Game Mechanics: Dual wield is not classic

[guineapig]

Originally Posted by Skaff [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I vaguely remember the offhand finally becoming independent after a certain point... but I have no clue when.

This is true, if you look at any current EQ forums they confirm this to be the case.

We just don't know when this change took place exactly and what the formula was before the change.

Personally I don't care either way, I just like doing EQ investigations. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[razorz]

Everytime your main hand hits, you have a chance to dual wield and double attack. This is why there is a "skill" for dual wielding, otherwise you would just train 1 point and it would work. This is also why you dont always swing your offhand, even if it only has an 18 delay while your main has a 22 delay.

It's probably reasonably simple to recode that part of the emu mechanics, if they wanted to do so. It's similar to a dice roll:

Main hand swings roll dice based on dual wield skill, high enough dice roll, offhand swings, another dice roll is done to check if main or offhand are going to double attack as well.

[YendorLootmonkey]

My understanding was you wanted the lowest delay weapon in your main hand to ensure the main-hand damage bonus got applied as many times as possible in a given time period (which caused the Moss-Covered Twig to be super-overpowered and consequently nerfed, and which is why rangers covet the rev whip.) Has this changed, not classic, or am I remembering incorrectly?

[guineapig]

Originally Posted by YendorLootmonkey [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My understanding was you wanted the lowest delay weapon in your main hand to ensure the main-hand damage bonus got applied as many times as possible in a given time period (which caused the Moss-Covered Twig to be super-overpowered and consequently nerfed, and which is why rangers covet the rev whip.) Has this changed, not classic, or am I remembering incorrectly?

I was also under the impression that this is part of what made the moss covered twig so potent back in the day.

[khanable]

edit: everything I was able to dig up more or less stated that the offhand being dependent on the main hand was a myth

[Graki]

I remenber an other thing : if you had 2 same weapons, they did same damage.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Originally Posted by Graki [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I remenber an other thing : if you had 2 same weapons, they did same damage.

Until level 28, when you start to receive the damage bonus on your main hand.

[Phallax]

Originally Posted by Akame [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The question (or complaint) that I think the original poster is trying to say is, was it a bug? or was it as "intended."

If it was a bug, Rogean has already said they'll be proactively fixing actual bugs in the game ahead of verant schedule because they should have been fixed by verant earlier. If it was working as intended, then we can pay attention to the OP and discuss classic vs not.

Frankly for this argument, I am with "not."

quote below answers if its a bug or not, probably the best explination of how it SHOULD work

Originally Posted by razorz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Everytime your main hand hits, you have a chance to dual wield and double attack. This is why there is a "skill" for dual wielding, otherwise you would just train 1 point and it would work. This is also why you dont always swing your offhand, even if it only has an 18 delay while your main has a 22 delay.

It's probably reasonably simple to recode that part of the emu mechanics, if they wanted to do so. It's similar to a dice roll:

Main hand swings roll dice based on dual wield skill, high enough dice roll, offhand swings, another dice roll is done to check if main or offhand are going to double attack as well.

[Akame]

I think this is a more thorough example of how it should work:

Edit: NM this is just someones assumption, I'll try and see if I can find one of Yoda's old posts with actual parse information on.