I’ve noticed what I consider a trend in the discussion of weapons’ pros and cons:
It seems to me that the ability to pierce armor (or break shields on light attacks) has too huge an effect on the game. That you lose too much simply by picking most weapons that don’t have anti-armor attacks.
Kruberd, Glaivrillian, Falchpyre (until recently), 2xBardaxe… These are the best options in the game and to me it’s no coincidence their properties vs. armor.
So many times I’ve seen weapons written off for not having enough AP for legend… Swords, Spear, Shield combos, Mace. Weapons with no armor piercing are simply short of crossing the “uncanny valley” of effectiveness. They may never be good, no matter how well they cleave or push trash mobs.
I understand that high level team coordination yields more viable options for players wishing to use more weapons. But this doesn’t mean the devs can’t or shouldn’t strive to bring the comps for stacks and pugs into congruence, and to make all weapons viable for both if possible. It does however make a solution complicated. For example, buffing the non-AP weapons against armor might work well for pugs but could drastically and rapidly affect stacks.
Is there actually a problem here? A viable solution? This is a discussion topic, please enjoy and be respectful.