if you look at the way the shovel is in both sets, it is positioned to match the set. it is sideways in axe to take advantage of the blade side of the shovel and straight on for mace to take advantage of the bluntness of the shovel.
since we already have an axe and war mace set, there is no reason to allow broadsword to use these types of weapons. also, damage is not affected by the type of weapon.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
if you look at the way the shovel is in both sets, it is positioned to match the set. it is sideways in axe to take advantage of the blade side of the shovel and straight on for mace to take advantage of the bluntness of the shovel.
since we already have an axe and war mace set, there is no reason to allow broadsword to use these types of weapons. also, damage is not affected by the type of weapon. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Goblin_Queen
I know in some cases it'd require new animations even if all that's needed is to max the weapon be carried at a different angle (like the shovels) but I'm sure in other cases there wouldn't be a need for new animations.
|
The reason is for concept which most of this game is about. So yes, there IS a reason for it. There is no technical game play increase reason, no. It's for concept/customization. If I want a toon to be able to wield a sword, an axe and a mace through various costumes then that's the reason.
I'm also aware that the weapon graphic doesn't dictate the damage type but the set that the weapon is in DOES. And since in PvP I could see there being an argument that people want to visually see the damage type being used against them then I made the suggestion about how the weapon may change in PvP zones. I personally don't care if that happens or not since I don't PvP much and don't care if someone is using a Sword, Mace or Axe against me.
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie
How would a mace make a cutting blow without a cutting edge? While swords can be used to smack someone with the edge, it certainly doesn't have the weight to call it a blunt force attack.
/no
Paragon Wiki: http://www.paragonwiki.com
City Info Terminal: http://cit.cohtitan.com
Mids Hero Designer: http://www.cohplanner.com
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dispari
I don't know why Dink thinks she's not as sexy as Jay was. In 5 posts she's already upstaged his entire career.
|
Ok. So only Broadsword can customize across weapon types then. :P
This was just for cosmetics and customization. Not to influence or explain damage types.
And before we get too far into what's possible and not in the world, let's remember what game we're playing.
I was just thinking of something that wouldn't require new powersets. Hopefully a Polearms set would have multiple weapon types if we ever get that.
Edit - I suppose I just got used to it being an option in other games and think it could benefit City of Heroes. 
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie
Quote:
Alternatively, just roll another character with the same costume and similar name with different weapons. Because you're not going to be able to use any type of mace with a claw set, or an axe with a sword set or a sword with a mace set. The devs hold a higher quality for the animations in their game and that's one thing they won't allow. One advantage to just rolling another character is, you can choose with or without a shield.|
Originally Posted by Goblin_Queen
This is a bit hard to explain properly but some character concepts of mine call for the toon to wield different weapons - sword, axe and hammer for example. I'd love to see weapon customization get extended where 1 handed weapons can be used across the various 1 handed weapon sets - i.e. Broadsword can use Axe and Mace weapons. Similar to how the Shovel is used in both Axe and Mace sets.
I know in some cases it'd require new animations even if all that's needed is to max the weapon be carried at a different angle (like the shovels) but I'm sure in other cases there wouldn't be a need for new animations. I just think it'd really extend/fill out a lot of character concepts out there. Now if this is an issue in PvP for any reason (the damage type not matching the visual appearance of the weapon) then perhaps in PvP zones the weapon either matches the proper damage type or it defaults to the base model of that damage type. Meaning, if you go into Siren's Call and have a Mace in your hand but you actually are using the Broadsword power then it will default to the standard Broadsword graphic. If you have any Broadsword model in your hand tho, it retains that graphic. Similar to how certain powers are set to not show in PvE but have to show in PvP. |
But you're more likely to get an Epic AT with a 'Weapon Master' theme that basically lets you choose stances like Khelds choose forms with each stance having limited access to that particular weapon's set.
Alternatively, you could ask the devs for weapon models that could have some cross function (like the shovel)...so maybe ask for a 'mace with some pointy edges' for use with Axe/Mace or 'an axe-like sword' similar to the khopesh so that you don't have to roll a Mace, Axe, Sword, etc. character to complete your concept but maybe only 2 of the weapon sets.
Quote:
Oh, I agree with you, more customization is good...but only to expand the concept of a set. Doling out maces to use for your Dual Blades doesn't really expand on the concept of Dual Blades, though. And, honestly, not being able to use an Axe for your Broadsword just gives you more reason to play other sets...play more characters for concept, aesthetic AND mechanic reasons.|
Originally Posted by Goblin_Queen
Ok. So only Broadsword can customize across weapon types then. :P
This was just for cosmetics and customization. Not to influence or explain damage types. And before we get too far into what's possible and not in the world, let's remember what game we're playing. I was just thinking of something that wouldn't require new powersets. Hopefully a Polearms set would have multiple weapon types if we ever get that. Edit - I suppose I just got used to it being an option in other games and think it could benefit City of Heroes. |
But yeah, I'd like more customization for the sets too...like, 2-handed warhammers for Mace (whenever they get 2-handed animations done) that has all the same powers, just 2-handed weapon models complete with animations...
Oh, I've always wanted a 'Knives' option for Spines. Why not Dual Blades? Because there's no DB powers where you throw them. My ninja stalker specializes in throwing weapons and Spines fits well...simply making it so spines didn't poke out of your skin would work too.
Or how about 'Hand claws'? You know, not claws that come out of the back of your hands but claws coming out of your nails. Again, it'd need new animations...but that's the type of stuff I'd like to see...not less reason to play more sets.
I don't see a compelling reason against it. Especially with Broadsword/Axe/Mace, which largely just copy each others animations anyway. I would like a flaming sword too, and no, I don't expect it to start doing fire damage, much in the same way that I don't expect the Talsorian Blade to start doing energy damage.
If it's just for aesthetics, why not?
Quote:
This. The sets I mentioned are so similar with animations and power abilities, etc. I didn't (and still don't) think a purely cosmetic thing would ruin one of the three sets, preventing other people from playing them.|
Originally Posted by Warkupo
I don't see a compelling reason against it. Especially with Broadsword/Axe/Mace, which largely just copy each others animations anyway. I would like a flaming sword too, and no, I don't expect it to start doing fire damage, much in the same way that I don't expect the Talsorian Blade to start doing energy damage.
If it's just for aesthetics, why not? |
And sure, I'd love to see throwing knives and hand claws. ;D
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie
customization of accolade/patron powers like you get with your normal powers it looks silly that fire from my secondary set is green but the Accolade fire mastery power is orange :P
Quote:
Being able to customize your accolade/epic/patron/whatever powers, along with travel powers is In The Works (tm), but I don't know if it's Coming Soon (tm).|
Originally Posted by Xenophage
customization of accolade/patron powers like you get with your normal powers it looks silly that fire from my secondary set is green but the Accolade fire mastery power is orange :P
|
If it doesn't come with GR, I would imagine it coming sometime shortly after.
Quote:
they may copy some of the same animations, but there is no reason to have them customizable this way. both leo_g and i stated that. if one of them wasn't in the game already, then maybe. but all 3 are in game as entire power sets. there is no need for it.
|
Originally Posted by Warkupo
I don't see a compelling reason against it. Especially with Broadsword/Axe/Mace, which largely just copy each others animations anyway. I would like a flaming sword too, and no, I don't expect it to start doing fire damage, much in the same way that I don't expect the Talsorian Blade to start doing energy damage.
If it's just for aesthetics, why not? |
Quote:
Just because you state something previously doesn't mean I automatically agree with you, and it is perfectly acceptable for me to then state something in opposite to your opinion. That I didn't quote you specifically simply meant that I didn't wish to address anything you have stated. I don't *have* to argue with you, or even kind of be talking to you, just because you posted something in the thread. |
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
they may copy some of the same animations, but there is no reason to have them customizable this way. both leo_g and i stated that. if one of them wasn't in the game already, then maybe. but all 3 are in game as entire power sets. there is no need for it.
|
That being said...
There are plenty of reasons to allow this idea, chief among them being that it would probably be very easy to do, at least concerning Axe/Mace/Broadsword considering the meshes already exist and the animations are so similiar that I don't imagine them looking out of place after they have been transferred.
We aren't expecting that we'll suddenly be able to do smashing damage with our broadsword just because we're using a mace, much in the same way we aren't expecting the Talsorian Blade to start doing energy damage.
Let's look at Leo_G then, since you seem to have volunteered him for me to argue with.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
Oh, I agree with you, more customization is good...but only to expand the concept of a set. Doling out maces to use for your Dual Blades doesn't really expand on the concept of Dual Blades, though. And, honestly, not being able to use an Axe for your Broadsword just gives you more reason to play other sets...play more characters for concept, aesthetic AND mechanic reasons.
|
What if my character concept had relied upon a character who dual wielded an axe and a sword? How about an Axe and a Mace? Currently I have no choice but to either abandon the character or wait until they make a comparable "Dual Mace" or "Mace and Axe" set, despite the fact that the solution is so readily available.
If it doesn't alter game balance, is going to make people happy, and is (apparently) fairly easy to implement I see no reason not to attempt to include this change, and nothing you or Leo_G has stated have made me feel otherwise (which is kind of why I decided to post after both of you, in case you were still curious about that.)
Finally, I think restricting the models just because the set is called "Battle Axe" is kind of silly much in the same way I think debating about what a character is allowed to do because of their "origin" is silly, or trying to shove the Leadership pool onto your character, regardless of whether or not he could benefit from it, just because he's supposed to have leader qualities is silly.
Quote:
Because it makes no sense to "slash" at people with a hammer, nor indeed to parry, just as it doesn't make much sense "clobber" people with a dagger. It's not just about damage types. It's the fact that it's a sword set. You can't just insert maces into it and expect it to still be a sword set, specifically since Broadsword and War Mace are SIGNIFICANTLY different as sets. They don't even share all the same animations, and the animations they share are shared for the wrong powers. Aesthetically, it just looks bad.|
Originally Posted by Warkupo
If it's just for aesthetics, why not?
|
Furthermore, you can't have BOTH an axe and a sword in the same set. You get to customize ONE weapon for the entire set, not a weapon per power. So even at the best of times, why would you want to play Broadsword with a battle axe when you can just play Battle Axe?
Now, if the idea is to have many melee weapons in the same set, then suggest a brand new set that does this. Don't know how that could be achieved, though, not technically, at least.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I actually agree. You shouldn't be forced to use the mechanics of the Battle Axe set just for the aesthetic use of the Axe. In all honesty, I feel the way the devs implemented weapons to begin with is all wrong. You should have been able to pick a weapon model and then choose what style the set had from there(so -def for your axe, or lots of KB for your broadsword or combos with your mace).|
Originally Posted by Warkupo
I'm not entirely sure why this is considered a good thing. Why should I be forced to play the Battle Axe set, which I may not enjoy from a mechanical standpoint, when it would probably be very easy to just allow me the Battle Axe models on the Broadsword set, which, in this example, I do enjoy.
What if my character concept had relied upon a character who dual wielded an axe and a sword? How about an Axe and a Mace? Currently I have no choice but to either abandon the character or wait until they make a comparable "Dual Mace" or "Mace and Axe" set, despite the fact that the solution is so readily available. |
The problem though, is it's *not* implemented that way. We have an Axe set. We have a Broadsword set. We have a Mace set. If you want to use an Axe, you have to use the Axe set. Period. Giving the BS the Axe models give less a reason to play Axe (because now, if you want an axe, there's only one way). Yes that's a problem...but from a mechanics standpoint, not an aesthetic one. You can still have an axe now...you just have to play the axe set. You're provided with an axe, just not with the mechanics you want.
Quote:
I'm starting to repeat myself, and I don't personally care enough about this to keep arguing about it, so I'm done after this bit. *Edit* No I'm not, I hate myself and I want myself to suffer. |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Because it makes no sense to "slash" at people with a hammer, nor indeed to parry, just as it doesn't make much sense "clobber" people with a dagger. It's not just about damage types. It's the fact that it's a sword set. You can't just insert maces into it and expect it to still be a sword set, specifically since Broadsword and War Mace are SIGNIFICANTLY different as sets. They don't even share all the same animations, and the animations they share are shared for the wrong powers. Aesthetically, it just looks bad.
Furthermore, you can't have BOTH an axe and a sword in the same set. You get to customize ONE weapon for the entire set, not a weapon per power. So even at the best of times, why would you want to play Broadsword with a battle axe when you can just play Battle Axe? Now, if the idea is to have many melee weapons in the same set, then suggest a brand new set that does this. Don't know how that could be achieved, though, not technically, at least. |
The major flaw in your aesthetics argument is you. Just because you don't like how it looks, and can't get around it conceptually, doesn't mean that everybody is having the same dilemma. In fact, if I had to cite the major complaint shared between Axe, Mace, and Broadsword, it would be the the animations amongst them are aesthetically too similiar, and the only real difference between them is the mechanics of the set that the weapons are currently restricted too.
How similiar are the animations? Between Axe and Mace every single one of the animations is shared. If we extend this comparison to Broadsword the ONLY animation that is unique to it is that of parry. Which reduces the aesthetic side of the argument to whether or not you think the parry animation is adequate for Mace and Axe.
Just in case there is any doubt, here is a quick chart to compare the copied animations.
Beheader-> Bash -> Slash
Chop -> Clobber -> Hack
Gash -> Pulverize -> NOT PARRY
Swoop -> Jawbreaker -> Disembowel
Whirling Axe/Mace/Sword
Cleave -> Shatter -> Headsplitter
Pendulum -> Crowd Control -> Slice
So actually yes, as a matter of fact, you can slash at people with a hammer.
As for the effects of the set, and them possibly not looking appropriate, I am again going to have to strongly disagree with you. All three sets do knock-down, up, and everything in between as all three are rather LARGE weapons. It doesn't take a huge stretch of imagination for me to envision my broadsword, which is already knocking enemies on their *** in it's own set, to be transferred over to War Axe and continue knocking people over. Nor does it take the mind of a child to believe that an axe to the face might be slightly disorienting.
Which leaves the question of why we would possibly want to use an axe on one costume and a sword on the other, the answer of which I feel can be best arrived to by asking yourself if, when using a weapon set, do you use the same exact weapon for every costume? If your answer was "no", or if you know someone who has said "no" then you can probably begin to figure out why the OP, and probably myself, would like such a thing. Concept demanded it, and if you've ever met concept you should well understand what a fickle, yet dear and important, thing she is.
So, I again reiterate, if such a change can be implemented without seriously hampering the progress of something else deemed more important , there is absolutely no reason, be it a concern of whether the animations will fit, or whether the secondary effects will make sense, to deny the sharing of weapon models between the Axe, Mace, and Broadsword power sets.
If the best reason against this idea is truly "I don't like how it looks so nobody can play as it" then I demand all furries and half of Freedom be hurled into the sun for similiar reasons.
*EDIT* - @ Leo_G - It just seems like such a silly reason to deny somebody their fun. "THIS IS THE AXE SET, ONLY AXES CAN GO HERE." Are we seriously going to get hung up on such trivial semantics?
Regardless, I've said my peace (piece? I hate this expression) on the matter. Good luck to the OP.
*Edit 2* - Custom is not Costume.
BS, Mace and Axe got almost exact animations, and its supposed for the Mace and Axe to not cut "too much".
So, /yes.
More customization is much needed in this game, where you cant do this or that due to stupid decisions made in the past.
To be fair I must say I never saw the point in this sets because to me look exactly the same, got the same attacks and almost the same damage.
It should be one set called "Heavy weapons", were you can mix and match animations and weapons for each attack. Would be much fun that having 3 pointless sets that didnt cost the devs much work because they do the same.
Quote:
Thanks. I totally agree (of course). I just think it's also isn't worth arguing over the real world physics of sword vs mace vs axe. Not in THIS game where everyone can fly, turn invisible and shoot beams out of their hands. I don't think the change hurts anyone, if you don't like it, don't use it. And people will still play what sets they want to play, they are all so similar anyway. And this way - a Brute wants to wield a Broadsword they don't have to wait until Proliferation of an entire set to do it. They can pick Axe OR Mace and swap out a Broadsword model.
|
Originally Posted by Warkupo
How similiar are the animations? Between Axe and Mace every single one of the animations is shared. If we extend this comparison to Broadsword the ONLY animation that is unique to it is that of parry. Which reduces the aesthetic side of the argument to whether or not you think the parry animation is adequate for Mace and Axe.
Just in case there is any doubt, here is a quick chart to compare the copied animations. Beheader-> Bash -> Slash Chop -> Clobber -> Hack Gash -> Pulverize -> NOT PARRY Swoop -> Jawbreaker -> Disembowel Whirling Axe/Mace/Sword Cleave -> Shatter -> Headsplitter Pendulum -> Crowd Control -> Slice So actually yes, as a matter of fact, you can slash at people with a hammer. As for the effects of the set, and them possibly not looking appropriate, I am again going to have to strongly disagree with you. All three sets do knock-down, up, and everything in between as all three are rather LARGE weapons. It doesn't take a huge stretch of imagination for me to envision my broadsword, which is already knocking enemies on their *** in it's own set, to be transferred over to War Axe and continue knocking people over. Nor does it take the mind of a child to believe that an axe to the face might be slightly disorienting. Which leaves the question of why we would possibly want to use an axe on one costume and a sword on the other, the answer of which I feel can be best arrived to by asking yourself if, when using a weapon set, do you use the same exact weapon for every costume? If your answer was "no", or if you know someone who has said "no" then you can probably begin to figure out why the OP, and probably myself, would like such a thing. Concept demanded it, and if you've ever met concept you should well understand what a fickle, yet dear and important, thing she is. So, I again reiterate, if such a change can be implemented without seriously hampering the progress of something else deemed more important , there is absolutely no reason, be it a concern of whether the animations will fit, or whether the secondary effects will make sense, to deny the sharing of weapon models between the Axe, Mace, and Broadsword power sets. If the best reason against this idea is truly "I don't like how it looks so nobody can play as it" then I demand all furries and half of Freedom be hurled into the sun for similiar reasons |
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie
Quote:
As much as I wish it were, that probably wouldn't happen BUT I hope any future sets like Polearms are handled just like that! |
Originally Posted by Angelxman81
BS, Mace and Axe got almost exact animations, and its supposed for the Mace and Axe to not cut "too much".
So, /yes. More customization is much needed in this game, where you cant do this or that due to stupid decisions made in the past. To be fair I must say I never saw the point in this sets because to me look exactly the same, got the same attacks and almost the same damage. It should be one set called "Heavy weapons", were you can mix and match animations and weapons for each attack. Would be much fun that having 3 pointless sets that didnt cost the devs much work because they do the same. |
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie
Quote:
I guess it depends how trivial you consider quality and consistency is. There are reasons the devs have yet to give us animated hair, backpack and polearms. They keep a standard for quality that they stand beside and if the devs consider using a mace weapon in a broadsword set to cross that line of consistency/quality, then that's just too bad for your fun.|
Originally Posted by Warkupo
@ Leo_G - It just seems like such a silly reason to deny somebody their fun. "THIS IS THE AXE SET, ONLY AXES CAN GO HERE." Are we seriously going to get hung up on such trivial semantics?
|
Why not ask for speedier proliferation of these sets? I'd rather have a new set than a couple of weapon models I've seen before...
Quote:
That is if you ignore what the sets actually are and focus only on what you see as similar.|
Originally Posted by Warkupo
As for the effects of the set, and them possibly not looking appropriate, I am again going to have to strongly disagree with you. All three sets do knock-down, up, and everything in between as all three are rather LARGE weapons. It doesn't take a huge stretch of imagination for me to envision my broadsword, which is already knocking enemies on their *** in it's own set, to be transferred over to War Axe and continue knocking people over. Nor does it take the mind of a child to believe that an axe to the face might be slightly disorienting.
|
Broadsword focuses on -def effects, as well as the +def effect of Parry.If you put all three right-hand weapon sets together, Sword would be the lightest-hitting of them all, but that's because it offers significant survivability. It trades that off for having less AoE.
Battle Axe has knockback and ONLY knockback. Far more potent than the accidental knockback of Sword and Mace, this allows Battle Axe to stack its control effects and deliver control to large groups of foes. It also has NO OTHER SECONDARY EFFECT THAN THIS. Period.
War Mace focuses much more on control. It has strong stuns and reliable knockbck, but War Mace stuns. War Mace also does smashing damage. So no, you cannot "slash" with a mace, as slashing implies cutting, which War Mace does not do. It's really just as simple as that.
The sets are not identical, and you claiming that they are is nothing more than facetious. They are not the same set. They do share some animations, but not for the same powers, as well. Furthermore, they do not share visual effects. To claim that they're the same set is to claim that Electrical Melee and Energy Melee are the same set because they share animations for Total Focus, Energy Punch and Bone Smasher.
You have an argument about using an axe with sword powers, to a certain extent. The only counter-argument is that we already have an axe set. What do we do about that one? Your argument about using a mace for sword attacks is empty. A mace is a blunt weapon. It should not be used for cutting attacks. There really is no argument you can level that can explain why an ancient bone can cut. Sorry. This I'm simply not going to accept.
*edit*
I have a little more time to expand on this now that I'm not in a hurry. Here's my problem with this:
I don't have a conceptual problem with having axes in a sword set or swords in an axe set. I do not, however, see any need to and, furthermore, see a BIG problem with the fact that axes and swords have their own, separate, unique sets. I don't think anyone's arguing to just drop either set out of existence. That would be stupid. But the question then becomes - what of the other set? Do we get two (possibly three) sets called "weapons" that have the same weapon but different powers and effects in them? If so, can I have another set with an Assault Rifle that doesn't suck as much?
The Axe, Mace and Sword sets are not close enough to each other as to be interchangeable. In fact, having played all of them, they play in staggeringly different ways. When I play Axe, I tend to prioritise Cleave and Pendulum, whereas when I play Sword, I tend to prioritise Head Splitter and Disembowel (the equivalent of Swoop). When I play Mace, I dent to prioritise Clobber (a power that has no equivalents, mechanically) and DEFINITELY Crowd Control. The sets feel different from each other in actual play, especially after having played them.
Any suggestion made about proliferating weapons has to account for the different sets that already exist. Dropping sets out of the game is not an option for obvious reasons. Merging sets is not an option, because the sets are nothing alike. Proliferating weapons must still be done in such a way as to give each set a reason to still exist, above and beyond the ability to swing the same old weapons in a different way. Katana is already skirting the line quite a bit with so many of its weapons being available to other sets, and Dual Blades mostly avoids the problem by having two blades.
If anything, I'd like to have MORE weapon sets, not fewer of them. Two-handed weapon sets, if possible. Probably want to see a two-handed hammer, but a two-handed sword or axe would suffice.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I'd like to see any new melee sets have options for multiple weapon appearances so we aren't so limited conceptually speaking. So why not a two-handed weapon set - not just hammer, axe OR sword but a set that encompassed all three (if not more - staffs maybe?) types. |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
If anything, I'd like to have MORE weapon sets, not fewer of them. Two-handed weapon sets, if possible. Probably want to see a two-handed hammer, but a two-handed sword or axe would suffice.
|
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie
Quote:
since you keep mentioning staves, staffs and polearms, have you done a search for them? BaBs has posted about them. i suggest reading it.
|
Originally Posted by Goblin_Queen
I'd like to see any new melee sets have options for multiple weapon appearances so we aren't so limited conceptually speaking. So why not a two-handed weapon set - not just hammer, axe OR sword but a set that encompassed all three (if not more - staffs maybe?) types.
|
Braod Sword and Battleaxe are both slash weapons. I'd like to see both be renamed to 'Heavy Blade'. That way both could either be an Axe or a Sword.
Niether Axe or Broad Sword are used by a singe archetype so I feel that it would be perfectly fine to call them the same thing and allow both to use axes and swords.
They would be different mind you. Battle Axe would still have all it's powers, and Broad Sword would still have all of it's. They would just have the same name and shared weapon skins.
Whining about everything since 2006.
Ammo switching for Dual Pistols was my idea:
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=135484
Quote:
I mention them because they are mentioned often (and by others in this thread) and if we're ever to get a generic weapon set that could be customized more along the lines of what I suggested it could be one of those. I am more concerned with what I originally posted about tho. I have read him being quoted about it but I've also seen a ton of things we were told would be difficult to get. Doesn't nor shouldn't prevent anyone from discussing what ifs. But thanks for the suggestion....
|
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
since you keep mentioning staves, staffs and polearms, have you done a search for them? BaBs has posted about them. i suggest reading it.
|
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie
This is a bit hard to explain properly but some character concepts of mine call for the toon to wield different weapons - sword, axe and hammer for example. I'd love to see weapon customization get extended where 1 handed weapons can be used across the various 1 handed weapon sets - i.e. Broadsword can use Axe and Mace weapons. Similar to how the Shovel is used in both Axe and Mace sets.
I know in some cases it'd require new animations even if all that's needed is to max the weapon be carried at a different angle (like the shovels) but I'm sure in other cases there wouldn't be a need for new animations.
I just think it'd really extend/fill out a lot of character concepts out there.
Now if this is an issue in PvP for any reason (the damage type not matching the visual appearance of the weapon) then perhaps in PvP zones the weapon either matches the proper damage type or it defaults to the base model of that damage type. Meaning, if you go into Siren's Call and have a Mace in your hand but you actually are using the Broadsword power then it will default to the standard Broadsword graphic. If you have any Broadsword model in your hand tho, it retains that graphic. Similar to how certain powers are set to not show in PvE but have to show in PvP.
My Corner of DeviantART
The Queen's Menagerie