Should 2h weapons count as 2 items for set bonus?

Aisle9

No

Emma_Overload wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

iiYuki wrote: »

Why would it, its 1 item so it counts as 1 for the set bonus.

Because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.

Funny thing that no one seems to consider ... what do a huge majority of 5/5/2 DW PvE stam setups do with that second 5-piece bonus? I'll give a hint: Twice-Fanged Serpent, Sunderflame, Spriggan's Thorns, Night Mother's Gaze.

In other words, often the second 5-piece bonus is just used to get a lesser benefit than PvE magicka DPS get from the Concentration passive.

You can get the same amount of physical penetration from Maces. Which staff do I choose to get spell penetration? Oh, wait... none of them.

All of them.

Penetrating Magic, the 2nd passive.

That's on top of the 5k spell pen you get from light armor, thus the need for a stamina option that gives some physical penetration.

Just saying

lao

Yes

SirAndy wrote: »

lao wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

Furcula wrote: »

Thoughts on this topic?

327 thoughts on the topic, which is coincidentally also the number of threads on the subject that already exist on the forum and no, most people still don't like the idea, no matter how many times the same question is repeated by the same 5 players over and over again.

yet 63% have voted yes. i suggest you check ur maths

Right after you check your spelling ...

my spelling is actually correct. thank you but please get educated before trying to act smart. oh and if you gonna argue about "ur" on the internet then you´re (look here) an idiot beyond belief.

Emma_Overload

Yes

Aisle9 wrote: »

Emma_Overload wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

iiYuki wrote: »

Why would it, its 1 item so it counts as 1 for the set bonus.

Because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.

Funny thing that no one seems to consider ... what do a huge majority of 5/5/2 DW PvE stam setups do with that second 5-piece bonus? I'll give a hint: Twice-Fanged Serpent, Sunderflame, Spriggan's Thorns, Night Mother's Gaze.

In other words, often the second 5-piece bonus is just used to get a lesser benefit than PvE magicka DPS get from the Concentration passive.

You can get the same amount of physical penetration from Maces. Which staff do I choose to get spell penetration? Oh, wait... none of them.

All of them.

Penetrating Magic, the 2nd passive.

That's on top of the 5k spell pen you get from light armor, thus the need for a stamina option that gives some physical penetration.

Just saying

That's only for Destro skills, doesn't do anything for class abilities.

NyassaV

Yes

SirAndy wrote: »

SodanTok wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

Furcula wrote: »

Thoughts on this topic?

327 thoughts on the topic, which is coincidentally also the number of threads on the subject that already exist on the forum and no, most people still don't like the idea, no matter how many times the same question is repeated by the same 5 players over and over again.

Most? These polls are usually in support of the idea. I hope you dont consider yourself the most :P

That's only because *most* of the forum players are currently busy banging their heads against their keyboards instead of voting "NO" !

Seriously, this whole idea never had any traction. Might as well throw out any sort of character customization and go back to Quake 3.

It actually did have traction. Many people at ZoS were behind it, but Wrobel wasn't, so it's not happening

Casul

I could run grace of the ancients (3p), willpower(2p), necropotence (5p), and a monster set and end up with crazy strong shields with this idea. Hmm. My new lv 14 magblade loves this. But my stamward doesnt... hmm...

LiquidPony

No

ToRelax wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

iiYuki wrote: »

Why would it, its 1 item so it counts as 1 for the set bonus.

Because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.

Funny thing that no one seems to consider ... what do a huge majority of 5/5/2 DW PvE stam setups do with that second 5-piece bonus? I'll give a hint: Twice-Fanged Serpent, Sunderflame, Spriggan's Thorns, Night Mother's Gaze.

In other words, often the second 5-piece bonus is just used to get a lesser benefit than PvE magicka DPS get from the Concentration passive.

Well it's not like they have a weapon damage passive instead or anything. What's your point?

My point is in the post. It's pretty clear.

This isn't a contest to measure whose passives are better. That's certainly not the point. The point is that many people use the second 5-piece to attain something that other builds get passively. The point is to demonstrate that, despite what people seem to think here, the fact that 2H weapons don't count as 2 set pieces is already factored into the balance of other skill lines in the game, e.g., the devs at ZOS aren't fools and didn't build the game like this just to screw 2H users.

And again, huge stretches of this game have been dominated by magicka-based builds, despite the "disadvantage" of 2H weapons, which (again) entirely disproves the notion that this "disadvantage" means anything at all. There was a time not that long ago when we ran 8 mag DPS in Trials, even 8 magsorcs, because they were doing 70k DPS in raid with insane AoE from range with shields.

As others have said, "wands" or some other new melee magicka weapon type is a good proposal. Thus magicka users can choose to benefit from 5/5/2 setups (like they used to with DW magplars and the like) while also having to deal with the disadvantage of playing in melee range.

If you don't actually compare the passives, then how could you possibly make a point about what is or isn't considered by the devs when balancing their game? And how do you explain 2 hand and bow counting as one set piece only? I hope you're not going to tell me now they're already better for dps if not for the fact they give a set bonus less. Or are players just not supposed to use them as main dps weapons?
Personally, I would assume the spell penetration and weapon damage passive are set up that way to provide some diversity between stamina and magicka builds, as where the old mundus stones. Which would also be the reason for the design of these physical penetration sets, except for Spriggans, which mirrors Spinner. These armor passives have absolutely nothing to do with the amount of set bonuses you get from different weapon types.

So you're saying that ZOS doesn't factor in the passives available on certain types of builds or the setups typically used by those builds when designing sets or balancing combat?

That's an ... interesting take.

Stop trying to twist my words to fit your own understanding, please. You picked out a single light armor passive that actually has an quivalent in the medium armor tree and somehow built your argument about set bonuses on different weapons types on it, without any reasoning as to what the two have to do with each other. You even refused to compare the armor passives with each other in the first place, the one thing that would actually make sense if we are comparing balance between magicka and stamina dps.

And yes, I would say it's pretty clear that the bow and 2H weapons are not intended to be optimal as the primary PvE DPS weapon, because they've never been optimal as a primary PvE DPS weapon. They are, however, great primary DPS weapons in PvP for certain types of builds.

You do realize that their performance in PvP limits ZOS's ability to balance them in PvE in accordance with their philosophy to make things work similar in different types of content whenever possible? The fact that 2 hand performs well in PvP makes it difficult to balance it for PvE.

I'm not sure what your point is. And there is no equivalent to Concentration in the medium armor tree.

The reason I brought up the Concentration passive and the plethora of stamina physical pen sets was to demonstrate a kind of balance. Aside from the TBS meta way back, the stam meta has been either all TFS or NMG + Sunderflame for quite some time. Many stam DPS use that second 5-piece to get something that magicka DPS don't really need. Which, as I already said, leads me to what I see is a logical conclusion that the limitation on 5/5/2 setups for staff/staff users is something that ZOS considered when they designed armor passives, weapon passives, gear sets, and everything else combat-related in the game.

The point was not to "compare" light armor passives with medium armor passives in that way, as I suspected we were heading down an e-peen path of "nuh-uh, my armor passives are better." And that certainly wasn't the point. It's about looking at the whole design of gear/skills/combat/passives holistically and seeing that 2H weapons counting as a single piece is not imbalanced in and of itself.

Not really sure what the point of your second paragraph is.

LiquidPony

No

Emma_Overload wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

iiYuki wrote: »

Why would it, its 1 item so it counts as 1 for the set bonus.

Because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.

Funny thing that no one seems to consider ... what do a huge majority of 5/5/2 DW PvE stam setups do with that second 5-piece bonus? I'll give a hint: Twice-Fanged Serpent, Sunderflame, Spriggan's Thorns, Night Mother's Gaze.

In other words, often the second 5-piece bonus is just used to get a lesser benefit than PvE magicka DPS get from the Concentration passive.

You can get the same amount of physical penetration from Maces. Which staff do I choose to get spell penetration? Oh, wait... none of them.

@Emma_Overload If you think that maces provide penetration equal to Concentration, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Do you understand how the calculation for Twin Blade & Blunt works for maces? Do you see anyone using maces? And you do realize that Penetrating Magic provides exactly the same benefit as maces (only for Destro skills), right?

Pinja

Did u know if u vote NO u vote Yes?
And If u vote Yes you don't care for balance but still seem to support it.

KanedaSyndrome

Yes

Yes.

Mangybeard

Yes

LiquidPony wrote: »

jaye63 wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

jaye63 wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

iiYuki wrote: »

Why would it, its 1 item so it counts as 1 for the set bonus.

Because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.

Funny thing that no one seems to consider ... what do a huge majority of 5/5/2 DW PvE stam setups do with that second 5-piece bonus? I'll give a hint: Twice-Fanged Serpent, Sunderflame, Spriggan's Thorns, Night Mother's Gaze.

In other words, often the second 5-piece bonus is just used to get a lesser benefit than PvE magicka DPS get from the Concentration passive.

Well it's not like they have a weapon damage passive instead or anything. What's your point?

My point is in the post. It's pretty clear.

This isn't a contest to measure whose passives are better. That's certainly not the point. The point is that many people use the second 5-piece to attain something that other builds get passively. The point is to demonstrate that, despite what people seem to think here, the fact that 2H weapons don't count as 2 set pieces is already factored into the balance of other skill lines in the game, e.g., the devs at ZOS aren't fools and didn't build the game like this just to screw 2H users.

And again, huge stretches of this game have been dominated by magicka-based builds, despite the "disadvantage" of 2H weapons, which (again) entirely disproves the notion that this "disadvantage" means anything at all. There was a time not that long ago when we ran 8 mag DPS in Trials, even 8 magsorcs, because they were doing 70k DPS in raid with insane AoE from range with shields.

As others have said, "wands" or some other new melee magicka weapon type is a good proposal. Thus magicka users can choose to benefit from 5/5/2 setups (like they used to with DW magplars and the like) while also having to deal with the disadvantage of playing in melee range.

And I guess you missed me saying... you buy the game with what it has and play it. You dont grab a single player game and call the company and complain that 2 handers dont get what sword and board or dual wielders get. Stop asking for stuff that can cause bugs.

@jaye63 I don't recall addressing you at any point. Note that I voted "no" and please take a moment to actually read the comment you quoted.

misquote. been a long morning already.

Got it. Sorry for being snappy. This thread has been (as expected) full of entitled millennials throwing a hissy fit because they can't get things exactly the way they want them.

Ha!

Entitled millennials throwing hissy fits? Do you expect to be taken seriously while sounding like you just finished a faux news marathon? This is a videogame forum save your disdain with the future generations for facebook, uncle Jerry.

ToRelax

Yes

LiquidPony wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

iiYuki wrote: »

Why would it, its 1 item so it counts as 1 for the set bonus.

Because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.

Funny thing that no one seems to consider ... what do a huge majority of 5/5/2 DW PvE stam setups do with that second 5-piece bonus? I'll give a hint: Twice-Fanged Serpent, Sunderflame, Spriggan's Thorns, Night Mother's Gaze.

In other words, often the second 5-piece bonus is just used to get a lesser benefit than PvE magicka DPS get from the Concentration passive.

Well it's not like they have a weapon damage passive instead or anything. What's your point?

My point is in the post. It's pretty clear.

This isn't a contest to measure whose passives are better. That's certainly not the point. The point is that many people use the second 5-piece to attain something that other builds get passively. The point is to demonstrate that, despite what people seem to think here, the fact that 2H weapons don't count as 2 set pieces is already factored into the balance of other skill lines in the game, e.g., the devs at ZOS aren't fools and didn't build the game like this just to screw 2H users.

And again, huge stretches of this game have been dominated by magicka-based builds, despite the "disadvantage" of 2H weapons, which (again) entirely disproves the notion that this "disadvantage" means anything at all. There was a time not that long ago when we ran 8 mag DPS in Trials, even 8 magsorcs, because they were doing 70k DPS in raid with insane AoE from range with shields.

As others have said, "wands" or some other new melee magicka weapon type is a good proposal. Thus magicka users can choose to benefit from 5/5/2 setups (like they used to with DW magplars and the like) while also having to deal with the disadvantage of playing in melee range.

If you don't actually compare the passives, then how could you possibly make a point about what is or isn't considered by the devs when balancing their game? And how do you explain 2 hand and bow counting as one set piece only? I hope you're not going to tell me now they're already better for dps if not for the fact they give a set bonus less. Or are players just not supposed to use them as main dps weapons?
Personally, I would assume the spell penetration and weapon damage passive are set up that way to provide some diversity between stamina and magicka builds, as where the old mundus stones. Which would also be the reason for the design of these physical penetration sets, except for Spriggans, which mirrors Spinner. These armor passives have absolutely nothing to do with the amount of set bonuses you get from different weapon types.

So you're saying that ZOS doesn't factor in the passives available on certain types of builds or the setups typically used by those builds when designing sets or balancing combat?

That's an ... interesting take.

Stop trying to twist my words to fit your own understanding, please. You picked out a single light armor passive that actually has an quivalent in the medium armor tree and somehow built your argument about set bonuses on different weapons types on it, without any reasoning as to what the two have to do with each other. You even refused to compare the armor passives with each other in the first place, the one thing that would actually make sense if we are comparing balance between magicka and stamina dps.

And yes, I would say it's pretty clear that the bow and 2H weapons are not intended to be optimal as the primary PvE DPS weapon, because they've never been optimal as a primary PvE DPS weapon. They are, however, great primary DPS weapons in PvP for certain types of builds.

You do realize that their performance in PvP limits ZOS's ability to balance them in PvE in accordance with their philosophy to make things work similar in different types of content whenever possible? The fact that 2 hand performs well in PvP makes it difficult to balance it for PvE.

I'm not sure what your point is. And there is no equivalent to Concentration in the medium armor tree.

The reason I brought up the Concentration passive and the plethora of stamina physical pen sets was to demonstrate a kind of balance. Aside from the TBS meta way back, the stam meta has been either all TFS or NMG + Sunderflame for quite some time. Many stam DPS use that second 5-piece to get something that magicka DPS don't really need. Which, as I already said, leads me to what I see is a logical conclusion that the limitation on 5/5/2 setups for staff/staff users is something that ZOS considered when they designed armor passives, weapon passives, gear sets, and everything else combat-related in the game.

The point was not to "compare" light armor passives with medium armor passives in that way, as I suspected we were heading down an e-peen path of "nuh-uh, my armor passives are better." And that certainly wasn't the point. It's about looking at the whole design of gear/skills/combat/passives holistically and seeing that 2H weapons counting as a single piece is not imbalanced in and of itself.

Not really sure what the point of your second paragraph is.

- The medium armor equivalent to Concentration is Agility.

- To say that medium armor builds spend set bonuses on penetration is like saying that light armor builds spend them on spell damage; it's obvious and doesn't result in an argument for or against an extra set bonus on 2 handed weapons.

- Originally, we had 3 piece sets and most of the penetration sets weren't in the game. I'm not even sure what NMG did at launch. So no. The lower number of set bonuses on 2 handed weapons doesn't have anything to do with penetration (once again especiall so since it effects 2 hand and bow as well), but rather several of the physical penetration sets where likely added because of the different passives on light and medium armor. Hell, ZOS has been trying to make hybrids more viable for some time now, and forcing players to use a specific weapon type with a desired armor type wouldn't exactly help that cause.

- Just as obviously, 2 handed weapons providing one set bonus only doesn't necessarily mean there's an imbalance between stamina and magicka builds. Thanks for enlightening us. Of course the whole discussion is about whether it would help or detract from build diversity. Balance changes can be made in a lot of ways, and changing for weapon types at once likely isn't the way to go if your goal is just to fine tune dps potential.

- The point is that there is a simple explanation for why bow and 2 hand are not receiving more changes to make them more competitive in PvE. Of course ZOS would like them to be more viable, allowing for greater diversity among dps builds; why the hell not?

Aisle9

No

ToRelax wrote: »

The point is that there is a simple explanation for why bow and 2 hand are not receiving more changes to make them more competitive in PvE. Of course ZOS would like them to be more viable, allowing for greater diversity among dps builds; why the hell not?

Would they? For a short glorious moment 2H builds were viable in PvE then they were nerfed. Heavy attacks slowed down, Forceful's splash damage reduced...

You say ZOS would like to make them viable in PvE, and there's a simple explanation for why 2H are not receiving changes...




Because they were, then they got nerfed.

Just saying.

Durham

Yes

jasonthorpeb14_ESO wrote: »

Nolic1 wrote: »

So you all know Rich Lambert said in todays live stream it has been something they have thrown around but nothing as if it is coming or not.

And I say no cause it would create an imbalance unless they brought its natural damage down to 1 handed weapons and gave it a 6% increase from a passive to make it equal to dual wield other wise it would become super op.

They nerfed 2 handed a long time ago. Damage and passives wise 2 handed is EXACTLY the same as DW but only slower. Same DPS but more damage per hit, BUT SLOWER.

If they gave it 2 handed another set bonus it would make them equal.... like they should be.

Correct also dizzy swing also much harder to land then duel wield.. especially on good players ... two hander is also absolutely trash vs. sword and shield..

Levarius

Yes

I'm no expert or anything, but isn't Dual Wield used in pretty much every Stam PvE build except a squishier Stam Sorc build? What is even the downside of Dual Wield? Also, isn't Stam out-damaging Magicka builds? I don't really understand the argument that Dual Wield is only equal to other weapons because of the trait bonus, when it seems like it's better than every other weapon atm.

kyle.wilson

Yes

@ZOS_GinaBruno, @ZOS_BrianWheeler, @ZOS_RichLambert, @ZOS_Wrobel

This topic has come up weekly now for almost 3 years.
Can you at least comment on it?

STEVIL

No

Levarius wrote: »

I'm no expert or anything, but isn't Dual Wield used in pretty much every Stam PvE build except a squishier Stam Sorc build? What is even the downside of Dual Wield? Also, isn't Stam out-damaging Magicka builds? I don't really understand the argument that Dual Wield is only equal to other weapons because of the trait bonus, when it seems like it's better than every other weapon atm.

I haven't looked lately at the latest parses but for a while DW/bow was the strongest for sustain DPS grouo play - PVE dungeon trials and 2H/bow was the strongest stam option for PVP and more solo style play due to burst (pvp) and some versatility options that is needed in solo play (gap, self-heal)...

But of course, that is a very broad portrait done with broad strokes and some finesse elements etc... one that changes with the canvas (specific character and race and challenges) and with every new set of paints (patches, additions and changes) and the skill and preferences of the artist (particular player skill and preferences.)

When true that gives each a room within the mansion of the game in which they shine and others in which they don't shine as much. Bows tend to have their rooms too - more often in various PVP rooms and also as part of the other builds as well.

jnelson1182

Yes

as long as tour not using the exact same piece then I think yea each weapon in the 2H should count towards set, idk if its this way or not cuz it would mean making an off hand weapon belonging to whatever set along with making the single hand weapon for the main hand. I just don't think it'd be right to use the same 1H weapon in both hands and have it count as two pieces. just my thoughts on topic.