Dual Wield and Greatweapon balance

[Tesq]

@bretin

what's the problem? do not shield tank at rr 80 defend most of the guard damages? i dont see any problem with preserve 2h tanks from guard damages.

-Shield tank will have the same + less damage by direct hit,

- 2h will have instead more damage by direct hit but more damage done by them via 2h and same damages by guard

it's like pass from 1-2 pro-contr to 1-1 pro contr for me. This would bring on par 2h tank with s+b regard damages taken by guards. WHICH mean the difference is only regard:

s+b = less direct damages - less offensive output
2h= more direct damage- more offensive output.

[Tesq]

block/parry only i know ( guard damages are considered physic attacks)

So,if they are considered physical attacks, how do you expect disrupt to help?

You cannot disrupt physical attacks, this kind of **** has been explained to you, multiple times, can you please at least remember basic game mechanics?

i'm trying to be polite but you seems stupid.... maybe change the rule of how attack are considered when the user is 2h???

you can not agree but is not so hard to understand really.

[TenTonHammer]

>what if 2h tanks can also dodge and disrupt guarded attacks

Kek'd. You do know that BG can easily reach 50%+ disrupt?

Is that the value they get from will power buff and base stats?

cuase 2h build bg does not have enough points to spec shielding anger

[bloodi]

i'm trying to be polite but you seems stupid.... maybe change the rule of how attack are considered when the user is 2h???

you can not agree but is not so hard to understand really.

Yeah Tesq, they are going to modify guard mechanics so they can detect on the fly if you are wielding a 2h so the block changes to disrupt and then disrupt modifies itself into some kind of block that now blocks phisical attacks.

All while disrupts still works as disrupts against any spell targeted at you so you dont lose anything of course.

Its not at all hard to understand and super easy to implement, its not like those kind of things are hard coded.

[Tesq]

>what if 2h tanks can also dodge and disrupt guarded attacks

Kek'd. You do know that BG can easily reach 50%+ disrupt?

Is that the value they get from will power buff and base stats?

cuase 2h build bg does not have enough points to spec shielding anger

and even if it's 50% do you think that

-2h tank with:
40% from parry vs melee
40% from parry + 50% from disrupt vs m.rdps
40% from parry and 18(28% with the 2h penril buff) from dodge vs physic rdps

is better than a general for every attack of

s+b tanks with
40% block + a 40% from parry vs melee
40% block + a 40% from parry vs p.rdps
40% block + a 40% from parry vs m.rdps

I found it totally fine as x the value. It would be a little better on the dodge side and more in the disrupt side.
Guard damages should not be a tank concern really ...if they are the whole guard meccanic is a **** this is why they are so easy to defend against.
If 2h fail in this fix this part of the 2h tanks alredy.

cuz the atm situation is this

40% vs every attacks (2h) vs instead a 40% + 40% (s+b tanks) vs all attacks . 2h tanks get punished more than thay should from guards meccanic. They should be punished by direct damages not from guard imo.

[Penril]

Bretin already explained it (Wall of Darting Steel). I also disagree with Tesq's suggestion.

[rmpl]

No reason to encourage more 2h tanks.

[LeifCeline]

no need for 2 hand Tanks

[Azarael]

Troll elsewhere. Our view is that if you can use it, it should be viable.

[Bretin]

it's like pass from 1-2 pro-contr to 1-1 pro contr for me.

i'm totally with you man

Spoiler:

Troll elsewhere