Maul Nerf?



  • I don’t think a direct nerf to the maul was Torn Banner’s intent, but the recent changes to Man-at-Arms’ blunt damage resist causes torso shots to not one shot anymore. I disagree with this change and would like to kindly ask if something can be done to bring back the damage potential for my hammer of slaying in all its glory. The maul relies heavily on its ability to kill in a single blow, don’t take away its primary perk!

    Also, I am pretty interested in hearing what other people think about this change as well!



  • I thought it was fine how it was before the patch. Reliably kill archers and MAAs that are clumsy enough to get hit by the slowest, shortest twohander in the game and occasionally oneshot a careless vanguard.

    It’s not that big a deal, I just liked being able to use the maul effectively against any class and only switching to a secondary when facing someone who counters it well. I feel it’s a bit harsh to nerf a weapon’s versatility when it has such universal downsides as speed and reach, I shouldn’t have to specialize when nobody needs to specialize against me.



  • I totally agree, there is no reason for a MAA to survive a maul hit. If the most agile class manages to get hit by that big slow thing they deserve death.



  • Hammeh needs to return to its former glory. Having to 1 shot MaA is already a challenge, especially if they’re using a very fast weapon and spamming in your face. 2 shotting them is nearly impossible, unless they’re unfamiliar with the Hammeh.



  • I have to agree Slaughter. They inadvertently made the Maul an even worse choice in 1vs1s and team fights :\



  • Thanks, everyone for the feedback! I’m really glad to know at least some people agree with me on this! Hammer Time!!



  • My basic setup was Maul and HWS. The later i only used against skilled MAA with shields.

    I 'm having a real bad time against MAA now:

    -HWS is total rubbish now

    -really hard to land swings around the enemys shield with the maul wont benefit in one hitting anymore.



  • I don’t see how anyone can think it was fine before. Every time I saw somebody with the maul they were going somewhere around 30-3 every game. That seems a bit much to me. 1 hit in the head at most, seeing as 2-handers are extremely easy to use.



  • @Baskyn:

    I don’t see how anyone can think it was fine before. Every time I saw somebody with the maul they were going somewhere around 30-3 every game. That seems a bit much to me. 1 hit in the head at most, seeing as 2-handers are extremely easy to use.

    It was fine before… I’ve been in plenty of games where maul users are dopes who can’t hit the broad side of a barn and also get overwhelmed by faster weapons… You must have been in game with either people who didn’t know how to avoid the maul, or someone who actually knew how to use the thing…



  • I am seriously missing the option “Leave it as it is right now”. Having a biased vote already (excluding the current state) I expect nobody here to think about the question whether it might be better this way.



  • @Evil:

    I am seriously missing the option “Leave it as it is right now”. Having a biased vote already (excluding the current state) I expect nobody here to think about the question whether it might be better this way.

    Actually “one shot lights in head only” might as well be the current state. Besides, I’d like to know 2 good reasons mauls shouldn’t one shot MAA in torso…



  • @Evil:

    I am seriously missing the option “Leave it as it is right now”. Having a biased vote already (excluding the current state) I expect nobody here to think about the question whether it might be better this way.

    Option 4 reflects the current situation. Option 3 is how it was before the 10% blunt resistance buff on MAA. We’re here to figure out if this really specific buff that mostly affects a small amount of knights was really needed.



  • As an expertise within Two-handed blunt Knight, I’d have to say that the Maul is good where it is right now, no need for any nerf nor buff in my opinion. Its a very hard weapon to use, with a big reward if you manage to pull it off.



  • It would be nice if a developer can come in an confirm if the hammeh nerf was intended or not.

    To those guys who say the hammeh is OP, try actually using one in game with players of the same game experience as you. Contrary to what Baskyn says, it is much more difficult to use compared to say the 2 handed swords, and it quickly punishes the user who messes up. Those whom you see being successful like the 30-3 example, which is likely exaggerated or an anomaly, maybe you should factor in his level of game experience and the lack of his opponents’ experience.

    Hope to get official confirmation on this.



  • @jc_chan:

    It would be nice if a developer can come in an confirm if the hammeh nerf was intended or not.

    To those guys who say the hammeh is OP, try actually using one in game with players of the same game experience as you. Contrary to what Baskyn says, it is much more difficult to use compared to say the 2 handed swords, and it quickly punishes the user who messes up. Those whom you see being successful like the 30-3 example, which is likely exaggerated or an anomaly, maybe you should factor in his level of game experience and the lack of his opponents’ experience.

    Hope to get official confirmation on this.

    I’m not 100% sure they would just say “yes, we inteded to kill the main benefit of using the maul”…



  • Well, you can’t take maul that serious, because it’s somehow joke weapon (like quarterstaff or flails). Sure, it’s fun for smashing heads on that ffa with low lvls but in semi-competitive play every decent knight use sword of war/longsword.



  • @rumpelstiltskin:

    Well, you can’t take maul that serious, because it’s somehow joke weapon (like quarterstaff or flails). Sure, it’s fun for smashing heads on that ffa with low lvls but in semi-competitive play every decent knight use sword of war/longsword.

    lol no, maul is somewhat viable in the right scenarios, always depends on the player and the playstyle

    other then that, grand mace is probably the best knight 2h right now for the fast overhead playing style



  • @CRUSHED:

    @rumpelstiltskin:

    Well, you can’t take maul that serious, because it’s somehow joke weapon (like quarterstaff or flails). Sure, it’s fun for smashing heads on that ffa with low lvls but in semi-competitive play every decent knight use sword of war/longsword.

    lol no, maul is somewhat viable in the right scenarios, always depends on the player and the playstyle

    Daggers are also viable, what’s your point?



  • @rumpelstiltskin:

    @CRUSHED:

    @rumpelstiltskin:

    Well, you can’t take maul that serious, because it’s somehow joke weapon (like quarterstaff or flails). Sure, it’s fun for smashing heads on that ffa with low lvls but in semi-competitive play every decent knight use sword of war/longsword.

    lol no, maul is somewhat viable in the right scenarios, always depends on the player and the playstyle

    Daggers are also viable, what’s your point?

    you said that maul is somewhat a joke weapon, when its completly fine in anything over 5on5, where you oneshot flinched enemys easily and support your team by draining stamina and if someone decides to hit trade, he loses



  • With the blunt resistance increase for MaA Torn Bonner really did something….stupid. Right now it is mathematically impossible to have the maul one shot MaA to the body without the same attack one shotting knights with a headshot. The only solution would be lowering the head shot modifier for melee attacks (without introducing independant damage values for weapons/classes/hitzones). But this would mess up the game even more. This is the worst balance change TB did up to this day. I told them this would happen as soon as I read the first beta patchlog, but nobody cared…most likely they won’t care now.


Log in to reply