Sword to sword Interactions
- Thread starter SealTeam
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
LokiGodOfFire
Veteran
the "survival dagger" could be selected with the shield select button...
but disarming, yes that should be possible. or more precise arming. like slahes to the foes legs when he tries to block with a shield. or even a body slam to avoid his shield defense
but disarming, yes that should be possible. or more precise arming. like slahes to the foes legs when he tries to block with a shield. or even a body slam to avoid his shield defense
Angry Knight
Recruit
Would it be possiable have have a system where if you both go for each other, the person with the lower strengh has their weapon thrown from their hands and then they have to run a nd pick it up or whatever. Also it could be deflected and become wedged in trees, the ground, rocks etc.
One of the things I hate is the zerg effect when it's more people versus you, you'de think swinging around a heavy two hander would create some distance between you and your assailant if he can't catch the swing, or cut through 2 of em if you slice through the head .
Hmm, parry and kick option, you push a foe back with a slight domino effect.
.Hmm, parry and kick option, you push a foe back with a slight domino effect.
LokiGodOfFire
Veteran
best would be a higher push back effect, so more enemies fall down by the swings of 2 handed weapons, that imo are just useless.. works only in training
LokiGodOfFire
Veteran
but well best fighting simulation i saw yet was... well dark messiah
surely its not too realistic with all those cut off heads arms etc. but its quite well done... 2 hits one foe s dead.
against groups you dont fight. you run. you try to kick something in their way, separate them, get help etc.
that are some things that m&b can't really simulate.
but well its still a fine game n i like it. fightings better than elder scrolls 3 n 4....
give us kicking plz. or unarmed fighting, not fisticuff but something like wrestling, throws etc.
surely its not too realistic with all those cut off heads arms etc. but its quite well done... 2 hits one foe s dead.
against groups you dont fight. you run. you try to kick something in their way, separate them, get help etc.
that are some things that m&b can't really simulate.
but well its still a fine game n i like it. fightings better than elder scrolls 3 n 4....
give us kicking plz. or unarmed fighting, not fisticuff but something like wrestling, throws etc.
DarthMRN
Regular
I personally really like the idea of giving weapons durability like shields. It would totally change how weapons were used and battles fought in the game. But there is a problem: The one with the big, heavy weapon would be at a gross advantage regardless of skill, and as someone said somewhere, lone superfighters would lose out against the endless masses of goons as their weapon slowly wears down.
The solution would be a parrying mechanic IMO. I don't know jack about coding a game, but I think I've figured out a way to implement this in a very easy, non-invasive way, and would love some critical feedback.
Outline:
1) Enemy attacks
2) You time your block as normal and holds down the button
3) Depending on a trait-based trigger, you have a chance to make a parry rather than a static block
4) Parry animation is triggered in your character model, while a Deflected Attack animation is triggered in the enemy
5) While the Deflected Attack animation lasts, the enemy is open for riposte from you
Now, some specifics:
There would be no need for any fancy physics or cut-scene like animations. Simply four new animations for each weapon type. When an opponent strikes at your head with his sword now, you see an animation of your own weapon going over your head in a horizontal line, stopping the attack from impacting. With this system, you instead see your weapon tilting downwards to the left (preferrably accompanied with a sound cue of some sort to let you know you parried successfully) and an animation of the enemy's attack having been redirected, perhaps something generic, like their weapon bouncing back (just to keep it simple), while your own weapon is now ready to riposte while he is momentarily stunned as the Deflected Attack animation plays. As an example. There would obviously need to be at least one Deflected Attack animation per weapon type, and four Parry animations, one for each angle of attack.
As for how it would be triggered, I was thinking of something like a percentage chance equal to 0,25 % for every point of Weapon Proficiency you beat your opponent by. But it could be handled as a separate skill too.
If the parry doesn't kick in, a regular block is made, with corresponding damage to your weapon.
Of course, for the sake of simplicity, there would be no guarantee of the two animations even making physical contact with each other. You might well see your axe aimed at the enemy's head be bounced back by a Parry animation that didn't even make contact. The animations would just be cues for mechanical effects. We can hardly expect a fencing system from M&B that even hyped-up, big budget games cannot do.
That way, we would be rid of peasants using clubs to block our great axes without making big weapons the be-all end-all of combat. And make combat way more interesting in the process. And I think it would be very doable, the new animations being the only real problem. Calculating the effects of Weapon Proficiencies in real time is done already, and otherwise, it would be a mere matter of replacing Block animations with Parry animations in the defender, and Injured animations with Attack Deflected animations in the attacker.
The solution would be a parrying mechanic IMO. I don't know jack about coding a game, but I think I've figured out a way to implement this in a very easy, non-invasive way, and would love some critical feedback.
Outline:
1) Enemy attacks
2) You time your block as normal and holds down the button
3) Depending on a trait-based trigger, you have a chance to make a parry rather than a static block
4) Parry animation is triggered in your character model, while a Deflected Attack animation is triggered in the enemy
5) While the Deflected Attack animation lasts, the enemy is open for riposte from you
Now, some specifics:
There would be no need for any fancy physics or cut-scene like animations. Simply four new animations for each weapon type. When an opponent strikes at your head with his sword now, you see an animation of your own weapon going over your head in a horizontal line, stopping the attack from impacting. With this system, you instead see your weapon tilting downwards to the left (preferrably accompanied with a sound cue of some sort to let you know you parried successfully) and an animation of the enemy's attack having been redirected, perhaps something generic, like their weapon bouncing back (just to keep it simple), while your own weapon is now ready to riposte while he is momentarily stunned as the Deflected Attack animation plays. As an example. There would obviously need to be at least one Deflected Attack animation per weapon type, and four Parry animations, one for each angle of attack.
As for how it would be triggered, I was thinking of something like a percentage chance equal to 0,25 % for every point of Weapon Proficiency you beat your opponent by. But it could be handled as a separate skill too.
If the parry doesn't kick in, a regular block is made, with corresponding damage to your weapon.
Of course, for the sake of simplicity, there would be no guarantee of the two animations even making physical contact with each other. You might well see your axe aimed at the enemy's head be bounced back by a Parry animation that didn't even make contact. The animations would just be cues for mechanical effects. We can hardly expect a fencing system from M&B that even hyped-up, big budget games cannot do.
That way, we would be rid of peasants using clubs to block our great axes without making big weapons the be-all end-all of combat. And make combat way more interesting in the process. And I think it would be very doable, the new animations being the only real problem. Calculating the effects of Weapon Proficiencies in real time is done already, and otherwise, it would be a mere matter of replacing Block animations with Parry animations in the defender, and Injured animations with Attack Deflected animations in the attacker.
GaGrin
Squire
The only thing I dislike about that implementation is the way it is disconnected from player interaction. The majority of the combat system is well within the control of the player at all times and I feel that any mechanic that is added must allow some method of high player skill to overcome poor character skill in this kind of hybrid game system.
I personally would prefer something where block timing increased blocking chance as well as proficency. So holding a block would defend, but wouldn't ever cause a parry, waiting and timing it would enable parries - with higher prof ratings meaning parries at less and less perfect timing.
I also see no way for the parried attacker to defend against the riposte - there should always be a way out even if you simply make the weapon unusable for a few moments and tie recovery time into weapon proficency - they still can potentially dodge the attack (always more difficult than a block/parry) but it doesn't leave them without defence.
I personally would prefer something where block timing increased blocking chance as well as proficency. So holding a block would defend, but wouldn't ever cause a parry, waiting and timing it would enable parries - with higher prof ratings meaning parries at less and less perfect timing.
I also see no way for the parried attacker to defend against the riposte - there should always be a way out even if you simply make the weapon unusable for a few moments and tie recovery time into weapon proficency - they still can potentially dodge the attack (always more difficult than a block/parry) but it doesn't leave them without defence.
DarthMRN
Regular
Hmmm...
Well, blocks are timed, to some extent, so for all I know it might be possible to make it so you have to time it right for a parry. But imagine a scenario where it is you alone against a horde of spearmen. The prerequisite for the whole mechanic was that weapons used for blocking would be damaged, and to give you a way to avoid taking this damage if you were skilled enough. If the player is forced to time it right himself, it would weaken the usefulness of the technique tremendously.
Of course, you can say that realistically your character shouldn't be able to parry five out of ten incoming spear tips in fast succession in the first place, but then, he shouldn't be able to defeat a vastly superior foe (or army) due to player skill alone either.
As for defending against the riposte, you may have a point that it sucks to be a sitting duck. But honestly, when your average trooper can endure as much punishment as he can, clubs can knock you down, and knights can stun you with their horse before hitting you unhindered, it is not like sitting duck mode is anything new in M&B.
Besides, if the Weapon Proficiency thingy was followed, the only foes who would suffer riposte openings with any frequency would be those weak enough you would just wade through them anyway. The rest would suffer them only occasionally, and likely have enough armour to wheather the riposte anyway.
To take it a bit further, this would definetly make combat more dangerous for the player, as he might attack a superior foe, find himself parried and riposted against unable to do anything about it -perhaps while staving off several opponents. I can se why this would be a problem, but personally, what I like most about M&B is the feeling of being just one among many, which means that anything that makes character skill more important than player skill is a good thing in my book. But I can understand why many would disagree on that.
Perhaps a compromise? Make parries even more likely than what I suggested. 0,30 % pr. point of Proficiency difference, with a successful parry preventing any use of weapon or shield for a short while, but still permitting movement, so that you can at least back down from the incoming horde. How does that strike you?
Well, blocks are timed, to some extent, so for all I know it might be possible to make it so you have to time it right for a parry. But imagine a scenario where it is you alone against a horde of spearmen. The prerequisite for the whole mechanic was that weapons used for blocking would be damaged, and to give you a way to avoid taking this damage if you were skilled enough. If the player is forced to time it right himself, it would weaken the usefulness of the technique tremendously.
Of course, you can say that realistically your character shouldn't be able to parry five out of ten incoming spear tips in fast succession in the first place, but then, he shouldn't be able to defeat a vastly superior foe (or army) due to player skill alone either.
As for defending against the riposte, you may have a point that it sucks to be a sitting duck. But honestly, when your average trooper can endure as much punishment as he can, clubs can knock you down, and knights can stun you with their horse before hitting you unhindered, it is not like sitting duck mode is anything new in M&B.
Besides, if the Weapon Proficiency thingy was followed, the only foes who would suffer riposte openings with any frequency would be those weak enough you would just wade through them anyway. The rest would suffer them only occasionally, and likely have enough armour to wheather the riposte anyway.
To take it a bit further, this would definetly make combat more dangerous for the player, as he might attack a superior foe, find himself parried and riposted against unable to do anything about it -perhaps while staving off several opponents. I can se why this would be a problem, but personally, what I like most about M&B is the feeling of being just one among many, which means that anything that makes character skill more important than player skill is a good thing in my book. But I can understand why many would disagree on that.
Perhaps a compromise? Make parries even more likely than what I suggested. 0,30 % pr. point of Proficiency difference, with a successful parry preventing any use of weapon or shield for a short while, but still permitting movement, so that you can at least back down from the incoming horde. How does that strike you?
GaGrin
Squire
I always consider new mechanics from the point of view of a new player character in a one-vs-one. If its a fair mechanic in that situation then its a fair mechanic. Numbers/terrain/weapons etc. just confuse the issue so lets treat multiple opponents as its own problem for now.
The trouble I see with basing it purely on weapon proficency is that a starting player is going to have a very large number of ripostes performed against him with abosultely no chance of performing them back. This kind of mechanic is extremely one-sided and more than a little unfair considering the advantage that higher weapon proficencies already grant.
As I mentioned I like the general theory of the idea and I DO think that parries need to be more involved than the solid blocks ingame currently... I just would prefer something that can go both ways, rather than your current comparison mechanic.
The trouble I see with basing it purely on weapon proficency is that a starting player is going to have a very large number of ripostes performed against him with abosultely no chance of performing them back. This kind of mechanic is extremely one-sided and more than a little unfair considering the advantage that higher weapon proficencies already grant.
As I mentioned I like the general theory of the idea and I DO think that parries need to be more involved than the solid blocks ingame currently... I just would prefer something that can go both ways, rather than your current comparison mechanic.
DarthMRN
Regular
What sort of advantages do Proficiency give at high levels? For all my time spent playing, I've never noticed anything but increased damage. And that always bothered me.
How are the Proficiency differences in the early game, BTW? A starting character might have something like 60. How much do river pirates, sea raiders and bandits have? But I guess what you are saying comes back to my personal preference: Getting parried badly by more seasoned warriors early in the game, and later not at all, and finally parrying back as your skill grows is just the kind of thing I would love to play.
On the other hand, I see what your are saying. The early game can be challenging enough for a casual player as it is, without the stray knight totally owning them and their party.
But you bring up a valid point about the odds. Perhaps a solution could be to give anyone a chance to Parry against anyone. A 2% chance minimum, perhaps.
As for something more involved than a simple comparison, I don't see that there is much to chose from. I suppose some button combo would be viable, but that suffers from the same problems as timing, namely being too difficult to perform under anything but ideal circumstances.
Ok. Retry:
Rather than having the parry be passive, lets assume that realism counts for enough in M&B that a good parry would be impossible against multiple opponents, thus justifying the below.
A Parry can be performed if timed correctly, which would make it very hard to do against more than one opponent unless there is a gross skill difference. The difference in Weapon Proficiency increases the error margin for that timing AND automatically reduces the damage inflicted on the weapon used when blocking. But to compensate for the added difficulty, I would add an automatic riposte to a successful parry (which would require an even more complicated animation).
That way you have your player component, and a skilled user can still block for a long time with his weapon before it is broken, while also have a fair chance to trounce his foe through sheer skill.
Two problems arise with this solution, however:
1) Far more complicated than my original suggestion. There is a difference between what would be preferable, and what is feasible.
2) In the latest versions I've noticed a distinct increase in difficulty using only a weapon to defend with compared to earlier versions, where you really didn't need a shield for anything but arrows. You already have to time a block fairly well to have it happen, which means that the window for a correctly timed parry like this would be tiny even at high skill levels. I dare say that in the heat of battle, with multiple foes bearing down on you, the tiny window would ensure that parries only happened as flukes -lucky breaks- and then where is the player skill component? Then it might as well be a matter of chance generated by your stats.
How are the Proficiency differences in the early game, BTW? A starting character might have something like 60. How much do river pirates, sea raiders and bandits have? But I guess what you are saying comes back to my personal preference: Getting parried badly by more seasoned warriors early in the game, and later not at all, and finally parrying back as your skill grows is just the kind of thing I would love to play.
On the other hand, I see what your are saying. The early game can be challenging enough for a casual player as it is, without the stray knight totally owning them and their party.
But you bring up a valid point about the odds. Perhaps a solution could be to give anyone a chance to Parry against anyone. A 2% chance minimum, perhaps.
As for something more involved than a simple comparison, I don't see that there is much to chose from. I suppose some button combo would be viable, but that suffers from the same problems as timing, namely being too difficult to perform under anything but ideal circumstances.
Ok. Retry:
Rather than having the parry be passive, lets assume that realism counts for enough in M&B that a good parry would be impossible against multiple opponents, thus justifying the below.
A Parry can be performed if timed correctly, which would make it very hard to do against more than one opponent unless there is a gross skill difference. The difference in Weapon Proficiency increases the error margin for that timing AND automatically reduces the damage inflicted on the weapon used when blocking. But to compensate for the added difficulty, I would add an automatic riposte to a successful parry (which would require an even more complicated animation).
That way you have your player component, and a skilled user can still block for a long time with his weapon before it is broken, while also have a fair chance to trounce his foe through sheer skill.
Two problems arise with this solution, however:
1) Far more complicated than my original suggestion. There is a difference between what would be preferable, and what is feasible.
2) In the latest versions I've noticed a distinct increase in difficulty using only a weapon to defend with compared to earlier versions, where you really didn't need a shield for anything but arrows. You already have to time a block fairly well to have it happen, which means that the window for a correctly timed parry like this would be tiny even at high skill levels. I dare say that in the heat of battle, with multiple foes bearing down on you, the tiny window would ensure that parries only happened as flukes -lucky breaks- and then where is the player skill component? Then it might as well be a matter of chance generated by your stats.
LokiGodOfFire
Veteran
To the advantages of higher weapon proficiencies:
They improve the weapon speed somehow... go n try to wield a twohanded warhammer from horseback with twohanded skill 70 and try it with skill 90 again, its quicker.
They improve the weapon speed somehow... go n try to wield a twohanded warhammer from horseback with twohanded skill 70 and try it with skill 90 again, its quicker.
LokiGodOfFire
Veteran
I had a different experience there.
Had a twohanded warhammer and used it from horseback. Now i fought with skill 60 and it was slow, to the end of the battle the skill was about 100 and it was nearly the same speed as a heavy axe on foot... the speed plainly improved.
Had a twohanded warhammer and used it from horseback. Now i fought with skill 60 and it was slow, to the end of the battle the skill was about 100 and it was nearly the same speed as a heavy axe on foot... the speed plainly improved.
AlphaDelta
Banned
This idea isn't exactly sword to sword, but it's close.
Why is it that you can only use the shield, or the sword, never both at the same time? It seems to me that currently 1 handed weapons are a bit un-realistic in the way that the combat system does not allow you to hold up your shield and at the same time stab to the front.
Why is it that you can only use the shield, or the sword, never both at the same time? It seems to me that currently 1 handed weapons are a bit un-realistic in the way that the combat system does not allow you to hold up your shield and at the same time stab to the front.
morgoth2005
Grandmaster Knight
I want a large yellow flash like in Star Wars
