Braver Class Talk

[Zipzo]

Eh, all I'm saying is that it's not like you have to keep it on all the time for normal trash enemies that you'll be able to face roll even without average stance.

personally I think the whole idea behind average stance is terrible, it literally doesn't have a downside or a condition to it outside of not being able to use weak stance at the same time, it's just a pure damage boost. Even though it's multipliers are lower it ends up being useful because it doesn't turn you glassy or nerf your damage when you hit from the wrong direction, or the wrong spot. (though I think the changes to fury stance made it have almost the same issues).

I seriously think it would have been better for average stance to only boost damage against non-weakpoints, or even decrease damage TO weakpoints but have a higher base multiplier.

You definitely don't have to have W.Stance up, you're just missing out on 50% possible extra damage given you take the measures to fulfill Weak Stance (and 30% if you'd have taken A.Stance without any requirement). Whether that's a big deal or not to you is your choice to decide but mathematically it's pretty significant.

It's no secret that A.Stance is a boring skill. I mean it's called Average Stance, what can we really expect.

My postulation is simply that the Katana PAs that see the most use (and most certainly will after the buff) will not benefit from Weak Stance in combat situations as often as it will Average Stance.

If you or anyone really wants to argue that Hien Tsubaki or Asigiri are great PAs for hitting weak spots then this conversation may as well be about Teddy Bears. When you're using the Katana you want the freedom to attack from whatever angle you please. Adding a conditional requisite to your damage (that corresponds with a huge chunk of your damage mind you) that entails you can only do damage on exposed weak spots just makes you weak overall in my opinion.

[gigawuts]

Well, it's less like average is for faceroll and more like it's a set of bonuses you cannot have while using weak stance. I personally would've rather seen passive bonuses with extra bonuses to non-weak points, like maybe...

Average Bonus
+10% Weak Damage
+12% Non-weak Damage
Average Bonus 2
(Same)
Average Bonus Charge
+10% Weak Charge Damage
+12% Non-Weak Charge Damage

Total: 21% weak point, 25% non-weak point, 33% weak point charged, 40% non-weak point charged

Weak Stance
+30% Weak Damage
Disables Average Skills
Weak Stance Up
(same as it is now)
Weak Stance Charge
(same as it is now)

But this is counter to the system we already have in place, which works the same way via stances that override eachother.

[otaku998]

Hope they adds the other missing skills into ST soon (if they ever plan to). Curious what they want to do with the whole Crit and Bomb or wtv it is called

[Xaelouse]

Double stance builds are dead.

More like they're gonna be the same as they've always been, and just as (or more) effective and more compatible with KC. Maybe if there's a weapon with good atk and weapon potential that boosts sakura, I'd consider going full average.

[gigawuts]

Yeah this whole average vs. weak stance is really pedantic and is only the focus of discussions because there's simply nothing else to talk about. When they add real skills with real abilities is when real discussion can commence. What I'm really interested in is the Critical Bonus skill, which has an attribute for PP of 1-10 based on the SP you spend in it. If that actually grants you bonus PP for each crit as the stat implies that would be awesome.

Then there are other skills, plus when fighter gets its new secondary stance up skills and chase advance 2 a real discussion on subbing options can begin as well (hunter has no new damage skills on the visible horizon, which we should all be thankful for).

[Zipzo]

Well, it's less like average is for faceroll and more like it's a set of bonuses you cannot have while using weak stance. I personally would've rather seen passive bonuses with extra bonuses to non-weak points, like maybe...

Average Bonus
+10% Weak Damage
+12% Non-weak Damage
Average Bonus 2
(Same)
Average Bonus Charge
+10% Weak Charge Damage
+12% Non-Weak Charge Damage

Total: 21% weak point, 25% non-weak point, 33% weak point charged, 40% non-weak point charged

Weak Stance
+30% Weak Damage
Disables Average Skills
Weak Stance Up
(same as it is now)
Weak Stance Charge
(same as it is now)

But this is counter to the system we already have in place, which works the same way via stances that override eachother.

I would have much preferred a skill tree similar to that of the fighter where both stances are taken because I actually enjoy the stance dance dynamic, it adds a (sometimes cumbersome) detail to game play it is undeniably more interesting than the Hunter tree, so it's not like I have certain vendetta against either skill given I'm maining bow or katana at the time.

The tree just doesn't have enough points. That's where things get stickier than your single dad in his 40s' house. If you want to be proficient with either weapon you have to dunk the points and go all in. Spreading them evenly is simply neglecting that you are making yourself useless for any kind of content that requires good damage to carry your spot (all of it).

If we want to put the threshold of this conversation on what is "fine", then there's no reason to really make a decision. You can probably leave your tree empty & blank and still do fine.

More like they're gonna be the same as they've always been, and just as (or more) effective and more compatible with KC. Maybe if there's a weapon with good atk and weapon potential that boosts sakura, I'd consider going full average.

Yeah no. Not sure how a double stance build becomes better with KC when nothing was changed relating to KC or the stances. You're simply not making the most of your damage if you don't get the charge skill. That's like not taking one of the Fury Stance Up skills.

[Kondibon]

You definitely don't have to have W.Stance up, you're just missing out on 50% possible extra damage given you take the measures to fulfill Weak Stance (and 30% if you'd have taken A.Stance without any requirement). Whether that's a big deal or not to you is your choice to decide but mathematically it's pretty significant.

It's no secret that A.Stance is a boring skill. I mean it's called Average Stance, what can we really expect.

My postulation is simply that the Katana PAs that see the most use (and most certainly will after the buff) will not benefit from Weak Stance in combat situations as often as it will Average Stance.

If you or anyone really wants to argue that Hien Tsubaki or Asigiri are great PAs for hitting weak spots then this conversation may as well be about Teddy Bears. When you're using the Katana you want the freedom to attack from whatever angle you please. Adding a conditional requisite to your damage (that corresponds with a huge chunk of your damage mind you) that entails you can only do damage on exposed weak spots just makes you weak overall in my opinion.

I'm not even trying to dispute that Average stance is the better choice for katanas.

I'm beginning to realize that the reason I, and a lot of other people, dissagree with you so much is probably just a case of pragmatism vs idealism. A lot of us talk about how we WANT the game to work, and what we'd like to see done to have it work that way, while you simply look for what works best with what we have.

I don't think either side is wrong but think it might explain why we have such a hard time agreeing on stuff.

[Zipzo]

I'm not even trying to dispute that Average stance is the better choice for katanas.

I'm beginning to realize that the reason I, and a lot of other people, dissagree with you so much is probably just a case of pragmatism vs idealism. A lot of us talk about how we WANT the game to work, and what we'd like to see done to have it work that way, while you simply look for what works best with what we have.

I don't think either side is wrong but think it might explain why we have such a hard time agreeing on stuff.

This is like the the most insightful thing I've ever read on PSO-W in regards to me on game mechanics. I'm sure others may disagree entirely but I'll take it.

[NoiseHERO]

This is like the the most insightful thing I've ever read on PSO-W in regards to me on game mechanics. I'm sure others may disagree entirely but I'll take it.

If you were as socially capable as kondibom you've probably would've saved yourself at least 80 pages of the arguing you've done on this site, huh! 8D

[Husq]

I'm not even trying to dispute that Average stance is the better choice for katanas.

I think it is really about how close combat weapons collide with hitboxes in the game.
Most of the time if I try hitting a weak spot, which is exposed in front of my character, there is a high chance that it connects to another hitbox. Example would be those garongo. Flip them and try hitting between their legs, sometimes you hit their head or tail, instead of their belly.

I actually did went with weak stance on my katana build, like probably most people, before being informed that charge attacks don't work with katana PAs. It wasn't a big deal at first, because it still works with hunter weapon PAs, until I noticed that they have changed some hitboxes on some enemies. Before the ep2 update you can hit gilnas opened core with assault buster with no problem. Since that update, it is different. Instead of hitting the core, even visually, you actually hit the whole upper half, meaning the weak stance bonus doesn't kick in. If they tweak the hitboxes a bit in favour for close range classes, weak stance would be really good option and doesn't need to be turned on and off.