just saw 75 new posts in this thread, this is NOT that important..
like, the reason WHY people use shields on nonweps is for defense and vanity (either or too). nonweps dont get skills and blocking so like.. shouldnt weight be a good enough tradeoff? like i dont get what the issue is
the issue is that weight isnât actually a tradeoff for non-weapon classes the way it is for weapon classes. a warrior eating a mobility penalty feels it every fight because they need to close distance and dodge. a mage sitting at range casting spells barely notices it, and on top of that ardent cuts the penalty in half anyway. so the âtradeoffâ exists on paper but doesnât actually punish the classes that shouldnât have free defense.
Not if they just use nebula to just make it so the enemy is forced to be at distance, or slash to have better cqc than the cqc builds.
My paladin has slash as one of the highest damage dealing moves Iâve used while still having negative power
the argument was never that mages never move, itâs that the mobility penalty from a shield hits them significantly less than it hits a weapon class whose entire gameplan revolves around closing distance and staying mobile. a mage needing to reposition is different from a warrior who needs agility every single fight to function. the penalty lands unevenly and thatâs the problem.
ehh, nebula damage output is so low that it doesnt really force someone to distance themself from you, like a berserker is not going to care that you do a baby explosion every second or two when they hit you with a devastating 600 damage blitz, and slash is very situational
i mean true, but just saying if you are powerstacking you still need to be closerange even as a lighter mage and ESPECIALLY as a solid mage, like thats what i meant
cool thought experiment but maybe fix it by weight being unaffected by enchants, just so âhey, u gotta live with itâ
this does nothing because weapon classes would be similarly disadvantaged, except having a shield also restricts them to about half of the skills something like a mage/berserker/hybrid could do
15% and 25% are different thresholds so thatâs not a straightforward comparison, and amuka was specifically testing the ardent greatshield which halves the penalty, so in practice itâs closer to 12-13% rather than the full 25.
and yes distancing matters for mages but a warrior who canât close distance loses the fight. a mage whoâs slightly slower at repositioning still has self-explosion, slash, quake and t-jump to create distance or attack up close.
the knockback is negligible as well from my experience using it, if anything it actually helps the person chasing you down because then you cant launch a counterattack unless you predict where theyâll be knocked back
a close ranged attack with a bad hitbox and a minimum 1 second delay
not sure about this
yeahhh annihilation is uncounterable just lets mages heal a bunch, that should be addressed too tbh
the weight being unenchantable is actually a pretty good part of a fix but it still doesnât address the full issue. even with the full unmodified weight penalty, a mage at range casting spells feels it less than a warrior who needs mobility. the penalty becomes real again but it still doesnât hit every class equally. itâs better than the current situation, i just donât think it fully solves the free defense problem on its own either.
not necessarily, warriors still have good ranged options
i was going under the assumption that weight operated on a system of 1 weight=1% mobility reduction and was basing my answers upon that (ardent 50 weight=25% reduction, ardent 30 weight=15% reduction)
is this wrong i need to know
self explosion and quake (especially quake) are pretty weak for how open they leave you and slash is really inconsistent
surprised you didnt mention leap, itâs much better than t jump in terms of distance making