Cold Iron Vanquisher and Iron Slug: Underpowered?
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 22:13
Or am I just using them wrong?
I see no situation in which a pathetically weak Leviathan Blade with a UV for high damage bonus vs undead can be better than a standard Leviathan Blade or a Normal/Elemental damage weapon. It just has no versatility. If you keep one on-hand exclusively for use against undead enemies, you could easily fulfil that purpose with one of the 5* Brandish weapons or an Avenger. If you use it as your main weapon, a Leviathan Blade is honestly more useful, has greater versatility, and does better in general than a Vanquisher except when up against the undead. The Vanquisher does nothing better than any other blade, and is in fact weaker than its rival blade against all enemy types except undead, which other blades already do better.
The Iron Slug is also weak. The Valiance does better damage faster, and doesn't require the player to stand still. The charge attack is also much more useful. It also loses its ability to Stun except with a charge attack, either that or it's just exceedingly rare for the stun to proc compared to a Mega Magnus. This weapon is almost a downgrade from the Mega Magnus, with the only bonus being that its damage type changes to the universal "Normal" damage type, something that the Valiance already covers much more efficiently and with far less movement penalty.
So I don't get it.
Are they underpowered, or am I doing something wrong here?
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 22:26
#2
I like the weapons, and I
I like the weapons, and I enjoy using them. And they're better than not using weapons at all, which is definitely a good thing.
But I thought the philosophy of the game was that a player could use any weapons and not be punished for their personal taste? Being the weakest link in a Vanaduke party because you like the cool-looking sword with chains on it is punishing someone for their taste.
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 23:06
#3
Yes, but
But they're not so weak that you'll be hurting the team by using them.
I totally agree that they don't perfectly match the game's philosophy, but sometimes their lack of power or lack of use is exaggerated.
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 23:16
#4
Some day my Cold Iron
Some day my Cold Iron Vanquisher will get some love.
Some day.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 00:41
#5
i love every inch of steel of
i love every inch of steel of my very high attack speed UV cold iron vanquisher. Good damage and defense (more attack speed = faster shielding after a swing) vs any kind of monster, and a little bonus vs the annoying undeads.
I fracking love it <3
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 02:19
#6
"i love every inch of steel
"i love every inch of steel of my very high attack speed UV cold iron vanquisher. Good damage and defense (more attack speed = faster shielding after a swing) vs any kind of monster, and a little bonus vs the annoying undeads.
I fracking love it <3"
That's great and all, but the lesson here is that, with the same UV, the Leviathan Blade will always beat CIV. It makes the CIV pretty much useless.
Basically all that really needs to be done to fix it is up the bonus to undead, perhaps doubling it or more. Since it's pretty much only good at one thing, it should be the best at that thing.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 02:28
#7
Awesomest, you should be a PR
Awesomest, you should be a PR guy! Being underpowered comparatively (which is generally speaking how power is measured; against a baseline) is still being underpowered, the role is fulfilled by something else better in everyway (for the same price), there is no trade off, reasonable pros for the cons, simply decreased functionality.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 04:08
#8
Comparisons
Comparing apples to apples, the CIV does deal less raw damage than Leviathan Blade, but from what I've heard (I don't own one myself), all other things being equal, the difference isn't enough to require even an extra hit with the CIV to kill most enemies (can't say it's true for all of them with certainty). I think players will naturally rank equipment even if the developers' philosophy is to avoid doing so themselves. Sometimes it's okay to just ignore the raw power and use what looks coolest.
I don't have much to say on your choice in guns. I think you're trying to compare apples to pteranodons.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 04:21
#9
CIV does around 50% extra dmg
CIV does around 50% extra dmg to undead ( dun have exact figure ), and does no reduced dmg on the rest.
How's it not balanced? CIV's more allrounded compared to elemental swords, which does pathetic dmg on beasts and gremlins. It's still a great weapon for people who wants to use their weapon slots for guns and bombs instead of 4 sword of different attack types and UV.
Leviathan is well known for its raw dmg, but is still weaker than a CIV with the same level and UV.
Variety is necessary for this type of games, if only looks matter then all 5* sword should have the same dmg type / damage / charge and only look different.
If it sucks so bad that u feel like using a proto sword over it, go make / buy another one.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 04:44
#10
Your data contradicts
Your data contradicts everyone else's data.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 06:59
#11
SILLY VIDEO GAMES, PHILOSOPHY IS FOR BEARDED HERMITS
But I thought the philosophy of the game was that a player could use any weapons and not be punished for their personal taste?
Have you considered stand up comedy?
Because that is the funniest thing I have ever heard.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 07:07
#12
Why do I bother responding to idiots? Because I'm a troll.
@RapBreon
un·der·pow·ered
adjective /ˌəndərˈpou(-ə)rd/
1. Lacking sufficient mechanical, electrical, or other power
They still kill enemies, so they definitely have sufficient power.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 07:30
#13
Luden is right
Leviathan is weaker than CIV in the long run. Though their about equal in power if you get a UV on CIV as well as its undead bonus its by far better.
As for the iron Slug, my choice of gun, your just not using it to its advantages. I like the fact it can interrupt gun pups attacks & knock over wolvers, gremlins, mechs & zombies therefor trapping them in place, though I agree it could use a little power boost.
If you don't like the weapon your using doesn't mean its underpowered, rather its just not cut out for your play style.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 09:45
#14
@Luden
50%? That's SO wrong. Here's some actual concrete numbers. (copied from my wikipage)
Cold Iron Vanquisher:
- Normal hit: 183
- Normal combo finish: 234
- Normal charge attack: 352
- Undead hit: 224
- Undead combo finish: 280
- Undead charge attack: 413
Leviathan Blade:
- Normal hit: 200
- Normal combo finish: 254
- Normal charge attack: 378
- Fiend hit: 243
- Fiend combo finish: 303
- Fiend charge attack: 442
Depth 27, only damage bonuses were Fiend High on Leviathan and Undead High on CIV.
So as you see, a high increases the damage in around 45 points, depending on what attack you use. CIV is indeed slightly stronger for undead... but.
A Leviathan with Undead Very High would be better than even a CIV with Maximum because of their base powers. A very high on a leviathan would make it hit for around ~260, while a CIV would end up dealing the exact same with a maximum, however still having less attack power than a Leviathan for other monster races.
But what LobsterHime said here is pretty much true; The bonuses/base power on those weapons are too low to make any difference at all for killing normal mobs. The damage difference would need to be around 70 points of damage to actually make killing normal mobs take less hits than the other weapon. At most, killing Vanaduke or Jelly King would be faster with a Leviathan rather than CIV. Maybe trojans, aswell. But there's not much else other than those specific mobs.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 10:29
#15
The thing is, with the same
The thing is, with the same bonus, the CIV can be more effective than the Leviathan blade because it can have a second bonus applied to it. You could be lucky and get a UV bonus High against undead on what eventually becomes a CIV, and thus get a Maximum! boost which would crush the Leviathan blade in your above comparison (or basically just do the extra 20-30 damage per swing, if that is crushing). The minor loss of power versus the possibility of dual UVs makes the CIV a good sword for its role (banishing undead).
As for the Iron Slug, I haven't tested it at all yet. I'm told it has a nice AoE effect to it and reports above suggest it can interrupt attacks well (which most guns don't do), so that puts it above most other guns alone. UV damage bonuses would apply to all enemies in the AoE though.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 11:23
#16
I got a CIV with a low bonus
I got a CIV with a low bonus to undead, with an ash tail set, I get Maximum! bonus damage to undead and Medium bonus damage to everything else
Though I have a question, in this case, would going to Skolver set waste the extra Medium Bonus damage in the case of undeads?
I'm not sure if the bonus damage to monster race is applied after a general bonus damage or if it just uses the racial bonus damage instead of the general (my assumption is that it will use only the racial bonus damage, since general bonus damage stack into the racial bonus damages)
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 13:04
#17
All the bonuses are added up
All the bonuses are added up and you get a bonus in general. The values are:
- Low
- Medium
- High
- Very High
- Ultra
- Maximum!
So two Highs, or a High plus Medium and Low (in your case) both add up to a Maximum! bonus. So a Skolver coat + something else would still grant you a Maximum! bonus versus Undead, but a complete Skolver set would waste several bonus levels.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 13:57
#18
CIV as it is currently can
CIV as it is currently can not be better than the Leviathan. According to pretty much every set of numbers posted on the forums so far, a CIV does a negligible amount of extra damage on Undead and that's with a natural HIGH bonus.
Logically, a Leviathan is already as good against any enemy type as a CIV is if it has a HIGH bonus against that type. A Medium UV against Undead is probably enough to guarantee the Leviathan out-damages CIV on Undead. Since the damage against Undead is already incredibly similar, take the enemy type UV you'd want on the CIV and put it on the Leviathan instead. That damage difference WILL be the difference between an extra hit or not.
Assuming equal Unique Variants, there is simply no situation that a CIV will ever out-perform the Leviathan except BARELY on Undead. Hopefully one day they will make the CIV less laughably weak, but that day is not today.
And upon further thought, I find it hard to believe there isn't already some kind of gap between how many hits it takes for the two to kill non-Undead in t3, especially if for some reason you're not killing healing mobs first. So yeah. Leviathan all the way.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 13:46
#19
Doesn't CIC/CIV have a better
Doesn't CIC/CIV have a better special attack?
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 13:54
#20
The Magnus line of guns have advantages other than pure DPS
I can't say much about the CIV, but the Iron Slug does have advantages to balance out its disadvantages vs. the Valiance, which i sum up over here in the Bazaar, where i am currently selling one of these guns ^_^... http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/7109
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 20:51
#21
Why do I bother responding to you? Because I've seen better.
@Awesomest
Three flaws with that son, firstly; terms in the English language as misappropriated and transformed into a colloquial term on a regular basis (look at slang, popular catch phrases...rappers, etc.), often the term evolves passed its original meaning whilst maintaining some resemblance of it's original use. The gaming community is not above this and hijacks terms all the time, underpowered is one of these terms that carries a specific meaning within the gaming community.
Second; the definition there details "SUFFICIENT" power, they kill enemies yes, but slowly, thus is lacks sufficient STOPPING power, therefore underpowered. A car with a speed regulator in it stills moves, but is limited on how fast it may travel and accelerate, arguably underpowered.
And finally; dictionaries offer different explanations, which people seem to forget, from my good friends and dictionary.com I bring you;
underpowered (ˌʌndəˈpaʊəd)
— adj
lacking or low in power: two-litre cars are underpowered
What's that? 'Lacking'? or 'Low'? in power, low in power compared to others fulfilling the same role? Seems to dictate underpowered to me. Also, check Merriam-Websters description of the term underpowered if you want a more 'credible' source.
Also quoting a dictionary didn't help your point, your point was they are underpowered comparatively, your 'misplaced' dictionary reference merely detailed that being underpowered was a state of not having enough power. I would like to reiterate being comparatively underpowered and being underpowered when compared to everything that does the same job but better, makes it underpowered it what it does, as such underpowered in general.
You're clearly quite low on the totem troll pole son, quit arguing your point and start presenting me with some actual deliberate logical fallacies in an attempt to make me maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.
Consider this my first free lesson.
http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/307706/what+trolls+want+you+to+t...
Though you may have seen it, it's still relevant to your interests.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 22:20
#22
Um.
My point wasn't that they were underpowered, nor underpowered comparatively. Since you're an English major, you should be able to figure out what I was trying to communicate on your own.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 23:13
#23
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
"They may be weaker than other weapons but that doesn't mean they're underpowered.
They're only underpowered comparatively." -Awesomest
"My point wasn't that they were underpowered, nor underpowered comparatively. Since you're an English major, you should be able to figure out what I was trying to communicate on your own." -Awesomest
If only I were a mind-reader.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 23:45
#24
At least someone doesn't believe I'm a troll.
facepalm.
Since I'm just being trolled because I'm smart enough to understand a dictionary, I'll drop it.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 00:46
#25
Your point was;
Your point between those two above quotes were irrelevant to your original point (the point I was rebutting), it was there to contradict my point.
Additionally, you're not being trolled at all (mildly at some point, possibly, maybe, not sure where it begins and it stops), I am contending your understanding of a dictionary. Singular in the fact had you been motivated enough to check other dictionaries, you wouldn't have embarrassed yourself with that post. Luckily for me however, you did not and provided me with this brief, yet ever so entertaining skirmish.
Alas, I am sad you surrender Awesomest (or should I say, Awesomer?)
Regards,
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 01:09
#26
Well, put it this way,
Well, put it this way, Awesomest. You said in your first post word for word "They're only underpowered comparatively." Then in your second-to-last post you essentially said you didn't mean the very first thing you said. It's hard to not ridicule that.
Even if you both used different dictionaries, the concept is the same- less power than there should be. Due to the fact that both CIV and Leviathan are from the same Alchemy tree and are the exact same type of weapon in all ways except damage, there is no excuse for CIV to be so lacking compared to Leviathan.
A comparison between the Iron Slug and Valiance is moot because they're incomparable. They're different weapons meant for different play-styles/purposes. It falls to whichever the player is more comfortable with/better at using.
It can be argued that CIV's purpose is meant for undead-killing and Leviathan's is not. Well that's nice. I sure do wish it did more damage to them than the Leviathan, then.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 01:10
#27
I lied. Looks like I have to reply to defend my pride.
you wouldn't have embarrassed yourself with that post.
What. :|
You're the one shoving words (see:comparatively) into meanings where it doesn't exist.
Underpowered doesn't mean weaker than something else. It only means it doesn't have enough power to fulfil its purpose.
Those weapons aren't underpowered; they fulfil their purpose of being able to kill monsters. They have enough power to do that. How can they be underpowered?
They cant be, unless you're talking about them being underpowered COMPARED TO another weapon.
Just because idiots on the internet skew meanings of words, doesn't mean they are right. That's exactly why they're idiots.
EDIT: And my point was that their damage isn't low enough to warrant a complaint. Learn to UNDERSTAND posts, not just read them.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 01:46
#28
You know, Awesomest. A Proto
You know, Awesomest. A Proto sword does enough damage to fulfill the purpose of killing an enemy. You're missing the point of what RapBreon is saying. The issue isn't whether or not it can kill an enemy, but whether or not it does as much damage as it should.
-edit-
And you know, there are only so many ways to understand "They're only underpowered comparatively." None of those ways equate to "there's no reason to complain that it is slightly less powerful."
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 01:22
#29
...
And how much damage should it do? :|
-edit-
Read the whole post.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 01:16
#30
Now Cold Iron Vanquisher, I'm
Now Cold Iron Vanquisher, I'm really happy for you, and I'mma let you finish, but the Leviathan Blade has the best damage of all time.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 01:31
#31
Lol wat
Things can't be underpowered compared to nothing.
You need an arbitrary point where higher is over, and lower is under.
Saying that a weapon is ok in power because it can kill monsters is silly. You can kill any monster with any weapon in the game, even Vanaduke with a Proto Gun if you have enough free time.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 01:45
#32
I used comparatively,
I used comparatively, contextually and grammatically correctly, at no stage was the word misused outisde of its dictionary meaning, so drop that point. Apparently your self endowed wisdom of the dictionary is ill-founded.
Your point of, it can kill something, therefore not underpowered is...just wowwwwwwww son, that is an incredulous statement. I can ride a billy-cart down a hill or drive a car, both provide me with locomotion, however the car is much more powerful and CAPABLE of taking from point A to B. CIV is a billy-cart Awesomest, a billy cart.
As demonstrated by OTHER dictionaries, underpowered can mean it has less power than it CAN or SHOULD have, yes comparatively, but like your edit, if you learnt to UNDERSTAND and not READ, being underpowered and being underpowered compared to something ELSE is not a mutually exclusive endeavour, very often they are the same, as often the power of something has a baseline for which it is measured against. You are trying to draw a distinction which is not required or even relevant to the discussion.
Additionally I understood your point from the very beginning, it was a rather simple concept, I was challenging your knowledge of English and your method of explaining your point (failure to understand my point, funny how that is). So while I take classes on understanding posts, you should take classes on more thoroughly explaining your point, not one-liner attempts at condescending others, this way, you'll avoid this little thing that's happening right here.
Finally, because I do like to contend every incorrect point you make, how do you think words get added to the dictionary man? How do you think English has evolved? It's an evolving document, and it's defecating (intellectually or not) on it, that allows it to change and rise from the ashes of defecation (so poetic)! Idiots they may be (debatable), but they control the direction of our language.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 02:12
#33
This may be superfluous at
This may be superfluous at this point, however PuPu sparked an idea, that may end your thought that being underpowered and being comparatiely underpowered are mutually exclusive, and it involves using your fabled dictionary.
un·der
[uhn-der] Show IPA
–preposition
1.
beneath and covered by: under a table; under a tree.
2.
below the surface of: under water; under the skin.
3.
at a point or position lower or further down than: He was hit just under his eye.
It's a preposition to powered, obviously being underpowered. Three is the best explanation for my point "at a point or POSITION lower of further down than" as such under by its intrinsic nature is a comparative term, as it is UNDER something else which is clearly on top of it. Therefore to be UNDERpowered it must be underpowered COMPARED to something else because it is over it. While it is true something can be underpowered without comparative context, it would be incorrect usage of the term, as it would become powerless (which wasn't the complaint). Hope this shows you the error of your point.
Sat, 06/04/2011 - 23:28
#34
My power is definitely hiding
My power is definitely hiding under my table.
Sun, 06/05/2011 - 01:03
#35
This thread... Just what have... I don't even..?
Ugh. Whatever.
While that was quite the educational debate it is however off-topic.
While I don't really have a say on the initial debate I would like to mention that the Cold Iron Vanquisher does not retain its massive knockback feature upon upgrading from Tempered Calibur to Cold Iron Carver. Another shy-away feature for the neat-looking albeit less powerful sword.
Sun, 06/05/2011 - 04:49
#36
@Awesomest
The term underpowered used in a real world setting might have the meaning you found in a dictionary. Like when you try to power some electric device insufficiently.
In gaming environment the term is used together with overpowered to describe comparative differences in powerlevel.
Either do your research propperly or stop trolling.
now ontopic:
I think it's bearable CIV does about as much more damage to zombies as it does less to everything else, compared to Levi (around 10%). Think like a damage type (elemental/shadow/pierce/etc) that only does mild increased damage to 1 type of enemy, while doing mild reduced damage to 5 enemy types.
Not balanced but bearable. (also compare aegis to the new shield; it's balanced because aegis is an npc recipe)
Perhaps lower the base difference to 5% and lower the UD bonus to medium.
They may be weaker than other weapons but that doesn't mean they're underpowered.
They're only underpowered comparatively.