Why is the Claymore so weak to other Swords?

    Diese Seite verwendet Cookies. Durch die Nutzung unserer Seite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies setzen. Weitere Informationen

    • Why is the Claymore so weak to other Swords?

      Why does the Claymore, the biggest weapon in the sword line, have the least amount of damage?

      I understand the whole. "Ranged/Dash Root" but doesnt Splitting Strike on the W that every sword gets just make the Claymore E even more of a joke since the range of the W is equivalent to the E and comes with less bugs? (Claymore E often not dashing correcting, barely even putting you in auto-attack range)

      Claymore E is also only single target while the Clarent, D.Swords, and Carving Sword have AoE that out damages a single target spell on the same CD. Claymore being 2handed, having the least dmg, and strictly single target, with an E thats trivialized by the sword W?

      Is the weapon just the joke of the sword line set? Similar to other weapons? Or am i missing something and being unreasonable?

      I understand that this is happening across several weapons in other sets. One seems to be the odd one out completely overshadowed and lacking anything to separate itself from the clearly well tuned others.

      Would appreciate feedback and thoughts.
    • I mean the W doesn’t make the E worthless. You can’t miss an E, you can wiff a W. You got 2 roots all other swords have 1. It’s not the same as a broadsword or dual sword so don’t expect it to put out dmg like one. Plus you can burst your full dmg at the start of the fight where as all other swords have to wait 8 seconds to get 3 stacked.

      Claymore isn’t meant to do what an artifact sword does, and it never should. The artifacts should be clearly stronger than the non artifacts.

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von owensssss ()

    • TeeZee schrieb:

      Why does the Claymore, the biggest weapon in the sword line, have the least amount of damage?

      I understand the whole. "Ranged/Dash Root" but doesnt Splitting Strike on the W that every sword gets just make the Claymore E even more of a joke since the range of the W is equivalent to the E and comes with less bugs? (Claymore E often not dashing correcting, barely even putting you in auto-attack range)

      Claymore E is also only single target while the Clarent, D.Swords, and Carving Sword have AoE that out damages a single target spell on the same CD. Claymore being 2handed, having the least dmg, and strictly single target, with an E thats trivialized by the sword W?

      Is the weapon just the joke of the sword line set? Similar to other weapons? Or am i missing something and being unreasonable?

      I understand that this is happening across several weapons in other sets. One seems to be the odd one out completely overshadowed and lacking anything to separate itself from the clearly well tuned others.

      Would appreciate feedback and thoughts.
      The claymore was one of the most dominant weapons for the most part during the beta runs. It was so popular and supposedly overpowered that it was being used in hellgates and GvGs in addition to being the second most used outdoors weapon after the warbow. The developers had to nerf it a few times until it finally became next to useless. Now you rarely see it being used, as there are far superior choices for roaming weapons and it isn't any good for anything else.

      This thread brings back so much memories.. I hate what they did to Iron Will. The whole sword line suffered just because claymore was broken.
    • owensssss schrieb:

      I mean the W doesn’t make the E worthless. You can’t miss an E, you can wiff a W. You got 2 roots all other swords have 1. It’s not the same as a broadsword or dual sword so don’t expect it to put out dmg like one. Plus you can burst your full dmg at the start of the fight where as all other swords have to wait 8 seconds to get 3 stacked.

      Claymore isn’t meant to do what an artifact sword does, and it never should. The artifacts should be clearly stronger than the non artifacts.
      Sword Line W (Splitting Slash) - Has 5sec less of a cooldown. Does Similar damage. Is better by virtue of it being longer range, AoE, requires no stacks, and safer then Claymore E (Charge).

      • It maybe a skill shot but is over all more valuable then Claymore E. It has purpose in ganking as Soft-CC but if the enemy turns on you to engage the root becomes less valued.
      Artifact Weapon (Clarent Blade/Carving Sword)
      1. Clarent Blade possess more damage potential on Clarent Blade E (Mighty Swing) while being 1-handed allowing a Mist Caller or Shield for added benefit, allowing to be more deadly and defensible then the Claymore.
      2. Carving Sword E (Fearless Strike) has near identical damage and has a scaling armor penetration. Coupled with fact the Dash is longer range and requires no target allowing it to be used both offensively and defensively.

      • While Carving sword as an artifact weapon could be argued to be intended to be stronger/different. It does everything the Claymore can do but better while being more defensible (free-cast E) and less "Selfish/Greedy" by providing useful debuffs (Armor Pen) in group-play. Leaving the Claymore with nothing to show for itself or its own strengths.
      • As the GvG meta has already proved. The Clarent Blade is over all better in every aspect. Higher Single-Target Burst potential while being AoE. 1-Handed. Less bugs.
      The Claymore needs something to distinguish itself. A good example of this is shown in the Spear Line. The Spirit Hunter, Herron Spear, and Glaive all have unique aspect about them all making them valued in their own right depending on the situation.

      In my honest opinion, if the Claymore is a weapon designed for ganking/solo fighting and intended to be single target. Its damage and strengths should reflect that.

      Zarek schrieb:

      The claymore was one of the most dominant weapons for the most part during the beta runs. It was so popular and supposedly overpowered that it was being used in hellgates and GvGs in addition to being the second most used outdoors weapon after the warbow. The developers had to nerf it a few times until it finally became next to useless. Now you rarely see it being used, as there are far superior choices for roaming weapons and it isn't any good for anything else.
      This thread brings back so much memories.. I hate what they did to Iron Will. The whole sword line suffered just because claymore was broken.
      I played during that beta. Yes it was powerful no doubt. But over the changes that have been made since then i would argue that other weapons were under-developed. With the addition of their changes to other weapons and new skills added. I wouldnt see why having the Claymore as a single target burst weapon is bad in the current state of the game.

      Now that every sword has access to Splitting Slash and with the points i made above the claymore is now obsolete. It's sad. I love the weapon.

      That being said, even as bad as it is. I'll be the masochist that i am continue to use it. I just hope the developers might notice and give some love to the Claymore as it is in desperate need of it.
      Those were funny days lol

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 3 mal editiert, zuletzt von TeeZee ()