Why does dual wield halve block chance and why does 2h halve parry chance?

Hello,

I am wondering what the reasoning is behind halving the block chance versus dual wielders and halving the parry chance against 2handed.

What would get out of balance if the block and parry chances were always the same, regardless of weapon type?

What is the reason that makes it an requirement that dual wielding has to penetrate guard by 50% ?

If I guard a target with block chance at 60% cap, I will reduce 60% of 2handed DPS characters on average. 2handed already do a lot less DPS than dual wielding classes (which is fine), but in the guarding scenario I diminish their DPS to only 40% of that, which is basically nothing. On the other hand, I reduce the amount of damage coming from a dual wielder by only 30%, so he still does 70% of his DPS on average.

Next, parry. I really don't understand why parry needs to be halved when defending against 2handed. Especially, parry can't be transferred to another character, like it is the case with guard coming from blocking. It just alters 1on1 fight viability to some extent. Which 2handed class would become underpowered if they had to face a character with 50% parry cap?

Could someone please explain to me why Mythic designed it that way? Thank you.

And also, an extra question: If I manage to get my block chance over the cap of 60% ... let's say it would be 80% actually. Do I have 40% block chance against dual wielders then? Or does the cap count before the reduction, so I end up with 30% block chance although I my uncapped block chance is 80% ?

Tue 4 Sep 2018 3:51 PM by Seigmoraig

I have the feeling that it is a real world analogy kind of thing. With 2 weapons it would be easier to get through a shield. With a 2 handed weapon it would be easy to blow through a parry

Wed 5 Sep 2018 11:36 AM by relvinian

Block parry block parry block block block parry parry parry.

Although to be fair, vs assassin which already poison poison poison poison poison poison poison,

Maybe block shouldn't be halved.

If you get ur block chance over cap and its halved I believe ur getting the xtra benefit.

Wed 5 Sep 2018 11:43 AM by Jaegaer

If dual wield would reduce parry chance then Assassin duels would be utterly broken.

Wed 5 Sep 2018 2:45 PM by schreon

Jaegaer wrote: ↑
Wed 5 Sep 2018 11:43 AM
If dual wield would reduce parry chance then Assassin duels would be utterly broken.

I believe there is a misunderstanding. I don't see any post asking for this.

On the contrary, I am wondering why halving defenses in some scenarios takes place in the first place. I don't see a reason for that, so I tend to believe that removing the "halve your defense"-mechanics would be an overall improvement. However, maybe I'm missing some special case which is reason enough to do so. So I honestly aks for an explanation ^^ --- if there is any.

Wed 5 Sep 2018 3:08 PM by schreon

Seigmoraig wrote: ↑
Tue 4 Sep 2018 3:51 PM
I have the feeling that it is a real world analogy kind of thing. With 2 weapons it would be easier to get through a shield. With a 2 handed weapon it would be easy to blow through a parry

I have a hard time imagining how wielding 2 dirks instead of 1 helps when trying do penetrate the defenses of a huge tower shield.

Though, I can see how parrying the swing of a big two handed hammer might be difficult using the same 2 dirks in your hand. However only wielding 1 dirk won't make the situation better in any way.

I can see where the real world analogy comes from, but I think it is questionable in the current state of implementation.

Wed 5 Sep 2018 7:01 PM by Magesty

My assumption is that this mechanic was initially added to give 2H and DW specs a little bit more of an offensive edge. It sort of works using general logic from a real life stand point and definitely helps game balance to an extent. Shield is the strongest line in the game by far and needs some mechanics that bring it to heel. Should it be a 50% penalty? No, probably not. A lower percentage would likely be more appropriate. Maybe something along the lines of 25-40% would make it less overwhelming.

What I do know is when they arbitrarily pulled this penalty from the live servers it obliterated solo/small man balance. I was playing on classic servers at the time and shield users were way out of line after these changes. Every shitty Reaver, Thane, Valk or whatever else had MoB3 and the heal proc dragon shield. A guild mate spent a fair amount of time soloing on a savage leading up to that time period and it became basically impossible for him to compete against shield users. I'd assume the same could be said for assassins or rangers trying to fight sword and board characters. Completely removing the penalties created an anti-fun RvR environment where the strongest solo classes became those that could turtle the best. There was no real way to punish them as all blocking penalties were removed. High RR Reavers who knew how to backpedal and mouse turn properly suddenly became raid bosses where a few weeks before they were reasonably balanced opponents.

The issues that arose from removing the penalty are fairly similar to the problems that dodger is going to create in small man/solo situations when people realize every assassin has basically nothing better to purchase with their RSPs and is clocking in at 50%+ chance to evade every swing while countering with 1.XX styles. I'm not much for predictions, but I do know that the tears are going to be real once the servers go live and people realize just how monstrous the characters lurking in the shadows truly are.

Now, there are a lot of factors that were at play on the classic servers that pushed shield users way over the edge that have nothing to do with the defensive penalty being removed. They were exacerbated by it, but only as secondary issues. On this server removing the penalty wouldn't have such a huge effect on solo and small man play, but I think history should be acknowledged and any alterations of these mechanics need to be carefully done.

Wed 5 Sep 2018 11:07 PM by Takii

schreon wrote:
Jaegaer wrote: ↑
Wed 5 Sep 2018 11:43 AM
If dual wield would reduce parry chance then Assassin duels would be utterly broken.

I believe there is a misunderstanding. I don't see any post asking for this.

On the contrary, I am wondering why halving defenses in some scenarios takes place in the first place. I don't see a reason for that, so I tend to believe that removing the "halve your defense"-mechanics would be an overall improvement. However, maybe I'm missing some special case which is reason enough to do so. So I honestly aks for an explanation ^^ --- if there is any.

You're asking for someone to explain to you the thinking behind a decision taken 18 years ago at a company that no longer exists?

Cmon. That's not what you're asking.

Wed 5 Sep 2018 11:47 PM by schreon

Yes it is, because there are tons of people who played back then and remember such stuff. Like Magesty who gave an informative response which totally makes sense.

Maybe there are more or other reasons, but what Magesty wrote down seems very plausible to me.

So, if a too high defense is a problem in smallman and solo, I can imagine there are smoother ways of balancing that. Like, half your own parry chance as soon as you wear a shield. That would also prevent characters from turtling too much, even to a very similar degree, but it would not make guarding another character against a DW melee train as pointless as it feels currently.

If taking 60% average DPS out of a DW train using guard results in balancing issues, I am interested in reading them.

Thu 6 Sep 2018 12:34 AM by Takii

You're talking about changing pretty core mechanics of the game. I don't think that's what people are interested in this server for.

Uthgard was one extreme but let's not go to the other.

Thu 6 Sep 2018 12:37 AM by Cadebrennus

Seigmoraig wrote: ↑
Tue 4 Sep 2018 3:51 PM
I have the feeling that it is a real world analogy kind of thing. With 2 weapons it would be easier to get through a shield. With a 2 handed weapon it would be easy to blow through a parry

This. Not only does weapon choice and style of wielding said weapons offer some sort of balance for doing so (ie not using shield) it also has the damned cool factor.

Thu 6 Sep 2018 2:34 PM by Kaosfury

playing a shield / parry champ, it aggrivates me. i feel as if my defences suck, and whats the point of going shield parry, im not saying the penalty needs to go away, but maybe visit it, to make sure its fair for all. enemys and my self

Thu 6 Sep 2018 3:00 PM by Cadebrennus

Kaosfury wrote: ↑
Thu 6 Sep 2018 2:34 PM
playing a shield / parry champ, it aggrivates me. i feel as if my defences suck, and whats the point of going shield parry, im not saying the penalty needs to go away, but maybe visit it, to make sure its fair for all. enemys and my self

Unless you're facing someone who is dual wielding polearms your defenses should be okay.

Thu 6 Sep 2018 4:35 PM by Hammurabi0788

Its fine as is. Only affects you vs a few classes and it gives those offensive specs some offence. No different then your shield spec gives some defense. Being that max block is 60%. You could still be blocking 30% against duel wield and then add in whatever parry you have. Still should have better defense then the duel wielder.

Thu 6 Sep 2018 8:17 PM by schreon

Hammurabi0788 wrote: ↑
Thu 6 Sep 2018 4:35 PM
Its fine as is. Only affects you vs a few classes and it gives those offensive specs some offence. No different then your shield spec gives some defense. Being that max block is 60%. You could still be blocking 30% against duel wield and then add in whatever parry you have. Still should have better defense then the duel wielder.

It's not about the personal defense of a single character only. It is also about guarding a 2nd person against enemy dual wielders.

It's not that I have a grudge against Dual Wielders or anything. I'm playing hero the past weeks now and I am very confident with my personal defense and my damage output. However, I had lots of situations where I tried to guard against melee trains. My observation is that guarding is effective against 2h and 1h (especially reaver) , but it is rather weak against DW. This means that 2h and 1h are indirectly getting weaker and DW are getting stronger relatively.

Considering the forum posts about several 2h classes complaining about subpar viability (especially paladin!), giving DW an additional advantage vs those other melee damage variants might just be a tad too much.

Please just keep in mind that the extent of these defense penalties should be considered when tweaking overall balance between classes and specs. Only tuning the penalty in the case of guarding another character is also an option.

Thu 6 Sep 2018 8:44 PM by Cadebrennus

schreon wrote: ↑
Thu 6 Sep 2018 8:17 PM
Hammurabi0788 wrote: ↑
Thu 6 Sep 2018 4:35 PM
Its fine as is. Only affects you vs a few classes and it gives those offensive specs some offence. No different then your shield spec gives some defense. Being that max block is 60%. You could still be blocking 30% against duel wield and then add in whatever parry you have. Still should have better defense then the duel wielder.

It's not about the personal defense of a single character only. It is also about guarding a 2nd person against enemy dual wielders.

It's not that I have a grudge against Dual Wielders or anything. I'm playing hero the past weeks now and I am very confident with my personal defense and my damage output. However, I had lots of situations where I tried to guard against melee trains. My observation is that guarding is effective against 2h and 1h (especially reaver) , but it is rather weak against DW. This means that 2h and 1h are indirectly getting weaker and DW are getting stronger relatively.

Considering the forum posts about several 2h classes complaining about subpar viability (especially paladin!), giving DW an additional advantage vs those other melee damage variants might just be a tad too much.

Please just keep in mind that the extent of these defense penalties should be considered when tweaking overall balance between classes and specs. Only tuning the penalty in the case of guarding another character is also an option.

Also keep in mind that the dual wieldders tend to be one trick ponies when both weapons are out. They can be more easily DPSed down than a character with sword and board. For this reason I would much rather melee a Berserker than a Warrior. Same with Merc vs an Armsman/Paladin, or BM vs Hero/Champ. You get the idea.

Sun 9 Sep 2018 4:25 AM by Cadebrennus

schreon wrote: ↑
Thu 6 Sep 2018 8:17 PM
Hammurabi0788 wrote: ↑
Thu 6 Sep 2018 4:35 PM
Its fine as is. Only affects you vs a few classes and it gives those offensive specs some offence. No different then your shield spec gives some defense. Being that max block is 60%. You could still be blocking 30% against duel wield and then add in whatever parry you have. Still should have better defense then the duel wielder.

It's not about the personal defense of a single character only. It is also about guarding a 2nd person against enemy dual wielders.

It's not that I have a grudge against Dual Wielders or anything. I'm playing hero the past weeks now and I am very confident with my personal defense and my damage output. However, I had lots of situations where I tried to guard against melee trains. My observation is that guarding is effective against 2h and 1h (especially reaver) , but it is rather weak against DW. This means that 2h and 1h are indirectly getting weaker and DW are getting stronger relatively.

Considering the forum posts about several 2h classes complaining about subpar viability (especially paladin!), giving DW an additional advantage vs those other melee damage variants might just be a tad too much.

Please just keep in mind that the extent of these defense penalties should be considered when tweaking overall balance between classes and specs. Only tuning the penalty in the case of guarding another character is also an option.

Sorry for the double post but I had another thought about your comment regarding protecting someone else.

First of all, kudos to you (seriously, no sarcasm) for thinking of the true meta of this game. It's not a solo game and never will be (speaking as someone who does solo occasionally). Team oriented play and thinking is what makes this game great.

That being said, when trying to protect a squishy, you have more options than just standing there and hoping the RNG helps you to block enough attacks to allow your squishy groupmate to live. One, you have your shield styles. I'm pretty sure you have slam, and that's a big factor in stopping the attackers for long enough to give your squishy enough time to run and reset. Two, you should ABSOLUTELY have snare styles on your hotbar, regardless of whether or not you use them 1v1 or in PvE. These will (again) give your squishy another opportunity to flee and reset position. Bonus!, they are not subject to an immunity timer (like stun/mezz), and also last longer than stun styles. The last option are ASR (Attack Speed Reducer) styles, which as the acronym suggests, reduce the attacker's attack speed. However, exercise caution with ASRs. I read a while back that due to the way the code works, ASRs may increase single hit styled damage. It's been a while since I read this so take it with a grain of salt. The upside of an ASR is that you give the attacker less opportunity for more style effects on your squishy.

All of these options mean that you can be more effective in protecting someone than you give yourself (and your class/spec) credit for.

Sun 9 Sep 2018 11:06 AM by schreon

True, snare is the reason why I eventually specced Celtic Spear instead of Large Weapons.

Of course, peeling with snare styles and debuff-styles is important. In fact, Slam and snare styles feel like the only means allowing you to effectively safe your group mates. As guard does not grant 100% damage mitigation, as bodyguard does, it naturally is only a means to slow the enemy tank train down. It gives your supporters more time to react as well as reduces the amount of burst that has to be healed while you try to slam+snare your target.

The block cap in RvR is 60% afaik. Slowing a 2handed train down by 60% is massive. Slowing a DW train down by 30% is not good enough. Don't forget that the guarding character is victim to slam and snare-peels as well!

Let's consider the extreme case of 3 DW characters in a melee train. Except for zergs, I never experienced larger trains. Guard reduces the damage by 30%. Versus 3 DW characters, this is equal to 3x30% = 90% of the damage of one DW character. You could say, guard cancels the potential of less then 1 character in this specific situation (also keep in mind that most DW classes have the same stun + snare-peel tools at their disposal!)

On the other hand, if that 3man train consisted of 3 two-handed characters, guard would cancel 3x60% = 180% of a single enemy melee. Thus in such a scenario, it cancels the potential of almost 2 characters.

The question is, is this what we want? DW damage is higher than two-handed, is it necessary that it also counters guard so well? Is guard supposed to be so extremely strong against 2handed trains?

To me, it would feel smoother if, in the ideal case of a 3-melee train, guard would always cancel damage equal to the potential of like 120%-150% of one character, no matter what weapons that character is using.

That could be achieved if the cap for guarding other characters would be reduced to 40-50% , but at the same time the DW penalty was removed.

What do you think, would tempering with this detail of the game hurt the classic feeling? Would it put DW at a too large disadvantage? (keep in mind that DW damage still is significantly higher than other types of melee damage). Would people stop using DW classes in meta and switch to 2handed ones? Or would there still be DW in the train, but also some 2handed?

Sorry, this thread turned to something that would rather fit the Suggestions forums.

Sun 9 Sep 2018 5:22 PM by Cadebrennus

I think it's important to air concerns as well as tactics because people may not be aware of them all. As someone who has primarily played DW classes I think DW is very strong albeit with some disadvantages. For one, the Dual Wielder will never approach the single hit damage of a Two Hander. Ever. This is important because of the fast paced nature of RvR. With the aforementioned stuns/snares (and mezzes) that can be unleashed on a tank (even with Det/Stoic) sometimes the tank will only be able to get a single hit off. Keep in mind that DW swing chance caps at 72%, and while Left Axe swings 100% of the time (for max 86% damage) both of the offhand swings have a chance to miss/fumble/etc. This single hit that all tanks can end up doing because of the other factors in play (due to attentive groupmates helping the squishy groupmate) can be the most important hit to get in. In your example 3 Two-handed tanks are going to be more effective than 3 Dual Wielding tanks, unless PBT is factored in, in which case the 3 Dual Wielding tanks will edge out. Keep in mind also that Dual Wielding isn't some sort of godmode, rather it simply functions as a random damage add (in the case of CD/DW) or a flat damage add (in the case of LA) that is in fact unstyled so is therefore a lower damage hit than the Mainhand damage (regardless of weapon speed)
and has a greater chance of being blocked/parried/evaded/missed.

http://talsyra.tripod.com/daocmechanics/la_cd_dw_mechanics.html

I think it is balanced nicely against Two-Hand for that reason. In your example you mentioned 3 of one tank or 3 of another, but the common knowledge rightly assumes that the best tank setup is a mixture of the two. This is not for the fact that one is better than the other, but that they complement each other so well. In that scenario the DW purpose isn't straight DPS but 1) bursting PBT, and 2) positional DPS and effects.

All this being said why do I primarily play Dual Wield classes? Because it looks cool