So why bother with alternate weapons?

In Fiel's Formula thread it states that there will no longer be a difference between swords and alternative weapons after the big patch. Additionally skill splits are being removed so that all skills apply equally to both swords and alternatives. I think I also read somewhere that the stab/slash difference is being removed. Now if weapon speeds are equalized (I assume they wont be but who knows?) there will be no difference between swords and alternatives. If there will be a weapon speed difference, then why even bother with alternatives? I examine this question knowing that alternate weapons will have slightly higher base weapon attack, but the weapon attack difference has never been enough to offset the speed difference before. Soooo...what's the point?

To some, axes are way cooler. Other than that... I have no idea.

Speed of the weapon.

There's a small handful of Axes and Blunt Weapons that match sword speeds.

That may be so, but unless they start making new classes that use axes and blunts, swords will always be more valuable. Why didn't they just exercise more effort in differentiating the weapons, and giving more leeway to alternates?

Initially I thought the split removal was a good thing, but how exactly does this help classes? Add this to the list of changes not quite properly thought out?

Swords: Can be used by Heroes and Paladins
Axes: Can be used by Heroes
Blunt Weapon: Can be used by Paladins
Polearm: Can be used by Dark Knights and Arans
Spear: Can be used by Dark Knights

Swords and PA will be significantly more expensive than the others because of the shareability. Cheaper alt weapons+scrolls makes for easier scrolling for better stats. Of course this only applies to some weapons. Ex. VIP Axe vs VIP Sword, both have same speed and attack. VIP Spear vs Arcglaive, 122 atk Slow (7) vs 102 atk (Normal).

Uniqueness or cheapness of axes/blunt weapons may make it a more viable option for some people.

Maybe they should add some sort of special attribute to the different weapon types...

Well, you can stock up on blunt weapons scrolls right now...

Uniqueness or cheapness of axes/blunt weapons may make it a more viable option for some people.

This mostly. A vip 1h sword is very expensive + the scrolls are too.

On the other hand, a vip 1h axe is extremely cheap when compared, and the scrolls are too.

Uniqueness or cheapness of axes/blunt weapons may make it a more viable option for some people.

The logic you're using is about 6 years old. My point is that the patch doesn't change any of the logic in end game weapon choice. (it does change the logic in weapon paths, and I'll explain below)

Sure some people may initially prefer the axes and blunt weapons for accessibility, but as soon as they get the money they'll switch to the option that gives them faster leveling or higher dps. Using this logic you can only argue that the removal of the split helps people because it leads them to the same conclusions that Nexon wants them to reach, but without the previous punishment (before blunt weapon users just got the shaft and either had to reroll a new character or deal with their subpar weaponry). If the damage formulas are ultimately the same, and if most every sword is faster than its blunt weapon equivalent, but only slightly weaker, which would you pick?

Interestingly the removal of the split does do something which nobody has mentioned which is increase item and scroll functionality for a short period of time. That is, now you have to option to do both instead of one or the other, and because of this you can change weapon type and style every so often as you approach a solid level. Page/Knight and Fighter/Sader become more dynamic in their leveling due to the split removal. This makes some classes less linear in terms of equipment changes. Of course accessibility and equalizing damage formulas encourages this, but the best choice will always be there so long as you have the money to pay for it.

On the other hand, you're also arguing that Nexon's change will result in segregation of the obviously privileged "rich kids" and the lesser "casual and penniless". So one's motivations and strivings don't really change (everyone still seeks the best weapon which in this case is swords), but their options do change, and in this case the casual and penniless have no better option than settling for second best. The caveat of your argument is that Nexon's change will not make the game better, but much much worse. (unless you're a sucker with low self-esteem)

Arguing for uniqueness is like arguing that there is no cash shop. Uniqueness applies more to the visual feel of the game rather than how the game is played. For this reason, uniqueness isn't an actual response to my arguments. An underlying assumption to this argument is that Nexon will eventually release a cash item that allows your weapon to look like any other weapon in the game. At that point your "uniqueness" argument is trashed.

Maybe they should add some sort of special attribute to the different weapon types...

This is what I think people were hoping to see. Changes that do more to differentiate the weapons rather than make it more obvious which weapon is better. The unique alternate weapons should have been given precedence over the universal default, or at least given them special attributes that justify switching between the two.

I wish weapon formulas depended on the speed - faster weapon = lower damage formula.

As it is, there are so many Fast(5) 1h weapons and Normal(6) 2h - why would anyone use the slower alternative with the same w.atk?

Most of the slow weapons (blunt weapons, the beheader and berserker) carry a lot of weight... it makes sense they should swing slower and hurt more.

The logic you're using is about 6 years old. My point is that the patch doesn't change any of the logic in end game weapon choice. (it does change the logic in weapon paths, and I'll explain below)

Sure some people may initially prefer the axes and blunt weapons for accessibility, but as soon as they get the money they'll switch to the option that gives them faster leveling or higher dps. Using this logic you can only argue that the removal of the split helps people because it leads them to the same conclusions that Nexon wants them to reach, but without the previous punishment (before blunt weapon users just got the shaft and either had to reroll a new character or deal with their subpar weaponry). If the damage formulas are ultimately the same, and if most every sword is faster than its blunt weapon equivalent, but only slightly weaker, which would you pick?

Interestingly the removal of the split does do something which nobody has mentioned which is increase item and scroll functionality for a short period of time. That is, now you have to option to do both instead of one or the other, and because of this you can change weapon type and style every so often as you approach a solid level. Page/Knight and Fighter/Sader become more dynamic in their leveling due to the split removal. This makes some classes less linear in terms of equipment changes. Of course accessibility and equalizing damage formulas encourages this, but the best choice will always be there so long as you have the money to pay for it.

On the other hand, you're also arguing that Nexon's change will result in segregation of the obviously privileged "rich kids" and the lesser "casual and penniless". So one's motivations and strivings don't really change (everyone still seeks the best weapon which in this case is swords), but their options do change, and in this case the casual and penniless have no better option than settling for second best. The caveat of your argument is that Nexon's change will not make the game better, but much much worse. (unless you're a sucker with low self-esteem)

Arguing for uniqueness is like arguing that there is no cash shop. Uniqueness applies more to the visual feel of the game rather than how the game is played. For this reason, uniqueness isn't an actual response to my arguments. An underlying assumption to this argument is that Nexon will eventually release a cash item that allows your weapon to look like any other weapon in the game. At that point your "uniqueness" argument is trashed.

Hey now, you never said anything about end-game weapons until this post. And you're putting a lot of words in my mouth. I'm just saying that at any point if someone needs a weapon and they can't afford (or don't want to pay for) a more expensive line, they'll go for the alternative. It's just easier to switch between them now for whatever reason you prefer. I think of it as similar to the difference between 1-handed and 2-handed weapons before. 1-handed swords are a whole lot more expensive than 2-handed swords, and fast 2-handed swords are more expensive than normal speed 2-handed swords. I use 2-handed swords because I'd rather not bust my ass off for some extra damage.

Aesthetics do affect gameplay decisions, whether or not you like it. I have a friend who chose bishop over archmage because Genesis looked cool, I would rather have a VIP 2-handed sword than 1-handed because it doesn't look like crap, etc. Just because it might not apply to you doesn't mean that it doesn't apply to others who do make decisions on how jobs, equips, skills, etc look. Also, shockingly, not everyone buys NX clothes.

Also, 6 years? GMS wasn't even out of beta yet.

1h-weapons also allow access to more potential stats through the use of shields at the same time. Shields with w.att also can fill in the void for the w.att difference between 1-h & 2-h weapons as well as the w.att multiplier.

Overall 1-h weapons are undoubtably more efficient now.

Not *EVERY* endgame player is going to put in that level of farming for their equipment, especially if they enjoy alts often. If a 200 mil investment results in a godlier axe than a sword at that point, where as breaking 1bil + makes investing in scrolling a sword the best option then i can see some strategic choices being made.

Just because the change doesn't replace the optimal equipment setups does not make it pointless. Pointless to the richest of endgame players, yes, but it may have a point to everyone else. One group does not a whole MMO community make. However, if one feels doing everything possible to optimize damage with the maximum funding is the only thing worth doing, then it certaintly is pointless in their situation. Overall though, BWs and Axes did get a very nice buff out of this change.

It is practically impossible to properly differientiate them and balance them without making them basically the same, people would eventually figure out which of the two offers better DPS and bandwagon onto that one anyway leaving us back at square one. As the combat system currently is I don't see much else they can do that won't result in players doing maple science and figuring out the overall best choice is.

Weapon properties such as Slash or Blunt affecting different mobs differently is an option... but then we'll have the same problem archmages did which caused them to need a Elemental Reset ability too. So it really doesn't seem like much else can be done.

In the end though, this is the Q & A section as opposed to the debate section, I'd say your main question of what's the point has pretty much been answered though i understand many don't find the change satisfying.

Hey now, you never said anything about end-game weapons until this post. And you're putting a lot of words in my mouth. I'm just saying that at any point if someone needs a weapon and they can't afford (or don't want to pay for) a more expensive line, they'll go for the alternative. It's just easier to switch between them now for whatever reason you prefer. I think of it as similar to the difference between 1-handed and 2-handed weapons before. 1-handed swords are a whole lot more expensive than 2-handed swords, and fast 2-handed swords are more expensive than normal speed 2-handed swords. I use 2-handed swords because I'd rather not bust my ass off for some extra damage.

Aesthetics do affect gameplay decisions, whether or not you like it. I have a friend who chose bishop over archmage because Genesis looked cool, I would rather have a VIP 2-handed sword than 1-handed because it doesn't look like crap, etc. Just because it might not apply to you doesn't mean that it doesn't apply to others who do make decisions on how jobs, equips, skills, etc look. Also, shockingly, not everyone buys NX clothes.

Also, 6 years? GMS wasn't even out of beta yet.

Doesn't matter if it's an endgame weapon, the logic is still there. They don't have to be end game weapons, but endgame is where people look when they're building their characters. Also, when you're talking about weapons you choose the 1h-2h dichotomy which isn't as important as the alternate weapon split to me. In other words, I no longer consider the 1h-2h dichotomy as part of the alternate debate (I did at one time, and I admit it's still important). When you talk about downgrading you don't even mention the alternate, you mention the cheaper sword. The question is whether you still look toward a better weapon (sword) after you get a godly scrolled alternate.

Aesthetics don't affect gameplay to the degree you say they do. I've never bought NX. I wore an ugly sauna for years. Several people wore saunas. A very small minority will choose alternate weapons over swords, and an even smaller minority will choose those weapons because they are aesthetically pleasing (most likely reason I can think of is money or simple ignorance over which weapon type is better). Most people will choose stats over aesthetics any day. Just look at all the noobs running around wearing those ugly spirit hats (me). Basic gameplay aesthetics stopped being important right after the cash shop was released.

6 years ago I was a blunt weapon page in beta...sooo yeah. The argument reaches pretty far back.

1h-weapons also allow access to more potential stats through the use of shields at the same time. Shields with w.att also can fill in the void for the w.att difference between 1-h & 2-h weapons as well as the w.att multiplier.

Overall 1-h weapons are undoubtably more efficient now.

How did this become a thread about 1h weapons? In any case, I don't argue that 1h weapons have become so much better ever since Nexon fell in love with their own stat whoring gameplay mechanisms.

Not *EVERY* endgame player is going to put in that level of farming for their equipment, especially if they enjoy alts often. If a 200 mil investment results in a godlier axe than a sword at that point, where as breaking 1bil + makes investing in scrolling a sword the best option then i can see some strategic choices being made.

Just because the change doesn't replace the optimal equipment setups does not make it pointless. Pointless to the richest of endgame players, yes, but it may have a point to everyone else. One group does not a whole MMO community make. However, if one feels doing everything possible to optimize damage with the maximum funding is the only thing worth doing, then it certaintly is pointless in their situation. Overall though, BWs and Axes did get a very nice buff out of this change.

It is practically impossible to properly differientiate them and balance them without making them basically the same, people would eventually figure out which of the two offers better DPS and bandwagon onto that one anyway leaving us back at square one. As the combat system currently is I don't see much else they can do that won't result in players doing maple science and figuring out the overall best choice is.

Weapon properties such as Slash or Blunt affecting different mobs differently is an option... but then we'll have the same problem archmages did which caused them to need a Elemental Reset ability too. So it really doesn't seem like much else can be done.

In the end though, this is the Q & A section as opposed to the debate section, I'd say your main question of what's the point has pretty much been answered though i understand many don't find the change satisfying.

True, it doesn't make it pointless, and I recognize that now, but it does imply that the change wasn't well thought out, and it doesn't really change where players look for their motivation. It's great that players can find these weapons now and not throw them out, or search the free market and buy nicely scrolled items. But where's the justice in the situation? How is this balance? Actually, I consider that significantly buffing the damage for alternate weapons is a fair way to balance the weapons. In this way, players who are true to a class attempt to scroll items for that class, but players who want to swap great weapons between warriors can do that too. I find it ok if players end up band-wagoning to their proper class weapon, don't you? I find it balanced if you are forced to choose between a good universal weapon or a great single class weapon.

I never said I liked the concept of weapon types either, but I submit to not always having my way all the time. One possible choice is removing the weapon system completely, along with respective scrolls, in favor of a more neutral (and non class-based) system. But that would actually require thinking on the designer's part. I never really liked the whole weapon reductionism due to class choice idea. In beta, class choice was often determined by whatever weapon dropped for you first, as the choices were so limited that is was sometimes impossible to be what you wanted. I would rather be a weapons expert, and use bows too.

I'm not really satisfied with the change or the answers. My conclusion is that reasoning is shifting more towards an economic base now more than ever. It is good for some people, it just wasn't the change I (and several other people) were hoping for after all of these years. I was hoping I had missed something and that there really is something great about the new changes that I had not seen and that the wizards of southperry picked up on. That's why I posted it in Q&A. Among other ill-thought out changes, I anticipate this topic becoming more important with the actual release of the patch.

Is the axe DPS vs sword dps really that much off? For example, could you give me any reason back in 2005-2007 to even bother making a strength dit? They were inferior in every way besides have two extra weapon attack. People choose different things for different reasons.

2h sword: 4.6 mult.
2h axe: 4.1 mult.
1h sword: 4.0 mult.
1h axe: 3.8 mult.

Compound that with all the endgame 1h axes being slower than swords (highest Fast5 axe used to be the black paintbrush) and there really was no good reason to choose axe unless you wanted to be slower and weaker. .5 str multiplier, even with the same speed weapon, made 2h axes really pathetic.

After the BB, it's basically a matter of choosing the weapon with the highest w.atk out of a set of equal speed options. Swords do tend to win on speed, but there are a few exceptions (the VIP axes seem to be the same speed as swords - though the VIP BWs are not)

In 2nd job the Lionheart and Japanese Map dominate just by being Fast(4), no point using a normal or slow speed axe/bw then.

VIP 1h axe is a fast wep Stereo

He was asking about 05-07 o.o after BB the VIP 1h axe will be a good weapon for Heroes.