2-hand weapons were used against heavy armor, as one-handed bounced on: 2-handed should be AP weapons.
As has been said already, they make excellent flankers and shock troops. They're also useful for looking scary. If you're like every other modder out there, you like to, well, mod things. Add the trait to your two-handed units which makes them scary to units around them and you've turned them into effective terror weapons whos charge can break lines. Voila, you've given them more depth on the battle field while not straying so far out of the realm of plausibility,
2h wep users (especially 2h swordsmen) are shock troopers (like berserkers for Isen) they are used in sync with your frontline troops (1h wep w/ shield) who hold the enemy in place while you move around to the flank and charge into the enemy and cut them to pieces. simple.
Or are you referring to a strictly in-game standpoint?
You mean to an armoured opponent?
I am cooking up a system that dispenses with AP (although I think it might still be needed for the estoc and the war hammer), and I'll put it up for review in the SS forum.
Weapons that were designed to defeat armour were heavy at one end in order to transfer more energy to the body of the enemy. All that means is a bigger attack number. The hard part is balancing that with defense stat and attack delay and animation.
Two Handed swords in TATW are some of the most fun units you can play with.
I mean, have you seen Isenard Beserkers vs Olog Hai?
It would not be a decent substitute - it would be the correct way of doing it. It's slapping AP on weapons that's the easy way out.
"I have to ask why you want to do it that way. The requisite balancing seems overly complicated."
Because I like things to be as good as possible.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)