What is the best 1h for Legio?

[DR.]

Alia is not even a crossbow the repeater name says it all.

Huh... I'm amazed I never noticed this before.

Wanna trade?

Sure

[Malong]

If they are experienced enough with different weaps, they probably can, agreed.

Still, this thread would be damn boring if we wouldn't allow ppl to give their point of view. It would just be simple maths based on stats, so the thread "what is the best x" would have just one reply and no reason to continue.
I prefer it much as it is: different opinions based on different preferations and experiences. Diversity is a foundation that makes the community.

Sometimes I wonder if you post solely to see your count increment by one instead of adding meaningful content. This is one of those times.

No, I just meant to support Baron on the below quoted:

No but all I got from that post is you think I'm stupid for saying stats aren't all

No, but stats are readily available and people can predict performance with abstract thinking.

What is best for one is not for the other as it is not all just in stats, at least not in every case it is so simple. E.g. some archers would prefer damage in their bows while others might value speed more, so for one Stag is the best one and someone else will value Fiendish. Like for 1h some will prefer DWP for the ability to deal against strong armour while others might say it is too short and too slow while you fight enemies not so heavily armoured and will look for Wrath.

The 2nd part of my post was: it makes no sense to stubbornly prove your point and reserve yourself the right to be always correct, everyone has the right to hold his own opinion and possibly you might find this opinion justified if you'd take a minute to think instead of fighting.

Apologies if I didn't make it clear enough and you missed the point. In case you didn't and simply found it "not meaningful enough" - be it, it's your point of view. Some others maybe would find some meaning in it.

This conveniently ignores the entire "now that I have it, it's the best" post. No item suddenly improves depending on ownership.

[Sir Baron]

It's more about it's now being used
I saw it once with April sever and once with Woody
That is all
I just don't see how it can be best if you can never use it
from what your saying Dev and Boss gear is best in game even though we can't use it

[Malong]

It's more about it's now being used
I saw it once with April sever and once with Woody
That is all
I just don't see how it can be best if you can never use it
from what your saying Dev and Boss gear is best in game even though we can't use it

Terrible analogy: it's available to players and thus is nothing like exclusive dev and boss items. In fact, other players had/have it. The difference was that _you_ didn't have it, and it didn't suddenly improve after it was in _your possession_. If you can't grasp that after this many posts explaining the same concept in different words, then you probably never will.

[Winter]

I prefer it much as it is: different opinions based on different preferations and experiences. Diversity is a foundation that makes the community.

In case I was not clear in my response:

"One more fallacy is worth briefly discussing. It is perhaps best understood as a version of the red herring fallacy, but is repeated with sufficient frequency that it deserves special attention. When discussing the merits of alternative points of view, it is not uncommon for someone to declare, perhaps somewhat defensively, that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Jamie Whyte has a nice discussion of this strange form of reasoning. He argues, first, that it’s not entirely obvious that we do have such a right. Second, the idea that we are each entitled to our own opinion is almost always irrelevant to the context in which the claim is introduced. Within the context of a conversation about the merits of competing ideas and opinions, Whyte suggests that appealing to the right to one’s own opinion is best interpreted as placing a requirement on others to desist from trying to change that individual’s views. But, as Whyte suggests, if people hold an opinion that places them in mortal danger then we would seem to have a responsibility to rid them of the dangerous attitude. Even ignoring practical matters, and granting people their right to hold opinions that are poorly supported by available evidence, it’s rather strange that people would want to hold an opinion simply because they have a right to. To illustrate the charge of irrelevancy, suppose we’re engaged in a discussion about the merits of teaching comprehensive sex education courses in high schools, as opposed to the abstinence-only programs that some individuals prefer. Arguments, ideas and objections flow back and forth. At some point, however, some people simply announce that – despite all that’s been said – they’re entitled to their opinion. How is this relevant? The point of such discussions is to try and establish which ideas are best supported by the evidence and arguments we have available. People’s right to their own opinion fails to advance the discussion. Either an opinion is held for good reasons, in which case there is no need to defend the opinion by appealing to rights, or an opinion is held despite the absence of good reasons, in which case that opinion clearly should influence neither behaviour nor decisions nor the development of social policies. Either way, in almost every context, having a right to an opinion is irrelevant." - Creating Scientific Controversies: Uncertainty and Bias in Science and Society

You really see a lot of this on this forum...

[DR.]

It's more about it's now being used
I saw it once with April sever and once with Woody
That is all

Ok so do you think a noob will see both on the floor and now what's better?

I had this problem with exc that being if I dropped the thing most people would run right past.. That's part of the reason why I sold it.

[Bobo]

@Winter: referring to what you cited I'd say claiming that everyone has his point / opinion about the subject is relevant to the said subject of the best Legio 1h.

Another example if those given previously are not convincing enough: it may be disputable and circumstances dependable if the amount of throwables ammo can be a point of high importance for Legio. In case the said Legio must carry the run and sweep most enemies by himself it may pretty be the winning point. Taking that into consideration VHTA can be found as the best Legio 1h (opinion presented by Kenneth), as it provides Legio with the highest amount of throwables while serving as 1h at the same time. Not the strongest or fastest 1h, not he most powerful throwables, but still most versatile solution.

Another example, pikeman this time: if you stay behind cade best polearm is probably one with long range and lots of piercing damage, like e.g. PoK. If you fight in the open you might do better with something shorter and faster, like Naval. So what is the best polearm? I guess it depends on your favourite play style, skills, etc. Myself I do no good with poking / stabbing weaps, for lack of experience and skill, in result I will not find e.g. Jormungandr any good while someone else would love it.

It is not that clear that stats only and some maths can give the reply to the question, on the contrary IMHO. Perhaps there is no such thing like best weap for everyone. Why bring somebody down for having a different opinion? Atm the voting goes 23 for Excalibur / 20 for DWP / 28 scattered between others.

Which ones of those who voted you find incorrect (or incapable of reading stats and doing mats) and guilty of being flat-earthers with no right to have their opinion in this scientific discussion? Discussion is about ppl giving their opinions. Should for most cases there be one opinion clearly correct while all others clearly incorrect there'd be no room to discuss. Why have the poll then? Computers could do the job. Do we have this forum to discuss or to apply calculations or perhaps simply to agree with those who nominate themselves being always correct by definition?

[Malong]

Another example if those given previously are not convincing enough: it may be disputable and circumstances dependable if the amount of throwables ammo can be a point of high importance for Legio. In case the said Legio must carry the run and sweep most enemies by himself it may pretty be the winning point. Taking that into consideration VHTA can be found as the best Legio 1h (opinion presented by Kenneth), as it provides Legio with the highest amount of throwables while serving as 1h at the same time. Not the strongest or fastest 1h, not he most powerful throwables, but still most versatile solution.

Another example, pikeman this time: if you stay behind cade best polearm is probably one with long range and lots of piercing damage, like e.g. PoK. If you fight in the open you might do better with something shorter and faster, like Naval. So what is the best polearm? I guess it depends on your favourite play style, skills, etc. Myself I do no good with poking / stabbing weaps, for lack of experience and skill, in result I will not find e.g. Jormungandr any good while someone else would love it.

It is not that clear that stats only and some maths can give the reply to the question, on the contrary IMHO. Perhaps there is no such thing like best weap for everyone. Why bring somebody down for having a different opinion? Atm the voting goes 23 for Excalibur / 20 for DWP / 28 scattered between others.

Still relevant:

This conveniently ignores the entire "now that I have it, it's the best" post. No item suddenly improves depending on ownership.

[Bobo]

Surely so, I do agree. It has nothing to do with the item value / virtues if one owns the item or not. Still, there is a tendency to overestimate this what is better known vs that what remains less explored. E.g. that is why products presented in showrooms sell better than those not present there, despite the latter might be much better.

[Thunderstorm]

Since i do have Excalibur now i think Excalibur is still the best weapon ingame btw