Kipsta
Yes! I have finally reached 275 skill in two handed after two hundreds seventy five hours of playing. I am finally granted 25% arrow damage absorption!!1111
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
"Arrow deflection" for two-handers in 1.4.1e
- Thread starter Sheepify
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
this had me laughing more than it should, I think I'm a nerd again hahahahaha
And yes, I understand your point, one could also anticipate it by seeing the archer ready to shoot, not necessarily seeing the arrow.
Well since we're still talking about how "possible" arrow deflection could be in real life with a sword. Here are some examples of greatswords and their real to life info.
Pictures and information about great swords
It's cool to look at but what i really wanted to point out was their real life blade width's we're roughly around 43 mm+/-, which is roughly an inch and a half. They aren't massive fat blade like in games and shows. I believe the Scottish Claymore, yea that big boi blade of pop culture and what not, still just reaches about a 2 inch width. If you really want to be science-y smart about this...
you'd have better luck blocking an arrow with a 1 handed sword, because their roughly the same width, and you'd have more movement control of a 1 handed sword. yes a 2 hander would have more surface area, but unless you're holding the grip by your face and have it pointed down to protect your legs, or just standing it up like a skinny metal shield. it's not going to be a good day for you.
So if we're going to have a "arrow defection perk" can we have it for 1 handed swords too, because it'll make more sense...but oh wait!
as a 1 handed sword user you already have that perk...it's called equip a shield.
Lastly, the human hand is roughly around 3.5 inches wide, some bigger some smaller, but all wider than a sword. you'd also have a better chance stopping an arrow from fetally killing you, if you just wore armor (which i assume you are already are for the battlefield) and having a small metal plate that could fit on your hand like a glove to protect your face. So if i had to chose, use a sword to block an arrow, or a glove like metal plate.....
bring me the glove please.
Pictures and information about great swords
It's cool to look at but what i really wanted to point out was their real life blade width's we're roughly around 43 mm+/-, which is roughly an inch and a half. They aren't massive fat blade like in games and shows. I believe the Scottish Claymore, yea that big boi blade of pop culture and what not, still just reaches about a 2 inch width. If you really want to be science-y smart about this...
you'd have better luck blocking an arrow with a 1 handed sword, because their roughly the same width, and you'd have more movement control of a 1 handed sword. yes a 2 hander would have more surface area, but unless you're holding the grip by your face and have it pointed down to protect your legs, or just standing it up like a skinny metal shield. it's not going to be a good day for you.
So if we're going to have a "arrow defection perk" can we have it for 1 handed swords too, because it'll make more sense...but oh wait!
as a 1 handed sword user you already have that perk...it's called equip a shield.
Lastly, the human hand is roughly around 3.5 inches wide, some bigger some smaller, but all wider than a sword. you'd also have a better chance stopping an arrow from fetally killing you, if you just wore armor (which i assume you are already are for the battlefield) and having a small metal plate that could fit on your hand like a glove to protect your face. So if i had to chose, use a sword to block an arrow, or a glove like metal plate.....
bring me the glove please.
you wouldn't be "blocking" the arrow by using the sword like a shield. It's more like you're cutting it out of the air, so blade width shouldn't matter much
And this is a very good point. For all we know if might even be in game without the perk, given how heavy they went on the "physical simulation" aspect I wouldn't be surprised. Someone should test that! (I would do it but I can't even hit heads consistently, let alone a flying arrow
)you're tripping, not just tripping, but RAGE-TRIPPING. Keep it up, it's good for your heart
My guy you are so wild haha, but i really like reading this thread. just wanted to add some fuel.
Nothing to see here.. just two guys falling in laugh
Saint Jiub
Sergeant
i really don't care about the realism of the perk but "you can maybe block some arrows maybe" after like 100 hours of grinding being the extent of the character progression in this game is very depressing. 3% damage here. 5 hp there. this is the kind of progression they do in grindy f2p pvp games so a new person isn't completely outmatched. but we are playing a single player rpg where your character is basically done when you buy a decent weapon with only renown doing much after.
Well, also keep in mind that besides what the perks do, you still do get a steady increase in power just from having higher skill levels. I think a lot of people miss that because its hidden behind the skill info box and if you don't press the tiny button, you never see it. The perks are just added on top of that, so even without any perks, you're still a lot stronger and faster at high skill levels.
deflect THIS:
1.4.1 has broken 2 handed and one handed attack speed + dmg when you pick the last perk, something is off there. Probably the code was implemented incorrectly because the same perks had much less of a retarded effect or were simply not working, idk. I've finally reached the last 2h perk and now the toon swings the sword ridiculously fast (relative to in-game speeds). Why related to in-game speeds? Because the speed of the specific sword I'm using doesn't seem wrong, it's a reasonably fast speed achievable irl, but I doubt such "realism" was intended at all...
1.4.1 has broken 2 handed and one handed attack speed + dmg when you pick the last perk, something is off there. Probably the code was implemented incorrectly because the same perks had much less of a retarded effect or were simply not working, idk. I've finally reached the last 2h perk and now the toon swings the sword ridiculously fast (relative to in-game speeds). Why related to in-game speeds? Because the speed of the specific sword I'm using doesn't seem wrong, it's a reasonably fast speed achievable irl, but I doubt such "realism" was intended at all...
deflect THIS:
1.4.1 has broken 2 handed and one handed attack speed + dmg when you pick the last perk, something is off there. Probably the code was implemented incorrectly because the same perks had much less of a retarded effect or were simply not working, idk. I've finally reached the last 2h perk and now the toon swings the sword ridiculously fast (relative to in-game speeds). Why related to in-game speeds? Because the speed of the specific sword I'm using doesn't seem wrong, it's a reasonably fast speed achievable irl, but I doubt such "realism" was intended at all...
Yeah, that last perk is obviously broken. The devs probably didn't even test it because I can't imagine that those speeds are intended.
Old revolvers like this are easy to deflect, because you can see the bullets in the cylinder and know when its firing. This is why they are now outdated and replaced by pistols with laser to blind you, then he will run over and hit you on the head with the glock and since its plastic there is a chance you will be taken prisoner.deflect THIS:
1.4.1 has broken 2 handed and one handed attack speed + dmg when you pick the last perk, something is off there. Probably the code was implemented incorrectly because the same perks had much less of a retarded effect or were simply not working, idk. I've finally reached the last 2h perk and now the toon swings the sword ridiculously fast (relative to in-game speeds). Why related to in-game speeds? Because the speed of the specific sword I'm using doesn't seem wrong, it's a reasonably fast speed achievable irl, but I doubt such "realism" was intended at all...
This is not even something I had to look up everyone knows this
HERETIC! MEN, SEND HIM TO THE PYRES!!!!
The thing is that this specific revolver is using Adamantium Hollow-Points and they explode in supersonic waves of black-hole neutrons that make you disintegrate!
i was reffering to science. you are right that there are tons of books, and so
called experts that involuntarilly tried to convince about the 'x' theme. what i
showed in the video of 160 pounds are guys that have the passion to test and
confirm or reject a certain myth of medieval (and other) themes.
instead of saying the classical among historians, (battle of azincourt, and crecy)
that arrows did penetrate armor. because that would justify the story more
easily, they did an analysis. In which they found that armour could not be penetrated
by arrows (and in a percentage early gun powder guns.) but something else must have happened.
if anyone is actualy interested in what they found happened in agincourt i could write it.
about Lars Anderssen, i have to say he is very, very talented but he is NOT actualy
telling us anything worthy historically. he only put on the table a thing we already knew.
that archery can be used close range. his bow is 20 to 30 max pounds Dr. weight.
bows will be effective in this draw weight only in tavern fights, or street related fights.
not on a battlefield. on a battlefield speed and power matter.
i am not a historian, but i am very interested on history, i've read hundred of books on
ancient-medieval warfare. and i watch all the time historians that now what they are talking, because they
put to the test the theory's they are investigating.
if anyone has time, i friendly suggest some historical youtubers who go as far to test myths.
and are very interesting.
lindybeige, shadiversity, metatron, tods workshop, skallagrim, scholagladiatora, thands (something)
i'm sure i forgot someone...
EDIT: i don't doubt that a warrior could, if very charismatic and with the purpose being FROM BEFORE
to cut an arrow. but what is the problem is that no-one in history trained to cut arrows as
a battle technique. so no muscle memory. and the other is if you are behind the sword you'd
get hit by splinters going 200 km. and the other is that you'll need to have your sword in a position
to do that. that means if you get hit by a warbow from 20 meters, your sword should be in a position
to react to that. this technique is used in martial arts in deflecting blows, or evading, but that's
another subject.
called experts that involuntarilly tried to convince about the 'x' theme. what i
showed in the video of 160 pounds are guys that have the passion to test and
confirm or reject a certain myth of medieval (and other) themes.
instead of saying the classical among historians, (battle of azincourt, and crecy)
that arrows did penetrate armor. because that would justify the story more
easily, they did an analysis. In which they found that armour could not be penetrated
by arrows (and in a percentage early gun powder guns.) but something else must have happened.
if anyone is actualy interested in what they found happened in agincourt i could write it.
about Lars Anderssen, i have to say he is very, very talented but he is NOT actualy
telling us anything worthy historically. he only put on the table a thing we already knew.
that archery can be used close range. his bow is 20 to 30 max pounds Dr. weight.
bows will be effective in this draw weight only in tavern fights, or street related fights.
not on a battlefield. on a battlefield speed and power matter.
i am not a historian, but i am very interested on history, i've read hundred of books on
ancient-medieval warfare. and i watch all the time historians that now what they are talking, because they
put to the test the theory's they are investigating.
if anyone has time, i friendly suggest some historical youtubers who go as far to test myths.
and are very interesting.
lindybeige, shadiversity, metatron, tods workshop, skallagrim, scholagladiatora, thands (something
)i'm sure i forgot someone...
EDIT: i don't doubt that a warrior could, if very charismatic and with the purpose being FROM BEFORE
to cut an arrow. but what is the problem is that no-one in history trained to cut arrows as
a battle technique. so no muscle memory. and the other is if you are behind the sword you'd
get hit by splinters going 200 km. and the other is that you'll need to have your sword in a position
to do that. that means if you get hit by a warbow from 20 meters, your sword should be in a position
to react to that. this technique is used in martial arts in deflecting blows, or evading, but that's
another subject.
Last edited:
Thelior
Sergeant at Arms
Well it probably wasn‘t used widely on the battlefield, but i could imagine that a warrior could eventually try to hit the arrow, perhaps only as a spontaneous reaction.
I also don‘t really get why everyone assumes, that the only way to deflect an incomming arrow with a sword is cutting it in half... Wouldn‘t it be more feasible to hit it with the flat side of the blade? This should be enough to deflect the arrow while still being able to do it by simply tilting an sword held in an upright position and would probably be easier to accomplish than actually cutting the arrow. (Not trying to convince anyone here, just thinking “loud“)
Thank you for reminding me to laugh my a** off because people legit believe it's possible to slice a lethally shot arrow in the air.
it's possible that someone somewhere tried to stop an arrow,
and succeded, but that will be one in a trillion. maybe it happened maybe not.
but from what i see from youtube masters swordsman "x", trying to
cut a bullet in mid air would be a full time job, when eventualy they are
confronted with real HEMA or kendo practitioner's they get ripped.
and succeded, but that will be one in a trillion. maybe it happened maybe not.
but from what i see from youtube masters swordsman "x", trying to
cut a bullet in mid air would be a full time job, when eventualy they are
confronted with real HEMA or kendo practitioner's they get ripped.
It warms my soul thinking how happy that swordsman would be after he successfully blocked that one in a trillion bow shot, and then thinking...
"Man...I sure hope someone doesn't try to shot me right away again" Lol
because you'd have to redirect it, if you try to stop it with the flat, it won't stop and it could damage the sword too (depending on a massive range of factors). I also don't see how that could be pulled off with "heavier" unbalanced weapons (2h axes for instance), probably not enough time to react. With swords it's possible, but unlikely, remember, swords were rarely used in the battlefield (exception being greatswords which fit the category of "heavier", harder to handle, slower to react).
I think that the perk is not unrealistic, for it's physically possible to do it, if it is "historical", well, I'd say it isn't. All I've found out are tids and bits that some samurai would cut arrows to "deflect" them, but I also think it's likely to be a really rare skill and occurrence.
So, comparing this perk by associating it with lasers is just mental... Makes no sense. Ranting about this perk is also a bit ridiculous considering the insurmountable amount of other extremely "unrealistic" things in M&B (all of the games)
Similar threads
