Quote:
Originally Posted by Valerossi0
The main problem about an assassin with an polearm seems to be why choose an gladiator than ?.
If i see what skills and rogue got how fast they attack and what damage they make with pole and even can charge, i dont see an reason for me anymore to take an gladiator.
I thought to be special as gladiator in heavy gear fighting with an polearm, but if assassins that meant to be fast fighters can do the same heavy with poles , than please explain me some more reasons to go gladiator.
|
EDIT: I don't usually get so invested in a conversation and I was thinking about why I have now. I realize that my ego is to blame. I finally had made up my mind about being an assassin instead of a ranger when I saw assassins could use polearms. My ego perceives people who think that assassins shouldn't use polearms as a threat becuase i'm well aware of the fact that enough people complain the dev's might change it that assassins can't use polearms, therefore my posts are rather overly-defensive. I apologize, i mean no offense.
Good point, but I think that being a gladiator you could pick assassin skills if you wanted or ranger or class"x".
Well the reason you would go as gladiator would be to use SWORDS/POLEARMS/HEAVYARMOR/TANKING/LOOKS/SKILLS. Also wouldn't you rather use the weapon that has better stats rather than using an out dated polearm? Besides the attack animations and skills are different, don't tell me the only reason you chose to play a gladiator was for charge and polearm, that is just silly in my opinion.
In terms of daggers/swords being useless over polearms, that is a legitimate worry. It really depends on what the polearm stigma replaces. If it replaces a huge dagger damage boost or crowd control ability then I think it is fine. If the polearm gives a huge benefit based on how the skill calculations are made then I agree it is not balanced. I understand the concern that if the damage range increases with the polearm and most attacks are instant then the damage boost would be substantial. But we do not know the cost of the damage boost.
Anyway I think its too early for us to judge, everyone is jumping to conclusions. At least I know I was initially very amazed at seeing a polearm assassin, but then I stepped back and thought about it. If it turns out to be a bug then we need not worry about it, if it is not a bug then by the time the game reaches us it will be balanced, and we need not worry about it. So in the end we need not worry about it.
@aggalos Gladiators aren't meant to do as much damage as assassins in the first place. That's why they get extra armor and extra health. It's not like gladiators are assassins with plate armor, that would truly be unbalanced. Again not you nor I understand the true scope of the cost vs benefit of using a stigma to get a polearm.
@Dez I don't think that the weapon a class uses changes the class role in any form whatsoever. Maybe if I saw an assassin tanking, healing, or casting magic spells then I would agree. The assassin still has the same skills that any other assassin's have. Again the argument here is: I don't believe that a stealthy class can stealth with a huge weapon because how do you hide in real life with a huge heavy thing on your back? Basically a polearm assassin is not compatible with how
I think a game should represent the assassin archetype. Correct me if I misunderstand your point.
Personally I think flying shouldn't be in the game. It's not right and realistic that we can just pop wings out of our backs. I don't want to play a game that differs so much from what I think a game should be, is again the consistent argument that i'm reading. If people don't want to play a game that tries to add something "new" then they should go play a old game and be comfortable with old ideas.
This thread is like a broken record: The same invalid points are brought up over and over again. I'm not a friend of ignorance though I am a friend of truth. We shouldn't be discussing this issue because none of us know the truth behind it, we can only speculate.