kentiahMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 2Arc User
edited April 2013
The problem with GWF is that it generally seems rogue single target damage is still outclassing most aoe situations, the starting left click at-will for GWF doesn't even aoe except for the last hit, meanwhile reaping strike isn't a very good aoe move, as you have to wait three charges for it to even be worthwhile, which, by that point, a rogue has already killed one of the monsters, and is working on, if not killed the second depending on the situation.
I suppose the issue could be summed up as, GWF is really only useful in a HIGH amount of enemies situation (probably way more than five mobs, as I'd say even with around five, two rogues would still most likely cut through them faster than having a rogue and a GWF), and it's at-will aoe is pretty horrible at doing what it's "supposed", at least til a good bit later, and even then... I'm not necessarily asking for Rogue nerfs, but something needs to happen in some form, buffs would be welcomed obviously.
0
tealcobaltMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 10Arc User
edited April 2013
I've seen so many people ask this question over the years and all I really have to say is watch Deadliest Warrior seriously and learn how melee weapons actually work and not just learn how melee weapons work but learn how armors work against weapons and actually watch and learn the pros and cons of each. Great swords don't hit vital areas and never have.
Example chain mail was made to protect against slashing and a great sword is slashing... chain mail does not protect against piercing and a dagger is piercing it penetrates the armor hits the vital areas. Just like the arrow was made to penetrate armor... This goes on and on up to modern times and will happen forever somethings are only made to do the one thing they were made for.
Deadliest Warrior is a great show and you would even see a great sword bouncing off armor in one of the episodes unlike the dagger penetrating the target... One is seriously wounding you the other would most likely just knock you over depending on how big the guy is he might break some bones or whatever but its no death blow you could survive but you can't survive bleeding out (with no help).
Great sword is not what you think it is comparing it to a dagger the dagger does more damage in real life terms also probably a good reason why in most games the dagger classes do the most damage after all its single target and piercing damage aiming for the vital areas dealing the most damage hitting them.
When you ask this question you clearly don't understand melee combat and weapons/armor in real life which is fine but you may as well learn it if your going to ask it.
I know this is a game and some games take after this rule but anyways D&D has it's own rule set and the classes follow that rule set. Your current great sword class is not a striker period you wanna do a lot of damage and use a great sword wait for them to add a great sword striker class.
Side note just because you play a AOE heavy class don't expect to top the charts because you do mainly AOE damage and hit every mob that is ridiculous that is exactly why you should be doing less damage than the single target damage dealers why the hell should AOE classes top charts?
Lets not turn this into Blazing Wizards AOE one shotting everything in sight that was the most game breaking thing I ever saw.
As senseijohn said "in general precision will win of brute force - if precision gets there first"
Example chain mail was made to protect against slashing and a great sword is slashing... chain mail does not protect against piercing and a dagger is piercing it penetrates the armor hits the vital areas. Just like the arrow was made to penetrate armor... This goes on and on up to modern times and will happen forever somethings are only made to do the one thing they were made for.
So then in NWO a Dagger is better vs Chain Mail and a Great Sword is better vs cloth and leather?
0
werealchemistMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited April 2013
GWF = AoE Melee DPS
TR = Single Target Melee DPS
AoE
get a TR in a mob of 7-10 enemies they take them out 1 at a time 2 hits each (about 15 seconds)
get a GWF in a mob of 7-10 enemies they hit about 7-10 at a time 3 hits each (about 5 seconds)
Single Target
get a TR vs 1 enemy they take them out in 2 hits each (about 3 seconds)
get a GWF vs enemy they takes him out in 3 hits (about 5 seconds)
see how it evens out?
0
tealcobaltMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 10Arc User
So then in NWO a Dagger is better vs Chain Mail and a Great Sword is better vs cloth and leather?
No in Neverwinter the situation right now is the GWF is not a striker class so it wasn't made to deal enough damage to ever top the dps charts. In the future it's possible they add a Great Sword striker class or paragon path that is able to top dps charts with other striker classes like the TR.
In this game it just has to do with D&D classes and striker classes will be the ones topping and competing for the top dps on the charts if your not a striker class you simply will never be at the top. So no matter how much people want TR to be nerfed no matter what they wouldn't make it so any current class could pass their dps they are the ONLY striker class currently in the game.
You guys most likely will get your wish for a striker great sword class in the future and most likely it will eventually have it's OP time.
Overall the question "Why does a dagger hit harder than a greatsword" can't be answered for a game it all goes by how they program it. In real life if you want to learn why daggers do more damage than greatsword then as I said watch Deadliest Warrior it's a good show and you will learn a lot about melee weapons and more.
In reality a dagger does more damage than a great sword using skilled people in less the target is plate then the dagger and great sword are both meh compared to a arrow, spear or mace. All weapons are made to kill and all have pros and cons some kill easier than others but still have a weakness.
Greatsword simply isn't what everyone thinks it is bigger does not mean it's better lol. Swing a real greatsword around in real life you will be tired quickly in less you jacked and swing them around daily training. Try to aim at a target and thrust if you never did it before your chance of missing is like 95% probably higher they are heavy and hard to aim and use effectively over a long period of time.
Grab two real daggers and swing them around and thrust at a target with them and I bet you would like them a lot better for your first time using melee weapons. You can learn quickly on your own why daggers were made to kill precisely, quickly and easily for someone very skilled. Overall the great sword in my opinion compared to other melee weapons in real life is it's not a very effective weapon in less you are the biggest guy there is on foot and highly skilled to effectively use it for long periods of time.
Greatsword was highly effective for men on horseback and mostly used by them though out history (I think) and fully armored knights used them too and some others used them too but though out history there has always been a better weapon than the greatsword for killing and war realistically "Over-sized two-handers were not practical weapons there were other more popular weapons." . It has nice reach and can hit multiple targets but meh no one is really big enough to effectively use them in less you use them daily.
I have a bunch of melee weapons around my house a 2 handed sword being one of them and if I had to pick out of all of them for a real combat situation I'd easily take the katana and Wakizashi over anything else next under that would be like Spartans short sword/spear/big *** shield third on my list would be dual daggers. Greatswords are pretty close to the bottom of my list they are just not effective weapons compared to other melee weapons when it comes to games they need to add katana/wakizashi wielders they are incredible blades compared to anything else only thing I'd say that is better than a Katana would be say a light saber lol.
There's a reason why some Katana's are known as 3-4 body blades. They are the most superior blades right now overall and probably will stay that way till that hilt has hot laser coming up from it instead of steel.
Only reason I see all theses games using greatswords is because they are popular in games and always have been and for a AOE melee class something simple and easy to make. Plus some greatswords look awesome and that's why people will pick the class because the weapons look good. I'd rather see more unique weapons you know how many melee weapons there are? A lot.
Regarding the topic at hand, the idea of wielding daggers for insane carnage is a modern RPG construct. A dagger is either a last-resort weapon, or something you use you assault an unsuspecting--and preferably unarmored--opponent. You don't walk into a sword fight with a dagger. The idea of a dagger-wielder having tremendous amounts of agility which allows them to overcome their severe mechanical disadvantage is a romantic myth, like chain-mail bikinis. That's just not how combat plays out. But since the concept of the dagger-wielding acrobat rogue has become a staple trope for the fantasy genre, that's what we're stuck with.
There nothing fancy or romantic about it someone that knows how to fight and is skillful can easily step inside the huge sword swing and slit a throat. You speak of mechanical advantage yet overlook the disadvantage of such a huge cumbersome weapon and insanely heavy armor.
The thing is rogues are suppose to be sneaky, be able to disable traps, be pro assassins. Thing is though do you really want rogues zapping in and "assassinating" (emulating cut throats, and other one hit kill mechanics) peeps? I rather doubt it so they up their damage.
They are the only striker class in the game their damage SHOULD be higher than a defenders, they should be equally more squishy as well, which they are.
See the thing is a proper rogue will not "walk into a sword fight" they will stab you in the back.
Also the moment you start playing a fantasy game like this real life mechanics kind of go out the door. What do you expect?
Greatsword simply isn't what everyone thinks it is bigger does not mean it's better lol. Swing a real greatsword around in real life you will be tired quickly
I am not asking for TR to be nerfed, I am bigger picture. I want classes to be as balanced as they can, I want classes to follow their traits and I want at least challenging game play more often then not. I think that means with NWO, I would be asking for what a forum dweler would say is nerfing all classes to some level, to first balance them with the AI better and then try to smooth out the classes against one another. It's only a nerf now because our heroes came out very dominant vs the AI. So now it's a perception thing. If it came out the other way, forum fanboy would be defending that as the righteous choice. I'll just stick with masterful game play mechanics, wherever that leads the rest.
In regards to swinging a GS and getting tired, but remember I have 20 points of strength and rising. I will not get tired.
In regards to swinging a GS and getting tired, but remember I have 20 points of strength and rising. I will not get tired.
Oh so it's ok to be "unrealistic" and say, " I have 20 points of str" so I won't get tired but then say well you can't count those "20 points of dex" and evade me?
I have 20 points of str and can swing all day long but you can't dance all day long with your 20 points of dex?
wolfenhowlMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 26Arc User
edited April 2013
Shifting through some of the pages on this thread I can not believe the amount of aberrations and misinformation people are spewing out about warfare and it's implements.
You can't quantify a weapon based solely on it's weight and damage potential.The training of the person using it is more important than the weapon itself.Back in ancient times and not only,romans used to train with a wooden gladius AND armor a lot heavier than the ones use in battle,they were dangerous because they were disciplined and trained.Just like nowadays when you go in the army they make you run around with full combat gear so you get used to it's weight and in time it doesn't feel like a burden.
A dagger has always been a last resort weapon,you wouldn't see people charging into battle with a dagger at the ready unless they didn't have any other weapon.If daggers were so great as people seem to believe why would they just use daggers as a main weapon? It would certainly be a lot easier to equip a whole army with them...
Daggers were mostly used because they were easily to conceal,that's why it suits the rogue not because it's more dangerous then others.
0
tealcobaltMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 10Arc User
A dagger has always been a last resort weapon,you wouldn't see people charging into battle with a dagger at the ready unless they didn't have any other weapon.If daggers were so great as people seem to believe why would they just use daggers as a main weapon? It would certainly be a lot easier to equip a whole army with them...
This is true but its not at the same time it was not always used a last resort weapon this highly depends on what time frame we are talking about in history and what soldiers and tribes ect ect. I would say that there were easily more people though out history who did use it as a last resort weapon though. But anyways yes all soldiers through out history have always had a last resort weapon. Every weapon has pros and cons and they all have a strong point and a weakness. Which is why all soldiers usually carried a variety of weapons with different fighting styles.
Dagger and greatsword are both far from great melee weapons overall both need high skill to effectively use daggers are more realistic over a greatsword for any normal person who doesn't use a greatsword on a daily basis I don't think people realize how heavy they are alone I give credit to all soldiers who lived back in the day of melee wars.
As I said before this question really can't be answered for a game it all goes by how they program it... it doesn't have to make sense at all in a game.
"Let's argue about the real-world validity of melee weapons in a universe filled with magic potions that instantly heal all wounds and where people can shoot ice out of their hands."
Oh so it's ok to be "unrealistic" and say, " I have 20 points of str" so I won't get tired but then say well you can't count those "20 points of dex" and evade me?
I have 20 points of str and can swing all day long but you can't dance all day long with your 20 points of dex?
Was that even the point? The point was a GW could possibly do as much or even out damage a dagger. It was stated a dagger is good vs chain, find the weakness go for the kill. I then countered with a GS must win then vs cloth and leather. Now it's can I hit someone or not? Hmmm.... that curve is just a bit outside.
"Let's argue about the real-world validity of melee weapons in a universe filled with magic potions that instantly heal all wounds and where people can shoot ice out of their hands."
You guys do remember this is a video game, right?
The majority of the posters in this thread just fell off the turnip wagon this morning. EQ1 started the trend of ignoring real world characteristics in weapons in favour of letting people who want to use daggers (in this example) as their main weapon do so. Since then in most if not all MMOs all weapons do about the same damage, be they daggers or maces or greatswords, modified by class skills/powers.
I am forced to conclude that this is the OPs first MMO.
-Agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Neverwinter isn't D&D, it is a MMO based on a game that uses D&D terms but isn't really D&D either. NW is fun (for that matter so is 4E), but it isn't D&D, and once you wrap your expectations around that you will be able to enjoy the game for what it offers and not worry about what it does not.
Daggers were mostly used because they were easily to conceal,that's why it suits the rogue not because it's more dangerous then others.
They're also very convenient for when you don't have the space to swing a larger weapon or lack the strength to do so. Sticking a small, sharp, pointy thing into someone else is much easier than cleaving them in twain!
The right to command is earned through duty, the privilege of rank is service.
The number of posts since I last checked this thread is literally making me dizzy... I'm not sure if I ought to reply to most of this. Twisted theories, wild and offensive accusations flying everywhere, I seriously feel like I'm peeking into the Far Realm here...
0
azhrarn80Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 18Arc User
right now the trickster rogue is the only dps class in the game so naturaly they will do higher dps than any other class.
when more dps classes are added then we can compare what dps class does the most dps.
until then it's just apples to oranges and makes no sense at all.
^ what he said! Game isn't even fully released, there isn't enough theorycrafting/testing out yet. You can basically EXPECT that there will be tweaking and balancing. It is perfectly okay to post ideas, thoughts w/e but most of the posts here are unfounded and no reflection of how the devs ment for the class-mechanics to work. However it was entertaining to read
I think we can all admit that the Rogue is currently (as of BW3) the most powerful class by far. Some might even say they're overpowered. While I lack sufficient experience with the class to say yea or nay on that, I do believe that a small nerf is in order on a particular point.
In the very first combat in which all classes are engaged is fighting the zombies outside of Neverwinter. When I played a Rogue I was able to kill each one with 2 strikes from Sly Flourish, sometimes one with a crit (which happen more often with a Rogue than any other class). Meanwhile my GWF required 3 strikes to kill the same zombies. While I understand that Sly Flourish is a single-target attack, and therefore it might seem logical to have it deal higher damage than the GWF's AoE at-will, I believe it should deal less damage for a couple of reasons.
First, Sly Flourish is very fast, and in the time it takes the GWF to swing 3 times the Rogue can attack 5 or 6 times. This means that even if SF dealt less damage than the GWF at-will per-hit they can still pump out more damage on a single target over any amount of time.
Second, Rogues use daggers. Obviously anyone who gets hit with a dagger is going to be far less hurt than someone who gets hit with a greatsword. I know for a fact many of you are thinking that a Rogue can strike with greater precision using a dagger than a GWF can with a greatsword, so it's arguable that they could do more damage per-hit. However the difficulty of striking accurately enough to make that difference ought to require more care and patience than the rapid slicing that you see in-game.
In my honest opinion, I believe the rapid striking Rogue At-Will powers ought to deal significantly less damage than they currently do. With their encounter and daily powers untouched the Rogue remains a significant threat, but they can no longer simply stand toe-to-toe with an enemy and out-damage them. Rogues were never, in any D&D Edition, designed to play that way. They are the stealthers, sneaking around and picking the opportune moment to strike before running away and letting more robust classes stand and fight.
Well, in practice, consider real world self defense. The concept here is often referred to as "shot placement". As in, with self defense, a flesh wound with a .44 mag does less "damage" than a well aimed .22 pea shooter to the heart. That is the difference between a GWF and a rogue, then: rogues aim for the heart, GWF is (apparently, in this game) flailing about taking any hit he can get, even if it does not hit anything "vital". Honestly, I thing GWF damage is very poor at least for the first many levels, to the point that I deleted mine, tried again, and am going to delete it again shortly.
Rogues in 3.5 could kill you with one hit easily from stealth, actually. Meant to play how? A combat built D&D rogue in the older rules could have high str bonus (16+ score usually) and that added to dex bonus to hit (weapon finesse feat), and from stealth hit bonus, etc. At higher levels the stealth hit was looking at 10 d6 per attack (2 weapons, typically). In some versions the assassin prestige class made you save or die upon being hit with that, on TOP of the damage. They could also get hide in plain sight, in the neverwinter nights games, killing one from stealth, taking 2 steps away, restealthing, repeat -- from a single level of shadowdancer class.
In groups, they moved from target to target, backstab and move on, any enemy that attacked anyone else was vulnerable to this.
The rules in this game are a little strange, yes, but even so there were always 2 types of D&D thief builds, the combat version that was an average fighter when going toe-to-toe and deadly when a back was turned, and the utility builds for opening locks and traps and scouting.
TLDR; D&D rogues have always been played by some as top tier damage, GWF needs a buff (maybe just for low-mid levels?), and where you hit something is more important to damage than the size of the weapon.
0
elawynMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 0Arc User
The idea is that the rogue can strike a heavily armored opponent BETWEEN the gaps in the armor. For opponents wearing chain armor, a narrow bladed thrusting weapon (or arrows etc) goes through it like it wasn't even there.
I would just like to point out that I believe balancing classes solely based on literally the first combat ingame might not be the best solution to achieve a well balanced and fun game.
There is something called anatomy, and as a paramedic i see this a lot: blunt force trauma is often far worse then a stab to pretty much anything save your heart/brain or directly to your spine (which would instantly kill). With the way a couple classes are heavily armored (if a giant sword was swung with any force at all, which they would since they are warriors) they would be resulting in crushed ribs/crushed thoracic or lumbar regions of the spine if they were hit in the chest or abdomen, the resulting internal injuries and devastation would clearly be far worse, Car accidents are terrible things to get called to as it mangles the bodies of those who were in it, that would be most like getting hit by a giant sword in armor.
i should mention this as well: For those who aren't in heavy armor, you would get cleaved in half fairly easily.
So people say rogues are suppose to do more damage, and with that perfectly timed shot its an instant kill sure, (ultimates imo) But getting cleaved in half at waist or getting a giant sword burried into your chest from shoulder to your belly button is by far "more damage"
I do play rogue btw. Just saying GWF should not be as useless as they are. right now they might as well be swinging those water noodles that people take to the pool/beach
I'm not going to lie, I didn't read any pages other than the first so I apologize if someone brought up similar points to that of my opinion. Second, I do not play a GWF so I don't have any experience with the class and may be at fault in some of my current ideas of how the class works.
Assuming you are correct that a rogue can hit harder and faster, overall doing far greater damage than the GWF, I assume the reason is for that of balance. The typical rogue probably builds himself into a glass cannon, doing far greater damage and criticals than a GWF, but the great weapon fighter retains far sturdier durability and survivability. Using an elementary example: Assume the GWF does 35 damage to 3 targets of 50 health and soaks up 20 damage over the course of 5 seconds.. You now have 3 targets with 15 health.
Now let's assume the rogues hits quickly deal 60 damage to a single target at a time while suffering the combined attacks of all three with his (And remember, I'm only assuming here that the GWF are the tank class, as I do not play one) lower armor/defense. While dealing damage over the same course of 5 seconds: He may hit a single target for a higher amount of say 60 damage opposed to the weapon fighters 35, but he now has one enemy defeated, 2 still striking him with one diminished to 40 HP of his original 50 but may suffer a greater loss of life from the weaker armor deducting 30 from his total HP opposed to the 20 taken by the GWF.
Also, as I play a rogue, I understand that rogues also have other benefits such as their own AoE and ranged abilities, but we're sticking to the simpler basics here. One brought 3 opponents down to a margin of their life and took less damage, one killed a single target and began damaging a second but took more damage in the process. 3 opponents at 15 health or one dead with two left to go, which is better? Neither, each class has their own role in a party that makes them good at specific forms of engagement.
In pvp, using the same basic theory I used earlier, we could probably also assume that while a rogue would probably hit harder, the GWF can endure that extra bit while the rogue's more frail HP drops a similar amount because of his lack of higher defense and armor: Back to balance, two equals of different classes essentially take the same amout of damage. The rogue does more, but the GWF's armor blocks more. The GWF does less, but the rogue's defense is less.
If it any way this 'theory', and that's all it is folks, (I'll actually admit without shame that I am not a very hardcore MMO player and have only played a few and don't claim to have a masters degree in their mechanics.) is correct, then it makes sense why the rogue is the way it is and the GWF is as he is. It would also negate the need to nerf one over the other; damage isn't everything. Range, Defense, HP, and so forth are all elements that can give one class an edge over another, or make up for what they're lacking in sheer critical hits.
Assuming there was an archer class, or just using the control Wizard for an example since I recently began playing one...I was pretty impressed with the range he could hit from. Initiating from that range on another class and hitting them multiple times before they can approach you, knocking them away once they do reach, and/or using the control oriented spells to make it a pain in the *** to get close to them before you've suffered a devastating combo of hits and spells, would make it so that even if the damage they were pushing out wasn't as high as another class, they have their own unique set of strategies and mechanics that is not inferior to another solely based on damage output.
Edit* Since people seem to be talking more realistically about why a giant broadsword is doing less damage than a rogue with daggers well I guess I'll try to take my guess at that.
1. It's a video game, and for balance sake it can't always be realistic.
2. The role of the assassin is to come in from nowhere, striking his opponent down accurately for a kill. The gameplay is limited, so they can't properly portray it in a way that makes sense for the broadsword doing less (such as showing different animations of the blows only grazing their opponents, or being deflected into a less 'Omg that should have cut me in half' sized wound).
What it all comes down to can be summed up like this:
You drive a 1973 Ford Pinto that has a top speed of around 80 MPH (our GWF for comparison)
Person X drives a 2013 Aston Martin Vanquish with a top speed pf 186 MPH (the TF chimes in)
Instead of trying to get your Pinto fixed up to go faster (buff to GWF, which really is needed TBH), you cry for a governor to be put on all Vanquishes so they only go 80 too (The dreaded "Balance the classes" whine that has been around since the first Rougelike games came on the scene back in the old old days)
MMO games are not meant to have an "Everyone does the same DPS" balance, with the exception of the one that is PvP only. Each class has a role. The biggest problem is not that the rogue kicks ***, its that the GWF is a hybrid class, half tank, half DPS. I think Cryptic went too far in how much DPS the GWF sacrifices for greater survivabilty (on paper at least, in reality VERY questionable) and AoE DPS ability (again VERY questionable on the AoE portion AND overall utility of said AoE in the current game state).
Named for my ex!
0
gullyvuhrMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 5Arc User
edited May 2013
Some of the stupidest arguments ever put down into words are in this thread.
The answer to the OP: None. There is no reason save the fact GWF are pretty under-powered at the moment. The answer to which weapon hits harder is that it is a game, and a dagger could hit as hard as a greatsword under certain circumstances in order to ensure a rogue using it wasn't worthless in combat.
Comments
I suppose the issue could be summed up as, GWF is really only useful in a HIGH amount of enemies situation (probably way more than five mobs, as I'd say even with around five, two rogues would still most likely cut through them faster than having a rogue and a GWF), and it's at-will aoe is pretty horrible at doing what it's "supposed", at least til a good bit later, and even then... I'm not necessarily asking for Rogue nerfs, but something needs to happen in some form, buffs would be welcomed obviously.
Example chain mail was made to protect against slashing and a great sword is slashing... chain mail does not protect against piercing and a dagger is piercing it penetrates the armor hits the vital areas. Just like the arrow was made to penetrate armor... This goes on and on up to modern times and will happen forever somethings are only made to do the one thing they were made for.
Deadliest Warrior is a great show and you would even see a great sword bouncing off armor in one of the episodes unlike the dagger penetrating the target... One is seriously wounding you the other would most likely just knock you over depending on how big the guy is he might break some bones or whatever but its no death blow you could survive but you can't survive bleeding out (with no help).
Great sword is not what you think it is comparing it to a dagger the dagger does more damage in real life terms also probably a good reason why in most games the dagger classes do the most damage after all its single target and piercing damage aiming for the vital areas dealing the most damage hitting them.
When you ask this question you clearly don't understand melee combat and weapons/armor in real life which is fine but you may as well learn it if your going to ask it.
I know this is a game and some games take after this rule but anyways D&D has it's own rule set and the classes follow that rule set. Your current great sword class is not a striker period you wanna do a lot of damage and use a great sword wait for them to add a great sword striker class.
Side note just because you play a AOE heavy class don't expect to top the charts because you do mainly AOE damage and hit every mob that is ridiculous that is exactly why you should be doing less damage than the single target damage dealers why the hell should AOE classes top charts?
Lets not turn this into Blazing Wizards AOE one shotting everything in sight that was the most game breaking thing I ever saw.
As senseijohn said "in general precision will win of brute force - if precision gets there first"
~Oscar Wilde~
"Look at what the Great Weapon Fighter can do, he's so OP!"
~Andy Velasquez~
So then in NWO a Dagger is better vs Chain Mail and a Great Sword is better vs cloth and leather?
TR = Single Target Melee DPS
AoE
get a TR in a mob of 7-10 enemies they take them out 1 at a time 2 hits each (about 15 seconds)
get a GWF in a mob of 7-10 enemies they hit about 7-10 at a time 3 hits each (about 5 seconds)
Single Target
get a TR vs 1 enemy they take them out in 2 hits each (about 3 seconds)
get a GWF vs enemy they takes him out in 3 hits (about 5 seconds)
see how it evens out?
No in Neverwinter the situation right now is the GWF is not a striker class so it wasn't made to deal enough damage to ever top the dps charts. In the future it's possible they add a Great Sword striker class or paragon path that is able to top dps charts with other striker classes like the TR.
In this game it just has to do with D&D classes and striker classes will be the ones topping and competing for the top dps on the charts if your not a striker class you simply will never be at the top. So no matter how much people want TR to be nerfed no matter what they wouldn't make it so any current class could pass their dps they are the ONLY striker class currently in the game.
You guys most likely will get your wish for a striker great sword class in the future and most likely it will eventually have it's OP time.
Overall the question "Why does a dagger hit harder than a greatsword" can't be answered for a game it all goes by how they program it. In real life if you want to learn why daggers do more damage than greatsword then as I said watch Deadliest Warrior it's a good show and you will learn a lot about melee weapons and more.
In reality a dagger does more damage than a great sword using skilled people in less the target is plate then the dagger and great sword are both meh compared to a arrow, spear or mace. All weapons are made to kill and all have pros and cons some kill easier than others but still have a weakness.
Greatsword simply isn't what everyone thinks it is bigger does not mean it's better lol. Swing a real greatsword around in real life you will be tired quickly in less you jacked and swing them around daily training. Try to aim at a target and thrust if you never did it before your chance of missing is like 95% probably higher they are heavy and hard to aim and use effectively over a long period of time.
Grab two real daggers and swing them around and thrust at a target with them and I bet you would like them a lot better for your first time using melee weapons. You can learn quickly on your own why daggers were made to kill precisely, quickly and easily for someone very skilled. Overall the great sword in my opinion compared to other melee weapons in real life is it's not a very effective weapon in less you are the biggest guy there is on foot and highly skilled to effectively use it for long periods of time.
Greatsword was highly effective for men on horseback and mostly used by them though out history (I think) and fully armored knights used them too and some others used them too but though out history there has always been a better weapon than the greatsword for killing and war realistically "Over-sized two-handers were not practical weapons there were other more popular weapons." . It has nice reach and can hit multiple targets but meh no one is really big enough to effectively use them in less you use them daily.
I have a bunch of melee weapons around my house a 2 handed sword being one of them and if I had to pick out of all of them for a real combat situation I'd easily take the katana and Wakizashi over anything else next under that would be like Spartans short sword/spear/big *** shield third on my list would be dual daggers. Greatswords are pretty close to the bottom of my list they are just not effective weapons compared to other melee weapons when it comes to games they need to add katana/wakizashi wielders they are incredible blades compared to anything else only thing I'd say that is better than a Katana would be say a light saber lol.
There's a reason why some Katana's are known as 3-4 body blades. They are the most superior blades right now overall and probably will stay that way till that hilt has hot laser coming up from it instead of steel.
Only reason I see all theses games using greatswords is because they are popular in games and always have been and for a AOE melee class something simple and easy to make. Plus some greatswords look awesome and that's why people will pick the class because the weapons look good. I'd rather see more unique weapons you know how many melee weapons there are? A lot.
There nothing fancy or romantic about it someone that knows how to fight and is skillful can easily step inside the huge sword swing and slit a throat. You speak of mechanical advantage yet overlook the disadvantage of such a huge cumbersome weapon and insanely heavy armor.
The thing is rogues are suppose to be sneaky, be able to disable traps, be pro assassins. Thing is though do you really want rogues zapping in and "assassinating" (emulating cut throats, and other one hit kill mechanics) peeps? I rather doubt it so they up their damage.
They are the only striker class in the game their damage SHOULD be higher than a defenders, they should be equally more squishy as well, which they are.
See the thing is a proper rogue will not "walk into a sword fight" they will stab you in the back.
Also the moment you start playing a fantasy game like this real life mechanics kind of go out the door. What do you expect?
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
I am not asking for TR to be nerfed, I am bigger picture. I want classes to be as balanced as they can, I want classes to follow their traits and I want at least challenging game play more often then not. I think that means with NWO, I would be asking for what a forum dweler would say is nerfing all classes to some level, to first balance them with the AI better and then try to smooth out the classes against one another. It's only a nerf now because our heroes came out very dominant vs the AI. So now it's a perception thing. If it came out the other way, forum fanboy would be defending that as the righteous choice. I'll just stick with masterful game play mechanics, wherever that leads the rest.
In regards to swinging a GS and getting tired, but remember I have 20 points of strength and rising. I will not get tired.
Oh so it's ok to be "unrealistic" and say, " I have 20 points of str" so I won't get tired but then say well you can't count those "20 points of dex" and evade me?
I have 20 points of str and can swing all day long but you can't dance all day long with your 20 points of dex?
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
You can't quantify a weapon based solely on it's weight and damage potential.The training of the person using it is more important than the weapon itself.Back in ancient times and not only,romans used to train with a wooden gladius AND armor a lot heavier than the ones use in battle,they were dangerous because they were disciplined and trained.Just like nowadays when you go in the army they make you run around with full combat gear so you get used to it's weight and in time it doesn't feel like a burden.
A dagger has always been a last resort weapon,you wouldn't see people charging into battle with a dagger at the ready unless they didn't have any other weapon.If daggers were so great as people seem to believe why would they just use daggers as a main weapon? It would certainly be a lot easier to equip a whole army with them...
Daggers were mostly used because they were easily to conceal,that's why it suits the rogue not because it's more dangerous then others.
This is true but its not at the same time it was not always used a last resort weapon this highly depends on what time frame we are talking about in history and what soldiers and tribes ect ect. I would say that there were easily more people though out history who did use it as a last resort weapon though. But anyways yes all soldiers through out history have always had a last resort weapon. Every weapon has pros and cons and they all have a strong point and a weakness. Which is why all soldiers usually carried a variety of weapons with different fighting styles.
Dagger and greatsword are both far from great melee weapons overall both need high skill to effectively use daggers are more realistic over a greatsword for any normal person who doesn't use a greatsword on a daily basis I don't think people realize how heavy they are alone I give credit to all soldiers who lived back in the day of melee wars.
As I said before this question really can't be answered for a game it all goes by how they program it... it doesn't have to make sense at all in a game.
That's true but your missing the rest of why they use them...
"Let's argue about the real-world validity of melee weapons in a universe filled with magic potions that instantly heal all wounds and where people can shoot ice out of their hands."
You guys do remember this is a video game, right?
Was that even the point? The point was a GW could possibly do as much or even out damage a dagger. It was stated a dagger is good vs chain, find the weakness go for the kill. I then countered with a GS must win then vs cloth and leather. Now it's can I hit someone or not? Hmmm.... that curve is just a bit outside.
The majority of the posters in this thread just fell off the turnip wagon this morning. EQ1 started the trend of ignoring real world characteristics in weapons in favour of letting people who want to use daggers (in this example) as their main weapon do so. Since then in most if not all MMOs all weapons do about the same damage, be they daggers or maces or greatswords, modified by class skills/powers.
I am forced to conclude that this is the OPs first MMO.
Realm of the Demiurge Foundry Works
Neverwinter isn't D&D, it is a MMO based on a game that uses D&D terms but isn't really D&D either. NW is fun (for that matter so is 4E), but it isn't D&D, and once you wrap your expectations around that you will be able to enjoy the game for what it offers and not worry about what it does not.
They're also very convenient for when you don't have the space to swing a larger weapon or lack the strength to do so. Sticking a small, sharp, pointy thing into someone else is much easier than cleaving them in twain!
^ what he said! Game isn't even fully released, there isn't enough theorycrafting/testing out yet. You can basically EXPECT that there will be tweaking and balancing. It is perfectly okay to post ideas, thoughts w/e but most of the posts here are unfounded and no reflection of how the devs ment for the class-mechanics to work. However it was entertaining to read
Rogues are so easy to play.
Rogues are so squishy.
Rogues overpowered?? NOPE they are good the way they are
Play other class if you want a challenge. These WoW **** players and their rogues
i loled at this
so for rogue have dmg is bad? but for mages have perma CC and GWF 2 hiting at lvl 60 is ok?
so you want us to be ussles? or just no threat to you so you can always rolf stomp us right? bingo?
check ppl who play lvl 60 GWF and they out dmg everyone, GWF's at start are abit crapy yes
Rogues are better at start, but that doesnt mean you can trash talk ppl who play them,
i say fu Sir
and have a good day
Well, in practice, consider real world self defense. The concept here is often referred to as "shot placement". As in, with self defense, a flesh wound with a .44 mag does less "damage" than a well aimed .22 pea shooter to the heart. That is the difference between a GWF and a rogue, then: rogues aim for the heart, GWF is (apparently, in this game) flailing about taking any hit he can get, even if it does not hit anything "vital". Honestly, I thing GWF damage is very poor at least for the first many levels, to the point that I deleted mine, tried again, and am going to delete it again shortly.
Rogues in 3.5 could kill you with one hit easily from stealth, actually. Meant to play how? A combat built D&D rogue in the older rules could have high str bonus (16+ score usually) and that added to dex bonus to hit (weapon finesse feat), and from stealth hit bonus, etc. At higher levels the stealth hit was looking at 10 d6 per attack (2 weapons, typically). In some versions the assassin prestige class made you save or die upon being hit with that, on TOP of the damage. They could also get hide in plain sight, in the neverwinter nights games, killing one from stealth, taking 2 steps away, restealthing, repeat -- from a single level of shadowdancer class.
In groups, they moved from target to target, backstab and move on, any enemy that attacked anyone else was vulnerable to this.
The rules in this game are a little strange, yes, but even so there were always 2 types of D&D thief builds, the combat version that was an average fighter when going toe-to-toe and deadly when a back was turned, and the utility builds for opening locks and traps and scouting.
TLDR; D&D rogues have always been played by some as top tier damage, GWF needs a buff (maybe just for low-mid levels?), and where you hit something is more important to damage than the size of the weapon.
The idea is that the rogue can strike a heavily armored opponent BETWEEN the gaps in the armor. For opponents wearing chain armor, a narrow bladed thrusting weapon (or arrows etc) goes through it like it wasn't even there.
I would just like to point out that I believe balancing classes solely based on literally the first combat ingame might not be the best solution to achieve a well balanced and fun game.
This is just my opinion.
i should mention this as well: For those who aren't in heavy armor, you would get cleaved in half fairly easily.
So people say rogues are suppose to do more damage, and with that perfectly timed shot its an instant kill sure, (ultimates imo) But getting cleaved in half at waist or getting a giant sword burried into your chest from shoulder to your belly button is by far "more damage"
I do play rogue btw. Just saying GWF should not be as useless as they are. right now they might as well be swinging those water noodles that people take to the pool/beach
Assuming you are correct that a rogue can hit harder and faster, overall doing far greater damage than the GWF, I assume the reason is for that of balance. The typical rogue probably builds himself into a glass cannon, doing far greater damage and criticals than a GWF, but the great weapon fighter retains far sturdier durability and survivability. Using an elementary example: Assume the GWF does 35 damage to 3 targets of 50 health and soaks up 20 damage over the course of 5 seconds.. You now have 3 targets with 15 health.
Now let's assume the rogues hits quickly deal 60 damage to a single target at a time while suffering the combined attacks of all three with his (And remember, I'm only assuming here that the GWF are the tank class, as I do not play one) lower armor/defense. While dealing damage over the same course of 5 seconds: He may hit a single target for a higher amount of say 60 damage opposed to the weapon fighters 35, but he now has one enemy defeated, 2 still striking him with one diminished to 40 HP of his original 50 but may suffer a greater loss of life from the weaker armor deducting 30 from his total HP opposed to the 20 taken by the GWF.
Also, as I play a rogue, I understand that rogues also have other benefits such as their own AoE and ranged abilities, but we're sticking to the simpler basics here. One brought 3 opponents down to a margin of their life and took less damage, one killed a single target and began damaging a second but took more damage in the process. 3 opponents at 15 health or one dead with two left to go, which is better? Neither, each class has their own role in a party that makes them good at specific forms of engagement.
In pvp, using the same basic theory I used earlier, we could probably also assume that while a rogue would probably hit harder, the GWF can endure that extra bit while the rogue's more frail HP drops a similar amount because of his lack of higher defense and armor: Back to balance, two equals of different classes essentially take the same amout of damage. The rogue does more, but the GWF's armor blocks more. The GWF does less, but the rogue's defense is less.
If it any way this 'theory', and that's all it is folks, (I'll actually admit without shame that I am not a very hardcore MMO player and have only played a few and don't claim to have a masters degree in their mechanics.) is correct, then it makes sense why the rogue is the way it is and the GWF is as he is. It would also negate the need to nerf one over the other; damage isn't everything. Range, Defense, HP, and so forth are all elements that can give one class an edge over another, or make up for what they're lacking in sheer critical hits.
Assuming there was an archer class, or just using the control Wizard for an example since I recently began playing one...I was pretty impressed with the range he could hit from. Initiating from that range on another class and hitting them multiple times before they can approach you, knocking them away once they do reach, and/or using the control oriented spells to make it a pain in the *** to get close to them before you've suffered a devastating combo of hits and spells, would make it so that even if the damage they were pushing out wasn't as high as another class, they have their own unique set of strategies and mechanics that is not inferior to another solely based on damage output.
Edit* Since people seem to be talking more realistically about why a giant broadsword is doing less damage than a rogue with daggers well I guess I'll try to take my guess at that.
1. It's a video game, and for balance sake it can't always be realistic.
2. The role of the assassin is to come in from nowhere, striking his opponent down accurately for a kill. The gameplay is limited, so they can't properly portray it in a way that makes sense for the broadsword doing less (such as showing different animations of the blows only grazing their opponents, or being deflected into a less 'Omg that should have cut me in half' sized wound).
Seze - Rogue - Necropolis -
I don't think anyone is disputing this.
You drive a 1973 Ford Pinto that has a top speed of around 80 MPH (our GWF for comparison)
Person X drives a 2013 Aston Martin Vanquish with a top speed pf 186 MPH (the TF chimes in)
Instead of trying to get your Pinto fixed up to go faster (buff to GWF, which really is needed TBH), you cry for a governor to be put on all Vanquishes so they only go 80 too (The dreaded "Balance the classes" whine that has been around since the first Rougelike games came on the scene back in the old old days)
MMO games are not meant to have an "Everyone does the same DPS" balance, with the exception of the one that is PvP only. Each class has a role. The biggest problem is not that the rogue kicks ***, its that the GWF is a hybrid class, half tank, half DPS. I think Cryptic went too far in how much DPS the GWF sacrifices for greater survivabilty (on paper at least, in reality VERY questionable) and AoE DPS ability (again VERY questionable on the AoE portion AND overall utility of said AoE in the current game state).
The answer to the OP: None. There is no reason save the fact GWF are pretty under-powered at the moment. The answer to which weapon hits harder is that it is a game, and a dagger could hit as hard as a greatsword under certain circumstances in order to ensure a rogue using it wasn't worthless in combat.