Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

Users who are viewing this thread

e27 said:
Why dual Shields? What good would that do? It's safe to assume that it would never get used on MP, and the vulnerability to calvary...

That's a joke. :v

Well, as Si-A-erra said, it can be more useful than dual sword wielding. I just don't see the real benefit of using dual blades. Sword and dagger, perhaps, but two swords? No. You're likely to die fast, even if you stay behind a shield wall and then break out of it to attack, because honestly, swords are heavy and that weight can make you slower. Unless we can find some elven-forged swords which are as light as feather like in those stories like Eragon and stuff, of course. It's only for fantasy. We still can punch people using the shields, after all.

lel use two board shields and put another one on the back. I will name that army The Immortal Turtles. XD

Oh, in case any of you are wondering, dual wielding in Monster Hunter uses two daggers, not swords. The length isn't more than a half of your arm.

MadVader said:
Is calvary a dual-mounted version of cavalry? You need to dual-shield against them to brush off the double horse team and avoid trampling. Then you jump at the right moment to stab the rider with your horned helmet.

Cool. Now we need a horned helmet. imma b a uni-corn

Bromden said:
Dual shields go well with dual helmets.

With two horns each.
 
FrisianDude said:
Depending on the shield, it may well be heavier than the sword, seems to me.

Many shields are heavier than most one-handed swords, but still, one-handed swords aren't light. A shield helps you survive in battle, and therefore helps you kill, so the weight is worth it, but another sword on the left hand isn't. Dead men give no death.
 
It's light, if you have good muscles on your arm. It's like about two kilogram, right? Doesn't sound so light to me... or is it? :???:

Light or not, carrying an extra sword on your left hand isn't so efficient.
 
A one handed 2 kg sword is considered heavy. Carrying two one handed swords in battle won't fatigue you any more than carrying a sword and shield. Dual wielding isn't a problem because the weapons' weight, but because most people won't know how to use it properly outside of mad chopping.
 
I don't see whats so wrong about dual wielding I mean of course in the beginning of a battle you need a shield cause of arrows but in the middle of of the fight you don't have to worry about that, this argument could apply for two handed weapons since it's an even better prey for archers since you would be slower and it takes forever to swing.

Swords aren't that heavy, I mean 5 pounds for each hand is nothing and I'm pretty sure even lighter for the main hero in the game.
 
Basically, if you drone on and on about dual-wielding you are a kid with no taste that grew up on crappy action movies and games. That's the problem, not the weight.
 
MadVader said:
Basically, if you drone on and on about dual-wielding you are a kid with no taste that grew up on crappy action movies and games. That's the problem, not the weight.

Not really, but how about adding dual wield for the main hero only so if your a hater you can just avoid it, or maybe make dual wielding as an 'add on' so both sides are happy.
 
What do you mean "never really attempted"? In game, or in reality? And for the lot of people who like the idea, you know the saying: if something stupid is liked by millions of people, it's still something stupid.
 
I meant in M&B. So the argument for one side is like 'dual wield is badass and totally works.' And the other side is like 'dual wield looks stupid and  unrealistic'. But either way it goes I will play the **** out of bannerlord.
 
Back
Top Bottom