"Advanced" tier weapons.

Spear users are instantly **** IMO too.

I quit playing.

Trolololol.

In honesty, most spears can stab and have nothing else, which limits what you can do with them.

^This

Also, spears are terrible at stopping shields, just pull up a shield with some stability, and you've rendered them useless most likely.

Also, spears are terrible at stopping shields, just pull up a shield with some stability, and you've rendered them useless most likely.

Not if they spam 2H R2.

RenegadeCop wrote:

Also, spears are terrible at stopping shields, just pull up a shield with some stability, and you've rendered them useless most likely.

Not if they spam 2H R2.

Or walk up to you with poise and kick you.

I tried to discuss the finer points of the great scythe last page so don't blame me

havels great shield + corner = nullified spear and its easy to have a parrying tool on stand by if they pull out a shotel or bleed weapon.


anyway... howabout them daggers? so fast, so light and with cool movesets any "advanced" tricks that you guys would care to share? seriously though i've had a ton of fun using pricsy's dagger and the dst in the right hand with a shield and whip in the left slots, you can threaten opponents with the most infamous backstab tool in the biz and pressure people with bleed.

SKS and DWGR and LEO and semi-pro = win....unless you're a mage

^shameless mage plug

Honestly I'm unwilling to argue about spears.

Here is my blunt opinion: my final word.

If you think spears aren't overpowered, you're retarded, or the people you've fought that have used one are retarded. A properly built spear user can destroy any opponent, unless their own skill is lacking. Feel free to rep me down for that, or whatever you want. But I'm completely unwilling to argue with a brick wall.


But onto a different subject. Anyone ever really played around with the blue tearstone ring? I've discovered that if applied to a tank character, 800 physical defense makes dexterity weapons do about 40 damage a hit. The gold tracer only does 33's, with chaos blade hitting about 42. It's very good for a complete second life, and is one of the few occasions where I think a strength weapon has a clear advantage.

i actually have played with the bltsr but i only got to around 750 defense, still though the few times i wasn't killed before it activated the effect was noticeable, if only it activated at 30% then i'd say that the ring was equal to the rtsr..

The best thing about it is goodbye chip damage. You can use a Dark Hand or Cleansing Greatshield, and it's 80% to fire, lightning, magic, and physical is enough that no amount of physical AR below 950 can do chip damage, and no value below 500 magic/fire/lightning can chip you.

This makes chip damage almost non-existant, while also allowing you to -easily- get below your 380 HP activation threshold.

A properly built anything can beat any opponent, unless of course skill is lacking.

Jansports wrote:A properly built anything can beat any opponent, unless of course skill is lacking.

Your argument lacks depth in every meaning of the word. I could beat up a retarded monkey with a spoon, this does not mean a spoon is a great weapon to outfit our military with, and then tell anyone whom loses family that "If the foe was lacking skill, the spoon would be adequate"

Do not argue semantics with me.

IMO, "A properly built [X] user can destroy any opponent, unless their own skill is lacking," is actually a good standard for what should be considered balanced. The reason why spear is relatively so powerful and maybe why it's seen as OP is that there are a lot of weapons that have extremely lopsided match-ups because Dark Souls PvP balance is ****.

But probably I am reading this sentence differently than Rynn wrote it. I don't think that's the point he was trying to get at.

Okay. I'm going to use proof format because I think it applies well here.

There are players who want to win for the sake of winning.
These players choose to use a variety of weapons.

Therefore, a variety of weapons are seen as "the best option for winning"

Since spears are not the only weapon represented their relative power level is not dramatically higher than other weapons. They do not 'overpower' other weapon choices.

I am not a mentally handicapped person for thinking this.

She is correct.

And this is going in the quotes of the day.

Rynn wrote:...I could beat up a retarded monkey with a spoon, this does not mean a spoon is a great weapon to outfit our military with, and then tell anyone whom loses family that "If the foe was lacking skill, the spoon would be adequate"...

Jansports wrote:Okay. I'm going to use proof format because I think it applies well here.

There are players who want to win for the sake of winning.
These players choose to use a variety of weapons.

Therefore, a variety of weapons are seen as "the best option for winning"

Since spears are not the only weapon represented their relative power level is not dramatically higher than other weapons. They do not 'overpower' other weapon choices.

I am not a mentally handicapped person for thinking this.

I think this is really just a semantic difference. I think Rynn says OP and just means top-tier, which spears definitely are.

Saturday-Saint wrote:
I think this is really just a semantic difference. I think Rynn says OP and just means top-tier, which spears definitely are.

I kinda doubt it lol.

I agree a few of the spears are quite good, SKS MLBH Demon's DSS. But there is a line between among the best and strictly overpowered. There are simply too many weapons/builds that are capable of decimating people for one thing (such as spears or dark magic or weapon buffs) to be "better enough" than other options for me to consider them overpowered.

And I take literal person offense that I be called of all things a juvenile derogatory term for the mentally disabled for thinking so.

Jansports wrote:...And I take literal person offense that I be called of all things a juvenile derogatory term for the mentally disabled for thinking so...

Ya. But thats where I'd insert the "Rynn meant..." type of thing.

I dont think she would actually direct that comment at anyone outright (could be wrong), but the way she worded it was just %$#@ing brilliant.

I'm not one for using IRL scenarios for a game, but having a lot of military history in my family, and watching a couple friends die in Iraq....

I just like the reference.

Rynn, I hate to say it but the spoon comparison isn't logical or a counter to Jan. He said, and I'm sure you know, that a well built anything could defeat anything. I admit that's a bit short on the topic but then you compared it to a low quality "build" facing a drastically vulnerable opponent. Basically, I could beat an afk guy with a broken sword hilt if we're going Dark Souls. If you're of the opinion that spears are op, I'm fine with that and everyone else should respect that opinion too but to be so dismissive to any counter point and seemingly hostile from the get go is counterproductive. If you really don't want to argue with a brick wall no one is forcing you to.


Same goes for everyone actually.

Saturday-Saint wrote:

Jansports wrote:Okay. I'm going to use proof format because I think it applies well here.

There are players who want to win for the sake of winning.
These players choose to use a variety of weapons.

Therefore, a variety of weapons are seen as "the best option for winning"

Since spears are not the only weapon represented their relative power level is not dramatically higher than other weapons. They do not 'overpower' other weapon choices.

I am not a mentally handicapped person for thinking this.

I think this is really just a semantic difference. I think Rynn says OP and just means top-tier, which spears definitely are.

I suffer from using a word by it's meaning, rather than it's stigma.
Overpowered means "Advantaged", not "Game breakingly stupid and in dire need of a nerf". spears are advantaged, Katana's are equally advantaged.

^ That....exactly that.....Is what people should start saying. OP as a term needs a nerf and I think "advantaged" is perfect.

Saying xyz could beat abc in 123 situation is revolving lingo. Its therapist talk, and its chick**** if you ask me.

Its like saying, "I could leap tall buildings in a single bound...if I could jump that high."

Its making a comment in a way so that it cannot be rebutted. I hate it.

Also, spears are not equal to katanas. They are not much better, but they are better.

Overpowered:

Adjective


1. Smtn. that obtained more power than needed

2. Smtn. possessing too much power

First non World of Warcraft specific definition.

I don't think spears, along with everything else as viable as they are in pvp, have "too much power" they have an appropriate amount of power, as you admit there are different but equally powerful options (at least katanas, certainly a case can be made for several weapons/spells here)

Having equally powered options is literally the definition of balance. Spears are as strongs as Kats are as strong as Zweis are as strong falchions are as.... and so forth.

If you mean there is a host of overpowered options including (but not limited to) spears and katanas, then I think it's that you fundamentally disagree with how much power the player can aquire, which is a symptom of the game itself, not any specific aspect of the game.