I don’t know if this is intended or not but it seems like a weird quirk. On every other weapon I’ve seen the heavy attack does more damage than the light attack. On the Antax Mk. V and the Rashad Mk. II the heavy attack does less damage than the light attack versus Maniac armor types.
I have checked other weapons and even other axes and their heavy attacks vs. light attacks all do more damage when comparing the same strike type.
Is this intended, a bug, a typo in the calculation? I would love to know the reasoning behind this strange weapon behaviour.
This is almost certainly a bug. There was an identical problem that persisted for years in Vermintide 2 where kruber’s longbow did less damage to berserkers with charged shots. I’ve seen it reported a few times already but it remains to be seen if fatshark will take action on it or if it will drag on for years.
The bug is actually the light attack dealing too much damage. It was fixed in an update previously, but it got quickly reverted due to community outcry.
Nerfing the light attack is fine as long as they buff the heavy attack at the same time. Having the “heavy” strike deal less damage than the light attack is counterintuitive design that has no sensible parallel in any other successful game I can think of.
How about they leave well working weapons just the way they are now, and pay all the balancing related attention to the weapons that massively underperform?
Imo it is pretty lame and boring if heavy attacks deal more damage to everything.
It is more interesting when you actually have to know something about your weapon when it comes to choosing the optimal attacks for an engagement.
No they should keep working on it instead of letting it fall by the wayside. It took fatshark almost five whole years to fix the kruber longbow problem and almost half a year just to fix the rashad axe hitreg. It’s better to keep moving forward and trying new things instead of letting them remain half assed forever.
I disagree with this. Even if lights do less damage than heavy attacks you still have valid reasons to perform both types. Light attacks are faster and you can perform several in quick succession whereas heavy attacks are slow and leave you vulnerable. The former is better for managing multiple targets while the latter is better against single targets. This allows tactics and strategy to come into play as you determine what attack to use when.
The problem with making the light attack more powerful is that it renders the heavy attack obsolete. What’s the point of performing heavy attacks if they are slower, and leave you vulnerable, AND do less damage? There is none. THAT is what I would call lame and boring and it’s exactly the situation we find ourselves in.
Yes and i did not sugget otherwise.
But why would you focus your attention on unnecessary changes to weapons that work really well in comparison to many others, rather than FIRST making all weapons viable and actually looking at the ones that are half assed right now?
If heavy is always better against any type of single targets, where is the tactics?
It would be a simple binary decision.
How does it make the heavy attack obsolete, when the light attack deals more damage against just ONE enemy type?
Especially when it is much more risky to use light attacks against Dreg Ragers (maniac), than it is to use heavy attacks.
On this specific mobile weapon, heavy attacks do not leave you vulnerable at all. The opposite is the case. You can easily dodge and move around between your heavy attacks.
So instead of having the clear binary decision of „light against multi target, heavy against single target“, you now have to consider the enemy type and if you prefer to kill it faster or safer.
That’s not what I said. I said they should keep working on it. Not that they should keep working on it to the exclusion of everything else. Fatshark should be able to balance top performers and buff underperformers at the same time. Being unable to do so would demonstrate a lack of talent.
The reason I bring this up is that nothing is a permanent as a temporarily solution. If all you do is work on what you consider to be major problems and let the minor problems sit by the wayside. Those minor problems will eventually become a major problem simply because of how long you have neglected them.
As for the rest of your post, I get what you’re saying but the axe isn’t a good candidate for the kind of tactics and strategy you want. It is a very simple weapon, you hit quickly for a lot of damage, or you hit slowly for even more damage. The heavy attack should deal more damage in all cases compared to the light attack. If it doesn’t it would be like me selling you a truck where the accelerator and brake pedals are reversed on thursdays. Or making a lasgun that deals less damage to ogryns if you ADS before shooting. Combat axes gain nothing from having special snowflake configuration like this, all it can do is confuse people.
If you want people to vary up their choice of attacks and form new strategies depending on the combat situation that’s totally valid. But there are better ways to do that than force players to memorize counterintuitive exceptions to general rules.