Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options

Dual Wielding - it sounds like both 1H weapons need to be modified through crafting first?

NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
edited May 10 in General Discussion
If you go to exactly the 2 hour mark in the VOD:

Steven says this:
However, the way we're servicing dual weapons is that they will occupy your main hand and off-hand, and you will have a specific recipe which includes the previously completed one-handed weapons that are intending to be dual'ed.

So my take from that is that you can't just grab any two 1H weapons and start dual-wielding them. You need to see a crafter first.

This can go two ways:
  1. Each individual weapon simply gets the option to be dual wielded after the crafter modifies it. I wonder if there are any stat changes with that? Because otherwise, why the need to modify them in the first place?
  2. Or, both weapons you want to dual wield get combined into a locked pair, essentially functioning as one item in inventory, but once equipped takes up both hands the same way a 2H weapon does.

If they go with the second option, can they be separated again? If you want to swap one of the weapons? And what about enchanting? Does that apply to the pair or do you pick which weapon to enchant? And if they can be separated again, do they both just lose the enchantment level?

I think the first option is the simpler method, but it makes me wonder about the need to craft or use that recipe on the intended weapons, so I think the second option is quite likely as well.

Thoughts?
«13

Comments

  • Options
    AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Hate it.

    Implies some other stuff I also hate.

    But they should do whatever they can.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • Options
    NiKrNiKr Member
    I think it's the second option w/o ability to separate them. And I expect them to have literally all one-hands to be combinable, kinda like L2's swords were.

    Here's a list of L2's duals (in an earlier version). It's a pretty long list
    https://l2db.ru/items/weapons/dual/interlude/
  • Options
    NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    NiKr wrote: »
    I think it's the second option w/o ability to separate them. And I expect them to have literally all one-hands to be combinable, kinda like L2's swords were.

    Here's a list of L2's duals (in an earlier version). It's a pretty long list
    https://l2db.ru/items/weapons/dual/interlude/

    In L2 did they inherit the stats from both, and just combined them like 1+1=2?
  • Options
    NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    ChatGPT has this to say, but I can't get it to really explain the details, like, what happens if you combine two weapons of different rarity, and about the stats:
    In the early versions of Lineage 2, particularly in the Chronicle 1 and Chronicle 2 stages, the mechanics of dual wielding were indeed different from later versions. During this period, players had to combine two weapons into a single pair to effectively dual wield. Here's how it generally worked:

    Obtaining Two Weapons: Players would first need to acquire two compatible weapons that they wished to dual wield. These weapons could be of the same type or different types, depending on the player's preference and character class.

    Crafting or Combining: To dual wield these weapons, players would need to combine them into a single pair. This process typically involved visiting a blacksmith NPC or utilizing a crafting system within the game.

    Resulting Pair: The combining process would result in a single pair of dual-wielded weapons. This pair would retain the characteristics and stats of both original weapons but would function as a single entity in terms of equipping and using them in combat.

    Character Requirements: Depending on the version of the game, there might have been specific requirements or limitations for dual wielding, such as character level, class specialization, or skill proficiency. Players would need to meet these requirements to effectively dual wield the combined weapons.

    Maintenance and Enhancement: Once players had their dual-wielded weapon pair, they could continue to enhance and upgrade them through various means available in the game, such as enchanting, socketing, or using special items to improve their stats and performance.

    Overall, the process of combining two weapons into one pair for dual wielding added an additional layer of depth to the gameplay in the early versions of Lineage 2, requiring players to invest time and resources to create and maintain their preferred dual-wielded setups.
  • Options
    NiKrNiKr Member
    Nerror wrote: »
    In L2 did they inherit the stats from both, and just combined them like 1+1=2?
    Nah, you created a new weapon with its own stats and effects (if there were any). But L2's gear design was way more simplistic, so I definitely don't know what Intrepid would go for if they do go for smth similar to L2's system.

    Btw, L2 didn't need a player crafter for lower lvl duals, so there's a tiiiiny chance we'll have an npc that can combine some weapons into one duals for you (just like we have a processing npcs).
  • Options
    DepravedDepraved Member
    Nerror wrote: »
    If you go to exactly the 2 hour mark in the VOD:

    Steven says this:
    However, the way we're servicing dual weapons is that they will occupy your main hand and off-hand, and you will have a specific recipe which includes the previously completed one-handed weapons that are intending to be dual'ed.

    So my take from that is that you can't just grab any two 1H weapons and start dual-wielding them. You need to see a crafter first.

    This can go two ways:
    1. Each individual weapon simply gets the option to be dual wielded after the crafter modifies it. I wonder if there are any stat changes with that? Because otherwise, why the need to modify them in the first place?
    2. Or, both weapons you want to dual wield get combined into a locked pair, essentially functioning as one item in inventory, but once equipped takes up both hands the same way a 2H weapon does.

    If they go with the second option, can they be separated again? If you want to swap one of the weapons? And what about enchanting? Does that apply to the pair or do you pick which weapon to enchant? And if they can be separated again, do they both just lose the enchantment level?

    I think the first option is the simpler method, but it makes me wonder about the need to craft or use that recipe on the intended weapons, so I think the second option is quite likely as well.

    Thoughts?
    haven't seen the video, but most likely option 2, like on l2
  • Options
    GrilledCheeseMojitoGrilledCheeseMojito Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I don't like either option. It feels like we're regressing in dual wield "technology" from games that could handle it 2 decades ago.

    I see what they're angling for but the fact that it can't just be "pick up weapon A and B and if you have the requirements for both you can just do it" seems strange in a game that's intended to be as freeform as Ashes is.
    Grilled cheese always tastes better when you eat it together!
  • Options
    nanfoodlenanfoodle Member, Founder, Kickstarter
    edited May 11
    This is the rallity of what DW worked in RL over what the movies teach us. DW your off hand was always a smaller weapon. This sounds refreshing to me. Also it really helps crafting economy/health. If done right, this would also influence things like damage and debuff effects by the unique characteristics of each weapon you weild.
  • Options
    DepravedDepraved Member
    I don't like either option. It feels like we're regressing in dual wield "technology" from games that could handle it 2 decades ago.

    I see what they're angling for but the fact that it can't just be "pick up weapon A and B and if you have the requirements for both you can just do it" seems strange in a game that's intended to be as freeform as Ashes is.

    its not a tech limitation or anything, its design and balance.
  • Options
    After reading this thread, the examples stated here on dual wield weapons might be one of the reasons Rogues are being delayed in the Alpha 2.
  • Options
    StewBadStewBad Member
    I like the idea of having to combine 1h weapons in order to dual-wield them. I do not, however, like the idea that they would not be separable.

    Maybe if there were a drastic difference in the rarity of the items? If we assume for this hypothetical that rarity goes (common to rare) white > green > blue > purple > orange, if you combine a weapon with another that is more than 1 rarity in either direction you would be unable to separate them (Combining a purple with a green or a blue with a white or orange). On the reverse side, if they were within one rarity (Combining a blue and purple, or blue and green) you would be able to separate them again.

    I can see losing an individual enchantment on both weapons, had then been enchanted prior to combining, and the pair combined together resulting in no enchantment. As well as losing the enchantment on the pair should you separate them. I think that would be appropriate, as you would be altering the item from its current form.
  • Options
    CROW3CROW3 Member
    I’m wondering if this is some weird game system constraint being passed into the player experience as a ‘feature.’ Idk. This isn’t intuitive nor does it add any actual fun factor to dual wielding.

    Complicating simple things doesn’t create depth, it just adds complication.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • Options
    LloydLloyd Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    When he says that you can dual wield any weapon but it will take a recipe it makes me curious as to what he means by recipe. Obviously if it's absolutely required to have the recipe in order to wield them together that seems a little weird to me.

    As I stated on my stream while you brought this up I think that weapon skill trees being separate from dual wielding is good. Being able to use your one-handed sword skill tree and your one-handed mace skill tree to use weapon skills as a prerequisite to the dual wielding tree was my initial thought. If that's what he means by "recipe" I think that is probably fine. I'll probably make a video to better explain my thought process. I'm trying to type it out and I don't think it does the conversation justice.
    TL;DR: My initial feeling of dual wielding weapons as a crafting "recipe" feels unnecessary and an extra step that if it is going to be in the game, it should just be available to the player.
    cevs5u9i2f1s.png
    _____________________________________________________________________________________
    Current Member of the Gray Sentinels.
  • Options
    All I know is that I love to mix and match different weapons when dual-wielding. Especially if they give different procs or bonuses like Combat Rogue used to do it for mace procs in WoW.

    If it turns out that you can dual wield only 1 type of weapon, I am done.
  • Options
    DepravedDepraved Member
    edited May 11
    StewBad wrote: »
    I like the idea of having to combine 1h weapons in order to dual-wield them. I do not, however, like the idea that they would not be separable.

    Maybe if there were a drastic difference in the rarity of the items? If we assume for this hypothetical that rarity goes (common to rare) white > green > blue > purple > orange, if you combine a weapon with another that is more than 1 rarity in either direction you would be unable to separate them (Combining a purple with a green or a blue with a white or orange). On the reverse side, if they were within one rarity (Combining a blue and purple, or blue and green) you would be able to separate them again.

    I can see losing an individual enchantment on both weapons, had then been enchanted prior to combining, and the pair combined together resulting in no enchantment. As well as losing the enchantment on the pair should you separate them. I think that would be appropriate, as you would be altering the item from its current form.

    well, dual wielding will replace your off hand item. if you weren't dual wielding, you would still have to get 2 items for your hands, presumably the best items you can get. these 2 items will be either a sword and a shield, or 2 swords.

    after creating a dual wielded weapon, you could just add the enchants to that one, instead of adding them to each individual weapon before the fusion. i mean, you are supposed to think before hand if you will use a sword and a shield, or 2 swords.
  • Options
    AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Depraved wrote: »
    StewBad wrote: »
    I like the idea of having to combine 1h weapons in order to dual-wield them. I do not, however, like the idea that they would not be separable.

    Maybe if there were a drastic difference in the rarity of the items? If we assume for this hypothetical that rarity goes (common to rare) white > green > blue > purple > orange, if you combine a weapon with another that is more than 1 rarity in either direction you would be unable to separate them (Combining a purple with a green or a blue with a white or orange). On the reverse side, if they were within one rarity (Combining a blue and purple, or blue and green) you would be able to separate them again.

    I can see losing an individual enchantment on both weapons, had then been enchanted prior to combining, and the pair combined together resulting in no enchantment. As well as losing the enchantment on the pair should you separate them. I think that would be appropriate, as you would be altering the item from its current form.

    well, dual wielding will replace your off hand item. if you weren't dual wielding, you would still have to get 2 items for your hands, presumably the best items you can get. these 2 items will be either a sword and a shield, or 2 swords.

    after creating a dual wielded weapon, you could just add the enchants to that one, instead of adding them to each individual weapon before the fusion. i mean, you are supposed to think before hand if you will use a sword and a shield, or 2 swords.

    That's like, the biggest 'issue' though.

    When I equip a Mace in I normally just... equip a second one. Or I equip a shield. And I just change based on which I need. Any obstacle between 'I am dual wielding... now I'm single wielding with a shield' seems unnecessarily weird to me, obviously I'm biased.

    Even if this was a durability thing, I still don't 'get it', but I'd bet it's a durability thing somehow.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • Options
    NiKrNiKr Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    Even if this was a durability thing, I still don't 'get it', but I'd bet it's a durability thing somehow.
    At the risk of completely reducing any and all contribution of other game designers by saying this - it's an L2 thing :D I know it's pretty much a meme at this point, but, like, seriously, there's just TOO MUCH similarity in design points.
  • Options
    VoeltzVoeltz Member
    Yeah, this seems overly complicated. Sounds like it will be a pain in the ass any time you decide to swap out a weapon. Imagine getting an upgrade or simply trying out new weapon combos and you have to go and have it what, deconstructed and re-crafted or something? Why can't they just combine the damage values and/or attack speeds of each weapon? Pretty sure even old school MMOs have systems like that for auto attacks. Only challenges I could see is balancing and creating the animations for all the weapon attack combos.
  • Options
    DepravedDepraved Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    StewBad wrote: »
    I like the idea of having to combine 1h weapons in order to dual-wield them. I do not, however, like the idea that they would not be separable.

    Maybe if there were a drastic difference in the rarity of the items? If we assume for this hypothetical that rarity goes (common to rare) white > green > blue > purple > orange, if you combine a weapon with another that is more than 1 rarity in either direction you would be unable to separate them (Combining a purple with a green or a blue with a white or orange). On the reverse side, if they were within one rarity (Combining a blue and purple, or blue and green) you would be able to separate them again.

    I can see losing an individual enchantment on both weapons, had then been enchanted prior to combining, and the pair combined together resulting in no enchantment. As well as losing the enchantment on the pair should you separate them. I think that would be appropriate, as you would be altering the item from its current form.

    well, dual wielding will replace your off hand item. if you weren't dual wielding, you would still have to get 2 items for your hands, presumably the best items you can get. these 2 items will be either a sword and a shield, or 2 swords.

    after creating a dual wielded weapon, you could just add the enchants to that one, instead of adding them to each individual weapon before the fusion. i mean, you are supposed to think before hand if you will use a sword and a shield, or 2 swords.

    That's like, the biggest 'issue' though.

    When I equip a Mace in I normally just... equip a second one. Or I equip a shield. And I just change based on which I need. Any obstacle between 'I am dual wielding... now I'm single wielding with a shield' seems unnecessarily weird to me, obviously I'm biased.

    Even if this was a durability thing, I still don't 'get it', but I'd bet it's a durability thing somehow.

    its just a balance thing I suppose.

    instead of using 2 of the best 1 handed weapons with op effects (aka you get the effect x 2), you just get a new weapon with a different effect (it could be just x1.5 of the 1 handed weapon) and a different weapon tree.

    imagine having x2 weapon tree of the same to have a higher chance to land bleed or whatever (I supposed they could add dr, but they could just add dual wielding how it is now).
  • Options
    NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Honestly, that plan sounds stupid.
  • Options
    PercimesPercimes Member
    If to dual wield we need a recipe to combine our weapons into one set, the same should apply to shield and weapon, it's also a set. That's how contrived this concept is.

    Seriously, the only items that should come in joint pairs are footwear and hand wearable. Boots and gloves. And for all that is holy, no mismatching socks!
    Be bold. Be brave. Roll a Tulnar !
  • Options
    hleVhleV Member
    edited May 11
    Gear is generally not soulbound in AoC, but we have DW-bound weapons? A very unnecessary mechanic if you ask me.
  • Options
    NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Percimes wrote: »
    And for all that is holy, no mismatching socks!

    YOU'RE NOT MY MOM!

    If I want to wear a red sock and a blue sock I should be able to knit one of each, combine them into a locked pair, and over-enchant them as I see fit.
    hleV wrote: »
    Gear is generally not soulbound in AoC, but we have DW-bound weapons? A very unnecessary mechanic if you ask me.

    I see what you mean, but the resulting DW weapon itself won't be soulbound at least.
  • Options
    OtrOtr Member
    edited May 11
    NiKr wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Even if this was a durability thing, I still don't 'get it', but I'd bet it's a durability thing somehow.
    At the risk of completely reducing any and all contribution of other game designers by saying this - it's an L2 thing :D I know it's pretty much a meme at this point, but, like, seriously, there's just TOO MUCH similarity in design points.
    I can live with this strange constraint.
    But where did L2 got this concept from?
    My guess is that the game had a dedicated weapon slot and a shield slot.
    And this binding was a programing trick to make the 2nd single handed weapon look as if is being placed into the shield slot. But actually was like a 2 handed weapon.

    Also being implemented this way, shield dual wielding is automatically excluded because there is no 2 handed shield in the game.
  • Options
    JustVineJustVine Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Nerror wrote: »
    Percimes wrote: »
    And for all that is holy, no mismatching socks!

    YOU'RE NOT MY MOM!

    If I want to wear a red sock and a blue sock I should be able to knit one of each, combine them into a locked pair, and over-enchant them as I see fit.
    hleV wrote: »
    Gear is generally not soulbound in AoC, but we have DW-bound weapons? A very unnecessary mechanic if you ask me.

    I see what you mean, but the resulting DW weapon itself won't be soulbound at least.

    Well actually in Ashes of Creation Steven explicitly is against mismatching socks. Player freedom starts at killing noobs as a demonic monkey looking tulnar with a wand as a fighter and ends at 'but don't do it unfashionably'. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Dye_cosmetics

    Given other games have better off handing with better player expression, I don't really think this is a balance thing. It's more likely that Steven just 'really wants to micromanage this specific part because he has a really clear idea of what his vision is for the thing' and less a 'big picture' thing like balance. But I only say this because I have a very clear idea of what the proc system COULD be and have very high standards as to what it SHOULD feel like and more freedom in dual wielding definitely enhances what that core combat looks like.

    I'll keep advocating for AoC to think about https://ffxiclopedia.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Skillchains since even FFXI only added them at the end of their development process. It really hammers home the freedom of expression meets teamwork balance Ashes keeps saying it aspires to.
    Small print leads to large risks.
  • Options
    SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    No dual wielding unique legendaries then.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • Options
    CROW3CROW3 Member
    Songcaller wrote: »
    No dual wielding unique legendaries then.

    Sounds like they have to be married first. 🧐

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • Options
    SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Songcaller wrote: »
    No dual wielding unique legendaries then.

    Sounds like they have to be married first. 🧐

    So...in corruption, if you dropped one weapon would you drop both in dual wielding or would you drop the main hand weapon each time? Seems like a high chore for dual wield. We'll see how effective dual wield will be.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • Options
    PercimesPercimes Member
    edited May 11
    JustVine wrote: »
    Given other games have better off handing with better player expression, I don't really think this is a balance thing. It's more likely that Steven just 'really wants to micromanage this specific part because he has a really clear idea of what his vision is for the thing' and less a 'big picture' thing like balance. But I only say this because I have a very clear idea of what the proc system COULD be and have very high standards as to what it SHOULD feel like and more freedom in dual wielding definitely enhances what that core combat looks like.

    Hmm, then I guess the procs component part is such a major aspect of combat that it can't be left out of a very structured frame. They've rejected the options of having only the main hand weapon to proc; the one where it's at a fixed ratio (let say main hand procs 66% of the time, off-hand 33%, or 50/50%); the one where both weapons attacks are tracked individually and procs according to spec options in their relative weapon tree, or maybe the joining recipe is just how the system is fed one of these rules, or something similar.

    If a character was using two weapons of the same type (with the same proc effect) it wouldn't matter as much, but if they procs different effect, it impact how it interact with the class augment and group synergy. Balancing meaningfulness of choice vs. power.

    Kind of a roundabout way to solve this, and still feel weird to me.

    Am I getting it right?
    Be bold. Be brave. Roll a Tulnar !
  • Options
    NiKrNiKr Member
    Otr wrote: »
    But where did L2 got this concept from?
    My guess is that the game had a dedicated weapon slot and a shield slot.
    And this binding was a programing trick to make the 2nd single handed weapon look as if is being placed into the shield slot. But actually was like a 2 handed weapon.
    Dunno where it came from originally, but yeah, it was a "one handed + shield slots" (or just two-handed weapon), so duals would take up both hands.

    Feels like Steven just went with the same design, rather than trying to build the entire game's combat around the ability to have 2 completely separate weapons with separate effects and with separate passives for said weapons.
    Otr wrote: »
    Also being implemented this way, shield dual wielding is automatically excluded because there is no 2 handed shield in the game.
    Not quite sure why 2-handed shields matter here. Theoretically Intrepid could still let us combine 2 shields as a duals.
Sign In or Register to comment.