1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

True Dual Wield - Why not?

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Coragin, Feb 23, 2010.

  1. Coragin

    Coragin Guest

    I was wondering today. With the release of the Tok expansion we got an influx of "dual" weapons as a single weapon. Sais, The swords of pros (forgot their name), Fans, ect, you guys get the point. All of which are basicly supposed to be "dual wield" however we all know they are just 2 handed weapons with a different graphic.

    Why cant we add a true dual wield? Here is my proposal, now keep in mind this is another one of my "pop in my head and post" ideas, so add to, take away from, ect, see if, even for fun could come out with a workable system.

    The idea of dual wield is great and obviously you could not dual wield two 2h weapons. But what about equipping two daggers? Two Katanas? Heck even two viking swords? Or mix and match?

    The idea is to use two weapons at once and some balance would need to be made to other dmg ratios. Possibly making parry much better to counter act dual wield?

    Now I have two ideas on how this would work.

    1. You second equipped weapon adds damage and adjusts SSI by taking both weapons base speed and SSI and doing some kind of math. Possibly like this...

    WeaponA + WeaponB / 2 + xdmg
    WeaponA + WeaponB / 2 - xSSI

    Basicly adding together the SSI and dmg and combining them, then adding dmg for the dual wield factor, while taking away X ssi to even it out.

    (I already see the problem of dual slayers, so to counteract this, only main hand slayer would work)

    2. Have each weapon work independently. Mainhand would suffer -5% SSI, while offhand gets a penalty of -20%. And it would be a special move type thing, "Double Attack". A third weapon skill if you will that becomes available at GM+Tactics and isint specific to any weapon like the two we already have per weapon. Double attack would take STAMINA and not mana. The "Recast" timer would be much like how fcr/fc works now, except be a base of each weapons speed and SSI on the delay on using it again. So the slower and higher dmg the weapons, the slower the reuse time on double strike. And secondary weapon specials would only work when double attack is fired. So if you dont activate double attack its basicly a passive weapon. But if you do, all mods apply, hit area, hit spell ect.

    Why did I think of this? Well, while watching Star Wars and reading RA Salvatores Dark Elf series, I was thinking it would be cool to have different colored weapons in each hand. As it sits now you cannot make two different colored weapons.

    The final Idea:

    Make the dual wielded weapon act exactly as a shield would. Follow my logic here tho. This is related to Bushido.

    With Bushido and parry if you use a shield, you lose all parrying pretty much due to the fact that bush and parry only work with no shield and 1h and 2h weapons. So allow the equipping of a secondary weapon and it counts as a 2h weapon. However, you dont get any bonuses from it in the way of slayer/hit area/ect. HCI and DCI would take effect as well as luck, ect, as long as it is PASSIVE it will work. Except slayers, will only work if your mainhand weapon DOES NOT have a slayer property. Basicly secondary weapon is a shield without the shield penalty for bush/parry.

    Problems I see here.

    1. Dmg inc on secondary weapon being 50% adding to overall dmg inc.
    2. Putting your slayer on secondary weapon to get an extra mod on primary. (this is a pvm problem not pvp for the most part, except dragon slayer prop to kill pets)
    3. 15% DCI/HCI, FC1, 50% dmg inc + Slayer being the norm. But I think that is too much property weight anyways to add ALL.

    To combat this, possibly make slayers only work if it is in primary?

    Anyways, that is my thoughts. As always my ideas are a spark in my head, and goto posting. Then I add in specifics as I type. Remember that when posting a reply. This is NOT something I put a ton of thought into. But I would appreciate replying with the following.

    Act as if this IS getting implemented, reply with problems you see and how you would correct them. Ways to balance something like this, i.e. can only do it with 110 or 120 weapon/tactics or 120 weapon/tactics/bush/parry. Something like that.

    So whats your idea on how you would implement this? Pretending that is IS going go to into game and its upto us to balance it. Honestly I think #3 is the best, just making it take the place of a shield.
     
  2. Beer_Cayse

    Beer_Cayse Guest

    I played DAOC for a while and had some decent success with dual-wielding. It was fun in fact. I would suggest that dual-wield be weapons in the same class ... both Swords, both Fencing, etc. Something like a Katana and a Warfork would not be allowed.

    In general you've hit the hot spots of contention with at least some suggestion of how it would work. SSI, DI, parry ability, etc. I'll be interested in seeing other reactions.
     
  3. Silverbird

    Silverbird Slightly Crazed
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    1,405
    Likes Received:
    52
    There are even more issues ...
    Having 4 weapon specials to choose from. With a very good choice you could get (disarm, dismount, bleed/mortal, ai/poison). What about mage weapons? What about sc, fc-1?
    DAOC was a fully other playground. There were huge differences among dual wields (midgard - left axes, hibernian - celtic dual and albernian - did they have dual wield?).
    What other ppls are asking for for years now is a two handed sword just for the look of it. (The No-Dachi doesnt count for that and its not for 2-handed-swords weapons in general.)
     
  4. Gowron

    Gowron Guest

    I have to say I kind of favor this idea. *shakes head* Hard to believe, but 'tis true.

    I would think that a dual wield would be a very complex thing to do. I think it may even require an additional skill to be brought to the game.

    Also, for special moves, would their be a special for just dual weapons, or would their be a special for each combination? I tend to favor the latter.

    I would think it should be the off-hand weapon would do less damage and enhance parry.
    I haven't had time to fully consider the effects of magical properties on both, but I'm not totally against this, but I will add that if the weapons have different slayer properties, then the toon is at risk of catching double damage from either of the opposites.

    Interesting idea. I hope the DEVs read this and actively consider the pros and cons to such a venture.
     
  5. Coragin

    Coragin Guest

    I would say that no double slayers, primary would always be the only one working. And as far as specials, to stop minmaxing only allow specials from the primary weapon. Or...

    Only allow the primary special ability from each weapon. Or only secondary. Would allow to mix and match and still not have 4 special moves. At little more diversity and might give dexxers a small jump on archers and mages.
     
  6. WarderDragon

    WarderDragon Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran Alumni BRPA

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    2,688
    Likes Received:
    69
    This wouldn't be a bad idea. If you were allocated the two primary special moves for your dueling weapons, you could obviously mix and match until you find the two moves you prefer for that scenario. DPS would be averaged out between the two weapons.

    It would open up the realm of possibility for Sword Breakers and the Cloak and Dagger fighting styles of Renaissance Europe.

    The problem, obviously, is the artistic limitations of the legacy client.
     
  7. MalagAste

    MalagAste Belaern d'Zhaunil
    Reporter Professional Governor Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend Campaign Supporter Royal Knight

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2000
    Messages:
    18,957
    Likes Received:
    5,448
    I always thought this would be nice.... but our DEV team can't even fix what we do have.... I seriously doubt they could come up with a true dual wield without breaking it all together.
     
  8. Gildar

    Gildar Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,354
    Likes Received:
    4
    It would be nice, but very very time consuming to implement and properly balance. Simply adding in 2h weapons that are effectively a combination of two 1h weapons gives a lot of the same effect with a lot less work...

    Perhaps have a way to combine two items into a single item, with a limited set of what things can be combined (with a fixed set of special moves for each combination). Slowly add more combinations, one at a time so that each combination can be evaluated individually. That would add a little more than just the 2h weapons that look like two 1h weapons, but not add nearly as much up-front cost as instantly allowing any 1h weapon to be used with any other 1h weapon.
     
  9. Stupid Miner

    Stupid Miner Guest

    Dual slayer really isnt much of a concern. We already have Dual Slayers: Conjurer's Trinket + Weapon.
     
  10. Cetric

    Cetric Grand Inquisitor
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    4,110
    Likes Received:
    906
    i can't even comprehend the adverse effects of this in pvp..
     
  11. Coragin

    Coragin Guest

    Perhaps you would elaborate? I really only asked for one thing in the way of replies. To act as if were already being implemented and that we need to figure out how and that replies reflect that.

    How would this effect pvp? There are a total of three suggestions, which ones or all and how? How would you change it?

    And not to sound like a jerk, but every time anyone makes a suggestion someone always chimes in on how its this or that for pvp. Anyone ever think that pvp should not be the basis for every single change/new stuff added to the game? Now I know some people that is all they get out of UO, pvp and nothing else and that is fine. Some dont do it at all, some like me, do both. :)
     
  12. Coldren

    Coldren Sage
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    115
    Why do that? Only make available the primary special in the main hand, secondary from the second hand.

    Also, slayers? Most can easily meet the DI cap with one slayer, EoO, and DI from exceptional or Imbuing. Two slayers would be a bit of a waste for some.

    I wouldn't mind seeing this.
     
  13. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    And a mage could carry two spellbooks, one in each hand.......
     
  14. WarderDragon

    WarderDragon Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran Alumni BRPA

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    2,688
    Likes Received:
    69
    As absurd as that would be; why not? Just average out the collective benefits of both equipped items.

    So a mage with a 30% SDI Spellbook in one hand and a 25% SDI in the other would have his Total SDI averaged out to something like 27%. The real benefit would be the return of the Tank Mage, who could equip a melee weapon in one hand and a spellbook in the other.
     
  15. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    If both weapons were balanced, could you chug pots without disarming?

    I want my archer to double wield repeating crossbows :)


    SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIENDS!!!!!
     
  16. Konge

    Konge Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    2
    Why not? The entire melee combat system would have to be reworked. Psh... them do something like that... You crazy. Sure be a nice little way to buff melee characters, maybe they'll add in 2 tile range for pole arms and a damage bonus for two handed short weapons and magical speed hacking ponies that explode if you run a script insta banning your account unless you have 120 riding skill (which there isn't even a scroll implemented yet, it's "on the to do list." Then we all get AK-47's instead of bows and first person action but people keep complaining about jump-shots with the Armsel Striker, and straffing spray so everyone get's cement boots that prevent jumping or moving too fast, so everyone just grenade spams luna bank (New Jersey now) and rez kills everyone and then the game explodes because Draconi's time bomb finally went off ( He set it on 5 months rather than 5 minutes).

    But seriously, the time it would take to impliment correctly is way to great, I'd just be happy with them rebalancing weapon DPS to give people more of a choice of weapons...
     
  17. Konge

    Konge Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    2
    Um... they'd have to be balanced to even dual wield... and your swing rate would go way down. Not to mention you'd probably break the game, isn't there already enough "ZOME ULTIMATE ARCHERS ONLINE" posts? This would just make them change ultimate to Uber and use leet speak while everyone dresses up in green platemail trying to be Master Chief to "Finish the Fight"
     
  18. Stupid Miner

    Stupid Miner Guest

    ... Only if there's a corresponding boost for shield-users and 2-handed weapon users.
     
  19. Sunchicken

    Sunchicken Guest

    HEY!! why dont we have the energy swords from halo so we can just 1 hit kill the mages...
     
  20. Jhym

    Jhym Guest

    You're ignoring the primary reason they won't do this.

    They would have to add second-handed artwork for every single dual wield in the game. Any any new ones as they come up. They are barely keeping up with holiday boxes and trying to finish SA artwork.

    As for the concept, honestly I don't think we need it other than for specific weapons crafted to be dual wields (and thus created specifically through new artwork.) So I wouldn't mind dual wield swords, daggers and possibly mauls or maces, maybe even dual-wield boomerangs. But overall? We don't need every single weapon to be dual capable.

    I also think each weapon in a dual should be counted as 1/2 the standard weapon for all properties if it were to be done, but allow both to use their specials.

    In any case they are not likely to do this when we have too many other things that are needed.

    :popcorn:
     
  21. Beer_Cayse

    Beer_Cayse Guest

    remember - Archery cannot dual-wield. Are not Archery weapons 2-handed by design? Then again, perhaps a player race with 4 hands will be coming ... then it would work!
     
  22. Konge

    Konge Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    2
    That would be logical if it weren't for the "balance property."

    I thought of ideas, based on other games and mmos, on how to get dual wielding somewhat balanced... but come on, it's never going to happen so I'd just be typing up what I thought to be a good system just for shats n pickles.

    Also thought of a new way to balance races...

    all these come from other games and general lore for said creatures... IE humans would be better at using melee weapons, elves better archers, and gargs would receive a less penalties for using duals, but blah blah blah, sampires, Dragons, and archers it shall be!