I don't remember anything about arguing against engage. If I did, it was probably because the suggestion was too powerful in my opinion.

They wanted to change it to give it a nice chance of preventing someone from leaving. You did tests that confirmed it has a chance, but it was a small one.

Against people with no system and don't have the messages highlighted, If someone is trying to decap me even in unholy amount of spami'm going to see it. And decap isn't going to be much use for nontracker knights.

Wrong.

First off, group combat spam is considerable.

Secondly, the first message for decap does not tell the target. This detail is what makes it rather strong. You only know the true target on the second message, about 5 seconds before death.

Non-tracking Knights have more ways to keep someone still or held down then I do. There is no problem here. However I did envoy an upgrade to engage, some envoy veto'd it, can't remember who.

Edit: Just finished reading the rest of this thread, hadn't read up to Nico's post till now. It was me who suggested the upgrade to Engage and tested how it currently worked (It stops like 1/20, don't remember the percentage I came upon exactly, and it doesn't consume their balance or anything when it blocks them, so it doesn't actually "block" them like carcer would if it ticked on their trying to exit). I wanted it to work somewhat similar to Imperian engage, but it was Geb who veto'd it.

What's Imperian engage like?

Yes, I remember that now. I also remember another warrior specialty had a chance too, but it was a lot smaller then what I as a Pureblade experienced.



Where does it show on the wiki that I veto'ed it? I've looked all over it and found no evidence of me vetoing anything about engage. Like Forren said, I pointed out in the envoy channel that my engage already stopped people from running. To prove my point, we conducted some tests. Now the part about me vetoing anything does not show up in the wiki.

I have read your suggestion though, I do believe that if I had seen it I would have vetoed it. I do not believe warriors need another Carcer like ability that also does damage to the person trying to flee. I am more inclined to believe that engage should be along the same lines as what Pureblades possess right now. I stop people from running at a pretty good percentage rate from my experience. I can also reapply it on the next attack if I so desire.

After looking at a few combat logs, and talking to a few people about their class it just seems to me that Knights, mainly those who choose Pureblade or Axelord are probably the weakest pvp/hunting choice.

I am not completly sure how Knights stack up compared to everyone else, so I was wondering if anyone has any input that relates to the subject at hand.

My reasoning because, from what I experianced so far is that Knights don't have any abilities to fight more then one person at a time, and Pureblade/Axelord knights can't really depend on toxins, the toxins will only be effective if the person is off herb balance. So they pretty much have to chop of some limbs to win, and even with one exit blocked and the rest icewalled it's hard to stop some targets, even if you have them engaged to stop them from running away before you chop off said limbs. Most bleeding from knights can quickly be stopped by spamming clot and eating chervil, you can parry most attacks, rebounding and circle/pentagram slows them down. I'm not sure how good Knights are at trying to outdamage, but using a klangaxe or katana that isn't easy to do, most combatants have some good armour, and putrefaction is just a pain so magic/elemental damage runes are the only way around that, and they don't even fire enough to be a dependable tactic.

Axelords are flatly the worst weapon spec handsdown, no argument there. The spec is completely worthless.

Pureblade isn't that bad. They can sever tendons really easily, and they have decapitate. Decapitate is amazing in many situations, given how fast it is, especially for trackers against people hindered and in pits.

My engage stops people from leaving on a small percent chance, as a blademaster.

Whether two handers get a better rate or not would require paralleled test with a one hander. I'm tempted to think two handers have a better flee blocking rate than one handers from sheer experience, though I have not tested it enough to make any concrete conclusions.

Edit: Most warriors have written engage off as a useless skill anyway. Aside from Geb and myself, I don't see other warriors using it with any consistency. Given the extreme ease in which you can escape engagement, I think a significant upgrade to engage (increase blockrate to 50% or so) is not unreasonable.

Edit2: On a completely different note, replacing the griefing and mostly unused BC skill of shieldsmash with a shield version of coule would be rather neat-- same % chance to disarm the target's shield as coule, but only work for shields.

I was using it when i was Paladin. Maybe my memory is bad but i think it was more then 1/20. Aroun 1/4. But maybe its my bad memory.

It is possible for a properly equipped Pureblade to do a legtendon in a single blow on anything less than field plate. I had a Greatsword with 498 natural precision back when I was a pureblade. Add in forging runes and drawdown and it would hit 542. I could get upwards of 1700 wounding in a single assault. One shot legtendon. Pureblades can be incredibly powerful with the right weapons, but they take a lot of time and skill to master, without a question - and let us not get into the difficulty hunting. I loved being pureblade, but I did switch to bonecrusher and I certainly have not regretted it.

Axelords though, they are truly a sad specialization. I've only seen a few, and none of them terribly effective. I'm going to push my envoy to work on improving them! All warrior guilds, lend a hand here, eh? I'm sure we could come up with something. Perhaps even having a meeting between all the envoys and axelords out there (warrior envoys, that is) to discuss the issues might be in line.

Blademaster and Bonecrusher are quite effective. Any time I see continual arguments back and forth over which is better, that's a sign of balance, in my eyes.

Hunting is actually pretty nice for me as Pureblade. It's about as effective as using two rapiers at once. Try borrowing a Blademaster's rapiers and hunting, Purebladers, because I am having absolutely no problems with it. And I don't think it's because I'm an Orclach with Native Weapon, either.

As a Pureblade I used two hunting-quality rapiers instead of a Pureblade weapon for hunting. I was Elfen at the time. It worked quite well. In fact, it was an increase of 40% damage over my katana with equivalent damage, even considering lowered accuracy. (I had the formula for this, though not anymore.)

Engage does not need to hinder movement, I would prefer it was just changed from it's static IRE concept to something that fits Lusternian warriors specifically. In the form of two changes:

1. Change it into untargeted swing or jab(should be possible to set), one for two handers or two for one handers. In short, a random normal attack without balance if a opponent tries to flee while engaged. It is balanced by the fact that disengage exists and engage is clearly visible.
2. Change engagement so that it is impossible for a person to be engaged by more than one warrior at a time.

Indeed, a good balance.

Further details:
- should not be stopped by rebounding
- can only engage when the target is not rebounded

Having an engage rebound a normal hit would be silly.

I would also agree with that change, Daevos. It looks good to me.

hrmm well though i agree axelords are probably the worst i think pureblades are quite balanced if not better then some of the other specializations..i especially think this after someone amputated my leg in one hit via puiassance meaning i was bleedin 600, had to apply salves 3 times, had taken about 2000 damage so couldnt apply for wounds and by the time i had got the leg back they had it and almost another one gone..i guess this may just be the arty weapons but they definitely have the potential to be very powerful

That's an awesome idea. As I've never been engaged, I assume being tackled doesn't trigger it?

It shouldn't.