(Ignore the stupid term I'm going to attempt to make, it just makes this a whole lot easier for me to explain my point
)
To go along with the point about "cheap" weapons such as Spears, I honestly think that the problem with them is that there is no "true" counter to them. A true counter is something that is specifically designed to stop something else. It could be something such as a long range weapon, an armor piece, a tactic, whatever.
For example, Great Magic Barrier is a true counter since it is specifically designed to stop magic. The rings that add defense to either magic defense, fire defense and lightning defense are true counters too, since they're meant to block something specific. Arguably, I could say that Bows are true counters to different play styles, since they can easily deal decent damage from afar (Such as facing a Greataxe user), or, at the very least, deal with different situations that other weapons might have problems dealing with.
However, something like having high poise would simply just be considered a counter, since it generally helps with everything, but sometimes not to the extent of a true counter. My opinion is that the more "cheap" tactics don't necessarily have any true counters to them, or at least, there are less counters available to use against them. The Spear, stops Bow users since they can poke and still have decent range. But, Spears are also extremely effective in close range too. So, what are you supposed to do to stop them? By using a counter, such as backstabbing, since generally every weapon can do that. But, the Spear user can do that back to you too.
If the Spear user follows the same guidelines that other players are told when trying to "counter" Spear users, the Spear has a good advantage. Such as stacking poise or roll-stabbing along with using a Spear. The fight pretty much devolves into whoever is more skillful at "cheap" tactics.
My point is, that there is nothing that completely (or at least, viably) negates the supposed "cheap" tactics. Sure, poise and roll-stabbing can help the situation, but it doesn't stop the Spear. Even then, the Spear user can have it too.
(Warning, this example is by no means meant to be perfectly balanced. It's merely to show my point.
)
Let's say for example, that the devs added Flails to the game. Flails, can outrange Spears and break their guard if they're poking, no matter what. That would practically mean that poking wouldn't be very viable against a Flail. However, Flails wouldn't hardly do any poise damage, and they would have a terrible stagger if the player misses. Also, their whole moveset focuses on mid range fighting anyways.
Essentially, something close range could easily beat the crap out of a Flail since the Flail isn't very good for short range.
Neither of those two weapons would have a good standing against
all weapons, such as how the Spear is now. Since, the Spear would have a true counter to it finally, with the Flails true counter being close range combat, since I'm also going to add that they can't BS.
Another thing, could be that since Spear users also have access to these counters, that it basically just comes down to how unprepared or unskilled they are compared to their opponent. When both players have stacked poise and can roll-stab, that pretty much negates those. Even then, those don't stop Spears.
If the Spear's true counter is something that a Spear user can't have while using a Spear, that's part of what could also make it a true counter (if it's effective against the Spear, anyways).
Bowdownbe4me wrote:
...When facing a flippy spear, there is no better alternative then to turtle behind a decent shield with a rapier. They won't be able to pose you any threat from their preferred range because their weapon has no dead-angle potential. This forces them into a bs fishing competition, where you have the upper hand with a weapon that will out damage their spear bs...
While you would definitely have the upperhand in a BSing competition, you'd have no chance to BS against someone of equal skill. The Spear out ranges the Rapier, thus eliminating the need to go into the Rapier's range. The Rapier is basically just a short Spear, with nothing over the Spear other than something that the Spear can viably defend against.
Animaaal wrote:
There is nothing wrong with "playing to win". There is something wrong in saying Dark Souls is balanced enough that no builds would suffer from this logic.
Pretty much this exactly. While there are all these counters and whatnot, you can't possibly have access to all of them due to limitations.
Dutchy wrote:- Spoiler:
Derailing from the current argument. I like to winge a lot on the forum (As some probably know) I talk about Dark Magic, spears, Miracles, Weapons, shields, tactics, bows etc. As being OP on a regular basis. But that's usually the end of it. I sit back and go, well, it's in the game, so there's no point whinging. But the way I see it, PTW focuses on the mindset of players. I was once called a scrub simply for calling something OP. Now, I use a shotel, Greatbows. These have been called OP before. Do I think they are OP? Nope. Do the people I call out think their tactic is OP? Nope. (Well with some exceptions) Then how do we discern what is OP? Someone else hit the nail on the head. Consensus. Within these forums, we convene to try and make a fair game out of Dark Souls. Maybe that's just how people are, to want things balanced. The devout PTW groupies make up the minority, and so I understand why they come off as grudging. I would honestly understand the PTW mentality, and maybe even try it for a time, if it's representatives didn't come off as such elitists. I understand that being called "Elitist" comes with a negative connotation, and you might argue that it is hypocritical. I think the main difference between A scrub and an elitist, and this is supported by PTW, is that Elitist will force their views onto others. We "Scrubs" do this as well (through the banning and disliking of certain tactics) But this does not mean we inhibit another's Gameplay. We simply think of it as being OP. Linking back to the consensus, if enough people think this way. It will be banned from TOURNEY PvP. It may be looked down upon outside of tourney's, but scrubs do not down right discredit elitist thinking. But from the elitist mentality, I am not experiencing the full game. This is a baseless argument; Every one experiences the full game, it's the experience and lack/gain of self justice we get from it. Just because I don't Dark Bead spam others to death, does not mean that I am not experiencing the full game, nor does it mean that the people who don't cut through people's shields with a shotel like I do aren't experiencing the whole game.Saturday, you come off as a bit too brash for my liking.
And that's my two cents ^_^
I might be nitpicking when I say this, but having more people complain about something does not equal it being OP.
Realistically, they would usually be right. But, what if their opinions are wrong? Is it really OP?
To sum up my entire thing, we're trying to make Dark Souls into something it's not. A balanced PvP game. Hence why the player-made rules exist. Dark Souls CAN be a competitive game, but it is not by itself. At least, not a balanced one.
Eh, maybe I'm just rambling. Since I seem to be extremely redundant with my posts.
by Saturday-Saint Sun Apr 28, 2013 12:41 pm
