Current Events > Poorly balanced weapons.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I'm a big fan of spears and staves

But for some reason like 80-90% of video games, if the have those weapons at all, they suck. :(

Not in Disgaea. The main character can usually use a spear well even if they are fist attackers.

It's always something I've found weird for sure. The spear has always been the simplest and most basic weapon humans have us in large numbers in our history. It's just a long pointy stick. You can fancy it up, but when you need weapons in large numbers you can go into the woods, find a long straight stick, sharpen it, and Bam you got yourself a spear.

Yeah I always gravitate to spears but unless you're playing dynasty warriors or something, they tend to be one of the more underwhelming weapons, especially in rpgs :(

Ive never had a problem as a katana wielder.

Spears aren't really designed for one-on-one ground combat, they're to combat cavalry. Tho every weapon in a game should be viable in some way

Spears and lances and whatnot are very good in Wrath of the Righteous for mounted Charge builds.

Like "one-shot the final boss" good.

Those overly powerful weapons that always cause tons of unintented splash damage to yourself, other characters and everything in the vicinity. But the majority of players seems to love these kind of weapons for some reason.

Big example: Fat Man from Fallout 3/New Vegas

Also, why aren't there playable spears in Skyrim? The series literally has a Daedric Artifact called the Spear of Bitter Mercy and when the Goblins CC added it, it was restricted to a Goblin follower.

marvel_fan333 posted...

Spears aren't really designed for one-on-one ground combat, they're to combat cavalry. Tho every weapon in a game should be viable in some way

Yeah, it might not be particularly realistic but I like them for the rule of cool and it's disappointing that they tend to be not good.

marvel_fan333 posted...

Spears aren't really designed for one-on-one ground combat, they're to combat cavalry. Tho every weapon in a game should be viable in some way

Spears are the first melee weapon, and overall they're the best melee weapon.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

Yeah, it might not be particularly realistic

It's actually very realistic. Spears straight up beat out any other standard melee weapon in most situations.

marvel_fan333 posted...

Spears aren't really designed for one-on-one ground combat, they're to combat cavalry. Tho every weapon in a game should be viable in some way

That's fundamentally untrue. In every sense of the word.

marvel_fan333 posted...

Spears aren't really designed for one-on-one ground combat, they're to combat cavalry. Tho every weapon in a game should be viable in some way

spears were the absolute most common weapon in the world for several thousand years. they were used against everything

Guns, even though they should be the alpha weapons without question they always end up weak as shit in most fantasy games.

Hell not just in most games but other media also.

ROBANN_88 posted...

spears were the absolute most common weapon in the world for several thousand years. they were used against everything

I'm pretty sure every culture invented the spear.

Like, universally, from what I remember everyone independently made spears and fried dough.

Akimbo 1887's in MW2 on launch.

It was a sniper, shotgun, and SMG rolled into one package

Lmao that Spears weren't the best melee weapon IRL

Guide posted...

It's actually very realistic. Spears straight up beat out any other standard melee weapon in most situations.

Really? I usually see them associated with infantry.

Well, in any case, I hate how they're usually underpowered anyway.

Then there are games with firearms where the pistols are the strongest options while assault rifles are inaccurate garbage in comparison.

The only reason other weapons evolved at all is because of the limitations of spears. Just because they were the first weapon doesn't make them the best any other person at very close range is better off with literally anything else.

Prismsblade posted...

Guns, even though they should be the alpha weapons without question they always end up weak as shit in most fantasy games.

Hell not just in most games but other media also.

I like when enemies take like eight shots to go down, or like one to three punches.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

Really? I usually see them associated with infantry.

Well, in any case, I hate how they're usually underpowered anyway.

Oh yeah spears go crazy dude.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

Really? I usually see them associated with infantry.

Yeah.

In combat, generally speaking the person who has the easiest time getting their weapony bits into the other person has the advantage.

It's pretty hard to top spears in the "I can get you before you get me" metric for melee weapons, and extremely hard to top that when it's a bunch of spears.

Prismsblade posted...

Guns, even though they should be the alpha weapons without question they always end up weak as shit in most fantasy games.

Hell not just in most games but other media also.

There was a time when the rate of fire was so slow and bayonets so crappy that if a bunch of dudes with melee weapons got within melee range of you you were kind of fucked. IE Highland Charges during the Jacobite Rebellions. Imagine hundreds, or thousands, of Scottish dudes charging you in wedge formations, usually downhill, firing the guns they had at you in a volley, dropping the guns, taking your volley in response by ducking as low to the ground as they could, then screaming and finishing the charge by taking the point of your bayonet on their targe (type of shield) and then gutting you with either a broadsword or dirk.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

Well, in any case, I hate how they're usually underpowered anyway.

that i can agree with
like it's wierd in DnD that spears have the weakest damage dice, but Halberds have one of the strongest

ROBANN_88 posted...

that i can agree with
like it's wierd in DnD that spears have the weakest damage dice, but Halberds have one of the strongest

I'd assume that one's just for balance purposes, since I think just about anyone can use a spear, except maybe dork-ass wizards.

If the cheapest and simplest of the Simple Weapons were as effective as they should be it'd throw off weapon damage progression.

IIRC Spears in D&D 5th edition at least have the Versatile tag. This makes them decent options for low level monks, since they count as a Monk Weapon and you can use the higher damage die when attacking with the spear before utilizing your Martial Arts die for the remaining attacks.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

Really? I usually see them associated with infantry.

Well, in any case, I hate how they're usually underpowered anyway.

It's partially a case of trying to balance out weapons in games that give you options, and the sword just... looking cooler and getting all the glory in mythos. Swords originated from knives just getting longer and longer, and, being almost entirely one vast blade, were also very expensive. Swords have practicality to them, sure, but being a long, expensive version of a common thing, they were almost certainly as much of a status flex as they were born of utility.

Low attack speed weapons are hardly ever balanced. Less chance to proc effects and whiffing an attack is more punishing.

DrizztLink posted...

I'd assume that one's just for balance purposes, since I think just about anyone can use a spear, except maybe dork-ass wizards.

If the cheapest and simplest of the Simple Weapons were as effective as they should be it'd throw off weapon damage progression.

Yeah, it's this. Why bother with martial weapon profs when you can just fuck people up with simple weapons.

sabin017 posted...

Low attack speed weapons are hardly ever balanced. Less chance to proc effects and whiffing an attack is more punishing.

Dragon's Dogma 2 did a lot wrong but Warrior is absolutely top tier unga bunga.