More and more, it seems to me that both types of weapon skillsets are being lumped together as if they were the same. So I'm curious if anyone can either refute or support the idea that not only are they similar but that they are also balanced well against each other. Here is my own evaluation, based only on what I perceive the strengths of each type are:

One Handers

1. Greater versatility with razing
2. Ability to attack two different body parts within the same round, thus not only increasing the range of afflictions but also hindering wound curing
3. Better affliction rate with wounds
4. Better affliction rate with venoms
5. Better critical rate against mobs
6. Greater ability to utilize a wide range of wounds effectively
7. Better combat support skills, ie Coule/Riposte

Two Handers

1. Increased stat cap on precision, as well as stat maximum for artifacts
2. Increased effect from attaching stat artifact runes, in the area of speed
3. Arguably better transcendant skills
4. Greater ability to utlize some useful wounds such as Legtendon, because of a lower wound damage requirement
5. Ability to slitlock with greater ease

Here are a few I would add for Two Handers

6. The ability to sever limbs, removing the ability of the target to tumble.
7. The ability to cleave through shields and rebounding at the same time, damaging the target in the process.

Maybe this is just me, but it also seems like 1H warriors have more afflictions designed to screw up curing (stun abilities, pinleg, fractureskull, bleeding) while 2H warriors have more afflictions designed to directly hold you down (amputate, easy legtendons, easy slitlock, etc).

Geb, I don't really consider the ability to amputate to be much of a asset. Simply because the ability to block tumbling is only active before the first level of the affliction is cured. Secondly, that first level can be cured instantly with allheale. Also why I didn't consider Disembowel or Burstorgans to be assets, since they can be cured instantly as well. Another factor against amputate stopping movement is that it still possible to walk freely with one leg gone, or at least it was the last time I checked.

I can see the point with cleave going through all defenses at the same time, even speed. But I considered versatility to be more important, since cleave is limited to jabs, and both two handed sets are relatively weak on jab afflictions. As well as because the ability to raze then hack down instantly is quite desirable. Also another factor is that cleave only optimal speed wise compared to raze/slash in situations when you have to go through multiple defenses. Otherwise the two hander is taking a lost in efficiency compared to a one hander in a similar situation.

I consider amputate an asset, because a person can easily be put on his behind by a Pureblade before it is done. Remember that a person can't stance or parry while prone. Also remember that legtendon is acquired via jabs (arguably one of our best afflictions). It takes a legtendon about 4 seconds to be completely cured, but I can re-attack using my wounding weapon in about 3 seconds. That easily gives me time to accomplish the deed (which I have done against mages up to warriors with fullplate). Granted Axelords are not as lucky to have that, since their stun does not keep a person down long enough to allow for the tactic I mentioned.



Again, I find cleave useful because legtendon and severed nerve are jab attacks. Cleave helps insure that my repeated jab affliction attacks are not hindered by a person rebounding and shielding. The person will have to take a more active roll in his defense to significantly slow down my assault. Now, I do admit that I use raze when I am going for swing afflictions, but the reason for that is mainly because I do not want to project what body part I am trying to acquire the swing affliction on. There are times when my target is unable to heal all of his/her wounds on a particular body part and it is at a state that would allow me to get a decent swing affliction on it. Instead of projecting my intention to attack that limb with Cleave if rebounding pops up, I raze then swing. Raze is very fast, so I lose very little efficiency using it under that circumstance.

I would dispute the ease of putting someone on their back right before amputating, for a few reasons. First of all because the distance between the Heavy and Critical wound states are not insignificant. Secondly Legtendon can be instantly cured with allheale as well, in fact all regen cured wounds can be. Though, I will say that I've always believed that Legtendon is not arguably but is the best wound in the Pureblade set, but still the fact that allheale cures it significantly weakens its effectiveness. Also I agree about Axelords, they do tend to be the weaker of the two handed sets. Mainly because Knockdown is not as good for them as it is for Bonecrushers, and Legtendon is better for Pureblade than it is for Blademasters.


Again, at no point did I say cleave was not a good skill, my point is that one handed raze is more flexible and thus ultimately better. It really is a arguable point though, since the usefulness of either one handed raze or cleave depends on the situation. Against someone who is focusing solely on shielding and rebounding, I can agree that cleave may be more useful. But I would question the usefulness of jab afflictions still, for the reason that when it comes to parry and stancing, the most likely location to be defended are either the legs or the head. Also severing the arm is no way impedes the use of pentagram/circle, so it would be of negligible benefit. On the projection of intent, I would say it can't be denied that you would lose more efficiency in such a situation than a one hander would.

I am sure you can't circle/pentagram with broken arms.

Ah but is it possible with no arm? It is possible to walk out of the room with no leg, so here lies the enigma.

Tested it again, and it seems that I was actually wrong this time. I erred in mistaking PierceArm for SeverNerve initially. But even though Severnerve stops the ability to pentagram/circle, it does not do so for significant periods, since it is a instant smoke cure.

I accomplish the feat often enough to consider it a viable tactic to consider under the right circumstances. I was going to go into the why’s and how’s of it, but doing that would just be making it easier for other people to find ways to defend against it.

I do agree that Two Handers should not be directly compared to Dual Wielders when it comes to balancing them. I do agree that Two Handers needed a bit of tweaking to even them out with Dual Wielders, but I do not see them as being far less capable than Dual Wielders. Slightly so yes, but not significantly so.

I'll agree with what has been said of Axelord. It is the weakest of the 4 skillsets. It's supposed to be a mix of BC, BM, and PB, but instead of being a good mix, it seems to take the bastard skills of each and downgrade them. Stun is not effective as a BC, we have the same issues with amputate that a PB does, and the BM affictions are all easy cures, as the stun is useless. In addition, the trans skill is horrible. I actually used it once in combat. I was in a room with 5 of my enemies. I used Roundhouse and hit 1 person, thus robbing me of balance and 5 power, for nothing.

Needs serious looking in to. Does anyone know when this mysterious warrior summit is?

It is supposed to happen when Achaea releases boats

Below are 4 suggestions I believe would balance out Pureblades with their dual wielding counterparts.

1. Allow the Pureblade to give the Collapsed Lung affliction without the person having a punctured lung. Move the difficulty of the attack to critical wounds.

2. Increase the Two-hander poison affliction rate to 75%, but only after a change to the manner in which slit-locks are cured is implemented. (I don’t want to make slit-locks any easier to acquire until there is an alternative way to cure them besides the use of cures that use power.)

3. Give Pureblades the ability to impale at heavy wounds.

4. Also give them the ability to disembowel at critical wounds.

Those four changes would give Pureblades more of a reason to target the chest and gut, which will then give their opponents more of a reason to move their parrying to those body parts. They would also allow Pureblades to be a bit more effective with poison use.

Oh well, that is my take on what is needed.

Why should two-handers be MORE effective at using poisons then one-handers? It's counterintuitive.

We are talking about balance, not what is intuitive or counterintuitive in YOUR mind. They only have one weapon to swing, so while dual wielders have double the chance per round to afflict with a poison, two handed fighters only have one chance per round. The boost in that chance would balance out the chances of having poison stick between the two fighting types. Dual wielders still have greater versatility, since they can use two different poisons per round.

Dual-wielding:
0.5 * 0.5 = 0.25 chance to not afflict with poison
0.5 * 0.5 = 0.25 chance to afflict with two poisons
1.0 - 0.25 - 0.25 = 0.5 chance to afflict with one poison
1.0 - 0.25 = 0.75 chance to afflict with at least one poison

Giving two-handers a 0.75 base poison afflict rate:
1 - 0.75 = 0.25 chance to not afflict with poison

The chance to inflict with -some- poison would then be the same with both two-handers and dual-wielders, but dual-wield still have a chance to get two poisons, while two-handers don't. Even with that change, two-handers would be worse at poisoning.

I'd also suggest perhaps having two poisons come off at once when poison procs for a two-hander. I really don't feel like figuring out the math with that, though.

The warrior summit happened a long time ago from what I heard, you can ask Xenthos about the details. The only things to come of it though from what I've seen is the rebounding fix and the still debatable fix to styles.

No one has called for a new one, since this one obviously didn't do anything useful?

Yes at the warrior summit, Xenthos asked about the 2 handers and was told they did not want to deal with it. We were cast aside at the time. Hopefully they will be returning to us. I have no clue what they have in the works but I think it would be nice to get some input from the Divine.

And will some one please tell us why charge is still not working? Is this due to some change or is it that people haven't bugged it enough?

Roark is reviewing combat styles.
Rebounding will no longer be able to be smoked when an aura is already
active.
Surge, regen, perfection, etc. will be examined to ensure they scale
properly.

Possibility of "maneuvers" was suggested. This would allow warriors to
determine which afflictions within a range they wish to attempt for. For
example, I could do a maneuver called "lungattack" which would strike at
their chest with an attempt for one of two wounds: collapselungs or
puncturelung. Currently, a chest attack would select from heartpierce,
collapselungs, puncture chest, or puncture lung. There would not be a
higher chance to get an affliction in general, but there would be a much
higher chance to get a collapselungs, due to the fact that it will not
hit with a puncture chest.

Two handed weapons won't be looked at until after maneuvers have had
more thought.

(My notes from the warrior summit. It was run on a time limit with a strict agenda and no going off topic.)