A Debate to End All Debate - Two Handed Swords Too Fast

[othr]

I realize that with proper training you will learn how to preserve your balance and how to cause loss thereof in your opponent with a well balanced weapon.  Right now only two such techniques exist in MP warband, one being this 'chamber blocking' and the other one more of a bug, I assume, where you kick and execute your attack almost instantaneously.

How are these two techniques (chamber blocking and kickslashing) relevant to 'preserving your balance'? As far as I know, not nearly falling over when swinging a sword mostly has to do with pure swinging technique.

I highlighted the relevant part for you.

Well, thanks, but I asked for how it is relevant to 'preserving your balance', not 'how to cause loss thereof in your opponent'. By rereading your post, I realise that both of these techniques refer to the second. I simply was confused because the whole discussion was about preserving your own balance while swinging a blade.

Swinging your weapon rapidly would impact your 'balance negatively (1h or 2h, it doesn't really matter).  People have suggested a stamina bar, I'd rather see something along the lines of, hmm, loss of balance.  Exactly like the fat guy in the video I linked, a poorly executed maneuver would cause you to stagger.  How to code this for warband, well, the simplest approach would be, of course, something that counts the number of swings performed over time, the higher the number the higher the chance of you staggering.  The heavier and longer the weapon the worse the stagger becomes.  The period to get your 'chance to stagger' back to 0% would be rather short, 2-3s of defending or not doing anything.  This could add more depth to the combat system, and make it more strategic and interesting.

 

[Night Ninja]

There's one glaring flaw with that proposition. The combatants in Warband are trained. They are not weekend warriors who spend the rest of their spare time trying to break the world record for twinkie consumption.

 

[dana22]

2 handed weapons shouldnt swing as fast as 1 handers. Period. For the sake of balance. That worked in EVERY game so far.

 

[Lost-Lamb]

Well that's certainly debatable, I cringe every time I see those clumsy overdone arcs in games

 

[Yodarkore]

Okay. To let everyone be happy and agree to it, i can pwn every sword user by using my "modern" FAMAS/M16/AK74 (remember "indiana jones and the last crusade" ? :p )

Back on topic, i think they could add a "stamina" bar that should somewhat deplete every time you attack/block, to simulate that irl stamina loss over time that everyone might experience if they do a little sport/wood chopping or every "physical" activity.

I wasnt present in medieval time (otherwise i would be dead since long time ago, therefore not being able to write anything on any internet forum :p ), but when some people say that we should be "able to do more while jumping" or such things i think they are wrong, cuz they lack of sport training for themself (PC gaming might train you to only one thing: better hand to eye coordination, and if you stop gaming for a few weeks, you will loose it, it has been demonstrated by "scientific" demonstrations already).

In those civilized times, warriors spent all their day training the weapon they wanted (forced to) use. That's why they were kinda "champions". Heavy armored knights where put on their heavy horses (not that fancy light charger you can see on  movies but that heavy horse used to pull heavy lifts) by some cranes (my english isnt good enough to say right word for it).

As for 1H with 2H, i think that (in game) they might add some "shield profiency" to reflect training in use of 1H + shield vs dual 1H wielding (wich isnt implemented, and, historically speaking, was really rare) vs 2H users.

 

[Condestavel]

The idea os stamina is actually a very good one. There is one game called Severence: Blade of Darkness (rather old by now), this game is in many ways a prelude to Mount & blade, and I can honestly say that in terms of one to one combat was superior to MB, BUT due to its mechanics it was meant for you to fight 3 oponents max at the same time so i'm not trying to compare them (M&B is unique). It had parrys, feints, parry plus hits. It was very well done indeed here's an example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0C5uhumvb4 - ewven though this example is not perfect, if you have the patiente search for more.

Now to the point. In that game there was stamina, if you spam you would tire very quickly. Also with shields, if you hit a shield you would "recoil" leaving you open for a quick hit or two BUT you wouldn't spam block with shield because if the oponent landed a heavy blow on the shield you would take minor damage, and if the shield break you would receive 50% of the damage and YOU would "recoil".

 

[Frankmuddy]

just a comment on your weapon weight argument. Yes people think two handed weapons being so big that they must weigh a ton. in which case you are right, they dont. but you forget that holding a two handed sword that is almost 4 foot long at one end multiplies its feel of weight, try taking a metal pole that is about 4ft long and weighs around 5.5lbs (average size and weight of a claymore) and holding it at one end straight out from you, trust me it will seem alot heavier than it is. Now im no expert on this, but i think it has something to do with your hand placement being farther away from the center of gravity of the blade.

I am an expert on this, but since I know you won't take my word for it I'm going to go dig out a bunch of videos of german long sword fighting that demonstrate that the two handed weapons in M&B are not only not too fast, but in fact not fast enough to equal their real world counterparts.

Longsword

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj4Ng6DBfrg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6Pnw-9A8qQ&feature=fvw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC5FIyfI8TA&feature=related

Two guys in armor beating the hell out of each other

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnqOMbFDEAI

More longsword

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahi2wSjkra4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73FYGTJZAd4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNja00FNyeg&feature=related

And finally, a sword that is actually too big and heavy to use

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR1gCSO9NB0

 

[dana22]

@Condestavel

You dont need stamina. You just need to make 2 hander weapons slower.

Right now 2h's are spammable because of the speed, if they would be slower people wouldn't just mindlessly mash a button because that could create window of opportunity for their opponent to strike back.

 

[Roh]

I have no interest in reading the entire thread. The OP made some very good points. And I enjoyed the vid. However I would just say I would like to see a multiplayer mod that adds a stamina system at some point. I think that would balance things out very nicely.

I find attack spam to be yes very unrealistic. Especially when it can go on forever coming from a guy running around in 40+ pounds of armor with heavy sleeves. I mean he would get tired at some point.

And beyond realism I just think it would make combat more enjoyable for folks like me who enjoy careful tactical gameplay more than a type based on reflexes and uber click speed ability.

 

[Frankmuddy]

@Condestavel

You dont need stamina. You just need to make 2 hander weapons slower.

Right now 2h's are spammable because of the speed, if they would be slower people wouldn't just mindlessly mash a button because that could create window of opportunity for their opponent to strike back.

I disagree, I think they're fine, and mindless button mashing will get you cut down like a mindless animal.

 

[JonnyCombat]

Excellent post and well researched.

Any weapon of any type in the hands of a skilled user is a dangerous weapon.

I've actually held a real claymore (I'm English with Scottish relatives) and it's not as light as you're making out.  A true claymore is a massive thing, hence why the burly Scots carried it.  But then like you said, I'm not a mentally and physically tough medieval warrior so of course it's a struggle

As with every weapon choice the two handers do have a major failing: ranged weapons.  They also tend to be carried by spammers who haven't actually developed any other fighting skills and they can get shredded when you team up on them.

I use the same method for mount n blade online that I do for flight sims.  Target priorities.  I tend to class a claymore wielding nutter as my primary target on the battlefield, and will backup team mates engaged with one.  Once he's dead move on to the next one.

Or set up machine gun nests, mine fields, and flame throwers and see if he can swing throught that!

Oh no.. wait, wrong century.

 

[kingofnoobia]

2 handed weapons shouldnt swing as fast as 1 handers. Period. For the sake of balance. That worked in EVERY game so far.

Shove that period up your arse. You can't simply state something highly controversial and period it. You could say that it worked in every game so far, but the simple fact is that there aren't many games with decent melee. So it's hardly a time-tested system then, is it?

Besides, twohanders are balanced. Sure, in a one on one fight you're better off with a twohanded sword than with sword n board (though even that is already discussable, the twohander must be a good blocker, otherwise he's ****ed). But once you enter group combat against semi-decent opponents, you'll simply need a shield to last. I realise that you can get a good kill-streak by simply swinging a long bardiche in a group of unexperienced players. That is not the fault of the game mechanics. It's the players you are fighting against. You can get the exact same killstreak, with just a tad more effort, with a sword and board too.

The idea os stamina is actually a very good one. There is one game called Severence: Blade of Darkness (rather old by now), this game is in many ways a prelude to Mount & blade, and I can honestly say that in terms of one to one combat was superior to MB, BUT due to its mechanics it was meant for you to fight 3 oponents max at the same time so i'm not trying to compare them (M&B is unique). It had parrys, feints, parry plus hits. It was very well done indeed here's an example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0C5uhumvb4 - ewven though this example is not perfect, if you have the patiente search for more.

Now to the point. In that game there was stamina, if you spam you would tire very quickly. Also with shields, if you hit a shield you would "recoil" leaving you open for a quick hit or two BUT you wouldn't spam block with shield because if the oponent landed a heavy blow on the shield you would take minor damage, and if the shield break you would receive 50% of the damage and YOU would "recoil".

I am very much against stamina. I would absolutely hate it if I can no longer fight due to a bar being empty.
And I may be wrong, but the combat in that game looks crap to me. It's simply the movements that **** it up completely. Too much running and jumping about. And I don't like the mechanics you describe either. Stun/recoil simply isn't cool. No one should be completely defenseless, at any moment, in my opinion. Yes, I dislike knockdown and kick (at least the kickslashing part) in MnB too.

 

[Roh]

Meh, I did say a mod. That way those who like it.. Can use it. Those who don't won't have to. Simple.

 

[Shik]

Heavy armored knights where put on their heavy horses (not that fancy light charger you can see on  movies but that heavy horse used to pull heavy lifts) by some cranes (my english isnt good enough to say right word for it).

Umm no. Knights most certainly were not lifted by cranes onto their horses.
As for stamina: it wouldn't really be relevant as each battle only lasts around 5 minutes, 90% of which is spent running around rather than actually attacking. Also, I don't like the concept.

 

[kingofnoobia]

Heavy armored knights where put on their heavy horses (not that fancy light charger you can see on  movies but that heavy horse used to pull heavy lifts) by some cranes (my english isnt good enough to say right word for it).

Armour isn't that cumbersome. You can simply climb up a horse in full armour really. Not exactly what you said, but this video shows quite well that the mobility of a man in armour isn't as compromised as popular belief indicates: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMuNXWFPewg

You can even swim in plate armour, if you're fit enough.

 

[Teladis]

The main problem is not the speed of the 2hander. It is the feinting that resets the swing timer.


If you do a swing, make the swing go all the way through the animation. There is noway in hell you can stop a 2hander that fast to block in mid swing.


Feinting is the main problem meaning that the combat system itself needs to be reworked a tad to add more to it.

 

[Night Ninja]

The main problem is not the speed of the 2hander. It is the feinting that resets the swing timer.


If you do a swing, make the swing go all the way through the animation. There is noway in hell you can stop a 2hander that fast to block in mid swing.


Feinting is the main problem meaning that the combat system itself needs to be reworked a tad to add more to it.

I wonder if you've ever handled a real sword. If you haven't, please stop trying to speak like an authority on the subject.

 

[Urist]

Weapon are balanced around battle mode. While the two-handed
sword has an advantage over the 1hander without a shield,
the mayority of the Swadian footmen chooses sword&board.

It's not only the lesser vulnerabily against ranged weapons,
it's also the greater chances of survival when being outnumbered
and the protection from (melee) friendly fire that makes a shield
so great in a battle.
Furthermore even in an one-on-one situation between a twohanded sword
and a sword&board user, in my opinion the latter has the better chances
if both fighter are equally skilled. A two-handed sword has to work alot
to break a good shield.

 

[Condestavel]

2 handed weapons shouldnt swing as fast as 1 handers. Period. For the sake of balance. That worked in EVERY game so far.

Shove that period up your arse. You can't simply state something highly controversial and period it. You could say that it worked in every game so far, but the simple fact is that there aren't many games with decent melee. So it's hardly a time-tested system then, is it?

Besides, twohanders are balanced. Sure, in a one on one fight you're better off with a twohanded sword than with sword n board (though even that is already discussable, the twohander must be a good blocker, otherwise he's ****ed). But once you enter group combat against semi-decent opponents, you'll simply need a shield to last. I realise that you can get a good kill-streak by simply swinging a long bardiche in a group of unexperienced players. That is not the fault of the game mechanics. It's the players you are fighting against. You can get the exact same killstreak, with just a tad more effort, with a sword and board too.

The idea os stamina is actually a very good one. There is one game called Severence: Blade of Darkness (rather old by now), this game is in many ways a prelude to Mount & blade, and I can honestly say that in terms of one to one combat was superior to MB, BUT due to its mechanics it was meant for you to fight 3 oponents max at the same time so i'm not trying to compare them (M&B is unique). It had parrys, feints, parry plus hits. It was very well done indeed here's an example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0C5uhumvb4 - ewven though this example is not perfect, if you have the patiente search for more.

Now to the point. In that game there was stamina, if you spam you would tire very quickly. Also with shields, if you hit a shield you would "recoil" leaving you open for a quick hit or two BUT you wouldn't spam block with shield because if the oponent landed a heavy blow on the shield you would take minor damage, and if the shield break you would receive 50% of the damage and YOU would "recoil".

I am very much against stamina. I would absolutely hate it if I can no longer fight due to a bar being empty.
And I may be wrong, but the combat in that game looks crap to me. It's simply the movements that **** it up completely. Too much running and jumping about. And I don't like the mechanics you describe either. Stun/recoil simply isn't cool. No one should be completely defenseless, at any moment, in my opinion. Yes, I dislike knockdown and kick (at least the kickslashing part) in MnB too.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Heavy armored knights where put on their heavy horses (not that fancy light charger you can see on  movies but that heavy horse used to pull heavy lifts) by some cranes (my english isnt good enough to say right word for it).

Armour isn't that cumbersome. You can simply climb up a horse in full armour really. Not exactly what you said, but this video shows quite well that the mobility of a man in armour isn't as compromised as popular belief indicates: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMuNXWFPewg

You can even swim in plate armour, if you're fit enough.

Are you serious? Because if you are, let me break it for you,  you're ignorant as hell. You have TONS of examples in literary accounts of people who drown because of the armor, mostly when an army routed, but not only so. The most famous case being of Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor, who drowned in the river going to a crusade.

Plate armour consisted of a helmet, a gorget (or bevor), pauldrons (or spaulders), couters, vambraces, gauntlets, a cuirass (back and breastplate) with a fauld, tassets and a culet, a mail skirt, cuisses, poleyns, greaves, and sabatons. At a minimum full plate armour set could be as light as only 20 kg (45 pounds).

You would swim like a brick after 30 seconds.

 

[Yoshi Murasaki]

I understand now why people complain about 2 handers


Yup. I went through many servers and was surprised how many of them have Melee Friendly Fire switched off, and some even Ranged Friendly fire switched off. Of those who had Melee Friendly Fire on, some had it reduced to 25% (0% self, 25% ally, or something like that).

There, that's the reason. There's nothing wrong with 2handers on Friendly Fire servers.



Also, I noticed how different playstyle is on servers without friendly fire. When 3 guys are on you, a good player will have much more chance on Friendly Fire server (semi-circling around each of them, etc), while on non friendly fire server these three guys just keep spamming on him.

I love friendly fire and really can't stand servers who have it switched off and thus promote mindless spam. Since I play on servers with FF on, no wonder I didn't understand all these spamming accusations. On FF servers, 2H are nicely balanced.