Aldeigju的最近内容

I can recall many times where this would have saved me. Especially when traveling with a group of infantry as a support troop (cross/bowman, which I do a lot) and getting ambushed, who do they target first? The one who can't readily defend himself. AKA: Me.

Attempting to switch to my sword only gets me killed since it leaves me open, however if I were able to block with my cross/bow it would at least grant me a tiny chance of survival as I often attempt to manual block anyhow out of instinct.

Anyone else get the bug where if you get whacked off a ledge, sometimes you fly across the map and die instantly on impact? That happened to me a number of times a couple patches ago, I don't know if it's still there or not.

I think all these throwing ideas should use a different key other than x. Maybe c or v. I'm sure the TW team can bind things to other keys, and they merely chose x for convenience. Other than that I have no real stance on the matter.

As for the shield idea, I think it should replace kicking if the player has a shield. Perhaps doing less damage but stunning for a few milliseconds longer. Then when they lose their shield they kick instead, doing more damage but stunning for less of a time (as it is now).

Agree.

I like playing in both 3rd and 1st person views. (usually depends on what weapon/class I'm playing with/as) But I don't think you should force people to play in either view strictly. It would give those used to playing in one view an advantage over others, and I don't think that would be very fun for most people.

Kleidophoros 说:

dude ready to strike will move his hand down the grip as the axe goes down just like the stunned dude moved his hand all the way down the handle.

点击展开...

Yes, I know, I stated so in my post. However, apply M&B's movement limitations system to it and it makes sense.

Kleidophoros 说:

and i dont think using axes with polearm grip would do any good. it sounds silly.

点击展开...

Both stances I'm referring to (sort of):

Notice one of them is "stunned" while the other is ready to strike.
(I understand the one ready to strike is going to let momentum guide the axe anyway, but it's an example.)

Those axes aren't THAT heavy. It's just momentum that makes them powerful. Someone skilled to use an axe like that can easily outmaneuver a swordsman especially with their range advantage.

But yes, this needs to be addressed. To help without 'nerfing' the axes, I propose that they have two stances which the player can choose from by hitting the x key the same way throwing axes work.

The default mode would be how it is now. Only the axe should behave naturally. Swinging it like a baseball bat should make the attacks slow (maybe a tad bit slower than it is now), but powerful when they strike.

Hitting the x key makes the player grip the axe closer to the head (like one would hold a spear/polearm), making the axe faster, but weaker with a shorter reach.

To make up for this, shields need a tweak too. Top-tier shields should be made of metal (or reinforced with it) which would negate the "bonus against shields" effect that axes have, while letting the axe eat through the weaker wooden shields. (I believe Nords are the only faction with metal shields (Huscarl's shield), or at least that's what it sounds like. )

I have the feeling this (my post) has been suggested before.

[Edit:] I didn't address the speed-issue correctly, the default stance should have a heavy momentum penalty giving the player a short recovery time that leaves them "stunned" when they miss with the axe.

It happens when you join a game as soon as a round ends too.

Does it to me all the time, but I guess that's just my luck to blame.

SteveO 说:

Don't like it.  Currently to help out infantry you need to move among them, and the infantry aren't exactly concerned with where they're going, so stepping out in front of a friendly cav isn't exactly problematic to them thus you'd get thrown off/damaged/what have you by your own team simply by trying to help.

At least when archers do it they have control over it up til the release of the arrow.  People come out of no where and end up blocking horses.  I think the current penalty of rearing up and being vulnerable for several seconds is penalty enough.  A reared horse/rider is an archer magnet.

点击展开...

...This suggestion has nothing to do with infantry or archers...?

Did you read the whole post?

I'm not going to try and use facts or anything because I know very little about the topic. So I'm just going to give my opinion from a players point of view.

I don't think it would be a good addition. Not because it's "wrong era" or "would be overpowered", but because it would break the feeling of the game.

Take a look at all the other current weapons, they're all simple. Even the current crossbows are simple. Anyone can take a look at them and know how they work. If you brought something like this into the game it wouldn't feel right.

Ohh, I messed up the polls a bit. I fixed the options and reset the votes. ._.

Also

EdwardWellcraft 说:

Personally I think horses should have a natural survival instinct. Even the most well trained warhorse will not purposely ride straight into another horse, a wall, or off a cliff/ wall. They should naturally attempt to veer away if they are approaching a solid object quickly.

点击展开...

I'm not sure about this, I mean. These aren't show horses, these horses are bred to face battle. So I'd imagine they would be trained to disregard danger. If you added that to the horses traits then you would have to make them rear up or get startled every time they took damage. :\