Author Topic: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes  (Read 11388 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Hekko

  • Master Knight
  • *
  • Drabanterna gotta drabant
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • MP nick: Drabant_Ryttmästare_Hekko
  • M&BWBWF&SNW
The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« on: May 27, 2012, 03:22:57 AM »
Introduction

I am making this post, not because I am doing badly in melee, or because I want longer kill streaks but because I find melee the most enjoyable part of the game, and that melee is not living up to it's full potential. As most of you might know I am the head organizer of the groupfighting tournament, and I was reckoned quite good at duels in MM as well as such I do feel that I am qualified to discuss the workings of melee. I believe that I and the group of people I tend to discuss melee are very well versed in the mechanics of melee, and how they interconnect. We certainly do not know everything but we, I believe, are the people who discover inconsistancies in melee or atleast pick up on new discoveries quite early, as well as accurately estimate what effects that can be expected. Credit for discoveries should go to alot of people, amongst others Evanovic, Vorlen, Sid and others who have tested things and shared their findings with me.

Furthermore I would like to disclaimer the post with the fact that I know that some things are "hardcoded" in the engine and as such have to be changed on Taleworlds' side. Secondly I also know that bugfixes are and such may  be eating alot of time, and as such it may be hard to get around to fine tuning such things as melee, that is operational, albeit unpolished.

Finally I would like to say that some of the explanations I offer are more questions directed at the developers.

The overall melee feel

One of the things that strikes me the most about melee is how imprecisse and crude it feels. People like to throw around the ballerina word as something negative about spinning, and maybe it was. However, I feel as if melee has gone from being a ballerina, not to a brute force kind of melee where you feel that there's strength behind your attacks and so on, as I am guessing people hoped, but rather a sort of drunken stumble. Things may work out as you envisaged them, but on the other hand you may end up not actually piercing with your stab, you may end up trying to turn quick enough only to have both parties turning around like a dog chasing it's own tail, trying to (re)chamber but nothing happens, blocking someones attack clearly, but once you lift the block it turns out that his attack is still hanging there soon to be in your face, taping block at the right time only for the block not to register. Things don't always work this way, hell, I would argue that they don't work this way most of the time, nevertheless, the relatively high prevalence of incidents like the ones described and the random intervall of them feels punishing and removes the sense of control of your character, not to mention contrary to competitive play. Some of these effects I hope to offer an explanation for, and solutions for, while other incidents and situations I have no explanation for.

Stabs failing to pierce

Pokes/Stubs/Whiffs/Glances/whatever you call them, are one of the somewhat wierd, and random effects in this DLC, and I would like to claim that they have become both more random as well as prevalent in NW compared to MM. I can offer a couple of explanations to this. The first one being the increased length of bayonets. Longer bayonets mean that the sweetspot for the weapon lies farther away from the character on the screen, which in turn means that the minimum distance for an effective stab is increased. Another potential source for the higher frequency of this effect may be the lowered turning speed, causing attacks being "swiped" in being too late in the stab to pierce or making people reluctant to turn which in turn means that they are not applying any delay to the stab.

Hanging overheads


The overhead stab seems like one of the hot potatoes of NW. On the one hand side a majority of people wanted it in a poll conducted almost a year ago, on the other hand alot of the complaints seem to stem from the ovearhead stabs. (For an analysis of the overhead stab on ought to check out Evans post on the subject). One of the problems is that the "deadly" point of musket only starts at the muzzle of the musket, not the point of the bayonet, which interestingly enough means that the range of the overhead is the same-ish as the normal stab contrary to previous belief. However, it also has the effect that stabs that lock as if they have already hit your block are still active causing people to drop their block to early. Another interesting theory I have heard is that the overhead would use the sweetspot calculation of a normal overhead attack (sword swing) causing the hanging effect where the stab is seemingly deadly even when it seems to be on the way back already. Another effect of this that me and Evan tested was that the ovehead stab does alot more damage when backpedaling, which further suggest that the calculations between the overhead and down stab are fundamentally different the same holds true when walking forward when the overhead does significantly less damage. Furthermore something that I found in the beta when testing the fixed height overhead is that the hitbox is actually slightly to the side of the visual representation of the bayonet, causing an attack that is "in" the enemy to miss on occasion.

Extra feints

There is also some clunckiness in the animations between attacks as well, when moving an attack between up and down there in extra "nudge" in the animation giving you an extra "free" feint on the way. This coupled with the fact that moving an attack between directions looks incredibly similar to starting an attack it quickly becomes very confusing for the player on the recieving end. The problem here really is that the animations are quite dodgey and need a bit of love. This is something quite important to sort out because it gives alot of extra benefit for no real risk. With swords following the feints is easier because of the clearer animations and lack of vagueness.

Lack of tap-blocking

Tap-blocking is when you hit block when the attack is about to land instead of continually holding it down. I have heard several people say that while this works properly when just trying to defend the block does not register when you are attacking. I would like to extend it to that it does not work while you are blocking either. Which in turn means that it's sometimes impossible to cancel bad stabs or react to a sudden second opponent because you are already commited. This was not really the case in MM where some people with good reflexes pulled of some rather incredible blocks giving blocking a high skill ceiling.


Design choises


Now that I have touched upon the clunckiness of melee I want to discuss some design choises I think would be for the best. I am a great friend of chambers and that will probably show through in the following sections, albeit, hopefully they will also illustrate why I am a friend of chambers. As well as why I dislike mechanics that work the other way around compared to chambers. Another thing to note is that the clunkiness feel is also present when discussing these other effects, but not as a stand alone effect but subtly interconnected.

Chambers

Chambers were one of my favourite things in MM. They caused a break from the normal rythm of melee forcing your opponent to adapt and react in order to survive, otherwise they would die. This does not really hold true in NW though. Firstly the ovearhead is constantly blockable. In all the tests I have ran we could block the overhead without any trouble. The only potential explanation I have to offer for this is that it might be that the sweetpot/timing is calculated as for an ovearhead (sword) swing. The normal stab is, however, unblockable still assuming that one does not blunder it away. On the other hand one pretty much has to blunder it away though because the lower turning speed means that the traveltime between succesful chamber block and landing stab increases enough for the other person to block the resulting stab. Furthermore, chambers are harder to do succesfully, I am guessing that the longer range of bayonets, lower movement speed, lower turning speed and wierd timing calculation of ovearheads are the culprits behind this. Furthermore, the down chamber which still is quite good is quite hard to get off due to the percieved and real benefits of the ovearhead causing it to be the by-far dominant attack direction, which in turn means that there are no normal stabs to chamber. So the risk of chambering has gone up while the benefit of chambering has shrunk which overall has decimated the usage of chambers.

I think the lower prevalence of chambers is a bad thing because it creates a gameplay where you have no way to force your opponent into acting in a different manner in order to survive which means that adaptability and understanding and thought have less of a role in melee, all of which are skills that I think an interesting game should contain.

Implied chambers

An implied chamber is when you "try" to chamber a feint of the enemy causing the enemy to have to stop feinting and block in order to survive since your attack connects first since they are canceling and then restarting their attack compared to your direct attack. To pull this off a bit of positional awareness and understanding was called for. It had the same effect as chambering in the sense that it forced the feinter into blocking rather than continuing to feint as was their plan. This again is something that I find is good and interesting gameplay, you force an alternate behaviour on your enemy upon pain of death, however, the technique is not fail safe, and doing it in a bad position or too slowly will result in your own death instead. This however is lacking at the moment since you can swtich from an up-attack to a down attack quicker than the implied chamber lands, which I find to be a serious design flaw.

Wierd weight parity between swords and bayonets 


Swords seem to weigh less in comparison to bayoneted muskets, which in turn means that swords tend to be stunned upon blocking an overhead. This is a bad choise in my opinion. It gives a chamberlike upside to something very basic i.e. holding an up-attack. The sword wielder has to block twice in a row which breaks the rules of attack-priority and the rythm of the fight, not because the bayonet wielder took a succesful risk but because he just played normally.

Rifle melee damage

I think everyone knows that rifles/cavalry muskets used as a club can deal an imense amount of damage with some speedbonus, I guess a part of it is due to the slowness of the weapon causing the speedbonus to go through the roof. This however means that rifles using as clubs are very very useful as melee weapons, making riflemen all-round specialists rather than just accurate at long range.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 06:48:39 PM by Hekko »

Hekko

  • Master Knight
  • *
  • Drabanterna gotta drabant
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • MP nick: Drabant_Ryttmästare_Hekko
  • M&BWBWF&SNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2012, 03:23:27 AM »
Proposed changes

So while the problems ought to be quite uncontroversial I will now tread the more controversial waters of suggesting some changes that hopefully would fix the problems and increase the enjoyability of melee overall.

The overhead stab

The overhead stab needs an overhaul. I am quite convinced of the fact that alot of it's problems stem from the way the calculations being for an overhead swing rather than a stab. I am also convinced that the inherent here are cause for alot of the grief in melee and as such this should be one of the main priorities. Something I also know is that the changes to this have to be made on Taleworlds side, which is why I hope that Vince might be able to nudge them into doing it since NW really deserves to not be wingclipped by a lack of support.

Re-shorten the length

The bayonet should be shortened back to it's old length. I believe it would make chambering more useful as well as pokes less prevalent both of which are desired effects. Ontop of this cavalry will get a bit of a boost. While I don't think cavalry needs a boost it certainly won't become overpowered because of this change and alot of cavalry players will be satisfied in the process.

Changes to different stuns

I want to caveat this part with the fact that I am uncertain about whether or not some or even most of the things I am suggesting are possible, nevertheless, they are high up on my wishlist, which is why I will include them.

Increase the stun (on attacking again) for hitting into someones block. This should be done, because as it stands at the moment you can sometimes just spam your way out of a fight because the stun is so short. Spamming as a technique should never be rewarded since it's simple and lack though, understanding and timing.

Increase the stun (on your block) after having you attack chamber blocked. While I am not certain an effect of this kind even exists I do believe that it would push chambering into the realms of useful again, espcially in conjunction with shorter bayonets. Nevertheless this might not be called for if all other changes manage to get a similar effect.

Decrease the stun on (blocking) after having been stabbed. As it is at the moment you sometimes are stunlocked by getting stabbed until the next stab which lands, which is excessive to say the least! Attackpriority should certainly still lie with the one who succesfully landed the stab but it shouldn't be this over the top.

Increase the weight on swords. At the moment swords do not weigh enough, which causes too many stuns (on the attack) for sword wielders which is stupid, since it breaks the pacing of the fight, with no effort on part of the bayonet user which hardly is desirable.

Smoothen and clarify the feinting animations


The animations of feints are too unclear. While feinting is per deffinition designed to be confusing it does not need the help of animations which are indstinguishable until very late into the animation. I believe this may be again something that taleworlds will have to fix, but as I said, NW deserves it.

Increase the duration it takes to feint slightly

Feinting is a bit too quick as well, because at it is at the moment you cannot really break out of being feinted by any other means than getting out of range and there turning on the feinter. In MM you had the option to attempt (imply) a chamber on of the feints in order to get attack priority. This is also the case with swords to a degree to quote Lord Willy "If you move from one sideswing to another you're going to be dead very soon" which he told me after he killed me with a quick slash on the side I feinted on for the third time. The speed it takes to change between attacks should especially be increased!

Tap-blocking should be reintroduced

There was not really any reason to remove tap-blocking, in a group fight it was what kept the pace up for the lone guy and generally kept the speed of a melee higher.

Rifle melee speed increase

Rifles used in melee mode should have their speed increased a bit since I think that might lower their speedbonus which in turn will make them de facto do less damage while compensating them for the loss of damage.

Re-increase the turningspeed slightly

This may be the single most controversial thing I will suggest. Nevertheless, at the moment I believe this is one of the biggest reasons why I alteast feel that I lack control of my character is because I can't turn in a way that I want. While I am not advocating a return to MM levels of turning I do think that a bit of an increase will add more precission to the movements of the character making melee feel more fluid and interesting. It would probably also help chambers a bit and decrease the "dog chasing it's own tail" effect slightly, both of which are good effects in my opinion.

I might add in more things as I think of them but this is it for now.

Caveat for the entire thread

The melee in NW is very good. Hell, if we wouldn't have had MM/Native before the melee in NW would have been revolutionary. As it stands at the moment we had warband/MM which is why people are craving for some changes to the melee to make it feel as melee has been improved as much as the graphics, shooting and other parts of gameplay.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 04:46:23 PM by Hekko »

DarkOmega

  • Knight
  • *
  • Fools rush in where angels fear to tread
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nord
  • M&BWBWF&SNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2012, 05:09:51 AM »
Quote
NW compared to NW.

Think you meant NW compared to MM there friend but i totally agree with almost all of this and i feel that because the melee is not solid i don't enjoy playing the DLC and only get on for events.

Blue spy

  • Regular
  • *
  • Betty I Hardly Knew Ye
    • View Profile
    • SAdraGoons
  • Faction: Bandit
  • MP nick: SAdraGoons_Bluspy
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2012, 08:07:28 AM »
I hope that I am not in a minority by enjoying this new melee system that I feel is considerably more fluid and fast-paced then the combat in Mount and Musket.

Quote
I think everyone knows that rifles/cavalry muskets used as a club can deal an imense amount of damage with some speedbonus, I guess a part of it is due to the slowness of the weapon causing the speedbonus to go through the roof. This however means that rifles using as clubs are very very useful as melee weapons, making riflemen all-round specialists rather than just accurate at long range.

I'd like to weigh in on this that I don't see why riflemen should get the speed of their "club" style attacked nerfed when from my experience regardless of the speed of their attack an adept bayonet user will usually get a stab in and win the fight I've just never personally seen these rifle-butts of death in combat and they only ever seem to work against people that don't even attempt to block attacks in the first place.

 
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 08:11:10 AM by Blue spy »

BenKenobi

  • Grandmaster Knight
  • *
  • Ультрамариновый набок берет!
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2012, 08:36:15 AM »
I hope that I am not in a minority by enjoying this new melee system that I feel is considerably more fluid and fast-paced then the combat in Mount and Musket.

I hope you are. Especially with the fluid word.

 

Aksei

  • Veteran
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • MP nick: Olb_Uffz_Aksei
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2012, 08:47:53 AM »
i agree with hekkos points.

while i enjoyed meele in MM i now often try to stay out of fighting.


.....and yesterday i was killed by a militia wooden stick in one hit  :mrgreen: wtf

hazy

  • Master Knight
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • MP nick: Harry
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2012, 10:17:36 AM »
Ohhhh another melee discussion, I wanna join, I wanna join!



Pokes/Stubs/Whiffs/Glances/whatever you call them, are one of the somewhat wierd, and random effects in this DLC, and I would like to claim that they have become both more random as well as prevalent in NW compared to NW. I can offer a couple of explanations to this. The first one being the increased length of bayonets. Longer bayonets mean that the sweetspot for the weapon lies farther away from the character on the screen, which in turn means that the minimum distance for an effective stab is increased. Another potential source for the higher frequency of this effect may be the lowered turning speed, causing attacks being "swiped" in being too late in the stab to pierce or making people reluctant to turn which in turn means that they are not applying any delay to the stab.

Didn't actually realise there is a ~20 range difference between the muskets in MM and NW, reducing the length would help definitely, although I would be rather reluctant about changing the turning speed.

The overhead stab seems like one of the hot potatoes of NW. On the one hand side a majority of people wanted it in a poll conducted almost a year ago, on the other hand alot of the complaints seem to stem from the ovearhead stabs. (For an analysis of the overhead stab on ought to check out Evans post on the subject). One of the problems is that the "deadly" point of musket only starts at the muzzle of the musket, not the point of the bayonet, which interestingly enough means that the range of the overhead is the same-ish as the normal stab contrary to previous belief. However, it also has the effect that stabs that lock as if they have already hit your block are still active causing people to drop their block to early. Another interesting theory I have heard is that the overhead would use the sweetspot calculation of a normal overhead attack (sword swing) causing the hanging effect where the stab is seemingly deadly even when it seems to be on the way back already. Another effect of this that me and Evan tested was that the ovehead stab does alot more damage when backpedaling, which further suggest that the calculations between the overhead and down stab are fundamentally different the same holds true when walking forward when the overhead does significantly less damage. Furthermore something that I found in the beta when testing the fixed height overhead is that the hitbox is actually slightly to the side of the visual representation of the bayonet, causing an attack that is "in" the enemy to miss on occasion.

Fixing the animation to be a proper representation of its length would be the best way to go. As for doing more damage when walking backwards, well that just sounds silly and I don't think its correct.. you weren't aiming for the head whilst moving backwards were you?

There is also some clunckiness in the animations between attacks as well, when moving an attack between up and down there in extra "nudge" in the animation giving you an extra "free" feint on the way. This coupled with the fact that moving an attack between directions looks incredibly similar to starting an attack it quickly becomes very confusing for the player on the recieving end. The problem here really is that the animations are quite dodgey and need a bit of love. This is something quite important to sort out because it gives alot of extra benefit for no real risk. With swords following the feints is easier because of the clearer animations and lack of vagueness.

Aiming down and spamming feints between upper and lower stabs has gotten me some of the easiest kills I have ever recieved, I guess its because when I look so far down people can't tell the difference between the two stabs so much and fail to block it often enough.


Tap-blocking is when you hit block when the attack is about to land instead of continually holding it down. I have heard several people say that while this works properly when just trying to defend the block does not register when you are attacking. I would like to extend it to that it does not work while you are blocking either. Which in turn means that it's sometimes impossible to cancel bad stabs or react to a sudden second opponent because you are already commited. This was not really the case in MM where some people with good reflexes pulled of some rather incredible blocks giving blocking a high skill ceiling.

I still do this tbh with not so much trouble but the overhead is a little trickier due to its 'hanging' effect.

Chambers were one of my favourite things in MM. They caused a break from the normal rythm of melee forcing your opponent to adapt and react in order to survive, otherwise they would die. This does not really hold true in NW though. Firstly the ovearhead is constantly blockable. In all the tests I have ran we could block the overhead without any trouble. The only potential explanation I have to offer for this is that it might be that the sweetpot/timing is calculated as for an ovearhead (sword) swing. The normal stab is, however, unblockable still assuming that one does not blunder it away. On the other hand one pretty much has to blunder it away though because the lower turning speed means that the traveltime between succesful chamber block and landing stab increases enough for the other person to block the resulting stab. Furthermore, chambers are harder to do succesfully, I am guessing that the longer range of bayonets, lower movement speed, lower turning speed and wierd timing calculation of ovearheads are the culprits behind this. Furthermore, the down chamber which still is quite good is quite hard to get off due to the percieved and real benefits of the ovearhead causing it to be the by-far dominant attack direction, which in turn means that there are no normal stabs to chamber. So the risk of chambering has gone up while the benefit of chambering has shrunk which overall has decimated the usage of chambers.

Chambering overhead is useless because it is blockable, someone who doesn't even know what chambering is can essentially defend himself against it, which is not something I like. Chamber blocking downstabs isn't so different but because the overhead is so superior I just don't bother with it. I don't think turning speed has effected chamber blocking ability, I think the weapon length is a bigger factor.

An implied chamber is when you "try" to chamber a feint of the enemy causing the enemy to have to stop feinting and block in order to survive since your attack connects first since they are canceling and then restarting their attack compared to your direct attack. To pull this off a bit of positional awareness and understanding was called for. It had the same effect as chambering in the sense that it forced the feinter into blocking rather than continuing to feint as was their plan. This again is something that I find is good and interesting gameplay, you force an alternate behaviour on your enemy upon pain of death, however, the technique is not fail safe, and doing it in a bad position or too slowly will result in your own death instead. This however is lacking at the moment since you can swtich from an up-attack to a down attack quicker than the implied chamber lands, which I find to be a serious design flaw.

I've noticed this still works for me if they are going from a overhead to downstab feint, if its vice versa they can quickly pull the overhead stab faster than I can.

Swords seem to weigh less in comparison to bayoneted muskets, which in turn means that swords tend to be stunned upon blocking an overhead. This is a bad choise in my opinion. It gives a chamberlike upside to something very basic i.e. holding an up-attack. The sword wielder has to block twice in a row which breaks the rules of attack-priority and the rythm of the fight, not because the bayonet wielder took a succesful risk but because he just played normally.

I don't really have a problem with this but I never noticed it in MM so putting weights similar to how it was then should be a quick and easy fix, unless its intentional, of course.

I think everyone knows that rifles/cavalry muskets used as a club can deal an imense amount of damage with some speedbonus, I guess a part of it is due to the slowness of the weapon causing the speedbonus to go through the roof. This however means that rifles using as clubs are very very useful as melee weapons, making riflemen all-round specialists rather than just accurate at long range.

The cavalry musket available to the russian milita is great, it has decent damage, ok speed and has a great range thanks to the fact that the character holds it at the end of the musket so the animation gives it some extra 'range'! Its a great weapon and I love it. The other rifles do deal a lot of damage, but the range is bad enough for me to not see them as effective fighting weapons

Phew, that took me longer than I expected it to take :S

Maboobs

  • Sergeant Knight
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2012, 10:56:02 AM »
All I want is all this buggy parts with the random glances and glitches to be fixed. And perhaps tone down the damage on the cavalry muskets and rifles, it's quite odd being one hit killed by one of them when it hits you in the stomach  :lol:  (ie. I could understand it if it hit me in the head)

EDIT: Buggy bits being fixing the overhead so it actually feels and acts like any other attack in the game, rather than the way it feels out of place with all the timings of other attacks.

Moogs

  • Master Knight
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Khergit
  • MP nick: Moogs
  • M&BWBWF&SNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2012, 11:14:16 AM »
I agree with Maboobs, if all the glitches and bugs get rooted out we'll be left with a solid melee system.

@Hekko I was talking to a few people last night about the state of NW, especially the melee. You've summed up everything we talked about in one post the day after we had the conversation, it's like you were there yourself.

MaHuD

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Blazing and burning are the jewels of war.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nord
  • MP nick: CoR_Hired_Blade
  • M&BWBWF&SNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #9 on: May 27, 2012, 11:31:56 AM »
Nice post!
:)

Quote
Lack of tap-blocking
Tap-blocking is when you hit block when the attack is about to land instead of continually holding it down. I have heard several people say that while this works properly when just trying to defend the block does not register when you are attacking. I would like to extend it to that it does not work while you are blocking either. Which in turn means that it's sometimes impossible to cancel bad stabs or react to a sudden second opponent because you are already commited. This was not really the case in MM where some people with good reflexes pulled of some rather incredible blocks giving blocking a high skill ceiling.
Hm, "tap blocking"  used to be parrying but was removed in Warband Beta due to it being extremely spam heavy if coordinated with other attack feints. (there was an actual animation for parrying aswell)
I remember a post once that they said that they just removed the animations, and that the system is still there. Supposedly you would stun the attacker for a longer time if you parry his attack rather than just block.
But I don't think I have noticed much difference, so it may have been removed all together at some point.

Anyway, to me it seems that blocking in NW is slower than feinting, but perhaps I am accidentaliy parrying all the time which might explain the longer block durations.

Birdtalon

  • Regular
  • *
    • View Profile
    • Birdtalon
  • Faction: Rhodok
  • MP nick: Birdtalon
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #10 on: May 27, 2012, 12:17:15 PM »
I have read through your post and concur with everything.

I did think that the melee in mmrussia3 was much more 'enjoyable', even if it wasn't realistic.

Quote from: =DG=Côc@in£
Birdy - Lenin (Hero of the People) - Hailed as a legend among the people.

Evanovic

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • NW Official Servers Admin
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Vaegir
  • MP nick: 91st_Sjt_Evan_Forbes
  • M&BWBWF&SNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2012, 12:30:31 PM »
Great post Hekko, I think we are nearing the point where we're going to have enough knowledge of the causes of the problems to diagnose effective solutions. :wink:
 
I've got some replies for Hazy. Nice contributions Hazy, I'm just adding to what you've said. :wink:
 
Didn't actually realise there is a ~20 range difference between the muskets in MM and NW, reducing the length would help definitely, although I would be rather reluctant about changing the turning speed.

The turning does affect it a bit in that most chambers don't occur when the opponents are directly facing eachother, this means the chamberer has to turn his stab into the enemy player. With the lesser turning speed this takes longer which will give him more time to get that block in, and you can imagine if the enemy is moving around the side of you, you're not going to be able to turn fast enough to capitalise on your well-timed and risky chamber.

You're right about the length being a big factor though; this is what causes the lack of damage / stubs in chambers.

Quote
Fixing the animation to be a proper representation of its length would be the best way to go. As for doing more damage when walking backwards, well that just sounds silly and I don't think its correct.. you weren't aiming for the head whilst moving backwards were you?

I can assure you it's correct. We did it on dummies in our training grounds where it tells you the damage when you hit them. Started infront of a dummy and walked backwards whilst making a stab. When we did the normal downstab you'd do about 2 damage, but when you did the overhead stab it did around 78 damage, similar to what it'd do when moving forwards. This just proves that it's doing rather weird calculations for what is meant to be a stab.
 
Quote
Aiming down and spamming feints between upper and lower stabs has gotten me some of the easiest kills I have ever recieved, I guess its because when I look so far down people can't tell the difference between the two stabs so much and fail to block it often enough.

The overhead animation starts from the waist, just as a downstab does. This is what causes confusion, as during an overhead feint it appears as though the enemy is changing to a downstab, and there is this ambiguous period of time where it's simply impossible to tell whether the enemy is going to feint into an overhead or a stab. It's a big problem indeed, as it's a very effective and deceptive attack that is done so easily and with so little risk on the part of the attacker.
 
In MM the defender had the tool of chambering to stop feint-spam, but as explained chambering has really diminished as an effective means of counter, so this is why the amount of feinting  has shot through the roof as a favourite attack: it's been enhanced by poor animation and had it's counter unintentionally nerfed. It's completely anti-competitive and anti-skill-based gameplay; the risks don't correspond to the rewards at all.

« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 12:35:16 PM by Evanovic »
Evanovic / Evanski. 4-time Group Fighting Tournament Winner. Team: Graham and his Minions & Team Argyll

cenzila

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Kazakh and Proud
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • MP nick: Cenzii
  • M&BWBWF&SNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2012, 12:38:35 PM »
totally read all of it xD...but yeh i have to say i prefered the mm melee system over this, but its not bad either, and its just down to personal preference i think
Cenzii: Right get rid of some and add 5-10 new ones
FSE_Vincenzo:Ok
Cenzii: So what do we do
FSE_Vincenzo: Execute order 66
Cenzii: Very well, Darth Vince
Cenzii pew pew's at ze jedi

gokiller

  • Grandmaster Knight
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nord
  • MP nick: Gokiller
  • WBWF&S
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #13 on: May 27, 2012, 12:47:48 PM »
I don't mind the current "melee system". Neverless, I enjoyed the MM melee system more in gameplay than this one.

James Stewart

  • Grandmaster Knight
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNW
Re: The State of Melee - Proposed Changes
« Reply #14 on: May 27, 2012, 12:51:27 PM »
I don't mind the current "melee system". Neverless, I enjoyed the MM melee system more in gameplay than this one.
I agree, and it seems most people enjoyed the old system more. But I'd be happy if they just rooted out all the various bugs that Hekko listed.

God I miss thumping people to death. :cry: