Dual Wielding Speed

[stars2heaven]

After looking at the 2 primary arguments being made here I think I have made a decision on who to agree with. But let's just go over the reasons for fun.

 

Pro Blocking with DW:

 

1. Makes good RP sense (I can agree with this. Being able to parry seems reasonable.)

 

2. Is better balanced. (Cant say I agree here. Taking the other options into consideration makes this look like the glass cannon approach. I think that giving it even a limited ability to block could mean it gets too much without having to give up enough. That is a maybe though since I haven't played the game yet. I may change my mind later.)

 

3. fighting without blocking makes the game play less interesting. (this one seems more opinionated than the rest. I don't see how it is objectively less interesting, though I can see how someone might think it is. I read one person say it comes down to just trading blows, but I don't see any difference between DW and any other combat style if that is the case, they all come down to who can bring their opponents hp down first.)

 

 

So I guess Im gona have to side with the anti-blocking side for the time being. But my rp side says that I want parrying, and if I later decide that it isn't too imbalancing then I will be looking for a mod that enables that ability.

[falloutreign]

On Nate, I am sure he has been here longer than me and i'm sure he has been a valuable asset in the past but how is this constructive:

"Then don't dual wield. It's really easy. Or, complain...also an option. Or mod it out and become OP...it's a single player game, what do I care? "

 

I admit to falsely interpreting the "what do I care" part and I apologise for that, but being told not to do something because I don't like it rather than discussing it is rather poor form.

Your criticizing someone's criticisms is just as off-topic and non-constructive to the thread, and it just goes in a circle. Soon enough half the posts are just about two or more people telling the other that their post isn't useful, but, ironically those saying such a thing are guilty of it.

 

You've had some very valid points, I do not completely disagree with you. But take my reply that you put in quotes into context, you said "This, bethesda is bullshitting when they said they did it for balance reasons. If they wanted to balance it they could simply make it you needed to have steep perk requirements or dual wielding did less damage. They only possible logical reason I can see that dual wield woudn't have block is console limitations. edit: For the post above me, not being able to parry when dual wielding in a single player rpg IS stupid." Some potential validity in the first part of your post, but, it was superfluous. Not to mention the lack of reasoning behind your edit.

 

I suggest that if you have not yet, read the rest of the comments that others have provided when it comes to balance. Consider someone else's point of view, it only stings a little bit. ;)

 

If you're talking about me criticizing your fanboy, there was _nothing_ constructive about his post, it was a blatant flame. I think his post was 100% useless to the topic at hand but if anyone disagrees I am more than willing to try to understand their reasons why.

 

There was reasoning behind my edit, it wasn't as clear as it should have been though, granted; apologies for that. The key word being rpg, trying to roleplay a finesse based character with no parry I feel is rather stupid. I'm not as bigoted as you may think, I have read the majority of the posts in this thread, granted not all.

 

Most the arguments against that I have seen consist of two things, variety and balance. Balance I have already given my views as to why I disagree with it as being a valid reason. Variety is all well and good and I have no problems with it. What I have the concerns for is how interactive dual wield combat will be. So I don't even disagree with half the arguments in this thread.

 

And no it didn't sting, thanks for the concern though :)

[Lowk]

Can you guys chill, please? I'm actually very interested in this discussion; a lot of us seem to be. It would be a whole lot more constructive without the flaming...

 

Anyway, I've already made my points on the matter, and there seem to be a lot of good arguments for each side a few pages back...I'm still of the opinion that things are good as-is.