I have been a Blademaster for some time, but I am finding it that Pureblades are actually some how a little bit better at hunting, and some times pvp. I have the best weapons of cap you can get 180 damage broads, 235 precision scimitars, and 279 speed rapiers, I was thinking of getting a 498 precision Greatsword or some thing, then a Highspeeded Katana or whichever is the fastest for hunting, and trying some pvp out with the greatsword.

Could I get some advice here?

It is stupid to switch from onehanders to twohanders.
Bashing is slower, PvP is stupid.

Switched from Bonecrusher to Pureblade yesterday. Hunting is slower, PvP - so far I like it more, but we will see.

Well, more so Pvp, but I think hunting is about the same. I takes me 6-8 hits to take down a Fesix, I saw daevos take one down in three

6 - 8 hits with onehanders = 3 - 4 hits with a twohander...

More weapons wielded = More hits = More chances of World Shattering Criticals!

Yes, but though two-handers land criticals half as often their criticals do four times the damage of a one-handed critical - as they do twice as much base damage, roughly, then multiplied by X. So, 4x that of a one-hander's damage on a regular critical. Exception is if both one-hander swings land criticals, in which case they'll be even.

However, consider the following:

Blademaster A does 100 dmg per swing.
Pureblader B does 200 dmg per swing.
Creature C has 300 hp.

It takes Blademaster A 3 swings.
It takes Pureblader B 2 swings.

Total damage done by Blademaster: 300
Total damage done by Pureblader: 400

The Pureblader wastes damage on overkill. Same goes for Critical strikes. The critical from a Blademaster will kill a creature, and he'll have his second swing of the combo be able to move on to the next creature in the room, thus maximizing his damage potential, whereas the Pureblader doesn't have that option, thus his Bashing does, in fact, become slower with a weapon of the same speed and proportional damage stats and strength.

Unless the creature has 400 health, in which case they are the same. It all depends, though overall two-handers are all-or-nothing with damage while one-handers have some middleground.

And I just did the math in my head, the things I said about criticals are off. A pureblade critical does 2x that for a one-hander critical and equal damage to a double one-hander critical. Example:

One-hander: 100 damage each, 200 damage each crit, 300 for one, 400 for both
Two-hander: 200 damage, 400 damage crit

Once again, all-or-nothing on two-handers. Especially when it comes to missing. Also, on the topic of which is better for bashing, two-handers make up for time by being able to hit through shields instead of waiting for them to come down. Makes up for them not being able to go on to hit a second target.

Actually, if the thing has 400 health and you calculate Criticals in, its still bad for the Purebladers in any situation except for a normal critical.

If a Blademaster does 100 dmg per swing, and the creature has 400 health, and the Blademaster lands a 4x critical, they'll kill it in one swing.

If the Pureblade does 200 dmg per swing and the ccreature has 400 health, and the Pureblader lands a 4x critical, they also kill it in oneswing but wasted 400 dmg. Enough to kill an entire other creature.

And once you raise the health beyond a two-hit margin, the handicap or the Pureblade becomes more evident.

Also, when huge criticals are involved, Cleave loses a good chunk of its "speed boost" because things tend to die long before they shield.

Stick with blademaster.

See, I like how Richter anwsers, just what I wanted. Thank you.

Not that Richter is a huge authority on combat... but yeah. Stick with blademaster.

I be forging a 500 precision greatsword (or trying) just in case

blademasters have options and versatility... which is much better in the long run.

Once someone knows how to stop your one method of killing them, you can't kill them anymore. unless your a blademaster, then you have options

Agreed with Daganev. About 2 weeks ago, probably less, I switched to Pureblade to see if they suck so bad as I was told. They do.

Reason? Sure, they might have cut tendons at heavy wounds, but it's all they actually have. Absolutely no useful wound afflictions on chest, gut and (this applies to every specialisation, so I don't mind) arms. If the enemy parries head and stances legs, only assaults come through.

Only thing it's good for is to mow down unexpecting novices, or to assault the head time after time and hope that senso kicks in while the enemy won't have power/skills to remove a slitlock.

actually geb does a good job of putting the hurt on arms to punish you for not parrying them, you end up losing the arm so you can't parry anything, then you're in trouble.

His sword is incredible though, a true masterpiece of artieness.

Swords! Anyhow, I will leave people with their notions that there are no reasons to hit the other areas besides the legs and head, while I enjoy the heck out of doing exactly the opposite of what people state is a waste of time.

Target any bodypart you want Geb. I'd only like to add that during every fight I had with you, arms afflictions were not a problem for me. I lost badly in both of them, but it was due to me being lazy and having retarded combat triggers.

I know, that all I want is a method to have burstorgans stick. Some method of preventing them from healing burst organs for 12 seconds...

Warriors should have three ways to instakilling a person, Head, Gut or Chest.

Each warrior sepcialization should have two of those options as a reality.

I'm not sure how maneavueres are suppose to help though, it will reduce some randomness, but it to me, doesn't really fix the situation. Because your still protected by parry head, stance legs, for anyone but blademasters I think.