Melee - The 2H Experience [Survivability Solution]

Hopefully we see at least something similar to this being implemented.
I mean GGG specifically asked for ways to improve the survivability of melee without benefiting ranged, this is it.
Last edited by Xendran#1127 on Apr 27, 2013, 2:52:14 PM
Does it mean one handed weapons are fine because they let you use shield as a trade-off for the lack of damage two handed ones provide? While I like the OP idea I don't think the potential 6-links need that much of a buff compared to their potential 3-link counterparts. Ok, idk if that was in English but if you try you might be able to get what I meant.
✠ ✠
"
wiggin wrote:
I don't think the potential 6-links need that much of a buff compared to their potential 3-link counterparts.


If you think that 2h melee users do not need a buff, you have never played them.
Also you flat out 100% cannot say "that much of a buff" because no numbers have been provided whatsoever. It is quite literally an impossible claim to make.

1h Is much better because you can get your block rate REALLY damn high, and you have a shield that is not only giving you block, but more arm/es/eva, and 6 extra slots on your character for mods that increase your survivability even further. It also allows you to use tempest shield.

Last edited by Xendran#1127 on Apr 27, 2013, 10:42:18 PM
"
Xendran wrote:
If you think that 2h melee users do not need a buff, you have never played them.
Also you flat out 100% cannot say "that much of a buff" because no numbers have been provided whatsoever. It is quite literally an impossible claim to make.

1h Is much better because you can get your block rate REALLY damn high, and you have a shield that is not only giving you block, but more arm/es/eva, and 6 extra slots on your character for mods that increase your survivability even further. It also allows you to use tempest shield.

In terms of PvE, you have things utterly backwards. When people are too poor (or too cheap) to be properly geared, they come here to QQ and yes, 2h is more gear-intensive than 1h. However, at the end of the day they kill things much faster, and in terms of farming efficiency that's really the only thing that matters. Survivability is overrated in farming, you only need so much to be effective, one-shot everything, DPS is king.

In terms of PvP, you're dead-on correct.

So I'm unsure whether to agree with you or not. Should the game be balanced for PvE or for PvP? If the answer is "somewhere in the middle," where is that middle? How can this be done while keeping 1h and 2h thematically different so each one is a different play experience? All tough questions.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Survivability is most definitely NOT overrated when it comes to farming high level maps.
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
"
Xendran wrote:
If you think that 2h melee users do not need a buff, you have never played them.
Also you flat out 100% cannot say "that much of a buff" because no numbers have been provided whatsoever. It is quite literally an impossible claim to make.

1h Is much better because you can get your block rate REALLY damn high, and you have a shield that is not only giving you block, but more arm/es/eva, and 6 extra slots on your character for mods that increase your survivability even further. It also allows you to use tempest shield.

In terms of PvE, you have things utterly backwards. When people are too poor (or too cheap) to be properly geared, they come here to QQ and yes, 2h is more gear-intensive than 1h. However, at the end of the day they kill things much faster, and in terms of farming efficiency that's really the only thing that matters. Survivability is overrated in farming, you only need so much to be effective, one-shot everything, DPS is king.

In terms of PvP, you're dead-on correct.

So I'm unsure whether to agree with you or not. Should the game be balanced for PvE or for PvP? If the answer is "somewhere in the middle," where is that middle? How can this be done while keeping 1h and 2h thematically different so each one is a different play experience? All tough questions.


I personally feel that GGG would be insanely foolish, beyond my ability to describe, to attempt to balance this game for pvp, or both pve and pvp. When companies like Anet and Blizzard, fail hugely for many years to succeed at doing this, I really don't (no offense intended towards GGG) think that GGG is going to pull it off. Granted, an ARPG and an MMO are in many ways very different, but I still think the heart of an ARPG is it's pve, with any sort of pvp being a side show. In many ways, pvp balance is far more capricious than pve balance, and GGG would be best focusing on pve, and allowing pvp to go wherever the meta and the current state of the game takes it.
Alteration Orb Union Local #7
"Alts are 16:1 Chaos. You got that tough guy?
"
Obsidus wrote:
I personally feel that GGG would be insanely foolish, beyond my ability to describe, to attempt to balance this game for pvp, or both pve and pvp. When companies like Anet and Blizzard, fail hugely for many years to succeed at doing this, I really don't (no offense intended towards GGG) think that GGG is going to pull it off. Granted, an ARPG and an MMO are in many ways very different, but I still think the heart of an ARPG is it's pve, with any sort of pvp being a side show. In many ways, pvp balance is far more capricious than pve balance, and GGG would be best focusing on pve, and allowing pvp to go wherever the meta and the current state of the game takes it.
Good points.

Which means: until you get enough survivability to be awesome with your 2h, suck it up and take it like a man, because eventually you will have enough survivability and you'll be more awesome than a 1h build ever could be. (Protip: Use the 1h and a shield until you get there, then respec to 2h.)
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:


Which means: until you get enough survivability to be awesome with your 2h, suck it up and take it like a man, because eventually you will have enough survivability and you'll be more awesome than a 1h build ever could be.there, then respec to 2h.)


What part of this sounds like good game design to you?
"
Xendran wrote:
What part of this sounds like good game design to you?
Don't be over-idealistic. You can't balance for all times and situations; the best you can hope for is to have each strategy have its own opportunity to shine. Sword + board is by far better at clearing content you're otherwise under-prepared for; 2h is by far better at clearing it faster after you've mastered it; this makes 2h the ultimate, in the true meaning of the word. There's really no other sane way to balance the system, other than making the two weapon types so similar that they lose their individuality... which I think is partly what you're attempting with this thread, to make 2h (and thus 6L) more fitting to a tanky style, when they're supposed to be high-risk high-reward weapons.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Apr 28, 2013, 1:17:25 AM
Actually yeah, one thing i should have pointed out is that this would be a bandaid fix. If the underlying issue of the way difficulty is handled in this game (Raw damage rather than aggression, status punishment for letting yourself eat hits, etc) gets fixed, 2h would be perfectly fine the way it is.

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info