Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

[Grank]

I'm not much of a history dude or a martial artist, and since the previous 436 pages have been literally filled with explanations as to why dual wielding is physically impractical, I wanna add this one thing. Even in video games in which dual wielding is supported, I still don't dual wield. I tried it in Skyrim once, and everytime I hit things with my right hand, I tend to make another swing with it than using the other hand. It's just easier and more effective.

Or just try to grab two kitchen knives, sticks, or whatever weapon-ish and move them a bit. I bet you my favorite mug it feels much better to use just one.

I like anime and flashy cool things too, and personally I'd like to see the feature supported just for flexibility sake (I get bored of realism sometimes (like really, why do you play video games in the first place?)), but since Taleworlds isn't that... well, just say I'd rather have them spend their development resource for Bannerlord than making a feature that most people won't use.

 

[Zombie Warrior]

[...] most people won't use.

That word is generalizing too much. The reason why this thread is lasting so long is because there are a lot of people on both sides of the argument. If you actually read the thread you'd see that there are good arguments on both sides and that this feature was already in the original mount&blade at some point. Thus, they wouldn't waste much of their time and the way armagan talked of that feature when he mentioned this, he didn't seem against dual wielding. I suggest you do actual research instead of pretending to know.

 

[Engra]

Ok ok, really dual wield needs to be implemented. Ragnar Lothbrok and his viking hoard will cleave you in two with axes if you disagree. nuff said.

 

[Baguette Eater]

Shut up

 

[Zombie Warrior]

I love that warm welcome. 
I like how every aspect of it was so damn nice to this noob.

 

[e27]

Ragnar Lothbrok and his viking hoard

never heard of them

 

[AWdeV]

Clearly this ragnar lothbrok is some sort of dragon and he sleeps on a pile of vikings like Smaug sleeps on a pile of gold and jewelry.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

I love that warm welcome. 
I like how every aspect of it was so damn nice to this noob.

Come on man, he's only made two posts and one is on the trolliest thread on this forum. Nobody finds this thread that fast. I call dupe.

 

[Dryvus]

Clearly this ragnar lothbrok is some sort of dragon and he sleeps on a pile of vikings like Smaug sleeps on a pile of gold and jewelry.

They're very comfortable among their beards.

 

[Amman d Stazia]

Maybe the great dragon Ragnar has a supply of throwing-Vikings that he wields two handed?

 

[Bohemond Chesne]

Clearly the dragon holds a viking in each hand, throwing them simultaniously. And each viking holds a baby-viking in each hand, and throws them simultaniously, as he himself is thrown. And each baby-viking holds an axe in each hand, and throws them simultaniously, as they themselves are thrown.

And thus a great cload of vikings, tiny vikings, and axes, smite down all who dare oppose the Great Dragon Ragnar.

 

[Amman d Stazia]

One thing dual wielding would allow is the proper conversion of men and horses to mechanised units, eg tanks, or ships.
Particularly if the two wielded items could be deployed independently....

 

[Zombie Warrior]

One thing dual wielding would allow is the proper conversion of men and horses to mechanised units, eg tanks, or ships.
Particularly if the two wielded items could be deployed independently....

This is quite an interesting idea and it does seem to make sense. 

 

[QuailLover]

Make it require a four button mouse.

 

[Grank]

I don't know about you guys, but I play Mount and Blade with two mice and three keyboards. One keyboard for each baby viking in my hands, and teeth.

 

[Zombie Warrior]

As I see it, the controls for dual wielders would be:

Left click: Attack from the left hand.
Right click: Attack from the right hand.
Q: Block.
Z: Quest.

 

[Twezie]

As I see it, the controls for dual wielders would be:
THERE WONT BE DUAL WIELDING IN WARBAND

u guys think these would work?

 

[Amman d Stazia]

Actually, it's they keyboard key 'd'

When you hit it, the item in your Left hand is used as an offensive weapon every time you use the right mouse button.
When you hit 'd' again, it switches back to left-item defensive.

So, in other words, the mouse buttons control one hand each. The keyboard button 'd' toggles the left hand between offensive and defensive modes.

Wasn't that hard, really, for well-paid, highly experienced programmers to think up.

 

[Rebel King]

There seems to be a lot of posts where people do not think having two wielded swords isn't realistic in a battle or useful, as having a shield and sword would be the same as wielding two swords into battle (as some are suggesting).

If you're saying having two swords during war isn't realistic then I would urge you to rethink how the game is played; for example, when a character that is travelling outside the castle, you have a view of the whole map, which is unrealistic as humans back then didn't have that much of a view of the whole kingdom or where allies troops are located (and viewed constantly through out the game they didn't have google earth, etc). Going back to 'if duel swords is realistic during battle' I say it is, in the midst of chaos of battle a person would grab anything to survive. Thus, duel swords should be considered when playing Mount & Blade.

If we're speaking of gameplay where duel swords would be the same as a shield, then it's practically a preference if I wanted duel swords or a shield and sword. Personally, I would choose duel swords as it looks badass for the character. I acknowledge that there would be cons when wielding two swords such as being more vulnerable to arrows, javelins but that's fine. I accept those consequences for looking badass.

I personally- I'm sure others would too- would love having duel swords in the game, as it adds more options to how a person can play the game and is not limited to a certain amount of weapons and looks.  .

 

[Andrix]

There seems to be a lot of posts where people do not think having two wielded swords isn't realistic in a battle or useful, as having a shield and sword would be the same as wielding two swords into battle (as some are suggesting).

If you're saying having two swords during war isn't realistic then I would urge you to rethink how the game is played; example,  a character that is travelling has a view of the whole map, which is unrealistic as humans back then didn't have that much of a view of the whole kingdom or where the allies are located (and viewed constantly through out the game they didn't have google earth, etc). Going back to 'if duel swords is realistic during battle' I say it is, in the midst of chaos of battle a person would grab anything to survive. Thus, duel swords should be considered when playing Mount & Blade.

If we're speaking of gameplay where duel swords would be the same as a shield, then it's practically a preference. Personally, I would choose duel swords as it looks badass for the character. I acknowledge that there would be cons when wielding two swords such as being more vulnerable to arrows, javelins but that's fine I accept those consequences for looking badass.

I personally- I'm sure others would too- would love having duel swords in the game, as it adds more options to how a person can play the game and is not limited to a certain amount of weapons.  .

Just because the game has one unrealistic thing about it (map view), doesn't mean we should implement more of those. Also, where we are discussing combat system, it is better to focus on multiplayer.