Redo THF animation while moving; give us back glancing blows

[Junts]

Sure, I'm all for evening out the animation speed with both styles. But standing there and auto-attacking for the sake of occasionally glancing targets- no thanks, I'll leave that to those who want to be less effective.

I kite, I control aggro with the reach of my weapon, and I have more fun and efficiency out of moving while taking down a target, whether it is a boss or a trash mob. Thus, I expect to get the full benefit out of my THF feats while I'm doing that. Telling me that "BUT thf'ers can damage multiple targets!" in the face of TWF is laughable.

If reasons are to be given, pro and against each style when comparing, they better be practical reasons, applicable to and associated with how content is run.

When you see a thf barbarian or fighter run into a crowd of mobs at end game content, and just start blindly swinging their weapon around through its attack sequence, I hardly beleive you'll consider that efficient combat.

You make some good points but I do want to put out that Aax has a good point re: twf, as the investment in dexterity required to TWF is considerable even for TR builds, which suggests that, for its greater cost, your return on investment for TWFing should be higher when all things are equal. However, its very rare that all things will be equal because different class features will interface better with one of the two styles: As an example, barbarians will almost surely be better off with two-handed after these changes (due to their pre benefits and capstone), while paladins will continue to be better with twf (due to the extra procs of their special attacks, and their added-on-every-hit damage being so very, very high). This is, of course, counterbalanced by how much the BP investment required to twf hurts non-tr'd paladin builds, who need considerable numbers of many statistics. Its ok for the fighting styles to not be exactly equal when everything else is equal, and in fact they shouldn't be due to the 8 build points (1/4 of a 32 pt build) required to be a twf that a thf does not need to invest. This is to say nothing of the to-hit penalty and potential extra feat (otwf) that twfing demands. It -is- the more expensive style.

In the end, though, the class benefits to each will determine what is better, and that will vary per class. Only fighters gain bonuses which are equally good with both styles (since their benefits scale up for thf weaponry to keep it equal), which makes tons of sense in the context that fighters are by far the most logical class to be equally skilled with either style.

[Junts]

Again, very dry response.

I used vorpal as an example of the types of effects that TWF is better at. Not vorpal exclusively- we all understand its useless in end game content.

Junts, very well said.

Better stunning blow (due to 2 chances) is a better example of hte kind of thing twf has a substantial advantage of even in the endgame. Being a thf stunning build requires you to have a much higher dc to be as effective as a twf offhanding a warhammer.

Its also worth mentioning that THF is by nature the better style to use if you cannot afford all the feats, and that this is an important niche to have in the game: Builds with only 2 feats to spend on fighting style, or less, are so much better off being two-handed fighters. Its important that one style be able to bridge this gap, and between the dexterity investment and how bad it is without all its feats, twf is not the style for this benefit. The futher attempt to interface thf with s/b (via glancing blows on bastard/dwarven axe), while it hasn't been that effective, is a great example of this, as if your ac-tank build can afford to spend feats on a fighting style, thf feats will benefit them in both roles, and twf feats will only benefit them while dpsing.

Even as someone who's tank spends zero feats on either style, thf is the logical choice for me as a dps method, and its a fairly effective one. This is a really important role in game, because while people who specialize in damage dealing need to be better at it (and are), DDO suffers enough from the devaluing of other roles and builds and multitalented builds at endgame, and thf being a way to contribute at least some reasonable damage is a very important part of allowing those hybrid warchanters, ac tank builds, clerics, fvs and etc to be capable of contributing dps, even if they only contribute 50-75% of what a serious dps build may. After all, if both your healer and your bard are contributing 50% of a real dps character's output, its like you've got another dps character in the group in addition to the helaer and the bard.

[Chai]

I think you may not be thinking about this in the context of how DDO is actually played

Situation 1: Lots of mobs. Chances, in the present game, that these mobs are going to be killed in an auto-critical state are extremely high. 20-30 glancing damage per swing is pretty meaningless in the context of 250-350 point critical hits .

Woah woah woah, stop the train right there. Thats a pretty clear cut 8-10% DPS loss you are calling meaningless, even in the one situation you bring up. Like I stated before, I have seen many forumites argue long and hard about DPS regarding much smaller figures than 8-10% of the total being dealt.

That being said, take my numbers, I dont care. Making 100% of all THFers have to play their toon differently than they had to yesterday, due to 10% of the high end players exploiting a combat animation to erk out a few more DPS points, when they could have fixed it by fixing the animation rather than nerfing the numbers......

....is_just_lame_sauce.

[Chai]

Better stunning blow (due to 2 chances) is a better example of hte kind of thing twf has a substantial advantage of even in the endgame. Being a thf stunning build requires you to have a much higher dc to be as effective as a twf offhanding a warhammer.

1.8 chances you mean? My how the nerf bat has swung. Monks and rangers might be better DC stunners than they were pre nerf, but the big str classes sure aint. -and this because they had to noob down the DCs in epic quests to mid 30s on a weak fort save mob (caster)

[Junts]

Woah woah woah, stop the train right there. Thats a pretty clear cut 8-10% DPS loss you are calling meaningless, even in the one situation you bring up. Like I stated before, I have seen many forumites argue long and hard about DPS regarding much smaller figures than 8-10% of the total being dealt.

That being said, take my numbers, I dont care. Making 100% of all THFers have to play their toon differently than they had to yesterday, due to 10% of the high end players exploiting a combat animation to erk out a few more DPS points, when they could have fixed it by fixing the animation rather than nerfing the numbers......

....is_just_lame_sauce.

8% of a 3second kill is not the same as 8% of a 6 minute raid fight.

I will freely admit, by the way, that I practice my twitching constantly and that doing it regularly is really, really hard: i doubt i successfully twitch on more than half my swings, and I basically do it by habit while standing around waiting for things to get better at it.

It is really, really, really hard to do it consistently.

[Cetus]

You make some good points but I do want to put out that Aax has a good point re: twf, as the investment in dexterity required to TWF is considerable even for TR builds, which suggests that, for its greater cost, your return on investment for TWFing should be higher when all things are equal. However, its very rare that all things will be equal because different class features will interface better with one of the two styles: As an example, barbarians will almost surely be better off with two-handed after these changes (due to their pre benefits and capstone), while paladins will continue to be better with twf (due to the extra procs of their special attacks, and their added-on-every-hit damage being so very, very high). This is, of course, counterbalanced by how much the BP investment required to twf hurts non-tr'd paladin builds, who need considerable numbers of many statistics. Its ok for the fighting styles to not be exactly equal when everything else is equal, and in fact they shouldn't be due to the 8 build points (1/4 of a 32 pt build) required to be a twf that a thf does not need to invest. This is to say nothing of the to-hit penalty and potential extra feat (otwf) that twfing demands. It -is- the more expensive style.

In the end, though, the class benefits to each will determine what is better, and that will vary per class. Only fighters gain bonuses which are equally good with both styles (since their benefits scale up for thf weaponry to keep it equal), which makes tons of sense in the context that fighters are by far the most logical class to be equally skilled with either style.

Theres really nothing that I disagree with there. Again, very well spoken.

I am a huge proponent of having the efficiency of each style vary with class- thats the point I am trying to articulate.

They should each be superior to one another in their own respective niches. If there is a ton of backside damage, then TWF is the better style. If you are going for just brute front number damage like a fighter or barbarian- THF should be the way to go.

But, if the barb or fighter decides to spend the extra resources to acquire teh TWF feat, they should be able to excel in other areas to make TWF desireable even in those classes. I just don't think single-target DPS should be one of them, because then THF'ers don't have a reason to stay there, especially those that are aiming to deal highest damage output possible, like I am.

Now, in what ways can TWF shine other than single-target damage output to make it desireable over THF? Well, tactical combat such as stunning and tripping is one. Introduction of ways to deal with bosses such as tendon-slice should NOT be removed, but instead become another way TWF'ers can excel at dealing DMG output almost as high as a THF but additionally cripple and immobilize targets...

The possibilities can be great...I just don't think it should be so cut and dry in terms of which style has the greater dps due to the highr resource requirement. It will instantly trash the other style in the eyes of those who want maximum damage output.

Having the DC to tactical feats provided by weapons such as vertigo or stunning stack additively from wielding two fo them would be a great attraction to the style, without the damage output of TWF being higher than THF.

[Ellistran]

Active combat is what makes this game fun. Moving around to dodge incoming attacks and flanking your targets is active combat. Why take feats that you only benifet from by being stationary in an active game.

Why not make THF and TWF feats the same and remove splash damage from the game. If you want to damage near by targets then take the Cleave feats.

For the sword and board players include feats that allow you to attack with your shield as an off hand weapon wile still maintaining your shield bonus and maybe DR?. This would require a new attack animation and several feats but would be well worth it.

I enjoy twitch play, it adds an element of skill and a differnt level of gameplay then just duct tapping your attack button down. I would like to see changes made that make the game more active, not closer to a turn based system.

[Aaxeyu]

I think you may not be thinking about this in the context of how DDO is actually played

Situation 1: Lots of mobs. Chances, in the present game, that these mobs are going to be killed in an auto-critical state are extremely high. 20-30 glancing damage per swing is pretty meaningless in the context of 250-350 point critical hits whihc you're using to down the mob. You don't really care if you did 2 extra crits worth of damage to the other held mob (since the glances can't crit), as it's a meaningless time saving. I think you'd agree with that. Its probably not even 500 damage, since you're killing even epic mobs in about 10 swings that way, and dont get glances on every swing.

Situation 2: You're whacking on Horoth maintanking. You're going to be hitting him for 2-6 minutes depending on difficulty, he isn't autocrit and he has fortification. Doing what amounts to an extra 25-35 damage per swing over this time is a significant benefit that I'm sure you would never turn down. When you extend this out to mobs like epic dq (where you care about your to-hit as well, and twitch penalizes dps that way), it becomes a more significant differential.

I think we can agree that glancing blows are not equally effective in those two situations; they are far, far more helpful in the 2nd situation than the first one, despite being presented as an effect that should be more helpful in the first one.

Scenario 2 is not relevant because it is only 1 mob. The question was not whether glancing blows in one situation was better than glancing blows in another.

What was said was that in a scenario like you describe in siutation 1 the damage you do to nearby mobs is insignificant while the exact same damage to your primary target is significant.
But you see, that is flawed. In your example glancing blows are insignificant both on your primary target and your secondary targets.
In a situation where you hit multiple mobs glancing blows are either significant or not. You can't have it both ways as Durnak tried to argue (IE. THF must have glancing blows, but glancing blows are "redicolously insignificant").

[Junts]

Theres really nothing that I disagree with there. Again, very well spoken.

I am a huge proponent of having the efficiency of each style vary with class- thats the point I am trying to articulate.

They should each be superior to one another in their own respective niches. If there is a ton of backside damage, then TWF is the better style. If you are going for just brute front number damage like a fighter or barbarian- THF should be the way to go.

But, if the barb or fighter decides to spend the extra resources to acquire teh TWF feat, they should be able to excel in other areas to make TWF desireable even in those classes. I just don't think single-target DPS should be one of them, because then THF'ers don't have a reason to stay there, especially those that are aiming to deal highest damage output possible, like I am.

Now, in what ways can TWF shine other than single-target damage output to make it desireable over THF? Well, tactical combat such as stunning and tripping is one. Introduction of ways to deal with bosses such as tendon-slice should NOT be removed, but instead become another way TWF'ers can excel at dealing DMG output almost as high as a THF but additionally cripple and immobilize targets...

The possibilities can be great...I just don't think it should be so cut and dry in terms of which style has the greater dps due to the highr resource requirement. It will instantly trash the other style in the eyes of those who want maximum damage output.

Those who truly want maximum damage output are a minority though; its not uncommon to consider /2 rogue for umd ability and evasion on a barbarian, and that decision alone may determine whether twf is better than thf: sneak attack is on every swipe, a dex investment is better for an evader, loss of capstone, etc. Further, pre lines and their benefits may change it: even if you'r etaking all 3 feats, thf is better on a defender of siberys than on a kotc, because the defender gets straight str bonuses (and consequently can do better dps vs non-evil outsider targets, and have better to hit), whereas the kotc gets damage-added-after.

its ok for what's best for raw damage to be determined primarily by the other aspects of your character, and for one (and no offense, it -should- be twf due to the much, much higher cost) to outperform the other in totally neutral scenarios. In practice, totally neutral scenarios will basically never happen, and pre choice will dictate the decision for basically every build in the game except possibly Kensai who's bonuses are equal.

This is also not to outweigh the importance of weapon availability: right now, dps is overly biased towards thf with ultimate equipment due to how much better ESOS is than its comparative 1handed (echaosblade) counterparts. In optimal gear, nearly every class is in fact a better dpser as thf right now, overriding even class and pre based differences, due to the weapon.

These things are always going to be more significant, IMO, than the raw differences between thf and twf going forward, which makes it totally ok for twf to be slightly superior when everything else is equal: its unlikely to be equal, and 8 build points is a -really- big deal: it leads to most twf being 3 hit behind (since they rarely can also afford 18 str), and its just a big deal in general.

[krud]

Woah woah woah, stop the train right there. Thats a pretty clear cut 8-10% DPS loss you are calling meaningless, even in the one situation you bring up. Like I stated before, I have seen many forumites argue long and hard about DPS regarding much smaller figures than 8-10% of the total being dealt.

In those situations that 8-10% is usually just over-damage (kind of like over-healing). It doesn't really speed up the death of those mobs by much. In drawn out raid boss fights, heaping more on the total dps ends the fight quicker, rather than simply adding over-damage.

That being said, take my numbers, I dont care. Making 100% of all THFers have to play their toon differently than they had to yesterday, due to 10% of the high end players exploiting a combat animation to erk out a few more DPS points, when they could have fixed it by fixing the animation rather than nerfing the numbers......

....is_just_lame_sauce.

/agreed totally

[Junts]

Scenario 2 is not relevant because it is only 1 mob. The question was not whether glancing blows in one situation was better than glancing blows in another.

What was said was that in a scenario like you describe in siutation 1 the damage you do to nearby mobs is insignificant while the exact same damage to your primary target is significant.
But you see, that is flawed. In your example glancing blows are insignificant both on your primary target and your secondary targets.
In a situation where you hit multiple mobs glancing blows are either significant or not. You can't have it both ways as Durnak tried to argue (IE. THF must have glancing blows, but glancing blows are "redicolously insignificant").

Whether saving at most one-two hits on an autocrit mob is worthwhile is up to the user, I suspect. My guess is that even with the gb changes, in those situations twitching will still be better simply because it's so much faster to kill that one target, and kiling one thing before the next is always better than damaging many targets. You're much better off doing 600 dps to one target than 400 to target a and 100 each to targets b and c, since it makes target a stop damaging you much faster.

[Junts]

In those situations that 8-10% is usually just over-damage (kind of like over-healing). It doesn't really speed up the death of those mobs by much. In drawn out raid boss fights, heaping more on the total dps ends the fight quicker, rather than simply adding over-damage.

/agreed totally

This is a good point, since those glancing blows will often mean you need 1/4 of the last hit to kill the mob instead of 3/4 of it, which doesn't actaully save you any time .. but over a very long fight, can be significant.

Its similar to how lightning strike is far better in boss fights than it is vs trash mobs, since frequently on the trash mob, the lightning strike will be wasting 1/3 to 2/3 of it's damage output, and in practice add far less dps than it would mathematically suggest.

[Cetus]

Scenario 2 is not relevant because it is only 1 mob. The question was not whether glancing blows in one situation was better than glancing blows in another.

What was said was that in a scenario like you describe in siutation 1 the damage you do to nearby mobs is insignificant while the exact same damage to your primary target is significant.
But you see, that is flawed. In your example glancing blows are insignificant both on your primary target and your secondary targets.
In a situation where you hit multiple mobs glancing blows are either significant or not. You can't have it both ways as Durnak tried to argue (IE. THF must have glancing blows, but glancing blows are "redicolously insignificant").

lol

you're still missing it.

[Cetus]

Those who truly want maximum damage output are a minority though; its not uncommon to consider /2 rogue for umd ability and evasion on a barbarian, and that decision alone may determine whether twf is better than thf: sneak attack is on every swipe, a dex investment is better for an evader, loss of capstone, etc. Further, pre lines and their benefits may change it: even if you'r etaking all 3 feats, thf is better on a defender of siberys than on a kotc, because the defender gets straight str bonuses (and consequently can do better dps vs non-evil outsider targets, and have better to hit), whereas the kotc gets damage-added-after.

its ok for what's best for raw damage to be determined primarily by the other aspects of your character, and for one (and no offense, it -should- be twf due to the much, much higher cost) to outperform the other in totally neutral scenarios. In practice, totally neutral scenarios will basically never happen, and pre choice will dictate the decision for basically every build in the game except possibly Kensai who's bonuses are equal.

This is also not to outweigh the importance of weapon availability: right now, dps is overly biased towards thf with ultimate equipment due to how much better ESOS is than its comparative 1handed (echaosblade) counterparts. In optimal gear, nearly every class is in fact a better dpser as thf right now, overriding even class and pre based differences, due to the weapon.

These things are always going to be more significant, IMO, than the raw differences between thf and twf going forward, which makes it totally ok for twf to be slightly superior when everything else is equal: its unlikely to be equal, and 8 build points is a -really- big deal: it leads to most twf being 3 hit behind (since they rarely can also afford 18 str), and its just a big deal in general.

If I can throw you all the rep in the world I would. This is the most informative post in this entire thread. Well done.

[PopeJual]

"Better vorpal" is a much weaker argument for TWF than "damage against multiple mobs" is for THF.

THF also costs less, so it would be strange if it the a better combat style (assuming equal weapons).

"Hey, where did the forest go? I can't see it with all these trees in the way!"

[Aesop]

/off topic...? Sorta


This could be a horrible idea as I'm sorta shootin from the hip with it and haven't thought about math and all that jazz but...
edit: I'm also vaguely feverish

TWF was turned to Proc abilities with bonuses from the TWF Feat Chain

maybe we could throw some consistance in the combat system and have that be the way things work in general.


Moving would reduce all Proc Rates by 20%


Cleave and Great Cleave seem relatively useless right now so maybe...

Cleave +10% Chance at Glancing Blow +10% Damage +0% Effect
Great Cleave +10% Chance at Glancing Blow +10% Damage +0% Effect


TWF base 40% Proc Rate
TWF Feat +15% Proc
ITWF Feat +15% Proc
GTWF Feat +15% Proc
Tempest 1 +10% Proc
Tempest 2 +10% Proc
Tempest 3 +5% Proc +5% Double Strike


THF Base 40% Proc Rate +20% Damage
THF Feat +5% Proc +10% Damage +3% Effect
ITHF Feat +5% Proc +10% Damage +3% Effect
GTHF Feat +5% Proc +10% Damage +3% Effect
Barb Cap +10% Damage +5% Effect
Great Weapon Aptitude 1 +2% Effect
GWA 2 +2% Effect
GWA 3 +2% Effect


BS/DA Base 30% Proc Rate +20% Damage *Main Hand Only*

THF would gain benefits from THF Feat Chain and GWA while BS/DA would not as they are not true two handed weapons... they are just bigger one handed weapons (in this game anway) I would propose though that Kensai has something added to benefit the special case weapons like these ... maybe either GB damage or Proc rate or some small amount of both



S&B Base 20% Proc Shield Bash 10% Proc Shield Block
Improved Shield Bash +20% Shield Bash
Shield Mastery +10% Shield Block +3DR
Improved Shield Mastery +10% Shield Block +3DR
Defender (either) 1 +10% Shield Block +2DR
Defender 2 +5% Shield Bash +5% Shield Block +2DR
Defender 3 +5% Shield Bash +5% Shield Block +2DR


so just so I can see this


with all the Feat and Enhancements Relevant listed above (if somehow full tempests could come up with the feats in there limited build options)


Tempest
105% Main Hand 105% Off Hand 20% Glancing Blows 20% Glancing Damage
105% Main Hand 85% Off Hand 0% Glancing Blows Moving


WF FB
75% Glancing Blows 80% Glancing Damage 20% Effects
55% Glancing Blows 80% Glancing Damage 20% Effects Moving


S&B
50% Shield Bash 60% Shield Block 20% Glancing Blows 20% Glancing Damage
30% Shield Bash 40% Shield Block 0% Glancing Blows Moving

S&B BS
50% Shield Bash 60% Shield Block 50% Glancing Blows 40% Glancing Damage
30% Shield Bash 60% Shield Block 30% Glancing Blows 40% Glancing Damage Moving




dunno maybe the fever is getting to my brain... but something should be workable... again I haven't done any math on this its just an idea and the numbers seen above are just vague representations based on things remembers or possibly hallucinated...

Aesop

[Aaxeyu]

lol

you're still missing it.

No, I think I get it.

Again, I wholeheartedly disagree that TWF should do more DPS than THF, just because it costs more.

Everyone one of you people who mentions damaging multiple targets as a pro for THF is either ignorant or misinformed.

TWF is far superior for applying weapon effects, such as vorpal, smiting, disruption, any kind of guards...etc

This is a very powerful feature that THF doesn't have.

[Cetus]

No, I think I get it.

I know exactly what I said, you don't need to hand-pick sentences out of my posts to prove to me that...

I still think you are missing it.

[krud]

/off topic...? Sorta


This could be a horrible idea as I'm sorta shootin from the hip with it and haven't thought about math and all that jazz but...

Cleave and Great Cleave seem relatively useless right now so maybe...
.
.
.

Aesop

Heh, I had a similar brain fart, probably the same time you did.

my idea for cleave/great cleave was that it would randomly turn one or more of your glancing blows into a regular hit. It could be passive, or active (like a smite). Obviously, that would remove the cool animation from the picture, but it would definitly make it more useful.

[Aesop]

Heh, I had a similar brain fart, probably the same time you did.

my idea for cleave/great cleave was that it would randomly turn one or more of your glancing blows into a regular hit. It could be passive, or active (like a smite). Obviously, that would remove the cool animation from the picture, but it would definitly make it more useful.

yeah cause as it stands now I believe Cleave and great cleave actually reduce DPS

Aesop