Will 2H savage of 1.65 be a valid option

[Chaskha]

I do remember being two shotted (as a caster) by savages with their gigantic 2H hammers under celerity/haste.
While it was annoying for me, I'm sure it was a blast for the savages.

How do you plan to deal with that ?

 

[Onewish]

Would be cool to see always for different styles of play even if its not min/max but can still feel powerful.

 

[Fey]

Savage won't get PF correct? If so they're a meme and you won't have to worry about it.

 

[Eversor]

Savage won't get PF correct? If so they're a meme and you won't have to worry about it.

Hammer has rear snare, it's priceless. There's a reason 99% of non stealth Mid melee uses hammer.

 

[Thedeadone]

The dot proc might cause problems but i bet 2h troll hammer savage with Dragonstorm would be cool.

 

[Eversor]

The dot proc might cause problems but i bet 2h troll hammer savage with Dragonstorm would be cool.

especially with the savage self haste on that slow swinging hammer.

 

[Algarakai]

Hello,
In fact, there s always the same probleme with Midgard style, the only style who stun target are submit to shield blocking...
How can you do it without shield??
Savage or skald need some stun style on parrying

 

[Process]

Savage has great stuns in H2H. If you go 2H on a savage you do so knowing that you're forfeiting those stuns. That's what is beautiful about this game.. you decide how to build your character and you are making trade offs along the way.

 

[Cadebrennus]

Savage has great stuns in H2H. If you go 2H on a savage you do so knowing that you're forfeiting those stuns. That's what is beautiful about this game.. you decide how to build your character and you are making trade offs along the way.

 

[Pendalith]

Its viable pre rr5 imo

 

[Malidry]

The reason 2H savages were so strong was because they could quad hit with a 2 hander. That quickly got nerfed a few patches after 1.65

 

[Spiegal]

Wait, savages could multiple hit on 2H? I don<t recall that

 

[Jabstar]

Wait, savages could multiple hit on 2H? I don<t recall that

for tiny period of time they could. was funny

 

[Sergej Fählisch]

Yeah, i can read how bad midgard will be...
Good advertise folks.
S/C charges only for midgard? Ummmh... nope

 

[sehenry]

The last I knew savages had quad hits with 2h in the 1.65 patch. Both Uthgard and Pheonix changed it but both admitted it was in the 1.65 patch.

Everyone saying we need to leave this set to 1.65 is ok with savages quadhitting with 2h weapons right? This was the patch level that savages were 1 shotting casters fairly often which is why they were changed so quickly.

 

[whamburger]

Quad hitting with 2h was removed before or with 1.65

I think it's covered by this patch note:
"We've toned down the damage that Savages do while wielding any weapon other than a Hand to Hand weapon (to be equivalent to Hand to Hand weapons)."

It's not really clear how they toned it down, but there's no mention of removing 2h quad hits anywhere in the patch notes from 1.60 all the way through 1.73 (Catacombs). They definitely did not have 2h quad at Cata release, so it stands to reason it was the 1.65 changes

 

[sehenry]

Quad hitting with 2h was removed before or with 1.65

I think it's covered by this patch note:
"We've toned down the damage that Savages do while wielding any weapon other than a Hand to Hand weapon (to be equivalent to Hand to Hand weapons)."

It's not really clear how they toned it down, but there's no mention of removing 2h quad hits anywhere in the patch notes from 1.60 all the way through 1.73 (Catacombs). They definitely did not have 2h quad at Cata release, so it stands to reason it was the 1.65 changes

I think it should be gone, but until we see an actual patch showing the moment it was pulled out, shouldn't 2h quad hits stay? Lots of people here keep arguing for classic 1.65 with just minor QoL changes that they should be arguing for this to be in game also.

We shouldn't be allowed to "assume" it was pulled around this patch level when it could have been the next patch or the patch before without posted proof since this seems to be the standard everyone wants to go off of.

If it is allowed, and I don't see how you can't without showing some serious hypocrisy, I can't wait to see all the crying from hibs/albs that savages are to OP and need nerfed =)

 

[whamburger]

Like I said in my post, there is no note stating it was removed at least up until 1.73. If we go by the 'no explicit note' baseline then they should still have 2h quad hits in live right now. Do they? If not, then it must have been removed

Go yell at Mythic/Broadsword, or find me the patch note saying it was removed so we can know with certainty which patch it was

 

[sehenry]

Like I said in my post, there is no note stating it was removed at least up until 1.73. If we go by the 'no explicit note' baseline then they should still have 2h quad hits in live right now. Do they? If not, then it must have been removed

Go yell at Mythic/Broadsword, or find me the patch note saying it was removed so we can know with certainty which patch it was

That's my point, we don't know when it was removed with certainty so I'm not sure it is fair to remove it in 1.65 under the assumption that it just seems like the right time it happened.

 

[whamburger]

That's my point, we don't know when it was removed with certainty so I'm not sure it is fair to remove it in 1.65 under the assumption that it just seems like the right time it happened.

But you're saying we may as well include it because there's no explicit patch note, which I disagree with because it was clearly removed at some point and it logically points to 1.65