03-Apr-2013 - Dungeoneering Dual Wielding and Charming Imp

[V O R K]

Finally all the horrors of charm collecting are gone for me. & i'm also quite happy that they make the "bank all" a toggle. Glad that Jagex starts to implent updates which can be player-altered at own choice.

[Sir_Squab]

Sounds to me like the easiest solution is make it so off-hand binds don't count towards your active bind.

[Hameigh]

I think they should make 2H take up 2 bind slots and then add another bind slot. Unfortunately it looks like the charm collector will force me to actually Dung rather than level it purely from free xp.

[strilmus]

It doesn't really matter how it's done, but the game should be treating the three types of weapon setups (2H, Dual and Shield) as being equivalent in value, instead of just looking at the number of items involved. Another way would be to have 2H weapons take up two bind slots.

given that dg has only a certain number of possible items

 

and that the customization menu allows you to keep three presets with their individual color values when applicable thus proving the limitations aren't as low as we are led to think they are ("it's too time consuming and/or impossible to convert existing items to custom menu" + few months later = "hey buy our keepsake keys" + a few more months later = "hey we turned rare card collectibles into custom items despite the fact that we didn't do this earlier with any of our other items not released from solomon but you can't have them without paying")

 

i don't think it'd be like, a huge dedication to allow three specific full gear loadouts per person, especially when many people hate certain types of combat anyway

[Leon S]

Still no fix to mage prayers?

 

Nice...

 

 

Looking forward to pimping out double mage (best dps class in the game).

 

 

lolwat

[Sy_Accursed]

It doesn't really matter how it's done, but the game should be treating the three types of weapon setups (2H, Dual and Shield) as being equivalent in value, instead of just looking at the number of items involved. Another way would be to have 2H weapons take up two bind slots.

given that dg has only a certain number of possible items

 

and that the customization menu allows you to keep three presets with their individual color values when applicable thus proving the limitations aren't as low as we are led to think they are ("it's too time consuming and/or impossible to convert existing items to custom menu" + few months later = "hey buy our keepsake keys" + a few more months later = "hey we turned rare card collectibles into custom items despite the fact that we didn't do this earlier with any of our other items not released from solomon but you can't have them without paying")

 

i don't think it'd be like, a huge dedication to allow three specific full gear loadouts per person, especially when many people hate certain types of combat anyway

 

Imo the logic thing to do would be firstly allow 1 bind per slot per type of item.

Eg Weapon you are allowed 6 binds - staff, wand, bow, knife, 2h and 1h

Shield you are allowed 6 binds - 3*shield (each class) + 3* offhands

etc.

Plus have 5 slots into which items you can't use go (so you can bind like primals or w/e without killing off ur usable binds)

 

Then have the 3 sets and make it so each set can only use binds from 1 class (melee, mage or range) and have however many slots, 5 seems ok BUT the first slot is like a specialised 'hands' block that can take a 2h OR a 1h and an off-hand. Plus give them a ring assignment slot.

Then on the ring of kinship right-click toggles have 3 options (melee, range, mage) with only 2 visible subject to what ur on and can't toggle mid-combat.

 

Boom dw vs 2h not a bind issue and the swapping thing made useful.

[Will H]

It doesn't really matter how it's done, but the game should be treating the three types of weapon setups (2H, Dual and Shield) as being equivalent in value, instead of just looking at the number of items involved. Another way would be to have 2H weapons take up two bind slots.

given that dg has only a certain number of possible items

 

and that the customization menu allows you to keep three presets with their individual color values when applicable thus proving the limitations aren't as low as we are led to think they are ("it's too time consuming and/or impossible to convert existing items to custom menu" + few months later = "hey buy our keepsake keys" + a few more months later = "hey we turned rare card collectibles into custom items despite the fact that we didn't do this earlier with any of our other items not released from solomon but you can't have them without paying")

 

i don't think it'd be like, a huge dedication to allow three specific full gear loadouts per person, especially when many people hate certain types of combat anyway

 

It wouldn't be a problem, but wouldn't that be a bit boring? If everyone could kit themselves out with full armour, they'd have a tough time dying at any point, and a big part of the personal skill involved in Dungeoneering would be lost. I like the bind system, it just hasn't been adapted to dual wielding weapons. I'm a bit surprised by how Jagex made such an obvious mistake here.

 

Adding an extra bind for everyone but making 2-handed weapons take up two slots seems the simplest thing to do to me.

[jayc3399]

It doesn't really matter how it's done, but the game should be treating the three types of weapon setups (2H, Dual and Shield) as being equivalent in value, instead of just looking at the number of items involved. Another way would be to have 2H weapons take up two bind slots.

given that dg has only a certain number of possible items

 

and that the customization menu allows you to keep three presets with their individual color values when applicable thus proving the limitations aren't as low as we are led to think they are ("it's too time consuming and/or impossible to convert existing items to custom menu" + few months later = "hey buy our keepsake keys" + a few more months later = "hey we turned rare card collectibles into custom items despite the fact that we didn't do this earlier with any of our other items not released from solomon but you can't have them without paying")

 

i don't think it'd be like, a huge dedication to allow three specific full gear loadouts per person, especially when many people hate certain types of combat anyway

 

It wouldn't be a problem, but wouldn't that be a bit boring? If everyone could kit themselves out with full armour, they'd have a tough time dying at any point, and a big part of the personal skill involved in Dungeoneering would be lost. I like the bind system, it just hasn't been adapted to dual wielding weapons. I'm a bit surprised by how Jagex made such an obvious mistake here.

 

Adding an extra bind for everyone but making 2-handed weapons take up two slots seems the simplest thing to do to me.

Why do 2hds have to take up two slots? Are you really going to use that many slots. or are you talking on the load outs?

[Alg]

Adding an extra bind for everyone but making 2-handed weapons take up two slots seems the simplest thing to do to me.

Or keeping the same amount of binds, with each weapon set taking up one slot? So you could have a two-handed weapon, or a one handed weapon and offhand/shield (Because, weak as they may be, it'd be pretty dumb to leave shields out).

Same function as your idea, just with a different flavor.

[strilmus]

It doesn't really matter how it's done, but the game should be treating the three types of weapon setups (2H, Dual and Shield) as being equivalent in value, instead of just looking at the number of items involved. Another way would be to have 2H weapons take up two bind slots.

given that dg has only a certain number of possible items

 

and that the customization menu allows you to keep three presets with their individual color values when applicable thus proving the limitations aren't as low as we are led to think they are ("it's too time consuming and/or impossible to convert existing items to custom menu" + few months later = "hey buy our keepsake keys" + a few more months later = "hey we turned rare card collectibles into custom items despite the fact that we didn't do this earlier with any of our other items not released from solomon but you can't have them without paying")

 

i don't think it'd be like, a huge dedication to allow three specific full gear loadouts per person, especially when many people hate certain types of combat anyway

 

Imo the logic thing to do would be firstly allow 1 bind per slot per type of item.

Eg Weapon you are allowed 6 binds - staff, wand, bow, knife, 2h and 1h

Shield you are allowed 6 binds - 3*shield (each class) + 3* offhands

etc.

Plus have 5 slots into which items you can't use go (so you can bind like primals or w/e without killing off ur usable binds)

 

Then have the 3 sets and make it so each set can only use binds from 1 class (melee, mage or range) and have however many slots, 5 seems ok BUT the first slot is like a specialised 'hands' block that can take a 2h OR a 1h and an off-hand. Plus give them a ring assignment slot.

Then on the ring of kinship right-click toggles have 3 options (melee, range, mage) with only 2 visible subject to what ur on and can't toggle mid-combat.

 

Boom dw vs 2h not a bind issue and the swapping thing made useful.

most damage in dg comes from attacks your armor can't block, and enemies who are higher than your level in terms of damage output

 

does having a helmet+gloves+boots really make much of a difference there?

 

yet there's no reason to actually HAVE those items made, and for the most part, it's wasted content

 

you can either just have those gears be never used, or you can make a system where they are used

 

alternate idea: offhand items can have their own bind slot like ammo

[Ginger_Warrior]

Don't get why this is such an issue. It's not like they nerfed 2H in the process.

 

If you're bothered about efficiency and getting the most value per active slot, run a 2H set up like you have done quite happily for the past few years. If you want to go all Prince of Persia, sacrifice the slot, or wait until the inevitable update which corrects the two-slots issue (inevitable only because enough people are whining about it, and we all know successful that tactic is).

[Sir_Squab]

It doesn't really matter how it's done, but the game should be treating the three types of weapon setups (2H, Dual and Shield) as being equivalent in value, instead of just looking at the number of items involved. Another way would be to have 2H weapons take up two bind slots.

given that dg has only a certain number of possible items

 

and that the customization menu allows you to keep three presets with their individual color values when applicable thus proving the limitations aren't as low as we are led to think they are ("it's too time consuming and/or impossible to convert existing items to custom menu" + few months later = "hey buy our keepsake keys" + a few more months later = "hey we turned rare card collectibles into custom items despite the fact that we didn't do this earlier with any of our other items not released from solomon but you can't have them without paying")

 

i don't think it'd be like, a huge dedication to allow three specific full gear loadouts per person, especially when many people hate certain types of combat anyway

 

Imo the logic thing to do would be firstly allow 1 bind per slot per type of item.

Eg Weapon you are allowed 6 binds - staff, wand, bow, knife, 2h and 1h

Shield you are allowed 6 binds - 3*shield (each class) + 3* offhands

etc.

Plus have 5 slots into which items you can't use go (so you can bind like primals or w/e without killing off ur usable binds)

 

Then have the 3 sets and make it so each set can only use binds from 1 class (melee, mage or range) and have however many slots, 5 seems ok BUT the first slot is like a specialised 'hands' block that can take a 2h OR a 1h and an off-hand. Plus give them a ring assignment slot.

Then on the ring of kinship right-click toggles have 3 options (melee, range, mage) with only 2 visible subject to what ur on and can't toggle mid-combat.

 

Boom dw vs 2h not a bind issue and the swapping thing made useful.

most damage in dg comes from attacks your armor can't block, and enemies who are higher than your level in terms of damage output

 

does having a helmet+gloves+boots really make much of a difference there?

 

yet there's no reason to actually HAVE those items made, and for the most part, it's wasted content

 

you can either just have those gears be never used, or you can make a system where they are used

 

alternate idea: offhand items can have their own bind slot like ammo

 

Offhand items having their own bind slot makes the most sense.

[Will H]

Don't get why this is such an issue. It's not like they nerfed 2H in the process.

 

If you're bothered about efficiency and getting the most value per active slot, run a 2H set up like you have done quite happily for the past few years. If you want to go all Prince of Persia, sacrifice the slot, or wait until the inevitable update which corrects the two-slots issue (inevitable only because enough people are whining about it, and we all know successful that tactic is).

Well, a major part of the update right now is dead on arrival, for a reason that the developers should have easily picked up on. Pointing that out and suggesting a simple way to fix that isn't exactly whining.

[Quyneax]

For 2h, you have your basics:

Slice, Smash, Cleave (31.25-125%), dismember (125%), Sever (47-188%).

For dual wield, you get:

Slice, Sever, Dismember (same as above), Punish, Decimate (25-100%).

 

So basically for dual wield your basics are worse, especially considering that Cleave is multi-target.

 

Then for tresholds, both have Assault, and you get either Flurry and Destroy or Whirlwind. Flurry has 4*80% damage, but takes 6s to do, Whirlwind is instant 188%. Comparing the two, you can do Whirlwind + two one third basics in the same amount of time as one Flurry, for a total of 188% damage per target + 200% or 188% or 125% per target or just straight 125% (Dismember, Sever, Cleave, Slice/Smash respectively) + 1.33 * 125% (Slice, Smash) and no adrenaline lost. Ignoring adrenaline, you get 320% * targets and 188% * targets + 291%+, which means you need 3 targets to make Flurry better. Of course Whirlwind is better if your targets die in the initial hit regardless.

 

Destroy is nice, but you rarely need anything after using basics + Assault + Whirlwind.

[Sy_Accursed]

For 2h, you have your basics:

Slice, Smash, Cleave (31.25-125%), dismember (125%), Sever (47-188%).

For dual wield, you get:

Slice, Sever, Dismember (same as above), Punish, Decimate (25-100%).

 

So basically for dual wield your basics are worse, especially considering that Cleave is multi-target.

 

Then for tresholds, both have Assault, and you get either Flurry and Destroy or Whirlwind. Flurry has 4*80% damage, but takes 6s to do, Whirlwind is instant 188%. Comparing the two, you can do Whirlwind + two one third basics in the same amount of time as one Flurry, for a total of 188% damage per target + 200% or 188% (Dismember, Sever) + 1.33 * 125% (Slice, Smash) and no adrenaline lost. Ignoring adrenaline, you need 360% * targets > 188% * targets + 350+% which means you need 3 targets to make Flurry better. Of course Whirlwind is better if your targets die in the initial hit regardless.

 

Destroy is nice, but you rarely need anything after using basics + Assault + Whirlwind.

 

So we are saying ability wise 2h wins out but in terms of basic weapons longs seems to win out then?

Guess that means all in all for true efficiency 2h still rules the roost BUT if you do wanna be lazy and momentum without losing out more than necessary dual long swords seem a little better due to their slightly higher dps.

Though of course if you wanna do a mix of the 2 and not waste binds the small margin for the lazy way means 2h is still the better choice as an all rounder.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Don't get why this is such an issue. It's not like they nerfed 2H in the process.

 

If you're bothered about efficiency and getting the most value per active slot, run a 2H set up like you have done quite happily for the past few years. If you want to go all Prince of Persia, sacrifice the slot, or wait until the inevitable update which corrects the two-slots issue (inevitable only because enough people are whining about it, and we all know successful that tactic is).

Well, a major part of the update right now is dead on arrival, for a reason that the developers should have easily picked up on. Pointing that out and suggesting a simple way to fix that isn't exactly whining.

It was dead content to start with because there's no need for it. It doesn't increase damage output, there isn't a "dual wield" weak monster in DG which give DW any kind of niche role. When compared to the weapons you can use in one slot only, there is literally no good reason to duel wield in DG.

[Quyneax]

@Sy: Your quote is the old version, I tend to edit my post afterwards to correct things :P. But yeah, ability wise 2h is really just better, so given how small any base dps advantages from dual wield are, it's probably best to go 2h even without considering binds.

 

Going by t80 stuff at level 80, it's 980+80 plus 490+40, fast speed, versus 1788+120, average speed, which is 4/5 * 1590 versus 4/6 * 1908, which is 1272 vs 1272. Then claws are 768 + 80 and 384 + 40 at fastest speed, for a total of 1272 as well. So they are equal, speed won't matter that much. If your strength level is higher, faster would be better, but t11 weapons are balanced with 99 strength in mind, you're not going to go higher than that (well, ovl, but ok).

[michel555555]

hows dual mage and range looking compared ccs and sag?

 

is mage worth it solely for con blast?

[Flyingjj]

Newspost says the coin-generating gloves are Sadim's gloves (Midas backwards), but the in-game advertisement lists them as Samid's gloves. #-o

[Riqualyn]

It doesn't increase damage output, there isn't a "dual wield" weak monster in DG which give DW any kind of niche role. When compared to the weapons you can use in one slot only, there is literally no good reason to duel wield in DG.

 

For ranged attackers, a number of monsters had their weaknesses changed from arrows to thrown, animated books come to mind, not sure of others yet. Mage and melee nothing will have changed since there are no new styles.

[Platinum_Myr]

It's worth noting that thrown items take a regular slot and not an ammo slot, so you can bind law runes and thrown items..

[chenw]

@Sy: Your quote is the old version, I tend to edit my post afterwards to correct things :P. But yeah, ability wise 2h is really just better, so given how small any base dps advantages from dual wield are, it's probably best to go 2h even without considering binds.

 

Going by t80 stuff at level 80, it's 980+80 plus 490+40, fast speed, versus 1788+120, average speed, which is 4/5 * 1590 versus 4/6 * 1908, which is 1272 vs 1272. Then claws are 768 + 80 and 384 + 40 at fastest speed, for a total of 1272 as well. So they are equal, speed won't matter that much. If your strength level is higher, faster would be better, but t11 weapons are balanced with 99 strength in mind, you're not going to go higher than that (well, ovl, but ok).

 

Unfortunately, while that statement is sound in theory, in practice the slower weapons do more damage than fast weapons at the same tier, at least for 99 strength, and holds for at least rune and dragon weapons. The difference is minor (around 1% between fastest and average, with fast somewhere in between), but maybe enough to persuade some ppl to use fast or average weapons over fastest weapons.

 

+ damage armor also have the same 'issue'

[Urza285]

I wish people understood what Jagex was intentionally trying to do. Two hand weapons in the beginning of EOC were supposed to be big hit critical damage weapons (pretty much the same dps as 2hers). Duel wielding was supposed to be high dps. Main hand plus shield was defensive. Why can't they stick with their own concept?! I wish they would give players passive puffs based on what's wielded. They could do this also with the offensive/defensive/hybrid armours.

 

What annoys me is jagex has a lot of potential and I'm seeing half baked ideas. They could even give 2hers a break on certain abilities like berserk. How about provoke or incite having breaks if you are wielding a shield?

[Alg]

What annoys me is jagex has a lot of potential and I'm seeing half baked ideas. They could even give 2hers a break on certain abilities like berserk. How about provoke or incite having breaks if you are wielding a shield?

Another missed opportunity was to make a sort of mini-triangle with the three: shield > DW > 2H or something similar.

[Saradomin_Mage]

Yeah, besides having certain abilities tied to certain styles (DW, 2h, shield), I think it'd be interesting if they also implemented abilities that work differently based on your style.

 

In early EOC I really thought there was supposed to be some kind of triangle (shield > DW > 2h > shield etc) but I guess not. The only kind of "counter" ability I can see is really Decimate with bonus damage vs shielders. Would make for more tactical gameplay if more abilities could counter each other - eg a 2h ability that cancels reflect, a DW ability that hamstrings 2h damage output, etc.