[Suggestion] More variations in sword design.

At present, buying the 'better' swords gets you a miniscule upgrade over the cheaper weapons. Using different swords doesn't feel substantially different at all, and any improvement is minimal. What I'd like to suggest is that there should be several sword 'archetypes', with each type having its own distinct weaknesses and strengths.


1) The cavalry sword. This will be a longer weapon with a significant boost to cut damage, at the cost of some speed.

Examples: the Albion Ritter, Hospitaller, Gaddhjalt and the Sword of St Maurice.

Swords like these have substantial blade presence and are generally slightly longer than the 'average' arming sword. They tend to be excellent cutters, but are harder to set into motion or stop. A telling blow with one of these ends arguments very quickly.


2) The generic sword. A compromise design that is fairly balanced across the board.

Examples: the Albion Solingen and the Knight. The Native one-handed 'generic' swords and the arming swords.

These swords don't excel at any one area, but this means a certain amount of versatility. They are, in effect, the Mario of swords.


3) The Nordic sword. A quick, vicious cleaver of moderate length, but inferior in the thrust except against soft targets (represented by a lowish thrust damage value and cut damage instead of pierce). This can be equally applied to other cut-oriented infantry swords.

Examples: the Hersir,  Huskarl, Jarl, etc.

These swords have been described as 'big butcher knives', which is a rather apt description in my view.


4) The 'melee' sword. A fast, handy and slightly shorter weapon, with an emphasis on the thrust (Native short swords) or the cut (like the falchion).

Examples: the Thegn viking sword and the Vassal falchion.

The former is slightly smaller than its brothers, but this means an increased 'handiness' and quickness. The latter is a no-nonsense cleaver which is also fairly capable in the thrust, though it should probably be slower to recover if used in that role due to increased blade presence.

I'd also like to see some variation, mainly in swords and picks.  Even if only in name.  For example, it's far more fun to play with a Nordic War Sword than a Sword, for the cool factor.

Rhodoks or Swadians could get some nice and weirdly shaped falchions:



For a heavier rider sword, I would LOVE to see the Tritonia. (Albion website doesn't work for me so I can't link good pictures. :/)

I think the Rhodoks could use some swords, be it the falchion or something else.

I don't even know if they need to add in new models to the game, but really having a difference in the 'feel' of each weapon would be nice. I know that is a lot of work and would involve new animations, which would f everything up, but would really be cool to have separate swing animations/stances for swords, axes, picks, maces and spears, just to give each weapon a different feel. Right now I could swing a pick or an axe and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between each weapon.

Unfortunately I think this kind of variety is probably too much to ask for at this point in the game and would fundamentally change it too greatly to easily deal with.

Graphical variety of weapons is good. Significant stat improvement - bad idea.
This is not an MMORPG where you are defined by your epic loot sword. This is a skill based game and equipment should make only a very small difference. Real life swords are not that different when it comes down to effectiveness - the hand that swings them makes all the difference. A two point damage improvement on a 30 damage sword is about the same as another point in power strike, which is often the difference between archer and infantry in melee ability.

in addition to design, i reccomend significant balancing with different quality weapons/armor.

just look at this chart:

Modifier Cost Damage Speed Req Quantity Note

Cracked 50% -5

Rusty 55%         -3

Bent 65%                 -3         -3

Chipped 85%  -1

Heavy 190% +2 -2

Balanced 350% +3 +3

Strong 490% +3 -3 +2 only bows

Tempered 670% +4 only swords

Masterwork 1750% +5 +1 +4

Large Bag 190% +1 for thrown weapons
+3 for bolts
+4 for arrows

Click to expand...

I mean really? is +5 damage really worth 17.5 times the original price (masterwork)? i could see this with things like hunting bows or low-level weapons, where 5 extra damage is alot, but i dont want to go from 1000 to 17000 for a great sword just for 5 extra damage! for a few hundred bucks i could get a bag of throwing axes that deal 33 damage!

they need to either increase the deficit/rewards, or significantly decrease the price variations.

shields are much much much more balanced. look:

Modifier Base cost Durability Resistance

Cracked 60%   -56 -4

Battered 85%           -26 -2

Thick 160%   +47 +2

Reinforced 210%   +63 +4

Click to expand...

I would pay 210% for an extra 4 resistance! but i wouldnt pay 1750%! totally different levels with this and weapons.


same thing for weapons goes for armor:

Modifiers  Cost  Armor

cracked 50%         -4

tattered 50%        -3

rusty 55%               -3

ragged 70%                 -2

battered 75%              -2

crude 83%          -1

sturdy 170%         +1

thick 260%               +2

hardened 390%         +3

reinforced 650%         +4

lordly 1150%         +6

Click to expand...

I mean, honestly, 11 times the cost for +6??!?!!? let me give you an example:

Heraldic mail with Tabard. base cost: 3654. body protection: 51 leg protection: 15

now would you pay 42021 for an extra +6 to body and leg armor? it just seems like a total waste of money, and nobody wants to use that for something so stupid.

with my current army of around 210, i could either pay a weeks upkeep, or buy 6 extra armor points, or pay a weeks upkeep and get very good armor at a fair price. makes no sense does it?

I don't understand why the devs are being so conservative with weapon choices. THIS IS A BETA GO CRAZY. If it becomes unbalanced it can be easily fixed and tweaked.
I really cant see people complaining that  there are too many sword choices.

Prussian Iron said:

in addition to design, i reccomend significant balancing with different quality weapons/armor.

just look at this chart:

Modifier Cost Damage Speed Req Quantity Note

Cracked 50% -5

Rusty 55%         -3

Bent 65%                 -3         -3

Chipped 85%  -1

Heavy 190% +2 -2

Balanced 350% +3 +3

Strong 490% +3 -3 +2 only bows

Tempered 670% +4 only swords

Masterwork 1750% +5 +1 +4

Large Bag 190% +1 for thrown weapons
+3 for bolts
+4 for arrows

Click to expand...

I mean really? is +5 damage really worth 17.5 times the original price (masterwork)? i could see this with things like hunting bows or low-level weapons, where 5 extra damage is alot, but i dont want to go from 1000 to 17000 for a great sword just for 5 extra damage! for a few hundred bucks i could get a bag of throwing axes that deal 33 damage!

they need to either increase the deficit/rewards, or significantly decrease the price variations.

shields are much much much more balanced. look:

Modifier Base cost Durability Resistance

Cracked 60%   -56 -4

Battered 85%           -26 -2

Thick 160%   +47 +2

Reinforced 210%   +63 +4

Click to expand...

I would pay 210% for an extra 4 resistance! but i wouldnt pay 1750%! totally different levels with this and weapons.


same thing for weapons goes for armor:

Modifiers  Cost  Armor

cracked 50%         -4

tattered 50%        -3

rusty 55%               -3

ragged 70%                 -2

battered 75%              -2

crude 83%          -1

sturdy 170%         +1

thick 260%               +2

hardened 390%         +3

reinforced 650%         +4

lordly 1150%         +6

Click to expand...

I mean, honestly, 11 times the cost for +6??!?!!? let me give you an example:

Heraldic mail with Tabard. base cost: 3654. body protection: 51 leg protection: 15

now would you pay 42021 for an extra +6 to body and leg armor? it just seems like a total waste of money, and nobody wants to use that for something so stupid.

with my current army of around 210, i could either pay a weeks upkeep, or buy 6 extra armor points, or pay a weeks upkeep and get very good armor at a fair price. makes no sense does it?

Click to expand...

Well look at multiplayer. Arming sword gives you only +2 to all damage, but it costs 410g.

Actually I would like to see a small buff on most swords speed, a single point or two for the expensive ones at least.
After all, axes have a bonus against shields and maces have knockdown. Swords have no bonus. I don't like that the "club with a spike" is among the fastest (if not the fastest when 2-handed) weapon in the game (it is an awesome weapon but anyway).
The "great sword" is the most expensive weapon in the game, let's compare it to other similar weapons:

Great sword:
1123 gold
42 damage, 28 thrust damage
Speed 89, reach 120

Great axe:
446 gold
51 damage, + bonus vs shields.
Speed 90, reach 96

Glaive:
352 gold
38 damage, 21 thrust
speed 83, reach 157

So if the great sword is so much more expensive than the great axe and the glaive, it should have something that makes it better. Sure, it has better range than the great axe. Sure, it does more damage and is faster then the glaive, but some drawbacks against both as well. It's absolutely not a superior weapon by any means.
But why is it so expensive?
You can see a similar pattern among many weapons. Swords need to get some attention imo.
I suggest that either are the prices adjusted down on swords or that they get an adjustment up in their speed.

Oh, I totally dig the idea of giving the rhodoks falchions as swords, at least for their crossbowmen. Give the sergeants the pollaxe too, and thrown in the bardiche for Vaegirs and quarterstaffs for Nord scouts.

How great would it be if you could customize your own pommel (!?) for a sword? Not a priority but that would be super awesome.

mouthnhoof said:

Graphical variety of weapons is good. Significant stat improvement - bad idea.
This is not an MMORPG where you are defined by your epic loot sword. This is a skill based game and equipment should make only a very small difference. Real life swords are not that different when it comes down to effectiveness - the hand that swings them makes all the difference. A two point damage improvement on a 30 damage sword is about the same as another point in power strike, which is often the difference between archer and infantry in melee ability.

Click to expand...

There's a reason why there are entire books written about historical sword designs. It's quite clear that have never handled swords in real life. The difference in feel between two similar-looking swords can be (and often is) miles apart, and we haven't even gotten started on the performance. The point of this is to make different sword types feel significantly different while maintaining ingame utility. A cavalry sword should hit like a truck once it's up to speed but it will be slower to recover, whereas a 'brawling' sword should be very handy and quick.

Attacksmurfen said:

Oh, I totally dig the idea of giving the rhodoks falchions as swords, at least for their crossbowmen. Give the sergeants the pollaxe too, and thrown in the bardiche for Vaegirs and quarterstaffs for Nord scouts.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Falchions seem to mesh well with the Rhodok theme i.e. underdogs with mostly peasant weapons very well. Speed bonuses should also receive an increase across the board (except maybe for the scimitar, that thing is already ridiculously fast).

Merlkir said:

For a heavier rider sword, I would LOVE to see the Tritonia. (Albion website doesn't work for me so I can't link good pictures. :/)

Click to expand...

Somehow I forgot about the Tritonia. :S





Another sword that has that powerful look to it is the Vigil.

Night Ninja said:

There's a reason why there are entire books written about historical sword designs. It's quite clear that have never handled swords in real life. The difference in feel between two similar-looking swords can be (and often is) miles apart, and we haven't even gotten started on the performance. The point of this is to make different sword types feel significantly different while maintaining ingame utility. A cavalry sword should hit like a truck once it's up to speed but it will be slower to recover, whereas a 'brawling' sword should be very handy and quick.

Click to expand...

Yes, but these are tradeoffs, not really improvement. The overall difference between swords designed for the same style of fighting is small. It will be hard to find two, same era swords where on is longer, faster and chops better than the other all at once. People did and will kill for every little, minor improvement in weapons that will give them a tiny little better chance to kill for the next minor "improvement".

Dammit, I missed out the 'you'.

mouthnhoof said:

Yes, but these are tradeoffs, not really improvement.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is the whole point. Swords used for different roles have different designs. A cavalry sword is a big weapon with lots of blade designed to kill people from horseback. A civilian sword is light, agile and optimized for use against sofer targets because you don't expect to run into armoured opposition while out shopping.

The suggestion was for more differentiation between the types.

mouthnhoof said:

The overall difference between swords designed for the same style of fighting is small.

Click to expand...

I refer you to Oakeshott typology. The overal cosmetic differences may appear to be small, but the handling characteristics and performance can and do vary widely.

mouthnhoof said:

It will be hard to find two, same era swords where on is longer, faster and chops better than the other all at once.

Click to expand...

Quite possible, actually. Compare the longsword to the arming sword.

Different swords would be made on different armouries, with different qualities - not all swords would have been perfect, so why not implement that fact in the game too?
It's perfectly possible to have a longer blade still being very light and very fast, and still have excellent cutting ability in comparison to a heavier, shorter and broader blade. The steels' quality and tempering, the cross section of the blade and the skill of the swordsmith all make a difference. Although there will always be some kind of trade off between different blade types in general.

But you still have to find what suits you and your strenght, stature and personal taste. And what you want to use it for, cavalry use, against a peasant rebellion or against armoured knights.
And if you are fighting armour, get a poleaxe and a warhammer (a.k.a military pick in Warband) as a sidekick and leave the sword at home.

Maybe add the single player swords in the game and have players random drop weapons and items when they die like bots in singleplayer campaign. Then you can keep the weapons/armour till the server restarts or something. Also, make weapons break. That way sometimes youll have to pick up a lower quality weapon till you can find/purchase another.

Attacksmurfen said:

Different swords would be made on different armouries, with different qualities - not all swords would have been perfect, so why not implement that fact in the game too?
It's perfectly possible to have a longer blade still being very light and very fast, and still have excellent cutting ability in comparison to a heavier, shorter and broader blade. The steels' quality and tempering, the cross section of the blade and the skill of the swordsmith all make a difference. Although there will always be some kind of trade off between different blade types in general.

But you still have to find what suits you and your strenght, stature and personal taste. And what you want to use it for, cavalry use, against a peasant rebellion or against armoured knights.
And if you are fighting armour, get a poleaxe and a warhammer (a.k.a military pick in Warband) as a sidekick and leave the sword at home.

Click to expand...

No don't leave the sword at home, just in it's sheath until you might need it 

Also don't forget there were longswords specifically designed to fight armor. They could still cut, but less powerfully. They generally tapered all along the blade into a very sharp point. They were adept at puncturing through mail, and would be used to slip into the gaps in plate armor and puncture the mail beneath.

Personally, I think the bastard swords need a boost in their thrusting damage. It's disappointing when I run my sword all the way through somebody's unarmored chest, cause some damage and have to keep fighting him, or sneak up behind someone and stab through his unprotected head or neck but not kill him.


Overall I support this thread.

ares007 said:

Attacksmurfen said:

Different swords would be made on different armouries, with different qualities - not all swords would have been perfect, so why not implement that fact in the game too?
It's perfectly possible to have a longer blade still being very light and very fast, and still have excellent cutting ability in comparison to a heavier, shorter and broader blade. The steels' quality and tempering, the cross section of the blade and the skill of the swordsmith all make a difference. Although there will always be some kind of trade off between different blade types in general.

But you still have to find what suits you and your strenght, stature and personal taste. And what you want to use it for, cavalry use, against a peasant rebellion or against armoured knights.
And if you are fighting armour, get a poleaxe and a warhammer (a.k.a military pick in Warband) as a sidekick and leave the sword at home.

Click to expand...

No don't leave the sword at home, just in it's sheath until you might need it 

Also don't forget there were longswords specifically designed to fight armor. They could still cut, but less powerfully. They generally tapered all along the blade into a very sharp point. They were adept at puncturing through mail, and would be used to slip into the gaps in plate armor and puncture the mail beneath.

Personally, I think the bastard swords need a boost in their thrusting damage. It's disappointing when I run my sword all the way through somebody's unarmored chest, cause some damage and have to keep fighting him, or sneak up behind someone and stab through his unprotected head or neck but not kill him.


Overall I support this thread.

Click to expand...

Honestly, those swords weren't very good vs mail either, I know, I have 2 (Albion Talhoffer and Albion Burgundian). The Talhoffer has a reinforced tip which could break a link or two in mail, but wouldn't cause more damage than to piss people off.
And yes, I don't understand why thrusting in general is so weak, it's harder to pull off and you can't speed it up so much on foot as you can with a cut.