Please Rework Swords

    • UNFM wrote:

      Calesvol wrote:

      UNFM wrote:

      there is 3 noobs with 1-20m pvp talking and barking about how swrods are bad do u rly think I will take them serious ?
      Maybe they only have 1-20m pvp because they love themselves some swords and swords are bad. Maybe if swords were good, they'd have the same fame as you. Question mark?
      maybe they should stop watching and listening to streams and play game themself.. and stop blaming weapon of their lack of skill then for sure they can hit same fame as me :) as you can see the problem is not with weapon but with stacks and managment/overlay in CD

      other part of game is still playable and good for swords.
      only AVA need buff/rework. Logic of these people is if I cant kill someone in 10seconds = weapon is shit and need buff. this is delusional thinking about balance.
      which part of the game is good for swords?
      give me examples.
    • I tend to agree that swords are not that bad, but I do think they need some consideration. The many iterations of Parry Strike are 100% why swords have seen some increase in play over the past year, but now that PS has been toned down either directly (loss of silence, reduction of damage, increase cooldown) and indirectly (reduction in reflect damage), it has left swords in a current state of underperformance.

      I don't buy the "better version" of every sword argument. Just because Bloodletter is better than Claymore at this and Halberd is better than Clarent at that, does not necessarily mean swords overall are bad. I also don't buy that a handful of people who are overperforming with swords makes them good.

      Swords definitely need some re-thought on how to obtain stacks. The current method is problematic. It requires to sword users to be in range to use Q, which will then grant them a mobility bonus to help with future stacks, but if the sword user cannot maintain range initially, then none of that bonus matters. Moreover, the use of E makes them start from scratch with this dilemma.

      So, either the buff needs to last longer, or E needs to not remove the speed buffs, or W's need to have a way to generate stacks (beyond Iron Will). Also, some swords need some help with their E, namely Kingmaker and Clarent Blade; Dual Swords could use some uninterrupt love too, IMO.
    • Your asking UNFM to provide examples, when he legit ignores hard facts and data i presented with the sources to back them up. UNFM is not a sword player, he doesnt know what hes talking about, he can barely explain or provide evidence for what he believes to be true , because what he is saying is not. He literally just repeats himself.


      If i said a fire truck was red, and he said it was blue. Then i pulled out several hundred thousand pictures of fire trucks, and even provided links to the history as to why they are painted red. This moron would still say it was blue.


      It is better to not engage with these types of people as they are delusional. Or trolling, one of the two.I only comment to ensure he does not mislead others. Also


      Calesvol wrote:

      I don't buy the "better version" of every sword argument. Just because Bloodletter is better than Claymore at this and Halberd is better than Clarent at that, does not necessarily mean swords overall are bad.
      This is still a valid argument as certain weapons in this game are tailored to specific content, and are expected to perform within their archetype. Sword are a bruiser Weapon, when its archetype is easily achievable by other weapon types, with far less effort , then yes the argument becomes heavily valid.


      For example, a bloodletter with very minimal effort can perform the functions of a sword .It is played in almost every aspect of the game and has built in executes that make Any sword E spell look like Childs play. It has multiple i frames, sustained damage, burst damage, high bleed damage, damage modifiers, free mobility, free repositioning , has added health , has a strong stun which also doubles as an interrupt, instant cast abilities with cooldown modifiers .And finally has perfect synergy with every armor piece in the game. Plus it doubles as an assassins and a bruiser. Without relying on stacks as well. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.


      All of that in one rune Artifact wep, Now look at clarent blade also a rune weapon. A complete joke, nerfed so hard it was removed from the 5v5 meta in old territory gvg's and is now used as a zvz stalker hood support wep. Which no one plays btw.


      The point is, every single sword has nothing unique about it that isnt better with another weapon. And when i say better, i mean VASTLY SUPERIOR to the point of comparisons seeming like an april fools joke .
    • moking wrote:

      If i said a fire truck was red, and he said it was blue. Then i pulled out several hundred thousand pictures of fire trucks, and even provided links to the history as to why they are painted red. This moron would still say it was blue.

      Merksline wrote:

      I lol'ed so hard at the fire truck it made me log in and comment
      But, then there's this...



      To be honest, I don't see a lot of facts from either side. I see a lot of me-search and a lot of anecdotes, which tells us part of the story. The only evidence being provided is win rate in CDs, which is certainly valid but quite myopic. No one is providing any data to back up claims. Even so called "links to sources" are just links to other posts where people are giving their opinions on things. There's literally no number crunching and even if there was, I don't trust anyone to not just cook the books and isolate data to support a specific narrative versus looking at the full picture.

      I read moking's post on IP scaling for swords and there is zero data to support any claims made in that post. The narrative is that swords don't scale well in IP restricted content, but there's literally no evidence to support this claim in the post. It's all conjecture. Just take my word for it. We're told how different content reduces IP and that swords are somehow worse off as the result, but there's no explanation for why this is the case. There's certainly no data to support it.
    • The point of the fire truck example was to provide an objective example. Not to provide multiple perspectives. In other other words if we lived in a world where every fire truck was painted red, and someone insisted they were blue just to be contrarian, despite the evidence .Then they are either a troll or absurdly ignorant.

      Taking it literally was not the intention, otherwise i could say the sky is blue, UNFM says its rainbow colored's, i show him 1000 pictures of a blue sky and the science as to why the sky is perceived as blue. But he still insists that it is a rainbow.

      Then you come in and post a picture of a sky aurora. But we all know that the sky is not always an aurora. And 99 percent of the time it is blue and generally accepted as such. Its the same with that specific fire truck example.

      And the reason why that example was so relevant, is because UNFM made a very specific claim. That claim was then refuted by me with direct links to NDA patch notes, and data from the murder ledger, data btw that anyone can go read for themselves and perform the math required. I even explained the time line of events and used forum post to back up that said time line. The discussion of those post are irrelevant to when they were discussed and why. What's important are the events after and the NDA PATCH NOTES that back up those events.

      And even if we were to consider the actual content of the discussion, and not just the why. We can see the vast majority of players defending my position. Which directly refutes UNFM claim of a community asking for nerfs because sword were sooo op. They never have been. Which was the point of the links and sources. Not just some "forum post".


      And on the topic of PVP scaling guide. In the first paragraph i stated this was not a builds guide, nor is this a "why this ability sucks guide" there is no need for math, other than to address a claim i made that certain instanced content is ip capped, which i provided the caps for each Instanced content. Everything else is as i said, a general analysis /guide that is meant to explain how the weaponry performs in a ip capped environment.

      I could have easily introduced math into the discussion , but no claims were made that required mathematical evidence. As my basis for the claim has always just been my own opinion and the objective fact that there is reduction applied. For example Sword q does less than 129 damage to a cloth target in arena. Hits like a wet mop basically. That's when you factor in the 80 percent reduction and armor. I will stop here as this is not the intention of the post.

      Also nothing i posted was anecdotal as i never posted any math on build dependent data, or individual player win rate data.
    • This dude actually got banned, lmao.

      Calesvol wrote:


      moking wrote:

      If i said a fire truck was red, and he said it was blue. Then i pulled out several hundred thousand pictures of fire trucks, and even provided links to the history as to why they are painted red. This moron would still say it was blue.

      Merksline wrote:

      I lol'ed so hard at the fire truck it made me log in and comment
      But, then there's this...


      To be honest, I don't see a lot of facts from either side. I see a lot of me-search and a lot of anecdotes, which tells us part of the story. The only evidence being provided is win rate in CDs, which is certainly valid but quite myopic. No one is providing any data to back up claims.

      And what data do you expect from us? It’s not like we have any tools but murderledger.
      Somehow i thought that this subforum was made to make a discussion, provide arguments, and find out how to deal with problem, or is there a problem at all.
      So people here made some points, explained why the made it, some provided possible solutions. Then comes unfm with “swords are fine”, insults others, and bring literally 0 value to the conversation. Are these the “data” you looking for Calesvol? Because saying this is not enough too.

      Why swords are okay being underrepresented in CD? Why swords are ok, if the amount of players who make content for open world with them are so low compared to lets say bloodletter? And no, bloodletter isn’t better than claymore, it’s better then the whole freaking sword tree at small-scale fights and bruising. Yeah, dagger type weapon is better at being bruiser then big-ass swords, does this sounds right? No data here of course, just an opinion based on amount of content for yt (seriously just check it), personal experience and advices from more experienced players. Whenever ppl see that i use duals, they advice me to drop it immediately, lol.
      Are swords being ok with close to 0 usage in most type of not solo content? I bet everyone will be happy to get a sword DD for their hce or avalonian group.

      Same points were made again and again, across 10 pages of this thread. But all we getting - “Swords are fine”, “i don’t buy”. Very argument, such data, wow.

      It’s not like people here want to make swords op weapon. I personally just want that they could have identity, definitive roles, and were USEFUL, and not played by only non-meta autists.

      Make second Q and Parry strike castable on run (ahem, axes), make first Q more reliable; at least speed up dual swords E animation, adjust E numbers of gallatines, clarent, and kingmaker hitbox.
      It won’t solve everything, since stacks are still here, but it’s already will be huge improvement for quality of live.
    • Metteia wrote:

      And what data do you expect from us?
      I am just saying there is a lot of conjecture from both sides, and I do not see a lot of good, concrete arguments or analysis. I see a lot of opinions, which are totally valid. That is part of the purpose of the forums and it certainly creates the discourse that swords are underperforming, which I support.

      What I would like to see is more analysis. Murderledger is great. I think it tells one part of the story with data. If you were to tell me that 90% of streamers play daggers and only 1% play swords, that too would be good evidence. But, saying...

      Metteia wrote:

      And no, bloodletter isn’t better than claymore, it’s better then the whole freaking sword tree at small-scale fights and bruising.
      ...is a lot of what I am seeing. A statement that is backed by nothing. There's no supporting argument for this statement. What I would like to see is statements like these backed up by supporting reasons and potentially some sort of analysis, where if you tell me that Bloodletter has more mobility than Claymore or Carving Blade and that is one key area of why the weapon is better, then I'd like to see some numbers around that. Like, Bloodletter can achieve X amount of space in Y amount of time whereas swords can only achieve W amount of space in Z amount of time.
    • Calesvol wrote:

      .is a lot of what I am seeing. A statement that is backed by nothing. There's no supporting argument for this statement. What I would like to see is statements like these backed up by supporting reasons and potentially some sort of analysis, where if you tell me that Bloodletter has more mobility than Claymore or Carving Blade and that is one key area of why the weapon is better, then I'd like to see some numbers around that. Like, Bloodletter can achieve X amount of space in Y amount of time whereas swords can only achieve W amount of space in Z amount of time.
      Do you see gatherers using a claymore or a bloodletter XD. In all seriousness, not everything requires data, common sense and 1 to 1 comparisons are plenty. You don't need a spreadsheet of x and y movement to see claymore has less mobility than a bloodletter.
    • Calesvol wrote:

      Metteia wrote:

      And what data do you expect from us?
      I am just saying there is a lot of conjecture from both sides, and I do not see a lot of good, concrete arguments or analysis. I see a lot of opinions, which are totally valid. That is part of the purpose of the forums and it certainly creates the discourse that swords are underperforming, which I support.
      What I would like to see is more analysis. Murderledger is great. I think it tells one part of the story with data. If you were to tell me that 90% of streamers play daggers and only 1% play swords, that too would be good evidence. But, saying...

      Metteia wrote:

      And no, bloodletter isn’t better than claymore, it’s better then the whole freaking sword tree at small-scale fights and bruising.
      ...is a lot of what I am seeing. A statement that is backed by nothing. There's no supporting argument for this statement. What I would like to see is statements like these backed up by supporting reasons and potentially some sort of analysis, where if you tell me that Bloodletter has more mobility than Claymore or Carving Blade and that is one key area of why the weapon is better, then I'd like to see some numbers around that. Like, Bloodletter can achieve X amount of space in Y amount of time whereas swords can only achieve W amount of space in Z amount of time.
      Statement? Argument? Why didn't you quote my following words? And why didn't i see a SINGLE argument from you? You just visit this topic to talk stuff, like " I don't see a lot of facts from either side" or "I don't buy it". Almost every person who was up for swords rework mentioned something about it - whether it's personal opinion or observation, some provided possible solutions. You just simply ignored it. And i don't mean to be rude, you seem to be a reasonable person, and also provided solutions. But what I can't get is why you blaming us for not providing evidence that almost for every sword there is a better weapon.

      Okay, let's do the math then.
      Lets take a Bloodletter, btw i have no idea why you compared it to claymore since bl is a far more versatile weapon than any sword. Closest would be the Carving sword maybe - E ability looks similar and damage is not affected by the amount of stacks, + it seem to be one of the most popular swords for open world and small-scale pvp. Yes it's 2-handed, but broadsword's E hitting only one person and dont provide any mobility (outside of combat), and clarent blade... well it's just shit.

      So let's compare weapons for small scale PVP, and take values for flat T8 normal weapons:
      Auto-attack:
      Bloodletter - damage per attack 66; DPS 109/sec; DPS with 3 stacks of Assassin Spirit: 128.62
      Carving - damage per attack 124; DPS 124/sec; DPS with 3 stacks of Assassin Spirit: 157.48
      Woah, we have a winner! And we all know how important auto-attack in ~5v5 environment and how much impact it does. Especially when everyone just let sword players stack and AA.

      Now let's take values for skills from the wiki, they are listed for 1060 IP.
      Q abilities:
      Bloodletter - Deadly swipe - 272 damage, 3 meter radius, 4 sec CD, FIVE METERS range (provides mobility). Also Assassin spirit boosts damage so the damage is 320.96. Oh, did i mention that you can instantly get 3 stacks?
      Carving - Heroic Cleave - 189 damage, 6 meter radius, 3 sec CD, STOP YOU WHEN USED. No bonuses for this one cause fu sword users. And good luck hitting a guy who just walks from you, will work in 50% of cases, thanks to great AO netcode. "But man, i can get TWO stacks if i will hit THREE enemies! And just chase down people!!!" Well, good luck chasing bloodletter users where there are no mobs around to stack, and you would stop to Q anyway.

      Let's sum up: 321 dmg vs 189. That suck. Seriously. Twice range, and 1 sec CD less? How many times do you see ppl stacked together? So let's imagine perfect conditions - hitting the same target for 100 seconds with Q only: BL-8024, Carving 6300 damage. Yeah, you won't hit BL Q for full damage the first 3 times. But does it matter with THAT difference? And i already mentioned the mobility aspect.

      W abilities:
      Bloodletter - Chain Slash - 543 damage, range 6m to start, and 8m to jump to another target. 15 sec CD. Invisible and untargetable during jumps, so-called i-frame. Hit up to 4 ppl, no need to aim. Gets boosted by Assassin Spirit - 640.74 dmg

      Carving -
      Splitting Slash - 432 damage, root for 2 sec, range 14m. Great to chase down or lock people. But good luck hitting it on 3+ enemies. Also you will chase only in the case if you won scrimish. See numbers and think about your odds again.
      Iron will - move spd +20%, defence +25%, and 1 stack, yay! Actually maybe good for surviving bursts, and chasing people.
      Parry Strike - 256 dmg, 5m radius, 0.8 sec invulnerability, reflect, 18 sec CD. Was really great before reflect rework. Can give nice damage if you are being focused. But you are locked in the place during it, and radius just 5m.

      Let's sum up: Seems like swords provide some utility. I honestly have no idea what is the best pick here, and usually just get splitting slash to save my duo, or chase down people. Considering it's damage, range, and root it seems to be on par with Chain slash. But if we take into account the inability to miss, raw damage, opportunity to get out of some nasty AOE (unlike parry strike when you just stay) and invulnerability... I would pick Chain slash since it won't be a problem to chase people with bloodletter anyway. But it's IMHO ofc.

      E abilities:
      Bloodletter: Above 40% Health: 490 Below 40% Health: 1055 | with 3 AS stacks - 578.2/1244.9 | 13m range | 30 sec CD, and -10sec to ALL CD if hitting >40% target. No comments
      Carving: 521 dmg | 11m range | 20 sec CD. Reduces the enemy's resistances for 6 sec. 0 stacks 21 pierce, 3 stacks 72 pierce. Consumes all stacks whe used.

      Aight, i could say that this is a tricky topic now since the Carving sword can allow you and your mates to deal more damage. But you need to stack and then lose these stacks to have a noticeable difference. The curse can do almost the same with 392 dmg, and 52 pierce for 4sec(wiki says 5sec lol), on 15 sec CD. While bringing more damage and more sustain (unlike swords, curse doesn't have troubles procing merc jacket) and being ranged. Anyway - in perfect conditions, it's 521 dmg with resistance reduction vs 1245 with CD reductions. With a lesser range of carving. Seems obvious for me.

      And we didn't even get to the fun part.
      1 - Resilience 40% swords vs 75% bloodletter. no comments
      2 - Bloodletter is one-handed. Now imagine dumping these huge numbers even more. MUCH more. Or you can go for CD reduction or survivability. No option for carving ofc.
      3 - Passives. For swords, it's only one option for most cases. And i didn't even bother myself to count another 6% damage boost from the dagger passive

      Let's compare one-handed swords with BL, for the same small scale scenario, that will probably be more fair:
      Clarent E - 689 damage with 3 stacks. 6m radius, 15sec CD. kek
      Broadsword E - 918 damage with 3 stacks and TEN seconds cooldown. Now we are talking. also, you get 70 resistances for 3 sec. Nice. Although Q and W are still subpar, and regular bow will be probably better for raw damage in 1 target, esp if you don't have a pocket healer. And again bow has more sustain, range, and don't need to dodge AOE in the middle of the brawl. Also, no mobility for you, if you playing broadsword. Can't get stacks fast? No damage too. But yes, you can really stick to people and delete them, which is nice.

      So only a broadsword can get close in terms of damage to the bloodletter. For the solo target. But bloodletter have more mobility, more AOE, I-frames, and hard-hitting Q for consistent damage. No need to lose stacks, and you can really secure kills with your E, resetting your Hellion jacket/ specter hood. Resilience penetration also take a huge part: the more people - the better. You can even use it for ZvZ, unlike the broadsword. And again if you need a hard-hitting and cheap weapon to dump huge numbers in one target - why would you use a broadsword instead of a bow?

      Small changes to Q and W abilities can improve it a lot. Again look at what they did with axes.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Metteia ().

    • Right now it's simply easier for people to go pike, get druid robe/cleric robe, whatever hat item, royal sandals/soldier boots and just rush at someone with the extra damage from demon cape. Spears can stack their main damage at any time and anywhere on the map whenever they want whereas swords ya gotta fight the other person at least a tiny bit and hope they don't run away/purge stacks/cleric cowl/demon boots/etc before u get that claymore E off. Plus pike E is lower cd than claymore so by the time a pike would finish its rush they pop cleric robe or something like hellion hood to not get hit anymore, wait it out, keep stacks, another E. It's a hard weapon to try to play atm which is why stats are misleading and as Calesvol pointed out that doesn't mean they're bad. Pike in general was good for half a year+ but people slept on it because it wasn't "meta". Cursed had one of the best dps in the game but people slept on it because it wasn't "meta". I'm sure the exact same situation goes for Mace but now it's becoming "meta".

      Would you call maces a top weapon 6 months ago for cds? But in its current state why go broadsword when there's mace/spears if you want to keep using melees?


      For 2v2 hellgates spears are better in every way. Pike for burst or Glaive for team play synergy. Carving I always considered as that one sword where you could potentially 1v5 group dungeon dive if you had enough spec and enough balls to try but not necessarily the best for group zvz+ content. Maces, hammers, or axes always seemed better. I've wanted to try committing more into the sword tree but decided on spears months and months ago and guess I'm glad I did-it's just the easier weapon to use tbh. Much respect for any sword mains out there because they're keeping skillful AO alive in CDs.
      Don't forget capes are purge-able, this means if you're using martlock cape for example against a black hands that he may simply purge the capes ability. Also keeper cape is purgeable etc.