Quote:
Originally Posted by Janis
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.
|
True, but how you explain an Assassin showing more proficiency in a weapon a Gladiator master by default? Assassins are about getting in your back and do a 1-hit massive damage and lots of fast hits and criticals. So they are meant to sneak into enemy lines and surprise and enemy and kill him as fast as he can and then sneak out. Gladiators are about brute force, never hiding, using their bodies to get into enemy lines and use AoE massive skills and knocking back and hitting hard but slow.
You can't say it's correct for an Assassin to have a weapon that hits harder than a dagger, and hits equally faster and with equal chances to get a crit.
Again, my point is... there will be no choice... why would you use a dagger if it doesn't hit as hard as a pole? then... why make assassins use daggers if everyone will use polearms cause they hit harder? Why would you make a gladiator for melee damage if another class does it for twice as you and can teleport and hide, etc?
Too many advantages that leave the people playing this game seriously without a choice.
I would be ok if there is a pro v/s con on each weapon. Something like:
-Polearm: +p.atk -atk. speed -accuracy
-Dagger: -p.atk +atk. speed +critical
-Staff: -p. atk -atk speed + accuracy + mana regen.
So it would actually be a choice... and you choose between an assassin hitting hard but slow or an assassin hitting not that hard but fast, to fit your playstyle. Not make one better than the other.
And we can clearly see that assassin hitting as fast as she would do with daggers and no missing and with much more patk... that's for sure... that's why we are complaining.