WW dual wield or shield?

[Mist_Sahara]

is it generally better to dual wield with ww, or use a 1 handed weapon and a shield when it comes to being able to survive and kill in hell?

basically, i'm wondering if the extra hits provided through dual wielding will make up for the absence of a shield.

[kirbyisroxor]

Use a shield. Blocking is better than getting hit and dieing, I think!

[mstrnicegui]

I remember reading a post about someone who tested a range 5 2h weapon that hit the last ww breakpoint vs. dual wielding two range 3 1h weapons that hit the last ww bp. The range 5 weapon hit 10 times vs the dual wielding 8 times.

It is viable to dual wield, wear weapon/shield, use range 5 weapon in pvm as long as all of the above hit the last ww breakpoint. It is most important to get to that last breakpoint as it will mean at least 33% more dmg on average.

[rikstaker]

Gui's right.

If u want pure offense,use a 2h range 5 wep.

offense barbs(dual wiled & 2h) dont have any more survivability problems than wep/shield barbs.It just the same IM and mana burn.If u are pure PVM go for a 2h wep build,hits more than dual wielders,plus cheaper to build.

rIK

[acceleration turkey]

ill post on this thread, although it is related to the other whirlwind thread

check out this (http://forums.rpgforums.net/showthread.php?t=232140) thread to learn more about why i dont think range is that important for whirlwind (some of the posts are not on topic). what i mean is that you should not seek range at the exclusion of other mods, although the argument that range can only be found on a weapon is compelling.

I remember reading a post about someone who tested a range 5 2h weapon that hit the last ww breakpoint vs. dual wielding two range 3 1h weapons that hit the last ww bp. The range 5 weapon hit 10 times vs the dual wielding 8 times.

here's my opinion on that:

i always thought that the benefit of dual weilding is seen when there is more than one target in range. when dual weilding, it takes -35 to hit the last break point on each weapon, but the weapons check in a staggered way:

frames

weapon 1
0 4 8 12 16 20

weapon 2
2 6 10 14 18 22

the above represents the frames at which hit checks are performed with the right and left hand weapon. when you overlap them you get:

dual weild:
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

sounds to me like the test you are talking about is on a single target. the range 5 weapon gets an extra hit on the way in and on the way out, 10 compared to 8. i imagine it would have been the same with a single range 3 vs a single range 5. dual weilding does not help on a single target. so if we want to believe that monsters do not always line up nicely as rik said, the benefit of dual weilding becomes smaller. however, the idea that a range 5 two-hander automatically hits more is not the case either. if you are in the habit of picking your whirl lines such that you target the dense point of a monster group, you would probably appreciate dual weilding more, and need range less, because you tend to whirl in a target-rich environment.

i guess what it comes down to for me is, the only time when you actually need to kill quickly to save your own skin is when you are in a target-rich environment. if you need 4 whirls instead of 3 to pick up a few straggling blowgun flayers at the edge of the map, i dont see what the rush is. in the end its a matter of degree...if a weapon is short and has 10% crushing blow, i probably wouldnt use it over a range 5 weapon with similar damage but no CB.

[Mule]

If you have one opponent, two handed is better, multiple dual wielding is better. This assumes the combined average of the one handers is larger than the two hander, and both weapon (one and two handed) types are at the same breakpoint.

[acceleration turkey]

If you have one opponent, two handed is better, multiple dual wielding is better. This assumes the combined average of the one handers is larger than the two hander, and both weapon (one and two handed) types are at the same breakpoint.


dual weilding is also good because both weapons get off-weapon benefits. if you wear war travs or have a lot of damage charms, both weapons get extra damage. if you have crushing blow, both weapons have it. if you have damage-independant mods, the high frequency of dual weilding works in your favor.

[rikstaker]

check out this (http://forums.rpgforums.net/showthread.php?t=232140) thread to learn more about why i dont think range is that important for whirlwind (some of the posts are not on topic). what i mean is that you should not seek range at the exclusion of other mods, although the argument that range can only be found on a weapon is compelling.
Turkey,range is important-swallow that-(more on that later)

If I got ias and dmg on the weapon already,I wouldnt give up range even for the very best mods,simply caz u said it urself,there are other sources.heck,If faced with a situation where there is only a slight difference in dmg,like tombreaver vs bonehew,I'd surely use reaver.

i always thought that the benefit of dual weilding is seen when there is more than one target in range. when dual weilding, it takes -35 to hit the last break point on each weapon, but the weapons check in a staggered way:

frames

weapon 1
0 4 8 12 16 20

weapon 2
2 6 10 14 18 22

the above represents the frames at which hit checks are performed with the right and left hand weapon. when you overlap them you get:

dual weild:
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22.

Thats correct,but as u know,against single targets,the alternate check is only performed 50% on the alternate weapon.it looks like this..

0 4 6 8 12 14 16 20 22

-you get the 9th check if the first check was performed exactly when ww in, meaning u started ur whirl when the target was just entering ur range and not when it was already in it. Anyway,its roughly 50% more hits on a single target.

dual weilding does not help on a single target. so if we want to believe that monsters do not always line up nicely as rik said, the benefit of dual weilding becomes smaller. however, the idea that a range 5 two-hander automatically hits more is not the case either. if you are in the habit of picking your whirl lines such that you target the dense point of a monster group, you would probably appreciate dual weilding more, and need range less, because you tend to whirl in a target-rich environment.

i guess what it comes down to for me is, the only time when you actually need to kill quickly to save your own skin is when you are in a target-rich environment. if you need 4 whirls instead of 3 to pick up a few straggling blowgun flayers at the edge of the map, i dont see what the rush is. .

There are conditions attached to that statement.If we are talking pvp,well.. dualwielding does help against single targets-against casters,since u'd either have a resists shield or wizzy instead of a range 5 weapon.Though it would hit harder & slightly more often but the benefits in resists/mana/faster-tele outweigh the chance of a hit or 2 more with range 5 wepons.

If we are talking pvm,you said it yourself-we tend to whirl in target rich environment and not against single targets.Dualwield works better than 2 h long range weapons only if:

multiple(1+) targets are fairly constantly available in range for the alternate check to occur.Now why that doesnt happen OFTEN:

is caz AFIK

1.dualwielding as opposed to 2h/wepshield, speeds up ur run/walk,further denting the chances of having multiple targets in range constantly for additional checks.The faster u move the faster the target(s) get out of range.

2.There are very few areas where targets line up nice & close,meaning a very little gap between them.Think arcane sanctuary,maggot lair,some areas in keep, where those disciplined spawns do infact line up nicely.

LEGEND;
l = whirl path
b = barb
x = targets

l
l
b
x
x
x

the above scenario is'nt as common as we think it is.

The advantage that range 5 weps have is:

scenario 1:
l
l
b x x x
l
l
scenario 2:
l
l
b
x
x
x

1. They can consistently hit two targets or more(depending on monster size,yes I am not 100% sure but it is a factor,from what i observed) in the same frame under both scenarios due to the longer range.Thats why we all feel that they hit more than shorter range weapons,but cant prove.

2.Target(s) stay in range longer -already proven in tests Gui was talking about,moreover its a generally accepted principle based on logic.

I also observed that even range 3 weps managed to hit two adjacent targets in the same frame but not as consistently as range 5 weps.

Saying that dualwield attacks at 12 aps is theoretical,in reality though a prudent estimate would be somewhere around 9-10 due to the reasons above).

I am not talking single target here,I am saying that targets won't always be available in range constantly for every 2 frame checks to occur.

Range is important for ww,extremely important,I am sure people who have built ww barbs with different range weapons will testify to that.




in the end its a matter of degree...if a weapon is short and has 10% crushing blow, i probably wouldnt use it over a range 5 weapon with similar damage but no CB.

u sure? :scratch:

Turkey:In ur other post u said something about arm length,that seems intersting & fairly accurate to me but I dont think the barbs stretches out his arms fully when ww so I think instead of === its == or =,he hold his weapon(s)fairly close to himself.

And have u noticed that when using range 5 weapons like gpa the weapon stretches or sorta hangs out of the ww swirl animation,whereas short range weapons stay within it.

turkey,I enjoy all my discussions with u. :uhhuh: :drink:

rIK

[rikstaker]

1. They can consistently hit two targets or more(depending on monster size,yes I am not 100% sure but it is a factor,from what i observed) in the same frame under both scenarios due to the longer range.Thats why we all feel that they hit more than shorter range weapons,but cant prove.


correction:thats two adjacent targets.(that looked misleading.)

And,I'd just like to add that scenario 1 is surely more common than scenario 2.

monsters dont line up behind each other,they try to swarm u,in doing that they break formation & go around each other & in doing so arrange themselves in the order somewhat simillar to scenario 1,i.e they are often adjacent to your ww path & not lined up directly in it this becomes more evident by their A.I behavior after u start whirling through them.

Sure,with ww u have full control on ur whirl lines,but that doesn't grant u power to dictate how packs move when u get to work.U can surely, if u are quick enough whirl through 3 or 4 nicely lined up monsters,but only initially,when u turn & whirl back,they arent so keen on discipline the second time.

rIK

[rikstaker]

Thats correct,but as u know,against single targets,the alternate check is only performed 50% on the alternate weapon.it looks like this..

0 4 6 8 12 14 16 20 22

-you get the 9th check if the first check was performed exactly when ww in, meaning u started ur whirl when the target was just entering ur range and not when it was already in it. Anyway,its roughly 50% more hits on a single target.


The above sequence is assuming first check is made immediately,at the start of ww.

Now if we consider the first check is made at the 4th frame, and 2frame checks occur on the same target after the 8th frame (alternate dualwield theory) we still get 9 checks total.

so its

4,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22.

rIK.

ww tech stuff is boring :yawn:

[skilledlord]

shield helps u survive much longer.

[rikstaker]

RANGE
one thing to note about range is that the numbers 1 2 3 4 5 are somewhat deceiving, because they suggest that perhaps range 5 reaches 5x that of range 1. i would guess that the min range is more like 3 or 4, and then each range is +1. a visual example:

the area which you can do whirlwind damage is the distance between the center of your character and the tip of your weapon.
O is character
- is weapon
= is "arm length"

it is my suppoosition that the weapon ranges look something like this:

-===O===- range 1
--===O===-- range 2
---===O===--- range 3
----===O===---- range 4
-----===O===----- range 5

this is what i think they do NOT look like:

-O- range 1
--O-- range 2
---O--- range 3
----O---- range 4
-----O----- range 5

the difference is that in the first example, the presence of 3 minimum units (arm reach) makes the marginal difference between range 5 and range 1 less great than if range 5 were actually 5 times as long as range 1. in my first example, a range 5 weapon has a reach of 8 units, and a range 1 weapon has a range of 4 units, so it has half the wing span during a WW attack.
.

I had a tough time deciding on where to post this.

The 'arm lenth' you are talking about is actually the 'base range' idea,which suggests that weapon range is an extension of the base range.Like u said it make the difference between long & short range weapons less great.

But I strongly beleive that the actual 'reach' of the base range is similar to the reach of range 1 weapons.It is definitely not the same as the reach of range 2 or range 3 weapons,ur graphic is somewhat misleading.

thats why I said it has to be = or perhaps ==(I doubt it)

So i beleive,
a range 1 weapon is actually (1+1) range 2.
a range 2 weapon is (1+2) range 3.
range 3 = 4
range 4 = 5
range 5 = 6.

No u'd notice the difference between a range 1 & range 5 weapon is 3 x,and not 5x if there wasnt any base range or 2x,in your supposition.

rIK