|
|
|
stranger
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
I've seen this brought up maybe once before, but I haven't seen any sort of progress or discussion on it.
I am currently unsatisfied with how dual wielding a melee weapon with a wand doesn't allow you to use the melee weapon when close enough to an enemy.
I'd like to see this changed at some point. It was the same in the first game and was slightly disappointed then too, and was hoping it would be different this time around.
Anyone feeling the same?
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2014
|
You should be able to use it if you put it in the main hand. Thats the weapon slot on the left.
Not sure if switching weapons from hand to hand costs Ap in combat.
Try it out and see if its workable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
Thanks for the suggestion. I'll give that a shot sometime today and update.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
Update: It still costs AP swapping items from main-hand and off-hand.
I'd love to be able to utilize a dual wand/melee weapon combo to be able to do damage based on the physical/magic armor the enemy has.
Is this a known issue to the devs? I'd hope this doesn't fly under the radar, it's something I'd love to see implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Aug 2014
|
Wand and melee weapon has always been a silly combo I wish worked properly. Not sure if it ever will be viable at all, but if it just functioned at all it would be cool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
Wand and melee weapon has always been a silly combo I wish worked properly. Not sure if it ever will be viable at all, but if it just functioned at all it would be cool. I think having the diversity on the fly to be able to go ranged/melee and physical/magic damage would be fun to play. But that's kind of how I feel, I don't know if it's even a good way to play, but I'd love for it to just work properly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2014
|
Update: It still costs AP swapping items from main-hand and off-hand. Ok but, when you put a sword in your main hand does it work in close melee range?
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Oct 2016
|
Sounds like an interesting tactic, I hope they change it so it works. It almost certainly wouldn't be hard at all either, just gotta make sure you don;t accidentally make the dagger able to attack at the range of the wand in the process.
Chaotic neutral, not chaotic stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2017
|
Larian should really consider adding a skill called Wand of Magus for people who put wand in off hand next to a melee weapon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
Update: It still costs AP swapping items from main-hand and off-hand. Ok but, when you put a sword in your main hand does it work in close melee range? I believe it still costs AP, but I'll specifically test that some time today hopefully.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2017
|
Update: It still costs AP swapping items from main-hand and off-hand. Ok but, when you put a sword in your main hand does it work in close melee range? I believe it still costs AP, but I'll specifically test that some time today hopefully. I tested this in the past. With sword in main it's standard melee attack. With wand in main it's standard magic attack. It costs 1 ap to swap their position,then 2 more to execute a basic attack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Mar 2017
|
Update: It still costs AP swapping items from main-hand and off-hand. Ok but, when you put a sword in your main hand does it work in close melee range? I believe it still costs AP, but I'll specifically test that some time today hopefully. I tested this in the past. With sword in main it's standard melee attack. With wand in main it's standard magic attack. It costs 1 ap to swap their position,then 2 more to execute a basic attack. That is so ass-backwards. Should be regular 2AP to attack, if not in range to melee, melee attack misses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2016
|
Update: It still costs AP swapping items from main-hand and off-hand. Ok but, when you put a sword in your main hand does it work in close melee range? I believe it still costs AP, but I'll specifically test that some time today hopefully. Attacking always costs AP, and unless you're using a crossbow always costs 2 AP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
[/quote]
Attacking always costs AP, and unless you're using a crossbow always costs 2 AP. [/quote]
We were determining if switching weapons from main-hand to off-hand costing AP, not attacks costing AP.
[/quote]
That is so ass-backwards. Should be regular 2AP to attack, if not in range to melee, melee attack misses.
[/quote]
If they made it contextual based on the distance you were from an enemy, I think that would be fine
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2016
|
We were determining if switching weapons from main-hand to off-hand costing AP, not attacks costing AP.
I thought that was already determined, up above. Where someone says that it does in fact cost AP to do??? Or I'm misreading...
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
We were determining if switching weapons from main-hand to off-hand costing AP, not attacks costing AP.
I thought that was already determined, up above. Where someone says that it does in fact cost AP to do??? Or I'm misreading... We first tested if it cost AP to swap items between hands, and then tested if it still cost AP to switch hands within melee range. Both cases it costs AP
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2016
|
I don't see why it'd be different if enemies were close to you or not. If it costs AP to switch weapons from hand to hand, it's gonna do so no matter what. That seems fairly obvious to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
I don't see why it'd be different if enemies were close to you or not. If it costs AP to switch weapons from hand to hand, it's gonna do so no matter what. That seems fairly obvious to me. I agree, but that's what Hiver wanted me to test *shrug*
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Oct 2016
|
It's not a matter of determining what is, it is a statement of how we want it to be. I can see the reasoning that it should not cost extra to use a weapon that is already in your hand. This kind of strategy doesn't interest me but probably should probably not be penalized for those who wish to employ it. Maybe there is some problem that I'm not seeing? The biggest argument I can see against this change (removing the need to swap weapons to use the off-hand) is that they are so close to release and are almost certainly time crunched as it is right now.
Chaotic neutral, not chaotic stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2016
|
It's not a matter of determining what is, it is a statement of how we want it to be. I can see the reasoning that it should not cost extra to use a weapon that is already in your hand. This kind of strategy doesn't interest me but probably should probably not be penalized for those who wish to employ it. Maybe there is some problem that I'm not seeing? The biggest argument I can see against this change (removing the need to swap weapons to use the off-hand) is that they are so close to release and are almost certainly time crunched as it is right now. I honestly think it's just simply overlooked. Like I said, I hardly see people bring this up so it's really not a pressing issue for the devs to get it fixed. I'd love for it to get addressed as some point though.
|
|
|
|
|
