Sword or maul of an onslaught build?

Ariades_swe

For an onslaught build what do you all prefer?
Sword for more damage during onslaught phase or maul for more damage when onslaught not up.

Master_Kas

I normally go with a sword for the buffed weapdmg/healing. But then again I'm a scrub and main magicka builds :P

OG_Kaveman

Master_Kas wrote: »

I normally go with a sword for the buffed weapdmg/healing. But then again I'm a scrub and main magicka builds :P

swords do not amp healing, it is pure damage percentage. with that in mind, you would be better off with a nirn maul in pvp in almost every other scenario, so i would just go with that that.

TBois

I personally go for a sword because onslaught is a fairly cheap ultimate, and I want it to hit like a truck in my particular burst combo.

Master_Kas

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Master_Kas wrote: »

I normally go with a sword for the buffed weapdmg/healing. But then again I'm a scrub and main magicka builds :P

swords do not amp healing, it is pure damage percentage. with that in mind, you would be better off with a nirn maul in pvp in almost every other scenario, so i would just go with that that.

It does buff your weap/spelldmg which increases heals or I got this all wrong?

Chilly-McFreeze

Master_Kas wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Master_Kas wrote: »

I normally go with a sword for the buffed weapdmg/healing. But then again I'm a scrub and main magicka builds :P

swords do not amp healing, it is pure damage percentage. with that in mind, you would be better off with a nirn maul in pvp in almost every other scenario, so i would just go with that that.

It does buff your weap/spelldmg which increases heals or I got this all wrong?

It‘s just a % dmg amp, like beserk. It doesnt buff your weapon dmg more than other 2h weapons.

OG_Kaveman

Master_Kas wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Master_Kas wrote: »

I normally go with a sword for the buffed weapdmg/healing. But then again I'm a scrub and main magicka builds :P

swords do not amp healing, it is pure damage percentage. with that in mind, you would be better off with a nirn maul in pvp in almost every other scenario, so i would just go with that that.

It does buff your weap/spelldmg which increases heals or I got this all wrong?

you got this all wrong, like Chilly-McFreeze already said.

Rahar

Personally? Maul. Sword might have been worth it when Onslaught was 12 (10?) seconds, but with 5 seconds more often than not you're CC'd or LoS'd. I might change my mind if it was in a BG or with a very coordinated group, but for most cases, having the pen while Onslaught isn't up is a bigger deal to me.

technohic

Master_Kas wrote: »

OG_Kaveman wrote: »

Master_Kas wrote: »

I normally go with a sword for the buffed weapdmg/healing. But then again I'm a scrub and main magicka builds :P

swords do not amp healing, it is pure damage percentage. with that in mind, you would be better off with a nirn maul in pvp in almost every other scenario, so i would just go with that that.

It does buff your weap/spelldmg which increases heals or I got this all wrong?

For magicka though, sword is better as maul is not boosting you spell pen.

As for the OP, 5 seconds does not make up for the loss of pen on a maul. Also; I heard someone tested and the most pen you get from onslaught is 20-25k armor. It's not full if they are beyond that

Asardes

Even magicka builds have 15K+ physical resistance w 5L/1M/1H and Major Resolve. Stamina ones in 1L/5M/1H have 20K+. And that's disregarding BS procs, and most people run that set on both magicka and stamina. Major Fracture is 5.3K. So unless you have other sources of penetration (CP, class passives, set bonuses) you're still left with with 10-15K resistances to overcome. Maul heavy weapons bonus is equivalent to 2-3K penetration minimum since it' 20% of the remaining resistance. Sharpened trait is 2.75K. The more resistance the target has, the better maul will perform.

So you have to choose between sharpened greatsword and nirnhoned maul. Personally I prefer the latter unless I'm using Spriggan since it will give better penetration against most players as I ecplained and nirnhoned also buffs your weapon damage and hence healing. Onslaught is only up for a short time so you will lose more sacrificing penetration for upfront damage.

If I have both Spriggan and easy access to Major Fracture (ex. Stam DK: Noxious Breath) I can even go nirnhoned sword but it will only marginally outperform maul.

GRXRG

In no-cp is 100% better maul and there is no question, the penetration you get is way superior than the sword % damage buff, especially against tanky targets.
In cp it comes out to preference, you can use cps to slot more physical penetration using piercing, overall I still prefer maul.
But if you build up purely on a combo hit and run build that rely only on onslaught to kill, maybe is a bit better sword, but yeah.

Iskiab

GRXRG wrote: »

In no-cp is 100% better maul and there is no question, the penetration you get is way superior than the sword % damage buff, especially against tanky targets.
In cp it comes out to preference, you can use cps to slot more physical penetration using piercing, overall I still prefer maul.
But if you build up purely on a combo hit and run build that rely only on onslaught to kill, maybe is a bit better sword, but yeah.

I think pen is just as good or better in CP pvp. The only difference is you have more ways to boost your damage so it’s not as simplistic, but Nirn Maul is still the best combo.

BaiterOfZergs

A maul is always going to be better in pvp whether it’s no cp or cp pvp. I was the one saying that awhile ago and even had one of the eso streamers test it out themselves because they didn’t believe me.

To add, feel like the average pvp player should have at least 8-10k pen without doing anything drastic.

Sword should be used in pve unless you’re a mag user.