Poleaxes - the forgotten weapon

[Valoran]

If they are so good, why does nobody uses them outside of 1v1 tournaments?

Sword is still way better with more attack directions, less stam drains and less handle hits. Spears are way better in group fights where you wont get free parrys or space to do fancy mix ups with spins.

I didn't say they're the best weapon, and i'm not sure how being used in group fights makes a weapon good or bad in general. Lots of people use hammers in group fights but don't in duels, does that mean clubs are bad weapons because they're only "viable" in one type of combat? People will use the right tool for the job, and if poleaxes fit someones needs for how they want to play or what they want to do, they can use them.

They have the same number of attack directions as a sword, all directions will deal good damage on a poleaxe, and they are longer and hit harder than swords do. If those are things a player is personally willing to sacrifice stamina drain and handle hits for compared to a sword then poleaxes might be a good choice for them.

My main point is that they aren't as bad as some people are saying they are. They do have benefits and uses, and can be used very effectively in the right hands.

Another point worth making, is that quite often people complain the most about things they want to use, or are already using but want to be better. I would place a reasonable bet that a lot of people who are saying poleaxes suck actually do use them, and simply want them to be better so their weapon of choice is better. Not that this really affects the discussion, but it's worth noting.

 

[ElPerro]

I didn't say they're the best weapon, and i'm not sure how being used in group fights makes a weapon good or bad in general. Lots of people use hammers in group fights but don't in duels, does that mean clubs are bad weapons because they're only "viable" in one type of combat? People will use the right tool for the job, and if poleaxes fit someones needs for how they want to play or what they want to do, they can use them.

They have the same number of attack directions as a sword, all directions will deal good damage on a poleaxe, and they are longer and hit harder than swords do. If those are things a player is personally willing to sacrifice stamina drain and handle hits for compared to a sword then poleaxes might be a good choice for them.

My main point is that they aren't as bad as some people are saying they are. They do have benefits and uses, and can be used very effectively in the right hands.

Another point worth making, is that quite often people complain the most about things they want to use, or are already using but want to be better. I would place a reasonable bet that a lot of people who are saying poleaxes suck actually do use them, and simply want them to be better so their weapon of choice is better. Not that this really affects the discussion, but it's worth noting.

They might have technically 4 directions, but in reality the only viable ones are thrust and right swing for the mix up. Overhead and left swing are very easy to parry since they dont have any way to hide the animation.

They also might hit harder but way slower with more stam drain, making their actual DPS lower too.

The point is, are they good enough to justify taking 200 points? For that they should be twice as effective as a sword or spear or hammer to warrant using twice the skillpoints. But they arent. Not even in 1v1 as swords are just as good.

 

[Valoran]

They might have technically 4 directions, but in reality the only viable ones are thrust and right swing for the mix up. Overhead and left swing are very easy to parry since they dont have any way to hide the animation.

They also might hit harder but way slower with more stam drain, making their actual DPS lower too.

The point is, are they good enough to justify taking 200 points? For that they should be twice as effective as a sword or spear or hammer to warrant using twice the skillpoints. But they arent. Not even in 1v1 as swords are just as good.

Fair points, but I don't agree that they should be twice as effective because if they were no one would use anything else.

 

[Duessel]

I didn't say they're the best weapon, and i'm not sure how being used in group fights makes a weapon good or bad in general. Lots of people use hammers in group fights but don't in duels, does that mean clubs are bad weapons because they're only "viable" in one type of combat? People will use the right tool for the job, and if poleaxes fit someones needs for how they want to play or what they want to do, they can use them.

They have the same number of attack directions as a sword, all directions will deal good damage on a poleaxe, and they are longer and hit harder than swords do. If those are things a player is personally willing to sacrifice stamina drain and handle hits for compared to a sword then poleaxes might be a good choice for them.

My main point is that they aren't as bad as some people are saying they are. They do have benefits and uses, and can be used very effectively in the right hands.

Another point worth making, is that quite often people complain the most about things they want to use, or are already using but want to be better. I would place a reasonable bet that a lot of people who are saying poleaxes suck actually do use them, and simply want them to be better so their weapon of choice is better. Not that this really affects the discussion, but it's worth noting.

Its a fair point for sure. I stick and have stuck to 2h axes since combat beta only switched to halberds out of frustration from patches making the weapon less desirable.

I think the issue is at the core heavy weapons dont have the same benefits offsetting the negatives that faster weapons do. Saying that these weapons are viable in non-1v1 formats also is wildly wrong. I would rather have a sword spammer or spear poker over a 2h axe user in a team fight. Sure an heavy weapon user can get a huge hit in on an unsuspecting player but after the first hit the jig is up they can parry your attacks easier then most NPC's and in a team fight "feeding" parries means your allies get killed. This on top of how easy it is to hit your allies with wild right and left swings means your mostly over head with axes/maces and at least get stabs with halberd (actually nice to have).

In a perfect world we revert back to the parry damage bleed system we used to have. Mitigating a big hit from a weapon to 0 every time is horrible when the swing back from a sword is so fast and in most cases only a minor amount less damage (Axes do 40~60 and Swords do 30~50 in my experience). Hopefully weapon abilities shore up this vast valley of a difference if not hopefully knock down will if they intend to keep this perfect parry garbage.

 

[Jatix]

I view abilities the same as staff magic in MO1. You could get lucky but most features they say they are going to add wont make it to the game.

Fair points, but I don't agree that they should be twice as effective because if they were no one would use anything else.

This is why pole weapons should only be 1 primary. If somethign takes more primaries, it should be better. But now that makes them op. So just make them take 1. Make 'polearms' primary its own with no parent. Just like spears. Or make poles a secondary under spears bnecause they use the same animation.

 

[For Sure]

Theres only 1 viable poleaxe, flake halberd. Anything else is too heavy. Very OP for naked duels but thats it. Your dps is gonna be trash against anyone wearing decent armor. In its current state, not worth 200 points at all.

the 40 kids in koto disagree with you. one of the 40 cupprum poleaxes about to one tap somebody.

 

[Emdash]

Poles were monster in MO1, imo, and they justified their use. They were OP for a short while, but mainly fair w/ all the other OP stuff, and taking poles would be the ideal on a fighter, if you had the pts. That's OK to me, but I dunno if they were ruining the game etc. It def got stupid looking, but the pole wep itself is fun to use.

Poles would still be strong if it wasn't as easy to parry. Like I said, heavy weps in mortal swing like spatulas. It'd be interesting if they made heavy weapons/slow swing charge/swing faster after a feint. It kind of makes sense, you already put some effort into pulling it back. That might help balance it. You can keep smashing someone w/ a wep until there is an opening, but you wanna be sure it's gonna hit them hard when it does. Just like dudes talkin' about hammers and real axes, getting hit for a 60 or 70 while you are running by someone is a big deal in a team fight. Means you are always a little closer to death than you wanna be w/ dude around.

 

[wyqydsyq]

the extra 100 primary points would be way better spent on archery, mounted skills or creature control. a foot fighter with a spear + lvl90 taurdog/brown bear is a lot more impactful than a foot fighter with a poleaxe

 

[ElPerro]

the 40 kids in koto disagree with you. one of the 40 cupprum poleaxes about to one tap somebody.

thats why theyre still in koto xD

 

[Branjolf]

still an issue

 

[Tashka]

They have the same number of attack directions as a sword

Two of them are so obvious that no one uses them unless they want to give a free parry to an opponent. Swords just have way more options for skillful gameplay.

 

[Albanjo Dravae]

You gonna carry 3 weapons tho?

Fair but gives you the capacity to use any of those weapons and It's a clear versatility that relatively pays of.
But still for 200 points being able to use 3 types of weapons doesn't mean poleaxes should be broken. I agree.

 

[Banespike]

For me poleaxe is not worth at all, swords are king right now and you got points for ma/ Mc if you go only 1 weapon. You should be stronger on foot if you spec in poleaxe / poleswords because you gimp you mounted play.
Just my 2 cent

 

[Tzone]

yeah sword are king but so ish are spears. Axes are good utility in a team fight though.
polaxes really need a buff, pole swords are somewhat viable but not like how swords are.