Combat axe underperforms in comparison to other melee weapons

[Simko]

The main problem is, that it does good damage but has zero survivability.
If you have a ballistic shield, Stun-lance automatically shields you DURING STRIKE + it stuns.
Stun baton doesn't shield automatically but it stuns, so that is massive survivability still.
Axe has better damage and high attack speed, problem is it doesn't stun, and while trying to utilise that higher attack speed, you are completely open for attack because the user flings that thing around like a hollywood medieval movie actor, desperately trying to keep that shield anywhere but shielding him.
Please allow me to strike and be shielded at least.

[Inardesco]

Axe doesn't need stun when it pushes the enemy backwards.

[Buntkreuz]

Originally posted by Inardesco:

Axe doesn't need stun when it pushes the enemy backwards.

Which doesnt matter because OP is right, the lance is superior to it when it not only stuns but also allows usage of the shield at the same time.
I have tested melee excessively this week and the lance with shield has really good survivability especially against the Illuminates, as it allows clearing the trash while being protected from ranged attacks (even laser beams etc).
With the Axe you have far less protection without necessarily being stronger in attack, since you need to close distance to your enemy, something the lance is also superior at.

[Inardesco]

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

With the Axe you have far less protection without necessarily being stronger in attack, since you need to close distance to your enemy, something the lance is also superior at.

You really needed testing to figure out that an axe has less reach than a spear? Like...C'mon man...even Bronze Age civilizations were fully aware of that.

[Buntkreuz]

Originally posted by Inardesco:

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

With the Axe you have far less protection without necessarily being stronger in attack, since you need to close distance to your enemy, something the lance is also superior at.

You really needed testing to figure out that an axe has less reach than a spear? Like...C'mon man...even Bronze Age civilizations were fully aware of that.

I get that sometimes people desperately want to win the internet for their ego but this was the worst attempt i have seen on this forum today.

[Inardesco]

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

Originally posted by Inardesco:

You really needed testing to figure out that an axe has less reach than a spear? Like...C'mon man...even Bronze Age civilizations were fully aware of that.

I get that sometimes people desperately want to win the internet for their ego but this was the worst attempt i have seen on this forum today.

And you think that seriously saying

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

since you need to close distance to your enemy, something the lance is also superior at.

is something that doesnt make people go ?

OP already said axe deals more damage and has higher attack speed.

It also has a wider attack radius than the spear.

Making it objectively better to clear a horde of enemies than the spear because of it. Spear is fine if you want to keep things at a distance.

[The_Dipl0mat]

I've found great usage in the axe so far, and found I can even actually kill Overseers in a reasonable timeframe. Having about the same performance as the baton would have.

Instead of stunning enemies and making them easier to kill, I just kill faster but it leaves me open to more attacks. So overall boils down to if you can play a more tactful aggressive build, or a more defensive style of melee

[Simko]

Originally posted by Inardesco:

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

I get that sometimes people desperately want to win the internet for their ego but this was the worst attempt i have seen on this forum today.

And you think that seriously saying

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

since you need to close distance to your enemy, something the lance is also superior at.

is something that doesnt make people go ?

OP already said axe deals more damage and has higher attack speed.

It also has a wider attack radius than the spear.

Making it objectively better to clear a horde of enemies than the spear because of it. Spear is fine if you want to keep things at a distance.

The real problem is that even the baton is better, because it balances its lackluster blatantly idiotic attack animation (be it slightly faster) with a stun. Might as well just use the constitution at that point, at least it has a gun as well.
Edit: AND YOU CAN AIM THE LANCE which is raising the skill ceiling a lot.

[Buntkreuz]

Originally posted by Inardesco:

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

I get that sometimes people desperately want to win the internet for their ego but this was the worst attempt i have seen on this forum today.

And you think that seriously saying

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

since you need to close distance to your enemy, something the lance is also superior at.

is something that doesnt make people go ?

OP already said axe deals more damage and has higher attack speed.

It also has a wider attack radius than the spear.

Making it objectively better to clear a horde of enemies than the spear because of it. Spear is fine if you want to keep things at a distance.

The problem is that you wanted to win so hard that you didnt read properly.
Laughable even more since you dont understand the difference between distance (range) and width.
Maybe you are just playing dumb, but looking at what you type, i doubt that.

Go into the game, pick the axe, go attack a standard Devastator. He will kill you because the Axe doesnt stagger him.
You attack him and it will do minor damage even with its attack speed, he will punch you in the face and thats it.
Pick the lance and hes stunned and you can finish him off even faster.
The Axe isnt even useful against many trash Bugs.

OP is right. Yet i like the axe as its fun, even if worse.

[Aid of Healer]

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

Originally posted by Inardesco:

You really needed testing to figure out that an axe has less reach than a spear? Like...C'mon man...even Bronze Age civilizations were fully aware of that.

I get that sometimes people desperately want to win the internet for their ego but this was the worst attempt i have seen on this forum today.

bro don't bother with a shill. That's all they can do, think of weak comebacks

[Buntkreuz]

Originally posted by Aid of Healer:

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

I get that sometimes people desperately want to win the internet for their ego but this was the worst attempt i have seen on this forum today.

bro don't bother with a shill. That's all they can do, think of weak comebacks

You are right. Not worth the time and effort.

[ItzPress]

While I do think the stun melee weapons are better due to that infinite access to shutdown debuff, I think the axe is fine for variation's sake if it's about dealing some more damage in comparison.

I just think it's time we simply get a melee slot now because we seem to be getting more melee weapons and there was some argument for it prior with it giving infinite stun access, but they don't entirely compete with sidearms still. You could even move the throwing knives to that melee slot to then buff it by not giving it grenades as competition.

[Maj. Crimes]

You guys still bring a knife to a gunfight?

[Hasselblad]

Originally posted by Simko:

The main problem is, that it does good damage but has zero survivability.
If you have a ballistic shield, Stun-lance automatically shields you DURING STRIKE + it stuns.
Stun baton doesn't shield automatically but it stuns, so that is massive survivability still.
Axe has better damage and high attack speed, problem is it doesn't stun, and while trying to utilise that higher attack speed, you are completely open for attack because the user flings that thing around like a hollywood medieval movie actor, desperately trying to keep that shield anywhere but shielding him.
Please allow me to strike and be shielded at least.

That inert hunk of sharpened metal is not as effective as a high tech device that electrocutes your foes?

Cannot imagine, hard to fathom.

[Simko]

Originally posted by Hasselblad:

Originally posted by Simko:

The main problem is, that it does good damage but has zero survivability.
If you have a ballistic shield, Stun-lance automatically shields you DURING STRIKE + it stuns.
Stun baton doesn't shield automatically but it stuns, so that is massive survivability still.
Axe has better damage and high attack speed, problem is it doesn't stun, and while trying to utilise that higher attack speed, you are completely open for attack because the user flings that thing around like a hollywood medieval movie actor, desperately trying to keep that shield anywhere but shielding him.
Please allow me to strike and be shielded at least.

That inert hunk of sharpened metal is not as effective as a high tech device that electrocutes your foes?

Cannot imagine, hard to fathom.

Didn't read half of my points. Also let's say your point stands, what is the reason that weapon even is in the game?

[Simko]

Originally posted by Maj. Crimes:

You guys still bring a knife to a gunfight?

On terminid front with a lance and shield you can kill everything but biletitans, and rather easily at that even in a horde scenario. And it goes hard af.

Or better said:
I'm over here thrusting my lance; I got guts on my lance right now. I'm just thrusting my sh!t I'm stimmed as fck man I'm a helldiver man like for real.