Hey,
on patchday I noticed a lots of salty vets who seemed to instantly hate them and say the are OP and need to be patched.
After playing several times against them I come to the conclusion that they are pretty OK (they're rather a bit underpowered in duels then other weapons).
Now before the hating starts let me sum up why I do think so.
Strengths of spears:
+ heavy piercing damage
+ decent slashing damage (compareable to a 0.95kg bastard blade)
+ when using them without shield the right slash and the thurst look similar (but not the same like a lot of Vets claim). After getting used to it you can pretty good distinguish them.
+ good range
Weaknesses:
- thursts are hard to hit on close targets that move.
- slashes produce almost only handle hits on close targets.
Most weapons in MO2 are just the same. Parry, and land a counter.
Spears feel like a completly differnt playstile. I honestly didn't expect any weapon to feel that different. You need to keep a certain range to the enemy in order to do good damage and land clean hits. If the enemy plays defensive he's pretty screwed.
But now let's come to the spears drawback.
If you use any "short" weapon e.g. swords, clubs, axes,... and you stay close to the spear user and walk/run cirecels around him his only left attack are the thursts. And even those are hard to hit. Slashing hits only handle hit on that distance and go for 1 or 2 damage. So as soon as you play offensive against a spear and stay in close distance to him they will have a hard time.
In the beginning, without adapting my playstile they felt OP.
But after using their weaknesses to my adavantage they felt rather underpowered.
So in my opinion spears are great how they are. Players just need to adapt and understand that lurking for parry's against spears is not the most efficient way how to fight them.
on patchday I noticed a lots of salty vets who seemed to instantly hate them and say the are OP and need to be patched.
After playing several times against them I come to the conclusion that they are pretty OK (they're rather a bit underpowered in duels then other weapons).
Now before the hating starts let me sum up why I do think so.
Strengths of spears:
+ heavy piercing damage
+ decent slashing damage (compareable to a 0.95kg bastard blade)
+ when using them without shield the right slash and the thurst look similar (but not the same like a lot of Vets claim). After getting used to it you can pretty good distinguish them.
+ good range
Weaknesses:
- thursts are hard to hit on close targets that move.
- slashes produce almost only handle hits on close targets.
Most weapons in MO2 are just the same. Parry, and land a counter.
Spears feel like a completly differnt playstile. I honestly didn't expect any weapon to feel that different. You need to keep a certain range to the enemy in order to do good damage and land clean hits. If the enemy plays defensive he's pretty screwed.
But now let's come to the spears drawback.
If you use any "short" weapon e.g. swords, clubs, axes,... and you stay close to the spear user and walk/run cirecels around him his only left attack are the thursts. And even those are hard to hit. Slashing hits only handle hit on that distance and go for 1 or 2 damage. So as soon as you play offensive against a spear and stay in close distance to him they will have a hard time.
In the beginning, without adapting my playstile they felt OP.
But after using their weaknesses to my adavantage they felt rather underpowered.
So in my opinion spears are great how they are. Players just need to adapt and understand that lurking for parry's against spears is not the most efficient way how to fight them.
