still gives you less spell power than dual wield and still costs you a set bonus.

Huh? Staff gives you an 8% increase to direct damage spells and the opportunity to weave la/ha from range. Not to mention crushing shock and eots, it's damage output is far superior then using dual wield on a magicka based build.

If they allow staffs to count as a set bonus it will absolutely kill any reason to use dual wield on a magicka based build. The only reason anyone goes for dual wield is the set piece, otherwise if you want direct damage you go staff.

The fact that melee/stam based weapons are being used on magicka builds perfectly frames the entire reason this change is needed.

If you honestly think that this is the reason why it's used, then you don't understand the game well enough to suggest a 2h weapon count as 2 pcs for set bonuses.

STEVIL

Lynx7386 wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

No. Straight up no. Yeah sure it sucks that you don't get that one extra slot piece bonus but also you have to spend less legendary mats making your weapons legendary so whatever.

Edit: In regards to whether or not they're considering it I really hope they aren't.

I'd gladly pay double the upgrade materials if it meant being able to run 5/5/2 with a staff or bow

i would agree to double the cost for 2H if they leave the set bonuses as they are now.

This game does not need even more sameness and lack of diversity in play.

Lynx7386

STEVIL wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

No. Straight up no. Yeah sure it sucks that you don't get that one extra slot piece bonus but also you have to spend less legendary mats making your weapons legendary so whatever.

Edit: In regards to whether or not they're considering it I really hope they aren't.

I'd gladly pay double the upgrade materials if it meant being able to run 5/5/2 with a staff or bow

i would agree to double the cost for 2H if they leave the set bonuses as they are now.

This game does not need even more sameness and lack of diversity in play.

Every stamina dps build at endgame uses dual wield. How is increasing the viability of more weapon types going to make the game lack diversity?

IronCrystal

What makes anyone think there will ever be diversity in end game builds? There will always be one or two builds that are considered best in slot and that becomes meta in PvE.

PvP is a different story.

Xundiin

Lynx7386 wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

No. Straight up no. Yeah sure it sucks that you don't get that one extra slot piece bonus but also you have to spend less legendary mats making your weapons legendary so whatever.

Edit: In regards to whether or not they're considering it I really hope they aren't.

I'd gladly pay double the upgrade materials if it meant being able to run 5/5/2 with a staff or bow

i would agree to double the cost for 2H if they leave the set bonuses as they are now.

This game does not need even more sameness and lack of diversity in play.

Every stamina dps build at endgame uses dual wield. How is increasing the viability of more weapon types going to make the game lack diversity?

DW has better sustain in PVE than 2H, which is why it's used. Changing 2h to count as 2 pcs isn't going to change that DW is still better for DPS in PVE. it will imbalance the game making an already bursty weapon more powerful. Making PVP even more of a nightmare than what CP has already made it.

STEVIL

Lynx7386 wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

No. Straight up no. Yeah sure it sucks that you don't get that one extra slot piece bonus but also you have to spend less legendary mats making your weapons legendary so whatever.

Edit: In regards to whether or not they're considering it I really hope they aren't.

I'd gladly pay double the upgrade materials if it meant being able to run 5/5/2 with a staff or bow

i would agree to double the cost for 2H if they leave the set bonuses as they are now.

This game does not need even more sameness and lack of diversity in play.

Every stamina dps build at endgame uses dual wield. How is increasing the viability of more weapon types going to make the game lack diversity?

First, "Every stamina dps build at endgame uses dual wield. " is not true.

many and maybe all but unlikely of the group/trial endgame pve use DW because DW has better sustained DPS when used alongside bow than the other options.

however, for PVP where burst is more valuable and non-group play is less guaranteed for the support roles, 2H/bow is often used and is generally seen as a top contender if not the top choice for damage burst.

So, right now depending on which endgame content you play PVP or PVE and solo vs group/trial the choices for weapon tend to differ.

Second, in quite a few of these "top dps" cases, it is maelstrom weapons or master weapons in play which already have their own different set count thing going on which the changes suggested would not really impact. maybe on the back bar.

Third, right now those using 2H and DW look for different sets to wear. DW use the 12piece set favoring combos, while 2H/staff/bow look for the more 11pc focused sets where it is convenient to swap after triggering a 5pc bonus that has cooldown or runtime. (These tend to optimize the gains giving you very close to a 5-5-2 type performance without having a 12pc combo of sets. by weapon choice.) So, because of the difference in set counts, the optimal sets sought for each differs.

if you change it so no mater what choice you make, everyone can run 5-5-2 then the top 5% or so of 5-5-2 builds will be settled on and "most everyone" will run those.

Right now the functional differences help drive more sets into play, whereras if the functional differences are reduced so drastically, that driver will vanish.

See, the reason you see so many DW/bow in the maybe 5% of content that is trials and groups end game top end is that those are mostly driven by the same needs for the DPS - long term sustain dps - and other considerations are not that important when you have someone else tanking someone else healing and buffing and so on.

Change the needs of the content - more solo oriented or more burst priented - and see different tools preferred like we have now.

Everything is very good somewhere and nothing is very good everywhere - except maybe bow which gets the second bar on both quite a bit of time.

KingJ

I hope not there some very broken build I could run if they allowed this to happen in PvP.

DHale

No way ever. Then that make duel wield worse and makes it better than staff users, so NO.

idk

Rickter wrote: »

They were considering it. It was that whole "Rune Weapon" slot where 2h wielders could slot an attuned "Rune" and gain a set item slot.

as for whether there has been any more news on it: no.

it was probably a @ZOS_MattFiror "we would like to do that but right now, there's no ETA"

@Rickter

I believe it was @ZOS_MattFiror that said they were looking at options for 2H weapons including possibly having 2 set bonus.

DragonBound

Xundiin wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

No. Straight up no. Yeah sure it sucks that you don't get that one extra slot piece bonus but also you have to spend less legendary mats making your weapons legendary so whatever.

Edit: In regards to whether or not they're considering it I really hope they aren't.

I'd gladly pay double the upgrade materials if it meant being able to run 5/5/2 with a staff or bow

i would agree to double the cost for 2H if they leave the set bonuses as they are now.

This game does not need even more sameness and lack of diversity in play.

Every stamina dps build at endgame uses dual wield. How is increasing the viability of more weapon types going to make the game lack diversity?

DW has better sustain in PVE than 2H, which is why it's used. Changing 2h to count as 2 pcs isn't going to change that DW is still better for DPS in PVE. it will imbalance the game making an already bursty weapon more powerful. Making PVP even more of a nightmare than what CP has already made it.

Yes it will, that is like saying all classes that have lots of burst are not reliable for pve. How would it make pvp a nightmare? Explain in detail here, people with dw and staffs are a nightmare right now because of the clear bonuses.

Xundiin

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Xundiin wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

No. Straight up no. Yeah sure it sucks that you don't get that one extra slot piece bonus but also you have to spend less legendary mats making your weapons legendary so whatever.

Edit: In regards to whether or not they're considering it I really hope they aren't.

I'd gladly pay double the upgrade materials if it meant being able to run 5/5/2 with a staff or bow

i would agree to double the cost for 2H if they leave the set bonuses as they are now.

This game does not need even more sameness and lack of diversity in play.

Every stamina dps build at endgame uses dual wield. How is increasing the viability of more weapon types going to make the game lack diversity?

DW has better sustain in PVE than 2H, which is why it's used. Changing 2h to count as 2 pcs isn't going to change that DW is still better for DPS in PVE. it will imbalance the game making an already bursty weapon more powerful. Making PVP even more of a nightmare than what CP has already made it.

Yes it will, that is like saying all classes that have lots of burst are not reliable for pve. How would it make pvp a nightmare? Explain in detail here, people with dw and staffs are a nightmare right now because of the clear bonuses.

It's obvious why it would. You have a 2H weapon that has massive burst capability over DW and Staves but it's restriction is that it can't use 2 5 piece set bonuses on the same bar. If you allow this, the burst potential of the 2H goes up. DW has always been better for PVE, it will always be better for PVE. it has better sustain. unless you want to nerf 2H's ability to burst in favor of Sustain, it will never beat or be more viable as a DW DPS set up in PVE. Since you want sustain.

PVP has always been about burst. Yes you can still pvp with a sustain build, but it's harder to pull off over burst builds. This is excluding NB's since they break all this because of their passives. And if you want to see an example of burst class in pve vs pvp viability look at the NB. It excels in PVP, struggles in PVE.... do you really need more proof than this?

Adding the current burst plus the ability to run 2 5 pc bonuses increases that burst more than raising the CP cap 100 points. PVP is already imbalanced, and you want to add more imbalance with this. It's not just about mat cost. It's how the weapon skill line works. How it synergies with the rest of the game. Changing something as major as this would drastically change the mechanics and synergy of how 2H skill line operates. And not in a good way.

If they did allow this to go through, then they would have to either a re-balance the entire skill line of 2H which could kill it completely, or change the 5 pc bonuses on gear sets, which again would kill a lot of builds and sets making them less than ideal for anything.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 2H isn't broke. it has it's place, just like DW does.

Chrysa1is

NO! This will be another portal for cancer builds. No

SkorosMindkiller

I think what they will have to do is to change the set bonus code so that it only counts as two items if it’s not the only item, or will only count as two if it’s the fourth and fifth item. I think that would be fair. Another idea would be “wand” and “focus” that uses the same skill line as staff, but all effects are 50% if only a wand is equipped.

SkorosMindkiller

Edit to add: For bow, add a quiver item for the second slot. For 2h, add a pommel item for the second slot.

Sybreed_Neurodrive

No thanks, if you want to use 2 sets and a monster set.
You have to sacrafice something for it, i'm against this enough said.

Lynx7386

Asphyxiateed wrote: »

No thanks, if you want to use 2 sets and a monster set.
You have to sacrafice something for it, i'm against this enough said.

DW users sacrifice nothing for it, why should Everyone else?

IronCrystal

Lynx7386 wrote: »

Asphyxiateed wrote: »

No thanks, if you want to use 2 sets and a monster set.
You have to sacrafice something for it, i'm against this enough said.

DW users sacrifice nothing for it, why should Everyone else?

What are you talking about, DW has little burst, but good sustained damage.

2H has *** tons of burst, but little sustained damage.

There are definitely tradeoffs here. Why do you think 2H is so popular in pvp despite the set bonus limitation?

xeNNNNN

IronCrystal wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

Asphyxiateed wrote: »

No thanks, if you want to use 2 sets and a monster set.
You have to sacrafice something for it, i'm against this enough said.

DW users sacrifice nothing for it, why should Everyone else?

What are you talking about, DW has little burst, but good sustained damage.

2H has *** tons of burst, but little sustained damage.

There are definitely tradeoffs here. Why do you think 2H is so popular in pvp despite the set bonus limitation?

The only two handed weapons i see in pvp daily is maelstrom 2H.

IronCrystal

xeNNNNN wrote: »

IronCrystal wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

Asphyxiateed wrote: »

No thanks, if you want to use 2 sets and a monster set.
You have to sacrafice something for it, i'm against this enough said.

DW users sacrifice nothing for it, why should Everyone else?

What are you talking about, DW has little burst, but good sustained damage.

2H has *** tons of burst, but little sustained damage.

There are definitely tradeoffs here. Why do you think 2H is so popular in pvp despite the set bonus limitation?

The only two handed weapons i see in pvp daily is maelstrom 2H.

You are telling me you see more people running dagger and axe? We play very different servers. Only people who run dual swords are magplars.

Strider_Roshin

IronCrystal wrote: »

xeNNNNN wrote: »

IronCrystal wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

Asphyxiateed wrote: »

No thanks, if you want to use 2 sets and a monster set.
You have to sacrafice something for it, i'm against this enough said.

DW users sacrifice nothing for it, why should Everyone else?

What are you talking about, DW has little burst, but good sustained damage.

2H has *** tons of burst, but little sustained damage.

There are definitely tradeoffs here. Why do you think 2H is so popular in pvp despite the set bonus limitation?

The only two handed weapons i see in pvp daily is maelstrom 2H.

You are telling me you see more people running dagger and axe? We play very different servers. Only people who run dual swords are magplars.

I hear the "2H has burst" argument a lot. I'm assuming you're referring to Uppercut since DW actually provides more burst to half the classes in this game (Nightblades, and Templars). With that said, the move Uppercut is a terrible move that rarely lands against anyone with a lick of talent; whereas regardless on whom you're attacking Flurry is able to land its hits with minimal effort; heck all you need to do is start the attack, and you can finish its animation while walking away. Therefore this "burst" everyone is raving about is in reference to a terrible move that's easy to walk through/dodge. And regardless on how much "burst" a particular move can do, if it misses your total DPS = zero.