An interesting proposal regarding dual-wielding and weapon/shield socket arrangements
|
So I am not sure if this has been brought up before, but people that choose to dual wield or weapon & shield builds cannot obtain the same arrangement of linked items as other builds that use a 2 handed weapon or a bow & quiver.
The amount of sockets are the same all around but the links are far worse with dual slot configurations. Not only do you lose access to a second 6-link, but it isn't even a 5-link, or a 4-link... it's a 3-link. If you try to solve it by putting 6-links on 1 hand weapons and removing them from shields, you give dual-wielders a huge buff. On the opposite end of the spectrum, if you give shields 6-link and remove sockets on 1 hand weapons you make dual wield very useless. What I think would be a cool mechanic is if there was a system where you can link your 2 items together (whether it be 2 weapons to dual wield, or a weapon/shield combo) and once they are "linked", the items reset to the minimum of 1 socket on each item, and then any jeweler or fusing orbs used on one of the items apply to both as if they were a single item. Then you can achieve a 6-link between both items. There would be some kind of indicator graphic like this to show it is linked:  Also "unlinking" the items keeps the current sockets the way that they are, but you permanently lose your "link" and if you wish to link them again the sockets will be reset back to 1 and you will have to try your luck to get back to 6 linked. | |
|
I like this idea, but it'll still be a disadvantage to 1h+1h/shield because once the items are linked up and are 5-6 link, you're now stuck with TWO items you can't replace if you don't want to go through the trouble of getting another 5L/6L.
i too fas fo youuuuuuu
| |
|
id think that just puting 4 sockets on one handers and shields would even it up pretty good
the linking of items like you are saying getting 5 or 6 linked, the block and other advantages you get by having two item worth of stats together seems to be OP to me much like bows are now |
|
" I was actually thinking about something similar to this idea myself. Rather than trying to have some complicated system of linking the items and then treating them as a single item like you described though, I think my idea would be a bit simpler. In addition to the normal links between sockets on weapons and shields, just allow the first socket on each of these items to have a chance of rolling one additional link which is not connected to anything. If both your items have this extra link on them, it will be treated as though those 2 sockets are linked. So it would look something like this: O = socket - = link Weapon: O-O-O- Shield: O O O- In this example, the third socket on each item would be considered linked to the other one. Also, of course, the third socket on the shield is linked to the first 2 sockets on the weapon as well since there is a path to them, but the first 2 sockets on the shield are not linked to any others. ------- Weapon: O-O-O Shield: O-O-O- This time, all 3 sockets on each item are linked, but since only the shield has the extra link on it, the sockets are not linked between the 2 items. | |
|
You already get the stats from the 2nd weapon or shield plus an.increase in attack.speed. There's supposed to be
a drawback. Although I do appreciate the "outside the box" suggestion. | |
" I thought about this way as well, but the problem with that is now dual-wielders have the advantage of getting 8 sockets between both their weapons, while everyone else only gets 6. " This was my original idea as well, but the problem I thought about with this was that the would be no way to properly set up the probability of rolling it. "Linking" them together means they can use the same probability formula that they use for 6 socket items right now. Having it like you suggest would make that "extra link" either much too hard or much too easy to obtain. " The thing is that Bow users already have something like this with a quiver. Quivers can add significant damage with the right mods, on top of them already having a 2 handed weapon. Of course they can also get away with putting 6 sockets on a bow and 0 on a quiver, because you can't dual wield bows. | |
|
A good idea, but as Duskbane said - you now have two items that are linked together. What do you do when you find a new weapon that gives you ~30% more DPS? More gem-links has a habit of tying down your gear upgrades, and part of the benefit of not going 2-handers is that your gear is easier to roll. If you need to cancel the item-link in some way, you're also going to have to reset the now separate items to 1-socket as well.
The mechanics appears to be somewhat-complicated and requires us to re-examine the balance between 2H and 1H as well. Separately, specifying a minimum of 1 socket on each item eliminates the possibility of the 1-socket combination on your new combo (which occurs all too often when rolling for 6S... -_- ). This can be resolved by tweaking chances but just pointing out that potential advantage. | |
" Well just like as if you were using a 2 hand weapon, if you found an upgrade you would lose your 6 link as well. As it stands... yes the gear is easier to roll, but having two 3-links in my opinion is pretty much useless. With a 2 hand configuration you get a possible maximum of two 6-links and three 4-links. With a dual wield or weapon/offhand combo you get one 6-link, three 4-links, and two 3-links. You don't even get a 4 or 5-link. That just seems like a very high penalty to me and pretty much makes it not worth it to do those configurations. With what I was suggesting it would be just as hard to get a 6-link as it is normally on 6 socket items. Most people would probably get 4 or 5 linked sockets. I would much rather have a 4-link even if that means I lose 2 sockets overall, because like I said before 3-links are just so incredibly bad. |
