Earlier it was posted that the changes to spear were in the spirit of nerfing the weapon into the ground the term “babysteps” was used to describe this spirit. I would like to know if the spear is achieving the balance that the devs have hoped for or is they work on more steps to correct it?
As far as I understand, they’re trying to figure out ways to bring other weapons up to the spear’s level, rather than nerf the spear further.
As I’ve said in other threads, the spear has already lost its place as the go-to weapon in PVE, and nerfing it further could make it useless in PVE. Sometimes you need to stop taking away from one and start giving to the rest if you want to keep all weapons in the game.
6 Likes
In PvP, the spear has long been overpowered. To the point that it’s rare to see anyone wield anything other than spear. Myself, I’ve always been partial to daggers even if the reach on the spear puts me at a disadvantage.
My biggest issue for a long time about Spears in pvp wasn’t the damage, but the stun and the hit box a spear has!
Most weapons in CE only stun at the end of the rotation. The spear on the other hand stuns each hit. Pair the stun up with the ridiculously long front hit box on the spear, and it’s no wonder that it became the PvP meta weapon on choice.
You can literally hit players as they’re running away in front of you while remaining still, even IF the spear tip itself isn’t touching the player. The “hit box” of the spear is longer and even wider than the spear’s mesh texture. Like it has an invisible power around it that can harm anything it gets close to. No other weapon in the game has such a large area of effect!
When I heard they were “fixing” the spear, these were the things I had hoped they were going to fix but they didn’t. Sure, nerfing the damage helped lower the spear a little on the “over powered” scale, but that’s never actually been the real problem behind the spear that needed adjusting in order to balance it with other weapons.
3 Likes
How to nerf spear? Easy as pie.
It’s not about dmg, obviously, greatswords or even axes can one combo a tank build with 1 or 1.5 combos. The spear takes significantly longer and that’s fine.
It’s not about cc. In fact, other weapons cause cripple, bleeding, stuns more reliably then the spear. Problem is, they never reach spear users.
Which leads to the actual problem:
It’s about the bamboozling reach
If you want to leverage other weapons to the same competitive level as spears, you have to shorten spear range by a significant amount. E voilà, spear dmg is fine, cc is fine, and you are hittable or at least have to pay more attention to your stamina.
I’ve been using spears since the first day of release and would like the devs go this path. Also, devs, if you’re reading this. Finally delete the attribute bonuses from armor and allow players to attach certain attributes to the armors we want to use. This would foster a more diverse pvp meta and allow us to actually counter build without locking us into one single armor.
1 Like
My favorite part of all this…and sorry if I seem cynical is as follows.
- Baby Steps in the damage of the first thrusts of the spear.
- Bring all the other weapons up to the spear level. Ie. Adding hyperarmor to hammers. Increasing range of the mace. Hyper armor to Daggers.
Then…the real kicker.
Lets nerf the spear…but then make a spear that regenerates your life in abundance!
The irony is almost as thick as demon blood.
Or…we will add a version that applies venom or poison.
Counterintuitive much.
So we will nerf the spear but make it still the most sought after PVP and PvE weapon.
At least a good archer can combat a spear user. Sometimes.
2 Likes
how i would see a more balance spear would be eiter a slower hit on the first heavy or a gap between the hitbox & the wielder that don’t hit, because the poky point is far from the one who had it in hand.
I’ve saw such a wierd attack hitbox with baby dragon, when they spit fire. You can actualy be between the dragon and the fire
4 Likes
I’ve been wanting the same thing for a long time as well. There seems to be no reason that attributes are “armor patched” or “augments” rather than just the armor itself having inherited attributes.
As a dagger spec, I wear only light gear, which limits me on what sets I can actually wear for combat. I love the look of other light armor sets, but they’re not going to work for combat because they have survival or encumbrance as their attribute.
Also, cold weather light pvp gear is totally lacking, imo.
So removing attributes from armor and allowing players to augment the armor ourselves with the desired attribute seems like a no brainer!
2 Likes
What advantage would a spear have if it lost its reach? What would make a spear a spear? Because if you reduce its reach and leave it otherwise as it, what incentive would you have to even consider using it over e.g. a one-handed sword and shield?
The reach of the spear should not extend further than the actual spear itself. Unfortunately, that’s currently not the case. Other weapons tend to have the opposite issue where the effect of their weapons doesn’t extend to the edges of the weapon itself, which means some contact goes ignored.
This seems like a issue Funcom could address first before balancing other issues with weapons.
2 Likes
The reach of the spear should not extend further than the actual spear itself. Unfortunately, that’s currently not the case. Other weapons tend to have the opposite issue where the effect of their weapons doesn’t extend to the edges of the weapon itself, which means some contact goes ignored.
This seems like a issue Funcom could address first before balancing other issues with weapons.
I never moticed this behaviour you mention. As far as my experience goes, the spear’s reach matches the in game model and animation.
The only weapon i can think of having issue making contact with enemies / players is the katana. But it’s more tied to the animation/actual sweap of the weapon than clip model / hit detection.
Now that’s said, spear’s reach comes to a cost in real life. And this cost is absent from the game :
Spears are cumbersome to carry and wield around. Not because of weigh, they are actually light - but because of their size. A spear is a large weapon. You really need space around you to wield one.
This could be reflected in game by restricting spear users from rolling. Using the heavy armor “step aside” animation instead.
(even if there should be more obvious restictions to apply, but i don’t see preventing a spear wielder to poke you if he doesn’t have enough space behind him or to prevent large sweap in tight area to be easy things to implement - let alone the bad gameplay experience such a thing would probably result in)
I think it would be enough to solve the issue. Spear users will still be able to poke from further away than you, but they wont be able to keep this reach advantage undefinitly. Spear might even need a buff after such a restriction.
Great observations, thank you both.
This is almost correct. The avatar extends their reach to the point of “poking” the spear, yet it does the same damage as if it had been thrust two-handed. The stun effect on a “poke” is just not realistic. Thats why people preferred swords, maces, axes etc over spears in RL.
3 Likes
The stun effect on a “poke” is just not realistic. Thats why people preferred swords, maces, axes etc over spears in RL.
Not trying to get picky, just for actual historic accuracy :
Spear (more largely polearms) has been the prefered and primary melee weapon from the first war up to the rise of firearms on the battlefields (and even then, one could agrue that rifles + bayonnet still were spears until WWI).
1 hand weapons were sidearms or daily-carry weapons.
Other non-polearms, 2 handed weapons were specialist weapons (exemple : the Scottish claymore was a shock-troop weapon, the Dane axe was a weapon designed to hook and break shields from 2nd lines or flanks)
I practice medieval theatrical/stunt combat. I’d rather get hit by a miss-calculated arming sword (standard 1h sword) full sweap than a miss-calculated spear - end of reach - “poke”.
As a general rule, we don’t like to stunt with spears because miss-haps are way more painfull, way more dangerous and way more likely with polearms that any other of our weapons. (dispite our spears having special blunt caps)
This is a question I get asked a lot after my suggestion. The answer is:
First attacks of a spear still are fast and deliver opportunity for poking advantage
And more importantly, consider heavy vs. light chains. Spear has always been about the first two hits of the chain, neglecting that there is an AoE attack in the last spear attack that knocks down everything.
As a thought experiment, think of a tank spear build that aims at using the full combo, not needing the reach advantage. That’s how spears could still persist.
And hey, even if I am competely wrong and spears would not be used anymore. Would that be so bad? Because then finally a variety of weapons would be useful, instead of 1 superior.
2 Likes
Not the preferred weapon as much as the cheap, easy to mass produce weapon for the cannon fodder against cavalry charges. A spear is basically a knife on the end of a wooden pole. Given the fact that most pikemen early on were conscript farmers and townspeople, it was easy to say , Here you go, the pointy end goes toward the enemy." During feudal times there weren’t many standing armies, and making a “knife” on the end of a pole was a lot cheaper, when you had to provide the local feudal lord with warriors. armed out of your own pocket.
1 Like
Not the preferred weapon as much as the cheap, easy to mass produce weapon for the cannon fodder against cavalry charges. A spear is basically a knife on the end of a wooden pole. Given the fact that most pikemen early on were conscript farmers and townspeople, it was easy to say , Here you go, the pointy end goes toward the enemy." During feudal times there weren’t many standing armies, and making a “knife” on the end of a pole was a lot cheaper, when you had to provide the local feudal lord with warriors. armed out of your own pocket.
Soldiers used their ‘cheap’ spear dispite having a - or several - sidearm(s). Including when they had access to good quality swords. And for a very good reason : spears were that good.
Soldiers were expensive. They nearly never were used as cannon fodders in the medieval period, or before. (it’s a more modern concept, emerging from the rise of firearms against which protection -armor- was way less effective)
Calvalry was even more expensive, no sane general would have sent his cavalry against a line of spears. Calvalry was used for arrassement on the flank. Either on units allready engaged against your own units, or to force enemy units to maneuver and open themselves to your own units.
Conscription has been nearly absent of medieval history of warfare. Mostly because farmers were way more valuable in cropping fields than battlefields ; you can’t win a war with a starving army.
War has been fought by regular/professional fighters, most of them mercenaries, during the medieval period. Roman legions were professional soldiers, complemented by large numbers of foreign mercenaries. So were Greek, Percian, Egyptian armies.
The exceptions were raiders, making a leaving of raiding (some times part-time like the vikings who raided outside of their local cropping season). Or Cast societies were warriors had their own cast.
Or you are the Uns. They don’t fit to any description, mostly because they didn’t felt bound follow any. And were doing pretty much whatever they fancied on the moment.
What you describe isn’t history.
What you describe is Hollywood’s medieval fantasy.
Your version of history is the movie “The 300.” It took Rome almost 500 years to establish a standing army. The early greek city states other than Sparta never had standing armies. In Feudal times tradesmen and skilled labor were more highly prized than farmers. You confuse the small group of armed professionals most had back then to what we would know today as policemen, as an army. Easy mistake.
It took Rome almost 500 years to establish a standing army.
Which is precisely why my wording has been “Roman Legions”. Because it describes precisily the standard army Rome had, once it had one, composed of proffesionnal roman troops and foreign mercenaries (“Auxiliaries” - some times up to 3/4 of a roman army, despite laws forbiding large use of auxiliaries)
The early greek city states other than Sparta never had standing armies.
They had, small ones. Generally complemented by large numbers of mercenaries and allied cities armies when major conflicts erupted, as i described it.
In Feudal times tradesmen and skilled labor were more highly prized than farmers.
In Feudal medieval Europe, Farmers were among the skilled laborer and valued as such.
Most often, the confusion comes from the other word used to describe farmers : “peasant”. And the deep misunderstanding of what was a peasant.
Generaly poeple think of peasants as slaves used like labor animals would. Pretty much following the image of the black slavery in northen america.
This couldn’t be further than reality.
Peasants pledged themselves to the service of a lord, they were not forced into service. In exchange of their service, the lord had duties toward peasants, among which protection and arbitration (justice). And if Peasants felt the lord next door was a better at its lordy dutties, they went for the lord next door.
You confuse the small group of armed professionals most had back then to what we would know today as policemen, as an army.
I don’t, if you read me again, you’d notice that what i describe are armies mostly manned by paid mercenaries (who were professionnals and, contrary to the modern representation and pejurativeness of the word, loyal to a lord/city/state). And its the very origin of the “soldier” word : they were paid a sold to fight.
(and and the small group of regular troops a lord would maintain would be known today as a militia rather than policemen)
Seriously? You dream sir. Peasants aka Serfs were tied to the land they worked and guess who owned the land? They were slaves in all but name. If you think they could just wander off to a new lord, you would be mistaken. Even though it would be nice to wish Feudalism was some kind of Camelot la la land, the harsh realities were just the opposite for the lower classes. After emancipation in the US slaves became “free” but the sharecropper system bound them to the land again. But we regress, since the OP was about the spear in a video game. “If I put this pointy rock on the end of this long stick, I can kill this boar before it guts me.” That’s the origin of your glamor weapon.
I think (historical accuracy aside) that it’s obvious that Spears need an adjustment. I like the idea of making it impossible to roll with a spear, as that would break the meta of “poke n roll” anyway. Or eating up more stamina is a keen idea as well. Either way, the reach of the spear needs to be balanced out with something else.
1 Like