On the one hand is the image of a huge two handed weapon to smash everything in large blows which i love. I always felt that a burning 5 ft. hammer just emphasizes my authority more than 2 smaller weapons. And I think that skills like Cleave or Hammer of the Ancients will profit from a high single weapon dmg.
On the other hand its better to attack faster with less dmg per hit when facing a horde of enemies. Doing 20 dmg every 0.5 sec when fighting mobs with 100 hp is better than attacking for 80 dmgpoints every 2 sec. Also with two weapons equipped it's easier to combine effects. F.e. if you want enemies to be frozen, just change one of your weapons to something with the according effect. If you're wielding just one piece of equipment, well.. it's obvious that your aren't equal flexible.
Im gonna make my final decision after playing the barb for a few hours and figuring out if the critical hit effects are usefull or a high base dmg build is the way to go. Cause the traits, as we now them right now are encouraging dual wield for crit builds with http://diablowiki.net/Frenzied_Attacks and 2 hander for simple high damage http://diablowiki.net/Thunderous_Blows.|||Without knowing anything about the under the hood numbers, these sorts of conversations are mostly opinion and conjecture. I have the feeling that dual wielding will fall in line with the high speed "Berserker" style builds and the two handers will shine with the more ponderous "Juggernaut" style. These are sort of the 2 iconic archetypes i feel. Too early to guess though like i said. Especially without knowing more numbers and specific traits.|||2h look so much more BA than dual wield so thats what i'll definitely use.
|||I'm undecided, but leaning towards dual wield, with two big axes 
|||If world of warcraft has taught us anything, one handers sometimes end up just as big if not bigger than two handers. *cough thunderfury cough*I found that D2 had very little room for dual-weild play. Only 3 skills directly interacted with such, and one of them was for thrown weapons. Anything else ended up being better for two handers because most (except WW, IIRC) considered only the right hand weapon for its damage. Now, if everything had instead (as it should have!) worked as a double attack (ie, concentrate hitting with both weapons at once), we'd probably have had seen many more dual weilders. Yes, clearly, the disparity lied in the skills generally benefiting 2h more. Will it be the case for D3? I'm hoping they'll have a bit more foresight.|||Two handed of course. It feels much more barbaric than 1handers. As mentioned above the fiery 2 handed mace from 2008 gameplay video was amazing with that fire effects|||Having maxed out Hammer of Ancients and Fury charge with the various +dmg shouts I can't wait to smash into Mages/WDs/DHs in the arena and smack em with the biggest hammer in the game.|||Dualwielding two-handers ofc.
Nothing like swinging around thoose 2 Grandfathers in D2 :P|||I really hope that both dual wield and 2handed are represented equally in diablo 3. In D2 the skills pretty much leaned towards using 2handed weps besides for double swing and frenzy. Well frenzy barbarians are a viable build in Diablo 2, and fun to play, you didn't have much options. Whereas with a 2handed weapon there was more than 1 skill you could use to kill **** with. I think that they are going to have both in D3 represented more equally. At least i hope so|||Blizzards want to accomplish the same, so you are good to go.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html...25&sid=3000#24
No comments:
Post a Comment