Combat realism in Brytenwalda the discussion
- Thread starter Life_Erikson
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Seleri
Recruit
mouthnhoof said:
I'm not kidding in any way and if you read what I wrote, you wouldn't have to ask. So the character of the show as a competetive match-up doesn't suite you, I understand that and I don't like it either. However, watching the show will still illustrate what kind of damage a weapon can do and that's basically the only purpose I used it to.
mouthnhoof said:
Why overpowered? It doesn't need to make much damage. And if the enemy is intelligent enough (ill try if they are) they will raise their shields right afterwards.
-I see that there's a little problem. We can shieldbash right afterwards and afterwards and so on. That must be changed, so you just can shieldbash in several periods.
We dont need to make the damage that high or even that the enemy falls down. A stun would suffice all as well, when the enemy doesn't block.
Gerard Mulder
Veteran
I like the shiedbash and close quater spear idea. I like 2 handed swords but only for some special swords like Hrunting etc. I like all else the way it is and do not agree with any of the suggested "reforms" in the head of this thread. The slow speed, the low damaga the crippled cav and archery all contribute vatly to the Brytenwalda feel and sets the mod apart from native. Cheaper but much weaker shields could open up a few strategies but would mainly benefit the 2 hand axe users.
Brytenwalda is best with weapon breaking occuring quite often on powerweapons like swords and 2 hand axes but much less on spears.... The spear should be the dominant weapon and as such needs all the help it can get. It is just too bad that Mount and blade has a weak spot here and it can probably not be fixed in a mod.
Cheers,
Gerard
Brytenwalda is best with weapon breaking occuring quite often on powerweapons like swords and 2 hand axes but much less on spears.... The spear should be the dominant weapon and as such needs all the help it can get. It is just too bad that Mount and blade has a weak spot here and it can probably not be fixed in a mod.
Cheers,
Gerard
olla podrida
Regular
Hi Gerard!
That's ok for you, but this is a thread to discuss a minimod which is to be made for those who want the combatsystem changed. So if you don't like it you don't need to download it.
One thing you wrote I want to underline, that this mod is spear focused. That should be the case with the minimod, too.
They should deliver a bit more damage then they do now in comparison the other weapons.
That's ok for you, but this is a thread to discuss a minimod which is to be made for those who want the combatsystem changed. So if you don't like it you don't need to download it.
One thing you wrote I want to underline, that this mod is spear focused. That should be the case with the minimod, too.
They should deliver a bit more damage then they do now in comparison the other weapons.
Gerard Mulder said:
This modification to Brytenwalda is ment to make the combat feeling more realistic.
To find out what's best for the mod and how early medieval combat really felt like, I created this thread.
This is not a "I don't like Brytenwalda let's change it" thread, but one to improove gameplay.
I recognize, that many players want to keep the old gameplay, so I think this will stay an optional modification
and will never be an inherent part of Brytenwalda. (I think this is what Idibil want it to be too as long as there're still players who want the "old" Brytenwalda)
PS: Two handed axes won't be anymore ingame then (at least none, which can not be welded with on hand too)
so this will not be a problem.
Gerard Mulder said:
olla podrida said:
Taking note: Spears should deliver more damage in relation to other weapons. (Now just too weak in relation)
Seleri
Recruit
Although I already added some thoughts, I'll try to get somewhat more precise in this post.
1. Speed
Base Speed of all weapons needs to be raised by some degree, maybe save for the Two Handed War Axe. Also I think speed should scale with profiency, to imitate the effect of training.
2. Damage
Base Damage needs to be raised. Especially Polearms need a buff to their piercing damage values. However, damage scaling with profiency should be less important than it is right now. It's not that difficult to deliver a heavy blow without training, but delivering them fast and precisely is. Piercingdamage on a sword should NEVER be higher than at a spear.
3. Critical Damage or "Headshot!"
Not that I've anything against headshots in general, what bugs me is, that you get a damage bonus for getting a hit on the head with distance weapons, but you don't get it for delivering a blow to the hat. Also it's quite irritating to have someone with an arrow through the head charge at you in full speed.
Headshots as well as blows to the hat, as far as it's unarmored or only lightly armored, should be basically killing blows. One may walk away with an hatchet in the head, but he's not fighting anymore.
4. Horses
Charge Damage wouldn't be hurt by a small buff. However the most impotant point with these is damage delivered from horseback. To get a 100% Bonus right now is uncommon enough, but in reality the increase would be way higher. I'd suggest to at least double the bonus.
5. Armor
Armor right now isn't specific enough. Chainmail has to be effective against slashing, but far weaker against piercing damage. Also it's effectiveness against blunt damage shouldn't be that high. With leather it's another story. better ability to absorb blunt damage, but more vulnerable to slashing and piercing.
6. Weapon Breakage
Right now I think it's to high. I broke 3 Weapons in a single battle, spear, axe and sword, all of high quality and that's unbearable. If a weapon smith would sell a weapon fpr this price, that breaks shortly after, he'd be dead as soon as one of his customers comes back alive despite of his broken weapon. A tempered sword breaking while slashing down a couple of peasants wasn't of quality at all.
1. Speed
Base Speed of all weapons needs to be raised by some degree, maybe save for the Two Handed War Axe. Also I think speed should scale with profiency, to imitate the effect of training.
2. Damage
Base Damage needs to be raised. Especially Polearms need a buff to their piercing damage values. However, damage scaling with profiency should be less important than it is right now. It's not that difficult to deliver a heavy blow without training, but delivering them fast and precisely is. Piercingdamage on a sword should NEVER be higher than at a spear.
3. Critical Damage or "Headshot!"
Not that I've anything against headshots in general, what bugs me is, that you get a damage bonus for getting a hit on the head with distance weapons, but you don't get it for delivering a blow to the hat. Also it's quite irritating to have someone with an arrow through the head charge at you in full speed.
Headshots as well as blows to the hat, as far as it's unarmored or only lightly armored, should be basically killing blows. One may walk away with an hatchet in the head, but he's not fighting anymore.
4. Horses
Charge Damage wouldn't be hurt by a small buff. However the most impotant point with these is damage delivered from horseback. To get a 100% Bonus right now is uncommon enough, but in reality the increase would be way higher. I'd suggest to at least double the bonus.
5. Armor
Armor right now isn't specific enough. Chainmail has to be effective against slashing, but far weaker against piercing damage. Also it's effectiveness against blunt damage shouldn't be that high. With leather it's another story. better ability to absorb blunt damage, but more vulnerable to slashing and piercing.
6. Weapon Breakage
Right now I think it's to high. I broke 3 Weapons in a single battle, spear, axe and sword, all of high quality and that's unbearable. If a weapon smith would sell a weapon fpr this price, that breaks shortly after, he'd be dead as soon as one of his customers comes back alive despite of his broken weapon. A tempered sword breaking while slashing down a couple of peasants wasn't of quality at all.
Seleri said:
1/2/4: nothing new to me
3: "Headshots" with melee weapons allready deliver much more damage in native
5: Don't know how this works in M&B and if it is possible to edit this
6: VERY IMPORTANT (note)
Tchan
Veteran
Well can i ask all you yay sayers to what level you have played this mod?
Strikes me your just the nerf gang, and if you ever hit level 10 or above you'l realise that you just ****ed the game mechanics up.
With average spear skills im killing people with one hit from horseback, with the 2h axe i can kill 40 bandits, with sword and shield and can take out 15 dena's, and from horseback i can kill 40 if i have the patience and dont get giddy from constantly riding in circles.
Anyways i've said this before, i think you should just go play the game and stop whining. It's just the first 10 levels are tough and that's what you are complaining about.
Strikes me your just the nerf gang, and if you ever hit level 10 or above you'l realise that you just ****ed the game mechanics up.
With average spear skills im killing people with one hit from horseback, with the 2h axe i can kill 40 bandits, with sword and shield and can take out 15 dena's, and from horseback i can kill 40 if i have the patience and dont get giddy from constantly riding in circles.
Anyways i've said this before, i think you should just go play the game and stop whining. It's just the first 10 levels are tough and that's what you are complaining about.
Tchan said:
Sorry but maybe just you should stop whining. This modification for Brytenwalda is going to be optional!
People who don't like it just don't need to download it.
Anyways the aim of the mod is not "to make whining noobs lifes easier", but to improove realism.
I said about a hundred times so.
And it really doesn't interest me how many bandits you can kill....
If you see problems with the realism in later levels, just say so.
But there's not only you who had allready mentioned that this is maybe going to be a problem.
And I wrote too, that I worry about this.
Reading the thread first would help.
graycloak
Sergeant
1. Speed scales with skill or stats, either way it gets progressively faster..I think this is basically fine the way it is; close quarters animations blocking way too many swings is more of a problem.
2. Again, damage goes up as you level and increase abilities/skills...I have no problems with present damage and often one-shot opponents as well as occasionally getting one-shotted, higher damage would start to make it silly.
3. I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure headshots already do more damage - if for no other reason than head armors have low values in this mod
4. the damage from horse impact could go up slightly, the physics of the knockback and getting stuck are really a problem with native and how it handles collisions
5. Given that wearing various padding under the chain was pretty much standard practice, the argument that the leathers of the period should be better against blunt weapons is pretty weak. I think the armor comparisons are pretty good as is.
6. Weapon breakage can already be turned off, I am not sure how many different levels of "breakage" there need to be. Also, given that it only is a problem for the player, the entire concept is kind of silly. Quartermaster to player, "So, why are you the only schmuck in this entire army who breaks a sword every battle?"
2. Again, damage goes up as you level and increase abilities/skills...I have no problems with present damage and often one-shot opponents as well as occasionally getting one-shotted, higher damage would start to make it silly.
3. I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure headshots already do more damage - if for no other reason than head armors have low values in this mod
4. the damage from horse impact could go up slightly, the physics of the knockback and getting stuck are really a problem with native and how it handles collisions
5. Given that wearing various padding under the chain was pretty much standard practice, the argument that the leathers of the period should be better against blunt weapons is pretty weak. I think the armor comparisons are pretty good as is.
6. Weapon breakage can already be turned off, I am not sure how many different levels of "breakage" there need to be. Also, given that it only is a problem for the player, the entire concept is kind of silly. Quartermaster to player, "So, why are you the only schmuck in this entire army who breaks a sword every battle?"
1/2: The main idea is to improve realism and actually you don't need to be very good to swing for exemple an axe fast and deadly. (I try to care about the danger of one shots in later levels)
3: They're and yes: Helmets really need to give more armor. (noted)
4: Allready mentioned
5: Reasonable (We don't need to change anything there then)
6: I'll talk to Idibil there. Weaponbreakage is interesting but the chance is way too high and bad for gameplay
3: They're and yes: Helmets really need to give more armor. (noted)
4: Allready mentioned
5: Reasonable (We don't need to change anything there then)
6: I'll talk to Idibil there. Weaponbreakage is interesting but the chance is way too high and bad for gameplay
Donkerman
Sergeant at Arms
My opinion on weapon breakage:
Weapons should have a health (I think it already has) that deteriorates with usage, which could be fixed (healed) by a weaponsmith. On very rare occasions a weapon could instantly break regardless of its health. But this should be very rare and maybe become more probable with lowering health (percentage wise). But weapon breakage shouldnt be a hasstle just an added realism. I dont want to run to the weaponsmith after each battle or be scared to wing my sword at an oponent. I also think blocking with a weapon should cause more damage to the weapon than striking an oponent on the body.
Weapons should have a health (I think it already has) that deteriorates with usage, which could be fixed (healed) by a weaponsmith. On very rare occasions a weapon could instantly break regardless of its health. But this should be very rare and maybe become more probable with lowering health (percentage wise). But weapon breakage shouldnt be a hasstle just an added realism. I dont want to run to the weaponsmith after each battle or be scared to wing my sword at an oponent. I also think blocking with a weapon should cause more damage to the weapon than striking an oponent on the body.
Donkerman said:
The main problem is, that you need to make a script that does this. I'm not a scripter but I think that this would be very difficult to make.
Yeah. I've allready added "deleting the weapon brakeage" or at least fixing it, so it wont happen that often.
lordrrm
Recruit
hello gents,
I like this mod a lot so, the more realism the better, if you ask me.
Increasing horse combat does not make it more realistic as this mod is set in 7th century England. There hardly was horseback combat at that time!
The discussion about the size of warhorses is a tricky point. ''Small'' horses used in combat where mostly seen in mid-eastern Europe at the time as used by nomadic people. More to the west horses where still used to carry the soldiers to the battle and fast manouvre on the battlefield. It is not until later that horses played a more active role and knights prefered bigger horses but scientific studies have made clear that a bigger horse did not effect delivered damage, weight of armor it can carry etc. very much. It was more a thought of the time and prestige to have a special bread warhorse and it is the weight and strenght of the rider which is of influence on the combat.
The saddle introduced by the romans made it able to use polearms on horseback. Otherwise one could only use a shortsword but not while riding/moving. The technique for using a polearm without stirrups is very difficult and could have you ''launched''. So a polearm and short sword should be all used in this mod and the swords only while standing still with your horse.
It is not untill the introducton of ''modern'' stirrups by the Avars that mounted combat became more common. Up intull that time horses where mainly used to bring man at arms to the fields and have them move quick on the battlefield.
Stirrups became popular fast in Europe but where not used in England untill the 8th century! Only then it was possible to use weapons while on horseback and riding.
Charging was later possible when a new type of bit (and perfected with new and more widely used spurs) was introduced which allowed a better control over the horse. Overall we also see horses being armored at the time that happened to act as heavy cavalry.
All in all we should not think of the early middle ages as the era of knights.
Actually the first use in such a way was seen in France and middle Europe when lords armed regular men with armor and weapons to protect castles and it surroundings. It was hugely succesfull. They where called milites. Horseriding combat was very difficult and therefore more and more nobles became involved because it gave prestige to be identified with such horsemanship and it is not untill then that it became very popular and the era of horse mounted combat became widespread and we later speak of ''knights'' instead of ''milites''.
The main difficulty is the way we think . Much like Homers Yllias and Oddysee describe more about his own age instead of the history it is suposed to be telling just like the movie Gladiator also has stirrups which says more about how we ride horses nowadays instead of how the romans did it.
sorry if my english isn't good but i hope it is clear what i am saying
I like this mod a lot so, the more realism the better, if you ask me.
Increasing horse combat does not make it more realistic as this mod is set in 7th century England. There hardly was horseback combat at that time!
The discussion about the size of warhorses is a tricky point. ''Small'' horses used in combat where mostly seen in mid-eastern Europe at the time as used by nomadic people. More to the west horses where still used to carry the soldiers to the battle and fast manouvre on the battlefield. It is not until later that horses played a more active role and knights prefered bigger horses but scientific studies have made clear that a bigger horse did not effect delivered damage, weight of armor it can carry etc. very much. It was more a thought of the time and prestige to have a special bread warhorse and it is the weight and strenght of the rider which is of influence on the combat.
The saddle introduced by the romans made it able to use polearms on horseback. Otherwise one could only use a shortsword but not while riding/moving. The technique for using a polearm without stirrups is very difficult and could have you ''launched''. So a polearm and short sword should be all used in this mod and the swords only while standing still with your horse.
It is not untill the introducton of ''modern'' stirrups by the Avars that mounted combat became more common. Up intull that time horses where mainly used to bring man at arms to the fields and have them move quick on the battlefield.
Stirrups became popular fast in Europe but where not used in England untill the 8th century! Only then it was possible to use weapons while on horseback and riding.
Charging was later possible when a new type of bit (and perfected with new and more widely used spurs) was introduced which allowed a better control over the horse. Overall we also see horses being armored at the time that happened to act as heavy cavalry.
All in all we should not think of the early middle ages as the era of knights.
Actually the first use in such a way was seen in France and middle Europe when lords armed regular men with armor and weapons to protect castles and it surroundings. It was hugely succesfull. They where called milites. Horseriding combat was very difficult and therefore more and more nobles became involved because it gave prestige to be identified with such horsemanship and it is not untill then that it became very popular and the era of horse mounted combat became widespread and we later speak of ''knights'' instead of ''milites''.
The main difficulty is the way we think . Much like Homers Yllias and Oddysee describe more about his own age instead of the history it is suposed to be telling just like the movie Gladiator also has stirrups which says more about how we ride horses nowadays instead of how the romans did it.
sorry if my english isn't good but i hope it is clear what i am saying
It's clear, that the early medieval period wasn't a period of cavalry and especial not of knights that's for shure.
But what shell I do now with this?
I defenitly won't remouve cavalry out of the game. This would be a far too deep change to Brytenwalda.
I cannot do a script that keeps you away from attacking while moving with the horse.
It wouldn't be realistic and usefull to gameplay too I think.
The only thing I can do to make cavalry less important in game is lowering the health of horses and their charge.
(which was allready mentioned)
Would be great if anybody knows how to make a script to make horses shy.....
I don't know how to.
But what shell I do now with this?
I defenitly won't remouve cavalry out of the game. This would be a far too deep change to Brytenwalda.
I cannot do a script that keeps you away from attacking while moving with the horse.
It wouldn't be realistic and usefull to gameplay too I think.
The only thing I can do to make cavalry less important in game is lowering the health of horses and their charge.
(which was allready mentioned)
Would be great if anybody knows how to make a script to make horses shy.....
I don't know how to.
lordrrm
Recruit
I'm fine with the way horses are now and know it is impossible or hard to change a lot about it. I think it is actually very good that you already lowered health but it should not be to low. I think horsemanship is fine as it is in this mod.
My post was more a reaction because I've read people asked for more horse combat/charging.
My post was more a reaction because I've read people asked for more horse combat/charging.
