bringing back the thought of dual wielding! (in General)

seriously, I don't think it's over powered. You lose the ability to have a shield, so either losing good defense, or st from a bom, etc... Need to use skill so you lose BL or Archery, both damage increasing losses.. Finally, Cash sink, because you have to invest in not one, but 2 weapons. finally, if must, have second weapon be at %50-%75 damage, because of dominant and non dominant hands.

the second weapon could attack in one of 2 ways, single attack type, just with more damage, or it could be another attack within the round. The PTH will be at %50-%75, so it won't hit as much as the other weapon, so its not doubling the amount of hits (if both were identical weapons). single handed weapons only.

Dex requirement relative to ST. to reach 100% efficiency to even got the 50%-75% from the other weapon and 100% from first weapon, and maybe even so much invested into the skill itself. so XP sink.

Why would you want it? More damage, without BL defense loss. dual chakram, dual BoT, one chakram and els? The thought of having a sweet dual wielding minion.

I know its been shot down before, but we need more stuff, and new things here. I'm also for special bonus's for full armored minions, such as all elven, including sword and bow.

Encumbrance makes this a limited engagement.

Why would you even want this? It would be less damage and more expensive. BL is the exact same thing as your proposing but implemented in a simpler form.

The only difference would be the ability to benefit from two different effects. However, that is a very, very small benefit considering the huge limitations you would face.

ok, take away some of the penalties I introduced. I was just trying to make it fair. Add some spice to this game.

oooh, encumbrance, ok, so you need soo much dex in comparison to ST, but also training DW skill more increases encumbrance greatly. will have to work out some details to prevent mages and enchanters from doing this. encumbrance problem solved, and not overpowered because its an XP sink.

EoD/NS: You are the smart ones figure a way to make it work. I get really freaking pissed off when I hear that anything is possible in code land yet when it is talked about you say it is either not viable or possible. I say Bull Crap use those brain cells of yours and figure it out rather than be lazy and shoot it down.

Why would we use our brain cells for such a minor difference yet huge coding endeavor?

Basically, you are adding the ability so that people may have two different effects on their weapon. However, their weapons can only be about half as good as they were (at theoretical max, i.e. having no PTH or damage penalties as purposed above.)

So far, the skill is sounding like a nooby trap. It requires you to spend more money on already expensive to upgrade weapons and then it makes you do less overall damage than just using BL (using the idea of penalties above.)

Ignoring these facts, how would you even implement the skill of duel wielding? First, one would assume it would be made similar to BL by basing its effectiveness off of strength. However, what happens as it gets below the needed strength level? Does it penalize your damage output, make you swing the second weapon a certain percent of the time, or what?

A simpler way to implement it would be to just require a base amount similar to AP. You could then have massive damage and PTH penalties like 50%, so it would basically make it a cheap exp alternative to BL while costing you your shield. This idea sounds great, but it would heavily favor USD users which people already complain about.

In the end, I just don't see a need or use for this skill. However, if you can show one, then I would support it. But at its purposed idea it does not work. It isn't my, NS, or anyone elseﾒs job to flesh out someone elseﾒs idea to get it into a working concept. If someone has an idea, they purpose it, and it gets criticized, they (or supporters of the idea) need to be the ones to figure out its place in the game and how to implement it. So don't start berating us Zenai after we reasonably criticize an idea or pass on the responsibility of solving its benefits to the game and implementation.

>So don't start berating us Zenai after we reasonably criticize an idea or pass on the responsibility of solving its benefits to the game and implementation.

Yet you berate to start in a brow beating manner just so you do not have to deal with the idea to begin with. Again stop being Lazy and figure it out. The first answer is a lazyman's answer. Find a few more answers THEN you are actually starting to think. This is when you find actual solutions. So in a few words shove the ego and use the brain cells.

Oh and to make a point here how can a person flesh out an idea if they do not know how? A good idea can come from anywhere and it is indeed NS', yours, mine or anyone else's responsibility too flesh it out IF they have the capability to do so. It's that "Do what you can if you can" rather than "It is not my responsibility" attitude....or the "Can Do" over the "Can't do"

BL *is* DW.

I've said it *many *many* times before.

Now, you could use a DW skill to cheese applications of the ES DoT, which is about all that would be unique about it.

Which I'd weigh in on the side of being a no no.

To be fair, you could conceivably also use it for dual-wielding crossbows, although any other ranged weapon would probably be ludicrous :)
I assume one would use a ST-drain and a DX-drain crossbow in parallel in that case most of the time (or dual ST-draining ones, who knows).

I'd still call it an unnecessary idea, and I am opposed to bothering with at all, I just thought I'd mention this one bit anyway.

I've said my piece in the other thread....it could be balanced and you know it.

Also, you might possibly allow the use of a regular melee weapon on top of an UC-like weapon (enabled by leaving a blank dual wield slot).

Maybe even allow both the use of a melee/ranged weapon alongside a direct damage spell.
For instance, you could have a fireball/ELBow archer, or a decay/MoD tank, or any other such weird combos.

As for the skill, you could make it akin to AP - simply boolean.
The downside//penalty would be to lock out the shield slot alongside a flat damage reduction, say something along the lines of -20% for whatever is selected for the "main hand" and -40% for the "off-hand" one.

...

Still not convinced that would be worth the bother though.

A proposed way to make dual wield viable.

A flat exp amount just like AP. The ability to wield two one handed weapons. -35% to the offhand. OR off hand hits once for every 2 hit of main with the minimum being if main only hits once the offhand would still swing.

Each class of weapon would hold different perks. Hammer class weapons give a flat 7.5% boost to ST per weapon when dual wielding. Edged weapons 7.5 % DX boost. Other classes other boosts. Weapon effects would not stack but work independently as they do now. So that way each hit from a BoTh wouldn't sap 40% or the MoD wouldn't ignore all AS.

It's at least some form of organized idea instead of all this pointless banter.

Not the point Sickone it's just the matter of it is possible over it cannot be done. Thanks for showing "A" way it could be done.

Dan, does this;

Do more Damage than BL in total?

Makes BL redundant.

Costs more as you need to spend CBD on Two weapons?
Take up more ENC?

Would never be used over BL. Unless the increased damage was so large, that nothing else in the game competes with it.

It can be balanced stop the nay saying just because you cannot figure it out bro. It's a highly arrogant thought process to think just because you do not have the answer that no one else could.

To be fair...

Yes, dual wielding melee weapons (and just that) is not a good thing, for the reasons you already mentioned (just use BL instead and be done with it, if all you want is two melee weapons).
That's why we kind of stopped talking about JUST that particular potential use.

So we started going on a tangent about other potential allowable uses of something that probably shouldn't even be called dual wield anymore - mainly physical+magic, but maybe also some ranged+ranged (crossbows).
Allowing it to combine different damage types (in particular magic+physical) and making it cost only a small flat XP amount would make it so that it would not be a straightforward replacement//obsolescence of BL, but a mere enrichment of variation.

The challenge would be to determine how much the ability to use such a damage combo should cost in terms of damage reduction (if any) - whatever XP goes into BL to boost one weapon's damage potential in case of BL would be spendable on the spell, which deals a damage that could be more or less than the weapon depending on how big the weapon is, and that could turn out to be much more or much less than the added damage using BL would have granted, and there's also the lack of shield issue.

You could theoretically balance it around a certain expected average aggregate of enemy EC/AMF/AC/other damage reduction combined with expected average self weapon NW, ST, added DD XP and average AMF resist, making it so that at that particular completely hypothetical current average mid-point, the use of BL and the use of this so-called "dual wield" is about on par (more or less), but actual results wildly vary based on the two combatants' setups.

I'm NOT saying it would be easy, and I'm NOT saying it's really needed either, but IF we ever decide to allow it, it could actually be at least theoretically balanceable.

Potentially yes it COULD do more damage than BL. That depends on a lot of variables such as which items you were using and the amount of NW in each. Say comparing a 100,000,000 NW MH with BL trained vs 2 50,000,000 NW MH's with dual wield trained no. It would do more damage than one MH without BL but less than with. The perk would be it would work like UC where it lets your encumbrance be higher so you could potentially do more damage but it would require much more NW.

I completely agree that in most of these current propositions it would be either way to OP or it would be useless. Melee weapons are already practically useless just look at the listings of how much NW is actually sank Into what items. I just would like to see some kind of change to combat this and make physical damage viable again in the upper ranks.

I meant BoTh's not MH's. I completely spaced I haven't had my coffee yet

It's not highly arrogant Zen.

This has been thought out, discussed, and picked apart, for years. By more than just myself.

But if you think there's something that has been missed, and that DW could offer something distinctly different to BL, then please show us.

Reading old discussions, it was shot down because it would be overpowered. this time it looks like its shot down because its underpowered.

Picture this. dual BoT, VA, TS. Immortal dual Wielding Zombie Warrior!

GL my point still holds, that was before this is now and again just because you and even a crew of people couldn't figure it out before still doesn't mean that only THEY could ever have the answer. It is still an arrogant assumption. Oh and just to throw it out there since you enjoy calling me out I NEVER said I had the answer just that you cannot assume that there was not one out there....let's make sure to keep things straight here before you jump to some more assumptions GL.

And so much has changed, right?

Apart from the ES, and DW chessing applying a DoT. Which makes it even *less* likely to be balanced.


I really don't know what to say.

Apart from it's just as arrogant to think *you* know something that others have missed over the years, and are adament we're all wrong.


It's not an assumption. I was directly calling you out Zen. If you think I'm so wrong, actually provide some basis for that. Give us a design for DW that is balanced, and fits in with BL.

Otherwise, please take the informed analysis of others, who have spent time on this issue, and have figured out that BL *is* DW.

This isn't Religion. The balance of a new skill isn't some unkown quantity. It's easily discussed, dismantled and digested.

Instead of ignoring all this, maybe those wanting DW should push for the ability to rename skills and DDs. That was, you could rename Blood Lust into Dual Wield. And Shocking Grasp into Dim Mak.

CB is built on the abstract. Toasters fighitng Garfield or Optimus Prime. In a backdrop of Middle Earth.

Embrace that instead.

GL: How many times have things that have been "Proven" by major groups of ppl been proven wrong by one? I mean seriously for you or anyone to think they have reached a unsolvable answer is just plain foolish to begin with. To even attempt to logically explain yourself in a world of possibilities is proving you to be less knowledgeable to start. Beside even in the world of Math and Science, which is what code is based on to begin with, a Fact is only a Fact until proven wrong.


You have not even unequivocally proved it wrong to begin with. You do not, by your own admission, have access to CB's Code nor do you have the capability to work it so seriously all you have is rhetoric and conjecture that was think tanked by outside gamers of a system. They were crunching numbers they could decipher from what they dealt with not what they got out of the code from actually reading it. So enough with the I know for a fact crap GL because you do not.

What does having access to the code have anything to do with it?

Zen, you're starting to go off base, just becuase you think you know something that the rest of us don't, or worse, are just disagreeing with us, for no reason at all. Other than you just don't like the answer.

If you have a super secert idea for making a new DW skill balanced, let us know.

Otherwise please drop it, and the accuastions of arrogance.

Zen, outside gamers...

Jon said *exactly* the same thing about DW, and was in total agreement.

But I'll leave you to hunt out his posts on the matter...

GL: Then Stop trying to say you DO for a fact know for the sake of rebuffing me then how about that?

GL: Even the Mighty Jon has Admitted he was wrong on things chew that for a while.

I *know* for a fact that BL is CBs version of DW. And that a DW skill is nearly impossible to balance in old, and current CB.

If you disagree, show some actual proof/evidence/reasonable arguement as to why.

Or please stop.

Again, you can hunt out the old threads on DW if you wish, which hold a lot more information as to the whys.

Screen Shot it and show me in the CB code GL or Stop where you are right now. I take NOTHING from your word just because you are an Admin PERIOD.

Code? Admin?

What the heck Zen...

Please stop now.

It's true GL if you cannot show me an in depth analysis of why DW cannot be balanced in the CB code via Screen Shot then digress. It's that simple. I tire of you constantly coming around acting that your word is the only one. Others have ideas and just because you(or a group) could not come up with an answer to a hard question doesn't mean someone else(or another group) can't. Let Ideas Flow it how answers are found.

What the heck does the code have to do with it? You're rambling now as oyu don't have a point, and can't follow the current thrust of the discussion.

As for DW. Here it is in all it's ugly glory;

What do you want DW to do? Simple enough question. Use two melee weapons at the same time. Why? I'll get to the later.

What are the initial implications?

Obviously, we want it to take a skill slot to unlock. Simple.

Then, the impact is this. Using Two weapons means they have to both be half the size of using a single weapon, due to Enc. So we amend either the damage, or ENC, so that using two weapons equals the damage of using one. But that costs more CBD to do so. So no one in thier right minds would ever do so.

So we have to up the damage, again, to compensate.

So now we have a case where spending more, gives you more damage.

OK.

How about the whole to-hit mechanics?

Do you attack with a single atack as usual? Or do you attack with both, seperately? With a single attack, how do you form the stats of the weapon you're attakcing with? Average? But the weapons could both use different upgrade curves.

If you allow seperate hits, how do global PTH bonuses (and maluses) effec these? If you wear a ToA, does it's PTH get added to both weapons? Split across both? How does that work with different + upgrade curves?

How do DBs work?

Lets assume that the PTH is cancelled out by the MTH. Gratz, you now have up to two extra attacks that no none Tank can do anything about (Dex relationship) per round. Potentially doubling your damage, for nothing. OP much?

No let's move on to special effects. Do you combine these? Do each individual weapon hits use their individual weapon 'specials'?

Gratz again, you 'free' bonus 2 off hands hits now also apply the ES DoT, while your normal main hand hits use a MoD.

You combine them into a single ultra hit. So you VA from a Morg that bypasses AC with Vorpal. Or you ignore PL and apply the ES DoT. Whatever OP combination you can dream up.

Now that's sorted, you have to deal more Damage with DW than a single Weapon would with BL. So you have to up it's damage again.

End of the day, these technical issues aside, what do you want DW to do?

Simple. Deal more damage at the cost of a skill slot.

How much? Not x2 damage, as that would be OP. Let's say you do 75% increased damage due to the off hand attack.

Blood Lust does that.

But you want a drawback, and you can't use your shield is one. Shields reduce incoming damage.

Blood Lust used to cause you to take increased damage. Let's bring that back. All without messing with ENC, or costing your twice as much CBD to run as DW would.

What do *you* want DW to do, that BL doesn't, or can't be amended to do?

More damage than usual? Check. Drawback? Check.

Meld OP special weapon abilities. Hell no. And why anyone would think that would be a good idea, is frankly beyond me.

*Everything* that DW could do, Blood Lust does already.

Without messing with ENC, To-Hit or CBD costs.

If you think something has been missed, kindly point out what.

You said balancing DW can't be done GL I pointed out that you cannot possibly say that and be correct which again is true. You do not code for CB furthermore you have based your straw man argument on the research of others (who did not have acces to the code as well?)and as you so aptly pointed out you before you do not know how to code to begin with. So in conclusion yet again GL if you cannot "Prove" your argument via the code of CB with a detailed analysis and explanation then you are spinning your wheels. In short Digress GL and admit for once you just might be incorrect.

You do not need access to the code to balance an ability...

Stop trying to push that misinformation as some sort of gospel.

Either comment on my discussion of DW above, or conceed that you have the wrong end of the stick on this one.

I'll humour your faulty logic for a moment.

*You* Zen, have no access to the Code. Jon (and others, who do have access) have Said that BL *is* DW for CB.

They have access to the Code.

Yet you are somehow claiming to know better.

Hypocracy much?

(Still, having access to the Code is a red herring in this. But you seem insistant that it's relevant...)

Faulty? You mean like yours basing information off of other people's words? Oh and to make this point yet again just be cause NS/Jon has access to the code doesn't mean they are omniscient. They have bith been wrong before and will be wrong again in the future because dun dun dun they are human.

Accepting your type of logic, because I know better and you don't so shut up, would mean the end of any idea, thought or suggestion at your mere word. If this was done in any environment we as a species would stagnate. I say we live and yes play in a world (RL and CB) of infinite possibilities that have yet to be realized. I for one will NOT allow the likes of you or anyone like you in any form cut that off just because you/they want to be right.

Having access to the code has nothing to do with anything. Coding is simply taking a concept, which isn't code (obviously), and turning it into a functional application on computers.

We are arguing a concept here. We don't need to know how to do code, what the code looks like, or anything to do with code.

Saying we don't have access to the code; therefore, we can't know how to balance DW is silly.

Stop the crap rhetoric and actually comment on the analysis of DW I posted above.

Bottom line stop telling people they don't have the right to their ideas because you know better. You don't whether you choose to admit it or not. Honestly it is people like you who makes players want to forum their ideas and yes even play CB less and less because they are limitedin everything as fae as suggestions. It one of the reasons I detest FORS because it is a player deterrent.

EoD that is not true I have spoken in depth with programmers yes even NS about ideas and have been told point blank anything can be done it's just how difficult it would b to balance in the CODE. Don't believe me fair enough have NS weigh in on it. Until then I am sticking to my guns on this period.

Zen, your words are empty and hollow, unless you post something substantial to back your stance.

BL is DW. If fulfills the same function for CB.

You disagree, you need to say why. So far, you've said nothing.

I can say the exact same thing for you GL every single one of your arguments is based solely on conjecture.

Then you must have missed the *massive* post above with indepth analysis of the DW skill.

I suggest you go reread it before commenting further.

It's not an I depth analysis of DW GL it is an in depth conjectured guess based on a theory or set of theories from a group of people. Now if you had access to the code and said the code does not support this type of coding then I might believe you and digress but all you have thrown at me is straw man arguments which we both know is nothing more than intepretable assumptions at best.

We didn't say he had a right to his idea? First off, DW isn't really HIS idea, the inner workings might be his, but the general concept of it isn't his.

Second, we looked at his argument and critiqued it. We showed him the problems with it and reasoned our way to several conclusions based on different premises.

1. It is the same as BL but costs you more money.
2. It is better than BL but costs you way more money thereby benefiting USD users.

Overall, BL does what people are purposing for DW. We pointed this out and said that the idea wouldn't work because of these reasons. You then come in throwing a fit telling us we can't say "it will never work" and "it can't be balanced." Although I don't really get your second point considering most of our problem with the skill is it is the same as BL, not that it can not be balanced.

But ignoring that fact, you still have yet to add ANYTHING relevant to the subject. Here we are debating this concept, knocking ideas around, and concluding results while you have been ranting that we can't come to such conclusions without adding points or showing new ideas.

Honestly, if I was to implement DW. I would make it be a flat exp requirement. Your second weapon acts independent so it has its own hit chance, its own weapon properties, its own damage upgrade, etc. And then make it do 75% damage it would normally do.

The benefits would be: you could have a second effect (so MoD and ELs), a second chance to hit, and wouldn't take up any exp like BL. This idea would heavily favor long term players and USD users as it would increase their damage without much USD. (This would be a massive buff too me since I have plenty of ENC and use DEX BTH a lot)

Clearly, this idea of DW would not be balanced, but it is as simple as you can come up with. Anything else becomes super complicated with swing chances being based on the relationship of the skill level and whatever you base it on.

...Zenai you do know it is nearly possible to code ANY concept into some working form with code.

So, why are you bring up the code so much? The code is not a limiting factor here. It is the innate nature of the concept of DW that is the problem.

This is like banging my head against a brick wall.

I'm going to bed.

Zen, I hope in the cold light of day you reread your posts and see how, poor, they are.

You didn't critique him you totally blew him out of the water and made your arguments based on what you think you know and expected him and everyone else to take it as fact. This is one of the reasons why I tire of this game and the negative feel of it on a daily basis is sorely testing my resolve to stay in it. CB3 .....heh CBD is all but dead with people not even letting ideas bloom. Sadness. I'm done you and GL can have this thread and every other idea/suggestion thread to come into existence from now on. I honestly feel dirty having even attempted to have said a damned thing to either of you. As a matter of a fact have forums too.....what's the use I mean you guys obviously have all the answers so why even try right? To hell with it all I say just go ahead and corner and kill every idea and let's see how long CB2 is gonna last.

What what gave you the impression that my ideas had to be taken as fact? He gave his idea of it. I gave my idea of it. He has yet to answer my ideas and give his ideas again.

It is a debate. What am I suppose to do? Simply accept his ideas? Not give responses? What kind of debate is that? Ideas should always be challenged and fleshed out. Not taken for granted....

I don't know how to make money; you make it for me Zenai.

Sorry, the world doesn't work like that. If he or others don't know how to do something, it isn't my responsibility to do it for them.

I can see how posts like this help new users stay.

I think there are way bigger things that affect new player retention ;).

Aren't you the one coping out?

Zenia's argument for this thread:
You say there is a way for DW to work. We ask you to give your idea/reasoning. You say you don't know but that we should figure it out. We give you our reasoning and it leads us to it not working. You say that it isn't good enough and there must be a way for it to work. We say show us. You say you don't know, but that it is our responsibility. We say not it isn't. You say we are coping out.

Really, dude. This argument is not only circular in nature but quite stupid.

I love it how you two guys love so much arguing with each-other that you only barely acknowledge stuff other people say :P

I can play the quote myself without adding anything new tot he topic game Zen;


I am *this* close to locking this thread...

Close it then GL it is about the only Good thing you would have truly contributed to it any way. All I have seen you do since you have become an Admin be be a damned Douche Bag when it comes to New Ideas/Suggestions. This was something you were completely adamant about BEFORE you were an Admin and I find it absolutely appalling that you have flipped your script. Close I [Admin Edit] DARE you!

Stop your vitriol Zen, or I will request a forum ban for you.

I've supported you in the past, but your posting is a lost cause.

Take a step back, reread your posts, and try to comprehend how they look, and make you look.

GL if I cared one bit how things made me look I would never try to get you MR. Super Right to listen to a damned thing. You can't even admit there is even a remote possibility that you are wrong in anything. Which is why I said the forums are yours for the killing of ideas both New/Old/ Misc. Now stop addressing me. If you want to talk with me so badly CM me but I will not guarantee that you wont get cussed out. IE Stop and how about you put your admin skills to actual use and just delete any and everything you I have posted yesterday and today and let people go through with their ideas without your meddling crap.

this thread was created to discuss a possible new skill, it has devolved into something much less than that. closed.